Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

America's Cup: American Magic reveal how 83kph crash happened

American Magic have explained how an unexpected gust of wind saw Dean Barker lose control of their AC75 and capsize at 83kph.

...

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/americas-cup/123975375/americas-cup-american-magic-reveal-how-83kph-crash-happened

Why unexpected? Was anyone's head outside the boat?

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

They have 11 days ...should be doable 

Correct.

I doubt this job is terribly much more than that of when ETNZ played turtle in Bermuda.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Why unexpected? Was anyone's head outside the boat?

Agree. That was not an unexpected gust. Blind Freddy  should have seen it coming.

I think the statement was some artistic addition by a non sailing journalist.

Share this post


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

Correct.

I doubt this job is terribly much more than that of when ETNZ played turtle in Bermuda.

That was hardly structural damage was it.   Most was fairings and wing damage not a metre hole in a load zone 

Share this post


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

That was hardly structural damage was it.   Most was fairings and wing damage not a metre hole in a load zone 

What about the wing? It was shredded.

Also, you are forgetting about all the electronics and hydraulics that were fucked (or fucked adjacent).

Share this post


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

It's hard to tell, but in the pics the core looks like an aluminium honeycomb. Moisture can be vacuumed out. Delamination should be worse on the outside where it is easier to fix.

Getting rid of the salt will be the issue. You've got a hull that's a battery if you don't.

Share this post


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

What about the wing? It was shredded.

Also, you are forgetting about all the electronics and hydraulics that were fucked (or fucked adjacent).

They had that yes and as stated wing damage not an enormous hole though plus electrical and sail damage not to mention any internal damage on top of that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

Getting rid of the salt will be the issue. You've got a hull that's a battery if you don't.

Alu honeycomb tends to also have holes  in the cell walls to let the pressure stabilise when curing. The down side is that it fills up far beyond the damage and the area needing replacing just keeps on growing, especially when in the water for as long a they were.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mako23 said:

I’m not sure those are cracks...they also might be were the paint has been worn of with all sorts of objects were rammed  against the hull when rescuing the boat 

What caused those red lines?

Share this post


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

They had that yes and as stated wing damage not an enormous hole though plus electrical and sail damage not to mention any internal damage on top of that.   

Its a massive task that will take hours to even asses what has to be done and how extensive the damage is 

Share this post


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

Well, ETNZ stated it took them 8000hrs to build the hull. So if you have 50 man and 12 days, each man working 16hrs per day its 9600hrs. But this is theoretical, the first issue would be they dont have molds on site, or do they? But then again, many things can be salvaged from this boat, it would have to be only partialy rebuilt. This will be organisational and logistical race with time.

Try 80000 hours...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZL3481 said:

Carbon skins + aluminium honeycomb + salt water = battery .

The entire hull shell could be compromised.

It takes time for water to penetrate far AND for corrosion to have a big effect. Likely it will not compromise the whole hull (though I wouldn't want to buy it in 3 months time :)

WAG - the damaged area + 0.5m around will be compromised. It's a LOCAL impact of something flying through the air and punching out.

Yes, the ribbons you see on the external shots are just torn uni tapes.

When I watched a video of them lifting it out I was watching the hull reflections. Most are very uniform still. There was one area that might have been a fold in the hull shape though.

I would be surprised if the batteries were this far forward; keeping heavy weights centered nearer the loads (big electric motors) means your heavy cables are shorter. Low weight is very important to keep the boat foiling.  So very likely close to the middle of the boat about 2m aft of the hole.

And finally to the poor engineers who designed the battery hold down bracket/box whatever - it's very hard to design for load cases you didn't think about. That is what gets you 80% of the time. "Gee I never thought of a 2G deceleration sideways"...

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

Try 80000 hours...

Really? Say a boat building crew of 20 persons, doing typical Kiwi 48 weeks/year of work.

20 persons x 48 weeks x 40 hrs/week = 38,400 hours.

Now I don't think it took them 2 years to build the boat. Maybe 80,000 hours if you add all the engineering, fabrication of custom parts, electronics, etc, etc. But 80,000 hours for a hull is nuts.

Share this post


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

The hull skin shouldn't be all that structural. It's there to keep the structural bits from sinking.

Yes but the skin is thin and its the first one to show where there was structural stress. Judging from those other photos i now only see two crack lines, as drawn in image. Hole seem to be boxed between ribs/bulkheads of the boat, and since there is some carbon tear at the bottom it probably opened like tin can from top to bottom. Maybe something hit it from the inside to start this cracks fail totaly creating loose slab that was ripped away by fast moving water on impact. I added screenshot of ETNZ hull design with bulkheads spacing, im sure Patriot has different spacing but it makes total sense why hole is so square in shape, it only opened between ribs.

1240327-03.thumb.jpeg.8c0819f2c70533db8261555b417682bdb.jpg

1240327-03.thumb.jpeg.8c0819f2c70533db8261555b417682bd.jpg

TNZ1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if its fixable (and I believe its very fixable) week or two tops

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Marty6 said:

Wrong, Barker is the helmsman, Hutchinson is the skipper, at least according to the official roster ;)

Crazy, isn’t it?

As Hutch wanted the glory of being the skipper, he has to accept the responsibility too.

What good he believed he was doing as a grinder is a mystery. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

For the Eddie Izzard fans...

It was a tough choice...

IMG-20210117-WA0033.jpg

We're gonna run out of cake at this rate!

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Nonsense, if it takes 9 months to make a baby, 9 women can make a baby in 1 month. Same principle for boat builders.

I volunteer to be that one man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the tiny holes in the honeycomb cell walls could be an issue with water penetrating far into the hull. Oh, just checked the dates - AC is late March. That's a bit longer and yes corrosion will occur in that time frame. I don't have any feel for how long a broken panel submerged in 1m of water will take for cells to slowly fill up, then allow water into the next panel and so on. Need to laminate up a panel with one side made of plexiglass and see. Good thesis topic "Water Ingress into Damaged Honeycomb Composite Structures"

They're using aluminum honeycomb since it's the best material for the job, even though it can make a battery and is not good for longevity. These boats are not made to last for years.

Looking at the video where it was lifted out you see these nice uniform reflection curves. The one in lower front is interrupted by carbon uni hanging down. Maybe.

But these reflections suggest the hull damage isn't too bad on the part of the hull I've drawn on. Can't see enough reflections above the hole to judge.

image.png.af9ba8c008ab0d899226d7520a2dda6a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Their communication is on a different level.  They show authority and no indecision particularly with regard to risky moves.

They hesitate sometimes as we saw in race 3 but I agree it is not at crucial times. They only hesitate when there is time to hesitate.

Share this post


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

I volunteer to be that one man.

If they all look like Roseanne Barr? <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zonker said:

Really? Say a boat building crew of 20 persons, doing typical Kiwi 48 weeks/year of work.

20 persons x 48 weeks x 40 hrs/week = 38,400 hours.

Now I don't think it took them 2 years to build the boat. Maybe 80,000 hours if you add all the engineering, fabrication of custom parts, electronics, etc, etc. But 80,000 hours for a hull is nuts.

Their build team was around 60 people. 8 months to build the boat less the 5 week forced break for COVID. So say 40 hours per week (I've never seen a boatbuilder do only 40 hours per week) x 35 weeks x 60 people and see where the numbers lay. It's north of 80000 hours.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a unique scenario due to covid you can't just sack crew members and get someone else on a plane with 14 days of quarantine (also must hold an American passport due to nationality rule). 

Stuck with what they have I'm afraid. 

Unless Dennis is in Auckland? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive got a roll of that silver 3m cloth tape they can have.

Might need replacing after a race or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, NZL3481 said:

Getting rid of the salt will be the issue. You've got a hull that's a battery if you don't.

It only has to last through the end of the event.

Look at the big Cup sloops like Reliance in the early 20th century: bronze bottom plating on steel frames, with aluminium topsides, none galvanically isolated. Sometimes broken up shortly after the event.

Disposable boats bought by disposable income are not new in the AC. Conspicuous consumption at its most conspicuous.

I love it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

They had that yes and as stated wing damage not an enormous hole though plus electrical and sail damage not to mention any internal damage on top of that.   

Oh well, just label me hopeful ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would be surprised how quickly these thin walled cell walls corrode. But this ignores how they fix the structure that punched the hole.

Share this post


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

Alu honeycomb tends to also have holes  in the cell walls to let the pressure stabilise when curing. The down side is that it fills up far beyond the damage and the area needing replacing just keeps on growing, especially when in the water for as long a they were.

I was wondering if Al honeycomb for marine use was also perforated.

Ugh, what a mess.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being on holiday only keeping a loose eye on threads, any speculation about B1s. Who has one and state of readiness. I remember LR saying their B1 is being kept race ready which I thought was sensible but apparently nobody else is/was?

Will anyone offer Amway a boat? Wouldn't win and might bring in some extra cash? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lat35sowth said:

Ive got a roll of that silver 3m cloth tape they can have.

 

 

 

dr-shrink.thumb.JPG.0d4cd2ccdf2669b6bb50619e73bb3741.JPG

Share this post


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

Well, ETNZ stated it took them 8000hrs to build the hull. So if you have 50 man and 12 days, each man working 16hrs per day its 9600hrs. But this is theoretical, the first issue would be they dont have molds on site, or do they? But then again, many things can be salvaged from this boat, it would have to be only partialy rebuilt. This will be organisational and logistical race with time.

They are not building a complete AC75 for scratch.  They have laser scanners and design documents that can match the counter of the hull that need repair.  They can print pieces to fill in the voids for the mold.  The boat will not leave the hanger, they can bring in extra help, etc...  If the boat is not too far gone/destroyed , they will have it ready to sail in time.

Share this post


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

Being on holiday only keeping a loose eye on threads, any speculation about B1s. Who has one and state of readiness. I remember LR saying their B1 is being kept race ready which I thought was sensible but apparently nobody else is/was?

Will anyone offer Amway a boat? Wouldn't win and might bring in some extra cash? 

As I understand, they are already in the semi-final as long as they can have the boat ready to sail by the 29th Jan.

It would be nice for the event, and for keeping their race team sharp, getting straight back on the horse etc, etc, but it is not necessary for them to qualify for the SF.

Share this post


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

They are not building a complete AC75 for scratch.  They have laser scanners and design documents that can match the counter of the hull that need repair.  They can print pieces to fill in the voids for the mold.  The boat will not leave the hanger, they can bring in extra help, etc...  If the boat is not too far gone/destroyed , they will have it ready to sail in time.

Sometimes easier to build from scratch. Just working out what to cut out, prep, decontaminate etc adds time to a repair of  top of building the new parts. And that ignores engineering the grafts etc.

Share this post


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

If they all look like Roseanne Barr? <_<

With my looks I would grateful. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Check again this image, you can clearly see half rounded line that is really evenly distanced from arm and suggests this is reinforcement of arm into the hull. Even hole in bottom part isnt square in that corner since this circular crack intersects it. I think this is the biggest structural problem they will have to face. Hole is the least problem, but hull cracked in places where it is supposed to be strongest is a problem.

Er86l8pUwAAC4VI.jpg

Er86l8pUwAAC4VIb.jpg

I am not so sure those are cracks.  The surface is made of strands of carbon fiber tape that goes in various directions.  To me, it looks like the object hit the hull and broke most of the carbon fiber strips as it went through, thus the square hole.  But, it did not break all of those carbon fiber strips cleanly and some peeled back and tore off the surface finish of the hull.  It does not make sense that an object would cause those types of cracks in the hull composite.  We are just seeing where those strips peeled back the surface layer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they have it half done already, just waiting for the glue to go off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the exit wound, exit wound of a puncture through a cored composite structure with skins made of unidirectional plies (which this will be - its a gnats cock lighter due to lower resin volume fraction than wovens) will give rise to an awful lot of peeling  of the outside skin.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Nonsense, if it takes 9 months to make a baby, 9 women can make a baby in 1 month. Same principle for boat builders.

I don't think the boat builders will be allowed to keep and impregnate 9 women in the forward hull section:wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NZL4EVER said:

Despite his old age, PJ is still a better commentator than most old AND young farts here on SA. :P

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got the Flex-Seal trailer loaded into the Antotov and the Flex-Girls will be joining me when their Sunday afternoon shifts at the titty bar is over! Never fear, help is on the way. We are even bringing the tinny with the screen door bottom for chase boat when the racing resumes.

 

Holy Beeep!!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly the odds are stacked against them even if they get the boat re-built. I think their dream to win the cup is over. They were fast in the breeze but no good in the light and from what I have seen ETNZ can do both. Now ETNZ can focus on being faster than Ineos and Luna Rossa. The after guard has been aweful in the Prada cup and that doesn't make their chances any better. Sad after so much work to go out in these circumstances. The resumes of Dean and Terry are on the line too.

Share this post


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

I don't think the boat builders will be allowed to keep and impregnate 9 women in the forward hull section:wub:

Jeez, you guys really don't keep up with the times. These days it's all done with pre-preg, minimum fuss!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Alu honeycomb tends to also have holes  in the cell walls to let the pressure stabilise when curing. The down side is that it fills up far beyond the damage and the area needing replacing just keeps on growing, especially when in the water for as long a they were.

How do you know it’s an al cored hull?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is too much emphasis on a couple of issues.  If Dean had taken the soft-cock option by going around the other gate and lost say 20 secs to LR and then further down the track they had fallen into one of the holes in the wind that had developed.  This may have allowed LR to pass AM before the finish. Then the forum would be lit up with how weak Dean was and it was his fault they lost.  Dean took the racing option and so he should have.

As for the runner that is a furphy. I think you will find the main was eased as far as it could go.  There is no long sheet on the main, it is trimmed hydraulically.  These boats are not set up to reach as displacement boats reach with the main well eased.  The apparent wind is always way forward so no need to be able ease the main and jib right out.  The runner is hardly ever eased away on the leeward side but if it is it is just a small amount.  The runner did not stop the main from easing, the system just doesn't allowing to happen.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

Amway to have press conference this afternoon.

Fingers crossed that it is (relatively) good news.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZL3481 said:

Their build team was around 60 people. 8 months to build the boat less the 5 week forced break for COVID. So say 40 hours per week (I've never seen a boatbuilder do only 40 hours per week) x 35 weeks x 60 people and see where the numbers lay. It's north of 80000 hours.

Well colour me surprised. That's a lot of folks - I'm guessing a significant amount of those hours account for building mast(s), foil(s), rudders(s)?  Sure they are part of the boat and have to be counted but the hours for the bare hull are likely not much different from any other high end racing boat project of similar size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Hutch had any nuts he would fit out Defiant ASAP and start sailing it.  The crew obviously needs practice, so sitting around with the thumb up their asses isn’t really doing them any good.  And I am not so sure that Defiant is that much slower than Patriot.

Look at InEOS.  It’s less about the hull and more about the setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, trt131 said:

I think there is too much emphasis on a couple of issues.  If Dean had taken the soft-cock option by going around the other gate and lost say 20 secs to LR and then further down the track they had fallen into one of the holes in the wind that had developed.  This may have allowed LR to pass AM before the finish. Then the forum would be lit up with how weak Dean was and it was his fault they lost.  Dean took the racing option and so he should have.

As for the runner that is a furphy. I think you will find the main was eased as far as it could go.  There is no long sheet on the main, it is trimmed hydraulically.  These boats are not set up to reach as displacement boats reach with the main well eased.  The apparent wind is always way forward so no need to be able ease the main and jib right out.  The runner is hardly ever eased away on the leeward side but if it is it is just a small amount.  The runner did not stop the main from easing, the system just doesn't allowing to happen.

Agreed Barker took the right option.  However they weren't co-ordinated, communicating nor setting it up earlier enough then.  Then the execution wasn't done well nor with force which may have been a product of the lead up failings.

I agree on the runners being a red-herring.  AM of all the boats has the least leeway in easing the main because of their type of boom and a narrower traveller range compared to ETNZ and LR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZL4EVER said:

This is a unique scenario due to covid you can't just sack crew members and get someone else on a plane with 14 days of quarantine (also must hold an American passport due to nationality rule). 

Stuck with what they have I'm afraid. 

Unless Dennis is in Auckland? 

Dennis? You're kidding, right? The old fucker wouldn't be able to think fast enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Enzedel92 said:

If Hutch had any nuts he would fit out Defiant ASAP and start sailing it.  The crew obviously needs practice, so sitting around with the thumb up their asses isn’t really doing them any good.  And I am not so sure that Defiant is that much slower than Patriot.

Look at InEOS.  It’s less about the hull and more about the setup.

Question is how much was stripped off Defiant to build Patriot, and how much of the electronics/hydraulics left in Defiant are needed to repair Patriot (if that’s’ the call)? I haven’t been following closely so could be off base here-agree that if Defiant is ready to sail, in NZ, and parts aren’t needed, get it on the water!

In terms of materials, typically only the highest modulus uni-carbon is tough to get. I suspect they have that in-house and if not, one of the teams does, and if not Hall/Southern have some they can probably spare if not currently using for a rig build. The extent of core damage is a bigger concern.

Share this post


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

Well colour me surprised. That's a lot of folks - I'm guessing a significant amount of those hours account for building mast(s), foil(s), rudders(s)?  Sure they are part of the boat and have to be counted but the hours for the bare hull are likely not much different from any other high end racing boat project of similar size.

Masts are outsourced, as are the foil control arms & hydraulic cylinders, but foils, steering systems, hydraulic distribution etc. are all in-house.

These are likely to be the most technically complex boats ever constructed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Agreed Barker took the right option.  However they weren't co-ordinated, communicating nor setting it up earlier enough then.  Then the execution wasn't done well nor with force which may have been a product of the lead up failings.

I agree on the runners being a red-herring.  AM of all the boats has the least leeway in easing the main because of their type of boom and a narrower traveller range compared to ETNZ and LR.

Most of the fast cat sailors on here would suggest that easing a main in that situation is a little suicidal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, trt131 said:

I think there is too much emphasis on a couple of issues.  If Dean had taken the soft-cock option by going around the other gate and lost say 20 secs to LR and then further down the track they had fallen into one of the holes in the wind that had developed.  This may have allowed LR to pass AM before the finish. Then the forum would be lit up with how weak Dean was and it was his fault they lost.  Dean took the racing option and so he should have.

As for the runner that is a furphy. I think you will find the main was eased as far as it could go.  There is no long sheet on the main, it is trimmed hydraulically.  These boats are not set up to reach as displacement boats reach with the main well eased.  The apparent wind is always way forward so no need to be able ease the main and jib right out.  The runner is hardly ever eased away on the leeward side but if it is it is just a small amount.  The runner did not stop the main from easing, the system just doesn't allowing to happen.

Better to lose then the result they ended up with.

The main was hard on the backstay as soon as they started their bearaway, before the shit hit the fan.  The top of the fat head didn't open up.  Even if they couldn't release any more mainsheet, that sail could have been more depowered. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that a battery broke off its mounting and crashed through.
 

We’ve seen 5 AC75 sky jump capsizes (3 by ETNZ) but this is the first splashdown that was this much ‘sideways’.

My other guess is that they will be good to go by the 29th. 
 

edit: looking fwd to hearing from TH in about 90 minutes. 

Share this post


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

Better to lose then the result they ended up with.

The main was hard on the backstay as soon as they started their bearaway, before the shit hit the fan.  The top of the fat head didn't open up.  Even if they couldn't release any more mainsheet, that sail could have been more depowered. 

And if they always take the cautious option they are guaranteed to lose and might as well not have bothered challenging in the first place.

If you are racing, then you race. If not, go buy a trailer sailor.

Share this post


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

Better to lose then the result they ended up with.

The main was hard on the backstay as soon as they started their bearaway, before the shit hit the fan.  The top of the fat head didn't open up.  Even if they couldn't release any more mainsheet, that sail could have been more depowered. 

Hindsight is wonderful.  They were going for the win FFS.

There is no mainsheet, its all hydraulic.  Easing the head open more would not have done anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

Jeez, you guys really don't keep up with the times. These days it's all done with pre-preg, minimum fuss!

 

My wife likes a minimum fuss.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Haven’t seen this one posted yet, so fwiw

0D32D4EE-7080-47BF-8004-775432F0260D.thumb.jpeg.9e205c73bccc56fa8908aee35ed0e97e.jpeg

 

That damage area is like 4 x the size at least of the visible hole. Its like someone unzipped the bottom of the hull.

Share this post


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

That was hardly structural damage was it.   Most was fairings and wing damage not a metre hole in a load zone 

really  ? where did  the   battery-sized  hole   come  from ? smack that  off  the  foundations = major  unknowns

Share this post


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

Haven’t seen this one posted yet, so fwiw

0D32D4EE-7080-47BF-8004-775432F0260D.thumb.jpeg.9e205c73bccc56fa8908aee35ed0e97e.jpeg

Just watched the replay again.  If the hole was made that big solely by the crash wouldn't the boat have taken water on quicker than it did?

It takes some time before boats get there with flotation devices.  For a couple or minutes you can see one of the crew standing on the lower gunwhale  below the rudder with his feet in water.  

I would have thought with that size hole it would have filled up quicker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, CaptainAhab said:

How do you know it’s an al cored hull?

It's shiny and silver. Look at the close up pics.

Also typical of cost is no object/longevity is not a concern builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it looks like the hole was cut.  If something punched through the hull the hole would be more ragged.  Did the salvage divers do this to get the flotation bags inside?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Just watched the replay again.  If the hole was made that big solely by the crash wouldn't the boat have taken water on quicker than it did?

It takes some time before boats get there with flotation devices.  For a couple or minutes you can see one of the crew standing on the lower gunwhale  below the rudder with his feet in water.  

I would have thought with that size hole it would have filled up quicker.

The Rule includes language about sealed bulkheads, I forget the details, but maybe that helped. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trt131 said:

I think there is too much emphasis on a couple of issues.  If Dean had taken the soft-cock option by going around the other gate and lost say 20 secs to LR and then further down the track they had fallen into one of the holes in the wind that had developed.  This may have allowed LR to pass AM before the finish. Then the forum would be lit up with how weak Dean was and it was his fault they lost.  Dean took the racing option and so he should have.

As for the runner that is a furphy. I think you will find the main was eased as far as it could go.  There is no long sheet on the main, it is trimmed hydraulically.  These boats are not set up to reach as displacement boats reach with the main well eased.  The apparent wind is always way forward so no need to be able ease the main and jib right out.  The runner is hardly ever eased away on the leeward side but if it is it is just a small amount.  The runner did not stop the main from easing, the system just doesn't allowing to happen.

What's "softcock" and what's safe when you have a commanding lead in marginal conditions?

 

There was no need to take risks.

Share this post


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

:( 

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of which are the high risk maneuvers in these boats and why.

1) tack bear away

2) bear away

3) gybe head up

4) head up tack

6) head up

5) gybe

6) tack

 

Retracted! Asked a friend who is a world class foiling champ, he said the gybe would be safer, would have gone for it even worth extra distance apologies for being wrong

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Interesting call by Casper after the fact

He was wearing 2 sets, the broadcast one was not working, onboard comms seemed to function normally, so he was in the loop.

 

Thanks Nav.  did not know that. Bit of CEO speak which is expected. Much more to filter out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh that's worse than the picture I posted. I've circled in red what I *think* is damaged hull skin. The outline in blue is probably what you would cut out to do a repair. For a repair like this you don't do a piecemeal effort. You just cut a nice big rectangular hole and capture all the damaged area. You're minimizing the lap perimeter thus minimizing weight.

Edit - the area on top of the hole circled in red might be the reflection of a ladder!

You can see the frame through the hole that probably supports the foil hardware.

Jan 29th? Sucking air through teeth sound. "Maybe gov'nor, just maybe". But I wouldn't bet on it.

image.thumb.png.1ac018191a1272cc8abb6d97202be481.png

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, trt131 said:

To me it looks like the hole was cut. 

More logical SA advice!

"To insert a round flotation device we recommend cutting a square hole".

  • Like 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

really  ? where did  the   battery-sized  hole   come  from ? smack that  off  the  foundations = major  unknowns

Clearly didn’t read the comment this responded to 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trt131 said:

I think there is too much emphasis on a couple of issues.  If Dean had taken the soft-cock option by going around the other gate and lost say 20 secs to LR and then further down the track they had fallen into one of the holes in the wind that had developed.  This may have allowed LR to pass AM before the finish. Then the forum would be lit up with how weak Dean was and it was his fault they lost.  Dean took the racing option and so he should have.

As for the runner that is a furphy. I think you will find the main was eased as far as it could go.  There is no long sheet on the main, it is trimmed hydraulically.  These boats are not set up to reach as displacement boats reach with the main well eased.  The apparent wind is always way forward so no need to be able ease the main and jib right out.  The runner is hardly ever eased away on the leeward side but if it is it is just a small amount.  The runner did not stop the main from easing, the system just doesn't allowing to happen.

They wouldnt have lost in that breeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m guessing that angular piece is the battery bracket that failed and preceded the battery through the hull wherein the hydro forces finished the job. Just guessing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sort of shows the futility of doing composite structure failure analysis based on a shiny reflective surface at night! Looking at it again, a lot of what I think was damage was maybe reflections of stuff on the ground.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

This sort of shows the futility of doing composite structure failure analysis based on a shiny reflective surface at night! Looking at it again, a lot of what I think was damage was maybe reflections of stuff on the ground.

Wouldn’t be the first boat written off by a pic of a boat  with reflection from something else.    ETNZ boat 1 was a total write off apparently 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The Rule includes language about sealed bulkheads, I forget the details, but maybe that helped. 

On NZ Radio a person working on the salvage said that it was touch and go and only minutes away from it sinking.  Now if that hole wasn't caused by the crash then the only explanation for the relatively slow fill was that there is other structural damage inside where the water seeped rather than poured.  

Share this post


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

My guess is that a battery broke off its mounting and crashed through.
 

We’ve seen 5 AC75 sky jump capsizes (3 by ETNZ) but this is the first splashdown that was this much ‘sideways’.

My other guess is that they will be good to go by the 29th. 
 

edit: looking fwd to hearing from TH in about 90 minutes. 

Can you post the link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter Lester:

"The boat is really vulnerable [at that moment] if there's a gust of wind or a wind change and right at the critical moment where they went around the mark, they got big squirt.

"At that point, they lost the rudder, they lost steerage and the end plate of the rudder cavitated and the cavitation means the rudder isn't working anymore.

"The rudder sinks, the back of the boat sinks, the lead foil gets a lot of elevation and you're off into space and at that point, you're totally out of control."

https://amp.tvnz.co.nz/news/story/JTJGY29udGVudCUyRnR2bnolMkZvbmVuZXdzJTJGc3RvcnklMkYyMDIxJTJGMDElMkYxOCUyRmFuYWx5c2lzLXBldGVyLWxlc3Rlci1icmVha3MtZG93bi1tb21lbnQtYW5kLWFmdGVybWF0aC1vZi1hbWVyaQ==

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Can you post the link?

TC, I think you posted it already? edit: unclear to me if it will be available from in the US without using a VPN, am going to dial up TE’s Sailing Illustrated FB page, he will have it live

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, weta27 said:

More logical SA advice!

"To insert a round flotation device we recommend cutting a square hole".

confirmed by terry - structure did it itself! crazy water pressure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Square shape makes a lot more sense now; popped a 'panel' between transverse vs longitudinal supports 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

All batteries accounted for.

 

Hahah he didn't mince those words either. Unprompted, "we're fortunate we got both batteries out of the boat" 

 

Where did that rumor even come from?

Share this post


Link to post