Luna Rossa Challenge. AC 36

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
10,445
2,531
New Zealand
build and launch dates please, sail numbers mean nothing
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=3050222

Alinghi design co-ordinator Grant Simmer revealed that subtle changes to the appendages in May last year, after some testing, had made SUI-64 faster than it had been when it was launched in November 2001.

https://www.sail-world.com/NZ/GBR-Americas-Cup-Team-Origin-buy-Alinghis-SUI-75/-33907?source=google

SUI 75 was built by Alinghi at the Decision Boatyard in Vevey, Switzerland. It left Switzerland on 6th March 2002 and was launched in New Zealand.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lickindip

Anarchist
758
525
Auckland
and when did they start the build for SUI 75?, was it before or after the testing of 64 ?

You could safely assume started testing in November 2001, guestimate of 2 months to commission, test, and evaluate ... then redesign sui75, which leaves 1-2 months to build ... that seems a quick turn build

a safe bet would be 75 was underway prior to the launch of 64

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
10,445
2,531
New Zealand
and when did they start the build for SUI 75?, was it before or after the testing of 64 ?

You could safely assume started testing in November 2001, guestimate of 2 months to commission, test, and evaluate ... then redesign sui75, which leaves 1-2 months to build ... that seems a quick turn build

a safe bet would be 75 was underway prior to the launch of 64
A safe bet would also be 38 was also underway before the launch of 32, but that makes  no difference. That does not mean 38 was boat one and 32 was boat 2, If one boat is launched before another boat, that makes it boat no.1. When the other boat is launched, that makes it boat no.2. The sail numbers reflect that.

Making safe bets doesn't negate the facts. Sail numbers reflect order of launch, which is all that matters. Build dates are irrelevant because only the teams and the build companies know those dates.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

rh3000

Super Anarchist
3,694
1,726
Auckland, New Zealand
and when did they start the build for SUI 75?, was it before or after the testing of 64 ?

You could safely assume started testing in November 2001, guestimate of 2 months to commission, test, and evaluate ... then redesign sui75, which leaves 1-2 months to build ... that seems a quick turn build

a safe bet would be 75 was underway prior to the launch of 64
You've picked on odd hill to die on mate ;-)

 

Terry Hollis

Super Anarchist
32 was longer and narrower than 38 and had a smaller sail area, this extract from https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11446333 makes it quite clear that they weren't A and B versions of the same design ..

Coutts: Very early on it had quickly became evident 32 was the better boat. It was the more extreme boat for the time - it was longer and narrower than 38. There was the thinking because the design tools were pretty unsophisticated compared to what they are today, there was a bit of uncertainty as to whether we had gone too far with some of the design concepts, so we wanted to hedge our bets a little bit and go back a bit so NZL-38 was a little bit wider and shorter with a little bit more sail. So that was pitched more towards where we thought the opposition might be - and that turned out to be right, that's exactly where the opposition were.
Scantlebury: We had learnt from previous America's Cups not to show your cards too early. So we started out racing with NZL-38, but any time in between round robins we were working up NZL-32 and trying to get that as fast as possible. It was a nice luxury to have. We could still have probably won the America's Cup in NZL-38.
 

WetHog

Super Anarchist
8,606
421
Annapolis, MD USA
You've picked on odd hill to die on mate ;-)
Yeah talk about a reach.  The boat built and launched first is boat one, not complicated.  And more times than not the 2nd boat is a refined version of the 1st boat but there are examples where the 1st boat turns out to be the best, winning, design.  And examples are provided above.

In regards to SUI-75, it pretty much dominated the Acts before new boat one's for AC32 came on line.  And it won match races against all of the big teams boat one's before it was retired for SUI-91.  It was no slouch.  

WetHog   :ph34r:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ex-yachtie

Super Anarchist
2,998
1,342
Auckland, NZ
and when did they start the build for SUI 75?, was it before or after the testing of 64 ?

You could safely assume started testing in November 2001, guestimate of 2 months to commission, test, and evaluate ... then redesign sui75, which leaves 1-2 months to build ... that seems a quick turn build

a safe bet would be 75 was underway prior to the launch of 64
Fuck mate, you're the one who's made the claim.  How about you prove to us that you're right.

 

Lickindip

Anarchist
758
525
Auckland
what I'm pointing out is that in those cases B2 is not an evolution from learnings of B1 being thoroughly tested and evaluated on the water

the main lines of the B1 & B2 are pretty much set in stone before anything has gotten wet. So its a flip of a coin between which sail number is faster not a systematic design process

from the AC72 Cats onwards the design/test/build process has changed, B1 built and spent time on the water before B2 design is locked in

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
10,445
2,531
New Zealand
what I'm pointing out is that in those cases B2 is not an evolution from learnings of B1 being thoroughly tested and evaluated on the water

the main lines of the B1 & B2 are pretty much set in stone before anything has gotten wet. So its a flip of a coin between which sail number is faster not a systematic design process

from the AC72 Cats onwards the design/test/build process has changed, B1 built and spent time on the water before B2 design is locked in
Its because the design tools and associated computer modelling tools and VPP programs are much more advanced and complex than they were in the 90's. But the premise is the same.

Back in the 90's, as Peter Bake said 2 boat testing programs were the only way to determine which concept was faster.

Peter Blake on the two boat testing program from 1995: 

"Take 2 boats out sailing, and they're nearly identical, so you know where their slight differences are, but they're so close to being identical that the average person couldn't pick it. Then you make a change to one of the boats, it might be to the wings on the keel, it might be to a sail. You then do a test for 10 minutes. Look at the numbers, look at which boats won,  and note it down. Do a test for another 10 minutes. This goes on day after day after day after day.  90% of the guys time out on the water, is doing tests. And if something works really well, and it happens each time, you put a tick beside that as being an improvement. If you've only got one boat, how can actually go out there and say this sails faster than that sail? You wouldn't have the slightest idea, are wings better or not? you wouldn't have the slightest idea. Are rudder wings better? No one would know. You'd be kidding yourself"

The computer tools back then were primitive compared to the tools the teams have developed now. Teams don't need to run two boat testing campaigns anymore because the tools are so accurate that the designers can gain the same, or better results using the computer tools that they would from a full scale 2 boat testing program, but the premise remains the same. The computer tools allow the design teams to effectively develop and refine generations of boats without building a single boat. 

Boat 2 now is an evolution because thats the way the computer tools work. But going back to your original statement, there has been instances in the past where Boat 1 has been quicker than boat 2. At least 2 examples in NZL32 and SUI64.

 

Ex-yachtie

Super Anarchist
2,998
1,342
Auckland, NZ
Right, so when you said:

when has any B1 ever been faster than B2? and no don't count boats that were built at the same time as they are B1a and B1b
You actually chose to re-define what B1 and B2 mean?

Tell, when has there ever been a B1 and B2 in a cup cycle, and not a B1a, B1b, B1c...? And how did B1 directly influence B2?

 

Forourselves

Super Anarchist
10,445
2,531
New Zealand
The evolution of Prada Challenge/ Luna Rossa Challenge

FB_IMG_1562580494733.jpg


3050136550_6c3a5b6cea_b.jpg


Large_DSC_0057.jpg


LunaRossaAC45Gaeta12cb_01003_jpg.jpg


SeFFx.jpg


LunaRosaFoilingAC45.jpg


m671_crop169014_1024x576_1536055800EAD5.jpeg


lunarossaac75.jpg


 
Top