• 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.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hump101

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Brittany, France
  • Interests
    Naval Architecture structural engineering, speedsailing, offshore racing
  1. Hoy and a few others have been measured at 2.7kW peak output, so 1450 is a bit low.
  2. Just adding to Groucho's comments, another benefit of the wing mast is that, by cranking it to windward instead of leeward, you can rapidly depower the sail, very useful in a blow.
  3. One of our alloy powerboat hulls was being displayed in a Middle East boat show. I was there to press the flesh, and one evening a man asked me to hold the end of his tape measure whilst he measured the hull. When I asked him what he was doing he was quite open that he was going to copy it, as he owned a GRP boat shop locally. When I pointed out that he didn't have the right to do so he just laughed and said I couldn't stop him. He made his copy, but in GRP and far too heavy, so the performance was terrible, and then had the cheek to ask me to try and fix it. He didn't sell any as far as I am aware, but soon we were getting people telling us our design was flawed because the performance wasn't as stated, and when we investigated we found they were referring to this copy, not our originals. Not a nice situation.
  4. Check with the charter company. I have a helmsmans certificate of competency, sail/power, but have never had to produce it to charter in the Adriatic or Ionian. If you do need it you can get a cert after an afternoons exam, provided of course you are ready for it (navigation, lighting, buoys, safety, colregs, etc. is in a written exam, and then take a yacht out in a practical exam for a few hours). Having the cert gives me my insurance on my own yacht, the only reason I've needed it so far.
  5. There are powerboats, even commercially operated large ones, with V-foils fore & aft far away of the center of gravity and no active control systems or even slower adjustments. Yet they are very stable in pitch. If there are none in sailboats it's not because of lack of stability, but because of too much drag to be useful. We've tested model powerboats with foils at the corners and again the same boats with main liftng foils at the CG and aft control foils (all T foils). Foils at the corners was fine in pitch stability in a straight line, but was a higher drag solution. The big difference is the behaviour when manoeuvring. Yawing on main foils seems to be quite stable, and hence the attitude of the hull remains approximately similar, but with foils on each corner they are yawing and swaying, and seem more prone to losing lift leading to crash diving. We didn't test in waves, and it should be remembered that model foils are VERY sensitive to surface interaction issues, hence the above observations have very limited applicability.
  6. Lots of kids sailing cats here in France, Hobie teddy's (not sure if this is a current model). My son started at 10, but could have started earlier if we'd been in the area before. He had a great time. Easily righted with two kids, bulletproof, but heavy, though any cat, regardless of construction, is too heavy for a 10 year old to move around on the beach so it doesn't really make any difference.
  7. As an owner of an F40 cat - one with "accommodation space" in the hulls, I would second Rob's suggestion. I've been working on a design like this for a while. Go for a cat with beam 80% of length, a removable pod accommodation, removable racks, and hulls the size of the floats on a 40' tri. This would be the cheapest, fastest, most easily containerised option, and the only way an offshore-capable boat could beat smaller inshore boats with the pod removed. If you want ultimate speed, then a tri is just a hull too many. Offshore it will always have two in the water, even when you are sailing quite hard, because the angle of heel required to get the main hull out and still have enough dihedral to stop the windward float slamming means that the efficiency of the rig is too compromised unless it cants. I know you see lots of videos with the main hull out, but ask the crews how often the main hull is out offshore, not so often. In a cat the hulls are in the water when you are resting, but a lighter cat on two hulls has less WSA than the heavy tri on two when most is on the float. As soon as you are ready to go you can be on one hull easily, much more steadily than with a small cat. Big tri's dominate in length-constrained classes because the structural issues are more easily addressed, so they can be made with more righting moment, but that is no longer an issue at 40' with infused tow. They also dominate because the righting curve has more area underneath it, as noted above, but this is also less of an issue now we have cheap 9D controllers. If you had a weight-, or money-constrained class (two views of the same thing), the cat is not so easily beaten. I love my boat, but accommodation split between hulls is a pain for racing offshore, and once you have a centre pod, you don't need more than floats for hulls. You can make the pod move from side to side to optimise RM, and achieve similar RM to a tri with less width, mass, and windage. Of course, accommodation will be minimal, but sleep, cook and poop is all that is required and any more accommodation is just money and weight. If you really want to go cruising, have a second mega-pod to stick on and live with the performance hit. With the smaller floats it will all fit in one container, fabrication is easy using an existing tri float mould (plenty laying around here) and off the peg mast section, and such a boat would be class-competitive for all the small inshore, coastal, and transatlantic/pacific races (nothing southern ocean, of course). I've costed this at $300,000 for a one-off (a few years ago, so update for inflation, 3DI, and if you want lifting foils), a series would be a bit cheaper. It's about the only design I would swap mine for.
  8. You don't need a life-threatening head impact to lose conciousness long enough to drown. That's why I started wearing one, not just to prevent injury. I wiped out hard enough to burst my ear drum, which is unpleasant enough, but I was knocked out for a brief time too, and would have drowned without immediate help. I've had far worse wipeouts since (burst my ear drums again twice) but never been near to losing conciousness with a helmet on. All on windsurfers, but I can see this happening with an A now the speeds are getting similar.
  9. I first wore a helmet for windsurfing after a couple of nasty accidents. I thought it would inhibit the sensing of wind direction via my ears, but surprisingly you quickly get used to sensing the wind via other exposed bits instead.
  10. Yes, I'm still here, hopeful that with a change in management we will see a proper race this time. And yes, I followed the last race hoping to see a race despite my reservations, and I'll probably follow the next one regardless of the format, just to see how it plays out. The fact that I'm a lost case does not mean I can't hope for a better format eventually. If there was another fully crewed race around the world I'd probably follow that, but there isn't, hence why I really want this race to sort itself out (from a technical and sailing perspective, I hear the roaring commercial success). Regarding Jacks euthanasia suggestion, are you suggesting self harm, or that the race be killed? Why not fix it instead? I hope my comments above are read in the manner intended, as positive criticism to encourage positive change. I'm not trying to be negative at all, when the previous format was announced it was clear that the racing would suffer, and it did. We're told it was a great commercial success, so why not develop it to retain the commercial success and try to improve the racing? I don't see why you can't have both, given that the commercial success doesn't seem to be related to the sailing at all.
  11. There is no irony between those two paragraphs if you think that DF's boat broke because its parts were defective, rather than, as you infer, the sailors broke it. It wouldn't have been more interesting for me to see Abu Dhabi and SCA sailing new boats against a couple of retreads, but it wouldn't have been less interesting either, since I can't get less than zero interest. I'm hopeful of something better next time around, though I suspect that by the time they set out again with the VO65's, the singlehanded monohull 24 hour record will be greater than these boats can achieve, and that is the real measure of far this event has reduced as a technical and sailing challenge.
  12. On the contrary, those examples you give were huge issues with the individual teams concerned, but didn't ruin the entire races, because lots of other races were going on within those races for other teams. However, for the OD's, with so little to differentiate them, the smallest differences in reliability play a huge role, and then there is nothing else to watch because all the rest are stuck together. In years to come we will be looking back on the last race and saying that DongFeng never stood a chance from the beginning because you can't compete without a reliable boat, much as you are now saying about your examples. In a design race there is always a winner with the best design, and a loser. In a OD race of such a large, complex machines there is also always going to be a winner with the most reliable boat, and a loser. It's widely acknowledged that AD won the last race with a boat that their team spent a lot of time and money on, much more private team time than any other team. Their boat wasn't faster, but it was always fast. Compare their prep to that of DF, a relatively late campaign that used the public repair and maintenance system to a much greater degree. Without the specific skills of certain crew they probably wouldn't have finished several other legs, and arguably had the other teams had the same issues they wouldn't have had the skills onboard to fix them. All irrelevant because, once you've had to slow down to repair something in an OD fleet, your gone. In any case, as I tried to explain above, whilst I'm definitely not an OD fan, the OD principle itself is not the real problem, it just exacerbates the real problem, which is the removal of the crews skills in making any difference to the results due to the tenderness of the boats combined with their strength. When the difference the crew can make is smaller than the noise created by reliability issues then you no longer have a race, just a lottery. This is the issue I hope Mark Turner will address for the next race, assuming he is still stuck with these boats. I'm not suggesting they add RM or remove strength, risking the crews health, but they can, for example, add in a public domain data acquisition system that monitors a range of elements, and applies "not to exceed" values to them, and penalises the teams if they exceed them. Each team would then have to exploit the structures to get speed as optimally as possible, testing another skill set and hopefully differentiating between them, without risking failure of the boat. Thus, for example, the crew that can steer through the waves, minimising the loading for a given speed, will gain ground. Artificial, yes of course, but no more so than choosing not to have autopilots to keep the crew busy, or not providing crew protection on deck to give good images of waves washing over the boats, or any of the other arbitrary design choices made.
  13. OK, so I'll change my statement to "If the VOR's analysis of the return is so accurate and positive, and your hypothesis that the sponsors are numbers driven is correct, then we can expect so many new sponsors that VOR with have to restrict entry. Lets see how that works out." The same premise applies, just with new faces. The old VOR is dead, in my view, for two reasons: The first is that the OD boats mean that each leg is basically a one day race into port with a long boring delivery in which all boats are stuck together like glue. I'm sure the crews are trying their hardest all the time, but that is the nature of OD, when ALL the crews are trying their hardest they ALL achieve the same thing. The second, and for me the most important, is that the low RM combined with high weight makes the boats near bulletproof, and the element of seamanship, where the skill of the sailor is able to extract that little more from the structure, or is able to extract that little more speed whilst protecting the structure, is gone. This last element is, for me, the essence of trans-ocean racing, and without it there is no differentiation between the crews, and hence the situation in the first comment above. The joke of the OD idea is that, despite their best efforts, the mast and other issues with the Dong Feng boat probably cost them the race, so as it turned out, the limitations of the OD build process decided the outcome. Maybe Dong Feng are happy with their returns, so all is good in your eyes, but I'd be pretty angry if I was one of the sailors, and if I was a potential sponsor I'd also be pretty concerned to make sure I had the "best" OD boat next time around, but how do you ensure that with the current OD setup?
  14. You didn't understand my meaning. The VOR as we knew it is dead, now we have the new VOR, a very different event. Commercialisation is not the issue here - it's been commercial for a very long time. It's the choices made of how to commercialise it last time that ruined the racing. If the VOR's analysis of the return is so accurate and positive, and your hypothesis that the sponsors are numbers driven is correct, then we can expect all the previous sponsors to be queuing up for the next edition, along with so many more that VOR with have to restrict entry. Lets see how that works out.
  15. Whilst the commercial aspects of sponsors needs are clear, I think drawing parallels between the ESS and the VOR has limited validity. The ESS was constructed for sponsors needs, in the format, the support, the locations, etc., and sponsors buying into it do so on this basis. The VOR, on the other hand, has been distorted from what it once was, the premier crewed round the world yacht race, into the current sponsorship vehicle, which doesn't bear any resemblance, as a sailing spectacle, to the original. Yet sponsors and spectators are still being sold the "premier crewed trans-ocean yacht race" mantra based on its past glories, and this is where the bad taste is left for the sailing public, in particular, and anyone else being sold this by the VOR itself or the sponsors. The VOR is not what it once was, not by a long shot, and frankly must now count itself behind such races as the BWR, TJV, and others, in terms of the sailing and technical challenge it represents. Maybe we all need to accept, as ShanghaiSailor implies, "the VOR is dead, long live the VOR", but some of us still mourn its passing.