Oh no not again!

Cheers MC

Jeff Morris wrote:

The fact that it may be a NACA foil does not mean that it is well suited to the task. It
only means the NACA, the forerunner of NASA, cataloged the properties of the shape back in
1932. I assume you're talking about the symmetrical "4-digit" series, which would have a
round front and maximum thickness about 30% aft. These have been the standard starting
point for keel and rudder designs for the last 70 years.

Perhaps you could give us the foil number, and explain why you picked that particular
shape, and why you think its better that the one specified by Bill Tripp.

Frankly, every time I look at those pictures I wonder how the boat ever goes upwind.

-jeff


"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

Your ignorant statement proves you know nothing
about NACA foils.

S.Simon

"SAIL LOCO" wrote in message

...

One can see the thickness of the keel which is necessary for proper lift in
a shoal keel.

The above quote from the photo caption is really funny. I'll bet that thing
really goes to windward with that fat balloon keel. That thing might give the
propper ballast for it's size but trust me it offers no lift.


S/V Express 30 "Ringmaster"
Trains are a winter sport