34th America's Cup: multihulls!

Has the official accident report concerning Andrew Simpson's death been released yet?

 

In a sense this new mode of transport is more gymnastics then anything else, right?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for the event. As in F1 the technological spinoff is immense, the sceptical fascinating.

Potential risk is also significant. I feel sorry for the guys who instigated the new class, they meant well. Like the boats the AC beast took control, as it always does. Imagine what is going on in the meeting rooms - especially oracle's, if they feel they are behind the 8 ball. The lawyers will looking deep, that is for sure.

Whatever else, these are classic AC events unfolding.

m

 

No, not yet. And there seems to be some question if there ever will be one.

Earl

 

Ha! They are foiling fine now but they knew they were in a lottery before. They were just as happy to seen the weather conditions limited to a level where they could foil in benign conditions. It's the wave 'strikes' that these boats can't cope with at foiling speed, nothing to do with the skill of the crew. It was always going to be a lottery. And the risk of loss control as in uncontrolled directional instability was going to be the real killer with waves and strong gusts.

As for HFTU it's the forum that suffers from your Napoleon Complex not me ( look it up). Earl has made some very sensible observations, and they describe where you fit into the psych of this event too.

These craft are wonders of engineering and a great example of what can be achieved with light weight composites. But...... and at that point you start insulting people left right and center. So HTFU should be applied to whom…….?

 

34th AC

I'm posting this because Paul Cayard is a friend and I respect what he has to say: ( but I don't necessarily agree 100%)
From Scuttlebutt tonight--

Too Big, Too Powerful, Too Dangerous
Published on June 24th, 2013 | by Editor


Paul Cayard, the CEO of Artemis Racing, hasn’t done much talking since their America’s Cup training accident on May 9 that destroyed their boat and killed crewman Andrew Simpson. But he’s talking now… here’s what he said in an interview with the SF Chronicle…

“San Francisco is one of the windiest venues in the world. But that’s a good thing if you’ve got the right tool for it. It’s a horrible thing if you’ve got the wrong tool. Right now we’ve got the wrong tool. We’ve got a boat (AC72) that’s made for San Diego (where the winds are much lighter), and we’re trying to race it in San Francisco.

“We knew it for a long time, and we probably never really as an event grabbed that reality enough and did something about it. So the Oracle capsize (in October) opened everybody’s eyes: Even the 72-footers can tip over. Fortunately, nobody was hurt there, but the boat was destroyed completely. And then ours was probably the straw that broke the camel’s back.

“The fact that this (the review of safety recommendations) is happening might save five other people’s lives. The question is: If that hadn’t happened May 9, would we be in the midst of this whole review? Would we be talking about (smaller) wind limits and bigger rudder foils?”

 

I' ll say it again, its not the boats it's the sailers. these are new rides none of these guys have more than afew months sailing these boats give them six months and all this back and forth will sean trite

 

Sure, but only for the very, very few people who can afford it.

 

I didn't say that I was speaking "for" anyone. I am merely saying that there are other people who feel that there are major problems in predicting where technology will lead, and that there are people who feel that the AC72s are the wrong boat for the current Cup. You only have to read other comments in this thread or SA to see that I am not the only person making these points.

I mentioned that I was not the only one saying these things because in the past you have repeatedly made personal attacks on me and my motivation, so I was trying to point out that these views were not held by me alone. In a similar vein, Earl for example has raised the fact that people like engineering professionals know very well that there are major psychological issues when it comes to making accurate predictions of the future of technology.

 

Of course people get better at handling new craft, but that doesn't mean that those craft become acceptably safe* or able to finish all the time. There's plenty of craft that have significant limits on the conditions they can survive even with the best sailors aboard.

Earlier you used the progress of windsurfers in the '80s on SF Bay as an example. Using the same example, even after years of training basically no one could sail a Division 2 windsurfer in 30 knots without crashing occasionally, and no one can use a 25m windsurfer sail in 30 knots or do a triple forward loop.... no matter how much you train and learn, some craft can just get out of control too easily.

*yep, there are different definitions of "acceptably safe".

 

New wing base on 17 from local SF news helicopter footage

 

34th AC

From Reuters: ( read the whole story here- http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/8839543/Luna-Rossa-legal-action-could-delay-start )

PRESSURE ON: America's Cup organisers have put some not-so-subtle pressure on the four syndicates over safety and rule changes. A lawyer for the Italian team competing in this summer's America's Cup sailing regatta in San Francisco says he is prepared to go to court over last-minute rule changes that came in the wake of a fatal training accident in May.

The four teams competing for the cup have been meeting with mediators to reach agreement on 37 safety measures that Regatta Director Iain Murray and race organisers formulated after the wreck of an Artemis Racing catamaran killed Olympic gold medallist Andrew Simpson.

While there is broad agreement on most of the new rules, a fierce dispute has arisen over a change in the specification for a piece of boat equipment known as a rudder elevator, which helps control the super-fast, high-tech catamarans when they go airborne on hydrofoils.
=============
>Based on SA scuttlebutt, Oracle has been using a rudder foil with an adjustable flap since March. Moths, the Rave and the Osprey, among others use such a rudder foil. But it is illegal under current rules. Rather than cheating, it could be a perfectly acceptable way for Oracle to determine the ideal rudder foil set up. It's not cheating when used during development-any other team could do the same thing, as best I understand it.

 

34th AC

See PDF below-shows measured movement of head of Oracle foil----
---
We may soon have access to more detailed video of the lee main foil movement to change its angle of incidence. The original video is here and shows the top of the foil move forward(pivoting about the lower bearing-reducing the angle of incidence) at 55 sec. in-just as one would expect immediately after takeoff. More to come, I hope, since it is clear that as speed goes above or below the designed range of the curved(surface piercing) foil, the angle of incidence of the foil will need to change.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ItiZuU64pnc

Note-the PDF below presented by blunted on SA shows the angle change of the foil as the head moves forward:

 

Another thing i noticed after watching that vid, is that USA now has a much stiffer boat... all that horrible twisting that was present early in the peice, seems to be all but gone now?

 

I wouldn't believe the speculation you read about the hull shapes (and other design aspects) for 17 not being designed for foiling. It's true that ETNZ were foiling on their SL33s before OTUSA were foiling on their AC45s. But the AC45 experience was obtained in time to inform the design of the AC72s.

I don't know what you mean by the "judges decision". The design rule has never prohibited foiling, and I don't know of any Public Interpretation that ruled it in.

 

Earlier you used the progress of windsurfers in the '80s on SF Bay as an example. Using the same example, even after years of training basically no one could sail a Division 2 windsurfer in 30 knots without crashing occasionally, and no one can use a 25m windsurfer sail in 30 knots or do a triple forward loop.... no matter how much you train and learn, some craft can just get out of control too easily.

*yep, there are different definitions of "acceptably safe".[/QUOTE]

Good points,thanks.IMO it just seams a little early to say the boats aren't up to the course,so far the only directly involved person I've heard question the design of the boats vs. race conditions is local sailor Paul Cayard,does his org. have enough time in the boat to know. Were they training some where else?