Announcements
New Discussions
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 36 of 202 1 2 34 35 36 37 38 201 202
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: Team_Cat_Fever] #261007
07/07/13 06:58 PM
07/07/13 06:58 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by Team_Cat_Fever
You have twisted what Murray stated as to what would happen if the rules weren't agreed to in the end( which they originally had been). He said he would inform the Coast Guard that the "safety rules" that had originally been agreed to now are being argued, which would negate the permit as it had been issued.Result being the CG would rescind the permit, that's just obeying the law. A considerable difference to asking them to revoke it. If the terms don't meet the permit a new one would have to be issued (or not) under the new terms.

Here is the quote of what Mr. Murray said:
Quote
If the jury agrees with New Zealand and Luna Rossa, Murray said he’ll go back to the Coast Guard, which issued a racing permit this week, and say he doesn’t think the racing would be safe. In that case, the Coast Guard would almost certainly withdraw its permit. “Without a permit to race on San Francisco Bay, there will be no regatta,” Murray said.


I don't know the difference between "rescinding" and "revoking" the permit, but Murray clearly states that the permit would be withdrawn. He did not give any indication whatsoever that he would try to amend the permit, or apply for a new permit with a different safety plan. I don't see any way to read the statement "there will be no regatta" other than as an "all or nothing" ultimatum. I'm not twisting what Murray said, just taking him at his word.

-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261008
07/07/13 07:48 PM
07/07/13 07:48 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by mummp
"The first person to commend the Safety Recommendations was Grant Dalton, CEO of ETNZ. He publicly congratulated Murray for his work and said “you won’t get any push back from ETNZ on this.

Paul Cayard has simply repeated (almost verbatim) what Iain Murray said in his earlier attack on ETNZ.

Quote
The inclusion of these rules excludes no one. Yet, excluding these rules, and keeping the other 35, will exclude Artemis Racing. The fact is that if ETNZ and LR get what they want, Artemis Racing will be excluded from competition."

I'd like to see some justification of that statement. Is Paul Cayard stating that his team is incapable of building a boat within the class rules? How exactly does not allowing rudder elevators that extend outside the hulls and not allowing rudder rake changes on the water exclude Team Artemis from the America's Cup?

The fact of the matter is that the America's Cup Class Rules represent a contract between all the competitors. There is a proper procedure for changing the class rules, and (just like amending a contract) it requires unanimous consent. When Iain Murray made his safety recommendations, they included changes to the class rules, but he could not get unanimous agreement on all points from the teams. Instead of proceeding with the 35 points that were acceptable to everyone, Murray tried to force his way on the dissenting teams by including all 37 of his proposals in the safety plan attached to the USCG permit application. ALL the subsequent consternation is a direct result of that action. Don't blame ETNZ and Luna Rossa for standing up for their rights under the rules (i.e. protesting) - blame the man who tried to subvert them.

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: Isotope235] #261011
07/08/13 06:39 AM
07/08/13 06:39 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Originally Posted by mummp
"The first person to commend the Safety Recommendations was Grant Dalton, CEO of ETNZ. He publicly congratulated Murray for his work and said “you won’t get any push back from ETNZ on this.

Paul Cayard has simply repeated (almost verbatim) what Iain Murray said in his earlier attack on ETNZ.

Quote
The inclusion of these rules excludes no one. Yet, excluding these rules, and keeping the other 35, will exclude Artemis Racing. The fact is that if ETNZ and LR get what they want, Artemis Racing will be excluded from competition."

I'd like to see some justification of that statement. Is Paul Cayard stating that his team is incapable of building a boat within the class rules? How exactly does not allowing rudder elevators that extend outside the hulls and not allowing rudder rake changes on the water exclude Team Artemis from the America's Cup?

The fact of the matter is that the America's Cup Class Rules represent a contract between all the competitors. There is a proper procedure for changing the class rules, and (just like amending a contract) it requires unanimous consent. When Iain Murray made his safety recommendations, they included changes to the class rules, but he could not get unanimous agreement on all points from the teams. Instead of proceeding with the 35 points that were acceptable to everyone, Murray tried to force his way on the dissenting teams by including all 37 of his proposals in the safety plan attached to the USCG permit application. ALL the subsequent consternation is a direct result of that action. Don't blame ETNZ and Luna Rossa for standing up for their rights under the rules (i.e. protesting) - blame the man who tried to subvert them.


There was an article linked previously that stated some surface area prescription for the rudder foils - Cayard stated that they had the older rule, smaller, asymmetrical (about the rudder centerline) rudder foils and had just received newer larger symmetrical foils that they had ordered for the new rule. I believe his statement was saying that they wouldn't have time to order new foils if the rule changed again (presumably a hybrid mix between the old and new rule).


Jake Kohl
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261013
07/08/13 07:27 AM
07/08/13 07:27 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 774
Greenville SC
bacho Offline
old hand
bacho  Offline
old hand

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 774
Greenville SC
I was under the impression that the old smaller rudders had smaller posts and wouldn't be compatible in the mounting for the larger rudders.

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: Jake] #261014
07/08/13 07:31 AM
07/08/13 07:31 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
P.M. Offline OP
Pooh-Bah
P.M.  Offline OP
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
Originally Posted by Jake
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Originally Posted by mummp
"The first person to commend the Safety Recommendations was Grant Dalton, CEO of ETNZ. He publicly congratulated Murray for his work and said “you won’t get any push back from ETNZ on this.

Paul Cayard has simply repeated (almost verbatim) what Iain Murray said in his earlier attack on ETNZ.

Quote
The inclusion of these rules excludes no one. Yet, excluding these rules, and keeping the other 35, will exclude Artemis Racing. The fact is that if ETNZ and LR get what they want, Artemis Racing will be excluded from competition."

I'd like to see some justification of that statement. Is Paul Cayard stating that his team is incapable of building a boat within the class rules? How exactly does not allowing rudder elevators that extend outside the hulls and not allowing rudder rake changes on the water exclude Team Artemis from the America's Cup?

The fact of the matter is that the America's Cup Class Rules represent a contract between all the competitors. There is a proper procedure for changing the class rules, and (just like amending a contract) it requires unanimous consent. When Iain Murray made his safety recommendations, they included changes to the class rules, but he could not get unanimous agreement on all points from the teams. Instead of proceeding with the 35 points that were acceptable to everyone, Murray tried to force his way on the dissenting teams by including all 37 of his proposals in the safety plan attached to the USCG permit application. ALL the subsequent consternation is a direct result of that action. Don't blame ETNZ and Luna Rossa for standing up for their rights under the rules (i.e. protesting) - blame the man who tried to subvert them.


There was an article linked previously that stated some surface area prescription for the rudder foils - Cayard stated that they had the older rule, smaller, asymmetrical (about the rudder centerline) rudder foils and had just received newer larger symmetrical foils that they had ordered for the new rule. I believe his statement was saying that they wouldn't have time to order new foils if the rule changed again (presumably a hybrid mix between the old and new rule).


Try this.


Philip
USA #1006
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261018
07/08/13 09:52 AM
07/08/13 09:52 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
B
brucat Offline
Carpal Tunnel
brucat  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
I think a lot of things are being taken out of context. There probably won't be any one answer that pleases everyone. Hopefully the jury gets us past this quickly so the focus can return to racing.

I'd like to see the finals be between ETNZ and Oracle USA. I think those two have the most experience on these boats and will provide the best racing.

Mike

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261019
07/08/13 09:57 AM
07/08/13 09:57 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
T
ThunderMuffin Offline
Carpal Tunnel
ThunderMuffin  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
T

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
When is the IJ slated to rule? They must know that they're basically holding up everything.

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261020
07/08/13 10:03 AM
07/08/13 10:03 AM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,658
Florida Suncoast, Dunedin Caus...
catman Offline
Pooh-Bah
catman  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,658
Florida Suncoast, Dunedin Caus...
Philip,

This may have been said before.

Thanks for taking the time to gather all the AC info and post it here. You've made it easy for me to keep up with all of it. Your effort is much appreciated.

CHEERS!


Have Fun
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: catman] #261021
07/08/13 10:13 AM
07/08/13 10:13 AM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,118
Northfield Mn
Karl_Brogger Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Karl_Brogger  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,118
Northfield Mn
Originally Posted by catman
Philip,

This may have been said before.

Thanks for taking the time to gather all the AC info and post it here. You've made it easy for me to keep up with all of it. Your effort is much appreciated.

CHEERS!


X2


I'm boatless.
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: brucat] #261023
07/08/13 10:49 AM
07/08/13 10:49 AM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by brucat
There probably won't be any one answer that pleases everyone.

Mike,

I agree. At this point, I don't see any likely outcome that is fair to all. I sympathize with Artemis over the quandary they're in. They went down two design paths (small and large symmetric elevators), not anticipating the possibility of a third form of the rules. A 35 of 37 point rule change could leave them SOL. ETNZ and LR also went down two design paths (small elevators, and large asymmetric elevators, neither with rake adjustment). A full 37 point rule change could leave them disadvantaged. Only Oracle developed small, large symmetric and large asymmetric elevators, with adjustable rudder rake. They will come out even or advantaged in any case. The fairest solution would be to return to the original elevators, but Iain Murray has already stated very clearly that he won't permit that to happen. I wish the jury well in finding an equitable solution within the rules and look forward to its decision.

Originally Posted by catman
Thanks for taking the time to gather all the AC info and post it here. You've made it easy for me to keep up with all of it. Your effort is much appreciated.

Phillip,
I've been thinking the same thing. Thanks very much for keeping us all posted.

Sincerely,
Eric

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261024
07/08/13 11:09 AM
07/08/13 11:09 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
B
brucat Offline
Carpal Tunnel
brucat  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
Eric, I think maybe you're getting wrapped up in some of the buzz. Pretty uncharacteristic of you, so maybe you know something we don't?

From what I've read, Murray has to report the change. The CG doesn't have to revoke the permit, but if they do, the regatta is in jeopardy. I think everything that I've seen lines up with this, meaning that there is a possibility for the regatta permit to remain intact, regardless of the final rudder rule.

No one, including Murray or the CG, wins if the regatta is flushed.

Mike

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261026
07/08/13 11:41 AM
07/08/13 11:41 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
P.M. Offline OP
Pooh-Bah
P.M.  Offline OP
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
Thanks for the gratitude guys.

Here it is again. Please go to this link and LISTEN to 37:30 35:30 through 46:00, then come back and comment. It's from the horse's mouth. How many times can the media ask the same question?

Last edited by mummp; 07/08/13 11:44 AM. Reason: correct time clip

Philip
USA #1006
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: brucat] #261027
07/08/13 11:54 AM
07/08/13 11:54 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Originally Posted by brucat
Eric, I think maybe you're getting wrapped up in some of the buzz. Pretty uncharacteristic of you, so maybe you know something we don't?

From what I've read, Murray has to report the change. The CG doesn't have to revoke the permit, but if they do, the regatta is in jeopardy. I think everything that I've seen lines up with this, meaning that there is a possibility for the regatta permit to remain intact, regardless of the final rudder rule.

No one, including Murray or the CG, wins if the regatta is flushed.

Mike


Mike, your position assumes that Murray has an ulterior motive with the rule changes. While I too once held that position based on the stream of information coming out of the two teams that lodged protests, I think it's important to note that he was put in place by all of the competitors and it's unlikely that he's being influenced by one team.

I'm starting to come of mind that Murray just honestly believes that these changes are safer and, frankly, it's hard to argue with that actually. The offset rudder lifting foil (asymmetrical is a misleading term) does lead to enormous torque loads on the vertical rudder foil and hinge system and could lead to breakage....for all we know one or both of the capsizes to date had this issue lead to the capsize. I can see how allowing the rudder foil to be centered on the rudder and extend beyond the beam of the boat can be safer.

With regards to the issue of adjusting the rudder foil, there was also a lot of bad information circulating about this early. Previous to these changes, the rudder/foil rake had to be set prior to racing for that day. We all know that every one of these boats can adjust the rake of the rudder and it's attached foil - they would be insane to try and foil without this capability or, at the very least, it would be absolutely required for testing to determine the optimum setting. We also know that the wind can change dramatically in San Fran throughout the day and one rake setting may be terribly inadequate for the day. Teams would have the choice of setting it aggressively and being slow in the light air or setting it more flat and being in danger of a pitchpole should the wind build later. The rule allows them to change it prior to starting each race and better tune it for the conditions. I also believe this is a safer scenario than allowing one setting for the day.

I've come to mind that these changes are pretty reasonable. Oracle seems to have had a jump on this because they had a lot of different rudder and foil combinations. If I were to guess, I bet their pitchpole lead to (or was caused by) rudder failure that lead them to try several different things. New Zealand is probably on par with them in this regard. I don't think any team could change and try different rudder foils without being observed since it flies above the water regularly.

The two teams with less budget / development are likely behind when it comes to foil options - Artemis admitted it with Cayard's tour/interview yesterday and ~maybe~ Luna Rossa admitted as much in the vacuum of their competing yesterday. They're slated to race Artemis through this week and since Artemis isn't racing, we probably won't see LR until Saturday when they're scheduled to race NZ again. By not showing up and racing yesterday, they had an additional week to work out the new rudders.

Also remember that the original rule was intended to make foiling unpractical. Some of these limitations have become liabilities now that everyone is foiling - it makes sense to tweak the rule to make things safer and I think the only real argument you could make against it is that the timing leaves something to be desired.

This is such a game of controlling the media that I think the race management fell behind the two protesting challengers in getting their story out. Those two protesting competitors set the tone and we have already seen several glaring inaccuracies out of those reports that you really have to question the whole thing.



Jake Kohl
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: ThunderMuffin] #261028
07/08/13 12:23 PM
07/08/13 12:23 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
P.M. Offline OP
Pooh-Bah
P.M.  Offline OP
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
Originally Posted by Undecided
When is the IJ slated to rule? They must know that they're basically holding up everything.


“We’d like to have a decision on Wednesday”


International Jury to hear Emirates Team New Zealand and Luna Rossa applications

About the Jury


Philip
USA #1006
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: Isotope235] #261044
07/08/13 04:02 PM
07/08/13 04:02 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,658
Florida Suncoast, Dunedin Caus...
catman Offline
Pooh-Bah
catman  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,658
Florida Suncoast, Dunedin Caus...
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Originally Posted by mummp
"The first person to commend the Safety Recommendations was Grant Dalton, CEO of ETNZ. He publicly congratulated Murray for his work and said “you won’t get any push back from ETNZ on this.

Paul Cayard has simply repeated (almost verbatim) what Iain Murray said in his earlier attack on ETNZ.

Quote
The inclusion of these rules excludes no one. Yet, excluding these rules, and keeping the other 35, will exclude Artemis Racing. The fact is that if ETNZ and LR get what they want, Artemis Racing will be excluded from competition." I'd like to see some justification of that statement. Is Paul Cayard stating that his team is incapable of building a boat within the class rules? How exactly does not allowing rudder elevators that extend outside the hulls and not allowing rudder rake changes on the water exclude Team Artemis from the America's Cup?

Th

e fact of the matter is that the America's Cup Class Rules represent a contract between all the competitors. There is a proper procedure for changing the class rules, and (just like amending a contract) it requires unanimous consent. When Iain Murray made his safety recommendations, they included changes to the class rules, but he could not get unanimous agreement on all points from the teams. Instead of proceeding with the 35 points that were acceptable to everyone, Murray tried to force his way on the dissenting teams by including all 37 of his proposals in the safety plan attached to the USCG permit application. ALL the subsequent consternation is a direct result of that action. Don't blame ETNZ and Luna Rossa for standing up for their rights under the rules (i.e. protesting) - blame the man who tried to subvert them.


If you listen to the IM presser he explains what happened quite clearly. He did not force the teams to accept the rules. They had meetings in which all teams agreed to the rule changes (or did not complain about them at the time) including the rudders. He felt he had the approval of all the teams prior to announcing them. Then he was ambushed for whatever reason by ETNZ and LR. You can see why he's pissed. Then there is the one other bit that is interesting, during his talk he says LR had spun out a couple times. That is news to me at least. So much for the so called perfect foiling design. I think it's time to give the man what he wants. Anyone that thinks US-17 needs IM to step in and win them the regatta is drinking some bad koolaid.


Have Fun
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: catman] #261046
07/08/13 04:30 PM
07/08/13 04:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
T
ThunderMuffin Offline
Carpal Tunnel
ThunderMuffin  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
T

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
Originally Posted by catman
Anyone that thinks US-17 needs IM to step in and win them the regatta is drinking some bad koolaid.


You obviously haven't been reading any of the news. ETNZ has this thing in the bag and is already making space for the auld mug in Auckland.

Any change now is clearly an attempt to commandeer the cup from their divine-right of victory.



Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: catman] #261047
07/08/13 04:35 PM
07/08/13 04:35 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
P.M. Offline OP
Pooh-Bah
P.M.  Offline OP
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,490
On the Water
Originally Posted by catman
Then there is the one other bit that is interesting, during his talk he says LR had spun out a couple times.

Iain Murray . . ."Luna Rossa spun out twice, doing 36 knots, ended up head to wind. How's that not a safety issue?"(45:48)

I would guess that the shore laundry crew had some extra cleaning of soiled pants to tend with.


Philip
USA #1006
Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: P.M.] #261048
07/08/13 04:36 PM
07/08/13 04:36 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
B
brucat Offline
Carpal Tunnel
brucat  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,969
Jake, how did you misread my post so badly? I said nothing of motive, quite the contrary. It's been reported that he must report the change, then it's up to the CG

Of course, there has been a rash of sailing fatalities in CA recently...

Mike

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: catman] #261049
07/08/13 04:46 PM
07/08/13 04:46 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by catman
If you listen to the IM presser he explains what happened quite clearly. He did not force the teams to accept the rules. They had meetings in which all teams agreed to the rule changes (or did not complain about them at the time) including the rudders. He felt he had the approval of all the teams prior to announcing them. Then he was ambushed for whatever reason by ETNZ and LR.

If that's the case, then why didn't the teams sign-off on the changes (as required by the class rules) right then and there? Had the proper procedure been followed, there would be no controversy now. Using the Coast Guard permit as a backdoor to amend the class rules makes no sense if all teams agreed to the changes.

Murray keeps repeating that story, but I don't think it holds water.

Re: AC72 Oracle Team USA Spaceship has landed [Re: brucat] #261050
07/08/13 05:09 PM
07/08/13 05:09 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by brucat
Eric, I think maybe you're getting wrapped up in some of the buzz. Pretty uncharacteristic of you, so maybe you know something we don't?

Yes, I've been overly vociferous on this topic. Thanks for thinking it's uncharacteristic. I don't have any special information, I just think that the statements and actions of the Regatta Director and the Teams don't add up. That, and it has touched a couple of my hot-buttons.

Quote
From what I've read, Murray has to report the change. The CG doesn't have to revoke the permit, but if they do, the regatta is in jeopardy. I think everything that I've seen lines up with this, meaning that there is a possibility for the regatta permit to remain intact, regardless of the final rudder rule.

If the Jury decides to change Murray's proposals, then all he needs to do is give the Coast Guard an updated safety plan and the CG will then amend the permit. It's my understanding that it's pretty much a rubber-stamp deal. Murray, however, shows no intent to do so. Instead, he said that he would tell the CG that the racing is unsafe and expect the CG to withdraw the permit.

Quote
No one, including Murray or the CG, wins if the regatta is flushed.

Indeed. That is one reason I think Murray is acting either disingenuously or irrationally. If Murray ever did act to get the permit rescinded, I expect he would be replaced immediately.

Page 36 of 202 1 2 34 35 36 37 38 201 202

Moderated by  Damon Linkous 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 428 guests, and 82 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Darryl, zorro, CraigJ, PaulEddo2, AUS180
8150 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,404
Posts267,055
Members8,150
Most Online2,167
Dec 19th, 2022
--Advertisement--
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1