Recon diary

[Mozzy Sails]

Yeah, think those are camera's on the back of INEOS. Their mount holds them a little off the stern so they can angled forward to see the rudder / elevator.

They then also have the distance / level sensor, which are incidentally the same sensor that at least AM and ETNZ are using.

Go-pro (or equivalent) are cheap (relatively) and have great sensors for such a tiny camera. For post analysis with some lens correction software run over the image I am not sure why anyone would use anything else. But wireless connection is hopeless for latency if you want to use a real time prompt (for watching a rudder doesn't come out of the water) and if running at high FPS the battery doesn't last long. But if you deconstruct them you can wire in to whatever you want... battery and latency then aren't an issue and you can record centrally which means if the camera is lost, you don't lose the data... you just have to make them waterproof again

The fact these (any potentially the LRPP) are wired means they are being recorded centrally on the boat, but could also be used by crew.

 

[Scillyjosh]

Yeah the looks like it's proper industrial embedded camera setup they've got!

Advantage of using proper machine vision type cameras is things like global shutter sensors, high frame rate, mlli second syncronisation of data, the ability to stream uncompressed/less compressed video from the sensor the processor allowing manipulation to be done before recoding. Think edge detection image segmentation etc. Not too important when looking at the rear foil, although it could provide valuable deformation data at milli second time but think about the advantages when looking at sails. Real time shape, deformation and you can even have a feed forward system that could real time predict loading based on simulation by measuring deflections on otherwise hard to instrument structures.

 

[accnick]

The rules committee are saying if INEOS want to drag other teams in to this, then they have to do it on a case-by-case basis. Which is fair enough. That last competitor response did come across as mud slinging, and whilst interesting, not specific to the mast tube / tow post issue.
"The Rules Committee considers that in the case of TR-4.16, resemblance should be determined on a case-by-case basis."

It is a weird situation, where the definitions in the technical regulations don't really count for anything where the LEQ12s are concerned and everything is going to have to be queried on a case by case basis against is resemblance in form or function to an AC75 component.

These are the definitions that might have been relevant were it not for TR-4.16:
11.108 Mast tube
The principal spar of the yacht. For the AC75 Class Yacht this includes the one design laminate provided in the mast specification as well as any team designed reinforcements permitted by the AC75 Class Rules. The mast tube excludes any attached components such as luff tracks, mainsail support structures and control systems as well as taping or local reinforcements for the connection of such components.

and an LEQ12 specifically excludes instruments and structure required to support that structure (I guess this definition is why the initial enquiry refers to the tow mast as an 'instrument post').

11.95 LEQ12 yacht

Any sailing yacht (or platform towed to simulate a sailing yacht) including an AC40 Class Yacht, that exceeds 6 m LOA, is less than or equal to 12 m LOA (including all fittings when sailing such as rudder struts and bowsprits, but excluding instrumentation and structure required only to support that instrumentation) and that is capable of producing meaningful design or performance information for use either directly or indirectly in the design.

I guess the next query will be whether LRPP's foils instrument is not part of an LEQ12 (as per definition), and therefore not part of the foil as it is "instrumentation and structure required only to support that instrumentation" or whether, as INEOS seem to infer, LRPPs instrument on the foil has one or more features which resemble a foil / wing and therefore should have been notified and will need to be judged on a case-by-case basis as TR.4.17 seems to bypass these definitions anyway.

And talking of LRPPs instrument a bit of image manipulation show's this (sneak preview of this months recon report)...
View attachment 558055
These are

You are misreading 11.95. If you read the entire sentence, the part of the clause you boldface is only relevant when it comes to determining LOA, not any other aspect of the yacht.

 

[Mozzy Sails]

You are absolutely correct.
The conclusion I think is still the same, as the wheel / controls are not part of the hull, so don't take the AC40 hull they have out of class. They can also be put on other AC40s and aren't a quota component.

 

[Mozzy Sails]

November sum up... mixed up the format from the previous monthly report with a little more discussion, bringing Rob and Tom in

 

[Stingray~]

November sum up... mixed up the format from the previous monthly report with a little more discussion, bringing Rob and Tom in

Love especially the discussion about ETNZ’s possibly flapless foils. Very interesting!

 

[Kiwing]

Thanks Mozzy. Always interesting to bring up out of left field ideas. It gets the brain into top gear.

 

[Stingray~]

November

 

[Stingray~]

From the super-nice chapter timestamps in the Description
---
Destroyed bow, dropped masts, rule controversy and most importantly new tech! Just the second Mozzy Sails Recon Report and it's been an incredibly busy month.
0:00 - Intro
0:20 - Sailing Overview
0:50 - Alinghi Red Bull Racing
1:55 - American Magic
3:28 - ETNZ
4:33 - Luna Rossa Prada Pirelli
5:32 - INEOS Britannia
7:09 - Discussion Intro
7:24 - Tow Mast / INEOS delays
9:28 - AC40 repairs
13:10 - Legacy AC75 v LEQ12
19:53 - Banana Wing
27:46 - Outro

 

[Stingray~]

I like these charts too, like this example for AM

 

[wajamamaj]

Great update.

Mozzy what if you rebroadcast the AC video live with you and your guys doing voiceover instead of the usual crew? or maybe the official feed can add you as another translation i.e. "ENGLISH - sailing language" versus "ENGLISH - trying to dumb this down in case any of the general population are still watching...no Dennis Conner isn't in this one."

 

[Stingray~]

Great update.

Mozzy what if you rebroadcast the AC video live with you and your guys doing voiceover instead of the usual crew? or maybe the official feed can add you as another translation i.e. "ENGLISH - sailing language" versus "ENGLISH - trying to dumb this down in case any of the general population are still watching...no Dennis Conner isn't in this one."

Fun idea, an alternate commenting crew by these guys.

I noticed this latest video had over 1.5K views within an hour of it getting posted, very cool!

 

[Stingray~]

Love especially the discussion about ETNZ’s possibly flapless foils. Very interesting!

Any feedback from you guys about that discussion, on ETNZ's banana foils?

edit: timestamp here

 

[I ride bikes]

Are rubber like flaps permitted, or does that fall foul of the morphing rule?

 

[Stingray~]

Are rubber like flaps permitted, or does that fall foul of the morphing rule?

Is there a morphing rule?

The suggestion Ben made involved the possibility they may ‘deflect’ in intended ways to offset wave or other conditions, using what he suggested could be a very clever laminate layup? Something like that. He also suggested that if they are like that and are flapless then the use of arm flex may get more important?

Some of us wondered even during AC36 if some of the foils could look different under loads.

It’s a possibly significant shift in the game.

 

[enigmatically2]

Good video as always @Mozzy Sails , but i am minded to quote Vince Lombardi. "Practice doesn't make perfect, only perfect practice makes perfect". In this case of course they aren't practising, but learning for their race boat, but the same applies.

Most of ETNZs sailing time has been in a vanilla AC40, much with auto-pilot on. They wouldn't have put AC secret tech on the AC40 so that doesn't count.
AM and alinghi are both using MK1 AC75s with limited modifications, so what they have learned from those is also limited (though it may be helping Alinghi catch up).
Ineos have been only tow testing and so their learning is limited (might have been more if they had been tow testing on single foils).
So the only team who is getting full value for their sailing time is LR.
So I think LR are further ahead than your graphs suggest

 

[The_Alchemist]

Good video as always @Mozzy Sails , but i am minded to quote Vince Lombardi. "Practice doesn't make perfect, only perfect practice makes perfect". In this case of course they aren't practising, but learning for their race boat, but the same applies.

Most of ETNZs sailing time has been in a vanilla AC40, much with auto-pilot on. They wouldn't have put AC secret tech on the AC40 so that doesn't count.
AM and alinghi are both using MK1 AC75s with limited modifications, so what they have learned from those is also limited (though it may be helping Alinghi catch up).
Ineos have been only tow testing and so their learning is limited (might have been more if they had been tow testing on single foils).
So the only team who is getting full value for their sailing time is LR.
So I think LR are further ahead than your graphs suggest

I mostly agree, but I think you are underestimating the modifications to the AM boat. They are running cyclors, have the boomless main, custom fitting mains, custom fit jibs with new controls, all new deck and crew layouts and new control systems. All of which will be perfected and then dropped directly into the new AC75. They are basically testing and training crew in a new boat, not an old AC75. Yes, they have not tested any new foils or hulls yet, but they will have two fully trained crews to do head to head racing in their two AC75's. No teams are doing any hull testing and there has been very limited foils testing so far.

I think Alinghi is in deep trouble. They are trying to make modifications to boat they still do not know how to sail and doing it in rough seas. It is like first learning how to fly in an F16 while taking combat sorties and being shot at by ground missiles. I think they have tried to bite off too much all at once. It would have been nice to learn the sailing techniques in an AC40 (auto pilot) and then move into the old AC75.

 

[Liquid]

Are there any recon pics of AM's new cockpit setup?

 

[enigmatically2]

@The_Alchemist possibly, though I struggle to see what they will learn from cyclors that they couldn't from sims, especially as they must be limited by the 12.5% deck change limit with everything else. Which must constrain the changes they have made, esp the under deck boom

 

[JALhazmat]

Boomless set up isnt the same as under deck boom set up