Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Pool Shark 3D Update: New Photos

Expand Messages
  • solingpoolshark
    The production prototype is now complete and sailing. Our club: http://www.sailbakersfield.com/ also built 10 new Pool Sharks over the New Year s holiday, each
    Message 1 of 35 , Jan 4, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      The production prototype is now complete and sailing.

      Our club: http://www.sailbakersfield.com/ also built 10 new Pool Sharks over the New Year's holiday, each with custom sails from Chuck Black.

      Here are some new photos of the first production boat:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FootyUSA/photos/album/1436710001/pic/list

      Hopefully we will have photos of the whole fleet in the water over the next couple of weeks.

      During the building process, David Ogden documented the project with a digital video camera. Once we finish post-production, I will be including an instructional DVD with every kit that takes the builder through every stage of construction. We will probably also post it on YouTube for easy access.

      Anyway, the production prototype with the new 'bandy mast' cat rig is fast, balances well, and accelerates like a rocket. She is also very easy to sail. But, best of all, the new cat rig is actually easier to assemble than a McRig!

      Stay tuned. More to follow.....
    • solingpoolshark
      Thanks Graham. I ve found it s more fun when the designers/skippers share ideas and collaborate. btw, I m not really a manufacturer. While I intend to make
      Message 35 of 35 , Jan 7, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks Graham.

        I've found it's more fun when the designers/skippers share ideas and collaborate.

        btw, I'm not really a "manufacturer." While I intend to make Pool Shark kits available, I will do so mostly to promote model yachting (We did the same thing with our special Victoria Rigs, and tuning guides for Fairwinds and Victorias).

        The Footies are the most fun I've had in a development class since the 50-800's (fore-runner of the Marblehead Class) in the late 70's - early 80's. In those days, there were no Skalpels; it seemed like everyone had a new design or idea, and many of them worked pretty well until it was ultimately discovered that the minimum-weight, maximum-Keel-Length C/F boats would dominate.

        But, it took nearly two decades of "wild west" design/build activity in the class until that happened. In the meantime, it was a very fun, albeait, expensive design playground.

        The beauty of the Footy Class is that the same fun development can be had for pennies on the dollar. That's why I chose to build Pool Shark out of vacuum-formed styrene; she's cheap and very easy to build. And if she's not as fast as I think she is; I'll just build another plug and vacuum-form a new design.

        But, I do think she'll be fast.... ;-)




        --- In FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com, "scalesailing" <scalesailing@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hello Chris,
        > thank you for the acknowledgement for my work on the OPUS rig and it's influence on your cat version, I appreciate it. Actually to have another designer like yourself take inspiration from it and create your own version is quite a compliment. Keeping our ideas in the open is the way to move our class forward in my opinion, I'm glad to see you as another manufacturer share that idea.
        >
        > I will be most interested to watch how your cat version performs because it certainly looks good. The bendy mast with it's controlling backstay really gives some nice opportunity for sail shape control as I am sure you will have discovered by now.
        >
        > Good luck to you too with Pool Shark 3D, the more choice we can offer to the footy world the better it will be for us all.
        >
        > All the best,
        > Graham McAllister
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com, "solingpoolshark" <CSTAIGER@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Graham,
        > >
        > > I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for sharing your work on the OPUS Rig with the rest of us. Like most designers/builders I'm always borrowing ideas from other designers/builders, and I'd like to think I contribute my fair share to the development process.
        > >
        > > As I mentioned earlier, your OPUS Rig was the inspiration for the Cat version I'm currently using on Pool Shark 3D. Your idea for a 'bendy' mast seems to work well in Cat Rig form as well.
        > >
        > > Good luck with the OPUS/Dragon and thanks again for sharing your work with the rest of us.
        > >
        > > Chris.
        > >
        > > --- In FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com, "scalesailing" <scalesailing@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Very well said Bill as always. It's good to remember every so often what makes this such an excellent and interesting class and for me it is the reasons you have just re-stated.
        > > >
        > > > I must admit I did pause in boat development for much of this summer when the possibility of banning diagonal boats was raging. But happily the openness to possibility of the box rule has remained intact and I (plus Dragon and the OPUS rig) am moving ahead full sail with renewed confidence in the longevity of our great little class.
        > > >
        > > > Graham McAllister (ScaleSailing.com)
        > > >
        > > > --- In FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com, "Bill" <billhagerup@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > Though maybe a bit strongly stated, your point is weel made, Stan. My biggest fear for the future of the Footy class is that it might get turned into yet another one-design class over time.
        > > > >
        > > > > The box rule is not always well understood by beginning Footy sailors...in fact, many Footy owners don't have a measurement box. It's not needed, of course, if building a kit or scratch building from someone's published plan, but I think when you put a boat in the box, start looking at the different angles a boat can be placed, see all the tradeoffs that different placement decisions create, you begin to see the real strength of the Footy concept. Certainly that is what has attracted talented designers to the class.
        > > > >
        > > > > The day that conformity is a class goal is the day I give away all my Footys!
        > > > >
        > > > > I really enjoy going to a Footy regatta and seeing such a great variety of boat designs, with such different interpretations, competing equally. Wide, skinny, short, long, deep fin, short fin, different rig designs...they have all demonstrated success. As yet, there's no dominant design.
        > > > >
        > > > > That's the really special thing about Footys being an Open (development) Class, and, I think, an essential part of the character of Footys.
        > > > >
        > > > > So who "blows the whistle" with regard to rules? There's two aspects of this. First, the Technical Committee makes interpretations of rules issues when needed, based on the rules as written. Second, rules changes can be proposed by any registered skipper and will be periodically be distributed to all as a ballot.
        > > > >
        > > > > I'm pleased to note that the rules ballots to date have resulted in removing restrictions rather than tightening them, keeping the spirit of an Open Class alive and well.
        > > > >
        > > > > Bill
        > > > >
        > > > > p.s. The inflatable Footy would not be legal as described, because the boat must fit in the box "in racing trim."
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com, marcjsmith@ wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > A.2 The metric dimensions relate to a boat approximately 1 foot long.
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > how does one measure approximatley?
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > My express is ready,  and I may build a new skinny V-12  we'll see...
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Marc
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > > > From: "William Allman" <wha3@>
        > > > > > To: FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2010 9:27:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
        > > > > > Subject: Re: [FootyUSA] Re: Pool Shark 3D Update: New Photos
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Amen!
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --- On Mon, 1/4/10, Stan Ogden <SOgden@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > From: Stan Ogden <SOgden@>
        > > > > > Subject: Re: [FootyUSA] Re: Pool Shark 3D Update: New Photos
        > > > > > To: "FootyUSA Listserve" <FootyUSA@yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > > Date: Monday, January 4, 2010, 8:17 PM
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >  
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Footy Sailors;
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Regarding Chris Staiger’s new “Pool Shark 3D” Footy.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > It makes me mad...to see one man’s view of the approved Footy rules distort the original intent of the Footy Class.  The rules say that...”IF IT FITS IN THE BOX, and can perform the sailing rig functions within the BOX, it is approved.  It doesn’t say “THAT IT MUST BE 12” LONG.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > What’s wrong with you guys?  If you don’t like the rules, start another class where it is a One Design Class with a length of 12”?  This would not necessarily be an OPEN CLASS like we have with the Footy Class.  With the current rules we have, it provides an opportunity for unique design, innovative concepts for hulls, rigging and entrepreneurial ideas to develop something new and possibly exceptional within a pre-measured BOX.  That’s America’s supreme greatness for innovation, is it not?  Why destroy or put down that concept?
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Stan Ogden  AMYA#10832
        > > > > > Bakersfield MYC
        > > > > > Footy #1887
        > > > > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ ++++
        > > > > >
        > > > > > On 1/4/10 3:32 PM, "Christopher Simmonds" <christopher. simmonds@ talktalk. net> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >  I think it's a terrific boat, well thought out, pioneering, and a great example of a development Class, BUT, it's not really a Footy, as described by its eponymous name! A Footy in my humble estimation is a development Class, but with a core element that is the length of the hull being 12" - no?  Taken to the extreme, why not have an inflatable hull that folds to 12 inches for the measurement box, but expands in water to a hull length of 24 inches!
        > > > > >  
        > > > > > Seriously, though, is it not better to keep the original parameters in mind before we end up with a hybrid  Class that will not be equally competitive?
        > > > > >  
        > > > > > Why not allow these boats that exploit the loose rules, to continue to be developed, but perhaps limit the  Class waterline length to a predetermined measurement, thereby introducing a modicum of  conformity and competitivity between the disparate designs?
        > > > > >  
        > > > > > I sail a Footy 507, so am not in the vanguard of cutting edge design, but would like to still race with other Footys and not always bring up the rear!
        > > > > >  
        > > > > > Great fun, chaps, and it's good to be able to air one's views without being piloried.  All developments are to be admired, but who owns the whistle that must be blown occasionally to keep the game fair?
        > > > > >  
        > > > > >  All the best!
        > > > > >  quayrocks
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.