Your Feedback

Disgruntlement from the ranks on the America's Cup fiasco, the 2012 Olympic classes selection fiasco and other topics

A bulging inbox from readers to various topics discussed recently on thedailysail. Starting off with comment on the Dynamic Stability System, moving onto a Star Wars look-a-likey and then straight into more vicious comment regarding the ISAF Olympic classes decision.

The prospect of a mega-cat (or trimaran) fight for the 33rd America's Cup has got people excited but the shear drudgery surrounding the legal proceedings is taking it's toll. Charles Apthorp suggests hiring Alistair Campbell (British politcal PR spin doctor) to get them out of their mess. A very disgruntled audience in summary.

If you have anything to add on these points email us here

On DSS Foils

Graeme Sutherland writes:

The DSS foil system looks interesting, but sailing is full of pet projects that make extravagant performance claims. So I'm looking forwards to seeing how HiFi performs, as the basic idea strikes me as being sound.

Unfortunately it's not going to be applicable to either Minis or Class 40s. Leo Voorneveld informs me that Minis have a maximum beam of three metres, and the foil would extend outside of this, though a narrower hull might be a possibility. The Class 40 rules ban any appendages other than a keel and no more than two rudders.

Incidentally, Francois Rougier produced a concept for an Open 60 for a potential entry in the 2002 Around Alone that used a similar foil to Hugh Welbourn's design to stabilise a narrow hull. The boat was intended as an update to the Harle designs favoured by VDH.

On PRB's reaching strakes :

Ross Bateson spots a resemblance:

The new front lip on PRB sure does make it look ugly. It reminds me of this chap, from Star Wars, which one of the geek websites reliably informs me is a Sullustan, or something.





While we feel certain this is where the minds at Farr Yacht Design found their inspiration, in our video interview with him Michel Desjoyeaux questioned the legality of these strakes on the basis that they surely they formed a hollow?

We queried President of Farr Yacht Design Patrick Shaughnessy about this. He came back strongly:

The hull strakes are unequivocally rule compliant. In fact because of the way the rule is constructed there are two separate ways they can be considered; as hull, or as appendages. In either case they are clearly permitted.

In the case that they are considered hull...

Rule B.1 does not allow the hull to get shallower in section as you move towards the centerline (which is a common rule feature to avoid allowing a catamaran or other multihull like features). However, based on previous discussions with the IMOCA measurers, that this rule does allow the hull to have tumblehome, which is to have the widest point (in any section) of the hull below the sheerline. In this context, because we
have designed the lower surface of the hull strake to be deeper in section as you move toward centerline the feature is clearly in compliance with rule B.1. As a result, the hull strakes simply add tumblehome to the hull.

How they can be considered an appendage...

If you ignore IMOCA rule B.1, the strakes could be considered appendages under the definition in the ERS. The ERS defines an appendage as: "Any item of equipment ... which is wholly or partly below the sheerline or its extension ..., attached to the hull shell or another hull appendage, and used to affect: stability, leeway, steerage, directional
stability, motion damping, trim, displaced volume...". The hull strakes are designed to affect trim and motion damping, and may also affect directional stability and as such could be considered an appendage.

In conclusion, the strakes are clearly rule compliant, whether they are part of the hull, or whether they are considered appendages.

As a side note, the hull strakes are not unique for an IMOCA Open 60, as Ocean Planet carried conceptually similar features. And as a further side note, there are other IMOCA class boats existing that have tumblehome in their hull shape.



On the dismal ISAF Olympic classes selection for 2012...

Thomas Siders (Tornado US-775, A-Class US-79) writes:

It is my understanding that what stopped the MNAs and ISAF from changing their position was that they did not want to look bad or weak by going back on their vote. They did not want “egg on their faces” by standing down from the earlier decision. ISAF President Goran Petersson then insisted upon having the vote secret. I had expected transparency in this vote, but was not surprised by this move. It is my belief that this does not clear the air or put an end to the issue. What it does instead of clearling up the issue is that it further fractures the sailing community. The correct outcome would have been to stand up like a man, state that a mistake had been made and then correct it. President Petersson and those who stood with him in the belief that standing firm was the only way to save face, look worse now then they previously had. Now it looks even more like a stodgy council that is unwilling to take ownership for their actions.

We hear that we should be patient and re-address this issue for 2016. What I would like to know is, where are these sailors going to come from? With multihulls being out of the Olympics for an eight year period of time and event selection not scheduled to happen for another four years, who is going to be around, competing at an Olympic level in 2012. Are they to cross their fingers and hope for a multihull vote? The slate of events selected is nothing short of baffling. How is it that we ended up with six dinghy classes? I was not against there being a keelboat class in the Olympics, but against the six dinghy classes. I think that the five disciplines approach to solving this issue was the correct way to move ahead and insure that sailing is fairly represented. I know the Nick Dewhirst, Chairman of UKCRA has sent an open letter to Jaques Rogge, President of the International Olympic Committee to petition that the IOC extends an eleventh event for the 2012 Games in London. I do not know if he will have the success that the Star class had with their earlier petition. It is my hope that there will be a ground swell of support behind this issue.

I was hoping at the same time that some of the AC sailors who are now involved with multihull sailing at its highest level would speak up and show some support for this cause, but have not yet seen it happen. This decision is not good for the health of the sport or for promoting its visual appeal to the television audience. It is time that ISAF wakes up, gets out of their stodgy position and begins to truly represent all of those who sail and race on a worldwide basis.

Lars Segerlund writes:

It's simple, I will at all cost avoid any official sponsors of ISAF and resign my membership from the yacht club and windsurfing club since both are affiliated with ISAF.

I will if possible join any multihull organisation that is NOT affiliated with ISAF.

Vote with your wallet.

I am a multihull sailor, but what bugs me most is the Moth on foils and the women's high performance skiff, they should really have their time in the sun.

Also the Tornado was the only mixed crews, and in my not so humble opinion all classes should be mixed. (On a note which I think is irrelevant to the issue, match racing only works with old slow boats, when boat speed becomes a tactic it's irrelevant, so it's unmodern and boring ).

Chris Gould offers a counterpoint:

Anyone for women match racing in 2-man skiffs? Or even 18s - the match-racing might not be up to much, but it would sure be a spectacle! Maybe go 4-up with a tactician.

In relation to our interview with Jerome Pels , from Balitmore, USA, Donald Lawson writes:

What waste of time it was for you guys to interview him. If you wanted to talk to someone who didn't care or understand multihull sailing, why not call the drunks in from the corners to ask them about sailing?

He shows the problem with ISAF. They just don't understand what people want. They don't care what people want. How can you make a decision that says Media friendly and really think that the slowest boat you have fits that description?

The other part said they Media friendly boat needs to be fast and exciting. Who would love to watch paint dry? Or would you like to watch boat crash, flip over, travel at insane speeds or just look like futuristic boats?

ISAF has not learned the lessons of the America's Cup. Look at all of this excitement surrounding the Cup that hasn't been there in years; especially from the USA. The thought of fast giant trimarans gives you that feeling of futuristic sailing!

Then you have to ask, womans match racing over a high speed skiff? Again, afraid of the future. Did they ask the sailors what they thought? ..................... Oh yeah, they did. The ignored what the sailors suggested and said. Wow, some democracy! Maybe the Olympic sailors of the world should develop some kind of union against the type of problem?

Or maybe the sailors who want to sail real media friendly boats should start their own league and contact IOC about entering the Olympics separate from ISAF.

At this point what other choices do multihullers have?

From Tom Siders:

My comment is a simple one. Now that it appears that many of these AC sailors are getting their feet wet upon multihulls, maybe they could add their voices to restoring the multihull class to the Olympics. As much as a farce that this AC has become since the end of the 32nd AC, something good could come out of this if the teams and sailors got behind the push the reinstate multihulls for the 2012 games. This DoG challenge has put a great deal of focus upon the multihull community from the D35s, X40s and the older ORMA 60s, now use your voices to help support correcting a wrong that ISAF and the MNA’s allowed to take place.

On the America's Cup

Charles Apthorp writes:

In some ways a Judgment of Solomon, delaying the decision so the races takes place next year, which can't have been unintentional - being a complete cynic - and lets the parties fight it out on the water with neither side having an advantage.

I would have thought it would be unlikely that the appeal court would interfere as the test is: - was the judgment 'wrong' rather than the appeal court substituting its own view of the facts for that of the lower court Judge.

This dispute should have been mediated in private - I don't think Alinghi have done the sport any favours by their conduct particularly by forcing this matter to Court. Basically they have lost across the board - they should hire Alistair Campbell to see if they can 'spin' their way out of this one!

David F. Hill writes:

Why should I care about two rich spoiled boys who keep threatening to take their bat and ball home if they do not get their way. I hope both "giant 90 foot multihulls" have mechanical breakdowns during the first race before the first mark that renders them impossible to sail and the whole sordid affair sinks with them!

Peter Crew of Houston, Texas writes:

Well, ,,,at long last a decision on a date!!! Now, the question of where??? Perhaps the race should be held at some neutral location, March winds in the Gulf of Mexico are great for cat sailors!!!!!!!!

Jarosław Kaczorowski from Poland writes:

Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!

William Tucker suggests a change of plan:

At last! Let the games begin. How about 90 foot ice yachts with a venue in Finland!

D Werbeck writes:

It means..."a sporting chance" Sportsmanship...etc?
Remember those days when money was not an end...in itself or that the privileges it brought....were proportional...to the balance with responsibilities...?

Responsibility...was the product that produced....a future for the next generations?
Time to return to integrity and.............its corrects!

Finn Nielsen writes:

As of now 'it is what it is' ....unfortunate that at the very least the Americas Cup has been wounded by all this legal sparring (no pun intended) and it will never be what it was in the past - as i reflect on the past events i somehow feel the holy grail has lost something of the almost magical appeal and has shifted to a contest of corporate manipulation.

From Beijing Ian Stewart writes:

Certainly more interesting if both boats are ready.

Might even be a tad warmer for the crew in March than in November, though it means practice all through winter.

I wonder what games Alinghi might play with venue now? They can make it anywhere....

Egmont Bonomi Antunes writes from Beijing:

I have been following your coverage of the AC for about 2yrs now, ever since I became a member. As opposed to many people, I am very very excited about the up and coming 33rd AC which, as recent events indicate, will most likely be held in 90ft multihulls.

I am a firm believer in the man vs. nature side of sailing. By this I mean mans constant struggle to find better, more efficient ways of driving a small or large craft through the water, or over it (Moth), using the mere force of the wind. This, in my eyes, is where the real race is.

For me this is the stuff of dreams, it reminds me of the days when great men of industry the likes of Vanderbilt, Sopwith, Lipton, Stevenson etc.... went out to create what were the greatest testaments of speed on water of the time, the J class, still awe inspiring to this day.

As Brad points out in your article: 'I don’t think anyone really envisages what they’ll see with these boats when they are launched in terms of the size of them and the power of them and the speed of them. It will be something that hasn’t been seen before.'. I agree that these boats, if built, will set a new standard in terms of speed and efficiency and will remain a benchmark for years, if not decades, to come. It all depends on whether or not something like this ever happens again.

Needless to say that I plan on being as close as possible to these leviathans of speed when the racing finally begins.......

Editor and Publisher James Boyd responds: I have mixed feelings about the 33rd America's Cup - as an avid yachting technology junkie and a multihull fan of some 20+ years the prospect of a dust-up in 90ft superpowerful never-been-seen-before inshore trimarans developed by the best teams in the game, is too good to be true. However in the process the amount of destruction brought about by the present AC hiatus - the number of teams that have had to pack up, the number of sailors, designers and support teams having to look for work elsewhere (thankfully there still seems to be a reasonable amount of it), and in particular the number of sponsors who will have got bored by the situation and will be instead spending their marketing bucks elsewhere - is way too high a price to pay.

I sincerely hope now we vaguely have a date for the 33rd AC, that each party has scored a victory in the court in New York, that in the interests of the sport and all those involved with it, Alinghi/SNG and BMW Oracle Racing/GGYC will stop playing silly buggers, will get around a table and try to reach consensus on when and where the 33rd America's Cup will be held. Then hopefully come the summer of 2009 the remnants of the existing challengers can revitalise themselves and get back into the game.

If you have any comments on the above... email us here