Another America’s Cup entry destroyed - Page 32 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > General Interest > General Discussion (sailing related)
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree121Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #311  
Old 05-23-2013
KeelHaulin's Avatar
STARBOARD!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 10
KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

While the AC event committee may THINK they are running the show; it's really just a façade to make the whole deal look more polished and marketable. The real decision power lies with the Defender and to a lesser extent the Challenger of Record (who are Oracle and ETNZ). If they can't hash out an agreement then the whole thing goes to the courts and it falls back to the wording of what was agreed upon several years ago. Hopefully it won't get to that. It could end up that Artemis and Luna Rossa abandon their campaigns and it goes straight to the AC 34 event between Oracle and ETNZ.

Last edited by KeelHaulin; 05-23-2013 at 05:12 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #312  
Old 05-23-2013
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,830
Thanks: 4
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Are you saying that it is the CG that will say how the boat is built and designed? That makes no sense the CG dos not that function does not have any experience with this types of boats and is not in conditions to know what is safe or not.

Regards

Paulo
Read what I write.
The CG can make their decesions on past history of the AC 72's. The CG does review ship stability and design, they do this all the time as a part of their inspection process. Agree they do not know foiling sailboats, but then apparently even some designers do not, we are all learning.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #313  
Old 05-23-2013
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,830
Thanks: 4
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Are you saying that it is the CG that will say how the boat is built and designed? That makes no sense the CG dos not that function does not have any experience with this types of boats and is not in conditions to know what is safe or not.

Regards

Paulo
Read and Learn:

USCG Office of Design & Engineering Standards (CG-ENG)

Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG)
Formerly (CG-521), (CG-3PSE), and (G-MSE)

Mission:
The Office of Design and Engineering Standards is responsible for developing and promulgating national regulations and standards that govern the safe design and construction of ships and shipboard equipment, including hull structure, stability, electrical & mechanical systems, lifesaving & fire safety equipment, and related equipment approval and laboratory acceptance. Additionally, it establishes policy, provides technical clarifications, and resolves any appeals. Furthermore, it represents the United States on several committees and sub-committees at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and is actively engaged with various standards committees (e.g., ASTM, IEEE, NFPC, etc) as well as classification society rules committees (e.g., ABS, LR, DNV, etc.).

Divisions:
The office is divided into five technical divisions:

Human Element and Ship Design Division (CG-ENG-1) focuses on the human factors and risk management aspects of marine design and operations, including specialized programs in novel ship design, crew endurance management, Prevention Through People, and functions as the administrator of the Alternate Compliance Program.
Naval Architecture Division (CG-ENG-2) is responsible for policy and standards development in the traditional areas of stability, structures, and load lines and also functions as the administrator of the Ship Structure Committee and of updates to the Assumed Average Weight Per Person (AAWPP).
Systems Engineering Division (CG-ENG-3) is responsible for policy and standards development in the traditional areas of marine electrical and mechanical systems, including related equipment approvals and laboratory acceptance.
Lifesaving and Fire Safety Standards Division (CG-ENG-4) is responsible for lifesaving and fire safety standards and regulations, including related equipment approvals and laboratory acceptance.
Hazardous Materials Division (CG-ENG-5) is responsible for policy and standards development related to transportation, storage, and handling of hazardous materials in the marine environment, including vapor control systems and packaged hazardous materials & solid hazardous materials in bulk.
Policy Documents:


Lifesaving and Fire-fighting on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. The Coast Guard published a Federal Register Notice of recommended interim voluntary guidance with request for comments on Lifesaving and Fire-fighting Equipment, Training and Drills Onboard Offshore Facilities and Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) Operating on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf ((77 FR 70172), published 23 November 2012). The comment period for this notice ends on February 21, 2013, please see the notice for more information.


Electrical Equipment Certification Guidance for MODUs. The Coast Guard published a Federal Register Notice of policy on Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) Electrical Equipment Certification Guidance ((77 FR 71607), published 03 December 2012) regarding electrical equipment installed in hazardous areas on foreign-flagged MODUs that have never operated, but intend to operate, on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.


Implementation Date for Carbon Dioxide System Lock-Out Valve and Odorizer Requirements. Coast Guard CG-ENG Policy Letter No. 05-12 (7 September 2012) clarifies the application of the new requirements for lock-out valves and odorizing units contained in the final rule "Carbon Dioxide Fire Suppression Systems on Commercial Vessels" ((77 FR 33860) published 7 June 2012).


Equivalency Determination—Design Criteria for Natural Gas Fuel Systems. Coast Guard CG-521 Policy Letter No. 01-12 (19 April 2012) establishes design criteria for natural gas fuel systems that provide a level of safety that is at least equivalent to that provided for traditional fuel systems by existing regulations. International standards for the design of natural gas-fueled ships are currently being developed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). In June of 2009, the IMO published interim guidelines on safety for natural gas-fuelled engine installations in ships in Resolution MSC.285(86).


Dynamic Positioning (DP) Guidance for non-MODUs. In May 2012, the Coast Guard published a Federal Register Notice of Recommended Interim Voluntary Guidance for MODU operators on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. The Coast Guard published a companion Federal Register Notice of Recommended Interim Voluntary Dynamic Positioning Guidance for Vessels other than MODUs ((77 FR 62247), published 12 October 2012) for non-MODU vessels operating on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.


Dynamic Positioning (DP) Guidance for MODUS. In December 2011, the Coast Guard published a draft policy letter on Dynamic Positioning (DP) Systems, Emergency Disconnect Systems, Blowout Preventers, and related training and emergency procedures on a Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit, and requested public comment. Numerous comments were received, both as submissions to the docket and at a public meeting. Upon review of the comments, the Coast Guard published a follow-on Federal Register Notice of Recommended Interim Voluntary Guidance ((77 FR 26562), published 4 May 2012) for MODU operators on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.


Acceptance of the 2009 MODU Code. For purposes of foreign MODU compliance with U.S. coastal state regulations, Coast Guard CG-ENG Policy Letter No. 02-12 (7 May 2012) establishes that the design and equipment standards of the 2009 MODU Code are considered to be at least as effective as the design and equipment standards of the 1979 and 1989 MODU Codes. A foreign MODU in compliance with the design and equipment standards of the 2009 MODU Code may be accepted under 33 CFR 143.207(c).


Transportation of Hazardous & Noxious Liquid Substances on OSVs. Coast Guard CG-ENG Policy Letter No. 03-12 (15 May 2012) revises some previous guidance provisions of CG-522 Policy Letter 09-01 Rev. 1 (5 Apr 2010) pertaining to IMO Resolution A.673 (16), "Guidelines for the Transport and Handling of Limited Amounts of Hazardous and Noxious Liquid Substances in bulk on Offshore Supply Vessels." This policy letter implements Resolution A.673 (16) and provides the United States’ interpretations for the design, construction, and operation of new and existing U.S. flagged Offshore Supply Vessels (OSVs). The policy letter is intended to guide voluntary compliance until such time as the new international standards are incorporated in the applicable U.S. regulations.


Alternate Pressure Relief Valve Settings on Certain Vessels Carrying Bulk Liquefied Gases. Coast Guard CG-ENG Policy Letter No. 04-12 (8 Aug 2012) provides policy regarding alternate maximum allowable relief valve (MARV) settings for ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk in independent Type B and Type C tanks.

Contact the Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG):
U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters (CG-ENG)
2100 Second Street, SW -- Mail stop 7126
Washington, DC 20593-7126
202-372-1353
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #314  
Old 05-23-2013
KeelHaulin's Avatar
STARBOARD!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 10
KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

These regulations apply to production ships and boats; not one-off craft. I seriously doubt the USCG is going to question the structural design of the AC72 fleet, which are probably the most technically advanced sailing craft on the planet (aside from Hydroptere and other foiling cats). Answers are being sought on the issue of why Artemis had it's failure; which are likely due to robustness of it's design/construction. This is a team problem; not a fleet problem.

If the USCG does a safety check they are looking for lifejackets, flares, and other basic safety and structural flaws. A guy built an all Aluminum trimaran to sail offshore (Circumnav?) a few years ago; the CG stopped him at SF Gate and did a safety check; then let him go. The boat was not built anywhere near the standards for offshore sailing cats. It only made it as far as Santa Cruz before it had major problems IIRC.

Last edited by KeelHaulin; 05-23-2013 at 05:18 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #315  
Old 05-23-2013
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,830
Thanks: 4
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeelHaulin View Post
These regulations apply to production ships and boats; not one-off craft. I seriously doubt the USCG is going to question the structural design of the AC72 fleet, which are probably the most technically advanced sailing craft on the planet (aside from Hydroptere and other foiling cats).

If the USCG does a safety check they are looking for lifejackets, flares, and other basic safety and structural flaws. A guy built an all Aluminum trimaran to sail offshore (Circumnav?) a few years ago; the CG stopped him at SF Gate and did a safety check; then let him go. The boat was not built anywhere near the standards for offshore sailing cats. It only made it as far as Santa Cruz before it had major problems IIRC.
Point is the CG does have the authority.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #316  
Old 05-23-2013
KeelHaulin's Avatar
STARBOARD!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,662
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 10
KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough KeelHaulin will become famous soon enough
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

They have the authority to do what? Step aboard and 'kick the fenders' and look for minor safety violations (like not having a waste plackard?) In the example I cited they could have easily deemed the craft not seaworthy and towed it in. THEY DIDNT. This boat was probably 100x less seaworthy than an AC72.

It's not gonna happen; so why argue the point? USCG is not going to shut down a multi-billion dollar event/venue just because one person lost their life in an accident. Have they stopped Luna Rossa from testing their boat? Has the AC committee stopped Luna Rossa despite their 'stop practicing for now' request? Every boat has a pretty tight timetable now for getting prepped and as I said before, the USCG is not going to step in and be blamed for causing a multi-billion dollar event to be scratched.

Last edited by KeelHaulin; 05-23-2013 at 05:28 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #317  
Old 05-23-2013
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,830
Thanks: 4
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeelHaulin View Post
It's not gonna happen; so why argue the point? USCG is not going to shut down a multi-billion dollar event/venue just because one person lost their life in an accident. Have they stopped Luna Rossa from testing their boat? Has the AC committee stopped Luna Rossa despite their 'stop practicing for now' request? Every boat has a pretty tight timetable now for getting prepped and as I said before, the USCG is not going to step in and be blamed for causing a multi-billion dollar event to be scratched.
Yea, why argue the point...
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #318  
Old 05-23-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,437
Thanks: 0
Thanked 116 Times in 103 Posts
Rep Power: 4
JonEisberg will become famous soon enough
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeelHaulin View Post
They have the authority to do what? Step aboard and 'kick the fenders' and look for minor safety violations (like not having a waste plackard?) In the example I cited they could have easily deemed the craft not seaworthy and towed it in. THEY DIDNT. This boat was probably 100x less seaworthy than an AC72.

It's not gonna happen; so why argue the point? USCG is not going to shut down a multi-billion dollar event/venue just because one person lost their life in an accident. Have they stopped Luna Rossa from testing their boat? Has the AC committee stopped Luna Rossa despite their 'stop practicing for now' request? Every boat has a pretty tight timetable now for getting prepped and as I said before, the USCG is not going to step in and be blamed for causing a multi-billion dollar event to be scratched.
Exactly... Hell, the CG is not even the lead investigative unit looking into the ARTEMIS accident, that investigation is being handled by the SF Police Department, as was done last year after the Farrallons tragedy...

Quote:

San Francisco police will lead the investigation into what happened. This is the same major accident investigations team that investigated an accident during a yacht race off the Farrallon Islands last April that killed several people.

Training Canceled, Artemis Team Mourns After Death of Olympic Sailor | NBC Bay Area

Because the fatality occurred with what is technically considered a 'recreational' rather than commercial vessel, the San Francisco Police Department is leading the investigation into Simpson's cause of death, with the U.S. Coast Guard offering assistance to both the ACEA and the SFPD.

In a conversation this morning, Coast Guard Captain Matt Bliven explained that the Coast Guard has offered to act as liaison with the ACEA's investigating committee, much as they did in the aftermath of last April's Low Speed Chase incident. Bliven says he is generally impressed with how much attention is focused by the AC teams on safety. "Given the totality of what they are doing, we're pretty convinced that they are operating safely," he said. "They are making good efforts to keep clear of commercial traffic, and have been notifying us and the Vessel Traffic Service when and where they will be operating." That said, the event permits for this summer's AC events are not due to be issued until shortly before the actual event dates.

Latitude 38 - 'Lectronic Latitude
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #319  
Old 05-23-2013
casey1999's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: HI
Posts: 2,830
Thanks: 4
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 4
casey1999 is on a distinguished road
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Yea, the CG got nothin to do with it......


Safety ideas become rules for Americas Cup | SBS World News


The US Coast Guard has insisted all America's Cup safety ideas discussed following a training death become rules for the sailing contest.

Safety recommendations made by America's Cup regatta director Iain Murray in the wake of British yachtsman Andrew Simpson's death will be made rules of the event, officials said on Thursday.

Tom Ehman, vice commodore of the host Golden Gate Yacht Club, said the 37 ideas to make the powerful AC72 catamarans safer were part of an overall safety plan submitted to the US Coast Guard.

"At the end of the day, it's the Coast Guard's call to give us a regatta permit. If we don't get a permit we don't have a race," Ehman said.
And there was concern the regatta permit might be turned down by the Coast Guard in the wake of Simpson's death and a spectacular capsizing of an Oracle team AC72 on San Francisco Bay last year in which no one was hurt.

"Without some of these things that Iain recommends, yes, there was concern that we would not get the permit, and they told us so," Ehman said.

"It behooves us to be very cautious and the Coast Guard supports that."

Simpson, an Olympic gold medallist and crew member of Swedish team Artemis, died when Artemis' AC72 nose-dived while training on San Francisco Bay on May 9.

He was apparently trapped beneath a solid piece of the boat and could not be revived after being found. The exact cause of the accident is still under review by Artemis and by an America's Cup panel headed by Murray.

Buoyancy aids, body armour and helmet beacon locator devices were among the recommendations announced Wednesday by Murray -- all ideas discussed by teams made more urgent after the death of Simpson two weeks ago.

"A lot of these are things the teams have been discussing implementing on their own. The tragic loss of Andrew Simpson just sped up the process," Ehman said.

The Coast Guard permit is scheduled to be issued next month, a timetable that did not change because of the tragedy.

Among the changes in rules was a 10-knot lower wind limit, to 20 knots maximum during the Louis Vuitton Cup challenger series in July and August and to 23 knots maximum during the America's Cup proper in September.
Brief gusts will not wipe out a race but sustained higher winds might, Ehman said.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #320  
Old 05-23-2013
tommays's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,235
Thanks: 1
Thanked 24 Times in 24 Posts
Rep Power: 6
tommays will become famous soon enough
Re: Another America’s Cup entry destroyed

Well

They have in fact pulled the race permits for ALL events in the recent past EVEN the club with all the really rich lawyers
__________________
1970 Cal 29 Sea Fever

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

1981 J24 Tangent 2930
Tommays
Northport NY


If a dirty bottom slows you down what do you think it does to your boat
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
North america to central/south america Sofiami Crew Wanted/Available 5 04-18-2013 08:19 AM
destroyed impeller CapnRon47 Gear & Maintenance 22 08-01-2012 10:06 PM
Sailing club is destroyed in fire NewsReader News Feeds 0 06-23-2012 03:10 PM
Rhode Island YC Destroyed by Fire SOUNDBOUNDER General Discussion (sailing related) 5 01-21-2011 03:58 PM
Hammond, Indiana, Marina effectively destroyed jdkirkk General Discussion (sailing related) 4 03-01-2006 10:43 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:33 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.