Don't worry. I am not accusing ETNZ to not following the regulations. I am actually a big fan. Maybe I should also say that my wife is from NZ and I am a big ETNZ fan even if I happen to be Swedish. It is not my fault. Blame my parents :-)
The question was more like as follows.
As far as I understand to "original" if that makes sense ETNZ elevators/winglets/tip fence whatever you want to call them were built for what ETNZ thought were the perfect ones for performance. Then they had to make them larger to follow the new regulations (minimum area). They did a protest and the outcome will de decided today. If ETNZ were racing with there "original performance optimized" elevators I don't think that they will have large area as per the new regulations and it will mot measure. Am I correct or did I get it all wrong? If that would be the case what happens?
Or did I get it wrong and the ETNZ elevators were always large enough and they were only protesting against the max beam rule?
Sorry if I mixed it up?
My understanding is they were always big enough and the issue is not so much to do with the size and much more to do with the shape and positioning. ETNZ made a number of compromises in other aspects of the boat to accomodate them within the rules.
The new rule allows everybody else to run similar sized and probably better shaped rudders without having to make the same compromises to the rest of their design.
ETNZ could possibly design new better shaped rudders under the new rules, but there is no way they can undo the compromises made to the rest of the design and make them effective, they would probably also have to redesign the main foils to accomodate this as they would no longer be optimum, all this would take months of testing which they simply don't have! So there only real option would be to use what they have and to hope that even with the compromises they made that it was good enough.
LR are running the same design but a little further behind and in fact only just got their new foils so it would hurt them possibly even more than ETNZ as they might not even get their compromised package up to full speed anyway, they also have a smaller budget so yet another set of foils or rudders is probably not an option at all.
Yes. And as LR and ETNZ (and one day maybe Artemis) are in the middle of a knockout series, it is ridiculous to expect them to make changes during the racing at such a late stage. Of couse Oracle have an extra two months to play with the ruling all they like.
I am with Max on this one. Murray is a great guy, but he called this one wrong and I hope the IJ tell him. The question then is if he has the guts to call it off as he says he will. Max had the guts to carry out his threat, will Murray.
Clearly it is not a question of safety, look at LR and ETNZ, it is a question of the safety of two of the AC72 designs (Artemis and Orcale) that have not been well designed or engineered as both have so far shown. You cannot at this late stage give them extra help to get to the line. That is not sport at this level.
As for LE he has a reputation for hard ball in business, So I guess he might just decide to let Murray shut it down and keep the CUP for anothe three or four years.What should he care about the Kiwis who need the publicity for the sponsors and by the sounds of their new Govt will not get any more funding, so LE will close out his biggest competitor for the next time.
AC, Don't you luv it?