• 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.  

Ross 780

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ross 780

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    sailing and cycling
  1. Artemis?

    As OR17b had its foiling foils on which I understand should be slower upwind than Artemis, doesn't this suggest Artemis was not performing particularly well and should have been all over OR17b like a rash upwind.
  2. Artemis?

    With all the local action going on SF harbour on the day in the photo below you cant help thinking that some local sailors must have seen Artemis do more than just this. Haven't seen any reports on this thread that Artemis was going anywhere fast either up or downwind. Did they do any serious sailing. With 300 odd boats out there you would have thought some one on a rail calling starboard might have seen something interesting.
  3. Artemis?

    Compare how much of the A you can see without the mast in the picture next, with how much can be seen in the second one. Looks like it has sunk about 600 to 800mm.
  4. Artemis?

    Looking at how they are putting the wing up it is readily apparent they have never done it in strong let alone moderate winds. Ask the LR boys how much these kick and buck in the wind, braking a shin bone with ease. I saw the ETNZ wing bucking and rearing violently in the wind. These guys need to get their systems sorted out before some one gets hurt. Not enough restraining lines and too many guys close to the wing foot.
  5. Artemis?

    LR are using a similar sort of crane to Artemis which enables the crane cable to come down to the hook more vertically. The crane used in the accident did not have a pivot style jib at the top so that the cable was more at an angle when connected to the wing. It was the angled cable that caused the tear. Nobody goes up the wing to attach/ detach the cable. ETNZ still use the crane without a pivoting jib. On that Wednesday when the wind was very fresh out of the west they really dodged a bullet. As I said at the time the fact that the wind was comng from the foot of the wing rather than the luff and that they were sheltered by the buildings on the base meant it didn't fly with more force. But make no mistake. The wing and the ground crew got a serious workout.
  6. Artemis?

    I was looking out my office window just as the fabric at the top of the mast flew free. I am about 1/2 km away. The wing was well up in the hoist ie much closer to the vertical than the horizontal.