• 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.  

Recommended Posts

Can we please have discussion about the next race in this thread and leave the 2017-2018 thread for that race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is deck probably up to about the mast.  So some indication, but technically, no foredeck. And indeed, a very interesting curvaceous design. One would assume it is the latest thoughts on controlling green water over the deck. It looks almost like an inverse of the reverse camber deck seen on a lot of the latest IMOCA 60s. Maybe they can run control lines under the curved up parts, which might make the deck a bit more human friendly than square edged conduits. 

Share this post


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

There is deck probably up to about the mast.  So some indication, but technically, no foredeck. And indeed, a very interesting curvaceous design. One would assume it is the latest thoughts on controlling green water over the deck. It looks almost like an inverse of the reverse camber deck seen on a lot of the latest IMOCA 60s. Maybe they can run control lines under the curved up parts, which might make the deck a bit more human friendly than square edged conduits. 

 

With these large beamy plaining boats, they're supposed to be heeled over 20-30 degrees, the design makes the leeward side much safer to work on because it is actually leveling when the boat is heeled over. Also helps create headroom/volume where you want it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the timeline for these boats? Will the info come out in dribbles while the upcoming race goes on? Or is there some clear date or dates that they will unveil the details?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

There is deck probably up to about the mast.  So some indication, but technically, no foredeck. And indeed, a very interesting curvaceous design. One would assume it is the latest thoughts on controlling green water over the deck. It looks almost like an inverse of the reverse camber deck seen on a lot of the latest IMOCA 60s. Maybe they can run control lines under the curved up parts, which might make the deck a bit more human friendly than square edged conduits. 

That's my fixed idea about the future design of VOR's, Shelters for the crew in case of heavy seas rolling of the deck.
For my sake retractable not to desturb aerodynamics in case of light weather.

And I agree about the lines under deck...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, schakel488 said:

That's my fixed idea about the future design of VOR's, Shelters for the crew in case of heavy seas rolling of the deck.
For my sake retractable not to desturb aerodynamics in case of light weather.

 

Dead right there schakmeister..then again the snatches have to watch out for the hatches..(flame suit employed)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in case of employment or deployment the crew really really really have to watch out.
These shelters are one of my engineerings ideas.
Does anyone wants to bet about the man over board procedures in the upcoming VOR?
And I know they have lifelines  and safety buoyancy devices.
Safety first...

Share this post


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

Given the AC's announcement it seems Verdier's foiling mono's will be ruling the waves for a while.

I Know,

Good for Verdier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, schakel488 said:

Well in case of employment or deployment the crew really really really have to watch out.
These shelters are one of my engineerings ideas.
Does anyone wants to bet about the man over board procedures in the upcoming VOR?
And I know they have lifelines  and safety buoyancy devices.
Safety first...

Retractable shelters have been on the IMOCA 60s since at least 2008. What do you mean about the MOB procedures, can you elucidate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 7:52 AM, Francis Vaughan said:

There is deck probably up to about the mast.  So some indication, but technically, no foredeck. And indeed, a very interesting curvaceous design. One would assume it is the latest thoughts on controlling green water over the deck. It looks almost like an inverse of the reverse camber deck seen on a lot of the latest IMOCA 60s. Maybe they can run control lines under the curved up parts, which might make the deck a bit more human friendly than square edged conduits. 

Nope. It's just about getting VCG down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had rather not. 
Safety files are confidential.
But I am not looking forward to the coming VOR for safety reasons.
The racing on the other hand will be great.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SO you ask if anyone wants to bet about MOB procedures, and then follow it up by saying safety files are confidential.  WTF?

Also, why should the coming VOR be any more dangerous than the previous one? Sailors now have to be actually qualified, the safety training is well done, the coverage from shore is like never before. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Potter said:

SO you ask if anyone wants to bet about MOB procedures, and then follow it up by saying safety files are confidential.  WTF?

Also, why should the coming VOR be any more dangerous than the previous one? Sailors now have to be actually qualified, the safety training is well done, the coverage from shore is like never before. 

I'm struggling to understand him too. Not sure what's diff about this edition that'll make the 65 more dangerous. It's interesting getting criticism from some saying the 65 are too robust and are a bus. Then others say it's too unsafe. 

Don't think there's much the 65s are worse than prior boats at. Except maybe DNF a leg because the boat's structural limits the crews ability to drive them hard. If I had to nikpick something it'll be the habit of helm not being clipped in and getting hit by a large one really instantly knocks you to the rear of the lifelines. But they're probably as speced to keep you on board. Just painful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the only things that I could think of is that if the shelter is badly designed, it will limit visibility to such a degree that you wouldn't notice if someone falls overboard and would make it harder for the helmsman to see the person swimming in the ocean. Also it could work as a "kicker" if you get huge flooding on deck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schakel used to post a lot of unintelligible rubbish last time around.  Just ignore.

Share this post


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

Schakel used to post a lot of unintelligible rubbish last time around.  Just ignore.

This

 

The idiot has returned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schakel's posts are indeed unintelligable, however they are being used as opportunity by the "connected" ones, e.g. Potter, Miffy, etc. to promote their own agendas which by now are boringly predictable. Maybe these guys can resist the temptation?

Share this post


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

Schakel's posts are indeed unintelligable, however they are being used as opportunity by the "connected" ones, e.g. Potter, Miffy, etc. to promote their own agendas which by now are boringly predictable. Maybe these guys can resist the temptation?

I don't think anybody can accuse Potter with 'promoting his own agenda' 

He's well connected and posts up good information.

Miffy? Not so sure, haven't seen him/her that much.  

Share this post


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

I don't think anybody can accuse Potter with 'promoting his own agenda' 

He's well connected and posts up good information.

Miffy? Not so sure, haven't seen him/her that much.  

Agree that Potter usually posts good information; Miffy doesn't but is prolific and always the same message. Why do they bother to respond to Shakel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys guys guys,

The VOR hasn't even started and the shit fight already started.
I apologize for the Scallywag, WOXI, Perpentual Loyal thread I opened during the last S2H.
But that's it.

@ Mad, Waar was jij tijdens de laatste clubborrel? (yachting club off course)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the heck are they going to make foils strong enough to last a whole ocean leg? With FIVE trim tabs!? Don't bother arguing that the IMOCA 60 boards lasted because Alex Thompson broke his, and Armel L'clèach said he was only using the boards when he needed to, no clue how he managed that, but that's what he said 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boring. there was a huge amount of anticipation/excitement for the new foiler boat - damn shame they've lost their nerve- now potentially another round with the 65's. Boring. I don't think they'll get the numbers if they try the 65's again as everyone has moved on. Keep Mark Turner on, he breathed new excitement into what was getting a bit tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine that, Mark fights to turn the VOR back towards its roots as a southern ocean challenge race for sailors, and the sponsors say screw that, my largest markets are in the middle east and china.   I would step down too.

There is always the no electronics slow cork bobbing around the world race coming up.

And who knows if we can really race around the world anymore with province sized ice bergs breaking off Antarctica.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2017 at 7:42 PM, Alinghi4ever said:

So, the VOR 19/20 and the AC 2021 may have rougly the same boat? A Foiling Mono.

VOR19/20? Ha, Ha!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a disaster..! This race is never far from controversy. When the CEO steps down you know what's going on behind closed doors..

Share this post


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

Boring. there was a huge amount of anticipation/excitement for the new foiler boat - damn shame they've lost their nerve- now potentially another round with the 65's. Boring. I don't think they'll get the numbers if they try the 65's again as everyone has moved on. Keep Mark Turner on, he breathed new excitement into what was getting a bit tired.

Sad news that Mark is stepping down, He's a visionary on running offshore event with  tons of personal experience at sea fitting him perfectly for the job.  He appears at first sight to be sandwiched between two corporate, like by hut separately funded entities, each. each with their own budgets and visions going forward.  Tough situation.

And as long-time ocean racing commentator Brian Hancok notes he's a lone ranger, apparrenttyr successful funning his own show and probably chafes under corporatepressure/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2017 at 7:28 AM, KiwiJoker said:

 He appears at first sight to be sandwiched between two corporate, like by hut separately funded entities, each. each with their own budgets and visions going forward.  Tough situation.

Mark always comes across as diplomatic, progressive, and level headed which imo is exactly what the VOR needs right now. Do we have more information about whether this was solely his decision or he's getting corporate pressure to leave? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, it was entirely Mark's decision with the Volvo Execs wanting him to stay. However they would not keep to the timeline that he envisioned, and without that he sees his plans as being in jeopardy.

I have to say he has got a really strong management team in place, which I know was one of his aims. So I think his departure will not affect the coming race, and that team are more than capable of delivering the new boat for 2020.

 

Share this post


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

As I understand it, it was entirely Mark's decision with the Volvo Execs wanting him to stay. However they would not keep to the timeline that he envisioned, and without that he sees his plans as being in jeopardy.

I have to say he has got a really strong management team in place, which I know was one of his aims. So I think his departure will not affect the coming race, and that team are more than capable of delivering the new boat for 2020.

 

Come on Potter! There has to be much more to it than that.

This years race is already a failure which can be laid at Knut and VOR's door and Mark may have managed a bit of good damage control OK before he resigned.

But, a resignation like this is an admission of a personal failure to achieve his objectives. Something which Mark will find a bitter pill to swallow.

If Mark thought the event going forward has any hope of regaining its former status I very much doubt he would have resigned.

Mark's resignation suggests to me that the VOR is finished.

Share this post


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

As I understand it, it was entirely Mark's decision with the Volvo Execs wanting him to stay. However they would not keep to the timeline that he envisioned, and without that he sees his plans as being in jeopardy.

I have to say he has got a really strong management team in place, which I know was one of his aims. So I think his departure will not affect the coming race, and that team are more than capable of delivering the new boat for 2020.

 

I agree Potter, there is a lot of talent there, people like Bicey (albeit inherited) don't come along every 5 minutes. Does one now assume they are also looking for a new environment sustainability manager as Mrs T is also walking? If it was a "my (MT) way or the highway" dummy spit by MT then one wonders why he took the job in the first place. Balancing corporate and go forward vision is a CEO's day job in any industry. Seems to me he wasn't up for it and is better at running his own gig. I hope the replacement can sort it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Balancing corporate and go forward vision is a CEO's day job in any industry. 

Neither Knut, nor Bourke, nor Turner was a 'CEO in any industry'.  A CEO in any industry would find the VOR a pretty big challenge, just as MT found working for a conservative corporate board.

Share this post


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

Balancing corporate and go forward vision is a CEO's day job in any industry.

 

1 hour ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Neither Knut, nor Bourke, nor Turner was a 'CEO in any industry'. 

Parking the superb attributes of all, maybe therein lies the problem this event has had for a long time??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Neither Knut, nor Bourke, nor Turner was a 'CEO in any industry'.  A CEO in any industry would find the VOR a pretty big challenge, just as MT found working for a conservative corporate board.

Whaaaaat?

While acknowledging that running the VOR requires a combination of various leadership, PR and strategic skills.....it is a less complex model compared to many typical mid sized international public corporations with independent board. The VOR product has to please sponsors every couple of years compared to pleasing customers every day in a rapidly changing world. It has relatively few employees who generally love their work compared to the challenge of motivating thousands of employees and retaining your best managers who are being head hunted by your competition. The VOR has to manage expenses within budget and provide sponsors with an ephemeral return on the sponsorship dollars . The CEO has to make a profit that exceeds the cost of capital in hard dollars that a board will measure quarter in and quarter out while at the same time meeting environmental and employees goals set by a supervisory board. 

Mark Turner sounds like a successful and popular team manger with good leadership skills. Who knows he might make a good CEO ? But I wouldnt rank the VOR as among the Himalayas of management challenges. More like the Berkshires. It's a good stiff hike but we don't need Jeff Bezos.

Share this post


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

Whaaaaat?

While acknowledging that running the VOR requires a combination of various leadership, PR and strategic skills.....it is a less complex model compared to many typical mid sized international public corporations with independent board. The VOR product has to please sponsors every couple of years compared to pleasing customers every day in a rapidly changing world. It has relatively few employees who generally love their work compared to the challenge of motivating thousands of employees and retaining your best managers who are being head hunted by your competition. The VOR has to manage expenses within budget and provide sponsors with an ephemeral return on the sponsorship dollars . The CEO has to make a profit that exceeds the cost of capital in hard dollars that a board will measure quarter in and quarter out while at the same time meeting environmental and employees goals set by a supervisory board. 

Mark Turner sounds like a successful and popular team manger with good leadership skills. Who knows he might make a good CEO ? But I wouldnt rank the VOR as among the Himalayas of management challenges. More like the Berkshires. It's a good stiff hike but we don't need Jeff Bezos.

Running sporting organizations has long been distinguished from running businesses, and few would require more 'getting up to speed' from an outsider than the VOR.  And the pay is a fraction of what a CEO of a F500 company would make...maybe that's the problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Running sporting organizations has long been distinguished from running businesses, and few would require more 'getting up to speed' from an outsider than the VOR.  And the pay is a fraction of what a CEO of a F500 company would make...maybe that's the problem!

More to the point CLEAN would be the reported issues Mark Turner had with trying to run the show whilst hamstrung by the board for want of a better word. Clearly a good CEO will not want to work in that environment if he is being micro managed or being over ruled. Begs the question why have a CEO? Answer: Because the board don't want to do the work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good CEO's manage Boards (who are a disparate bunch at the best of times), not the other way round and line managers run the business. CEO's good and bad either walk or are pushed on account of this aspect. Sporting organisations rarely have or can afford this model and more often than not suffer because of it.

 

Share this post


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

Hence my last concluding sentence Terra.

I'd happily recommend you for the job Jack.! Worthy cause......:D

Jack_in_the_Box_2009_logo.svg.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terra you go get me all the metrics including a line by line P&L of the last 2 races and corresponding budget items for 17/18 and 19/20 I could probably make a meaningful suggestion or two. Without that info we are all just cyber wankers with an opinion and who happen to love the race and don't want to see it die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

And the pay is a fraction of what a CEO of a F500 company would make...maybe that's the problem!

Putting aside pay and concentrating on capacity Clean you have had a lightbulb moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.tipandshaft.com/volvo-ocean-race/pourquoi-mark-turner-a-demissionne-de-la-volvo-ocean-race/

Quote

Ce n’est que dans les dernières semaines que l’ambiance s’est tendue, lorsqu’il a fallu débloquer les fonds pour financer le mannequin du moule, fabriqué chez Persico. Selon nos informations, les actionnaires souhaitaient attendre la fin de l’année afin d’évaluer plus en profondeur les risques, comme le veulent les process habituels dans ces multinationales. Des risques qui ont été jugés trop élevés, d’autant plus que, après avoir accepté de construire un VO 65 neuf pour AkzoNobel, la Volvo Ocean Race se retrouve finalement avec un huitième bateau à quai, faute de sponsor – l’ex SCA, « refité » pour 1 million d’euros comme les autres et proposé un temps à… Franck Cammas au sortir de la Coupe de l’America. Ce qui représente un coût non négligeable pour l’organisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2017 at 9:15 PM, Rantifarian said:

The bucket list was never sorted and you are trying for a Volvo gig? 

Bucket List and the Volvo Proa are totally unrelated, so why not?    

Included in our proposal was building a half size model to prove the concept.  This would have cost Volvo 25,000€ in a program that budgeted 7.5 million Euros for 10 boats  and would have been sailing when the winner was announced.      

We were not short listed, so I am using Bucket List as the proof of concept.  If/when it works, we will sell plans for home and pro builders.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now