Slippery bottom?

[Wansworth]

 

[veshengro]

Sold on the idea already...Right, I'm off to wallpaper me boat.

 

[Wansworth]

Sold on the idea already...Right, I'm off to wallpaper me boat.

Floral

 

[Chiara’s slave]

I’ve tried a fouling release system. It didn’t end well.

 

[Stemar]

Leaving aside cost - it sounds expensive, I wonder if it would work on a mud berth? If so, I could be tempted, 'cos sfa else does anything.

 

[Neeves]

It is not abrasion resistant, it is easily damaged. You need to use your yacht regularly. If you apply it and change your mind there is no simple removal and without some expense nothing else will then stick to the hull, except fouling organisms. It may contain carcinogens.

Its been tried on large commercial vessels, many have reverted to 'conventional' AF.

If it was as good as suggested we (you and I) would have been using it 10 years ago (and cost now would be reduced and conventional AF a relic of the past).

I recall International trialed it on a racing yacht some, many, years ago. If it was a success we would know.

The concept works on props etc - but they work quickly and often (google Prop Speed). But I am pretty sure given Prop Speeds market penetration - if it worked - they would have done it (we would know)

Things may change

Jonathan

 

[Chiara’s slave]

We used our fouling release coated race boat three times a week. That wasn’t enough for it to be self cleaning. We’ve gone for copper coat on Chiara. At least you can scrub it without damage. No. It doesn’t stop all the weed but it cleans up nicely, even after a winter with little use. And it’s very smooth.

 

[geem]

We used our fouling release coated race boat three times a week. That wasn’t enough for it to be self cleaning. We’ve gone for copper coat on Chiara. At least you can scrub it without damage. No. It doesn’t stop all the weed but it cleans up nicely, even after a winter with little use. And it’s very smooth.

The smoothness thr bottom that you cana Chieveley with Coppercoat is one of the things people forget. Worth a bit more speed

 

[Zing]

Consider ‘rough’ golf balls are faster for not being smooth. Maybe a bit of rough is what we all need.

 

[geem]

Consider ‘rough’ golf balls are faster for not being smooth. Maybe a bit of rough is what we all need.

You go with rough. Just leave the barnacles on! I will go with smooth. Not seen any race boats adopting the golf ball roughness approach

 

[chriscallender]

Consider ‘rough’ golf balls are faster for not being smooth. Maybe a bit of rough is what we all need.

I seem to remember that is because golf balls spin, and the roughness allows them to be somewhat steered in flight by people skilled at golf, ie not by me. Now sailing boats also spin, at least they do when going down the Alderney Race with a large spring tide behind them and they hit a whirlpool (I know this for a certain fact ) so you could be on to something.

Chris

 

[geem]

I seem to remember that is because golf balls spin, and the roughness allows them to be somewhat steered in flight by people skilled at golf, ie not by me. Now sailing boats also spin, at least they do when going down the Alderney Race with a large spring tide behind them and they hit a whirlpool (I know this for a certain fact ) so you could be on to something.

Chris

I don't think so. Golf balls spin in air. A compressible fluid. Boats sail in water. A none compressible fluid. Racers go for super smooth bottoms as they know they get more speed. Golf balls in air and boats in water have no fluid dynamic similarities

 

[Chiara’s slave]

We’re in the 1200 grit club.