Sydney to Hobart 07

[Alan Wheeler]

I can not debate whether they have the motor running at all times, but I can certainly say, they do not need to. Canting a keel only needs to be done once on each tack. Fine adjustments for wind strength etc can be done purley electricaly, with the motor running to top off batteries once a day say. No need and I can't understand why anyone would want to run an engine all the way. Besides, the fuel one would have to carry would outweigh any performance advantage the canting keel gave you in the first place.

[Whimsical]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

the AC race which is all about technology.

ROFLMAO
What technology is that Rule bending technology or legal one upmanship technology.

Mike

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

I can not debate whether they have the motor running at all times, but I can certainly say, they do not need to. Canting a keel only needs to be done once on each tack. Fine adjustments for wind strength etc can be done purley electricaly, with the motor running to top off batteries once a day say. No need and I can't understand why anyone would want to run an engine all the way. Besides, the fuel one would have to carry would outweigh any performance advantage the canting keel gave you in the first place.

Alan, they run the motor the whole time. I expect they run it even when it's not needed, in case they need to tack or gybe suddenly. How much diesel do you think it would require to run a small engine, mostly at idle, for a couple of days? The things probably use less than 1 litre per hour - so less than 50 litres of fuel.

A guy in the Scarborough sailing club has a water ballasted 50' mono he had built specifically for racing - carbon fibre, no interior, and the whole megabuck deal. It draws about 3 metres, so it often cant get into or out of the marina. It has a diesel driven pump to transfer the water ballast on tacks which spends so much time idling that he has to replace or rebuild it every year or so due to glazing of it's bores. He runs it throughout the entire race.

What's hilarious is that he almost always gets beaten by my mate's 38 foot, backyard built, CRUISING catamaran - complete with innerspring matresses, microwave oven, etc, etc.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

What's hilarious is that he almost always gets beaten by my mate's 38 foot, backyard built, CRUISING catamaran - complete with innerspring matresses, microwave oven, etc, etc.

And your mate is probably quite a few Hundred thou $$$ better off

Dave

[cooper]

....its been said before but, Human power for all sailing systems or they are recognised in a differant class. This is so everybody knows that you are comparing similar types of sailing. There is a huge differance between an engine driven canting keel and a battery operated nav system. Like the changes in formular one motor racing rules, the CYC should impose a no motor rule. The gear could still be used, but it would rely on the abilities of the crew, not a single finger pressing a button. This means when the going gets tough then using the "extras" also gets harder. If they continue down the powered line then I dont see why they shouldnt allow multies, and for that matter hydies....that would be interesting ...hydies doing 30 knots plus across Bass Strait......whoooooeeeee.....there would be tears.....

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

The point is, they go faster because their engines are running. Without their engines running they would be slower. It's not complicated is it?

Actually, they go faster because their keels can move. It sounds like your issue is how they move.
Fundamentally, there is no difference except the technology, the rules allow the technology and you choose to disagree with the rules.

Each to his own but, with all due respect, why inflict your perceptions on others?

You obviously have every right to voice your reasoning and opinion here but it only serves to cause acrimonious debate when you make it judgemental.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by Whimsical

ROFLMAO
What technology is that Rule bending technology or legal one upmanship technology.

Mike

Although it may seem like both of the above, there is an incredible amount of actual design technology with which you might be unfamiliar that hopefully makes the biggest difference among the boats. For all the criticism of the AC races, that's where most of the new advances come from.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Actually, they go faster because their keels can move. It sounds like your issue is how they move.
Fundamentally, there is no difference except the technology, the rules allow the technology and you choose to disagree with the rules.

Each to his own but, with all due respect, why inflict your perceptions on others?

You obviously have every right to voice your reasoning and opinion here but it only serves to cause acrimonious debate when you make it judgemental.

Directly or indirectly, the engines are attached to the keels. The engines are what make the keels move.

So what if we design a different shape of "keel" (that looks a bit like a propellor) and call it a "rotating keel" hydraulically coupled to the motor, just like a swing keel, and run it all the way to Hobart too?

If you are going to allow one kind of motor driven underwater appendage, why not another?

Maybe I sound judgemental to you. That's your opinion. I have nothing against movable keels - but they should not be motor driven.

I'd like to see the Sydney-Hobart opened up to multihulls too. At least they are sailing boats.

[Ex-Calif]

Hmmm. Tempest in a teacup. Some governing body sets up rules and says we are gonna have a race. Don't like the rules? Don't race. Don't race but like to watch and don't like the rules? Don't watch.

If nobody watches they'll change the rules.

Stray thought - No matter what vehicle, racing fast is about money. More money = more fast

If they used bloody great batteries would anyone on this thread have an issue?

[44'cruisingcat]

Well, yes. I don't think they should be using anything other than wind and crew power to sail the boat. Communications etc can be electric or whatever they like, but the actual sailing of the boat shouldn't be motorised IMHO.

[Weyalan]

It is the rich, big, fast end of yacht racing that provides the drive for innovation that often ends up becoming the standard feature on the more mundane everyday boata few years down the track. The rich guys (or syndicates) with their big fast boats may look like petulant kids playing bend-the-rules in a very exclusive play-pen, but it is because of them that we end up with affordable epoxy/kevlar/carbon hulls, or carbon fibre rigs, or fancy 3DL laminate sails, etc... in fact, they can probably be thanked for the fact that we are not all sailing wooden boats with wooden spars and hemp rigging.

At any given time, we, the ordinary joes, are probably shaking our heads at the outrageous amounts of money that these guys are spending and the lenghts to which they will go to get more speed. But we need these people, and what they do is, eventually, good for sailing.

[Weyalan]

For what it is worth, I think this could be one of the best Sydney to Hobart races for years: There are 4 98-foot supermaxis, of which 3 have a real and genuine chance of taking line honours (Wild Oates XI, Maximus, Leopard. RealisticallyWild Thing is only a chance if the other 3 break / pull out). But the 98-footers are actually quite unlikely to win on corrected time. I reckon that Rosebud; the newish TP65 is probably most likely to win on handicap, unless, of course, it is hard on the nose the whole way, in which case, any old IOR shitter is probably in with a sniff). There are also 3 or 4 open 60s, and all in a ll a good looking field.

Unusually, this year's Melbourne to Hobart is going down the East coast of Tassie, and as a result, has a larger fleet than the last couple of years (more traditionally, a West coast route). There is also a Launceston to Hobart race this year, which has aattracted a fleet of 25 or so. All in all, there will be a lot of boats coming up the Derwent before the New Year.

I did get a couple of invites for the aforementioned races, but I decided I would rather spend the time crusing on Insatiable, with Lisa, some beer and a fishing rod.

[cooper]

hey Weyalan, why did they change the route for the "West coaster" ?

[Weyalan]

Originally Posted by cooper

hey Weyalan, why did they change the route for the "West coaster" ?

I couldn't say, for sure, why the route for Melbourne to Hobart has been changed from "West Coaster" to "East Coaster". However, it is apparent that the fleet for the West Coaster has been on the decline over the last few years, and only attracted adozen or less entries over the last couple of years.Speaking to a few yachties who have done a bunch of West Coasters, it becomes apparent that it is not necessarily a soft option compared to the Sydeny to Hobart and can be just as tough, but without the glamour. It is significant that there are about 40 entries for the race this year, so the decision to change seems to be paying off...

The new Launceston to Hbbart was the idea of a bunch of sailors from Geilston Bay Boating Club, who's boats, with all dur respect, were probably not approporaite for a Melbourne to Hobart or Sydney to Hobart. With the interest generated by the inaugural Launceston to Hobart, it was logical to change the route of the other race too.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Weyalan

the West Coaster has been on the decline over the last few years, and only attracted adozen or less entries

My perception is that doing the Syd-Hobart you need to have rocks in your head and a jolly warm jumper, but to do the West Coaster you need to be a total ding-a-ling masochist with a whole sheep!

The east Coaster you're exposed to Bass Strait for 200 miles where the west coaster you cop the full southern ocean for over 400 miles. And you never get to see the Syd-Hob mob. Whereas this east coaster you will be racing together for the last 200 miles and finishing together.
It will all make it much more exciting.