Sydney Hobart

[Karsten]

I was wandering what all the professionals think about the recent Sydney - Hobart race. The two leading "Super Maxies" had to retire. One lost its keel because the hydraulic jacks failed and the other buckled the deck near the mast. The conditions were "going upwind and falling from the top of big waves" as I understand.

Were the boats not designed for these conditions and did the crews just drive them too hard? Whey weren't they told during the race if this was the case? Is there going to be some sort of investigation to find out what exactly happened to better understand the forces and therefore be able to design better boats the next time? Who is going to share information like that? Only the original designers? Are all other designers still left in the dark if they have to design a "Super Maxi" in future and therefore potentially risk the lives of crews not to mention waste allot of money?

Guess these questions also apply to other extreme racing boats. I find it pretty embarrassing for the profession to see people climbing into life rafts from multi million dollar yachts that were allegedly designed for races like this.

Cheers,
Karsten

[D'ARTOIS]

If you compare a super high end racing yacht with a F1 car you know that you are walking on the outer edge of technology.
If something fails, or breaks, or whatever, it is as it is, all in the game. As long as no lives are lost, we take the damage for granted and are looking for the next race.
Sydney Hobart is the Grand National of Sailing Yachts. No race for prissy's.
Of course, a boat can be driven too hard, as can an F1, this is all about the balance between weight versus safety. You care or not....
Back in the '80s I used to skipper an AC, when the owner brought his two extremely beaut's of daughters aboard I knew that I was on a safe ship.........

[Brett Aust]

Point of note,

Nicorrette dropped it's mast yesterday, sailing with sponsors and small sails. They were left with a splintered stump about a metre above the deck.

That puts all of the big sydney/hobart maxi's bavck in the shed.

[brian eiland]

I was wandering what all the professionals think about the recent Sydney - Hobart race. The two leading "Super Maxies" had to retire. One lost its keel because the hydraulic jacks failed and the other buckled the deck near the mast. The conditions were "going upwind and falling from the top of big waves" as I understand.

You might have a look thru this tread subject, "CBTF(Canting Ballast Twin Foil)" (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2200) , and more specifically to designer Jim Pugh's observations at item number #83 (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showpost.php?p=36725&postcount=83)



Nicorrette dropped it's mast yesterday, sailing with sponsors and small sails. They were left with a splintered stump about a metre above the deck.

That puts all of the big sydney/hobart maxi's bavck in the shed.

Then this today.
STUFF HAPPENS
Ludde Ingvall's supermaxi Nicorette, only two weeks ago sailed triumphantly into Hobart, to win the 2004 Rolex Sydney to Hobart race on Line Honours. She had survived weather that brought her two rivals, Skandia and Konica Minolta undone, but it could be she suffered more damage that was believed at the time. This afternoon, during a corporate sail with Nicorette sponsor clients, the 90 footer was about half a mile seaward of the the entrance to the Gold Coast Seaway at around 3.30pm (AEST), sailing under main and headsail, in a flat seaway, at about 10 knots. Suddenly with a thunderous crack, her mast splintered and broke near the boom gooseneck and fell cleanly into the water. The mast and sails are in 22 metres of water and the total bill is expected be around AUS$1 million.

A Nicorette spokeswoman, Jane Hyland said the crew and guests had returned to the marina and Police confirmed no-one was injured. 'Unfortunately these boats are a bit like F1 racing cars,' she said. 'You can race them through Bass Strait and nothing happens to them and then in very moderate conditions we break a mast.' She said an early assessment suggested there was an engineering failure. 'But until our mast builder gets up there to have a look at it we certainly are not able to make any call as to why it happened and how it happened in very mild conditions.' Recovery of the mast, which is in 22 metres of water, will start tomorrow at 5am.

Unusually, its the second time in two years that Nicorette yachts have been dismasted after surviving the rigours of a Hobart race, only to fall down in mild conditions.
- Rob Kothe, Sail-World website, full story:
www.sail-world.com/


And then finally you might have a look at, Materials and Factor of Safety (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6092)

[mistral]

so the Sidney Hobart 2004 final result for maxis is :
-2 dead on the battle field
-1 seriously injured, died two weeks after winning the battle

.....but fortunately we're just talking about boats, not people, fortunately....
Jim pugh's observations seems quite interesting; under a veil of polite diplomacy he told that both boats were not properly enginereed; a curious fact for such state-of-the art boats, don't you think???
we're not talking about AC boats, who get back to marina with 21 knots of breeze, we're talking 'bout Sidney-Hobart!!!!!!
may be 'it's time to build boats more similar to world rally cars than to F1 cars.....

Mistral

[D'ARTOIS]

When Carbon breaks it doesn't tell you so before. Carbon is a strange material. It can suddenly collapse. And when it does - a mast in this case - God may help you that you are not in the vicinity when it happens! It doesn't break, it explodes!
Carbon absorbs stresses till a certain point - then it collapses caused by internal overload of stresses. Then, Carbon has it's strength in the unidirectional direction, it's compressive strength is not that great. And Carbon hates vibrational environments. To get it practical for masts, you must compromise. In spite of that, mastcollapses will always happen, immaterial if it concerns Alu or Carbon. Only carbon splinters are very difficult to detect by X-rays......
:idea:

[brian eiland]

Now here's a fine mess

WHARINGTON SUES
Grant Wharington, owner and skipper of the maxi monohull "Skandia" which
capsized after losing its canting keel during the Rolex Sydney Hobart
race, released the following notice today concerning a lawsuit filed
against the designer of his boat's canting keel hydraulic system:

"The super-maxi yacht Skandia, previous line honours winner of the 2003
Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race, was forced to abandon the 2004 Rolex
Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race when the hydraulic system designed to control
its canting keel failed.

"Extensive damage was caused to the yacht as a direct result of the
failure. The keel subsequently detached from the yacht completely, and the
yacht was towed to safe harbour.

"Today, proceedings were issued out of the Supreme Court of Victoria
against the designer and manufacturer of the hydraulic system, seeking
unspecified damages arising out of the failure. It is the intention of the
plaintiff to seek a speedy resolution to this litigation.

"We would like to take this opportunity to stress that we have 110%
confidence in our Chief Designer, Don Jones - in what he has done with
Skandia and what he continues to do with our latest VO 70 project. This
action should send a strong message to all that Don is in no way
implicated in any of this, and he should continue to enjoy his well earned
reputation as one of the most innovative and safest yacht designers of our
time.

As the matter is now the subject of legal process, no further comment can
be made at this stage."
http://www.wildthingyachting.com.au/

[brian eiland]

Designer of Konica Minolta, Brett Bakewell-White gave his view on what
happened in a story posted on The Daily Sail subscription website. Here are
a couple of excerpts.)

"The damage to the boat was relatively minor. It consisted of a core shear
failure across the cabin top from window to window - approx. 1.8m long -
the skins remained intact. The transverse crease in the cabin top was about
150mm in front of the keel tower and behind the mast. Essentially it was
caused by the keel's momentum compressing the cabin top as the boat crashed
out of the back of a very large wave. This part of the cabin top had
received a significant design effort when the boat was designed and was
capable of exceeding ABS grounding requirements, so it is rather surprising
that sailing loads have managed to exceed these quite stringent requirements"

You might have a look at this tread subject as well, "Is there progress in composite construction" (http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5851)

[D'ARTOIS]

If something new is invented, not specifically in yacht racing, lot's of people are waiting for the first weakness or failure of the new designed boat, object, etc to show up.
When I started in the late '60's with epoxy (from Ciba-Geigy) everybody was not only sceptical but did not even know the purpose of the material. I glued and baked part of the steering house of my Lambo Espada with epoxy and baked it afterwards in the electrical oven. My wife screaming on the top of her lungs! Then Kevlar, came, then Carbon came and so many other devices that made boats (and cars) faster. Forgotten are the simple assumptions "that anything under the waterline does not matter" - the reality proofs different: all weight matters. Very lucky that even the Boyo's that can afford such fantastic plastic as Nicorette or Marie Cha (a boat I really admire) cannot afford the ultime material "Boron": 2 times stronger and lighter as Ti4V6 or the more complicated alloys like TiVaCr wolfram-carbide alloys.
The high carbon content in the latest engineering of wovens and non-wovens however, leads in straight line to such complicated damages as caused in Skandia.
The original designer of Skandia may downgrade the integral damage of the design he created, he must see to it and accept it that he cannot design, and is unable to, a configuration that is strong enough to cope with the forces inflicted by high speed, bad weather, vibrations, violent movements of weight, fast weightshifting - high impact loads throughout rig, rigging, stresses around the keel surface, - the week underbelly of the F1 searacer - I feel it unjustified, in spite of what I wrote before, that now the law is unleashed on that poor designer!
I advise the big sailing boyo's to have a look at the cost's of a F1 car team! And the engineering necessary to bring such a car on the circuit. Compared to that, Offshore racing is what Sunday's money is to a child!
So let Skandia take her losses, she is probably scrapyard material anyway, who says?
A Sidney Hobart is very good at that. Do you come with a boat that is insufficient whatsoever, Sidney Hobart will bring you back to earth. One should actually add the rule that one cannot hold designers responsible for the incapability to design a system that must be able to bring 6 or 7 tons of lead multiplied by the arm of the keel in seastate 5 to 7 at a speed of 10 knots plus multiplied by the weight of forward motion, subject to rollercoaster
accelerations from port to starboard or vice versa.
Right or not?

[mistral]

D'artois i may agree with you as long as we remember that those boat are not remote controlled, but they have a crew on board!!! I'm not worried because of a Tycoon who lost his new million-dollar toy, who cares about him!!! I'm worried because sailors may lose their life becuse they race an unseaworthy boat, that's all.
I wouldn't define what happened to Skandia a "minor damage"; the boat lost completely her keel and has been towed to avoid a complete loss of the boat, a total core shear failure is not a minor damage!!!!
Think about the same failure in a Volvo open in the southern ocean, in a force 8 gale, 700 miles offshore for the nearest coast, and tell us what will happen to the crew.....

Mistral

[D'ARTOIS]

Dear Mistral,

That's what I said, that it is NOT minor damage that came to Skandia. But you are right that I forgot to add those things you said about the crew, they may be good sailors but they cannot be expected to have any insight in the high end engineering of meterials that are, exproperly used. Underline that!
Kevlar, the ****** of Yachtbuilding, was originally designed to replace steelbelts in car tyres and carbon to make flightweight fishing rods.
No, you are definately right with those flinterthin racing constructions like that stupid French girl had, Isabelle? that had to be rescued by an Australian fregate that had almost to go to SA to get that girl from her ill-designed helter-skelter.
And therefore it should be said sometimes loud and clear, to bring those boyo's back to earth!
I wanted just to ventilate some criticism on this whole canting keel design business. It might work perfect in a boat with enough flesh in the guts to cope with the internal forces that such monstrum of equipment creates.

In order to get such a boat ready to take those forces they shoud design a Ti4V6 or Ti 318 webframe; build the boat with the webframe as an integral part so that the soft plastic doesn't have to absorb those hellish forces the canting keel wishes to produce, the webframe will do that and can. It will make the boat 600 kilo's or so more heavy, but it will stiffen the hull considerably so they might partly compensated by the fact that higher rigging loads might be applied. And faster sailing. Finally.......
:idea:

[mistral]

in military and civil aircraft engineers use to place a g-meter/recorder so that you can download datas of loads (accelerations) after every flight; many problems have been discovered during test flight checking carefully wich loads a structure has been punched by during a previous manoveuring cycle; i don't know if anything similar has been done for maxis or other boats; maybe just AC boats has been so intensively engineered (with poor results....); i have the sensation that canting keels are just pointing out how really poor is the knowledge that we have about dynamic stresses on the water during a seaway; we have to gain a deeper knowledge, something more complex than put a huge safety factor in a static stress calculations.

Mistral

[D'ARTOIS]

Mistral,

I think to open new post: Engineering in Modern Racing Yachts how do I promote that?

[K4s]

Perhaps a leaf should be taken from Sir Peter Blakes book,He maintained that you can push any boat past the point of no return wether it be of heavy or light construction,the secret to success is really in the hands of those that sail on these boats.Maybe its the sailers that should be recieving the bad press rather than the boats.
K4s

[D'ARTOIS]

Is that a Joke or what? Let's keep this discussion serious. If this gentleman expresses such wisdom, then he better sails the boat himself. Never say something if you are unable to do the job yourself.

[D'ARTOIS]

I must agree with you. Indeed, the boat was almost after point of no return!!:idea:

[Doug Lord]

Seems to me that the failure of Skandias system for whatever reason is being blown way out of proportion. There are canting keel boats now over half way in the Vendee and canting keel boats have had a 20+ year history of ocean sailing.
It was interesting that when Konica Minolta had trouble even a "famous" sailing writer -Peter Campbell- reported that she had a "massive canting keel". Sail-World and Scutllebutt replayed his story.
Coupled with the Skandia story canting keels became unsafe ,dangerous etc.
Of course Konica Minolta has a fixed keel not a canting keel...
The point is that any failure has to be analysed on a case by case basis not as part of a hysteria that could be based on false information-and is at least based on a lack of information.
Hopefully ,the failures that occured will be analysed and shared with the designers all over the world so that everybody learns something.
Don't put all canting keel designs/installations "in the same boat" because of one well publicized failure.

[Brett Aust]

There was more than one canting keel failure...

Xana retired on the first day due to keel problems. Electronic controls I believe.

[brett aust]

Sorry - scrub that. The boat was targe. hmm must be friday...

[FAST FRED]

While much work is being done on finding a method of non distructive testing for Carbon fiber construction , there is NOTHING , yet, but "visual inspection" .

So maxis will continue to shed keels , and Air Busses will continue to shed their rudders with booring regularity.

And boat racers will sue designers & mfg as regularly as air lines sue Air Bus.

At least the racers seldom end up DEAD!

FAST FRED

[Doug Lord]

Unfortunately, Brett's comments again prove my point about "hysteria" or at least careless "reporting". Targe is the ex-Wild Oats that retired with some kind of electrical system problem that apparently affected all systems on the boat-not a structural failure of the canting keel.She competed in the Pittwater Coffs race immediately after the SH-and came close to winning it-but the newer Wild Oats beat her to it becoming the second canting keel boat to win a major ocean race recently(after Nicorette wining the SH) Dozens(there,now I'm doing it) of fixed keel boats retired for many reasons including electrical,mast failure and structural problems.
No doubt canting keel systems make an important target because they are on the leading edge of design even after twenty some years having just won one of the worlds toughest ocean races and the Pittwater race.

[D'ARTOIS]

Let's keep in track - nothing has been said about the canting keel itself, nor about "that it is already 20 years in existence" - in theory, yes - but not in living reality. Only over the very recent past, the large racers are equipped with this innovative system.
"The Vendee Globe is already halfway" says Mr Lord.
That has nothing to do with the environmental circumstances of the Sidney Hobart, as I said already earlier in this post, the Grand National of yacht racing.
What I am pointing at is simply this: A racing yacht is designed to go as fast as it can go. And the boy's on the boats do that. If they don't, they may go. Team members are as expendable as football players and an intimate knowledge of the boat they sail on is only achieved after a season or so. That is one.
On the racing yacht of today, the crew is often unaware when something is going to collapse. A carbon mast goes in seconds, no advance warning. It is boom! - over and out.
Rigging? It goes like that.
Are there overload detectors mounted on vital parts? Tell me.
Is there any kind of pre-warning system mounted or integrated in vital parts of the hull, giving indications of high stresses or undesirable flexing in the hull? Just tell me.
Some years ago we had a m.o.b. case when one of the crewmembers was pulled overboard because he launched a pail over the side to get some water to wash out something.
A yacht that moves at full speed through a moving sea is subject to massive
powers.
If you undo - for whatever reasons - the integrity of hull and keel, you may rest assured that another point of failure is created.
When a mast goes overboard, alas, such things happens - the hull still floats.

And that's what this post is saying: bit by bit the modern racing yachts are becoming a risk factor, not only for the crew, but also for the coastguard,
naval forces etc, that has often to go to distant locations to save a crew from a disfunctional yacht. To what purpose? Fodder for the tabloids and lawyers?
Because that's the future of modern yacht racing. Making them first hazardous and then sueing the people who helped creating the increasing risk factor.
The long distance racers are fully aware of this. Therefore they will keep a sharp eye on the rig in order not to overload it. Their ambition is to arrive at their destination - the high risk factor is therefore not there. It is in the medium to short distances where the boats are pushed till they break and the more conventional designed boats will profit from the mistakes of the bigger ones.

[mistral]

Hey Lorsail, take a look at Vendee's boat, there's been two keel failure, Sill et Voila and the guy from Austria (i think his name is Robert Sedleck); it's a huge amount 2 failures in a 20 boats fleet, isn't it??? Think about any other part (mast, rudder,bowsprit, sails) and project this data, think of a 10% dismasted boat in a normal regatta, because VOR 60 ARE built for Vendee, so for such boats it IS a normal regatta!!
keel failure is not even comparable with a broken mast or boom, or with a splitted bowsprit or an electrical issue, simply because there's a high chance that your boat will SINK losing the keel!!!

Mistral

P.S: vendee's guys (and girls) demonstrate us to be able to repair almost evrything during the race, but to have trouble with your keel means that you have to retire immediately, no doubt!

[Tripp Gal]

Just an observation to make.

You are trying to determine the relative "safety" and "integrity" of a system that is being used in the world's toughest races where the skippers do push their boats far harder than the recreational fleet does.

Canting keel technology isn't bad technology. With that said, owners and designers make tough decisions regarding fail over systems, and overbuilds when they put these boats together. It's risk management 101. Is the risk greater than they are willing to take? If so, they build in safety systems.We aren't privy to those discussions so we do not know exactly what is said in those meetings other than the press releases fed to us.

Before canting keels there were fin keels being ripped off a boat. Whether it's the BOC or SH or whatever, keels have been ripped off, bulbs have dropped off, and the list goes on. When bulbed keels came out people were ranting about how often those keels were ripped off and how "unsafe" they were. But again there were long discussions between owners and designers about how little engineering is required to get them around the course barring what they considered extreme acts of God.

[Doug Lord]

Well said TG. Canting keel technology should not be indicted because of a few isolated failures on race boats being pushed hard. The failures need to be looked at on a case by case basis. Sil's failure was ,apparently a laminate failure and yet there is a sistership sailing with the same identical system that has not(knock on wood) failed . The failure on Brother,apparently, was caused by a bearing failure. Both boats got the crew to safety.
And,again, the Vendee is being won by canting keel boats just as was the SH and Pittwater Coffs.Canting keel systems have hundreds of thousands of ocean miles on them; this is fast, reliable, technology that can only be improved as time goes by.

[D'ARTOIS]

I was corect in my assumption that the older and smaller boats would profit from the problems of the bigger ones. The 55' Aera was the overall winner.

Next to that I want to say: what a spectacular sight to see those yachts fighting against 6-7 meters high seas!

Rest assured that the problems with the canting- or swing keels as they are called here will be only temporarily.

[K4s]

No joke the boats didnt ruin themselves,if conditions had been easier all would probably have finished.Im not trying to condem the sailers but are reminded of another saying,"A bad tradesman blames his tools",again Blake has been consistantly quoted along the lines of seamanship(good)is the most important member of your crew in any offshore excursion.I dont want to disparage anyones sailing efforts but to blame the boats and by association the designers and builders is in my mind unfair.
Perhaps if the boats had not been driven as hard as they were they would not have broken.
Just a thought
K4s

[Doug Lord]

Seems to me the the guys on Skandia and the other raceboats embody the term seamanship in that they went thru horrendous situations yet got everybody home safely-that happened because of the crew and skipper working together.
As I remember it, both(Konica/Skandia) skippers said they weren't "pushing too hard" whatever that means; it is after all a race.
But when all hell broke loose they handled themselves in an exemplary way.....

[Brett aust]

Quote:
Unfortunately, Brett's comments again prove my point about "hysteria" or at least careless "reporting".

Hysteria or careless reporting, I don't think so. Whatever the reason, if control to a canting keel system is compromised, the complete system can work against you which in turn compromises the vessel.

Canting keel systems are appearing to suffer (at this point) from reliability issues. Unless improvements are made, these types of incidents are going to continue.

[Doug Lord]

"Canting keel systems are appearing to suffer(at this point) from reliability issues". Bret, come on! Give me a break!!
Which canting keel systems? All canting keel systems? Are you deliberately vague?! Why?
The recent "score":
Sydney -Hobart structural failure: one canting keel, one fixed keel.
In the Vendee two canting keels have failed for two different reasons neither of which was similar to the published reason for Skandia's failure.Four other boats have withdrawn for myriad other problems.
There isn't a single shred of evidence that "canting keel technology" is responsible for these widely different failures. Every case must be analyzed separately and rationally just as they have been in the failures of carbon masts, rudders and fixed keels.
Again, to focus on these failures given the recent success by canting keelboats and the fact that canting keel boats are leading the Vendee globe is absolutely absurd!!! To knock the whole technology because of a few failures is nuts.To say there is a crisis of reliability belies the extraordinary reliabiliy shown by canting keel boats in the worlds toughest races over the last twenty years.

[CT 249]

Seems to me the the guys on Skandia and the other raceboats embody the term seamanship in that they went thru horrendous situations yet got everybody home safely-that happened because of the crew and skipper working together.
As I remember it, both(Konica/Skandia) skippers said they weren't "pushing too hard" whatever that means; it is after all a race.
But when all hell broke loose they handled themselves in an exemplary way.....


Doug, it's hardly the embodiment of seamanship to lose control of your keel, hop into a liferaft, get picked up by a helicopter and have to tow the shattered remains of your boat home......

It IS a race, but like any race (unless it's the race to Eden Fisherman's Club, which we won in '86 after I drove us onto a sunfish :-) ) you have to finish to win; just like Ludde did. If you talk to guys like multiple winner Roger Hickman, you'll find that he places a huge emphasis on traditional seamanship (keeping the crew fed and rested, keeping the boat and sails in one piece) while still sailing a high-tech boat well.

We keep on hearing (since at least Windward Passage II in '87) of maxis that "can't be slowed down enough" as Konica reported. One wonders whether there is a problem with the size of storm sails, perhaps trysails are too large on these boats.

One thing of which I was not aware (because I largely dropped out of offshore sailing about the time IMS came in) was a "revenge effect" of increased stability. On the old IOR boats (light or heavy) and typical Kiwi-type "club racers" (Young 88, Farr 1020 or more radical boats like Inglis designs) and even (I think) light IMS boats like Mumm 36s, you must steer around the backless waves. If you come charging over the crest, you lose too much speed on the crash landing. So there's a lot of emphasis placed on weaving around bad waves, bearing away at the crest etc. It's sort of like the act you do in a Laser, for the same reasons - speed not seamanship.

On the more stable IMS boats (Aussie IMS boats didn't go the Euro low stability route) with all the ballast in the keel and more concentrated weight distribution than the IOR or Inglis/Y88/Farr 1020 types, the fast way to Hobart is to just let the boat crash and bash. It feels bloody awful, but top designers and Hobart winning skipper/drivers assure me it's the way to go; just drive the boat fast straight off the crest, let it crash, and hope it's strong enough. The same has occurred with the stable IRC boats. The hull shapes of these are often similar to the Young and Inglis type, so the operating factors are the increased stability and weight concentration (which increases speed of motion).

So with the older boats, the fast sailors kept speed up by easing the boat over waves, just like a Laser sailor. With the new boats, the fast route is to just let them drop off the crests and hope they can handle the landings. No wonder the new boats are breaking; it's a classic case of the law of unintended consequences. Reduced stasbility may actually increase the finishers.....

I haven't checked this out widely, but I did ask a couple of Hobart winning drivers and a multi Hobart winning designer who sails on his boats. Anyone else want to confirm it, or am I wrong?

[Doug Lord]

Chris, thats funny coming from skiff sailors whose modus operandi is to take movable ballast further outboard than just about any other type of boat.Canting keels allow the the ballast to be moved outboard to develop higher speed with less heeling,less weight,less crew(in some cases) and a better ride than deep fixed keels and that seems eminently sensible to me.
Of course canting keel boats develop high loads,so what? So do Open 60 trimarans or G class cats or whatever. The vast majority of canting keel boats have proven to be very fast and reliable..
I disagree with you regarding seamanship- surviving a crisis caused by failure of the boat is the essence of semanship and those guys did a great job.

[mistral]

canting keels are on the stage since about 20 years; but in spite of this, they're still used only in extreme racer; we have to point out that fin keel has become a widespread technology in less then 20 years (1950-1970); i perfeclty know that canting are a good technology to improve performance, the numbers speak clear and loud, and Righting Moment is a fact, not a personal opinion; i'd personally love to see a AC cup boat with canting keels grinder-powered, or sportboats like mumm30 with this stuff inside, but the reality is that, in 20 years, this tecnology has remained an "edge" solution, so, few boats, very few tests, and a relevant statistical number of failure, considering 20 years of experience; there are not good or bad technologies, there are just poorly tested ones, but if things keep going this way canting keels will have a very rocky and narrow path to become reliable technology.

Mistral

[Doug Lord]

Mistral, you're just plain wrong about canting keels being used just on race boats. The new issue of Sail magazine has an article about a 60 footer designed as a cruising boat. CBTFco has done a number of cruising versions of canting keel boats as have others. The Schock 40 is a "cruiser-racer"...
The last five years has seen a tremendous growth in the use of canting keels most have which have been in succesfull applications whether racing or cruising.
And the winning just keeps on keeping on....

[mistral]

i'm talkin 'bout GREAT numbers, how many canters have you seen in your marina?? consider just cruisers, i'm not talking about 100 boats in whole europe and 200 boats in USA, i'm talking about 30% of total amount of sailing boats!!!! That means a successful solution!!! That may interest normal sailor!! of course most of the racing cars have carbon disk brakes, but it means nothing for me and you when we have to buy a new car.

good night
Mistral

[Doug Lord]

Well, maybe we need to build a bunch of the 18' canting keel racing daysailers we looked at a while back....

[K4s]

Seems to me the the guys on Skandia and the other raceboats embody the term seamanship in that they went thru horrendous situations yet got everybody home safely-that happened because of the crew and skipper working together.
As I remember it, both(Konica/Skandia) skippers said they weren't "pushing too hard" whatever that means; it is after all a race.
But when all hell broke loose they handled themselves in an exemplary way.....
In no way am I degrading these guys efforts,only thing that didnt get home safe was the boat..perhaps the crew skipper and boat needed to be working together.Im not knocking these guys,there Ive said it again ,just questioning the wisdom of shifting the spotlight to designers and builders of these boats without firsthand knowledge.This isnt a negative comment on the crews but perhaps a view of the problems experienced from a different perspective.
Take it as critisism or think about it,your choice.
K4s

[Karsten]

Just came back from holidays.
I don't think canting keels are dangerous and I didn't want to start this discussion to talk them down.

I think that we agree that these modern racers are different to "normal" yachts and different and higher loads are present under certain conditions. Higher loads are not a problem. They only require more material. It doesn't really matter what sort of material. Carbon is great because it has very high strength in the fibre direction and if used correctly will be able to deal with the loads. By the way the Airbus rudder fell off because of pilot induced loads that were not considered during the design. There was no problem with the carbon fin at all and Airbus got cleared. It's the regulations that needed update to include that pilot action.

To make supermaxis and other extreme yachts safe I think a wide approach is required. To make a good design you have to know three things:

1. The loads
2. The material properties
3. The geometry

Seems to me that the first point is not really well understood in this case. Failures are always a good opportunity to learn. But when I hear that the mastbuilder has a look at his own broken mast then I don't think that that is an independent investigation. I think a few independent experts should look at the problem and then publish their findings so that everybody can learn from it.

Point 2 and 3 are usually not a problem but I think much more quality control is required to make sure that the material properties and geometry are what they are supposed to be to improve relaibility. If one keel breaks and the sistership's keel is fine mayby somebody buggered it up during manufacture? I know the sort of quality control and cleanlyness in place at aircraft manufacturers and from memory shipyards are dusty, smelly places with lots of stuff lying around everywhere.
Also aircraft get regular inspections especially after unusual events like hard landings to make sure all structure survived it. If a carbon mast suddenly breaks in 10 knots it sounds like there was some previous damage. A visual inspection is not going to find delaminations or broken fibres somewhere in the laminat. Ultrasound should find delaminations but it's obviously time consuming and expensive. An alternate would be to carry out a proof load test to 100% of the design loads. If the mast survives it, it should be fine and not break during the next sail.

So I think the whole high end yacht design and manufacture can be easily improved but I'm not so sure that it will actually happen. The owners want to spent as little money as possible on their toys. They are not going to carry out a load test on the mast unless they are forced to. The same with the designers. They are not goint to share their knowledge because it's a competitive advantage.

Cheers,
Karsten

[CT 249]

"Chris, thats funny coming from skiff sailors whose modus operandi is to take movable ballast further outboard than just about any other type of boat."

But I'm talking about offshore sailing in relative comfort and safety. Skiffs don't race offshore in the same sort of conditions that conventional dinghies (470s, Lasers etc) can handle. Ask the PROs at the Olympics.

"Canting keels allow the the ballast to be moved outboard to develop higher speed with less heeling,less weight,less crew(in some cases) and a better ride than deep fixed keels and that seems eminently sensible to me."

Dunno, if you want less heel, less weitght and more speed than fixed keels, going multi seems more sensible to me. I don't know about the better ride but I'm interested in that aspect; can you point me to accounts confirming it?

"Of course canting keel boats develop high loads,so what? So do Open 60 trimarans or G class cats or whatever."

"I disagree with you regarding seamanship- surviving a crisis caused by failure of the boat is the essence of semanship and those guys did a great job."

I dunno, it depends whether the failure of the boat is caused by something like not easing off. After all, if the Skandia guys had eased off radically, they may still have won easily if Konica pulled out. Konica would have won easily had they eased right up, as Nicorette did.

Wharro etc did a perfectly good job after disaster hit (hitting an EPIRB or putting out a Mayday, getting into the chopper etc....all things all S-H crews are trained to do), but avoiding disaster is the main factor in seamanship.

If someone goes hairing downwind under big kite in 55 knots of breeze and a bad seaway, broaches and stuffs the boat big-time, that would be good seamanship under your principle. I must say, it's one I've never heard of before. Last time I did the S-H, the skipper created a boat failure by driving too hard......no-one said that was good seamanship even tho' we managed to crawl to the finish.

[D'ARTOIS]

According to a spokesman of Reichel-Pugh Yachtdesign, see Logbook, Skandia was what is called " a Budget Boat " whatever that means. Unsuitable materials were used in the construction of the ram and according to the same spokesman,
"he had heard things (about Skandia) that maked him "cringe".

This is of course no good news to the Skandia people, because if this is true, than Mr Wharington might have lost his case already.
A second fact to think about is the sponsor. If my information is correct the Swedish Insurance (?????????????) conglomerate "Skandia" is the boat's sponsor.

There are no lost lifes in this accident so there is no case of accountability on Mr Wharington's side to anybody - except maybe to a disappointed sponsor.

The question may be saying he is going to sue designer/yard is one; doing so is two.

If Reichel-Pugh is correct that for budgettary reasons Skandia's equipment and/or the materials used in it were not according to standard, Wharington will have a very weak ground to file suite on.

You may conclude that if the boat is fitted out again, the sponsor might still back up the boat, if not, Reichel-Pugh's expressions could be right.

[Doug Lord]

Chris, both crews have said publically that they were not pushing the boats too hard in their estimation.
When a cantng keel is at max cant the bulb is closer to the boat in a vertical sense and pitching is reduced. There is an article on the z86 Pyewackett in Latitude 38 where I believe it was Disney himself who remarked on this fact.I think it was about 9 months ago. If I find it I'll post the details..

[CT 249]

Doug, the info about canters having a better motion in that way makes perfect sense, and it's a plus for canters.

Re pushing boats; so if the boats weren't pushed too hard, and they weren't underbuilt, why did 100% of the new maxis suffer damage? It can't all be put down to "freak waves", statistically they must be encountered by some boats so they should not be called freak. Maybe the guys weren't pushing too hard by comparison with "normal" boats, but maybe these 90+ footers have to be treated as something different??? I dunno the answer, I just raise the question....but when 1/3 of a fleet is towed home capsized, one third is forced to retire, and the remainder limps home, it seems strange that no-one did anything wrong.

[Doug Lord]

Giving in to speculating on the cause as if all causes were related(or not) is just a waste of time. Hopefully, we'll find out more as time goes by but it's not a given that the specific failure analysis of each boat will be released. Hope it is.....

[MikeJohns]

The real problem is that a well engineered and thoughtfully designed blue water racer is no problem to design or produce, its the owner(s), who want to pass the finish line first that buy the lighter-faster more highly stressed boat for that 1 hour edge in a 3 day race. So without regulation we will always have those who push the limits and then to be competitive the rest follow.

If you want safety put your money in a foolproof rating system then we can all relax a bit and sail our strong heavy wallowing tubs to victory :)

[CT 249]

I know it's been said before, Mike, but at the moment we DO have a rating system (in fact at least two of them) that allows "strong heavy wallowing tubs" to win (or at least, get on the podium.....and when you look at the gear on many of the older boats it's clear that they are often being handicapped by comparatively poor sails).

Look at this year's Sydney-Hobart. Out of 5 IRC divisions, 1 went to a modern IRC raceboat; 1 went to a medium displacement cruiser-racer (IMX 40) that's fully fitted out down below; 1 went to a Swan 48; 1 went to a 1973 vintage cold moulded heavy displacement masthead-rigged fully-fitted S&S 47; one went to a 10+ year old Farr racer-cruiser.

The results are often that way. The Bermuda race before last was won overall by a Phillip Rhodes Bounty 43, a '50s or early '60s long keeler with about an inch of solid glass in the hull. The biggest UK race was won overall by a Folkboat or Folkboat derivative (Contessa 26) several times in recent years. The Australian national offshore title has gone to a Swan 48 and a 1909 Fife metreboat type in the last 4 years.

The old boats can certainly win races. That's clear on the evidence. It just seems that complaining about the rules is easier for many old-boat crews than admitting they are not sailing well enough.

So why do people sail lighter boats? Because they are more fun (to many racing sailors) and faster (which turns on some people).

[Richard Petersen]

I do not care how you design, rule or try to control any type of a race. There is only 1 first place. A owner buys a boat, HE wants first place or nothing!! YOU ARE A HIRED GUN, captain. You tell him and mean it, " I will push the boat, crew and my self to win at every opening I can find. Do we have a understanding? Good!". That is the position of a good captain. Everything else means nothing to the 2 men. Do not fault them. They are RACING.

[CT 249]

........

[CT 249]

I spoke to a mate from sailing (windsurfing, not ocean racing) last night. He had a good perspective on the conditions of the Sydney-Hobart; he's a professional mariner, now an engineer on an oil-rig tender in Bass Strait (after working IIRC the Indian Ocean on big tankers for years).

They were in port for an unprecedented three days (because of the Xmas holidays stopping work on the rigs) from the 27th. However, they were in direct contact with the conditions out there from the rigs and from the fact that they know how the conditions in their exposed home port relate to what's happening in the Strait.

His call was 60 knot winds, 8 metre + swells. He also pointed out (as many S-H crews do) that the problem was the shallow nature of the Strait and the effect the southerly set has on kicking up the swells into steep and very nasty waves. HE confirmed that the Strait waves are much rougher than the open ocean rollers.

The conditions the S-H was getting, he said, were "horrendous" and in such winds, even on the 80m, 2000 tonne oil rig tender you could feel the whole bow shaking, actually see the ship bending (IIRC) and when off-watch, your bunk felt "as if someone had got the end of your bed and was shaking it as hard as they could". He said he was VERY glad he wasn't on a yacht in such stuff.

I found it interesting that a Bass Strait pro would say the conditions were nasty; they weren't blown up by the yachties.

Of course, that doesn't mean that driving the boat flat out through such conditions is smart......

[BrettM]

CT249. this guys name isn't "ash" by any chance?

[CT 249]

Got it in one......hope he doesn't mind me calling him a "mate", it's easier to type than "a guy who I know and who seems like a good bloke"...

[BrettM]

Bet he also has a brother called brett...

[MikeJohns]

I know it's been said before, Mike, but at the moment we DO have a rating system (in fact at least two of them) that allows "strong heavy wallowing tubs" to win.

So why do people sail lighter boats? Because they are more fun (to many racing sailors) and faster (which turns on some people).

The Hobart doesn't bear that one out. Perhaps the current rule is still a bit deficient ? It favours the larger boats presently (if they can hold together long enough to finish).

Light fast boats can be great fun in the right place but I think Bass strait was not the right place nor was it fun.

[CT 249]

Bet he also has a brother called brett...


Ahhh, that'd be right. Don't you have a sportsboat of some sort? PS I won;t be able to reply, off to the Nationals tomorrow AM.

Mike, fun comes in all different ways doesn't it??? Last Hobart I did, I found it quite fun to go close-reaching across the Strait with the tiller in one hand, the traveller controls in the other, and the mainsheet on my lap. I was playing the little boat (2,400kg, 30') like a Laser under storm trysail. I was watch captain, helm and bowman, and it was lots of work but also challenging, intense and rewarding.

Would I have been happier on a 2,400 kg 30 footer with more accomodation, full positive flotation, less concentrated weight, heavier framing and a more seakindly shape? Yep.

Would I have been happier on a big heavy boat? It depends on the boat. On some of them it woould have been OK, on many it would have been a case of just having to endure the weather in a boat I could not enjoy sailing. On some heavy boats, there is no responsiveness or tweaking that distracts you, so you are free to concentrate on getting wet and bouncing. No fun for me.

So for some people, light IS fun in Bass Strait. And personally, I feel the failure rate of heavy boats is, as I've mentioned, little if at all better.

And Hobart is just one race per year. Why would you sail a heavy boat all year just to have a better boat for one race, when many people prefer a lighter boat for the other 51 weeks?

Anyway, I'm off down to Geelong to sail a big, heavy, slow old sailboard; the original Windsurfer nationals are on. One of the interesting things about sailing lots of classes is that you get to see both sides; sometimes you're on the side of the old traditional gear, sometimes on the side of modern lightweight stuff. It's all fun.

[mighetto]

Mistral,

I think to open new post: Engineering in Modern Racing Yachts how do I promote that?

The easiest method would be to open the church for the Future of Yacht Design. (FOYD) Your flock of true sailing anarchists are waiting :)

[mistral]

I do not care how you design, rule or try to control any type of a race. There is only 1 first place. A owner buys a boat, HE wants first place or nothing!! YOU ARE A HIRED GUN, captain. You tell him and mean it, " I will push the boat, crew and my self to win at every opening I can find. Do we have a understanding? Good!". That is the position of a good captain. Everything else means nothing to the 2 men. Do not fault them. They are RACING.

that's why I will force the owner to stay on board ;) :) :)
Mistral

[K4s]

I do not care how you design, rule or try to control any type of a race. There is only 1 first place. A owner buys a boat, HE wants first place or nothing!! YOU ARE A HIRED GUN, captain. You tell him and mean it, " I will push the boat, crew and my self to win at every opening I can find. Do we have a understanding? Good!". That is the position of a good captain. Everything else means nothing to the 2 men. Do not fault them. They are RACING.
This owner would not only like to have the first place but over and above that I want my boat back in one piece and ready to use tommorrow.
Any so called hired gun captain that doesnt understand that can go find another boat and the very best of luck to that sorry owner,We have NO understanding?Good F**K OFF and the sooner the better!
All that attitude shows is a total lack of respect to the owner and his equipment not to mention the rest of the crew.

[mistral]

K4S, I wouldn't be so sure, many owner are only attracted by competition, they're not wise sailor, they're primarily aggressive people addicted to victory and fame, they "play" sailing because this can give them an appearence of elegance and "noblesse", i don't think any Larry Ellison, for instance, would pull off his feet from metal in a race like sidney-hobart just to save his boat; the boat is just a means to reach his personal glory, crew is just a bunch of hired person; of course not all owners act this way, but they exists and are not so few as we may hope.....

Mistral

[K4s]

Mistral,I,m only talking about myself,I like to win but I like my boat and the guys I sail with.Then again I dont have millions of dollars to throw away being reckless with other peoples lives or the welfare of my boat.
K4s

[mattotoole]

Seems to me that the failure of Skandias system for whatever reason is being blown way out of proportion. There are canting keel boats now over half way in the Vendee and canting keel boats have had a 20+ year history of ocean sailing.
It was interesting that when Konica Minolta had trouble even a "famous" sailing writer -Peter Campbell- reported that she had a "massive canting keel". Sail-World and Scutllebutt replayed his story.
Coupled with the Skandia story canting keels became unsafe ,dangerous etc.
Of course Konica Minolta has a fixed keel not a canting keel...
The point is that any failure has to be analysed on a case by case basis not as part of a hysteria that could be based on false information-and is at least based on a lack of information.
Hopefully ,the failures that occured will be analysed and shared with the designers all over the world so that everybody learns something.
Don't put all canting keel designs/installations "in the same boat" because of one well publicized failure.

Doug, you make a great point. However, CBTF adds so much complexity to designs that are already pushed to the limit, increasing the chances of something going wrong. Whether this is appropriate for racing on the open ocean is worth discussing. Maybe it is, if the F1 analogy is used, or maybe not.

[Richard Petersen]

I am going to say how you eliminate all the " CRAP " from racing. Each CLASS has only one yard building the type of boat. Period! MOMIE. MOMIE. I can't cheat anymore easily. This is not fun, if I can't cheat somehow. In upstate N Y, the wealthy had CLASS BOATS. NO changes were allowed, repairs were exact material replacements. Beleive it or not those old boats are being refitted as original, EXCEPT for the linen sails. All the owners agreed. Why would they agree on that subject. I guess because when they race, they are are racing for that pleasure of belonging to a group of like MINDED people. People racing with PROS are crawling into a very strange bed with few house rules.

[Doug Lord]

Matt, thanks. I personally have some reservations about a forward foil hanging out there all by itself but the CBTF guys have told me that if the forward foil was hit on a properly designed CBTF boat it would not stop the boat. It would have an effect on the upwind ability of the boat.
There are other systems that can be used for extra lateral resistance including daggerboards with some new boats putting the daggerboard BEHIND the keel which is can be better for balance. And then there are fixed wings, like ACC wings that Andy Dovell has experimented with very succesfully: if they break off so what? The boat just loses a litte windward ability but the hull and keel are not compromised. My system, the kFOIL uses a wing or wings that retract into the bulb when not needed or when they hit somthing. The kFOIL is totally unproven on ocean going boats but offers a lot of potential. I'm liking the wings-retractable or not more and more because they take up no room in the boat and are easy to handle.
Skandia had what they called a forward cannard but it wasn't CBTF and it did NOT fail in the race. Wild OatsII won the Pittwater Coffs ocean race and it is full blown CBTF....
But no system yet offers the windward ability of CBTF using "collective"....
Back to the original point: when considering/criticizeing/applauding these systems the details really do count and the propensity by some to label all canting keels as the same-and faulty, dangerous ect. is just plain nonsense.

[Richard Petersen]

How many canting keels fall off of boats that do not race all out in storms, or are never grounded? Well? There must be something else we can improve more than this.

[usa2]

Canting keels dont typically fall off if they arent in storms or get damaged by a grounding. The problem with them is that they are only really efficient offshore, where you are more likely to run into a storm than not. You cant build an inshore round the buoys racer with a canting keel, because on upwind legs it wont be able to compete in tacking duels without getting killed. The keels on the big boats, where the concept makes the biggest difference, should be strong enough to stand up to a huge storm- especially if the boat was designed with line honours in the Sydney-Hobart in mind.

[CT 249]

I'm not sure about that....the canter Skandia beat the other 98'er Konica (a fixed keeler) on the short courses of Hamilton Island race week. She did lose badly on the short races of the Rolex Cup though but IIRC the top boats in that series were Targe and/or Wild Oats which are 60-66' canters.

[Doug Lord]

USA2, I'm surprised you'd make such an uninformed comment about canters: Schock 40's do well in tacking duels when anybody get's close enough to get into one-so I'm told. CBTF boats in particular can tack with the best fixed keel boats and then some especially after they figure out how to use collective. And in rc canting keel boats a CBTF or kFOIL boat will tack faster than or equal to a fixed keel boat; keel movement is very quick on most rc canters but the thing that slows some down is when they have a non-moving foil significantly forward of the keel fin. That puts the brakes on everytime they tack.Same thing happens in big boats with forward foils that don't move especially if there is a lot of space between the foil and the keel.

[usa2]

it does depend on how long your tacking duels are...But when the keel is swung over it takes about 8 seconds, while on say an IACC type boat they can tack in about 3 seconds, give or take a little. Of course, since the canters are usually just faster than their conventional counterparts, the question would be if they were close. The CBTF boas can turn as quickly as an IACC-type boat, but they cant get settled on their tack as quickly. Im just using the IACC boats as an example..dont know if any of them have ever gone head to head with a canting keeler. Lets say Morning Glory and SUI-64 (Alinghi) squared off on a americas cup course. MG is most likely to lose going upwind because the slower tacking, but downwind she would kill SUI-64 because she can sail slightly higher and a lot faster than the IACC type. this is all just a theoretical situation....

[Doug Lord]

US2, the ACC boat would lose big time in both directions: the z86's have more SA than an ACC boat and upwind they have COLLECTIVE which would guarantee a better VMG even if they didn't have more power.Their greater power is in a rig a lot less advanced than an ACC rig so there might not be a huge disadvantage due to the rig for the ACC boats. But the z's have a longer waterline and collective upwind -they'd cleanup. Especially if the wind was blowing...I'd stay up late for the race ,though...

[usa2]

strong winds would mean the Z86's win- not just cuz their hull and rig, but because the IACC would sink

[usa2]

how fast does a Z-86 go upwind would anybody guess?

[Doug Lord]

Hull speed is about 12.4 and probably wouldn't be exceeded much upwind but down wind it could be nearly doubled -maybe more.

[usa2]

and an IACC can go at least 13 upwind.... and tack faster than the Z86. If the IACC covered the Z86, she would be forced to sail long legs to take advantage of her theoretical higher speeed on the wind with more sail area. The IACC could just tack straight up the course. The collective steering does help, but it still takes 8 seconds to swing the keel, which means the IACC boats are tacking on dimes and taking off while the Z86 is coming around slower. I think the IACC would win upwind, based on pointing higher and sailing at least as fast. Off the wind of course is a diffferent question, as the Z86's have more sail and are wider than the IACC boat.

[Doug Lord]

Maybe, but you're considering swinging the keel as part of the tacking process and it being max to max. You can start the keel moving before you tack and finish movement afterwards. And a twin foil boat will tack faster than a fixed keel. But the acc rig is a better upwind rig.Be interesting to see. My upwind speed was a guess you know; I'd like to see what the boats actually do.There was a Latitude 38 article with speeds in it but I can't find it....

[usa2]

even then, if you start swinging the keel before you tack, the boat slows down because it begins heeling and spilling wind as the rig cants farther over. I dont see how you figure a Z86 can tack faster than an IACC either.. The IACCs are very slow for their size off the wind, but those things are optimized for upwind sailing. obviously these boats we are comparing here have never had an actual head to head match race, but there are very few boats that can match an IACC boat in a full-out tacking duel, and despite the MZ86's being about a foot longer, with more waterline and sail area, the IACCs are more easily turned, because they are built with tacking duels in mind. The Z86's are ocean racers. If you get in a tacking duel in the middle of the ocean, its easier to escape the problem of being covered than if you are inshore racing upwind on a narrow course. I'll keep looking for the actual Z86 upwind speed...

[Doug Lord]

I don't know much about the z's but if you look at it logically and it takes 8 seconds max cant to max cant and 4 seconds to turn the boat- seems to me you'd be better off to start the keel two seconds before starting the turn rather than having four seconds of keel movement still left AFTER the turn.
A twin foil boat will manouver much quicker than a standard fixed keel; if you add in the ac trim tab they're going to get closer.
Interesting race; probably happen one day.
By the way, on Chads I see roy doesn't want any discussion of canting keels, movable ballast etc.Funny, I thought that was a "discussion" forum.

[usa2]

apparently there are rules on what one discusses there...

[usa2]

according to something i read on scuttlebutt europe or whatever its called, MZ86 upwind-11 knots. they must exceed that a little-like you said, 12.4- but they cant exceed it by much.