Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ex-yachtie said:

How can you say the CoR was asked if it was mutually consented?

I think you should read that again & have a think about it then consider writing something else :huh:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I am asthonished to see the attack of TNZ against LR, obviously it's MC, but could be the results of hard negotiation.

Trying to stay out of this one...but seriously: attack???

One. More.time.

No gag order...no team's give any beef, one late entry fee challenge, sorted. Hutch says he feels safer in the boat. Some teams sail the boat into an uncomfortable attitude. 

There was so much well deserved shit flying at this time last cycle...ya gotta pick that the lack of airborne feces is a really good sign that this is a friendly competition.

Badboards notwithstanding.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I am asthonished to see the attack of TNZ against LR, obviously it's MC, but could be the results of hard negotiation.

1. “Asthonished”. Have you been drinking?

2. What attack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

1. “Asthonished”. Have you been drinking?

2. What attack?

Can you imagine TNZ attacking LR..? Seriously the Italian's are TNZ's puppets.! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ex-yachtie said:

1. “Asthonished”. Have you been drinking?

2. What attack?

You should read before commenting and writing stupid comments under influence :)

When Shoebridge is pointing the Italians it is not very nice, when he tells the other teams would not have been able to design the foil arms they wrongly underestimate them.

That said, I recognize that they probably did it to save costs and because they genuinely thought the others were not able to be at their level.

"Shoebridge explained that the foiling arm and cant system were split into two projects and which were undertaken by Luna Rossa and Emirates Team New Zealand respectively - as the two projects were too much work in themselves for a single team. With Luna Rossa being in Italy and in charge of the foil arm aspect, it made sense to have them built in Italy.

Shoebridge explains that the foiling arm and cant system were built as supplied one design systems to "keep costs under control, and secondly, so the system and foil arm didn't get turned into an arms race. With new teams entering it would be very difficult for them to put together people with the experience to design those parts", he explained."

https://www.sail-world.com/news/216299/Emirates-Team-NZs-Shoebridge-outlines-Cup-plans

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, terrafirma said:

Can you imagine TNZ attacking LR..? Seriously the Italian's are TNZ's puppets.! :D

If you had been following, the contrary was said. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You should read before commenting and writing stupid comments under influence :)

When Shoebridge is pointing the Italians it is not very nice, when he tells the other teams would not have been able to design the foil arms they wrongly underestimate them.

That said, I recognize that they probably did it to save costs and because they genuinely thought the others were not able to be at their level.

"Shoebridge explained that the foiling arm and cant system were split into two projects and which were undertaken by Luna Rossa and Emirates Team New Zealand respectively - as the two projects were too much work in themselves for a single team. With Luna Rossa being in Italy and in charge of the foil arm aspect, it made sense to have them built in Italy.

Shoebridge explains that the foiling arm and cant system were built as supplied one design systems to "keep costs under control, and secondly, so the system and foil arm didn't get turned into an arms race. With new teams entering it would be very difficult for them to put together people with the experience to design those parts", he explained."

https://www.sail-world.com/news/216299/Emirates-Team-NZs-Shoebridge-outlines-Cup-plans

 

 

 

 

 

So, what attack? Spell it out for me. Pretend I’m stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tornado-Cat said:

You should read before commenting and writing stupid comments under influence :)

When Shoebridge is pointing the Italians it is not very nice, when he tells the other teams would not have been able to design the foil arms they wrongly underestimate them.

That said, I recognize that they probably did it to save costs and because they genuinely thought the others were not able to be at their level.

"Shoebridge explained that the foiling arm and cant system were split into two projects and which were undertaken by Luna Rossa and Emirates Team New Zealand respectively - as the two projects were too much work in themselves for a single team. With Luna Rossa being in Italy and in charge of the foil arm aspect, it made sense to have them built in Italy.

Shoebridge explains that the foiling arm and cant system were built as supplied one design systems to "keep costs under control, and secondly, so the system and foil arm didn't get turned into an arms race. With new teams entering it would be very difficult for them to put together people with the experience to design those parts", he explained."

https://www.sail-world.com/news/216299/Emirates-Team-NZs-Shoebridge-outlines-Cup-plans

 

 

 

 

 

What about anything Shoebridge said "wasn't very nice"? He was simply explaining the foil arm situation.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. So the Italians are fucking up the foils. No surprises there really as Italy is the China of Europe. They may be able to design a nice sports car and build a pretty good looking Cathedral but, clearly this task should have been passed to a composite builder that actually knows what they're doing. The COR was given this task as a nod to them for tagging along and helping out with a bit of support. LR are the poor cuzzies after all. They're there for the pussy and super yacht parties, let's face the facts here. Baltic Yachts could do this before lunch and hang a massive BBC off it by dinner time. They'd even chuck in a couple of tasty wet nurses for Dalts to suckle off while he fumbles around trying to get his wrinkly old todger for TC to clobber over.

Pffffft. Still nothing worth reading in here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 10:38 PM, Forourselves said:

ETNZ did not plan to have their boat rear ended in Bermuda either, nor did they plan to nosedive, however there must be contingencies. If AM planned their schedule to not account for any unforseen setbacks, than they aren't managing their schedule properly.

ETNZ was able to repair their boat as well as move it forward in Bermuda.

If AM are sitting on their hands because they can not install foil arms, then they are wasting their time, and I really don't see them sulking because of a setback...do you? 

Perhaps this could be time to move forward with their test boat and simulation programs.

You imply teams are forced to twiddle their thumbs because of a setback. If indeed they are going to shut up shop because the foil arms aren't ready, than thats their choice, but do you really see that happening?? Really? They have a perfectly capable and usable test boat, they also have a base in Auckland which is scheduled to be operational by August giving them valuable training time in Auckland over the NZ summer.

Therefor it may not be a bad thing, as it could present opportunities now, that they may not have scheduled until later just as it did for ETNZ in Bermuda. setbacks are part of the game. 

AM isn't just standing around with their head up their arse, but they are losing two months of on water testing because the AC organizers were not able to meet the deadline.  An error that doesn't affect the AC organizers because they did not plan to be ready by the deadline.  All of the teams have emphatically stated that time is the most valuable commodity in preparing for the AC.  As for the canting arms, AM had already designed a similar system for use in the mule.  If you go back and listen to the interviews, AM understands that issues happen and there is nothing that they can do about it.  But it still has wiped out any lead they had in building the boat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

AM isn't just standing around with their head up their arse, but they are losing two months of on water testing because the AC organizers were not able to meet the deadline.  An error that doesn't affect the AC organizers because they did not plan to be ready by the deadline.  All of the teams have emphatically stated that time is the most valuable commodity in preparing for the AC.  As for the canting arms, AM had already designed a similar system for use in the mule.  If you go back and listen to the interviews, AM understands that issues happen and there is nothing that they can do about it.  But it still has wiped out any lead they had in building the boat.

AM, Ineos, and LR are losing 2 months. If you look at it, look at the last Cup, How many ,months did the Bermuda teams spend training in Bermuda? Months before ETNZ did, they had much more on water training than ETNZ did, and it came to nothing. They were all beaten by a better design, by a team that used the time they had wisely.

BAR launched early last time and ended up being well off the pace, perhaps launching early isn't always the best plan. If AM were prepared to launch on March 31st, does that necessarily give them any type of "lead in building the boat" does building and launching early necessarily equate to being in the lead? Not necessarily.

If we've learned one thing from Bermuda, Its not the amount of time, its not the amount of money, its how you use it. They can either spend it complaining about losing 2 months, or spend it using the time wisely to focus on other areas of the campaign. 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall if ever I knew who/what ORIGINALLY designed the foil arms that failed.  Back in December 2018 it was reported that they were "now" designed by a NZ firm Pure Design

BUT the foil arm test failure would not affect any launch or sailing programs.  Right.  

Look whether original design, build, schedule, or whatever, something was amiss.  Some teams are probably affected more than others. 

https://www.sail-world.com/news/212692/Italian-Challenger-running-AC75-rig-on-test-boat

"They also report on the foil arm development by Luna Rossa:

The technology under scrutiny is that of the foil arms, which have been routinely cracked by Persico Marine and which would be giving further concern to the designers. The loads are very high and, since it is an equal design component for all the teams (the foil will be instead of free design), before you can trust them you will still need several tests. The next one is scheduled in January, again from Persico.

Sail-World understands that while the arms are built at Persico, they are designed now by Auckland based composite engineers Pure Design. The Foil Cant System is a fully operational system in Auckland. The test failure of an arm is not a significant setback and will not affect any launch or sailing programs."

 

 

Share this post


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

If AM were prepared to launch on March 31st, does that necessarily give them any type of "lead in building the boat" does building and launching early necessarily equate to being in the lead? Not necessarily.

I was sure you would come up with such a stupidity, one lay off day in SF was enough time to allow OR to win the cup in SF, and you tell us that 2 months, first on the water is nothing ?

You come back with the usual bullshit "TNZ had no money and spent it wisely", how much did they spend ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

I was sure you would come up with such a stupidity, one lay off day in SF was enough time to allow OR to win the cup in SF, and you tell us that 2 months, first on the water is nothing ?

You come back with the usual bullshit "TNZ had no money and spent it wisely", how much did they spend ?

Huh? How do those two have anything to do with the other? Lets rewind for a bit, Oracle had how many months of 2 boat training in San Fran, yet all of that came to nothing, because it wasn't until they sailed against ETNZ, and "copied" ETNZ - not my word, but Nathan Outteridge himself stated "Oracle had been watching very closely what Team NZ were doing and have no doubt been copying the way ETNZ tack the boat".

The Bermuda teams - again spent months training against each other in hopes of gaining valuable intelligence about how each team performed. That all, ultimately came to nothing as well, because none of those teams won.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/216878/Dalton-backs-new-Americas-Cup-Challengers?fbclid=IwAR0n61r2duAk8Lfrg57DDmg0_v6sbWurRL_yNWQSc1kWOuXhyWSCl5-hHQw

"Dalton drew a parallel with the difficulty the new teams are having in getting traction - even less than two years out from the start of an America's Cup - with Emirates Team New Zealand's situation in the previous event, in Bermuda, which the New Zealand team won by a big margin."Around this time in last America's Cup, the other teams were already camped in Bermuda", he recalled. "They were already sailing test boats. We were in New Zealand, broke, and didn't even have a boat. It doesn't necessarily follow that you have got to be right there now.

Told ya.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, right, I propose that when TNZ boat is ready you keep two months before splashing to be fair with AM, w'll see how many hours it takes before you begin to whine B)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

AM, Ineos, and LR are losing 2 months. If you look at it, look at the last Cup, How many ,months did the Bermuda teams spend training in Bermuda? Months before ETNZ did, they had much more on water training than ETNZ did, and it came to nothing. They were all beaten by a better design, by a team that used the time they had wisely.

BAR launched early last time and ended up being well off the pace, perhaps launching early isn't always the best plan. If AM were prepared to launch on March 31st, does that necessarily give them any type of "lead in building the boat" does building and launching early necessarily equate to being in the lead? Not necessarily.

If we've learned one thing from Bermuda, Its not the amount of time, its not the amount of money, its how you use it. They can either spend it complaining about losing 2 months, or spend it using the time wisely to focus on other areas of the campaign. 

 

 

Do you even read the dribble that you post?  oh, it doesn't matter...  such and such had this happen.... etc, etc.....  The fact is that AM is not getting two months of on the water testing that they had worked hard to get!  That is a major penalty that was imposed on AM by the incompetence of the AC design team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Herfy said:

Do you even read the dribble that you post?  oh, it doesn't matter...  such and such had this happen.... etc, etc.....  The fact is that AM is not getting two months of on the water testing that they had worked hard to get!  That is a major penalty that was imposed on AM by the incompetence of the AC design team.

"That is a major penalty that was imposed on AM by the incompetence of the AC design team" 

Is it? You're the only one who seems to think that. Do you even know for certain when AM were supposed to launch? Did they actually confirm it was March 31?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Tornado-Cat said:

Yeah, right, I propose that when TNZ boat is ready you keep two months before splashing to be fair with AM, w'll see how many hours it takes before you begin to whine B)

Haha the tin foil hatters are out in force today!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Forourselves said:

Did they actually confirm it was March 31?

Can you actually confirm the day ETNZ will be launched ? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two apparent positions

1. Yeah the arms were a fuckup but never mind because no harm no foul, nobody would have been ready on 3/31 and it's not NZ's fault in any case

2. Yeah the arms were a fuckup and you can't say nobody was affected because only a team gets to determine what they would have done with the foil arms and assemblies if they got them on time. Left em in the box, bolted em to a Hummer and drove around a track with em, put em on a boat nobody else can prove no harm, no foul

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Can you actually confirm the day ETNZ will be launched ? :rolleyes:

Don't need to because they said "Mid-year" and its not mid year yet.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

The fact is that AM is not getting two months of on the water testing that they had worked hard to get!  That is a major penalty that was imposed on AM by the incompetence of the AC design team.

It is most likely true that AM were ready to hit the water once the foil arms should had shipped. As a result of the delay, it follows they likely have been delayed. (Although, do we know this - in terms of has AM explicitly stated this?).

What is less likely to be true however, is that had they built their own arms, they would be in the water as early as if one-design foil arms has shipped on time. We have no way of knowing this unless we invent a time machine and can see AM adding this to their build project without any impact on deadline (unlikely), and without any issues like what have occurred with the one-design arm. 

Also, we can only rule out that this delay hasn't similarly delayed the progress of another other team (including ETNZ) if we know exactly what is going on in each of those teams too - which, much like AM, we don't.

So I don't think it's reasonable to suggest the delay a) would have been negated by letting AM design their own arm, and b) only impacted AM more, or at all, vs any other team including ETNZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if anyone is able to have a good moan to the NZ media about being wronged, it may be deano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk about wing arms........ has American Magic got the mast section yet from Southern Spars, has any other teams for that matter?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that although the mast is a one design item it's not a supplied item. The dimensions, laminating schedules etc are very strict, in fact if I understand things correctly they can be inspected during manufacturing to ensure compliance to the rule. However each team can source the section from where ever they want including building in house. So if they don't have their mast yet then it's their problem not the Defenders. Having said that I'd go straight to Southern Spars if I were ordering one.;)

Share this post


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

My understanding is that although the mast is a one design item it's not a supplied item. The dimensions, laminating schedules etc are very strict, in fact if I understand things correctly they can be inspected during manufacturing to ensure compliance to the rule. However each team can source the section from where ever they want including building in house. So if they don't have their mast yet then it's their problem not the Defenders. Having said that I'd go straight to Southern Spars if I were ordering one.;)

It's not strictly one design, parts of it are but there are certain areas of the mast teams can modify to their own requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, rh2600 said:

It is most likely true that AM were ready to hit the water once the foil arms should had shipped. As a result of the delay, it follows they likely have been delayed. (Although, do we know this - in terms of has AM explicitly stated this?).

What is less likely to be true however, is that had they built their own arms, they would be in the water as early as if one-design foil arms has shipped on time. We have no way of knowing this unless we invent a time machine and can see AM adding this to their build project without any impact on deadline (unlikely), and without any issues like what have occurred with the one-design arm. 

Also, we can only rule out that this delay hasn't similarly delayed the progress of another other team (including ETNZ) if we know exactly what is going on in each of those teams too - which, much like AM, we don't.

So I don't think it's reasonable to suggest the delay a) would have been negated by letting AM design their own arm, and b) only impacted AM more, or at all, vs any other team including ETNZ.

It this article, AM talks about how they had to design their own foiling infrastructure:

https://www.sail-world.com/news/215250/Am-Cup-American-Magic-tests-the-limits--Part-2

“””One of the features of the AC75 is the development of the radical foil arm and canting mechanism which are supplied parts on the AC75 and are currently under development in a joint project between the Challenger of Record and Defender.

That was another area where American Magic had to go it alone in the development of the Mule and designed and built their own foiling infrastructure based on what was available from the AC75 class rule and available design drawings. 

“Our setup is relatively similar to the AC75”, Hutchinson confirms.”””

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Forourselves said:

"That is a major penalty that was imposed on AM by the incompetence of the AC design team" 

Is it? You're the only one who seems to think that. Do you even know for certain when AM were supposed to launch? Did they actually confirm it was March 31?

In this article they state that they were on track to launch on March 31st.

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2019/03/17/returning-the-americas-cup-to-the-usa/

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It this article, AM talks about how they had to design their own foiling infrastructure:

https://www.sail-world.com/news/215250/Am-Cup-American-Magic-tests-the-limits--Part-2

“””One of the features of the AC75 is the development of the radical foil arm and canting mechanism which are supplied parts on the AC75 and are currently under development in a joint project between the Challenger of Record and Defender.

That was another area where American Magic had to go it alone in the development of the Mule and designed and built their own foiling infrastructure based on what was available from the AC75 class rule and available design drawings. 

“Our setup is relatively similar to the AC75”, Hutchinson confirms.”””

Cool, could you clarify the point are you trying to make, it's a bit to implicit for me brains. That they already had a foiling arm and so didn't need to wait on the one design one?

Or that they would have already had a design they could have scaled up if there never was a one design one, hence it wouldn't have added to their timeline?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider that the premise for Supplied foil arms would allow 3 outcomes:

1. Safety factors and design characteristics of a critical support piece could both be guaranteed and ensured.

2. This would control costs, limit brain numbing tail chasing attempts to whittle away laminate, or seek new sectional shapes in the search for a drag or mass reduction - most likely resulting in part failure and horrific accidents/incidents for little actual gain (for $$$$'s spent), and potentially event ending calls. 

3. Allow teams to focus on researching - Hull, Foil and Rig Design - the remaining Big ticket items which would lock/unlock performance gains depending upon choices - but be less critical to overall boat safety than a foil arm failure at speed.

Furthermore these outcomes need to be put back in the context of this being the first iteration of a brand new class of boat. The intellectual power required to fully cover off all elements of a highly technical and unproven rule would be daunting to even the most hardened of design teams - removing one critical element from the To-Do list was probably welcomed with open arms by all truly involved. The team financiers would welcome the fixed price concept of foil arm and actuators with equally open arms. 

Witness the video of the visiting engineers to ETNZ to see the foil actuation system in operation was very telling - it is an open, collaborative and wide eyed bunch of smart peeps getting blown away by the scale of the project they are immersed within. 

TH is quoted as saying how helpful and collaborative contact with ETNZ has been. No one would would say that, even for a puff piece, if they didnt have to.

This attempt to talk up a conspiracy of delaying challenging teams  to the time that the challenger will also launch is just hooey from gossip mongering morons. 

It's an embarassing situation for sure; but better to discover structural integrity now, rather than down the track with incidents and accidents and a whole shit load of finger pointing as teams claim they only designed to parameters dictated to them by the rule. 

Now that the actuation system is delivered, the teams can apply actual lift and deployment sequencing to their both their playbook and overall pool of knowledge. The 2 teams with mules will have a more intimate understanding of the subtle nuances of system characteristics and how that translates to rate of turn in tacks and gybes, and even crew movements.

Witness how choreoagraphed and how quickly foiling tacks were carried out in Bermuda, with coordination of foils and rig settings. Much similarity will be drawn from that. Dry laps means big gains.

On that basis alone AM are still the challenger in the box seat - their mule being more representative of the final full size version - and allowing them to blood more people into the mannerism of these boats than say the Ineos version, which is almost too small for its own good. But compared to teams who don't have a mule...... they remain streets ahead.

The one imponderable is where ETNZ sits - do they have a secret mule? IMHO - probably, given their track record with such testing, despite their (natural) denial. Being the lead instigators of this rule gives them their greatest advantage - which ultimately has historically been the hardest part of winning the AC - which areas do you spend the bulk of your time refining/reseaching for the greatest gains? 

Impatient and information starved anarchists will just have to wait it out, without burying the proverbial hatchets in each others backs............ 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thought out, thx.

Your point reminds me how etnz almost lost their last campaign due to structural issues with foils (integrated arms you could say). They tend not to make the same mistake twice, so good to have them in charge of the design now, or at least have more of a hand in.

Share this post


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

The one imponderable is where ETNZ sits - do they have a secret mule? IMHO - probably

Improbably. Slim chance of keeping it secret given that all major teams are monitoring each other. AC34 foiling tests quickly became public knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Improbably. Slim chance of keeping it secret given that all major teams are monitoring each other. AC34 foiling tests quickly became public knowledge.

And besides, they have said that they will commence building a test/trainings boat/mule in May, this month that is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They kept the cycles secret,

Look up Lake Horoko, perfect, one road in .....

Then there is always the hundreds of lakes on private land.

Didn't mention test platform/rig/robot ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Kiwing said:

They kept the cycles secret,

Look up Lake Horoko, perfect, one road in .....

Then there is always the hundreds of lakes on private land.

Didn't mention test platform/rig/robot ...

 

This is the type of testing that I mean, not necessarily 38ft mules, so sorry if that was not clear.

They have a strong history of using models and test rigs to validate - especially as this can/will be used to keep simulators calibrated and verified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Boink said:

Consider that the premise for Supplied foil arms would allow 3 outcomes:

1. Safety factors and design characteristics of a critical support piece could both be guaranteed and ensured.

2. This would control costs, limit brain numbing tail chasing attempts to whittle away laminate, or seek new sectional shapes in the search for a drag or mass reduction - most likely resulting in part failure and horrific accidents/incidents for little actual gain (for $$$$'s spent), and potentially event ending calls. 

3. Allow teams to focus on researching - Hull, Foil and Rig Design - the remaining Big ticket items which would lock/unlock performance gains depending upon choices - but be less critical to overall boat safety than a foil arm failure at speed.

Furthermore these outcomes need to be put back in the context of this being the first iteration of a brand new class of boat. The intellectual power required to fully cover off all elements of a highly technical and unproven rule would be daunting to even the most hardened of design teams - removing one critical element from the To-Do list was probably welcomed with open arms by all truly involved. The team financiers would welcome the fixed price concept of foil arm and actuators with equally open arms. 

Witness the video of the visiting engineers to ETNZ to see the foil actuation system in operation was very telling - it is an open, collaborative and wide eyed bunch of smart peeps getting blown away by the scale of the project they are immersed within. 

TH is quoted as saying how helpful and collaborative contact with ETNZ has been. No one would would say that, even for a puff piece, if they didnt have to.

This attempt to talk up a conspiracy of delaying challenging teams  to the time that the challenger will also launch is just hooey from gossip mongering morons. 

It's an embarassing situation for sure; but better to discover structural integrity now, rather than down the track with incidents and accidents and a whole shit load of finger pointing as teams claim they only designed to parameters dictated to them by the rule. 

Now that the actuation system is delivered, the teams can apply actual lift and deployment sequencing to their both their playbook and overall pool of knowledge. The 2 teams with mules will have a more intimate understanding of the subtle nuances of system characteristics and how that translates to rate of turn in tacks and gybes, and even crew movements.

Witness how choreoagraphed and how quickly foiling tacks were carried out in Bermuda, with coordination of foils and rig settings. Much similarity will be drawn from that. Dry laps means big gains.

On that basis alone AM are still the challenger in the box seat - their mule being more representative of the final full size version - and allowing them to blood more people into the mannerism of these boats than say the Ineos version, which is almost too small for its own good. But compared to teams who don't have a mule...... they remain streets ahead.

The one imponderable is where ETNZ sits - do they have a secret mule? IMHO - probably, given their track record with such testing, despite their (natural) denial. Being the lead instigators of this rule gives them their greatest advantage - which ultimately has historically been the hardest part of winning the AC - which areas do you spend the bulk of your time refining/reseaching for the greatest gains? 

Impatient and information starved anarchists will just have to wait it out, without burying the proverbial hatchets in each others backs............ 

Well said!  

Of course, far too practical and sensible for the conspiracy theorists here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are calling "cock-up" not "conspiracy".

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Well said!  

Of course, far too practical and sensible for the conspiracy theorists here.

Conspiracy is more of a Kiwi thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never read, even here, that it was a TNZ conspiracy to help them because they were late, but a fuckup that could advantage them.

The only conspiracy theories seem to come NZ. Always good to whine about something coming from the exterior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a conspiracy among evil people to call it a cock up.

Cluster fuck is what it is....NZ and Prada

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I never read, even here, that it was a TNZ conspiracy to help them because they were late, but a fuckup that could advantage them.

The only conspiracy theories seem to come NZ. Always good to whine about something coming from the exterior.

 

To me it seems the biggest advantage would fall to any other challengers that were not going to make the deadline, I don't know where the Team UK and Prada build schedules sat prior to finding out the foil arms would be late, but they would seem to stand to gain the most if they were lagging, even more so any other late challengers who were almost certainly delayed in delivering.

I doubt it really has a whole lot of bearing on the ETNZ campaign, they have no requirement to win any of the pre regatta events and aren't in the challenger series.

Share this post


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

Improbably. Slim chance of keeping it secret given that all major teams are monitoring each other. AC34 foiling tests quickly became public knowledge.

Whatever. If it were public knowledge, why was it such a surprise to the other teams?

Share this post


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

 

To me it seems the biggest advantage would fall to any other challengers that were not going to make the deadline, I don't know where the Team UK and Prada build schedules sat prior to finding out the foil arms would be late, but they would seem to stand to gain the most if they were lagging, even more so any other late challengers who were almost certainly delayed in delivering.

I doubt it really has a whole lot of bearing on the ETNZ campaign, they have no requirement to win any of the pre regatta events and aren't in the challenger series.

I have to admit it is kind of fun to watch ETNZ fuck this up so bad after all the conspiracies and bullshit from them in the last few defenses. I love how you guys just NEVER admit to any mistake ever by your amazing team. This paragraph is really a thing of beauty. Of course it doesn't advantage the infallible ETNZ, but only everyone else. This is going to be fun watching this shitshow unwind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, pusslicker said:

I have to admit it is kind of fun to watch ETNZ fuck this up so bad after all the conspiracies and bullshit from them in the last few defenses. I love how you guys just NEVER admit to any mistake ever by your amazing team. This paragraph is really a thing of beauty. Of course it doesn't advantage the infallible ETNZ, but only everyone else. This is going to be fun watching this shitshow unwind.

gettyimages-801438074.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2019 at 6:57 PM, rh2600 said:

Cool, could you clarify the point are you trying to make, it's a bit to implicit for me brains. That they already had a foiling arm and so didn't need to wait on the one design one?

Or that they would have already had a design they could have scaled up if there never was a one design one, hence it wouldn't have added to their timeline?

More towards the second point.  AM had to build their own system in order to make the Mule as close as possible to the final boats.  There was just some discussion doubting AM’s ability to do this, so I was just adding the info.

 

My whole point is not that there is any conspiracy, just that AM got cheated out of time that they had planned to have on the first boat.  Something that won’t affect the others teams.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

fun to watch ETNZ fuck this up so bad

There is no fuck up, as much as you and a couple of others (you know who you are) desperately want there to be. It's all going as smooth as. A two month delay is nothing, considering the technical challenges in a completely new and bleeding edge design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ex-yachtie said:

Whatever. If it were public knowledge, why was it such a surprise to the other teams?

It wasn't (foiling in AC34). Well known long, long before the event began. Unlike cyclors, which wasn't known to other teams. But AFAIK ETNZ did not sail a test boat with cyclors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

It wasn't (foiling in AC34). Well known long, long before the event began. Unlike cyclors, which wasn't known to other teams. But AFAIK ETNZ did not sail a test boat with cyclors.

You’re talking out a hole in your ass. ETNZ have recently released video of foling tests on a lake which were underway well before the foling run down Auckland harbour. Those lake tests weren’t “public knowledge”. If they were, Oracle and Artemis wouldn’t have been so far behind when ETNZ launched their race boat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only time foiling was "publicly known" was when someone snapped a photo of ETNZ foiling past North Head. Many thought it wasn't possible that something so big could be completely raised out of the water. When that happened, ETNZ came out publicly and admitted they had achieved 100% lift and from then on, the cat was out of the bag so to speak. 

Dalton briefly touches on it at 1:00

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ex-yachtie said:

You’re talking out a hole in your ass. 

Typical Kiwi fanboy aggression that's killing this forum. 

Share this post


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

Typical Kiwi fanboy aggression that's killing this forum. 

#deflection

Go on, admit you were wrong. It won’t hurt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wrong. Images of ETNZ foiling were public knowledge way before the start of AC34.

We are wasting our lives here. There's nothing to talk about. Might come back in 2020.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dogwatch said:

Not wrong. Images of ETNZ foiling were public knowledge way before the start of AC34.

We are wasting our lives here. There's nothing to talk about. Might come back in 2020.

 

Bit isn't that what SA is all about?:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up to a point. But with no events in 2019 and no certainty on who is actually competing until Cagliari 2020, there's sod all worth discussing with rude fuckers like Ex-Yachtie. So I'm out of here. Not entirely an impulse decision, I've been considering it for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Not wrong. Images of ETNZ foiling were public knowledge way before the start of AC34.

We are wasting our lives here. There's nothing to talk about. Might come back in 2020.

 

That’s not what you wrote. 

 

If you cant form and hold a solid point of view it’s no wonder you’re not enjoying your time here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Up to a point. But with no events in 2019 and no certainty on who is actually competing until Cagliari 2020, there's sod all worth discussing with rude fuckers like Ex-Yachtie. So I'm out of here. Not entirely an impulse decision, I've been considering it for a while.

Well as this place is about as toxic as PA at times, its understandable.

Share this post


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

Typical Kiwi fanboy aggression that's killing this forum.

There's a bunch in here - Puss, A4E, TC, that are determined to put the boot into ETNZ, AC36 and anything NZ. It's a concerted effort, so not unreasonably there is push back from Kiwis. It's all grist for the mill though, and pointless to take it too seriously.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Up to a point. But with no events in 2019 and no certainty on who is actually competing until Cagliari 2020, there's sod all worth discussing with rude fuckers like Ex-Yachtie. So I'm out of here. Not entirely an impulse decision, I've been considering it for a while.

I will miss you and be looking forward to your return when the action starts

Share this post


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

There's a bunch in here - Puss, A4E, TC, that are determined to put the boot into ETNZ, AC36 and anything NZ. It's a concerted effort, so not unreasonably there is push back from Kiwis. It's all grist for the mill though, and pointless to take it too seriously.

That's when the ignore function truly comes into its own, the threads are pretty much unreadable without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But come on...back to the point...no-one knew about the lake tests that etnz were doing...That was the point under discussion, whether etnz had the wherewithal to be conducting some measure of physical tests in secret. Not whether there were images of the boat foiling before the races started. Perhaps jumping into a discussion with a strong pov without first trying to discover context will get you snapped right back.

9 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Not wrong. Images of ETNZ foiling were public knowledge way before the start of AC34

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I happened to witness that first foil..mate and I were at the old Masonic in Davenport for a beer after kiting or paragliding at north head when the boat came down the channel into town about 1/2 mile off. Must have been NEerly for us to be at North head. We dropped our beers and ran across the street. I said, wow she's really flying a hull.my mate said, actually he could see under both of them..we wondered wtf. Wasn't for a couple of weeks that the photo circulated and the cat was truly out of the bag. Good times.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The only time foiling was "publicly known" was when someone snapped a photo of ETNZ foiling past North Head. Many thought it wasn't possible that something so big could be completely raised out of the water.

Are you sure about that "wasn't possible" claim?

70cefa191e4456025842139bef9d993c.jpg.1828064bb964c435d0e57648270dde3b.jpgmaxresdefault.thumb.jpg.b34717f527b0012ef023f1d44634574c.jpg_SCF3288_527.jpg.0fd6a49dfbcf4b0683911990f20ac665.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ Really? Motor boats? You've now grasped the "Well ferries have been foiling for a long time straw"? You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel for arguments now! Well since you've pointed these machines out, notice they are monohulls, and have been foiling for a very long time, so you've destroyed your own theory about them being "unsafe"as hundreds of people travel these ferries every day. So thanks for proving my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 11:08 AM, pusslicker said:

I have to admit it is kind of fun to watch ETNZ fuck this up so bad after all the conspiracies and bullshit from them in the last few defenses. I love how you guys just NEVER admit to any mistake ever by your amazing team. This paragraph is really a thing of beauty. Of course it doesn't advantage the infallible ETNZ, but only everyone else. This is going to be fun watching this shitshow unwind.

It's almost like your answering a different post...

I literally said zero about whether or not ETNZ were at fault, likewise I never said it wouldn't advantage ETNZ.

I just stated that it was likely to benefit Team UK and LR more as they have to compete directly with American Magic sooner.

As for the last part, well thats just pure ETNZ attack nonsense, well actually the first part was to, now that I think about.

If you had an actual opinion on the topic it might be a more interesting discussion, as it stands I can't really see that your contributing much.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 4:32 PM, Forourselves said:

^^^ Really? Motor boats? You've now grasped the "Well ferries have been foiling for a long time straw"? You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel for arguments now! Well since you've pointed these machines out, notice they are monohulls, and have been foiling for a very long time, so you've destroyed your own theory about them being "unsafe"as hundreds of people travel these ferries every day. So thanks for proving my point.

Foiling is based upon the speed, not the source of the power.  You said "Many thought it wasn't possible that something so big could be completely raised out of the water."  It was obviously an idiotic statement, so now you go and change the subject again.  OK Trump Jr.  

There have been foiling sailboats for a long time before NZ "discovered" how to foil"!  NZ did surprise people by being able to foil a boat under a set of rules that were designed to prevent foiling.  They did an excellent job of designing and learning how to handle a sailboat within the rule restrictions.  But, please don't claim they landed on the moon.

Also, the ferries have a stable CoG.  They don't try to throw it way off to one side to counteract the force on the sails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Herfy said:

Foiling is based upon the speed, not the source of the power.  You said "Many thought it wasn't possible that something so big could be completely raised out of the water."  It was obviously an idiotic statement, so now you go and change the subject again.  OK Trump Jr.  

There have been foiling sailboats for a long time before NZ "discovered" how to foil"!  NZ did surprise people by being able to foil a boat under a set of rules that were designed to prevent foiling.  They did an excellent job of designing and learning how to handle a sailboat within the rule restrictions.  But, please don't claim they landed on the moon.

Also, the ferries have a stable CoG.  They don't try to throw it way off to one side to counteract the force on the sails.

Here we go again... No one had ever seen an Americas Cup boat foil...EVER. If we wanted to talk about freakin motor boats we wouldn't be doing it in an Americas Cup forum now would we!? Get a clue moron.

There had NEVER been a foiling boat in the Americas Cup before...EVER. Therefor, foiling was first introduced to the AC in 2013 by ETNZ. In terms of the AC, they had indeed "landed on the moon" as no one had ever done it before.

If you wanna discuss Ferries, go and do it somewhere else, because last time I checked, they don't race passenger ferries in the Americas Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2019 at 6:57 AM, Horn Rock said:

There's a bunch in here - Puss, A4E, TC, that are determined to put the boot into ETNZ, AC36 and anything NZ. It's a concerted effort, so not unreasonably there is push back from Kiwis. It's all grist for the mill though, and pointless to take it too seriously.

Right? It's all everyone else's fault. Not our plucky Kiwi's. They're justifiably pushing back and heroic in doing so. It's a conspiracy against our hero's? It's a good thing you guys don't take yourselves too seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, pusslicker said:

Right? It's all everyone else's fault. Not our plucky Kiwi's. They're justifiably pushing back and heroic in doing so. It's a conspiracy against our hero's? It's a good thing you guys don't take yourselves too seriously.

Pushing back against what? There's nothing to push back on. They're not pushing back, they're making shit up to make themselves feel better, because they're scared the Oracle reign will be forgotten along with their precious multihulls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

In other news, interestingly timed, NZ press reports that Jimmy felt sorry for y'all...

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/112472511/jimmy-spithill-felt-sorry-for-dean-barker-in-2013-americas-cup-win

 

Well technically he felt sorry for DB, not NZ ;-)

He isn't prepared to say he's a fan of the AC75 either ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Here we go again... No one had ever seen an Americas Cup boat foil...EVER. If we wanted to talk about freakin motor boats we wouldn't be doing it in an Americas Cup forum now would we!? Get a clue moron.

There had NEVER been a foiling boat in the Americas Cup before...EVER. Therefor, foiling was first introduced to the AC in 2013 by ETNZ. In terms of the AC, they had indeed "landed on the moon" as no one had ever done it before.

If you wanna discuss Ferries, go and do it somewhere else, because last time I checked, they don't race passenger ferries in the Americas Cup.

Again, you said that a big boat couldn't foil, so if you don't even want to read what you write then why bother writing it?  Ok so now it is just the AC... the AC is controlled by very strict rules and the rules have never allowed foiling boats.  Hey, everyone gives the Kiwi's a tremendous amount of credit for making it happen, but if you want to continue to act like a fool about it go ahead.  We have strayed off topic for too long.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Herfy said:

Again, you said that a big boat couldn't foil, so if you don't even want to read what you write then why bother writing it?  Ok so now it is just the AC... the AC is controlled by very strict rules and the rules have never allowed foiling boats.  Hey, everyone gives the Kiwi's a tremendous amount of credit for making it happen, but if you want to continue to act like a fool about it go ahead.  We have strayed off topic for too long.

Again, you're in an Americas Cup forum talking about passenger ferries. The only fool is the one on an Americas Cup forum claiming ETNZ stole the passenger ferries thunder as they did it first. So if you want to continue to act like a fool, go to the passenger ferry thread. I'm sure you'll be right at home with the rest of the nutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Forourselves said:

Again, you're in an Americas Cup forum talking about passenger ferries. The only fool is the one on an Americas Cup forum claiming ETNZ stole the passenger ferries thunder as they did it first. So if you want to continue to act like a fool, go to the passenger ferry thread. I'm sure you'll be right at home with the rest of the nutters.

200w.gif.431cd013db2f87545c14fa9fbb123b74.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the spirit of #makeferriesgreatagain - I have the perfect song to theme your relationship with 4ourselves.

It includes the lyrics:

Some day
Yes
It might come Babe
When I'll be babe, over you.
And always up to that moment
I will try to say I'm, over you.
 
By Bryan Ferry / Phil Manzanera performed by Roxy Music
 
I feel your pain....... relax with a bit of this.......
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So while Jim Ratcliffe is looking at getting fossil fuel out of the ground but not doing it ( and getting shit from all sides apparently)

dear old Grant Dalton has a “hold my beer” moment and signed up Z energy as a partner, who actually ARE pulling fossil fuel from the ground.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/217472/Z-Energy-partners-with-Team-NZ-for-Cup-Defence

yes there is some chat about bio fuel but that isn’t what has made them a multi billion dollar company fucking the  planet has and you can bet it’s the cold hard cash that he is after.

This post in meant in jest, incase anyone is easily offended but it’s pretty fucking funny given the evil Jim killing our planet postings from some quarters, how do you square this away for TNZ? 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,I am loath to add to this particular shit fight. I did observe most of the chatter about ineos came from what appears to be local EU quarters. Some dislike local actions like being fracked upon it seems. Is there a local groundswell against Z? Emirates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey no idea but given that Z is where loads of people fill up thier cars every day I doubt they are burning effigies of the board of directors  in the streets. 

Much like they aren’t doing that in the Uk either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Z and Emirates are not shitting where they sleep so to speak... I suspect a lack of NIMBY'ism makes them less of a target...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s always better when you dig up other peoples yards to get them hydrocarbons out, the mess and shit stays there. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, barfy said:

Well,I am loath to add to this particular shit fight. I did observe most of the chatter about ineos came from what appears to be local EU quarters. Some dislike local actions like being fracked upon it seems. Is there a local groundswell against Z? Emirates?

Not really defending either, but Z is only a retailer and the other an airline, neither of them is actually directly involved in fossil fuel extraction.

So yes one of them sells fuel and one of them burns loads of it, but protesting either would not really change how fuel is extracted very much (other than perhaps them exerting some small kind of consumer pressure on producers).

Share this post


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

So while Jim Ratcliffe is looking at getting fossil fuel out of the ground but not doing it ( and getting shit from all sides apparently)

dear old Grant Dalton has a “hold my beer” moment and signed up Z energy as a partner, who actually ARE pulling fossil fuel from the ground.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/217472/Z-Energy-partners-with-Team-NZ-for-Cup-Defence

yes there is some chat about bio fuel but that isn’t what has made them a multi billion dollar company fucking the  planet has and you can bet it’s the cold hard cash that he is after.

This post in meant in jest, incase anyone is easily offended but it’s pretty fucking funny given the evil Jim killing our planet postings from some quarters, how do you square this away for TNZ? 

 

 

As far as I know Z actually AREN'T (feel free to find evidence to the contrary) pulling fuel from the ground, they are a retailer not a fossil fuel producer.

Z energy was the retail branch of Shell that was bought by local interests and as far as I know they only buy fuel from producers and sell it to consumers. 

They are also quite active in moving to other alternatives with a number of Z stations sporting EV fast chargers these days (in partnership with ChargeNet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Boybland said:

Not really defending either, but Z is only a retailer and the other an airline, neither of them is actually directly involved in fossil fuel extraction.

Yip, and Albert Speer claimed to actually believe that he was simply designing shower rooms for his mate Adolf. 

Share this post


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

 the other an airline, neither of them is actually directly involved in fossil fuel extraction.

I think the criticism of Emirates is less about pollution, but rather being a company owned by a State with dubious human rights record...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

I think the criticism of Emirates is less about pollution, but rather being a company owned by a State with dubious human rights record...

True that.

There are many countries that operate in various ethical shades of grey, just not many with shit loads of cash and a very nice airline.

And, although I'm not sure, most of the distress comes when an oil extraction company actively changes the make up of the ground beneath one's feet. We are really going to be fucked with the whole extinction thing cause peeps aren't gonna wake up; until.it's.too.late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder why some virtuous make a case with fossil fuel, it's even sillier make a distinction between a retailer and a producer while the same take planes and use a car.

So the user would blame the producer ?

But nothing justifies slavery, stoning and sharia.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I wonder why some virtuous make a case with fossil fuel, it's even sillier make a distinction between a retailer and a producer while the same take planes and use a car.

So the user would blame the producer ?

But nothing justifies slavery, stoning and sharia.

Word. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I believe the sharia may be an inexplicable choice of some folk. Having half a continent go up in a firestorm, or your ground water ruined is no choice of any one. I agree with you TC making distinctions between shit outcomes is silly.

So, anyway, thanks for coming over to this thread

On 5/15/2019 at 7:07 AM, JALhazmat said:

post in meant in jest, incase anyone is easily offended but it’s pretty fucking funny

And starting the entire discussion in another country because you are pissed at dissenters in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey No problem, it’s news worthy enough for Richard Gladwell, and the Ed isn’t exactly hitting it out of the park with AC coverage so thought you guys might be interested to know you landed another blue chip sponsor to top up the coffers.

Oh come on you if you can’t laugh at picking up a petro chemical sponsor in a “green environmentally friendly” sport then when can you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites