Jump to content

enigmatically2

Members
  • Content Count

    2,333
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by enigmatically2

  1. So we should allow 4 to post bollocks like using fibreglass to build a boat was innovative and not challenge it? As for statistics, I'm an engineer, I believe in evidence to support an argument, not just repetitively posting that anyone who disagrees is a "hater"
  2. Boris could have said: Well we are moving westwards to try and get away from Europe (at 10mm per year). But Europe are coming with us which demonstrates that they need and want us more than we need them
  3. It does. You can use your AC75 (but then it counts from your meagre allowance); your LEQ12 (separate allowance) or Ac40 ( if within the AC40 rule then that allowance, else counts from you AC75 allowance. Nothing else allowed (apart from simulation)
  4. I am away and so can't easily check the rules, but if my memory is correct they can test foils on an AC40 provided they fit within the AC40 rule. But if they they contravene that then they count as one of the AC75 foils. Which means that essentially they are tied to that foils design - or at least the immutable portion (again from memory something of the order of 80%). Only the LEQ12s really offer a testing opportunity for different foils. You get the feeling that NZ want to lever their simulation and avoid anyone testing anything radical or innovative. Which is shame given that the
  5. Gosh. With such innovation I bet that NZ also have more noble laureates than the US, UK, Italy or Switzerland. Using fibre glass to build a boat? Who'd have thought it
  6. One hopes that teams that are getting 2 will only get one before the others get theirs
  7. Hopefully with it only being a small adaptation of the previous rule, not so much The more I think about it, the biggest disappointment is that they have not opened up more potential to reduce cavitation. Although I postulated the aeration solution I am not convinced that it is viable with the rules as they are (hope it is). They haven't allowed better surfaces. I say that because whilst improving light air performance is great, it would be nice to see that top end increased. Unless of course none of them were hitting cavitation speeds - I don't recall any hard evidence that they w
  8. Yes and no. Of course you can move it to some extent. But you will (I would think) want to localise the weight near the CofG of the hull to minimise angular momentum. Given the other constraints I doubt you have too much ability to control the CofG. The bowsprit may not make make much difference (though having been so far forward it will be disproportionate), but as I say its the only change where the impact is fairly obvious
  9. There is nothing in the rule to prevent it, but then nor was there last time. So I suspect not. But it I have little more than that. Swept-rake would give more stability but more drag for the same lift I think. Not sure how balance will be effected by the mass changes either. Plainly the loss of the bowsprit will move the CofG aft, not so sure about the other changes
  10. The rules prohibit tank testing. And limit the foils that can be rested on an L12, AC 40 or Ac75. And that's the only type of testing you can do
  11. @t_huebs You may well be right. However its the only explanation I can see for the change in box size - the foil shape you posted would have fit in the old box for example. That and the fact that I can't make the RM calculations add up without something like it. Time will tell @SchakelTow tests are allowed. And given that you are allowed 4 foils on an LEQ12 I think that is one reason why they will be essential
  12. The UK has been quite successfully moving over to clean sources of energy despite not being the sunniest of areas. There are a fair number of solar farms but wind turbines generate much more. Maybe the AC would be better using wind power than solar?
  13. Really? You just don't get how utterly invisible this competition is in most of the world. 99.9% of UK couldnt tell you who current holder of AC is. Probably 95% couldnt even tell you what sport it was for
  14. But if the sail were up, all the panels on the stbd side would be in shadow. Hence why I suggested output would be 50% of a shore site
  15. The weight need not necessarily be a disadvantage because there is a specified all up mass. So if you can build the hull lighter then you might as well add something that contributes rather than inert ballast. On the other hand you would have to design the boat such that it could work without any solar power, otherwise you are screwed on a rainy day. Especially if Cork is the venue. I would also point out that there is a large shadow creator stuck out the top of the boat, so you would have to assume that even on a sunny day you can only get 50% energy that a good shore site would
  16. Wow. Amazing. Assuming they all turn up that is the most teams since.... Since.... Since someone other than GD ran it. Wow
  17. I think the NZ sailing national body might have accepted the $50m offer from the govt. Being as how it's roughly 10x more than they get in revenue. To cover all other forms of sailing. Might have been able to win more than one medal at the olympics
  18. Nice idea but we know too little about it to say much
  19. How does the fact that TNZ have won 4 times mean they are a national team? Liverpool FC have won the champions league 6 times. And had a victory parade every time. They still aren't a national team. Like ETNZ You cannot distinguish between what you wish the world looked like and how it actually is
  20. Yawn. Yeah and your dad's bigger than mine. Both irrelevant (as usual) to the question though. Just the usual pathetic and repetitive deflection How about trying to contribute something of merit to the forum for a change?
  21. You mean they hire a bus and tell people to turn up? Hardly national team criteria Every football or rugby team that wins anything better than a teacup gets one of those
  22. Odd why the government wouldn't fund one. Would cost less than a new rugby stadium after all. Almost as if the govt doesn't think they are a national team. Imagine
  23. How about Donald - he still worth around $2bn Still speculation that Trump could be charged with obstructing the certification of the election so he may want to run away He was responsible for a 70% rise in americans applying for NZ residency (the ones that wanted out of US after he was elected) so you owe him. I guess And NZ is popular with people planning for the collapse of civilisation* so it might appeal to Trump because he seemed to think that if he wasn't president that would happen. And there are lots of golf courses * only a cruel person would suggest t
  24. Not sure. If you have a device that actively sucks then that is clearly prohibited. But if (say) there were aeration holes between the top and bottom of the foils that were only opened when the flap segments/flexures were in a certain position (the position they would be in when the boat is approaching cavitation speeds) then there is no device sucking as such. That could then mitigate against cavitation, without reducing lift at lower speeds. I thought that such a design was banned but I can not now find any rule that would cover it
×
×
  • Create New...