Should Power Assited Systems be Allowed?

Wind

Will thanks for the comments but you shouldn't have told these guys that you were holed up in a powerboat-now they'll discount your comments as an agent-provacateur for the so-called "power assist" boats....By the way that sounds like fun!

 

Pointless

---------------------------
So are you saying that in the grand scheme of things this thread is pointless? Hmmmm.....

 

LOL!

Are you admitting that the canters that use power assist are power boats?

BTW the Transatlantic speed record for power assisted boats is 53 knots ... proving that power assist can indeed be faster than sailpower.


"Averaging 53 knots for the entire trip, the sleek luxury yacht is capable of top speeds over 65 knots."

 

Oh ,Brother..

First you say Wild Oats is not a fast boat then you say an out an out powerboat is "power assist" which is the same term you use to describe some of the fastest sailboats in the world....methinks thee has lost thy mind?!
You've certainly murderated any credibility left in the argument you were making as best I can tell with my power assisted brain.....

 

you people are starting to obscure the facts in this topic.

 

The whole point of handicapping is to level the playing field.

Which hasn't happened, as new designs set new "records" before adequate
data is obtained to rate them realistically. And, some boats don't sail to their ratings in certain weather conditions. (As you stated).
Corrected time is an extrapolation, nothing more, nothing less.
As the variables increase so do the disparities.

I say, keep the button pushers separate.

 

To me, it's irrelevant whether or not the playing field can be levelled by handicapping. The fact is, the Sydney-Hobart is a SAILBOAT race. If they want to make it a powerboat race, fine, but right now it isnt, and boats WHICH NEED TO HAVE AN ENGINE RUNNING ALL THE TIME are not my idea of sailboats. Using a diesel occasionally for battery charging is something completely different, however I wouldnt be averse to requiring boats to use wind or solar generation in those cases either. Even the maxi cats and tri's like Playstation and Geronimo do not use power assisted sailing systems, in fact its probably about the only limitation imposed by the rules in "The Race", and it results in very fast SAILING boats.

 

On the contrary - if the weather gods hadn't interfered, the canters wouldn't have won on handicap.

That's not what I said, though that would be the case for ALL boats. What I said was that the weather changed after the first few boats crossed the line, slowing the rest of the fleet down considerably. If those first boats had experienced the same weather as the rest of the fleet, the handicap result would have been very different

 

Wild Oats is fast compared to what? Not compared to Play Station, not compared to a windsurfer.

Power assist is what it is. Boats can be sail boats, a combination of sail and power, or power only.

The point of the thread is that ANY power is some power and sailboats don't use power to sail. They use power to communicate and to navigate, but not to sail.

If you think that 14.7 knots is fast compared to 29+ then it's not my credibility that should be in question.

 

Lorsail: You know, almost every ocean racer uses the engine to charge batteries;is that Power Assist?

As stated by others above, in a sense it is. Electronic navigation equipment is also a form of assistance. As is an auxiliary, solar power, and any number of other things. The goal of sailing is not to maximize speed at all costs. Motorboats do that much better, which is why sailing has become primarily a recreational activity.

But recreation by its very definition is optional, something we do because we want to rather than because we have to. As such, each and every individual decides for him- or herself what he or she wants to do. If a group of people decide to challenge themselves by staging a constest to propel vessels across a body of water with various and sundry limitations on those craft, then it is not for anyone else to criticize those people for not choosing a different activity that would involve either less challenge or some different kind of challenge. The idea that it "doesn't matter" how a boat achieves speed or righting moment contradicts the entire purpose of the activity in the first place.

Lorsail: I just can't get it in my mind why we all think it's so cool for an 18 footer to be powered up by a significant proportion of it's overall weight moving to weather on a trapeze but the same thing is not ok for big boats where the ballast couldn't be moved effectively except by some form of engine.

Sounds to me like the words of a stinkpotter. "Why shouldn't we use engines?" "What's wrong with power on a boat?" Nothing, as long you don't you call it an unpowered sailboat or try to claim records set by unpowered sailboats.

Also the words of a non-athlete. Sailing is a SPORT, and sports have ALWAYS distinguished between human power and motorized power. What's cool is human beings demonstrating their athletic capabilities in a fair, competitive sport. In most sports, that does NOT involve the use of motors, and in many cases not even unpowerd equipment that would improve performance.

For instance, bicycle racing is certainly not banned from the sporting world, but no bicyclist would ever claim to have beaten any running record. And a bicycle doesn't generate power at all.

Likewise, a quarterback (American football) might concievably improve his performance by carrying a shoulder-mounted football launcher. He could pump it up beforehand (again, no artificial power required here), have the center hike the ball, quickly stuff it into the launcher, aim, fire, and BLAM!, a perfectly spiraling bullet hits the reciever right in the numbers every time.

In my personal opinion, to not understand the basic principles of rules and fair play is to demonstrate a lack of character. Automobile racing is here to stay, but it's in a separate class of MOTOR sports with its own rules and values. No one in any sport using performance-boosting equipment would ever claim to have beaten a record set in another sport that prohibits that type of equipment.

Lorsail: Without that ability those boats would be relegated to being fixed keel lead bellies or sailing extremely ineficiently.

Or competing in a separate class. Which I would very much like to see. It would be great to see a multimillion-dollar "battle of the beasts" entertaining us in a new, innovative motor sport. I'm sure lots of engineers and fans of motor sports would enjoy it. Maybe even some sailors!

Lorsail: As far as racing against other boats goes I think it is perfectly acceptable as long as the rule in use is fair to all of them.

That all depends on what accomplishments the winners of the races claim. If they claim to have broken an unpowered sailing record, then no, it's not fair, and to suggest otherwise IMO demonstrates poor competitive character.

Lorsail: If the rule is fair that would mean that sometimes the super boats would win on handicap and sometimes they would lose on handicap.

Handicap racing is different from class racing. Many races are based on class rules rather than handicaps, and I don't see what about that is so hard to understand.

Lorsail: As to records:if a sailboat is allowed to participate by the rules in any particular race or for any particular record and that boat obeys the rules then any record that comes from her participation is just as valid now as any record or race result in the past.You say it's not fair because special waivers have to be in effect but those are the same waivers in effect for any race that allows the crew to use a trapeze!

Crew hiking out on a trap do not require a motor. Again, that's a fundamental principle of athletics, and it takes a complete unappreciation of sports to not understand that. In my opinion, the SH organization made a mistake in allowing motors to be used in what I would consider an unpowered class sailing race.

Lorsail: I see no reason that they shouldn't be able to sail in any handicap races that rate them fairly and see no reason at all that any record set by them is less of a record.

That applies only to handicap races. It's nonsense to say that handicapped results should apply to restricted class races.

Lorsail: This stuff is here to stay and as long as these boats are fairly rated and raced according to the same rules other boats have been for years,whats the problem?

One of the problems, Doug, is your rudeness in flagrantly misinterpreting what other people say, calling their opinions "hogwash" and other insulting terms with no explanation, and seeming to have no understanding of what most of the sailing and sporting communities value. It would be very nice if you could promote powered canters as a new separate class of boats, a new motor sport, instead of trying to hijack the good reputation that sailboats and sailors have for taking on the elements using nothing but their own ability and energy from the wind.

 

Wild Oats is fast compared to conventionally ballasted monohulls.

 

Thanks, that makes WO a fast slow boat then?

 

Seperate because unequal?

Lorsail:

I am ignorant of just about all you say. I have no idea how many CBTF cruisers there are out there. And as for setting speed rcords, I have no doubt about that. Any boat with a deep, narrow canting keel should be faster than one without. The TF part only enhances the efficiency of the design because, as far as I can tell, the CLA does not change no matter how far the ballast strut (formerly keel) is canted. A 90 deg. cant is theoretically possible for that reason.

As for the engineering, I little doubt that these things can stand up to all hydrostatic and hydro dynamic loads that they are likely to face. Including ones brought about by their enhanced performance. I am sure their engineers are doing their job.

The same could be said for the TITANIC. Indeed, her sister ship served for more than a generation with just a few misshaps due to her size. She was broken up not because she was unsafe (sensible rules and regs were put in place after the ignoble death of her sister) but because she was unafasionable.

The problem is, as I thought I carefully explained, is the risk of underwater collisons with 'sea junk' (left by negligent shippers) and curious sea creatures.
This type of mishap is thoroughly predictable and, in my opinion, should be a major design consideration.

From what I have been able to tell, the CBTF falls seriously short in this regard. The TF's are deep, narrow, and supported only at the top. And, please correct me if I am wrong, one or both of them must rotate to some degree. A collison at 20kts with even a 100kg object could severely damage one or both foils making the boat now rudderless. But that is not my main concern.

Rudderless boats can be jury rigged to steer adequately (unless the rudder is jammed at an impossible angle).

My main concern is the ballast strut itself. It could be ripped from its pivot and end up at the bottom of the sea. The boat it was mounted on would then be left (along with a huge hole in its bottom) without ALL its ballast. It would then roll right over and maybe float or maybe sink, but, in any case, be generally helpless. How does someone jury rig 50,000 ftlbs or more of righting moment.

And I do not limit this concern to just CBTF's. I think all canting ballast boats share this hazzard as do (to an arguably much lesser gegree) all deep, narrow, bulb keel boats. But the very effectiveness of the CBTF technology enhances this risk. I further agravates the situation by making, or threatening to make the CBTF the new standard sail boat type. First it will make all other racing sailboats obsolete (and that can happen very quickly). Then it will make inroads into the cruising community. I can see the hype already. "Step right up folks. Why sail at 8 knots when you can sail at 28. And in a fully ballasted monohull."

It is for this reason that I think ALL canting keel boats should have to race in a seperate class (maybe amongst multis, even) and be considered, as multi's are, unconventioal boats. Their performance potential (as well as their hazzard potential) is so much greater that I cannot even see a workable rating system to include them with other keel boats.

Thank you again for your lengthly reply.

Bob

 

Rudeness

Skippy, the essence of rudeness is to call Wild Oats or any boat like it a "motorsailer" or "power assisted" while slyly trying to say that the power to move the keel is the same as power used to turn a prop.
The essence of rudeness is your attempt to impugn my character and anyone elses character that supports the use of power to move heavy keels on boats where ,sofar, it is impractical to do it any other way.To deny or, again, impugn the"athleticism" of the great sailors enduring hell on the VOR boats is nuts. It shows a complete lack of appreciation of what it takes to make these great sailboats go fast. Your comments are almost as silly as Randy saying Wild Oats is not fast or equating canting keel boats with big power boats but his comments were in a humorous vein or at least tongue in cheek to some extent-yours weren't and were absolutely offensive ,ill informed and rubbish.

 

(As you stated).
My mistake. You didn't.
On the contrary - if the weather gods hadn't interfered, the canters wouldn't have won on handicap.
Correct, even more reason to separate them given the difference in elapsed time of the fleet.