• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Archived

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

PeterHuston

Is the 62 really going to end up as a 45?

Recommended Posts

At 45 feet, it's just a regatta; Who gives a flying rat's ass? The "America's Cup" is dead at that size, just invite anyone who can pony up the bucks for a 45 foot cat to race.

The AC used to be a spectacle; big boats, national teams. Now there are virtually no Americans on the American team, no Italians on the Luna Rosa team; hell, it's the NZ match race series.

Hope they have fun in Bermuda, I'll go sailing or watch golf (and I hate golf).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

But, and it is a big but(t), you look fucking foolish to propose it after 18months of proposing a much more sophisticated larger platform that people were salivating over seeing.

 

It's better to look temporarily foolish correcting a mistake than carry on in the wrong direction for another 30 months.

 

“When my information changes, I change my mind. What do you do?”

 

Not clear who originally said this. Might have been the economist Keynes. http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/07/22/keynes-change-mind/

 

 

Was it hard information that changed, or just Russell's perception of of the way a 45 boat looks on TV?

 

 

 

 

Changed information including the failure of Team France to raise money, the failure of BAR to gain a major commercial sponsor, the drop-out of AUS, the lack of any other new challengers, the deep opposition of European teams to an Auckland qualifier, the known desire of TT to reduce spending (and I suspect the same from an increasingly uninterested LE), the greater suitability of a smaller boat to Great Sound and the accelerating performance of foiling 45 footers.

 

 

The majority of that is not changed information, it is failure to understand the market correctly, create a plan, make projections, and then miss them completely.

 

If whoever came up with the idea of 62's and the dual venue concept, all to support start up teams, worked at Oracle Corp, they would have been shown the door long ago for that level of failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is changed information, and a reaction to it.

You are apparently all about taking RC to task, throwing rotten eggs just like Clean does without any constructive suggestion whatsoever, and probably also miss the mark (LE) but anyway: There is no way that whoever it is can pre-predict teams' abilities to fundraise. Since the teams don't even know their own private prospects with any certainty early on, and since all of them continue to fundraise throughout the entire AC cycle, the organizers can hardly be expected to divine the result of those negotiations way ahead of time. Reacting is the best move, given time for teams to try and then to assess the situation.

If you have a better one than your previously-posted brilliant marketing-genious idea that somebody just show up and Challenge GGYC on SF Bay then let's hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1D-anything is very much against the historical spirit of the event.

 

But then, so is racing outside the Defender's home country, let alone home waters.

 

On the other hand, once something has been completely shit upon, it doesn't matter much if it also gets pissed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ The more open the better IMO but yes, that's likely the general mix teams will get to vote on, with some nuances included.

The key word is 'vote' and that's IMO a generally good overall principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

Just call it the RC world super league of the world and get on with it....

 

Let TNZ, TLR, TA, BAR get together and figure out how to make the Americas Cup mean something again....maybe they could make the AC35 a thee day regatta, racing around the Isle of Wight...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

 

 

Seriously? It doesn't matter anymore. The technology is cool, the racing will be cool, but the old mojo has been written out of the script. If that's what people want, so be it. Just stop with the charade (which of course won't happen).

 

Where's a mad radical Maori with a hammer when you need one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have good info on the proposal, that's why I am asking your opinions. I'll let you know what the new boat to be voted on is tonight in this thread before I put up the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool.

 

I like the middle one but I bet the discussion evolves over the next week or so if/as necesseary.

 

Nope. One proposal already delivered to all entered teams, one vote on Tuesday. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

 

Foils are where there is the biggest potential for significant improvement. Foils only keeps the focus on what is least known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

Foils are where there is the biggest potential for significant improvement. Foils only keeps the focus on what is least known.

And it's my guess (not preference) for the option that will get voted up or down.

 

"Not an AC45, but a bit bigger...

a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open wing, open foils.

 

What - you nuts?

 

However - Volvo pretty fun 1 design. But America's Cup supposed to be a national technology effort. RCFC indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One design components in the AC? How to kill years of tradition and what makes the Cup different and special. RCFC is getting more appropriate, because the main feature of any circus is the clowns...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

 

 

Foils are where there is the biggest potential for significant improvement. Foils only keeps the focus on what is least known.

 

 

Agree. But they are one of the most expensive parts of the boat and involve lots of testing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is changed information, and a reaction to it.

 

You are apparently all about taking RC to task, throwing rotten eggs just like Clean does without any constructive suggestion whatsoever, and probably also miss the mark (LE) but anyway: There is no way that whoever it is can pre-predict teams' abilities to fundraise. Since the teams don't even know their own private prospects with any certainty early on, and since all of them continue to fundraise throughout the entire AC cycle, the organizers can hardly be expected to divine the result of those negotiations way ahead of time. Reacting is the best move, given time for teams to try and then to assess the situation.

 

If you have a better one than your previously-posted brilliant marketing-genious idea that somebody just show up and Challenge GGYC on SF Bay then let's hear it.

 

Until you have ever sold anything in the marketing arena, why don't you get back to us then.

 

Until then, go fuck yourself.

 

Oh yeah...make constructive suggestions? I've made plenty. I've been in in the thick of it. You on the hand, have never done anything except buy shirts and hats when you go to an event.

 

You want an example of someone who made a constructive input? Look no further than Larry himself when he made the comment to Mr. Malibu about the 45. Do you think that is something that just came to the top of his head right then? I don't. I think he made the suggestion and Russell ignored him, until now.

 

Why Larry keeps putting up with Russell is something I do not understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is changed information, and a reaction to it.

 

You are apparently all about taking RC to task, throwing rotten eggs just like Clean does without any constructive suggestion whatsoever, and probably also miss the mark (LE) but anyway: There is no way that whoever it is can pre-predict teams' abilities to fundraise. Since the teams don't even know their own private prospects with any certainty early on, and since all of them continue to fundraise throughout the entire AC cycle, the organizers can hardly be expected to divine the result of those negotiations way ahead of time. Reacting is the best move, given time for teams to try and then to assess the situation.

 

If you have a better one than your previously-posted brilliant marketing-genious idea that somebody just show up and Challenge GGYC on SF Bay then let's hear it.

 

Until you have ever sold anything in the marketing arena, why don't you get back to us then.

 

Until then, go fuck yourself.

 

Oh yeah...make constructive suggestions? I've made plenty. I've been in in the thick of it. You on the hand, have never done anything except buy shirts and hats when you go to an event.

 

You want an example of someone who made a constructive input? Look no further than Larry himself when he made the comment to Mr. Malibu about the 45. Do you think that is something that just came to the top of his head right then? I don't. I think he made the suggestion and Russell ignored him, until now.

 

Why Larry keeps putting up with Russell is something I do not understand.

 

You wouldn't buy the greatest comeback in sporting history and then chuck it out with the garbage would you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Changed information including the failure of Team France to raise money, the failure of BAR to gain a major commercial sponsor, the drop-out of AUS, the lack of any other new challengers, the deep opposition of European teams to an Auckland qualifier, the known desire of TT to reduce spending (and I suspect the same from an increasingly uninterested LE), the greater suitability of a smaller boat to Great Sound and the accelerating performance of foiling 45 footers.

The majority of that is not changed information, it is failure to understand the market correctly, create a plan, make projections, and then miss them completely.

 

If whoever came up with the idea of 62's and the dual venue concept, all to support start up teams, worked at Oracle Corp, they would have been shown the door long ago for that level of failure.

 

You won't find me defending Coutts' business planning skills.

 

However that, for example, Team France would find raising €€€ exceedingly hard would have been a probable outcome 18 months ago. Today it's a proven fact. Probable changing to definite is new information. So said Claude Shannon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger.

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils?

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils?

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils?

 

 

 

Foils and wing are the two elements offering the most potential for innovation

 

Plateform is the element offering by far the least potential for innovation

 

AC is primarily a design competition

 

So I would go for:

 

1D platform, open wing, and open foils

 

 

Edit: I believe the platform is also the most expensive to modify in terms of build. Going 1D there means budgets go into what impacts performance the most. It wont make victory cheaper but it will lower the entry cost for those who "come to learn for next time".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because the main feature of any circus is the clowns...

Funny you should say that because when I went to the circus aged 7, my huge disappointment was the lack of trapeze artists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americas cup is by fundamental definition a design contest. Any holder who trys to make it something else -- with the collusion of the challenge or not --is failing in their duty of care and open to a legal challenge. Any 'cup' contest that is not a competition of design evaluated on the water is open to future challenhe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the boats that we have already seen (the Turbo's that is) the only logical proposal would be

 

open foils

open platform on 45ft hulls

1d wing

 

Just think of it - the wing is the most fragile part in any mishap, it's the only area where it makes economical sense to have a one design component

 

Besides that, with the importance of hull shape being secondary in foiling boats, the AC45 hulls can easily be used as a basis for a new platform, another potential saving in budget

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americas cup is by fundamental definition a design contest. Any holder who trys to make it something else -- with the collusion of the challenge or not --is failing in their duty of care and open to a legal challenge. Any 'cup' contest that is not a competition of design evaluated on the water is open to future challenhe.

 

Although the AC is understood by most as being primarily a design contest, not only is there no language in the DoG prohibiting partial or even full OD, but there is language that makes it legally possible by Mutual Consent.

 

If you want to go "sea layer" on ACEA and legally challenge them, you have to come up with some explicit language of the DoG as basis for a legal argument. Your personal view on what AC is or should be does NOT constitute such a basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the boats that we have already seen (the Turbo's that is) the only logical proposal would be

 

open foils

open platform on 45ft hulls

1d wing

 

Just think of it - the wing is the most fragile part in any mishap, it's the only area where it makes economical sense to have a one design component

 

Besides that, with the importance of hull shape being secondary in foiling boats, the AC45 hulls can easily be used as a basis for a new platform, another potential saving in budget

1 design does NOT mean 1 builder. Having a 1 design wing does not imply any cost reduction of breakages. Only 1 builder would and only marginally (repairing a 1 build wing isn't cheaper than repairing a prototype). Further, two seasons of ACWS haven't shown any carnage in this particular area .

 

It is precisely because hull shape, and plateform for that matter, is secondary in foiling boats that it makes no sense to waste money with each team designing their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Considering the boats that we have already seen (the Turbo's that is) the only logical proposal would be

 

open foils

open platform on 45ft hulls

1d wing

 

Just think of it - the wing is the most fragile part in any mishap, it's the only area where it makes economical sense to have a one design component

 

Besides that, with the importance of hull shape being secondary in foiling boats, the AC45 hulls can easily be used as a basis for a new platform, another potential saving in budget

1 design does NOT mean 1 builder. Having a 1 design wing does not imply any cost reduction of breakages. Only 1 builder would and only marginally (repairing a 1 build wing isn't cheaper than repairing a prototype). Further, two seasons of ACWS haven't shown any carnage in this particular area .

 

It is precisely because hull shape, and plateform for that matter, is secondary in foiling boats that it makes no sense to waste money with each team designing their own.

 

 

Thing is, there are already a dozen or more AC45 wings around - and that is what I meant with 1 design, ie compliant with the old AC45 class rules

 

And as far as carnage is concerned, in the ACWS of old, the boats weren't going 45kts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so...here is the proposal.

 

One design hull (including board and rudder cases)

One design wing

open foils

open rudder

 

48 feet long

Hulls and wings built by each team

Strict manufacturing controls by ACEA (on site inspection, bar coded parts, everything weighed, etc)

Teams allowed to purchase platform, wings from other teams (maybe just 'assembled in their country', but not sure anyone cares about country of origin anymore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so...here is the proposal.

 

One design hull (including board and rudder cases)

One design wing

open foils

open rudder

 

48 feet long

Hulls and wings built by each team

Strict manufacturing controls by ACEA (on site inspection, bar coded parts, everything weighed, etc)

Teams allowed to purchase platform, wings from other teams (maybe just 'assembled in their country', but not sure anyone cares about country of origin anymore

Does 'one design hull' imply OD also for beams, pods, winches, etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

so...here is the proposal.

 

One design hull (including board and rudder cases)

One design wing

open foils

open rudder

 

48 feet long

Hulls and wings built by each team

Strict manufacturing controls by ACEA (on site inspection, bar coded parts, everything weighed, etc)

Teams allowed to purchase platform, wings from other teams (maybe just 'assembled in their country', but not sure anyone cares about country of origin anymore

Does 'one design hull' imply OD also for beams, pods, winches, etc?

 

 

Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Americas cup is by fundamental definition a design contest. Any holder who trys to make it something else -- with the collusion of the challenge or not --is failing in their duty of care and open to a legal challenge. Any 'cup' contest that is not a competition of design evaluated on the water is open to future challenhe.

 

Although the AC is understood by most as being primarily a design contest, not only is there no language in the DoG prohibiting partial or even full OD, but there is language that makes it legally possible by Mutual Consent.

 

If you want to go "sea layer" on ACEA and legally challenge them, you have to come up with some explicit language of the DoG as basis for a legal argument. Your personal view on what AC is or should be does NOT constitute such a basis.

 

By "understood" you mean the clear view of other owners of the America that they where setting out to demonstrate the superiority of America yacht design?

 

May be I've missed something?

 

1958: the word "constructed" wherever it appeared in the Deed of Gift of the America’s Cup shall always be construed as "designed and built"

 

1980: A yacht shall be deemed to be "designed" in a country if the designers of the yacht’s hull, rig and sails shall be nationals of that country

 

1982: A foreign designer—however he is designated—participating in the design of a boat or a sail would violate both the letter and spirit of the above Resolution, and any boat or sail so designed would be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition. Similarly, a hull or sails which are merely copies of those of a foreign designer would also be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition

 

1990 - 2: However, no person may claim dual or multiple nationality. If a person satisfies the conditions of nationality for more than one country, he shall elect and declare a single nationality, and may participate only on behalf of the country whose nationality he declares.

 

 

In other words according to the DoG and the resolutions of the trustees the hull, rig and sails shall be designed by nationals solely of the challenging country who may be nationals of only one country and the involvement of a none national designed makes the design invalid for the AC.

 

That leaves the possibility of OD foils or a change in heart by the trustees at total odds with everything that has gone before. ... plus a shit fight over whether a wing is a sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the Qualifier series get abandoned, or moved to Bermuda, or ?

 

edit: apparently moved to Bermuda - Last Friday RC said:

 

Will downscaling the boat impact the competition structure?

The Protocol calls for the first round of racing, called the America’s Cup Qualifiers, to be held at a separate location from Bermuda, but what we are proposing now with the smaller boat is for all the racing aside from the AC World Series to be in Bermuda. Moving between locations had been a concern, so this benefits the teams in both cost savings and lost time.

Looking forward, if we downscaled the boats, it would open up the possibility in future America’s Cup editions of having events in multiple venues around the world. These boats would be a lot more transportable. But for this edition, the AC World Series will remain in the AC45 with foils as has previously been agreed, and then we would use the downscaled boat in 2017 beginning with the AC Qualifiers and then through to the AC Match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Americas cup is by fundamental definition a design contest. Any holder who trys to make it something else -- with the collusion of the challenge or not --is failing in their duty of care and open to a legal challenge. Any 'cup' contest that is not a competition of design evaluated on the water is open to future challenhe.

 

Although the AC is understood by most as being primarily a design contest, not only is there no language in the DoG prohibiting partial or even full OD, but there is language that makes it legally possible by Mutual Consent.

 

If you want to go "sea layer" on ACEA and legally challenge them, you have to come up with some explicit language of the DoG as basis for a legal argument. Your personal view on what AC is or should be does NOT constitute such a basis.

 

By "understood" you mean the clear view of other owners of the America that they where setting out to demonstrate the superiority of America yacht design?

 

May be I've missed something?

 

1958: the word "constructed" wherever it appeared in the Deed of Gift of the America’s Cup shall always be construed as "designed and built"

 

1980: A yacht shall be deemed to be "designed" in a country if the designers of the yacht’s hull, rig and sails shall be nationals of that country

 

1982: A foreign designer—however he is designated—participating in the design of a boat or a sail would violate both the letter and spirit of the above Resolution, and any boat or sail so designed would be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition. Similarly, a hull or sails which are merely copies of those of a foreign designer would also be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition

 

1990 - 2: However, no person may claim dual or multiple nationality. If a person satisfies the conditions of nationality for more than one country, he shall elect and declare a single nationality, and may participate only on behalf of the country whose nationality he declares.

 

 

In other words according to the DoG and the resolutions of the trustees the hull, rig and sails shall be designed by nationals solely of the challenging country who may be nationals of only one country and the involvement of a none national designed makes the design invalid for the AC.

 

That leaves the possibility of OD foils or a change in heart by the trustees at total odds with everything that has gone before. ... plus a shit fight over whether a wing is a sail.

 

 

 

. . . go boy go . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so...here is the proposal.

 

One design hull (including board and rudder cases)

One design wing

open foils

open rudder

 

48 feet long

Hulls and wings built by each team

Strict manufacturing controls by ACEA (on site inspection, bar coded parts, everything weighed, etc)

Teams allowed to purchase platform, wings from other teams (maybe just 'assembled in their country', but not sure anyone cares about country of origin anymore

 

Disappointed by OD wing, means all teams are locked up in the views of a third party on a critical component.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any organized yacht Club of a foreign country, incorporated, patented, or licensed by the legislature, admiralty or other executive department, having for its annual regatta an ocean water course on the sea, or on an arm of the sea, or one which combines both, shall always be entitled to the right of sailing a match for this Cup with a yacht or vessel propelled by sails only and constructed in the country to which the challenging Club belongs, against any one yacht or vessel constructed in the country of the Club holding the Cup. The competing yachts or vessels, if of one mast, shall be not less than sixty-five forty-four feet nor more than ninety feet on the load water line; if of more than one mast, they shall be not less than eighty feet nor more than one hundred and fifteen feet on the load water line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An oped (and a response)

America's Cup: Why Ben Ainslie is Team New Zealand's worst nightmare

 

30 Mar 2015

 

Without Emirates Team New Zealand, the 34thAmerica's Cup in San Francisco would have been an unmitigated disaster. If Luna Rossa or Artemis Racing had been the challenger, Oracle would have won every race by at least five minutes and the concept of high-speed foiling catamarans would have been consigned to the scrap heap.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Americas cup is by fundamental definition a design contest. Any holder who trys to make it something else -- with the collusion of the challenge or not --is failing in their duty of care and open to a legal challenge. Any 'cup' contest that is not a competition of design evaluated on the water is open to future challenhe.

 

Although the AC is understood by most as being primarily a design contest, not only is there no language in the DoG prohibiting partial or even full OD, but there is language that makes it legally possible by Mutual Consent.

 

If you want to go "sea layer" on ACEA and legally challenge them, you have to come up with some explicit language of the DoG as basis for a legal argument. Your personal view on what AC is or should be does NOT constitute such a basis.

 

By "understood" you mean the clear view of other owners of the America that they where setting out to demonstrate the superiority of America yacht design?

May be I've missed something?

 

1958: the word "constructed" wherever it appeared in the Deed of Gift of the America’s Cup shall always be construed as "designed and built"

 

1980: A yacht shall be deemed to be "designed" in a country if the designers of the yacht’s hull, rig and sails shall be nationals of that country

 

1982: A foreign designer—however he is designated—participating in the design of a boat or a sail would violate both the letter and spirit of the above Resolution, and any boat or sail so designed would be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition. Similarly, a hull or sails which are merely copies of those of a foreign designer would also be ineligible for use in America’s Cup competition

 

1990 - 2: However, no person may claim dual or multiple nationality. If a person satisfies the conditions of nationality for more than one country, he shall elect and declare a single nationality, and may participate only on behalf of the country whose nationality he declares.

 

 

In other words according to the DoG and the resolutions of the trustees the hull, rig and sails shall be designed by nationals solely of the challenging country who may be nationals of only one country and the involvement of a none national designed makes the design invalid for the AC.

 

That leaves the possibility of OD foils or a change in heart by the trustees at total odds with everything that has gone before. ... plus a shit fight over whether a wing is a sail.

 

 

Go to court with that :)

 

Edit: remember who designed, built and sailed the vessels that won the Cup in the last decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Edit: remember who designed, built and sailed the vessels that won the Cup in the last decade.

 

Makes you wonder why they went to all that trouble to build them in the challenging country doesn't it??

 

Designers and sailors qualified by a pretty shallow residence requirement by chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the best would have been a smaller boat without OD in order to let creativity win the Cup.

If the OD package fails, what happens then ? And what is left of the AC ?

 

However this is a proposal, it will probably be negotiated, competitors may find an agreement on a 48 ft boat with less OD parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turns out this was a good scroop too, from last week on another site

 

 


Just off the phone with Pete Melvin.

He's involved with the redesign program and whats being proposed here. Basically, the teams already running the AC 45 Turbos have come to the realization
that the boats are plenty fast and a 62' might be overkill. What they are proposing is using AC 45 parts in the new boat, which possibly would have hull extensions
implemented for longitudinal stability, (less down the mine shaft business) and major cost savings. This might help some teams stay in the game and encourage others
who could afford $10~$15 million for a campaign. They pretty much have 1 week to sort out the numbers ans assess and vote.

While some teams have already begun the tooling for the 62' hulls might object, Pete notes that the original calcs for the 62' vs the 72' were only 5% slower on average around the course,
the new thinking is 50 knots would be possible, but at what costs? With the revamped AC 45 turbo's, that might be possible anyways. The bonus for the teams, they would have spare hulls
around without major expense, which could be a major asset!

Pete noted that this is the last feasible opportunity for teams to make a decision one way or another...

Stay tuned...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hesitated to put up something in the intro about 1 April because I didn't want to remind anyone that Wednesday's stories will be bogus but my phone has been blowing up for an hour with people asking me 'april fool's?'

 

 

 

First reaction when I red this was: April fools day is on Wednesday - this is two days early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I hesitated to put up something in the intro about 1 April because I didn't want to remind anyone that Wednesday's stories will be bogus but my phone has been blowing up for an hour with people asking me 'april fool's?'

 

 

 

First reaction when I red this was: April fools day is on Wednesday - this is two days early.

 

Sorry for blowing it.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well , I hope that something comes out of the new design that will trickle down to the puddle jumper crowd,,,,,,, me. May be they will design a foiling Sabot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well , I hope that something comes out of the new design that will trickle down to the puddle jumper crowd,,,,,,, me. May be they will design a foiling Sabot!

Such a great idea:

 

Get a cast off foil from one of these new mini AC Racers - cut off the top - bore a hole for the leeboard bolt - and away, silver!

 

Moths will have nothin on the flyin shoe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the best would have been a smaller boat without OD in order to let creativity win the Cup.

If the OD package fails, what happens then ? And what is left of the AC ?

 

However this is a proposal, it will probably be negotiated, competitors may find an agreement on a 48 ft boat with less OD parts.

 

 

 

The AC today exists in name only. All history is marketing with no relation to reality.

 

OD is the only way to get the five existing teams on the line. OD is definitely a bailout for TNZ, and Patricio will most likely abandon his fatwa, and join the party. One of the most interesting developments is the Japan sock puppet. Here's hoping it comes through, giving TS the chance for the helm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How much does the new rule differ from the AC62?

 

Platform was OD for the 62.

Wing was OD for the 62.

Platform not OD.

 

 

Wing exterior shape, therefore nr. elements etc. was OD for 62. I am not sure about the internal workings. I think that and structure of wing was up to the teams, with weight and CG limits. The foils, boats, systems was all open to design with a tight box rule.

 

Now with the 48 (yawn) OD everything but foil shapes and laminates sure ain't much. Just enough is up to the teams that if anything breaks, the ACEA cannot be the reason.

 

What a farce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if today's news on Prada's latest results, and their stated intention to cut costs, will impact their decision.

 

Ouch. http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/06/06/prada-dives-as-it-adjusts-to-new-norm-in-chinese-demand/

 

I'd wondered a couple of days ago whether there was more to Luna Rossa's stance than was yet apparent.

 

It's a bit much really expecting a publicly listed company to pay for the boss' rather expensive hobby, especially at times like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wonder if today's news on Prada's latest results, and their stated intention to cut costs, will impact their decision.

Ouch. http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/06/06/prada-dives-as-it-adjusts-to-new-norm-in-chinese-demand/

 

I'd wondered a couple of days ago whether there was more to Luna Rossa's stance than was yet apparent.

 

It's a bit much really expecting a publicly listed company to pay for the boss' rather expensive hobby, especially at times like these.

 

This might be news to readers of the WSJ but not to the Bertelli. He has continued with his AC plans in spite of the downturn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By BA

--

 

Sir Ben Ainslie: We need an America's Cup with long-term future and must make changes despite big team protests I do not just think this is a good idea, I think it is essential. Without making radical changes, the America's Cup will never reach its potential commercially

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/11504747/Sir-Be-Ainslie-We-need-an-Americas-Cup-with-long-term-future-and-must-make-changes-despite-big-team-protests.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

IMO, the best would have been a smaller boat without OD in order to let creativity win the Cup.

If the OD package fails, what happens then ? And what is left of the AC ?

 

However this is a proposal, it will probably be negotiated, competitors may find an agreement on a 48 ft boat with less OD parts.

 

 

 

The AC today exists in name only. All history is marketing with no relation to reality.

 

OD is the only way to get the five existing teams on the line. OD is definitely a bailout for TNZ, and Patricio will most likely abandon his fatwa, and join the party. One of the most interesting developments is the Japan sock puppet. Here's hoping it comes through, giving TS the chance for the helm.

 

Agreed. I understand that they want to reduce the costs but I would prefer an AC raced in free bathtubs than in 50ft OD.

 

IF all this information is true, they are very wrong to think they can make a big event with OD boats, enough are already existing.

I would then understand if LR and NZ bail out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By BA

--

 

Sir Ben Ainslie: We need an America's Cup with long-term future and must make changes despite big team protests I do not just think this is a good idea, I think it is essential. Without making radical changes, the America's Cup will never reach its potential commercially

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/11504747/Sir-Be-Ainslie-We-need-an-Americas-Cup-with-long-term-future-and-must-make-changes-despite-big-team-protests.html

It is the oldest trophy in sport. What potential must it reach? Some want the formula one of sailing. Why choose mario carts? It just is not the real thing.

 

BA and FC cannot make the cut. Sadly neither can Artemis racing. So... move the goal posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you think of a fully one-design AC? Not an AC45, but a bit bigger. NO

 

What about a 1D platform, 1D wing and open foils? NO

 

What about a 1D platform, open wing, and open foils? NO

 

What about a 1D wing, open platform, and open foils? YES

 

See Red/Bold. I know it might make more sense to have open wing rather than open platform, but we have seen the wings looking pretty damned similar, and given the most probable thing to break to pieces in a boat crash being the wing, and that it would be nice if all the teams could share some spares, dramatically lowering costs, I think 1D wings make more sense than 1D platforms. As for the platform, I know it is thought of as little more than a foil/wing delivery system these days, but the platform is still a place where the boats can look considerably different. Give me a box rule (length/width/maybe some section requirements) for the platform, and let the teams have fun with it. Dropping to 48', or whatever, along with 1d wings, is already going to be such a massive cost reduction, let the teams tinker with platform, rudders, and foils (including the foil boxes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only took him 8 years but it seems clear Cousin Coutts has realized his World Sailing League dream. Who is Cousin Coutts going to get to lead the ACEA oversight of the OD components? Paul "No Stache" Cayard?

 

WetHog :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the commercial potential for the AC? Team owners raking in the dough like in football? Maybe that has something to do with the problem. Prada seems to be spending advertising dough, while OR guys are possibly looking to turn this thing into a way of creating income from the event it's self.
As for the rule changes, maybe they are just dialing in the plan for a good challenge (obviously financial would also have an influence too). Lots of inventing going on since stable foiling became a given for the AC cats.
i didn't follow the 12 meters much, but it seemed like there wasn't that much speed difference in the boats. This OD aspect will keep the boats closer in speed, but there could still be a faster boat if some aspects are left open to team design.
Hopefully the Italians will come around after an initial emotional response. The way the subject was handled may have been a problem for them, possibly.
The control systems were supposed to be a good part of the edge that OR had/has. If they one design control systems it seems to show OR isn't doing all this to seal up their chances of keeping the cup. They seem to be doing stuff that actually evens up the playing field. Choosing a venue with shifty winds kind of makes it any one's game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fully in favour of this proposal as it is the best way for another team to win the thing away from Larry. Even better if it's a billionaire prepared to turn the AC back into a no-holds-barred spectacle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty soon we will hear that for the AC to be commercially viable, it has to be fleet racing

this.

 

In Olympic classes. ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World Sailing League = Stolen America's Cup name, oldest trophy in sports and insulting to GLS. His family should take the name, trophy and DOG away from them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty soon we will hear that for the AC to be commercially viable, it has to be fleet racing

 

That was the first part of the hijack by Coutts, the Red Bullshit Youth America's Cup.

 

He let a sugar water company buy the title rights to the AC, stick the word youth in front of it, and then hold an event that was not a match race.

 

Running the America's Cup in smaller one design boats is like the Kentucky Derby being only shetland ponies on the race track because they eat less hay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By BA

--

 

Sir Ben Ainslie: We need an America's Cup with long-term future and must make changes despite big team protests I do not just think this is a good idea, I think it is essential. Without making radical changes, the America's Cup will never reach its potential commercially

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/11504747/Sir-Be-Ainslie-We-need-an-Americas-Cup-with-long-term-future-and-must-make-changes-despite-big-team-protests.html

His take on the OD parts

 

--

The America’s Cup – like Formula One – has to be a design race as well as a race on the water. That is what attracts some of the world’s best engineers – people such Adrian Newey, who has committed to the Ben Ainslie Racing project – to the sport. I am all in favour of standardising certain elements – the platform, the wing, the hull shapes, the crossbeam. All of this would help to reduce costs. But you must leave areas for development, for instance the foils, the daggerboards, the rudders and the control systems.

--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much does the new rule differ from the AC62?

 

Platform was OD for the 62.

Wing was OD for the 62.

Restrictive rule - but neither was OD, in it's normal (non-AC) usage

 

One designer's rule might be (have been) a better way to put it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the commercial potential for the AC? Team owners raking in the dough like in football? Maybe that has something to do with the problem. Prada seems to be spending advertising dough, while OR guys are possibly looking to turn this thing into a way of creating income from the event it's self.

As for the rule changes, maybe they are just dialing in the plan for a good challenge (obviously financial would also have an influence too). Lots of inventing going on since stable foiling became a given for the AC cats.

i didn't follow the 12 meters much, but it seemed like there wasn't that much speed difference in the boats. This OD aspect will keep the boats closer in speed, but there could still be a faster boat if some aspects are left open to team design.

Hopefully the Italians will come around after an initial emotional response. The way the subject was handled may have been a problem for them, possibly.

The control systems were supposed to be a good part of the edge that OR had/has. If they one design control systems it seems to show OR isn't doing all this to seal up their chances of keeping the cup. They seem to be doing stuff that actually evens up the playing field. Choosing a venue with shifty winds kind of makes it any one's game.

 

Hard for me to believe the control systems will be one design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By BA

--

 

Sir Ben Ainslie: We need an America's Cup with long-term future and must make changes despite big team protests I do not just think this is a good idea, I think it is essential. Without making radical changes, the America's Cup will never reach its potential commercially

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/11504747/Sir-Be-Ainslie-We-need-an-Americas-Cup-with-long-term-future-and-must-make-changes-despite-big-team-protests.html

 

Now that's just embarrassing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is the commercial potential for the AC? Team owners raking in the dough like in football? Maybe that has something to do with the problem. Prada seems to be spending advertising dough, while OR guys are possibly looking to turn this thing into a way of creating income from the event it's self.

As for the rule changes, maybe they are just dialing in the plan for a good challenge (obviously financial would also have an influence too). Lots of inventing going on since stable foiling became a given for the AC cats.

i didn't follow the 12 meters much, but it seemed like there wasn't that much speed difference in the boats. This OD aspect will keep the boats closer in speed, but there could still be a faster boat if some aspects are left open to team design.

Hopefully the Italians will come around after an initial emotional response. The way the subject was handled may have been a problem for them, possibly.

The control systems were supposed to be a good part of the edge that OR had/has. If they one design control systems it seems to show OR isn't doing all this to seal up their chances of keeping the cup. They seem to be doing stuff that actually evens up the playing field. Choosing a venue with shifty winds kind of makes it any one's game.

 

Hard for me to believe the control systems will be one design.

 

As I was saying about control systems...

 

Quoting Ben Ainslie here.

I'm all in favour of standardising certain elements ­ the platform, the wing, the hull shapes, the crossbeam. All of this would help to reduce costs. But you must leave areas for development, for instance the foils, the daggerboards, the rudders, aerodynamic fairings and the control systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

By BA

--

 

Sir Ben Ainslie: We need an America's Cup with long-term future and must make changes despite big team protests I do not just think this is a good idea, I think it is essential. Without making radical changes, the America's Cup will never reach its potential commercially

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/sailing/11504747/Sir-Be-Ainslie-We-need-an-Americas-Cup-with-long-term-future-and-must-make-changes-despite-big-team-protests.html

 

Now that's just embarrassing!

 

And so transparent. Makes a change I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things were clearly off the rails before this came up. TF and BAR were in danger of falling out, leaving three challengers - the same as last time. If TNZ and LR leave because of this change and Japan comes on board, that leaves four challengers which is better than three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites