When trial and error is no longer enough
The potential risks and consequences of high-speed foiling are an accelerating topic of debate that is finally making its way into the sport’s wider consciousness. Now speculation needs to be replaced with fact…
Over the past decade high performance boats have become much faster. The pace of development has been meteoric, particularly with the widespread uptake of hydrofoiling. While the popularity of the International Moth took off in the mid-noughties, it took the flying exploits of the AC72 catamarans in the 2013 America’s Cup to really capture the attention of the wider sailing world. Since then the number of foiling craft has proliferated, from dinghies and small cats up to the likes of Wild Oats XI, which has also dabbled with foils at the Maxi level. Now foils have become de rigueur on the latest generation of Imoca 60s, and so it goes on.
Speed up, reliability down Breakage is an almost inevitable part of development. As legendary America’s Cup designer Ben Lexcen once said, ‘If it doesn’t break it’s too heavy.’ However, this trial and error approach doesn’t cut much ice with the insurance industry. Simon Tonks, deputy head of marine at Hiscox, has been insuring raceboats for more than 20 years. ‘At Hiscox we’re passionate about the sport of sailing and we love to support the latest developments,’ he says. ‘But with these increased speeds come increased risks, not
72 SEAHORSE
only to the boats, but to the people sailing them and those in the vicinity. When you’ve got MOD70s and other kinds of high-performance boats flying around confined spaces like the Solent, these have safety – and insurance – implications.’
Standard of crews
One aspect that concerns Tonks is the standard of sailing ability. ‘There aren’t that many experienced helmsmen for foiling cats and we get asked for quotes from people who want to buy, say, a high- performance 30ft foiling multihull, and they’ve done some racing on a J/24 or J/122. So they want to go from a boat that does barely 10kt to a foiling multihull capable of 35kt, and with no qualifications or relevant experience.’
To race an M32 catamaran the class requires the sailors to have undergone a licensing course where helmsman and crew learn the basics of handling the boat, the manoeuvres, how to get the mainsail on and off its halyard lock, and so on. While the licensing doesn’t come without a cost, the safety benefits are obvious and it may well end up saving the owner money too, because of the basic, but vital, lessons learnt before they even start racing the boat. Tonks would like to see other classes
Big things hurt…. while much of the safety focus has recently been on foiling it is very easy to overlook the relentless expansion in recent years in superyacht racing, with yachts
growing in size and
performance, while many owners want crews to push their boats harder than ever before…
adopt a similar approach. ‘You wouldn’t expect to see Formula One cars being raced by weekend enthusiasts,’ he says. ‘But that’s effectively what we’re seeing in some parts of the sailing world.’
20 per cent breakage
Aside from risk to crew there’s the reliability of equipment. Tonks says that, of the Class40s insured by Hiscox, around 20 per cent have broken a mast primarily through carbon failure. It has now reached the point where many insurers won’t even insure the rig. Hiscox still does, but only provided a 100 per cent non-destructive test (NDT) is carried out on the rig. ‘If you’re spending £400-500k on a Class 40 why wouldn’t you want to go that extra step to get a full history on the rig, with a comprehensive NDT test? But the main reason we ask for NDT is we want to eliminate build fault. Why wouldn’t you want to do that?’ The answer, of course, is money, although as Tonks points out, ‘The cost of an NDT test is generally only 0.5 per cent of the price of the boat. The average price of a full NDT test on a Class40 mast is around £2k plus costs which does not seem much when you balance this against safety considerations and the fact you know that what’s going into the boat is fit for purpose
INGRID ABERY
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 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96
