IRC
One size does not fit all
I read with interest the November 2017 article ‘No optical illusion’ about the latest Doyle Sails code zero development. The push by grand prix sailmakers to work around the rating rule limitations of 75 per cent mid-width relative to foot length is nothing new, and has been something both sides of the argument have been trying to solve for many years, as that article notes. But it is important to not look at either party as being the villain in the piece. The adage ‘keep it simple’ applies to rating rules in spades.
And the general approach is to rate upwind sails and downwind sails separately and differently. In many cases the code zero is intended as a reaching sail or, on very fast boats where the appar- ent wind is always forwards, downwind sails. But we are talking about a handful of boats here, not half the fleet. However, if honest, most see the ultimate code zero as a sail that rates as a downwind sail but works efficiently upwind. In reality, this should be caught by the rating rules and treated as the sail it is – upwind. Some will argue that you have to crack off a bit for it to work, but if the VMG upwind is efficient, surely that is an upwind sail and the rating rules should treat it as such? Many will discuss the steep improvement curve in sail material
and construction over recent years and decades. To a lot of us it is hard to believe that only just over two decades ago panelled sails still dressed the majority of the racing fleets around the world. But then again, have a look at the majority of fleets out racing on a Thursday evening in your local club. You still see panelled sails and sailmakers’ marks from companies no longer in business. Some will say that the Thursday night beer can race is not real racing; but to the vast majority of those participating in the sport this is the focus and, rather than talking about doing a handful of offshore classics every year, doing one in a lifetime is probably what is on the bucket list. For that vast majority, deciding which if any sail in the wardrobe
has seen its last season and needs replacing is the autumn discussion, not what configuration of the new aero package they
30 SEAHORSE
are going to test first in the spring. Let’s be realistic, to most owners rating rule controls are not a restriction, they are protection. I see little merit in the argument that the big flat code zeros
look great in images, and work a treat for the Maxi72s on a fetch up Bomb Alley in Sardinia, or on many a leg of the Caribbean 600. That is not what most of us spend our Thursday evenings doing. The other side of the code zero is the increase in loads. I remem-
ber when I was asked to develop the rules that changed the Whit- bread 60 into the Volvo Ocean 60. The biggest development was a move to carbon rigs – and one of the main considerations was a rig that could withstand the extra loads of the recently accepted code zero sails. Most boats in the marina were never designed with a code zero in mind. Maybe a cruising chute, but not something that loaded the boat like a code zero would when tight reaching. The first generation of VO60s saw not only stronger rigs, but
larger winches, bigger blocks and reinforced bow bulkheads to cope with the higher tack loads. Add a code zero to the inventory of the average racer/cruiser and do you expect to see the same structural changes being made to get the best from the new sail? Of course not. But is that what we are encouraging? I don’t think we should. Looking at many aspects of our sport
and they have appeared not through natural selection, but by getting around manmade rules. The code zero appeared through finding a hole in the W60 inventory that the headsail rules couldn’t cover. That has evolved into making an upwind sail measure as a downwind sail for rating purposes. This happens everywhere: the latest foil developments in the
Imoca 60s are driven by a rule limit of five appendages. I suspect that in five more years we will look at the current approach to foiling monohulls and laugh. However, it has to start somewhere. But, just as with foils, I don’t see a code zero being a requirement to be successful in our sport. David Witt recently said at a Volvo Ocean Race press conference that ‘if you aren’t foiling in 10 years you will be dead’. I can’t
NICOLE PEHE/DPPI
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
