• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

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

      Moderation Team Change   06/16/2017

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

Archived

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

CARBONINIT

VOR Leg 5

2,151 posts in this topic

If Tele remain 1000 miles ahead of ADOR then will they have time to do a suitable repair and get back out in front of ADOR?

 

I reckon that gives them 3 days and that could be enough. There is then a long way to the finish of the leg and Tele has been consistently faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"and now we understand that Telefonica has similar structural issues to us and is heading to Ushuaia for repairs."

 

"In Auckland, Cookson’s Boats are well advanced on the construction of a replacement bulkhead and longitudinals and these are due to be air freighted out to Chile along with other materials on Friday".

 

I wonder how far back they they are going to split the longitudinals?

I really don't know much about constructing with carbon.

what's the maximum sheet size and how far back will the pull the longitudinals.

Is it just a matter of splicing the new ones with the old at some point beyond the hull separation point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually have experience kevlar boats breaking and had to repair them, prior observations about poor laminating qualities are true. Not as stiff as S glass, in my experience. But I am not an engineer, don't pretend to it at all. Have been told by an engineer who I respect that kevlar is nearly useless in laminate stacks, that the W60s had a built in kevlar lifeboat but that it didn't significantly strengthen the total structure. but that's hearsay.

 

Of note is that each and every boat in this race has had at least one significant structural failure: either the engineering sucks or the crews push the structures beyond the anticipated loads, or perhaps both: you pick. I think that hitting a container at sea is both random and anticipateable. But if you design for it you probably will have an uncompetitive boat, name the last race an icebreaker won. A number of references to "non-structural" bulkheads, funny, i tend to doubt there is a single one on any of these boats. i imagine they all serve a structural purpose or they wouldn't be there. and they probably all do double duty tieing things together and shortening panel spans. if you are in the heaviest seas and your panel spans double then you might expect things to get a bit out of shape. i doubt there is enough redundancy for that,"o, we designed it stronger in case we lose a ring frame or two". don't usually hear that in the racing press.

 

What might be more germane is the time of the seasons, they are in the 40s and 50s during the equinox. May be a straight shot from capetown is safer? First southern hemi swell is expected Thursday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"and now we understand that Telefonica has similar structural issues to us and is heading to Ushuaia for repairs."

link?

 

EDIT: link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telefonica apparently now also slowing down to preserve the boat. Martinez said something about problems with the bow, must be similar to Camper. It's now effectively a 2 boat race if nothing happens to GPMA and PUMA. It seems the worst of the system has passed and 20+ kn sailing for the next 48 hrs.

 

 

im still not convinced telefonica wont go into Ushuia. If they have some structural problems in the bow, wont it get worse once they get on the wind? After Cape Horn, they are likely to have significant amount of windward work in short seas.

 

*coughs*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty here saying that it is inevitable that if these boats - and any race boats - are pushed too hard in big wind/seas the hulls or bulkheads will break. OK, if that statement is accepted, how do sailors know how hard they can push? Don't say "experience" because nobody gets very much experience in breaking hulls. You can instrument rig loads but afaik you can't instrument hull loads. I've done racing where I've been concerned to keep the rig in the boat but I've never had to worry about breaking the hull and I think the same would be true of 99.9% of sailors. So, how do you know where enough is enough as far as keeping the hull and bulkheads intact?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very easy to build strain gauges into a laminate. The problem is in a race environment limits often become targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty here saying that it is inevitable that if these boats - and any race boats - are pushed too hard in big wind/seas the hulls or bulkheads will break. OK, if that statement is accepted, how do sailors know how hard they can push? Don't say "experience" because nobody gets very much experience in breaking hulls. You can instrument rig loads but afaik you can't instrument hull loads. I've done racing where I've been concerned to keep the rig in the boat but I've never had to worry about breaking the hull and I think the same would be true of 99.9% of sailors. So, how do you know where enough is enough as far as keeping the hull and bulkheads intact?

Fear maybe, if you won't accept experience?

 

Measuring strains not loads. The derivation of load from strain is through the rigging element stiffness. You can instrument hull strains, and even simpler bulkhead strains. But it won't matter if you did in a racing scenario. It is useful for data gathering, but in such tests nobody goes into seas, winds and conditions quite the same as during the race. Too much is on the line, economically. During racing, sailors have enough on to drive, navigate, trim and repair. They do not need to look at a system of green/yellow/red lights that can't see the broach or slam that is about to happen.

 

Which VO70s have broken hulls in this leg? The bulkhead on ADOR is clearly intact, just not in the boat anymore. Their problems seem to begin (and end?) with secondary bonds. Maybe Camper or Tele also saw actual interply or core bond failure on their bulkheads. Whichever, support is removed, then stringers start to be loaded more than they can handle. The initial failure can also be related to fatigue, which is not as well designed for in sandwich composite structures as it is for metals of all sorts.

 

It's very easy to build strain gauges into a laminate. The problem is in a race environment limits often become targets.

what he/she said...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty here saying that it is inevitable that if these boats - and any race boats - are pushed too hard in big wind/seas the hulls or bulkheads will break. OK, if that statement is accepted, how do sailors know how hard they can push? Don't say "experience" because nobody gets very much experience in breaking hulls. You can instrument rig loads but afaik you can't instrument hull loads. I've done racing where I've been concerned to keep the rig in the boat but I've never had to worry about breaking the hull and I think the same would be true of 99.9% of sailors. So, how do you know where enough is enough as far as keeping the hull and bulkheads intact?

 

This is exactly where the problem is!!! You can break any boat, and it dosn't matter how smartly engineered any race-boat is, as long as there is a fleet pushing each other to the limit and obviously past it then boats will break. And it isn't a coincidence IMHO that with the most competitive fleet ever in history pushing each other that everyone is having failures. Groupama have had to repair hull damage in 3 legs so far!! Puma and Abu Dhabi have lost rigs, AD have popped a BH and lots of other hardware, Sanya have had a hull failure, winch pod and now rudder failure, Tele now have core problems in their bow section, not to mention Campers current problem. the only thing anybody is going to "learn" from any of this is how much slamming a VO70 can take and only the 11 guys on board will actually know this for the next time they are in the rough stuff. The designers won't know shit. Any idiot can keep chucking more carbon and weight into a boat but it will still break but at a higher speed and in worse conditions...

 

Just like a WRC driver has to button off in rough stages and conditions, sailors must also have to know how hard to push as well. Hard to tell these competitive racers to go slow though aye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's very easy to build strain gauges into a laminate. The problem is in a race environment limits often become targets.

 

Interesting article in May Seahorse about composite structural engineering, and how in the dark designers are about the actual loads experienced. One suggestion is that what's needed is a lot of data from a lot of boats via 6 axis accelerometers and data loggers. Not cheap, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quiet whisper in your shell-like ears - how about finer hulls and less weight?? Because these too fast for monohulls VO70's are just not good enough, even with state of the at engineering and materials. Yes or No?

MOD70's for the next Volvo? Less loads, less weight, less pounding, less crew - did I say faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if a bit of Kevlar would make things much better.

 

Having the last layer in Kevlar would make the hulls more resilient to impact.

 

Bingo, you hit the nail on the head. Kevlar boats do not break, you would never have hull breaches that could compromise the boat. Having had a Kevlar boat before I can vouch for their strength. Yes it is heavier and hardy to maintain hull rigidity after time, harder to get runner loads up as the boat ages but by then these boats are out of date and ready to be recycled through private owners. There is no disadvantage if all boats are built accordingly.

A few of the 70s have done this, and at least one of the broken boats this leg has a layer of kevlar in the outer skin. As Doug says, this doesn't prevent secondary bonding failure. It may also reduce the skin stiffness allowing more core impact damage. That has also been seen in the past. The 70s with kevlar laminates have not proven any more robust than the ones without, so the trend has tended to die out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quiet whisper in your shell-like ears - how about finer hulls and less weight?? Because these too fast for monohulls VO70's are just not good enough, even with state of the at engineering and materials. Yes or No?

MOD70's for the next Volvo? Less loads, less weight, less pounding, less crew - did I say faster.

And the likes of Cammas and Coville have both said a Volvo would break a MOD70 far easier than a VO70. It is all about managing speed in Multihulls, it seems Cammas and co are giving a good demonstration right now that the same approach works with canters like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I can't argue with those two ... but as you say, different approach required ... and they've got it the closest to being right. And will win too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A few of the 70s have done this, and at least one of the broken boats this leg has a layer of kevlar in the outer skin. As Doug says, this doesn't prevent secondary bonding failure. It may also reduce the skin stiffness allowing more core impact damage. That has also been seen in the past. The 70s with kevlar laminates have not proven any more robust than the ones without, so the trend has tended to die out.

 

That's very interesting, do you know which boats had Kevlar layers?

 

It's a shame that only half of the story will be in the public domain, as it's as interesting as the racing itself in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A few of the 70s have done this, and at least one of the broken boats this leg has a layer of kevlar in the outer skin. As Doug says, this doesn't prevent secondary bonding failure. It may also reduce the skin stiffness allowing more core impact damage. That has also been seen in the past. The 70s with kevlar laminates have not proven any more robust than the ones without, so the trend has tended to die out.

 

That's very interesting, do you know which boats had Kevlar layers?

 

It's a shame that only half of the story will be in the public domain, as it's as interesting as the racing itself in my view.

Sorry, not my place to say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few of the 70s have done this, and at least one of the broken boats this leg has a layer of kevlar in the outer skin. As Doug says, this doesn't prevent secondary bonding failure. It may also reduce the skin stiffness allowing more core impact damage. That has also been seen in the past. The 70s with kevlar laminates have not proven any more robust than the ones without, so the trend has tended to die out.

 

IANA composites engineer, but don't you get ...interesting... intra-panel stresses if they're made of materials with of differing elastic modulus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quiet whisper in your shell-like ears - how about finer hulls and less weight?? Because these too fast for monohulls VO70's are just not good enough, even with state of the at engineering and materials. Yes or No?

MOD70's for the next Volvo? Less loads, less weight, less pounding, less crew - did I say faster.

 

You are a genius- why has nobody else thought of benchtesting against a boat that has yet to go round the world, never mind across the Southern Ocean or even, for that matter, raced against each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few of the 70s have done this, and at least one of the broken boats this leg has a layer of kevlar in the outer skin. As Doug says, this doesn't prevent secondary bonding failure. It may also reduce the skin stiffness allowing more core impact damage. That has also been seen in the past. The 70s with kevlar laminates have not proven any more robust than the ones without, so the trend has tended to die out.

 

IANA composites engineer, but don't you get ...interesting... intra-panel stresses if they're made of materials with of differing elastic modulus?

For sure. The kevlar skin is purely there for impact resistance, not to take any structural loads. The problem then is that it is replacing fibres that could help with the structural loads. So a trade off, but one that doesn't help with secondary bonding, and doesn't seem worth it in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 5 days ago on the 23-rd of April 4 teams broke their 24 hour run of leg 5:

 

Camper 528 Nm.

Telefonica 525 Nm.

Groupama 508 Nm.

Puma 494 Nm.

 

which is an indication how fast the ships are in heavy weather.

 

The one who doesn't break anything leads.... So much is clear.

So far Groupama, Puma and Telefonica proved that.

 

The margin is little, and as a Groupama-fan I hope they continue to win.

 

I think this is a very competitive Volvo Ocean Race compared to the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty here saying that it is inevitable that if these boats - and any race boats - are pushed too hard in big wind/seas the hulls or bulkheads will break. OK, if that statement is accepted, how do sailors know how hard they can push? Don't say "experience" because nobody gets very much experience in breaking hulls. You can instrument rig loads but afaik you can't instrument hull loads. I've done racing where I've been concerned to keep the rig in the boat but I've never had to worry about breaking the hull and I think the same would be true of 99.9% of sailors. So, how do you know where enough is enough as far as keeping the hull and bulkheads intact?

 

That's the whole point of designing for graceful failure modes. You protect the hull integrity by making sure something else, less hazardous than loss of the hull, breaks first. Then the crew has some assurance they won't break the hull apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for build, every structural designer attempts to gauge the impact of imperfection in build. To be more sure in more critical areas by adding weight/material. The best boatbuilders in the world are involved in these constructions. I would personally rate Cookson (Camper) above King (Tele) or NEB (Puma). I have not worked with Persico (ADOR).

 

 

Multiplast in france should probably stay on top of this rating (gruopama and many more...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

Maybe they are factually reporting, and you are reading into something that is not there. My take would be that if Tele are throttled back and heading for a pitstop then why push in big weather. Wait for the weather to calm a little, then push with less risk. After all the boat in front has already throttled back and still has repairs to make. What would be the point in pushing hard if you don't need to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

bet their course has more to do with gybing/wind angles than any conspiracy that there's another unreported problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quiet whisper in your shell-like ears - how about finer hulls and less weight?? Because these too fast for monohulls VO70's are just not good enough, even with state of the at engineering and materials. Yes or No?

MOD70's for the next Volvo? Less loads, less weight, less pounding, less crew - did I say faster.

 

 

Less weight, yes. Less loads? Not by a long shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As for build, every structural designer attempts to gauge the impact of imperfection in build. To be more sure in more critical areas by adding weight/material. The best boatbuilders in the world are involved in these constructions. I would personally rate Cookson (Camper) above King (Tele) or NEB (Puma). I have not worked with Persico (ADOR).

 

 

Multiplast in france should probably stay on top of this rating (gruopama and many more...)

 

Groupama had a lot of issues during the build. I would put them alongside King. Seen a few builds out of Persico and in my opinion they have raised the bar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

bet their course has more to do with gybing/wind angles than any conspiracy that there's another unreported problem.

 

Nobody sails out of the pressure on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody goes from the fast route to a slow route on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody sails extra distance unless there's a benefit to it. Nobody sails into a high pressure ridge on purpose - unless there's a really good reason. Gybe angles won't cut it if you look at the weather overlay on the tracker. ADOR is going from winds in the twenties to an area where it drops into the mid-teens and even less farther along. There's plenty of sea room for them to head farther south for the pressure and still stay out of the exclusion zone. They're 250 miles north of the boundary. Something ain't right. Sailing out of the system into the high is like death; even if they need to gybe twice to get around the eastern ice boundary mark they have to stay in the breeze. Don't need no conspiracy to note the facts and regret the lack of reporting on point.

 

You got a better rational for the odd course and dropping boat speed, I'm happy to hear about it. I can't think of a racing basis for what's showing on the tracker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for build, every structural designer attempts to gauge the impact of imperfection in build. To be more sure in more critical areas by adding weight/material. The best boatbuilders in the world are involved in these constructions. I would personally rate Cookson (Camper) above King (Tele) or NEB (Puma). I have not worked with Persico (ADOR).

 

 

Multiplast in france should probably stay on top of this rating (gruopama and many more...)

 

Groupama had a lot of issues during the build. I would put them alongside King. Seen a few builds out of Persico and in my opinion they have raised the bar.

 

I am not sure what issues you are talking about but at least the boat doesn't disintegrate at sea and failures seem to be less critical (touching wood as a Groupama fan, I hope that I won't bring them bad luck by saying this!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am not sure what issues you are talking about but at least the boat doesn't disintegrate at sea and failures seem to be less critical (touching wood as a Groupama fan, I hope that I won't bring them bad luck by saying this!).

 

You mean disintegrate at sea like it did towards the end of leg 4? Maybe that was fortunate, allowing themm to replace and have a proper look before this leg.

 

During build I understand large sections of inner skin had to be replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

bet their course has more to do with gybing/wind angles than any conspiracy that there's another unreported problem.

 

Nobody sails out of the pressure on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody goes from the fast route to a slow route on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody sails extra distance unless there's a benefit to it. Nobody sails into a high pressure ridge on purpose - unless there's a really good reason. Gybe angles won't cut it if you look at the weather overlay on the tracker. ADOR is going from winds in the twenties to an area where it drops into the mid-teens and even less farther along. There's plenty of sea room for them to head farther south for the pressure and still stay out of the exclusion zone. They're 250 miles north of the boundary. Something ain't right. Sailing out of the system into the high is like death; even if they need to gybe twice to get around the eastern ice boundary mark they have to stay in the breeze. Don't need no conspiracy to note the facts and regret the lack of reporting on point.

 

You got a better rational for the odd course and dropping boat speed, I'm happy to hear about it. I can't think of a racing basis for what's showing on the tracker.

 

1. While I know the weather overlay on the tracker isn't really the best, if you advance the weather and do some math, at current speeds they aren't sailing out of the breeze.

2. At current speeds they are 3days behind tele who seem likely to stop. A three day pitstop puts Abu right on top of them without Abu having to thrash their boat further.

3. If tele don't stop then Abu have zero chance of catching up so why thrash the boat further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what issues you are talking about but at least the boat doesn't disintegrate at sea and failures seem to be less critical (touching wood as a Groupama fan, I hope that I won't bring them bad luck by saying this!).

 

You mean disintegrate at sea like it did towards the end of leg 4? Maybe that was fortunate, allowing themm to replace and have a proper look before this leg.

 

During build I understand large sections of inner skin had to be replaced.

 

If you hit something doing 15 or 20 knots, however you build within reason the skin will be damaged, but as far as I am aware the primary structure didn't suffer in this instance, if it had been more serious they wouldn't have ben able to repair so quickly. i don't think that they would have had to come back if this had happened at the beginning of a leg.

 

If they've replaced large section of the inner skin during the build - even if that's not ideal - it just means that the QC was tight enough. The race isn't over, incidents can still happen though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what issues you are talking about but at least the boat doesn't disintegrate at sea and failures seem to be less critical (touching wood as a Groupama fan, I hope that I won't bring them bad luck by saying this!).

 

You mean disintegrate at sea like it did towards the end of leg 4? Maybe that was fortunate, allowing themm to replace and have a proper look before this leg.

 

During build I understand large sections of inner skin had to be replaced.

 

If you hit something doing 15 or 20 knots, however you build within reason the skin will be damaged, but as far as I am aware the primary structure didn't suffer in this instance, if it had been more serious they wouldn't have ben able to repair so quickly. i don't think that they would have had to come back if this had happened at the beginning of a leg.

 

If they've replaced large section of the inner skin during the build - even if that's not ideal - it just means that the QC was tight enough. The race isn't over, incidents can still happen though.

 

+ 1,

A shock-mark may lead to further peeling of the outside plies (see Hugo Boss in pre-Vendee incident), which makes the damaged area look much bigger.

QC requesting skin sections to be redone because of a bad bond with the core and/or a forgotten film in the laminate is quite common - at least here - although I do not know anything about G IV build problems (would I have, I would have kept my mouth shut ;))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you hit something doing 15 or 20 knots, however you build within reason the skin will be damaged, but as far as I am aware the primary structure didn't suffer in this instance, if it had been more serious they wouldn't have ben able to repair so quickly. i don't think that they would have had to come back if this had happened at the beginning of a leg.

 

If they've replaced large section of the inner skin during the build - even if that's not ideal - it just means that the QC was tight enough. The race isn't over, incidents can still happen though.

Considering the footage at the end of leg 4 showed the emergency bilge pumps going full speed to stay on top of it, I suspect they would have had to turn back if they were about to face the Southern Ocean at that stage. As far as I know, they don't think they hit anything (apart from water). I agree though that a panel failure and an internal structure failure are a different issue. QC is great, but even better when it confirms all is as it should be rather than requirign a second shot at it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

bet their course has more to do with gybing/wind angles than any conspiracy that there's another unreported problem.

 

Nobody sails out of the pressure on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody goes from the fast route to a slow route on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody sails extra distance unless there's a benefit to it. Nobody sails into a high pressure ridge on purpose - unless there's a really good reason. Gybe angles won't cut it if you look at the weather overlay on the tracker. ADOR is going from winds in the twenties to an area where it drops into the mid-teens and even less farther along. There's plenty of sea room for them to head farther south for the pressure and still stay out of the exclusion zone. They're 250 miles north of the boundary. Something ain't right. Sailing out of the system into the high is like death; even if they need to gybe twice to get around the eastern ice boundary mark they have to stay in the breeze. Don't need no conspiracy to note the facts and regret the lack of reporting on point.

 

You got a better rational for the odd course and dropping boat speed, I'm happy to hear about it. I can't think of a racing basis for what's showing on the tracker.

Why bother beating up the boat? ADOR isn't exactly fighting for every last point to stay on the podium. I'll actually go a bit further with Loopy's explanation. With the exception of ADOR, most of this generations "quick pit stop for repairs" became "out for the leg". This is pretty much a delivery for ADOR. I don't see a point in stressing the boat. They'll get third or fourth just by finishing, and that position is decided more by what TF do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what issues you are talking about but at least the boat doesn't disintegrate at sea and failures seem to be less critical (touching wood as a Groupama fan, I hope that I won't bring them bad luck by saying this!).

 

You mean disintegrate at sea like it did towards the end of leg 4? Maybe that was fortunate, allowing themm to replace and have a proper look before this leg.

 

During build I understand large sections of inner skin had to be replaced.

 

If you hit something doing 15 or 20 knots, however you build within reason the skin will be damaged, but as far as I am aware the primary structure didn't suffer in this instance, if it had been more serious they wouldn't have ben able to repair so quickly. i don't think that they would have had to come back if this had happened at the beginning of a leg.

 

If they've replaced large section of the inner skin during the build - even if that's not ideal - it just means that the QC was tight enough. The race isn't over, incidents can still happen though.

 

I am in the building construction business, not marine.

Ninety percent of building construction failures are the connections, and appears the trend continues here.

 

I assume the hull/skin transfers it's load to the stiffest element such as a bulkhead or stringer.

It appears the composite hull skin has delaminated at the stiffest elements, or the bulkhead or stringer have delaminated from the interior skin layer?

 

Finite element analysis (FEA) would show stress concentrations at the connections, and hindsight questions the connections, as FEA does not design connections. Connections in my industry are the last thing that would fail.

 

From Camper video I saw repairing a stringer or bulkhead, it appeared it was with say 4 or 6" carbon tape lapping hull and bulkhead or stringer.

Hindsight tells me there should have a gusset plates at these junctions distributing the loads to a larger area of the hull.

Carbon tape could peal away, or do little to distribute the load as it bends on it's minor axis versus a series of gusset plates.

With hindsight the lack of a series of gusset plates at these connections makes me wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sail7seas, I am also in the construction industry...

 

 

 

Back to the race, Groupama is 15 points behind Telefonica, that would be nice if they manage to keep Ken Read at bay and that AD decides to race hard and snatch the podium from Telefonica!

 

There is a long way to go though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

bet their course has more to do with gybing/wind angles than any conspiracy that there's another unreported problem.

 

Nobody sails out of the pressure on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody goes from the fast route to a slow route on purpose - unless there's a reason for it. Nobody sails extra distance unless there's a benefit to it. Nobody sails into a high pressure ridge on purpose - unless there's a really good reason. Gybe angles won't cut it if you look at the weather overlay on the tracker. ADOR is going from winds in the twenties to an area where it drops into the mid-teens and even less farther along. There's plenty of sea room for them to head farther south for the pressure and still stay out of the exclusion zone. They're 250 miles north of the boundary. Something ain't right. Sailing out of the system into the high is like death; even if they need to gybe twice to get around the eastern ice boundary mark they have to stay in the breeze. Don't need no conspiracy to note the facts and regret the lack of reporting on point.

 

You got a better rational for the odd course and dropping boat speed, I'm happy to hear about it. I can't think of a racing basis for what's showing on the tracker.

Why bother beating up the boat? ADOR isn't exactly fighting for every last point to stay on the podium. I'll actually go a bit further with Loopy's explanation. With the exception of ADOR, most of this generations "quick pit stop for repairs" became "out for the leg". This is pretty much a delivery for ADOR. I don't see a point in stressing the boat. They'll get third or fourth just by finishing, and that position is decided more by what TF do.

 

You could of course be right, but boy that flies in the face of everything these guys have trained for. I guess I find it a little hard to believe that for crew morale if nothing else, they wouldn't race the boat to the finish line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope the organizers and the teams use this experience of boats falling apart (after merely days, not weeks on end, of rough bot not unexpected weather) to do some soul searching and work with outside consultants and university programs to figure out what's going wrong here. With the knowledge of this happening, it is simply irresponsible to send the crews into another leg without having this resolved.

 

It is also clear that the skippers don't have any idea what is causing this. Look at the confident comments made by Nicko, the Camper skipper in the Leg 4 Documentary after the delay of the start in Sanya. He claimed his boat was "built for this". The point is not that he evidently now has been proven wrong, the point is someone led him to believe he was right. That someone...better stands up, confesses and most importantly: starts working on fixing this, before it all goes truly pear shaped and people end up in rafts on their way to a meet and greet with the pinguins.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

 

 

 

That's actually a great idea. I don't see how having a ship around would detract from the quality of the racing or kill the spirit of the race. We are interested in watching them sail fast, not die.

 

Sorry, you mentioned Tele -- I thought they were still racing, no? I realize they are somewhat damaged but it doesn't sound as dire as Camper.

 

I would heartily support having a rescue ship nearby. Heck, isn't that whacky dude on Sea Shepherd lurking around down there? ... maybe donate some dough to his program and have him tail along behind the fleet for a few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting remark from the G4.

"As such we're not pushing the boat full pelt and for the past 24 hours for example, we haven't been canting the keel right over to windward so as to reduce the loadings. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, where is ADOR going? Seems like odd routing or am I missing something?

 

Looks to me like ADOR is keeping north to stay out of big winds/big waves. In a situation where they are, say, 2.5 days behind Telefonica and Tele is now reported to planning a throttled back saunter to a pit stop, ADOR should be pressing to make sure they can get ahead of Telefonica during their stop. I would suggest that the facts would support an inference that ADOR has another, new problem and have to nurse the boat along. Again factual reports from the boat would be a nice thing. Isn't that what the media folks are for?

 

 

 

Do you guys even know how to read the weather forecast feature on the tracker??? granted its pretty inaccurate, but I mean seriously your gonna assume something is wrong before even thinking their track is weather related.... use some common sense and look at the boats and the weather maps its pretty much much clear as day to see what the boys on the boat are thinking and how there strategy is gonna play out.

 

Is it that hard to connect the dots.....really

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I miss the reason Camper picked Puerto whatever instead of Ushuia for their pit stop? Seems like a long detour compared to what Telefonica are doing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re ADOR - Well, their course was leading them away from the pressure to the south of the exclusion zone. If they had gybed toward it, they would have had more pressure, and could have stayed in that pressure due to tighter coriolis. Instead they sailed a greater distance to the north in light air, and when they finally gybed for the central ice limit mark, they are forced to at a very deep angle downwind = slow. Pretty weak for sailors of that caliber, I would say, so it must be that they are babying the boat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this clip from Puma, where Kenny Read extolls the virtues of PB&J in the middle of the southern ocean.

 

http://new.livestream.com/pumaoceanracing/leg5/videos/369170

 

That is freaking AWESOME! I had to share that with my good buddy, who went we were on a long, cold brutal delivery. He was coming down off watch and I handed him a peanut butter sandwich. That was over twenty years ago and I don't think he has had one since.

 

Good times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's Gpma analysis: LINK

 

Pretty good and informative again.

 

I start loving these guys, they prove to be the best seamen out there more and more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if a bit of Kevlar would make things much better.

 

Having the last layer in Kevlar would make the hulls more resilient to impact.

 

Bingo, you hit the nail on the head. Kevlar boats do not break, you would never have hull breaches that could compromise the boat. Having had a Kevlar boat before I can vouch for their strength. Yes it is heavier and hardy to maintain hull rigidity after time, harder to get runner loads up as the boat ages but by then these boats are out of date and ready to be recycled through private owners. There is no disadvantage if all boats are built accordingly.

 

 

These calls for a combining kevlar and carbon are not realistic. Carbon breaks at a level of stress at which kevlar has only developed a small portion of its potential strength. In other words, if you start with equal length strands of carbon and kevlar each of which would break at 1000 N of loading. You will find the pair will break at around 1300 N. The Carbon breaks first (it reaches 1000N loading while the stress on the kevlar is only 300 N), and then the kevlar cannot take the entire 1300 NM load. In contrast, two strands of carbon would take a 2000 NM load. No materials engineer would combine kevlar and carbon unless they have different loadings/purposes. For instance, kevlar is sometimes added purely to increase abrasion resistance, but is assumed to provide almost no structural strength.

 

Building in kevlar is also much more labor intensive than carbon as you cannot cut/sand/grind/repair kevlar laminates easily (i.e., without causing further damage/delamination). It would be much harder to do any sort of at-sea repairs. They would be better off going with S-glass than kevlar if they wanted to make the boats more resilient. However, construction in S-glass is just as expensive as carbon, and the boats would be slightly heavier.

 

At any rate, I suspect the optimal solution to the types of bow problems we have been seeing is probably additional carbon ring-frames in the front 6 M of the boats. Adding two ring frames would result in each frame/bulkhead carrying a reduced load, and the span of the unsupported sandwich panel (and thus deflection) would be decreased. 25KG of carbon ring frames would make a substantial difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure. The kevlar skin is purely there for impact resistance, not to take any structural loads. The problem then is that it is replacing fibres that could help with the structural loads. So a trade off, but one that doesn't help with secondary bonding, and doesn't seem worth it in the end.

 

Since a layer of kevlar bonded to carbon will provide less impact resistance than an equal weight layer of carbon, I don't think the reason is impact resistance. I suspect it is abrasion resistance. It is not structural, but protects the structure.

 

Which boat has a layer of kevlar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

 

 

 

That's actually a great idea. I don't see how having a ship around would detract from the quality of the racing or kill the spirit of the race. We are interested in watching them sail fast, not die.

 

Sorry, you mentioned Tele -- I thought they were still racing, no? I realize they are somewhat damaged but it doesn't sound as dire as Camper.

 

I would heartily support having a rescue ship nearby. Heck, isn't that whacky dude on Sea Shepherd lurking around down there? ... maybe donate some dough to his program and have him tail along behind the fleet for a few days.

 

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I miss the reason Camper picked Puerto whatever instead of Ushuia for their pit stop? Seems like a long detour compared to what Telefonica are doing?

 

In their post they said they are "cautious sailing", so maybe a combination of logistics and mellower ocean to protect the front half from falling off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

 

Yeah, I suspect you could build a canting keel 70 foot sail boat that could keep up with this fleet and that could be diverted in the event of an emergency. Of course, if you've got a 70 ft canting keel sail boat sitting around, and you happen to be sailing in close proximity to the other boats, it might be tempting to enter the race yourself.

 

These boats all server as emergency/rescue boats for all other competitors. There is no need to have another boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if a bit of Kevlar would make things much better.

 

Having the last layer in Kevlar would make the hulls more resilient to impact.

 

Bingo, you hit the nail on the head. Kevlar boats do not break, you would never have hull breaches that could compromise the boat. Having had a Kevlar boat before I can vouch for their strength. Yes it is heavier and hardy to maintain hull rigidity after time, harder to get runner loads up as the boat ages but by then these boats are out of date and ready to be recycled through private owners. There is no disadvantage if all boats are built accordingly.

 

 

These calls for a combining kevlar and carbon are not realistic. Carbon breaks at a level of stress at which kevlar has only developed a small portion of its potential strength. In other words, if you start with equal length strands of carbon and kevlar each of which would break at 1000 N of loading. You will find the pair will break at around 1300 N. The Carbon breaks first (it reaches 1000N loading while the stress on the kevlar is only 300 N), and then the kevlar cannot take the entire 1300 NM load. In contrast, two strands of carbon would take a 2000 NM load. No materials engineer would combine kevlar and carbon unless they have different loadings/purposes. For instance, kevlar is sometimes added purely to increase abrasion resistance, but is assumed to provide almost no structural strength.

 

Building in kevlar is also much more labor intensive than carbon as you cannot cut/sand/grind/repair kevlar laminates easily (i.e., without causing further damage/delamination). It would be much harder to do any sort of at-sea repairs. They would be better off going with S-glass than kevlar if they wanted to make the boats more resilient. However, construction in S-glass is just as expensive as carbon, and the boats would be slightly heavier.

 

At any rate, I suspect the optimal solution to the types of bow problems we have been seeing is probably additional carbon ring-frames in the front 6 M of the boats. Adding two ring frames would result in each frame/bulkhead carrying a reduced load, and the span of the unsupported sandwich panel (and thus deflection) would be decreased. 25KG of carbon ring frames would make a substantial difference.

 

I think you are trying to describe strain to failure, yes? A basic premise of composite engineering is that a skin, made up of various layers of fibre connected to one another will essentially strain at the same rate, in a given direction. This occurs up until the resin lets go of the fibre. Your explanation leaves out the directionality of the fibre application and the stiffness of each ply, at least it does not explain them directly.

 

If you put a band of carbon 300g, Kevlar 300g and E or S glass 300g all the same direction in a laminate skin, and apply a load in the direction of the fibre, pretty much only the carbon will carry any of the load. Until it fails. It does the former because it is stiffest. It fails because it has a lower strain to failure. (Big caveat, not all carbon fibre is the same: we routinely consider if T300, T700, T800, M30S are appropriate for a given application and angle. The differences are very large.) You can expand on that principal as you consider other fibre orientations. IF you wanted to, and maybe WYD can confirm, you would put woven kevlar on the inside skin (probably away from frames only) at a direction that is not being "used" by carbon fibre already (as in 45/-45), if possible. Not at frames because it is AWFUL in compression, and the inside skin compresses over frames.

 

I will take a moment to add for all of the people describing the eminent demise of 66% of the fleet's sailors, 5 boats are racing, 1 is back in port having broken a rudder and destroyed its exit (VOR should change their status to "suspended racing" until they retire). Camper is in serious need of repair, so much they are not rounding the Horn until they do. Tele could finish, but IMHO they can round, stop, repair and control 3rd place all at the same time. I contend the sailors are at far greater risk from getting side swiped by waves (as we saw graphically on Telefonica) and battered to death than from sinking. It has been a very nasty leg, in a particularly harsh and competitive edition of the race. No multi would have stayed in that sea state, nor needed to. I dare say any Imoca would have chosen to let the system go. But no boat is in any danger of sinking and needs a "rescue ship". "Disintegration" is overplaying the situation. The precautions of the rule and boat design have succeeded (multiple times in this regatta) in creating a vessel to navigate under its own power back to safe harbor, as much or more than they have failed to keep all boats in pristine condition. I too am disappointed the fleet is 6 boats and that few have made it through this leg in decent performing shape, but it is that kind of race.

 

I for one am in awe and humbled by the shear determination these guys have, by the maelstrom through which they race and by the media we are all able to see in almost real time. Ask them if they want a rescue boat. I bet they want longer stopovers instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/snip/

 

I for one am in awe and humbled by the shear determination these guys have, by the maelstrom through which they race and by the media we are all able to see in almost real time. Ask them if they want a rescue boat. I bet they want longer stopovers instead.

 

Ask them right now and I bet they would settle for a KFC bucket and some rum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

 

 

 

That's actually a great idea. I don't see how having a ship around would detract from the quality of the racing or kill the spirit of the race. We are interested in watching them sail fast, not die.

 

Sorry, you mentioned Tele -- I thought they were still racing, no? I realize they are somewhat damaged but it doesn't sound as dire as Camper.

 

I would heartily support having a rescue ship nearby. Heck, isn't that whacky dude on Sea Shepherd lurking around down there? ... maybe donate some dough to his program and have him tail along behind the fleet for a few days.

 

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

 

 

 

Basically, you'd need an aircraft carrier. Could be kind of expensive. OTOH, it would be easy to do repairs to the boats on board, then chuck 'em back in the water after they were fixed -- no need to hobble over to out-of-the-way ports for repairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

 

Yeah, I suspect you could build a canting keel 70 foot sail boat that could keep up with this fleet and that could be diverted in the event of an emergency. Of course, if you've got a 70 ft canting keel sail boat sitting around, and you happen to be sailing in close proximity to the other boats, it might be tempting to enter the race yourself.

 

These boats all server as emergency/rescue boats for all other competitors. There is no need to have another boat.

 

I know they do and other boats are forced to come in aid in a mayday situation, but in some cases it may take them too long to reach a crew in serious, life-threatening danger. As some people have said, I don't know if there's actually a boat that can keep up, especially with that sea state, or if someone would be willing to pay the bill. I am thinking maybe a military ship could possibly do the job? Then again, it's all $.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I miss the reason Camper picked Puerto whatever instead of Ushuia for their pit stop? Seems like a long detour compared to what Telefonica are doing?

 

My guess is because it the biggest port on that side of the Horn, and has road service directly to Italai if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

 

 

 

That's actually a great idea. I don't see how having a ship around would detract from the quality of the racing or kill the spirit of the race. We are interested in watching them sail fast, not die.

 

Sorry, you mentioned Tele -- I thought they were still racing, no? I realize they are somewhat damaged but it doesn't sound as dire as Camper.

 

I would heartily support having a rescue ship nearby. Heck, isn't that whacky dude on Sea Shepherd lurking around down there? ... maybe donate some dough to his program and have him tail along behind the fleet for a few days.

 

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

 

 

 

Basically, you'd need an aircraft carrier. Could be kind of expensive. OTOH, it would be easy to do repairs to the boats on board, then chuck 'em back in the water after they were fixed -- no need to hobble over to out-of-the-way ports for repairs.

 

Or... you need to think a bit more. How bout send a trawler out of NZ 2 days in advance of the fleet to a station approx 1/3 the leg. As the fleet approaches the chase boat shadows the fleet till around mid way.

On the other end, you send a similar chase boat out of SAmerica (somewhere) to get to an approx station to intercept the fleet, it then shadows the fleet to the north east as they approach the horn.

 

The rescue if needed may not be quick, but certainly within a 24hr window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw which teams can be foreseen in the next VOR edition?

-Groupama - depnding on the sponsor finantial situation and camapaig cost

-Sanya - most likely, if I'm not mistaken Sanderson is hired for two campaigns

-Tele - their third edition (Movistar, TeleBlu&TeleBlack, Tele) - usual suspect

-Puma - no clue, but according to some comments here about their ROI in the last campaign - usual suspect as well

-ADOR - ?

-Camper - If they loose they will be highly motivated

 

Is Knut Frostad going to stay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

This is a race!! Not a f**kin' cruising rally with a nanny boat. You care to specify the details for a boat capable of following the fleet at average 25 knots, with 4 metre seas (being nice here) with a range of at least 7000 miles? You now need at least 2 boats maybe 3, all needing at least 4 crew.

 

Just get back to me when you've done the numbers.

 

Fark me, its idiot season again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

This is a race!! Not a f**kin' cruising rally with a nanny boat. You care to specify the details for a boat capable of following the fleet at average 25 knots, with 4 metre seas (being nice here) with a range of at least 7000 miles? You now need at least 2 boats maybe 3, all needing at least 4 crew.

 

Just get back to me when you've done the numbers.

 

Fark me, its idiot season again.

 

See above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://new.livestream.com/groupamasailingteam/leg5

 

Couple of pics from Puma under the Groupama livestream cool.gif

 

Just had a look at the videos . Why the fuck don´t they show these things on the VOR-site? It´s brilliant footage and you have to search half the net to get it. What do these VOR-people do. Hold the best footage back for themselves?

Same thing with the comments. You hear and see Camper, Camper and Camper again. Man, Camper is OUT of this leg. They don´t play any roll no more. Don´t they have someone around to translate Spanish and French. THERE is where the music is playing and especially with Puma. They send the best pics and the best comments. Without any doubt they are doing the best job seen from the sponsors point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

 

Yeah, I suspect you could build a canting keel 70 foot sail boat that could keep up with this fleet and that could be diverted in the event of an emergency. Of course, if you've got a 70 ft canting keel sail boat sitting around, and you happen to be sailing in close proximity to the other boats, it might be tempting to enter the race yourself.

 

These boats all server as emergency/rescue boats for all other competitors. There is no need to have another boat.

 

I know they do and other boats are forced to come in aid in a mayday situation, but in some cases it may take them too long to reach a crew in serious, life-threatening danger. As some people have said, I don't know if there's actually a boat that can keep up, especially with that sea state, or if someone would be willing to pay the bill. I am thinking maybe a military ship could possibly do the job? Then again, it's all $.

 

 

 

You can get one second hand from the MOD: Type 42 Destroyer

 

More seriously, boats seem to be able to come back under their own means so I am not sure if this is really needed.

 

In my view, they need more to protect the crew from the elements and make sure hulls are more resilient to wave impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

These calls for a combining kevlar and carbon are not realistic. Carbon breaks at a level of stress at which kevlar has only developed a small portion of its potential strength. In other words, if you start with equal length strands of carbon and kevlar each of which would break at 1000 N of loading. You will find the pair will break at around 1300 N. The Carbon breaks first (it reaches 1000N loading while the stress on the kevlar is only 300 N), and then the kevlar cannot take the entire 1300 NM load. In contrast, two strands of carbon would take a 2000 NM load. No materials engineer would combine kevlar and carbon unless they have different loadings/purposes. For instance, kevlar is sometimes added purely to increase abrasion resistance, but is assumed to provide almost no structural strength.

 

 

I think you are trying to describe strain to failure, yes? A basic premise of composite engineering is that a skin, made up of various layers of fibre connected to one another will essentially strain at the same rate, in a given direction. This occurs up until the resin lets go of the fibre. Your explanation leaves out the directionality of the fibre application and the stiffness of each ply, at least it does not explain them directly.

 

Yes I was illustrating the limitations of combining materials with different young's modulus by explaining the simplest case of parallel materials loaded in tension. I went on to point out that one might be able to combine kevlar and carbon if they had different loadings. It is possible to have perpendicular fibers of carbon and kevlar in the same laminate in which both sets of fibers can develop their nominal tensile strengths because the strains are independent. This gives a laminate that is stiff along one axis and flexible along the other. This is a somewhat special case and is very difficult to engineer, the loads need to be very predictable.

 

 

You can expand on that principal as you consider other fibre orientations. IF you wanted to, and maybe WYD can confirm, you would put woven kevlar on the inside skin (probably away from frames only) at a direction that is not being "used" by carbon fibre already (as in 45/-45), if possible. Not at frames because it is AWFUL in compression, and the inside skin compresses over frames.

 

I think if you run the numbers you will see that this will add almost nothing to the laminate strength, although slightly more than a parallel orientation. The direction of strain for the kevlar weave cannot be close to orthogonal to the strain of the carbon (assuming inner skin is bi- or tri- directional carbon as on these boats) so the kevlar will never carry much of the load until the carbon has ruptured, which happens after just a little elongation. Then whatever force ruptured the carbon would make quick work of the much weaker kevlar weave. Putting a layer of kevlar on the inner skin is just a good way to make it hard to repair the boat. You would always be better off just adding another layer of carbon if you want a stronger skin.

 

As I suggested earlier. I think the optimal solution from a strength-to-weight perspective is probably more ring frames (and/or bulkheads), not thicker skins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These boats all server as emergency/rescue boats for all other competitors. There is no need to have another boat.

 

I know they do and other boats are forced to come in aid in a mayday situation, but in some cases it may take them too long to reach a crew in serious, life-threatening danger. As some people have said, I don't know if there's actually a boat that can keep up, especially with that sea state, or if someone would be willing to pay the bill. I am thinking maybe a military ship could possibly do the job? Then again, it's all $.

 

Why do you think the "rescue" ship is likely to be closer to the stricken VOR boat than another VOR boat? Perhaps each VOR boat needs its own rescue boat that hovers 10 miles to windward for the full race. Obviously what the race needs is to double the cost of a campaign and double the number of sailors who are sent into harms way.

 

None of the structural failures have seriously risked sinking the boats. Nanny boats are seriously overkill, and likely less effective than other safety measures such as airbags or additional water tight bulkheads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 5 days ago on the 23-rd of April 4 teams broke their 24 hour run of leg 5:

 

Camper 528 Nm.

Telefonica 525 Nm.

Groupama 508 Nm.

Puma 494 Nm.

 

 

I think this tells us everything you need to know. The level of damage done to the lead boats is almost directly proporsional to the speeds achieved during this period. The keys skills the French have picked up through all those short handed and big multihull races is how to manage the boat. On paper all the big cats and tris can go around the world faster than they have but the crews have throttled back when needed to protect the boat and keep it upright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re ADOR - Well, their course was leading them away from the pressure to the south of the exclusion zone. If they had gybed toward it, they would have had more pressure, and could have stayed in that pressure due to tighter coriolis. Instead they sailed a greater distance to the north in light air, and when they finally gybed for the central ice limit mark, they are forced to at a very deep angle downwind = slow. Pretty weak for sailors of that caliber, I would say, so it must be that they are babying the boat...

 

No word why ADOR are throttled back. Is it damage? Have they pretty much settled for fourth? Aren't they willing to even try to get past Telefonica? Is there something else to explain that excursion to the north? At least they have picked up some pressure and some speed and are doing respectably at the moment. Note that Camper too has gybed for pressure. Apparently there's slow and there's too slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can expand on that principal as you consider other fibre orientations. IF you wanted to, and maybe WYD can confirm, you would put woven kevlar on the inside skin (probably away from frames only) at a direction that is not being "used" by carbon fibre already (as in 45/-45), if possible. Not at frames because it is AWFUL in compression, and the inside skin compresses over frames.

 

I think if you run the numbers you will see that this will add almost nothing to the laminate strength, although slightly more than a parallel orientation. The direction of strain for the kevlar weave cannot be close to orthogonal to the strain of the carbon (assuming inner skin is bi- or tri- directional carbon as on these boats) so the kevlar will never carry much of the load until the carbon has ruptured, which happens after just a little elongation. Then whatever force ruptured the carbon would make quick work of the much weaker kevlar weave. Putting a layer of kevlar on the inner skin is just a good way to make it hard to repair the boat. You would always be better off just adding another layer of carbon if you want a stronger skin.

 

As I suggested earlier. I think the optimal solution from a strength-to-weight perspective is probably more ring frames (and/or bulkheads), not thicker skins.

I can't argue much with the logic. It would not add to laminate strength. The addition of such a ply, an off axis aramid woven, would be to give more post rupture ... I think tenacity is the right word ... to the laminate. It is a shell damage limiter at best, not prevention. Would perhaps improve the situation for Sanya leg one, eventually G4 leg 4. I have stated again and again I do think Kevlar belongs in these boats, as well as the fact that Leg 5 damage seems to be about bonding frames/bulkheads to the inside of the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These calls for a combining kevlar and carbon are not realistic. Carbon breaks at a level of stress at which kevlar has only developed a small portion of its potential strength. In other words, if you start with equal length strands of carbon and kevlar each of which would break at 1000 N of loading. You will find the pair will break at around 1300 N. The Carbon breaks first (it reaches 1000N loading while the stress on the kevlar is only 300 N), and then the kevlar cannot take the entire 1300 NM load. In contrast, two strands of carbon would take a 2000 NM load. No materials engineer would combine kevlar and carbon unless they have different loadings/purposes. For instance, kevlar is sometimes added purely to increase abrasion resistance, but is assumed to provide almost no structural strength.

 

 

I think you are trying to describe strain to failure, yes? A basic premise of composite engineering is that a skin, made up of various layers of fibre connected to one another will essentially strain at the same rate, in a given direction. This occurs up until the resin lets go of the fibre. Your explanation leaves out the directionality of the fibre application and the stiffness of each ply, at least it does not explain them directly.

 

Yes I was illustrating the limitations of combining materials with different young's modulus by explaining the simplest case of parallel materials loaded in tension. I went on to point out that one might be able to combine kevlar and carbon if they had different loadings. It is possible to have perpendicular fibers of carbon and kevlar in the same laminate in which both sets of fibers can develop their nominal tensile strengths because the strains are independent. This gives a laminate that is stiff along one axis and flexible along the other. This is a somewhat special case and is very difficult to engineer, the loads need to be very predictable.

 

 

You can expand on that principal as you consider other fibre orientations. IF you wanted to, and maybe WYD can confirm, you would put woven kevlar on the inside skin (probably away from frames only) at a direction that is not being "used" by carbon fibre already (as in 45/-45), if possible. Not at frames because it is AWFUL in compression, and the inside skin compresses over frames.

 

I think if you run the numbers you will see that this will add almost nothing to the laminate strength, although slightly more than a parallel orientation. The direction of strain for the kevlar weave cannot be close to orthogonal to the strain of the carbon (assuming inner skin is bi- or tri- directional carbon as on these boats) so the kevlar will never carry much of the load until the carbon has ruptured, which happens after just a little elongation. Then whatever force ruptured the carbon would make quick work of the much weaker kevlar weave. Putting a layer of kevlar on the inner skin is just a good way to make it hard to repair the boat. You would always be better off just adding another layer of carbon if you want a stronger skin.

 

As I suggested earlier. I think the optimal solution from a strength-to-weight perspective is probably more ring frames (and/or bulkheads), not thicker skins.

 

I agree fully with you regarding stiff elements attracting the load and breaking first, I was suggesting Kevlar on the outer lamination only to protect the carbon fibre from impacts and being teared. Doubling the number of ring frames will divide bending stress by 4 and shear stress by 2 without adding too much weight which is indeed the obvious answer! It would make the structure much stiffer though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some ideas for the rules for the next go-around:

- no in-leg 'repair stops', you break you retire

- drop testing of the boats from a 10m height - 10 times each

- no on-deck stacking (maybe they would put some freeboard in then)

- cassette style rudders so they can be replaced in water (i.e. AC45 style)

- additional crew for in-port races

- 2 laps of the planet - one non-stop, one on a ship to in-port races.

 

Maybe a lot of this will happen as a result of this edition of the VOR anyway - sailor led development and refinements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some ideas for the rules for the next go-around:

- no in-leg 'repair stops', you break you retire

- drop testing of the boats from a 10m height - 10 times each

- no on-deck stacking (maybe they would put some freeboard in then)

- cassette style rudders so they can be replaced in water (i.e. AC45 style)

- additional crew for in-port races

- 2 laps of the planet - one non-stop, one on a ship to in-port races.

 

Maybe a lot of this will happen as a result of this edition of the VOR anyway - sailor led development and refinements.

 

I suspect you will not find a sailor who has sailed the VOR, or any of the current sponsors, who would sign on to this proposal. No repairs plus destructive testing is a odd combination, guaranteed to drive up costs and weight, and to slow the boats down. It will not reduce injuries to sailors or improve value to sponsors. Not going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's Gpma analysis: LINK

 

Pretty good and informative again.

 

I start loving these guys, they prove to be the best seamen out there more and more.

 

 

I'm American and still I root for the Groupe' Team...They don't make stupid comments or try to lay blame, etc. etc. And these posts they they write are spot on and make the VOR website news along with the news from the other boats basic rubbish, aka CLOWNSHOES. In this last one the Goupe' Team explains why they recently lost about 15 miles to Puma and then basically challenges the Puma boys to try to match them to the Horn. I love this shit, they have laid down the gauntlet and it seems that they are now pulling back some miles. Keep in mind that there is still a bunch of miles left to the horn and either of these 2 boats could bust up if they press too hard. Maybe Groupe' is trying to get Puma out of the race with this challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's Gpma analysis: LINK

 

Pretty good and informative again.

 

I start loving these guys, they prove to be the best seamen out there more and more.

 

 

I'm American and still I root for the Groupe' Team...They don't make stupid comments or try to lay blame, etc. etc. And these posts they they write are spot on and make the VOR website news along with the news from the other boats basic rubbish, aka CLOWNSHOES. In this last one the Goupe' Team explains why they recently lost about 15 miles to Puma and then basically challenges the Puma boys to try to match them to the Horn. I love this shit, they have laid down the gauntlet and it seems that they are now pulling back some miles. Keep in mind that there is still a bunch of miles left to the horn and either of these 2 boats could bust up if they press too hard. Maybe Groupe' is trying to get Puma out of the race with this challenge.

 

I think it's hysterical the way everyone keeps on extolling the virtues of the French when currently only half the sailing crew onboard even is from the country. What's more it's not as if they are the only team that has weathered this thing intact so far, Puma has been right there with them.

 

I don't want to take anything away from the Groupama guys, they've sailed masterfully so far, but in a brutal leg, they aren't the only ones who have done so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't organizers have a ship escorting these boats during this leg? Since time to reach them from land is so long and other boats racing are not in great shape to give aid if necessary, would it not be a good safety measure? I know, it would kind of kill the spirit of the race but given the fragility of the boats, it might be a good idea even to send someone from Chile to escort Camper and Tele.

 

On the other hand, how does a 3 boat (if that) in-port race in Brasil sound to sponsors?

This is a race!! Not a f**kin' cruising rally with a nanny boat. You care to specify the details for a boat capable of following the fleet at average 25 knots, with 4 metre seas (being nice here) with a range of at least 7000 miles? You now need at least 2 boats maybe 3, all needing at least 4 crew.

 

Just get back to me when you've done the numbers.

 

Fark me, its idiot season again.

 

+1 While we are at it, should we consider a "rescue" vessel to stand by in close proximity in case the first "rescue" boat has a breakdown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm American and still I root for the Groupe' Team...They don't make stupid comments or try to lay blame, etc. etc. And these posts they they write are spot on and make the VOR website news along with the news from the other boats basic rubbish, aka CLOWNSHOES. In this last one the Goupe' Team explains why they recently lost about 15 miles to Puma and then basically challenges the Puma boys to try to match them to the Horn. I love this shit, they have laid down the gauntlet and it seems that they are now pulling back some miles. Keep in mind that there is still a bunch of miles left to the horn and either of these 2 boats could bust up if they press too hard. Maybe Groupe' is trying to get Puma out of the race with this challenge.

 

I'm from the USA and I also find it easy to cheer on G4. But, I think you may be doing Puma a bit of an injustice. As I see it they're playing an interesting game this leg. They seem content to do what it takes to stay in contact with the lead group but they're willing to lay back far enough to break the feed-back loop. I don't know if there is some kind of high level game theory thing going on or if it's just happenstance. I suspect at least some of the former as KR has spoken a bit about saving the crew and boat in the past. And he's got a couple of men healing so he needs to keep from overworking the remaining crew. G4 is justifiably happy with where they are and a bit of goading of Puma is fun and may be profitable. My guess is that Puma will be content to bide her time and look for passing lanes in the Atlantic. Perhaps the French will run low on gauntlets and their chilly fingers will make them vulnerable. Perhaps they will sail to an easy victory. There's a long way to sail yet. Patience is a virtue and sometimes a good strategy too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been a long time since Puma were more than 40 miles back. That can be picked up in a matter of hours in easier conditions. Why not just loosely match G4 speed now? It's a long way to Brazil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by sail7seas, March 28, 2012 - No reason given

I agree fully with you regarding stiff elements attracting the load and breaking first, I was suggesting Kevlar on the outer lamination only to protect the carbon fibre from impacts and being teared. Doubling the number of ring frames will divide bending stress by 4 and shear stress by 2 without adding too much weight which is indeed the obvious answer! It would make the structure much stiffer though.

In addition to doubling the ring frames,

will doubling the number of rings frames reduce the loads collecting at the bulkhead delaminating from whatever they are attached to?

(connection failure) Assuming the bulkheads collect loads to.

Share this post


Link to post

......Doubling the number of ring frames will divide bending stress by 4 and shear stress by 2 without adding too much weight which is indeed the obvious answer! It would make the structure much stiffer though.

 

In addition to doubling the ring frames,

will doubling the number of rings frames reduce the loads collecting at the bulkhead delaminating from whatever they are attached to? (connection failure?)

 

In a simple case, yes, as stress=force/area and you are essentially halving the force and doubling the contact area. The situation is a bit more complicated as the loads are not simple static loads, rather dynamic, so how much force ends up getting applied to a contact area is highly variable, i.e dependent on sea state and rig load. I agree with the FEA pro's here, the issue is determining the applied loads in a static and dynamic situation on these boats.

 

Another factor is the still relatively limited fatigue data available on composites. Yes it is 2012 and we know FAR more than we did in the 70's and 80's, but 30 years of data isn't the same as a century's worth on steel, for example. In the past 30 years alone there have been changes to resins, fiber strands and paints that certainly have a direct impact on composite life predictions.

 

Finally, I have no idea what was going through Camper's head when they decided to push hard again after making a relatively major repair at sea. I question how you can value the integrity of such a repair-the parts being bonded are constantly shifting, and the temperature is near or below freezing. Are the repair kits designed with epoxy that cures quickly to say 90% strength of a typical laminating resin in very sub-optimal conditions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Camper situation seems pretty clear at this point - they have to get to Puerto Montt with little time to spare. They have a really tricky job of balancing reasonable boat speed against safety against time to repair and time to finish the leg. Their recent speeds of 6-10 knots seem to be weather related, not repair related. That the boat is back up to speeds of 12-14 seems, again, to be weather related. Making 12 knots in18 knots of wind is hardly "pushing" a V70.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm American and still I root for the Groupe' Team...They don't make stupid comments or try to lay blame, etc. etc. And these posts they they write are spot on and make the VOR website news along with the news from the other boats basic rubbish, aka CLOWNSHOES. In this last one the Goupe' Team explains why they recently lost about 15 miles to Puma and then basically challenges the Puma boys to try to match them to the Horn. I love this shit, they have laid down the gauntlet and it seems that they are now pulling back some miles. Keep in mind that there is still a bunch of miles left to the horn and either of these 2 boats could bust up if they press too hard. Maybe Groupe' is trying to get Puma out of the race with this challenge.

 

I'm from the USA and I also find it easy to cheer on G4. But, I think you may be doing Puma a bit of an injustice. As I see it they're playing an interesting game this leg. They seem content to do what it takes to stay in contact with the lead group but they're willing to lay back far enough to break the feed-back loop. I don't know if there is some kind of high level game theory thing going on or if it's just happenstance. I suspect at least some of the former as KR has spoken a bit about saving the crew and boat in the past. And he's got a couple of men healing so he needs to keep from overworking the remaining crew. G4 is justifiably happy with where they are and a bit of goading of Puma is fun and may be profitable. My guess is that Puma will be content to bide her time and look for passing lanes in the Atlantic. Perhaps the French will run low on gauntlets and their chilly fingers will make them vulnerable. Perhaps they will sail to an easy victory. There's a long way to sail yet. Patience is a virtue and sometimes a good strategy too.

 

There is no doubt that each team only release reports that have been "lightly" spin doctored. Groupama have injuries, one of their helmsman was hurt, that alone could upset the balance. TF didn't report the full extent of their damage until recently announcing they too have to make a pitstop. The race between Groupama and Puma is vital, especially for Puma, if they could win this leg they would be closer to the leading boats who will all drop some points this leg. For G4 a win will really catapult them at TF and an overall win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hysterical the way everyone keeps on extolling the virtues of the French when currently only half the sailing crew onboard even is from the country. What's more it's not as if they are the only team that has weathered this thing intact so far, Puma has been right there with them.

 

I don't want to take anything away from the Groupama guys, they've sailed masterfully so far, but in a brutal leg, they aren't the only ones who have done so.

 

Yet people talk of Puma as the American team and only two of the crew are American. There are more australians and Kiwis on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hysterical the way everyone keeps on extolling the virtues of the French when currently only half the sailing crew onboard even is from the country. What's more it's not as if they are the only team that has weathered this thing intact so far, Puma has been right there with them.

 

I don't want to take anything away from the Groupama guys, they've sailed masterfully so far, but in a brutal leg, they aren't the only ones who have done so.

 

Yet people talk of Puma as the American team and only two of the crew are American. There are more australians and Kiwis on board.

 

 

I'm a Puma (and KR) fan. I guess I see the national affinity more with the skipper than the crew. Regardless, I love the fact that the boats have dudes from all over the world represented. That's what makes this race great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hysterical the way everyone keeps on extolling the virtues of the French when currently only half the sailing crew onboard even is from the country. What's more it's not as if they are the only team that has weathered this thing intact so far, Puma has been right there with them.

 

I don't want to take anything away from the Groupama guys, they've sailed masterfully so far, but in a brutal leg, they aren't the only ones who have done so.

 

Yet people talk of Puma as the American team and only two of the crew are American. There are more australians and Kiwis on board.

 

No, you're talking about that, I made zero mention of it.

 

In the process you completely glossed over the greater theme of my point which is the extraordinary seamanship required in this leg isn't some nationalistic thing but instead a matter of seamanship. Furthermore it denigrates the skill of all sailors involved to reduce this skill simply to a part of their national character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said 'people' and referenced your quote highlighting that only half the crew were French. Please do not flatter yourself.

 

As you mentioned it first, and used more words to talk about it, that was your greater point. The way you wrote it relegates your comments about seamanship as secondary.

 

Where has anyone denigrated skills over nationalistic fervour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, I have no idea what was going through Camper's head when they decided to push hard again after making a relatively major repair at sea. I question how you can value the integrity of such a repair-the parts being bonded are constantly shifting, and the temperature is near or below freezing. Are the repair kits designed with epoxy that cures quickly to say 90% strength of a typical laminating resin in very sub-optimal conditions?

I'm wondering the same. Perhaps they thought the damage was due to a grave build error, and that the repair would automatically be stronger.

 

The Camper situation seems pretty clear at this point - they have to get to Puerto Montt with little time to spare. They have a really tricky job of balancing reasonable boat speed against safety against time to repair and time to finish the leg. Their recent speeds of 6-10 knots seem to be weather related, not repair related. That the boat is back up to speeds of 12-14 seems, again, to be weather related. Making 12 knots in18 knots of wind is hardly "pushing" a V70.

Agree, but nobody's claiming they're pushing now. samc99us's post is about Camper's first major repair on this leg, after which they came back pushing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're looking at a support vessel that can go 20+ knots in 5.5m seas for 3 weeks and still be stable and nimble enough to carry out rescue in those conditions?

A nuclear sub would be fantastic! Perhaps one of the Seawolf class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Puma is navigating themselves into very little wind...I'm surprised they do not continue following the French??? WTF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Groupama has gybed onto port tack whilst Puma is continuing south on stbd tack - should be interesting to see who deals best with the unusual light air patch ahead of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said 'people' and referenced your quote highlighting that only half the crew were French. Please do not flatter yourself.

 

As you mentioned it first, and used more words to talk about it, that was your greater point. The way you wrote it relegates your comments about seamanship as secondary.

 

Where has anyone denigrated skills over nationalistic fervour?

 

I pointed out that only half the crew was French since it was my contention that being French doesn't give any mythical advantage in heavy weather as some posters seemed to want to imply. You took it from there to point that "people" want to call Puma an American team, which is neither here nor there given my point would have been equally valid had it been Telefonica, Camper or Sanya in second place.

 

The way I wrote my forst post asks that people read the post as a whole and not each sentence as some one off item out there in the ether. If word count is the basis of your reading comprehension and you're not able to take sentences together than there is little sense in continuing.

 

And now on to more interesting things.it's difficult to see any reason to continue south if you're ion Puma's position, the farther South and the longer you project the weather, the uglier things get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites