7264 replies to this topic

[seis]

At least one of the teams were more than half-way to full funding (build 72' and race in the LV) late January and signing up sailors a couple of weeks ago. With 3 months to go to entry fee deadline and another few months for build start deadline it is too early to write off this team (and a few others I suspect). I can't reveal which team I am talking about but it ain't China, the other French or the Finn team. The pessimists around here will have become quite by 2013 when we'll see - yes we will actually be able to see it wherever we are - the greatest sail boat race ever I predict. Just my 2 cents /vf

I have hope to see Energy, Korea, and perhaps Green Comm on AC72.

[GauchoGreg]

At least one of the teams were more than half-way to full funding (build 72' and race in the LV) late January and signing up sailors a couple of weeks ago. With 3 months to go to entry fee deadline and another few months for build start deadline it is too early to write off this team (and a few others I suspect). I can't reveal which team I am talking about but it ain't China, the other French or the Finn team. The pessimists around here will have become quite by 2013 when we'll see - yes we will actually be able to see it wherever we are - the greatest sail boat race ever I predict. Just my 2 cents /vf

The pessimists will move on to the next thing. They never stop.

[Dixie]

Anyone else notice our feathered friend there in the comments of the PC article?

[GauchoGreg]

At least one of the teams were more than half-way to full funding (build 72' and race in the LV) late January and signing up sailors a couple of weeks ago. With 3 months to go to entry fee deadline and another few months for build start deadline it is too early to write off this team (and a few others I suspect). I can't reveal which team I am talking about but it ain't China, the other French or the Finn team. The pessimists around here will have become quite by 2013 when we'll see - yes we will actually be able to see it wherever we are - the greatest sail boat race ever I predict. Just my 2 cents /vf

I have hope to see Energy, Korea, and perhaps Green Comm on AC72.

Those are the three I would believe have the best shot. Gotta give China credit for actually keeping a presence on AC.com. Aleph, on the other hand, has vanished from the face of the earth (well, I guess Aleph competed in the last RC44 event, but that is hardly AC news).

[SW Sailor]

At least one of the teams were more than half-way to full funding (build 72' and race in the LV) late January and signing up sailors a couple of weeks ago. With 3 months to go to entry fee deadline and another few months for build start deadline it is too early to write off this team (and a few others I suspect). I can't reveal which team I am talking about but it ain't China, the other French or the Finn team. The pessimists around here will have become quite by 2013 when we'll see - yes we will actually be able to see it wherever we are - the greatest sail boat race ever I predict. Just my 2 cents /vf

I have hope to see Energy, Korea, and perhaps Green Comm on AC72.

Those are the three I would believe have the best shot. Gotta give China credit for actually keeping a presence on AC.com. Aleph, on the other hand, has vanished from the face of the earth (well, I guess Aleph competed in the last RC44 event, but that is hardly AC news).

Agreed - Loick with his extensive experience on large cats could have a formidable presence. It was apparent in AC33 when he took over helming from EB who was snake waking all over the place.

Would love to see the new guys on TK keep the momentum from Draper going - but that's likely a tall order. Not sure if any of the Chaebols are interested sponsors, but that could easily be a game changer for TK as they have deep pockets and budgets for these types of events.

GC seems to have made some progress with sponsorships lately, and they have a recent piece on the team website about a local planning company that will set-up and manage the SF team base, etc. so it sounds like their is activity behind the scenes taking place.

I hate to disparage all the AC34 anti-fans that pounced on the comment about only 3 challengers, but RC did make a comment that a 4th challenger is a possibility, which could yield 9 AC72's out on the SF Bay, possibly 10 if two of the three above go into a build.

For the AC34 anti-fans waiting on the sidelines to jump for joy in celebration should 9 or 10 72's not be built or show up on the SF Bay, please remove your hat and pinch a loaf in it. You know who you are .

[~Stingray~]

^ One of the fun things to come out of Tuesday's event was how big and in-yer-face OR's 'Defense trials' two-boat competition is going to be. Other two-boat teams may run them both too, when not in actual LV races.

There are plenty of suggestions that GCR is the most advanced among the remaining possibilities so far. They have flat out said that the Lombardy deal guaranteed their entry to the LV. We can reasonably doubt them until we see proof of the build but that may be a long wait, depending their build plan timeline. Otoh, If they really do have €54M in cash and services to depend on then it even seems possible they might build two boats given how that's a pretty darn serious budget number; in which case the evidence might come sooner rather than later.

My guess by process of elimination is that vadfan is referring to either ET or TK. And since ET already has sailors, and since TK is rebuilding with Outteridge, then it's TK that is closest to making it next after GCR.

ET seems to have commitments enough to build a boat but not yet enough to fund a decent campaign around it. They would be my third-in-line addition at this stage but it's got t be dang hard for even the team principals to know how and when prospective decisions may come down.

China? Barot and Dabbadie are apparently still in China but will they have even one decent sailor to send to Naples?

And if Pennec and the Gitana boys are busy with x40s and MOD70s then will Aleph?

Hopefully they either put up or shut up soon, at least ACWS wise, because those two look pretty fragile right now - without any evidence whatsoever to the contrary that we can point to.

For the event itself, seems to me that China having a presence in the LV would be pretty big; so for that sake, I guess I hope TC somehow ultimately make it too - with a solid enough campaign that the Chinese can be proud enough to follow it.

[eric e]

The fact Energy has not thrown in the towel, to me, would seem to indicate they still feel they have a good shot at making it. In many ways, they sound a lot like ETNZ early last year.

Without all the bitching about the event and constantly playing the pity card that they're broke.

Gotta love Loick's attitude and his interviews, and would love to see him funded for at least one 72 if not two.

^Ditto!

the way you guys completely

and repeatedly

fail to allow for the subtle but important differences

in inter-cultural communication

would be a joke

if it wasn't a tragedy

remember you invented the cool-aid

and you drank it

[SW Sailor]

The fact Energy has not thrown in the towel, to me, would seem to indicate they still feel they have a good shot at making it. In many ways, they sound a lot like ETNZ early last year.

Without all the bitching about the event and constantly playing the pity card that they're broke.

Gotta love Loick's attitude and his interviews, and would love to see him funded for at least one 72 if not two.

^Ditto!

the way you guys completely

and repeatedly

fail to allow for the subtle but important differences

in inter-cultural communication

would be a joke

if it wasn't a tragedy

Borrowing TK's lecturing podium ?

Do teach us

[SimonN]

Got to love the OR fanboys.

So, GD, IM, PC and others say there will be 3 challengers, although IM was later told by his masters to talk it up. I am sure they all acknowledge there is a small chance of other teams doing something, but the collective wisdom is that 3 is the most likely number. However, the OR fanboys would rather go for wild speculation, smoke signals and rumour over what those 3 say.

Then let's look at the figure of 3 challengers. Let's even pretend it will be 4 or even 5. I was so roundly attacked just before entries closed when I said I doubted there would be even 6 challengers. Back then, 6 would have been considered a real diappointment, a failure. We will not have 6. I personally am more optimistic than most and say there will be 4 teams competing for the LVC. This will be the worst turn out for the LVC ever. Irrespective of how greart a spectacle the event turns out to be, the choices made by Oracle/GGYC and the actions of AC Alphabet has killed competition. They have done it by making this by far the most expensive it has ever been to be competitive in the Cup. More than ever before, this MC Cup is about who has the most money.

And the funniest thing of all the OP fanboys comments........one man is to blame for all of this by talking negatively! It's OK, everybody. GGYC, Oracle, AC Alphabet have done everything right and if it wasn't for GD constantly going on and on, there would have been lots more teams raising record amounts of money to be able to compete! It's all GD's fault! It doesn't ahve anything to do with it being the most expensive Cup ever and it taking place during one of the toughest economic times in modern history. It has nothing to do with the (allegedly) poor performance of ACEA, their inability to put together a timely calander of events, sign media/TV deals, secure any other major sponsor beyond LV and the fact that it is clear to anybody looking from the outside that ACEA is run by somebody who doesn't have a clue about the sport. NO! It's all Grant Dalton's fault.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

[~Stingray~]

Tell me again how having another Areva would improve the LV, let alone the Match for the Cup.

Waiting....

[ro!]

Tell me again how having another Areva would improve the LV, let alone the Match for the Cup.

Waiting....

How many Areva 's were in there when you confidently predicted 15.. minimum 10 teams.....

[SW Sailor]

Got to love the OR fanboys.

So, GD, IM, PC and others say there will be 3 challengers, although IM was later told by his masters to talk it up. I am sure they all acknowledge there is a small chance of other teams doing something, but the collective wisdom is that 3 is the most likely number. However, the OR fanboys would rather go for wild speculation, smoke signals and rumour over what those 3 say.

Then let's look at the figure of 3 challengers. Let's even pretend it will be 4 or even 5. I was so roundly attacked just before entries closed when I said I doubted there would be even 6 challengers. Back then, 6 would have been considered a real diappointment, a failure. We will not have 6. I personally am more optimistic than most and say there will be 4 teams competing for the LVC. This will be the worst turn out for the LVC ever. Irrespective of how greart a spectacle the event turns out to be, the choices made by Oracle/GGYC and the actions of AC Alphabet has killed competition. They have done it by making this by far the most expensive it has ever been to be competitive in the Cup. More than ever before, this MC Cup is about who has the most money.

And the funniest thing of all the OP fanboys comments........one man is to blame for all of this by talking negatively! It's OK, everybody. GGYC, Oracle, AC Alphabet have done everything right and if it wasn't for GD constantly going on and on, there would have been lots more teams raising record amounts of money to be able to compete! It's all GD's fault! It doesn't ahve anything to do with it being the most expensive Cup ever and it taking place during one of the toughest economic times in modern history. It has nothing to do with the (allegedly) poor performance of ACEA, their inability to put together a timely calander of events, sign media/TV deals, secure any other major sponsor beyond LV and the fact that it is clear to anybody looking from the outside that ACEA is run by somebody who doesn't have a clue about the sport. NO! It's all Grant Dalton's fault.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

You bring up several valid points - management, the economy, difficulty in raising sponsor money, etc.

First, I don't think anyone dumped all this on Dalton shoulders as you opine. Has he consistently undermined the event ? No question, starting with "not entering", and the list goes on, and on. Is he helping the event or other challengers by such actions ? I don't think so, and I also don't think he cares as he continues to grind his ax about having to compete against billionaires and complain that he's broke. The AC has always been an expensive endeavor, maybe he's out of his league and needs to reconsider what he undertakes.

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

Third, I don't think anyone has said this has been executed perfectly, as has been the subject of several posts. Because some (like me) choose not to throw gasoline on an already burning fire in a cess pool does not mean I think things have been perfect. Needless to say this whole event is a major undertaking and if anything, I've said give them time to improve things before passing fianl judgment, which has been passed by many since they announced the AC would be raced in cats. I trust they will improve. How much, and in what areas I don't know.

Fourth, In terms of the number of challengers, some predicted more, but as soon as a few people mentioned 3, a small crowd pounced on the number as if it is the final number. Could it be ? Possibly, but challengers also have another 3 months to secure funding. I choose to hold out hope that one possibly two more will enter the challenger series making it four or possibly five. Certainly the talent is there to make this a competitive event.

Fifth, the intent is to lay a foundation for a new cup format. Maybe it will take two iterations and a little economic help to pull this together, but it's good to know the resources and commitment are in place to bootstrap the first attempt to overhaul the event.

Lastly, and this point has been largely overlooked, this is likely to be the most level playing field the AC has seen in several decades, which the challengers have openly acknowledged, at least the honest ones that aren't preoccupied with bitching.

[dogwatch]

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

The coffee has already been consumed, Simon. We are now in the damage limitation phase. The party line now is that there may only be 3/4 challengers but they are perfectly formed. What is sad is to see IM obediently trotting out this position.

[dogwatch]

Tell me again how having another Areva would improve the LV, let alone the Match for the Cup.

Damn, when you told us that those predicting only 8 challengers were wrong by "an order of magnitude", and that we'd look very foolish, we all assumed you believed there would be more. Now I realise you meant all along there would be an order of magnitude fewer.

[dogwatch]

I think it would be safe to say, knowing how Bruno Peyron works, that if they had thrown in the towel on AC34, that they would announce it and officially reformulate their effort as interim competition in the ACWS with hard plans for AC35. The fact Energy has not thrown in the towel, to me, would seem to indicate they still feel they have a good shot at making it. In many ways, they sound a lot like ETNZ early last year.

But in a recent interview he indicated for the first time that he may now be positioning for AC35. That's a significant change of tune. I still hope he makes it for AC34 but potential French finance industry backers are taking a hell of a haircut on Greek sovereign debt.

[dogwatch]

The pessimists will move on to the next thing. They never stop.

We are blessed to have so much material to work with.

[SW Sailor]

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

The coffee has already been consumed, Simon. We are now in the damage limitation phase. The party line now is that there may only be 3/4 challengers but they are perfectly formed.

And how is this different from the level of competition in AC32, and how many times has this already been mentioned ?

This is likely to be the case in any challenger series, but you can continue ignoring it if you choose to.

[SW Sailor]

The pessimists will move on to the next thing. They never stop.

We are blessed to have so much material to work with.

Attached Files

•  397155_10150694582782292_118796017291_11320764_515254491_n.jpg   26.2K   5 downloads

[Rennmaus]

Got to love the OR fanboys.

So, GD, IM, PC and others say there will be 3 challengers, although IM was later told by his masters to talk it up. I am sure they all acknowledge there is a small chance of other teams doing something, but the collective wisdom is that 3 is the most likely number. However, the OR fanboys would rather go for wild speculation, smoke signals and rumour over what those 3 say.

Then let's look at the figure of 3 challengers. Let's even pretend it will be 4 or even 5. I was so roundly attacked just before entries closed when I said I doubted there would be even 6 challengers. Back then, 6 would have been considered a real diappointment, a failure. We will not have 6. I personally am more optimistic than most and say there will be 4 teams competing for the LVC. This will be the worst turn out for the LVC ever. Irrespective of how greart a spectacle the event turns out to be, the choices made by Oracle/GGYC and the actions of AC Alphabet has killed competition. They have done it by making this by far the most expensive it has ever been to be competitive in the Cup. More than ever before, this MC Cup is about who has the most money.

And the funniest thing of all the OP fanboys comments........one man is to blame for all of this by talking negatively! It's OK, everybody. GGYC, Oracle, AC Alphabet have done everything right and if it wasn't for GD constantly going on and on, there would have been lots more teams raising record amounts of money to be able to compete! It's all GD's fault! It doesn't ahve anything to do with it being the most expensive Cup ever and it taking place during one of the toughest economic times in modern history. It has nothing to do with the (allegedly) poor performance of ACEA, their inability to put together a timely calander of events, sign media/TV deals, secure any other major sponsor beyond LV and the fact that it is clear to anybody looking from the outside that ACEA is run by somebody who doesn't have a clue about the sport. NO! It's all Grant Dalton's fault.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee!

You bring up several valid points - management, the economy, difficulty in raising sponsor money, etc.

First, I don't think anyone dumped all this on Dalton shoulders as you opine. Has he consistently undermined the event ? No question, starting with "not entering", and the list goes on, and on. Is he helping the event or other challengers by such actions ? I don't think so, and I also don't think he cares as he continues to grind his ax about having to compete against billionaires and complain that he's broke. The AC has always been an expensive endeavor, maybe he's out of his league and needs to reconsider what he undertakes.

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

Third, I don't think anyone has said this has been executed perfectly, as has been the subject of several posts. Because some (like me) choose not to throw gasoline on an already burning fire in a cess pool does not mean I think things have been perfect. Needless to say this whole event is a major undertaking and if anything, I've said give them time to improve things before passing fianl judgment, which has been passed by many since they announced the AC would be raced in cats. I trust they will improve. How much, and in what areas I don't know.

Fourth, In terms of the number of challengers, some predicted more, but as soon as a few people mentioned 3, a small crowd pounced on the number as if it is the final number. Could it be ? Possibly, but challengers also have another 3 months to secure funding. I choose to hold out hope that one possibly two more will enter the challenger series making it four or possibly five. Certainly the talent is there to make this a competitive event.

Fifth, the intent is to lay a foundation for a new cup format. Maybe it will take two iterations and a little economic help to pull this together, but it's good to know the resources and commitment are in place to bootstrap the first attempt to overhaul the event.

Lastly, and this point has been largely overlooked, this is likely to be the most level playing field the AC has seen in several decades, which the challengers have openly acknowledged, at least the honest ones that aren't preoccupied with bitching.

+1 to Simon's post, it shows that he is capable of a balanced view, to criticize what he does not like and to compliment what he likes, without regard to the person. It indeed is possible to disagree with someone one day because of one thing and agree with him the other about another thing - go figure. Again, the world, and the AC for that matter, is not either-or, it is as-well-as.

What harm actually did the “not entering” of ETNZ do? It generated a bit of additional interest in the AC at a very early stage and more posts/clicks on SAAC. At a stage when we did not even know where the first ACWS event will take place -talking about doing damage…

It’s very friendly to give ACEA et al. the benefit of doubt for the 100th time now, but actually why? They were the ones that spouted about the best, the biggest, the awesomest, the revolutionariest blah blah blah. Why not measure them against their promises, especially since many (also GD?) said already early on that they do over-promise? Looks like the early critics were not too wrong…

So, 3 challengers secured, others maybe in the pipeline. Not comparable to AC32 and AC33-MKI. Better than AC33-MKII, tho.
It will be nice to watch the sailing no matter what GD says and no matter how many challengers will turn up. But, if there are only few, the on-shore presentation may be a bit meager, because that was something the “fleet-fillers” were needed for in previous ACs. Not to mention to draw fans (the oh so badly needed public) from their home country into interest for the AC - TV viewers, consumers (!) all of them. Again: The number of challengers does not necessarily influence the quality of racing, but it certainly influences the financial viability of the event, especially on a global scale.

The most level playing field it is this time, I agree, and from a sporting perspective I will not revise my initial statement that the protocol is breathtakingly fair - especially in comparison to the AC33-MKI sorry effort.

[kiwi_jon]

The Soiler has this stupid idea in his poor excuse for a brain that because TNZ did not ship their AC45 to Cascais using ACRM supplied shipping that it undermined the AC.

Solier must have missed the memo because ACRM did not ship the AC45's from Auckland to Cascais but Valencia as a staging port as there were no ACWS venues at that stage. The shipping that ACRM organised was on a commercial container ship and at the teams cost. There was no obligation on the part of the teams to use this shipping.

Only 2 of the 4 teams that were in Auckland shipped to Valencia, Artemis and CT. Oracle shipped to San Francis and TNZ had another 6 weeks sailing the AC45 in Auckland before shipping to Cascais via their shipping partner/sponsor Maersk.

34th America’s Cup Regatta Notice 2011/12

From: Iain Murray, Regatta Director
To: Competitors for the 34th America's Cup
Date: 20 March 2011

Subject: ACRM Managed Shipping from New Zealand to first ACWS
Venue

ACRM can offer Competitors the following terms for shipping containers from
New Zealand to Valencia, in preparation for moving them to the first AC World
Series event.

Until the location of the first event is announced, we cannot finalize the onshipment
from Valencia but have allowed enough time to manage this no
matter where the first event is located. The cost of this on-shipping isn't
included in the cost shown below but will be communicated once we have the
destination. There is no additional management fee for this service and fees
are to be paid directly to the European agent and not to ACRM. Fees are due
after landing in Valencia.

There is no obligation to take up this offer and teams are free to ship when
ever and with whomever they wish.

Route: Auckland - Valencia

Last delivery date to the docks in Auckland: 12 May 2011

ETA Valencia: 18 June 2011

Cost per 40 foot High Cube: £3050.00

European Agent: PSP Logistics Limited, UK. Contact Frank Dixie -
Frank.Dixie@PSP-Logistics.com

NZ Agent: Gateway Cargo, Auckland. Contact Stephen Kirkham -
Stephen.Kirkham@GatewayCargo.co.nz

If you wish to take up this offer, we will need you to confirm this plus the
number of units to be transported to the agents and to Stuart Gentry, ACRM
Shipping and Logistics Manager by 4 April 2011 at the latest.
Stuart can be contacted on Stuart.Gentry@AmericasCup.com and PSP and
Gateway Cargo can be contacted on the e-mail addresses above. Stuart will
be coordinating the shipment for ACRM.

If you have any questions, please let Stuart know.

Iain Murray
Regatta Director

[dogwatch]

+1 to Simon's post, it shows that he is capable of a balanced view, to criticize what he does not like and to compliment what he likes, without regard to the person. It indeed is possible to disagree with someone one day because of one thing and agree with him the other about another thing - go figure. Again, the world, and the AC for that matter, is not either-or, it is as-well-as.

Absolutely. Critical assessment of what is and is not working in AC34 gives us something to discuss. Haters versus fanboys gets old awfully quickly. I think it's unfortunate that kiwi_jon, who clearly has a lot of knowledge, has allowed himself to be goaded into ad hominem attacks.

It will be nice to watch the sailing no matter what GD says and no matter how many challengers will turn up. But, if there are only few, the on-shore presentation may be a bit meager, because that was something the "fleet-fillers" were needed for in previous ACs. Not to mention to draw fans (the oh so badly needed public) from their home country into interest for the AC - TV viewers, consumers (!) all of them. Again: The number of challengers does not necessarily influence the quality of racing, but it certainly influences the financial viability of the event, especially on a global scale.

That's one reason why the number of challengers matters like hell. The exit stage left of Team Origin virtually guaranteed that there will be minimal mainstream media coverage in Britain. If there is no French team, the same will be true in France. And so on. Just possibly, the co-existence of the ACWS during the LVC may mitigate this. We could hope. This clearly matters to teams hoping to develop sponsorships in the AC35 cycle. They need to demonstrate media coverage in the regions of interest to potential sponsors.

The second reason the number of LVC entries matters is the oft-repeated point that it is rare - very rare - to win on the first challenge. Therefore teams need to develop. Having 3 strong challengers in AC34 does not bode well for AC35.

The third reason the number of challengers matters lies in the economic benefit to the venue and we can see this point has not escaped the supervisors of SF.

The most level playing field it is this time, I agree, and from a sporting perspective I will not revise my initial statement that the protocol is breathtakingly fair - especially in comparison to the AC33-MKI sorry effort.

That is indeed a positive that OR can be proud of.

[GauchoGreg]

+1 to Simon's post, it shows that he is capable of a balanced view, to criticize what he does not like and to compliment what he likes, without regard to the person. It indeed is possible to disagree with someone one day because of one thing and agree with him the other about another thing - go figure. Again, the world, and the AC for that matter, is not either-or, it is as-well-as.

Absolutely. Critical assessment of what is and is not working in AC34 gives us something to discuss. Haters versus fanboys gets old awfully quickly. I think it's unfortunate that kiwi_jon, who clearly has a lot of knowledge, has allowed himself to be goaded into ad hominem attacks.

It will be nice to watch the sailing no matter what GD says and no matter how many challengers will turn up. But, if there are only few, the on-shore presentation may be a bit meager, because that was something the "fleet-fillers" were needed for in previous ACs. Not to mention to draw fans (the oh so badly needed public) from their home country into interest for the AC - TV viewers, consumers (!) all of them. Again: The number of challengers does not necessarily influence the quality of racing, but it certainly influences the financial viability of the event, especially on a global scale.

That's one reason why the number of challengers matters like hell. The exit stage left of Team Origin virtually guaranteed that there will be minimal mainstream media coverage in Britain. If there is no French team, the same will be true in France. And so on. Just possibly, the co-existence of the ACWS during the LVC may mitigate this. We could hope. This clearly matters to teams hoping to develop sponsorships in the AC35 cycle. They need to demonstrate media coverage in the regions of interest to potential sponsors.

The second reason the number of LVC entries matters is the oft-repeated point that it is rare - very rare - to win on the first challenge. Therefore teams need to develop. Having 3 strong challengers in AC34 does not bode well for AC35.

The third reason the number of challengers matters lies in the economic benefit to the venue and we can see this point has not escaped the supervisors of SF.

The most level playing field it is this time, I agree, and from a sporting perspective I will not revise my initial statement that the protocol is breathtakingly fair - especially in comparison to the AC33-MKI sorry effort.

That is indeed a positive that OR can be proud of.

All excellent points. From very early on, I have said 6 challengers is what is desired, and I believe that should include at least one French and one Asian team. If we end up with 4 or 5 challengers, it will still be great, but obviously not what we would hope for. Three challengers would absolutely be a dissappointment for local impact, international interest, and simple quantity of racing, although the quality of racing will not be impacted I the least. Having a concurrent ACWS with the teams not participating during the LV or even the AC would certainly help, particularly in France and England.

[SW Sailor]

The Soiler has this stupid idea that GD's constant bitching about money when he's government funded, complaining about wings and cranes, boycotting the AC website, and shooting his mouth off in SD undermined the AC.

Porta Potty, apparently you missed the memo about the gag order.

[Indio]

I see Sailing-With-Simpleton is still flagging IHC classes. That village will be sending out a posse any time soon to look for him: thought he'd be hiding out in the Badlands.

[SimonN]

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

I did have a pop at GD, because I do not like his management style and do not believe that ETNZ can win with him running the show. I also said he should keep his head down and stop being an "outsider" because it is hurting his team. At no time have I ever suggested that GD is having a negative effect on the event because I do not believe his posturing has any effect on it at all. That sort of stupidity I leave to you.

[SW Sailor]

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

I did have a pop at GD, because I do not like his management style and do not believe that ETNZ can win with him running the show. I also said he should keep his head down and stop being an "outsider" because it is hurting his team. At no time have I ever suggested that GD is having a negative effect on the event because I do not believe his posturing has any effect on it at all. That sort of stupidity I leave to you.

Thanks for the credit, but I believe it's in ACEA's hands .

[SimonN]

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

I did have a pop at GD, because I do not like his management style and do not believe that ETNZ can win with him running the show. I also said he should keep his head down and stop being an "outsider" because it is hurting his team. At no time have I ever suggested that GD is having a negative effect on the event because I do not believe his posturing has any effect on it at all. That sort of stupidity I leave to you.

Thanks for the credit, but I believe it's in ACEA's hands .

I don't think so. A quick search shows many posts by you on the subject. This is just one example is just the latest in a long history you have at trying to blame GD.

Dalton has been undermining the event ever since he "didn't enter", didn't want to use the website, didn't like the idea of having to use cranes, didn't want ACEA to ship his shit to Cascais, wouldn't buy a second AC 45 in a million years (yet that's the first thing LR did), shot his mouth off in SD, etc. etc.

[SW Sailor]

Second, if I recall correctly, you took a pretty direct shot at Dalton not that long ago, so your hands aren't exactly clean, or did you forget already ?

I did have a pop at GD, because I do not like his management style and do not believe that ETNZ can win with him running the show. I also said he should keep his head down and stop being an "outsider" because it is hurting his team. At no time have I ever suggested that GD is having a negative effect on the event because I do not believe his posturing has any effect on it at all. That sort of stupidity I leave to you.

Thanks for the credit, but I believe it's in ACEA's hands .

I don't think so. A quick search shows many posts by you on the subject. This is just one example is just the latest in a long history you have at trying to blame GD.

Dalton has been undermining the event ever since he "didn't enter", didn't want to use the website, didn't like the idea of having to use cranes, didn't want ACEA to ship his shit to Cascais, wouldn't buy a second AC 45 in a million years (yet that's the first thing LR did), shot his mouth off in SD, etc. etc.

Yes, and I stand by my comments which are based on GD's actions and his direct remarks. GD is sure as hell not supporting the ACWS concept and everything it involves, which is the point of my posts. If you take the time to read them you might see this.

Closer to the point, I don't recall ever stating or even inferring that his ongoing efforts to undermine the event have reduced the number of ACWS participants or AC entrants. This is the conclusion you're trying draw, which is incorrect. As I stated, macro-economic conditions are probably the biggest factor in the number of challengers with this event.

Regardless, keep searching to prove your claim that I stated his efforts have limited the number of challengers, and let me know as soon as you find some conclusive material in my posts that support your position. Good luck.

And BTW, I don't consider GD a macro-economic factor .

[~Stingray~]

Wing extension photos, by AR

https://www.facebook...=3&l=0c78487b34

[Alpina]

Expect WingTri action very soon...

[JWR]

Wonder how teams with clear wings will deal with the ugly yellow wing extensions. Ostensibly painting them black?

[nav]

Wing extension photos, by AR

https://www.facebook...=3&l=0c78487b34

Nice - and they have permission to test 'until further notice'!

http://noticeboard.a...ing-Artemis.pdf

[J-BIRD]

Expect WingTri action very soon...

I heard it (72 wing) was due to go in this week but they dropped it ....... since the skin is a carbon -nomex sandwich
there is a bit more involved in the repair ......... maybe early next week

any of you guys living near Sagunto to get some pics??

[K38BOB]

Wonder how teams with clear wings will deal with the ugly yellow wing extensions. Ostensibly painting them black?

...... clear coat should work

[valenciasailing]

It seems Artemis have stepped the wing on their ORMA60 trimaran. Heading to Sagunto to "spy"...

[nav]

It seems Artemis have stepped the wing on their ORMA60 trimaran. Heading to Sagunto to "spy"...

Good man...

(Sure hope he doesn't get flicked - imagine if we had to rely solely on SA for news!)

[seis]

Vsail.info Artemis wing pic:

[Tony-F18]

Awesome!
It looks a lot bigger then the AC45 one

[Alpina]

Holy shit!

[the loose cannon]

two element wing at the top and three element wing below that top section, parabolic trailing edge (for pressure distribution gains, and maybe even a little 'smoother' twist profile when they twist it.) Cant really tell from this angle about the lines holding it up - pretty!

[KingMonkey]

Is this an AC72 Wing on the ORMA. . . or just a special, different wing?

[Alpina]

AC72 Wing.

[KingMonkey]

Thanks.

[trenace]

Seriously impressive.

[~Stingray~]

Dang - AC72 Wing porn!!!

edit: that thing looks downright scary, bet they trial in in very light air to start...

[nav]

Dang - AC72 Wing porn!!!

edit: that thing looks downright scary, bet they trial in in very light air to start...

Looks great - actually smaller re the people than I had imagined. Piece of cake

[maxmini]

Dang - AC72 Wing porn!!!K

edit: that thing looks downright scary, bet they trial in in very light air to start...

Looks great - actually smaller re the people than I had imagined. Piece of cake

It does look quite a bit smaller than expected . Perhaps it is not full scale ?

[zillawatcher]

Seems to me BOR 90 wing was much bigger. Surely an impressive wing though.

[~Stingray~]

Dang - AC72 Wing porn!!!K

edit: that thing looks downright scary, bet they trial in in very light air to start...

Looks great - actually smaller re the people than I had imagined. Piece of cake

It does look quite a bit smaller than expected . Perhaps it is not full scale ?

Am on a phone with liitle time to look at it, yes - could it be a %- scale wing? Those amas are about 70'.

[KingMonkey]

I don't have photoshop at work, and it'll be hard til we get a better angle, but I just did a crappy size compare by pasting them into Word and making the wings the same height as a side-one one of DZ.

Looked to me like the DZ boat was comparatively much smaller, i.e. that it had a greater height compared to DZ's LOA than the Artemis wing does to the LOA of even the ORMA 60. That said:

a) I doubt anyone would find that very surprising and
I'm sure people can do a better picture comparison to the one I just did.

[nav]

US17 maxed out at 68m/223ft
* add couple of meters for the wing extensions to the 45

[trenace]

So, DLR of about 15

[nav]

So, DLR of about 15

It appears to be full size to my unreliable eyeometer, but I know there are some who love doing tricks with scales and so on who will prove it one way or the other.

One question though: should that photo have been posted here?

That doesn't seem to give Pierre much of a scoop for his work.

[Monster Mash]

So, DLR of about 15

It appears to be full size to my unreliable eyeometer, but I know there are some who love doing tricks with scales and so on who will prove it one way or the other.

One question though: should that photo have been posted here?

That doesn't seem to give Pierre much of a scoop for his work.

It made it to the FP with photo credits to Pierre

[Tornado-Cat]

US17 maxed out at 68m/223ft
* add couple of meters for the wing extensions to the 45

Interesting.
With a ratio L/mast of 1,8 the boat will one of the most extreme ever seen. I bet they will have to move a bit forward the curved or T foils if they don't want to pitchpole.
Interestingly, the faster the boat vs the wind, the safer to pitchpole, but if they slow downwind for a penalty, Oouch....

[nav]

So, DLR of about 15

It appears to be full size to my unreliable eyeometer, but I know there are some who love doing tricks with scales and so on who will prove it one way or the other.

One question though: should that photo have been posted here?

That doesn't seem to give Pierre much of a scoop for his work.

It made it to the FP with photo credits to Pierre

Oh well then....so they probably got permission. Or does this not even apply to a 'news outlet'?? What applies to posting photos here - anyone know?

I had assumed that a simple 'copyright', as in this case, meant - use with specific permission only.

Whereas for example the AC photos are usually "copyright - can be used for editorial purposes, 'With Author Attribution'." That's a much more user friendly mode!

[X-taze]

AC72 Wing.

Really???? Proportions are looking right on a 60ft (about 1.7-1.8 times the boat lenght) so it is very unlikely to be an AC72 wing... may be a scaled down version done as a "proof of concept".

[nav]

AC72 Wing.

Really???? Proportions are looking right on a 60ft (about 1.7-1.8 times the boat lenght) so it is very unlikely to be an AC72 wing... may be a scaled down version done as a "proof of concept".

That's the open question - but it's not a 60' any more!

[seis]

So, DLR of about 15

It appears to be full size to my unreliable eyeometer, but I know there are some who love doing tricks with scales and so on who will prove it one way or the other.

One question though: should that photo have been posted here?

That doesn't seem to give Pierre much of a scoop for his work.

It made it to the FP with photo credits to Pierre

Oh well then....so they probably got permission. Or does this not even apply to a 'news outlet'?? What applies to posting photos here - anyone know?

I had assumed that a simple 'copyright' as in this case meant - use with specific permission only.

Whereas for example the AC photos are usually "copyright - can be used for editorial purposes, 'With Author Attribution'."

Pierre himself has twitted this photo.
© in the pic and in my post...

[nav]

So, DLR of about 15

It appears to be full size to my unreliable eyeometer, but I know there are some who love doing tricks with scales and so on who will prove it one way or the other.

One question though: should that photo have been posted here?

That doesn't seem to give Pierre much of a scoop for his work.

It made it to the FP with photo credits to Pierre

Oh well then....so they probably got permission. Or does this not even apply to a 'news outlet'?? What applies to posting photos here - anyone know?

I had assumed that a simple 'copyright' as in this case meant - use with specific permission only.

Whereas for example the AC photos are usually "copyright - can be used for editorial purposes, 'With Author Attribution'."

Pierre himself has twitted this photo.
© in the pic and in my post...

Yeah I've seen the copyright in the photo - kind of hard to miss. The Author can post work wherever he/she chooses but that doesn't negate the copyright does it. Author wouldn't have gone to the trouble of superimposing the copyright label for no reason one would have thought.

Just trying to clarify. Seems pertinent if there is any quibbling going on between sailing news websites. Or does Anarchy rule?

Notice they credited the photo on the FP, but did not link to his site, as it seems is usually done (nor to the thread).



Anyway, how tall do you reckon that wing is?

[seis]

(Pierre twitted the pic before publish the article in vsail.info)
I think it's a standart AC72.
The amas of tri are 74'.

Another pic posted in a spanish forum

[GauchoGreg]

Funny, this "Poodle" looks like they might actually want to beat Oracle.

[seis]

A link

[seis]

Another link:

http://img706.images.../13032012ca.jpg

[seis]

The article

http://www.vsail.inf...an-in-valencia/


The post

http://foro.latabern...2&postcount=853

[~Stingray~]

new at ac.com


New wing makes appearance with teams getting ready to race
Posted on 13 March 2012

This is an exciting time in the America's Cup cycle. Personally, I love this period leading into the first event of the year. Everybody is eager to get going, all the dreams for the season are still there to be realised and everyone is a winner - or at least a potential winner still - going into race one.
...

---
edit, and at SailWorld,
Artemis Racing test new wingsail on Orma 60 in Valencia

[Rohanoz]

So, I know this has been discussed at other times, but we now have a live example...

Surrogate Yacht means any catamaran yacht that is greater than 10 meters LOA,
except that an AC45 Yacht whose "platform" (external shape of the hulls, and the
crossbeams) comply with the AC45 Class Rule shall not be a Surrogate Yacht. For
the avoidance of doubt, daggerboard cases may be modified, and for the purposes of
this definition any such modification is not deemed to change the external shape of
the hull.

They can modify the wing, daggerboard, rudders, rigging and running gear as long as they don't change the shape of the hulls or alter the crossbeams. However they are then no longer a class AC45 and cannot race in the ACWS.

Oracle have 4 AC45's. The 2 originals they will keep as class boats and the other 2 they will use as test platforms.

By the letter of the law, they are fine, as this platform is a tri. But IF, as is speculated, this IS a 72 destined wing...
How can that be right? Pick up a fully pre-developed/tested rig and plonk it on your 72 platform?

[K38BOB]

Funny, this "Poodle" looks like they might actually want to beat Oracle.

Paul was taken aback when I wished him enough luck to come in 2nd




I have no doubt he's in it to win it

[seis]

The rules are words.
You can play into the rules.
I love to respect the rules.
I hate the cheaters but I love who think about the loopholes of playfield..

[~Stingray~]

Could we see a protest, or a 'clarification' question asked?

'Catamaran' may be in the words (screwup?) but there's a variety of wing parts build restrictions too, right? Can they really develop the heck out of this wing? And, what if it breaks?

[seis]

Could we see a protest, or a 'clarification' question asked?

'Catamaran' may be in the words (screwup?) but there's a variety of wing parts build restrictions too, right? Can they really develop the heck out of this wing? And, what if it breaks?

There is a limit of 6 wing spar sections. I think it's sure those are their first two of six.
But there is no date limit for wings, only for launching the AC72s.

[o69u812]

Anybody else guessing that thing could have beat Alinghi for a lot less money than the Oracle spent...

[seis]

(hh) Wing Spar means the mast, or spar, that carries most of the compression loads due to
sail (including wing) and rigging load, and which is substantially transferred to the boat via
the mast base.

29.6. Wing Spar Limits

Each Competitor may build, acquire or otherwise obtain a maximum of six Wing Spar
sections, provided:

(a) any Wing Spar section less than 12m in length that is part of a wing whose length
from mast base to wing top is less than 22m, is not counted in this limit;

(b ) a Wing Spar section is included in this limit when the Competitor or its representative
takes delivery of the section; and

(c ) a Wing Spar section shall be deemed to be new if more than 50% of its mass is
replaced.

(d) A wing spar extension for a AC45 Yacht acquired by a competitor from ACRM and
used solely on an AC45 Yacht shall not for the purposes of Article 29.6 constitute a
wing spar section.

http://noticeboard.a...dments-1-11.pdf

[~Stingray~]

^ Thanks. Should we assume that everything attached to the wing spar is unlimited in new parts and controls and flap configurations and such - within the DR of course?

The 'plan forms' in the DR being so restricted, this wing does give us a fairly tight view of the overall outline, but that may be all we can take.

Looking forward to the AR coverage of it tomorrow, alluded to by Peter Rusch's article.

[Estar]

'Catamaran' may be in the words (screwup?)

No screw-up. OR wanted to be able to keep 17, so they needed to write in a tri exemption.

[seis]

^ Thanks. Should we assume that everything attached to the wing spar is unlimited in new parts and controls and flap configurations and such - within the DR of course?

The 'plan forms' in the DR being so restricted, this wing does give us a fairly tight view of the overall outline, but that may be all we can take.

Looking forward to the AR coverage of it tomorrow, alluded to by Peter Rusch's article.

I think so. The 6 wing spar sections is the only number restriction about wing construction.


Using a 74' tri for testing wings Artemis has unlimited time for testing wings... but the others have only 30 days in 2012.
We can expect to see a lot of changes in the Artemis wing for testing those weeks...

I think it's possible we will see another Team with a big tri... or a request of clarification!

[maxmini]

Funny, this "Poodle" looks like they might actually want to beat Oracle.

Everybody " wants " to, it's the doing it that's the hard part

[seis]

The 70' tris seem a good platform for unlimited wing testing.

The ORMA 74 is heavier than an AC72. Less boat speed, less apparent wind. Not ideal conditions for testing AC72 wings.

But there are a few old ORMA60 that could be modified...

Is Oracle rebuilding an old tri?

Is Oracle building an (AC)72 tri to test their wings?

We will see the trimaran Vodafone in Auckland become a 70'?

We will see the MOD70 of Guichard used as a platform to test the wings of Energy (if they get money)?

There is a MOD70 without sponsors (ex-Veolia)...

Crazy scenarios?

[Rohanoz]

They're the exact scenarios I was imagining when I saw this 'non-catamaran' surrogate.
Does the centre hull of a custom built 70' tri of the dimensions of an AC72 even have to go in the water?

AC has always been about the billionaires - fairy thinking usage, and testing limitations just makes them spend their money in other ways.

[Estar]

Crazy scenarios?

I think so, for two reasons. #1 Wind tunnel testing is both more private and more precise and controllable, and #2 its very late in the process for someone to try to modify an existing tri - its not just a case of simply dropping in a wing.

My sense of the benefit here is not aero work on the wing, but crew experience and development with controlling such a large wing, but I would expect all the teams to have cockpit 'simulators' where they can develop, test and train on the sail control hardware - which again is more private, and more easily modified & developed but admittedly not as 'real' as actually being on a boat.

[Xlot]

On a different note, the humongous crane seems to belong to Gruas Bonet of AC33 fame.

[Tom O'Keefe]

"#2 its very late in the process for someone to try to modify an existing tri - its not just a case of simply dropping in a wing."


Estar wasn't that Ernesto's logic before Oracle threw a wing on Dogzilla?

[GauchoGreg]

^ Thanks. Should we assume that everything attached to the wing spar is unlimited in new parts and controls and flap configurations and such - within the DR of course?

The 'plan forms' in the DR being so restricted, this wing does give us a fairly tight view of the overall outline, but that may be all we can take.

Looking forward to the AR coverage of it tomorrow, alluded to by Peter Rusch's article.

I think so. The 6 wing spar sections is the only number restriction about wing construction.


Using a 74' tri for testing wings Artemis has unlimited time for testing wings... but the others have only 30 days in 2012.
We can expect to see a lot of changes in the Artemis wing for testing those weeks...

I think it's possible we will see another Team with a big tri... or a request of clarification!

Artemis obviously had a great idea with this. Actually pretty surprised Oracle has not jumped on this idea already.

[malvarrosa beach]

The Artemis Racing base in Sagunto, is in the Vulkan Shipyard facilities, inside the "Puerto de Sagunto", 12 NM of Valencia PAC

These are pics of the tri ORMA60, taken today at noon

Attached Files

•  Artemis Racing Orma60 unwinged_1280x957.JPG   167.48K   123 downloads
•  Artemis Racing Orma60 unwinged 2_957x1280.JPG   103.58K   114 downloads

[malvarrosa beach]

Training activity weeks ago in Sagunto waters of Artemis Racing AC45.
Hope to catch some pics of the "AC72 winged" Orma60 in the coming days ...

Attached Files

•  Artemis Racing AC45 1.JPG   90.21K   60 downloads
•  Artemis Racing AC45 2.JPG   83.25K   48 downloads

[SW Sailor]

"#2 its very late in the process for someone to try to modify an existing tri - its not just a case of simply dropping in a wing."


Estar wasn't that Ernesto's logic before Oracle threw a wing on Dogzilla?

About three months before AC33 BMWO installed an engine and modified the tri for a wing down in SD.

[maxmini]

^ Thanks. Should we assume that everything attached to the wing spar is unlimited in new parts and controls and flap configurations and such - within the DR of course?

The 'plan forms' in the DR being so restricted, this wing does give us a fairly tight view of the overall outline, but that may be all we can take.

Looking forward to the AR coverage of it tomorrow, alluded to by Peter Rusch's article.

I think so. The 6 wing spar sections is the only number restriction about wing construction.


Using a 74' tri for testing wings Artemis has unlimited time for testing wings... but the others have only 30 days in 2012.
We can expect to see a lot of changes in the Artemis wing for testing those weeks...

I think it's possible we will see another Team with a big tri... or a request of clarification!

Artemis obviously had a great idea with this. Actually pretty surprised Oracle has not jumped on this idea already.

This project has been common knowledge for months so it's not like they suddenly sprung it on anybody. If oracle thought it was the way to go or did not already have a better program in place they would have already had one or two in the water by now .There is always a method to Larry's madness

[Estar]

"#2 its very late in the process for someone to try to modify an existing tri - its not just a case of simply dropping in a wing."

Estar wasn't that Ernesto's logic before Oracle threw a wing on Dogzilla?

In a way, yes, you are right.

But there we were talking about the actual race boat - and a very significant speed edge on the race course, that they could get in no other way (same with the engine). Here we are talking about building/modifying simply a test bed, and they have quite good testing alternatives.

Obviously OR could do this if they wanted. They certainly have the resources to do it, and as you point out have done something very similar before. But the question is whether its more of a distraction than a help. OR particularly already have crew experience with very big wings (which AR does not have), they don't need this for aero information, they don't need it for control/handling information. The one benefit for OR would be for 'real world' reliability testing, but their engineers seem excellent at that already. . . And the crew training benefit, time on the water with a big wing, but you would want the boat to handle and perform like the AC72, so the crew does not learn bad habits - I don't know how hard that would be to accomplish but would be a distraction for both the design and build teams.

One thing we know is that RC is an excellent technical/design project manager. He is very good at deciding when something is a distraction vs a true benefit. They even have a tri already built (bigger but still a possible test bed) and are not doing it, so I guess he has judged it a distraction.

[nav]

Don't forget though that the 45 wing was designed by OR, with all that experience - and they forgot to but in any limiters to stop it falling apart when 'inverted'!

It's those working details that can't be tested in a wind tunnel nor on a scale model, like strengthening any under-built areas and really sorting all the leads, blocks, lines, (and hydraulics too now right?). That's where I can see the benefit of more sailing time.

Reliability and ease of control will be key in SF.

[Estar]

Don't forget though that the 45 wing was designed by OR, with all that experience - and they forgot to but in any limiters to stop it falling apart when 'inverted'!

It's those working details that can't be tested in a wind tunnel nor on a scale model, like strengthening any under-built areas and really sorting all the leads, blocks, lines, (and hydraulics too now right?). That's where I can see the benefit of more sailing time.

Reliability and ease of control will be key in SF.

Actually, you can do quite complete mechanical system 'stress' testing in a lab. They know the loads and such and can do a quite good job replicating them in a controlled situation. The AC45 was 'rushed' out and not considered very complex, and not confidential, so they did not go thru a thorough procedure for it - instead deciding to simply beta test it on the water.

RC is one of the best at this game. We will just have to see what he does. I vote that building an extra 'tri' test platform is more of a distraction than a help, but I am very certainly willing to be schooled by RC.

He must have considered this when writing the protocol. It's an obvious and clear exception to the Surrogate yacht rule. At that time at least, he must have felt it would not be worthwhile do a tri . . . However, back then the AC72's were going to be used in the ACWS and now they are not, so that does add a twist that may not have been expected.

[johnmoon]

I think allowing the Trimaran in an allowied test platform under the rule is a ploy by OR to get teams to go off on test program that is a waste of time and effort. It just show's how mixed up Artemist really is at this point. The Tri is too slow for any real useful evaluation.

[Monster Mash]

I think allowing the Trimaran in an allowied test platform under the rule is a ploy by OR to get teams to go off on test program that is a waste of time and effort. It just show's how mixed up Artemist really is at this point. The Tri is too slow for any real useful evaluation.

Disagree.
If the mision is to learn how to control and tune the wing then any suitably quick platforn will work just fine.

[~Stingray~]

I think allowing the Trimaran in an allowied test platform under the rule is a ploy by OR to get teams to go off on test program that is a waste of time and effort. It just show's how mixed up Artemist really is at this point. The Tri is too slow for any real useful evaluation.

Disagree.
If the mision is to learn how to control and tune the wing then any suitably quick platforn will work just fine.

With just one 74' hull in the water, very much like an AC72, this thing could be fast - very fast!

Am really hoping AR treats us to some eye candy here soon.

[Xlot]

It's those working details that can't be tested in a wind tunnel nor on a scale model, like strengthening any under-built areas and really sorting all the leads, blocks, lines, (and hydraulics too now right?). That's where I can see the benefit of more sailing time.

Reliability and ease of control will be key in SF.

However, back then the AC72's were going to be used in the ACWS and now they are not, so that does add a twist that may not have been expected.

[zillawatcher]

Don't forget though that the 45 wing was designed by OR, with all that experience - and they forgot to but in any limiters to stop it falling apart when 'inverted'!

It's those working details that can't be tested in a wind tunnel nor on a scale model, like strengthening any under-built areas and really sorting all the leads, blocks, lines, (and hydraulics too now right?). That's where I can see the benefit of more sailing time.

Reliability and ease of control will be key in SF.

+1

[seis]

Don't forget though that the 45 wing was designed by OR, with all that experience - and they forgot to but in any limiters to stop it falling apart when 'inverted'!

It's those working details that can't be tested in a wind tunnel nor on a scale model, like strengthening any under-built areas and really sorting all the leads, blocks, lines, (and hydraulics too now right?). That's where I can see the benefit of more sailing time.

Reliability and ease of control will be key in SF.

+1

+10

[SimonN]

Anybody who thinks there isn't an advantage to time on the water with a complex wing needs to stop taking whatever drugs they are on. Simulation will get you only so far. Artemis have managed to get one up on the others. And it is not something the others can respond to very easily because it isn't just a matter of modifying a suitable boat. Design and build schedules will have been programmed a long time ago. You cannot simply say you now want to finish the design and build of the first wing, say, 4 months early. It would throw the whole program into caos. The Artemis program will have been developed around this, others won't have been.

I think this one move by Artemis is a bit of a game changer. Before, OR must have been pretty confident that given the same amount of time for development and time on the water as prescribed by the protocol, their wing knowledge would make it hard for other teams to catch up. Now Artemis will have had more big wing experience than OR by the time OR get their first AC72 wing on the water.

[~Stingray~]

+1

[Scarecrow]

I have to agree with Simon, with the restrictions on how much testing they can do on the AC72s this is a stroke of genius as Artemis will know more about their wing and have developed it more than anyone else. This way when they launch their cat they can focus on the cat not the rig which also means it will potentially be more developed than the other teams as well.

Given access to the
Winged tornado
AC45
AC72 wing (on trimaran)

Artemis have without a doubt the best development path and if anyone thinks otherwise they are deluding themselves especially as 60' tris are actually quite cheap in the scheme of things.

[maxmini]

If it was necessary to go the route of Artemis Oracle would have done it . Its obvious they don't think so as they have had plenty of time and resources to do so . Its not like the tri appeared out of thin air yesterday