Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

My guess is pretty close, I would say 10-12 kts of wind with 20-25 kts of speed. Just by the thumb.

Very interesting, the windward foil does not seem as high as already seen, so they may use the tip + negative flap in order to lift the boat when falling to windward. That would be the decisive solution to prevent a windward crash.

What do you think ?

As the windward foil in the position they were carrying it had the lifting surfaces (foil wings) essentially perpendicular to the sea surface, it can only produce drag and yaw when it digs in, no lift that I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, nav said:

As the windward foil in the position they were carrying it had the lifting surfaces (foil wings) essentially perpendicular to the sea surface, it can only produce drag and yaw when it digs in, no lift that I can see.

You are right, however with inversed V I wonder if they can angle it, and use some negative or positive flap, so that it produces lift when hitting the water.

Obviously we would need better picture and test to know if it works. If possible that would be a major achievement and greatly increase the boat stability as it would work like a dynamic trimaran.

If it works any mono could be be transformed as a foiler with trimaran stability, huge potential.

Remains to be demonstrated though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You are right, however with inversed V I wonder if they can angle it, and use some negative or positive flap, so that it produces lift when hitting the water.

Obviously we would need better picture and test to know if it works. If possible that would be a major achievement and greatly increase the boat stability as it would work like a dynamic trimaran.

If it works any mono could be be transformed as a foiler with trimaran stability, huge potential.

Remains to be demonstrated though.

Why bother with a mono?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Why bother with a mono?

In some instances boats that flip back up the right way by themselves are preferable.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Boybland said:

In some instances boats that flip back up the right way by themselves are preferable.

Ha. Damn right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

I'm not defending INEOS's business practices, but prior to their involvement the press releases from Ainslie and Simmer sounded like they may not be able to run a competitive campaign. So the choice to the team may have been INEOS or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response, World Sailing chief executive Andy Hunt said although the governing body had not yet given official sanction to the America's Cup event, they expected to do so "in due course".

Hunt said while racing boat advertising must comply with World Sailing's advertising code and meet generally accepted moral and ethical standards, it "does not sanction or otherwise approve sponsorship of competitors or teams".

"World Sailing has laid out its own ambitious commitment to help create a better world through sport through Sustainability Agenda 2030 and we have no reason to believe that the 36th America's Cup will not comply with World Sailing policy."

 

He didn't add "Oh by the way, we are sponsored by Gazprom, compared to whom Ineos are angels."

But good for Vivienne Westwood et al for turning around the greenwash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Fireball said:

I'm not defending INEOS's business practices, but prior to their involvement the press releases from Ainslie and Simmer sounded like they may not be able to run a competitive campaign. 

Really? I recall no such press releases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2018 at 12:38 PM, nav said:

Ah hmm........

'Cleanest' to dirtiest campaign - in one big cheque. :D

image.png.a00e5b241c058dd934294265db2a2abe.png

"Principles? Don't be silly - that was all spin"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my swiss town Lausanne, INEOS have nearly bought the soccer team and ice-hockey team, with some bad reactions, but the people forget very quickly this kind of troubles... I will not forget, and I hope that this totally insane company will not get the opportunity to have a clean image thanks sailing. I was doubtfull from day one on, and still hope some changes in this AC sponsoring deal...  https://twitter.com/BlackmanLenoir/status/989454208821841920

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to forget or not realise that this is more than a sponsorship deal. Radcliffe owns the team. This deal will not be undone.

I also find the protesters mentioned above really naive to think that any sports governing body  or even event organiser could ban INEOS from sponsoring a team in the AC. This is not like cigarette advertising in F1, which stopped because countries banned cigarette advertising which meant F1 couldn't be shown or take place in those countries which was unacceptable to F1. In this case, INEOS isn't doing anything illegal and as a company are not banned from advertising in any country that i am aware of. I don't like what they do, but there are zero legal reasons for preventing INEOS from sponsoring a sailing team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Class Sailor said:

... I don't like what they do...

Me either, but I still drive a gas powered vehicle, my outboard runs on gasoline, so does my chainsaw, lawnmower, snowblower, rototiller, ... the list goes on... plus I consume electricity generated from natural gas... fuck me.. I am supporting fracking! Only fracking good thing about it, one company at least supports sailing. Way better than F1 or other fas guzzling sports. Every evil has a bright spot I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

I also find the protesters mentioned above really naive to think that any sports governing body  or even event organiser could ban INEOS from sponsoring a team in the AC.

It's also naive to believe the protesters believe that is a likely outcome. What they are doing is pointing at greenwash,. By the way, here's a picture of a younger Vivienne Westwood. Do you like the t-shirt slogan?

1*8CAABfJRSAHHtekS9BQKBA.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World $ailing will do precisely nothing - they need the $$$$ from AC.    Bob Fisher got it right and then the riposte from the W$ bean counters was classic accountancy obfuscation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem with INEOS?  They are a major chemical company and we need chemicals, solvents, plastics, etc.. to live in our current society.  Fracking is an environmental problem and should be better understood before it is being used, but that is not the major profit drivers of INEOS.  Most chemical companies are very keen on environmental issues and can be run ethically and their profits are not "dirty money".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dogwatch said:

It's also naive to believe the protesters believe that is a likely outcome. What they are doing is pointing at greenwash,. By the way, here's a picture of a younger Vivienne Westwood. Do you like the t-shirt slogan?

 

 

What is it that Johnny Rotten (the Sex Pistols) said of Vivienne Westwood  (and her ex-partner, Malcolm McLaren)?

“A pair of shysters; they would sell anything to any trend that they could grab onto”.

It appears that she is not adverse to a bit of greenwash herself:

https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/vivienne-westwood-is-not-eco-friendly/

FWIW, her manoevures to avoid paying UK tax make it hard for her to criticize Ratcliffe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GBH said:

World $ailing will do precisely nothing - they need the $$$$ from AC.    

If you are correct that their decision is influenced by the money they need, and if that wasn't an issue, what do you propose they could do? How could they ban a perfectly legal entity who undertakes legal activities from sponsoring a team? In the case of F1 and cigarette advertising, that was easy because cigarette advertising was banned in many F1's venues and key markets. AFAIK, INEOS isn't banned from advertising their brand anywhere.

I believe there are zero ground on which World Sailing could act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

What is it that Johnny Rotten (the Sex Pistols) said of Vivienne Westwood  (and her ex-partner, Malcolm McLaren)?

“A pair of shysters; they would sell anything to any trend that they could grab onto”.

It appears that she is not adverse to a bit of greenwash herself:

https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/vivienne-westwood-is-not-eco-friendly/

FWIW, her manoevures to avoid paying UK tax make it hard for her to criticize Ratcliffe.

Good post, she is well known for her ‘convenient’ protests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

Are these areas that are being frakked? I’m not familiar with the names/geography. 

The disposal water has only had a minor mention compared to the seismic and damage to underground supplies to aquifers etc. I’ll take a look and see if this has even been covered properly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

There have been no "Deepwater Horizon" disasters in the Marcellus, no Piper Alpha disasters in the Bakken. 

Nothing beats Solar, Geothermal, and Wind in terms of clean energy.....but while we continue to rely on carbon energy...shale gas continues to be the cleanest and safest source.  The greatest problem with Frakking is not the frakk' itself but the "produced water" which comes from the wells.  If folks wanted to sensibly focus their energy on worthwhile legislative initiatives, they should push for strict controls around the disposal of produced water.....of which the most environmentally friendly would be recycling into pre-frack water.

All the burbling about earthquakes and the like from the opponents to hydraulic frakking makes them sound as absurd as those who do not believe that carbon emissions and the human population explosion are creating climate change.  

 

I found this a fascinating listen...

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/440/game-changer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dg_sailingfan said:

INEOS should withdraw with Ben too from all America's Cup Activities who made a mess out of it with their Sponsorship.

Why? At least the guy has won something recently, unlike that "other" Team Great Britain skipper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mfluder said:

Why? At least the guy has won something recently, unlike that "other" Team Great Britain skipper

Don't forget it's just the standard clueless nonsense we've come to expect (and didn't miss) from A4e... Best to pop on Iggy like last time..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2018 at 8:40 AM, IPLore said:

The bottom line is that hydraulic frakking for onshore shale natural gas is one of the cleanest and safest forms of carbon energy in the world.

Except for the release of CHto the atmosphere.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask any celebrity "environmentalist" who flies around the world in oversized private jets to make a stand for The Environment.

It is those who speak most loud for the cause, that have the largest carbon footprint (Al Gore).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JALhazmat said:

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

Well fucking said! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, so, apart from the contaminated waste, frackking is super clean?

Ah so not nuclear then? Apart from the contaminated waste that's pretty clean too no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tangentially related and new to me: from https://hyc.ie/news/693-shane-diviney-finishes-gc32-racing-tour-with-podium-celebration

‘Next year’s plans will be even more interesting’ Shane explained, ‘when we’ll see the GC32 Racing Tour merge with the Extreme Sailing Series which should mean we can expect at least 12 teams at each event.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JALhazmat said:

This Ineos is poison Shite pisses me off! 

You think land rover one of the biggest 4x4 brands gave a shit about building clean energy vehicles?

emirates, airbus etc yup we run or build fucking huge planes burning tonnes of fossil fuel every hour and yet they are not held up as ‘bad’

Nescafé kiwi coffee sponsors  with all the stupid coffee pods that don’t break down contributing hugely to plastic contamination.

Not at all,  but as soon as a self made billionaire gets involved fuck me don’t all the bleeding hearts come out all upset.

the AC is not an environmentally sound premis, building single use race boats from carbon fibre and other chemically derived compounds and then flying them around the world for a tv audience  and a big corporate shin dig is not what you do when you are worried about environmental impact.

how have people lost sight of any of that? 

 

 

 

 

I couldn’t agree more if I wanted to. This is classic “bitch about the source, but ignore who created the need” hypocrisy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rgeek said:

Ah, so, apart from the contaminated waste, frackking is super clean?

Ah so not nuclear then? Apart from the contaminated waste that's pretty clean too no?

Nope. Just lots of pot calling the kettle black going on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have all respect for Jim Ratcliffe, built a fortune, against stupid european bureaucracy and immigrationist policy, smart enough to live in Switzerland and Monaco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Monkey said:

Nope. Just lots of pot calling the kettle black going on. 

May be. The pot and kettle are both black, is that what you're getting at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Don't get enough of those. From all those (too) short videos, it looks promising.

Could Ineos be on its way to release a new 2 crew boat on the boat market? It does look attractive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, if you have a dedicated chase boat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff. Very clean 'wakes' off the foils - less turbulence than the cats IIRC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nav said:

Good stuff. Very clean 'wakes' off the foils - less turbulence than the cats IIRC

On the the AC50s, the vertical (surface piercing) portion of the L foils was used to limit leeway. On the AC75s, the bifurcated wing makes it possible to separate vertical lift from leeway resistance via the independent flaps on each 'leg' of the wing, so you probably won't be using the arm that connects the wing to the boat for much lift, and instead orient it for absolute minimum drag. That means far less foil wake at the water surface, but doesn't necessarily mean 'faster'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guess. But I wasn't just talking about the 'foil' but the rudder as well and in fact the wake well behind the boat as well as what you see happening close in

We are likely to see some setups tried that have little if any angle between the wings attached to the foil arm, which will make the separation you speculate about 'difficult'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The rudder wake would be a decent speed indicator, since the rudder design isn't that different - roughly, less wake = slower - but since the test boat is about 60% of the size of an AC50, there are both scale effects plus the fact that the Reynolds number (which is a useful predictor of turbulence) for the same speed is quite different since it is directly proportional to the chord width of the foil. So I don't think you can tell much about the speed relative to known quantities like the AC50 from the wake.

Having said that, the thing is clearly ripping along.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now