The AC 37 has started, news and rumours

JonRowe

Super Anarchist
1,843
990
Offshore.
No, TFE argues that RYSR is perfectly legit but has brought up the ‘controversy’ with Hamish Ross - a sometimes guest on his show, who literally has a ‘PhD in America’s Cup.’

Me, I think it’s a reasonable question to ask and am not convinced either way about if it’d survive a court challenge. Hopefully nobody will bother. 
 

If it is so important to ‘protect’ a real Yacht Club like RYS then why did both AM’s NYYC and LR’s CVS YC’s  not do the same weird thing? edit: RNZYS too.. 
RNZYS has done something similar, NYYC is a US "Domestic Not-For-Profit Corporation", CVS is a "Amateur Sports Association" with a vat and tax code. So in short, they all have a legal entity behind them of some form. RYS is not unusual.

 

southseasbill

Super Anarchist
1,934
190
If I had downloaded the NZ Herald app and then subscribed through there (Apple in my case) it would have been simple. Instead I had subscribed via their web site using a Visa card, apparently requiring a phone call to NZ to do the unsubscribe instead of simply via the Apple->Settings->Subscriptions on the phone. 

The service rep was friendly and all, they also offered a deal for just $1.50/wk, almost took it. 
I cancelled my subscription to the Horrid 15 years ago when they went hard left woke. It was still mostly dead tree stuff in those days. No smart phone apps.

 

CheekyMonkey

Member
300
28
No, TFE argues that RYSR is perfectly legit but has brought up the ‘controversy’ with Hamish Ross - a sometimes guest on his show, who literally has a ‘PhD in America’s Cup.’

Me, I think it’s a reasonable question to ask and am not convinced either way about if it’d survive a court challenge. Hopefully nobody will bother. 
 

If it is so important to ‘protect’ a real Yacht Club like RYS then why did both AM’s NYYC and LR’s CVS YC’s  not do the same weird thing? edit: RNZYS too.. 
I'm looking forward to the discussion after TFE suggests that the AC75 v2.0 class rules will allow ship-borne artillery, to bring back an even more historic element.

Who needs the electronic virtual diamond boundaries? Get too close, and prepare to be sunk!

That will be a fun discussion.

Make way for Team Northrop Grumman American Magic!

(Which, after having already held "big hole in boat" drills, will have a leg up on everyone else)

 
So who is the Royal Yacht Squadron Racing a real YC or a part of a YC, then.... not a YC ?
It is an incorporated entity (aka Yacht Club) based in Cowes in a castle ,  which runs an annual regatta called "Cowes Week" on an arm of the sea called the Solent.  Its direct predecessor, an unincorporated club with letters patent , ran a regatta in and around 1851 in which a Yacht from the New york Yacht Club called America won and took away a rather large cup.  They are trying to win it back!  and have been trying unsuccessfully for close to 150 years.

 

dogwatch

Super Anarchist
16,863
1,576
South Coast, UK
I'm afraid that is incorrect. Firstly, Cowes Week is run by Cowes Combined Clubs (CCC), not RYSL. The Royal Yacht Squadron (RYS) is one member of CCC but far from the only one.

Secondly, RYSL is not a successor of the Royal Yacht Squadron (RYS). It is a club, whose members all members of the RYS and whose rules are the rules of the RYS. It is incorporated as company limited by guarantee, which is a common form of incorporation in the UK for what in some other parts of the world would be called a "not for profit". It is a clearly a vehicle to protect the assets of the RYS itself, and potentially the personal assets of its officers, from possible legal attacks during involvement with the AC. Very sensible.

There is no dichotomy between being a club and being  incorporated as company limited by guarantee and those suggesting otherwise are simply ill-informed on UK company law.

 
I'm afraid that is incorrect. Firstly, Cowes Week is run by Cowes Combined Clubs (CCC), not RYSL. The Royal Yacht Squadron (RYS) is one member of CCC but far from the only one.

Secondly, RYSL is not a successor of the Royal Yacht Squadron (RYS). It is a club, whose members all members of the RYS and whose rules are the rules of the RYS. It is incorporated as company limited by guarantee, which is a common form of incorporation in the UK for what in some other parts of the world would be called a "not for profit". It is a clearly a vehicle to protect the assets of the RYS itself, and potentially the personal assets of its officers, from possible legal attacks during involvement with the AC. Very sensible.

There is no dichotomy between being a club and being  incorporated as company limited by guarantee and those suggesting otherwise are simply ill-informed on UK company law.
Sorry Dog.....I had the gist but no time to look up. Thank you for your precise detail.

 

mako23

Super Anarchist
1,837
685
Auckland
Each of the four teams tried to bring technological innovation onto their boat. Some teams were more successful than others. Which technology from each team might be copied for AC37

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
Each of the four teams tried to bring technological innovation onto their boat. Some teams were more successful than others. Which technology from each team might be copied for AC37
Regarding Luna Rossa: The under-the-deck boom is interesting, if the loophole in the rules that permitted ETNZ to have extra mainsail area is no longer allowed. Also, the rig without runners for light winds was a good idea but unfortunately was ruled out. The double helmsman configuration was quite succesfull as well, but I don't know if it is easily replicable.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

JonRowe

Super Anarchist
1,843
990
Offshore.
Regarding Luna Rossa: The under-the-deck boom is interesting, if the loophole in the rules that permitted ETNZ to have extra mainsail area is no longer allowed. Also, the rig without runners for light winds was a good idea but unfortunately was ruled out. The double helmsman configuration was quite succesfull as well, but I don't know if it is easily replicable.
The same rule allowed the under deck boom, you'd have to write a rule specifying deck height to get around that. The double helmsman configuration is just training, all the teams swapped helms at various points, luna rossa just did it consistently. Easy enough for any of the teams to replicate for the next cup.

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
The same rule allowed the under deck boom, you'd have to write a rule specifying deck height to get around that. The double helmsman configuration is just training, all the teams swapped helms at various points, luna rossa just did it consistently. Easy enough for any of the teams to replicate for the next cup.
The hidden boom is not quite the same thing as having extra square meters of mainsail as ETNZ had. If they'll decide to better specify the exact sail area, they would close this loophole and maybe the batwings as well. We will have to wait until the new class rules will be published. The dual helmsman is not so easy to replicate. Not for lack of helmsmen or sailing skills, but it is a risky move. You have to be sure that the two helmsmen go along well because, if something starts to go wrong and they blame each other, it's the end! And you can't easily swap back to a different configuration. IMHO

 

JonRowe

Super Anarchist
1,843
990
Offshore.
The hidden boom is not quite the same thing as having extra square meters of mainsail as ETNZ had. If they'll decide to better specify the exact sail area, they would close this loophole and maybe the batwings as well.
They could do that, and that could also rule out a hidden boom with a rule change. The loophole that allow both techniques was the specifying of the mast dimension and fixing location of the mast and keeping the rest open, the "extra square meters of mainsail" was just a lower deck...

If they made the rule more restrictive all sorts of things could be ruled out but I don't think that will be an advantage to a challenger...

The dual helmsman is not so easy to replicate. Not for lack of helmsmen or sailing skills, but it is a risky move. You have to be sure that the two helmsmen go along well because, if something starts to go wrong and they blame each other, it's the end! And you can't easily swap back to a different configuration. IMHO
I disagree there, it is just training and team selection, all the teams have enough time now to try it out and decide if its worth doing in a race, there is nothing preventing people training either way, or both, and then picking the strategy on the day either.

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
They could do that, and that could also rule out a hidden boom with a rule change. The loophole that allow both techniques was the specifying of the mast dimension and fixing location of the mast and keeping the rest open, the "extra square meters of mainsail" was just a lower deck...

If they made the rule more restrictive all sorts of things could be ruled out but I don't think that will be an advantage to a challenger...

I disagree there, it is just training and team selection, all the teams have enough time now to try it out and decide if its worth doing in a race, there is nothing preventing people training either way, or both, and then picking the strategy on the day either.
I don't think that a co-helmsman alongside someone like Ben Ainslie would be easy to adapt, James Spithill also has a similar strong personality, but his position inside the LR team forced him to adapt to whatever Max decided him to do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

JonRowe

Super Anarchist
1,843
990
Offshore.
I don't think that a co-helmsman along side someone like Ben Ainslie would be easy to adapt, James Spithill also has a similar strong personality, but his position inside the LR team forced him to adapt to whatever Max decided him to do.
Maybe there are some specific examples of people who wouldn't work well with the technique, but that doesn't rule it out for teams. Imagine, in your example, if Ben stepped up to tactician / skipper ala THutch, and got two younger helms to just drive where he told them to? 

 

strider470

Super Anarchist
Maybe there are some specific examples of people who wouldn't work well with the technique, but that doesn't rule it out for teams. Imagine, in your example, if Ben stepped up to tactician / skipper ala THutch, and got two younger helms to just drive where he told them to? 
yes yes, of course it is doable. But if I were a team principal, I would not be so confident in trying that kind of solution. Mybe I would try something hybrid for the starting box only. I think LR were lucky that it worked so well for them.

 




Top