Sydney-Hobart 2006-Battle of the Canters

yes it was,
apparantly she 'fell off the back of two backless waves' and was soon after taking on a lot of water. After much effort they couldn't find the leak(s), the bilge pumps were not keeping up, and the skipper decided that for the crews sake they had to abandon. I heard a salvage boat was sent out but didn't have the right equipment or gear (what ever that could be?) to save her.

 

Yep. There's a lot of mourning going on. She was such a lovely boat, and so much loved by the family her owned her.

 

Koomooloo - One of the most beautiful boats ever to sail the oceans, a sad loss indeed

 

More about Hansp's favourite, Maluka. From the ABC site;

"One yachtsman who's made his name through speed, Sean Langman, won't be at the helm of his maxi this year. He's competed in 17 Sydney Hobarts, but his experience last year led him to question where technology was taking the race.

SEAN LANGMAN, SYDNEY-HOBART COMPETITOR: Everything ran off power. We had a computer technician and a full time engineer just to keep the boat running. We finally ran out of fuel a mile to the finish and I went, "Wow, now we've got to sail the boat to get it to the finish", and my feeling when I stepped off was, this isn't what the race or sailing is about to me.........What I have found over the last few years by going faster and faster and faster is you don't really get a chance to look around. The difference here is charging towards an albatross doing 28 knots, the poor thing is trying to get out of the way. Now it's going to turn around and have a look and a wave. It is really about communing with the sea again."

From the Manly Daily (paper); "Langman, who once said push-button sailing had sucked the life from the sport, could have taken the easy way out and reached Hobart inside three days aboard a slick maxi.

But he has no regrets - yet.

``I'm glad I've got back to `sailing' sailing,'' he said.

``This will be no easy ride and we'll know we're alive out there.

``This is what sailing is all about. I'm happy to do it this way but I'll let you know when we get to Hobart whether it's been a good move or not.''

By the way, last year he sailed a 90 foot canter; before that, an Open 60 lengthened to 66 feet. Yet his first offshore boat was a modified production quarter ton type. Once again, he shows that the big boat owners are often guys who start with competitive smaller production racer/cruisers; boats which we should encourage to create more owners.

 

Wild Oats First to Finish

Wild Oats, one of the largest CBTF ocean racers ever built has taken line honors and according to the Rolex Sydney-Hobart site the first back to back victory since 1964 and only the 6th in history.
This boat continues to demonstrate the capabilties of a well designed( Reichel-Pugh) CBTF(Canting Ballast Twin Foil) technology as well as the power of movable ballast.
Congratulations!
Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race 2006.. Breaking News
Address:http://rolexsydneyhobart.com/breaking_news.asp?key=523

 

Great racing on Ichi Ban. I know that Skandia had a damaged canard, but even so...

It is a pity that ABN-Amro had broken its mast, otherwise we would have had a close fight for the winning in real time.

The Volvo70's are incredible boats. They have succeeded in maintaining the pace with almost 30ft bigger boats, and not any boat, but boats that are supposedly the state of the art, in what ocean racing concerns.

It seems also that canting keelers have reached maturity. Lots of them in the race, and no problems related with keels.

 

Battle of the Canters

Ichi Ban-Volvo 70 squeaks by Skandia-so it's first second and third to canting keel boats....

 

No, Doug - it is first, second and third across the line are the largest, lightest boats in the race - no big surprise.
Now, if one of these was a 40-footer, THAT would be worth mentioning.
NEWSFLASH! Formula One car wins race against Ford Focus! Naah - that would never sell newspapers.
Steve

 

But it is typical that after all the discussions we have had recently that none of the canting keel boats had failures but one of the oldest boats in the fleet went down, isn't it?

Sad, I'm still mourning Koomooloo

 

Newsflash!

According to Sail-World Ichi Ban( VO 70) has a chance of winning on handicap:
Sail World: Sail and sailing, cruising, boating news
Address:http://www.sail-world.com/newstext/pda.cfm?Nid=29914&RequestTimeOut=180
-----------------------
First , second and third to canting keel boats is an undeniable fact; I'm all for the handicap boats having a nice "race" but no one should try to diminish the great job done by these boats representing the highest (current) technology in monohull ocean racers. ACTUAL first, second and third have meaning to some people.....

 

"Actual" first second and third places go to the top IRC boats.

The very press release you just quoted refers to Itchy as "the boat to beat on corrected time and to win the most coveted trophy of the race, the Tattersall’s Cup, given to the boat that sails closest to its ultimate ability."

There you go....according to your own source, the Tattersall's Cup for IRC corrected time results is "the most coveted trophy of the race"; the actual winner. First to finish is only first to finish.

The Notice of Race and Sailing Instructions - the official documents - say that the Overall winner is on IRC corrected time. The list of winners on the race web page says the corrected time winner is the "Overall" winner. So officially and in the judgement of your own source, you're wrong. If the use of quotation marks for "race" is an attempt to imply that IRC is not the real race, you are dead wrong.

Actually in my last Hobart we took one of the line honours prizes for first boat of our length to finish. It was a bit embarrassing really, we'd just been the first boat of our size to finish because we had the newest and fastest boat our size. The guys who did well were further back on older, slower boats of the same LOA. Winning because you have the quickest boat for its LOA is not what the Hobart is about, it's about IRC; they've downgraded the trophies for the first Under 40, First Under 30 etc over the last couple of years I think.

 

I love fast sailing boats as much as anyone, but the amateur racer <> F1 analogy is completely wrong when looking at the powered boats that are getting line honours.

Compare my street car to a F1 racer:
In addition to having a gasoline engine, and 4 wheels with rubber tyres ...
Computer controlled engine management on both.
Traction control systems on both.
Passive aerodynamics on both.
In some ways the systems on my street car are more sophisticated than those of a F1 car. I can see a direct link between F1 technology and the car I drive. I can relate to F1.

Compare my sailboat to one of the powered contraptions that some people think are the shape of things to come:
Except for having a sloop rig and floating, my sailboat shares very little with the line honours boats in the S-H.
My boat has one moving appendage ... not three.
My boat does not require external power to move ballast or trim sails. These systems are clearly not legal under the Racing Rules of Sailing (2005-2008).

51 MOVABLE BALLAST
All movable ballast shall be properly stowed, and water, dead weight
or ballast shall not be moved for the purpose of changing trim or
stability. Floorboards, bulkheads, doors, stairs and water tanks shall
be left in place and all cabin fixtures kept on board.
52 MANUAL POWER
A boat’s standing rigging, running rigging, spars and movable hull
appendages shall be adjusted and operated only by manual power.

Like many sailors, I have been racing for over 40 years. I used to be able to relate to the boats that win ocean races. Now all I see is a rating rule that first allows boats that would be DSQ'd in any race where the rules are enforced, then does such a poor job of handicapping them that they can win on corrected time.

There is NO WAY that a new boat should be able to win against a boat that has a track record. Anyone that sails, knows that it takes time to extract the maximum level of performance form a boat. Any racing team should be faster in their second and third season. Since handicapping rules assume a fully optimized boat that is sailed perfectly, how can a new boat earn first place on corrected time? We know that it is not fully sorted out and it's performance will improve with time, if it wins first time out, the rating rule is seriously flawed.

Thus from my personal experience, the IRC rule is a joke, the handicaps for the canters are a gift, and ocean racing bears very little resemblance to the racing that goes on at the local level.

Production cars have more in common with F1 than production sailboats have in common with the motorboats that are winning ocean races.

The powered canters are so far removed form the reality of everyday sailing that they will be the death of the sport. If F1 used technology that was completely different from production vehicles, it would die too.

 

Hobart: Canters First, Second and Third

Sorry guys but the canters were first second and third over the line-and one still has a chance under handicap. Movable ballast is a tremendous advance in fast monohull's and is here to stay-not just in canting keels either...
Mr. Dude: quoting only part of the rule(s) is a silly excercise in futility!

 

Yes and it will end up to have a major and decisive importance in the attribution of the best corrected time winner and on the attribution of “the most coveted trophy of the race.”


“Allen’s Ichi Ban crossed the finish line in second place at 1.42 am today to set itself up as the boat to beat on corrected time and to win the most coveted trophy of the race, the Tattersalls Cup, given to the boat that sails closest to its ultimate ability”.

http://rolexsydneyhobart.com/news.asp?key=2983

Those unfair and unjustifiable 30 minutes penalization can be the difference between victory and defeat. I believe that if it is the case we will hear more about this sad affair.

 

I think it would be enlightening if Doug were to enlarge on his notion of the way in which the rules should be interpreted.Normally,a clear breach of a single rule is quite sufficient to bring about a penalty.