I'm glad they are foiling again. I think that is what made the last cup such a spectacle and brought in so many people that normally wouldn't give two ****s about sailing

Holy wow...he came out with teeth. I guess after seeing what the Dalton rule got them last time (came back to bite Oracle) they decided to fight fire with fire and just go after them in the media in the same way Dalton uses the outlets. It's probably not a bad strategy...the public back and forth creates interest and intrigue and develops the characters for the story to play out (which is something Nascar in the US has really failed to grasp). I'm sure that struck a solid note with both Dalton and the New Zealand crowd and probably will unify them by touching on the emotional loss they suffered. Not to mention the New Zealand vs. Australia stress point.

Jimmy struck me as extremely prepared and practiced for that type of interview. This is going to be an interesting lead up to the racing!

They talked about some sort of promotional video featuring Spithill...I'll have to look around for that but would love to see a link if anyone has it.

I wonder if Oracle will retain M&M this time around or let them slip to New Zealand again (after paying them to write the boat rule!). That seemed like an odd risk for Oracle to take last time - and I think it almost cost them.

I'm surprised they are going to stick with the hard wing sail concept if they wanted to keep costs down.

If I recall, after the last go-round, they said the major expense was the 100+ person shore team required to mount/dismount the wing?

Building boats only 10 feet shorter, but still requiring a huge shore team to launch/retrieve the wing every day is not going to be much cheaper than the 72's.

Aaa..got the vid. They definitely have some quality marketing on board - they're really focusing on character development and nationality.





This is my favorite video shot of the entire thing last year.
http://youtu.be/rv6fLsz7Mk4?t=1m44s

The wing is smaller, so, yeah, it saves a little. The whole money thing has always been a ruse, though. The "cost reduction measures" may make it easier to put a boat on the water in the event, but it's still going to take a fortune to put a winning campaign together. The winner is going to spend whatever it takes.

+1

If you have to ask how much it costs, you probably shouldn't be taking a shot at the AC...

Well they complained there were only a few (4) teams who could even afford to show up with a 72. I think the number I heard, for Larry to win it, was about $200 Million. So now they will go cheap, to get more teams. This time, with the new 62 it will -only- cost....

$180 Million...each.

If they weren't going to make a major cost saving move, they should have left it as is, at least they already had 4 AC 72's built.

OR... if they were serious about saving money and attracting more teams, leave it at 45'.

I predict when the next AC 62 challenger series come around, there will still only be 4 teams who show up, if that, who can afford to build a competitive foiling hard wing 62. The new rule changed nothing in the cost required to compete. So it was all nonsense.


1. ETNZ
2. Australia
3. Artimis
4. Prada?

Sure there will be many more AC45 teams, but let's see how many build a 62 and show up at the Challenger finals.

I don't know if I totally agree...the wing will be one design now - so you save all the costs related to molds, forms, engineers, and computer time for that one which is a very different thing for someone to come in cold on.

All I know is what I read about it, after the cup, when someone from Oracle was being interviewed. He said, the ground crew for the solid wing was a huge expense, and they could have gone nearly as fast, for half the cost, with soft sails. That was why I was surprised they chose a boat that's nearly as big, and with the wings too. I don't see much of a cost savings there. I hope they decided to come up with a better way to control the foil's angle of attack.

I also saw an article that said that they'd go through a $40,0000 jib after 4 hours of sailing time.

Thats a lot of $$$ right there.

That comment was from Gino Morrelli.

Not to uncle Larry

If you have to ask, you can't afford it. With an entry hurdle of $3 million, they clearly don't care if you can't afford it.

Mike

And if anyone would know what it costs to use wings, vs. soft sails, it would be Gino.

Yes, I realize he was under contract for ETNZ when he said it.

This article implies that the wing is only an aerodynamic one design. It sounds like everything under the skin of the wing could be different from team to team. Does that really save anyone much?

http://www.sail-world.com/USA/Americas-Cup:-Iain-Murray-on-the-Venue-and-AC62-size,-shape-and-speed/121866

They will still have to take the wing off every night, store it indoors (find a huge hanger) and then put it back up every morning.

With a huge wing like the 72 had, (and I'm guessing the 62 wing won't be much smaller) it took a hundred guys four hours to launch each boat.

Where's the cost savings by going to the 62? 10 feet of hull? OK, a little less carbon there, but in the big scheme of things, they are still going to need the most expensive part, the shore crew, to raise and lower the wings daily, and they are going to need to find (or pay to build) storage facilities for the wings.

OK...so how much faster is using the wing, than using a soft sail, which would eliminate the need (and cost) for all of the above?

Is it 10% faster?

20%?

If the boat will go 40 knots with the solid wing, will it only go 32 knots (20% slower) with a soft sail?

The short crew is miniscule in costs.....
In the big scheme.

Really? You ever try to pay, feed and house 100 guys for a couple months? Then there's the heavy equipment and storage space needed for the wings.

I'll defer to Gino Morelli's earlier statement, that the easiest way to get the costs to come down significantly would be to go with soft sails. Only question I have is, how much slower would the boats be, and is that even an issue, if they can get them over 40 knots with soft sails, and they are all going about the same speed, does it matter if they are all going 45 instead of 40? It's a relative thing.

If a jib is $40k, how much would a main cost? $200k? Those sails would really add up. Then, would the teams even leave them with the mast stepped outside anyways? I'm guessing not. I don't know what kinda maintenance costs there are with the wings, but I'm guessing their additional costs are not that great by the end of a campaign.