Talk:Volvo Ocean 65

Grant Dalton's commentary

I am afraid, that Dalton's statement is not to be rated positively, regardless whether it is a correct citation, which is uncertain, because the given link does not proove this. It should be checked what is about his kind of humour.

The costs for a new boat is a minor position in the campagn's budget and a possible reduction of this costs for just getting the chassis of the boat is ridiculous, in fact. The affords for testing stay the same for all teams and design errors have to redressed by all teams at their own. In the last editions of the VOR Bruce Farr has shown, that his designs are less ready-to-use than others, so it was an extra risk to commission him (but Farr is much better lobbied through since 40 years then younger designers are). A benefit in costs and safety is only possible, if all teams pass their results into one pool to work out general solutions, but this is not to be expected. Remember the Illbruck-campaign, which was much faster than sister designs because the crew was trained better and many minor details were managed differently.

Costs could have been reduced, when a prototype were checked thouroughly for at least one year and the final One-Design is derived from this. But this was not the board's way. I am sure that the One-Design specification are adjusted several times even before the first race. Let's face the annexes of design and equipment rules to come the next months. And the specifications for the overnext edition will be changed tremendously for safty and reliability after the coming up edition. In the overnext edition nobody with winning ambitions will start with a 50.000 miles degenerated boat just to reduce the campaign's budget some 5 percent.--46.115.90.73 (talk) 13:54, 15 March 2014 (UTC)