New Hugo Boss Spotted

[Chimp too]

The information available so far suggests that the upper section of the keel was engineered too light and snapped in part while under load.  Had there been a collision with the proverbial blunt object there would be a row of holes down the hull as the large object bounced along.  There do not appear to be any at all.

Or when the keel hit the object, the load got transferred to the bearing support structure, which failed, and the keel fell out. If the keel itself failed then much less likely that they would have to cut it free. Sounds like the keel itself was intact until they were able to cut through the ram. 

 

[Sailbydate]

Or when the keel hit the object, the load got transferred to the bearing support structure, which failed, and the keel fell out. If the keel itself failed then much less likely that they would have to cut it free. Sounds like the keel itself was intact until they were able to cut through the ram. 

The keel was intact after impact. Alex and Neal had to cut away the ram, which was all that left the fin and bulb attached to the boat.

https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2019/11/04/hugo-boss-forced-to-cut-off-keel-in-transat-jacque-vabre/

 

[staysail]

Staysail, we don’t know that the OD keel failed. It could have been what the keel was attached to that failed. We can’t see that and I doubt HB will tell us if their structure was the bit that failed.

AFIK the objective of imposing a one design keel was safety in that it was not intended to come off!  It failed spectacularly in that objective.

I don't know whether the keel itself was broken or not. Does it matter if its doesn't stay attached to the boat? What is the point of a restriction which doesn't work?  Move on.

 

[Chimp too]

AFIK the objective of imposing a one design keel was safety in that it was not intended to come off!  It failed spectacularly in that objective.

I don't know whether the keel itself was broken or not. Does it matter if its doesn't stay attached to the boat? What is the point of a restriction which doesn't work?  Move on.

What if the OD keel was absolutely fine and did it’s job, but the team designed and built keel bulkheads/structure was not up to it? Can’t blame that on the OD keel, but on a team under building structure to save weight, and maybe get around rule requirements.
Now move on unless you know which part failed for sure and have evidence that you can share

 

[Fiji Bitter]

The only thing that is undeniable and obvious from the pictures is that some of the structure holding the one design keel and canting system failed. Nothing more, nothing less.

And because most people here fail spectacularly to analyse it sensibly it is indeed best to move on.

Anyway, I am sure we will hear more about it at some point, but whether we hear the whole truth, if that is even known, that I am not sure.

 

[popo]

There is fucking videos of the upper part of the keel intact when they cut the ram.

No fucking need to cut the ram il the head broke

Alex is being very transparent with what happenned

Some of you are just flat earther level on this one

 

[staysail]

What if the OD keel was absolutely fine and did it’s job, but the team designed and built keel bulkheads/structure was not up to it? Can’t blame that on the OD keel, but on a team under building structure to save weight, and maybe get around rule requirements.
Now move on unless you know which part failed for sure and have evidence that you can share

Yes I think (like you?) its highly probable the keel forging itself sustained little damage but the big point is it didn't stay on the boat and the attachments and the structure around them are not "one-design" so it is easy for you to suggest the designers/builders of the boat are responsible for what happened and not that the concept of the one-design keel as imposed by the Imoca rule, is a flawed concept..

Would you seriously suggest imposing even more rules such as a one design keel box and one design hull bottom around it and one design structure all around where the pins connect to the structure? where would it end?

Also, concerning the mast, bearing in mind where the faster modern Imocas get much of their power from, do you still think the one-design mast as currently ruled makes sense? If not, how would you propose a new one-design mast rule?

Don't you think the current breed of designers know as much as the guys that write the rules?

 

[popo]

Regarding the mast, Jeremy Beyou said that on charal, it's what is limiting the speed.

The foils give such a great RM with speed, that you have to reduce sails even if the boat is still quite flat and under control, because of the loads on the mast

 

[bridhb]

I'll weigh in with a stupid suggestion.  Leave the designing to the naval architects / structural engineers, but have rules that limit things that cost ludicrous amounts of money, sort of like the class 40.  Non-canting keels, non canting mast, get rid of those silly spreader outriggers, max beam (including foils) limits, or at least require the foils to be able to be retracted to a maximum beam.

Yeah, the boats would look very different.

 

[Chimp too]

Yes I think (like you?) its highly probable the keel forging itself sustained little damage but the big point is it didn't stay on the boat and the attachments and the structure around them are not "one-design" so it is easy for you to suggest the designers/builders of the boat are responsible for what happened and not that the concept of the one-design keel as imposed by the Imoca rule, is a flawed concept..

Would you seriously suggest imposing even more rules such as a one design keel box and one design hull bottom around it and one design structure all around where the pins connect to the structure? where would it end?

Also, concerning the mast, bearing in mind where the faster modern Imocas get much of their power from, do you still think the one-design mast as currently ruled makes sense? If not, how would you propose a new one-design mast rule?

Don't you think the current breed of designers know as much as the guys that write the rules?

The rules should require some evidence that the structure is designed to the appropriate safety factors so that they aren’t the weak link. 
I don’t think that the OD keel or mast need replacement as they are the limiting factors that keep the fleet under control.

and as far as who writes the rules, there is constant consultation with the active designers in evolving the rules. So the level of knowledge is going both sides of the fence.

 

[mad]

The rules should require some evidence that the structure is designed to the appropriate safety factors so that they aren’t the weak link. 
I don’t think that the OD keel or mast need replacement as they are the limiting factors that keep the fleet under control.

and as far as who writes the rules, there is constant consultation with the active designers in evolving the rules. So the level of knowledge is going both sides of the fence.

Agree about the keels, but with the new foils, some thought maybe needed about the spar specs and that’s not going to be too expensive to update. A lot cheaper than dropping one and associated damage. 
A few kilos of carbon would probably do it. 

 

[Sailbydate]

I'll weigh in with a stupid suggestion.  Leave the designing to the naval architects / structural engineers, but have rules that limit things that cost ludicrous amounts of money, sort of like the class 40.  Non-canting keels, non canting mast, get rid of those silly spreader outriggers, max beam (including foils) limits, or at least require the foils to be able to be retracted to a maximum beam.

Yeah, the boats would look very different.

And be a hell of a lot slower.

 

[staysail]

The rules should require some evidence that the structure is designed to the appropriate safety factors so that they aren’t the weak link. 
I don’t think that the OD keel or mast need replacement as they are the limiting factors that keep the fleet under control.

and as far as who writes the rules, there is constant consultation with the active designers in evolving the rules. So the level of knowledge is going both sides of the fence.

I think we have to agree to disagree.
I like to see designers having as much freedom as possible, particularly for open class racing boats.

A keel which breaks boats and a mast which can't carry the sail when you don't need to reef don't fit with my ideals.

 

[Sailbydate]

Indeed. Any who, 25 knots to practically zero in a couple of seconds is a pretty massive deceleration.

What sort of overbuilt OD structure could withstand that kind of punishment? Nothing I'd want stuck to the bottom of my race boat, that's for sure.

 

[yl75]

In below interview, Beyou is saying that the keel system is "rated" for 18 knts grounding :

https://voilesetvoiliers.ouest-france.fr/course-au-large/vendee-globe/video-vendee-globe-jeremie-beyou-il-y-aura-de-grosses-differences-entre-les-bateaux-fcdfa638-18ea-11ea-b153-67dafa5b3d4c

 

[bridhb]

And be a hell of a lot slower.

Possibly.  With the use of foils (and rudder t-foils which would not add that much cost I think), canting keels might not be that important anymore.  Hugo Boss sailed (limped?) back to safety after losing their articulating keel a lot faster than my 5 knt shitbox.  Again, stupid suggestions if I was king of IMOCA.  Some of those people designing these things are really smart.

As far as having an "approved" keel attachment.  That would almost take a structural engineer review and then what sort of liability in case of failure?  Of course I am American and worried about stuff like that.

 

[Laurent]

In below interview, Beyou is saying that the keel system is "rated" for 18 knts grounding :

https://voilesetvoiliers.ouest-france.fr/course-au-large/vendee-globe/video-vendee-globe-jeremie-beyou-il-y-aura-de-grosses-differences-entre-les-bateaux-fcdfa638-18ea-11ea-b153-67dafa5b3d4c

Very good find!

For those who are French speaking challenged, he is also saying that despite the fact that the new generation boats will get closer and closer in theoretical performance, because everybody sees what everybody else is doing, Jeremy is still convinced that there will be very large difference in boat speed, because the boat are so demanding; some will be able to push, and others won't.

He is also saying that you have to find the right "degraded mode" at 95% performance, because there are some times where it is not worth the extra effort to go 100%...

Regarding the keel failures, he does say that this is one of the things he fears the most: he does say that the One Design keel has a "rated" grounding speed around 18 knots, and that at 25 knots, you destroy the boat... He adds that around Azores Islands, which is an area with a lot of shipping activity, they all know that there is stuff in the water, and on top of that, a lot of marine life as well. So he goes further by saying; "you will not see me at 25 knots around the Azores..."

I wonder if we can quote him on that one, for the Vendée Globe... If the wind and sea conditions are right and everbody else is going 25 knots, I have a hard time to believe that he will restrain himself to 18 knots in this area, and lose 40+ miles in 12 hrs against his competition...

 

[popo]

I'll weigh in with a stupid suggestion.  Leave the designing to the naval architects / structural engineers, but have rules that limit things that cost ludicrous amounts of money, sort of like the class 40.  Non-canting keels, non canting mast, get rid of those silly spreader outriggers, max beam (including foils) limits, or at least require the foils to be able to be retracted to a maximum beam.

Yeah, the boats would look very different.

The Golden Globe Race thread is elswere man

 

[Boink]

I think we have to agree to disagree.
I like to see designers having as much freedom as possible, particularly for open class racing boats.

A keel which breaks boats and a mast which can't carry the sail when you don't need to reef don't fit with my ideals.

You need to place the this whole situation in context - before issuing such black and white statements.

The move to One design masts and canting keel specs was a life preserver to keep the whole class afloat and viable after a series of Vendee Globe editions where for the right or wrong reasons there was loss of both rigs and keels, causing some fatalities and a lot of multi-national political pressure, mainly because of sensational reporting by the media machines who love to focus on the cost of a Naval Rescue Mission and its cost to a taxpaying population most likely not French...... The organisers were under intense pressure to put their house in order and not make this a demolition/destruction/last man standing type of race.

So the specs were drawn up and they are what 8-12 years old now; and have done a remarkable job of improving finishing rates. Remember the race is so huge in France that returns on sponsorship investment can be many multiples of initial investment. But for the B, C and D grade teams who were never in with a shout of Line Honours, a new rig or new keel could be the difference in going or not going - so they would go with an old rig or a keel with a couple of laps already clocked up - and hence failure. Even the A grade teams with high budgets and intentions might be tempted by the carbon rams or hollow titantium bolts etc - at vast cost but but also higher risk of failure. So, pre One Design rules, it was tested or abused by a large proportion of the fleet.

Only with the advent of the Foilers have we seen the specs of the One Design items challenged, as boat speeds and RM have rocketed. So what. Its a good problem to have. Rather than no race or a race with bathtubs, that is so Govt. legislated as to be the proverbial watching paint dry....... Oh, hang on the GGR is already in existance.

There is a wholesale revision to the Class Rules scheduled for immediately after the next Vendee - whinge then; but expect to see One Design Masts and Canting Keel packages remain but with heavily revised specs - where investment dollars would go exponential with little outright gain in performance but again, likely trade away fleet resilience.

And its not like this class isn't the hottest design space outside of AC anyway.

 

[staysail]

You need to place the this whole situation in context - before issuing such black and white issues.

There is a wholesale revision to the Class Rules scheduled for immediately after the next Vendee - whinge then; but expect to see One Design Masts and Canting Keel packages remain but with heavily revised specs

Since when has advocating more freedom been "whingeing"?

You are trying to blame failures on both excessive budgets and inadequate budgets, both at the same time, neither of which I believe have been proven.

What you attribute to "abuse by all and sundry throughout the fleet" is a totally unwarranted exaggeration and generalization.

Lets hope anyone revising the rules will be a little more objective and will 'fess up to what isn't working and will avoid fouling up a good thing.  I shudder to think what "heavily revised specs" might be if written by anyone with your opinions.

The VG is a great event. It has always been pretty risky. It has always attracted teams with both high and low budgets. There is no shortage of teams wanting to take part. Just let people, rich or poor, be free to keep it going forward as the most interesting offshore racing event in the world and don't kill it by over regulation.