• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CARBONINIT

VOR Leg 5

2,151 posts in this topic

So the general thesis we are reading here is that there's nothing wrong with the VO70 rule or the designers or the boat-builders. The problem is that 4 out of 6 these crews and skippers, despite most of them having ocean race CVs as long as your arm, are clue-less and don't know how or when to ease off.

Either the World's best sailors don't know when to ease off...

or the World's best designers aren't designing sufficiently robust boats...

or the World's best boatbuilders aren't building them well enough...

or the World's best teams aren't making the right design/build decisions...

 

I think that takes care of all the possibilities. Given that most of the sailing teams have been heavily involved in the design/build of their boats, the responsibility all comes back to the same people anyway.

 

The only skipper to have expressed a view so far is Ken Read, who made his thoughts very clear; I bet that when the other 5 are interviewed after the finish, every one of them expresses a similar opinion.

 

Its a bit of everything mentioned above, more possibly that teams are not making the right build/design decisions.

I actually think a lot of it is to do with the VO70 rule. The bulbs were made a little heavier this time so maybe the scantlings are not up to spec for the extra power. Very rarely will a team build a boat heavier than the minimum and if you did chances are you would lose.

I have no doubt that all the teams have the knowledge and experience to know when to back off, just that some times that decision making process can come a little late.

 

Props to Abu Dhabi for a brave repair job and for letting the MCM film it so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the general thesis we are reading here is that there's nothing wrong with the VO70 rule or the designers or the boat-builders. The problem is that 4 out of 6 these crews and skippers, despite most of them having ocean race CVs as long as your arm, are clue-less and don't know how or when to ease off.

Either the World's best sailors don't know when to ease off...

or the World's best designers aren't designing sufficiently robust boats...

or the World's best boatbuilders aren't building them well enough...

or the World's best teams aren't making the right design/build decisions...

 

I think that takes care of all the possibilities. Given that most of the sailing teams have been heavily involved in the design/build of their boats, the responsibility all comes back to the same people anyway.

 

The only skipper to have expressed a view so far is Ken Read, who made his thoughts very clear; I bet that when the other 5 are interviewed after the finish, every one of them expresses a similar opinion.

There is another possibility: The structure of the race, with four doldrum crossing and numerous in-port races requires that, to win the most points, the boat must be built to win in the light, and survive in the rough, and what we are seeing is that the worlds best sailors do know when to back off, but the next rung down don't seem to.

 

Even blaming the race structure is a bit unfair, since the JV boats such as BPV are built along the same lines - superfast in the light, and able to skip around the rough stuff. The mono's are too slow to skip around, so either they accept the breakages when they get it wrong, or a scantlings rule is imposed that forces the boats to be strong enough for the rough stuff, so they'll all be equally slow in the light.

 

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

+1. Great post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and G4 is just rounding The Rock....Congrats Frank and crew...and Puma soon !!!

post-6361-094585600 1333118803_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think a lot of it is to do with the VO70 rule. The bulbs were made a little heavier this time so maybe the scantlings are not up to spec for the extra power. Very rarely will a team build a boat heavier than the minimum and if you did chances are you would lose.

Bulbs are lighter this time. The all up keel weight is the same at 7400kgs, but the minimum fin weight has been added. So the fins have gone from around 1720kgs up to 1900kgs meaning the bulbs are about 180kgs lighter.

Maybe this has pushed to replace the lost stability with more form stability, making the hulls more prone to slamming. But then again the change in race course has probably had a greater effect.

I think the comment that they are too loate in the season to be in the Southern Ocean has a lot of merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

IMHO Tele is showing great seamanship as well. I don;t see them pushing the blue boat to hard. G4 had delamination problems as well. It was never clear if it was an UFO or just material wear under stress. I doubt this is clear for Tele.

I think Tele is handling their situation very well. For Sanya I can't tell, but Camper & ADOR were pushing to hard for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the general thesis we are reading here is that there's nothing wrong with the VO70 rule or the designers or the boat-builders. The problem is that 4 out of 6 these crews and skippers, despite most of them having ocean race CVs as long as your arm, are clue-less and don't know how or when to ease off.

Either the World's best sailors don't know when to ease off...

or the World's best designers aren't designing sufficiently robust boats...

or the World's best boatbuilders aren't building them well enough...

or the World's best teams aren't making the right design/build decisions...

 

I think that takes care of all the possibilities. Given that most of the sailing teams have been heavily involved in the design/build of their boats, the responsibility all comes back to the same people anyway.

 

The only skipper to have expressed a view so far is Ken Read, who made his thoughts very clear; I bet that when the other 5 are interviewed after the finish, every one of them expresses a similar opinion.

There is another possibility: The structure of the race, with four doldrum crossing and numerous in-port races requires that, to win the most points, the boat must be built to win in the light, and survive in the rough, and what we are seeing is that the worlds best sailors do know when to back off, but the next rung down don't seem to.

 

Even blaming the race structure is a bit unfair, since the JV boats such as BPV are built along the same lines - superfast in the light, and able to skip around the rough stuff. The mono's are too slow to skip around, so either they accept the breakages when they get it wrong, or a scantlings rule is imposed that forces the boats to be strong enough for the rough stuff, so they'll all be equally slow in the light.

 

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

+1. Great post.

 

I would only disagree with one portion of this post. Lets not forget that Ian Walker has been around once before on a VO70, as well as most of these guys on various other offshore campaigns. By now I am pretty sure they know when to back off. However, from this aspect as well, they probably were pushing the boat hard to try and get that last podium spot and wound up getting over zealous in some aspects. But, just my thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

Having only 2 boats intact is really bad for the race, if there were say 4 slightly slower boats left in, the race would be far more interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Props to yabba dabba doh!

 

Ballsy fix especially when you're outside the environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would only disagree with one portion of this post. Lets not forget that Ian Walker has been around once before on a VO70, as well as most of these guys on various other offshore campaigns. By now I am pretty sure they know when to back off. However, from this aspect as well, they probably were pushing the boat hard to try and get that last podium spot and wound up getting over zealous in some aspects. But, just my thought.

I wasn't seeking to dismiss the experience of anyone in particular, but experience of pushing a boat that you think might break if you hit a rogue wave is very different to pushing a boat that you know will break from the loads it can generate itself if incorrectly sailed, let alone from an external source.

 

The first might give you some useful data points if you happen to hit something. The latter will be giving you useful data points continuously, and make sensing the limits instinctive. Groupama crew is full of people with this latter experience. I don't know the Puma crew but Ken Read certainly has too, and it is showing here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inside or outside of the Falklands for the two leaders? It would be great to see a split.

 

Judging from the tracker forecast, outside looks like an upwind ride, while the inside has weaker less stable winds but favourable wind directions. As long as Telefonica stops, I think the safe route for both boats will be the inside, just to avoid breakage.

 

However, a split would strategically benefit the trailing boat. So it's in Groupama's interest to cover Puma. Since Groupama is thought to be a slightly slower boat upwind, Puma might try and force Groupama to cover outside the Falklands. If the sea state is thought to be manageable, that is.

 

How about inside or outside of Isla de los Estados for starters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the general thesis we are reading here is that there's nothing wrong with the VO70 rule or the designers or the boat-builders. The problem is that 4 out of 6 these crews and skippers, despite most of them having ocean race CVs as long as your arm, are clue-less and don't know how or when to ease off.

Either the World's best sailors don't know when to ease off...

or the World's best designers aren't designing sufficiently robust boats...

or the World's best boatbuilders aren't building them well enough...

or the World's best teams aren't making the right design/build decisions...

 

I think that takes care of all the possibilities. Given that most of the sailing teams have been heavily involved in the design/build of their boats, the responsibility all comes back to the same people anyway.

 

The only skipper to have expressed a view so far is Ken Read, who made his thoughts very clear; I bet that when the other 5 are interviewed after the finish, every one of them expresses a similar opinion.

There is another possibility: The structure of the race, with four doldrum crossing and numerous in-port races requires that, to win the most points, the boat must be built to win in the light, and survive in the rough, and what we are seeing is that the worlds best sailors do know when to back off, but the next rung down don't seem to.

 

Even blaming the race structure is a bit unfair, since the JV boats such as BPV are built along the same lines - superfast in the light, and able to skip around the rough stuff. The mono's are too slow to skip around, so either they accept the breakages when they get it wrong, or a scantlings rule is imposed that forces the boats to be strong enough for the rough stuff, so they'll all be equally slow in the light.

 

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

I think there is a lot of responsibilty in designers other than skippers, the old black betty alias ABN AMRO 1 went around two times with a great record of reliability and performance. It is possible to build reliable vo70s. That was a great boat, I think Sanderson would rather have choseen that instead of the old telblue for sanya; he would probably have won this leg on that boat...and be 3rd or 4th overall now.. I am not sure the peformance gap would be so impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So that's 3 boats out of 6 suffering from failure disproportionate to the cause!

 

I am not sure this is disproportionate to the cause until we know the cause. This isn't a slamming loads failure, given its location. Several possible causes spring to mind:

 

1) a core bonding problem due to construction materials or procedures

2) The result of an impact that has slowly caused the sandwich to unzip or core to fail (e.g., this is the part of the boat that bumps against the dock if the fenders slip)

3) The result of rigging loads that far exceeded what was deemed possible (e.g., if you crash tack and catch your boom on the backstay in 40 knots of wind). Backstay tension create substantial stress near the turns in the bilge in between bulkheads. Rather than the mast coming down, the stresses may bend the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inside the Falklands looks pretty hard to beat: Better pressure and at ~40 hours from now you want to be in the southerly, closer to the coast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

Having only 2 boats intact is really bad for the race, if there were say 4 slightly slower boats left in, the race would be far more interesting!

 

Personally, I would rather see an unnoticeably slower race between 4 or 6 heavier boats than a faster race between 2 boats. And I would rather see more boats racing unnoticeably slower in these conditions than faster in the doldrums. This being the Volvo, who watches the boats in the doldrums anyway and who cares if they are faster there? In short, maybe the bias of the race, meaning everything from design to route planning, should be more towards these kinds of conditions than the lighter stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that's 3 boats out of 6 suffering from failure disproportionate to the cause!

 

I am not sure this is disproportionate to the cause until we know the cause. This isn't a slamming loads failure, given its location. Several possible causes spring to mind:

 

1) a core bonding problem due to construction materials or procedures

2) The result of an impact that has slowly caused the sandwich to unzip or core to fail (e.g., this is the part of the boat that bumps against the dock if the fenders slip)

3) The result of rigging loads that far exceeded what was deemed possible (e.g., if you crash tack and catch your boom on the backstay in 40 knots of wind). Backstay tension create substantial stress near the turns in the bilge in between bulkheads. Rather than the mast coming down, the stresses may bend the boat.

 

By cause, I meant external factors such as freak wave, pushing the boat too hard, hitting something...

 

I can understand that Sanya lost a rudder after hitting some immerged log or container, Groupama got a panel failure after driving the boat against the wind several days, or Puma lost his mast after chasing Telefonica very hard...

 

But delamination on the side, it's either a wave slamming hard on the boat or some stresses from the rigging or the keel that haven't been designed for. For Camper and Telefonica, I can understand that they have a panel fail at the front but loosing the primary structure of the boat is definitely disproportionate to slamming in the sea, that's something that you could expect after hitting another boat or a concrete wall!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Once the support team have found an isolated spot, they will begin repairs on Telefónica with a view to getting them back on their way after 12 hours -- the minimum amount of time a team can suspend racing."

 

Can anyone explain the logic behind this rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Once the support team have found an isolated spot, they will begin repairs on Telefónica with a view to getting them back on their way after 12 hours -- the minimum amount of time a team can suspend racing."

 

Can anyone explain the logic behind this rule?

 

Otherwise the teams could have people waiting for them in a bunch of places along the course and stop whenever they wanted, especially along the more coastal parts of the legs... this way it gives them more incentive to build the boats and gear stronger (more dependable), although as we know that's not working very well...

 

If Telefonica were to do the work themselves without using outside assistance (their shore team, for example) then they wouldn't need to suspend racing and wouldn't get hit by the 12-hour minimum... assuming they didn't use their engine for anchoring, maneuvering, etc...

 

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing work on ADOR.

 

*** PURE UNINFORMED SPECULATION WARNING *****

 

We're seeing a lot of delam issues this race. Has there been a change in the layups this generation? I'm wondering if the boats have gotten a bit stiffer (different carbon, different heat/pressure, different glue / thickeners, different cores) and what were seeing is failures resulting from increased localized stresses? Maybe the builders made panels that are a bit stiffer than the engineers modeled... Is that even plausible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

Having only 2 boats intact is really bad for the race, if there were say 4 slightly slower boats left in, the race would be far more interesting!

 

Personally, I would rather see an unnoticeably slower race between 4 or 6 heavier boats than a faster race between 2 boats. And I would rather see more boats racing unnoticeably slower in these conditions than faster in the doldrums. This being the Volvo, who watches the boats in the doldrums anyway and who cares if they are faster there? In short, maybe the bias of the race, meaning everything from design to route planning, should be more towards these kinds of conditions than the lighter stuff.

 

Yeah but you want is kind of opposed to what a team that want's to win wants. I gather that when looking at the route, designers saw how many times the boats would be transiting the doldrums as opposed to the single southern ocean leg and designed the boats to maximize the competitiveness in the predominant conditions of the race.

 

It would seem to me that that may have something to do with why the boats have been built the way they are. If the point structure or routing was different, we would see different boats but from a holistic standpoint, these boats make sense when you want to win the whole thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

Having only 2 boats intact is really bad for the race, if there were say 4 slightly slower boats left in, the race would be far more interesting!

 

Personally, I would rather see an unnoticeably slower race between 4 or 6 heavier boats than a faster race between 2 boats. And I would rather see more boats racing unnoticeably slower in these conditions than faster in the doldrums. This being the Volvo, who watches the boats in the doldrums anyway and who cares if they are faster there? In short, maybe the bias of the race, meaning everything from design to route planning, should be more towards these kinds of conditions than the lighter stuff.

 

Yeah but you want is kind of opposed to what a team that want's to win wants. I gather that when looking at the route, designers saw how many times the boats would be transiting the doldrums as opposed to the single southern ocean leg and designed the boats to maximize the competitiveness in the predominant conditions of the race.

 

It would seem to me that that may have something to do with why the boats have been built the way they are. If the point structure or routing was different, we would see different boats but from a holistic standpoint, these boats make sense when you want to win the whole thing.

Also, if you force a rule that makes the boats such that the less skilled can also race them, then you penalise the skilled and don't allow them to show their skills. There is already a race for those that want everyone together, the clipper. How many are glued to that tracker?

 

The JV, the Vendee, and the VOR are supposed to be the pinnacle of offshore racing in each catagory. I'd rather see a boat and a course that allows the very best to shine above the rest, in each area, by challenging the broadest range of skill to the limit. Otherwise we, and they, learn nothing from the experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't want to see a severe scantlings rule and heavy boats, I'd rather see fast boats and acts of great seamanship, as Groupama and Puma are exhibiting on this leg. It is no coincidence that the crews with the most experience of pushing fragile boats are doing so well, and the crews with only lots of old VOR experience, which is less relevant to this new reality, are suffering failures. They will learn, and I hope they are allowed to do so rather than the race being even further emasculated (ice gates, seriously? That should be a seamanship call too).

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

Having only 2 boats intact is really bad for the race, if there were say 4 slightly slower boats left in, the race would be far more interesting!

 

Personally, I would rather see an unnoticeably slower race between 4 or 6 heavier boats than a faster race between 2 boats. And I would rather see more boats racing unnoticeably slower in these conditions than faster in the doldrums. This being the Volvo, who watches the boats in the doldrums anyway and who cares if they are faster there? In short, maybe the bias of the race, meaning everything from design to route planning, should be more towards these kinds of conditions than the lighter stuff.

 

Yeah but you want is kind of opposed to what a team that want's to win wants. I gather that when looking at the route, designers saw how many times the boats would be transiting the doldrums as opposed to the single southern ocean leg and designed the boats to maximize the competitiveness in the predominant conditions of the race.

 

It would seem to me that that may have something to do with why the boats have been built the way they are. If the point structure or routing was different, we would see different boats but from a holistic standpoint, these boats make sense when you want to win the whole thing.

 

I agree, but it would be a matter of rules wouldn´t it? If all boats have to be a bit tougher per the rules, no one would have an advantage in the slow parts of the race but they would resist the tougher legs better. Again, personally, I would have preferred to see the whole fleet, or at least most of it, racing in the southern ocean a little bit slower than them sailing faster in the doldrums (which I actually see much less of or not at all). I am guessing the current leg is the most followed of all and that the slower ones draw much less attention. I mean, how many of us checked more than once a day when the boats were in that sewer that is the Malacca strait?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the rules are pretty sophisticated, but history shows that it's not easy to get designers to put extra weight where you want them to put it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the speed of Tele is as they did not have any damage.

Lets hope Abu also will get up to speed.

Personaly I find this leg VERY interesting.

A cripled VO70 will beat a W60 any day...

Nice combintion of speed, tackticks and seamanship :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing work on ADOR.

Cheers to ADOR for a mid ocean "fix". I really hope it gets them to safety and that they do not miss another leg, due to repair and delay. A true fix is not easy. The cause is hard to speculate. It is not keel related. They have core shear failure, in an area where they really do not expect it. If they were in shipping lanes, one might believe the impact theory. I do not.

*** PURE UNINFORMED SPECULATION WARNING *****

duly noted!

We're seeing a lot of delam issues this race. Has there been a change in the layups this generation? I'm wondering if the boats have gotten a bit stiffer (different carbon, different heat/pressure, different glue / thickeners, different cores) and what were seeing is failures resulting from increased localized stresses? Maybe the builders made panels that are a bit stiffer than the engineers modeled... Is that even plausible?

Short answer, no. The heat and pressure are unchanged. Modulus allowed has not changed AFAIK. Core materials as other races. The panel weights are controlled. The rig weight, keel fin weight, bulb weight all controlled. So, de facto the hull weight is controlled as well. It comes down to the designer to distribute the material in the hull. Does anyone have an idea what is dramatically different in ADOR structural arrangement to other teams? I do not off hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the speed of Tele is as they did not have any damage.

Lets hope Abu also will get up to speed.

Personaly I find this leg VERY interesting.

A cripled VO70 will beat a W60 any day...

Nice combintion of speed, tackticks and seamanship :-)

 

"Breaking News" on the Volvo Race site is pretty accurate for the leg. Let's hope they can get at least 3 boats on the podium!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing work on ADOR.

Cheers to ADOR for a mid ocean "fix". I really hope it gets them to safety and that they do not miss another leg, due to repair and delay. A true fix is not easy. The cause is hard to speculate. It is not keel related. They have core shear failure, in an area where they really do not expect it. If they were in shipping lanes, one might believe the impact theory. I do not.

*** PURE UNINFORMED SPECULATION WARNING *****

duly noted!

We're seeing a lot of delam issues this race. Has there been a change in the layups this generation? I'm wondering if the boats have gotten a bit stiffer (different carbon, different heat/pressure, different glue / thickeners, different cores) and what were seeing is failures resulting from increased localized stresses? Maybe the builders made panels that are a bit stiffer than the engineers modeled... Is that even plausible?

Short answer, no. The heat and pressure are unchanged. Modulus allowed has not changed AFAIK. Core materials as other races. The panel weights are controlled. The rig weight, keel fin weight, bulb weight all controlled. So, de facto the hull weight is controlled as well. It comes down to the designer to distribute the material in the hull. Does anyone have an idea what is dramatically different in ADOR structural arrangement to other teams? I do not off hand.

 

I don't know tons about the hull structure but the Abu Dhabi boat,as well as Sanya, have much different decks from a structural point of view vs the other boats, which could encourage different flex characteristics. They have more of a hard spot in the structure at the front of the cockpit which is nearly amidships. It was right at the front of the cockpit that Telefonica Black (Sanya sistership) broke nearly in half last race, and that is not far from the area where A-D is seeing this failure now. I'm not educated enough to know if this is a coincidence, but I bet a yacht designer could comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer, no. The heat and pressure are unchanged. Modulus allowed has not changed AFAIK. Core materials as other races. The panel weights are controlled. ...

 

Thanks. Continuing to grasp at straws: I don't suppose they've mixed nano-carbon or something into the glue or in some other way managed to squeeze a bit less glue and a bit more carbon into the skins?

 

I'm just taking it for granted that the structures are more prone to failure this time around. But I wonder if that's really a given?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing work on ADOR.

Cheers to ADOR for a mid ocean "fix". I really hope it gets them to safety and that they do not miss another leg, due to repair and delay. A true fix is not easy. The cause is hard to speculate. It is not keel related. They have core shear failure, in an area where they really do not expect it. If they were in shipping lanes, one might believe the impact theory. I do not.

*** PURE UNINFORMED SPECULATION WARNING *****

duly noted!

We're seeing a lot of delam issues this race. Has there been a change in the layups this generation? I'm wondering if the boats have gotten a bit stiffer (different carbon, different heat/pressure, different glue / thickeners, different cores) and what were seeing is failures resulting from increased localized stresses? Maybe the builders made panels that are a bit stiffer than the engineers modeled... Is that even plausible?

Short answer, no. The heat and pressure are unchanged. Modulus allowed has not changed AFAIK. Core materials as other races. The panel weights are controlled. The rig weight, keel fin weight, bulb weight all controlled. So, de facto the hull weight is controlled as well. It comes down to the designer to distribute the material in the hull. Does anyone have an idea what is dramatically different in ADOR structural arrangement to other teams? I do not off hand.

 

I don't know tons about the hull structure but the Abu Dhabi boat,as well as Sanya, have much different decks from a structural point of view vs the other boats, which could encourage different flex characteristics. They have more of a hard spot in the structure at the front of the cockpit which is nearly amidships. It was right at the front of the cockpit that Telefonica Black (Sanya sistership) broke nearly in half last race, and that is not far from the area where A-D is seeing this failure now. I'm not educated enough to know if this is a coincidence, but I bet a yacht designer could comment.

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/archive/extra/400799/telefonica-black

 

FYD here says the Tele Black damage started up high at hull/deck and extended down 2m or more around the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. PUMA and GROUPAMA are splitting course around Isla de los Estados

 

Surely, this crowd has some thoughts about the pros and cons of this decision-making?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like PUMA's bet is paying off so far. Big question is whether they get stuck in a hole but the tracker shows 27 knts and a boat speed of 14. Maybe they shortened sail a bit since it's probably pretty gusty in there? Go PUMA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But how much weight do you need to make the boats more robust?

 

These boats are weighting 14t so if you increase the boat weight by say 2%, that's 280kg which is an awfull lot to strengthen the area between the bow and the mast. Will it make the boat slower? Yes Will we see the difference as spectators? Probably not as they will still sail very fast.

 

 

This is a bit like asking how long is a string. If you KNEW what part of the structure was most vulnerable, it would take very little weight to fix it. I suspect that the 4 bow failures we have seen could have been prevented with less than 50 kgs of materials. The problem is that these solutions are only obvious in retrospect. If you just make everything stronger because you don't know what might fail, then the weight gain would be non-trivial. Every generation of the rule has tried to raise structural standard for the bits that broke last race. I am sure there will be new structural requirements for bows next race.

 

The ADOR failure is a bit harder to figure out since it is not part of a pattern. It will require an autopsy to try to determine what happened and if there are any lessons to learn that generalize to other boats. I don't remember ever seeing core failure or delamination in that section of a boat the was not the result of a collision (near max beam just above the static waterline).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back at the last race, there haven't been any reports of sail delams yet, the massive hull failures seem more limited (other than AD) to bow slamming issues, more masts fell down, no broken booms yet, no keel rams, etc., Probably evidence of learning from breaking, so perhaps the rule doesn't need major changes, some small tweaks, the sponsors and designers will want to learn from these lessons.

 

Big danger may be from popularity, stretching the race out too much, equinox to summer soon as the VOR becomes a tour de le monde. April 1st and Cape. Horn may not work.

 

Greenhalgh was driving AD hit 41, he's got a bit of experience, Nossiter was driving when they crash tacked ( crash when its all sanding then aback, for those who claim there ain't no such thing), he's got bit of experience. Injunction was avoid crash gybe, so they erred the other way. Would that have been enough to cause core sheer failure? You'd like to think not. Losing the chines may have weakened some panels, overall flexural pattern has been mentioned, pretty interesting c omment aboutnBlack and Bluenbeing sisterships.

http://www.yachtingworld.com/archive/extra/400798/ericsson-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah but you want is kind of opposed to what a team that want's to win wants. I gather that when looking at the route, designers saw how many times the boats would be transiting the doldrums as opposed to the single southern ocean leg and designed the boats to maximize the competitiveness in the predominant conditions of the race.

 

It would seem to me that that may have something to do with why the boats have been built the way they are. If the point structure or routing was different, we would see different boats but from a holistic standpoint, these boats make sense when you want to win the whole thing.

 

I think the doldrums idea would be plausible... except that the rule enforces minimum hull and structural weights (both overall and on by panel area). The designer/engineer cannot shave off weight to win the light-wind legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm just taking it for granted that the structures are more prone to failure this time around. But I wonder if that's really a given?

 

Well, they have definitely failed more. It might be differences in the structural strength, but it could be other factors. They have had unusually bad weather for much of this race (The med, the S China Sea, the approach to NZ, and most of this leg so far have involved heavy weather sailing including beating into Gale force winds). They could be pushing the boats harder; it is hard to back off the throttle for long if the other boats don't, leading everyone to trash their boats. The boats might be marginally faster, increasing slamming. It could also be dumb luck; a coin can come up heads 2 times and then tails 2 times without anyone changing the coin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by dlangpap, March 30, 2012 - cant edit

Interesting. PUMA and GROUPAMA are splitting course around Isla de los Estados

 

Surely, this crowd has some thoughts about the pros and cons of this decision-making?

 

Unfortunately the tracker weather does not show enough detail to be able to see wind differences at close range. G4 might have chosen to go to the outside because they are faster away from the wind and PUMA, being the chasing boat, took a risk by sailing through a shortcut but tighter to the wind. However, I think the big decision will come later when they decide how to pass the Falklands. From the tracker wind prediction it looks windier on the inside track...

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like they are going to HOURLY UPDATES: :D

 

Race DataReport time: Fri, 30 Mar 2012, 22:04:20 UTC

 

Next report: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:15:00 UTC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. PUMA and GROUPAMA are splitting course around Isla de los Estados

 

Surely, this crowd has some thoughts about the pros and cons of this decision-making?

 

Unfortunately the tracker weather does not show enough detail to be able to see wind differences at close range. G4 might have chosen to go to the outside because they are faster away from the wind and PUMA, being the chasing boat, took a risk by sailing through a shortcut but tighter to the wind. However, I think the big decision will come later when they decide how to pass the Falklands. From the tracker wind prediction it looks windier on the inside track...

 

 

There are pretty decent currents running around Staten Island (up to about 8kts). Which way to go is often down to the timing of the current. It may be that Puma was just far enough behind to make the current calculation different. The wind can be quite fluky in the straits of le maire (between the island and the mainland).The global grib files are usually not very accurate right in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. PUMA and GROUPAMA are splitting course around Isla de los Estados

 

Surely, this crowd has some thoughts about the pros and cons of this decision-making?

 

Unfortunately the tracker weather does not show enough detail to be able to see wind differences at close range. G4 might have chosen to go to the outside because they are faster away from the wind and PUMA, being the chasing boat, took a risk by sailing through a shortcut but tighter to the wind. However, I think the big decision will come later when they decide how to pass the Falklands. From the tracker wind prediction it looks windier on the inside track...

 

I have the feeling that puma decided to part company just after the 7pm sched and Cammas was too far away to cover him @10 pm... Well done Ken but will West pay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope so. C'mon PUMA!!

 

Broken boats or no, this so beats the hell out of the AC.

I'll second that. Go G4 ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. PUMA and GROUPAMA are splitting course around Isla de los Estados

 

Surely, this crowd has some thoughts about the pros and cons of this decision-making?

 

Unfortunately the tracker weather does not show enough detail to be able to see wind differences at close range. G4 might have chosen to go to the outside because they are faster away from the wind and PUMA, being the chasing boat, took a risk by sailing through a shortcut but tighter to the wind. However, I think the big decision will come later when they decide how to pass the Falklands...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but you want is kind of opposed to what a team that want's to win wants. I gather that when looking at the route, designers saw how many times the boats would be transiting the doldrums as opposed to the single southern ocean leg and designed the boats to maximize the competitiveness in the predominant conditions of the race.

 

It would seem to me that that may have something to do with why the boats have been built the way they are. If the point structure or routing was different, we would see different boats but from a holistic standpoint, these boats make sense when you want to win the whole thing.

 

I think the doldrums idea would be plausible... except that the rule enforces minimum hull and structural weights (both overall and on by panel area). The designer/engineer cannot shave off weight to win the light-wind legs.

 

I guess at the end of the day, and that was the point of my post, the organizers define the way the race is run and the teams and designers design around that based on the existing VOR rules. So if they decided to modify the rules a little bit to bias more exciting, heavier weather sailing (which is the most popular with spectators I recon) vs. less exciting, no-one-watches-anyway lighter weather sailing, it would be a win-win for spectators, teams and sponsors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Puma will pickup pressure and gage over the next 24 hours. But, I would bet on the outside track around the Falklands. So, I'd work the left for the next 12 to18 hours and then reach down to get to the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope so West does not pay. C'mon PUMA Groupama!!

 

 

FTFY :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they are going to HOURLY UPDATES: :D

 

Race DataReport time: Fri, 30 Mar 2012, 22:04:20 UTC

 

Next report: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:15:00 UTC

 

Well, I guess not. As they have now changed it to 01:15 UTC. Clearly a VOR head fake and I went for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Puma is able to get going a couple knots faster they may squeak through a window on the inside. But, they've got to raise their averages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No fair! Groupama took a short-cut across land!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that Kenny has chosen to engage G4 in a tactical battle up the coast. G4 don't really have much option but to engage them.

I can't blame Puma for that choice, especially given their comparative experience.

Thomas Coville: "We'll respond to them by showing that we're capable of taking up a challenge and going faster than them"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Puma is able to get going a couple knots faster they may squeak through a window on the inside. But, they've got to raise their averages.

 

From what the weather indicates they may be headed for an 8 degree lift, which could pay some nice dividends over a distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The drivel that's posted in this thread for the past several days has been hilarious. The post from TLS is a nice change to that trend. Noteably missing from that post is the fact that this is the latest seasonal Southern Ocean jaunt ever. There's less day light, the weather is colder and the air is denser, although they've perhaps not ventured sufficiently far south for that to be a major factor.

 

No one has every sailed in the deep south with boats as powerful or as strongly built as this fleet of 3rd generation V70s. The talk about designed-in fuses and improvements to crew protection on deck are lunacy. Every ounce of weight is applied to integrity and performance potential. The design parameters of appendages, hull, rigging and sails are optimized for balance - each component being designed to first comply with the Rule requirements and then designed to provide the best return on weight for the structural integrity offered and the highest performance potential.

 

The notion that a 2-year design cycle might not allow for sufficient FEA, is similarly off base. Hundreds of analysis are performed on components, assemblies and the entire design. The improvements in modeling tools and massively parallel computation solutions have completely changed what's possible over the last ~10 years. One might question the assumptions used for modeling - it's a bit surprising that there's been so much slamming-related failure but absolutely no canting-mechanism failure and that might suggest that too much weight is in the rams and bulkheads that accept those loads and the weight throughout the forward panels ought to have been moderately increased. Clearly the balance between the two is off a bit. If the V70 concept is used again in four years, I'd expect that we might see a modest increase in the minimum hull weight to give the designers an opportunity to do more about the slamming resistance.

 

The Volvo has had a remarkable safety record, mostly as a result of its remarkably conservative approach to scantlings, medical training, communication and safety-equipment requirements. It's that combination that allows unbelievably aggressive sailing in the worst conditions on earth. Talk that Camper pushed too hard is just silly. They were, as I recall, only ~20nm in first place, sailing a boat that's at best the same performance as the competition. Tucking in a reef or dropping from a C to a J would have lost that lead in one 3-hour sched. The Telefonica protest not withstanding, Camper needed a leg win to have a chance at winning the regatta and they're a frightfully competitive crew. No one remembers who finishes 2nd. No one who stood a single watch on Groupama would ever thing that Cammas was sailing conservatively - just take a look at the videos. If G4 has a delamination problem is everyone going to start ragging on Cammas given that Puma is only 50nm back? Please.

 

The V70 is a development class. Rather than slagging the organizers, crews, builders, architects and engineers who are making this remarkable entertainment possible, it might be better to give pause to the fact that this race, more than any other, has produced unbelievable depth of understanding of loads, stresses and capabilities of composite boat construction. The VOR is the toughest event in all of sailing if not all of sport. If you've got so much to offer it, why not sign on with a team? Otherwise, all this shooting from the hip on a couch is just silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope so. C'mon PUMA!!

 

Broken boats or no, this so beats the hell out of the AC.

I would agree, but I'm selfish, so only if there was a VOR stop in SF Bay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^natural development...

Australia II - winged keel

Groupama 4 - wheeled keel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably due to daylight savings we've had a 2hr sched instead of 3.

It's not a good one for Puma.

They've dropped 17nm to 53nm behind and I can't see any medium term positive their location to the west of G4.

The tracker is annoyingly not loading the +12hr and +18hr projections for me.

Tele have also done some 4x4 island hopping to find a quiet spot to suspend racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tele have also done some 4x4 island hopping to find a quiet spot to suspend racing.

 

So was there a shorecrew coming from Ushuaia to support repairs in Martial Bay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More here from Tele website

 

At 06:15 UTC the boat skippered by Iker Martínez was already alongside the yacht transporting the Spanish shore contingent. In the end the actual meeting point was at Caleta Martial, a cove on the island of Herschel (Chile) which also forms part of the group of islands known as the Wollaston Islands, positioned just North of Cape Horn and within the cape's national park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the rubber band has now pulled the front two back together - just under 30nm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, will any of these boats make it to Galway on their own. As far as I can tell only two are racing at the moment while the others have slowed down or stopped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADOR was right above the ice limit, at top speed, at night, when this delam happened. I doubt a container, but one of these could also ruin your day.

 

3238449487_554abae28e.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADOR was right above the ice limit, at top speed, at night, when this delam happened. I doubt a container, but one of these could also ruin your day.

 

3238449487_554abae28e.jpg

 

 

 

They didn't hit anything other wise you would have seen significant damage on the out side of the hull which there was none if you look at the photos ... they prob stressed the hull to much from the loads at 40+ knots of boat speed in that area and the two layers of laminate separated from each other (De-Lamination).

 

And for fuck's sake if they hit an Ice Berg or a fucking container @15+ knots the would have had a hole in the boat and @40kts they would have ripped half the hull apart.... use some common sense people, also if you take the time to read the reports from Ian Walker you would read that they slowly started hearing noise coming from that area and then realized the iner and outer hull where separating (De- Lamination) not form any contact with floating debris weather ice or containers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was responding to someone talking about semi-submerged containers.

 

In the first "repair" video Greenhalgh mentions "We thought we had a strong boat, we had confidence in it, but last night one wave ended all that.", which doesn't sound like gradual failure to me. In one of the pictures there looks like some scratched paint, but who knows, could be nothing or could be spray.

 

The true cause will come out eventually. It's true the way he said it makes it sound like they lost confidence that they have a strong boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the rubber band has now pulled the front two back together - just under 30nm.

 

And now down to 17 miles with Puma charging along at 15.8 knots and Groupama at 11.5 knots.

 

A lot of flukey wind lies ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^natural development...

Australia II - winged keel

Groupama 4 - wheeled keel

 

Wheeled keel may be fine, as long as they don't hit a pothole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wild guess prediction:

 

1. Puma

2. Telefonica

2. Camper

3. Abu Dhabi

4. Sanya

6. Groupama (ret.)

 

Groupama will be leading and break something major in the middle of nowhere, while pushing harder than anyone else. They will jam it to 11. Telefonica will sail conservatively, trying to cover both Camper and Puma to keep from getting too many points between them and Groupama. When Groupama breaks, they will cover Camper and let Puma go. Puma will go for broke and may be tough for Tele to handle anyway. Camper will also go for broke, will surge forward and fade back, but they won't manage the consistent performance of the other three boats. The way they sail just seems like they lack depth.

 

I just wrote the story for this leg, you don't have to watch now. ;-)

 

Or, it probably will work out competely differently!

 

 

Congrats to Groupama. I thought they would be the ones to blow it up, but they obviously had the exact right combination of brake and accelerator. Oh, and Puma too, but I predicted first place for them, so fingers crossed! It's very lucky for Telefonica and Groupama points-wise (I'm sure they are feeling badly for Camper and disappointed to miss that competition).

 

Question now is which boats will do the in-port and which will start Leg 6 on time? How the points will fall out. If Telefonica gets a podium after this they will be in very good position. I'm surprised they pressed so hard.

 

So put G4 back at the top of my list, but it ain't over yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADOR was right above the ice limit, at top speed, at night, when this delam happened. I doubt a container, but one of these could also ruin your day.

 

3238449487_554abae28e.jpg

 

 

 

They didn't hit anything other wise you would have seen significant damage on the out side of the hull which there was none if you look at the photos ... they prob stressed the hull to much from the loads at 40+ knots of boat speed in that area and the two layers of laminate separated from each other (De-Lamination).

 

And for fuck's sake if they hit an Ice Berg or a fucking container @15+ knots the would have had a hole in the boat and @40kts they would have ripped half the hull apart.... use some common sense people, also if you take the time to read the reports from Ian Walker you would read that they slowly started hearing noise coming from that area and then realized the iner and outer hull where separating (De- Lamination) not form any contact with floating debris weather ice or containers.

 

From the description of the damage offeredby the sailors who are actually there, 0:16 in link, it sounds like core shear failure. I would note that the honeycomb (not foam) in that area has also a stiff/strong direction and a less stiff/strong (we could say soft/weak) direction. That panel would have the stiff strong likely going across the boat, the short dimension. It is a big panel with lots of curvature. The root cause of this failure is not known, but it could have been a collision along side that was not immediately visible, nor in a photograph. There is a hint of evidence in the direction of the damage and repair. Ice, perhaps, but seems doubtful. Could also have happened way earlier in the race and only progressed to a level that the crew heard when they took a few sleigh rides. Could have maybe been damage that was there from the beginning. I am not certain about what NDT would reveal with regards to the core condition, but any voids in the skins, such as interlaminar shear failure, shows up very easily in tests done ashore. Could also be at the joint of two honeycomb panels. There are seams, that is reality. Builders must join those with glue, but not so much as to either add excess weight, nor create jumps in stiffness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G4overland.JPG

 

 

 

Isn´t this cheating ? :P

 

 

No, it's called "portage."

 

You have to pick-up the boat and carry it through bush and across rocks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the horn

 

1 Groupama

2 Camper

3 Telefonica

4 Puma

5 ADOR

6 Sanya

 

To the finish

 

1 Puma

2 Telefonica

3 Groupama

4 ADOR

5 Camper

6 Sanya

 

And as there seems to be a wish to add some spice with "rig failure", "ret" or "this one goes to 11", the closest race will be for spots 3-4 and 4-5 with just hours separating the finishers.

 

Got first and third to the Horn right. Maybe 5th too.

 

For the finish, Tele is going to have to do some miracles to pass G4, but this order is not looking too bad. Who can repair faster in Chile?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the various changes which COULD be made in the future I think we can all agree that Puma and Groupama did a masterful job not only at racing though the southern ocean but also slowing down to keep their boat in 1 piece. Any schmuck can make a boat go fast, it takes true skill to know when to slow down. Sanya non-withstanding I think this leg has shown a good example of what happens when you don't ease off the gas pedal enough. Camper & Abu Dhabi were both pushing hard (one because they were 1000+ miles behind and the other because he's got GD berating him to do better) and it shows in the fact that they broke their boats and have had to seek help.

 

Additionally Tom Rich and the New England Boatworks team deserve high praise for building a boat that has, so far, had no structural issues despite the hard beating, running and reaching which has been doled out so far during this race. I would imagine that Kenny & the Puma team are supremely confident in their boat now that their rig issues have been sorted out and they should be. If it means the team can put the pedal down a little harder when it counts then that's the little extra difference the team needs to do well in this race. They'll be able to count on their ability to go hammer down in about 1000 miles in order to pass Groupama for the lead and that's huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is something to be learned about where they repaired.

post-699-027294700 1333225957_thumb.jpg

This seems to me to be port side between the L and the E in their paint job. That is fairly far aft, I think just in front of the dagger board, and not far from the chainplates. did we know that yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is something to be learned about where they repaired.

post-699-027294700 1333225957_thumb.jpg

This seems to me to be port side between the L and the E in their paint job. That is fairly far aft, I think just in front of the dagger board, and not far from the chainplates. did we know that yet?

 

More here, they seem to be ahead of the mast.

post-699-049195600 1333226326_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are probably checking the whole hull with that (ultrasound) machine.

 

damaged area (i guess) :

526270_397214040298351_208949765791447_1528733_1896009909_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racing suspended at 4:37 UTC and they're trying to be back in it at 22:00.

 

5+ hours longer than the 12 hours they were anticipating = 50 or more miles they lost to the leaders than anticipated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmh, Puma seems to have a speed advantage over Groupama in these conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tele Buzzed by the Chilean Navy

Leg 5 Day 14

 

We only have a few hours left before we go into the pit lane. The boat is still going well, and in fact we're in front of the projected time for the stop. That's a good sign, because if we weren't going so well, we'd have to slow down a lot.

 

We've just had a pleasant communication with the Chilean navy. They have been in contact with us and we didn't know where they were. Well, it was a plane that spotted us. They passed very close to us and even took some photos from the plane! They asked us the typical questions: who we were, where we were going and stopping, the speed of the boat, etc, although I'm sure they had us well under control.

 

As Capey said yesterday, it seems we're going to pass the Cape at night. That's a shame for those of us who have never been there before, because we wanted a photo -- our first rounding of the mythical Cape Horn. We'll see what we can do to reflect the moment.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working fine for me.

 

The wind data while scrolling over the individual boats periodically disappears, but it is back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working fine for me.

 

The wind data while scrolling over the individual boats periodically disappears, but it is back.

 

that's annoying - 2pcs and 2 browsers (each) later I've still got nuthin'.

First world problems...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A note on sails... Apart from Sanya, who have done far less miles than any other team in the race, no one is using "traditional" laminated sails (film/fiber/film). All are using 3Di which has no film, thus no delam. Look into the 3Di process and you'll see what I mean.

 

North Sails also screwed up in the last race, changing their glues and 3DL process prior to the race, not to mention the Taffeta core 3DL sails that pretty much started to fall apart the instant sun hit them. There were also some surprise factors like a 400% increase in time spent in the tropics which of course everyone knew about, but no one had the time to test.

 

Anyways, 3Di is the way to go offshore. The only 3Di failures so far this race have been Camper with much lighter sails than other teams. Also secondary failures like Leg 4 when 4 out of 5 boats carrying 3Di sails broke the jib tack clip/line which resulted in sail breakages.

 

 

 

Looking back at the last race, there haven't been any reports of sail delams yet, the massive hull failures seem more limited (other than AD) to bow slamming issues, more masts fell down, no broken booms yet, no keel rams, etc., Probably evidence of learning from breaking, so perhaps the rule doesn't need major changes, some small tweaks, the sponsors and designers will want to learn from these lessons.

 

Big danger may be from popularity, stretching the race out too much, equinox to summer soon as the VOR becomes a tour de le monde. April 1st and Cape. Horn may not work.

 

Greenhalgh was driving AD hit 41, he's got a bit of experience, Nossiter was driving when they crash tacked ( crash when its all sanding then aback, for those who claim there ain't no such thing), he's got bit of experience. Injunction was avoid crash gybe, so they erred the other way. Would that have been enough to cause core sheer failure? You'd like to think not. Losing the chines may have weakened some panels, overall flexural pattern has been mentioned, pretty interesting c omment aboutnBlack and Bluenbeing sisterships.

http://www.yachtingworld.com/archive/extra/400798/ericsson-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puma have moved to within 2.4 miles of the lead while Tele has dropped back another mile.

 

Go the big, black, pussy!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it looks like they are about 60 miles from a divergent wind pattern. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G4 was really slow, comparatively, getting out of Auckland.

I wondered at the time if they'd changed something to favour running in the SO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puma have moved to within 2.4 miles of the lead while Tele has dropped back another mile.

 

Go the big, black, pussy!!!

wes, you are a piece of shit college dick..stop acting like you are a know all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puma have moved to within 2.4 miles of the lead while Tele has dropped back another mile.

 

Go the big, black, pussy!!!

wes, you are a piece of shit college dick..stop acting like you are a know all

 

If being able to read and then reiterate a sched makes me a knowitall then... well fuck... I guess I am.

 

Some people aren't cut out to PUI. Methinks you're one of them... but that's just my knowitall opinion dry.gif

 

And remind me where we've met that you were able to develop such an opinion of me? Have I personally offended you directly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puma leading Groupama

 

Yeah looks like it has died off and Puma have the better angle as well as a little more speed. Close racing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

off the latest camper blog it also says Abu Dhabi are also stopping in Porto Montt. Not sure if that was supposed to be made public yet.

 

"Word also came in today that Abu Dhabi will be joining us in Porto Montt, however we are uncertain if they plan to put Azzam on a ship or are quietly plotting a sneak shore team assault to fix their damage and be on their way before us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

off the latest camper blog it also says Abu Dhabi are also stopping in Porto Montt. Not sure if that was supposed to be made public yet.

 

"Word also came in today that Abu Dhabi will be joining us in Porto Montt, however we are uncertain if they plan to put Azzam on a ship or are quietly plotting a sneak shore team assault to fix their damage and be on their way before us."

Payback for Abu Dhabi revealing they were on stand-by to help Camper earlier? Great info anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puma leading Groupama

 

Yeah looks like it has died off and Puma have the better angle as well as a little more speed. Close racing..

 

25nm between them. I would say that G4 repositions itself to the west, for some more reaching/downwind conditions.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

off the latest camper blog it also says Abu Dhabi are also stopping in Porto Montt. Not sure if that was supposed to be made public yet.

 

"Word also came in today that Abu Dhabi will be joining us in Porto Montt, however we are uncertain if they plan to put Azzam on a ship or are quietly plotting a sneak shore team assault to fix their damage and be on their way before us."

 

Just posted that question on their blog, not sure if I will get answer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did he really say that he took the reef out by himself!!

 

Yes ! and the 2nd solo-watch helmsman says in french that these boats are very "safe", tracking along "straight" without much helm problem, much less physical than an Imoca 60 he says !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling Expedition... Calling Paradox... Calling all ships with the right software and the polars...

 

I'd love to see some optimal course up the coast of South America for theses guys... Maybe an East and West solution... Pretty please. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites