Sometimes I watch some YT content. Ridiculous what the AC75 are doing. Especially turning on foil without relevant loss of speed seems pretty nice comparing to my 5.0 which nearly slows down to zero when tacking. lol:
I think sailing in commercial shipping still has potential. And this is a major benefit of this pricey hightech boats. The gain of knowledge about moving on water is huge.
You know, we saw the AC evolution to multihulls and we all know that multihulls are shunned by the monohull community. Yes, these AC boats are technically monohulls which the monohull community can now claim... but with their foil outriggers are they really monohulls? I recall an article on the Ft Lauderdale/Key West race where a Corsair 31 crew was smelling the diesel engine used to move a canting keel foil/ballast until they passed the larger mega-million dollar mono. So what are these AC boats using to raise and lower their outrigger foils?
James
a battery-driven, hydraulic power-unit that supplies the energy to lift and lower the immensely strong - and heavy - foil cant arms. https://www.americascup.com/the-technology
" Foil Cant Systems may only be driven by battery power. Batteries will be supplied. "
Last few AC's the crews grinders were creating hydrophilic pressure and it was stored in a an accumulator if i recall correctly. I am sure Philip or Sam can speak with much more knowledge than I on this. This power was used for everything from raising and lowering the boards to adjusting the sail/wing (and probably a cappuccino machine below deck)
I would guess it is similar for these boats, the grinders are creating the power for sail adjustments but i can't find any hard data on that at this time
The foil cant system is AC one design. Every team gets the same package. The racing from last month revealed the possible Achilles Heel to the AC. There is a schit storm brewing behind the scene. Of all things it started with cant system software updates and some failures. The team that failed wants to blame it on the supplied software, etc., the other teams say if was their own fault with implementation. Could be a legal mess . . . .could . . .
If you want the facts watch the post race press conference from Terry Hutchinson. He is the skipper and team executive director. He addressed the "leeward runner" theory and completely debunked it.
Actual statement about the backstay circa the 6:00 mark
"I haven't looked completely at the data to verify the runner (backstay) was maxed eased but I would also say that wasn't the reason"
seems to me he is saying" back stay doesn't seem to be the issue, Traveled all the way out was (potentially) bad, the running backstay was (maxed) eased but then the main was (max) eased which loaded up that backstay, the wind was 12 knots before the move, then 18 and jumped to 24 quickly"
i always travel out fully when I gybe, and the only time i have capsized in a heavy air gybe (and ejected through my sail) was the time i didn't travel out. But i do typically have my hand on the main (between the upper and lower block) and manually move the traveler (IF i can)
To be clear: i was replying to the 2 backstays - not sure how / when they are set - he does mention they are "pre-set" but i think he is talking about the setting / amount of tension
If you get nothing else, they are scrapping "Defiant" to get the control system for the forward cant system to install into "Patriot". The control systems were a total loss. 16:10 of the video linked above. https://youtu.be/4-yvEmEqdBc