The water is only 10-15 feet deep. Pulling the anchors is not the issue (although the donated plow anchors are somewhat inappropriate). Wrangling those 2 meter diameter marks in 25 kts is a problem. They have a lot of windage - and they're heavy, with a chain bridle underneath them.

The biggest issue with the marks are the "skins" they put on them - they're very fragile and the marks cannot be towed in the water at all. The marks are yellow, but the skins are orange, so if the skins get ripped off, the marks are the wrong color.

I am in no position to affect how things are done at this event, other than to relay some of the concerns Jill has brought up to the people who might have some influence.

This is my first year here, and I'm just an Indian. I pick marks up and I put them down.

what a pile of **** boat. bring back the T and be done with it, you wanks.

Classy - what's that based on?

Thanks Matt. Skins and chain bridles, wow. No BIMBOs were involved in the selection of those marks/tackle, evidently?

Mike

Sounds like you could have used a boat-trailer.

I was asked offline where I saw the popped mast pictures. It was on FB.

Looks like it was in the middle of the diamonds though? That's usually not a spot I look at a mast and go "oh ****!, that ain't gonna last!"

5 masts all broke in the same spot.

It broke "like a kit kat".

interesting.

But were the mast breaks due to the sailing or the flip/hitting the bottom?

I am about the furthest from an engineer one can get (besides maybe an Art History major - their credo is "Fricta vis ut" or loosely translated as "Would you like Fries with that?"), but I would suspect that right about there is the second most highly loaded part of the mast?

When the diamonds are cranked along with full tension on mainsheet, that part of the mast is probably pre-bent a bit and can't flex due to the diamonds holding it in column and the mainsheet/boom tension pushing it forward?

But when you stick the mast in the mud, there's probably no way to properly determine where all the shock loading is going?

That's roughly in the middle...which makes sense. In the middle of the mast which is roughly in the middle between the upper diamond wire connecting point and the spreaders.

Carbon masts are speced for the N17 because they can be built to a constant standard... The tornado's had to move to a carbon stick by ISAF order because of all of the BS games that could be played with alu extrusions changing bend characteristics and still being class legal... measurable advantages to the teams with the perfect mast... but hardly one design. The class was ordered to change...

ISAF learned their lesson and required a carbon stick for the new Olympic class ...

Nacra's first stick was a total failure.... Their second stick also failed... Eventually they (ISAF and Nacra) went to an outside builder... (Hall spars I think) Why they are 8 grand is another good question.

I don't think the issue is the mast... I think the issue is the boats seaworthiness. I believe Nacra wants to fix it... but ISAF has their head up their butt and won't admit that they screwed up.

Enrique Figorora would be a good person to interview... He was an adviser to the ISAF technical committee and had a major voice in all of these decisons.

I don't think its the total issue either, but this isn't the first we've heard of mast failures with this boat.

I'm guessing the cost is relative to supply. As in I'm the only one supplying this, and I'm behind, so go f*ck yourself. It's what I would do and have done, it's smart operating.

Other than that, the C foils need to go at some point, it'll likely happen, but this is dealing with a bureaucracy, so smart things are never done quickly. How much attention would this class attract if they were flying like the NACRA carbon 20 or Phantom?

given the choice, would you think the Phantom would be the better thought-out platform?

Are they priced similarly?

There's issues with getting them right now. Production keeps getting pushed back, which is to be expected to be honest. But they are starting to roll out.

Better platform quality wise? I don't know. My small exposure to the Phantom F18's was just looking at them at Worlds in Long Beach, seemed to be a quality product. But I think that is true of most of the boats. The Flying Phantom looks incredibly stable, and it's had buckets of money poured into it's development. I think the 17 was kind of shotgunned into position.

At this point, yeah, I'd say it'd be a better platform, but what do I know. I'm in the frozen north where my own boat doesn't get used. I'd just base that on stability. It doesn't matter how easy the boat is to sail. The level of competition creates challenges all on it's own. Squeezing that last freckle of speed out takes dedication, skill, and practice. I think the 17 would create a more level playing field if it were either straight boards, winglet rudders were added, or if it got the flying package like the Carbon 20. The A-cats weren't running C boards for very long. 5-6 years? They didn't move away from it because of the awesomeness.

So... with one race to go before the medal round on Sat... the standings are Easton, Newberry and Wilmott.

Looks like Sarah and Matt had the best regatta after the nucelar events on day one.. Easton and Wilmott finished the three races on day one wheras Newberry finished one of them. and so they eat a 50 Nobody is a clear cut front runner with the Mendlablatts in the mix as well. ...

Hopefully the new teams can continue improving at the next event in Clearwater and move up the world ranks.

Puerto Rico and Canada are leading the US tho in the unofficial handicapping for qualifying their country for the olympics.

This is the critical equation. Does it matter if PUR is ahead of USA? Can they both qualify?

Mike

This year's Miami world cup was not a country qualifier. Next opportunity will be the 2015 Worlds where 3 country places will be up for grabs. If a spot isn't secured there, 1 spot will be available at a Continental qualifier (likely 2016 Miami).

Countries that have qualified: FRA, ARG, AUS, ITA, NZL, SUI, GBR, DEN, AUT, NED

It is cheaper to have your customers do the testing at there expense I would think

Nacra has had some quality issues in the past, but I really don't think they can be blamed for the mast breakages in Miami. Sticking the mast into the bottom in 15ft deep water and 20+ knots of breeze is going to snap masts no matter who built them!

Hey Jeff, edit out the "in the past" part and you'd have a correct statement. How about an Olympic multi that isn't youth-sized and can handle sailing weather? Fast in 10-15kts means nothing if you can't keep your sailors (or boats) in one piece when it blows over 20.

You certainly can't blame anyone let alone Nacra or ISAF for broken masts. As Jeff said, any mast would break hitting the bottom.
Do you know how many Lasers break masts? Would you say that boat isn't sailable over 20?
How about 49ers? They break masts all the time and their masts are not cheap even despite the fact that they have multi-piece masts. The 49ers have also had multiple generations of masts and they still still break.
It's part of sailing a high performance boat.