Barnyb

Team NYYC

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Kiwing said:

I don't see the separation bulb or much other evidence of the twin skins (unless you are suggesting that that batten is evidence of twin skins?). but looking at the D section in previous image it appears to have just two male tracks?

But it is all so new and puzzling (for me) it will be fun trying to piece together the evidence to get near the truth.

Anyway it looks like a great round of experimenting and learning

Twin skin NYYC 11-11-18.png

Look at the shot from aft and look through the window. Twin skin sail which is separated far further back than the diagram above - unless shopped. 

 

Share this post


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

The YT link for convenience:

 

Look at the mainsail window above. Either shopped or twin skinned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Big Show said:

Look at the mainsail window above. Either shopped or twin skinned. 

That's a much bigger separation than I would have expected at the foot... No?

Share this post


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

Look at the mainsail window above. Either shopped or twin skinned. 

I still can’t figure out the point of that window on the main. I get it on dinghies, but a 38 footer where you’re huddled in cockpits for aero?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a window IMHO. You can not see the stay through it?

Share this post


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

I still can’t figure out the point of that window on the main. I get it on dinghies, but a 38 footer where you’re huddled in cockpits for aero?  

They won’t sheet out much and the boats won’t heel much so what’s the story on those windows? 

Share this post


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

I still can’t figure out the point of that window on the main. I get it on dinghies, but a 38 footer where you’re huddled in cockpits for aero?  

it could be a future visual guide to align the twin sails when they begin to separate them, or just an aid for the sailors when crossing from side to side.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

C  G  I                 :ph34r:

Not in the sailing sequence. Water is one of the 3 holy grails of cg, insanely expensive in 3d. These folk have other things to do. The blur on the UK footage on the other hand would be a simple 2d track, with no masking of the live plate. Still not sure wtf they would be hiding.

Share this post


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

Not in the sailing sequence. Water is one of the 3 holy grails of cg, insanely expensive in 3d. These folk have other things to do. The blur on the UK footage on the other hand would be a simple 2d track, with no masking of the live plate. Still not sure wtf they would be hiding.

and besides, other footage, posted here no less has shown the boat foiling and a member here who has seen it personally said it it was hauling ass. what possible reason would the AM have to spend thousands of dollars on making a CGI video of the boat foiling?

Share this post


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

and besides, other footage, posted here no less has shown the boat foiling and a member here who has seen it personally said it it was hauling ass. what possible reason would the AM have to spend thousands of dollars on making a CGI video of the boat foiling?

+1 

It’s ridiculous and I suspect the Front Page was just making fun of the foolish BS that preceeded this video, about all the supposed ‘shopping of the original AM launch photos. Right up the back channel of the NZ fanboys here with their all the dumbassed Herbie conspiracy theories! 

Lmao

Share this post


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

Look at the mainsail window above. Either shopped or twin skinned. 

Is that a luff groove running next to the sail?

Screenshot_20181111-170645.png

Share this post


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

Is that a luff groove running next to the sail?

Screenshot_20181111-170645.png

I was wondering that myself also looks like a really beefy boom for a boat of that size, attachment car for that batten also looks really beef. 

Share this post


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

Is that a luff groove running next to the sail?

Screenshot_20181111-170645.png

Is that not just an overhead leach line? If you have this twin skinned sail you are going to need reasonable control of the leach for both parts... Some boats have some pretty nice block and tackles for the overheads...

Seems to me that the 'window' are for viewing the twin skins and their separation... 

Id love to have a good look at that sail on the loft floor!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The front page is suggesting the footage was CGI... Personally I don't think they would go through the trouble but who knows with the amount of money thrown around in these cup cylces. I will say that the mast looks a hell of a lot taller than some of the original photos taken when she splashed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it turns out the foil wings are not 'dummies', not just there until the 'real ones with anhedral' turn up, they are apparently ballasted and they clearly work well.

So one more point to clear up - do they have flaps?

image.thumb.png.edd534b4d906a3cedfb5948f8896f684.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from https://www.sailingworld.com/confirmed-flight-for-american-magic

..

There are two individual aft cockpits for helmsman Dean Barker, who steers from a pair of small silver wheels he salvaged from Softbank Team Japan’s AC50. Seated in his swiveling go-cart style seat, Barker has his own control buttons and grip adjustments at hand as well as a clear view of the horizon that allows him to scan for changes in wind strength, as well as the lobster pots that dot Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay. Hooking one of the Mule’s foils while flying at 30 knots is a major concern, says Barker.

..

As allowed by AC75 class rules, Individual mainsail tracks either side of the mast’s aft face hint of a double-surface mainsail concept, all of which is in very early stages of development.

..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the rules allow changing the angle of attack of the whole foil section, no flaps required then (I do think there is some rules around how big flaps can be, but how that would relate to the whole foil I don't know).

There is something going on at the back of the foil, you can see a white square where the foil meets the foil arm in the underwater shots.

Share this post


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

from https://www.sailingworld.com/confirmed-flight-for-american-magic

..

There are two individual aft cockpits for helmsman Dean Barker, who steers from a pair of small silver wheels he salvaged from Softbank Team Japan’s AC50. Seated in his swiveling go-cart style seat, Barker has his own control buttons and grip adjustments at hand as well as a clear view of the horizon that allows him to scan for changes in wind strength, as well as the lobster pots that dot Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay. Hooking one of the Mule’s foils while flying at 30 knots is a major concern, says Barker.

..

As allowed by AC75 class rules, Individual mainsail tracks either side of the mast’s aft face hint of a double-surface mainsail concept, all of which is in very early stages of development.

..

Interesting article.  They claim that it can take off in 9 knots of wind and the picture does show that the earlier pictures were photoshopped on the foils and a few other places.  you can clearly see the stays through the sail window and that second window indicating that it is a dual sail.

 

the-mule.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

", a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

A bit of a pre winge perhaps? Bet there are some ovens cooking around NZ over Xmas, the 50's and the supplied parts and etnz's boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2018 at 3:15 AM, nav said:

So it turns out the foil wings are not 'dummies', not just there until the 'real ones with anhedral' turn up, they are apparently ballasted and they clearly work well.

So one more point to clear up - do they have flaps?

Yes, but they may be small with the hinge in the darker part toward the trailing edge.

Perhaps this is the light wind setup, with bigger flaps and anhedral for heavier stuff. There are benefits to a straight foil when it's light and leeway isn't an issue. I'd guess it has a better lift/drag ratio than the heavily angled INEOS foils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2018 at 8:35 AM, Big Show said:

Look at the shot from aft and look through the window. Twin skin sail which is separated far further back than the diagram above - unless shopped. 

 

the batten... spar? near the foot of the main is... unusual... to say the least.

The horizontal line between the sets of tell-tales is almost certainly a join in the outer taffeta (falsely painted to match 3Di's appearance rather than adding any real benefit (other than off-anticipated-axis loading, aka "we don't know, but taffeta makes it ok-ish") - while T-Hutch and Dean are in this for real, the backing money is in this to promote a product) skin, and not a batten or shaping rib.

The issue I see with the diagram of the D-spare and twin luff sail as illustrated above (with the opposite skin joining around 1/4-1/3 of the cord), is that there is no sensible way to incorporate battens- unless the batten and car travel down a center groove making them unbiased per tack. This all sounds like a lot of added weight- which the Q team will already be behind the eight-ball on with the other teams siding in the 3Di camp, and therefore unlikely to be a production solution. 

More likely, the over-sized batten/spar near the foot, is a camber inducer of some sort, with the purchases going towards the main boom, driving camber into the lower section of the main twin skins.

When you think of a wing sail, the foil section shape is unchanged tack-to-tack. rather the pivot points, and rotation create the camber, and the surface shape is not 2d sail smooth as depicted in the illustration. Camber and twist are induced via controls limiting or invoking pivot in face of force applied to the particular section of the wing.

I would expect any real attempt of twin skin sail setups to be true uniformly twin skin from luff to leech with some camber and twist control battens or otherwise integrated throughout the span.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1661724249_14.2-11-18TwinskinSRW.jpg.488692ebc4e5cf36104c0e46ff55fde2.jpg

Maybe the trailing edges is not fixed together to enable NYYC to have a better wing shape?

Share this post


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

Interesting article.  They claim that it can take off in 9 knots of wind 

Compared with 13 kts in AC75’s preliminary evaluation, IIRC. But are The Mule’s foils ballasted?

 

Share this post


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

Compared with 13 kts in AC75’s preliminary evaluation, IIRC. But are The Mule’s foils ballasted?

 

They must be...... no way could you sail that boat without ballast. And to get the numbers that have been thrown around they will certiny have needed some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Mule will be packed for transit to a warmer Florida venue where testing will soon resume..."

Well, that answers that question

"...as they await the launch of Boat 1 in late April or May 2019, a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

I had heard that one of the suppliers charged with supplying a common part to all competitors is running behind schedule, in which case this would impact all teams equally. 

Share this post


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

"The Mule will be packed for transit to a warmer Florida venue where testing will soon resume..."

Well, that answers that question

"...as they await the launch of Boat 1 in late April or May 2019, a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

I had heard that one of the suppliers charged with supplying a common part to all competitors is running behind schedule, in which case this would impact all teams equally. 

There was a report somewhere about how the first foil arms that Persico produced broke in stress testing. Later, we got the ETNZ video showing them testing the FCS, but using an aluminum (was it?) arm designed to simulate the characteristics of the real arm, perhaps because of them not having a real arm to use. 

Share this post


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

"The Mule will be packed for transit to a warmer Florida venue where testing will soon resume..."

Well, that answers that question

"...as they await the launch of Boat 1 in late April or May 2019, a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

I had heard that one of the suppliers charged with supplying a common part to all competitors is running behind schedule, in which case this would impact all teams equally. 

Actually it will impact teams with test boats much less than those without, at least those teams can continue to develop and make progress while they wait.  ETNZ seem to be forgoeing a test boat so this is bad news for them, especially if it drags on too long!

Share this post


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

"The Mule will be packed for transit to a warmer Florida venue where testing will soon resume..."

Well, that answers that question

"...as they await the launch of Boat 1 in late April or May 2019, a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

I had heard that one of the suppliers charged with supplying a common part to all competitors is running behind schedule, in which case this would impact all teams equally. 

Umm..  they said a long time ago they’d be heading to Florida for the winter. It wasn’t really a question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Boybland said:

Actually it will impact teams with test boats much less than those without, at least those teams can continue to develop and make progress while they wait.  ETNZ seem to be forgoeing a test boat so this is bad news for them, especially if it drags on too long!

Will all teams get these supplied parts at the same time? You’d hope so..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Boybland said:

Actually it will impact teams with test boats much less than those without, at least those teams can continue to develop and make progress while they wait.  ETNZ seem to be forgoeing a test boat so this is bad news for them, especially if it drags on too long!

ETNZ have forgone a test boat and are using simulation - in some ways the delay in parts works to their advantage as they can continue to simulate the yet to be delivered parts, rather than deal with the bottleneck/delay of a structural flaw that one assumes once solved is not relevant to eventual real-world.

I'll await @Stingray~'s suggestion this is a calculated conspiracy - ETNZ go simulation and then ensure the real world parts are delayed giving them more time - that is until he realises that everyone is simulating or at least able to do so ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, rh2600 said:

I'll await @Stingray~'s suggestion this is a calculated conspiracy - ETNZ go simulation and then ensure the real world parts are delayed giving them more time - that is until he realises that everyone is simulating or at least able to do so ;-)

I will agree that everyone is simulating, not just ETNZ.

It’s not a binary choice of test-boat or simulation, the ideal is surely doing both in part because your simulator software can learn and improve from the data collected on the test boats. 

I expect we’ll see a variety of things tested on AM’s Mule; perhaps another Fracker T being launched soon, and with LR and ETNZ eventually launching test boats too. 

If the supplied parts become an issue worse than what we already know about then Yes, it could get a bit messy fairness-wise if it impacts Boat 1 launches in an unfair way. Surely the timing of supplied parts deliveries is required to be done properly in the Protocol somewhere?

On that note, how will Challenger teams know for certain if the supplied arms and FCS systems and batteries are as good as everyone else’s? It was one of the main points Bertarelli gave for not being interested in creating an Alinghi entry for AC36. A lot of it appears to be being organized by ETNZ and their BFF LR - just like the design rule development was too. 

Share this post


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

On that note, how will Challenger teams know for certain if the supplied arms and FCS systems and batteries are as good as everyone else’s? It was one of the main points Bertarelli gave for not being interested in creating an Alinghi entry for AC36. A lot of it appears to be being organized by ETNZ and their BFF LR - just like the design rule development was too. 

In the morning of each race day the all the foil arms will be lying on the beach and it's simply a mad dash to grab the ones you want.

XSURF_0037.jpg.70358e4c5862aa01af3551d233bfbaf1.jpg

Share this post


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

Will all teams get these supplied parts at the same time? You’d hope so..

 

I would certainly hope so, or at least within an acceptable window, anything more than a week or two would start to become a problem.

In the spirit of fairness you would kind of think the ones that have further to travel would ship first.

Share this post


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

I'll await @Stingray~'s suggestion this is a calculated conspiracy - ETNZ go simulation and then ensure the real world parts are delayed giving them more time - that is until he realises that everyone is simulating or at least able to do so ;-)

Nice coming from a dickhead that sees conspiracies everywhere.

Share this post


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

There was a report somewhere about how the first foil arms that Persico produced broke in stress testing.

Surely destructive ultimate test would be part of the stress testing? So them breaking shouldn't be too surprising.

Breaking at significantly lower than expected load would be an issue though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, hoom said:
  8 hours ago, Stingray~ said:

There was a report somewhere about how the first foil arms that Persico produced broke in stress testing.

Not the first time you have mentioned this "report somewhere" SR.

I don't remember if you actually came up with a source the last time you were asked?

Linky please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Kiwing said:

@atwinda I now have changed my opinion and can now "see" the vague stay and the other window.

604511252_TwinskinMule14-11-18.jpg.a0dfe2c49e3b87ced1c12fb3ab60539c.jpg

I think this is closer to this design than your other "fixed mast.  The Sailingworld article also mentioned "the ball joint of its rotating mast-wing section"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Monkey said:

Umm..  they said a long time ago they’d be heading to Florida for the winter. It wasn’t really a question. 

Will salinity be a factor when they finally get to Auckland? 8)

Share this post


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

Not the first time you have mentioned this "report somewhere" SR.

I don't remember if you actually came up with a source the last time you were asked?

Linky please?

In Cup Experience

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, 2Newts said:

[CUT]

"...as they await the launch of Boat 1 in late April or May 2019, a date dependent upon the arrival of supplied parts from overseas."

I had heard that one of the suppliers charged with supplying a common part to all competitors is running behind schedule, in which case this would impact all teams equally. 

I heard the same, let's see how much will this delay is. The impact depends on the date the teams are foreseeing for the Boat#1 launch. For ETNZ (if they go directly to boat #1) the impact should be huge, for NYYC I guess will be minor as they have a lot to play on the mule. For INEOS I do not know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ITA602 said:

 

I heard the same, let's see how much will this delay is. The impact depends on the date the teams are foreseeing for the Boat#1 launch. For ETNZ (if they go directly to boat #1) the impact should be huge, for NYYC I guess will be minor as they have a lot to play on the mule. For INEOS I do not know...

INEOS will be just fine, I am pretty sure we will see their nodding donkey come out of the shed soon!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ITA602 said:

 

I heard the same, let's see how much will this delay is. The impact depends on the date the teams are foreseeing for the Boat#1 launch. For ETNZ (if they go directly to boat #1) the impact should be huge, for NYYC I guess will be minor as they have a lot to play on the mule. For INEOS I do not know...

ETNZ already has boat #1 - in their simulator, so delay of the physical one might be no problem at all...

Share this post


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

I think this is closer to this design than your other "fixed mast.  The Sailingworld article also mentioned "the ball joint of its rotating mast-wing section"

The photos show the mast clearly deflected - so is there any question?

Share this post


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

I A lot of it appears to be being organized by ETNZ and their BFF LR - just like the design rule development was too. 

And there was me thinking the 'tension' between the Defender and the Challenger was the whole basis of the DOG - and especially the clause that states you either agree to conditions by 'Mutual Consent', or race according to the conditions stipulated by GS.

Nothing to see here..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, nav said:

The photos show the mast clearly deflected - so is there any question?

Swiveling spreaders?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, pusslicker said:

Nice coming from a dickhead that sees conspiracies everywhere.

The shoe is on the other foot now and he can't handle it.  It is amusing to follow though.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


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

The shoe is on the other foot now and he can't handle it.  It is amusing to follow though.  ;)

WetHog  :ph34r:

Me makes a joke about Stingers finding a conspiracy in something totally innocuous that everyone gets as sport.*

But true to form, a penny short and a day late, cantankerous old Pussstatler and Waldorfhog still manage to get sand in their knickers...

giphy.gif.45a031a14e7948813c7d5045a5a6fb69.gif

Talk about not being able to handle it... the rest of us are here for the wine and sport, why do you guys even bother when the sum total of your contributions is just vinegar and spit?

*noun a person who behaves in a good or specified way in response to teasing, defeat, or a similarly trying situation.

Share this post


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

  No spreaders?

 

Watch the video: single, swept-back spreaders - like the AC75

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

221743888_Mulespreaders.jpg.0fbc3a8c0c710e56729a3b8eec20b0b9.jpg     Ah you are right. Thanks for making me look further. Now swivelling spreaders ?? Wow it will take awhile to get my mind around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one that sees little value in these small test boats beyond basic proof of concept and a small amount of CFD calibration?

How many test boats did Oracle and Landrover build between them last time round?  That worked out well didn't it.

Share this post


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

Am I the only one that sees little value in these small test boats beyond basic proof of concept and a small amount of CFD calibration?

How many test boats did Oracle and Landrover build between them last time round?  That worked out well didn't it.

I see more value during this cycle than the last one. Last time around, the cup boat wasn’t drastically different than the 45’s. 

To quote a hilariously stupid movie, “nobody talks about brave men in their proud simulators.”  

I won’t write off ETNZ’s approach unless it fails, but I think with the crazy new boat, time in a similar boat may have value. Either way, it’s cool seeing the different approaches in action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I see more value during this cycle than the last one. Last time around, the cup boat wasn’t drastically different than the 45’s. 

To quote a hilariously stupid movie, “nobody talks about brave men in their proud simulators.”  

I won’t write off ETNZ’s approach unless it fails, but I think with the crazy new boat, time in a similar boat may have value. Either way, it’s cool seeing the different approaches in action. 

I think it comes down to practice in the transitions. For optimizing straight line speed, the simulator is probably as good as, or maybe better than, the test bed. But for figuring out maneuvers, nothing beats the real thing. Think about learning to foil gybe -- and then foil tack -- in the AC72s. Think about helmsmen going overboard from the AC50s. All hard to learn without the assistance of a test bed. 

And by the way:

32 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I won’t write off ETNZ’s approach unless it fails

Classic. I think I may use this at work. "I won't write off your idea, unless it turns out to be stupid." Thanks!!

Share this post


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

And there was me thinking the 'tension' between the Defender and the Challenger was the whole basis of the DOG - and especially the clause that states you either agree to conditions by 'Mutual Consent', or race according to the conditions stipulated by GS.

Nothing to see here..............

If you refuse to see the blatantly obvious facts that both the cooked up design and the supplied parts have been all under the control of ETNZ and their long-time, money-influencing BFF LR, then you are being just willingly, blissfully ignorant.

That those two teams maintain the right to change the rules at any time in the future to benefit themseves as they wish, had apparently escaped your notice too ;) Both parties want PRADA to win the PRADA CUP and want PRADA to be in the America’s Cup Presented By PRADA. 

 

NYYC may have an army of sharp lawyers to call on but the going-in situation was already stacked!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to look like some conspiracy nutter, but i have pulled every frame apart  - which bit of this has been doctored? All the rigging pics have a single set of spreaders and there is not one sign of them in any of the sailing footage, any of it.  I even tried to slow it down to see if they were super swept when sailing and could not see any sign of them. 

IMG_1332 (1).jpg

56402810049__C9B699B8-962B-4929-A370-789A1ED04838.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spreaders are clearly there on the dock out in "Meet The Mule", the outer stays are also almost vertical in a number of sailing shots indicating they are on spreaders, however it is rather odd how dificult they are to spot in the actual sailing videos.

Pretty sure it's just an optical effect though due to everything being black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure it is all optics, this pic makes it clear they are there with the angle of the standing rigging , but odd not clearly see them in any of the sailing footage posted.

FD9B26B8-B4E3-407E-83AE-813B2E8B0BCF.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back & looked over the "meet the mule" run where we previously discussed the foil tip vortex. 

Clicking through frame at a time makes it looks like (to me) that some effort was made to remove details in regard to the stays. 

Here is one frame with a faint image of the stays.  Other adjacent images have the stays completely gone.

image.thumb.png.93a59700a0651bbb258c230f2bdef724.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weird.

Presumably just to 'tidy the picture' since we have no spy limits -> other teams gonna have good pics of any secret sauce that may be going on up there.

And there shouldn't be anything particularly interesting going on there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2:08-12 as they tow it out is a pretty clear shot of the rigging.

4XV85cJ.png

Share this post


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

The spreaders are clearly there on the dock out in "Meet The Mule", the outer stays are also almost vertical in a number of sailing shots indicating they are on spreaders, however it is rather odd how dificult they are to spot in the actual sailing videos.

Pretty sure it's just an optical effect though due to everything being black.

This. The spreaders have a very thin section (are quite flat), so easy to spot when viewed from below but nearly invisible  (especially against the black sails) when viewed horizontally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kiwing said:

Help me here guys which one or how else ???

Probably the first. Hardly novel, e.g. Gitana, whose mast not only rotates but cants as well (as do lots of others), though it doesn't have spreaders. I think the whole dual–skin thing is bullshit, a wing mast and soft sail is likely just as good. Gitana's sail has almost no shape at all, the camber comes from mast rotation and wind pressure.

gitana.png.dac99a8f799ecd1c7149fb7db227ee59.png

Share this post


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

Probably the first. Hardly novel, e.g. Gitana, whose mast not only rotates but cants as well (as do lots of others), though it doesn't have spreaders. I think the whole dual–skin thing is bullshit, a wing mast and soft sail is likely just as good. Gitana's sail has almost no shape at all, the camber comes from mast rotation and wind pressure.

 

You think huh??? 

lets leave it to the guys who are professional in high end sailing boats to decide....

I can not see that anyone would be putting money into developing this concept if there were not gains to be had.

'They think' its going to work!

Share this post


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

 

Classic. I think I may use this at work. "I won't write off your idea, unless it turns out to be stupid." Thanks!!

Oddly enough, it’s already a running joke where I work. There’s one person who’s known for really dumb, overly complicated ideas that always claims we write off his suggestions. 

“I won’t write off your idea until it fails” is our traditional response. 

Must’ve been a Freudian slip because I didn’t really mean it in a negative way regarding ETNZ. 

Share this post


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

“I won’t write off your idea until it fails” is our traditional response. 

Depending on your line of work it might cost a bit of money to try it and prove the point.

What a change between the general comments when boat design was announced and the current ones following each video from Ineos or AM. I follow America's cup for the technological development and innovation, and we are fortunate to have such treat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Depending on your line of work it might cost a bit of money to try it and prove the point.

What a change between the general comments when boat design was announced and the current ones following each video from Ineos or AM. I follow America's cup for the technological development and innovation, and we are fortunate to have such treat.

Now that is a solid positive statement!

I honestly thought the first rendering of the AC75 was some kind of joke..... But seeing this come together and work as a concept on the water has been a true delight.

Just remember how far the foiling cats came from concept to the finished article; we are going to be in for a real treat of engineering here!!

At this point, hats off to the AM guys. They have built something pretty special.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Kiwing said:

1380294640_Mulespreadersattachment.jpg.059cb86db7136aec7cf6b140fdc16ac4.jpg Help me here guys which one or how else ???

option D: None of the above

spreaders are attached via conventional means, and rotate with the rig.

rotating rig means that side bend is really your fore/aft bend (luff curve) and thus why they'd want to control it via diamonds/jack stays... rig bends sideways, and is limited by the leeward diamond/jack stay...

c-scow rotating mast as evidence.

Image result for c-scow

 

The reason you don't see spreaders on the multihull rotating rigs, is that they are brick shit houses. very stiff.

Think Alinghi's 100'er for other examples of rotating mast with spreaders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@atwinda Thank you for your explanation.  Having played around with how it might work helps me understand how it probably works - spreaders and all rotate.

Very careful study of mule videos coming up. I shall try to get some evidence one way or the other.

I also, at first thought this concept was a ETNZ leg pull.  But WOW seeing the mule fly and reading some theory suggesting this twin skin has advantages over a wing aerodynamically shows we are in new wonderful territory. More fun guaranteed !! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry @atwinda the C-scow spreader stays come into the base of the mast.  The Mule spreader stays come down to the sides of the hull, hence would stop the 30-40 degree twist needed for the sail setup.

Share this post


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

Probably the first. Hardly novel, e.g. Gitana, whose mast not only rotates but cants as well (as do lots of others), though it doesn't have spreaders. I think the whole dual–skin thing is bullshit, a wing mast and soft sail is likely just as good. Gitana's sail has almost no shape at all, the camber comes from mast rotation and wind pressure.

 

It's always worth remembering these guys have access to computer power for modeling that most people can only dream off using.  It's about the only way you can come up with something as insane as the AC75 concept and have two groups build quite different variations on it that simply work straight out of the box! 

I imagine the twin skin details are probably equally well modelled and these guys know they are worth the extra money and complexity because the modeling tells them so.

It's a very fine time to be interested in yacht design indeed!  who knows what they will come up with next!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it looked to me like a rotating rig, like the scow above or Tornado or many other classes where the spreaders rotate with the rig (and why i was looking for them in the sailing video) .  I thought that is how it would work from the first video where they are putting the rig in and the appearance of a curved platform for a rotator (positive or negative) at the bottom of the rig and the video behind TL later as they are launching.

 

 

Capture3.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1916978334_Mulespreaders.jpg.e756b499c42e3dda2a3cefa284748644.jpg

You can see the spreader stays coming straight down to the sides of the boat. Which means I think they cannot rotate through the 60+ degrees they need to for the optimum  mast/sail shape. IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea - normally I would not fuss over all all of this, but after looking at the the rig photos (which look like a standard 1 spreader rig set up) in the launch photos, and what I expected them to do with a D section, rotation and twin skin to get maximum benefit, it just seemed like they were not in sync.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So That means, I think the the mast must rotate relative to the spreaders.

So how is that done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 3:06 PM, rh2600 said:

Talk about not being able to handle it... the rest of us are here for the wine and sport, why do you guys even bother when the sum total of your contributions is just vinegar and spit?

11c6xwx.jpg

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2018 at 10:27 PM, Monkey said:

I see more value during this cycle than the last one. Last time around, the cup boat wasn’t drastically different than the 45’s. 

To quote a hilariously stupid movie, “nobody talks about brave men in their proud simulators.”  

I won’t write off ETNZ’s approach unless it fails, but I think with the crazy new boat, time in a similar boat may have value. Either way, it’s cool seeing the different approaches in action. 

Even ETNZ had 2 test boats, bought one, modified another, or the same one, hmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lowers appear to attach to the sidewall independent of the spreaders, I don't see much mast rotation being able to occur.

Sorry for the crappy screen grab.

 

Screenshot_20181116-174716.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me that the mast is rigged in a way that does not involve rotation.  It does not give maximum performance but that is not important on a test boat where development for the control of the twin skin sail shape is the priority.

They might build a rotating test mast later as they have plenty of time for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps worth noting the rigging scheme is the same as that shown in AC75’s renderings, rigging being a common supply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, I went back and looked at the renderings and skimmed the rule , so it looks/appears non-rotating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the rule stipulates a rotating mast with supplied rigging fittings, spreaders etc.

I also believe the Mule has a rotating mast. I think you see a round base plate on the mule mast in the video of the launch and the mast rotated at less 30 degrees in the shot I posted with the gap between the skins.

So my question still stands how do they attach the spreaders to the mast? Can any one help?

The stays from the spreaders come straight down to the outer sides (as apposed to back to the bottom of the mast (like the C-scow and the Tornado)).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2018 at 4:28 AM, Boybland said:

It's always worth remembering these guys have access to computer power for modeling that most people can only dream off using.  It's about the only way you can come up with something as insane as the AC75 concept and have two groups build quite different variations on it that simply work straight out of the box! 

I imagine the twin skin details are probably equally well modelled and these guys know they are worth the extra money and complexity because the modeling tells them so.

It's a very fine time to be interested in yacht design indeed!  who knows what they will come up with next!

Sure, but in a competition tightly controlled by rules, it really doesn't matter unless there's a significant performance boost (such as the novel foil system). Dual skin sails have been tried many times over the years, maybe there are some gains but no one has found them to be worth the effort. Yet.

It seems to me that they will closely model a pocket luff, which is certainly better than a mast + soft sail where high performance matters, so it might be a practical version of a large pocket luff. But to say they're better than a wing mast + soft sail infers the offshore multi guys either haven't thought it has enough promise to bother with, or they've looked at it seriously and think it's inferior. It may well be the former, but I'm not writing off the latter. ;-)

It must also be said that the large offshore multis have a relatively conservative approach and go for incremental gains rather than giant leaps (as evidenced by their approach foil development). So maybe dual skin sails are on their to–do list, but they're focused on foil development at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites