• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
    • B.J. Porter

      Moderation Team Change   06/16/2017

      After fifteen years of volunteer moderation at SA, I will no longer be part of the moderation team. The decision to step aside is mine, and has been some time in the works but we did not wish to announce it in advance for a number of reasons. It's been fun, but I need my time back for other purposes now. The Underdawg admin account will not be monitored until further notice, as I will be relinquishing control of it along with my administrative privileges. Zapata will continue on as a moderator, and any concerns or issues can be directed to that account or to the Editor until further notice. Anyone interested in helping moderate the forums should reach out to Scot by sending a PM to the Editor account. Please note that I am not leaving the community, I am merely stepping aside from Admin responsibilities and privileges on the site.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About curiousinsider

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    The Med
  1. Tell that to the narrow moth sailors, rudder T-foils were what made them sailable downwind. Otherwise...pitchpole Correct, but please read above posts... Read them...and your point was that T-foils have nothing to do with preventing pitchpoles, which they quite clearly do... If you read I say that LIFTING rudder foil do not prevent pp, they help it. Well... Bigger LIFTING rudders foils still DO help prevent pp. Actually all AC72 rudders foils are lifting ones. As the boat pitch angle goes more bow down both boards and rudder foils see their angle of attack decrease but the rotation happens close to the CG so while the board sees little vertical movement the rudders sees a big change in vertical velocity so the angle of attack changes reducing the lift and thus restoring recovery moment to the point that if the change in angle is quick they can even generate downforce. The bigger the rudder foils (aka "elevators" these days) the bigger this effect is which turns to be a "dumping" effect against quick changes in pitch angle (as it happens right before a pitchpole) giving the crew time to do something (like increase wing twist or steer to change the AW) A quick estimate of the LCG of these boats and the rudder/boards longitudinal positions show that for the size of these the foils (especially at the range of speeds they sail!) their normal operating lift coefficient has to be low so their "oversize" is not performance related (why add wetted surface?)
  2. Unfortunately the AC72 rules (and for what matters any rule) fight systematic abuses of reductions in weight by say, reducing the thickness of skins or density of the core "beyond reason" by feeling confident with reduced safety factors or stating a minimum weight or VCG of a rig but it is hard (I can't even see how) to go beyond that. And unfortunately most (if not all) failures happen for other reasons. Even going to certification rules outside of racing ones like ABS does not guarantee safety. You may have more strict requirements regarding which load cases to use or even more detailed construction requirements but all you need is a minor design flaw, or failure in the construction process (just a little problem in a secondary bonding of a well design and, otherwise built structure) and under some dynamic situations (beyond the usual static load tests which regularly are performed) something can fail. TNZ lost a mast in the 4th race of the 2003 Cup because a rig fitting failed. Probably a properly designed and built one but maybe a dent, a sequence of loads (they certainly got a very unlucky sequence of waves) were enough to break it under very specific conditions. Luckily no one was underneath so few remember it. Actually since I’ve known about the AC things fail regularly in pretty much every competitive boat, some minor and some not so minor but people rarely hear about the ones which don’t turn to be catastrophic. Trust me shore teams are one of the most unfairly underrated people in the AC. So… yes. After something like what happened last Thursday hopefully everyone will learn and push to make competitive sailing safer but there is no way to make it absolutely safe and we may as well not even know the ultimate reason for the failure after reviewing all the available evidence. But still learn in the process. Two random examples of complexity (and by no means the most relevant ones): - After this not even all AC72 sailors will agree whether wearing a life jacket is safer or not. - Not even amateur leisure sailing is exempt of risk.
  3. I have to confess a bit of this “let's find something or someone to blame for this tragedy” that some display really bothers me. High level competition in which fast and highly loaded machines are used is intrinsically dangerous. It is a measured risk but time after time sailors (but not only, also designers and in general aficionados) push to sail faster and reach further. I doubt anyone is more aware of that than the sailors themselves and let's face it is dangerous and the only reason there are; no more casualties is that most sailors are well aware of the dangers and behave in a cautious enough manner. Just think of an accidental gybe or even how many times in a big boat someone less careful than he should stands under a boom ignoring that a halyard or halyard lock breaking can kill him. But sometimes even being careful is not enough and a sum of circumstances turn a “phew... that was close” that we forget two days after into a tragedy. That was for instance what happened (added to other circumstances but, again, more than one) when Martin Wizner got killed in 99 in an AC boat, which many of the ones looking for someone to blame might take as a reference of a much safer yacht. Some other times boats capsize, lose a keel, a mast (not such a rare thing!) or sink, nothing happens and we quickly forget about it ignoring how high the chances of that to happen were. You can even kill yourself falling off a bike riding at 10 mph! So as I said this simplistic search of someone to blame really bothers me (like that stupid comment above properly answered already by a few with some more common sense than the author). America's Cup sailors are well aware of the risks which exist (and are not small) and they behave professionally and do what they can within reason to protect themselves. And sometimes, in some rare occasions, like today, even the best ones can get caught in a tragic situation. And trust me, if anyone has any doubt, neither designers, boat builders, team managers, etc, you name it, involved in a project like this even considers to put the safety of any of the members of the teams behind anything else, or simply ignore it. Sure, sometimes mistakes happen and even without mistakes just an unexpected gust can turn a not very easy situation into a critical one but as harsh as it may sound it is a part of this “game” and I doubt there is anyone seriously involved in it not aware of it. So yes, we will all learn to sail and race safer (as it has been happening for many years) but the limits will always be pushed and that is the only reason for progress. It is the very same nature of high level competition and the persons involved in it. There is no room for reckless people. Having said that I think there is a need to put some perspective of what really is important here today and it is the fact that even if it was doing what he loved to do an exceptional sailor died today because of a sum of circumstances and a lot of friends (and he had many around) and family will miss him. And everyone else even related to him just by being a fellow sailor with think about him more than twice and feel sad about it. Also we will all learn and out of that hopefully analyze things with calm and help make sailing, even extreme fast competitive sailing, a bit safer than it was today, which won’t ever guarantee 100% safety but no one ignores that. So… sorry for the long venting but as I said it bothers me to read these finger pointers while sitting in from their sofas simplifying things beyond what they can be simplified looking for something or someone to blame and detracting attention from what I am sure most of us here care about: To regret a sad tragedy that we all hope it had never happened, to send our condolences and wish the best to those who love him and after that try to understand how to reduce the risk of it happening again, but today, unfortunately, even the last one is secondary.
  4. Better boat? So why didn't they win? Although it is received wisdom that the wing was the difference, I don't think this is the truth. And neither does Jimmy Spithill. In a recent interview he said that they won because they had a more powerful boat with more righting moment. And the fact that they had 110 foot-long hulls couldn't have hurt anything either. I'm sure the wing helped, but OR probably would have won without it. So why are te new hulls of the AC 72 almost replica's of The Alinghi dog-cat? Fastest boats on the planets chosse second best design? The BOR tri is the ultimate racing machine? I doubt that. Would be fun to try... AC 72 Catversion against tri version. both with wings. I am pretty sure the cat wins but we will never know. Well... a closer look shows they are not all that similar. However there was a fundamental reason for the bigger rocker of the BOR tri hulls (and everything else which was influenced by that extra rocker) and it was the fact that it still had to float with a maximum waterline length of 90 feet. No one could imagine than using water ballast tanks to be able to measure in a load case never used for sailing as A5 needed to do would be allowed. Advantages of appointing your own measurer...
  5. I don't think you can find a quote saying A5 would surely win after the wing was made public and mainly after the extension was set. I remember writing that I was impressed. Wing? The wing helped but righting moment won. As simple as that. Why do you think Alinghi's whole fight was to try to dispute the Cup in a venue where there was little wind?
  6. You in particular know I read Sailing Anarchy in hope of gems like this. ^^ So, the pitchpole of a 72 ft cat with the windward is normal for you ? If you don't think the cause is the design, what do you think it is, the crew? the "10ft waves" ? Do you say they are going to same design ? LOL When you bear away with one of these boats in 25+ knots there are so many reasons why pitchpole can happen that no one with a minimal knowledge would talk with the authority you display which can just come from ignorance. I am sure the TNZ guys who are far from stupid and who, by the way, have limited so far their testing to straight line sailing and low risk manouvers in signifficantly less wind (not saying that is wrong at all but certainly the chances for somthing like that to happen are way smalle) are less dismissive than you.
  7. This is awesome. You in particular know I read Sailing Anarchy in hope of gems like this. Where else can I get the real shit, the critical essense, the raw, untreated sewage of opinion from someone who is so qualified to comment? In all seriousness, thank you. Koukel You are right. Based on the correlation between Tornado-Cat predictions (wishful thinking?) for the 33rd Cup and the results from his words we should conclude that Oracle will defend succesfully against Artemis...