Recommended Posts

^ That's awkward .......

 

Is this true? These guys say that RM from the WW foil now ~is~ allowed?

 

They don't actually. They say that the rule will soon be changed - in light of experience and concerns expressed in an attempt to give a more stable and controllable (safer) result

Sounds perfectly likely...

 

Share this post


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

Who are they?

 

Probably SARDIANS .. :D 

Don’t know either but I posted one of their videos a month or two back. It was in Italian and you posted a short synopsis in response.

Share this post


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

but @mfluder  , @Indio and other fanboy retards will say that this is perfectly fine hey

If it turns the boat from a finicky lemon thats hard to get up on foils into something that performs well then its probably a good change no? :huh:

Share this post


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

Don’t know either but I posted one of their videos a month or two back. It was in Italian and you posted a short synopsis in response.

Ouch ... dotage approaching fast :(  Now that you mention it I vaguely recall, it wasn’t anything as interesting as this. FWIW, the two guys are from Quantum Sails Italy.

The date of the alleged amendment is also relevant: if it was after June 29, unanimous consent was required - the boat’s stability must be really critical ...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They also comment that feedback systems will be allowed from the foils and flaps. Perhaps to detect when ventilation conditions are forming and avoid it?

I think allowing downforce will significantly change the foil design, perhaps to something more asymmetric? How much extra strength will be required in the hull and rig, and hence extra weight? Maybe the rig is the failsafe?

Share this post


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

If it turns the boat from a finicky lemon thats hard to get up on foils into something that performs well then its probably a good change no? :huh:

yeah well scaling down the ac62 was a good change but didn't dtop them from talking shit

only difference is that it's a team they like that's making the changes

Share this post


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

but @mfluder  , @Indio and other fanboy retards will say that this is perfectly fine hey

wahoo

 

Depends why the rules are being changed. If the change is for a good reason, thats fine. If its just for some selfish reason because they have to scramble to change direction because the challengers have come up with something better (like it has in the past) than I would certainly have a problem with that. So far, that hasn't happened.

Share this post


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

yeah well scaling down the ac62 was a good change but didn't dtop them from talking shit

only difference is that it's a team they like that's making the changes

You conveniently fail to mention the little clause stating that the rule couldn't be changed without unanimous consent - the basis on which they entered

But spin it your way......if you are lucky no one will notice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Depends why the rules are being changed. If the change is for a good reason, thats fine. If its just for some selfish reason because they have to scramble to change direction because the challengers have come up with something better (like it has in the past) than I would certainly have a problem with that. So far, that hasn't happened.

yeah, i agree with you

the sclae down changed nothing but the scale of the boats though

not changing any control system ruling or anything

clear to see that whatever auto flight that luna rossa supposedly invented worked very well on an ac50

Share this post


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

the sclae down changed nothing but the scale of the boats though

not changing any control system ruling or anything

It was a year after the rule was initially released, completely changed from a box hull form & cross-structure to completely one-design shape for wing, cross-structure & hulls.

LR had been well advanced on their design program (from recollection nearly ready to start building?) & reasonably objected to the complete trashing of that effort/$$$ being imposed on them even while they were CoR.

It was a late very significant change pushed through against the objection of two of the strongest teams.

 

This change is close to rule release & a fairly minor tweak (small change to rule wording, could have been a big deal if teams were well down the design program), not seen any sign of teams objecting to it.

Share this post


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

yeah, i agree with you

the sclae down changed nothing but the scale of the boats though

not changing any control system ruling or anything

clear to see that whatever auto flight that luna rossa supposedly invented worked very well on an ac50

These are Americas Cup boats, not day cruisers. If you scale it down, loads change, therefor appendages change, therefor control systems change. 

Share this post


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

This change is close to rule release & a fairly minor tweak (small change to rule wording, could have been a big deal if teams were well down the design program), not seen any sign of teams objecting to it.

Agree, although image-wise it's a bit of a black eye for the technical guys. And again, IF the amendment was signed off after June 29, all teams have got to concur

Odd nobody else’s talking about this 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Why odd?

There seems to have been consultation right through, even when decisions were solely at the discretion of the COR/D. There was a bit of 'We haven't been included' from IBAR early on, but it has been (publicly) harmony and brotherhood ever since - regardless one shocking iniquity after another being pointed out here :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/07/19/looking-future-will/

Shirley Robertson, at the TP52 Worlds in her role as host for the CNN Mainsail Show, asked America’s Cup winning skipper Jimmy Spithill about the new boat for the next America’s Cup:

“This one will be another level. It’s extreme, it’s expensive, from first take, and what we are seeing, it’s unstable, and it’s going to very, very physical. Will it work? That’s the question. The America’s Cup has always been at the leading edge of boats. Look at what’s happened over the last decade. The AC72 kind of reminds me of this boat in that it is very, very powerful and never been done before. The speeds we could have… it’ll be a beast of a boat. It’s out there.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be realistic - this is a radical, huge boat using foiling technology in a new way, married to a (relatively) new rig that has also never been tried on this scale. In terms of being outside the norm, ETNZ have gone even further than the AC72s, and the quasi 'soft' sail further complicates things from a predictability standpoint. So it makes total sense that the design rule will evolve as unforeseen issues arise - especially with regards to flight stability, which directly translates to safety. Nobody wants to see a repeat of AC34 where a sailor lost his life. 

So I'm totally fine with whatever changes they feel they need to make, just like I was totally fine with the changes to the rudder stabilizers after the Artemis accident. It's just common sense.

Share this post


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

 it has been (publicly) harmony and brotherhood ever since

If true it means that all teams need extra RM to make the boat fly.

Next modification will be interesting :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The speeds we could have it’ll be a beast of a boat. It’s out there.

Sounds quicker than an AC50...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change could have been due to the complexity of the foilcontrol system monitoring down force,and what it would do if it detects it.

With the enormous rm these boats will generate as discussed in the Qa's,

It will probably be counter productive to use down force in straight line due to extra drag. Very useful in manoeuvres and getting up and onto one foil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now