Another Big Canting Keel Boat has Blown-up its Mast

[RHough]

Originally Posted by DanishBagger

hehe, yep, but that is the drivel thread. Much more leeway must be given there :-)

One bit of advice ...

Don't feed the troll.

Read the most replied to thread in the sailboat forum and see who you are trying to talk sense to. It is like trying to teach a pig to sing, you will frustrate yourself ... and annoy the pig.

[masalai]

Well put retro, but needs a bit of qualifying. Some threads are used to "vent the spleen" whilst waiting for information privately or in other threads by the likes of me with time to spare temporarily.

[DanishBagger]

Haha, Rhough, I'm not good at _not_ saying anything.

[RHough]

Originally Posted by DanishBagger

Haha, Rhough, I'm not good at _not_ saying anything.

Well then take your best shot ... Mig is bulletproof

[DanishBagger]

Originally Posted by RHough

Well then take your best shot ... Mig is bulletproof

Must be the unusual strong sloping forehead of his

[masalai]

Aaahhhh, the Neanderthal theory. Bigfoot lives!

[DanishBagger]

Originally Posted by masalai

Aaahhhh, the Neanderthal theory. Bigfoot lives!

It was supposed to be more or less implied

[DanishBagger]

Deleted in the interest in getting the thread back on track.

[DanishBagger]

Oh, forgot, DG:

I won't, so don't worry. On with the canters now.

[charmc]

Bagger,

You did a good job responding to the mighetto ramble, but I suspect it's wasted effort. Your response would be perfect for someone wanting to engage in a debate, challenging ideas and theories, as was happening here prior to post #57. Once the non sequitors begin, however, (slavery and its effect on modern racing yacht design??? Royalty as a hinderance to open communication about the perils of cutting edge technology???) logic flees and your reasoned argument is wasted. Continue if you want, but RHough nailed it: could be like trying to teach a pig to sing.

[water addict]

Originally Posted by mighetto

Marshmat, You raise very valid points:...Of course we can default to the Mighetto design code and only allow boats with which he approves....

........
So it is that the boat building industry seeks to educate US citizens, myself included, and as it happens I have been so educated in composite construction just for chatting here on boat design and on sailing anarchy and more recently on the SSSS board. Those who support truth paid 800 bucks to send me to a course and so now the payback to them. You argue like a barrister defending a wrong doer with the following comment:

Loads are not well known/ composite material structural properties can vary widely. Very difficult design and operating space to work with. If approached from a reliability/risk engineering approach, these high uncertainties are increasing the probability of failure. And guess what- we are seeing failures.

Composite construction is well understood in the power boat industry. ........

........
. But I must address this last comment of yours

Apparently the owners are willing to live with this risk though. Perhaps if this risk was spelled a bit more clearly to them in the planning stages though, they might not be. Would you spend a wad of cash on a structure that had, hypothetically, a 20%, 30%, or 40% chance of catastrophic failure in the intended use space? What level of risk would you accept?

This is so owner society which is code for slave society. .........

Addict, perhaps you did not know what you were saying with your post. .......;>)

Frank,
I know I've tried this before- I will try one last time.
When you state that you know more about structures and composites than I do, or that I do not know what I am talking about:
I graduated with honors with a BS in Nav. Arch., M.S. in structural engineering from top 10 engineering schools in the U.S. I work in structures at a U.S. navy R&D lab, since '89. We routinely test and certify metals and composites for structural use, design, and research/planning for subs, ships, and surface craft (smaller boats). These materials are used in water craft in every possible environ all over the world.

I have seagoing experience, over 100,000 open ocean miles, 3rd mate unlimited tonnage license, have sailed professionally on ships, sailboats, and powerboats of all sizes. I have personally aquired the data for composite test specimens under lab conditions. Seen it with my own eyes, made the specimens as well as quantified structural properties from test results. I have 4 patents related to my work for the navy.

I have no axe to grind regarding materials, risk assessment techniques, canters, water-ballast, multi vs monohull or any other type of watercraft. The beauty of boats of all kinds, is that they usually have some meaning and purpose to someone, or else they would not exist.

I did bait you with my prior post, and should not have. Sorry to anyone who might read this here. But Frank, the boating world is not out to get you. We have more important things to think about than corrupting your worldly view of the marine industry.

[Chris Ostlind]

Read the posting from the TRANSAT Ecover B to B race underway right now.
http://www.transatbtob.com/lang-gb.html

NEWS OF THE December 5 07

Dismasting of BRIT AIR (Lunchtime Radio Session Quotes below)

"It was at 1130 UTC this Wednesday 5th December that Armel Le Cléac’h contacted his shore crew and sponsor to alert them about the dismasting of his 60' monohull. The damage occurred prior to midday whilst BRIT AIR, 5th in the Transat B to B, was sailing under 1 reef and staysail at around 9°N. The Breton skipper is fine. Further information about the dismasting over the coming hours."

RADIO SESSION

We were able to contact Armel Le Cléac'h at the 1400 UTC radio session.

For those at the Paris Boat Show, you will be able to listen in live to the chat session hosted by Pierre Louis Castelli, on the Brittany Stand in Hall 1 N92-R111. Live broadcast at www.transatecoverbtob.com.


Quote from the Radio Session:

Armel Le Cleac’h: “It occurred around lunchtime French time. I heard a big crack. The mast broke and fell on the side of the deck. I'm a bit anxious about the damage it's done to the deck. There was a bit of wind and sea but it wasn't stormy. I had to try and sort out the mess pretty quickly. I managed to get the mast clear of the boat and it sank fast along with everything else. The Cape Verde islands are about 400 miles away so I'll try and head there. I'm currently under motor at a reduced speed because both the wind and the sea is on the nose. My shore crew are trying to find a solution. We're looking at whether there's enough fuel or whether we can rendez-vous with a ship to refuel or organise a tow. I don't understand how it happened. I had about 20 knots of breeze, a bit of chop and not too much sail as I'd reduced earlier this morning. I'm disappointed but I'll have to make do with it for now."


So, it's another big rig gone in less than heavy conditions, this time after emerging from the Doldrums. One can only guess as to the cause, this time. Man, what a drag.

[DanishBagger]

It's beginning to give carbon a bad rep. :-(

[Chris Ostlind]

I don't think it projects anything on carbon as a suspect material for many aspects of boatbuilding. The breakage scenarios are hanging around in that netherland between all-out racing stress issues and a lack of depth on the topic as it applies to canting keel induced loads.

I'd like to hear the conversations between the prospective race teams and the potential sponsor representatives as the racers pitch the money guys for the bag of cash to run the program. I wonder how explicit the questions are from the sponsor reps when it comes to the issue of breakages in the mast area and how that will play-out for the sponsors and their desire to get their name out front with a winning effort.

The on-the-water effort is only part of what makes this workable for the sponsor, so I wonder how much they care if the mast goes blewey. Do they factor possible consumer impressions of logo and color scheme if there's a breakage that gains valuable electronic and print coverage? Does the budget allow for a blown rig and subsequent replacement expense? In this day and age of canting keel boats, how is the team resource outlay apportioned to consider the breakage issue, if at all?

Then, there's the whole question of the dialogue between the race team manager, skipper and the design/fabrication team as to why the rig came down and what can be done about it not happening again. Very interesting stuff if one could be that proverbial "fly on the wall"

[marshmat]

From the perspective of the engineering team designing the yacht, this must be a bit odd:

They are being asked to implement a fairly radical technology with a lot of unknowns (the canting keel).

At the same time, they are being asked to increase the yacht's power and sail-carrying ability (bigger rigs).

Add to this, that they are being asked to do so while reducing the boat's drag both above and below the waterline, while also lightening it (which necessitates exotic, relatively poorly understood materials) and thus reducing the safety factors.

Put this to an engineer who designs skyscrapers, or bridges, or cars. He'll tell you that you've gone nuts and are throwing money away. Yet this is the nature of cutting-edge ocean racing; new technology has to come fast, furious and all at once. Engineers in general like to change one thing at a time, carefully study what happens, then make the next change. A whole lot of new stuff in a short time frame and with relatively few test beds, and it's not surprising that the resulting situations can become a bit unpredictable.