• 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.  


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About blakie

  • Rank
  1. impressive real whomper....he is just about right except this is AC34 not 35.
  2. AC Youth Cup

    ahhh Navas...cut yourself some slack my friend you have been the hero of this cup to show that it does not have to be all flash just common sense thank you thank you
  3. Artemis?

    how could anyone congratulate Artemis achievement is f..ng crazy! this has NOTHING to do with the accident nor the death of their mate they were long ago in BIG trouble the management of their campaign will be reviewed as the "how NOT to" for them to be attempting to race with just 6 days of sailing in their designed boat could be viewed as inrresponsible and they look mighty dangerous too...what if they capsize again? and someone else perishes? would you all still say how galant of them for not giving up? really? in my opinion it is down right offensive for them to not only spend that man's millions (second most spent by any team) and not even be ready to race....but to carry on piling on the expenses when they KNOW it is a futile attempt....donate it to stop world hunger. if this would have been any other LVCup they would have been eliminated by now....the rest who thing other wise are a bunch of hypocrites and dreamers....why don't you pay their bills and see how that feels.
  4. Artemis?

    i posted somewhere else....but this is a very interesting letter from an impressive source: * Dave Hollom.: Paul Cayard is wrong in saying that the AC72 rule allows elevators and that all AC72's have them. An elevator is an essentially horizontal control surface whose lift coefficient (Cl), either positive or negative, can be adjusted to alter and maintain the angle of incidence and hence the Cl of the main plane. This can be achieved by either an all moving surface or a surface that incorporates a moveable flap. Either way, it either all moves or has an element that moves which the AC72 rule specifically disallows. Any AC72 sailing with an elevator is therefore illegal. Nevertheless, to foil successfully you must have some method of adjusting the incidence angle (Cl) of the main plane. The problem is that lift squares with velocity and yet the boat remains (excluding any aerodynamic effects) the same weight at 20kts as it is at 40kts. As the lift, for the same angle of attack, increases fourfold between 20 and 40kts, the incidence angle of the main foil must reduce to a quarter in order that the lift force remains constant, which it must to produce a constant ride height. If, because of the rules, you cannot adjust the Cl of the mainplane by altering the angle of an elevator you must alter the angle of the mainplane directly by altering the rake of the daggerboard to which it is attached or, alternatively, by using free surface effects to automatically reduce the lift, progressively, as the foil nears the water surface, or a combination of both. In either case, longitudinal stability is more easily achieved with a horizontal surface, well separated from the main plane, on the rudders. This, under the rule must be fixed and is thus a horizontal stabiliser not an elevator. It does what it says on the tin. It ensures that the back follows the front and that, whatever incidence the main plane is set at, it is approximately maintained. Altering the angle of the stabiliser before the start merely adjusts the starting point for trimming the main plane. Its relationship to the angle of the mainplane will remain the same at any given speed and weight. However, the trim angle at which the boat naturally wants to run will alter. It will be either more bow up or bow down which I guess is the reason for allowing the angle to be changed before the start. But, as others have observed, how do you ensure that it is not then subsequently continuously altered during the race and thus becomes an illegal elevator. Also, if some means could be found of ensuring that the stabiliser is not subsequently moved, weather is very fickle. If running bow up is safer, and that is not necessarily so, how can it be safe to set the boat up at a more bow down attitude in lighter airs when, during the course of the race, things could freshen up? The easiest, safest, and perhaps fastest, solution to the problem is to use a rudder mounted stabiliser that is moveable at all times, i.e. an elevator. But that is illegal. Having mastered the legal, more difficult and perhaps slower solution you can understand why Emirates and Prada are a little less than chuffed when Oracle, who seem to have been unable to master the more difficult but legal approach are offered the easier, but under the original rule, illegal solution in the name of safety. The purpose of the safety rules may well be to bring safety to the whole fleet and to the event but when they unfairly favour one team to the disadvantage of others then they are wrong. If any team can produce a safe boat under the original rules, then any team that cannot and realises that their boat is not safe and are unable to fix the problem under the existing rules, should withdraw. This brings us to another of Paul's points. Paul seems to think that Emirates and Prada would like to see Artemis out of the event and that this is the reason for their objections. I say this in the nicest possible way. Are Artemis, at the moment, in any position to offer a threat such that it is worth trying to prevent them from sailing? I think not.
  5. Artemis?

    the Outteridge comment is very telling....at this level of sports there is so much you can do to "protect" your job/role....this is a mistake that a LOT of teams make and one that TH has experienced himself....or do you think that Kenny let him touch the wheel? interesting that he could have taken that stand himself? there are many ways to manage this, look at oracle? lots of talent there....it is all how you manage that talent. i think they are on a better track when they sign their talent and the jobs are up for grabs....it can be a bit destructive/divisive....but if everyone knows ahead of time, then it is game on. or do you think that it does not happens in the other teams? and YES the crew will cry out because they are smart and they know that they are being crippled to a point. sometimes calling for a skipper such in advance is not good, sometimes it is. we can debate this to death.....but you need depth because on any given day any of these guys can fall....and you will need a plan B. its good to plan ahead no matter how you look at it...competition can be good as long as the leadership is solid and the players buy in ahead of time.
  6. Artemis?

    i bet T Hutch got the boot because of team attitude...the fact that he possibly could not get around the shake up and PC had to clean up sheet all around. I have to say this new combo looks much better....this is the Americas Cup and there will ALWAYS be changes in the team, the skipper, the afterguard. this will probably not be the last one. not on Artemis not anywhere it happens in all sorts of sports....look at the San Francisco forty niners....the coach can't make up his mind about who to go with. he has two pretty good QB's and well there will be those that have different opinions of which is the right decision. I guess PC is the coach and the decision stands with him. get over it. i do agree with a previous poster about James Spithill who very non chalantly put his whole team in the red....he is not 100% safe yet. NOBODY is live by sword die by the sword. now it will be very interesting to see if Mr. Hutchinson still praises the Cup, the boats, the show....or does he join all the non-players and hope for a different game....this has always baffled me. of course you agree with the decision if you are in money train. let's see how he feels now that he is also in the sidelines...can't wait for the next Seahorse copy. ouch!
  7. AC Youth Cup

    you just proved our point....dumbass defend at all cost instead of....hey, maybe they have a point? can't say we didn't try
  8. AC Youth Cup

    I don't know that anyone would necessarily disagree with this, but;. What has become really tiring, even for a fan, is the incessant posts as to how unbelievable an event this will be. Hype has a runway, and at the moment it has clearly run it's course. Even if this event will be great, which I expect, you need to seriously lay off and let people realize it as it unfolds. You can post 1000 times on SA how great it will be, but give people the benefit of their own judgement in making that determination. If it happens let it - quit trying to force it. Everyone knows most of what you post is directly from TE or your personal interest in the cup - and as much as the AC has interest, not all share your or TE's viewpoint. Give it a frigging break, for your own benefit. I read this 3 times and then checked the poster's name 10 times! And I actually agree with everything said. So far, this round of the AC has only partly delivered. Some of what we have seen has been excellent. Some has been decidedly second rate. Nobody, including the whole AC Alphabet and defnder team think that it is anywhere near right yet. Despite that, dear old Stingray will jump on anything that wiffs of the slightest critisism of what is going on. Stingray - you used to be so admired for the depth of your research and your ability, at short notice, to provide exactly the right bit of information. You promised us that you wouldn't be a slavish follower of Oracle and would be ready to critisise them if there were shortcomings. You have lost all semblence of reasonable discourse as you now simply defend anything and everything the defender camp does or says. I believe that if RC held up a black card and said it was "Oracle White", you would be the first to argue that the black was indeed white! I would so much like to have the old Stingray back and I am sure so would many others. Spinbot needs to be put back in the box. i also read this and decided to come from retirement and chime in....as i totally agree with both posts. but i must add that my disappointment (not negativity) lies with Oracle, TE and all the powers within the team and organizers....they, as with SRay need to perhaps come clean with the ac world and say, "hey, maybe we got some things wrong" instead of the spinbot and more spinbot. they have over promised and under delivered and EVERYONE has noticed. including the prospective sponsors, teams, and so on. the list is sooo long is amazing....and yes, we will all tune in to see the cup in frisco....but you can't argue with the fact that they have done pretty mediocre job so far.
  9. Artemis?

    so what? GD might get couple of fines...for speaking up against big brother and IJ and everyone he darn pleases big freaking deal sounds like the big NFL, NBA and the boys that don't let Cuban and the team owners say a darn thing....but guess what? they still do, its great media opportunity...and one way to beef up the non profit contributions. and believe me...PC nor RC nor Ellison have the balls to kick TNZ out of the next Cup why? because they would have NO Cup if they did karma is a bitch
  10. Artemis?

    excellent interview by VS...Pierre really went beyond the call of duty and ASKED all the hard questions Cayard defended himself quite nicely if i was a jury member i would have sided with him that is until and ONLY until i hear the other side. come on Grant, show us your cards very interesting for sure