Recommended Posts

Yesterday...

 

If the ribs in the wing sections are the 'perfect aerofoil' - there is not much of the wing surface that actually matches those profiles.

Hell even the beam fairings are smoother, come on guys...

 

but otherwise looking pretty slick

 

big

11223512_951882914848755_271265547716219

 

(an older one of both surrogates)

fcba3defa0a4c7829190af09bf564872.jpg

 

12247935_951882871515426_691449513451566

 

12244258_951882784848768_562697335939887

@facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's all going to come out you know!

 

Heads will roll, many will weep, it will shock jonny sailor to the core to hear the true depths of the devious dealings of the IJ, etc, etc!

 

zzzzzZZZZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://admin.sotic.net/tools/documents/2013008DCMatthewMitchellNZLDisciplinaryCommissionDecision-%5B18302%5D.pdf

So did Mitchell "win"? He couldn't appeal, he's served his time and the new panel says he did nothing wrong, but only in relation to this "complaint" (and I can't tell what that was).

 

CONCLUSION
49. In the light of all of the above factors the Panel concludes that, notwithstanding Mr Mitchell’s request for the Panel to exonerate him, it would be inappropriate to recommence a fresh hearing into this unfortunate episode so long after the event.
50. Consequently, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure Rule 2.6, and under RRSAC Rule 69.2(a), the Panel orders that there shall be no further proceedings in this matter, the case is considered closed, and there is no finding by the Panel as to the truth or otherwise of the AC Jury Report or of any breach by Mr Mitchell of the RRSAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://admin.sotic.net/tools/documents/2013008DCMatthewMitchellNZLDisciplinaryCommissionDecision-%5B18302%5D.pdf

So did Mitchell "win"? He couldn't appeal, he's served his time and the new panel says he did nothing wrong, but only in relation to this "complaint" (and I can't tell what that was).

 

Sorry but I think you have misread it. It actually comes to no conclusion at all other than 1. an entirely new hearing would be needed to decide on exoneration and 2. it is far too late for that to be practical. Under "Conclusion" 50.

 

50. Consequently, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure Rule 2.6, and under RRSAC Rule 69.2(a),

the Panel orders that there shall be no further proceedings in this matter, the case is considered

closed, and there is no finding by the Panel as to the truth or otherwise of the AC Jury Report

or of any breach by Mr Mitchell of the RRSAC.

 

It is also dated 8 January 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took them long enough but they got there in the end - who needs lawyers? :D

 

 

^ no chance he's after some of Larry's trou$er mon€y?

 

Case refused: Too little, too late - the IJ cannot be expected to defend it's decisions and methods indefinitely, especially after the 'Privy Council' of Sport has adjudicated!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double the fun on Thursday as we put in some more two-boat training on the Great Sound in ‪#‎Bermuda‬. Strong, cool winds out of the north today pushed up a few swells, but you don't feel them much when you're foiling above the waves!

 

12038827_952692511434462_327451123134509

 

12240843_952692514767795_106219969156713

 

12265575_952692504767796_891097390307665@facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Close sailing.

 

“It was great. We had two boats racing around from anywhere from five to 15 knots. Extremely close – there were a couple of times there when I thought we were going to hit," said sailing team manager and helmsman Tom Slingsby.

 

12248013_953022898068090_860629476856927

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The recent video that included Fresh talking about all the measurements they get out of two-boat testing makes me think that after OR sells one of them to TJ, you'd think T1, they will launch a T3 early in the new year. And then two-boat test T2 and T3, before finalizing their Cup boat's systems and foils.

 

And despite all the early hot rhetoric about the supposed unfairness in the Protocol that allows OR to build a second Cup boat, from the likes of RG and later rebuffed by GD among others, it makes little sense to me that OR will even build that 'emergency' AC boat 2 given all the restrictions on their use of one. It seems more likely that T2 and T3 will be the leap-frogging development path, with lessons learned applied to the Cup boat right through to the end. Just like what some other teams are likely to do too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will train on T2 and T3, perhaps on T4, what other teams can't financially afford, most probably have their two AC boats what other teams are not allowed, and train with Artemis.

 

That is what they call level the playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will train on T2 and T3, perhaps on T4, what other teams can't financially afford, most probably have their two AC boats what other teams are not allowed, and train with Artemis.

 

That is what they call level the playing field.

On the other hand it provides a very important plus for all the challengers .

 

An excuse :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The recent video that included Fresh talking about all the measurements they get out of two-boat testing makes me think that after OR sells one of them to TJ, you'd think T1, they will launch a T3 early in the new year. And then two-boat test T2 and T3, before finalizing their Cup boat's systems and foils.

 

And despite all the early hot rhetoric about the supposed unfairness in the Protocol that allows OR to build a second Cup boat, from the likes of RG and later rebuffed by GD among others, it makes little sense to me that OR will even build that 'emergency' AC boat 2 given all the restrictions on their use of one. It seems more likely that T2 and T3 will be the leap-frogging development path, with lessons learned applied to the Cup boat right through to the end. Just like what some other teams are likely to do too.

So you think the idea of just building the one when there is the possibility of breaking your only one just before race time makes sense. They may not do much with it, but to not have it waiting in the wings in case of an unforeseen event would be dumb, and Oracle are far from that.

 

Can you imagine the repercussions. The defender lost the cup because they broke their boat and the racing had to continue for the TV scheduling. Sorry folks, we could have build a spare but decided not to....yeah right. Oracle may do a lot of things I disagree with, but they still get my respect as a competitive sailing team. To not have the spare boat would not be sensible, no matter what training they do.

 

As an aside, what are the rules on dealing with a damaged boat during the AC. With the TV times to be adhered to do teams just have to forfeit if they crash? Or are there spare one design bits that will be available in the event of problems. Would certainly effect how much you are willing to push the limit if your days are over if you crash and burn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck that. GGYC could just toss oracle and appoint the challenger thst came second. A small bow skin graft would be all that was required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So you think the idea of just building the one when there is the possibility of breaking your only one just before race time makes sense. They may not do much with it, but to not have it waiting in the wings in case of an unforeseen event would be dumb, and Oracle are far from that.

 

Can you imagine the repercussions. The defender lost the cup because they broke their boat and the racing had to continue for the TV scheduling. Sorry folks, we could have build a spare but decided not to....yeah right. Oracle may do a lot of things I disagree with, but they still get my respect as a competitive sailing team. To not have the spare boat would not be sensible, no matter what training they do.

 

As an aside, what are the rules on dealing with a damaged boat during the AC. With the TV times to be adhered to do teams just have to forfeit if they crash? Or are there spare one design bits that will be available in the event of problems. Would certainly effect how much you are willing to push the limit if your days are over if you crash and burn.

 

So it's OK for the challenger to lose the AC because of a broken boat, but not the defender? And don't say that you simply replace the challenger, because it doesn't work on so many levels.

 

The 2 boats for the defender rule is in place for one reason and one reason only - to give the defender an advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2 boats for the defender rule is in place for one reason and one reason only - to give the defender an advantage.

The way it was described, the reason was to help guarantee there'd be a Defense even if B1 broke up beyond repair.

 

But since that time the boats and schedule have changed enough that, again, it may no longer make sense to put a bunch of time and energy into building a B2 that will most likely not be needed, and that would sail for only a very short time anyway. That effort might be far better spent just doing the same things anyone else is allowed to do; up-develop T(s).

 

That (building just one) is the rumor about their current plan anyway; I guess time will tell which way they go.

 

Nobody else sees an advantage; that also makes it hard to see why OR would see one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The 2 boats for the defender rule is in place for one reason and one reason only - to give the defender an advantage.

The way it was described, the reason was to help guarantee there'd be a Defense even if B1 broke up beyond repair.

But since that time the boats and schedule have changed enough that, again, it may no longer make sense to put a bunch of time and energy into building a B2 that will most likely not be needed, and that would sail for only a very short time anyway. That effort might be far better spent just doing the same things anyone else is allowed to do; up-develop T(s).

That (building just one) is the rumor about their current plan anyway; I guess time will tell which way they go.

Nobody else sees an advantage; that also makes it hard to see why OR would see one.

There's not a snowballs chance in hell that TOusa will not have two boats ready to race at the start of the finals, just like any serious challenger will have one race boat and enough spares to build another, from maybe a challenger pool of all the one design bits..

 

You don't realize when you are spinning anymore...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The 2 boats for the defender rule is in place for one reason and one reason only - to give the defender an advantage.

The way it was described, the reason was to help guarantee there'd be a Defense even if B1 broke up beyond repair.

 

But since that time the boats and schedule have changed enough that, again, it may no longer make sense to put a bunch of time and energy into building a B2 that will most likely not be needed, and that would sail for only a very short time anyway. That effort might be far better spent just doing the same things anyone else is allowed to do; up-develop T(s).

 

That (building just one) is the rumor about their current plan anyway; I guess time will tell which way they go.

 

Nobody else sees an advantage; that also makes it hard to see why OR would see one.

 

Where do you get the idea that nobody else sees an advantage? I know at least 2 challengers who think it is an advantage but there is nothing they can do. I cannot see how anybody could think there was no advantage to it.

 

To start with, if whoever wins the challenger series gets seriously damaged during the match, it is automatically a win for the defender. If the defender got the same damage, they simply launch their second boat. That sounds fair... If the winner of the challenger series gets badly damaged before the match and cannot race, the loser of the challenger series steps in. By definition, that will be a slower, less competitive team. If OR has the same issue, they launch their second boat and should not lose any competitiveness at all.

 

Once Oracle launches the second boat, they are then in a position to train harder. It solves all the problems of maintenance eating into training time. Once the challenger series is over, they can 2 boat tune. It has to be an advantage over the challengers, who can only train against boats that will have by then been proven to be slower.

 

I am not saying that OR should not have been allowed 2 boats. I think that all competitors should have been allowed the same number. Allowing isn't the same as having to have. We have seen previous cycles where teams have been allowed 2 boats but didn't built 2.

 

So to suggest that there isn't an advantage to a second boat is simply wrong. There might be a different discussion about whether it is reasonable, which is far more subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seriously, Stinger, are you really going to try to uphold a position which is that having two boats ready to go is no advantage over not being allowed two boats?

really?

We've seen you spin many things, this one is going to require all your creativity. I, for one, am looking forward to your attempts.

Got my spare undies ready, I will be pissing myself laughing while you do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There one reason, and only one, for OTUSA to have one AC boat only, it would mean they changed the protocol to allow one of the T boat (probably as fast as the AC boat) to race if OR1 breaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Both RC and JS have said that the Challengers were offered the same opportunity to build two boats, under the same conditions on that B2 as what the Defender is facing. The Challengers apparently chose to not vote that offered Protocol change. OR is seeing the same non-advantage.

 

Despite that you think it is some big advantage, just like GD and other Challengers have said it is no advantage too, the Defender also see no advantage in the hassle of building up and running two AC boats instead of one. The T's are where the action will be, with the winning systems incrementally transferred up to that one boat.

 

If you are looking for Bertelli-style uber-all fuckerism, then you'll need to look a lot harder. I will be very impressed if any future Cup Defender bravely agrees to a competition Protocol that is as level as what this one is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seriously, Stinger, are you really going to try to uphold a position which is that having two boats ready to go is no advantage over not being allowed two boats?

really?

We've seen you spin many things, this one is going to require all your creativity. I, for one, am looking forward to your attempts.

Got my spare undies ready, I will be pissing myself laughing while you do so.

Yes I am.

 

Hopefully someone will ask RC or GS on the record about their plan in time, and they will explain the reasons. Probably with a caveat that plans could conceivably change even at this stage, but it would still be interesting.

 

Grant Dalton already answered that question: he had no interest whatsoever in building and running two boats when asked directly. ETNZ never two-boated last time either, even competing in the much-wilder AC72 Class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

seriously, Stinger, are you really going to try to uphold a position which is that having two boats ready to go is no advantage over not being allowed two boats?

really?

We've seen you spin many things, this one is going to require all your creativity. I, for one, am looking forward to your attempts.

Got my spare undies ready, I will be pissing myself laughing while you do so.

 

Yes I am.

 

Hopefully someone will ask RC or GS on the record about their plan in time, and they will explain the reasons. Probably with a caveat that plans could conceivably change even at this stage, but it would still be interesting.

 

Grant Dalton already answered that question: he had no interest whatsoever in building and running two boats when asked directly. ETNZ never two-boated last time either, even competing in the much-wilder AC72 Class.

It's funny that in almost 50,000 posts you have slagged off grumpy and not believed a word he has said, until last year, when he has his back to the wall, no money and struggling to keep his team afloat, he says that two boats are not nessacary when he can't afford to support one...

Oh... I don't expect you to figure it out, they didn't have the crews to run two boat testing in '34, but they had to have two in case one was taken out in the finals...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the possible advantage having a spare that Oracle could have if tuey build one, what are the rules.

 

For example challanger breaks boat after 3 races. Is there a delay until they bodge something together. Does the loser of the LVC take over. Same.goes forOracle if they are dumb enough not to have a spare. Bit they could break both if behind and pushing.

 

With the TV sched needing to be followed what has been planned at this point? Figured someone here will likely know, not so interested in the pros amd cons of 1 boat vs 2 boat as most people have already made their minds up.

 

Not sure what was done in the past either, but these boats appear to have the ability to be destroyed easier than the old lead mines. Plus we have the.broadcasting demon to appease with his required 10min soundbites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are looking for Bertelli-style uber-all fuckerism, then you'll need to look a lot harder. I will be very impressed if any future Cup Defender bravely agrees to a competition Protocol that is as level as what this one is.

 

 

Classic!

 

spin.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are looking for Bertelli-style uber-all fuckerism, then you'll need to look a lot harder. I will be very impressed if any future Cup Defender bravely agrees to a competition Protocol that is as level as what this one is.

 

The Joseph Goebbels school of media training? I recognise the style!

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the Defender can shield the people from the political, economic and/or sporting consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the Defender to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the Defender.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh.. SimonN is who wrote "The 2 boats for the defender rule is in place for one reason and one reason only - to give the defender an advantage."

 

It's reasonable to call the suggestion that the deck is stacked on this count just nonsense, for all the reasons that I already gave.

 

Yes they may still build a second boat but, as I already also suggested months ago already, it now seems unlikely for a list of reasons. That argues against the allowance being a crooked idea, one in there "to give the defender an advantage."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless Larry has cut the budget really hard, OR would be stupid not to build a second boat, even if it is only as insurance against an accident at the wrong moment that could cost them the Cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it's risky to not build that just-in-case-of-complete-breakup (ala AC72-B1 backup boat) but:

 

These smaller-scale boats might well be more readily-repaired than the relative monsters were.

 

The high side of the equation is with devoting their resources and time into the development boat(s) instead; perhaps even two-boat testing between the in-development boat(s) and that one AC boat, transferring systems across as they determine would help. It's even possible that a TX will eventually prove faster, but too much edgier, than the AC boat.

 

If it were so obvious an advantage to be allowed to build two AC boats then quite obviously there'd be no question. But there is.

 

OR is in overall in the same situation as everyone else in that they have to be strategic too, for all of them most especially time-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally the plus of building the second boat, even if it is only tested once far outweighs the potential feather duster moment of being 5 up then crashing the boat and having to forfeit. Most of the other teams are lucky to be able to afford one boat, so voting to keep it at one for the challengers helps to keep the first part a level field at least.

 

My question is still, are there any rules at this point on what happens in the case of major damage. With the push for TV schedules to be followed, it is unlikely there can be any unplanned delays. At this point, with the ACWS boats, there is a team limit of 10 to cover everything including repairs. A major repair on an AC boat would surely require more than this number of experienced glass guys. Has anything been published on how they will deal with this yet or is it in the still to be decided basket.

 

As an aside, was there any provision for this in the old leadmine days? Never came up to my meager knowledge, but it would seem stupid not to have had some provision in the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seriously, Stinger, are you really going to try to uphold a position which is that having two boats ready to go is no advantage over not being allowed two boats?

really?

We've seen you spin many things, this one is going to require all your creativity. I, for one, am looking forward to your attempts.

Got my spare undies ready, I will be pissing myself laughing while you do so.

The challengers were offered the ability to build 2 boats. They voted that amendment down. The consensus was that it would be too costly and unnecessary. One of the most vocal of that opinion Dalton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ but were they also offer to vote on OR to NOT build two boats - I bet they would have voted for that!

 

The majority of them were not able to afford two boats, including NZ when this vote came up. RC certainly knew that when he brought it up, so of course they voted to prevent as many as possible from having them. So, this is just a red herring. They were never given a vote on whether they wanted a "level single boat playing field".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Boat 3 arrives in Bermuda

OracleRacingTeam

This was an exciting week for us - on Tuesday our third AC45S testing boat arrived in #Bermuda. There's a lot of work to do before it is ready to sail in the new year and we'll keep sharing updates as we get closer to launch day. #americascup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video is new to me but dates back to the recent Oracle Openworld in San Francisco. It includes some good sailing video-clip selections but probably of most interest is what Aaron says about the coming AC50's during some of his segments. What Ian says about analyzing 'wind structure' is also cool.

--

 

The Role Technology Played in the Biggest Comeback in the History of Sports and how it continues to break boundaries as ORACLE TEAM USA prepares to the defend the 35th America's Cup in Bermuda in 2017

 

Ian Burns, Director of Performance and Technology, OTUSA Aaron Perry, Design Engineer

 

https://www.oracle.com/openworld/on-demand/index.html?playvid=4595032096001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

 

 

Like it or not there is a history of teams measuring each other up before the Match.

 

But if you look back to the most recent Match it didn't help the Defender at all, since they came into Race 1 expecting they were faster upwind but ETNZ faster downwind. That turned out to be 180 degrees wrong - probably because things had changed so much even in just the final week or two before Race 1.

 

Wrt Team Japan getting an old test boat from OR, so far ahead of the Match, well... I don't see how that helps the Defender either. As to it helping Team Japan well France was rumored to have been offered a similar package, yet declined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

Like it or not there is a history of teams measuring each other up before the Match.

 

But if you look back to the most recent Match it didn't help the Defender at all, since they came into Race 1 expecting they were faster upwind but ETNZ faster downwind. That turned out to be 180 degrees wrong - probably because things had changed so much even in just the final week or two before Race 1.

 

Wrt Team Japan getting an old test boat from OR, so far ahead of the Match, well... I don't see how that helps the Defender either. As to it helping Team Japan well France was rumored to have been offered a similar package, yet declined.

In AC34 a Challenger could have opted to purchase a design package from OR ( which ETF was going to do) and it wasn't unusual for defenders to sell previous boats to startup teams, so there isn't all that much that is really different. New teams need to get their first boat from someone, and if you have budget, you are going to buy the best boat you can get. Now TRAINING between Challengers and Defenders is something that I personally dont care for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video is new to me but dates back to the recent Oracle Openworld in San Francisco.

 

https://www.oracle.com/openworld/on-demand/index.html?playvid=4595032096001

A better description

--

The Role Technology Played in the Biggest Comeback in the History of Sports and how it continues to break boundaries as ORACLE TEAM USA prepares to the defend the 35th America’s Cup in Bermuda in 2017

Technology, leadership, and innovation: the keys to success in the last America's Cup for the biggest comeback in the history of sports. Fittingly, all this innovation is largely driven by technology, especially when it comes to the boats themselves. Engineering, building and racing the newly designed AC45S and future AC Class demand extensive performance analysis based on collecting huge amounts of data and applying the right analytics to improve boat design and performance. Essentially, ORACLE TEAM USA needed to be information gluttons and analytical junkies. This has led technology to break boundaries and will continue helping design a racing yacht that is smaller and but likely faster than its predecessor. This session outlines the five essential tools that played a critical role in supporting ORACLE TEAM USA win the 33rd and 34th America's Cup and how it continues to drive the team’s success today: data collection, real-time analytics, performance sailing technology, historical analysis, and extreme database performance.

--

Aaron Perry joined Oracle Racing in 2010 and was part of the team that designed and built the AC72 wingsail catamaran that defended the 34th America’s Cup in San Francisco. He is primarily responsible for the overall model of the race yacht used to loft the shapes of the hulls and platform as well as lay out key structural components, hardware, and onboard systems. Perry is a native Californian currently living in Bermuda who spends more time in or on the water than he ever dreamed possible.

--

Ian “Fresh” Burns is now part of his ninth America’s Cup campaign, spanning nearly 30 years of sailing history. He returns to his role heading up performance analysis with ORACLE TEAM USA, a team focused on winning a third consecutive America’s Cup.

Burns was the youngest of three children growing up around Sydney Harbour. His mother had been a keen sailor during the war years and the Burns children were all immersed in sailing from early ages. “As the youngest, I was the logical crew person,” says Burns. “There was no escape, really. From about the age of five, I was crewing regularly.”

After graduating with honors from the University of Sydney in mechanical engineering, Burns began to focus on international racing. “During my university years, I had my first taste of high-level racing when I got an opportunity to sail with Syd Fischer (who spearheaded five America’s Cup campaigns) when he was two-boat testing his Ragamuffin yachts.”

Opportunities to join the Kookaburra America’s Cup team in 1985 with Iain Murray—an old sailing buddy and multiple-time world champion who now runs the America’s Cup Regattas—allowed Burns to combine his sailing skills and technical aptitude in one occupation. Later, forming a design house with Murray, they were responsible for multiple Sydney-to-Hobart winning designs (including designing and navigating the winner in 1995), world championships, and Admiral’s Cup wins. Successive America’s Cups have offered consecutive positions as navigator on board various defenders and challengers, design involvement in carbon fiber masts and hulls, performance analysis, and software development.

Burns joined the Oracle America’s Cup campaigns when they first formed in the summer of 2000. He sailed with the crew as a navigator during the 2002 to 2003 Challenger Selection Series; for the 2007 and 2010 campaigns he ran the design process for the massive winged trimaran. Winning the 2010 and 2013 America's Cups with yachts that pushed the boundaries on what is possible provided Burns the ability to develop and apply the latest technology to the fastest boats.

Focusing on the performance information from the boats to help make them go faster has been a life-long passion for Burns, who has seen onboard yachting technology go from hand-bearing compasses and 10-knot top speeds to multiple computers integrated through a 50-knot platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

Like it or not there is a history of teams measuring each other up before the Match.

 

But if you look back to the most recent Match it didn't help the Defender at all, since they came into Race 1 expecting they were faster upwind but ETNZ faster downwind. That turned out to be 180 degrees wrong - probably because things had changed so much even in just the final week or two before Race 1.

 

Wrt Team Japan getting an old test boat from OR, so far ahead of the Match, well... I don't see how that helps the Defender either. As to it helping Team Japan well France was rumored to have been offered a similar package, yet declined.

In AC34 a Challenger could have opted to purchase a design package from OR ( which ETF was going to do) and it wasn't unusual for defenders to sell previous boats to startup teams, so there isn't all that much that is really different. New teams need to get their first boat from someone, and if you have budget, you are going to buy the best boat you can get. Now TRAINING between Challengers and Defenders is something that I personally dont care for.

 

Before AC34, no challenger or defender could buy or sell a boat to another competitor during a cup cycle. The only time boats changed hands was after the end of a cycle. I am sure I will be corrected, but I cannot remember a team buying a current version of an IACC boat from another team. What usually happened was that teams sold off their previous version boats ahead of the updated rule coming in. One thing is for certain. You could never buy a winning boat and you certainly couldn't race a boat built by another team in either the LV or the cup itself.

 

This is not about helping a new team get going by selling them an obsolete training boat, knowing that the team would design and build its own boat during that cup cycle. This is about a defender providing a challenger a state of the art training boat, complete with design IP, and then building that same challenger a state of the art boat for the main event. That is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we already know that Core will build much or most of the Holroyd/TJ-design-choiced Cup boat?

 

Given that Core may instead be committed full-out to OR and given the builders Holroyd and DB are used to going with, it may or not be the case that Core, or OR, will have much to do with TJ after selling them the T1. Can't really think why OR would have agreed to too much more, hardware-wise.

 

Design-wise, while they are apparently buying a starter design from OR, the fact they have their own designers and own arrangements with Airbus suggests they will be evolving things in their own preferred direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boat 3 arrives in Bermuda

OracleRacingTeam

This was an exciting week for us - on Tuesday our third AC45S testing boat arrived in #Bermuda. There's a lot of work to do before it is ready to sail in the new year and we'll keep sharing updates as we get closer to launch day. #americascup

 

Interesting that they've shipped the boat unpainted (aside from Durapox highbuild). Obviously more than just bolt on work to do on site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an earlier, time-lapsed video they put out that showed B2's assembly inside that shed and iirc it included views of the tents that various parts were painted inside of.

 

edit, am probably thinking of this one from 2 months ago

 

 

Published on Sep 18, 2015

Watch as time flies! Weeks of boat modifications on our AC45S at our Bermuda base in Dockyard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

 

 

I think the problems started when the RNZYS in 2,000 accepted that the cup would be defended by TNZ instead of the traditional regatta to determine the defending boat. Prior to then the defending YC had always had a choice .. since then the defending YC has never had a choice so the event has been controlled by successful boats owners and has been going downhill ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post Terry which explains when the concept of defender was fondamentally flawed, GGYC has been "improving" the concept up to an unprecedented level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terry

 

While I can understand that the lack of a defender series would lead to the defender sailing against challengers, I am not convinced that justifies designing and building boats for challengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but to me the lack of a defender series will never justify defender sailing against the challengers before race one of the cup. Don't care who it is, this should be a no no. The whole concept was to design your best, hide what you can then show up on the line. Now they are so busy trying to develop the series concept and bring in the hundreds of interested TV viewers, they don't give a toss about the actual event any more.

 

But then again it was often thought that there was no excuse to not have the event in the defenders country and look where that has gone. Just auction it off to the highest bidder. Maybe they should forget the racing results and auction the cup off. Or perhaps, to keep in with the modern all competitors are winners concept, they should all race then the cup is given to a team on a rotation basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

 

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

I think the problems started when the RNZYS in 2,000 accepted that the cup would be defended by TNZ instead of the traditional regatta to determine the defending boat. Prior to then the defending YC had always had a choice .. since then the defending YC has never had a choice so the event has been controlled by successful boats owners and has been going downhill ever since.

Bravo well said!

 

Blake amd co did not want thier plan upset by other challengers. But that was a really bad move and this is now a private billions club and has nothing to do with nationality or providing the best event.

 

Defenders are greedy and do to want to be challenged. They feel the money they spend means the "own the cup and the rules" and fuck the sport!

 

Very shallow thinking.

 

This thread shoild be Locked or abandoned, in protest, until the AC Is "returned to the fans_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but to me the lack of a defender series will never justify defender sailing against the challengers before race one of the cup. Don't care who it is, this should be a no no. The whole concept was to design your best, hide what you can then show up on the line. Now they are so busy trying to develop the series concept and bring in the hundreds of interested TV viewers, they don't give a toss about the actual event any more.

 

But then again it was often thought that there was no excuse to not have the event in the defenders country and look where that has gone. Just auction it off to the highest bidder. Maybe they should forget the racing results and auction the cup off. Or perhaps, to keep in with the modern all competitors are winners concept, they should all race then the cup is given to a team on a rotation basis.

God gissie! What stupid logic. The defender series has no bearing on the defender sailing in the Challenger series.

 

Remember the defender writes the rules.

 

TNZ by eliminating the defender series is within their rights to do this just as OR can sail in the challenger series.

 

The winners always write the rules amd its up to the challengers to bend the rules to win...

 

...As fay did with the giant mono, kiwis did with glass 12,s, TNZ did with that twin keel dog' and TNZ did with the Bow sprit/gybing brace bullshit!

 

So,you as a Kiwi, should know that the challengers are just as bad as the defenders in this bullshit thing called the AC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Boat 1 has gone to SoftBank Team Japan, while boat 2, and now boat 3 will undergo work before sailing in the new year.

This is what is so wrong with this new vision for the AC. When has it ever been right for the defender to provide a challenger with anything, never mind build a boat for them and provide them with technical IP. It goes against everything the cup has ever stood for. Until LE and RC got hold of the cup, it was seriously frowned on for the defender and a challenger to even line up on the water.

 

Of course, we will now see the Spinbot go into full operating mode, but there can never be any reason for going against such a fundamental principal .

Like it or not there is a history of teams measuring each other up before the Match.

 

But if you look back to the most recent Match it didn't help the Defender at all, since they came into Race 1 expecting they were faster upwind but ETNZ faster downwind. That turned out to be 180 degrees wrong - probably because things had changed so much even in just the final week or two before Race 1.

 

Wrt Team Japan getting an old test boat from OR, so far ahead of the Match, well... I don't see how that helps the Defender either. As to it helping Team Japan well France was rumored to have been offered a similar package, yet declined.

In AC34 a Challenger could have opted to purchase a design package from OR ( which ETF was going to do) and it wasn't unusual for defenders to sell previous boats to startup teams, so there isn't all that much that is really different. New teams need to get their first boat from someone, and if you have budget, you are going to buy the best boat you can get. Now TRAINING between Challengers and Defenders is something that I personally dont care for.

Before AC34, no challenger or defender could buy or sell a boat to another competitor during a cup cycle. The only time boats changed hands was after the end of a cycle. I am sure I will be corrected, but I cannot remember a team buying a current version of an IACC boat from another team. What usually happened was that teams sold off their previous version boats ahead of the updated rule coming in. One thing is for certain. You could never buy a winning boat and you certainly couldn't race a boat built by another team in either the LV or the cup itself.

 

This is not about helping a new team get going by selling them an obsolete training boat, knowing that the team would design and build its own boat during that cup cycle. This is about a defender providing a challenger a state of the art training boat, complete with design IP, and then building that same challenger a state of the art boat for the main event. That is wrong.

The only boat that OR is selling TJ is a now "obsolete" (to OR) development platform. They are not giving, selling or building for then an actual America's Cup Class and DB has already stated they are designing and building their own boat.

Even in the beginning it was stated that OR was going to provide TJ ( and TF if they want it) the basic design for a development boat, not an end result Anerica's Cup race boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus. They're all jusy teams at this

point. Enough of this challenger/defender business. Everything else about the AC and DoG has been fucked over. Why hang on to any concept of what the AC is supposed to be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because at any JAR I've ever attended, one boat doesn't set the rules.

 

Enough of the JAR argument, it doesn't hold water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video is new to me but dates back to the recent Oracle Openworld in San Francisco. It includes some good sailing video-clip selections but probably of most interest is what Aaron says about the coming AC50's during some of his segments. What Ian says about analyzing 'wind structure' is also cool.

--

 

The Role Technology Played in the Biggest Comeback in the History of Sports and how it continues to break boundaries as ORACLE TEAM USA prepares to the defend the 35th America's Cup in Bermuda in 2017

 

Ian Burns, Director of Performance and Technology, OTUSA Aaron Perry, Design Engineer

 

https://www.oracle.com/openworld/on-demand/index.html?playvid=4595032096001

 

Finding the general subject of data analysis mildly interesting, I snapped a few frames from in the above video presentation. May as well post a few.

 

post-41620-0-45428400-1448638567_thumb.jpg

 

post-41620-0-22814200-1448638584_thumb.jpg

 

post-41620-0-33934700-1448638597_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something different..

 

 

ORACLE TEAM USA christened its boxing ring with a command performance - skipper Spithill taking on all comers. 12+ rounds of pleasure and pain. All this and the team band too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something different..

ORACLE TEAM USA christened its boxing ring with a command performance - skipper Spithill taking on all comers. 12+ rounds of pleasure and pain. All this and the team band too.

Looks like a great bunch of people to spend the next few years with .

 

JS seems to be taking this fitness " fad " quite seriously :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JS handled that thing very well, he's the perfect main character.

 

'Mad Dog' Simmer did land a pretty good shot to his head, that argument about if it was a slip or intentional is quite funny and it's nice that in the moment JS took it in stride instead of decking him.

 

By the details you can tell that whoever is doing these OR vids has got good talent, to go along with a pretty good sense of humor. Thumbs up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A dozen Oracalers getting ready for the nice looking Moth Invitational event in Bermuda...

 

Arty video here - with foiling kites, cats and moths all in the same water

https://video-fra3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hvideo-xaf1/v/t43.1792-2/12344966_450660861790861_1489568510_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjIyNTAsInJsYSI6NDA5NiwidmVuY29kZV90YWciOiJzdmVfaGQifQ%3D%3D&rl=2250&vabr=1500&oh=da164dabc91e8fbe0cc7ef88a8d36654&oe=5660C1B5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid, thnx for the link.

 

Saw somewhere that JS plans to start in that regatta but will be leaving to Sydney before it finishes. Hopefully Slingers or someone from Artemis or another AC team places well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From http://www.mysailing.com.au/latest/america-s-cup-sailors-line-up-for-amlin-international-moth-regatta-in-bermuda

 

--

As many as 15 Americas Cup sailors are expected to compete in the Amlin International Moth Regatta, including Dean Barker and Chris Draper of SoftBank Team Japan, Tom Slingsby and Kyle Langford of ORACLE Team USA, and Francesco Bruni and Paul Goodison of Artemis Racing. Goodison placed 3rd at the Europeans last summer.

--

 

Event website http://bermudamoths.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid, thnx for the link.

 

Saw somewhere that JS plans to start in that regatta but will be leaving to Sydney before it finishes. Hopefully Slingers or someone from Artemis or another AC team places well.

NO has had time to get out on his Moth since the Flying Phantom cancellation. I would call him the favorite in this regatta, Goobs should place well too, as he is practicing with Nathan. Should be a good event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On YouTube now, beauty

--

 

 

Several ORACLE TEAM USA sailors will take part in the International Moth regatta next week. The high-performance, one-man, foiling dinghy, gives an opportunity for all of the sailors to develop their flight skills. And next week, the competition will be many of the best Moth sailors in the world. Here's a preview.

(Video by Javier Salinas / ORACLE)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great vid-thanks Stingray......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nice vid, thnx for the link.

 

Saw somewhere that JS plans to start in that regatta but will be leaving to Sydney before it finishes. Hopefully Slingers or someone from Artemis or another AC team places well.

NO has had time to get out on his Moth since the Flying Phantom cancellation. I would call him the favorite in this regatta, Goobs should place well too, as he is practicing with Nathan. Should be a good event.

Sorry, I thought I had read earlier that Nathan was going to sail this regatta, he is not. My mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dammit, CL. If you want cred then you need to take a page from The Donald and double-down. Me, I definitely KNOW that NO will duke it out to the Death.

 

Make no mistake about it: This Moth thing will be YUUGE :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dammit, CL. If you want cred then you need to take a page from The Donald and double-down. Me, I definitely KNOW that NO will duke it out to the Death.

 

Make no mistake about it: This Moth thing will be YUUGE :)

You are correct that this will be a YUUGE regatta, great conditions and venue for Moths. I am disapointed Nathan will not be there. However there are plenty of top Moth pilots in this, and I will be following.

 

And, if NO was sailing in this, he would kick ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something different..

 

 

ORACLE TEAM USA christened its boxing ring with a command performance - skipper Spithill taking on all comers. 12+ rounds of pleasure and pain. All this and the team band too.

There are some quite funny moments in that vid, it's worth a full watch.

 

This one is almost a year old but somehow new to me. Also includes some humor

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another of these double deals AC+OTUSA.

 

Effective immediately, Sperry is the official footwear partner of the America’s Cup and the official footwear supplier for ORACLE TEAM USA.

 

m1168_crop169014_1024x576_proportional_1

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another of these double deals AC+OTUSA.

 

Effective immediately, Sperry is the official footwear partner of the America’s Cup and the official footwear supplier for ORACLE TEAM USA.

 

Ha, this weekend I ordered a pair of Camper shoes.

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In ETNZ colours I hope... 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you handle the jandal?

 

46b67901ec866200d64280ea731a7ca8.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you handle the jandal?

 

46b67901ec866200d64280ea731a7ca8.jpg

WOOT!

(Want One Of Those) If found several on internet store, Thanks.

post-17796-0-05530300-1449926277_thumb.jpg

post-17796-0-44595300-1449926287.jpg

post-17796-0-55536400-1449926302_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Published on Dec 18, 2015

Meet Cooper Dressler: From the Red Bull Youth America's Cup in 2013 to grinder with ORACLE TEAM USA in 2015, discover his path to America's Cup sailing. Video by John von Seeburg & Mike Herbener / ORACLE TEAM USA.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^

He might complete the good deed by donating a new keyboard too: the one they have is sticking (Cllub, Trusst..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open Bics are heaps more fun for kids than Optimists: faster, more comfortable & no bailing. Bought a demo unit from the 2010 LVPS for my kids.

Sunfish, one of the oldest and most wide spread youth boatclass is maybe just as funny maybe even more. (how to compare?)

post-17796-0-55426900-1450669166_thumb.jpg

post-17796-0-78516900-1450669182_thumb.jpg

post-17796-0-82528400-1450669199_thumb.jpg

And no bailing in a Sunfish as well since she has self bailers.

post-17796-0-36099300-1450669406_thumb.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before AC34, no challenger or defender could buy or sell a boat to another competitor during a cup cycle. The only time boats changed hands was after the end of a cycle. I am sure I will be corrected, but I cannot remember a team buying a current version of an IACC boat from another team. What usually happened was that teams sold off their previous version boats ahead of the updated rule coming in. One thing is for certain. You could never buy a winning boat and you certainly couldn't race a boat built by another team in either the LV or the cup itself.

 

 

 

 

 

This is not about helping a new team get going by selling them an obsolete training boat, knowing that the team would design and build its own boat during that cup cycle. This is about a defender providing a challenger a state of the art training boat, complete with design IP, and then building that same challenger a state of the art boat for the main event. That is wrong.

 

 

A bit out of the loop, and late to this conversation no doubt, but EB and Alinghi had all their technical data and line drawings for SUI-64 up for sale during the beginning of the AC32 cycle and they even had SUI-75 for sale, according to the below linked article. Also, they had an "open market" for design data until Oct. '04:

 

 

 

After winning the cup in Auckland, one of the rule changes Alinghi instigated was to allow an open market for design data until October 2004. "What's really useful is that this allows a team to start off immediately from the level of winning boat," Coutts added. "This will be a big benefit, especially if a team want to launch their first boat early."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/2376732/Yachting-Alinghi-put-their-secrets-on-sale.html

 

So, its been done before, in regards to a Defender doing what it could to prop up a new team to the AC. Another example was +39 losing their rig during ACT 13. They didn't have a spare and Alinghi gave them one of their spares so +39 could participate in the LVC.

 

Ultimately though what are we talking about? OR giving Team Soft Dick a used OD multi-hull? Considering fake Team USA is defending the Cup in Bermuda, whats the big deal?

 

WetHog :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

--

 

 

 

Published on Jan 5, 2016

How do the America’s Cup catamarans lift out of the water and maintain forward momentum? ORACLE TEAM USA designer Hal Youngren discusses the balance between reducing cavitation and maximizing performance in foil design with this #TechTuesday video by Javier Salinas.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken Ried and San Honey had a bit to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites