Rob Weiland
Market disrupter?
Five days of racing in perfect Key West conditions made it clear that in 2017 we are in for a tough battle for all three spots on the podium. After 10 races it was Quantum Racing who in light conditions sailed near-faultlessly through the final two days (2,1,1) to come back from being well off the podium and take their first win from a pack of six boats that were all still in contention for second on the final run of the final race. The less consistent teams made up positions 8 to 11 but all showed potential. Sled with a 2nd and 3rd, Gladiator with a 1st, Alegre with a 3rd and 4th and we all applauded Paprec for their first and certainly well-deserved race win since joining the 52 Super Series. With a bit of breeze, say from 9kt, this year as yet there is no visible performance spread between the boats. Where last year one could still see differences upwind now these are gone. If any- thing you sometimes see boats show good downwind speed. One of these is Rán, over the years always strong downwind, so I tend to credit helm and crew for that. Boats going faster or slower down- wind than previously can often be related to changes made to the keel fin. These changes are nearly always primarily made to achieve better characteristics upwind and then unavoidably show up down- wind. Of course sail design plays a role too but this is hard to quantify for the outside observer. In Key West all eyes were on Interlodge, the new Botín Partners- designed boat. No doubt she is fast and it looks like she might be too fast to ignore in the sense that it might prove hard to optimise the 2015 boats to get to her potential once she is sorted out. This is crucial. If true it will trigger building new later this year rather than further optimisation. To build new for the 2018 season one has to start designing no later than July, possibly August. So three more events to assess the true strength of Interlodge. Part of her performance progress will be equipment, mainly the rig. But what is in the design that can possibly be hard to incorporate in the existing boats? Sure, her rig is a little further aft in the boat, around 7 or 8cm. But with J fixed in the TP52 box rule, as is IG, P, BAS, ISP, and even a minimum on E, there isn’t much more you
26 SEAHORSE
can do than move the lot. With it, of course, the keel will move, at least the fin will. Stern treatment never seems at its optimum – in combination with hull volume distribution and hull rocker I guess that is a substantial part of the puzzle. Interlodgeis Botín’s 13th-generation TP52 (hard to believe but true). Put the computers and software used to create the first gen- eration next to what is used to create the 2017 Interlodgeand you will see the same difference between the two boats, night and day. The 12th generation, their 2015 boats, compared to the Vrolijk boats, are at their strongest in light and lower medium upwind con- ditions. The aim will have been to improve upwind in more breeze without giving away in the lighter stuff, whether up or down. It looks as if this has led to a rethinking of hull volume distribution and appendage sizing and positioning. More clearly visible are some quite radical efforts to further improve the deck aerodynamics. Ever since Emirates Team New Zealand’s Botín TP52 of 2009 this designer’s trademark bulbous deck has been further refined in search of both hull stiffness and clean airflow into the sails. Slowly we see that optimising for extremely close fleet racing in
a way forces you to ‘over-specialise’ the hulls towards the conditions they will mostly race in, so medium breezes, let’s say 9-16kt of wind. This invites a focus on less rocker than one would aim for when designing a more all-round boat or a more offshore-oriented boat. Both in the very light and in strong breeze a little more rocker will help. To have less drag or to lift the bow. Is moving the rig aft motivated by this? Just thinking while typing… The modern TP52 has become somewhat more of a wave-piercer than its predecessors. Will it therefore be possible to design a better 52-sized IRC boat if not controlled by the box rule? In theory of course, yes, but in practice I feel too much choice might kill you. Imagine not being constrained by E, P, J and IG. How many variables can you play with, each with its consequences in sail and rig design in an endless spiral of experimentation. Not being restricted by the box rule will allow you to bring more sail area higher up, where we find more breeze. As predicted by a handful of sail designers, increasing the head of the mainsail (Mainsail Top Width) has had a turbo effect on the TP52s far beyond
NICO MARTINEZ
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
