Jump to content


New AC 35 Rule

The next big thing...

  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#1 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 26 November 2013 - 05:04 AM

Well I see that 7 people are on AC anarchy at the moment. The crowd is gone, event is over, move along...

 

So the next big news event is going to be the new AC 35 class rule. Any scuttlebutt? Do we have any remote idea of when Larry et al will divulge? This year? Spring 2014?

 

Cats for sure. How big? Wings? (yes), Less crew (yes), foils? (yes), fully adjustable? (yes). 

 

Any insiders care to share?.....

 

 

 



#2 SW Sailor

SW Sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,122 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 06:06 AM

No inside information, but I'd expect something in Q1, maybe February from some general comments. Maybe they'll announce the venue earlier than that, but I'd expect everything being discussed is under NDA until released by GGYC. We'll see if the kiwi connection is as leaky as before.

 

Sounds like RC wants to tighten things up regarding reducing the attorneys involvement which may also impact the openness of rules clarifications, etc. Looks like he wants to make the event less prone to politics in general, and politics dragged in front of the public, which is a good idea.

 

Anyone's guess regarding the boats, but I hope they find a way to stick with the magnificent 72's.

 

Clean probably knows more and will release information shortly.



#3 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,277 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 05:36 PM

Nothing has been decided at this early stage but the boat size being discussed is between 50 to 65 ft .

#4 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 27 November 2013 - 05:07 AM


Nothing has been decided at this early stage but the boat size being discussed is between 50 to 65 ft .

boo

#5 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 27 November 2013 - 07:56 AM

Nothing has been decided at this early stage but the boat size being discussed is between 50 to 65 ft .

Just 7 more feet and you have a 72.... Sure hoping for 65 then.

 

50 is too close to the 45's. Might as well sail in dinghies..



#6 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 05:15 PM

Even with 18 ft it's foils are cool. I wish I had the same on my Tornado.

The video seems to have been taken in Brittany, France.

 



#7 SellingSailing

SellingSailing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 27 November 2013 - 05:50 PM

Anyone know who is running the show from the ACEA perspective?  Do we still have the Coutts/Ehman/Barclay show?  



#8 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 06:22 PM

Anyone know who is running the show from the ACEA perspective?  Do we still have the Coutts/Ehman/Barclay show?  

We already saw Coutts being involved

 

http://www.americasc...th-americas-cup



#9 Mariner2442

Mariner2442

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Location:Nevada City,CA

Posted 27 November 2013 - 07:17 PM

Do you think they should stick with multis? Don't get me wrong, I had a blast watching those rockets fly around the course but it seemed like most of the downwind tactics were wiped out. The whole concept of the wind shadow, and covering your position was lost on the downwind. Yeah it was cool seeing 45kts but is it worth the loss in strategy? 



#10 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 07:27 PM

Do you think they should stick with multis? Don't get me wrong, I had a blast watching those rockets fly around the course but it seemed like most of the downwind tactics were wiped out. The whole concept of the wind shadow, and covering your position was lost on the downwind. Yeah it was cool seeing 45kts but is it worth the loss in strategy? 

Yes.  You lost some elements of strategy but gained others.  You also gained emphasis on skill & athleticism.  But finally, the biggest event in the sport is being raced in the most advanced performance boats.



#11 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 07:48 PM

Among the money-concerned there's consideration being given to smaller sizes, see link above (RC: "The boats will likely be smaller than 72-feet with some one-design components, which will reduce the number of sailors and designers.") but:

 

Since after the Match itself, it is just about impossible to find anyone among the sailors or designers who were involved in AC34, from all 4 of the teams, advocating for anything else. Foiling, wing-sailed multihulls are here to stay for AC35, preferably in AC72's.

 

Even a lot of hardcore, long-time monohullers have admitted to having been blown away by the Match, Jochen Schumann as just one of many, many examples.

 

And so whether we think they should or not, they will stick with racing fast mutihulls.



#12 kadyca

kadyca

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,068 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 08:00 PM

I'm guessing 55 ft full foilers with two wing sizes to accommodate different wind strengths. As spectacular as they were, it doesn't seem to me that Oatley had much enthusiasm for trying to compete in them, especially given the costs, which was the main factor in the weakness of AC 34 having too few competitors. 55 ft will be enough of a step up from the 45s, yet small enough to seem possible to a wider set of potential teams, and will have significantly reduced crew costs and operational costs and yet, designed for full foiling from the get go, will probably be nearly as fast, especially at up to 30 knots. 

 

With regard to venue, I can't imagine that Larry will want to go any place else besides SF, and I believe that the city will have a lot more incentive now to reach another host agreement.

 

An interesting development in local SF politics was the defeat this month of the 8 Washington development project, which could also spell trouble for the Warriors proposal for pier 30-32, and while there is certainly more support in the city for an arena, don't underestimate the ability of the No Wall On the Waterfront proponets to put the kibosh on it, especially if it also goes to a ballot.

 

Consequently, the mayor may be looking for a back up plan for the Warriors, which could revert to Larry's AC plan for pier 30-32, now with more time to address all the issues.

 

Still, if I were Larry (don't I wish), I would assiduously try to avoid 30-32, as it is just to controversial. There's even more animosity in the city towards him than the nameless/faceless rich folks who wanted to build their luxury condos at 8 Washington. And Larry would still need the luxury development rights on seawall lot 330 in order to justify fixing the piers.

 

Other options could be an expansion at pier 80 for the bases or maybe as part of the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard re development project, or something part of the planned development for TI? Of course, there is always Alameda for the bases, too.



#13 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 28 November 2013 - 03:58 AM

Do you think they should stick with multis? Don't get me wrong, I had a blast watching those rockets fly around the course but it seemed like most of the downwind tactics were wiped out. The whole concept of the wind shadow, and covering your position was lost on the downwind. Yeah it was cool seeing 45kts but is it worth the loss in strategy? 

it's a complete WAG - but the number of downwind passes we witnessed in the AC34 final far surpasses any recent cup. Sure - blanket the opponent with the chute, but how often did this actually result in a pass? Once - twice - not at all?

Passes happened with slow boats on big splits upon wide courses - but if you care to see tight and close match racing and especially passing - stick with the AC72.

#14 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 10:48 PM

America’s Cup: Early speculation regarding new format

The America’s Cup could be coming to New Zealand after all, if early speculation regarding the shape of the next regatta comes to pass.

One possibility mooted ahead of the next Cup is that all entrants to the next regatta will stage a leg of the America’s Cup. An international series will be held before a semifinal and final in San Francisco, if that is the venue for the next Cup chosen by holders, Oracle Team USA.

 

See more at: http://www.sailingsc...h.wZhSwTJX.dpuf


#15 Scarecrow

Scarecrow

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,693 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Aus

Posted 09 December 2013 - 11:00 PM

Others have said it but I'm not sure how shipping boats around the world is going to save much money and no-one is going to sign up to a protocol for an LVC format where they may not even get to race at the location of the cup.

#16 fireball

fireball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 728 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 12:29 AM

Any events in 2014 and probably 2015 will have to be run in the AC45s. There isn't enough time to develop anything else.



#17 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,534 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 10 December 2013 - 12:46 AM

A recent article, I think featuring GD, mentioned OD components for the next boat. Specifically hulls and wing.

Seems a lot more than mere components.

WetHog

#18 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 12:55 AM

Most interesting excerpts from the story:
 

"...

 

The theory now is that all entrants will get to stage an America's Cup event in their own back yard in 2014, 2015 and 2016 - with the local team arranging the event and "owning" the financial structure. Then the top four teams over the international series would head to San Francisco (or wherever the finals venue is) for semifinals and the Cup match against the holder in 2017.

 

...

 

The concept of annual, "global" America's Cup events was also raised during the last Cup regatta. The 2013 America's Cup advisory committee - assembled by Oracle supremo Larry Ellison and containing heavy hitters in US sports, marketing, media and commerce - had plans to launch a World Series in 2014.

The original principle was to establish 10-20 franchises around the world, each to race an AC45 or similar catamarans in various venues. The franchises would be established not only in the US, Britain, Europe, Australia and New Zealand but also Asia, the Middle East and Africa. Then, in 2017, the challengers would race off for the right to become the challenger in the America's Cup match.

 

The AC45s might have had their day. Not only were they compromised in the ACWS cheating scandal which saw OTUSA team members banned from the Cup regatta, they possess little of the aura, danger and foiling abilities of the AC72s which contested the 34th Cup. In addition, the costs of transporting two classes of boat around the world is prohibitive.

 

... a possible shape for the next America's Cup may be as follows:

 

Sixty-five-foot foiling catamarans - smaller than the AC72s but still big and fast enough to provide what Coutts called the "grandeur" of the Cup. They might also have identical hulls and wingsails but have a design component in the foils, for example. That would reduce team and design costs, allow closer racing but not shut the door on all technological advances.

 

All entrants to hold "home" regattas in these boats, with results counting to finding America's Cup semifinalists.

The top four challengers to take part in the Louis Vuitton regatta to find the challenger to take on OTUSA in the Cup match in 2017.

 

The theory now is that all entrants will get to stage an America’s Cup event in their own back yard in 2014, 2015 and 2016 – with the local team arranging the event and “owning” the financial structure. Then the top four teams over the international series would head to San Francisco (or wherever the finals venue is) for semifinals and the Cup match against the holder in 2017.

 

..."

 

 

Have to wonder how much of this is opinion of the writer, particularly the part about the AC45s.  I tend to think that they are still the most likely boats for ACWS-style regattas in the first 2+ years of the new cycle.  I also question the idea that only 4 teams would advance to racing in SFO.  Seems to me all challengers will square off in SFO, with preliminary regattas doing little more than set up seeding for the racing to be held in SFO.  I hope the hull and wings are not entirely OD.  I think beams and the wing spar, in OD, would be OK.

 
 


#19 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,918 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 10 December 2013 - 01:49 AM


... Silly season in full swing ...

#20 Observer

Observer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 02:12 AM

Others have said it but I'm not sure how shipping boats around the world is going to save much money and no-one is going to sign up to a protocol for an LVC format where they may not even get to race at the location of the cup.

Unless they get thier on thier own bottoms....like it used to be at the start...



#21 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 10 December 2013 - 06:30 AM

I'm liking this part....

 

"Sixty-five-foot foiling catamarans - smaller than the AC72s but still big and fast enough to provide what Coutts called the "grandeur" of the Cup. They might also have identical hulls and wingsails but have a design component in the foils, for example. That would reduce team and design costs, allow closer racing but not shut the door on all technological advances."



#22 PeeToLee

PeeToLee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:Sailing, Flying, Motorsports, Baseball, NFL Football

Posted 10 December 2013 - 12:34 PM

Unless they get thier on thier own bottoms....like it used to be at the start...

Hey, now *there's* an idea!

 

A local round, followed by a fleet ocean race to the next local round locale, followed by a fleet ocean race to the next... 

 

:)



#23 WetHog

WetHog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,534 posts
  • Location:Annapolis, MD USA

Posted 10 December 2013 - 01:10 PM

I'm liking this part....
 
"Sixty-five-foot foiling catamarans - smaller than the AC72s but still big and fast enough to provide what Coutts called the "grandeur" of the Cup. They might also have identical hulls and wingsails but have a design component in the foils, for example. That would reduce team and design costs, allow closer racing but not shut the door on all technological advances."


Thats the bit I read about OD hulls and wings. Not sure I like the precedent it would set.

WetHog

#24 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 06:22 PM

I'm liking this part....
 
"Sixty-five-foot foiling catamarans - smaller than the AC72s but still big and fast enough to provide what Coutts called the "grandeur" of the Cup. They might also have identical hulls and wingsails but have a design component in the foils, for example. That would reduce team and design costs, allow closer racing but not shut the door on all technological advances."


Thats the bit I read about OD hulls and wings. Not sure I like the precedent it would set.

WetHog

 

I hate the idea of OD hulls & wings.  Beams and spars would be OK, as both would still allow huge variety of design options while constraining broad areas of design, not too dissimilar to length/beam/sail-height restrictions, and thus reduce significant costs.

 

I REALLY hope they don't go any smaller than 65'.



#25 Sailer X

Sailer X

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 381 posts
  • Location:uk

Posted 10 December 2013 - 09:05 PM

OD wings would be good for early Acts or a World Series type circus to keep costs down and get new entrants up to speed? then you could go development class for the Finals



#26 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 11 December 2013 - 07:14 PM

OD wings would be good for early Acts or a World Series type circus to keep costs down and get new entrants up to speed? then you could go development class for the Finals

 

Sure, I would think most everyone would be fine with that, IF they are using the big boats in preliminary racing (ACWS, Acts, etc.).  I would still think that it may be preferable to keep the preliminary racing in AC45s (converted to foiling).



#27 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 28 January 2014 - 03:47 AM

Any rumors on when the OR gods will speak on the new AC rule?



#28 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 01:57 PM

Which is wise.

 

Ac 72 now are undermanned and dangerous. 

Nothing has been decided at this early stage but the boat size being discussed is between 50 to 65 ft .



#29 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,838 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 28 January 2014 - 04:21 PM

Any rumors on when the OR gods will speak on the new AC rule?

At the appropriate juncture. In due course. In the fullness of time.

#30 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 04:34 PM

Venue first, then all the minor details.



#31 pwormwood

pwormwood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Location:Palmetto, FL USA
  • Interests:performance sailing...LIVING life...

Posted 28 January 2014 - 05:47 PM

Having watched the C class wings develop over time, I'd hate to see the AC wing development locked down to a one design rule prematurely.

 

Tactics don't go away when you go faster, they change.  Race car drivers going 4 times the speed of a 72 employ tactics.

 

Although the hull design has historically been an important factor in winning the AC, it will be much less so if the rule is rewritten to encourage full time foiling.  While I love seeing the hull shapes evolve, with foiling I think the wing and foils are the big development area; so maybe hulls and beams are a candidate for one design cost savings.

 

...And I really, really, really like the 72's...



#32 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 28 January 2014 - 10:16 PM

...And I really, really, really like the 72's...

  

I hope they find a way to stick with the magnificent 72's.

Three cheers for the AC72!

Dilute the cup not!

#33 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 11:30 PM

Bah,..................... a new 55-65 cat, with a new foil rule, will be faster, safer, easier to handle. 72s will probably have their place in a museum



#34 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:15 AM



...And I really, really, really like the 72's...

  

I hope they find a way to stick with the magnificent 72's.

Three cheers for the AC72!

Dilute the cup not!
+4

And +5 to SF Bay, there's no chance AC-Anything will foil Hawaiian swells.

#35 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:16 AM

Boo for smaller, safer, cheaper, easier.

 

Keep the outrageous, ridiculous, magnificent  72's.



#36 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:26 AM

Boo for smaller, safer, cheaper, easier.
 
Keep the outrageous, ridiculous, magnificent  72's.

+10

Am having drinks with an AC designer rockstar this eve, will post his preferences if permitted to, looking forward to it!

#37 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 29 January 2014 - 01:54 AM

All in favor of ridiculous - say aye.

#38 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 29 January 2014 - 07:57 AM

All in favor of ridiculous - say aye.

Aye! Eye! I! Aie!



#39 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 08:46 AM

When crews get smashed it's too late. Better stick to the safe side.

And drunken decisions on safety issues doesn't help the game.



#40 Alpha FB

Alpha FB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 08:59 AM

When crews get smashed it's too late. Better stick to the safe side.

And drunken decisions on safety issues doesn't help the game.

A 60' cat foiling at 50 knots will hurt just as much as a 72' once it goes wrong...



#41 Alpha FB

Alpha FB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:07 AM

And for the record:

 

+several milliion for AC72's in SF Bay!!!!!!



#42 CheekyMonkey

CheekyMonkey

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:09 AM

Any rumors on when the OR gods will speak on the new AC rule?

 

IIRC, I've seen mention of sometime in the Spring.

 

While they must be cognizant of the cost issues, I just hope that the rule keeps the spirit of the competition in mind.

 

I follow motor sports as well, and all the formulas I like seem hell bent to either dumb down the rules, or make the cars hideous.



#43 Alpha FB

Alpha FB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,008 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 09:14 AM

...or make the cars hideous.

 

You must be referring to the latest crop of F1's: yikes!

 

They've been ugly for a long time now, but this new lot really pushes the sales of eye bleach!!



#44 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 11:21 PM


Boo for smaller, safer, cheaper, easier.
 
Keep the outrageous, ridiculous, magnificent  72's.

+10

Am having drinks with an AC designer rockstar this eve, will post his preferences if permitted to, looking forward to it!
Just a quick follow up. Basiliscus and I hooked up last night at a restaurant in the Everett Marina, first hookup since SF on the night before Race 1. I forgot to ask his preferences about keeping the AC72 but to say he's deep into wingsailed, foiling cats would be a massive understatement. And yes, OTUSA gets him back!

He'd just signed closing papers a couple hours earlier on a breathtaking piece of real estate, a jewel that overlooks the Puget Sound from high on a nicely wooded bluff and with a good trail down to its own private beach that must be 200' long. Just stunning, I think I spent more time asking about that and looking at his iPhone photos and videos than we even talked AC. Stunning place, am jealous as hell. Thanks, B!

edit, I did get a repeat explanation of how leeway affects power and it sank in just a little deeper this time; thanks publicly for that too.

#45 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 11:42 PM

Would love to hear your take on leeway or what you learned?



#46 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 29 January 2014 - 11:57 PM

Would love to hear your take on leeway or what you learned?

Ah jeez, figured a smartass would ask!

I really can't do it justice, think he has posted the explanation before. Basically, the boat pivots around regardless the leeway; with all the subsequent consequences. It happens in a different language too :)

One conversation was about the last race JK was tactician where that attempted 180 at the bottom left mark was a disaster, leaving them at (think it was) 6 to -1. B pointed out how in that and several other races under flood, the key move was to continue on towards shore for a short time to get that relief, and only then tack back towards Alcatraz, because that way you optimized the shore benefit and the cone relief benefit. If you tack too soon then the cone effect is greatly diminished where you reach the Alcatraz-side boundary. So it was a blown call all around, although it may not have been just JK's choice.

#47 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,731 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 30 January 2014 - 04:46 AM

When crews get smashed it's too late. Better stick to the safe side.

And drunken decisions on safety issues doesn't help the game.

very true 

 

the sad truth is the late Mr. Simpson did get smashed and may have been murdered by a illegal and defective ac boat 

 

sfpd was considering involuntary manslaughter charges - evilsin -ehman must have bribed them off -or stalled the investigation -

 

I just received the sf medical examiners report -complete -

 

it has some very disturbing facts and show me theres been a  huge cover up -

 

by sf -ggyc - and uscg and worst ORACLE RACING and ARTEMIS'S CAYARD 

 

maybe sa execs will do the true story - waiting..... 

 

and hopefully that tragedy will not be ever repeated -

 

thanks for your posts on that very crucial safety issue -



#48 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 10:46 AM

When crews get smashed it's too late. Better stick to the safe side.

And drunken decisions on safety issues doesn't help the game.

very true 

 

the sad truth is the late Mr. Simpson did get smashed and may have been murdered by a illegal and defective ac boat 

 

sfpd was considering involuntary manslaughter charges - evilsin -ehman must have bribed them off -or stalled the investigation -

 

I just received the sf medical examiners report -complete -

 

it has some very disturbing facts and show me theres been a  huge cover up -

 

by sf -ggyc - and uscg and worst ORACLE RACING and ARTEMIS'S CAYARD 

 

maybe sa execs will do the true story - waiting..... 

 

and hopefully that tragedy will not be ever repeated -

 

thanks for your posts on that very crucial safety issue -

Diplomatic! Good.

Too much people look at the America's Cup. 

When too unsafe it will be revolting.

Huge responsibility  for each crew member of every team as well.

Sometimes I wonder,,, is this still fun?



#49 Mariner

Mariner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,514 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 30 January 2014 - 07:05 PM

Would love to hear your take on leeway or what you learned?

Ah jeez, figured a smartass would ask!

I really can't do it justice, think he has posted the explanation before. Basically, the boat pivots around regardless the leeway; with all the subsequent consequences. It happens in a different language too :)

One conversation was about the last race JK was tactician where that attempted 180 at the bottom left mark was a disaster, leaving them at (think it was) 6 to -1. B pointed out how in that and several other races under flood, the key move was to continue on towards shore for a short time to get that relief, and only then tack back towards Alcatraz, because that way you optimized the shore benefit and the cone relief benefit. If you tack too soon then the cone effect is greatly diminished where you reach the Alcatraz-side boundary. So it was a blown call all around, although it may not have been just JK's choice.

Does anyone know if JK is still with OTUSA or not?



#50 eastern motors

eastern motors

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:SE MI

Posted 31 January 2014 - 01:15 AM

Gino Morelli basically thinks wing sails are a waste of money

 

http://www.sailingwo...riting-the-rule

 

One-design wings would be even dumber.  Spend a ton of money for everyone to have the same thing and no development.



#51 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 01:17 AM

Gino Morelli basically thinks wing sails are a waste of money

 

http://www.sailingwo...riting-the-rule

 

One-design wings would be even dumber.  Spend a ton of money for everyone to have the same thing and no development.

 

Funny, his partner seems to not agree when it comes to quality AC racing relying on human power.



#52 floater

floater

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,465 posts
  • Location:Berkeley - California

Posted 31 January 2014 - 02:30 AM


Gino Morelli basically thinks wing sails are a waste of money
 
http://www.sailingwo...riting-the-rule
 
One-design wings would be even dumber.  Spend a ton of money for everyone to have the same thing and no development.

 
Funny, his partner seems to not agree when it comes to quality AC racing relying on human power.
those two are a bit of a cypher in my mind. I always felt they were sort of a 'B' grade design team - until they showed up with Aotearoa - and proved that assumption wrong.

Except for Oracle's eventual dominant display anyway...some A teamers certainly inhabit that space

#53 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 03:00 AM

Great interview with insights and opinions from a big headed, super confident Gino, who thought at the time he had all but won the Cup.

 

What a difference a few short weeks would make.  Ha Ha.



#54 GauchoGreg

GauchoGreg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 06:08 PM

The thing is, that while it may be possible to have straight line speed highly comparable between the hard wing and soft sails, you are NOT going to be able to have nearly as efficient maneuvers with the soft sail, particularly upwind, and without those, you will be reduced to drag races.  That is what Pete Melvin basically said.  I have to wonder if they could even do what Oracle did upwind without the wing.  Maybe the difference would be made up by articulating rudders/foils?  It would be interesting to have a long interview with both guys at the same time regarding these issues.  But anything that can be done to make maneuvers as efficient as possible is very much worth some cost in order to enhance the numbers of maneuvers done in the racing.



#55 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 09:46 PM

What I wonder about is if the weight of the boat, once it is built beefy enough to deal with probably 10X the loads with a soft-sail as compared to a wing-sail, makes foiling all the less efficient.



#56 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 10:34 PM

Basically he says that the only difference would be 1 or 2 % speed differential and 3 or 4 degrees deeper downind.

A big difference for identical boats but very small for the event if we compare with the advantages: cheaper, easier rigging, safer boat, bigger racing envelope.

The big different is not made by the sail but by the foils.

IMO, they will hit the 50kts with smaller 60 ft boats.



#57 surfsailor

surfsailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 306 posts
  • Location:Maui
  • Interests:Surf. Foiling. Vintage guitars.

Posted 31 January 2014 - 10:53 PM

Basically he says that the only difference would be 1 or 2 % speed differential and 3 or 4 degrees deeper downind.

A big difference for identical boats but very small for the event if we compare with the advantages: cheaper, easier rigging, safer boat, bigger racing envelope.

The big different is not made by the sail but by the foils.

IMO, they will hit the 50kts with smaller 60 ft boats.

 

Top speed potential would be in the ball park of AC34 boats, but 50 kts is very unlikely with soft sails, whereas the AC72s in their current form with the addition of a few foiling controls will easily get there.. Tacking would be a nightmare - no roll tacking, poor acceleration, large amount of time required to trim - so bye bye upwind strategy. Upwind foiling would be gone. Rig loads would increase exponentially, so the platforms would need to be re-engineered from scratch at huge expense. those same increased loads - and the addition of heaps of rigging - would decrease safety, not improve it.

Just sayin'.



#58 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 11:05 PM

Agreed that rig loads would increase, but it could be controlled with a stronger, while heavier, platform.

 

I am not sure tacking would be much more difficult. Roll tacks would probably still be possible without using the wing camber. It would also be much safer, cf the near capsize from NZ when they lacked power from the hydrolics.

 

When tacking, the problem for a multi is not the sail as much as the hulls digging into the water and preventing the turn. Now foils make it much easier as the boat pivots quickly around. A new generation of foils and rudders would also help.

 

Remains to be seen on the water though...



#59 Kiwing

Kiwing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts

Posted 31 January 2014 - 11:05 PM

How I hope they keep the wings.  Even if they were mass produced and only tweeked by the teams!

 

I felt the real advances were in the wing and foil combination.

 

Nice to see things are still ticking!!  Can't wait to see the perfection of this whole new world of sailing.



#60 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,918 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 31 January 2014 - 11:29 PM

Thinking out loud: if wings stay, they've got to be comparatively smaller for a wide wind range. Gennakers will then be used more often, but won't that prevent flybing? A (larger) soft sail could be reefed, so that only jibs would be needed.

Don't think the platform weight penalty would amount to much, but believe (battery) powered winches would then be required.

#61 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,574 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 01 February 2014 - 12:58 AM

Why are you all talking in feet? You know they put meters in the actual rule and measure in meters too, don't you. I think it should be 17 meters and be called the AC17.

#62 nroose

nroose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,574 posts
  • Location:Berkeley

Posted 01 February 2014 - 01:01 AM

Oh, and do away with the thoughts of OD. Make the rule clear and concise to allow for innovation and discourage/avoid loopholes and expensive details.

#63 pwormwood

pwormwood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Location:Palmetto, FL USA
  • Interests:performance sailing...LIVING life...

Posted 01 February 2014 - 04:13 AM

The AC17 thing is kinda cool - it gets the boats down to 56' - achieving the get smaller/get cheaper idea. And the length would be an interesting size boat that could be driven pretty hard...but I hate to see the length get shorter than a Volvo boat for the big and bad factor....



#64 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 02:03 PM

Posted yet? Good one
--

31 Jan 2014
WRITING THE RULE - PETE MELVIN TALKS ABOUT THE NEXT CUP BOAT
http://www.americasc...t-Cup-boat.html

#65 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 01 February 2014 - 07:58 PM

Posted yet? Good one
--

31 Jan 2014
WRITING THE RULE - PETE MELVIN TALKS ABOUT THE NEXT CUP BOAT
http://www.americasc...t-Cup-boat.html

Nothing new there then.



#66 ~Stingray~

~Stingray~

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,198 posts

Posted 01 February 2014 - 09:33 PM

Yes, although much newer than the Morelli interview posted right above.

The site is called AC35 now too, with a slightly different and cleaner look.

#67 Guitar

Guitar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,434 posts
  • Location:Gold Country California
  • Interests:Sailing, gold mining, meteorite hunting.

Posted 02 February 2014 - 03:01 PM

So, just a thought, but could the lead elements be OD and the trailing elements be open for innovation? Would certainly reduce cost but still offer opportunities.



#68 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 06 February 2014 - 04:23 AM

So its gonna be smaller winged cats with certain one-design features, probably hulls and parts of the wing. I'd rather the 72's but it should still be a kick ass class with the foils and controls being the secret sauce. 



#69 Barnyb

Barnyb

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,446 posts
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 11 February 2014 - 09:56 AM

http://www.americasc...d-in-March.html

 

The new version of the America’s Cup Class Rule, which will produce a foiling, wingsailed catamaran in the 60-65 foot range, is on schedule to be released next month.

Several potential America’s Cup teams are cooperating in the rule writing process with the design firm Morrelli & Melvin.

 

 

.....



#70 The Frog

The Frog

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 11 February 2014 - 03:21 PM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.

 

Depressing...



#71 Guitar

Guitar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,434 posts
  • Location:Gold Country California
  • Interests:Sailing, gold mining, meteorite hunting.

Posted 11 February 2014 - 03:48 PM

Source?



#72 The Frog

The Frog

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 11 February 2014 - 04:33 PM

A friend of a friend...



#73 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 11 February 2014 - 07:03 PM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.

 

Depressing...

Tragic even...



#74 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 11 February 2014 - 09:34 PM

My friend of a friend, who ran into an old friend, who had confirmed with somebody "in the know" says that's not true.



#75 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 12 February 2014 - 01:39 AM

My friend of a friend, who ran into an old friend, who had confirmed with somebody "in the know" says that's not true.

Hopefully that's true.



#76 zillafreak

zillafreak

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach

Posted 12 February 2014 - 08:15 AM

In a complete turn of events hailed by the old faithful fans of the Americas Cup, Larry Ellison decides to blow off the "affordability" issues altogether and go back to the classic "Billionaires race". Ellison states  "I finally came to my senses and thought to myself 'Since when does this shit have to be affordable'? The AC has always been about who has a bigger dick, more money, and a faster yacht". The AC35 will thus be raced in 100 Meter 3 masted monohulls that cost more than Denmark. "Put that in your pipe and smoke it aholes", Ellison is said to have uttered.  Grant Dalton was said to have been rushed to hospital with chest pains, realizing how much money he has to suck out of sponsors now.

 

maltesefalcon.jpg



#77 porthos

porthos

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted 12 February 2014 - 01:27 PM

My friend of a friend, who ran into an old friend, who had confirmed with somebody "in the know" says that's not true.

Save Ferris.



#78 MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

MAHGUAH_SCALPS_PILGRIMS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,731 posts
  • Location:33.98.n 118.45. w

Posted 13 February 2014 - 04:00 AM

new ggyc ortusa cost cutting measures cat 

 

so now 15 teams can be in the show 

 

 

 

Attached File  1011211_720747377970004_1637629945_n (1).jpg   84.01K   23 downloads



#79 brian weslake

brian weslake

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,520 posts

Posted 13 February 2014 - 05:16 AM



Gino Morelli basically thinks wing sails are a waste of money
 
http://www.sailingwo...riting-the-rule
 
One-design wings would be even dumber.  Spend a ton of money for everyone to have the same thing and no development.

 
Funny, his partner seems to not agree when it comes to quality AC racing relying on human power.
those two are a bit of a cypher in my mind. I always felt they were sort of a 'B' grade design team - until they showed up with Aotearoa - and proved that assumption wrong correct.

 

Fixed it for ya.



#80 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,277 posts

Posted 13 February 2014 - 08:14 AM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.
 
Depressing...


I hear J Boats will be the mfg :)

#81 Bill R

Bill R

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 13 February 2014 - 10:17 PM

I hope its not one design, if it is they might as well sail lasers, it will keep the costs down.



#82 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 14 February 2014 - 03:58 PM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.
 
Depressing...


I hear J Boats will be the mfg :)

Fleet is big enough at the moment: :)

http://www.jclassyachts.com/yachts

 

It's not going to happen.

I think this design development platform of the AC 65's will be held high.

I hear from boat design net, Tom Speer, that the development of the wings is pending in how many parts the wings may be divided.

It's complicated:

http://www.boatdesig...rs-44139-2.html



#83 Observer

Observer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 02:05 AM

Unless they get thier on thier own bottoms....like it used to be at the start...

Hey, now *there's* an idea!

 

A local round, followed by a fleet ocean race to the next local round locale, followed by a fleet ocean race to the next... 

 

:)

You mean like the Volvo Ocean Race....



#84 F-18 5150

F-18 5150

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,697 posts
  • Interests:sailing

Posted 28 February 2014 - 02:20 AM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.

 

Depressing...

 

The wing is not one design just the center spar of the wing.



#85 Xlot

Xlot

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,918 posts
  • Location:Rome

Posted 28 February 2014 - 11:19 AM


^
That would be my preference, but cost saving would then be minimal

#86 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 11:59 AM

Did the incident in Singapore where team Aberdeen flies of Gamma's Groupama had any effect on the new design.

I hope it did. It can go wrong like that (and even more with fatalities) in the new cup.

Attached File  Extreme Series singapore crash team Groupama and Aberdeen.JPG   65.48K   2 downloads



#87 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 01:02 PM

Agreed,  I think match racing in the next AC should be run on separate courses.

You can't be too careful. 



#88 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 01:48 PM

The new boats will have one design hulls, platform and wings.
Only the appendages will be designed by the teams.

 

Depressing...

 

The wing is not one design just the center spar of the wing.

I heard the carbon would be one design



#89 schakel

schakel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 03:26 PM

There is a rumour on boat design.net the oracle wing had 8 square meter extra in their wing.

http://www.boatdesig...-34612-266.html

So one-design makes the race more fair.



#90 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,277 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 05:38 PM

There is a rumour on boat design.net the oracle wing had 8 square meter extra in their wing.
http://www.boatdesig...-34612-266.html
So one-design makes the race more fair.


How far has the AC fallen when the term " one design " is part of the discussion ?

#91 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 28 February 2014 - 07:16 PM

There is a rumour on boat design.net the oracle wing had 8 square meter extra in their wing.
http://www.boatdesig...-34612-266.html
So one-design makes the race more fair.


How far has the AC fallen when the term " one design " is part of the discussion ?

And since when has 'more fair' played a part in the AC?



#92 maxmini

maxmini

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,277 posts

Posted 28 February 2014 - 09:47 PM

 

There is a rumour on boat design.net the oracle wing had 8 square meter extra in their wing.
http://www.boatdesig...-34612-266.html
So one-design makes the race more fair.


How far has the AC fallen when the term " one design " is part of the discussion ?

And since when has 'more fair' played a part in the AC?

 

Agreed !

 

 I was going to add " fair " to my post as well but decided to stay a little more up beat for the moment .

 

This is the Americas Cup. go big or stay home !



#93 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 28 February 2014 - 10:26 PM

 

 

There is a rumour on boat design.net the oracle wing had 8 square meter extra in their wing.
http://www.boatdesig...-34612-266.html
So one-design makes the race more fair.


How far has the AC fallen when the term " one design " is part of the discussion ?

And since when has 'more fair' played a part in the AC?

 

Agreed !

 

 I was going to add " fair " to my post as well but decided to stay a little more up beat for the moment .

 

This is the Americas Cup. go big or stay home !

+1



#94 Francis Vaughan

Francis Vaughan

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts
  • Location:Adelaide, Australia

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:01 PM

Think of the one design components as "here are a bunch of bits that make little to no difference to the performance of the boat, but will cost you a mint if you tool up to make them".  The design and tooling for the large structural components - like beams and the main wing spar will run to millions.  If each team has to design and create tooling for an item that they will make one or two of, and yet is essentially a generic component, you are imposing a silly cost overhead. Items that make a real difference - of course they make their own. So in a sense these one design components are the reverse of OD in normal classes - where design restriction are imposed on critical components to even up performance. Here it is the boring bits where it just makes sense to share the cost, whilst it is still a design free for all on the bits that matter.



#95 nav

nav

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,459 posts

Posted 01 March 2014 - 02:57 PM

^ Good point, hope we start to hear something a bit more definitive soon - maybe at the Sydney get together?



#96 Tornado-Cat

Tornado-Cat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 01 March 2014 - 03:51 PM

The AC unfair ? that's something new.



#97 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 01 March 2014 - 07:05 PM

Think of the one design components as "here are a bunch of bits that make little to no difference to the performance of the boat, but will cost you a mint if you tool up to make them".  The design and tooling for the large structural components - like beams and the main wing spar will run to millions.  If each team has to design and create tooling for an item that they will make one or two of, and yet is essentially a generic component, you are imposing a silly cost overhead. Items that make a real difference - of course they make their own. So in a sense these one design components are the reverse of OD in normal classes - where design restriction are imposed on critical components to even up performance. Here it is the boring bits where it just makes sense to share the cost, whilst it is still a design free for all on the bits that matter.

And yet ALL the bits matter in the AC surely.

 

If for example an OD component was to be the platform and it happened to be built like the NZL 5 tractor, where would the aero advantages of OTUSA's platform have come from?

 

Also, just say a team had the potential to develop a new hull or beam lay-up material that was lighter and stronger than carbon fibre? Remember the Kiwis 'cheating' when they threw out aluminium in favour of fibre glass?

 

Why would you hold development back, through some arbitrary decision about where future advances might be found?



#98 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 01 March 2014 - 07:26 PM

Think of the one design components as "here are a bunch of bits that make little to no difference to the performance of the boat, but will cost you a mint if you tool up to make them".  The design and tooling for the large structural components - like beams and the main wing spar will run to millions.  If each team has to design and create tooling for an item that they will make one or two of, and yet is essentially a generic component, you are imposing a silly cost overhead. Items that make a real difference - of course they make their own. So in a sense these one design components are the reverse of OD in normal classes - where design restriction are imposed on critical components to even up performance. Here it is the boring bits where it just makes sense to share the cost, whilst it is still a design free for all on the bits that matter.

And yet ALL the bits matter in the AC surely.
 
If for example an OD component was to be the platform and it happened to be built like the NZL 5 tractor, where would the aero advantages of OTUSA's platform have come from?
 
Also, just say a team had the potential to develop a new hull or beam lay-up material that was lighter and stronger than carbon fibre? Remember the Kiwis 'cheating' when they threw out aluminium in favour of fibre glass?
 
Why would you hold development back, through some arbitrary decision about where future advances might be found?

Why, look no further than a whining, bitching Dalton who never let up complaining about the costs.

#99 Sailbydate

Sailbydate

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,676 posts
  • Location:Wellington NZL
  • Interests:Sailing. Classic Yachts. Following what's happening in development classes.

Posted 01 March 2014 - 07:30 PM

 

Think of the one design components as "here are a bunch of bits that make little to no difference to the performance of the boat, but will cost you a mint if you tool up to make them".  The design and tooling for the large structural components - like beams and the main wing spar will run to millions.  If each team has to design and create tooling for an item that they will make one or two of, and yet is essentially a generic component, you are imposing a silly cost overhead. Items that make a real difference - of course they make their own. So in a sense these one design components are the reverse of OD in normal classes - where design restriction are imposed on critical components to even up performance. Here it is the boring bits where it just makes sense to share the cost, whilst it is still a design free for all on the bits that matter.

And yet ALL the bits matter in the AC surely.
 
If for example an OD component was to be the platform and it happened to be built like the NZL 5 tractor, where would the aero advantages of OTUSA's platform have come from?
 
Also, just say a team had the potential to develop a new hull or beam lay-up material that was lighter and stronger than carbon fibre? Remember the Kiwis 'cheating' when they threw out aluminium in favour of fibre glass?
 
Why would you hold development back, through some arbitrary decision about where future advances might be found?

Why, look no further than a whining, bitching Dalton who never let up complaining about the costs.

So, are you saying OTUSA are leaning toward OD components in the new rule, because of GD's bitching and whining?



#100 aldo

aldo

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 01 March 2014 - 07:34 PM


 


Think of the one design components as "here are a bunch of bits that make little to no difference to the performance of the boat, but will cost you a mint if you tool up to make them".  The design and tooling for the large structural components - like beams and the main wing spar will run to millions.  If each team has to design and create tooling for an item that they will make one or two of, and yet is essentially a generic component, you are imposing a silly cost overhead. Items that make a real difference - of course they make their own. So in a sense these one design components are the reverse of OD in normal classes - where design restriction are imposed on critical components to even up performance. Here it is the boring bits where it just makes sense to share the cost, whilst it is still a design free for all on the bits that matter.

And yet ALL the bits matter in the AC surely.
 
If for example an OD component was to be the platform and it happened to be built like the NZL 5 tractor, where would the aero advantages of OTUSA's platform have come from?
 
Also, just say a team had the potential to develop a new hull or beam lay-up material that was lighter and stronger than carbon fibre? Remember the Kiwis 'cheating' when they threw out aluminium in favour of fibre glass?
 
Why would you hold development back, through some arbitrary decision about where future advances might be found?

Why, look no further than a whining, bitching Dalton who never let up complaining about the costs.
So, are you saying OTUSA are leaning toward OD components in the new rule, because of GD's bitching and whining?

Yes

together with Italian girly moaning about expense and number of teams.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users