I think there are two differences at the moment in these boats contributing to the deficit.

1) New Zealand has better ride height control. Oracle maintains a higher elevation while upwind or on reaches. The few times we could see shots from astern with the boats underway, Oracle is almost ALWAYS crabbing with the bows pointed 5 to 10 degrees higher than their direction of travel...which means that AOA of the foils is higher carrying more drag, the apparent wind angle across the deck is more steeply angled, they are closer to a sideways stall putting them at higher risk of a big slide slip like we saw during the first leg of the second race yesterday. The good news is that that ~should~ be correctable given enough time - but I'm a little shocked they haven't already discovered, dissected, and solved this problem. I've noticed them crabbing quite a bit from the very beginning. It's probably a combination of control system and technique...but it DOES appear that Spithills steering wheel was changed at some point to Team Japan's style of twist grips that are presumably for ride height control....I'm not sure when he started using that but I'm pretty sure they didn't start out with that setup.

2) Possibly, wing control. I have always felt that Glenn Ashby was going to be a very quiet secret weapon if he was given the control he needed being one of the few honest champions of apparent wind sailing on these teams. I'm dying to know what all he is controlling from his tucked away cockpit. New Zealand is the only team without a winch and even their mainsheet control is push button hydraulics. They don't observably move their wing nearly as much as the others and other teams seemed to have slowly followed suit with fewer and fewer mainsheet wing movements as the event progressed. I suspect (this is pure speculation on my part) that Ashby is making smaller more localized and precise wing trim adjustments inside the wing where other teams were using the mainsheet to make less efficient course/gross adjustments to compensate for trim and power. If this is the case, this will be harder for Oracle to develop and match as it's dramatically complex and would require a great deal of acquired skill (time) and talent.

Oracle is not in a good spot right now - unless the crabbing issue is fabricated and they're trying to make things dramatic, which I highly doubt. They're going to need to come out winning immediately next week if they stand any chance at retaining the cup.

" I have always felt that Glenn Ashby was going to be a very quiet secret weapon if he was given the control he needed being one of the few honest champions of apparent wind sailing on these teams."

The "apparent wind champions" don't seem to have done any better than the "slow boat champions" over the last couple of ACs, and the only "multihull sailing champion" is long gone. Perhaps these guys are good enough to be able to develop new skills?

Sure they are good enough but the America's Cup has always had a trend to bias toward the "in crowd" mentality to a fault. While they have certainly invested in time, training, research, and design, I don't think they explored all the possible aspects of reaching out to existing multihull talent when they first switched to multihulls and we saw a lot of early rookie multihull mistakes. Regardless, Ashby, has demonstrated a real mastery for making fast boats fast. We'll never be able to put a number on how efficient NZ's wing trimming method is vs. Oracle's and we'll probably never even get a technical breakdown of the trimming system. In that vein, my opinion about Ashby is just opinion.

Who you are talking about "multihull sailing champion" that is long gone? Practically everyone in the America's Cup has come up from monohull and dinghy sailing with the exception of the French Team who, nationally, have embraced big multihull racing more strongly in the past. I don't think their performance is reflective of their talent but is more a reflection of their lack of funds.

I thought this was pretty interesting
the most interesting part was hearing about North and Doyle screwing over turner and not willing to build him new sails over a few months of competing - he got slower and his competitors got new sails

I thought that was interesting too - BTW, Doyle was the guy on Turner's crew that saved the day by re-cutting their own sails. It was North and Hood that wouldn't sell him sails....I would like to hear more details about how that transpired. I bet there is a lot more to that story than they had time to tell.

Yes, that was cool. They probably also didn't want to do Connor's story for fear of jynxing Oracle?

Anyway, since when are Ashby and Burling (and several others) not bonafide apparent wind champions? And hasn't Ashby won more than a few major catamaran regattas?

I, probably more than most, have consistently been vocal about the stupid decisions made during the past few cycles (no catsailor would ever leebow), and NZL has people racing who have never sailed before, but let's not throw them all in the same bucket.

I agree with Jake. In this light/moderate breeze, NZL is nearly flawless at foiling, and staying foiling. I think that's a combination of design and Ashby's skills. The only thing that impressed me more was Artemis' ability to turn down and accelerate off the starting line.

Mike

Ahh yes, thanks for clearing that up - I was well into my 2nd or 3rd rum by this time -

I would like to learn more about it too -

after an exhastive 44 second search on google - this is all i found
http://www.nytimes.com/1977/06/19/archives/us-yachts-begin-americas-cup-trials.html

and this
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2017/06/16/courageous-documentary-americas-cup-ted-turner

One of my buddies used to sail on Lanier with Ted. He says Ted won all the races. He would have several good looking ladies on the boat with him at all times and as soon as the start gun went off they would pull their tops off. Everyone just followed Ted around the course.

And Doyle had been working for Hood, and they were sailing on Hood's old boat!

I'm sure there was a TON more info that they didn't have time for. For instance, how did Turner connect with Jobson in the first place?

Mike

Back to Jake's discussion, I would almost think that Ashby controls a lot more than the mainsail...

I'd even venture a guess that they could have some software that automates many of the foil controls or settings during maneuvers (possibly tied to wheel position, as you see Burling yank that thing hard over).

Think about all the stuff you have to adjust:
- Main Foil draft profile (fore and aft pieces)
- Main sheet
- Jib clew
- Jib sheet
- possibly jib luff tension
- Daggarboard foils (height, AOA, etc)
- Rudder elevator

And only one (possibly two) folks doing all that at the same time they run across the trampoline?

I really like the Kiwi Biker Gang for their total out-of-box thinking on this boat design.

I think Nathan said it right at one point. From his description, NZL was one of the last teams to show up in Bermuda. This kept them away from the other team's development which may have been an advantage as those Bermuda teams were all working designs against each other. This lead development more closely together in terms of performance.

Having NZL show up late was a huge gamble, but seems to be very effective in lighter airs.

And I still think SWE was blazing fast compared to the other boats. Too bad consistency was their downfall. Probably their tradeoff for that speed (too hard to maintain or duplicate)...

haha!
Sportsmanship!

I have heard of boats on the TransPac race projecting risque movies on their sails at night to distract competitors

It's getting to the limit of my knowledge on the topic, but I'm quite sure that automated controls (ride height, etc.) are NOT allowed. These boats wouldn't have the ride height problems they clearly have if they were. During the last cup cycle, there was a lot of debate about one of Oracle's control system with this rule because they had put an extra layer of control between the daggerboard fore/aft position system and they were protested over it with the argument that it made for an automated control.

In that case, basically, they had issues when the button was pressed to move the daggerboard rake, the amount the daggerboard moved with the same button press duration was different depending on how much hydraulic pressure they had - this made it hard to control. Oracle came up with a system with a very small hydraulic cylinder that operated on a low consistent regulated pressure. That cylinder was mounted to the boat chassis and it moved it's arm over a center position switch that was mounted directly to the daggerboard. The button push moved the arm of the small cylinder off the switch in one direction or the other. The switch controlled the flow of hydraulic pressure that moved the daggerboard and the daggerboard would keep moving until the switch was centered again under the small cylinder actuator. With this system, the daggerboard might take more or less time to get to the setpoint but the setpoint made by pushing the button for any particular duration was very consistent. This is part of what allowed Oracle to start foiling upwind and defend the cup last iteration. There was some issue with how the protest was filed and I think it got thrown out on a technicality but it was generally accepted that that system did not constitute and "automated" control system.

Granted, we're under a new ruleset for this cup but I'm nearly certain that they still do not allow any automated control. Digital, remote, etc., yes - but a computer can't be initiating movements.

Additionally, on the NZ boat, their responsibilities and controls are pretty different from the other teams. The rear biking station appears to have control of the ride height on his forward handlebar grips (either the rudder rake or the daggerboard rake), Burling has at least boards up/down on his wheel and maybe some more stuff. I think Ashby just has sails...Ashby is the throttle man....so one other advantage here to the biking stations - the bike guys can still use their hands to control other stuff if needed whereas a traditional grinding station guy can do nothing but grind.

On Oracle, Jimmy appears to have switched to Japan's style of wheel with twist grips instead of push-buttons for the flight height controls. He also appears to have buttons for boards up/down. I'm not sure about the wing controls but they were foot buttons for the wing trimmer at one point.

I have been living the hell of Jury selection and jury duty all day so the judge said "NO CELLPHONES". . . .Whatever, so. . . .

Jake has covered a lot of good stuff so let's start here.



NZ has successfully pulled off an automated (let's for now call it a) "fly by wire" system that was accepted within the class rule. Outside of cyclors providing hydro power there are only two controls. Steering only provided by Burling and the "game boy" touch screen that is controlled by Ashby. Anything else you see is a decoy. That is why we have seen such excellent boat handling from NZ. That is also why we saw a capsize. I personally think that is why we also see NZ always banging a single jibe to the 2nd mark (port side) almost every time. The software that controls the touch screen is constantly learning and getting more efficient. With a single touch of Ashby's one single finger, NZ is able to control everything from calculations using inputs from the instruments and sensors. The touchscreen controls the following :
jib sheet
jib downhaul
wing first and second element trim
platform trim
platform heel
boatspeed
daggerboard rake position
daggerboard cant position
daggerboard extension
rudder rake
apendage loads from strain gauges

So technically, a computer (touchscreen interface and software) CAN be initiating movements with the touch of a finger and NZ successfully pulled it off. Gotta hand it to the kiwis, they figured out a way to foil the AC72 when the rules tried to prevent it. And for this AC cycle, they intentionally did not show up to Bermuda until too late in the game for anybody else to respond.

What happened? NZ brilliantly set up the measurement committee in an interpretation request and MC walked right into their trap. NZ receive the ruling on February 6 of this year, very late in the game. Did MC make the correct ruling? Technically yes, but in the spirit of the cup who knows. NZ knew what they were doing and executed it perfectly, and for that, they have earned the cup.

Although many of the guys came from mono's, good sailors can adapt to new platforms.

Might want to remember that Pete Burling was THIRD in the 2014 A-cat worlds. Like Outterideg, he's also been the Moth world champion; those boats are more like a cat than a mono.

When talking about software and data analytics, I have a HARD time believing that anybody could out "data" Oracle... I mean, really? ORACLE; am I the only one here who knows what Oracle does? Honestly, everybody thinks Microsoft makes the world run, but really, Oracle is more important in terms of the heavy lifting of keeping the lights on.

IMO, the deficit comes down to two things; foil design and system control (wing and boards). The ETNZ foils have a much wider crossover and although may require more trimming are faster and more stable b/c of the way that the work load is divided on board. This ties to the improved leeway performance; since they maintain a narrower flight margin, they could design a lower drag foil that produces equal lift, but needs more foil in the water. Oracle seems to be running foils that produce more lateral lift, but can't fly in the same narrow height grove; as such their vertical foils operate at a higher AoA as evidenced by the increased noise (and therefore higher drag).

Looking at pictures of the foils, I also think that ETNZ has gone for a higher aspect tip shape; notice that Oracle's foils appear to have longer chord length. I have a theory about what is going on here, but not time to type it out.

Lastly, the "automated" systems; it is thought that ETNZ is simply "chasing the dot". Ashby's controller tells him the optimum target and adjusts accordingly. Their elimination of the wing sheets makes me think that most of his adjustments are fine tuning the twist and shape further up the wing at all times. I suspect that Oracle has very similar data, but implemented their approach/systems in a significantly different (more conventional) manner.

Question is what can Oracle do to get to ETNZs pace before the weekend?
Last time in SF they had the better boat which they just weren't sailing properly but I'm not sure that is the case today, I don't see them making many mistakes or sailing in the wrong direction.
There are probably some small things they can do but putting on bikes and rebuilding foils seem ambitious with only 4-5 days between races.
Maybe they need a different skipper/trimmer/tactician setup?

Might not be relevant but I think one of the (many!) reasons for the kiwi success is that Gashby has done a lot of helming of their boat which might give him a better understanding on how it behaves relative to the wing trim.

Oracle beat NZ both times in the qualifiers. Was NZ sandbagging? In the stats both teams had equal average speeds.

Anyone remember the good old days when all you had to worry about was what was under the skirt?

Mike

I'm not quite sure I buy all of this. Do you have a link to the MC interpretation request? My understanding is Glenn is doing all the wing trim work (more inputs than shown there), and Blair Tuke is doing all the daggerboard trimming. Well, both are likely following dots on ipads with their fingers, so yes the computer is doing all the heavy lifting but the sailors are still technically moving the controls. I actually doubt Oracle is running things that differently; ETNZ's big advantage is that they can use their hands since they are on the bicycles.

I'm not sure if they sandbagged against Oracle in the LV series. I think they saved all there go fast toys for last, to avoid the same mistake as last time (letting the foiling out of the bag too early). Those races were sailed in a different wind range where ETNZ has less of an advantage, if any, compared with the other boats. They designed a weapon in the 8-12kt breeze range.