Jump to content


VOR Leg 5


  • Please log in to reply
2146 replies to this topic

#1801 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:47 PM

G4 seems to have found the answer to overpowered boats:

Posted Image

:rolleyes:

It's a tough one for us Groupama fans but I think that Puma really deserved to win this one over Telefonica, they've been sailing really well and Telefonica only came back because they were extremely lucky with the weather.

#1802 Larry30knots

Larry30knots

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
  • Location:DK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:48 PM

Battle for third ending with a close race into Itajaí too?
Anyone for a bet?

#1803 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:53 PM

Battle for third ending with a close race into Itajaí too?
Anyone for a bet?


I hope not because Groupama wouldn't resist very long. In the best case scenario, it would take a week for Camper to go round, so I think that we are safe, Groupama should manage to finish within 3 or 4 days.

#1804 Larry30knots

Larry30knots

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
  • Location:DK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:56 PM

Kenny said:



"We ran out of food a day and a half ago so we haven't eaten for a day and a half"




So they were counting on sailing even faster in the SO??? Lousy planning IMHY





#1805 Kenny Dumas

Kenny Dumas

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 668 posts
  • Location:Oregon

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:35 PM

Good time to go spend some money on Puma gear! Great race guys!!

#1806 rule69

rule69

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,673 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:50 PM

Taking a deep breath after that finish. Wow.

Back in the Pacific Camper is reprovisioning. Does anyone know how the RC is deciding these issues? Is there a hearing or a rule? The NOR says:

(ii) May, before resuming Racing remove garbage, use any equipment or
receive help to effect repairs but shall not take on food or other provisions
without the prior permission of the RC. This alters RRS 41 and 47.1


In practice it seems like everyone who stops is getting to take on provisions. If so, what's the point of the paragraph from the NOR?

#1807 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:13 PM

And here we go yet again. I had a good day Mr Umpire did you????????????







And your exprience is ?





So, if they are just a few miles apart and both in ca 16 11 kn of TWS, who can account for a 2-3 knot boatspeed difference? It is not "this guy's an olympic medalist and the other guy ain't". I think Puma has problems and are mum about it. Anybobdy?


My thoughts on Puma as well...and am just as confused about what kind of patch-up job on-the-fly Martinez & his miracle-makers did to get them back up in the 20+knts range consistently. I think Puma's got problems they're keeping quiet about.

1.6nm in it now: 60nm matchrace unfolding.

Who got out bed the wrong side today then?

A great day thanks, no problems at all, except your abuse on various forums

#1808 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:20 PM

Well done Tele! Again.


And bring back G4 for the next race/leg!

#1809 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:27 PM

Taking a deep breath after that finish. Wow.

Back in the Pacific Camper is reprovisioning. Does anyone know how the RC is deciding these issues? Is there a hearing or a rule? The NOR says:


(ii) May, before resuming Racing remove garbage, use any equipment or
receive help to effect repairs but shall not take on food or other provisions
without the prior permission of the RC. This alters RRS 41 and 47.1


In practice it seems like everyone who stops is getting to take on provisions. If so, what's the point of the paragraph from the NOR?



Maybe the bit where it says ''without the prior permission of the RC''?

#1810 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,003 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:49 PM

Kenny said:



"We ran out of food a day and a half ago so we haven't eaten for a day and a half"


So they were counting on sailing even faster in the SO??? Lousy planning IMHY


Can you believe it ?

Can't imagine why he didn't forsee 2500 miles and 6 or 7 straight days of match racing with G4 and Tele in a 6000 mile leg.

What was he thinking ?



#1811 Terrafirma

Terrafirma

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,528 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:51 PM

an impressive and well-deserved victory, as the only boat to keep sailing the whole leg- and a leg in the true spirit of the Southern Ocean. As individual legs go, this leg win is the big one


Well said and so true IMO. Congrats to Puma, the Karma gods finally delivered what was owing to Kenny and the team. Well done to TF but this one is Puma's, bad luck to G4, those guys aren't done with yet.

#1812 shanghaisailor

shanghaisailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 482 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:58 PM

Well done Kenny and the guys on Mar Mostro, 12 minutes in 18 days. less than 0.1%

A well worked for first 2 places and if nothing else this victory for Mr Read proves that to finish first, first you have to finish. Excellent management of the equipment through what have been some incredible condiitons over the past 18 days.

See ya on the water

Shanghai Sailor

#1813 dlangpap

dlangpap

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 156 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:12 AM

Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.

#1814 Greenflash

Greenflash

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • Location:Wish I was on a boat

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:13 AM

Well done Puma! The feeling they must be enjoying right now must just be fantastic! Well Deserved win!

#1815 Mr Moab

Mr Moab

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 461 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:10 AM

Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


This all brings to mind one of the single greatest feeds ever performed in a southern ocean leg. All the Volvo boys could learn a thing or two from this episode.

http://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/news/7913/2000-yves-parlier-s-incredible-achievement.html

#1816 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,972 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:58 AM

Good job, Puma. Yves Parlier is a bit of a hero to me also. But didn't Desjoyeaux return to port, work on his boat with assistance and then re-start, catch up and win, benefitting from better weather than that the fleet had to endure? So, yes, hail the indomitable spirit of the Vendee Globe, and Around Alone, but the Volvo is a tough race, too, comprising as it does a series of sprints rather than a prolonged endeavour. If the rules said that you couldn't touch land after starting then the teams would provision accordingly, I'm sure. If Tele had won this leg I would have no problem with it, they all face the same rules and race course.

#1817 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:24 AM

Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


Try explaining disqualification to your sponsor when a batch fault in your water maker fails 1 day out of Alicante...
If you read the blogs from Puma you will get some indication of their reasons for being slower than Tele; I doubt it will be addressed further publicly.
If a majority of the teams (or even a minority of the more influential ones) had a problem with the rules then they would, or will, change.
That's the reality of 'professional' sport.

#1818 Jammen

Jammen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 321 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 06:13 AM

G4 back on track :-)

#1819 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:08 AM

More here
http://www.volvoocea...ts-pursuit.html

#1820 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:12 AM

. If the rules said that you couldn't touch land after starting then the teams would provision accordingly, I'm sure. If Tele had won this leg I would have no problem with it, they all face the same rules and race course.


Well said sir

#1821 umpire

umpire

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,212 posts
  • Location:Edenbridge, UK

Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:22 AM

Comments from ETNZ in Puerto Montt

http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded

#1822 edelweis

edelweis

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 568 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:46 AM

G4 back on track :-)


even with live-tracker!

#1823 haizeko

haizeko

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Location:Bilbao, Basque Country, Spain
  • Interests:Mini transat, ocean racing, weather routing

Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:39 AM

It's a tough one for us Groupama fans but I think that Puma really deserved to win this one over Telefonica, they've been sailing really well and Telefonica only came back because they were extremely lucky with the weather.



Telefonica came back because:

1. THEY WERE EXTREMELY LUCKY WITH THE WEATHER. True, but they also were aware of the good weather conditions coming, and therefore decided to stop in a cove at Cape Horn, which also involves some risks. Also, their routing after the last ice gate to CH was really good, they recovered a lot of distance after making repairs.

2. The pressed really hard from then, they made averages of 24 kn in some reports.

3. They made an almost perfect navigation, being able to stay in phase with the High presure, and positioning themselves in the best place for taking the front

4. G4 and Puma made a big mistake, they forgot Tele and started a match racing without taking into account Tele in their tactics and long term strategy. The most obvious mistake was to sail closer to the Argentina coast, while Tele stayed offshore. Other strategy alternatives could have been evaluated before, but difficult to take when you are sailing so close to another boat and you want to cover it.

so things use to be more complicated in reality, and I am sure that tehre are many other reasons that we don´t know.

And congratulations to Puma, great race! they really deserve it

#1824 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:32 AM

Comments from ETNZ in Puerto Montt

http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded


Oh noooo - here we go again...
I think they're right - with formula stability these problems will get sorted by themselves.
I think at least 2 and possibly 3 boats will think that problems have cost them a shot at being top of the leader board at this point and I don't see anyone blaming the rulebook at this stage.

#1825 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 07 April 2012 - 11:53 AM


It's a tough one for us Groupama fans but I think that Puma really deserved to win this one over Telefonica, they've been sailing really well and Telefonica only came back because they were extremely lucky with the weather.



Telefonica came back because:

1. THEY WERE EXTREMELY LUCKY WITH THE WEATHER. True, but they also were aware of the good weather conditions coming, and therefore decided to stop in a cove at Cape Horn, which also involves some risks. Also, their routing after the last ice gate to CH was really good, they recovered a lot of distance after making repairs.

2. The pressed really hard from then, they made averages of 24 kn in some reports.

3. They made an almost perfect navigation, being able to stay in phase with the High presure, and positioning themselves in the best place for taking the front

4. G4 and Puma made a big mistake, they forgot Tele and started a match racing without taking into account Tele in their tactics and long term strategy. The most obvious mistake was to sail closer to the Argentina coast, while Tele stayed offshore. Other strategy alternatives could have been evaluated before, but difficult to take when you are sailing so close to another boat and you want to cover it.

so things use to be more complicated in reality, and I am sure that tehre are many other reasons that we don´t know.

And congratulations to Puma, great race! they really deserve it


1. There wasn't anything that G4 and Puma could do as they were in different weather systems, as soon as Puma could cover Telefonica he did it and I am sure that G4 would have done it.

2. G4 and Puma were pressing hard also, they just didn't have the right weather to do 24knots average.

3. G4 and Puma had no front to take!

4. I don't think so, offshore was faster because Telefonica was 24 hours behind but as they were beating, it was easy for G4 and Puma to cover as soon as Telefonica was close enough, like G4 did for Puma during leg 4. It doesn't really make sense to cover closely somebody who is more than 12 hours behind.

Telefonica is a really good crew with a very good shore crew, obvisouly they seize opportunities and they wouldn't be first otherwise. I was just pointing that Puma did a really good leg showing very good seamanship and Telefonica got extremely lucky to find two fronts pushing them (one in the Pacific and one in the Atlantic ocean). Sure Telefonica know how to seize opportunities but they had their fair share of luck so far especially during leg 2 and leg 5.

#1826 Terrorvision

Terrorvision

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,843 posts
  • Interests:Taking 'the' out of Psychotherapist

Posted 07 April 2012 - 12:27 PM

Come on, we all now that Telefonica backed off at the last minute in a true show of sportsmanship and let Puma take the win.......... :ph34r:

#1827 haizeko

haizeko

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Location:Bilbao, Basque Country, Spain
  • Interests:Mini transat, ocean racing, weather routing

Posted 07 April 2012 - 12:54 PM

.
.

3. G4 and Puma had no front to take!


.????? Please check the weather maps, that front took puma close to shore just north of mar del plata, when tele had to bear away for some time. Or is it that tele is able to disolve fronts?
Plase a little bit of riguour, this is boring already :blink:

#1828 dlangpap

dlangpap

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 156 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:23 PM


Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


Try explaining disqualification to your sponsor when a batch fault in your water maker fails 1 day out of Alicante...
If you read the blogs from Puma you will get some indication of their reasons for being slower than Tele; I doubt it will be addressed further publicly.
If a majority of the teams (or even a minority of the more influential ones) had a problem with the rules then they would, or will, change.
That's the reality of 'professional' sport.


The Vendee has this rule and they seem to be doing fine. I believe that if the rules and their contingencies are clearly explained to sponsors before contracts are made, there should be no problem regarding the type of situation you have described. Furthermore, that's when you get the right sponsors to begin with. It's great to have sponsors (as annoying as the whole mention of the complete names is> PUMA powered by Berg) and probably the only way to keep these kinds of races alive. However, my opinion is that in no way should the commercial interests of sponsors outweigh or be able to influence the rules and sporting aspect of these events, as has unfortunately already happened with many other sports.

#1829 ET1

ET1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 215 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 02:57 PM



Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


Try explaining disqualification to your sponsor when a batch fault in your water maker fails 1 day out of Alicante...
If you read the blogs from Puma you will get some indication of their reasons for being slower than Tele; I doubt it will be addressed further publicly.
If a majority of the teams (or even a minority of the more influential ones) had a problem with the rules then they would, or will, change.
That's the reality of 'professional' sport.


The Vendee has this rule and they seem to be doing fine. I believe that if the rules and their contingencies are clearly explained to sponsors before contracts are made, there should be no problem regarding the type of situation you have described. Furthermore, that's when you get the right sponsors to begin with. It's great to have sponsors (as annoying as the whole mention of the complete names is> PUMA powered by Berg) and probably the only way to keep these kinds of races alive. However, my opinion is that in no way should the commercial interests of sponsors outweigh or be able to influence the rules and sporting aspect of these events, as has unfortunately already happened with many other sports.

It has happend here, too. Or why would anyone in clear mind sail from Capetown to Abu Dhabi knowing about the piracy problems and avoiding them by loading the boats on on a big vessel? :ph34r:

#1830 4pines

4pines

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:06 PM



Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


Try explaining disqualification to your sponsor when a batch fault in your water maker fails 1 day out of Alicante...
If you read the blogs from Puma you will get some indication of their reasons for being slower than Tele; I doubt it will be addressed further publicly.
If a majority of the teams (or even a minority of the more influential ones) had a problem with the rules then they would, or will, change.
That's the reality of 'professional' sport.


The Vendee has this rule and they seem to be doing fine. I believe that if the rules and their contingencies are clearly explained to sponsors before contracts are made, there should be no problem regarding the type of situation you have described. Furthermore, that's when you get the right sponsors to begin with. It's great to have sponsors (as annoying as the whole mention of the complete names is> PUMA powered by Berg) and probably the only way to keep these kinds of races alive. However, my opinion is that in no way should the commercial interests of sponsors outweigh or be able to influence the rules and sporting aspect of these events, as has unfortunately already happened with many other sports.


It's professional sports. Commercial interests are going to play a very influential role in determining the layout and rules of any competition. I don't really have a problem with the pit stops, if it is going to be a prerequisite for quality sponsorship. No stops would be preferable. However, I understand the point that no sponsor wants to have their boat drop out of a leg because of breakage, especially if it's something like a water maker, that is can be repaired rather easily. Currently, I don't think the current rules really penalize teams for stopping enough. I think it needs to be at least 36 hours, you shouldn't be able to off-load or on-load anything except an injured crew member, and if you drop off an injured crew member they should be ineligible to compete in the next leg. That last part may be too much. I just think if you need to have severe enough penalties for stopping. At no point should be able to stop and gain a tactical or any type of advantage.

#1831 dlangpap

dlangpap

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 156 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:07 PM




Not to take anything out of the celebrations, the PUMA victory and GPMA (actually probably my favourite team), but looking at them comfortably setting up a very good looking jury rig in the safety and comfort of dry land, it gives me this weird sensation that, on an ocean race, these things should be done at sea? I have a similar feeling with TLF, which, admittedly, would have been even worse if they had won the leg, but don't these pit stops seem a bit artificial and unfair? We were discussing the rules regarding these pit stops, especially during TLF's comeback. Should a stop automatically mean disqualification, should turning engines on, receiving outside assistance while at sea?

On another subject and thinking already about the next leg, should PUMA be worried about the speed differential with TLF that nearly cost them the leg? One would imagine that if things had been reversed, they would never have been able to bother TLF. Has anyone heard anything from PUMA about this? Did they have different sails? Damage somewhere? Or was it mostly a matter of TLF sailing in better weather? All questions PUMA will have to address soon.


Try explaining disqualification to your sponsor when a batch fault in your water maker fails 1 day out of Alicante...
If you read the blogs from Puma you will get some indication of their reasons for being slower than Tele; I doubt it will be addressed further publicly.
If a majority of the teams (or even a minority of the more influential ones) had a problem with the rules then they would, or will, change.
That's the reality of 'professional' sport.


The Vendee has this rule and they seem to be doing fine. I believe that if the rules and their contingencies are clearly explained to sponsors before contracts are made, there should be no problem regarding the type of situation you have described. Furthermore, that's when you get the right sponsors to begin with. It's great to have sponsors (as annoying as the whole mention of the complete names is> PUMA powered by Berg) and probably the only way to keep these kinds of races alive. However, my opinion is that in no way should the commercial interests of sponsors outweigh or be able to influence the rules and sporting aspect of these events, as has unfortunately already happened with many other sports.

It has happend here, too. Or why would anyone in clear mind sail from Capetown to Abu Dhabi knowing about the piracy problems and avoiding them by loading the boats on on a big vessel? :ph34r:


Exactly, plus making them sail through that toilet that is the Malacca strait...

#1832 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 03:53 PM

Comments from ETNZ in Puerto Montt

http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded


+1.

I think Nico nails it here:




And WELL DONE PUMA!!

#1833 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,191 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

On Pit Stops:
There is nothing wrong with pulling in behind an Island, getting some rest and patching a few things that couldn't be done properly at sea.
This makes sense if there are brutal conditions, such as in the Straits of Luzon during the last race or if conditions are sufficiently adverse that sailing will simply mean you are pounding your head against the wall.
Nothing unfair about it, just good seamanship.

Assume Telefonica wasn't damaged, but was in the same relative position to Puma and Groupama. If Iker pulled into a cove on the Island of Cape horn and said, "That was brutal, we are going to give ourselves 24 hours to recharge, recoup and put the ship right before heading up the Atlantic." We all would have thought he was nuts.
If the then said," The weather model indicates that our best chance of overhauling Puma is to delay 24 hours and ride a series of frontal systems, we predict our 200+ mile deficit will be reduced to a single shift or puff on the final approach to the finish." We would have been blown away by his confidence and the accuracy of his prediction.
In this case AWESOME seamanship.

I don't even think that going ashore on a nearby island, picking up a few bottles of milk and a bag of cookies is a problem.
But I do think that having the shipwrights come aboard and rebuild stuff is outside the box.
Now I don't know really what I think about having a box of boat building materials dropped off and having the sailing crew do the repair while behind the island. Maybe is the same repair kit was available to everyone?
SHC

#1834 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:22 PM

Smack you really are an idiot, and I'm surprised to see Nico being so clueless right now. It's not about having 'no dramas' as he says. It's about 5/6 of the fleet unable to complete the most essential and iconic leg of the race without stopping for major repairs. How long does Nico think Formula One would last if 5/6 of the field retired on the most important track of the year?

VOR's bacon was saved by a freak weather pattern and Iker and Xavi and Pepe being machines. Were it not for that dramatic finish, things would be looking way worse than they already are right now for the future of the VO70 Rule.

Look for major changes in the Rule because of this leg. And I don't mean panel weights.

#1835 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:30 PM

On Pit Stops:
There is nothing wrong with pulling in behind an Island, getting some rest and patching a few things that couldn't be done properly at sea.
This makes sense if there are brutal conditions, such as in the Straits of Luzon during the last race or if conditions are sufficiently adverse that sailing will simply mean you are pounding your head against the wall.
Nothing unfair about it, just good seamanship.

Assume Telefonica wasn't damaged, but was in the same relative position to Puma and Groupama. If Iker pulled into a cove on the Island of Cape horn and said, "That was brutal, we are going to give ourselves 24 hours to recharge, recoup and put the ship right before heading up the Atlantic." We all would have thought he was nuts.
If the then said," The weather model indicates that our best chance of overhauling Puma is to delay 24 hours and ride a series of frontal systems, we predict our 200+ mile deficit will be reduced to a single shift or puff on the final approach to the finish." We would have been blown away by his confidence and the accuracy of his prediction.
In this case AWESOME seamanship.


+1. This is why I wasn't behind the delay on the Leg 4 start. Seamanship and keeping the boat together is the job of the skippers...and this leg has clearly shown the importance of that. It has also shown, as you point out, and as proven by Tele, that tucking in and waiting it out is not at all a win-killer (though they didn't have much of a choice).

I think the skippers understand that pushing hard is not always the best way to race - at least they should now. And I'm always for ultimate discretion being left to the skippers in dealing with bad conditions in a top tier race like this - not the organizer.

In any case, the VOR rocks. No doubt.

#1836 Steve Clark

Steve Clark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,191 posts
  • Location:Where the water is thin.
  • Interests:Human folly.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:42 PM

All the debate about pit stops would be mute if there were 5 times as many boats.
If 10 boats finished between Telefonica and Groupama it would make breakdowns more crippling to the final score.
The fact that a small fleet is so spread out indicates that the event isn't very competitive....
That is the argument that Laser sailors have been using on IC sailors for as long as I can remember.
I don't want to make that point, but simply recognize that it exists, and move along.
SHC

#1837 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:56 PM

Smack you really are an idiot, and I'm surprised to see Nico being so clueless right now. It's not about having 'no dramas' as he says. It's about 5/6 of the fleet unable to complete the most essential and iconic leg of the race without stopping for major repairs. How long does Nico think Formula One would last if 5/6 of the field retired on the most important track of the year?

VOR's bacon was saved by a freak weather pattern and Iker and Xavi and Pepe being machines. Were it not for that dramatic finish, things would be looking way worse than they already are right now for the future of the VO70 Rule.

Look for major changes in the Rule because of this leg. And I don't mean panel weights.


Oh, quit being a crybaby on the whole Ed Wood thing. I was just being honest. And it was brilliant.

Look, there are two sides to this coin. On the one side you have the racer/boat-geek perspective. From that standpoint, you're right. Having this many boats fail is a disaster.

But, on the other side you have the way bigger body of more casual fans following the race. And, though you seem to have difficulty understanding it, those fans think all this was pretty damn cool. Danger, drama, boats ending up all over the freakin' southern hemispere in New Zealand, Chile, Argentina, tucked behind islands at Cape Horn - and shore crews and equipment being flown, boated, shipped, etc. to try to fix everything. That's interesting stuff...to see how these pros deal with all this insanity.

Have you noticed the 110K views on this thread? Have you noticed the comments above yours as to how exciting this thing was?

In sports, spectacular failure is just as exciting as success. So in terms of PR and fan interest, this leg is a huge win for VOR. No doubt.

The downside, however, is the fact that they still have the in-port race...and start of L6...both of which might be a bit of a joke. With Sanya and now maybe AD on ships and only 4 boats representing..that's where things DO start to go very bad for VOR. And I guess this is why everyone's okay with the point system that allows boats to be put on ships, skip legs, etc. It limits the overall damage to the race. Whereas insisting a boat finish a race on its own bottom would mean we'd be down to 3 boats at this point I think (0 if you count the piracy asshattery).

So, I agree that there probably will be major changes in the Rule. Knut has already hinted at this - so it's not really news. But Nico is also right. Even if rules are changed, stuff will continue to break. Purely because these racers will push the boats until they do break. It's part of the game. And things will be dangerous and scary. And fans will eat it up.

So you're not at all wrong. You're just only half right. And I'm still smarter.

#1838 dlangpap

dlangpap

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 156 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:57 PM

I too would be in favor of un-aided pit stops. Yeah, if for safety reasons someone decides to stop somewhere and ride a storm out or make repairs in quieter conditions with what they have on board, that's fine. It's good seamanship as someone said. Of course in these cases there would be a fine line between repair or safety stops and strategic ones (I don't know where I stand on that). But it's a different thing to have outside aid and I believe once that is necessary or wanted, the boat should be dsq from a leg. As much as I like to see GPMA continue and TLF having a close finish against PUMA, there was something a bit artificial in the way GPMA built that jury rig and TLF was able to repair, continue and catch up. I think a lot of this has to do ultimately with being able to score points and please sponsors, but in the great scheme of things it seems a bit unfair in sporting terms. GPMA will probably arrive 3rd and score only 10 less points than PUMA? And TLF only 5? I would probably be fine with that if they had made it by themselves (and maybe within a time limit)?

#1839 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,972 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:58 PM

Rule changes will be driven and determined by the needs of the major stakeholders and not necessarily reflect some percentage of the fans opinions. E.g. day after day of boats sailing through the 40s and 50s: "O, look, dear, there's another wave sweeping the deck." Vs. the "human drama and stories" ("Nico and Dalts are idiots, didja hear their last interview." etc.,) that have emerged this cycle. For the cognoscenti, yes, there are obvious problems with the attrition rate but for the (uncharacterized) masses what looks better on TV and the media?

Sponsors want to know what generates the most "eyeballs", and they will probably have some interesting statistics. Of course there are ...damn lies and statistics, I personally still have difficulty believing that F1 is the world's most popular sport or that Nascar is so big. Yes, they are both difficult, challenging things but is that really what draws the masses? As we have seen with Olympic sailing pursuit of eyeballs can have deleterious impacts of cherished formats. Maybe Knut guys ought to have a medal race for all the marbles off Manhattan with no rules, last man standing? The Rollerball of ocean racing in a final demolition derby. I don't think that Moitessier would be there....

#1840 moody frog

moody frog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,662 posts
  • Location:Brittany

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:58 PM

On Pit Stops:
There is nothing wrong with pulling in behind an Island, getting some rest and patching a few things that couldn't be done properly at sea.
This makes sense if there are brutal conditions, such as in the Straits of Luzon during the last race or if conditions are sufficiently adverse that sailing will simply mean you are pounding your head against the wall.
Nothing unfair about it, just good seamanship.

Assume Telefonica wasn't damaged, but was in the same relative position to Puma and Groupama. If Iker pulled into a cove on the Island of Cape horn and said, "That was brutal, we are going to give ourselves 24 hours to recharge, recoup and put the ship right before heading up the Atlantic." We all would have thought he was nuts.
If the then said," The weather model indicates that our best chance of overhauling Puma is to delay 24 hours and ride a series of frontal systems, we predict our 200+ mile deficit will be reduced to a single shift or puff on the final approach to the finish." We would have been blown away by his confidence and the accuracy of his prediction.
In this case AWESOME seamanship.

I don't even think that going ashore on a nearby island, picking up a few bottles of milk and a bag of cookies is a problem.
But I do think that having the shipwrights come aboard and rebuild stuff is outside the box.
Now I don't know really what I think about having a box of boat building materials dropped off and having the sailing crew do the repair while behind the island. Maybe is the same repair kit was available to everyone?
SHC


Bang on about "pulling into a cove" as part of offshore racing tactics, Steve.

In the '81 heavy weather Quarter Ton Cup, two of the leading boats, "heavily" skippered by Bruno Troublé and Daniel Andrieu, went waiting under the lee of Cape Sicie (Med), letting others face disaster in brutal winds and hainous waves, around the cape.
Leaving few hours later in abatting weather and right on course, they went on to score 2nd and 1st in that long distance race and therefore 1st and 2nd in the cup !

#1841 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 05:06 PM


On Pit Stops:
There is nothing wrong with pulling in behind an Island, getting some rest and patching a few things that couldn't be done properly at sea.
This makes sense if there are brutal conditions, such as in the Straits of Luzon during the last race or if conditions are sufficiently adverse that sailing will simply mean you are pounding your head against the wall.
Nothing unfair about it, just good seamanship.

Assume Telefonica wasn't damaged, but was in the same relative position to Puma and Groupama. If Iker pulled into a cove on the Island of Cape horn and said, "That was brutal, we are going to give ourselves 24 hours to recharge, recoup and put the ship right before heading up the Atlantic." We all would have thought he was nuts.
If the then said," The weather model indicates that our best chance of overhauling Puma is to delay 24 hours and ride a series of frontal systems, we predict our 200+ mile deficit will be reduced to a single shift or puff on the final approach to the finish." We would have been blown away by his confidence and the accuracy of his prediction.
In this case AWESOME seamanship.

I don't even think that going ashore on a nearby island, picking up a few bottles of milk and a bag of cookies is a problem.
But I do think that having the shipwrights come aboard and rebuild stuff is outside the box.
Now I don't know really what I think about having a box of boat building materials dropped off and having the sailing crew do the repair while behind the island. Maybe is the same repair kit was available to everyone?
SHC


Bang on about "pulling into a cove" as part of offshore racing tactics, Steve.

In the '81 heavy weather Quarter Ton Cup, two of the leading boats, "heavily" skippered by Bruno Troublé and Daniel Andrieu, went waiting under the lee of Cape Sicie (Med), letting others face disaster in brutal winds and hainous waves, around the cape.
Leaving few hours later in abatting weather and right on course, they went on to score 2nd and 1st in that long distance race and therefore 1st and 2nd in the cup !


Didn't the same thing happen in this year's Round New Zealand?

#1842 Te Kooti

Te Kooti

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,436 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 05:18 PM

why would anyone in clear mind sail from Capetown to Abu Dhabi knowing about the piracy problems and avoiding them by loading the boats on on a big vessel? :ph34r:



Knut has heard the punters on the piracy question.

I do not think they will ever again use a ship.

Too silly!

#1843 mad

mad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,026 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:59 PM


...

Merf


I think Merf is great. You like that, you ought to have a beer with him sometime!

I have. ;)

#1844 SloopJohnB

SloopJohnB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:29 PM

Come on, we all now that Telefonica backed off at the last minute in a true show of sportsmanship and let Puma take the win.......... :ph34r:



Posted Image

Posted Image


Have the VOR boats have dispensation of have crew outside the lifelines?

Note the guy on the bowspit in the first photo.



#1845 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:37 PM

no lifeline between the pulpits

#1846 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,716 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 07 April 2012 - 08:50 PM

On Pit Stops:
There is nothing wrong with pulling in behind an Island, getting some rest and patching a few things that couldn't be done properly at sea.
This makes sense if there are brutal conditions, such as in the Straits of Luzon during the last race or if conditions are sufficiently adverse that sailing will simply mean you are pounding your head against the wall.
Nothing unfair about it, just good seamanship.

Assume Telefonica wasn't damaged, but was in the same relative position to Puma and Groupama. If Iker pulled into a cove on the Island of Cape horn and said, "That was brutal, we are going to give ourselves 24 hours to recharge, recoup and put the ship right before heading up the Atlantic." We all would have thought he was nuts.
If the then said," The weather model indicates that our best chance of overhauling Puma is to delay 24 hours and ride a series of frontal systems, we predict our 200+ mile deficit will be reduced to a single shift or puff on the final approach to the finish." We would have been blown away by his confidence and the accuracy of his prediction.
In this case AWESOME seamanship.

I don't even think that going ashore on a nearby island, picking up a few bottles of milk and a bag of cookies is a problem.
But I do think that having the shipwrights come aboard and rebuild stuff is outside the box.
Now I don't know really what I think about having a box of boat building materials dropped off and having the sailing crew do the repair while behind the island. Maybe is the same repair kit was available to everyone?
SHC

Interesting opinion. In light of the pending IJ hearing of the Tele case, might there be grounds for a counter-protest about Camper's and Groupama's pitstops and their repairs? I would have thought that both teams would have checked and received the greenlight to do what they needed to. Otoh if the rules allow them, more power to them.


Nico uses the analogy of F1 which I think is a stretch. I see it as closer to the World Rally Championships or the Kenya Rally where driving ability as much as machinery reliability plays a major part in winning and losing. And they have maintenance crews following them to re-build damaged vehicles, under time penalties. Pretty much the same as the current VOR...

#1847 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:08 PM

On Pit Stops:
...
I don't even think that going ashore on a nearby island, picking up a few bottles of milk and a bag of cookies is a problem.
But I do think that having the shipwrights come aboard and rebuild stuff is outside the box.
Now I don't know really what I think about having a box of boat building materials dropped off and having the sailing crew do the repair while behind the island. Maybe is the same repair kit was available to everyone?
SHC

Going into this race, it is accepted that it is a competition of logistics as well. Ericsson was in the last race far more prepared to work in Kochi than anybody else. They had done four missions to the port city before the race began IIRC. Where are the metal shops, who do you call to rent X,Y,Z not provided by VOR. E3 had a massive failure in the bow, and few teams could have done what they did for the repair, where they did it in the time it was done. <edit: I remember that was not on the way to Kochi, the two things are not perfectly related> The ability to put your pit crew on the boat in the middle of nowhere is part of getting ready. Is it right? Is if fair? Doesn't matter, it is in the rules and the same for everybody.

Don't expect to see changes to this part of the rule book either. As long as these boats have masts they can be dismasted. And that will mean they need outside assistance pretty damned quick. In the form of a crane. And those 11 souls on board are going to need enough food and diesel to make it edible to continue to race. So, where do you draw the line? VOR has chosen not to draw the line. Let them make what pitstops they think they need. Yes, if 12 boats were competing, we would see very different decision making.

Frankly, in most legs 12 hours penalty is pretty huge. Remember how hard it was for Puma in leg 4 starting, what was it? and hour and change later? This leg is and was different. 12 hours is huge if you lose a weather system, it is nothing if you can get a system to whisk you on your way. Tele got very lucky indeed, it was a fluke. It was not tucking into a harbor to ride out a storm, don't know why that analogy has come up. That was Green Dragon last race.

Related to the idea of the planned pit stop and taking Steve's VPP analysis in another thread to an (il)logical extreme. Could a team engineer a rig failure to lose the top say 1/3 or 1/4 or so, just about the point they are going to be swept through the southern ocean in 2nd and 3rd reef conditions. At the same time they prepare to step the new mast near the Horn? If so, is it worth 12 hours on that stretch to dispense with the windage and weight aloft? I ask this because right now the mast that G4 is using does not adhere to the VOR rule. Too light, VCG too low. Presumably the SI's have the requirement to have a valid cert at the start and not the finish of the leg.

#1848 Koukel

Koukel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:09 PM

How long does Nico think Formula One would last if 5/6 of the field retired on the most important track of the year?
VOR's bacon was saved by a freak weather pattern and Iker and Xavi and Pepe being machines. Were it not for that dramatic finish, things would be looking way worse than they already are right now for the future of the VO70 Rule.
Look for major changes in the Rule because of this leg. And I don't mean panel weights.

OK, here's another comparison to auto racing, about which I know even less than blue water, grand prix racing. I read once about how good F1 cars were at absorbing energy in the event of a crash. If I remember correctly, all the sacrificial bits and pieces that fly off the vehicle help to shed energy and protect the driver. The author went on to say this degree of safety was really a function of the F1 scoring system where points were delivered only to the top so many finishers.

Where this gets interesting is in comparison to Nascar where I'm told everyone or just about everyone to finish gets points... and therefore building a more stout vehicle gives a team the ability to finish and get points even if they rub a wall or accidentally run one of their competitors off the track. In other words, F1 you only get points for winning or nearly winning, Nascar you get points for finishing the race.

Now I don't see how this year's VOR results quite fit into that car racing analysis, but what if the points for each race were distributed far differently than today? I don't mean more points for the Southern Ocean, because I believe in equal rights for all oceans (you bigots), but say if the winner of a race scored 30, 2nd place 28, third place 27, fourth place 26 and so on, there would significantly more appeal for team and designers to build a boat capable of finishing.

Koukel

#1849 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:14 PM


...

Interesting opinion. In light of the pending IJ hearing of the Tele case, might there be grounds for a counter-protest about Camper's and Groupama's pitstops and their repairs? I would have thought that both teams would have checked and received the greenlight to do what they needed to. Otoh if the rules allow them, more power to them.

??? You are referring to leg 4 right? Where Tele seems to have not only had an "extra" SJ on board, but they documented the fact that they were taking it with the RC? Despite the requirement that they take and declare only one? This should be "counter protested" (is there such a thing?) that two teams suspended racing in accordance with the SI's?

Nico uses the analogy of F1 which I think is a stretch. I see it as closer to the World Rally Championships or the Kenya Rally where driving ability as much as machinery reliability plays a major part in winning and losing. And they have maintenance crews following them to re-build damaged vehicles, under time penalties. Pretty much the same as the current VOR...

The F1 analogy is pretty off, and you could see how uncomfortable Nico was with the whole situation. "We are built for this" pre leg 4. Etc. etc. Also GD was like an episode of "Lie to Me" with his body language. That was a pretty bad video report.

#1850 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:37 PM

Smack you really are an idiot, and I'm surprised to see Nico being so clueless right now. It's not about having 'no dramas' as he says. It's about 5/6 of the fleet unable to complete the most essential and iconic leg of the race without stopping for major repairs. How long does Nico think Formula One would last if 5/6 of the field retired on the most important track of the year?

VOR's bacon was saved by a freak weather pattern and Iker and Xavi and Pepe being machines. Were it not for that dramatic finish, things would be looking way worse than they already are right now for the future of the VO70 Rule.

Look for major changes in the Rule because of this leg. And I don't mean panel weights.

Re my bold part: The bit about retiring is premature. Time will tell though. Further we do not know if some boats could not have been nursed to the finish. We know that their crews chose to retire in 3 cases, and 2 chose to suspend for a period, 3 if you count ADOR going back to fix the bulkhead. Aside, I would point on that the Class 40's suffered the same fate on the "Cape Horn" leg, and nobody calls it a calamity. 6 boats in the race, 1 did not start, 2 did not finish. Different standing to be sure. This is not to say I think it is ok. I think it sucks, but looks even worse as SHC pointed out, because there are precious few boats at all.

Please let us know which rule changes you expect. I do think they will drop the distinction of panel weights above and below DWL+300 (still from ABS, oh brother). Kind of foolish to draw that line when you see these beasts spear the back of a wave. I am willing to say that some designers would have ignored that arbitrary limit, focusing on the chine instead. Further aside, at least the decks held up, does anybody remember the BT Imoca 60?

#1851 tamaozy

tamaozy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:Newport News, Virginia.

Posted 07 April 2012 - 11:47 PM

My wife wants to know why they cant have chase vehicles like in the Tour de France......sheesh, where do I start!!!!

Camper about to restart in the next little while, they are nearly back to the point of suspending racing. 3000 miles in under two weeks, should be able to do it but will be interesting how tired they are when they arrive and need to do inports etc.

#1852 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 April 2012 - 12:36 AM

The Vendee has this rule and they seem to be doing fine. I believe that if the rules and their contingencies are clearly explained to sponsors before contracts are made, there should be no problem regarding the type of situation you have described. Furthermore, that's when you get the right sponsors to begin with. It's great to have sponsors (as annoying as the whole mention of the complete names is> PUMA powered by Berg) and probably the only way to keep these kinds of races alive. However, my opinion is that in no way should the commercial interests of sponsors outweigh or be able to influence the rules and sporting aspect of these events, as has unfortunately already happened with many other sports.


The Vendee is a pure idea that has sponsorship attached to it.
The Volvo is sponsorship that has an idea attached to it.
(the 'purity' of the Volvo sponsorship and idea is a little cloudy if you're an idealist... luck the masses aren't idealists)
I don't think they're comparable in the slightest.

Sure as an idealistic sailor it might be hard to reconcile but it doesn't seem to be a problem for some of the worlds best sailors or the heavy hitting syndicates they've developed.
They're the ones who need to be lobbied, not Knut; he's just the one who negotiates a common agreement between the most influential ones and holds them to it during the event itself.

#1853 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 April 2012 - 12:54 AM

Smack you really are an idiot, and I'm surprised to see Nico being so clueless right now. It's not about having 'no dramas' as he says. It's about 5/6 of the fleet unable to complete the most essential and iconic leg of the race without stopping for major repairs. How long does Nico think Formula One would last if 5/6 of the field retired on the most important track of the year?

VOR's bacon was saved by a freak weather pattern and Iker and Xavi and Pepe being machines. Were it not for that dramatic finish, things would be looking way worse than they already are right now for the future of the VO70 Rule.

Look for major changes in the Rule because of this leg. And I don't mean panel weights.


See Formula 1 Indianapolis 2005.
F1 got over it just as the Volvo will get over this leg.
Consumers listen to the hype and look forward, not back.
Formula 1 purists are just as up in arms about the current state of F1 as people are on this board about the Volvo.

The Volvo has the perfect variable that Bernie Eccelstone has been looking to maximise for a long time - the weather.
Everything else can remain the same but the race will be different every time.
It's a marketing dream if they can achieve critical mass.

#1854 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 April 2012 - 12:59 AM

Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?

#1855 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,716 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:06 AM

My wife wants to know why they cant have chase vehicles like in the Tour de France......sheesh, where do I start!!!!


Tell her they've got chase submarines Posted Image

#1856 samc99us

samc99us

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:31 AM

Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?


I would think its identical to the one they broke, but perhaps it was a practice rig? I could see the replacement rigging being different. Still haven't heard why the original one broke in benign conditions compared to those faced earlier in the SO...

#1857 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:31 AM

Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?



They broke their mast in two at the first spreaders. So they've "recycled" the upper part of the mast and stood it on the deck. They now have a boat which is underpowered so as long as it is windy, it's not too bad.

#1858 supine

supine

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,322 posts
  • Location:Frankfurt/Main, Germany

Posted 08 April 2012 - 08:22 AM


Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?



They broke their mast in two at the first spreaders. So they've "recycled" the upper part of the mast and stood it on the deck. They now have a boat which is underpowered so as long as it is windy, it's not too bad.


Have a look at the photos http://new.livestrea...ailingteam/leg5

Posted Image

Looks alright with a reefed main, not sure what they've done to jury rig headsails on there though. Storm jib only?

#1859 Indio

Indio

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,716 posts
  • Location:Auckland

Posted 08 April 2012 - 08:55 AM

Any sign of the IJ hearing into Tele's extra jib allegation? Or are they waiting for Groupama to arrive with their video evidence? I would have thought all evidence would have been with the measurer already..

#1860 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:24 AM


Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?



They broke their mast in two at the first spreaders. So they've "recycled" the upper part of the mast and stood it on the deck. They now have a boat which is underpowered so as long as it is windy, it's not too bad.


Sorry if I wasn't clear Panoramix - I was talking about the replacement full size mast being shipped from France.

#1861 Koukel

Koukel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:32 PM

Posted Image

Looks alright with a reefed main, not sure what they've done to jury rig headsails on there though. Storm jib only?

Must be sad to cut main down.

Looking at it know, it's a no brainer using the top half. Has all attachment points, spreader, halyards etc. These guys are studs.

Koukel

#1862 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:39 PM

Please let us know which rule changes you expect.


I think we are going to see the introduction of the Volvo 80 One Design in a couple of months.

This is not insider info - it is just me attempting to read the tea leaves and the past few months of comments from insiders who are trying not to give anything away.

If they allow two-boat teams, it will be just as expensive as this edition. If they ban them, it could be a lot cheaper.

As much as I'd like to see them go to multihulls, I am pretty certain the Volvo 80 OD (or whatever it is) will be a mono.

#1863 LoopyGirdleSniffer

LoopyGirdleSniffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,406 posts
  • Location:Barbados

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:54 PM



Please let us know which rule changes you expect.


I think we are going to see the introduction of the Volvo 80 One Design in a couple of months.

This is not insider info - it is just me attempting to read the tea leaves and the past few months of comments from insiders who are trying not to give anything away.

If they allow two-boat teams, it will be just as expensive as this edition. If they ban them, it could be a lot cheaper.

As much as I'd like to see them go to multihulls, I am pretty certain the Volvo 80 OD (or whatever it is) will be a mono.


Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

On a personal level I think One Design is a better choice for the VOR. How many times over the last few editions have we seen one program get everything more right at the beginning and everyone else playing catch up for the remainder of the race.

#1864 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:54 PM

See Formula 1 Indianapolis 2005.
F1 got over it just as the Volvo will get over this leg.


How long did it take for F-1 to get back to the states after that debacle? Wasn't it seven years?

Thanks for proving my point.

#1865 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:58 PM

Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

On a personal level I think One Design is a better choice for the VOR. How many times over the last few editions have we seen one program get everything more right at the beginning and everyone else playing catch up for the remainder of the race.


It's just a guess mate, but when you make a big change, you pick a different number, and they just have to get away from comparisons to the MOD70 if they are to survive as a monohull event.

#1866 dlangpap

dlangpap

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 156 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:06 PM

Rule changes will be driven and determined by the needs of the major stakeholders and not necessarily reflect some percentage of the fans opinions. E.g. day after day of boats sailing through the 40s and 50s: "O, look, dear, there's another wave sweeping the deck." Vs. the "human drama and stories" ("Nico and Dalts are idiots, didja hear their last interview." etc.,) that have emerged this cycle. For the cognoscenti, yes, there are obvious problems with the attrition rate but for the (uncharacterized) masses what looks better on TV and the media?

Sponsors want to know what generates the most "eyeballs", and they will probably have some interesting statistics. Of course there are ...damn lies and statistics, I personally still have difficulty believing that F1 is the world's most popular sport or that Nascar is so big. Yes, they are both difficult, challenging things but is that really what draws the masses? As we have seen with Olympic sailing pursuit of eyeballs can have deleterious impacts of cherished formats. Maybe Knut guys ought to have a medal race for all the marbles off Manhattan with no rules, last man standing? The Rollerball of ocean racing in a final demolition derby. I don't think that Moitessier would be there....


I think there is something wrong with trying to achieve massive audiences with everything. An uninformed logic would believe that that´s the only way to maximize profits but I believe this could still be a reasonably profitable endeavour by smartly exploting a niche market. They can try to turn the whole thing into the next reality show for $$ sake but that will be short lived as that cherished massive audience will then turn their very short attention span to the next Keeping up with the Kardashians while the core market of true sailing fans will be disenchanted and alienated and might stop following the race altogether. And then they are in trouble. So my point was, maybe, for the sake of the sporting part of this event, it´s not necessary or even desirable to attract the big sponsors that demand show and ROI only without caring how phony a race can get. They could focus on a niche, get the right sponsors and produce a credible and still profitable event.

#1867 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:08 PM

What is a MOD70? Isn't that some kind of multihull? Why would it endanger the VOR70 which has maybe 10 times the brand recognition and is a monohull?

Anyway, all joking aside, VOR80? Holy smoke, if your goal is to increase reliability, it seems counter-intuitive to radically alter the design envelope and increase the loads.

#1868 LoopyGirdleSniffer

LoopyGirdleSniffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,406 posts
  • Location:Barbados

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:32 PM


Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

On a personal level I think One Design is a better choice for the VOR. How many times over the last few editions have we seen one program get everything more right at the beginning and everyone else playing catch up for the remainder of the race.


It's just a guess mate, but when you make a big change, you pick a different number, and they just have to get away from comparisons to the MOD70 if they are to survive as a monohull event.


Is it really that big a shift to go from development rule to one design? And I don't think we can get away from the comparisons.

#1869 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:01 PM



Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

On a personal level I think One Design is a better choice for the VOR. How many times over the last few editions have we seen one program get everything more right at the beginning and everyone else playing catch up for the remainder of the race.


It's just a guess mate, but when you make a big change, you pick a different number, and they just have to get away from comparisons to the MOD70 if they are to survive as a monohull event.


Is it really that big a shift to go from development rule to one design? And I don't think we can get away from the comparisons.


If two-boat teams are banned, it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper to enter if all you have to do is place an order for a complete boat. That's the big one, which addresses the VOR's biggest problem - lack of entries. Remember that the MOD costs only 4M Euros and change, and that's for three hulls, with estimates for a three year campaign including a RTW, two transats, and two euro tours at 12M total. Estimates for this edition's VO-70 are 12-20M dollars when you include development costs, with a full one-event program (9 months of racing and say 9 months of prep/practice/testing) between 20-30 million. More for those that had to spend 600k -1M every time they put a broken boat on a ship. And you might spend that 20M, and still get a boat that can't get out of its own way or worse yet, be slow AND unreliable.

#1870 LoopyGirdleSniffer

LoopyGirdleSniffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,406 posts
  • Location:Barbados

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:07 PM




Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

On a personal level I think One Design is a better choice for the VOR. How many times over the last few editions have we seen one program get everything more right at the beginning and everyone else playing catch up for the remainder of the race.


It's just a guess mate, but when you make a big change, you pick a different number, and they just have to get away from comparisons to the MOD70 if they are to survive as a monohull event.


Is it really that big a shift to go from development rule to one design? And I don't think we can get away from the comparisons.


If two-boat teams are banned, it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper to enter. That's the big one, which addresses the VOR's biggest problem - lack of entries. Remember that the MOD is only 4M Euros and change, and that's for three hulls. Estimates for this edition's boats are 12-20M dollars when you include development costs.


Can't argue with that, however the VOR is a well established (albiet reduced) international sporting event. The MOD's are relatively unknown and will more than likely not be stealing sailors from the mono world. Both races can exist without major changes to the VOR(go one design and ban two boat teams) and I'd guess both will have fairly similar numbers with regards to fans/followers.

#1871 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

Can't argue with that, however the VOR is a well established (albiet reduced) international sporting event. The MOD's are relatively unknown and will more than likely not be stealing sailors from the mono world. Both races can exist without major changes to the VOR(go one design and ban two boat teams) and I'd guess both will have fairly similar numbers with regards to fans/followers.


the VOR would be having trouble even without competition, and I'm not even saying that the MOD is direct competition just yet. What I am saying is that it was hard going for the past two editions to get teams to the line. Really hard going. Under the current rule, given the excessive retirements, it will be that much harder for the next one, and I think a four-boat VOR would kill the event...

They could wait until that point to make big changes, but I think they will get ahead of it and go 1D for the next one.

#1872 Terrorvision

Terrorvision

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,843 posts
  • Interests:Taking 'the' out of Psychotherapist

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:16 PM

If two-boat teams are banned, it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper to enter if all you have to do is place an order for a complete boat. That's the big one, which addresses the VOR's biggest problem - lack of entries. Remember that the MOD costs only 4M Euros and change, and that's for three hulls, with estimates for a three year campaign including a RTW, two transats, and two euro tours at 12M total. Estimates for this edition's VO-70 are 12-20M dollars when you include development costs, with a full one-event program (9 months of racing and say 9 months of prep/practice/testing) between 20-30 million. More for those that had to spend 600k -1M every time they put a broken boat on a ship. And you might spend that 20M, and still get a boat that can't get out of its own way or worse yet, be slow AND unreliable.


How much would it cost to put a MOD on a ship? The MOD is a great concept but it is totally untested so why are we even bringing it into play? Once they have gone round the marble a couple of times without breakage then we can compare but let's just take Sanya as an example- if a MOD had spunked into a UFO (Unidentified floating object) the consequences would have been far greater.

#1873 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,488 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:30 PM

The MOD is only a comparison because they have sold 9 of them (including Veolia, on the block now) during some seriously tough economic times, not because it is a direct competitor for the VOR. No one is 'bringing it into play.'

#1874 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:31 PM

If two-boat teams are banned, it'll be a hell of a lot cheaper to enter if all you have to do is place an order for a complete boat. That's the big one, which addresses the VOR's biggest problem - lack of entries. Remember that the MOD costs only 4M Euros and change, and that's for three hulls, with estimates for a three year campaign including a RTW, two transats, and two euro tours at 12M total. Estimates for this edition's VO-70 are 12-20M dollars when you include development costs, with a full one-event program (9 months of racing and say 9 months of prep/practice/testing) between 20-30 million. More for those that had to spend 600k -1M every time they put a broken boat on a ship. And you might spend that 20M, and still get a boat that can't get out of its own way or worse yet, be slow AND unreliable.


Finally an answer to the question of what the budgets are. Regarding MOD70 estimates, well they haven't even had a race yet, of course they are going to low-ball their costs in order to gain sponsors, let's wait and see how much it really costs. I doubt they are going to do a three year RTW, two transat and two euro tour series on a budget of 4 million per year. How many entries do they have? Looks like six....

The only way to reduce cost is to go one design, which will completely change the character of the race, but how much would the cost actually be reduced? The operating costs wouldn't be decreased by much. I think the lack of entries is as much down to the timing of when you had to put your hat in the ring and the state of the economy as anything else. We did just get through a depression and a global financial collapse that was greater than anything in our lifetime.

#1875 Terrorvision

Terrorvision

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,843 posts
  • Interests:Taking 'the' out of Psychotherapist

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:40 PM

The MOD is only a comparison because they have sold 9 of them (including Veolia, on the block now) during some seriously tough economic times, not because it is a direct competitor for the VOR. No one is 'bringing it into play.'

It has been mentioned several times by several people in this thread.

The MOD is only a comparison because they have sold 9 of them (including Veolia, on the block now) during some seriously tough economic times, not because it is a direct competitor for the VOR. No one is 'bringing it into play.'


Is the Moroccan team still alive?

#1876 s2 alter ego

s2 alter ego

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:34 PM

Have a look at the photos http://new.livestrea...ailingteam/leg5

Posted Image

Looks alright with a reefed main, not sure what they've done to jury rig headsails on there though. Storm jib only?

Staysail as a jib in most conditions, storm jib in the heavier stuff. No new sails allowed for this leg and rig setup.

#1877 s2 alter ego

s2 alter ego

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:04 PM


I think we are going to see the introduction of the Volvo 80 One Design in a couple of months.
This is not insider info - it is just me attempting to read the tea leaves and the past few months of comments from insiders who are trying not to give anything away.
If they allow two-boat teams, it will be just as expensive as this edition. If they ban them, it could be a lot cheaper.
As much as I'd like to see them go to multihulls, I am pretty certain the Volvo 80 OD (or whatever it is) will be a mono.


Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

For a OD80 it would be possible to design it with the same keelfin & -bulb as VO70, just a little heavier and also narrower to keep rightingmoment (=RM) identical to VO70.
OD80 could also have deeper sections in forward area, since optimising for speed isn't necessary for OD, further decreasing critical slammingloads. Keel loads would be mostly the same level allowing correct structural engineering from the beginning based on VO70 experience.
Result would be substantially less slammingloads for same conditions allowing to push a little bit more in heavier weather conditions for the same or even less risk level for breakages or crew injuries for off watch.
Same RM means same sail setup and rig could be used, with nothing coming bigger and heavier and hence the exhaustion levels would not be any greater than they are now on the 70's. Higher safety factors for the mast & rigging for the components that failed in this race.
If also point system is changed to give significan't amount of points for just finishing the leg, the teams would no longer take as much risk as they take now to finish ahead of their competitors. Just one more watertight bulkhead to limit the immersed volume in case they still push it too far and break it would allow finishing the leg at reduced speeds even with a much smaller compartment than in VO70 flooded.

Not saying they are gonna do it, just saying it's a possibility if they really want to keep the speeds and reduce the failure levels.

#1878 STYACHT

STYACHT

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam

Posted 08 April 2012 - 09:33 PM



I think we are going to see the introduction of the Volvo 80 One Design in a couple of months.Ooo
This is not insider info - it is just me attempting to read the tea leaves and the past few months of comments from insiders who are trying not to give anything away.
If they allow two-boat teams, it will be just as expensive as this edition. If they ban them, it could be a lot cheaper.
As much as I'd like to see them go to multihulls, I am pretty certain the Volvo 80 OD (or whatever it is) will be a mono.


Clean why do you think an 80?

Seems to me the 70's are plenty fast enough and already there's a wealth of info on them. Also when you get beyond 75 feet or so everything just becomes bigger and heavier. For relatively small crews that's going to be a deal breaker if you ask me. Having humped sails and gear around on 75 - 85 footers I'd say after a few weeks doing a headsail change would insight a mutiny. The exhaustion levels would be greater than they are now on the 70's.

For a OD80 it would be possible to design it with the same keelfin & -bulb as VO70, just a little heavier and also narrower to keep rightingmoment (=RM) identical to VO70.
OD80 could also have deeper sections in forward area, since optimising for speed isn't necessary for OD, further decreasing critical slammingloads. Keel loads would be mostly the same level allowing correct structural engineering from the beginning based on VO70 experience.
Result would be substantially less slammingloads for same conditions allowing to push a little bit more in heavier weather conditions for the same or even less risk level for breakages or crew injuries for off watch.
Same RM means same sail setup and rig could be used, with nothing coming bigger and heavier and hence the exhaustion levels would not be any greater than they are now on the 70's. Higher safety factors for the mast & rigging for the components that failed in this race.
If also point system is changed to give significan't amount of points for just finishing the leg, the teams would no longer take as much risk as they take now to finish ahead of their competitors. Just one more watertight bulkhead to limit the immersed volume in case they still push it too far and break it would allow finishing the leg at reduced speeds even with a much smaller compartment than in VO70 flooded.

Not saying they are gonna do it, just saying it's a possibility if they really want to keep the speeds and reduce the failure levels.


Longer boat, heavier, deeper bow sections, that does not add up to the same form stability unless a lot narrower. I contend at first blush impossible to have less RM. Add the same keel, and you have to have a tougher mast. And wouldn't you want a tougher mast? Maybe nitronic rigging to reduce the stability, further dumbing down the rig.

If a lot narrower with a lightish bulb for the size of boat, that is not a safe way either.

I am sure one design is being talked about in Alicante, but I don't support the plan. Hardly objective am i. If it would not be a bigger boat, not unless they ditch the canting keel. I see no way they would not just start over if they did go larger one design anyway. The idea of fitting such a boat with the wrong keel and mast will kill the race for sure.

#1879 GnarlyItWas

GnarlyItWas

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 557 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 09:43 PM

If the OD did happen, and happened for more than one edition. Could it be possible that the used boats were as quick as the new ones or would a hull with all the extra miles be softer and slower ?

#1880 Cyrille Hydrogene

Cyrille Hydrogene

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 491 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:12 PM

I heard in the last VOR video (http://www.youtube.c...h?v=0qmG3YTPRkQ) that G4 was sailed by a shortened crew of 7 (including the Media Man). Was there any explanation for that number?

#1881 Clovis

Clovis

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Location:Ici

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:28 PM

^^^^^
The blog of Yann Riou says that they wanted to make sure that the crew was as rested as possible for the next leg. Actually you can see Thomas Coville jumping out of the boat into the water at the exit of the harbour in their relaunch video.
Yann Riou even says that it's now really like in the April fool's video: they're all taking naps and naviguessing while one guy is helming (they gave up on trimming the sails and swinging the keel).

C.

#1882 s2 alter ego

s2 alter ego

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 10:55 PM

Longer boat, heavier, deeper bow sections, that does not add up to the same form stability unless a lot narrower.

If a boat is just scaled longer with no consideration to the structures, RM / weight is identical, while weight is increased at same rate as length.
Changing to deeper bow sections lowers center of buoyancy reducing RM marginally, if distributrion of buoyancy along length is kept the same, that is narrower waterlines near bow.

So much for the basic theory, what I had in mind was mostly a longer bow, with rig dimensions E,P, I and J kept the same, and mast position from the transom the same.
Since bow would be 10ft further from the mast, no need for the bow pole anymore. The hull shell weight is just a small proportion of the total, hence 10ft more does not change total weight much just around 10 kg for each square meter of additional skin surface plus one bulkhead. Total 150 kg ... 250 kg more at most. And since all extra length is for the empty bow, buoyancy is mostly added where the boat is narrow and thus hardly any increase in RM for the extra weight even with the same beam. Keep in mind sections near bow alone have naturally negative RM.

I contend at first blush impossible to have less RM. Add the same keel, and you have to have a tougher mast. And wouldn't you want a tougher mast? Maybe nitronic rigging to reduce the stability, further dumbing down the rig.
If a lot narrower with a lightish bulb for the size of boat, that is not a safe way either.

Reducing RM is not the target, nor dumbing down the rig. Rather keeping the same performance in light and medium air is. And beter top speeds while keeping it safe regarding slamming accelerations and loads. Beter 24 hour records for monohulls is always a good thing regarding geting sponsors and media attention.
Target is to reduce highest slamming loads when sailing downwind and surfing in heavy air down steep waves at 40+ knots like ABU did at least once, instead of just beefing up bow structures resulting higher accelerations for the crew. Off watch crew is already pushed to the limits much more than those on the deck, since they can't see any wave coming even when not sleeping. Reversing that would be good if possible, hence possibly more work for on duty while less slamming would be best.

I am sure one design is being talked about in Alicante, but I don't support the plan. Hardly objective am i. If it would not be a bigger boat, not unless they ditch the canting keel. I see no way they would not just start over if they did go larger one design anyway. The idea of fitting such a boat with the wrong keel and mast will kill the race for sure.

Did not suggest wrong keel & mast for the boat, just reducing slamming loads the natural way of longer narrower bow.
All 100 ft canting maxis are a lot narrower for their length than VO70 by a large margin. Some have even less beam in meters. Beam of the bow of a mono is the most significant thing affecting slamming, even more so than speed. Can't see how that would kill the race, since it allows less breakages without causing injuries to the crew due to higher accelerations like beefing up structures would do. Instead I see racing in conditions where they now need to slow down or break the boat and at the same time less slamming.
Think of it as optimising speed & safety with given RM & sailplan resulting a longer less slaming boat rather than optimising speed alone within a given box of parameters including size.

#1883 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 April 2012 - 12:52 AM


See Formula 1 Indianapolis 2005.
F1 got over it just as the Volvo will get over this leg.


How long did it take for F-1 to get back to the states after that debacle? Wasn't it seven years?

Thanks for proving my point.


Maybe I'm missing your point but as far as I can see F1 overall didn't miss a beat.
For F1 the US is STILL an emerging market (like Abu Dhabi in the VOR); no-one missed it in the slightest and the mistake hasn't happened again.
The sport evolved and moved on just like the VOR will with minimal fuss.
Are you seriously arguing that radical change is the only possible solution?
What evidence is there that the designers and builders would get it right next time?

#1884 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 April 2012 - 01:10 AM

One Design offers up the possibility that there is a problem with design and build that you'll lose all 6 boats at the same time.

I also find it ironic that calls are being made for the skippers to be responsible for choosing when to sail but that there are also calls to control what they are allowed to sail.

Rule changes are discussed in F1 nauseum.
Rule changes generally favour the big (resource rich) teams while formula stability increases parity by giving the little teams time to catch up.
I'd like to see the VOR have more teams full-stop.
I think there are lots of principles that could achieve that but often the real world is a bit more nuanced.
I think the best R&D for the next race is this race, but if there are too many new variables in the next race then the R&D from this race becomes meaningless.
Putting aside the breakages I think this race is extremely competitive.

#1885 samc99us

samc99us

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 742 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 01:54 AM

I was hoping the 3rd time would be the charm, only minor breakages with every boat completing each leg w/o outside assistance. I'm sure the shore crews were hoping the same.

Last race had some major breakages as well, namely when going upwind in nasty seas. Some of those failures were addressed but then others appeared. Beefing up the structure in one spot transfers the loads to the next weak area. The designers admit they still don't fully know the loads the boats are subject to, which is understandable. What surprises me most is not the hull failures (which are annoying), but the rig failures. There have been 4 rig failures so far in this race, which is 4 too many. Perhaps too much inadequate stainless being used on critical fittings, all coming from one place willing to stamp off beetle dung as ASME approved...

#1886 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 01:54 AM



See Formula 1 Indianapolis 2005.
F1 got over it just as the Volvo will get over this leg.


How long did it take for F-1 to get back to the states after that debacle? Wasn't it seven years?

Thanks for proving my point.


Maybe I'm missing your point but as far as I can see F1 overall didn't miss a beat.
For F1 the US is STILL an emerging market (like Abu Dhabi in the VOR); no-one missed it in the slightest and the mistake hasn't happened again.
The sport evolved and moved on just like the VOR will with minimal fuss.
Are you seriously arguing that radical change is the only possible solution?
What evidence is there that the designers and builders would get it right next time?


This is a good point - and what I'm trying to understand in all this hysteria about the "end of the VOR". What's the outcome you're looking for Clean? 0% failure rate in these boats? More boats so the inevitable failure rate doesn't mean as much? I just don't think there's a golden solution here. And I personally think a one design approach would be counterproductive.

Regardless, when someone with a skinny CV calls a guy like Nico "clueless" when it comes to the VOR...well...that's just funny right there.

(PS - boats have been breaking and causing drama now for 39 years apparently: http://www.volvoocea...line-drama.html - oh, and Nico even gets a mention.)

#1887 Panoramix

Panoramix

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 357 posts
  • Location:Rennes, Brittany, France

Posted 09 April 2012 - 05:51 AM



Back to the racing...
I'm quite surprised by the speed that Groupama is making up the coast.
It looks to me that they'll have pretty favourable weather all the way and plenty of time to get thee boat ready after that.
Does anyone know anything about the replacement mast?
Is it the same technology as the one that broke or will they be at a relative disadvantage for the remainder of the race?



They broke their mast in two at the first spreaders. So they've "recycled" the upper part of the mast and stood it on the deck. They now have a boat which is underpowered so as long as it is windy, it's not too bad.


Sorry if I wasn't clear Panoramix - I was talking about the replacement full size mast being shipped from France.


Oooops, you can ignore my answer then :rolleyes:.

I would imagine that the two masts are identical as they can't anticipate the nature of a breakage, but I don't know for sure.

#1888 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 April 2012 - 06:57 AM

Oooops, you can ignore my answer then :rolleyes:.

I would imagine that the two masts are identical as they can't anticipate the nature of a breakage, but I don't know for sure.


No harm, no foul ;).
If I articulate what I was thinking a bit better - if it's a practice mast would it be built exactly the same or would they have used it as a mule to develop the second mast (and it's therefore not quite as good)?
Will they be able to change it enough so that the same breakage is less likely a second time (assuming they are able to determine the reason for the breakage in the first place)?

#1889 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:04 AM

last 30 seconds :lol::
http://new.livestrea...5/videos/428495

#1890 Heriberto

Heriberto

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,061 posts
  • Location:Saint Paul, Minnesota
  • Interests:Mount Gay Sugarcane

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:39 AM

Rigging News has a scoop. Apparently Punta Del Este really, really wants the Volvo back.

....The personnel and authorities from the Yacht Club Punta del Este where working since they know about in trying to find solutions and finding the needs and requests from the Groupama Shore Team that was in contact with them to be able to organize things to repair the boat, meanwhile the Groupama yacht was trying to reach Punta del Este a big storm passed through the area which make the arrival of the yacht more dangerous at night with strong winds.

Finally they where safe at port and after that they were invited to go to the Yacht Club to have some hot meals and be able to get a proper shower and sleep at their rooms, after they left things organized talking to their Shore team that was delayed due to the stormy weather in Barsil and though arriving next day at noon....



#1891 nixon

nixon

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 206 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:46 AM

Nice extended video of GPMAs repairs (outside assistance) in Punta Del Este on Rigging News (and some nice comments by locals - as Heriberto says ^^^). Looks like they did a great job putting the pieces back into a useable configuration. Not sure if the whole video made livestream or VOR, but it is good. Probably better if you understand French, but hey...

I understand why the rules are skewed towards allowing boats to receive assistance while racing is suspended - but it is certainly a long way from the original ethos. Obviously the dynamics would change if we had 10 boats starting or even finishing. But stopping like this and still getting third...Hmmmm... Not that I begrudge them, they have sailed a top race - this leg and the previous legs. They could possibly still give Tele a run for their money...

#1892 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 April 2012 - 11:56 AM

Nice extended video of GPMAs repairs (outside assistance) in Punta Del Este on Rigging News (and some nice comments by locals - as Heriberto says ^^^). Looks like they did a great job putting the pieces back into a useable configuration. Not sure if the whole video made livestream or VOR, but it is good. Probably better if you understand French, but hey...

I understand why the rules are skewed towards allowing boats to receive assistance while racing is suspended - but it is certainly a long way from the original ethos. Obviously the dynamics would change if we had 10 boats starting or even finishing. But stopping like this and still getting third...Hmmmm... Not that I begrudge them, they have sailed a top race - this leg and the previous legs. They could possibly still give Tele a run for their money...


Click the little '"CC" at the bottom right of the player for english translation.

#1893 forss

forss

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 454 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 05:09 PM

great leg 5 review from telefonica.



#1894 clamslapper

clamslapper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 678 posts
  • Location:Marblehead, MA

Posted 09 April 2012 - 06:33 PM

Good Lord, what you guys predicted was true: VOR is becoming a race between sailboats and motored ships:

My link

... I mean, for Camper to be racing against the ship that's carrying ADOR on board, well, that is kind of surreal. Something jumped the proverbial shark with that article.

I can't wait for the Vendee Globe.

#1895 smackdaddy

smackdaddy

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 06:39 PM

Good Lord, what you guys predicted was true: VOR is becoming a race between sailboats and motored ships:

My link

... I mean, for Camper to be racing against the ship that's carrying ADOR on board, well, that is kind of surreal. Something jumped the proverbial shark with that article.

I can't wait for the Vendee Globe.


They really should add Sanya and ADOR to the tracker...with icons showing they're being shipped. It would be interesting to watch this race between Camper and Maersk X.

#1896 ET1

ET1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 215 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:08 PM

Have a look here and then apply for bowman for the next round :blink:
http://www.cammas-gr...d_of_Brad_Marsh

#1897 haligonian winterr

haligonian winterr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 697 posts
  • Location:Halifax, NS
  • Interests:Going Fast.

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:50 PM

Have a look here and then apply for bowman for the next round :blink:
http://www.cammas-gr...d_of_Brad_Marsh


Dead link? "Error, page not found"

HW

#1898 DtM

DtM

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,280 posts
  • Location:Out of the Office

Posted 10 April 2012 - 12:14 AM

Does anyone know when the protest against Tele is to be heard?

#1899 Cyrille Hydrogene

Cyrille Hydrogene

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 491 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 10 April 2012 - 05:58 AM


Have a look here and then apply for bowman for the next round :blink:
http://www.cammas-gr...d_of_Brad_Marsh


Dead link? "Error, page not found"

HW


This?

http://www.volvoocea...ood-as-new.html

His wound to the wrist could have been much more serious, it seems...
Brad was lucky, as he is back on the boat, and is even trying his hand at the helm during the shifts.

#1900 onimod

onimod

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Location:Sydney
  • Interests:Cannot be left blank

Posted 10 April 2012 - 10:43 AM

http://www.volvoocea...ood-as-new.html
His wound to the wrist could have been much more serious, it seems...
Brad was lucky, as he is back on the boat, and is even trying his hand at the helm during the shifts.

smart move ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users