Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Quick Thoughts after Day 1:   Race 1:  The Kiwi’s completely dominate Italy.  Better start, faster boat, better maneuvers, better everything.  Instant reaction is it is tough to believe that

Learnings for TVNZ live coverage? DON'T RUN THE FUCKING ADS THROUGH THE PRE-START/START!!!!! Muppets. 

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Indio said:

The foil arms hydraulic system is powered by a 15KW motor powered by 48V/5KwH lithium battery driving the hydraulic pump which charges the accumulator and then directly drive the 100mm bore dia./80mm piston dia. x 780mm stroke rams moving the barrel to which the arms are connected. The arms hydraulic system pressure is set at 350bar, so you can work out yourselves how much oil flow is moving the 1385-kg arm/foil from normal sailing possie to fully-up in 3 seconds. Nothing complicated at all here!!

The  "valve driver board malfunction in the FCS" and the overheated replacement board point to an electrical fault in their system. The fact that the "battery shut down completely" tends to support an electrical short-circuit in their system - the lithium battery management system includes integrated protection against overcharging, short circuit, deep discharge, polarity reversal, overheating and submersion - take your pick as to what caused the shutdown:ph34r:

The problem is not the FCS per se - I'm calling incompetence by their engineers who integrated the system.

Cheers for the explanation Indio. That all makes sense. Yeah I think they have under estimated the management of the foil cant system. Andrew Campbell chose his words carefully but it was a hint for Ben if he picked up on it. Don't think Ben did unfortunately. I also find it strange Ben mentioned a software update the night before? Anyone who knows anything about software updates will tell you you test them before you implement them. If the other teams seem to have control of their foil cant systems and Ineos doesn't it points to their engineers who off course aren't going to take the heat and therefore off load the blame onto the One Design System per-se

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Indio said:

AM @ $1.35 Vs LR @ $2.90 TAB odds for tomorrow's race.

Everyone here seems to think Luna Rossa in the lighter conditions will have the edge? Time will tell. I prefer AM over Luna Rossa because of their time on the water

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, terrafirma said:

Everyone here seems to think Luna Rossa in the lighter conditions will have the edge? Time will tell. I prefer AM over Luna Rossa because of their time on the water

I'm picking my favourite Challenger AM. Should be a great race - AM could finish tomorrow on 4 points with us on 3 and well on the way to winning the Xmas Cup and top dog in the Prada Cup, especially if ETNZ keeps beating LR like a rental donkey!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Indio said:

I'm picking my favourite Challenger AM. Should be a great race - AM could finish tomorrow on 4 points with us on 3 and well on the way to winning the Xmas Cup and top dog in the Prada Cup, especially if ETNZ keeps beating LR like a rental donkey!

I understand as a KIwi you would like the AC to be Team Middle East thrashing all before them but the big picture will be less interest in the AC and less money for your country. Some close races would be nice. I would love to see my team do well as well. I have only watched one race which was the donkey wallop that you refer to. I heard only one other race was close which was Amway against team Mid East.  Once my team is out I wont be on here for you to give me shit. No satisfaction all round.  When I watch England Rugby v the All Blecks I know there is a small chance England might win. It keeps me interested and coming back for abuse from people like you. If we turn the AC into an American style Basket Ball world cup it loses its appeal. You Kiwis need to just win it so this forum does not turn into a Kiwi fanboy box.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap I’m glad I didn’t drop $175 for NBC Gold.  The racing sucked accept for the last race, NBC completely missed the race 2 pre-start (initially I thought they edited out the pre-start for the replay but Kenny apologized for them missing it), commentator audio was scratchy, video feeds were glitchy and race info like boat speed and distance to leader was sporadic at times.   Having the replay on DVR allowed me to FF the BS.

Not having WS races in Europe is certainly a factor.  The teams and broadcasters are rusty for sure but I’d imagine all, accept for one team, should be more refined by the Prada Cup.  Maybe then I’ll put out the loot to watch live. 

And what about INEOS?  For get about them sandbagging, they are a bag of shit at the moment.  That last race seeing the team leaning hard to keep their boat upright was embarrassing.   Hot damn INEOS looked bad. 

Finally, that last race.  That was fun.  I will say ETNZs choice to gybe away at the top mark was sketchy.  Like they wouldn’t have done that if that race was for the Cup.  I look forward to AM lining up against LR. Anyway, at least the US team doesn’t suck like INEOS.

WetHog  :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blame it on the software...

"Ainslie revealed that the team had been getting updates to their software as late as noon on today's race day - indicating that the Brits are on a different version of what is supposed to be unique code, and begging the questions as to how this could be."

Sail-World

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Varan said:

Blame it on the software...

"Ainslie revealed that the team had been getting updates to their software as late as noon on today's race day - indicating that the Brits are on a different version of what is supposed to be unique code, and begging the questions as to how this could be."

Sail-World

The allegations, if true is rather concerning - if a developed code that's supposed to be disseminated to all the teams aren't somehow just dropped on an accessible dropbox for all the teams and are selectively pushed out to certain teams first... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Miffy said:

The allegations, if true is rather concerning - if a developed code that's supposed to be disseminated to all the teams aren't somehow just dropped on an accessible dropbox for all the teams and are selectively pushed out to certain teams first... 

What if the Brits are editing the code themselves and they are the ones on the non standard version? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, WakaNZ said:

If we are that confident the Kiwi's will sandbag, putting an even split of $$ across the Challengers will return dividends.

If the Kiwis sandbagged any of their races, the challengers are, in the words of Conor McGregor, FOOOOKED...

They were super quick to windward against AM in race 4. But AM showed a ton of speed downwind (which they desperately needed since they sailed 500+M more than ETNZ).

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Miffy said:

The allegations, if true is rather concerning - if a developed code that's supposed to be disseminated to all the teams aren't somehow just dropped on an accessible dropbox for all the teams and are selectively pushed out to certain teams first... 

I'm assuming it's their own code external to the FCS which they were updating. I'm not sure what the exact interface is between the FCS and the team's own controls, but it would be more logical for there to be an issue in the INEOS designed and implemented system than the FCS given that the other three teams don't seem to have the same problems, or are at least able to compensate / design around them. It would also seem unlikely that the defender would supply code updates to just one challenger.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, atwinda said:

I'm assuming it's their own code external to the FCS which they were updating. I'm not sure what the exact interface is between the FCS and the team's own controls, but it would be more logical for there to be an issue in the INEOS designed and implemented system than the FCS given that the other three teams don't seem to have the same problems, or are at least able to compensate / design around them. It would also seem unlikely that the defender would supply code updates to just one challenger.

Ben was pretty specific about it being FCS code supplied to them. He mentioned it as another complaint. He definitely wasn't talking about their own code.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Brutal said:

If the Kiwis sandbagged any of their races, the challengers are, in the words of Conor McGregor, FOOOOKED...

They were super quick to windward against AM in race 4. But AM showed a ton of speed downwind (which they desperately needed since they sailed 500+M more than ETNZ).

Lets be clear, we don't know for sure how much sand was on any of the boats, although we can assume with some confidence none was on INEOS or Luna Rossa cos you wouldn't sand bag THAT much would you???

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Varan said:

Blame it on the software...

"Ainslie revealed that the team had been getting updates to their software as late as noon on today's race day - indicating that the Brits are on a different version of what is supposed to be unique code, and begging the questions as to how this could be."

Sail-World

But this doesn't make any sense!  Who in their right mind would deploy untested, unproven software to a Production environment on race day?!  This simply doesn't compute, no matter what Ben says.  Nope, there's more going on here than software, canting arm mechanisms and batteries. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ripclaw said:

But this doesn't make any sense!  Who in their right mind would deploy untested, unproven software to a Production environment on race day?!  This simply doesn't compute, no matter what Ben says.  Nope, there's more going on here than software, canting arm mechanisms and batteries. 

Yup - the claims definitely need to be examined, which elements are supplied, which teams got what - and whether there's preferential access for some challengers and not others. OTOH it could be Ben Ainsley stirring up shit - I hate to say it but if I were buying insurance and Pete & Ben were the sales team, Ben isn't the one I'd be inviting to give the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ripclaw said:

But this doesn't make any sense!  Who in their right mind would deploy untested, unproven software to a Production environment on race day?!  This simply doesn't compute, no matter what Ben says.  Nope, there's more going on here than software, canting arm mechanisms and batteries. 

Ever worked in software environment that has bespoke hardware? That sounds like SOP in a lot of places. Not like you can run a full regression test and test plan on a QA system when there's exactly one instance of the boat.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ozchrisb said:

Ever worked in software environment that has bespoke hardware? That sounds like SOP in a lot of places. Not like you can run a full regression test and test plan on a QA system when there's exactly one instance of the boat.

Eh depends on how mission critical and the adverse impact of the rollout - if you're launching billion dollar hardware into space, no. If you're developing an arduino software for a coffee machine that brews on a timer for some moron? Sure.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Lets be clear, we don't know for sure how much sand was on any of the boats, although we can assume with some confidence none was on INEOS or Luna Rossa cos you wouldn't sand bag THAT much would you???

Fair point. Both ETNZ and AM made some very basic errors (and ETNZ may have had a technical issue right before the starting gun) in Race 4. And those errors (or possible issue) could have been the proverbial sandbags or they simply could have been errors made by crews learning to sail those boats in actual race conditions for the first time. Luna Rossa fell so far behind ETNZ so early that you couldn't really tell if they were trying to push the envelope at any point or just riding along. According to what Ainsley said at the post-race presser, INEOS was apparently a shitshow from the time they left the dock and provided zero competition for either AM or Luna Rossa.

Barring a miracle (or a really quick and effective Herbie install) in the INEOS shed tonight, it looks like ETNZ will have an easy two-point day tomorrow with two races against INEOS. Hopefully we will learn something about Luna Rossa as well with their two races against AM.

ETNZ showed amazing speed to windward and AM impressed with their speed downwind. ETNZ generally looked better during maneuvers and at one point were sailing way deeper than AM downwind. Were either of the teams letting off the gas or intentionally flubbing their turns? I guess we'll find out in a few months...

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, rh3000 said:

Ben was pretty specific about it being FCS code supplied to them. He mentioned it as another complaint. He definitely wasn't talking about their own code.

Well, if you see a challenger ask the arb panel what the hell is going on with the FCS code, then I'm ok with being wrong. But I just don't see how INEOS goes on complaining about not having access to the code, while at the same time getting updates to it upon request for their boat makes sense. I still think the code in question is between their physical control devices and whatever interface the FCS accepts input.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Miffy said:

The allegations, if true is rather concerning - if a developed code that's supposed to be disseminated to all the teams aren't somehow just dropped on an accessible dropbox for all the teams and are selectively pushed out to certain teams first... 

Or, maybe INEOS left the update in a box on a shelf, or on somebody's computer, filed under porn? There's a lot more to this than meets the eye, that's for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Or, maybe INEOS left the update in a box on a shelf, or on somebody's computer, filed under porn? There's a lot more to this than meets the eye, that's for sure.

So you're saying the code was inseminated rather than disseminated?

Could be why the boat appears if it had put on weight yesterday?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jaysper said:

So you're saying the code was inseminated rather than disseminated?

Could be why the boat appears if it had put on weight yesterday?

Well there have been a lot of pull requests...

Link to post
Share on other sites

First day out on the water watching yesterday, and the city was buzzing. Roadworks made downtown a maze but the cup village is excellent, lots of famous boats to see. Said hello to Ian Taylor from animation research. The spark 5g race zone and simulator is cool, I'm an excellent flight controller BTW. Then the orderly charge down harbour at 5kt, and some interesting anchoring from hospo boats. RG on board our boat taking plenty of pics, he wasn't surprised at results. End of the day bit blurry due to the free booze. Almost makes me miss living in AK. Today on a mates cat let's hope the breeze kicks in. Hard to tell separation on water but the last race was exciting. LOL of the day was TVNZs Toni Street asking "how long have we been able to hear the team talking on board?" Enough said I'll watch the replay on YT later and I didn't bother with the TV after that. I think Ineos had probs before racing they were toppling to windward and other random poses before the starts. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaysper said:

Lets be clear, we don't know for sure how much sand was on any of the boats, although we can assume with some confidence none was on INEOS or Luna Rossa cos you wouldn't sand bag THAT much would you???

 

Screenshot_20201218-074346_Chrome.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brutal said:

Fair point. Both ETNZ and AM made some very basic errors (and ETNZ may have had a technical issue right before the starting gun) in Race 4. And those errors (or possible issue) could have been the proverbial sandbags or they simply could have been errors made by crews learning to sail those boats in actual race conditions for the first time. Luna Rossa fell so far behind ETNZ so early that you couldn't really tell if they were trying to push the envelope at any point or just riding along. According to what Ainsley said at the post-race presser, INEOS was apparently a shitshow from the time they left the dock and provided zero competition for either AM or Luna Rossa.

Barring a miracle (or a really quick and effective Herbie install) in the INEOS shed tonight, it looks like ETNZ will have an easy two-point day tomorrow with two races against INEOS. Hopefully we will learn something about Luna Rossa as well with their two races against AM.

ETNZ showed amazing speed to windward and AM impressed with their speed downwind. ETNZ generally looked better during maneuvers and at one point were sailing way deeper than AM downwind. Were either of the teams letting off the gas or intentionally flubbing their turns? I guess we'll find out in a few months...

Caught a brief display of AM's 36.3kn VMG downwind - scarily fast! These machines will bust through the magical 50-kn barrier with a 17kn blow in the next two days - ETNZ is credited with 49.1kn, with AM 47.4kn from yesterday.

If AM ends today on 4 points, they'll be hard to peg back in the Xmas Cup, and will cause some serious angst in their opposition in the Prada Cup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

I thought I heard a comment on the World Feed about the issue before the start of R4 being one with GA’s main controls - anyone else hear that? 

Heard them say, "I've got nothing", a couple of times in the pre-start. They had issues for sure, but weren't saying anything about what problems.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck me, even if INEOS do have legitimate FCS issues then BA could have put a more professional face on for that presser. Surely part of his responsibilty as skipper is to conduct himself in a way that upholds the integrity of the team???? That slouched, pouty faced sulk was a shit show and watching the other guys hang him out to dry makes me wonder if they aren't all already sick of that bullshit.... he's really not helping us shift the 'whinging pom' label

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is what I did to watch the racing (in the USA), and what I plan to do today and tomorrow and Saturday.... 

I have an Amazon Fire Stick.  I downloaded the ExpressVPN app and made an account.  (you get a week free)

In the VPN app, I took my TV virtually to the beautiful snowy alps of Switzerland

I opened up YouTube app on the firestick and searched for PRADA America's Cup day 1

It played on my big TV and everyone (except my wife and daughter who wanted to watch the Amazing Race finale) was happy!  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Heard them say, "I've got nothing", a couple of times in the pre-start. They had issues for sure, but weren't saying anything about what problems.

Thanks. Thought I heard one of the commentators remark that he’d heard something more specific; no big deal, unless it accounts for the splashdown or two they had. Burling looked confident throwing the boat into a few difficult turns that for some reason didn’t work as well as he had likely expected them to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

I thought I heard a comment on the World Feed about the issue before the start of R4 being one with GA’s main controls - anyone else hear that? 

Ken Read said something about hearing an issue with the main or the traveler and then went into a soliloquy of how when something goes wrong, you need to run down the systems list and see what is working and what isn't...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brutal said:

Ken Read said something about hearing an issue with the main or the traveler and then went into a soliloquy of how when something goes wrong, you need to run down the systems list and see what is working and what isn't...

Bingo, that’s what I was thinking of. Thnx

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, NZK said:

Fuck me, even if INEOS do have legitimate FCS issues then BA could have put a more professional face on for that presser.

I thought he spoke well. Didn’t even bring it up until he got pressed on it by someone (Chisholm, maybe?). If Bruno hadn’t blundered into closing remarks then PB may well have made an interesting, possibly conceding, remark; he had his mike to his mouth as if ready to. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the commentators- Ken Read and Nathan are great. Particularly having Nathan, with his personal connections to the competitors and experience with the AC50s, just adds so much more authority to the broadcast. I'm glad they are there.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

Amway2go using quite a lot of mainsail windward crank post tack.

DF9D2F04-218F-4DDD-8826-CB30C6D7F459.thumb.jpeg.b81215f668e0f17d27a5b79fa753d735.jpeg

 

Having the sidebyside cameras on AM and NZ really shows how much more foot shaping you can do with the boomless systems, just an incredible amount of depth. AM have to load up the sail the old fashioned way.  Wonder if AM would be at an advantage in higher breeze, as NZ may not be able to get the foot as flat when totally overpowered. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

I thought he spoke well. Didn’t even bring it up until he got pressed on it by someone (Chisholm, maybe?). If Bruno hadn’t blundered into closing remarks then PB may well have made an interesting, possibly conceding, remark; he had his mike to his mouth as if ready to. 

They have had plenty of time to get the foil arms working. Like indio says most likely how they have linked into their own systems plus lack of hydraulic power with their set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, atwinda said:

Speaking of the commentators- Ken Read and Nathan are great. Particularly having Nathan, with his personal connections to the competitors and experience with the AC50s, just adds so much more authority to the broadcast. I'm glad they are there.

Nathan is a wonderful talented capable and humble young man who is also just a good lad - no ulterior motives, no "back in my day", just taking it all in and giving everything he's got in commentary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dullers said:

We are going to be fine. All part of the drama. My support for UK wont waver.

I wish I shared your optimism. Sadly I don’t, all the evidence seems to show Ineos is not fast. When they have lined up with other boats it’s hasn’t been great. However nothing would make me happier if I’m wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, RMac said:

Having the sidebyside cameras on AM and NZ really shows how much more foot shaping you can do with the boomless systems, just an incredible amount of depth. AM have to load up the sail the old fashioned way.  Wonder if AM would be at an advantage in higher breeze, as NZ may not be able to get the foot as flat when totally overpowered. 

Yup and in the bear away it looks as if the gunwales are going to get a severe boom slapping even on the tacks it’s lucky that Deano ain’t tubby or else he would struggle to squeeze around the boom end.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Miffy said:

Nathan is a wonderful talented capable and humble young man who is also just a good lad - no ulterior motives, no "back in my day", just taking it all in and giving everything he's got in commentary.

Agree. Seems to be of the same mould as Hutch. What are Iain Percy and Iain Jensen doing these days?

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, atwinda said:

Speaking of the commentators- Ken Read and Nathan are great. Particularly having Nathan, with his personal connections to the competitors and experience with the AC50s, just adds so much more authority to the broadcast. I'm glad they are there.

I agree, a good combo. It's actually pretty staggering NO isn't helming one of the boats. I'd rank him ahead of Bruni, Deano, and Ben. Probably JS too. He and PB first equal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Miffy said:

Eh depends on how mission critical and the adverse impact of the rollout - if you're launching billion dollar hardware into space, no. If you're developing an arduino software for a coffee machine that brews on a timer for some moron? Sure.  

If a whinging Pom is complaining about is boat not being fast enough, absolutely. It's still not clear to me where this "software" is coming from. In the main presser he's saying "we were getting software updates at midday" implying that they came from the supplier, but in the one on one's he's moaning about the team not sharing their control software with each other. Other comments in this thread imply that the fcs interface for the team is just on/off so it seems that the software he's referring to is his own teams. Really sounds like they're covering their own backsides on this one by blaming everyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sea Breeze 74 said:

I agree, a good combo. It's actually pretty staggering NO isn't helming one of the boats. I'd rank him ahead of Bruni, Deano, and Ben. Probably JS too. He and PB first equal.

Pretty hard to rank the likes of Spithill, Burling,  Ainslie and Outteridge.

I blame ETNZ for the reduced fleet.

These boats are a bridge too far for many would be teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ainslie's complaints may have a basis but one would think basic foil up/down control (which apparently failed in INEOS's second race) is part of the FCS package  and is therefore the same for all boats.  Why INEOS's crapped out & competitor's did not points to a problem with INEOS upstream of the supplied FCS package.  Glad to hear the rules guy  say no redress for supplied FCS failures unless the competitors change the rules.  In your face Ben!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brutal said:

Fair point. Both ETNZ and AM made some very basic errors (and ETNZ may have had a technical issue right before the starting gun) in Race 4. And those errors (or possible issue) could have been the proverbial sandbags or they simply could have been errors made by crews learning to sail those boats in actual race conditions for the first time. Luna Rossa fell so far behind ETNZ so early that you couldn't really tell if they were trying to push the envelope at any point or just riding along. According to what Ainsley said at the post-race presser, INEOS was apparently a shitshow from the time they left the dock and provided zero competition for either AM or Luna Rossa.

Barring a miracle (or a really quick and effective Herbie install) in the INEOS shed tonight, it looks like ETNZ will have an easy two-point day tomorrow with two races against INEOS. Hopefully we will learn something about Luna Rossa as well with their two races against AM.

ETNZ showed amazing speed to windward and AM impressed with their speed downwind. ETNZ generally looked better during maneuvers and at one point were sailing way deeper than AM downwind. Were either of the teams letting off the gas or intentionally flubbing their turns? I guess we'll find out in a few months...

It all depends what data points your eyes see.  At one point in that last leg AM had a VMG over 40 knots!  They all have room for improvements, but there is no way one can say that the NZ boat is significantly fast than AM.  AM also used smaller sails, jib and mainsail (look at the cup logo).

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, jaysper said:

I blame ETNZ for the reduced fleet.

These boats are a bridge too far for many would be teams.

3 real challengers in the 36

3 real challengers in the 35 (Artemis, Land Rover BAR, ETNZ)

3 real challengers in the 34 (Artemis, Luna Rossa, ETNZ)

Sounds like it is almost the nature of the event where $$$ + interest + unique expertise is self-limiting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RMac said:

Having the sidebyside cameras on AM and NZ really shows how much more foot shaping you can do with the boomless systems, just an incredible amount of depth. AM have to load up the sail the old fashioned way.  Wonder if AM would be at an advantage in higher breeze, as NZ may not be able to get the foot as flat when totally overpowered. 

Interesting. Back in the day, the schooner, America (which started all this, coincidentally) showed the British that lashing a loose sail foot to a boom helped with 'end plating'. This even included the staysail. back then. Now we're going the full circle. 

Nothing new under the sun, huh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, axolotl said:

Ainslie's complaints may have a basis but one would think basic foil up/down control (which apparently failed in INEOS's second race) is part of the FCS package  and is therefore the same for all boats.  Why INEOS's crapped out & competitor's did not points to a problem with INEOS upstream of the supplied FCS package.  Glad to hear the rules guy  say no redress for supplied FCS failures unless the competitors change the rules.  In your face Ben!

I think Sir Ben is confused between the FCS and the ECC which ties in all the logic controls of the HCC of which the FCS is just one small component, and all the other sensor data measured and collected aboard, and electrical switching of electrical actuators. The ECC is where I believe their problems are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the boats, Ben's would be the last one I would want to crew on.

Good leaders take responsibility for whatever happens, even when it is obvious that it was not their fault.  Ben does the opposite,

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

Frackers out of the shed mast in another stunning day on the sparkling Waitemata.

You out on the water today, Prilly? Looked bloody amazing, yesterday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, the FCS software should be open sourced, or at least made available to the other teams with full transparency on how control parameters are derived.

From the sound of it, the software is continually being updated. Why? Is the control being optimized based on feedback from simulations and real world experience? If so, is it being optimized from feedback from a specific implementation (TR)? Different hull shapes and sailing techniques may yield different optimizations. Why not let teams optimize the FCS for what best suits them?

But it is too late for that now. Now is the time to say it is what it is and be done with it. This is not the time to chasing a moving target that a single team is in control of.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NZK said:

Fuck me, even if INEOS do have legitimate FCS issues then BA could have put a more professional face on for that presser. Surely part of his responsibilty as skipper is to conduct himself in a way that upholds the integrity of the team???? That slouched, pouty faced sulk was a shit show and watching the other guys hang him out to dry makes me wonder if they aren't all already sick of that bullshit.... he's really not helping us shift the 'whinging pom' label

I thought he spoke well. Depends if you try to be objective or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

Yep. It suggests there are bugs still being fixed, or why else the updates? 

Personally I think that it is stupid to provide components such as this software as 1D, but at the end of the day the other challengers all have the same shit to deal with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, astro said:

Of all the boats, Ben's would be the last one I would want to crew on.

Good leaders take responsibility for whatever happens, even when it is obvious that it was not their fault.  Ben does the opposite,

Are you world class sailor then?  I think your optimism is misplaced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ed__miller said:

Lack of user acceptance testing... 

User Validation Test failed! Funny, happened this morning in an environment that I configuration-manage, f’ing indices got outta whack. 
 

This version won’t be promoted to production! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jaysper said:

Personally I think that it is stupid to provide components such as this software as 1D, but at the end of the day the other challengers all have the same shit to deal with.

Make the boats have a wifi connection and then open them up to hacking. Each team can have a 19 year old on staff who hasn't seen daylight in three years. "Oh! Luna Roooooooosa is suddenly off the foils!"  or "THE WHEEL JUST CAME OFF IN DEAN BARKER'S WRINKLED HANDS!"

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, porthos said:

Make the boats have a wifi connection and then open them up to hacking. Each team can have a 19 year old on staff who hasn't seen daylight in three years. "Oh! Luna Roooooooosa is suddenly off the foils!"  or "THE WHEEL JUST CAME OFF IN DEAN BARKER'S WRINKLED HANDS!"

It would be entertaining, probably more so than yesterday's first three races :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

User Validation Test failed! Funny, happened this morning in an environment that I configuration-manage, f’ing indices got outta whack. 

If they released a new version to Ben at midday before today’s races it was probably a spike fix based on the issues they had in the practice races... clearly cut corners and certainly didn’t pass uat. How can Ben have received software that the others didn’t appear to have? Surely a 1 design component forces all users onto the same version?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RMac said:

Having the sidebyside cameras on AM and NZ really shows how much more foot shaping you can do with the boomless systems, just an incredible amount of depth. AM have to load up the sail the old fashioned way.  Wonder if AM would be at an advantage in higher breeze, as NZ may not be able to get the foot as flat when totally overpowered. 

think we need to be a bit careful with this.

Look at the difference in the position of the clew on the AM sail.

The windward sail is relatively flat (ie outhaul tensioned), the leeward is heavily cambered (ie outhaul out).

This appears to be different from the boomless setups where both the windward and leeward sails are heavily cambered

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ed__miller said:

If they released a new version to Ben at midday before today’s races it was probably a spike fix based on the issues they had in the practice races... clearly cut corners and certainly didn’t pass uat. How can Ben have received software that the others didn’t appear to have? Surely a 1 design component forces all users onto the same version?

By the ETNZ response, the latest version was released on Friday. Perhaps Ineos didn’t install it until days later, and perhaps only because they were required to prior to racing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stingray~ said:

User Validation Test failed! Funny, happened this morning in an environment that I configuration-manage, f’ing indices got outta whack. 

If they released a new version to Ben at midday before today’s races it was probably a spike fix based on the issues they had in the practice races... clearly cut corners and certainly didn’t pass uat. How can Ben have received software that the others didn’t appear to have? Surely a 1 design component forces all users onto the same version?

worms out of tin now... https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/494_POINTS-TO-NOTE-ON-THE-FOIL-CANT-SYSTEM-FCS-USED-BY-ALL-COMPETING-TEAMS.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Priscilla said:

Nah, sitting in the office with my accountant.

 

EF886A68-A2BC-47EC-8054-8109BCA6671F.jpeg

OK. But word of advice. You'd better keep that fucker right away from your wallet!

On the other hand, if SHARP is displaying your expected turnover, take her to lunch.

Edited by Sailbydate
Big bucks
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

OK. But word of advice. You'd better keep that fucker right away from your wallet!

On the other hand, if SHARP is displaying your expected turnover, take her to lunch.

That figure Is my tendered price for the rebuild of the Frackers Royal barge start on Monday if I’m successful.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ed__miller said:

If they released a new version to Ben at midday before today’s races it was probably a spike fix based on the issues they had in the practice races... clearly cut corners and certainly didn’t pass uat. How can Ben have received software that the others didn’t appear to have? Surely a 1 design component forces all users onto the same version?

worms out of tin now... https://emirates-team-new-zealand.americascup.com/en/news/494_POINTS-TO-NOTE-ON-THE-FOIL-CANT-SYSTEM-FCS-USED-BY-ALL-COMPETING-TEAMS.html

Well, that's wrap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My windows PC does a re-start after software updates

My IOS devices restart after software updates.

As a guess, the team of professional complainers left the other computer on the shelf missing updates and when the original shat itself, plugged in a new one that needed to install the new updates and killed the batteries and then blamed someone else for their failures.

 

PB on the other hand "'if we had sailed better then we would have won"

The poms have been dismal failures in the America's cup since 1851. Why would this year be any different? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites