Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
I suspect the idea for ++ is to use it on boards that gave the finbox too far back.
If you're balanced with your setup, you don't need ++.
From the starboard website:
For racers looking for even more VMG upwind, a 115 Plus Plus fuselage is also available as an upgrade item. This places the front wing even further forward.
source:
starboardfoils.com/pages/2021-raceplus
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
I hope you always believe everything you read.
I learned to not believe everything I read when I started reading your posts 
Not sure about your statement; are you saying starboard designed the race plus plus fuselage for people with old boards so they can place the wing further front?don't get me wrong, I think the plus plus fuselage will help those people but the main goal is to generate more lift for upwind/downwind racing in very light wind.
Starboard made a .intake on their course race boards by placing the turtle too far back.
++ is to rectify their mistake.
To placed their mast base more forward, so less needed for ++.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Starboard made a .intake on their course race boards by placing the turtle too far back.
++ is to rectify their mistake.
To placed their mast base more forward, so less needed for ++.
I use both of the fuselages
+ and ++.I don't need to alter anything other than the
shim in each when swapping between the 2.
A little note on mastfoot: racers went from 107-112cm frontbolt to mastfoot with the original 115fuse to 116+cm with the 115+ fuselage, I dont know any racer personally who uses the 115++ since Luuc van Opzeeland switched to Moses, dont know his settings before that but he's not much of a settings guy (I believe he solely used it with 10.0 in sub 12 knots).. I've heard other people say it's too powerful for comfort (mostly sub 85kg racers). In addition, most racers here use the 115+ nowadays because they all switched to the olympic kit.
This is an interesting discussion. Three and four years ago we were all talking about the geometry of low AR front wing between feet and mast base at 107 cm plus or minus.
Now we are talking about EFFECTIVE center of lift of the high AR front wing, shimming the stab to tune the lift and balance, and still 107 cm plus or minus.
Just like all other aspects of our various water sports over the years, there is a continuous improvement evolution of equipment, and there is a separation of freeride, wave, freespeed, speed, and racing applications of the equipment. Most of this is driven by the racing world, as it has always been. (The big exception to this is Slingshot, who is hard over into freeride.)
Even if we don't race, we all benefit.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Starboard made a .intake on their course race boards by placing the turtle too far back.
++ is to rectify their mistake.
To placed their mast base more forward, so less needed for ++.
I find that really hard to believe. I know personally a guy who in cooperation with Steve Allen designed a foil he used to become world champion 2019. 2020 version they moved front wing 6cm forward and this year again more forward to gain higher VMG and I know they have protons moving front wing 9cm more forward. Also my Moses had front wing 6cm further back than new 2021 version.
Designer explained that they want reduce drag by moving wing forward, because then tail wing angle could be reduced. Secondly according to him, right VMG setup is to have unpleasant front foot preassure which I don't like.
Other design objectives were thinner and stiffer mast. I tried to bend different foil masts on the beach. My Moses and for example Starboard mast are torsionally chewing gum compared to Boss. Would be interesting to compare against F4 which should be very stiff as well.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Track....movable!
I think the main benefit of a foilbox over tracks is it handles sideways load better, but tbh I haven't seen anyone ever try racing with tracks so we can't be sure it doesnt work.
Kitefoil racing is moving away from tuttle to track mount, but they are way more in the centerline of the board and the mast doesnt really affect upwind performance as all upwind power is coming from the front wing. For windfoil the mast is offering lateral resistance because of the small heel angles we are using.
Moving the mast too far forward or aft relatively to the backfoot really changes the balance & upwind performance though, even keeping the front wing in the same place. My own feelings on the subject is that there is a general region of distance from the mast to the back of the board / back footstrap which offers best upwind performance and brands put the tuttlebox in that region.
Even if that wasnt the case, racers tend to spend big cash anyway, why not have them buy 5 different fuselages if you can from a business standpoint.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Starboard made a .intake on their course race boards by placing the turtle too far back.
++ is to rectify their mistake.
To placed their mast base more forward, so less needed for ++.
where did you get this information from ?
Select to expand quoteseanhogan said..LeeD said..
Starboard made a .intake on their course race boards by placing the turtle too far back.
++ is to rectify their mistake.
To placed their mast base more forward, so less needed for ++.
where did you get this information from ?
He made it up or miss interpreted someone I'd say. As WoH eluded to almost every foil race board from every brand has their track/box in a very similar position and enough footstrap position/mast position adjustment to cover any differences. The ++ is purely aimed at super light wind (<10kt) performance where you need bulk lift at lower speeds to have a good upwind VMG. Like I said elsewhere I've never seen one in the wild as their performance window is tiny, at my weight of 70kg I struggle to keep the + under control over 15kts downwind let alone a ++ 
I can also foil in 6kts on the + and we never end up racing in winds that light anyway because a lot of the fleet can't so it's a moot point.
Lee D, you should contact Tiesda to help him sort out his designs and "evolution".... seriously.....
I saw and tried one (++) way too powerful for me (95kg) should be efficient in very light winds for big heavy guys with a pro level. Not much use elsewhere
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Thought ++ was to allow farther forward mast base and straps.
I'm surprised you're commenting on this thread since you don't even own a SB + or ++ fuse. Sounds like you're making up crap to justify another foil. Please stop with speculations and BS. None of what you are saying makes any sense, nor is it what I asked. Unless you have a SB foil and fuses in question, I don't see how you can be an expert in this area.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Thought ++ was to allow farther forward mast base and straps.
That will work for people that don't have dedicated foil boards, but that's not why they created the + and ++
Are you so presumptuous you really think there is only ONE justification for ++?
Every decision is based in OVERALL impact.
Need we be reminded why?
Yeah, it takes an "expert" to say the foil is farther forward.
How it actually works is another story, something I did not comment on.
But I could have, since my boards have twin tracks and I have surf/wind/and longer wind fuzes.
Lee D reminds me of when you were giving advice on foils whilst you didn't even foil at the time ! Expert.....
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
How it actually works is another story, something I did not comment on.
"How it actually works" . Good point LeeD. Seems that everybody agrees the ++ does what it's supposed to. But so far nobody has even attempted to say why.
Why does moving the wing forward while leaving the mast back make such a difference?
As well as structural support, the mast provides lateral resistance to balance the sail but if you look at the angle the racers lean to windward a lot of the lateral resistance is coming from the wing. The mast has to counteract the moment from the feet, but then how much weight is actually on the feet? The sail is so cranked over a lot of weight bypasses the board, and then a lot of weight goes though the mast foot( the other mast) and that doesn't generate a moment around the centre line to be taken up by the mast.
It's all too complicated to work out on pencil and paper.
Without a good explanation we'll have to wait until the tuttle box on race boards is eventually replaced by a sliding track, to see if the ++ fuse then disappears, before we will know who's right or wrong.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..LeeD said..
How it actually works is another story, something I did not comment on.
"How it actually works" . Good point LeeD. Seems that everybody agrees the ++ does what it's supposed to. But so far nobody has even attempted to say why.
Why does moving the wing forward while leaving the mast back make such a difference?
As well as structural support, the mast provides lateral resistance to balance the sail but if you look at the angle the racers lean to windward a lot of the lateral resistance is coming from the wing. The mast has to counteract the moment from the feet, but then how much weight is actually on the feet? The sail is so cranked over a lot of weight bypasses the board, and then a lot of weight goes though the mast foot( the other mast) and that doesn't generate a moment around the centre line to be taken up by the mast.
It's all too complicated to work out on pencil and paper.
Without a good explanation we'll have to wait until the tuttle box on race boards is eventually replaced by a sliding track, to see if the ++ fuse then disappears, before we will know who's right or wrong.
Because moving the foil mast closer to being under the feet also moves the point of axis (the mast to fuse connection) to where foot movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
better to leave the foil mast back on race kit. free foiling etc easier pitch movement is what youre after, so track mount foils come into their own.
Select to expand quoteSubsonic said..
movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
Did you mean yaw movement?
I'd think that balancing pitch is all about the positioning/trim of front and rear wings whereas balancing yaw might be more about the mast position.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..Subsonic said..
movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
Did you mean yaw movement?
I'd think that balancing pitch is all about the positioning/trim of front and rear wings whereas balancing yaw might be more about the mast position.
I think he's talking about what I called the seesaw effect somewhere earlier, having both feet in front of the mast feels so much more stable to me than 1 foot behind, even if the power is in the same place & fuses are equally long. I tried with 2 different fuselages & mast positions on a track.
Select to expand quoteWhiteofHeart said..Ian K said..Subsonic said..
movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
Did you mean yaw movement?
I'd think that balancing pitch is all about the positioning/trim of front and rear wings whereas balancing yaw might be more about the mast position.
I think he's talking about what I called the seesaw effect somewhere earlier, having both feet in front of the mast feels so much more stable to me than 1 foot behind, even if the power is in the same place & fuses are equally long. I tried with 2 different fuselages & mast positions on a track.
Well that's getting somewhere. Has anybody else other than WOH been able to move the mast back and forward while holding all the other variables constant?
Select to expand quoteIan K said..WhiteofHeart said..Ian K said..Subsonic said..
movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
Did you mean yaw movement?
I'd think that balancing pitch is all about the positioning/trim of front and rear wings whereas balancing yaw might be more about the mast position.
I think he's talking about what I called the seesaw effect somewhere earlier, having both feet in front of the mast feels so much more stable to me than 1 foot behind, even if the power is in the same place & fuses are equally long. I tried with 2 different fuselages & mast positions on a track.
Well that's getting somewhere. Has anybody else other than WOH been able to move the mast back and forward while holding all the other variables constant?
I have heard of two of the major foil brands that have tried moving the foil mast forward. Apparently the pro riders just keep moving forward to stand in front of the mast to feel comfortable.
I think a lot is to do with the directional stability and tracking. Having all the force changes in front of the mast ( sail and foot pressure etc) in front of the mast is more of a constant.
Even the kiters have gone the same way. Older kite set ups had their rear straps behind the mast, now newer versions now the rear foot is directly over the mast.
( foil tracks are only for badly designed foils or people who can't foil properly, Tuttle boxes rule ) :)))))
Select to expand quoteWhiteofHeart said..Ian K said..Subsonic said..
movement has a larger influence on it. Something you don't really want when you're aiming to reduce pitch movement on race kit.
Did you mean yaw movement?
I'd think that balancing pitch is all about the positioning/trim of front and rear wings whereas balancing yaw might be more about the mast position.
I think he's talking about what I called the seesaw effect somewhere earlier, having both feet in front of the mast feels so much more stable to me than 1 foot behind, even if the power is in the same place & fuses are equally long. I tried with 2 different fuselages & mast positions on a track.
Yes, exactly. Just saw your earlier post explaining the same.
