 |
| Emirates/Team NZ reaching in the second LV Cup race |
Capsizes and equipment failure are an acceptable part of the sport, as every dinghy sailor will tell you. What makes the AC different is that the equipment has failed so early. Seaworthiness was defined by the great admiralty judge Learned hand as "ability for the service undertaken". The T.J. Hooper, 60 F. 2d 737 (2d Cir. 1932) By that measure these AC 72's should not be raced because they are "not fit for (their) intended purpose", as the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals defines the term.
For independent thinking by a sailing master and photographer follow Stephen Lirakis.
·
1 comment:
I believe that in the rush for speed above all else, they neglected to sea trial these flying catamarans enough to ensure they could get through a race without breaking. Utterly high tech, with myriad systems interdependent, and only the ightest weight material; there wasn't enough thought given to potential seaworthiness ( esp. In the windy & choppy waters of SF Bay with the forces involved at these unheard of speeds) nor the great benefit of structural strength & simplicity over complexity which appears lost in the race to go fast at any cost. These AC 72’s are an unfinished (under)design(ed) disappointment.
In the last America's Cup. A completely dominating trimaran giant Dogzilla, with the kinks worked out, beat Bertarelli's Swiss Cat without a single memorable breakdown or up on either boat in any race. Would that they had managed to do the same prior to this racing.
Post a Comment