• 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.  
GXMarsh

SuperFoiler Grand Prix 2018

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, the nuttz said:

Splitting Nathan, Glen and Goobs up would give more even racing but who knows what the Euroflex sponsors want?

Mopre important, it is what they want. I wouldn't go out in a  boat like that without my first choice of crew. I doubt Nathan and Goobs would want to be parted, and now to bring in a new sheet hand would undo all their work.

 

1 hour ago, the nuttz said:

Ride height control is obviously an issue for those getting used to the boat with lack of reaction time to get the foil pitch sorted before a wheelie then crash.  Maybe closed loop control like a moth wand and pitch gyro would help rather than relying on the reactions of the skipper and forward hand?

I know I must sound like I am on a loop, but it is nothing to do with the foils. No foil system can work fast enough to react to what we are seeing. Watch Moths sailing and note the difference between the top guys and also-rans in breeze. The same is true in the A's. Every new Moth and A Class sailor (unless you are genuinely some Olympic god like Nathan) spends time doing exactly what we are seeing with these boats, the whole thing leaping out uncontrollably. The issue isn't foil control  The problem is the rig, which overpowers any foil control system. It's fairly simple, at least to write! To make the boat rise, you ease the sheet. To lower ride height, you sheet on. If the boat accelerates fast, you had better sheet on very quickly otherwise the boat will leap out of the water. If you watched closely, Ashby was moving more sheet than anybody else and guess who looked as if their boat had some extra flight control. The lighter the boat and the higher power to weight ration, the more this applies. With the AC boats, their inherent weight dampened the reactions down somewhat, at least compared with these boats.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Mopre important, it is what they want. I wouldn't go out in a  boat like that without my first choice of crew. I doubt Nathan and Goobs would want to be parted, and now to bring in a new sheet hand would undo all their work.

 

I know I must sound like I am on a loop, but it is nothing to do with the foils. No foil system can work fast enough to react to what we are seeing. Watch Moths sailing and note the difference between the top guys and also-rans in breeze. The same is true in the A's. Every new Moth and A Class sailor (unless you are genuinely some Olympic god like Nathan) spends time doing exactly what we are seeing with these boats, the whole thing leaping out uncontrollably. The issue isn't foil control  The problem is the rig, which overpowers any foil control system. It's fairly simple, at least to write! To make the boat rise, you ease the sheet. To lower ride height, you sheet on. If the boat accelerates fast, you had better sheet on very quickly otherwise the boat will leap out of the water. If you watched closely, Ashby was moving more sheet than anybody else and guess who looked as if their boat had some extra flight control. The lighter the boat and the higher power to weight ration, the more this applies. With the AC boats, their inherent weight dampened the reactions down somewhat, at least compared with these boats.

flap control > cant control for this scale. I still haven't seen L/J/Z foils work adequately on small boats.

Constant crashing and an inability to perform in anything other than fair weather will end in complete commercial failure. Give them better control, drop some of the RRS like the Moths, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DickDastardly said:
  1. Boats too fast - crew on trapeze and risk of collisions with serious implications is too high to allow really close racing, related to points 1 - 3.  We barely saw any toe-to-toe stuff in the Americas Cup, and look at the resources devoted to that.  Chances are SF crews (even if they're AC veterans) won't be drilled enough to be confident taking much risk at all - they have careers to think about.  They'd need to train full time for a year to be as sharp as AC crews, and the boats are every bit as edgy it seems. 

Dick. Did you notice the SF's gybing inside the spectator fleet? How close do you want?

Given time they will all be going flat out and I have to say Euroflex at speed, was a delight to watch.

Adelaidians loved the event and kudos to them for being so damned orderly and not sailing/motoring through the racing. SF will not get that courtesy from the Gin Palaces on the  GC Broadwater....

Share this post


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

Dick. Did you notice the SF's gybing inside the spectator fleet! How close do you want?

Given time they will all be going flat out and I have to say Euroflex at speed, was a delight to watch.

Adelaidians loved the event and kudos to them for being so damned orderly and not sailing/motoring through the racing. SF will not get that courtesy from the Gin Palaces on the  GC Broadwater....

I hope you're right and that the entire fleet gets close in speed and capability but look at the personnel on Euroflex.  Light years of hig speed foiling experience and I'd suggest a hard act for anyone else to follow.  

Proof will be if more Adelaidians come out to the next edition, too early to claim victory or defeat yet.

I hope the fleet does get some respect up on the GC, the risks of a collision or wake-induced capsize are pretty high for the boats and sailors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BR3232 said:

flap control > cant control for this scale. I still haven't seen L/J/Z foils work adequately on small boats.

Constant crashing and an inability to perform in anything other than fair weather will end in complete commercial failure. Give them better control, drop some of the RRS like the Moths, etc.

Came sail an A. Their Z foils work really well. The only issue is that we cannot tack or gybe on foils, but they are significantly faster than you can get with T foils on an A which proved to be very draggy and not that quick. You also seem to have missed that the easy to sail Phantom Essential went for Z foils because they are so much more forgiving.

The biggest single issue is understanding the different types of boat and how they need to be sailed. Nathan Outteridge sailed the A Class nationals just before the Moth nationals. After the A's finished, he sailed the Moth he was going to race for the first time and at the presentation dinner that night, I asked him how it went. His reply was it was so much easier and I asked why. I thought he might say it was the wand, not trapezing or something of that nature but his reply was that in the Moth, he knew what to do but in the A, he was still learning. He did not think one boat was easier to sail, just that they were different. 

This is part of what is happening with the Superfoiler. There are changes that need to be made that will make the boats easier to sail but the biggest challenge is learning what you need to do different compared with either non foilers or other foilers. The biggest issue I see is that we have a lot of non foilers trying to learn to foil on the most difficult foiler that has been built to date. If I were one of those guys, i would get out on an A, or Flying Phantom or something similar to learn how the boat is likely to react and what controls it, because everything is happening so fast and powerfully its very hard to learn on the SF.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These boats are more like the three foil cats than 2 foil moths or 4 foil ACats. Despite nearly half of the SF crews having some very high standard Moth regatta time, I can not see how moth experience is helping a lot. There does not seem to be many here with much time on the 3 foil cats, GCs, FPs or anything else. This might be more relevant, ceratinly the AC experience is relevant, but adapting to the rather primitive push button control system seems to be the real challenge.

The single main V foil under the lee hull dates from about 2013: TNZ for San Fran AC. Control was marginal in rough water and changing winds. The AC guys changed to L foils before the match along with much better control systems. Meanwhile we have not really seen any of the many V foil cats doing anything really fantastic. Speed when conditions are right but control in waves and varied winds is still dubious.

Adelaide was a millpond, Friday had enough wind to stop racing, the other days were pretty light. Geelong will be rougher and could get bigger winds too. It will get very interesing.  

I am in the club who think the SF has gone in the wrong design direction. If the wanted a demanding monohul with big RM and big crashes, they could still refit these boats with centreline 2 in line + wand moth style foils. The seaplane floats and long narrow bow will make them sailable.

For those who think moths still demand extreme skills, have a look at the punters in my club fleet, last saturday in about 20kts and tide against wind.  Great rides, no crashes and more exciting than watching the supafoilers. 15 years of system and skill development makes it pretty simle.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I hope it succeeds too but I fear the whole concept is fundamentally flawed:

  1. Boats are way too difficult to sail.  This means that even competition is a long way off simply due to capability gaps across the fleet - even at this high level.  If it's close and even toe-to-toe competition that punters find engaging, SF is a long way from being able to deliver that.  There's a reason why most match racing circuits use easy to sail boats like RC44, MRX, Darings, Elliott 7s, whatever.
  2. Boats are way too bleeding edge - technical issues a long way from being sorted at this point.  The whole scheme will be a money pit for a long time as the bugs are sorted out (e.g. the speculation about rig size above) and the spectacle will suffer continually from breakdowns and risk losing audience interest along the way.
  3. Boats too unforgiving - one capsize and that's the end of the race, potentially a series, with a real risk to crew safety and integrity through capsize-induced injuries.  At least an aydeen crew can get back on the bike unassisted in a rapid time frame and get back to business.
  4. Boats too fast - crew on trapeze and risk of collisions with serious implications is too high to allow really close racing, related to points 1 - 3.  We barely saw any toe-to-toe stuff in the Americas Cup, and look at the resources devoted to that.  Chances are SF crews (even if they're AC veterans) won't be drilled enough to be confident taking much risk at all - they have careers to think about.  They'd need to train full time for a year to be as sharp as AC crews, and the boats are every bit as edgy it seems. 
  5. Boats have no spinnakers, related to point 4 - they obviously can't carry extras given the performance envelope.  Punters understand spinnakers / extras and think they look cool, plus commentators can talk about sail handling to fill space, plus sail handling becomes a variable in the match racing eqation whereas it isn't at present.  Most other match racing boats have extras. even the M32s.
  6. Boats too narrow band. Boring when they can’t foil, dangerous in over 15, big waves will cancel racing.  Risk of entire events being lost to weather is sky high. That’s not a recipe for commercial success 

Yep, I agree.

I'd rather watch 18 foot skiffs.

And these foilers are fugly.  Any foiler that cannot stay up on a gybe is boring and so last year. 

Must have paid some people a shit load to sail these platypuses.

Share this post


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

I hope it succeeds too but I fear the whole concept is fundamentally flawed:

  1. Boats are way too difficult to sail.  This means that even competition is a long way off simply due to capability gaps across the fleet - even at this high level.  If it's close and even toe-to-toe competition that punters find engaging, SF is a long way from being able to deliver that.  There's a reason why most match racing circuits use easy to sail boats like RC44, MRX, Darings, Elliott 7s, whatever.
  2. Boats are way too bleeding edge - technical issues a long way from being sorted at this point.  The whole scheme will be a money pit for a long time as the bugs are sorted out (e.g. the speculation about rig size above) and the spectacle will suffer continually from breakdowns and risk losing audience interest along the way.
  3. Boats too unforgiving - one capsize and that's the end of the race, potentially a series, with a real risk to crew safety and integrity through capsize-induced injuries.  At least an aydeen crew can get back on the bike unassisted in a rapid time frame and get back to business.
  4. Boats too fast - crew on trapeze and risk of collisions with serious implications is too high to allow really close racing, related to points 1 - 3.  We barely saw any toe-to-toe stuff in the Americas Cup, and look at the resources devoted to that.  Chances are SF crews (even if they're AC veterans) won't be drilled enough to be confident taking much risk at all - they have careers to think about.  They'd need to train full time for a year to be as sharp as AC crews, and the boats are every bit as edgy it seems. 
  5. Boats have no spinnakers, related to point 4 - they obviously can't carry extras given the performance envelope.  Punters understand spinnakers / extras and think they look cool, plus commentators can talk about sail handling to fill space, plus sail handling becomes a variable in the match racing eqation whereas it isn't at present.  Most other match racing boats have extras. even the M32s.
  6. Boats too narrow band. Boring when they can’t foil, dangerous in over 15, big waves will cancel racing.  Risk of entire events being lost to weather is sky high. That’s not a recipe for commercial success 

1- Give them time, a few weeks on the boats most days and they'll be looking way more polished. It'll close up quicker than you think.

2- Any cutting edge event will suffer issues with breakdowns etc. But I think this boat is about as simple as they could get it, there's loads of boats with much more moving parts aboard. Which is where a huge amount of problems stem from.

3- Ahh it'll just become, capsize and race over, they'll refine it quick enough to the point where it's not day/event over. The crew will be fine, everyone's just getting used to it. Especially once everyone's just trapping 99% of the races and they are just trap-trapping, they just get flung forward of the boat when they're out on trap, as opposed to sitting in, behind the WW board.

4- The boats aren't too fast. That's not a thing. The reason there was no toe-toe in the AC, was the open design rules, this is One Design (IMO the only real way to race) so the boats will all come together, it'll take a little while for them to even out though. Although yes, they'll be next season before they can compete properly with the AC boys, in the next few weeks we'll see everyone getting competitive, but by next season the boats will be very refined, and there will be more, and as such the racing will be much closer.

5- I'll admit the boats would look cooler with a code 0, but at the same time the added SA isn't going to help much, all the drive will be from the main anyway so it'll just add more to go wrong.

6- Spot on. The boats should have a couple of different mains and jibs, the sail inventory is perfect for like 10-15 knots, being able to use a smaller head main for heavy air and a fat-head main for light air would probably be a smart idea (even just two different mains would also work).

I'll add my own point here, and I don't know if anyone agrees here, but the lens on the on-board camera (the transom mounted one) needs to be that of one with a wider field of view. It's a very narrow angled lens and this gives a very very limited view around the crew once pointed at them.

I've added images to show the difference in view between the two. The AC50/72's had much wider angle of view for the trailing camera and that was much better than the superfoilers onboard view, which either showed the crew, or the view forward and not both.

 

ac50.png

superfoiler1.jpg

Share this post


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

Yep, I agree.

I'd rather watch 18 foot skiffs.

And these foilers are fugly.  Any foiler that cannot stay up on a gybe is boring and so last year. 

Must have paid some people a shit load to sail these platypuses.

Wouldn't have to pay me to get on one, I'd also way rather be on this than an 18' skiff...

Share this post


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

Wouldn't have to pay me to get on one, I'd also way rather be on this than an 18' skiff...

Go hard.  Get one.  Good luck.

Fugly fuckers with no heritage.  Imagine what a used one would be worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

If there ever was a case for more than one rig, this is it.

Great respect for McCartney et al, but un-shave the cost to 2 rigs and mere mortals might be able to crack it?

Technically do not doubt the quality of the work by M & M. Awesome.

Widen the (design) scope a little. More awesome....IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the detractors -- even if you have some good points, it's very early days. We're comparing it to the peak of 18f skiffs, which had years (decades?) of build up and polish, and to the last AC, which had 8 years of build up. We're f'g spoiled!

Crews will pick it up, the sailboat machine will evolve into more sails, a code zero, whatever to expand the envelope.

One observation: it looked to me that the foil rake setup is set for symmetric rake, probably because they expected one foil in the water. Very few shots captured Euroflex's two foils down from the side, and they seemed identically raked to me, and 2 buttons on the tiller extension... With Euroflex showing two-foils-down downwind sailing, perhaps this gets tweaked to differentiated controls?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the foils raked?  Buttons mean powers systems.  We can see how well buttons worked for Oracle.  Manual control of foils is a failed concept and it shows on these boats.

 

Share this post


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

The reason there was no toe-toe in the AC, was the open design rules,

You must have seen a different race series then I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, if I had the time and money I would buy one and form a Superfoiler team/sydicate to train up in Boston so long as I get to steer. This boat is stupidly cool and a genuine handful to sail. Precisely my cup of tea. I am genuinely praying that the SFGP keeps it up and that I make enough money to campaign one when I'm 30. Probably should have got a job in finance instead of starting a boat company....

DRC

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 form a Superfoiler team/sydicate to train up in Boston so long as I get to steer...

and I'll do the same in Miami, for an East Coast US circuit. Let's buy some lottery tickets... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the packs strapped to the tillers are scuba escape bottles? That really instills confidence! LOL.

I think it's fun to watch these guys wipe these things out every which way possible.

Seems like its gonna be a while before the entire fleet (if you can call it that) is able to do anything more than survive a lap or two. But good fun to watch IMHO.

I want to try!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is my first look at these and i am not highly qualified to opine aside from being a kite foiler myself.

kind of fun to watch but it doesn't quite come together.

My instinct having such high AR of foils, as well as other aspects of their shape, is the cause of headaches.

Feel free to dismiss my simplistic interpretations, but going for a level of efficiency you can't actually sustain is rarely the most successful...

Would fatter, shorter, cheaper wings also let them fly deeper and without crashes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, random said:

Go hard.  Get one.  Good luck.

Fugly fuckers with no heritage.  Imagine what a used one would be worth.

No thank you, I'll stick to the 1D racing I currently do. I prefer 50+ boats to compete against at a worlds than 6 in a series. Also no local competition. I've owned the fastest boat in the state before, and it was fucking pointless.

13 hours ago, random said:

You must have seen a different race series then I did.

I obviously did. I saw the one where TNZ showed up with a noticably different boat to everyone else (hull lines and beams aside) and proceeded crushed everyone so hard I actually felt sorry for the competition. I wonder what you were watching?

I mean my point was, that the finishing times will be much closer than the AC in a few weeks time.

Share this post


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

No thank you, I'll stick to the 1D racing I currently do. I

Sarcasm detection is not your strong point.

4 hours ago, darth reapius said:

I obviously did. I saw the one where TNZ showed up with a noticably different boat to everyone else

Did you only watch the final series?  There were others before that, you should check them out, some close racing I saw.

Share this post


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

Sarcasm detection is not your strong point.

Did you only watch the final series?  There were others before that, you should check them out, some close racing I saw.

giphy.gif

Didn't miss one minute of the AC, I don't really consider close racing in 6 out of 30 races to be "toe-toe". It was also only close between those who weren't good, aside from a couple good ones between TNZ and Artemis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These things remind me of the inventive/anything-goes, but insanely huge and powerful Can-Am racers of the late 60s and early 70s...

https://www.wired.com/2014/08/can-am-glory-years/

Share this post


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

These things remind me of the inventive/anything-goes, but insanely huge and powerful Can-Am racers of the late 60s and early 70s...

https://www.wired.com/2014/08/can-am-glory-years/

Why does the world have to be such a gigantic vagina?

Stopping anyone from doing anything because it's dangerous is stupid, make sure people are informed of the risks, then let them kill themselves. Can the world please move on from "protecting every single life" mentality.

Share this post


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

Why does the world have to be such a gigantic vagina?

Stopping anyone from doing anything because it's dangerous is stupid, make sure people are informed of the risks, then let them kill themselves. Can the world please move on from "protecting every single life" mentality.

There is a very contrary view to yours which I subscribe to. People need to be protected from their own stupidity not for their own sake, but for the sake of others. Everybody is a son, daughter, brother, sister, father, mother etc. etc. In other words, their death impacts others. It is all very well that they make the decision to risk their life, but is it fair on the other people who will be effected by the death? For instance, Bruce Mclaren, whose death is mentioned in the article, left a young daughter who grew up without a father. His death was unnecessary and it caused a public backlash against the dangers.

Which brings us to the problem in sailing. Serious injuries and deaths in sailing are not good for the sport. In the current age, most parents want their kids to take part in safe sports and there is a wide choice. It doesn't matter that the SF series is the pinnacle. A serious accident in such a high profile event would not be good for the sport, never mind the individual participant. I hope there isn't such an accident, but if there is, the question will be asked about if it was possible to make a boat of this sort of performance and difficulty safer, and the answer is yes. You could have all the thrills and spills and vastly reduce the chance of injury.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be as balanced/sensible/righteous/smug/religious, bourgeois-comfortable as you like .... but it means less than zero for adventurers.

In fact they laugh derisively at such cowardliness.

What they do may seem madness to the likes of you ... but then they're living their life at the front of the train, not comfortably secluded and protected in the last carriage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

You can be as balanced/sensible/righteous/smug/religious, bourgeois-comfortable as you like .... but it means less than zero for adventurers.

In fact they laugh derisively at such cowardliness.

What they do may seem madness to the likes of you ... but then they're living their life at the front of the train, not comfortably secluded and protected in the last carriage.

I think you are talking about something very different. I see 2 situations going on. There is clearly an area where adventurers go off and do what they want and I too believe that in most of those situations, it should not be regulated.  What I was discussing was rather different, that of organised sport. If somebody wants to try to sail their Moth across the Atlantic, let them, but when they come to an organised event, they need to conform to certain safety rules. 

Share this post


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

There is a very contrary view to yours which I subscribe to. People need to be protected from their own stupidity not for their own sake, but for the sake of others. Everybody is a son, daughter, brother, sister, father, mother etc. etc. In other words, their death impacts others. It is all very well that they make the decision to risk their life, but is it fair on the other people who will be effected by the death? For instance, Bruce Mclaren, whose death is mentioned in the article, left a young daughter who grew up without a father. His death was unnecessary and it caused a public backlash against the dangers.

Which brings us to the problem in sailing. Serious injuries and deaths in sailing are not good for the sport. In the current age, most parents want their kids to take part in safe sports and there is a wide choice. It doesn't matter that the SF series is the pinnacle. A serious accident in such a high profile event would not be good for the sport, never mind the individual participant. I hope there isn't such an accident, but if there is, the question will be asked about if it was possible to make a boat of this sort of performance and difficulty safer, and the answer is yes. You could have all the thrills and spills and vastly reduce the chance of injury.

"own stupidity not for their own sake", my opinion is that it's still their choice, you should assess your own risk, and your own situation.

Why should I be limited in what I do, because I have no one except my old man (which he is now, who understands what I do and why I do it, because he did the same), but I can't do something because it would effect him?

I mean I subscribe to the voluntary euthanasia school of thought. It shouldn't matter what other people want, it should be your choice as it's your life, and no one should expect anything of anyone else. You should be left to live your own life. In the case of Bruce Mclaren, it's HIS OWN FAULT he left his daughter to grow up without a father, not anyone else's, not the system, not lacking rule's, law's or restrictions that cause it, but his decision to participate in something incredibly dangerous.

All points aside, should we make being overweight or obese illegal? I mean if we are going to do everything else that we can to "save lives", then why not make it illegal to be out of shape? More people die from obesity related causes in the world than any other single cause.

Why not ban driving? That's the leading cause of people under 30.

Hell, of my closest 6 friends, 4 have lost parents (all under 50) to, Diabetes, a heart attack, Cancer, and a Car Crash.

Sailing also has barely any deaths worldwide, why has a sport like snowboarding/skiing kept going for so long when there are thousands of deaths a year of people in ski resorts? Hell, I was at a resort called Hakuba in Japans south and 8 people had died in one day, should we just ban all snow sports?

If it's an extreme sport, then it should be treated as such, if someone chooses to do something high-risk, then there should be no qualms when something happens.

I've nearly died in 4 major car accidents, that daily activity is much more dangerous than the cliffs/planes I've jumped off, the mountains i've skiied down, the oceans I've sailed across and the sharks I've dived with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we have the Prime Minister of Australia fined for not wearing a life jacket in Sydney Harbour while another Australian falls overboard in an ocean race while not wearing one.  Perhaps he hasn't read any VoR history.

Yeah, you can't legislate against stupid.

2 hours ago, darth reapius said:

f someone chooses to do something high-risk, then there should be no qualms when something happens.

So Darth you saying that Seat belts in cars are for pussies and should be optional?  That what you are saying?

Share this post


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

I've nearly died in 4 major car accidents…

And no doubt survived because of safety systems mandated by law. Automobiles are getting to be as safe as they can be, the next step is to replace the diver because the leading causes of accidents: fatigue, speed and drugs (including alcohol), can only be addressed when people stop thinking that that their individual freedom comes before everyone else's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the multihulls with their chopped off shorter floats and the monohulls with their foil base growing ever wider they are morphing into something similar to each other. No harm in that.Innovate or perish. 

Just remember the human brain can only cope with about 50 kilometres per hour of deceleration to zero over a couple of metres before the brain is damaged. The deceleration forces are lessened by the angle of impact and a whole host of factors. The main aim of car design over the last few decades revolved around crumple zones in an effort to decelerate the body so that the brain is not mashed by the front of the skull.Almost impossible to regulate this on an open deck. Still love Bullfrog. Still love boats.Keep innovating and if possible incorporate safety features.Cheers bottman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Clearly hit a sore spot, because while some of what you say is reasonable, there is so much bullshit in your comments I am (almost) lost to know where to begin.

Let's start with snowsports. There are not thousands of deaths a years in ski resorts. Even if there were, making a comment like that is misleading, because you need to look at deaths per participant, and by that measure, snowsports are remarkably safe. 

Driving is not much more dangerous than the activities you list. Again, you cannot take the absolute number of deaths. You need to considers the deaths against the number of participants.

Your comment about banning driving because it is the leading cause of death for people under 30. IIRC, Australia has some of the most stringent rules for young drivers which has brought down the fatality rate and there is talk of introducing this in the UK. Overall, safety in driving is one of the most heavily regulated areas regarding safety there is and as pointed out, your own survival probably is a result of regulation.

Maybe more relevant, nowhere do I advocate banning of all dangerous activities, but those who get on their high horses about personal rights always take an extreme view on this.

Why does civilised society regulate against the mistales and stupidity of others? Maybe because the 'I can do what i want" attitude, it is because of a total lack of consideration for others. Have you ever been at a sports event where somebody has died. I have, more than once. I also know other people who have. There is one inescapable truth. It can have a very marked and distressing impact on people, to the extent of traumatising people. Think about the rescue services involved. Often they put their own lives at risk, as well as suffering the mental issues that most first responders suffer from at some time. Do you have the right to risk of mentally harming others in order to do "whatever you want"?

Bottom line for me is that a civilised society does regulate to protect individuals from themselves and is right in doing so. The only issue is how far that should go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only safety concern I have with the superfoilers is the raised foil, particularly when someone is off trap.  4 Point foiling would be safer and still look just as spectacular as we have seen.

Share this post


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

Dying in a yacht race is just damned inconsiderate. You're going to take all the attention away from the winners.

+1 especially when we have more productive winner discussions about things like Truuuump and Baaaarnaby. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, random said:

So we have the Prime Minister of Australia fined for not wearing a life jacket in Sydney Harbour while another Australian falls overboard in an ocean race while not wearing one.  Perhaps he hasn't read any VoR history.

Yeah, you can't legislate against stupid.

So Darth you saying that Seat belts in cars are for pussies and should be optional?  That what you are saying?

What I'm saying, is that maybe they shouldn't be mandatory, and we just let the people not smart enough to wear them die.

Heres an example, a person runs a snorkelling with sea lions business, a person pays to go snorkelling with sea lions, doesn't inform them that they have NEVER been swimming before. They proceed to drown, do we ban commercial snorkelling tours, or do we accept this person is a moron and caused their own death?

FYI in the case mentioned the company in charge was found to not be at fault, as the person lied to them about having experience, and the company already has quite strict safety measure in place.

18 hours ago, RobG said:

And no doubt survived because of safety systems mandated by law. Automobiles are getting to be as safe as they can be, the next step is to replace the diver because the leading causes of accidents: fatigue, speed and drugs (including alcohol), can only be addressed when people stop thinking that that their individual freedom comes before everyone else's.

The leading cause of accidents is actually distracted driving. More than fatigue, speed AND drugs (including alcohol), a sad but true fact.

Yet we do absolutely nothing about it, I saw more drivers this morning on their phones than not, this morning I drove in peak-hour, on a freeway to near the city centre.

Oh wait, apologies it's a little fine. Good to see that law helping so well there.

Also, you are correct in that, yes the only solution to accidents on the roads is to replace the driver. 100%. Even with early test failures, and our early knowledge of driver-less cars, they are still many many times safer per kilometre driven than the best people and they will only get better.

The safety factors which saved be like seat belts and air bags were commercial successes in the automotive industry before they were law. People were mostly smart enough to buy them and use them before they were law.

Int he 4 accidents I was in, 1 was a distracted mother with her kids, T-boned me at 80, 1 was a teenage girl on her phone who rear-ended me at 80, 1 was a middle aged woman who changed lanes on the freeway whilst on her phone pushing me into the concrete barrier at 110 and the 4th was a meth-head in a stolen commodore who ran a stop then sign t-boned me and pushed my car half over a cliff, both doing 60.

3 hours ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

The only safety concern I have with the superfoilers is the raised foil, particularly when someone is off trap.  4 Point foiling would be safer and still look just as spectacular as we have seen.

This guy gets it. Let the people do what they want, but god help putting a 6 foot tall knife directly in-front of them. There's a change i'll get behind.

4 hours ago, Rawhide said:

Dying in a yacht race is just damned inconsiderate. You're going to take all the attention away from the winners.

They really need to do it like the ski resorts do, and sweep that shit under the rug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, darth reapius said:
20 hours ago, random said:

So Darth you saying that Seat belts in cars are for pussies and should be optional?  That what you are saying?

What I'm saying, is that maybe they shouldn't be mandatory, and we just let the people not smart enough to wear them die.

Here is where your logic falls down. The total cost to society of a road fatality in Australia is $4.34 MILLION per fatality. You would no doubt argue that is an inflated figure, because it includes future taxes to be paid, but in almost every case, the government has "invested" significant money into that person through their education (say $140,000 per person) so it is reasonable for government to expect a "return". Then consider the police, rescue services and the medical staff who have to deal with the "mess". Getting killed because of not wearing a seatbelt doesn't only have a significant impact on the person who dies. If it only effected them, let them do it

1 hour ago, darth reapius said:

 

5 hours ago, Tornado_ALIVE said:

The only safety concern I have with the superfoilers is the raised foil, particularly when someone is off trap.  4 Point foiling would be safer and still look just as spectacular as we have seen.

This guy gets it. Let the people do what they want, but god help putting a 6 foot tall knife directly in-front of them. There's a change i'll get behind.

What more has anybody been suggesting? For all your bluster, you are agreeing with the point made in the first place. 

Share this post


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

Here is where your logic falls down. The total cost to society of a road fatality in Australia is $4.34 MILLION per fatality. You would no doubt argue that is an inflated figure, because it includes future taxes to be paid, but in almost every case, the government has "invested" significant money into that person through their education (say $140,000 per person) so it is reasonable for government to expect a "return". Then consider the police, rescue services and the medical staff who have to deal with the "mess". Getting killed because of not wearing a seatbelt doesn't only have a significant impact on the person who dies. If it only effected them, let them do it

What more has anybody been suggesting? For all your bluster, you are agreeing with the point made in the first place. 

So all the increasing safety measures, all the extra laws, extra inconveniences, more fines, lowered speed limits etc and...

What do you know, deaths are increasing.

2014 1,150  
2015 1,209  
2016 1,293  

That's 4.91 to 5.08 to 5.34 people per 100 000 drivers.

So it's not where my logic falls down, it's where mandating "greater safety parameters" falls down.

What you think will "save lives because it's enforced", when translated into those affected, they are more dangerous because they're forced to do something because it'll make it safer for them.

It's like the helmet paradox, where a few ski resorts introduced mandatory helmets to help prevent head injuries, well head injuries increased. People skied/boarded more dangerously, because they "felt safer". Which is the reason no resorts enforce mandatory helmets even though they were introduced decades ago.

I agreed that the WW board being down would improve safety, but I disagreed that the boats were too fast, or too dangerous, and that anyone saying that is a pussy and should get fucked.

Share this post


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

^ Clearly hit a sore spot, because while some of what you say is reasonable, there is so much bullshit in your comments I am (almost) lost to know where to begin.

Let's start with snowsports. There are not thousands of deaths a years in ski resorts. Even if there were, making a comment like that is misleading, because you need to look at deaths per participant, and by that measure, snowsports are remarkably safe. 

Driving is not much more dangerous than the activities you list. Again, you cannot take the absolute number of deaths. You need to considers the deaths against the number of participants.

Your comment about banning driving because it is the leading cause of death for people under 30. IIRC, Australia has some of the most stringent rules for young drivers which has brought down the fatality rate and there is talk of introducing this in the UK. Overall, safety in driving is one of the most heavily regulated areas regarding safety there is and as pointed out, your own survival probably is a result of regulation.

Maybe more relevant, nowhere do I advocate banning of all dangerous activities, but those who get on their high horses about personal rights always take an extreme view on this.

Why does civilised society regulate against the mistales and stupidity of others? Maybe because the 'I can do what i want" attitude, it is because of a total lack of consideration for others. Have you ever been at a sports event where somebody has died. I have, more than once. I also know other people who have. There is one inescapable truth. It can have a very marked and distressing impact on people, to the extent of traumatising people. Think about the rescue services involved. Often they put their own lives at risk, as well as suffering the mental issues that most first responders suffer from at some time. Do you have the right to risk of mentally harming others in order to do "whatever you want"?

Bottom line for me is that a civilised society does regulate to protect individuals from themselves and is right in doing so. The only issue is how far that should go.

Yes, it hit's a sore spot, because the things I like doing keep being made harder and more inconvenient to do with arbitrary rules.

You would be shocked how many people die in ski resorts per year, it is all swept under the rug (seriously it's like a couple hundred per year in Japan alone). 

Driving is statistically the most dangerous thing anyone does on a daily basis, also the worst are not the ones I mentioned but are - Scuba Diving (I free-dive), Mountain Climbing, Motorcycle riding, Civilian Piloting, Sky diving, Base jumping and Hang Gliding per participant, along with... Recreational Boating (not sailing) where the risk factor is ALCOHOL. I can't remember this from off heart but it was something off the charts like 90%+ of recreational boating deaths, the person/skipper or both were drunk.

If civilised society is doing everything everything they can to protect individuals from them selves, then WHY IS 70% OF MY COUNTRY OVERWEIGHT OR OBESE? The LEADING cause of death in the country. Why do we waste so much effort on saving what would be a couple of individuals per year, when:

  • A minimum 140 Australians die prematurely every day from obesity-related disease.
    Source: Obesity Prevention Australia.

Seriously, how is it even a discussion to stop someone doing something they love when a couple of people per year die of it, when we have figures like that.

I am sick to fucking death of watching people around me die prematurely, but why make the lives of so many worse, to save so few, but do absolutely nothing to stop something which kills over 50 000 people per year, in a country with only 20 million.

Seriously, all this talk might save 1 person in a year, but In the time I wrote this post, at least 3 people died from obesity related disease in Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get all this discussion. There are only 18 people sailing in the Superfoiler series. If one of them dies in the first year then that's a rate of 5,555 per 100,000. I think racing the Superfoiler is fair bit more dangerous than going for a drive in your car.

One death in the series is not going the make any difference to the Australian economy, but it's going to completely fuck the Superfoiler economy. They'll probably go belly-up (this may happen anyway).

So the organisers should worry about safety. The financial survival of their business is at stake if they have a serious accident.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this stil Sailing ANARCHY? Or have I incorrectly entered the SB chatroom by mistake?

If ever this site needed to explain ANARCHY it sure needs look no further than SuperFoilers. Shame SA seems to have their knickers in a knot but I imagine SF didn't buy an advert. How does putting down a sailing event help sailing?

Sometimes I wonder....

I am totally reassured that SF safety is uppermost because smart people like Nathan, Goobs and Gashby et al, would have done the risk management assessment and they CHOSE to sail these rocketships.

Some on here obviously would have us all ONLY sailing 4kn shitboxes.

And there WILL be an exclusion zone on the Broadwater for the Gold Coast round. The SF's will be safe from the Gin palaces after all.

Best viewing seems to be Doug Jennings Park (if you can find a carpark) or on boats moored off Wavebreak Island.

Bring it on!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Is this stil Sailing ANARCHY? Or have I incorrectly entered the SB chatroom by mistake?

If ever this site needed to explain ANARCHY it sure needs look no further than SuperFoilers. Shame SA seems to have their knickers in a knot but I imagine SF didn't buy an advert. How does putting down a sailing event help sailing?

Sometimes I wonder....

I am totally reassured that SF safety is uppermost because smart people like Nathan, Goobs and Gashby et al, would have done the risk management assessment and they CHOSE to sail these rocketships.

Some on here obviously would have us all ONLY sailing 4kn shitboxes.

And there WILL be an exclusion zone on the Broadwater for the Gold Coast round. The SF's will be safe from the Gin palaces after all.

Best viewing seems to be Doug Jennings Park (if you can find a carpark) or on boats moored off Wavebreak Island.

Bring it on!

 

THANK YOU.

It is perfectly adaquete, it's a great boat, and those sailing it know the risks, and are well prepared for it! So far the even looks like it will be amazing once the kinks are ironed out!

Share this post


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

I don't get all this discussion. There are only 18 people sailing in the Superfoiler series. If one of them dies in the first year then that's a rate of 5,555 per 100,000. I think racing the Superfoiler is fair bit more dangerous than going for a drive in your car.

One death in the series is not going the make any difference to the Australian economy, but it's going to completely fuck the Superfoiler economy. They'll probably go belly-up (this may happen anyway).

So the organisers should worry about safety. The financial survival of their business is at stake if they have a serious accident.

 

They have something called insurance with liability. If you are too scared to sail a superfoiler then don't do it yourself.

TBH I didn't see a death in the Americas Cup affect the event. Everything went on as planned, even the team with the death, just launched their new boat and sailed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see that they can put the course where the site graphic says it will be. Sailing into that part of the seaway is tough enough when the tide is wrong, having to race there is not reasonable.

5a7d6f87ab9fd_SFCourseofficial.png.9eb886ffb2fa6fb0acf2dfa332159611.png

I think the course will be further north as marked below (assuming a standard Gold Coast sou'easter), it's about 1,500 m. Lots of sandbanks to dodge, tide will be an issue and there are some fairly substantial navigation marks to avoid.  A 15:05 low tide will make it really interesting, at least the sand banks will be in plain view!

I don't think you'll see much from Doug Jennings Park, Pacific and Anglers Parks might be better.

5a7d6ddb8cff1_SFcourse.png.7fcf18fc4cfe1f6038efe31057bbba07.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting!

I hadn't checked the tides as yet.

Low tide will present some very real challenges. What depth do the SF draw?

20 years ago they could have run the whole event in the Deep Hole.

There is no Deep Hole now..

IIRC Didn't the GC bid to run a round of the AC45 nominate the area basically across from SYC Main Beach? Well they called it a stadium...

Share this post


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

They have something called insurance with liability. If you are too scared to sail a superfoiler then don't do it yourself.

TBH I didn't see a death in the Americas Cup affect the event. Everything went on as planned, even the team with the death, just launched their new boat and sailed on.

After the death in AC34 they reduced the maximum wind limit from 33 knots down to 23 knots. Artemis kept their new boat in the shed to go through a complete stress test. The designer was sacked. They were so late launching that they didn't have time to learn how to sail the boat before the racing started.

Then they reduced the size of the boat from 72 feet down to 50 feet for AC35.

I'd expect a lot of changes for the Superfoilers if they have a season 2. Z boards and hiking racks instead of trapezes would be on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point that should be debated is what emergency response provisions to the organizers have in place and are these adequate.

The America's Cup teams were unprepared for the elevated risks of sailing AC 72s. In the wake of Bart Simpson's death they were forced to re evaluate and significantly change their sailing equipment and safety protocols.  Has the Superfoiler Grand Prix got suitable safety and response protocols in place or are they just winging it?  The fast end of the sport is developing very quickly, and what seemed reasonablable a short while ago is not reasonable now.  

Ashbey, Otteridge and Jensen are fully up to speed on the AC risk program, and probably should be the ones to comment on the suitability of safety and response preparations.

SHC

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

SuperFoiler draws about 13 meters when upside down.  I was nervous a mast was going to break when a boat was inverted last weekend.

Which is why Outer Harbour in Adelaide was a good spot..... it has a maintained depth of 14.2 m minimum and a good grandstand in the form of the overseas terminal building....... mind you, if they had capsized in between the spectator boats, that would be different.

And the emergency services couldn’t be closer if you tried.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me laugh. OK, they don't call them boats, they call them machines.

But now they are not races, they are 'skirmishes', and the sailors are 'going into battle'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

Did you catch the "SWAT Teams of the Sea" comment as Well?

It's precision that does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

Did you catch the "SWAT Teams of the Sea" comment as Well?

FFS, glad I killed the volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The swat team reference was in regards to the shore crews btw.

All boats being sent back to shore due to wind conditions, on water knob with the microphone says due to proximity to the southern ocean things are always wild and unpredictable down there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gets better... the boat ramp is the "launching pad"

Kleenmaid - nickname is the "people's boat"

Fk, I just spat my beer on the keyboard.

Share this post


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

Shame SA seems to have their knickers in a knot but I imagine SF didn't buy an advert. How does putting down a sailing event help sailing?

 

 

Jesus I haven't seen this much whinging since my kid was 4 months old.

 

We have been fans of the Superfoiler from the beginning.  We are simply tired of the fact that no one's figured out how to sail the thing in like two years of testing.  If Glenn, Nathan, and Goobs can barely get it around the course in the flattest water anywhere, maybe it's time to fix the design?  I get that the Macartneys goal is to be so extreme that only the 'best' can handle them, but two years?   And in the meantime, the racing is fucking terrible to watch.

how long did it take the skiffies to figure out the Grand Prix boats the last time round?  How long did it take the 49erers to figure those out?  Maybe 2-3 years is normal, but it seems like an awful lot of time.  

Share this post


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

Jesus I haven't seen this much whinging since my kid was 4 months old.

 

We have been fans of the Superfoiler from the beginning.  We are simply tired of the fact that no one's figured out how to sail the thing in like two years of testing.  If Glenn, Nathan, and Goobs can barely get it around the course in the flattest water anywhere, maybe it's time to fix the design?  I get that the Macartneys goal is to be so extreme that only the 'best' can handle them, but two years?   And in the meantime, the racing is fucking terrible to watch.

how long did it take the skiffies to figure out the Grand Prix boats the last time round?  How long did it take the 49erers to figure those out?  Maybe 2-3 years is normal, but it seems like an awful lot of time.  

The Grand Prix didn't figure anything out. They just used the existing 18 foot skiffs that had been sailing on Sydney Harbour since the 1890s. The 49ers are a smaller version of Julian Bethwaites' 18 footer.

Figuring out a new type of boat is not something that they have any experience in at all.

 

Share this post


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

The Grand Prix didn't figure anything out. They just used the existing 18 foot skiffs that had been sailing on Sydney Harbour since the 1890s.

 

Crap

18ft-Classic.jpg

18ft-Modern.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Jesus I haven't seen this much whinging since my kid was 4 months old.

Fk I have. Read the whinging about the VOR management.

Share this post


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

The Grand Prix didn't figure anything out. They just used the existing 18 foot skiffs that had been sailing on Sydney Harbour since the 1890s. The 49ers are a smaller version of Julian Bethwaites' 18 footer.

And if you have ever watched 18 ft skiffs close up, and not just edited highlights on YouTube there is a huge skill difference between the leaders and the back markers. Not many crews manage to develope the skill levels necessary to sail 18s really well. It will be the same for the SF.

Share this post


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

Crap

18ft-Classic.jpg

18ft-Modern.jpg

The first Grand Prix was run in 1987 following the 18 foot skiff World titles in Perth. Some of the boats stayed on after the World titles and sailed in the Grand Prix regatta.

But they were the same boats and crews. It's a development class, so they were 1987 era boats, not the replica of a boat from around the 1930s shown in the first photo.

The boats kept developing until the demise of the Grand Prix circuit in the late 1990s, but the development wasn't done by Grand Prix sailing. It's an open class rule so each team could choose whichever hull design and rig they preferred.

There's now a one-design hull, but that's completely separate from the Grand Prix. The photo above is the one-design hull, which was designed in the mid 1990s.

Share this post


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

The first Grand Prix was run in 1987 following the 18 foot skiff World titles in Perth. Some of the boats stayed on after the World titles and sailed in the Grand Prix regatta.

But they were the same boats and crews. It's a development class, so they were 1987 era boats, not the replica of a boat from around the 1930s shown in the first photo.

 

The first Grand Prix Sailing Grand Prix  in Perth in 87 when the 18s were still  a development class- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3TS47vqljQ

The Chesty Bond pic by TA was the JJ Champ that year and the last JJ winner while the class was still a unrestricted development class with hull design, rules were changed the following season, Chesty Bond didn't do the Grand Prix in Perth.

None of the Historic replicas were sailing at that time , the Murray One design 18 came in around 1994.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

And if you have ever watched 18 ft skiffs close up, and not just edited highlights on YouTube there is a huge skill difference between the leaders and the back markers. Not many crews manage to develope the skill levels necessary to sail 18s really well. It will be the same for the SF.

I sailed 18 foot skiffs over about a 15 year period and the Superfoiler looks like a very different beast. It's a lot more stable, but the crashes look much more severe.

All the crashes in the 18 footer videos are actually quite mild. They look spectacular, but the distances you fall are not really any different to an 18 foot long catamaran. That was the beauty of the class. It looked extreme, but it was actually quite safe.

Share this post


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

Jesus I haven't seen this much whinging since my kid was 4 months old.

 

We have been fans of the Superfoiler from the beginning.  We are simply tired of the fact that no one's figured out how to sail the thing in like two years of testing.  If Glenn, Nathan, and Goobs can barely get it around the course in the flattest water anywhere, maybe it's time to fix the design?  I get that the Macartneys goal is to be so extreme that only the 'best' can handle them, but two years?   And in the meantime, the racing is fucking terrible to watch.

how long did it take the skiffies to figure out the Grand Prix boats the last time round?  How long did it take the 49erers to figure those out?  Maybe 2-3 years is normal, but it seems like an awful lot of time.  

 

Where did you get the 2 years of testing from did you pluck that number from your ass?

The youtube page for SF- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_nrbAAGHb1O9MZKFsr7W_Q/videos

None of the crews have had much time in the boats to figure them out, 4 weeks ago they were still putting them together so the crews are all on a rather steep learning curve.I think they will all make rapid progress with more time in the boats.

The 18s changed the class rules after the first Grand Prix in Perth because the Olympic Gold medallist J Mc Kee couldn't sail the boat after 6 months full time, the rule changes made the boats easier to sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No live streaming on day 1.  Day 2 blown out.  Plan to do the catch up races between 12.30 (now) and 2 pm today.  No live streaming until 2pm -> 4pm for the 3 scheduled races for today.  Pretty ordinary if they want to look at TV coverage again in the future. I am sure the sponsors will be over the moon.

Anyway, 1st catch up race Euroflex is penalised on the start and has to hold still whilst the fleet foil off.  Top gate Euro have caught and past 2 boats and charging up the fleet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eurofelx now battling closely with Pavement for first.

Gavin Reitman who is always on the scene is streaming his own footage on his Forward WIP Australia Facebook page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another clean sweep to Euroflex. Tech2 led around a couple of marks to make it a bit more interesting. Not sure what happened to ID, as they didn't race. Might have damaged their foils pre-race, not sure though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On water footage from the boats had improved, so has the audio coming off the boats, worst part is still the commentary, although today the buzz word of machines was replaced with "sending it" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Half the people racing these boats also race moths. Looking at the speeds attained today and the time they waste tacking and gybing, pretty well all of these people would have done the course faster in their moths. Same in Adelaide. They could have had 3 times the boats, closer racing, more action and a better spectacle, at a fraction of the money, and if they had Randy Cunningham doing more entertaining commentry they would have a whole lot more people interested. Very disapointing.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2018 at 3:47 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Jesus I haven't seen this much whinging since my kid was 4 months old.

Yeah OK, now I agree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites