News Around the World
Four different solutions to the same question – how to interpret the AC75 rule? The closest answers came from Team New Zealand and Challenger of Record Luna Rossa – both were involved in creating the new Cup rule so it is not unfair to suggest that these two teams had the most time working on their new designs, even if initially only in conceptual terms. The first boat from American Magic (second from top) looks like a clever boat 1 concept, quick to get sailing, able to be pushed harder earlier than more extreme designs with that forgiving scow bow and the opportunity to begin working on details earlier than those getting to grips with more aggressive solutions. The Ineos Team UK design is definitely not conservative and if successful will probably be closer to the team’s second boat than those of their rivals; that said, the bow of the team’s first AC75 while raised slightly is still shallow and if the nose should dip far under the surface at speed the flow aft through the U-shaped deck profile could be pretty solid. Ironically, hours before this boat went into the water the photo (left) of Team NZ executing this face-plant appeared… not their first by any means. Hopefully maximum mast rake combined with the powerful flat stern that features on the first British design will minimise the frequency of such occurrences
probably means the end of the programme. SH: At least by launching a test boat early you have insight into knowing what you don’t know and so can do the relevant research. How risky is the Kiwi strategy of not sailing a test boat at all? GS: I think Team New Zealand will actually gain back the time of not having a test boat. They gain a bit because of the shipping logistics plus since the last Cup they’ve relied a lot on their simulator – which was already very advanced. I don’t think it’s that risky. But for this team a test boat has been really good because it
gave us a programme and a project to work on early; that helped us pull the shore team and sailing teams together and also get some important systems in place. SH: Lightbulb moments over the years? GS: In the 2003 Cup with Alinghi it was when we knew the boat was competitive and perhaps slightly better, but that was just a great moment! We hadn’t really been able to gauge the NZ perfor- mance until then. In 2013 it was when we realised that we could foil upwind, which turned out to be critical to that Cup. There haven’t been any lightbulb moments yet in this campaign, but hopefully we will have one over the next few weeks… SH: How critical is hull shape to foiling – I suspect there could be something radical here from a team in boat #2? GS:We could see something quite radical, there’s definitely enough scope in the rules. ETNZ’s boat with the central bustle and the Luna Rossa boat are clearly designed for foiling and not for displacement sailing… What that really tells us is that ETNZ and Challenger of Record Luna Rossa are not planning on racing in low wind speeds but primarily in foiling conditions. SH: Any surprises in the first four launchings? GS: Clearly the ETNZ and Luna Rossa hull shapes are ideas that we thought about but if you are thinking about sailing in displacement mode then you wouldn’t do a boat like that. And the ETNZ deck layout is very simple with a strong emphasis on energy production SH:Massive righting moment creates huge loadings. Could we see failures as brutal as occurred in the V5.0 ACC monohulls…
28 SEAHORSE
GS: Yes, of course. We have the perfect storm of high righting moments, very light boats and then add to that the dynamics of these boats with the big crashes we all expect. And of course you can easily capsize these boats; a big focus will be the safety of the crew… followed by trying to protect our physical assets. Hitting any- thing solid in the water will also be pretty catastrophic throughout the entire foil structure. SH: The Cup has always been about funding and without it every team struggles. What can you say about the support you’ve enjoyed in terms of freeing up the key management very early on to focus on the nuts and bolts of winning the Cup. GS: Jim Ratcliffe’s commitment and the nature of the Ineos funding have been critical. We also have a family of suppliers supporting us with products we need and it’s great to have this support, but we are fortunate not to be looking for cash sponsors. Jim’s backing is rock solid, not only financially but also the management side of the Ineos operation who give us a lot of support as well. SH: Unless you have been in a situation trying to secure funding for something of this size I don’t think most people can grasp the enormity of the problem. It’s been Grant Dalton’s full-time roll to travel the world trying to fund ETNZ, and he came very close to having to close the doors before Bermuda. Once you were aware you had secured full funding, what specific initiatives were you able to press the go-button for? GS: Prior to Jim Ratcliffe and the Ineos support we didn’t think we had enough funding to build two AC75 boats, which is absolutely critical in this campaign. Regarding Team New Zealand, since 2007 there’s always been issues with their funding, but in the end they’ve always had enough support from their private backers that they’ve been able to put incredibly strong campaigns together. We don’t expect this time to be any different – they’ve got a big, strong team and we are anticipating an incredibly strong defence of the Cup. SH: Jim Ratcliffe is also funding the Team GB cycling team. Any interaction or cross-fertilisation with them? GS: Clearly all these sports have different priorities but we share
RICHARD GLADWELL
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 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122