Current Jules Verne record holder onboard Banque Populaire V and Vendée Globe veteran Brian Thompson looks at the UK’s own rapidly developing rival to the traditional shorthanded racing centres of Brittany

Like many other Seahorse readers I have been following the current Vendée Globe with an almost obsessive level of interest. As a competitor in the 2008/09 edition, I know that only the fastest sailors with the highest degree of seamanship skills can win. It’s also still evident that even though the winning boat will have been designed and engineered with painstaking care, and built with incredible expertise and dedication, it can never be anywhere near ready for an event as gruelling as the Vendée Globe, ‘straight out of the box’.

From initial launching each boat will have been in a perpetual cycle of testing, development and refinement, both in terms of performance and reliability. So clearly the quality and dedication of the technical shore team are critical in this preparatory phase, as is the choice of technical base and boatyard for the project. There is a multiplicity of factors to be accounted for in deciding on that base.

In France the benchmark locations, where most of the top Vendée entries have traditionally been prepared, are Lorient, Port La Fôret and La Trinité. In the UK, perhaps surprisingly to some, the epicentre for Imoca 60 teams has been Gosport, at the western entrance of Portsmouth Harbour. Endeavour Quay in Gosport has been the boatyard of choice for many teams including Alex Thomson Racing, Dee Caffari Racing and my own 08/09 Vendée Pindar campaign.

Endeavour Quay is now the principal facility in Gosport and no fewer than nine Imoca teams have used the yard for recent refits. Four Volvo Ocean Race teams have also operated short-term bases there, as have high-profile private visitors including Rán, Rambler, Alegre, Beau Geste and of course the classic J Class.

I know Lorient and Gosport well. I have spent long stints in Lorient with both the maxi trimaran Banque Populaire V and our MOD 70 Oman Sail, so they bear interesting comparison. Both are former military towns forging a new identity and developing a more mixed economy, with marine businesses and sailing teams playing an increasingly important part. And they each have singular advantages, in their respective areas, for big boats.

Both ports enjoy all-weather and all-tide access, and both have well-protected docks. Similarly, they both have rapid access to open water for testing and large islands protecting their entrances – Isle de Groix and the Isle of Wight – so flat-water testing is possible almost every day of the year.

Although one could argue that the food is more interesting in Lorient... it’s also true that Gosport has benefits that its French cousin does not. It’s very close to the central Solent, where most of the major races start in the UK, and it’s only 90 minutes from London, which is important for corporate hospitality, a crucial element of every modern-day commercial campaign.

A growing number of marine trades and services also now base themselves in and around Gosport, but one cornerstone facility, Endeavour Quay, originally the Camper and Nicholsons yard, has been there since 1782. And with a satisfying closing of the circle, the same yard that built many of the most iconic J boats of the 1930s, including Velsheda, Shamrock and Endeavour, now plays host to them again some 80 years later.

However, today Endeavour Quay is a bustling and thoroughly contemporary place… more than 200 years after its inception. At any time you will find an impressive array of raceboats in a fully modernised yard, still as relevant as ever, with the unique advantages of the site itself plus the energy and experience of a great team led by Boatyard Manager Tim Newell.

Tim’s professional team is flexible, helpful and experienced – particularly when it comes to moving around our large and rather precious pieces of hardware. Another important feature is that Endeavour Quay operates an Open Yard Policy allowing outside contractors to work on-site. Tim’s finger on the pulse also extends to the surrounding area, from where he frequently conjures up contacts for anything a team might require, from unusual heavy plant to crew accommodation.

Meanwhile, the yard itself provides deep-water mooring, undercover storage, complementary wi fi throughout and a travel lift that can take boats as big as Rambler 100 and Velsheda… Recent upgrades also mean that the facility’s on-site mast crane can now comfortably handle spars of up to 34m.

The 2011 Fastnet Race saw many racing teams based at the yard, bringing in numerous containers and other large items of equipment. It’s a great location for regatta preparation; the J boat Rainbow was also based at Endeavour Quay for much of last summer for its regatta programme. And 2013 being another Fastnet year, Endeavour Quay will again be hosting projects from all over the world preparing for this ocean racing classic.

As Stewart Hosford, head of 5 West, and running the wellestablished Hugo Boss Imoca campaign, puts it, ‘The bases, the suppliers and the networks that exist in Gosport are part of the reason we are here. The machine shops, the rope and rigging guys and the transport links are all part of it; but Endeavour Quay plays a really significant role. We have done the majority of our refits here for the past 10 years since we became an Imoca team. The facility and the guys working here are an important part of who we are… and why we are successful.’

Visit Endeavour Quay's website »

Class manager Rob Weiland positions 2013’s expanded TP52 Super Series in today’s fast-changing big picture

Top-level yacht racing appears to be literally lifting away from the element to which it was until recently firmly stuck. As more hull volume rises above the water so boats go faster and faster. This evolution takes the fish directly from the water to the sky, without wasting any time on land – other than for construction and storage.

I believe Grant Dalton when he says that it was by accident that Emirates Team New Zealand stumbled on the ability to foil. Not all accident of course, the potential to foil was never far away and for sure they knew what to look for; but to foil with such ease and balance at the first attempt required a combination of intuition and creativity beyond what is rational.

Dalton is definitely no romantic, banking upon the irrational as a good source for boat design. From what looks to be mostly chaos, the upcoming America’s Cup has produced a craft that catches the imagination. And other teams with more resources still seem far from getting it right. Cynics might say it is logical the Kiwis are a step ahead… to them the flightless bird is familiar territory.

Kiteboarding is another attempt to fly that has a mystery quality – and therefore the potential to appeal to every living soul. This potential has been recognised by many including ISAF, albeit initially in a rather clumsy manner.

But it can be argued that governing bodies are about technical control, the rational, with little eye for the romantic. Kiteboarding was probably gifted the Olympic shield too quickly, but it created the buzz that now and then we all need. Taking it away again was more the ISAF we expect to see, the body that you love to hate! But it will not hurt kiteboarding, it has too much potential.

Monohull racing yachts are getting nearer to lift-off as well. Watch the amazing averages of the leading boats in the Vendée Globe. That a major contributor to these great speeds is much improved autopilot quality is a bit sobering… bad for Zen addicts. Speed is certainly not essential to defying gravity, but current opinion is that modern racing craft need to be fast to inspire. Modern times require more spectacular failure and more frequent drama.

Risk of total failure, as in a boat fragmenting like Oracle’s AC72, one typically associates with the young and daring on a small craft that is easily put back together, or with a larger craft funded by a sponsor who measures return only in terms of publicity. This is not a criterion for private owners of million-dollar craft.

By contrast our next 52 Super Series, featuring six events in Key West, Miami, Barcelona, Ibiza, Palma and Porto Cervo, is based upon close racing between the most perfect of ‘traditional’ monohulls at multiple-race events hosted by some of the world’s greatest yacht clubs. We firmly believe there is a market for this activity.

And the Super Series is attracting increasing attention; 2013 sees an increase of around 30 per cent in the number of teams, along with growing praise from owners, sailors and sailing fans. Some try to ignore the fact that we have just completed our first year and draw comparison with the ‘old days’. But really there is only one way… forward.

Forward offers many options. One is to mimic others in the search for competitors and attention. Pro events like the America’s Cup, Volvo and Extreme Series all struggle if measured by the number of competitors. Less professional events for substantially smaller boats fare better. As do events that focus largely on having a good time, the after-sail.

The logic is that it is lonely at the top and less lonely lower down, but this is hard to accept. At regular intervals the box rule concept – used in the Super Series – is also questioned, the type of boat it produces is questioned, the event structure and marketing are questioned. And costs… they are always questioned. The grass is often greener on the other side, but to hop over a fence is another matter. So far we have been careful to only move our fences in those directions supported by our class members, through evolution. Those who pay the bills rarely preach revolution.

The America’s Cup chose to go multihull, Volvo chose to go for less boat and one-design: revolution. Time will tell, but the first signs – especially in the Cup – are not encouraging. Most others, classes or events, are in no position to choose. They hang on to what is there.

The TP52 Class has a tradition of boat evolution based on member consent. The best compromise seems a good choice. A current question for the members is whether a more spectacular approach will help the class and the 52 Super Series to grow?

For marketeers this might be the obvious choice. Heart-stopping action sells well in sport. Burning bridges, however, and crash-bang sailing other than slamming into big waves require a change of attitude. Sailing never has been without risk, but it always has been about seamanship and getting home in one piece. Crash-bang probably suits pro circuits and paid-driver sports better than owner-driver competitions.

Monohulls get closer and closer to flying. Canting keels are already established, though mostly still attached to a relatively traditional hullshape. But new concepts like Murnikov’s Speed- Dream are appearing. It will only take the right mix of technology, funding and imagination.

But to think that it only requires a boat that goes fast to attract sailors and fans is too simplistic. First of all, no matter how extravagant the revolution, the novelty soon wears off. Secondly, it is very expensive to have a revolution every five years or so… financial reality quickly catches up. Thirdly, the boat is just one part of the magic. An important tool, but still a tool.

Organisation and events, the human element and the technical product all are tightly interwoven. There will be absolute fans of the TP52 who join the 52 Super Series for that reason, and there will be fans of the quality of the 52 Super Series who buy the tool that is required to participate.

And for sure there are other reasons to be interested in a TP52. The most common is that it is a versatile craft that can be raced to great effect in most if not all inshore and offshore arenas, under class rule, IRC, ORC, PHRF or HPR. Also, never underestimate the attraction of tinkering with boats. Planning a new boat, upgrading an existing boat, optimisation, some enjoy this more than sailing itself.

The 52 Super Series for sure is about quality. That indefinable mix of love of sailing, rational choices and hard work. We have just taken off in 2013 and hope you enjoy the flight.

Visit the 52 Super Series website »

Ker Design have been investing… heavily. Using the example of his new McConaghy-built Class 40 Jason Ker explains a fresh approach to yacht design

Introduction

After being immersed in America’s Cup design, with both ACC and then AC90 yachts, Ker Yacht Design refocused its attention on designs for private clients. Meanwhile, our commitment to R&D remained constant and it is this that has recently been bearing fruit with the remarkable new optimisation capabilities we have developed.

Our new Class 40 design for Team Concise (teamconcise.com), which is now entering series production at McConaghy in China, is our first project to take full advantage of this technology. We have now set our sights on taking Mini Maxi and Open 60 design to new heights.

Hull development
I am sometimes asked why, at a time when computers are used extensively in the design of yachts, all boats don’t look the same. The answer I used to give was that while there might be a perfect solution for a given race or set of races, based on a set of weather predictions, there is still an infinitely large number of shapes to choose from. The typical ‘shape optimisation’ approach, used by designers since the advent of tank testing, is to change one parameter at a time to determine its effect on performance – thus creeping towards a faster solution. With the adoption of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) the same approach continued, albeit with an increase in the numbers of models.

The typical result of this ‘linear optimisation’ approach renders most designs linear variants of a successful shape, a so-called ‘typeform’. However, in reality the shape parameters have coupled effects causing the real design space to be infinitely larger than that explored by linear optimisation or using enhanced sequential techniques such as genetic algorithms.

Occasionally a different and better typeform is discovered, through intelligent judgment or by accident, creating a new typeform that makes hulls designed around the previous one obsolete.

The rating manager’s dilemma: open the door to a small, seemingly harmless feature such as small topside hollows and you can be guaranteed someone, somewhere will test the edges – this is the Reichel-Pugh 86 Pyewacket after Juan K got to work remodelling her. If something as costly as a hull ‘tweak’ is perceived as even mildly advantageous then the damage to the wider fleet may be disastrous

At the start of the New Year I found myself sitting in a meeting with a group of builders and designers talking about the Volvo Ocean 65 project, when the screen saver flicked to a beautiful photo of the Judel-Vrolijk IRC yacht Jethou as she looked soon after launch. This seemed to provide a fitting distraction from the topic of the time and I was soon asked why IRC doesn’t encourage the shallow topside hollows seen then on Jethou – as she was – and which several present clearly found attractive.

I found it interesting that the initial understanding around the table was that this was probably just an issue of aesthetic taste by the rating office. I explained that in fact it all stems back to the philosophy behind IRC, and has nothing to do with any personal opinions but revolves around a standard set of questions that we regularly ask ourselves; in particular IRC rule 2.4, which simply states ‘IRC discourages unnecessary expense at all levels’.

Quoting this rule to my audience produced blank faces all around. No great surprise, as all were looking at Jethou and asking ‘where is the expense in building concavity into the hull of a one-off IRC mini-maxi?’ However, the important words here are ‘at all levels’.

At this stage we again ask ourselves another important question: ‘Why is this design characteristic being suggested or integrated into a design?’ It is rare that the answer is to slow the boat down. In this case I am sure that there is an element of aesthetics, but there is also the fact that when the crew weight is most needed, this slight hollow allows them to get that bit further out without increasing the wetted surface on the leeward side as much as would fuller aft sections.

By now I was getting suspicious looks as everyone asked themselves ‘how much advantage really is there with such a slight hollow?’ This again takes me back to those words… ‘at all levels’.