atwinda

Members
  • Content Count

    625
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by atwinda

  1. It's not wrong... I mean these boats are so close already - it certainly seems like someone with the $$ and motivation could take a v1 boat and do it if one of the cup teams doesn't. They also have the potential to run a "get up to speed" foil on one tack, and then gybe/tack onto the high-speed foils for the record run, if it was too difficult to get a foil capable of 70+ knots to be useful at 20 knots.
  2. atwinda

    Team NYYC

    Looks like the shed doors are open, and the camera cat is out front waiting for something to happen, via the web cam... edit- Shes out:
  3. atwinda

    Will Any Team Ever Fly A Code Zero?

    We hear a lot about "loosing rudder grip" etc, and that's when the crashes happen. What I am suggesting, is that they end up with an out of balance sail plan to below water foil configuration and it becomes too risky to even consider the code zero. So the question becomes, would you rather go 7 knots or be on your side?
  4. atwinda

    Will Any Team Ever Fly A Code Zero?

    A lot is being made of the drag penalty once up on the foils, but there is a balance aspect to consider as well. With the additional sail area, they must not be able to get to their desired settings elsewhere in the configuration once the boat is up and ripping. I'm sure the "structural headstay" as others are referring to it, is connected to hydraulics under deck, and they can play luff (jib Cunningham) and rake fairly easily, which may not be as feasible with the code zero tacked out onto the bow sprit.
  5. atwinda

    Team NYYC

    I am expecting to see their third set of foils when it comes out of the shed again. They've got nothing to lose at this point by piling on whatever gear they have been holding back. They had sailors from all the other teams crawling all over their boat, I'm sure they took note of a feature or two.
  6. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    I don't understand why you are arguing about this. As a sailmaker of 20 years, I'd expect you would be more familiar with 8 point offsets, and describing 2d curvature. Mozzy is wrong, and you are wrong. The illustration I provided is how you measure mast bend. The numbers aren't accurate because of the angle of the shot, not because the technique is incorrect. Let that sink in before you go off on another four-letter word keyboard rant.
  7. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    I gave PERCENTAGES to how much the mast is ACTUALLY BENDING- and qualified them by saying that they are not dead on because of the stated factors. They are far more accurate than a projected line from the mast base, and if the annotated diagram didn't make sense to you, you are the fucking idiot. Calling me a troll is rich for a sub 100 post sock.
  8. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    It is absolutely clear that you have no idea what you're talking about. I stand by that the yellow line in front of the mast is a better indication of mast rake, than mast bend. Obviously, these numbers are nowhere near accurate, as the shot is not dead on the side of the boat, and they don't account for mast rotation - so they should be taken with a grain of salt. However, it does accurately depict how fundamentally incorrect measuring mast bend via a straight projected line from the mast base is.
  9. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    The "mast" bend illustration is not describing mast bend, but rather rake. No doubt the mast is bending, but not 1.5 mast widths as pictured. A more accurate measurement would be taken from the aft edge, foot to head, and offset measurements made at 1/8 or 1/4 points. I think the thing most analysis is missing at this point, is the balance aspect. They appear to be running more rake, with smaller headsails, effectively moving the COE aft. This would all have to work in conjunction with the COG and whatever insane voodoo physics are at play underwater - which almost certainly have been affected by the foil mods and new rudder/elevator.
  10. atwinda

    Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 36

    Does @weta27 or one of the other superb NZ photogs have detailed shots of the mast head on any teams boat with the runners attached? Or even better of LR with or without the runners connected at deck level. While I understand "every little bit helps" I just think this whole backstay thing is a bit of a show. Similar to the jumperless rigs in the IACC v5 boats in Valencia. BMW Oracle had dummy jumpers during the lead up, but shed them once it counted- ultimately the team had tried to be too tricky with their equipment, and the gear wasn't reliable and didn't pay off. And with LLPR we have seen early engineering fail in the form of the foil arms, bow, and I'm sure lots more we will never hear about. I hope they keep their eyes on the prize and not get caught up in being too fancy...
  11. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    Would you have preferred I used the cunt word?
  12. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    Again with ETNZ and LLPR already committed their final foil designs, what is there to copy at this point? What idea can another team copy from ETNZ's foils or flaps that would integrate into their existing foil/flap config. There is no advantage in waiting to fit them to the boat- Hiding them until the last two weeks would only mean they don't have time to optimize and test different wind / wave conditions. Imagine it blows in the upper range for the last two weeks before the cup, and now they haven't tested the new super top secret foils in the expected light range because some yahoo on SA told them to conceal the foils until the last minute so no one could copy them (ya know cause we showed them foiling too early in 2013). It's illogical. What you're failing to grasp, and trying to cover up by pointing to previous cycles is, the individual boat systems are too tightly integrated, and it's too late in the game, to copy significant ideas from other platforms. Iterative test-driven development doesn't work like that. If you throw a hail mary late in the game, every tool in your development pipeline has to compensate as well. It's just not going to happen.
  13. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    As far as copying flaps, I would suspect that the flap shapes are highly dependent on the leading bit (the foil), and again, I don't think you could transplant an ETNZ shaped flap on any of the challenger's foils and expect a miracle. I agree that they likely have new parts planned up until the match. However, they don't have the Prada Cup to deal with, so there is no reason not to show up the line with their best gear. There is no one to dispatch other than the remaining challenger. Performance improvements during the match will consist of tuning and boat handling, not some 11th hour new-fangled mainsail they've kept top secret this whole time.
  14. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    100% wishful thinking- and that doesn't address the slight "whole package" issue. I'm not saying modification is off the table- Just that copying a foil is ridiculous and entirely impractical at this point.
  15. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    Who is going to copy them? INEOS and AM are out of foils, and LRPP would have had to commit to final designs for theirs by now. Each team is well down their own design paths, and I very much doubt that copying foils would help as the whole foil, platform, and sail package would have to adjust as well.
  16. atwinda

    Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 36

    They have exactly the same chance of using B1 as the other teams- ZERO. While the hull shapes might be similar, there is no chance the internal structure or layup schedule is the same. They would essentially be throwing away any gained performance benefits from learning how to build an AC75- and out of all the teams, they had the most structural problems (in the public domain) with their B1. The B1s would serve as better spectator platforms for the shore crew than they ever would as a competitor against another team's B2 (outside of the slight possibility that you break your B2 in 1/2 a day before the match). Just think of all the beer they could keep in those crew trenches.
  17. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    Have we heard if Ben got his wish and received the FCS code so his team could "fix" it?
  18. atwinda

    Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 36

    I don't think the runners would explicitly control only the top of the main (actually, I wouldn't expect the runners to change the upper shape of the main at all). Their effect would be seen more throughout the mid-span where the mast would bend and flatten the sail(s). The takeaway- they likely have a lot less luff curve in their mainsails than ETNZ, allowing them to get away with the less mast bend.
  19. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    It was obviously a rhetorical question to point out the abnormally high level of BS going around in this thread lately...
  20. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    If you consider Ben Ainslie's time with Oracle in 2013 a win, do you also consider his time with ETNZ in 2007 a loss? He was the B-boat helm in both cases. It seems that many here weigh Ben's influence heavily in the 2013 win, however, an argument could be made that another qualified tactician would have provided similar results- To be clear, I'm suggesting that it wasn't so much putting Ben in that role, as it was removing JK from it, which was a bigger influence. Ben being involved as a B-Boat driver likely had as much input during the development of the boats during the build-up as he would have as anyone on the A-Boat. I highly doubt he brought game-altering concepts to the table only after he was promoted to the A-Boat in the give it everything we've got assault to retain the cup. That's just not logical. I don't understand why there is so much importance placed on Ben's trophy case. He can obviously drive the boat, and I doubt that his age and reflexes are the reason the INEOS AC75 has underperformed to date. Does anyone here really think Ben is the last word in that organization- that Ben is sitting down and telling the designers how to shape the foils, sails, and hull? Those are all team management decisions. To paraphrase Ken Read- They need to close all the doors around them, hunker down, and assess the viability of every option they have available as a team. They aren't out yet, but relying on Ben's past results won't put them back into it either. The thing I am most surprised by is that INEOS and AM have used their foil allocation- especially considering that they both had test platforms, and they should have been far enough down the development path when it came to committing the designs for their AC75 foils. And actually, if my memory serves me correctly, I believe several around here claimed that ETNZ specifically would be behind the other teams with early test boats who were able to test foil configurations. The other notable thing to mention in this regard, is that INEOS would have carried the software IP from the 2017 AC foils into this, so they weren't exactly starting from a blank sheet as AM did.
  21. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    I have tried several ways to type this, but they all sound antagonistic- and I want to emphasize that's not my intention. Unfortunately for Ineos, the top speed of the day didn't help them unglue the bottom of the boat from the water when it counted. I have a hunch that both Ineos and ETNZ with a sort of similar hull concept really struggle to take off, and are much more optimized for flight. While LLPR and AM more subtle bustle/skeg approaches allow for lower take-off speeds. LLPR didn't have nearly as difficult a time getting back on their foils against ETNZ in that last one.
  22. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    Did the rudder let go, or did someone forget to stop turning the boat after the gybe? great footage.
  23. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    Yes - but think about it from the perspective of having to replace the controller at the dock and then go sailing. Ben: "somethings off... get the FCS guy on board to the check the controller" shore crew: "oh hey.. would you look at that, we didn't update the spare controllers firmware..." Ben: "what the hell do I pay you for!?" shore crew: "we'll download the update and install it on the water.." later at the presser "we received the updates as late as mid day". Not everything has to have a complicated or vindictive reason for happening.
  24. atwinda

    INEOS Team GB

    After watching the presser just now - the software-update-gate might be due to them swapping out the control board for a spare as Ben mentioned. Maybe the spare did not have the update applied to it ahead of time, and they didn't realize that until they were out on the water. I mean, that doesn't give much credit to the team in charge of that, but it's certainly in the "the easiest explanation" category. but man... Ben's attacks on the FCS and receiving redress for the FCS because it's out of their hands were very unprofessional. The exchange between Ben and Pete about ETNZ being open about anything if they asked for was just odd. Ben saying he didn't know if they would be able to sail today, cause they didn't know if they could fix their boat overnight... I mean come on... pull it together.
  25. atwinda

    Emirates Team New Zealand.

    I think something along these lines is likely. FCS has to accept input from the individual team's controls- whether that's as simple as "Up" or "Down", I don't know, but given the complexity of these boats that seems unlikely. INEOS being one of two teams to launch a smaller scale trail boat- they must have had to develop their own version of the FCS for that. I wonder if they made some macro-level control design decisions based on how their internal small scale FCS worked, and they are having some issues apply lessons learned there to the OD FCS...