AC72 Hull Design: Oracle vs ETNZ-LR vs Artemis

With some additional pics I could add Artemis to the comparison.
As a reference it gives an idea of the different concepts used. Needless to say ETNZ-Luna Rossa is the best hull-platform in my view.
Artemis is not a flying AC72, it is only assisted by curved daggers. Not even T rudders at the moment.
The front beam position is quite extreme although the Wing support vertex is a little backwards due to the V shape of the beam. The concept behind this is to gain structural benefits on the forward beam position, and the ability to have a better range for Wing trimming/rake to backwards, thus compensating that forward load.

To avoid pitchs or to maintain the bow up on this configuration they totally rely on the daggers lift. But we already saw what happened to that concept in Oracle. Lets wait her to sail, but I’m glad Peyron will be there helming at least in the initial tests.

So Artemis played safe on the flying area, but went quite extreme on the front beam and hull.

After confirming that Oracle was going down in the bareaways I have strong doubts that this incredible piece of machinery will work any different in the same situation, or maybe their dagger lift conf will prevent it?

It is easy now to chose an option, but I would have go ETNZ platform with Artemis conservative non foiling solution.
Clearly the most ‘standard’ & safe solution for SF conditions.
I still don´t get why desginers are going for extra foiling lift plus less aero/hydro drag to the extreme, risking the whole project when you are going to race in +20knots????? Someone would quickly answer: “Cause we want a design edge to win the Cup” 

The only issue is that they are working on unknown terrain for these kinds of beasts on the worst venue possible for a first try, and a rock solid bullet proof design right now would have won easily, as we don´t know if any of these extreme boats will end a single race in +20knots!

9 Responses

  1. Interesting observations. Do you think more volume at the bow (ie more like ETNZ Luna Rossa) would have prevented the Oracle capsize? These hulls look ridicously thin up front to me.

  2. Anonymous says:

    it's kind of interesting to see that the design teams have gone for the , non headsail, A-Cat hull characteristics while you would expect them to take a better look at F18's like the C2 and Infusion. i'm really glad to have the volume of my C2. especially in a chop.

  3. Anonymous says:

    The rudder on your Artemis model is too far aft. Check the rules – no rudder in the last metre of the boat.

  4. CSN says:

    Will correct thanks for remarking that.

  5. CSN says:

    Done, just bad placed on error as the reference pics I have shows it almost below the rear beam.

  6. Lucas says:

    Martin, me parece q tenes el front beam de AR un poco muy adelantado… no se en q seccion esta dibujado, pero esta alrededor de la media. de todos modos muy buen laburo!!! feliz cumpleanios!

  7. CSN says:

    Hola Lucas, lo voy a checkear… Pero alrededor de la media? de la Eslora?
    Viste las fotos? Miralas bien.

    Y fijate que el sporte del Wing en realidad está mas atrás. es un Beam en "V". Mirá esta foto:
    https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/530946_10151114144916087_409720443_n.jpg

    Es la característica mas notable del AR. Después te paso un PM. Ví los planos hace unos meses en persona y fue lo primero que remarqué y luego me confirmaron que fue la mayor discusión de diseño.

    Abrazo

  8. Lucas says:

    Martin te pido disculpas, me equivoque. Yo tambien vi los planos del barco y por eso me parecio q estaba un poco mas atras… pero se ve bien en las fotos q esta entre la 4 y 5 seccion.
    un abrazo grande! segui asi con el blog!

  9. Sjacopo says:

    In the photos I just seen in VSails of the first sailing of Artemis, I cannot see how Terry/L.Peyron is “driving” it. Oracle has a big bar like small catamarans, while Luna Rossa and ETNZ use a wheel. And artemis???
    Please Inform as soon as someone discover.