• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

generative.design

Members
  • Content count

    385
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About generative.design

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

504 profile views
  1. There was also this particular break, this double break. It was a bit like a chamfer in the diagonal which was very long This, and the comments on OR's foils are perhaps the most interesting bits. I found that shape particularly intriguing, I don't remember seeing it on previous designs. Can be well seen in stills from Jason's recent vid:
  2. I believe this was discussed openly during the LV - I believe someone from TJ said (who were using the same basic package as OR) they were losing hydro towards the end of each race, while the Kiwis were not. It's interesting to see that borne out powerfully by the data.
  3. Which would match up with the comment that he was trying to 'make the lines match up'. Especially sweet to think ETNZ pwned OR on the software/code front
  4. That's a neat summary of the cyclor issue, yet at the same time, it also shows how thin the arguments against cyclors always were. For example, the heeling and leaning out of the boat arguments certainly turned out to be incorrect as the AC50s essentially stay flat throughout the race due to the righting moment of the foils and 'anything goes' rudders. Likewise, the grinders were not going to be able to kneel while creating max power - I am having a hard time imagining that the teams thought they could. Granted, those are things you might only find out over the course of the design process, but that doesn't mean that you should make all the critical decisions at the start and then try a few adjustments to make up for those unwise decisions later... I think the biggest hurdles may well have been the fear of the unknown (and of innovation ending in failure, as it often does), and the really broad repercussions for crew changes that the cyclor option could have brought with it. In that sense, perhaps ETNZ had another leg up in that they were the ones who shook up the entire team after 2013 and were thus in a much better position to implement sweeping changes both in terms of crew and design, whereas the other teams were thinking on a smaller scale. And yes, if it never occurred to them, then they probably don't deserve to win Cups..
  5. Correct, yet another key advantage of the cyclor setup. It's almost like the ETNZ design team played chess thinking 8 moves ahead and the others only one.
  6. I am interested to find out why the other teams supposedly looked at the cycling option when there was still time to make such changes, but dismissed it as 'not much better' and thus not worth pursuing? Even if they (wrongly) thought that the benefits were only marginal, even a marginal benefit would surely be preferable to none, especially when you know your competitors might take advantage of it? How come only the ETNZ design team realized that there were a whole bunch of benefits coming from that one decision: better hydro budget = more tactical options and more maneuverability, better power generation, more consistent power (hydro) performance over the duration of the entire race or multiple races compared to grinders, and even better windage? Ultimately these are the things that are making the difference now.
  7. +1
  8. He basically hollered at JS to come up more "He's not going up!" (and was waving at him at the same time). PB believed JS wasn't keeping clear properly and pressed the button, umpires didn't agree and gave no penalty.
  9. It looked like they simply fell off their foils, very similar to the issue on ETNZ during race 4, I think it was? The choreography of the starts is easy to get wrong, and it looked like they got something wrong during a turn and were dead in the water.. and PB got them. In race 4, PB was miraculously able to come back from that mistake and win the start - PB was lucky that for some reason JS decided not to go for the hook.
  10. Yup, and JS freely admitting he might not be at the helm tomorrow. Fair enough.
  11. Yeah I thought that as well when they showed that stat for the first time, but when they showed for the second time, later in the race, you could see OR was wayyyy down on overall pressure. You could also see that a lot of OR's pressure was going to the foils, not the wing. ETNZ's hydro budget was exactly the opposite: most of the pressure was going to the wing, which they are adjusting much more aggressively than OR (see the previous discussion over the last few days). Plus, you could also see that the cyclors were able to replenish hydro much more quickly than the grinders, and that for that reason they were able to keep overall pressure relatively lower than OR - they didn't need a similar cushion for hydro-intensive situations because the cyclors were able to replenish quickly.
  12. The reason why they didn't do it earlier is probably simple - they wanted a reliable, stable boat that wasn't going to kill their grinders by being exceptionally hungry for hydro. Basically, they decided they had to shave their foils as a last-ditch attempt to match the better ETNZ design, but ETNZ's design achieved that same performance without being unstable.
  13. PB is making as nice lil gesture to JS during that pre-start hook - more raw emotion from the ETNZ team
  14. JS pretty much laid it out this morning - they shaved their foils to kill some drag, but in return they sacrificed stability. Less stability means they require plenty more hydro to keep the boat on the foils, which puts even more stress on the OR grinders, who are already not producing as much pressure as the cyclors. Well played ETNZ design team.