MidPack

Poll: Next AC Boat

Next AC Boat?  

636 members have voted

  1. 1. Next AC Boat?

    • Foiling cat very similar to AC35 boats
      191
    • Another foiling multihull
      127
    • Displacement monohull
      140
    • Foiling monohull
      160
    • Other
      18


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MidPack said:

You're wondering why recent initiatives haven't changed a long standing trend?

While the leading edge of the sport has advanced somewhat as you describe more recently, at the local level where overall participation is really determined, for thirty years the old guard has done everything they can to keep the boats and the format the same as the good old days. That's how the leading edge of sailing has recently gotten faster and more technical while the broad sport has declined for thirty plus years. The divide between the leading edge of sailing and what 99% of us see at our local harbors has never been wider, partly thanks to the old guard.

You're absolutely right we can't prove faster boats won't help slow the decline (there are other factors working against sailing - time, expense, family structure, the local old guard) but it's a reasonable assumption given the popularity of extreme sports with younger generations. If displacement monohulls and the same old formats or baby steps from the old norms could help, we wouldn't have seen the huge decline over the last thirty years. Insanity is doing what you've always done and expecting different results.

But your basic points are factually wrong. The real extreme sports are NOT very popular with the young generations. The outdoor activities that 18-35 year old non-participant Americans most want to do are camping; bicycling; backpacking; martial arts; climbing; weights; hiking; swimming; working out; kayaking; canoeing; fishing. That's not a list of true extreme sports, with the possible exception of climbing.  I can't find info from the UK but in Australia, the most popular sports kids participate in are swimming, cycling, soccer, basketball, hiking, tennis, cricket, athletics, netball and Australian Rules. There is only one "extreme" sport (surfing) in the top 20.

The facts are clear. The facts are simple. The overwhelming majority of kids do NOT do extreme sports and they do not WANT to do extreme sports.

Secondly to claim that there's some powerful "old guard" holding people back is ignoring what has been happening. Over the past 30 years sailing has thrown ALL the standard keelboats out of the most prestigious events to get smaller disciplines like cat sailing, match racing, windsurfing and skiff sailing in; it's seen industry figures like Seahorse, SA and Ronstan promote foilers; it's started two entire new high-performance Youth sailing disciplines (skiffs and cats) and put kiting into the World Cup; it's seen the major yacht manufacturers (like Beneteau and J) promote sportsboats; it's seen the major dinghy manufacturers (like Vanguard, RS and Laser) spend big bucks marketing skiffs; it's seen the major cat manufacturers try to sell faster spinnaker boats and foilers.

Exactly what more did you want? Did you want the most popular disciplines in the sport thrown out of every event instead of just losing Olympic medals and major events? How much more interference with the free market in the name of ideology do you desire?

Despite all this promotion, the "extreme" side remains a very small proportion of the sport, and in places like England it seems to be dwindling despite the major marketing thrust by the industry with RYA support. 

Thirdly, the "leading edge" has declined as much as the rest of the sport, perhaps more. The Volvo/Whitbread gets about a third as many boats as it used to. The AC gets about as third as many boats as it used to. Over the last 30 years much of skiff sailing has declined. Cat numbers in many countries are down. The "leading edge" high speed cat classes like Tornadoes, Prindle 19s, Mysteres, Nacra 20s, Nacra 5.8 NAs, F18 HT and 18 Squares have vanished in the USA and the growth in As and F18s does not make up for it. Classes like the 29er remain tiny in most countries despite being great boats heavily supported by ISAF.

For thirty years major sailing media, major sailing manufacturers and sailing associations have been promoting the extreme side of the sport, and in that time the sport has shrunk. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is insanity. We need a brave new approach, one that is centred on reality and not hype.

 

PS- have you coached a university sailing team recently? Have you taken a schoolkid or uni student out racing on a high performance boat recently?  Have you introduced a bunch of college students to sailing recently? Do you sail a high performance craft yourself?  If you did those things you may find yourself reassessing the public appeal of extreme sailing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ My kid - and every sailing kid I know - want to go foiling. They're not drawing keel boats all over their school notebooks. We got a quick tour of Comanche yesterday - just an amazing boat, but the first question when we got back to the car: Will they convert that to foils like Hugo Boss? My kid is part of the surfing tribe - we were over in Cali for a couple competitions - but foiling pushes all the right buttons. So I see huge growth potential for the sport there.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next generation of top sailors comes out of kite and windsurf foiling, just because it's the same basic principles but the cost of entry is chump change compared to anything remotely comparable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great - but you're in an unusual area and your kid has an unusual background and lives in an unusual area. Kids on Maui probably dream of tow-in surfing as well, but it's not something they do in West Kirby or the Alster. We used to draw 18 Foot Skiffs in our school notebooks but only one of us really got into them. Single instances can't beat proper large-scale international studies of what motivates kids to get into sports.

Oh, and how much is the kids' interest in sailing in Maui due to the cheap, tough simple Bics and Fevas some of them can sail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I hear ya - the Bics (along with a huge effort by a couple of great guys at the club) definitely improved the LYC jr sailing program, but basically the sailing conditions here are not all that and a bag of chips (all or nothing, thanks to the trades and the volcanic geography), and that's the main limiting factor. I'm guessing the main reason you weren't brought up on mini skiffs - besides the cost -  was because the local conditions didn't warrant developing them. 

And that's the thing about foils - there are relatively cheap ways to start doing it, and the fact that high performance sailing can be done in 8 kts TWS is a game changer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember back after 1983 everybody getting very excited about 12's sailing in Fremantke, because 12's weren't meant ot be able to handle high winds and big seas.

The idea of big foiling monohulls is fantasy land. Nobody has done it. Before the AC72's, people had buiklt large foiling multis even if it were with different foil technology.

If you make the class very much removed from what has already been done, all you do is increase potential development costs. Oracle won in the Ac72's because they spent more money on development, and kept spending. right up until the last race.

All the talk of sail handling is BS. We will never go back to the days of boats having spinnakers. If you are going to get fast monohulls, they will use asymetric kites on bowsprits which are really easy to use compared with the "good old days" when TNZ mamaged to stuff up their kite work in 2007.

I watched the racing from 2007 recently. It was like watching grass grow. I used to think the dial ups were exciting. No they are not. I saw more match racing during the last cup than I saw in 2007. Seeing 650 metres of seperation on a leg when it takes 15-20 minutes to come back together is not interesting. I saw more lead changes in some of the matches (ETNZ vs ART) than we have ever seen before. I think people forget just how much one team used to dominate the old lead mine racing. The 2000 and 2003 matches were a serious yawn fest.

I am not saying it has to be foiling cats, but please don't let it be big lead mines on big courses. Please don't revert to long races where we see one boat follow the other around the course for hours. Whatever happens, the boats need to be inspirational. I never had a burninmg desire to sail an IACC because it simply wasn't different enough to sailing i could do outside of the cup. I want to be in awe of the sailing ability of the crew, with them doing something I know I could never be capable of doing. It also needs to be better than any other series out there and with the new Volvo boats for the race after this one, the new in port racing class they intend to introduce, what is happening in the Extreme series and other series springing up, large lead mines will seem like JAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No mas. We're all just repeating ourselves (ad nauseum in some cases), and choosing facts to suit our POV, self included. And how sailing is doing in some countries, even regions of countries is also leading to apples and oranges discussions. What I know is admittedly US centric, I gather general sailing participation and development in NZ is very different than what I know - just for example, not asking to debate the differences. Like someone said earlier, I look forward to the RNZYS protocol, and think they're good hands.

Share this post


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

Like someone said earlier, I look forward to the RNZYS protocol.

Word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The Jay said:

But your basic points are factually wrong. The real extreme sports are NOT very popular with the young generations. The outdoor activities that 18-35 year old non-participant Americans most want to do are camping; bicycling; backpacking; martial arts; climbing; weights; hiking; swimming; working out; kayaking; canoeing; fishing. That's not a list of true extreme sports, with the possible exception of climbing.  I can't find info from the UK but in Australia, the most popular sports kids participate in are swimming, cycling, soccer, basketball, hiking, tennis, cricket, athletics, netball and Australian Rules. There is only one "extreme" sport (surfing) in the top 20.

The facts are clear. The facts are simple. The overwhelming majority of kids do NOT do extreme sports and they do not WANT to do extreme sports.

Secondly to claim that there's some powerful "old guard" holding people back is ignoring what has been happening. Over the past 30 years sailing has thrown ALL the standard keelboats out of the most prestigious events to get smaller disciplines like cat sailing, match racing, windsurfing and skiff sailing in; it's seen industry figures like Seahorse, SA and Ronstan promote foilers; it's started two entire new high-performance Youth sailing disciplines (skiffs and cats) and put kiting into the World Cup; it's seen the major yacht manufacturers (like Beneteau and J) promote sportsboats; it's seen the major dinghy manufacturers (like Vanguard, RS and Laser) spend big bucks marketing skiffs; it's seen the major cat manufacturers try to sell faster spinnaker boats and foilers.

Exactly what more did you want? Did you want the most popular disciplines in the sport thrown out of every event instead of just losing Olympic medals and major events? How much more interference with the free market in the name of ideology do you desire?

Despite all this promotion, the "extreme" side remains a very small proportion of the sport, and in places like England it seems to be dwindling despite the major marketing thrust by the industry with RYA support. 

Thirdly, the "leading edge" has declined as much as the rest of the sport, perhaps more. The Volvo/Whitbread gets about a third as many boats as it used to. The AC gets about as third as many boats as it used to. Over the last 30 years much of skiff sailing has declined. Cat numbers in many countries are down. The "leading edge" high speed cat classes like Tornadoes, Prindle 19s, Mysteres, Nacra 20s, Nacra 5.8 NAs, F18 HT and 18 Squares have vanished in the USA and the growth in As and F18s does not make up for it. Classes like the 29er remain tiny in most countries despite being great boats heavily supported by ISAF.

For thirty years major sailing media, major sailing manufacturers and sailing associations have been promoting the extreme side of the sport, and in that time the sport has shrunk. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is insanity. We need a brave new approach, one that is centred on reality and not hype.

 

PS- have you coached a university sailing team recently? Have you taken a schoolkid or uni student out racing on a high performance boat recently?  Have you introduced a bunch of college students to sailing recently? Do you sail a high performance craft yourself?  If you did those things you may find yourself reassessing the public appeal of extreme sailing.

 

You've chosen your "facts" just as selectively as anyone here. Suggesting everyone else is just factually wrong relies on your selections. I've posted volumes of facts with links to support them in the past, frankly I'm tired of doing it. People just pick their own facts anyway, like with politics.

And as for the health of junior and university sailing programs, it seems they are doing reasonably well in the US in many regions. The folks who instruct and support those programs are doing/have done their part to keep sailing going, hats off to them, I gather you're one of them. However, in the US at least, that has not been translating to adult sailors and boat owners in anywhere near replacement rate much less growth. Some argue the platforms juniors are exposed to, still Opti's and 420's at many financially challenged YC's, are a big part of the translation to adult sailors problem. Probably one of many more. The whole industry has contracted substantially in the US - boatbuilders, marine equipment/electronics, sail lofts, chandeliers, etc. Some of us were concerned about it, maybe others have already concluded it's inevitable and therefore not worth debating. I'm wondering...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find any links you posted that give factual support to a claim that most kids prefer "extreme" sports. I can find reports from three countries that show the opposite, and I've sat down and discussed the issue with academics from three universities who study the field and read the works of others from other countries. I'm not just posting random links.

I can't find any links you posted to support a claim that the "old guard" who have let the most popular form of sailing get thrown out of the Olympics, the VOR and the AC and have promoted skiffs, cats and foilers. I suppose it gets down to respect in some ways - I respect the people who sail 'conventional' boats because I know a lot of them and I know they are not fools or conservatives. They sail the boats they sail because they work better for most people.

Kids are exposed to Optis and 420s at many clubs in NZ, the UK, Australia and Germany. Kids at many of those clubs prefer them to more "extreme" boats. The vast majority (85% at national level) of Australian kids and many British and Kiwis kids sail the same sort of boats that kids from the US have sailed, like Optis, Lasers, Sabots and 420s. If American kids sail the same sort of platforms as kids from other countries with stronger sailing scenes then why assume the platforms are the problem?

If you haven't sailed high performance boats and haven't sailed with youth or coached them, then maybe you should try it. It gives you an interesting perspective. Fast boats don't attract many people - they often intimidate experienced sailors and non-sailors alike.

Share this post


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

I seem to remember back after 1983 everybody getting very excited about 12's sailing in Fremantke, because 12's weren't meant ot be able to handle high winds and big seas.

The idea of big foiling monohulls is fantasy land. Nobody has done it. Before the AC72's, people had buiklt large foiling multis even if it were with different foil technology.

If you make the class very much removed from what has already been done, all you do is increase potential development costs. Oracle won in the Ac72's because they spent more money on development, and kept spending. right up until the last race.

All the talk of sail handling is BS. We will never go back to the days of boats having spinnakers. If you are going to get fast monohulls, they will use asymetric kites on bowsprits which are really easy to use compared with the "good old days" when TNZ mamaged to stuff up their kite work in 2007.

I watched the racing from 2007 recently. It was like watching grass grow. I used to think the dial ups were exciting. No they are not. I saw more match racing during the last cup than I saw in 2007. Seeing 650 metres of seperation on a leg when it takes 15-20 minutes to come back together is not interesting. I saw more lead changes in some of the matches (ETNZ vs ART) than we have ever seen before. I think people forget just how much one team used to dominate the old lead mine racing. The 2000 and 2003 matches were a serious yawn fest.

I am not saying it has to be foiling cats, but please don't let it be big lead mines on big courses. Please don't revert to long races where we see one boat follow the other around the course for hours. Whatever happens, the boats need to be inspirational. I never had a burninmg desire to sail an IACC because it simply wasn't different enough to sailing i could do outside of the cup. I want to be in awe of the sailing ability of the crew, with them doing something I know I could never be capable of doing. It also needs to be better than any other series out there and with the new Volvo boats for the race after this one, the new in port racing class they intend to introduce, what is happening in the Extreme series and other series springing up, large lead mines will seem like JAR.

Good post.   The old AC lead mines were interesting to me at the time.  I watched what I could then.....but when I go back and look at replays of America cubed etc now......it is dull compared to the modern era. In the lead mines there were long periods when basically nothing was happening and the race would often be over 45 minutes before the finish. 

There were some great exceptions of close racing that we remember fondly but there was also a lot of grass growing.  

I enjoyed it then but at the same time I enjoy the way the AC has evolved.   My bet is that foiling has come to stay at the AC.

Share this post


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

I seem to remember back after 1983 everybody getting very excited about 12's sailing in Fremantke, because 12's weren't meant ot be able to handle high winds and big seas.

The idea of big foiling monohulls is fantasy land. Nobody has done it. Before the AC72's, people had buiklt large foiling multis even if it were with different foil technology.

If you make the class very much removed from what has already been done, all you do is increase potential development costs. Oracle won in the Ac72's because they spent more money on development, and kept spending. right up until the last race.

All the talk of sail handling is BS. We will never go back to the days of boats having spinnakers. If you are going to get fast monohulls, they will use asymetric kites on bowsprits which are really easy to use compared with the "good old days" when TNZ mamaged to stuff up their kite work in 2007.

I watched the racing from 2007 recently. It was like watching grass grow. I used to think the dial ups were exciting. No they are not. I saw more match racing during the last cup than I saw in 2007. Seeing 650 metres of seperation on a leg when it takes 15-20 minutes to come back together is not interesting. I saw more lead changes in some of the matches (ETNZ vs ART) than we have ever seen before. I think people forget just how much one team used to dominate the old lead mine racing. The 2000 and 2003 matches were a serious yawn fest.

I am not saying it has to be foiling cats, but please don't let it be big lead mines on big courses. Please don't revert to long races where we see one boat follow the other around the course for hours. Whatever happens, the boats need to be inspirational. I never had a burninmg desire to sail an IACC because it simply wasn't different enough to sailing i could do outside of the cup. I want to be in awe of the sailing ability of the crew, with them doing something I know I could never be capable of doing. It also needs to be better than any other series out there and with the new Volvo boats for the race after this one, the new in port racing class they intend to introduce, what is happening in the Extreme series and other series springing up, large lead mines will seem like JAR.

Good post.   The old AC lead mines were interesting to me at the time.  I watched what I could then.....but when I go back and look at replays of America cubed etc now......it is dull compared to the modern era. In the lead mines there were long periods when basically nothing was happening and the race would often be over 45 minutes before the finish. 

There were some great exceptions of close racing that we remember fondly but there was also a lot of grass growing.  

I enjoyed it then but at the same time I enjoy the way the AC has evolved.   My bet is that foiling has come to stay at the AC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, surfsailor said:

 I'm guessing the main reason you weren't brought up on mini skiffs - besides the cost -  was because the local conditions didn't warrant developing them. 

And that's the thing about foils - there are relatively cheap ways to start doing it, and the fact that high performance sailing can be done in 8 kts TWS is a game changer.

My family's been pretty much brought up on "mini skiffs" or fast cats for three generations. It's one reason I'm sure they'll never grow as popular as some other types (like normal dinghies) outside of the places that, as you say, have the right conditions.

Sorry, but with respect in many times and places that people sail, the wind's normally less than 8 knots TWS. I grew up in a high-speed sailing mecca like you, but it can give us pretty unrealistic ideas about the conditions people sail in most places in the world. Formula boards and some skiffs could plane in 8 knots and they didn't really change the whole sailing game - just a tiny bit on the edge.

Share this post


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

I can't find any links you posted that give factual support to a claim that most kids prefer "extreme" sports. I can find reports from three countries that show the opposite, and I've sat down and discussed the issue with academics from three universities who study the field and read the works of others from other countries. I'm not just posting random links.

I can't find any links you posted to support a claim that the "old guard" who have let the most popular form of sailing get thrown out of the Olympics, the VOR and the AC and have promoted skiffs, cats and foilers. I suppose it gets down to respect in some ways - I respect the people who sail 'conventional' boats because I know a lot of them and I know they are not fools or conservatives. They sail the boats they sail because they work better for most people.

Kids are exposed to Optis and 420s at many clubs in NZ, the UK, Australia and Germany. Kids at many of those clubs prefer them to more "extreme" boats. The vast majority (85% at national level) of Australian kids and many British and Kiwis kids sail the same sort of boats that kids from the US have sailed, like Optis, Lasers, Sabots and 420s. If American kids sail the same sort of platforms as kids from other countries with stronger sailing scenes then why assume the platforms are the problem?

If you haven't sailed high performance boats and haven't sailed with youth or coached them, then maybe you should try it. It gives you an interesting perspective. Fast boats don't attract many people - they often intimidate experienced sailors and non-sailors alike.

This is a thread about the next AC Boat, and by extension the recent foiling multis vs various monohulls. By your logic, I guess F1 should be contested in some more ordinary cars.

The links I've provided have been over the years, not recently, this is a long standing debate. You ignore the comments from others that don't suit you and you twist the words of others to suit your POV, e.g. I never said anything about the old guard WRT the Olympics - your construct, not mine.

But I'm done with this thread. But if you want to explain why sailing declined so dramatically in the US, and specifically junior sailors haven't become adult sailors and boat owners in replacement numbers for at least 20 years, and what if anything should be done about it?

Share this post


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

But the future is probably trimarans, which can be designed for the earliest launch (onto the foils) thanks to a missile-like, fast gliding center hull, and which could isolate heave (lifting the entire package) from righting moment by combining a big central foil (heave) with independent foils on the amas (righting moment) a la Maserati. These could have extremely wide beam (IE tons of righting moment, so you could really power them up) with little of the PP risk of cats. The amas themselves would be just large enough to keep the things from falling over at the dock.

My 2 cents.

I salute your imagination, and suspect you are on to something, but if folks find a catamaran novel - not sure what they would make of the machine you describe. But I suppose it makes sense to build a boat around the foils, rather than strap foils onto boat shapes we are comfortable with.

My guess is RNZYS will settle on something to suit their rising stars:  Burling and Tuke. So my assumption is an apparent wind machine, but then I heard a rumor of them looking for a Volvo berth...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what the new boat will be, but after reading Clean's interview with GA it seems obvious that the next boat will be very different than the AC50.  And not because GA said so, but because Clean let loose that Luna Rossa provided the technology to ETNZ for GA's wing control.  The "Luna Rossa auto-pilot".  Based on that, why would Luna Rossa agree to continue with a boat like the AC50 when it gave up its prized technology to ETNZ in order for ETNZ to win?  They wouldn't, or shouldn't.  So does that mean there might be a bone of contention in the protocol negotiations in regards to the next boat?

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is a thread about the next AC boats, let's see more of that discussion.  I would like to see a TP52 style boat in the 70-80' range.  Make it a box rule so that you now have real design challenges.  No canting keels, no foils just sailing with actual sailors.  100% Nationality rule for on the boat crew and boat/foils must be built in Challenging Country.

Share this post


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

If this is a thread about the next AC boats, let's see more of that discussion.  I would like to see a TP52 style boat in the 70-80' range.  Make it a box rule so that you now have real design challenges.  No canting keels, no foils just sailing with actual sailors.  100% Nationality rule for on the boat crew and boat/foils must be built in Challenging Country.

this 100 times over. 

my main issue with the last two AC cycles was that it was wholly unrelatable to what i do.  I don't sail wingsail boats, I don't foil, I don't sail multihulls.  I know that sounds old fashioned but the best part of growing up with the 12s was watching something that I could attain/model as a sailor.  

Share this post


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

this 100 times over. 

my main issue with the last two AC cycles was that it was wholly unrelatable to what i do.  I don't sail wingsail boats, I don't foil, I don't sail multihulls.  I know that sounds old fashioned but the best part of growing up with the 12s was watching something that I could attain/model as a sailor.  

My daughters are currently in sailing camp learning how to sail.  This just in, they are not learning on multi-hulls.  

I have nothing against multi-hulls, but there has to be a way to develop a mono-hull boat that is fast when compared to the old IACC boats.  Half the speed of the AC50's up wind and down would be more than enough to provide sufficient excitement while appealing to the vast majority who sail mono-hull boats.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WetHog said:

My daughters are currently in sailing camp learning how to sail.  This just in, they are not learning on multi-hulls.  

I have nothing against multi-hulls, but there has to be a way to develop a mono-hull boat that is fast when compared to the old IACC boats.  Half the speed of the AC50's up wind and down would be more than enough to provide sufficient excitement while appealing to the vast majority who sail mono-hull boats.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Well, I visit Vietnam quite regularly for what should be an obvious reason to most longer term readers here.

Whenever you ride a motorbike on the streets there, you ride it sloooooowly (particularly in Hanoi and Saigon) because the traffic is insane and the chance of death is pretty high because quite frankly Vietnamese don't follow any formal set of road rules.

HOWEVER, I can promise you that there is plenty of "rubbing" as the motorbikes are often within 10cm of each other, which makes the experience "exciting".

Certainly on the occasions that I have had an unseasoned foreigner on the back of the bike, they have had all the excitement they could manage - and then some!

The lesson from this rambling? You don't need speed to have excitement.

The IACC boats were incredibly exciting to watch in close quarters because they weren't limited to about 20 tacks and gybes for the whole goddamn race!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Well, I visit Vietnam quite regularly for what should be an obvious reason to most longer term readers here.

Whenever you ride a motorbike on the streets there, you ride it sloooooowly (particularly in Hanoi and Saigon) because the traffic is insane and the chance of death is pretty high because quite frankly Vietnamese don't follow any formal set of road rules.

HOWEVER, I can promise you that there is plenty of "rubbing" as the motorbikes are often within 10cm of each other, which makes the experience "exciting".

Certainly on the occasions that I have had an unseasoned foreigner on the back of the bike, they have had all the excitement they could manage - and then some!

The lesson from this rambling? You don't need speed to have excitement.

The IACC boats were incredibly exciting to watch in close quarters because they weren't limited to about 20 tacks and gybes for the whole goddamn race!

If by exciting you mean depressingly uninteresting the IACC's were exciting. I tried to go back and watch some of their races this weekend, fell asleep in the middle, woke up a few minutes later and they were further up the course hadn't tacked, but the gap had closed from 45 to 35 feet. Then I turned it off to watch paint dry, it was far more interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, StumbleNola said:

If by exciting you mean depressingly uninteresting the IACC's were exciting. I tried to go back and watch some of their races this weekend, fell asleep in the middle, woke up a few minutes later and they were further up the course hadn't tacked, but the gap had closed from 45 to 35 feet. Then I turned it off to watch paint dry, it was far more interesting. 

I'm guessing you like playing checkers rather than chess? Because that's the difference between the two types of yacht.

One is designed for those who appreciate tactics and have the patience to see them played out. The other is designed for the "Facebook" generation who have ADHD, can't focus on more than one thing at once and typically for no more than 5 minutes at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jaysper said:

I'm guessing you like playing checkers rather than chess? Because that's the difference between the two types of yacht.

One is designed for those who appreciate tactics and have the patience to see them played out. The other is designed for the "Facebook" generation who have ADHD, can't focus on more than one thing at once and typically for no more than 5 minutes at a time.

Checkers was designed for the Facebook generation? Also, exactly which 'generation' are we in now? Because that should probably be consideration.

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, WetHog said:

My daughters are currently in sailing camp learning how to sail.  This just in, they are not learning on multi-hulls.  

I have nothing against multi-hulls, but there has to be a way to develop a mono-hull boat that is fast when compared to the old IACC boats.  Half the speed of the AC50's up wind and down would be more than enough to provide sufficient excitement while appealing to the vast majority who sail mono-hull boats.

WetHog  :ph34r:

I do understand your point.  But tell me, is there a monohull capable of doing 17 knt  Upwind? In what kind of breeze?

Share this post


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

If this is a thread about the next AC boats, let's see more of that discussion.  I would like to see a TP52 style boat in the 70-80' range.  Make it a box rule so that you now have real design challenges.  No canting keels, no foils just sailing with actual sailors.  100% Nationality rule for on the boat crew and boat/foils must be built in Challenging Country.

+1

Share this post


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

Checkers was designed for the Facebook generation? Also, exactly which 'generation' are we in now? Because that should probably be consideration.

LOL

Well, I reckon you should watch "Black Mirror" - its an excellent tv series about the possible future effects of social media. Its pretty chilling to be honest and to me these beach cats in the AC is a step along the path :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, surfsailor said:

^ I think there are larger social issues than whether or not the AC is run in foiling cats. 

I disagree! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I struggle to see how anybody can claim the IACC racing was exciting. I think some have false memories or aren't comparing with modern day. As said, I have actually watched a number of the old races and the were seriously boring. I admit that is not how I remember them, but times have changed and so has our perception of what is interesting or not.  Let me summarise. I watched 4 races, chosen at random. there was a lead change, yes, one lead change in one race. 3 of the 4 races started with a dial up that lasted for over 2 minutes and which neither gained any advantage. The first upwind was a "drag race" where we saw 2 big boats nearly side by side sailing for over 10 minutes without any serious change in position relative to each other (tell me how that is exciting for anybody). The biggest tacking duel was 5 tacks in about 5 minutes. On 2 occasions, there was separation downwind of more than 500 metres, which meant that for 10 minutes, the boats were in completely different parts of the course and because it was about 10 knots, we were subjected to the most boring footage of the boats trudging along. Anybody starting to watch then would't even know there was a race going on. The manoeuvres some seem to remember so fondly (kite up, gybe with kite and drops) last a matter of seconds and are only interesting when on the very rare occasion they go wrong, which is both unexpected and unforgivable with the practice they do. Also, in this kind of racing, a 100 metre lead was game over. This type of racing has had its day. Please don't condemn us back to it. I will not get up at 3.00am to watch old style AC sailing like I did with this edition. This time around, even in some of the big wins by ETNZ over Oracle, you had the feeling that a bad gybe or tack could see the whole race tighten right back up and every manoeuvre was critical. The matches between ETNZ and Artemis were the best racing I have ever seen. You will not get that in lead mines.

As for the argument that foiling multihulls are too removed from what most sail, that is very weak. F1 cars aren't exactly like the cars we drive on the road or even the cars that are used in most amateur racing, although that misses the point because this isn't just about those who participate themselves. 

While i disliked a lot of what ACEA did and I would not use their race formats, the one thing that did resonate was "the fastest boats with the best sailors". Even if they don't use those words, it needs to remain the mantra. Whatever boats are chosen, they need to be a significant step up from everything else and a bigger TP52 with no canting keel isn't going to be that. The sailing world has moved on so far since 2007 when the event was last sailed in lead mines. There are too many extreme boats out there that it would be very easy for the next AC to seem very tame if the wrong boat is chosen. there is a real risk that the AC will become even less relevant an harder to promote in an era that teams are relying in sponsorship more and more. The direction that events like the Volvo are moving in, and the Extreme series has gone or even the Vende means that the AC has to come up with something truly special. I repeat. Bigger TP52's aren't going to cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ "the fastest boats with the best sailors"

I can't imagine the coming guffaws of laughter if the next boat isn't as fast or faster. Maximum Speed from the wind absolutely is the ultimate Yacht design achievement, here's hoping the technology continues to progress in that direction instead of some commercially Luna Rossa brand 'Grandiose' bullshit direction.

Bruno T's notion of prats dressed up in Red LV pants and White with Blue Stripes LV shirts for clothing, raising and lowering sails and a spinnaker every half hour or so, is as ridiculous a vision as the silly prat dandy that he is.

Share this post


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

^ "the fastest boats with the best sailors"

I can't imagine the coming guffaws of laughter if the next boat isn't as fast or faster. Maximum Speed from the wind absolutely is the ultimate Yacht design achievement, here's hoping the technology continues to progress in that direction instead of some commercially Luna Rossa brand 'Grandiose' bullshit direction.

They do not have to be as fast or faster than this time. That is the wrong thing to benchmark against. They have to be faster than other series going on. If the Volvo, Extreme, MOD70 or Vende, to name just 4 are faster and more spectacular, they will have chosen the wrong boats.

Share this post


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

..... instead of some commercially Luna Rossa brand 'Grandiose' bullshit direction.

Give it a rest - you bashed them when they left, now you are bashing them on their return

I think they have earned the right to help shape the next AC

Given the track record of your own crew how about you leave the spinning and pre-emptive attacks aside - at least until there is something more definitive than your own rumours to discuss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the diversion, Sailman, but the stuff we were talking about was linked to the question. Lots of people keep on calling for "extreme" AC boats because they claim that extreme sports are popular and that "extreme" sailing will help our sport. It seems very relevant to point out that "extreme" sports are normally less popular ones and that the major sports, just like the major disciplines in sailing, are the ones that are easily accessible and not "extreme".

Going "extreme" doesn't make a sport popular. It doesn't make a class popular. It doesn't even make for great ratings - so there's no reason the AC should be "extreme". That leads us to looking at something like the Maxi 72s or a bigger version of them, which would also be in the true AC tradition. 

 

5 hours ago, sailman said:

If this is a thread about the next AC boats, let's see more of that discussion.  I would like to see a TP52 style boat in the 70-80' range.  Make it a box rule so that you now have real design challenges.  No canting keels, no foils just sailing with actual sailors.  100% Nationality rule for on the boat crew and boat/foils must be built in Challenging Country.

 

 

Share this post


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

I'm guessing you like playing checkers rather than chess? Because that's the difference between the two types of yacht.

One is designed for those who appreciate tactics and have the patience to see them played out. The other is designed for the "Facebook" generation who have ADHD, can't focus on more than one thing at once and typically for no more than 5 minutes at a time.

Nope, chess club member in HS, and played chess a lot in college. 

Just to make sure it wasn't my memory I went back and watched the 2000AC*. What a lad of rubbish. The boat that won the start won every race, there were two lead changes in 5 races. The most exciting thing that happened was a crossing situation with a lead change, Prada chose to keep going left, NZ went right, Prada was ahead by more than a boat length. It was an incredible snooze feast. 

i will watch the next one whatever the boats are, but out of 7.5 hours of racing with just two lead changes was somehow more tactical than what we saw in this one is just wrong.

 

though I would agree with getting rid of the reaching start. They were just stupid.

 

* I should point out that I actually watched a 25 minute highlights real of each of the races since I couldn't find the full length videos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Thanks for more of your normally brilliant advice, tinfoil nav. Lmao, that one reminds me of when I stopped bothering to read your posts.

Speculation during the Silly Season is always fun, and despite what fantasies you have going on you are sure as hell no f'ing forumite Police Man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, StumbleNola said:

Nope, chess club member in HS, and played chess a lot in college. 

Just to make sure it wasn't my memory I went back and watched the 2000AC*. What a lad of rubbish. The boat that won the start won every race, there were two lead changes in 5 races. The most exciting thing that happened was a crossing situation with a lead change, Prada chose to keep going left, NZ went right, Prada was ahead by more than a boat length. It was an incredible snooze feast. 

i will watch the next one whatever the boats are, but out of 7.5 hours of racing with just two lead changes was somehow more tactical than what we saw in this one is just wrong.

 

though I would agree with getting rid of the reaching start. They were just stupid.

 

* I should point out that I actually watched a 25 minute highlights real of each of the races since I couldn't find the full length videos. 

The 2000 cup itself is a bad example because of the lopsided nature.

What about the LVC? What about 1987 LVC (not cup itself again)? LVC '95? Or LVC & Cup match '07?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AR vs SBTJ Semi Final racing in AC35 was by far the most compelling AC CSS race series of the past 20 years, it was dynamite by any measure you could come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jaysper said:

The 2000 cup itself is a bad example because of the lopsided nature.

What about the LVC? What about 1987 LVC (not cup itself again)? LVC '95? Or LVC & Cup match '07?

So other than all those Americas cups that were raced in big monohulls that were terrible they were pretty good? 

If your argument is that well matched boats make for exciting racing then you should be arguing for a OD regatta regardless of the boats they are sailed in. But if the argument is that the AC should be in monohulls because they make for interesting racing then 2000 proves you wrong and you can't just dismiss it and all the past regatta's which were lopsided. They are exactly my point, monohulls do not consistently provide close, interesting racing. 

Share this post


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

So other than all those Americas cups that were raced in big monohulls that were terrible they were pretty good? 

If your argument is that well matched boats make for exciting racing then you should be arguing for a OD regatta regardless of the boats they are sailed in. But if the argument is that the AC should be in monohulls because they make for interesting racing then 2000 proves you wrong and you can't just dismiss it and all the past regatta's which were lopsided. They are exactly my point, monohulls do not consistently provide close, interesting racing. 

I dont see monohulls any more or less competitive. This americas cup was in effect a OD cup. using a OD is going to produce close racing. A OD in monohulls will produce simillar results.  However when it comes to visual impact the CATS win big time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, StumbleNola said:

So other than all those Americas cups that were raced in big monohulls that were terrible they were pretty good? 

If your argument is that well matched boats make for exciting racing then you should be arguing for a OD regatta regardless of the boats they are sailed in. But if the argument is that the AC should be in monohulls because they make for interesting racing then 2000 proves you wrong and you can't just dismiss it and all the past regatta's which were lopsided. They are exactly my point, monohulls do not consistently provide close, interesting racing. 

Well, it depends I guess what you mean when we talk AC.

For me, its the whole regatta rather than just the final match.

Share this post


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

I struggle to see how anybody can claim the IACC racing was exciting. I think some have false memories or aren't comparing with modern day. 

But your comparison isn't fair because you are comparing events sailed inshore with very short courses with artificial boundaries and very short timeframes. That's not a valid comparison of mono v multi, it's a comparison of race formats.

Quote

As for the argument that foiling multihulls are too removed from what most sail, that is very weak. F1 cars aren't exactly like the cars we drive on the road or even the cars that are used in most amateur racing, although that misses the point because this isn't just about those who participate themselves. 

 

People keep on bringing up the F1 analogy and no one ever explains why we should model sailing off a shrinking discipline in a small sport, which is what F1 racing is. Why not learn instead from sports that get far more participants overall, or far more participants compared to the available funding?

And what lessons should we learn from F1 anyway? The idea that you should put obstacles on the track to slow people down? That a sport where a top team like McLaren can't find a major sponsor is good? That we should ban things like ABS, which is standard in road cars?  That we should have a power source that is dramatically limited in size, and produces 2/3 as much power as it did in the 1980s?  If F1 teaches us anything it could teach us that without lots of restrictions you don't have a sport.

 

"While i disliked a lot of what ACEA did and I would not use their race formats, the one thing that did resonate was "the fastest boats with the best sailors". Even if they don't use those words, it needs to remain the mantra. Whatever boats are chosen, they need to be a significant step up from everything else and a bigger TP52 with no canting keel isn't going to be that. The sailing world has moved on so far since 2007 when the event was last sailed in lead mines. There are too many extreme boats out there that it would be very easy for the next AC to seem very tame if the wrong boat is chosen."

There's been lots of more extreme boats out there for years. Back in 12 Metre days there were extreme boats like the maxi foiler Charles Heidsick; the wing-masted foiling "slanting proa" Rozieres; the "sliding proa" speed record contender Slingshot; the 85 foot "Formula One" shorthanded maxis like Royale, Fleury Michon VIII, Lada Poch, Jet Services IV, and the Irens 60 Fujicolour.  The 18 Foot Skiffs were at their most radical, with wings up to 30 feet wide and rigs about 50% taller than the current boats.  There were 40+ Tornado cats racing at the NAs, plus good fleets of Nacra 5.8 NAs, Prindle 19s, and 18 Squares. The Formula 40 circuit was in its brief bloom. A Volvo/Whitbread boat like GBII, UBS or Flyer (II) would have kicked an AC boat upwind and down. And windsurfing was extreme and still enormous, with 100,000 boards sold per year in Germany alone and people doing loops and using wingmasts.

The huge interest in fast cats and windsurfers and the strong French multi scene (about 100 boats at La Trinite, I think) meant that there were probably more "extreme" sailors out there than there are today. If moving to extreme sailing was going to help the sport then shorthanded multi sailing and windsurfing in particular would be even bigger today. They're not.

We've already had three rounds of people claiming "these new extreme AC boats are going to make the AC and sailing bigger". It hasn't worked. There are fewer entries and TV ratings are crap for such an expensive sport with such huge support from Ellison.

How many more times do we have to believe the claim before we can say it hasn't worked and we should try another tack?  

ch_heids_tri26505.jpg

download.jpg

images.jpg

Slingshot.jpg

images.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the LOVE....

First of all, the past few ACs we have seen the COMBINATION of technological advancement AND sailing skill reach the highest levels, with massive innovation of sailing.  Even with the tight rules on the platform that severely curtailed interest in the boats this past time, ETNZ in particular, was able to bring excitement and drama on the design AND sailing fronts.  This, to me, is the essence of what the America's Cup was created for.  The Auld Mug is a test of sailing skill AND boat / sail design, in no particular order, but involving BOTH.  Who the fuck cares when it comes to boat design and build when it comes to such a constraint on performance as to dictate a lead-hauling 52' monohulls with no apendages and no canting?  What EXCITING design and innovation that would bring....  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

No, to make the next Cup an advance on this, you can't go from "wow!, check that out" to "look at those fat assed human ballasts move from side to side on those identical slow boats".

Innovation is most interesting when it is associated with high performance, not minuscule refinements on low-performance machines.  There is no high-performance when restricted to monohulls without foils or canting, and just because many people do their beercan races in such, does not mean that it is in any way in character with what the America's Cup should be.  The idea of limiting the boat to monohulls at all, is stupid.... better to just have max length and sail area, then let the designers go crazy.

Share this post


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

I do understand your point.  But tell me, is there a monohull capable of doing 17 knt  Upwind? In what kind of breeze?

Not sure but I bet some of the designers/engineers affiliated with AC teams would like a chance to try and design one.  

And let me clarify, I am not a close minded mono-hull ancient.  What I really want is an end to the OD boats we saw for AC35.  Part of the allure of the AC for me over the last 30 years has been the differences in boats per cycle and who's gamble ultimately paid off in regards to boat design.  Multi's or Mono's, so long as that returns I will be happy.

Having said that, based on Clean's revelation that ETNZ's wing control difference maker was actually provided by Luna Rossa, I can't see Luna Rossa agreeing to any boat that will allow ETNZ to continue to develop their winning boat design for AC35.  Or at least agree to a boat that continues the stored energy system Luna Rossa gave to ETNZ. How can they?

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be totally reasonable to eliminate stored energy but open up the design.  I would prefer to throw LR a bone by going back to a ROUGH AC62 rule, no restrictions on hull/wing shapes, allowing foil flaps, etc.  Hopefully their work on their AC62 at the beginning of AC35 could be capitalized, somehow.  Next best would be going with the general dimensions of the AC50, but eliminating hull/wing-shape restrictions, and allowing flaps.

Again, widening the allowable wind range and sea state, and requiring an open water proving passage for the platform, with limits on alterations to the platform following the proving.

The idea of budget limits is interesting.... not sure how I feel about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently watched "Wind" again, and even knowing the ending since 1987 I found it more exciting than the Scalextrix flyers in their protected track of a race course.

Share this post


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

I think it would be totally reasonable to eliminate stored energy but open up the design.  I would prefer to throw LR a bone by going back to a ROUGH AC62 rule, no restrictions on hull/wing shapes, allowing foil flaps, etc.  Hopefully their work on their AC62 at the beginning of AC35 could be capitalized, somehow.  Next best would be going with the general dimensions of the AC50, but eliminating hull/wing-shape restrictions, and allowing flaps.

Again, widening the allowable wind range and sea state, and requiring an open water proving passage for the platform, with limits on alterations to the platform following the proving.

The idea of budget limits is interesting.... not sure how I feel about that.

Agree ,mostly with the open  passage issue. If you eliminate restrictions, you can't expect limiting budget, IMO

Share this post


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

Not sure but I bet some of the designers/engineers affiliated with AC teams would like a chance to try and design one.  

And let me clarify, I am not a close minded mono-hull ancient.  What I really want is an end to the OD boats we saw for AC35.  Part of the allure of the AC for me over the last 30 years has been the differences in boats per cycle and who's gamble ultimately paid off in regards to boat design.  Multi's or Mono's, so long as that returns I will be happy.

We did not have one design boats and the differences between the boats was probably more noticable than we ever saw with classes like the IACC. It is only the few that realise thee extent of the one design components (most are on here!). Look at Oracle and ETNZ. Everybody could see they were very different boats, one with cyclors and one with grinders. It was very obvious that they had different foils and it was reasonably obvious that they had different aero packages. Watching AC32 you could barely see the differences between TNZ and Alinghi. For those who like the technical side, there was far more of interest in this edition than with AC32, which surprised me. I really don't think the one design elements made as big an impact on either technical development or the spectacle that some thought it would. If the hulls had been more open like in the previous cup, I don't think we would have seen any real difference due to that, because the hulls didn't touchdown enough. What the one design element did bring was a degree of structural integrity combined with cost and time reductions. Despite being against it initially, I think it was more successful than anticipated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

We did not have one design boats and the differences between the boats was probably more noticable than we ever saw with classes like the IACC. It is only the few that realise thee extent of the one design components (most are on here!). Look at Oracle and ETNZ. Everybody could see they were very different boats, one with cyclors and one with grinders. It was very obvious that they had different foils and it was reasonably obvious that they had different aero packages. Watching AC32 you could barely see the differences between TNZ and Alinghi. For those who like the technical side, there was far more of interest in this edition than with AC32, which surprised me. I really don't think the one design elements made as big an impact on either technical development or the spectacle that some thought it would. If the hulls had been more open like in the previous cup, I don't think we would have seen any real difference due to that, because the hulls didn't touchdown enough. What the one design element did bring was a degree of structural integrity combined with cost and time reductions. Despite being against it initially, I think it was more successful than anticipated.

Except for a lot of people in NZ no one else in the world watched what you think was ' more successful than anticipated....

Share this post


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

^ "the fastest boats with the best sailors"

I can't imagine the coming guffaws of laughter if the next boat isn't as fast or faster. Maximum Speed from the wind absolutely is the ultimate Yacht design achievement, here's hoping the technology continues to progress in that direction instead of some commercially Luna Rossa brand 'Grandiose' bullshit direction.

Bruno T's notion of prats dressed up in Red LV pants and White with Blue Stripes LV shirts for clothing, raising and lowering sails and a spinnaker every half hour or so, is as ridiculous a vision as the silly prat dandy that he is.

Pinot kicked in again..

BT doesn't have 'notion' of guys dressed as you suggest, just your spin on anything different to lazza vision, which in case you missed it didn't work for anyone but you and about twenty posters here...

As for 'prat' you don't really know what it means but you define it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, ro! said:

Except for a lot of people in NZ no one else in the world watched what you think was ' more successful than anticipated....

You seem to be dumping on AC35 as a commercial flop. But who the fuck cares?

the point is that it was a brilliant regatta. 

I prefer my AC regattas to be abject commercial disasters: The most money thrown away on the coolest boats. That's success. 

Share this post


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

I recently watched "Wind" again, and even knowing the ending since 1987 I found it more exciting than the Scalextrix flyers in their protected track of a race course.

Scalectrix flyers! LOL!

Share this post


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

Having said that, based on Clean's revelation that ETNZ's wing control difference maker was actually provided by Luna Rossa, I can't see Luna Rossa agreeing to any boat that will allow ETNZ to continue to develop their winning boat design for AC35.  Or at least agree to a boat that continues the stored energy system Luna Rossa gave to ETNZ. How can they?

One question is if Luna Rossa also provided the developers to ENTZ. They did some staff transfer but in which areas? 
If ENTZ had to share their advancements (on LR tech) as part of the deal there is less reason to pivot into a totally different boat for the next edition. If anything it would help to keep the game between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jaysper said:

The 2000 cup itself is a bad example because of the lopsided nature.

What about the LVC? What about 1987 LVC (not cup itself again)? LVC '95? Or LVC & Cup match '07?

No it's not, that's how most AC and LVC racing has been. Though they were memorable, the exciting tactical battles were the exception. The history is documented for all to see, contrary to the selective memory throughout the thread.

Look at every AC all the way back to the J/Class and almost every one was lopsided, many shutouts, with the exception of 1983 and 2013. With AC35 there were some exciting tactical challenger and AC races, but many weren't close - just like almost every AC ever. Let's quit pointing to the exciting monohull AC's as typical, they weren't. 

I also watched a 2000 race between LR and NZ (first race I think) and it was boring as hell. The dialup took forever, NZ won the start and stretched away on the first leg and never looked back. On the last leg Coutts hands the wheel over to Butterworth so he can take his sweater off. I'm surprised he didn't put on a blue blazer and light up a pipe too.

IMG_1186.PNG

Share this post


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

We did not have one design boats and the differences between the boats was probably more noticable than we ever saw with classes like the IACC. It is only the few that realise thee extent of the one design components (most are on here!). Look at Oracle and ETNZ. Everybody could see they were very different boats, one with cyclors and one with grinders. It was very obvious that they had different foils and it was reasonably obvious that they had different aero packages. Watching AC32 you could barely see the differences between TNZ and Alinghi. For those who like the technical side, there was far more of interest in this edition than with AC32, which surprised me. I really don't think the one design elements made as big an impact on either technical development or the spectacle that some thought it would. If the hulls had been more open like in the previous cup, I don't think we would have seen any real difference due to that, because the hulls didn't touchdown enough. What the one design element did bring was a degree of structural integrity combined with cost and time reductions. Despite being against it initially, I think it was more successful than anticipated.

The differences between ETNZ and Alinghi in AC32 seem pretty obvious:

r2uxdy.jpg

I could post more pictures, but the above proves the point nicely.  

Sure ETNZ had cyclors, and there were different foils but the platforms (can't really call them boats can we?) were pretty indistinguishable.  I am not a fan of that.  I like variety. ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jorge said:

Agree ,mostly with the open  passage issue. If you eliminate restrictions, you can't expect limiting budget, IMO

No, but if you have to design and build for a very wide range of wind and sea state, you are not rewarded for pissing away insane amounts on design that is limited to tiny elements/conditions.  Further, a team may end up focusing on something innovative that works but does not require the same insane amounts of money... something that is hard to do when the rule is very tight or OD.  In the end, I believe the AC is most interesting when development is wide open, when teams take big different options, like the big K boat vs S&S, when Cheeze-Zilla goes against DOGZilla, when the Tractor goes against the Bat Boat (and Big Red / Blue, minus the tragedy).  When Australia stormed into New York with a winged keel.....  Sure, 10+ teams is neat, but when those ACs are raced with boring boats, hey don't hold a candle, to me, compared to to the ones where big design differences are involved.  If I had my preference, we would have something more akin to Round the Isle of Wight, or the Golden Gate to Farallones & back, or an equivalent in New Zealand, Australia, Italy or France.  But I would also be fine with the current shortcourse/short race if done in open conditions (wind/seas).

Share this post


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

No, but if you have to design and build for a very wide range of wind and sea state, you are not rewarded for pissing away insane amounts on design that is limited to tiny elements/conditions.  Further, a team may end up focusing on something innovative that works but does not require the same insane amounts of money... something that is hard to do when the rule is very tight or OD.  In the end, I believe the AC is most interesting when development is wide open, when teams take big different options, like the big K boat vs S&S, when Cheeze-Zilla goes against DOGZilla, when the Tractor goes against the Bat Boat (and Big Red / Blue, minus the tragedy).  When Australia stormed into New York with a winged keel.....  Sure, 10+ teams is neat, but when those ACs are raced with boring boats, hey don't hold a candle, to me, compared to to the ones where big design differences are involved.  If I had my preference, we would have something more akin to Round the Isle of Wight, or the Golden Gate to Farallones & back, or an equivalent in New Zealand, Australia, Italy or France.  But I would also be fine with the current shortcourse/short race if done in open conditions (wind/seas).

I like the w/l courses, but I agree with you about open development. Why the fuck should billionaires spend a hundred million developing a better TP-52, or spend time in a wind tunnel refining shroud placement to eek out .0001kn of speed. I want the AC to drive real development not continue to refine an already pretty refined class. 

My rules would look a lot like the C-Cat class rules but bigger, 65' max length, a max width, defined race course (open water), and max wind speed (~30kn). After that it's a run what you brung race. If you develop a lightweight fragile flyer predicting light air and smooth water you'll be fast until the boat shatters. if you want a monohull go for it, prove they are faster around the course, or not.

Trimarans, weird foil combinations, wing masts, canting keels, it all works for me. The one caviat is no stored power to manipulate physical objects, 

Share this post


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

My rules would look a lot like the C-Cat class rules but bigger, 65' max length, a max width, defined race course (open water), and max wind speed (~30kn). After that it's a run what you brung race. If you develop a lightweight fragile flyer predicting light air and smooth water you'll be fast until the boat shatters. if you want a monohull go for it, prove they are faster around the course, or not.

Trimarans, weird foil combinations, wing masts, canting keels, it all works for me. The one caviat is no stored power to manipulate physical objects, 

Sounds incredible but prohibitively expensive? I thought that's one of the big reasons they went from 72' to 50' foilers - too few "countries" wanted to enter due to costs. Some of the monohull proposals above of 90' and 100' with foils and the huge crews they'd require suffer the same problem, you'll have a handful of billionaires if that. The AC will always be expensive, but if you want to encourage more players (I do), there's a tradeoff with too much cost. That's exactly why we had the 50' ACC, smaller crews, many one design elements but still plenty of room for development with foils, wind controls, etc. AC35 was on the right track and there is no perfect formula.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MidPack said:

Sounds incredible but prohibitively expensive? I thought that's one of the big reasons they went from 72' to 50' foilers - too few "countries" wanted to enter due to costs. Some of the monohull proposals above of 90' and 100' with foils and the huge crews they'd require suffer the same problem, you'll have a handful of billionaires if that. The AC will always be expensive, but if you want to encourage more players, it can't cost too much. That's exactly why we had the 50' ACC, smaller crews, many one design elements but still plenty of room for development. AC35 was on the right track and there is no perfect formula.

That is the point of the open rules and open seas/wind range.  The HUGE costs and benefits to spending HUGE sums are really on the uber-refinement.  As StumbleNola says, having a big open rule and conditions would allow teams/designers to play with far-out ideas, possibly hoping for narrow range of conditions, and David could then kick Goliath's ass.  Of course, like we see now, the teams with the most $$$ will have an advantage, but that is ALWAYS going to be the case (and I would argue should be the case).  Of course, the bigger the boat, the higher the base cost would be, and it does go up exponentially.  But there is also a minimum size that makes for dramatic, exciting event.  Personally, I think it 60'+, particularly in the current environment of it being the length of the Volvo/IMOCA boats, and wanting the boats to be significantly bigger than ESS/GC32 or whatever cats the Volvo opts for (even though I would still like an ACWS in sub AC-Class boats, so the teams can have regular racing in economical but still fun boats).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, StumbleNola said:

I like the w/l courses, but I agree with you about open development. Why the fuck should billionaires spend a hundred million developing a better TP-52, or spend time in a wind tunnel refining shroud placement to eek out .0001kn of speed. I want the AC to drive real development not continue to refine an already pretty refined class. 

My rules would look a lot like the C-Cat class rules but bigger, 65' max length, a max width, defined race course (open water), and max wind speed (~30kn). After that it's a run what you brung race. If you develop a lightweight fragile flyer predicting light air and smooth water you'll be fast until the boat shatters. if you want a monohull go for it, prove they are faster around the course, or not.

Trimarans, weird foil combinations, wing masts, canting keels, it all works for me. The one caviat is no stored power to manipulate physical objects, 

Agree

Share this post


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

Sounds incredible but prohibitively expensive? I thought that's one of the big reasons they went from 72' to 50' foilers - too few "countries" wanted to enter due to costs. Some of the monohull proposals above of 90' and 100' with foils and the huge crews they'd require suffer the same problem, you'll have a handful of billionaires if that. The AC will always be expensive, but if you want to encourage more players (I do), there's a tradeoff with too much cost. That's exactly why we had the 50' ACC, smaller crews, many one design elements but still plenty of room for development with foils, wind controls, etc. AC35 was on the right track and there is no perfect formula.

The cost of an AC50 is right at about $3.5-3.7m USD ($5m NZD) according to the builder complete with a wing, a set of foils, and base hardware. This is roughly double what a TP-52 costs btw. Even for ETNZ the cost of the boat was not a major player in their overall campaign budget. It's everything else that surrounds the boat that drives the cost up and those are true no matter what boat the AC is raced in. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, GauchoGreg said:

Of course, like we see now, the teams with the most $$$ will have an advantage, but that is ALWAYS going to be the case (and I would argue should be the case).  Of course, the bigger the boat, the higher the base cost would be, and it does go up exponentially.  But there is also a minimum size that makes for dramatic, exciting event.

Agreed, all parts of the tradeoff I mentioned. I don't pretend to know where the performance vs cost balance is, and I doubt anyone here does either - but my central point was it's apparent the preferences some have posted completely ignore prohibitive costs. Even more now than decades ago, there's a limit to how big and expensive boats and crews can be unless we want something like 2010 again - that seemed pointless to me. After AC34 It appears no one was going to build another 72' foiler, and even the 62' proved to be too much for most? 

Again, looking forward to the RNZYS protocol, they seem like a smart bunch who've thought about what's best for a next AC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, bloodshot said:

this 100 times over. 

my main issue with the last two AC cycles was that it was wholly unrelatable to what i do.  I don't sail wingsail boats, I don't foil, I don't sail multihulls.  I know that sounds old fashioned but the best part of growing up with the 12s was watching something that I could attain/model as a sailor.  

NZ has never had a tp52 and the americans have absolutely dominated this class. So you think that would be a wise call from GD?

 

Share this post


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

The cost of an AC50 is right at about $3.5-3.7m USD ($5m NZD) according to the builder complete with a wing, a set of foils, and base hardware. This is roughly double what a TP-52 costs btw. Even for ETNZ the cost of the boat was not a major player in their overall campaign budget. It's everything else that surrounds the boat that drives the cost up and those are true no matter what boat the AC is raced in. 

 

Where did I say boat only? I even mentioned "huge crews" associated with bigger boats in my post. But it's all somewhat proportional. They're not going to build 90' monohulls on an otherwise shoestring crew/team budget when some teams will throw tons of $ at it. And there's a limit to how much money you can effectively throw at a partly OD 50' foiling cat with a crew of six. 

Again, we're not qualified to judge where the performance vs total cost balance is - but campaign cost is a consideration. RNZYS probably is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is who you are trying to please. For the non sailor, the attention span is 20 minutes so you would need to be able to run a race in that time frame.

As a sailor, I find the AC50s amazing but hard to relate to. I would much rather see them square off in boats for which the racing is much more likely to be closer and more competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RJW said:

The question is who you are trying to please. For the non sailor, the attention span is 20 minutes so you would need to be able to run a race in that time frame.

As a sailor, I find the AC50s amazing but hard to relate to. I would much rather see them square off in boats for which the racing is much more likely to be closer and more competitive.

Yet another reason these discussions go in circles, predictably with no possible "answer." Some folks propose what they'd personally like to see, while others propose what they think will appeal to a broader audience, sailors and non-sailors (future sailors?) too instead of what they may know/sail. And somewhere between. One may be selfish/short-sighted, the other may be misguided/pointless. And somewhere between. None of us can be 100% certain. A conundrum...

Share this post


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

The question is who you are trying to please. For the non sailor, the attention span is 20 minutes so you would need to be able to run a race in that time frame.

As a sailor, I find the AC50s amazing but hard to relate to. I would much rather see them square off in boats for which the racing is much more likely to be closer and more competitive.

And yet, very easy to argue that the racing has never been closer or more competitive than we saw in AC35.... well, except for ETNZ crushing OR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kiwi777 said:

NZ has never had a tp52 and the americans have absolutely dominated this class. So you think that would be a wise call from GD?

 

Not only has ETNZ had a TP52 but the one time they decided to join the TP52 circuit they won the friggin Audi MedCup in 2009.

t4twye.jpg

af7luh.jpg

zu108p.jpg

Not only did ETNZ win the 2009 Audi MedCup, but they beat 2nd place Quantum Sailing by 78 points:

Quote

Lead by skipper Dean Barker (NZL), the New Zealand team won four of this season’s five regattas culminating in their dominant performance at this Caja Mediterraneo Region of Murcia regatta. With a second place today they won by 13 points over Portugal’s Bigamist 7, while Quantum Racing (USA), the outgoing champions,finished third in the regatta and secured the runners-up on the season standings 78 points behind the Kiwi team.

http://www.istioselida.com/2009/09/emirates-team-new-zealand-islas.html

So, yeah, it could be a wise call by GD.  Some more shots of ETNZ's TP52 here:

http://www.sail-world.com/Australia/Emirates-Team-New-Zealands-TP-52-analyzed/57466?source=google

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/07/2017 at 8:35 PM, MidPack said:

.... The whole industry has contracted substantially in the US - boatbuilders, marine equipment/electronics, sail lofts, chandeliers, etc. Some of us were concerned about it, maybe others have already concluded it's inevitable and therefore not worth debating. I'm wondering...

no wunder saling iz kontrakting in US if salebotes hav to hav ^  

Yikes!

Share this post


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

And yet, very easy to argue that the racing has never been closer or more competitive than we saw in AC35.... well, except for ETNZ crushing OR.

Only looks close because the races last 20 minutes. Multiply the difference by six and suddenly does look so close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Only looks close because the races last 20 minutes. Multiply the difference by six and suddenly does look so close.

Hmmm.  Sorry, but that does not mean squat if the plan is to go back to that.  Further, the fact that the races are short and mistakes represent such major chances to lose the race does make the racing closer and more dramatic.  Try slicing it differently, it still ends up being the same.  If one wants to go back to slower monohulls, fine, but don't try and claim it is to be going BACK to when it was closer and more competitive.

Share this post


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

Hmmm.  Sorry, but that does not mean squat if the plan is to go back to that.  Further, the fact that the races are short and mistakes represent such major chances to lose the race does make the racing closer and more dramatic.  Try slicing it differently, it still ends up being the same.  If one wants to go back to slower monohulls, fine, but don't try and claim it is to be going BACK to when it was closer and more competitive.

The only meaningful metric of closeness of the results is percentage difference between winner and loser. The results were generally very lopsided from that point of view. Having shorter races masked this.

Take the IACC yachts and race them on a 20 minute course and see the difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, snaerk said:

no wunder saling iz kontrakting in US if salebotes hav to hav ^  

Yikes!

Damn spellchecker...:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to those pushing for a 90 or 100 foot TP52. You exist in a weird fantasy.  It is not necessary in this day and age to go to monsters for speed. And anyway, going back to said basic TP52, wouldn't come within a bull's roar of an AC50. Better make that 10 bulls roar distance. In these days of hydrofoils and yacht/missile flight you do not have to go big for performance. That is old world non-thinking, dinosaur defecation. Dead history. I like the "drunken"  talk of "you ain't seen nothing yet" emanating from ETNZ celebrations. Augurs well. keep the 50 foot platforms but open up the boundaries, trifoiler, caftoiler even maybe proafoiler. Remember the world record is held by one of these. But no retrograde step to ballasted BS plodding monohulls. Okay, unballasted you say, maybe and why not, but you're going to have to be wide. Bring it on. Interesting times ahead.

Share this post


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

In reply to those pushing for a 90 or 100 foot TP52. You exist in a weird fantasy.  It is not necessary in this day and age to go to monsters for speed. And anyway, going back to said basic TP52, wouldn't come within a bull's roar of an AC50. Better make that 10 bulls roar distance. In these days of hydrofoils and yacht/missile flight you do not have to go big for performance. That is old world non-thinking, dinosaur defecation. Dead history. I like the "drunken"  talk of "you ain't seen nothing yet" emanating from ETNZ celebrations. Augurs well. keep the 50 foot platforms but open up the boundaries, trifoiler, caftoiler even maybe proafoiler. Remember the world record is held by one of these. But no retrograde step to ballasted BS plodding monohulls. Okay, unballasted you say, maybe and why not, but you're going to have to be wide. Bring it on. Interesting times ahead.

You are not listening.  Those advocating keel boats, monohulls with real sails are not concerned with speed.  We are looking for a return to a design competition.  A challenge between Nations.  We are looking for sailboats with sailors actually sailing them and trimming the sails.  You are also not reading, the size range was 70-80'.  The TP52 was the concept.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sailman said:

You are not listening.  Those advocating keel boats, monohulls with real sails are not concerned with speed.  We are looking for a return to a design competition.  A challenge between Nations.  We are looking for sailboats with sailors actually sailing them and trimming the sails.  You are also not reading, the size range was 70-80'.  The TP52 was the concept.  

+1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An up-sized version of this? It could work...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, sailman said:

Those advocating keel boats, monohulls with real sails are not concerned with speed.   

Thanks, so now at least we know what they are advocating. Except for the fact that the boat with the most speed always/usually wins. So we are right back to speed.

Share this post


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

You are not listening.  Those advocating keel boats, monohulls with real sails are not concerned with speed.  We are looking for a return to a design competition.  A challenge between Nations.  We are looking for sailboats with sailors actually sailing them and trimming the sails.  You are also not reading, the size range was 70-80'.  The TP52 was the concept.  

What wacko fantasy-land do you live in? Monohullers without speed just as long as they toddle around together figuratively holding hands? And we're talking about high end Americas Cup competition in the 21st Century ... and you want to go back to the 19th?

So you like grass growing observations just as long as said grass is growing at the same speed. Not interested in speed or concerned about design development or interesting competition? Astonishing to see such arch-conservative nonsense in a Sailing Anarchy forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WetHog said:

Not only has ETNZ had a TP52 but the one time they decided to join the TP52 circuit they won the friggin Audi MedCup in 2009.

t4twye.jpg

af7luh.jpg

zu108p.jpg

Not only did ETNZ win the 2009 Audi MedCup, but they beat 2nd place Quantum Sailing by 78 points:

http://www.istioselida.com/2009/09/emirates-team-new-zealand-islas.html

So, yeah, it could be a wise call by GD.  Some more shots of ETNZ's TP52 here:

http://www.sail-world.com/Australia/Emirates-Team-New-Zealands-TP-52-analyzed/57466?source=google

WetHog  :ph34r:

yes sorry, i'll correct myself. we have never competed in a world championship

 

Share this post


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

What wacko fantasy-land do you live in? Monohullers without speed just as long as they toddle around together figuratively holding hands? And we're talking about high end Americas Cup competition in the 21st Century ... and you want to go back to the 19th?

So you like grass growing observations just as long as said grass is growing at the same speed. Not interested in speed or concerned about design development or interesting competition? Astonishing to see such arch-conservative nonsense in a Sailing Anarchy forum?

Absolutely agree!  Constraining the design rules to anything less than the fastest boat possible would be crazy in this day and age.

And while we're at it, let's remove the forward pass rule from rugby.  Obviously the facebook generation would rather see the ball go from end to end of the field as fast as possible - that's the whole point of the game!  It's only old dinosaurs and in-bred English public school boys who want to see the skillful progression of the ball up the field.  It's like watching paint dry on growing grass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey how about leaving it all open mono multi Tri the ultimate box rule!  No hydraulics and no electrics. But also remove the wind limits and sail in anything over say 5 knots so a foiling mono in 30 knots in Auckland may well have the edge over a pitch poling cat - crew to be limited with a Volvo style allocation for female and youth participation- and maybe a race format mixing up windward leeward, with passage races around waiheke and maybe even 2 mile speed sprints....???  Dates locked so a meteo's dream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Eiar said:

a foiling mono in 30 knots in Auckland may well have the edge over a pitch poling cat

Sure, you can bring a mono to a multihull defence :)

kz1 usa1 bdef 1988 ©Daniel Forster-Duomo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

both were at the pinnacle of their thinking at the time but in very different parts of the envelope - would dc's cat have been able to get downwind in 30 knots out of the east in a gnarly sea state?  Even NO et al had trouble getting the AC50s to turn safely downwind in 24 on the Sounds flat waters - with an open box rule you would introduce an R2AK element to the whole thing in terms of budgets, just ensure the best designers, meteo's and sailors do their thing and throw in some unexpected drama 

Share this post


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

Sure, you can bring a mono to a multihull defence :)

kz1 usa1 bdef 1988 ©Daniel Forster-Duomo.jpg

What could possibly go wrong? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What could possibly go wrong?"

That race in that period was an embarrassment to enlightened Kiwis. The monster was pathetic in comparison to state-of-art multihull. Even today people do not realize what a breakthrough the S&S catamaran revealed ... way back in 1988. That is nearly three decades ahead of what is occurring now. Conner was way ahead of the play. Too bad it took so long for the establishment to catch up.

Share this post


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

We are looking for a return to a design competition. 

a design competition 

boxed by inefficiency?

like carbon fibre dhows? 

dhow-racing-abu-dhabi-united-arab-emirat

do try to keep up

evolution does not favour slack-tards

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All design rules are "boxed by inefficiency" in some ways aren't they? Formula One cars are heavily restricted. Moto GP bikes are heavily restricted. Red Bull and Reno Air Race planes are heavily restricted. Just about all popular racing equipment is heavily