New ac 75 boat

[markhomer]

Just reading about the new design , would seem a big difference between the rule and the rendered depictions , assuming rule in bub fishfaces article in y&y is correct , boats are to be 20.7m long and main foils 10 to 12m fwd of transom , this would put them at least midships , all the renders show them clearly in aft 3rd of hull ????
Not quiet sure what the max half width of 2000 m refers to ?

 

[flaming]

I read that article too. Reasonably sure the 2,000m was a type, and should have been 2.000m.

I think Ben Ainslie's team (whatever they are now called) are due to launch a 30 foot test boat to see if the foiling works soon, so we should have more idea then.

 

[Chris 249]

It's a disappointing boat, IMHO. They said that multis were not mainstream enough, then went to a type that is probably the least popular of all the various types in existence. The remarkable thing about foiling, arguably, is that despite enormous publicity and the prestige of the AC, it remains a tiny niche; a great niche with remarkable boats, but incredibly small participation considering how long it's been around. There's little evidence it will ever become really mainstream, and (despite all the PR bulldust) the America's Cup is normally about mainstream boats. The early schooners, the US centreboard sloops, the Seawanhaka rule boats, the Js and the 12 Metres were all part of the mainstream of sailing in their day. They and their smaller sisters built to similar rules (in fact usually the same rules) raced in regular regattas at normal clubs and formed a major part of the overall fleet of their day. That doesn't apply to foiling cats or to foiling ballasted monos.

 

[Judders]

This is true and as a purist who loves watching match racing in slow boats, in my heart I agree, but the modern AC is more like F1. My Impala is no further from the new AC design than my Volvo is from an F1 car.

 

[flaming]

America's Cup is normally about mainstream boats. The early schooners, the US centreboard sloops, the Seawanhaka rule boats, the Js and the 12 Metres were all part of the mainstream of sailing in their day. They and their smaller sisters built to similar rules (in fact usually the same rules) raced in regular regattas at normal clubs and formed a major part of the overall fleet of their day. That doesn't apply to foiling cats or to foiling ballasted monos.

I'm not sure how true that is. Whilst the J's and the 12s did some other racing, the IACC boats never did. So it hasn't really been the case that the boats are "mainstream" since 1992. It's really only the 12s that you could ever really call "mainstream" and they were specifically chosen post war to keep the costs down. The J's were always Billionaire's boats. That the top of the sport didn't have the technology to make something that was all that far from the "mainstream" doesn't mean that they wouldn't have done if they'd been able to...

That said... I agree with your point that this is a very odd route to take. The interviews with TNZ I've seen all talk about wanting these boats to become the norm. And that's simply not going to happen. The average yachtie is simply not skilled enough to sail them.
I sort of see why they've taken this route, but it isn't the one I'd have taken. I'd have defined a simple box that resulted in something like a powered up TP but about 70' in length. And then I'd have expected 10 entries. And they could have had fleet racing early rounds that would have been fantastic viewing.

 

[Chris 249]

It's hard to quantify this stuff, but with respect, having done a lot of research on it I'll hold my ground. Yes, there was a change once the IACC boats arrived, but arguably that was unintentional. The early intention was to make something sort of like a big, skinny sportsboat; a bigger version of contemporary designs like Ron Holland's 11 Metre One Design, the "Formula One" 52 footers that Tony Castro created for a short-lived pro series, the 60ft non-rule speedster Andelsbanken, or the French Shamrock 9.5(?). The class morphed into something much heavier and skinnier, but the contemporary articles show that the original intention was to be fairly mainstream.

Yes, the Js were millionaires' boats, but they were built to the Universal Rule and were essentially big versions of the Universal Rule N,R, S etc classes that were raced at loads of typical North American clubs. There was also a later agreement between the UK and USA to create a system where the two countries raced Metre boats up to about the 15 Metre class, and then used the Universal Rule for boats above that. Of course the way the 23 Metres (Candida, Cambria, White Heather, Shamrock 23 Metre) raced with the Js and the vintage Britannia also shows how close the two rules were and how the Js fitted in with a system that went all the way down to 6 Metres and the Scandinavian 5 Metres. Add to that the fact that the Js raced at many British regattas and it looks very different, to me, to the current style where the AC boats are unique.

The top end regularly intentionally restricted technology even in AC boats. The J Class were quite conservative in terms of construction, interior fit-out and design; top designer Starling Burgess noted that “our latest America’s Cup yachts are more like the Gloriana in hull form (ie an 1890s design) than those of 30 years ago” and said that the Js did “not even contribute to the development of yachting as a true sport apart from the satisfaction of an illogical national vanity.” Even Ranger, the "super J", used 27 year old winches. The way Herreshoff, Burgess, Crane and other designers write of the development of the AC boats shows that they lagged behind the smaller boats in many ways.

You're dead right, IMHO, about what a missed opportunity this could have been. Like you I imagined something like a bigger TP52, which would have been awesome and would have been closely related to the sailing so many of us do. Since foiling remains a tiny part even of dinghy sailing (and the number of foiling cats is even tinier - 5 foilers out of 211 entries at the world's biggest cat, for example) there's no reason to think that foiling yachts will catch on.

One thing that's amusing is that some reports indicate that kitefoilers are going about as fast as AC boats, so we're actually at the same situation we had in IACC and 12 Metre days when a small "beach toy" could beat AC boats.

PS sorry about the long post, but there's a lot of history to encapsulate.

 

[flaming]

I guess we have a different definition of "mainstream"! I do think that size and cost have a bearing, not just whether it's an extension of the predominant rule.

My main issue really is that clearly the best platform for foiling is a multihull. So if you want to foil then why on earth come away from that? I agree that the AC50s had a lot wrong with them, and so a new rule that tidied up some of the issues could have worked well.
So for example I'd have done away with needing to generate hydraulic power to move the foils, as this was clearly limiting the amount of manouvers the teams could do. But I'd have also banned anything other than ropes on winches for sail handling. But that's all moot now, as we're getting the frankenboat.

 

[lw395]

The AC is definitely not about box rules.
It's about very limited variation in hulls and rigs, to keep speed as equal as possible.
Lots of restrictions which mean most of the design effort goes into getting around the rule, instead of designing a good fast boat.

This latest nonsense seems to me like giving two teams a massive leg-up, because they've done most of their design work before publishing the rule.
The 2013 cup was great. Perfect line up of teams, weather, TV presentation, back stories and all that.
Last year was not nearly so good.
I don't think the 2021 Cup will be anything special.

Plus, they've destroyed the catamaran circus in the build-up years, which kept AC in the public eye?

 

[Chris 249]

I guess we have a different definition of "mainstream"! I do think that size and cost have a bearing, not just whether it's an extension of the predominant rule.

My main issue really is that clearly the best platform for foiling is a multihull. So if you want to foil then why on earth come away from that? I agree that the AC50s had a lot wrong with them, and so a new rule that tidied up some of the issues could have worked well.
So for example I'd have done away with needing to generate hydraulic power to move the foils, as this was clearly limiting the amount of manouvers the teams could do. But I'd have also banned anything other than ropes on winches for sail handling. But that's all moot now, as we're getting the frankenboat.

I probably didn't express myself well - it wasn't just that the old AC boats were built to similar rules. It was that they were similar enough to the smaller mainstream boats that there was a very direct connection in design, technology and technique. For example, the J Class designers applied lessons from smaller Universal Rule boats directly to the Js; Australians yachties were introduced to dip-pole gybing by their first AC challenge; 12 Metre sail panel layouts affected the sail shape of half tonners. The transfer of ideas between the AC and the typical club racer was therefore pretty strong. Obviously there are some lessons that are moving up and down from small foilers, but far fewer than 1% of sailors sail foilers so the transfer of technology from the AC affects far fewer people.

Agree 100% about moving from cats to the AC75. If they wanted mainstream appeal they should have gone to mainstream monos, if they wanted to keep foiling they should have stuck to cats instead of creating a Frankenboat. Foiling's great, but it has simply failed to become really popular in any branch of the sport and the sooner it can be seen as a wonderful niche rather than the future of sailing, the better.

 

[lw395]

If you have a sensible set of rules, it becomes a bit academic whether the structure above the foils is a monohull, cat or tri, as the hull(s) will rarely be in the water.
The AC cats had a lot of bizarre restrictions, they were almost a one design based on a foil assist cat, very remote from a foiling craft anyone would design in the absence of those class rules.
These foiling monohulls are in the same vein.
I don't think 'mainstream' comes into it, apart from perhaps slightly more superficial resemblance to what a non sailor thinks a yacht ought to look like.
It's like some 1960s yacht club attitude to multihulls.
Maybe it will produce watchable match racing, but I doubt it.

Some technology might transfer to Open-60 style canting keel extreme mono's, but most of the research is going to be about optimising something in a crackpot rule set which will hopefully be forgotten in 5 years.

 

[Chris 249]

Good points about the relevance of the hull, and where the tech may end up.

You can put up a very logical, well-researched case that "mainstream" should come into it, because sports in which the top events use gear that is similar to that in local events are more popular. Therefore it is better for the sport and arguably for the AC if it uses gear that is closer to "mainstream".

Speaking as a cat owner and someone who is an avid sailing historian, the normal belief about the '60s attitude towards multis is arguably overblown and/or incorrect. To address just one point, reading Arthur Piver's collections of over-hyped lies and comparing it to the horrific death toll aboard his boats makes it appear that speaking up against his PR BS was the principled and right thing to do (and that's coming from someone whose family owned one of his early designs). There was appalling dishonesty among some multihull exponents in that era and given that, the attitude of the "mainstream" was arguably very good.

The relevance is that many people hear about the "multis were banned" myth and believe (incorrectly IMHO) that our sport is unfriendly towards new technology and that if only we opened the gates, the sport would thrive. The reality appears to be that limiting technology in sport is a very complex issue, and the simplistic thinking about the issue within sailing has really harmed our sport.

 

[lw395]

Sorry, it is completely wrong to say that 'multihulls were banned' is a myth, Herreshoff 1876?
Also IIRC several instances in the UK in the 60s when the likes of Bob Fisher and Reg White were involved on the East Coast.
Not to mention lots of UK dinghy clubs.
IMHO, it is entirely fair to say you can't have good yardstick racing mixing keelboats and multihulls though.

 

[Chris 249]

Although it's commonly said that Herreshoff's boat in 1876 was banned, it's simply untrue. It was DSQd from ONE race, and given a special and equal prize instead. Cats were then welcomed as a class, and in fact were favoured over monos on some ways.

In those days it was far from unknown to retrospectively DSQ a boat for being too different, since they didn't have our 150 years of experience in writing rules and NoRs. Instead, it was common to have a race committee who had wide latitude in making all sorts of decisions.

The 1876 race was for "boats", which (as contemporary writers said in reference to other issues) mean something quite specific to racing sailors from NY in 1876, just as "foiler" means something specific to us although all racing boats are "foilers" because their rigs for airfoils and their rudders are foils. As marine archeologists have noted, sailors used many words differently in those days. The committee therefore decided that Amaryllis didn't fit the description of "boat". We may say we wouldn't do it these days, but it's not too long ago that (for instance) the Moths retrospectively banned windsurfers.

I don't really know why the tale of the ban became so famous, but now that there are sources like contemporary newspapers and Nat Herreshoff's letters to be found on-line the truth is out there. There's more detail here; https://sailcraftblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/the-real-story-of-amaryllis-and-the-first-racing-catamarans/

Yep, some modern clubs didn't want cats - but just about every club in every human activity has some restrictions. There are clubs just for Mustangs but not other Fords, there are clubs just for MTBs but not for road bikes, there are clubs just for orchids but not other flowers, there are clubs for people who paint in oils but not watercolours, etc etc etc. Any sporting or hobby club has restrictions on the gear and disciplines it caters for. Having specialist mono clubs seems no different.

Ironically, plenty of cat clubs exclude monos, kites and windsurfers. Not far from me the offshore-racing multi guys found they couldn't get on with the beach cat guys, so they split into two separate clubs. If two sorts of multi can't get on....

As a cat owner I agree with you and Fish; it's basically impossible to fairly race a cat against a mono. As someone who races cats, windsurfers, dinghies and yachts I actually prefer "specialist" clubs or events much of the time. We used to race at a club that welcomed everything and it was a horrible mish-mash on and off the water.

 

[creeks]

First Vid - looks like fun:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other...lies-team-trials-a-foiling-monohull-prototype

 

[flaming]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BlqMETahnDM/

And it gybes...

For all my pessimism about this concept, that's an awful long way ahead of where I expected them to be....

 

[Iain C]

^Ditto. If you look at the development and increase in speed during the AC72 cup...and by that I mean just the increase in speed during the actual competition itself, not the development work beforehand, to be where they are now with these boats will be very interesting indeed.

I loved the 72s, as a spectacle of power and speed they were hard to beat, so I'm now really looking forward to this generation. But I'll agree, a "proper" TP/IMOCA type thing would have given far closer racing. However, in much the same way as Average Joe can rattle off a number of F1 drivers, teams, and circuits, far fewer people are fans of the much better racing and place changing in Moto GP or Touring Cars.

 

[DJE]

Strange that there doesn't seem to be anything official about the prototype on the Ineos Team UK web site.

 

[flaming]

Strange that there doesn't seem to be anything official about the prototype on the Ineos Team UK web site.

I think what we're seeing now is the difference between Land Rover's sponsorship, which needed to be commercially justifiable in PR output etc, and INEOS sponsorship, which is basically the pet project of the boss...

Ben and co are now in full "no excuses" territory, without the need for PR puff videos etc, and with that comes a return to the traditional cup secrecy I think....

 

[Keen_Ed]

In an amusingly full circle sort of way, Jim Ratcliffe (Mr INEOS), is now starting a company to build a new Land Rover Defender type car.
https://twitter.com/grenadier4x4

 

[lw395]

I think what we're seeing now is the difference between Land Rover's sponsorship, which needed to be commercially justifiable in PR output etc, and INEOS sponsorship, which is basically the pet project of the boss...

Ben and co are now in full "no excuses" territory, without the need for PR puff videos etc, and with that comes a return to the traditional cup secrecy I think....

One of the locals described as Sirben's name no longer being all over everything, he's just the driver now.

I guess some of the AC secrecy will be blown away in a year os so's time with the 'World Series' events?