Select to expand quoteAll i heard was 18 minutes of whining by someone very fortunate enough (and naive enough) to be able to play the new latest greatest gear churn game $$$ poor lost soul :(
If he spent the same time and money and energy on getting new and old punters back in the game his/business would be booming!
From a 'real' professional in the industry this is a much more positive, solution and action ...
Heres what Goya is planning.....basically a place to learn/rent/teach and grow new participants...
Smart grow the sport, grow your customer base, and not rely on gear churn as way to make money.
Want to sell more steaks ..get more people into your steak restaurant ..don't need to keep changing the menu all the time!
couldn't post the link ...
extract ...from USA website , linked on book face
Winds of Change: Goya Windsurfing to Open New Community Hub in Bingen
If you've driven down the main drag in Bingen, Washington, you've likely seen the new construction in the works! Maybe you're wondering what's going on-we were too-so we got some answers for you!Goya Windsurfing, if all goes well, will open in the Fall of 2024! The new showroom will be open to the public, offering windsurfing lessons and wholesale gear from beginner to pros.We spoke with Francisco Goya about his newest venture..
Who is Francisco Goya?
Francisco went to high school in Buenos Aires, Argentina. After graduation, upon turning 18, he left for Maui to live and pursue his dream. Having segued from skateboarding to surfing to windsurfing, Goya, along with some close friends, honed in on his passion for customizing gear, while riding for different shapers and designers, helping with their research and development. Just five years later, in 1994, he and his pals started Quatro. "It was those passionate windsurfers from all over the world who bought our gear and were stoked with the sport, that made it possible to start our own brand." In 2000, he became the windsurfing champion of the world.Goya sees the windsurfing industry as a community project. "We are all learning how to improve the sport. One thing I'm sure of is that it will take a lot more than one brand and one vision to really take windsurfing to where it deserves to be." He is a firm believer that brands need to collaborate to support each other.The new "surf mill" will manufacture surfboards, kiteboards, SUP's and wind boards, for winging, foiling and downwinding action.
When asked about the best places for wind sports, Goya tells us it is Maui, Europe, and the Gorge, on the Washington side, that has the best wind. His favorite spots to get some action are the Hatchery, Stevenson and Bingen!
The team plans to create events for the community and will need investors, grant money, and permits along the way. He emphatically states that he wants no barriers to learning the sport, and will offer community services to schools and the underprivileged as well as to seniors wanting to try something new!Why Windsurfing?Francisco describes windsurfing as the cheapest form of sailing, and believes it not only has the ability to remove one's fear of water, but connects us to others. "Diversity adds value to a community-we are able to meet people from all over the world, exposing us to different cultures and languages."Goya sees the potential for windsurfing to become the most popular water sport in the world. "The more I travel, the more people I see enjoying windsurfing from all ages and social groups-it is a sport that needs only water and a little wind."You can feel his passion for the sport when he speaks-he closes our conversation with, "I have always been able to find my answers in the water".
Select to expand quoteTaavi said..duzzi said..
A good youtube somewhat related to this thread, mostly about the state of the industry ?si=O9Q9oRcMbWwA433B&t=1078
Not sure what Marios' (author of the above video) general windsurfing skills were, but looks like somehow he ended up putting a huge cambered race sail on a freeride setup and then blamed a freeride board!? At least all his examples in the video are with huge sails.
My experience back in the day was totally different. After just a handful of days of learning I was totally comfortable with my setup, which although not competitive in foiling comps, was so much fun to ride. Who cares if it wasn't the most efficient setup, it was still wonderful to learn something new. Only good memories from that period. The fact that I have a slalom board in the video below instead of a freeride board (10 cm length difference) is not really important, the freeride boards that I tried were pretty much on a par.
And yes, it was fun in almost non-existent wind as well - absolutely no need for special and huge and complicated rigs.
There are always people who are gifted athletes and learn in "a few days". I never got over the fear and I still do not foil.
But besides personal athletic gift, the guy has a great point. Freeride is where most people are. It is almost bizarre but there is almost no windfoiling left in the San Francisco Bay area. It is bizarre, because windfoiling is arguably much more versatile and way more performing, than wingfoiling, but there you go: the easier, more freeriding tool won. (Hands down, windsurfing. windfoiling, kiting and kitefoiling are pretty much gone in the Bay.)
So to rephrase the question "Are new windsurfing developments possible", can we develop a windsurfing freeride package that is rangier and easier than what we have now?
The discussion often seems to revolve around the cost of windsurfing and that many have accumulated 15K worth of gear. And yes, I'm one!
This reminds me of a story in a book I read about the success of the Pandora charm bracelets. The bracelets are cheap enough, which gets people on board, but by the time they've loaded it with all the charms they want, they could have bought a gold bracelets with some diamonds!
So If windsurf equipment manufacturers wanted to boost the uptake, maybe they should have an ultra-cheap line up of entry-level gear - even to the point of selling at cost - and reap the rewards when they purchase the higher level gear once they're hooked?
The problem may be that they've missed the boat!
And with less people windsurfing, that may mean less incentive to spend money on R&D and we'll just get gear that's an evolution rather than a revolution?
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..
Electric motor assist would seem like the thing everything else has going on.
Just enough to keep the forward momentum on those superlight days or kick you onto the plane on the marginal days ?
Foot button on the deck / push button on the boom or flow sensor in the hull to make it automatic ?
Motor integrated into the board jetski style, so no extra drag from a propellor ?
Must be able to fit an e-foil motor to a fin and give it a go ? Surely somebody has done it ?
Could have a lima wave generator. Charge the battery while going crosswind or while planning fast. Battery lasts maybe 1min.then use batterypower to get planning. Where daggerboard would be is the switch to activate the planning assist which will autoswitch off after 15 seconds. Just posting this here to get patent rights in the future.
Select to expand quoteKit3kat said..Carantoc said..
Electric motor assist would seem like the thing everything else has going on.
Just enough to keep the forward momentum on those superlight days or kick you onto the plane on the marginal days ?
Foot button on the deck / push button on the boom or flow sensor in the hull to make it automatic ?
Motor integrated into the board jetski style, so no extra drag from a propellor ?
Must be able to fit an e-foil motor to a fin and give it a go ? Surely somebody has done it ?
Could have a lima wave generator. Charge the battery while going crosswind or while planning fast. Battery lasts maybe 1min.then use batterypower to get planning. Where daggerboard would be is the switch to activate the planning assist which will autoswitch off after 15 seconds. Just posting this here to get patent rights in the future.
Nuclear. If they can make small nuke bombs that fit in a suitcase , I'm sure they could make tiny reactors the size of a cigarette packet. Probably cheaper than a pack of cigarettes. Heaps of water for cooling to stop meltdowns. Only need just enough power to give those pesky wingers a run for their money on light wind days. I'm a genius, can't see any problems at all. I'm sure the guys developing the Fangy fin could iron out any bugs. I hear Flex2 has a lab in a hollowed out volcano.
In my opinion there is indeed something to do which is at the same time very basic, almost ttally overlooked and extremely important.Windsurfing boards tend to loose their shape.Boards are loaded vertically towards down where the footstraps are, and receive water contact in between towards up. This results in bottom shape changing after just very few sessions, expecially in fast riding boards, and developing a "spoon" shape (negative rocker curve, concave) under hull just where it would be important to keep the right shape.
Some brands (FMX at least) address this by adding small stringers in the hull, but in my experience this does not solve the problem totally. Probably because the stringers are positioned under the sandwich foam and inside the EPS core, so IF the problem is due to sandwich foam getting crushed under perssure the stringers simply can not work.
I think a better solution could be making the hull extra stiff and tough there (in the tail, from the front straps back). Could be done by using a tougher foam there (blending with the lighter one in the mid hull and nose, i. e. with a triangular shape) and adding extra carbon layers both inside and outside of the foam.Anyhow what really drives me mad is how much overlooked is this issue. While it's hugely more important than anything else. A 10 years old board with the underhull still in good shape (or reshaped) will easily outperfom its newest sibling with the typical deformation coming from 10 or so good sessions.
@geoITA
True.
Always a bit unsettling to hear Pro's beamingly recite how sometimes the rapid deformation of their board results in it becoming their "perfect/beloved" board (for a short while) as the rocker continues to become significantly affected...
I've often wondered why boards don't have an ABS I beam from the mast track to the fin box.
^^^It's easy to fix , just use 17 kg EPS instead of 13 kg or use another layer of glass or carbon. The problem is that we are weight obsessed. We are our own worst enemy.For an extra one kg on a large board , we could have both and extra reinforcements to stop the all too common delam issues. Unless you are elite or doing loops in the air , most wouldn't notice the difference. Yet we happily pay the extra $1000 to buy the lighter much more fragile version of a board to save 700 gms in weight. But you do get PRO , ELITE or carbon printed on top of the board. I've recently learned that shops sell more of the expensive fragile versions than the more robust versions of the same board. That's crazy. Nobody wants ROBUST printed on their board. It must be worth it to point out all the severe damage on your board to your mates as apposed to the guy with the cheaper model only having scratches on it.
I wonder if some version of this would work..
www.toysforbigboys.com/black-hawk-paraglider/
You'd need good flotation or shallow water
Select to expand quoteKit3kat said..Carantoc said..
Electric motor assist would seem like the thing everything else has going on.
Just enough to keep the forward momentum on those superlight days or kick you onto the plane on the marginal days ?
Foot button on the deck / push button on the boom or flow sensor in the hull to make it automatic ?
Motor integrated into the board jetski style, so no extra drag from a propellor ?
Must be able to fit an e-foil motor to a fin and give it a go ? Surely somebody has done it ?
Could have a lima wave generator. Charge the battery while going crosswind or while planning fast. Battery lasts maybe 1min.then use batterypower to get planning. Where daggerboard would be is the switch to activate the planning assist which will autoswitch off after 15 seconds. Just posting this here to get patent rights in the future.
Key part is that the prop/motor setup should retract/flip back into the board in some way, or be embedded in the board like a jet drive so that there's no added drag once planing!
Select to expand quoteImax1 said..
^^^It's easy to fix , just use 17 kg EPS instead of 13 kg or use another layer of glass or carbon. The problem is that we are weight obsessed. We are our own worst enemy.For an extra one kg on a large board , we could have both and extra reinforcements to stop the all too common delam issues. Unless you are elite or doing loops in the air , most wouldn't notice the difference. Yet we happily pay the extra $1000 to buy the lighter much more fragile version of a board to save 700 gms in weight. But you do get PRO , ELITE or carbon printed on top of the board. I've recently learned that shops sell more of the expensive fragile versions than the more robust versions of the same board. That's crazy. Nobody wants ROBUST printed on their board. It must be worth it to point out all the severe damage on your board to your mates as apposed to the guy with the cheaper model only having scratches on it.
The production boards available today in my opinion are quite heavy, I still use a 2006 falcon 131 79cmW 245L and it weighs in at 6.7kg, the bottom shape is still perfect and this is my most used board, the current equivalent duotone 130 slalom comes in at 7.30kg.
I was told a few years ago that only two 131's were imported into Australia, maybe this was a team rider board? I purchased it 2nd hand 15 years ago.
Select to expand quoteImax1 said..
^^^It's easy to fix , just use 17 kg EPS instead of 13 kg or use another layer of glass or carbon. The problem is that we are weight obsessed. We are our own worst enemy.For an extra one kg on a large board , we could have both and extra reinforcements to stop the all too common delam issues. Unless you are elite or doing loops in the air , most wouldn't notice the difference. Yet we happily pay the extra $1000 to buy the lighter much more fragile version of a board to save 700 gms in weight. But you do get PRO , ELITE or carbon printed on top of the board. I've recently learned that shops sell more of the expensive fragile versions than the more robust versions of the same board. That's crazy. Nobody wants ROBUST printed on their board. It must be worth it to point out all the severe damage on your board to your mates as apposed to the guy with the cheaper model only having scratches on it.
Probably easy to fix, not sure it would that way.
EPS has very little strength, be it 13 or 17 or 25. Plus, it sits under the sandwich skin that distributes loads on a larger surface. And it's quite elastic too. I tend to think the culprit is the foam, instead. The foam sits under just the outer skin layer, which is often glass rather than carbon in that area (hull), and that single layer is not nearly as stiff as a sandwich structure (outer layer + foam + inner layer). So the outer layer may bend under load and compress the foam, which is usually rather brittle and not elastic, meaning once crushed it stays crushed, even if just slightly so, but we are talking few/10 mm or so, which is enough to impair high speed performance and control.
Select to expand quotechoco said..Imax1 said..
^^^It's easy to fix , just use 17 kg EPS instead of 13 kg or use another layer of glass or carbon. The problem is that we are weight obsessed. We are our own worst enemy.For an extra one kg on a large board , we could have both and extra reinforcements to stop the all too common delam issues. Unless you are elite or doing loops in the air , most wouldn't notice the difference. Yet we happily pay the extra $1000 to buy the lighter much more fragile version of a board to save 700 gms in weight. But you do get PRO , ELITE or carbon printed on top of the board. I've recently learned that shops sell more of the expensive fragile versions than the more robust versions of the same board. That's crazy. Nobody wants ROBUST printed on their board. It must be worth it to point out all the severe damage on your board to your mates as apposed to the guy with the cheaper model only having scratches on it.
The production boards available today in my opinion are quite heavy, I still use a 2006 falcon 131 79cmW 245L and it weighs in at 6.7kg, the bottom shape is still perfect and this is my most used board, the current equivalent duotone 130 slalom comes in at 7.30kg.
I was told a few years ago that only two 131's were imported into Australia, maybe this was a team rider board? I purchased it 2nd hand 15 years ago.
I really have no problem with construction, although I am sure it depends on use and rider weight. At my weight, 70Kg, I never even dented something in 40 plus years of windsurfing, and I sail in a very rough location ...
Overall I think windsurfing is perfect/brilliant as it is. The major developments of "surfing the wind" came about initially with kiting, and then the whole foil revolution, with WindFoiling and now Winging with Foil.
In the right conditions its hard to beat windsurfing. Removing the fin and adding a Foil is the radical big improvement for light and moderate winds in relation to efficiency and drag elimination, but windfoiling isnt necessarily very user friendly. I much prefer windsurfing over Windfoiling. Winging is another evolution of windsurfing, and it significantly reduces drag and increases efficiency in light to moderate conditions, and is much more user friendly than Windfoiling. The Wing is so much lighter and easier to use than a windsurfing rig, which makes the sport easier for older men like me and women in general.
That leaves the whole human perception thing, we can see Winging as a threat to windsurfing, or we can see it as an evolution and even complementary to windsurfing. That is about the state of mind you choose.
Windsurfing is about peak experience.
More wind range and making it easier for beginners and so on isn't much about what it has been able to achieve; that peak experience.
...but, if we're really kicking ideas around: Electric Sails. Electric wind.
"VTOL ion-propelled aircraft are sometimes called "lifters". Early examples were able to lift about a gram of weight per watt"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion-propelled_aircraft
We don't need as much lift.
BTW hi everyone.
Select to expand quotehardie said..In the right conditions its hard to beat windsurfing. Removing the fin and adding a Foil is the radical big improvement for light and moderate winds in relation to efficiency and drag elimination, but windfoiling isnt necessarily very user friendly. I much prefer windsurfing over Windfoiling. Winging is another evolution of windsurfing, and it significantly reduces drag and increases efficiency in light to moderate conditions, and is much more user friendly than Windfoiling. The Wing is so much lighter and easier to use than a windsurfing rig, which makes the sport easier for older men like me and women in general.
If you love ocean downwinding, windfoiling works so much better than winging or windsurfing.
We can carve harder, go faster deep downwind for more distance and fly back upwind quicker.
It does take a big TOW commitment and good gear to get it dialed - but I reckon those few who've cracked the code would agree that there's nothing better 
Select to expand quoteazymuth said..
If you love ocean downwinding, windfoiling works so much better than winging or windsurfing.
We can carve harder, go faster deep downwind for more distance and fly back upwind quicker.
It does take a big TOW commitment and good gear to get it dialed - but I reckon those few who've cracked the code would agree that there's nothing better
Apologies for insulting WindFoiling, I've become an old man with slow reflexes and I couldnt handle WindFoiling I found it too fast and dynamic, I wouldve had to push through the stacking at speed from a height stage, and just wasnt prepared to do that.
Select to expand quotehardie said..
Overall I think windsurfing is perfect/brilliant as it is.
In the right conditions its hard to beat windsurfing.
Any discipline on the water is brilliant whether its Windsurfing, Foiling or Winging. We are fortunate in WA to have some of the best conditions that it really doesn't require any changes to windsurfing equipment. If your fortunate enough to have the time and prepared to do a little travel, you can find conditions to satisfy any one of the disciplines without any real change to equipment.
The last 90 days registered 40 sessions with a few windy days missed due to commitments. Average distance per session 85km, Average speed 35knots. The equipment 1 speed board and 1 88L slalom board, biggest sail 6.3.
I can understand that if your in a location that does not produce the consistent weather as we have, foiling is the go to. I have watched the wingers and must admit if I had to pick another disciple it would be winging, unencumbered from masts and harness lines a freedom you don't have with windsurfing.
Personally I have not honed the windsurfing aspect, so much more to improve so no need for another water sport, plus the adrenaline rush is like nothing else.
The current equipment is great if you tinker with it to set it up for the conditions. Rather than spending thousands of $$ on equipment or looking at further developments, skills to sail the equipment efficiently in light or strong winds is what I personally place the effort in.
Select to expand quoteKit3kat said..Carantoc said..
Electric motor assist would seem like the thing everything else has going on.
Just enough to keep the forward momentum on those superlight days or kick you onto the plane on the marginal days ?
Foot button on the deck / push button on the boom or flow sensor in the hull to make it automatic ?
Motor integrated into the board jetski style, so no extra drag from a propellor ?
Must be able to fit an e-foil motor to a fin and give it a go ? Surely somebody has done it ?
Could have a lima wave generator. Charge the battery while going crosswind or while planning fast. Battery lasts maybe 1min.then use batterypower to get planning. Where daggerboard would be is the switch to activate the planning assist which will autoswitch off after 15 seconds. Just posting this here to get patent rights in the future.
Select to expand quotegeoITA said..
.... This results in bottom shape changing after just very few sessions, expecially in fast riding boards, and developing a "spoon" shape (negative rocker curve, concave) under hull just where it would be important to keep the right shape....
That isn't quite how "elastic deformation" works - there are youtube videos which will explain it better than I ever could.
The shape certainly does change over time, but not that fast and usually not aggressively. It changes because the elasticity-limit of the material has been exceeded, which in the case of foam will be crushed.
If there was a major change to shape [ within the first few uses ], then the designs would take this into account. For example the first few uses of a sail causes the material to stretch somewhat - it is quite normal to have less-than-recommended downhaul for a few sessions.Select to expand quote...once crushed it stays crushed, even if just slightly so, but we are talking few/10 mm or so, which is enough to impair high speed performance and control...
Definitely agree that the material gets crushed over time - the material-limits are exceeded. Also agree that small changes to shape -particularly the rocker - will have some effect.
A solution to this but a few light passes of epoxy-paint will solve this problem. We change a ropes, tendons, and so on -> maintenance of other gear is usually required too.
Saying it another way -> the choice of materials does indeed ensure that changes to the shape do not occur easily. We could use foams which don't crush (aka staying in the elastic-deformation region of the material), but then the final board would be significantly heavier.
On the topic of "new developments" based on what I just wrote...
The sail makers could correctly print the rigged-luff-length on the sails.
And they could explain that customers _shouldn't_ downhaul to the printed spec, for the first few uses.
And all the manufacturers could come to a consensus which boom-length measurement is important. And which mast+extension is accurate. ... At least then the printed specs would be usable.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
As I tried to make clear, I completely understand why people choose to have lots of sails and as you said it's up to the buyer, but the point is that the claim "modern sails have wider wind ranges" has been made for decades on end and yet there seems to be no evidence that it's really happening, or that modern windsurf sails have a wide range compared to other sails.
I think what you are observing is a reasonable assessment based on the evidence you presented. But I dont think it is accurate.
[ You noted "decades" which implies 80's to 90's era. In that era camber-inducers were only just invented by Gaastra. Full-length battens were still flimsy fibreglass or even wood. ]
A 6m slalom sail from that era could be used [ obviously depending on body weight ] from about 8kn to about 22kn. It didn't really matter what board you used because the sail didn't generate much top-speed. Due to their shape, they were typically quite powerful on the low-end, but sail deformation limited their top-end. The sail-deformation limited their use.
A 6m slalom sail from nowadays typically doesn't have good low-end ( its why formula-sails were invented because _area_ is key ), you use them from about 12kn. Those same sails - even a freeride sail - is quite capable of being used in 35kn of wind. The sail doesn't deform much at all - the limiting factor is typically the person's ability to sheet-in.
Select to expand quotemathew said..Chris 249 said..
As I tried to make clear, I completely understand why people choose to have lots of sails and as you said it's up to the buyer, but the point is that the claim "modern sails have wider wind ranges" has been made for decades on end and yet there seems to be no evidence that it's really happening, or that modern windsurf sails have a wide range compared to other sails.
I think what you are observing is a reasonable assessment based on the evidence you presented. But I dont think it is accurate.
[ You noted "decades" which implies 80's to 90's era. In that era camber-inducers were only just invented by Gaastra. Full-length battens were still flimsy fibreglass or even wood. ]
A 6m slalom sail from that era could be used [ obviously depending on body weight ] from about 8kn to about 22kn. It didn't really matter what board you used because the sail didn't generate much top-speed. Due to their shape, they were typically quite powerful on the low-end, but sail deformation limited their top-end. The sail-deformation limited their use.
A 6m slalom sail from nowadays typically doesn't have good low-end ( its why formula-sails were invented because _area_ is key ), you use them from about 12kn. Those same sails - even a freeride sail - is quite capable of being used in 35kn of wind. The sail doesn't deform much at all - the limiting factor is typically the person's ability to sheet-in.
I agree that sail deformation limited the top end with the old sails and that the new ones have a vastly better top end. Manufacturers still seem to try to sell sailors just as many sails to cover the wind range. As your figures indicate, a lot of what it gained in top end handling with modern sails is lost due to their lower power at the bottom end.
I can't completely agree about your wind range figures since the wind range you quote for an ancient 6m slalom sail is way out of what I would have used at that time, and since I was top 20 at the slalom world titles at the time I wasn't particularly shyte. No one at the worlds or during the Aussie pro circuit at the time (which included Robby, Bjorn, Anders etc) would have used a 6m slalom sail in 8 knots because the lower wind limit was 15 knots and even in that a 7.8 or perhaps 7.3 was the standard sail.
Top end deformation and C of E shift were a problem, but that is to a significant extent a matter of technique, harness lines and back hand strength. Where those old sails did lose out, as we agree, was by having high aero drag that limited their top speed. I had an ex Pete Cabrinha Gaastra team 7.3 or 7.8 custom with foam/glass or carbon sandwich battens and something like 6 camber inducers and it, and similar sails, actually seemed to have amazing stability - at the cost of having a tight leach and deep upper camber that reduced the top-end speed. It would never make it as a production sail because it was also extremely unforgiving through gybes, although personally that suited my style very nicely.
I think essentially it's an issue about how we define range. We can have different (but equally valid) measures. Those of us who have done a lot of sailing on various OD longboards have spent a lot of time looking for power in light winds and practising holding onto a sail far over the top of its normal range, so our feeling for range is probably very different to that of other people.
I'll also say that I'm unsure how many people these days use a 6 in a true 35 knots. That is hitting well over 50 knots in the gusts. In such winds, people find it difficult walking, the water is covered in spume (not just white caps), things ashore are breaking, etc etc. I sail Sydney-Hobarts where we have sophisticated wind instruments so spend a lot of time getting real windspeed info and with respect, what many people call 35 knots is a wind that may hit 35 knots for very short times at the peak of the gust. That is actually a true 20 knots, by meteorological definition. Some people may be capable of using a 6 in a real 35 knots, but not the average sailor in what I would call normal conditions, with normal chop and gusts.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..mathew said..Chris 249 said..
As I tried to make clear, I completely understand why people choose to have lots of sails and as you said it's up to the buyer, but the point is that the claim "modern sails have wider wind ranges" has been made for decades on end and yet there seems to be no evidence that it's really happening, or that modern windsurf sails have a wide range compared to other sails.
I think what you are observing is a reasonable assessment based on the evidence you presented. But I dont think it is accurate.
[ You noted "decades" which implies 80's to 90's era. In that era camber-inducers were only just invented by Gaastra. Full-length battens were still flimsy fibreglass or even wood. ]
A 6m slalom sail from that era could be used [ obviously depending on body weight ] from about 8kn to about 22kn. It didn't really matter what board you used because the sail didn't generate much top-speed. Due to their shape, they were typically quite powerful on the low-end, but sail deformation limited their top-end. The sail-deformation limited their use.
A 6m slalom sail from nowadays typically doesn't have good low-end ( its why formula-sails were invented because _area_ is key ), you use them from about 12kn. Those same sails - even a freeride sail - is quite capable of being used in 35kn of wind. The sail doesn't deform much at all - the limiting factor is typically the person's ability to sheet-in.
I agree that sail deformation limited the top end with the old sails and that the new ones have a vastly better top end. Manufacturers still seem to try to sell sailors just as many sails to cover the wind range. As your figures indicate, a lot of what it gained in top end handling with modern sails is lost due to their lower power at the bottom end.
I can't completely agree about your wind range figures since the wind range you quote for an ancient 6m slalom sail is way out of what I would have used at that time, and since I was top 20 at the slalom world titles at the time I wasn't particularly shyte. No one at the worlds or during the Aussie pro circuit at the time (which included Robby, Bjorn, Anders etc) would have used a 6m slalom sail in 8 knots because the lower wind limit was 15 knots and even in that a 7.8 or perhaps 7.3 was the standard sail.
Top end deformation and C of E shift were a problem, but that is to a significant extent a matter of technique, harness lines and back hand strength. Where those old sails did lose out, as we agree, was by having high aero drag that limited their top speed. I had an ex Pete Cabrinha Gaastra team 7.3 or 7.8 custom that had something like 7 camber inducers and it, and similar sails, actually seemed to have amazing stability - at the cost of having a tight leach and deep upper camber that reduced the top-end speed. It would never make it as a production sail because it was also extremely unforgiving through gybes, although personally that suited my style very nicely.
I'll also say that I'm very unsure how many people these days use a 6 in a true 35 knots. That is hitting well over 50 knots in the gusts. In such winds, people find it difficult walking, the water is covered in spume, things ashore are breaking, etc etc. I sail Sydney-Hobarts where we have sophisticated wind instruments so spend a lot of time getting real windspeed info and with respect, what many people call 35 knots is a wind that hits 35 knots for very short times at the peak of the gust. That is actually a true 20 knots, by meteorological definition. Some people may be capable of using a 6 in a real 35 knots, but not the average sailor in what I would call normal conditions, with normal chop and gusts.
6.6 in 30kt yes.. Lots of times with wind measuring not just "I think it's that" The real issue is water state, open ocean not a chance . Flat water ..perfect.
My goto race sail was a NP 6.3 race sail 90s era. Had a range of 12-16 kts, super quick within that range and won a few races. My 6.6 was good in 17-25kts at Cervantes . YES the range has improved... in my opinion
Select to expand quotekato said..Chris 249 said..mathew said..Chris 249 said..
As I tried to make clear, I completely understand why people choose to have lots of sails and as you said it's up to the buyer, but the point is that the claim "modern sails have wider wind ranges" has been made for decades on end and yet there seems to be no evidence that it's really happening, or that modern windsurf sails have a wide range compared to other sails.
I think what you are observing is a reasonable assessment based on the evidence you presented. But I dont think it is accurate.
[ You noted "decades" which implies 80's to 90's era. In that era camber-inducers were only just invented by Gaastra. Full-length battens were still flimsy fibreglass or even wood. ]
A 6m slalom sail from that era could be used [ obviously depending on body weight ] from about 8kn to about 22kn. It didn't really matter what board you used because the sail didn't generate much top-speed. Due to their shape, they were typically quite powerful on the low-end, but sail deformation limited their top-end. The sail-deformation limited their use.
A 6m slalom sail from nowadays typically doesn't have good low-end ( its why formula-sails were invented because _area_ is key ), you use them from about 12kn. Those same sails - even a freeride sail - is quite capable of being used in 35kn of wind. The sail doesn't deform much at all - the limiting factor is typically the person's ability to sheet-in.
I agree that sail deformation limited the top end with the old sails and that the new ones have a vastly better top end. Manufacturers still seem to try to sell sailors just as many sails to cover the wind range. As your figures indicate, a lot of what it gained in top end handling with modern sails is lost due to their lower power at the bottom end.
I can't completely agree about your wind range figures since the wind range you quote for an ancient 6m slalom sail is way out of what I would have used at that time, and since I was top 20 at the slalom world titles at the time I wasn't particularly shyte. No one at the worlds or during the Aussie pro circuit at the time (which included Robby, Bjorn, Anders etc) would have used a 6m slalom sail in 8 knots because the lower wind limit was 15 knots and even in that a 7.8 or perhaps 7.3 was the standard sail.
Top end deformation and C of E shift were a problem, but that is to a significant extent a matter of technique, harness lines and back hand strength. Where those old sails did lose out, as we agree, was by having high aero drag that limited their top speed. I had an ex Pete Cabrinha Gaastra team 7.3 or 7.8 custom that had something like 7 camber inducers and it, and similar sails, actually seemed to have amazing stability - at the cost of having a tight leach and deep upper camber that reduced the top-end speed. It would never make it as a production sail because it was also extremely unforgiving through gybes, although personally that suited my style very nicely.
I'll also say that I'm very unsure how many people these days use a 6 in a true 35 knots. That is hitting well over 50 knots in the gusts. In such winds, people find it difficult walking, the water is covered in spume, things ashore are breaking, etc etc. I sail Sydney-Hobarts where we have sophisticated wind instruments so spend a lot of time getting real windspeed info and with respect, what many people call 35 knots is a wind that hits 35 knots for very short times at the peak of the gust. That is actually a true 20 knots, by meteorological definition. Some people may be capable of using a 6 in a real 35 knots, but not the average sailor in what I would call normal conditions, with normal chop and gusts.
6.6 in 30kt yes.. Lots of times with wind measuring not just "I think it's that" The real issue is water state, open ocean not a chance . Flat water ..perfect.
My goto race sail was a NP 6.3 race sail 90s era. Had a range of 12-16 kts, super quick within that range and won a few races. My 6.6 was good in 17-25kts at Cervantes . YES the range has improved... in my opinion
I'm happy to admit I may be completely wrong, but was that 30 knots constant and hitting 42 for some time, or hitting 30 knots at times? I'm not disagreeing that you can't hold a big sail in big winds on flat water since I respect your ability. I also haven't had an anerometer when windsurfing for eons. I'm just aware that there's a huge difference between defining a wind by the average, by the gust average, or by the peak in the gusts.
The thing about range still seems that it's a very hard thing to define. Do we mean the range over which a sail is completely comfortable and rock solid and the quickest thing on the water, or is is the range over which we can comfortably hold it in the lulls without losing too much speed, or is it the range over which we can possibly lump it while struggling at one end and schlogging at the other end?
I think I may still have a '90s NP 6.3 in storage somewhere and I would have said it had a much higher wind range, so which of us can really say? The definition is so variable that it makes talking about ranges almost impossible. Lots of one designs, for example, use the same sail from 0 to 25+ knots, which is a lot wider than your 6.6's. Obviously the thing is not that the IMCO 7.3 (to name one sail) had a wind range of 30 knots compared to your 6.6's wind range of 8 knots, but that the definitions of "range" are very different.
As another example, on my yacht we're set up for cruising and our headsail has a range of 0-25+ knots. The same design with sails from the same sailmaker could have five or six sails to cover the same winds, simply because we can define the "range" of each sail in a different way. One is saying that this sail is the best across this range, another is saying that this sail can handle this range.
So given that "range" is such a subjective issue, and sailmakers seem to try to sell just as many sails to take us across a wind range as they did 40(!!!) years ago, how can anyone say that the range has actually improved?
The last phrase sentence came out a bit wrong but can't be edited. I was trying to say once again that whether sails have developed wider ranges may just be a matter of different but equally valid definitions. I didn't mean to say that anyone who says sail ranges has become wider is wrong.
Select to expand quotemathew said..geoITA said..
.... This results in bottom shape changing after just very few sessions, expecially in fast riding boards, and developing a "spoon" shape (negative rocker curve, concave) under hull just where it would be important to keep the right shape....
That isn't quite how "elastic deformation" works - there are youtube videos which will explain it better than I ever could.
The shape certainly does change over time, but not that fast and usually not aggressively. It changes because the elasticity-limit of the material has been exceeded, which in the case of foam will be crushed.
If there was a major change to shape [ within the first few uses ], then the designs would take this into account. For example the first few uses of a sail causes the material to stretch somewhat - it is quite normal to have less-than-recommended downhaul for a few sessions....once crushed it stays crushed, even if just slightly so, but we are talking few/10 mm or so, which is enough to impair high speed performance and control...
Definitely agree that the material gets crushed over time - the material-limits are exceeded. Also agree that small changes to shape -particularly the rocker - will have some effect.
A solution to this but a few light passes of epoxy-paint will solve this problem. We change a ropes, tendons, and so on -> maintenance of other gear is usually required too.
Saying it another way -> the choice of materials does indeed ensure that changes to the shape do not occur easily. We could use foams which don't crush (aka staying in the elastic-deformation region of the material), but then the final board would be significantly heavier.
Hi Mathew,
in fact, we are not talking about elastic deformation, not at all.
I know that shape changes with time, quite quickly. Few years ago I had one of my boards re-shaped because of this reason. I asked a well known Italian shaper to take care of that and we talked about the problem. He told me that even his better built custom boards were prone to bottom deformation after just a few sessions. So I lean toward giving credit to his words.
As for the effect of bottom deformation, it's not just "some effect". As long as you are flying on the fin over flat water, you will not sense it. But if you hit some chop the board will tend to "stick" (more or less) to the water and will need more energy to "unstick", making the ride harder.
And, no, it's not just "a few light passes of epoxy-paint" that will solve the problem, unless of course you accept sensible weight build up and loss of the bottom graphics.
My point is that 1) some more 100 gms are well worth in order to obtain a stable bottom shape, and 2) maybe adding the weight of say Airex C70.130 in place of the usual Airex C70.75 in the last 80 cms or so of the boards bottom (we are talking 100 -150 gms more, depending on foam thickness 3mm or 5mm and of course hull width) would be a better choice than adding the weight of "Carbon T-Stringers laminated deep into the EPS core in a T beam configuration".
Please be aware that the elastic limit has not much to do with "time".
Select to expand quotegeoITA said..mathew said..geoITA said..
.... This results in bottom shape changing after just very few sessions, expecially in fast riding boards, and developing a "spoon" shape (negative rocker curve, concave) under hull just where it would be important to keep the right shape....
That isn't quite how "elastic deformation" works - there are youtube videos which will explain it better than I ever could.
The shape certainly does change over time, but not that fast and usually not aggressively. It changes because the elasticity-limit of the material has been exceeded, which in the case of foam will be crushed.
If there was a major change to shape [ within the first few uses ], then the designs would take this into account. For example the first few uses of a sail causes the material to stretch somewhat - it is quite normal to have less-than-recommended downhaul for a few sessions....once crushed it stays crushed, even if just slightly so, but we are talking few/10 mm or so, which is enough to impair high speed performance and control...
Definitely agree that the material gets crushed over time - the material-limits are exceeded. Also agree that small changes to shape -particularly the rocker - will have some effect.
A solution to this but a few light passes of epoxy-paint will solve this problem. We change a ropes, tendons, and so on -> maintenance of other gear is usually required too.
Saying it another way -> the choice of materials does indeed ensure that changes to the shape do not occur easily. We could use foams which don't crush (aka staying in the elastic-deformation region of the material), but then the final board would be significantly heavier.
Hi Mathew,
in fact, we are not talking about elastic deformation, not at all.
I know that shape changes with time, quite quickly. Few years ago I had one of my boards re-shaped because of this reason. I asked a well known Italian shaper to take care of that and we talked about the problem. He told me that even his better built custom boards were prone to bottom deformation after just a few sessions. So I lean toward giving credit to his words.
As for the effect of bottom deformation, it's not just "some effect". As long as you are flying on the fin over flat water, you will not sense it. But if you hit some chop the board will tend to "stick" (more or less) to the water and will need more energy to "unstick", making the ride harder.
And, no, it's not just "a few light passes of epoxy-paint" that will solve the problem, unless of course you accept sensible weight build up and loss of the bottom graphics.
My point is that 1) some more 100 gms are well worth in order to obtain a stable bottom shape, and 2) maybe adding the weight of say Airex C70.130 in place of the usual Airex C70.75 in the last 80 cms or so of the boards bottom (we are talking 100 -150 gms more, depending on foam thickness 3mm or 5mm and of course hull width) would be a better choice than adding the weight of "Carbon T-Stringers laminated deep into the EPS core in a T beam configuration".
Please be aware that the elastic limit has not much to do with "time".
For "time" deformation may be a denser eps foam could play too. From what i repair an build i find there is a big gap between the 13kg/m3 and less (for 15kg/m3 nominal) big cells construction quality and the 22kg/m3 (24 nominal) small and mid size cells industrial quality. A good amount of carbon, multiaxial direction whit right resin help a lot too for increase stiffness without too much weight penality.
