Archived

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

Alakaluf

WOW - Oracle AC45 with foils !

Recommended Posts

If heel is to leeward and the angle of the L is slightly less than 90 degrees, then the tip of the lifting foil would break the surface and reduce lift progressively. Spitty could adjust his height with more or less heel as well as more or less speed.

 

That's my guess.

 

Koukel

Very, very, very interesting Koukel. This winglet would not have a positive but negative lift which would help the main L foil to take off. The negative setting seems to be the case in some of the picture where they draw lines. So they have to find the best angle without increasing the drag too much.

Once on foil, the pitch would be controlled by the depht of the main foil.

The main advantage of the winglet would be to diminish the transition phases and get faster acceleration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If heel is to leeward and the angle of the L is slightly less than 90 degrees, then the tip of the lifting foil would break the surface and reduce lift progressively. Spitty could adjust his height with more or less heel as well as more or less speed.

 

That's my guess.

 

Koukel

Well I think you may be onto why they have a fence there. As the boat heels to leeward, the tip of the foil is likely to get into surface flow first, and suck "ventilation" down the foil. the fence makes that less catastrophic.

 

On the rudder foils I was noticing the two different positions of the wings. I think what you have is experimentation. I suspect BMWO are heavily into data collection mode here as well as learning to fly.

 

In the flying photos, its clear the rudder foil is at the bottom - like some of the original I-14 foils were. Now the foils are mid foil. I suspect BMWO are experimenting with optimal placement as well as sorting out the foiling thing.

 

Way back a few years ago, I remember reading about the A-cat class folks doing some experimenting with L and T shaped foils and IIRC they got to where in many conditions they were AS fast as unfoiled, a little faster in a narrow range, and slower in a bit more. And my imperfect recollection again was that they quit at that point because the cost to do the R&D to get them consistently faster was so high compared to the expected payoff, they opted to invest elsewhere.

 

Well Larry just bought a whole damn Island for $1/2 Billion. He can afford that R&D program that was out of reach for the A-Cat guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

 

Problem is that, even if the daggerboard flexes visibly, the angle of the lifting foil with the horizontal is quite small. While all surface-piercing foils have that at around 45 degrees (Doug will know why, obviously you don't want the entire foil to jump out of the water all at once).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If heel is to leeward and the angle of the L is slightly less than 90 degrees, then the tip of the lifting foil would break the surface and reduce lift progressively. Spitty could adjust his height with more or less heel as well as more or less speed.

 

That's my guess.

 

Koukel

-------------------------

Surface piercing foils work like that-the faster they go the less area in the water. But this foil has no "fences" on the upper surface and the likely result of its breaching the surface would be a crash caused by the upper surface ventilating.No fences and not enough initial area or angle.

Good shot ,though.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If heel is to leeward and the angle of the L is slightly less than 90 degrees, then the tip of the lifting foil would break the surface and reduce lift progressively. Spitty could adjust his height with more or less heel as well as more or less speed.

That's my guess.

Koukel

-------------------------

Surface piercing foils work like that-the faster they go the less area in the water. But this foil has no "fences" on the upper surface and the likely result of its breaching the surface would be a crash caused by the upper surface ventilating.No fences and not enough initial area or angle.

Good shot ,though.....

I'm confident of two things. The more vertical a lifting foil goes, the more likely the structure it supports is going to sink... And, the more simple an idea, the fewer things can go wrong. So the idea has at least two things going for it in addition to being rule compliant.

 

I'll agree that piercing may or may not be an ultimate component of a successful AC45 or AC72 dagger board foil, but I think the evidence suggests someone is trying it out.

 

Besides, what you are describing, the upper surface ventilating, may very well be a desired effect in a 72' cat that is starting to launch. Rather than fly, once the foil's tip pierces the surface and causes an amount of cavitation, the lift goes away, the boat arcs through some variation of a parabola with it's momentum still traveling distinctly forward... and in my active imagination the foil which has never left San Francisco Bay shakes off any bubbles and starts to lift again. All leading to a gentle landing.

 

I might be wrong, but I don't think my logic is wrong.

 

Koukel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if my logic is good but with a combination of negative lift on the winglet and positive one on a bigger under, the negative effect of the small one gives a bigger angle to the main foil, when the speed is high enough the winglet is out of the water and lets the bigger one work, when the speed goes down it goes into the water and create the same effect again until the next acceleration, it would auto regulate itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm convinced that whether fully out of the water at ~all~ times or not, there's going to be a ~lot~ of lift in the AC72's. SF conditions dictate that corner of the space being optimal for the most efficient ride speeds.

 

The SL33's have been into it for a time too, that Toyota NZ video interview w DB and w the SL33 suspended in the background showed it, clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps as clean points out it's scam. Both images have been manipulated. just to build interest. After all, this the Americas Cup, more smoke and mirrors than Fanny May, Enron, US Treasury, Gordon Gecko and 160 years of practise.

 

I love this game

 

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This image is from the Sumner of Sailing, The 13 year old opti sailor that went for a skid that day. The close up of the dagger board shows a dark shadow like the one on Spithill's fb page.

 

http://sumneros.com/

post-31389-098992200 1340842255_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found something interesting. Look at the picture of the foiling AC 45 on Jimmies Facebook entry . See this little extension on the downside of the windward foil. Just a fence?? The official picture of Oracle don't show that. They must be photoshopped to hide something???

 

fake.jpg

 

This image has been photoshopped and not very well. It has sRGB IEC61966-2-1 black scaled color profile embedded in the image that is not there in the original. In other words it has been added to.

 

Why are OR playing games at their fans expense. OR must be laughing their heads off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My guess is that the decision by somebody (RC?) was, 'Ok, release a few shots but cut the foil detail.'

 

Whoever posts to JS's site (TJ?) jumped the gun, didn't get the message, or just chose to ignore it and posted the real deal anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My guess is that the decision by somebody (RC?) was, 'Ok, release a few shots but cut the foil detail.'

 

Whoever posts to JS's site (TJ?) jumped the gun, didn't get the message, or just chose to ignore it and posted the real deal anyway.

 

The photo on Jimmy's facebook page is the obviously shopped photo. Why would you do that if you weren't playing games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just the protruding end of the board, half hidden in spray, yachtyakka - i think. What are you implying? That they have a full T foil there?

It's interesting they've placed the reverse shark-like little fin fence underneath the L foil; because, as pointed out, that's where the ventilation is going to run if the platform is heeled to leeward ... because the top will be all bubbles and perhaps the fence is going to slow the crash down - so the boat will sink sweetly back to clean foiling..

Doug, you've got think outside the conventional wand waving box here; there's untold hours of thought and development going on (and maybe some stir up phony stuff for the punters) ... but they will all be seeking to find the simplest,solution to gaining real speed - to beat the uninitiated herd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OR could very well pretend to be working on L foils while really testing C in another place. That would be the real hoax..:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My guess is that the decision by somebody (RC?) was, 'Ok, release a few shots but cut the foil detail.'

 

Whoever posts to JS's site (TJ?) jumped the gun, didn't get the message, or just chose to ignore it and posted the real deal anyway.

 

The photo on Jimmy's facebook page is the obviously shopped photo. Why would you do that if you weren't playing games.

Disagree, the JS shot is likely the real deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My guess is that the decision by somebody (RC?) was, 'Ok, release a few shots but cut the foil detail.'

 

Whoever posts to JS's site (TJ?) jumped the gun, didn't get the message, or just chose to ignore it and posted the real deal anyway.

 

The photo on Jimmy's facebook page is the obviously shopped photo. Why would you do that if you weren't playing games.

Disagree, the JS shot is likely the real deal.

 

 

I've got my tin hat on and think the detail is to clear to be real. Photoshop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My guess is that the decision by somebody (RC?) was, 'Ok, release a few shots but cut the foil detail.'

 

Whoever posts to JS's site (TJ?) jumped the gun, didn't get the message, or just chose to ignore it and posted the real deal anyway.

 

The photo on Jimmy's facebook page is the obviously shopped photo. Why would you do that if you weren't playing games.

Disagree, the JS shot is likely the real deal.

 

You can disagree all you like. The evidence is there that it is a fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm convinced that whether fully out of the water at ~all~ times or not, there's going to be a ~lot~ of lift in the AC72's. SF conditions dictate that corner of the space being optimal for the most efficient ride speeds.

 

SF small racing area dictates the fast in corners will probably be more important than ride speeds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, here's a blowup. There appears to be some BS going on; what are those silly vertical lines and the clumsy blob below foil? The actual shark fence looks original. What do you punters think?

post-6375-028780900 1340845387_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just the protruding end of the board, half hidden in spray, yachtyakka - i think. What are you implying? That they have a full T foil there?

It's interesting they've placed the reverse shark-like little fin fence underneath the L foil; because, as pointed out, that's where the ventilation is going to run if the platform is heeled to leeward ... because the top will be all bubbles and perhaps the fence is going to slow the crash down - so the boat will sink sweetly back to clean foiling..

Doug, you've got think outside the conventional wand waving box here; there's untold hours of thought and development going on (and maybe some stir up phony stuff for the punters) ... but they will all be seeking to find the simplest,solution to gaining real speed - to beat the uninitiated herd.

==========================

Wands? Hmmm....I've never suggested they had wands? Only that an altitude control system would be required for steady state foiling. Believe me, those foils are not and could never be surface piercing foils( I'm 98.5% positive). I'm still thinking, as I suggested earlier, that for steady state foiling the daggerboard could legally pivot and that if it does no rudder foil movement is required.

But all this photoshop intrigue and the lack of a video seems curiouser and curiouser.Maybe no steady state foiling? "Pop Fly Sailing in 3D?!

----

The bulb at the foil intersection, whether true or not, is possible- Moth foils almost all have a small bulb at the foil/board intersection.

 

Pix-Mirabaud(26'+ monofoiler) foil bulb:

post-30-002931600 1340845864_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ What evidence suggests it is a fake?

 

Again, we have seen the acorn on an OR board before; and a similar setup on TNZ's 33.

 

Some here think it's a shocking 'elephant in the room' possibility that AC33 will be won be a full time foiler; I just think that the one that is fully lift capable ~ for brief periods ~ is going to have downwind advantage.

 

GD has been arguing that legs should be longer. Perhaps he'll reconsider now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree about the intersection bulb, also the lack of rudder horizontal foil movement, everything is about those major lifting foils. The video of the SL33 poncing its bows up for a few seconds; they didn't have T rudders to keep them steady state flying ... otherwise they would have ... for 10-20 seconds, who knows, maybe longer? It is no problem, easy to lift the sterns with T's; that's why the X AC45 foils there are so fine and small. And agree, Stinger, whoever gets the foils working for long periods, downwind, is going to clean up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the evidence KJ is citing is the strange color profile of the facebook photo

 

"It has sRGB IEC61966-2-1 black scaled color profile embedded in the image that is not there in the original. In other words it has been added to."

 

 

as pics come from the camera they aren't going to have that

 

meaning the pics has been manipulated in a graphics program before being posed on fb

 

and the manipulation appears to have been in the black color areas

 

who pointed us to that pic again?

 

are they an anarchisti of long standing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some here think it's a shocking 'elephant on the room' possibility that AC33 will be won be a full time foiler; I just think that the one that is fully lift capable ~ for brief periods ~ is going to have downwind advantage.

When do teams have to declare what foils they use on the boat? Can a whole selection of foils be measured in and L or T or simple blade be a gameday decision? Lot's of people have accused Oracle of spreading their efforts very, very wide. This might just be Oracle doing their due dilligence.

 

I had a number of very smart people tell me on this same forum a couple of years ago that long narrow hulls were better than foilers anyway, but I'm not convinced. Sailors' world views have been changing for as long as there have been sailors.

 

As for purposely faking something, it would be just as good a head fake to have everyone think you're faking them out when you are really trialing your best option. There are a dozen lawyers on this team, I wouldn't put anything past them.

 

Koukel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone know how many AC45's Oracle have?

 

oracakle owns all of them -- remember acrm is oracle --

 

core builders is oracle -etc

 

evilsin owns ggyc now since he is paying the ggyc legal defense bills and infiltrated the bought club with demon ehman as circus ring leader

 

the facts herein are all documented within my posts on this issue

 

great question and needs to be investigated -cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 in newport - Spithill and Coutts

1 in SF - Coutts the one with the forward dagger boards and possibly additional foils on port dagger board and rudder ( no images of stb foils ) which means we don't know what they look like, if any.

1 in sf - with Red Bull livery - possibly the very first boat launched.

 

How many can a team buy under the rules?

 

Are teams allowed to test foils on a boat bigger than a SL33?

 

whatever the real situation is, this is much better than watching the lawyers bs.

 

Go Larry - you're a star

 

PS And Doug is back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone know how many AC45's Oracle have?

They are using 4.. so far. 2 are in Newport and 2 in SF.

 

The SF 2 are the test platforms, a little like the 2 SL33 test platforms that ETNZ has; and the (iirc) 2 33's that LR has.

 

OR, or anyone, ~could~ buy the spare Aleph boat; but my guess is that it will be kept ACWS-legal, for use in the WS and YAC whoever might purchase it.

 

BAR will get boat 16, but that will be ACWS legit too thru at least Sept.

 

Like LR, AR also has two AC45s (one is boat 10, ex GCR and probably a test platform).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does anyone know how many AC45's Oracle have?

 

 

OR has 4

The Red Bull AC45 is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ What would the "won't get foiled again" spin be this time?

 

Do you have any good interviews planned, out of Newport? I can think of a penetrating question ^ :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photoshopped out.

 

If you zoom way in on the windward board in this photo, you will notice what looks like a heat refraction off the bottom of the board. Most likely that is where someone chopped out the fence and Acorn:

 

http://www.sail-worl...SFOJUN33121.jpg

 

I'm no expert on photo fakery but I agree if you zoom the image to 400%, it looks like it has been touched up around the centre underside of the windward foil and (less certain on this one) underneath the outer end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagree, the JS shot is likely the real deal.

 

I don't see how you come to that conclusion. All the evidence points the other way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, here's a blowup (of the JS image). There appears to be some BS going on; what are those silly vertical lines and the clumsy blob below foil? The actual shark fence looks original. What do you punters think?

 

I agree if you blow the JS image up 400%, the vertical lines look artificial. That and the additional colour scale KJ has found lead me to believe the JS image has been doctored.

 

What's certain is that at least one of the images has been deliberately altered, since it appears all other detail as between the photos is identical. So in future, don't believe anything these lying OR bastards tell you.

 

That doesn't mean I don't believe OR is genuinely doing R&D work on foiling. On the contrary, this clumsy fakery indicates that they are and consider it worthwhile to lay down confusion as to their trail of investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've blown them up, yachtyakka, so you can pixel see the skulduggery. The fence has been added along with the elongated bulb at foil junction - or both removed. Which is original - or are they both tampered with and there is a true original somewhere else?

post-6375-075455500 1340857418_thumb.jpg

post-6375-067874600 1340857708_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've blown them up, yachtyakka, so you can pixel see the skulduggery. The fence has been added along with the elongated bulb at foil junction - or both removed. Which is original - or are they both tampered with and there is a true original somewhere else?

So we have two pieces of evidence pointing to the conclusion that the JS shot with acorn and fence has been doctored

 

[This image has been photoshopped and not very well. It has sRGB IEC61966-2-1 black scaled color profile embedded in the image that is not there in the original. In other words it has been added to.

 

Why are OR playing games at their fans expense. OR must be laughing their heads off.

 

We have k_j's discovery of the color profile data. I agree with him.

 

And we have the enlarged images from cc.

 

I've messed around with photoshop enough to know that the enlarged wing profile from the JS shot is way too-well defined. And the other shot looks, well, virginal.

 

We're being deliberately fed disinformation. Naughty but part of the game, I guess.

 

Draw your own conclusions.

 

All that I'm 100% sure about is that Oracle is not going to provide the straight scoop this far out from the AC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that I'm 100% sure about is that Oracle is not going to provide the straight scoop this far out from the AC.

 

Not telling is one thing. Releasing deliberately doctored images is something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that I'm 100% sure about is that Oracle is not going to provide the straight scoop this far out from the AC.

 

Not telling is one thing. Releasing deliberately doctored images is something else.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is that like the difference between

 

being economical with the truth

 

and flat out lying?

 

as 1 of them is false

 

at some stage someone had to decide who would best be served the bullshit

 

the magazines?

 

or JS's fb friends

will be fascinating to see....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that Jimmy's one is the fake.

Jimmy: What did I win?? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, maybe who has published the retouched image he thinks it will be seen by intelligent people who see the details ... And for the record, tweak all the rudder in gray ... That is very evident!

 

21cwl07.jpg

 

 

Qui potest capere capiat.

Tonto el que no entienda.

That seems to me the message: you are smart. Look closely at the details. This is Facebook... but this is the America's Cup!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW I think both shots are photoshopped.

 

For the dagger board, the bulb and fin were photoshopped in (as others have pointed out).

 

On the other dagger, the right angle joint looks too clean. Seeing the otherside of the joint would help. Maybe wondering about materials and how to construct such a thing would help determine the validity of the image (anyone?).

 

I think the T-foil on rudder might be chopped to. In this angle, we only see the leading edge and no surface area. That makes for an easy chop. If you assume the length (front-to-back) of the horizontal foil to be close to the width of the rudder tip, where it is mounted, that makes for a pretty small foil.

 

In the absence of more pics, I think these are fakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photoshopped out.

 

If you zoom way in on the windward board in this photo, you will notice what looks like a heat refraction off the bottom of the board. Most likely that is where someone chopped out the fence and Acorn:

 

http://www.sail-worl...SFOJUN33121.jpg

 

I'm no expert on photo fakery but I agree if you zoom the image to 400%, it looks like it has been touched up around the centre underside of the windward foil and (less certain on this one) underneath the outer end.

I loath adding fuel to the fire by writing this, but have not found elsewhere. The little bulby thing is not reflected on the wet hull, as is the remainder of the L foil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^ IMO, this is a red herring tactic. OR must be laugthing their ass off to see everybody focussing here, while the key is somewhere else, probably the tiller or completely different solutions like T-C foils :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking again at some of the pics I'd almost say they photoshopped the entire board in. Can't be 100% sure. I wonder what they actually have down there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^ IMO, this is a red herring tactic. OR must be laugthing their ass off to see everybody focussing here, while the key is somewhere else, probably the tiller or completely different solutions like T-C foils :)

 

yep, I agree, both are in the imaged world. witch I think is the Larry's game. get the pr people to fuck with the sailing public and get the chatter going :-)

 

get this game off the sport pages onto the front pages, Larry we are all batting for the same team (except JS and the truth, cause they are stool wankers).

 

what do you us to do?

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We yakked a little about a similar-looking shot back in Feb, at and around this post

^

That is OR4 thought, the picture in question is of OR5.

Your pic is consistent with the one with the guy with the hardhat adjusting the T foil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a little bit silly to speak about a still image being photoshopped when we've seen how in the AC they can "photoshop" hi def video in real time, don't you think? Or wait! Maybe there was a three hundred foot tall Americas Cup and 100 meter markers smack in the middle of San Diego bay!

 

I don't believe a high percentage of images get published as captured by a camera anymore. The idea that most everything we see through digital or print medium is enhanced, changed and easily manipulated should be a given. You really ought to have a conversation about it with your kids if you haven't already, because half their reality may be photoshopped.

 

Reminds me of college where we BS'd about "what is evidence" when Twain used those new fangled fingerprints to make a case about siamese twins.

 

Koukel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that most everything we see through digital or print medium is enhanced, changed and easily manipulated should be a given.

 

There's a difference between creativity and deception and if we forget that, we are off with the fairies.

 

fairies_cottin1c.jpg

 

As for this being anything particularly to do with digital technology, see the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the Newport event they had two guys on moths's sail by and for one brief moment one of them got up on the foils and made it about 100 yards befor crashing. The other guy pretty much made a fool,of himself falling over repeatedly . When the one guy did manage to get going the announcer told the fans what was going on and that Oracle had a foiling 45 in SF bay at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

 

That one image is faked is a certainty & both is a possibility. However I agree that it's highly likely they are experimenting with foiling. The surprise would be if they were not. The C-class guys have, as have pretty much all development dinghy classes within the parameters of their rules (I'm counting foiling rudders here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

 

That one image is faked is a certainty & both is a possibility. However I agree that it's highly likely they are experimenting with foiling. The surprise would be if they were not. The C-class guys have, as have pretty much all development dinghy classes within the parameters of their rules (I'm counting foiling rudders here).

 

Both may be doctored, even though they may not even use the one out of the water, but the other one. It will probably not be a L but a T with a 6 to 9 degrees angle to the exterior branch and a small fence in the midle or at the tip.

Let's wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Both may be doctored, even though they may not even use the one out of the water, but the other one. It will probably not be a L but a T with a 6 to 9 degrees angle to the exterior branch and a small fence in the midle or at the tip.

Let's wait and see.

 

 

 

done that here

 

http://www.facebook.com/groups/179458195441543/

 

like this?

 

 

Does it look like there is the faint outline of a square just to the outside of the foils in both of these pics? I guess they are hiding T-foils, looks like they pasted in an image of the wave from another part of the image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes, posted before but didnt get much comment.

 

Since he made an effort going by the (few, and well-covered) photos of the ETNZ hull, that guess may be close to accurate on some counts. The profile looks too flat on the underside of the bows, IMO. Compare that to DZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the rocker is a real issue on AC72. What is lacking in the picture is the real location of the foil (not sure it is where indicated), the kind of foil (we have seen elaborated C foils with TNZ) and MAINLY, the kind of rudder and pitch control system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes, posted before but didnt get much comment.

 

Since he made an effort going by the (few, and well-covered) photos of the ETNZ hull, that guess may be close to accurate on some counts. The profile looks too flat on the underside of the bows, IMO. Compare that to DZ.

 

 

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

 

With all the different foils and T-rudders around I would think it likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just had a second look to the picture with a the simplified L, it has clearly been badly photoshopped in ordre to make the people focus on it, and not the rudder which must have been well photoshopped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You couldn't have much of a t-foil and still stay within the maximum beam regulations for the AC72 class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

 

With all the different foils and T-rudders around I would think it likely.

 

Do tell how you think a skirt can protect the modesty of a cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You couldn't have much of a t-foil and still stay within the maximum beam regulations for the AC72 class.

 

I make a wild guess, it will be a T with a short exterior branch having a 6 to 9% angle and a longer inside branch with 0 to 2% angle.

The rest will be C foils with a tip finishing at about 90 degrees in the water.

The tiller will have a foil in the middle or 2/3 (the picture of OR is, IMO, pure BS).

 

But the key for T foils, if they are chosen, will be the autoregulation by the tiller.

 

Anyway, just amusing to make guesses, we will how right or wrong we shall be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

Skirts are prohibited for AC34.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes, posted before but didnt get much comment.

 

Since he made an effort going by the (few, and well-covered) photos of the ETNZ hull, that guess may be close to accurate on some counts. The profile looks too flat on the underside of the bows, IMO. Compare that to DZ.

 

 

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

 

With all the different foils and T-rudders around I would think it likely.

 

 

Problem with skirts is you can't sail with them. It won't be too hard to see what someone has for foils unless they're only sailing with one daggerboard and one rudder and never tacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the photographers around the bay, I wonder why there are only these few images to view. It's not as if the AC45s don't command attention when they are out. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

Skirts are prohibited for AC34.

 

Ding ding , we have a winner from a legal standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Yes, posted before but didnt get much comment.

 

Since he made an effort going by the (few, and well-covered) photos of the ETNZ hull, that guess may be close to accurate on some counts. The profile looks too flat on the underside of the bows, IMO. Compare that to DZ.

 

 

I wonder if we will see a new generation of "skirts" when the AC72s are launched?

 

With all the different foils and T-rudders around I would think it likely.

 

 

Problem with skirts is you can't sail with them. It won't be too hard to see what someone has for foils unless they're only sailing with one daggerboard and one rudder and never tacking.

 

And ding ding ding , we have a winner from a practical standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the photographers around the bay, I wonder why there are only these few images to view. It's not as if the AC45s don't command attention when they are out. . .

 

The oracle boats have a magnetic forcefield surrounding them up to 1,000 yards which erases all memory cards . It's true I read it on the Internet .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

 

 

 

Agree with Simon

Photoshoped to hide details, interesting how only one pic the boat seems quite stable the others all seem to be short non stable momentary 'flying' . a la F20c. or SL33 videos.

 

 

Check this link for info on the file image processed , click ELA on the option box to the left. eight saves is too much.

http://fotoforensics...c4299501.239940

 

 

 

History Action saved, saved, derived, saved, saved, saved, derived, saved, saved (8)

7CF1BEE111BEABAA62C657469D

Hi

story When 2012:06:19 02:35:20+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:39:11+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:48:38+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:55:59+02:00, 2012:06:20 03:19:21+02:00, 2012:06:24 19:28:13+02:00, 2012:06:25 20:13:38+02:00

History Software Agent Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)

History Changed /metadata, /metadata, /, /metadata, /metadata, /, /

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the photographers around the bay, I wonder why there are only these few images to view. It's not as if the AC45s don't command attention when they are out. . .

 

The oracle boats have a magnetic forcefield surrounding them up to 1,000 yards which erases all memory cards . It's true I read it on the Internet .

 

 

Explains the pods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Explains the water-surface repulsion too..

Yep, the boards are shopped, it's hovering, not foiling.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

This would have to be the best observation we've seen thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

 

 

 

Agree with Simon

Photoshoped to hide details, interesting how only one pic the boat seems quite stable the others all seem to be short non stable momentary 'flying' . a la F20c. or SL33 videos.

 

 

Check this link for info on the file image processed , click ELA on the option box to the left. eight saves is too much.

http://fotoforensics...c4299501.239940

 

 

 

History Action saved, saved, derived, saved, saved, saved, derived, saved, saved (8)

7CF1BEE111BEABAA62C657469D

Hi

story When 2012:06:19 02:35:20+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:39:11+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:48:38+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:55:59+02:00, 2012:06:20 03:19:21+02:00, 2012:06:24 19:28:13+02:00, 2012:06:25 20:13:38+02:00

History Software Agent Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)

History Changed /metadata, /metadata, /, /metadata, /metadata, /, /

 

That sequence doesn't indicate 'Photochopping' at all.

Opening a RAW file allows changing of some of the photographic qualities (exposure, contrast etc) or metadata (captioning, keywording) but the only bitmap editor that has been used is the last open/save with CS6 and that's not at all surprising as a last step in the process as that's typically when a photographer crops and watermarks the RAW file developed earlier.

I would guess that the tweaking of the image was undertaken in the first 5 edits (5 separated batch edits would be unsurprising) then the captioning/rating was done in Lightroom and then the picture was cropped (original image was 5760 x 3840 pixels reduced to 5296 x 3530)

I repeat - there is no overwhelming evidence of editing in the metadata.

I can accept that the picture shows an instantaneous state but it's not an edited picture in the layperson sense of the word.

 

I'd also suggest that editing multiple photos is really, really, really, difficult to get co-ordinated.

Also remeber that a guy (or girl) with the skills to do the editing would have absolutely no idea what they were actually editing in and are relying on direction from someone who knows what they are expecting to see.

It's almost impossible for that relationship to achieve a realistic result.

It's a little easier with animate objects (beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a chat with an old skiff mate of mine today, he still sails skiffs and for the last few years has been designing and racing his skiff with foils. In his opinion the foils shown in both images are fakes.

I think the foils are fake, but I think the boat sailing on foils isn't. What I believe we are seeing is an AC45 foiling, but the foils have been doctored in photoshop so as not to give everything away.

 

 

 

Agree with Simon

Photoshoped to hide details, interesting how only one pic the boat seems quite stable the others all seem to be short non stable momentary 'flying' . a la F20c. or SL33 videos.

 

 

Check this link for info on the file image processed , click ELA on the option box to the left. eight saves is too much.

http://fotoforensics...c4299501.239940

 

 

 

History Action saved, saved, derived, saved, saved, saved, derived, saved, saved (8)

7CF1BEE111BEABAA62C657469D

Hi

story When 2012:06:19 02:35:20+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:39:11+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:48:38+02:00, 2012:06:19 03:55:59+02:00, 2012:06:20 03:19:21+02:00, 2012:06:24 19:28:13+02:00, 2012:06:25 20:13:38+02:00

History Software Agent Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1, Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1 (Windows), Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)

History Changed /metadata, /metadata, /, /metadata, /metadata, /, /

 

That sequence doesn't indicate 'Photochopping' at all.

Opening a RAW file allows changing of some of the photographic qualities (exposure, contrast etc) or metadata (captioning, keywording) but the only bitmap editor that has been used is the last open/save with CS6 and that's not at all surprising as a last step in the process as that's typically when a photographer crops and watermarks the RAW file developed earlier.

I would guess that the tweaking of the image was undertaken in the first 5 edits (5 separated batch edits would be unsurprising) then the captioning/rating was done in Lightroom and then the picture was cropped (original image was 5760 x 3840 pixels reduced to 5296 x 3530)

I repeat - there is no overwhelming evidence of editing in the metadata.

I can accept that the picture shows an instantaneous state but it's not an edited picture in the layperson sense of the word.

 

I'd also suggest that editing multiple photos is really, really, really, difficult to get co-ordinated.

Also remeber that a guy (or girl) with the skills to do the editing would have absolutely no idea what they were actually editing in and are relying on direction from someone who knows what they are expecting to see.

It's almost impossible for that relationship to achieve a realistic result.

It's a little easier with animate objects (beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that...).

 

The boat is 'flying' at all images, the foils are just masked/retouched, just looking at that T rudder to the bare eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only foils we see are not the ones actually in use at that time (windward hull), maybe they are just show boards for all we know.

Although I dont see why the concept of the L boards wouldnt work.

We will just have to wait a few more weeks I guess. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That sequence doesn't indicate 'Photochopping' at all.

Opening a RAW file allows changing of some of the photographic qualities (exposure, contrast etc) or metadata (captioning, keywording) but the only bitmap editor that has been used is the last open/save with CS6 and that's not at all surprising as a last step in the process as that's typically when a photographer crops and watermarks the RAW file developed earlier.

I would guess that the tweaking of the image was undertaken in the first 5 edits (5 separated batch edits would be unsurprising) then the captioning/rating was done in Lightroom and then the picture was cropped (original image was 5760 x 3840 pixels reduced to 5296 x 3530)

I repeat - there is no overwhelming evidence of editing in the metadata.

I can accept that the picture shows an instantaneous state but it's not an edited picture in the layperson sense of the word.

 

I'd also suggest that editing multiple photos is really, really, really, difficult to get co-ordinated.

Also remeber that a guy (or girl) with the skills to do the editing would have absolutely no idea what they were actually editing in and are relying on direction from someone who knows what they are expecting to see.

It's almost impossible for that relationship to achieve a realistic result.

It's a little easier with animate objects (beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that...).

Well, that demonstration is as real as the foil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the photographers around the bay, I wonder why there are only these few images to view. It's not as if the AC45s don't command attention when they are out. . .

 

The oracle boats have a magnetic forcefield surrounding them up to 1,000 yards which erases all memory cards . It's true I read it on the Internet .

 

 

No ... they spread the card-erasure rumour.

 

The force fields are taniwha abatement devices.

 

Sir Russell knows a taniwha when he sees one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites