• 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

I am a bit surprised they have gone for a 75ft boat with so many crew if they are concerned about keeping costs down....

I was expecting maybe a 50-60ft with 8-10 crew.

it would be good to see something like a supersized Quant 23...

 

Quant-23-031.jpg

Share this post


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

75 ft monohull  with wing mast  and foils would be great with six crew max  if possible would make it different. So whats it to be a 75ft skiff or 75ft Moth?

 

1 hour ago, DC23 said:

I am a bit surprised they have gone for a 75ft boat with so many crew if they are concerned about keeping costs down....

I was expecting maybe a 50-60ft with 8-10 crew.

it would be good to see something like a supersized Quant 23...

 

Quant-23-031.jpg

I know the info is all new but two hints that seemed o stick out were 10 to 12 crew and " maybe " foiling . 

Share this post


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

If a cyclist from the tour the France can afford it, why not a AC team?

...Because a cyclist is a litle smaller than a 75ft sailboat with its, say, 125ft wing rig?

There are lots of wind tunels to put small objects in. But at that size you would probably have to first build your own damm fucking big tunnel and then test the boat. That's getting exponentially expensive.  ...Oh, and forget about scale models by the way! They work with different Reynold's numbers, so they may or may not predict the behaviour of the real thing. You never know. 

Having said that, I am absolutly pro wind tunnel testing. Keeping costs down? - Come on! This is the Americas Cup. Spending absurd amounts of money is a significant part of the competition. Always has been.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall no tank testing in the past cycle but did see photos of a small model of Oracle's boat in a BMW wind tunnel, fancy wind trails and all, probably as just BMW publication PR. 

Systems like Dassault's 3DX are a far better way to get that, and a lot else, done nowadays. Even if it's a touch more expensive.. and less 'traditional' ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TNZ and LR have been able to prepare to the next boat for 3 months, some say even more, which is a massive advantage mainly when it is about a new boat.

But how can they find serious teams if they don't tell which boats they are going to compete with ?

What will it be, an old slow 7mono ? a 75 ft pod with foils ?

Share this post


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

TNZ and LR have been able to prepare to the next boat for 3 months, some say even more, which is a massive advantage mainly when it is about a new boat.

But how can they find serious teams if they don't tell which boats they are going to compete with ?

What will it be, an old slow 7mono ? a 75 ft pod with foils ?

The argument you will hear from ETNZ fanboys is that it is 'normal' to screw the event in favor of the Defender. 

Even if that were true (and it's highly debatable over the past few cycles) then: that would still not make it 'right.'

The ability for Challengers to design and then build their boats, compared to the ability of the Defender and probably their sleeping-partner CoR, is many MONTHS out of balance. Possibly years, given the revelation P$B announced about how long ago the change was made, as a secret 'condition' deal made with GD back in 2015.

Share this post


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

The argument you will hear from ETNZ fanboys is that it is 'normal' to screw the event in favor of the Defender. 

Even if that were true (and it's highly debatable over the past few cycles) then: that would still not make it 'right.'

The ability for Challengers to design and then build their boats, compared to the ability of the Defender and probably their sleeping-partner CoR, is many MONTHS out of balance. Possibly years, given the revelation P$B announced about how long ago the change was made, 'conditional' back to 2015.

Yes, I heard rumors about boat testing in Switzerland not months but years before.

But worse is the suspense about the boat and the impossibility to hire the right architect without knowing whether it is a low tech or very hight tech boat.

Do they have to hire a hull designer or a foil designer ? and regarding the foil design, TNZ has the best one, a french. Ah, nationality rules do not apply to the design team :)

Share this post


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

The argument you will hear from ETNZ fanboys is that it is 'normal' to screw the event in favor of the Defender. 

Even if that were true (and it's highly debatable over the past few cycles) then: that would still not make it 'right.'

The ability for Challengers to design and then build their boats, compared to the ability of the Defender and probably their sleeping-partner CoR, is many MONTHS out of balance. Possibly years, given the revelation P$B announced about how long ago the change was made, as a secret 'condition' deal made with GD back in 2015.

Keep spinning it, Stinger.

You're really full of it this time around. What a difference perspective makes, eh?

Share this post


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

The argument you will hear from ETNZ fanboys is that it is 'normal' to screw the event in favor of the Defender. 

Even if that were true (and it's highly debatable over the past few cycles) then: that would still not make it 'right.'

The ability for Challengers to design and then build their boats, compared to the ability of the Defender and probably their sleeping-partner CoR, is many MONTHS out of balance. Possibly years, given the revelation P$B announced about how long ago the change was made, as a secret 'condition' deal made with GD back in 2015.

The argument you will hear from ETNZ haters is "The protocol is unfair, We can't tell you how or why, or in what way its unfair, but it is unfair because we say its unfair" lol

Share this post


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

The argument you will hear from ETNZ fanboys is that it is 'normal' to screw the event in favor of the Defender. 

Even if that were true (and it's highly debatable over the past few cycles) then: that would still not make it 'right.'

The ability for Challengers to design and then build their boats, compared to the ability of the Defender and probably their sleeping-partner CoR, is many MONTHS out of balance. Possibly years, given the revelation P$B announced about how long ago the change was made, as a secret 'condition' deal made with GD back in 2015.

Hire both kinds, fire half when all is revealed? Not ideal but also not that expensive. 

Share this post


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

Yes, I heard rumors about boat testing in Switzerland not months but years before.

But worse is the suspense about the boat and the impossibility to hire the right architect without knowing whether it is a low tech or very hight tech boat.

Do they have to hire a hull designer or a foil designer ? and regarding the foil design, TNZ has the best one, a french. Ah, nationality rules do not apply to the design team :)

Meant to quote this post above..

Share this post


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

Unless your 400+ posts are spread over the last 10 years in ACA then you don't completely get my post.  I can explain things though if need be. 

WetHog  :ph34r:

Hoggie you can check my profile and registration date and confirm that they are mate ;-)

Share this post


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

I recall no tank testing in the past cycle but did see photos of a small model of Oracle's boat in a BMW wind tunnel, fancy wind trails and all, probably as just BMW publication PR. 

Systems like Dassault's 3DX are a far better way to get that, and a lot else, done nowadays. Even if it's a touch more expensive.. and less 'traditional' ..

Just to prove your point 

https://www.3ds.com/customer-stories/single/oracle-team-usa/

 

I think ruling out tank testing and wind testing is a good idea. Evens out the playing field... and as a kiwi I can agree its a idea not from ETNZ

Share this post


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

...Because a cyclist is a litle smaller than a 75ft sailboat with its, say, 125ft wing rig?

There are lots of wind tunels to put small objects in. But at that size you would probably have to first build your own damm fucking big tunnel and then test the boat. That's getting exponentially expensive.  ...Oh, and forget about scale models by the way! They work with different Reynold's numbers, so they may or may not predict the behaviour of the real thing. You never know. 

Having said that, I am absolutly pro wind tunnel testing. Keeping costs down? - Come on! This is the Americas Cup. Spending absurd amounts of money is a significant part of the competition. Always has been.

 

 

If you don't keep costs down it doesn't come a contest. Even formula 1 has rules to keep costs down. Its one of the good things that Oracle did, was keeping costs down. 

Share this post


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

TNZ and LR have been able to prepare to the next boat for 3 months, some say even more, which is a massive advantage mainly when it is about a new boat.

But how can they find serious teams if they don't tell which boats they are going to compete with ?

What will it be, an old slow 7mono ? a 75 ft pod with foils ?

no, for cost savings, it will be a 62 ft boat...but that won't be announced for another year. 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heck use some imagination: 40 minute racing, upwind start, 49er skipper, apparent wind sailing, chief designer and team with foiling credentials, high speed large monohull, return to three sail sailing, penchant for fair sailing in both NZ and Italy, BAR and Alinghi as good as in, two US teams talking - certainly hope we see a Spanish and Australian team that would make a 7 boat fleet to start with - whose complaining here?  

Share this post


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

Heck use some imagination: 40 minute racing, upwind start, 49er skipper, apparent wind sailing, chief designer and team with foiling credentials, high speed large monohull, return to three sail sailing, penchant for fair sailing in both NZ and Italy, BAR and Alinghi as good as in, two US teams talking - certainly hope we see a Spanish and Australian team that would make a 7 boat fleet to start with - whose complaining here?  

Only the wankers with no dog on the fight....

Share this post


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

 

I know the info is all new but two hints that seemed o stick out were 10 to 12 crew and " maybe " foiling . 

Yawn , morning lab rats , ya not taking this seriously are you ? surly not .Its going to be the same old shit sailing around in 12 knot shit boxes  . Everyone will talk about it before , race a few weeks , pack up and go home. The planet will be non the wiser. Waste of time effort and money where the yachts after are mothballed  collecting dust or sent out to charter. The rules should stipulate that the winners future campaign boats should be faster, It is now not.The Americas Cup has now become irrelevant.  

Share this post


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

Awesome, that means one less opinionated retard, now off to raft anarchy with your misery.

Thank yeow.  I appreciate your words of wisdom. Pubs open slater.

Share this post


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

Hoggie you can check my profile and registration date and confirm that they are mate ;-)

See post #163, I thought you were having a go.  I was an idiot.  It happens.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

no, for cost savings, it will be a 62 ft boat...but that won't be announced for another year. 

:)

Not knowing what kind of boat will be sailed is much more penalizing that downsizing one we know.

Share this post


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

no, for cost savings, it will be a 62 ft boat...but that won't be announced for another year. 

:)

When it's your team calling the shots things get a bit more acceptable don't they?  :rolleyes:

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mako23 said:

Just to prove your point 

https://www.3ds.com/customer-stories/single/oracle-team-usa/

 

I think ruling out tank testing and wind testing is a good idea. Evens out the playing field... and as a kiwi I can agree its a idea not from ETNZ

In the rules as for now I do not see room for as lot of improvement.
It's really a one design as far as I can see.
Therefore the teams doesn't have to go wind tunneling and towing tanking.
And thanks for the oracle team case study from Dassault. I really like high tech.

Here is an article from towing tank testing for the swedish olympical laser crew.

59cfa79b453d5_laser_540towingtank.png.9dee1ea9947b55c3d2ad7e46988e5074.png

How to sail an Olympic Laser class dinghy - towing tank tests

The Laser dinghy is a strict one-design Olympic class and very few, if any, alterations are allowed. So what can be done in a towing tank to provide new insights for sailors? There is no meaning in just measuring the resistance since nothing can be done to the hull to minimize it. So what’s left? The way people sail the boat! Where the crew is positioned in different speed ranges and how much to heel the boat in different conditions could be a new contribution, or could confirm the way the best sailors sail the dinghy based on experience. In addition, a small thing like how much drag the self-bailer is generating when open is a typical question asked by keen sailors that we have now verified. Another question is how big an influence does my weight have on the performance?

Collaboration with Chalmers

SSPA has joined a project with Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg focusing on sports and technology. Education and research at Chalmers is well known and aims to contribute to a sustainable future for our society. For the past few years, the Area of Advance Materials Science has supported the project. The initiative has generated external funding and been welcomed at Chalmers, among staff, students, the sports movement in Sweden, and large and small companies.

The action of a small group of researchers and students, most working on an interdisciplinary and voluntary basis beside their normal work, has created a surprising impact. One noticeable thing is in recruiting new students, who have been attracted by the activities in five sports: Swimming, Equestrian, Sailing, Athletics and Floor ball. The exhibitions, informal lectures and presentations that the research group have held have attracted students, who previously would not have considered engineering as an option.

For research, the distance between research projects and ideas can be reduced compared with research projects involving industrial partners. For instance, new materials and usable products can be tested by interested and inquisitive users. The driving force is that individual athletes are eager and willing to test new ideas that promise to provide the slightest advantage.

The sports and technology group has come up with a number of research proposals and applications, ideas for master thesis work, bachelor thesis work, an international summer course for engineers, and developed a new master’s course starting in 2014. Networks with local, national and international players in the sports industry have been created, making the results of the research known to various new sectors.

The main objective for 2014 is creating a Sports technology centre. This includes five professorships and the following areas, of which several are close to SSPA’s competence: sailing dynamics, materials science in sport, measurements and modelling in sport, biomechanics in sport, and mathematics.

The centre will contribute to a more sustainable society through excellence in research, education, outreach and recruitment. The knowledge generated by the centre will improve the performance aspect in sports and to health and wellbeing for the public.

Tow tank testing

In the sailing sector, SSPA has carried out tow tank testing on a Laser class dinghy, showing very interesting results about how to sail a dinghy.

A dinghy was provided by one of Sweden’s top sailors. A towing rig was constructed so the hull could be towed without making holes in the boat. The dinghy was towed with a rod connected to a dynamometer close to the mast position about 20 cm above the deck. The actual towing point in this study was not important since we aimed for the actual sailing conditions regardless of how the trim and heel was achieved. In a small boat like this the person sailing it will be able to adjust position by moving forward, aft or sideways to heel or trim the dinghy to the desired condition.

The set up to the carriage allowed the hull to move freely in heave, pitch and roll but was restricted in surge, sway and yaw. Our attempt was to restrict the tests to downwind at a limited number of speeds. If upwind conditions were included in the test matrix, this first attempt would have been too extensive. Parameters such as leeway, load distribution between rudder and centreboard, righting moment etc., would have been included in that case. The rudder and centreboard were also excluded and we left these for two students doing their Masters’ at Chalmers to add afterwards using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD).

The weight tests were carried out using an 80 kg manikin as norm. Tests were repeated with ±10kg. The relative change in resistance is shown in the diagram. The initial results indicate that the weight has the biggest influence in the middle speed range (around 6 knots) but for both higher and lower speeds the influence is less. Would the curves coincide for 13 knots? The next test session in the tow tank might possibly provide
an answer.

Tests followed with a variation of trim versus speed. As expected the lowest resistance was found with the most possible forward trim for very low speed. For speeds below 3 knots the sailor should preferably sit forward of the mast. However this is prohibited by classrules (no part of the body in front of the mast). At higher speeds, 4 knots and upwards, the weight should be moved more and more aft as the speed increases. This is nothing new for an experienced sailor, but interesting to validate and obtain data about.

The explanation is that for low speeds, minimizing the wetted surface is the most important factor but for higher speeds, when wave resistance starts to be a dominating factor, long waterline is what gives speed (and lower resistance).

Heel is also an important factor and it was seen at all speeds heel all the way up to where the shear line with the curled deck edge was touching the water was favourable. It should be remembered that this was downwind and no aspects were considered regarding the effectiveness of the sailplan. Again the effect from minimizing the wetted area was the explanation and at heel the long waterline could be kept for all speeds.

The self-bailer

An attempt to detect the resistance from the self-bailer was carried out at 4, 6 and 8 knots. Even though it was small, the influence was detectable. And how to handle the resulting insight is the secret of the ordering customer, Chalmers University of Technology.

Photos and illustrations

Optimum heel for downwind sailing in the speed range of 3 to 8 knots.

A Laser sailed at the venue for the 2012 Olympics in Weymouth by Swedish Olympian Rasmus Myrgren. Photo: The Swedish Sailing Federation.

Relative comparison of resistance for 3 crew weights in a Laser dinghy.

Share this post


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

When it's your team calling the shots things get a bit more acceptable don't they?  :rolleyes:

WetHog  :ph34r:

Cheating one begins to be normal the other day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2017 at 2:40 AM, Raptorsailor said:

75 feet eh? Is BAR's snazzy garage big enough...

Similar, at http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/business/america-s-cup-rules-shake-up-prompts-fears-of-impact-on-land-rover-bar-1-8174696

  • New rules shake-up for America’s Cup prompts questions regarding Southsea’s suitability
  • New 75ft monohulls will need deep waters for sailing spectacle

me: GD when asked by Veitch how close the racing might be to, say, Takapuna Beach, mentioned 'if we need 5m of water depth at low tide, then..' etc 

Share this post


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

why on earth are there 2 threads about the same matter, nobody around here has a little bit of sense?

None.  It's an ACA thing.  

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

When it's your team calling the shots things get a bit more acceptable don't they?  :rolleyes:

WetHog  :ph34r:

I do believe it was a snide dig at orifice Hoggie. 

I can't imagine many if any etnz supporters would stick with them if they pulled that shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alinghi4ever said:

Agreed. On Thursday (NZ Time) ETNZ/LR had the chance to come clean and they didn't. Also, what is a "Stakeholder". Does that include potential Challengers?

A stakeholder is most probably a potential challenger, however they did not define it. Both them and the CoR know very well where they are heading so, why don't they tell ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Eiar said:

Heck use some imagination: 40 minute racing, upwind start, 49er skipper, apparent wind sailing, chief designer and team with foiling credentials, high speed large monohull, return to three sail sailing, penchant for fair sailing in both NZ and Italy, BAR and Alinghi as good as in, two US teams talking - certainly hope we see a Spanish and Australian team that would make a 7 boat fleet to start with - whose complaining here?  

If we read you correctly you are in the know, so why don't you tell us if it's going to be a big foil assist mono or a full time foiler. Your definition fits both and requires two different design teams. I am not the only one to ask the question, JS too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alinghi4ever said:

Agreed. On Thursday (NZ Time) ETNZ/LR had the chance to come clean and they didn't. Also, what is a "Stakeholder". Does that include potential Challengers?

A "Stakeholder" is anyone who has an interest in the event including spectators. 

Share this post


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

If we read you correctly you are in the know, so why don't you tell us if it's going to be a big foil assist mono or a full time foiler. Your definition fits both and requires two different design teams. I am not the only one to ask the question, JS too.

Its a 75 foot monohull. That's detail enough at this early stage, 3 months on from their win, the protocol has been announced and a venue has been confirmed (infact 2 venues have been confirmed) The racing format has been defined and rules announced. This is enough for potential teams to start the ball rolling on a campaign. A detailed class rule will be released in two months time. Thats still quicker than anything Oracle ever did. ETNZ worked with less of everything than JS has to work with now, so he can put up or shut up now. 

Share this post


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

A "Stakeholder" is anyone who has an interest in the event including spectators. 

Well it's disappointing that 'they' didn't consider LRBAR and presumably others as Stakeholders and I've already suggested that it may be unfortunately down to a long history of bad blood, bad relationships, etc. But I will say this, giving leeway to them on the boat, nationality rules, commercial arrangement, etc:

This AC36 Protocol is actually pretty decent, fairness wise. I expect the AP, RD and MC will be decent too and properly independent. They also deserve good credit for how fast they were to produce what they have so far. GD has a mountain to climb to pull this off properly but he started off well this week.

Share this post


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

I do believe it was a snide dig at orifice Hoggie. 

I can't imagine many if any etnz supporters would stick with them if they pulled that shit.

Ah, they are pulling similar shit than Oracle.  Take off the rose colored glasses.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BAR is by no means in. Interested but not in. The protocol leaves quite a bit to be desired for any potential challenger outside COR. Entering does not imply becoming a stakeholder or even having a say. Entry is not till Jan 18th rules not till March 2018. That's a huge loss of crucial development not to mention potential commercial sponsors not being able to see what they are getting in terms of branding and ROI  on the boats until 2019. There 's possibly an even chance of Auckland not delivering in time - nothings been decided or even looking like being decided in 4 months. Dalton seems to have dumped the entire hosting thing onto Auckland the  Gov and washed his hands. The current business/sponsorship climate is very different since previous Ac's in Auckland. its tougher than ever to raise money. The marine business has no spare money as the hospitality industry. Southern Spars laid off 40 people just after ETNZ won the cup, and they built the winning boat. That Mr PB is one smart cookie. He's got the boat he wants, way ahead of every other challenger in development, even chance of holding the event in Italy, runs the Challenger series, sponsoring it, inside track on ETNZ with them owing him money and favor - don't underestimate that favor thing in Italy. Oh and there's MdN and Azurra the other Italian challenge - Three Italian billionaires. Food will be good.

Share this post


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

BAR is by no means in. Interested but not in. The protocol leaves quite a bit to be desired for any potential challenger outside COR. Entering does not imply becoming a stakeholder or even having a say. Entry is not till Jan 18th rules not till March 2018. That's a huge loss of crucial development not to mention potential commercial sponsors not being able to see what they are getting in terms of branding and ROI  on the boats until 2019. There 's possibly an even chance of Auckland not delivering in time - nothings been decided or even looking like being decided in 4 months. Dalton seems to have dumped the entire hosting thing onto Auckland the  Gov and washed his hands. The current business/sponsorship climate is very different since previous Ac's in Auckland. its tougher than ever to raise money. The marine business has no spare money as the hospitality industry. Southern Spars laid off 40 people just after ETNZ won the cup, and they built the winning boat. That Mr PB is one smart cookie. He's got the boat he wants, way ahead of every other challenger in development, even chance of holding the event in Italy, runs the Challenger series, sponsoring it, inside track on ETNZ with them owing him money and favor - don't underestimate that favor thing in Italy. Oh and there's MdN and Azurra the other Italian challenge - Three Italian billionaires. Food will be good.

Yeah, the protocol and timeline for AC36 stinks, in a bad way, but the Kiwi fans on here can't smell it yet for whatever reason.  

I don't blame them actually.  I was blinded by the home team myself but I cam around.  The smart Kiwi's on here will, but the Indio's...  :lol:

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

BAR is by no means in. Interested but not in. The protocol leaves quite a bit to be desired for any potential challenger outside COR. Entering does not imply becoming a stakeholder or even having a say. Entry is not till Jan 18th rules not till March 2018. That's a huge loss of crucial development not to mention potential commercial sponsors not being able to see what they are getting in terms of branding and ROI  on the boats until 2019. There 's possibly an even chance of Auckland not delivering in time - nothings been decided or even looking like being decided in 4 months. Dalton seems to have dumped the entire hosting thing onto Auckland the  Gov and washed his hands. The current business/sponsorship climate is very different since previous Ac's in Auckland. its tougher than ever to raise money. The marine business has no spare money as the hospitality industry. Southern Spars laid off 40 people just after ETNZ won the cup, and they built the winning boat. That Mr PB is one smart cookie. He's got the boat he wants, way ahead of every other challenger in development, even chance of holding the event in Italy, runs the Challenger series, sponsoring it, inside track on ETNZ with them owing him money and favor - don't underestimate that favor thing in Italy. Oh and there's MdN and Azurra the other Italian challenge - Three Italian billionaires. Food will be good.

Put it this way, BAR are more in than they are out at this stage. They haven't officially entered, however, Ainsle has stated publicly they will be competing in Auckland for the Americas Cup. And I suspect that if entries opened today, Ainslie would be opening his wallet and confirming his entry for the next cup. Ainslie is similar to ETNZ in that way. Its not about politics, and saying, we'll only come if we get multihulls, otherwise we're out, like say, a certain Swedish team wants, its about doing what you must to win, because then, and only then, do you get to do things your way. Ainslie's long term goal is to win the Americas Cup for the UK, and I suspect he won't stop until he achieves that goal, just as ETNZ did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one cannot imagine ETNZ putting the foiling developments back in the cupboard when many other events around the world have embraced the ETNZ developments - and think back two cycles when ETNZ gave Luna rossa the technology under a development deal - let's try and take the team for their word: doing for monos what they have already done for cats - now think of the foils under aotearoa and transfer just some of that to monos or indeed take another leap - I think the short delay and talk of stakeholders is merely to ensure a minimum number of challengers is on board before anarchists get to chew the cud - hey would you rather see them Do it the other way around - it is simply commercial common sense - compare that to the magnificent efforts of  the commercial kommissar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sclarke said:

Put it this way, BAR are more in than they are out at this stage. They haven't officially entered, however, Ainsle has stated publicly they will be competing in Auckland for the Americas Cup. And I suspect that if entries opened today, Ainslie would be opening his wallet and confirming his entry for the next cup. Ainslie is similar to ETNZ in that way. Its not about politics, and saying, we'll only come if we get multihulls, otherwise we're out, like say, a certain Swedish team wants, its about doing what you must to win, because then, and only then, do you get to do things your way. Ainslie's long term goal is to win the Americas Cup for the UK, and I suspect he won't stop until he achieves that goal, just as ETNZ did.

Ainsle has issues with the "key stakeholders" and when he will get the boat rule.  He isn't the only potential challenger to have issues with that as well.  Its a big deal.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the Prot handy and have a Q about when you can sail/develop the AC75s: 

Can ETNZ sail theirs, when Challengers are tied up en route to NZ for the 2019 ACWS, and if ETNZ has B2 in Auckland while some Challengers are in wait-mode to get back down there for the 'Christmas Cup' ACWS event in Auckland after being in Italy during 2020?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we start calling the AC75 the Prada75 at this point?  Prada is going to leave its mark all over AC36 at this point anyway, especially if AC36 is contested in Italy.  Might as well from a synergistic stand point.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

Can we start calling the AC75 the Prada75 at this point?  Prada is going to leave its mark all over AC36 at this point anyway, especially if AC36 is contested in Italy.  Might as well from a synergistic stand point.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

I think we should call it the F**k you Oracle 75. It can be abbreviated to the FU75. I think thats a great idea.:D

Share this post


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

Can we start calling the AC75 the Prada75 at this point?  Prada is going to leave its mark all over AC36 at this point anyway, especially if AC36 is contested in Italy.  Might as well from a synergistic stand point.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

It's the Prada Cup.

In short, the PCup :D

Share this post


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

I got from very well informed insiders that they chose the new AC logo.

images.jpg

That's a shoe in for sure. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alinghi4ever said:

Portsmouth is apparently one of the Cities in Europe bidding to host an ACWS Event in 2019 Stingers.

That would explain BA's early declaration then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HQ facility is not a small building and it has immediate access to the deep water channel into Portsmouth. That's deep enough for major naval and commercial vessels. I don't see a problem with the HQ.

m2764_crop169003_680x382_147886105559AC.

"Stadium sailing" off Southsea is probably OK if the weekend is chosen so that high water coincides with the broadcast slot. Some of it is across the deep water channel, outside that the charted depth goes down to something like 1.5m. Add 4-4.5m rise of tide at HW. For deep water "stadium sailing" close to shore, you'd have to go to Cowes. Plenty of the good citizens of Portsmouth like to visit Cowes in order to enjoy chips ("french fries"), half a dozen pints and to round off the perfect evening, a fight. Oh dear, did I say that?

Share this post


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

 Plenty of the good citizens of Portsmouth like to visit Cowes in order to enjoy chips ("french fries"), half a dozen pints and to round off the perfect evening, a fight. Oh dear, did I say that?

Had I known that earlier, I would know Kowes

Share this post


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

The HQ facility is not a small building and it has immediate access to the deep water channel into Portsmouth. That's deep enough for major naval and commercial vessels. I don't see a problem with the HQ.

m2764_crop169003_680x382_147886105559AC.

"Stadium sailing" off Southsea is probably OK if the weekend is chosen so that high water coincides with the broadcast slot. Some of it is across the deep water channel, outside that the charted depth goes down to something like 1.5m. Add 4-4.5m rise of tide at HW. For deep water "stadium sailing" close to shore, you'd have to go to Cowes. Plenty of the good citizens of Portsmouth like to visit Cowes in order to enjoy chips ("french fries"), half a dozen pints and to round off the perfect evening, a fight. Oh dear, did I say that?

Caught the hovercraft across a few years ago and visited RYS, Cowes.

Did a quick visit through Queen Vic's beach house too. Lovely part of your country.

Share this post


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

Similar, at http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/business/america-s-cup-rules-shake-up-prompts-fears-of-impact-on-land-rover-bar-1-8174696

  • New rules shake-up for America’s Cup prompts questions regarding Southsea’s suitability
  • New 75ft monohulls will need deep waters for sailing spectacle

me: GD when asked by Veitch how close the racing might be to, say, Takapuna Beach, mentioned 'if we need 5m of water depth at low tide, then..' etc 

I don't think a deep keel and foiling are compatible, the drag of the keel would be too much to allow take off speed when the foils generate more lift than the boat weight. I wounder there might be no keel at all. Instead dagger boards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mako23 said:

I don't think a deep keel and foiling are compatible, the drag of the keel would be too much to allow take off speed when the foils generate more lift than the boat weight. I wounder there might be no keel at all. Instead dagger boards

Won't happen, IMO. Without a canting keel, the thing would just fall over.

Big rigs and powerful planing hull shapes will require max. RM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article from RNZ involves Glenn Ashby, previously thought to be absent at the announcement, but was obviously present and sounds excited about the future after all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Won't happen, IMO. Without a canting keel, the thing would just fall over.

Big rigs and powerful planing hull shapes will require max. RM.

Canting keels are not an option for match racing .. If they are going to foil it will be internal ballast .. possibly water ballast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Terry Hollis said:

Canting keels are not an option for match racing .. If they are going to foil it will be internal ballast .. possibly water ballast.

Not sure if water ballast is any better for match racing than canting keel

Share this post


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

Not sure if water ballast is any better for match racing than canting keel

If you want to foil you can't afford the drag of external ballast canting or otherwise .. water ballast can be increased or decreased as required for the conditions but not necessarily moved for a new tack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest a stakeholder is someone who stands to benefit financially. So there are two at the moment. No surprise. To be clear, the audience is never a stakeholder.

For everyone slagging ETNZ for not yet having a Rule, I would suggest that a well-written Rule is not an easy thing to create. Remember, some of the smartest and sleazyist people in international sport will try to drive a 75' boat through every missing comma, split infinitive and dangling participle. The AC34 & AC35 rules were atrocious and led to some pretty pathetic behavior - case in point - that zero is a valid tension for a shroud and that Oracle intended to race with zero tension lowers before they released the Rule even though the one-design wing spar would required stiffening in order to do so. AC35 required 3x more Interpretations than AC34, nearly 100 by the end or the regatta. A well formed, thoughtful Rule takes time. Rushing to publish is less fair to the competitors than one might imagine.

Those of you who believe the Rule, Protocol and Venue should all be announced at the same time are really pleading for them to all be announced 6-12 months after having won the cup. That's just reality for writing a Rule that will that will withstand unscrupulous scrutiny. Let's not even get into the political morass of Venue selection - that's a sport (real estate development) in which graft, greed and corruption are required and they simply cannot be scheduled.

The only thing for which one can rationally critique ETNZ is that the date of entry precedes that of venue selection. This is unforgivable and ETNZ knows this better than any.

With respect to the rest, I'd suggest that a Protocol now is better than everything in 12 months.

Does it give ETNZ and Prada an advantage? Yes, let's be clear. Like life, the America's Cup isn't fair. The Defender, and to a lesser extent the Challenger of Record, always have an advantage. That advantage is built into the Deed of Gift, which didn't even anticipate a Challenger Series.

As has been the case for some 160 years, if you don't like the America's Cup the solution is simple: Win it and make your own rules.

ETNZ didn't particularly enjoy ACs 33, 34 and 35, they fought the inequity where they thought they could and they pleaded their case in the court of public opinion (until gagged) if they thought that might help and/or to simply vent the frustration. And they won. Within the Rules, against all odds, on the water. It was perhaps the least controversial victory by any challenger, ever, and sweeter still for the adversity they faced as a Challenger.

The only thing we know for certain is that they have a long way to fall before they can begin to equal the pathetic behavior of the two Defenders that preceded them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


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

I'd suggest a stakeholder is someone who stands to benefit financially. So there are two at the moment. No surprise. To be clear, the audience is never a stakeholder.

 

"Stakeholder" is generally used as a warm, fuzzy and inclusive term to indicate that a company isn't entirely thinking about just its shareholders. With that in mind, I don't think it is unreasonable at this point to consider a team that has signalled unequivocally that they intend to enter to be a "stakeholder". Now if ETNZ doesn't want to do that, it certainly doesn't have to but in that case, enough already of the "stakeholder" bullshit.

Share this post


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

 

For everyone slagging ETNZ for not yet having a Rule, I would suggest that a well-written Rule is not an easy thing to create.

 

I don't think anybody asked for the rule, but, clearly some know more about the future boat than what has been told.

The difference between an archimedian mono with foil assist and a fully foiling mono is more than with a catamaran.

What is hidden now is more than Oracle did.

Share this post


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

Its a 75 foot monohull. That's detail enough at this early stage, 3 months on from their win, the protocol has been announced and a venue has been confirmed (infact 2 venues have been confirmed) The racing format has been defined and rules announced. This is enough for potential teams to start the ball rolling on a campaign. A detailed class rule will be released in two months time. Thats still quicker than anything Oracle ever did. ETNZ worked with less of everything than JS has to work with now, so he can put up or shut up now. 

What was so hard about what was said eh?

Concepts under consideration will be released in Nov, Rule in March

 

17 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Well it's disappointing that 'they' didn't consider LRBAR and presumably others as Stakeholders and I've already suggested that it may be unfortunately down to a long history of bad blood, bad relationships, etc. But I will say this, giving leeway to them on the boat, nationality rules, commercial arrangement, etc:

This AC36 Protocol is actually pretty decent, fairness wise. I expect the AP, RD and MC will be decent too and properly independent. They also deserve good credit for how fast they were to produce what they have so far. GD has a mountain to climb to pull this off properly but he started off well this week.

and again with the poor listening comprehension (leading to yet more conspiracy theories), 'stakeholders' are about to be consulted!

 

16 hours ago, WetHog said:

Ainsle has issues with the "key stakeholders" and when he will get the boat rule.  He isn't the only potential challenger to have issues with that as well.  Its a big deal.

WetHog  :ph34r:

It's a pretty stupid expression in sport I agree, but there are a lot more groups involved in setting up and running an AC cycle than just the teams, and to be fair some of them are way ahead of the (potential additional) teams at this point priority-wise

He is still an entitled whinging POM though - but he'll get the rule in March when it's finished, he'll get a few ideas, if he asks politely, about now probably....

 

6 hours ago, Moonduster said:

I'd suggest a stakeholder is someone who stands to benefit financially. So there are two at the moment. No surprise. To be clear, the audience is never a stakeholder.

For everyone slagging ETNZ for not yet having a Rule, I would suggest that a well-written Rule is not an easy thing to create. Remember, some of the smartest and sleazyist people in international sport will try to drive a 75' boat through every missing comma, split infinitive and dangling participle. The AC34 & AC35 rules were atrocious and led to some pretty pathetic behavior - case in point - that zero is a valid tension for a shroud and that Oracle intended to race with zero tension lowers before they released the Rule even though the one-design wing spar would required stiffening in order to do so. AC35 required 3x more Interpretations than AC34, nearly 100 by the end or the regatta. A well formed, thoughtful Rule takes time. Rushing to publish is less fair to the competitors than one might imagine.

Those of you who believe the Rule, Protocol and Venue should all be announced at the same time are really pleading for them to all be announced 6-12 months after having won the cup. That's just reality for writing a Rule that will that will withstand unscrupulous scrutiny. Let's not even get into the political morass of Venue selection - that's a sport (real estate development) in which graft, greed and corruption are required and they simply cannot be scheduled.

The only thing for which one can rationally critique ETNZ is that the date of entry precedes that of venue selection. This is unforgivable and ETNZ knows this better than any.

With respect to the rest, I'd suggest that a Protocol now is better than everything in 12 months.

Does it give ETNZ and Prada an advantage? Yes, let's be clear. Like life, the America's Cup isn't fair. The Defender, and to a lesser extent the Challenger of Record, always have an advantage. That advantage is built into the Deed of Gift, which didn't even anticipate a Challenger Series.

As has been the case for some 160 years, if you don't like the America's Cup the solution is simple: Win it and make your own rules.

ETNZ didn't particularly enjoy ACs 33, 34 and 35, they fought the inequity where they thought they could and they pleaded their case in the court of public opinion (until gagged) if they thought that might help and/or to simply vent the frustration. And they won. Within the Rules, against all odds, on the water. It was perhaps the least controversial victory by any challenger, ever, and sweeter still for the adversity they faced as a Challenger.

The only thing we know for certain is that they have a long way to fall before they can begin to equal the pathetic behavior of the two Defenders that preceded them.

 

 

Sense at last! Well done that wo/man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

---

Ben Ainslie warns protocol is ‘conflict of interest’
...

But like all other interested sailors and teams, Ainslie’s campaign has been left looking in from the outside. “The only thing we [knew] is what was leaked through the media; we have none of the details here so it’s interesting when they say there will be discussions with stakeholders. We’d love to be consulted and understand what constitutes a stakeholder. That’s something we will be pushing for, for more detail.”
 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/americas-cup/110264-110264

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is BA on the outside?

Because he signed the London Agreement committing to multi's going forward. If he wants to be a stakeholder going forward, he is going to have to put his hand up and say so. Then he will be welcomed by GD.

Share this post


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

I don't think anybody asked for the rule, but, clearly some know more about the future boat than what has been told.

The difference between an archimedian mono with foil assist and a fully foiling mono is more than with a catamaran.

What is hidden now is more than Oracle did.

I would suggest that given the amount of detail that has been announced, if you're campaign hinges on whether the boat is fully foiling/ foil assist, you don't have much of a campaign at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
entire show, has been dubbed “a duopoly” by Sir Ben Ainslie, whose Land Rover BAR (the only other confirmed campaign for the next Cup) was left out in the cold during consultations. “There are clear conflicts of interest in this protocol,” he said.
 
:lol::lol:
 
Try reading the Deed you idiot.
And next time you are invited onto a COR committee - try not to screw the party that invited you!
Joining coups is also not a good look....
 
How do you say 'DUH!' in Pomgolian!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something's not adding up. Since when is it bad that a CoR is strong? It sounds so weird when possible 2nd tier challengers complain about a strong Challenger of Record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Rennmaus said:

Something's not adding up. Since when is it bad that a CoR is strong? It sounds so weird when possible 2nd tier challengers complain about a strong Challenger of Record.

Yes - A good measure of equality between Defender and CoR is good. 

The issues BA is pointing out are more around better equality between Challengers, including the CoR. Especially so in this coming AC where Prada will be running the CSS.

Share this post


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

Something's not adding up. Since when is it bad that a CoR is strong? It sounds so weird when possible 2nd tier challengers complain about a strong Challenger of Record.

We have not had a strong COR for so long, no one is used to having one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Moonduster said:

I'd suggest a stakeholder is someone who stands to benefit financially. So there are two at the moment. No surprise. To be clear, the audience is never a stakeholder.

For everyone slagging ETNZ for not yet having a Rule, I would suggest that a well-written Rule is not an easy thing to create. Remember, some of the smartest and sleazyist people in international sport will try to drive a 75' boat through every missing comma, split infinitive and dangling participle. The AC34 & AC35 rules were atrocious and led to some pretty pathetic behavior - case in point - that zero is a valid tension for a shroud and that Oracle intended to race with zero tension lowers before they released the Rule even though the one-design wing spar would required stiffening in order to do so. AC35 required 3x more Interpretations than AC34, nearly 100 by the end or the regatta. A well formed, thoughtful Rule takes time. Rushing to publish is less fair to the competitors than one might imagine.

Those of you who believe the Rule, Protocol and Venue should all be announced at the same time are really pleading for them to all be announced 6-12 months after having won the cup. That's just reality for writing a Rule that will that will withstand unscrupulous scrutiny. Let's not even get into the political morass of Venue selection - that's a sport (real estate development) in which graft, greed and corruption are required and they simply cannot be scheduled.

The only thing for which one can rationally critique ETNZ is that the date of entry precedes that of venue selection. This is unforgivable and ETNZ knows this better than any.

With respect to the rest, I'd suggest that a Protocol now is better than everything in 12 months.

Does it give ETNZ and Prada an advantage? Yes, let's be clear. Like life, the America's Cup isn't fair. The Defender, and to a lesser extent the Challenger of Record, always have an advantage. That advantage is built into the Deed of Gift, which didn't even anticipate a Challenger Series.

As has been the case for some 160 years, if you don't like the America's Cup the solution is simple: Win it and make your own rules.

ETNZ didn't particularly enjoy ACs 33, 34 and 35, they fought the inequity where they thought they could and they pleaded their case in the court of public opinion (until gagged) if they thought that might help and/or to simply vent the frustration. And they won. Within the Rules, against all odds, on the water. It was perhaps the least controversial victory by any challenger, ever, and sweeter still for the adversity they faced as a Challenger.

The only thing we know for certain is that they have a long way to fall before they can begin to equal the pathetic behavior of the two Defenders that preceded them.

 

 

+1 Well said.

Share this post


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

Something's not adding up. Since when is it bad that a CoR is strong? It sounds so weird when possible 2nd tier challengers complain about a strong Challenger of Record.

Since Alinghi and Oracle instituted the manufactured poodle concept, that's when.  To most objective observers though, a powerful CoR is a good thing for all challengers but there's obviously some here who have agendas they need to advance.

Also, I'm not sure if BAR is being deliberately obtuse, but they have been provided info about the boat (if they haven't how do their sponsors know more detail than what is public?).  Perhaps they want a seat at the table, so anything less is considered "not being consulted."

Share this post


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

Suzanne McFadden

Good read, although nothing new.

Share this post


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

Good read, although nothing new.

Small detail but perhaps we'll hear this name again

'motor-racing guru Marco Piccinini, who co-authored the protocol on behalf of the Italians'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Alinghi4ever said:

Giving these Italian Clowns like Bertelli/M. Sirena and their Sponsor "Prada" this much control over the CSS will probably the biggest blunder Dalts did with the new Protocol.

Time will tell if Prada screws with the Challengers but something worrying about the situation is that if they ever want to make Protocol changes to do that, well there's no obvious reason for why ETNZ would not simply agree to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites