disciplines on the programme. Sherlock has been involved with
Leopard programmes for 32 years and with Leopard 3 since its build 16 years ago. ‘Currently, I run the race programme and work closely with the boat captain, Gian Ahluwalia, who managed the refit. ‘We began this project with a lot
of naysayers but we undertook a massive study before going ahead with it. I always had faith in the boat, which was the last project where Bruce Farr himself drew the lines. ‘Because of charter requirements,
the boat was always overweight. We stripped out all the MCA chartering requirements, redesigned the deck layout, replaced half the deck and much of the equipment and built a new rig. The weight went from 51.5 tons to 42 tons. The next step is to get to sub-40 with a new deeper keel fin and lighter bulb and by replacing the daggerboard system, which dates back to 2007.’ ‘In many ways this was like a new
build,’ says Bouzaid. ‘One of the first decisions was a new rig, so Steve Wilson was brought in early. We worked with Steve, Southern Spars and Farr Yacht Design, providing extensive modelling on the sail load interfaces to get the mast stiffness exactly right for the aero package and to inform decisions about loads going into the deck and structures. ‘The outcome is a 100ft canting-
keel maxi race yacht with only 10 tons of headstay tension. These load reductions are amazing when you consider that the headstay tension on a TP52 is 8.5 tons.’ The results speak for themselves.
At the Aegean 600 in July, Leopard 3 swept the boards with seven trophies including line and handicap wins and a newmonohull race record, then finished 2nd
at theMaxiWorlds. Dramatically reduced headstay
tensions are achieved by transferring much of the load onto the Structured Luff sails through the cunningham control. ‘For every ton you put on the sail, you can take two tons off the headstay, with the added bonus of less forestay sag than you had before,’ Bouzaid explains. ‘On a 100-footer, by adding 5 tons
Above: Y3K showcasing full Doyle Sails Struct- ured Luff technology integrated throughout the design and build process. Above right: back in full racing trim after a refit, Leopard 3 has new Structured Luff sails from Doyle that reduce headstay tension to just 10 tons
to the jib tack load, the headstay load reduces by 10 tons and headstay sag will reduce from about 0.8 per cent to virtually zero – particularly when you consider that, apart from the load reduction, Structured Luff actually projects the sail forward. There are lots of ways you can play with that ratio, but that is how it works.’ On Structured Luffmainsails,
higher cunninghamloads are largely used tomanipulatemast bend. ‘We have used that to good effect with the Maxi 72s, where you can change the mast bend profile quite significantly, even though you are locked in with checkstays,’ Bouzaid notes. ‘We played with this a lot on the AC75s during the last America’s Cup. We were using very high cunningham loads to bend those great big D- section masts. That was very useful on those boats, because you want the sails to be full and powerful when you are going for take-off and then you want them to be super-flat when you are foiling – and you are doing all that without a backstay!’ While best results are obviously
best achieved with a new build or a refit on the scale of Leopard 3, even when working with legacy equipment the performance of Galateia, Bullitt, Proteus and others is testament to what can be achieved. A common modification in those cases is to upgrade the hydraulic rams to cope with higher cunningham loads. Building vital close relationships
within teams often proceeds incrementally. ‘Even if it begins with one or two new sails, the switch to a full commitment generally happens quite fast. Otherwise you quickly run into compromises,’ says Sanderson. ‘If you are making a new light jib,
for example, do you design it to match the crossovers with the existing heavy jib from a different sailmaker? Or do you build the new light jib with the crossover to match a Doyle Sails heavy jib and fully optimise the potential? It usually doesn’t take long before teams see
the advantage of going all-in.’ These team entrenchments set up
curious dynamics within Doyle Sails, where a balance has to be struck between internal competition on behalf of rival teams and wider co-operation on progress and development. ‘The teams all have their own
programmes and ideas and we must be very respectful of the investment they are making to get an edge,’ Sanderson says. ‘We have had to come up with internal firewalls to deal with that. Where a team has come up with an idea, we are very careful that that IP stays exclusive to that team, until it is in the public domain. Then the race is on for other teams to try to figure it out.’ The benefits are very much a
two-way street. Sanderson is the first to acknowledge that he savours the privilege of rubbing shoulders with owners who are highly successful and competitive individuals in their various business fields. ‘I am a huge believer in trying
to tap the knowledge and wisdom of people we are associated with. Although we are just a very small part of what they do, many of them are quite passionate about the Doyle Sails story. What they can teach us about building a brand, for example, has value that money can’t buy.’ One of the lessons is that in
sport and business, past success – however satisfying – brings with it pressure for continued future achievement. ‘We never stop trying to learn
and improve and we are excited about new developments coming on stream,’ says Sanderson. ‘We see our new Hybrid product as a tier above Grand Prix level for teams stretching for those last small percentage gains and we are doing some interesting work with new composite gennakers that could be a big deal in the world of narrow apparent wind angle, high- performancemonohulls.’ The work goes on.
www.doylesails.com
❑ SEAHORSE 63
MAURO MELANDRI
JAMES TOMLINSON
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 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114
