The pace of change in sailing

[Supertramp]

But racing development did lead to aerodynamics, fuel injection, ABS, crash safety, active suspension, electronic gear box management, telemetry and a whole raft of otherwise unseen benefits we now take for granted.

You are right and I enjoy those benefits in a car. Perhaps the difference with boats and cars is that very few people would choose an old Ford Cortina estate vs a modern Mondeo but with boats there is still appeal and functionality in older designs.

Or perhaps boats are changing too slowly and need to catch up with the current pressures and opportunities. Looked at some new racing yachts today with carbon fibre, dyneema, soft shackle systems etc and realised the gap between my 30 year old boat (and my 50 years of history with boats) and the current models.

I still think that sailing today has room for a wide range of approaches. I see the appeal of a highly tuned racing machine but also a slow, steady, solid old design. I enjoy sailing the former but happier owning the latter!

 

[dunedin]

This week a teenager in Australia executed the first airborne tack on a foiling windsurfer, something other windsurfing experts (at Olympic medalist level) thought might be impossible. Foiling is definitely a key direction

 

[Daydream believer]

This week a teenager in Australia executed the first airborne tack on a foiling windsurfer, something other windsurfing experts (at Olympic medalist level) thought might be impossible. Foiling is definitely a key direction

We have the UK national youth champion in our club & I am sure that I have watched him do it. I will ask him when I see him

 

[dunedin]

We have the UK national youth champion in our club & I am sure that I have watched him do it. I will ask him when I see him

First iQFOiL foiling tack on Olympic gear

 

[davidej]

I remember the John Player speed trials of the 1960s.

Rod Macalpine Downie of Lady Helmsman fame built a 100 ft proa specially for it.

it was beaten by two Frenchman on a tandem windsurfer which they brought strapped on the roof of their car.

 

[Mudisox]

Speed week at WPNSA was always full of interesting developments but now it seems that it has become common place. Foiling boards with inflated wings are common place and the kites do stunts, I even found a group of Kite powered small foiling boards operating in Keyhaven the other week. Not much use for the slow comfortable cruising I was doing though!

 

[cherod]

But racing development did lead to aerodynamics, fuel injection, ABS, crash safety, active suspension, electronic gear box management, telemetry and a whole raft of otherwise unseen benefits we now take for granted.

But who is to say that all that stuff would not have been developed anyway , eg , aerodynamics , fuel injection , disc brakes etc were developed for planes , crash saftey eg by Volvo ( who have no racing background ) telemetry by a host of other industries ,, etc etc

 

[DFL1010]

 

[cherod]

Oops

Oops sor , i did forget that excellent performance .

 

[Aquaboy]

I'm sure I read somewhere Pogos don't go to windward very well

 

[Chris 249]

The pace of change has arguably stayed the same or perhaps even slowed dramatically. Apologies for the long answer, but this is something that interests me and I think that we can say that using numbers shows that the common claim that the rate of changed has increased is incorrect.

For the sake of neatness, instead of using 1996 as a base let's use 25 year spans; 1950, 1975, 2000, and then now.

Looking at top-level shorthanded racers (which was what the OP was about) there was no such discipline in 1950 - so there was an enormous change between 1950 and 1975. The boat that won the first OSTAR in 1960 was Chichester's long keel, wooden planked ketch of about 45'. By 75/76, the ultimate shorthanded racer was something like Vendredi Trieze (alloy 60' tri with fully-battened mains); the Kraken 55 tri Spirit of America; the 236' foot mono Club Med; or the ultra-light Gauloises. Going from no discipline at all to big tris, vast multis and water ballasted boats (which Tabarly had earlier) is far more of a change than going from a 2000 Open 60 to a foiler. We're looking at a vastly greater change in performance over that era than the modern era.

From 1976 to 2000, the shorthanded tris went from foam sandwich or alloy boats to carbon Irens, whereas the shorthanded monos went from the skinny Gauloises types (and very few of them) to canting-keel Open 60s. That was a vast jump.

If we look at the difference from 1996 to 2022 (as the OP did) then we should look 24 to 26 years the other way, to the 1968 and 1972 OSTARs. The 1968 race went to the ketch Sir Thomas Lipton; the 1972 top mono was British Steel, another heavy ketch. As far as I can make out, a 1996 Open 60 was about 30% quicker than those boats.

The foiling 60s look amazing, but they apparently go slower than the older boats upwind and in light airs, and the Round Europe last year saw them beaten by a non-canter. One analysis of times showed that over a bunch of races, the foilers were only about 2% faster than the non-foilers. That's not a huge jump.

What about "conventional" fully-crewed racing boats? In 1950, the 'leading edge" of boats around 50', for example, was something like Giles 48'er Cetawayo; planked, long keel, long cabin, attached rudder, now rating about .958 ORC which equates to about 670 ORC. In 1975 the "leading edge" was something like a Frers IOR boat; stripped out, fin and skeg, masthead rig, flush deck., rating about 580 ORC. By 2000, the "leading edge" was a full carbon fractional boat like the Farr 50 IMSs, rating about 490. Today it's something like a TP52, which rates around 430. So from '50 to '75 speed increased by about 16%. From '75 to 2000, it increased by about 18%. Since 2000, it's increased about 14%. No sign of a huge acceleration in pace of change.

What about typical smaller cruiser/racers? It was about a 7% jump from 1961 (Nicholson 36) to 1975 (Contessa 35 etc) and then a similar jump to boats like the J/109 in 2000 . J/Boats reckon that the current J/112e is about 2% quicker than the 109; it's hard to make a boat with accommodation significantly faster without making it a lot more expensive. So popular boats may have had a much slower pace of change than in earlier eras.

What about popular sportsboats? In 1975 you had the J/24; in 1992 you had the Melges 24; in 2022 we have nothing that's popular and much quicker. That's no real improvement in popular boats in 30 years.

Small cats? In the 1950s you had the 16' Shearwater, PY of 839. By 1975 the speed of popular new 16s had increased by only about 4% . In 2000, the quickest 16s had picked up about 7% more speed, or 11% with spinnakers. Since then the Nacra has increased speed by about 6% - and it's longer. Full foiling cats are about 5% quicker than the same boat without foils, whereas adding kites as they did before or around 2000 adds almost exactly the same to speed - so there's no evidence of an increasing change in speed.

Moths are quicker, but most skiffs and dinghies probably have improved less in recent years than in earlier eras.

The 500m sailing speed record was 31.8 knots in 1975. In 1993, the "boat record" was 46.52 knots, or an increase of close to 1% per year. Although Vesta's last record upped the ante a lot, overall since 2000 then the record has increased by only about 1.5% per year - and it's not improved at all for a decade. Not much evidence of increasing rate of change there.

 

[flaming]

The pace of change has arguably stayed the same or perhaps even slowed dramatically. Apologies for the long answer, but this is something that interests me and I think that we can say that using numbers shows that the common claim that the rate of changed has increased is incorrect.

For the sake of neatness, instead of using 1996 as a base let's use 25 year spans; 1950, 1975, 2000, and then now.

Looking at top-level shorthanded racers (which was what the OP was about) there was no such discipline in 1950 - so there was an enormous change between 1950 and 1975. The boat that won the first OSTAR in 1960 was Chichester's long keel, wooden planked ketch of about 45'. By 75/76, the ultimate shorthanded racer was something like Vendredi Trieze (alloy 60' tri with fully-battened mains); the Kraken 55 tri Spirit of America; the 236' foot mono Club Med; or the ultra-light Gauloises. Going from no discipline at all to big tris, vast multis and water ballasted boats (which Tabarly had earlier) is far more of a change than going from a 2000 Open 60 to a foiler. We're looking at a vastly greater change in performance over that era than the modern era.

From 1976 to 2000, the shorthanded tris went from foam sandwich or alloy boats to carbon Irens, whereas the shorthanded monos went from the skinny Gauloises types (and very few of them) to canting-keel Open 60s. That was a vast jump.

If we look at the difference from 1996 to 2022 (as the OP did) then we should look 24 to 26 years the other way, to the 1968 and 1972 OSTARs. The 1968 race went to the ketch Sir Thomas Lipton; the 1972 top mono was British Steel, another heavy ketch. As far as I can make out, a 1996 Open 60 was about 30% quicker than those boats.

The foiling 60s look amazing, but they apparently go slower than the older boats upwind and in light airs, and the Round Europe last year saw them beaten by a non-canter. One analysis of times showed that over a bunch of races, the foilers were only about 2% faster than the non-foilers. That's not a huge jump.

What about "conventional" fully-crewed racing boats? In 1950, the 'leading edge" of boats around 50', for example, was something like Giles 48'er Cetawayo; planked, long keel, long cabin, attached rudder, now rating about .958 ORC which equates to about 670 ORC. In 1975 the "leading edge" was something like a Frers IOR boat; stripped out, fin and skeg, masthead rig, flush deck., rating about 580 ORC. By 2000, the "leading edge" was a full carbon fractional boat like the Farr 50 IMSs, rating about 490. Today it's something like a TP52, which rates around 430. So from '50 to '75 speed increased by about 16%. From '75 to 2000, it increased by about 18%. Since 2000, it's increased about 14%. No sign of a huge acceleration in pace of change.

What about typical smaller cruiser/racers? It was about a 7% jump from 1961 (Nicholson 36) to 1975 (Contessa 35 etc) and then a similar jump to boats like the J/109 in 2000 . J/Boats reckon that the current J/112e is about 2% quicker than the 109; it's hard to make a boat with accommodation significantly faster without making it a lot more expensive. So popular boats may have had a much slower pace of change than in earlier eras.

What about popular sportsboats? In 1975 you had the J/24; in 1992 you had the Melges 24; in 2022 we have nothing that's popular and much quicker. That's no real improvement in popular boats in 30 years.

Small cats? In the 1950s you had the 16' Shearwater, PY of 839. By 1975 the speed of popular new 16s had increased by only about 4% . In 2000, the quickest 16s had picked up about 7% more speed, or 11% with spinnakers. Since then the Nacra has increased speed by about 6% - and it's longer. Full foiling cats are about 5% quicker than the same boat without foils, whereas adding kites as they did before or around 2000 adds almost exactly the same to speed - so there's no evidence of an increasing change in speed.

Moths are quicker, but most skiffs and dinghies probably have improved less in recent years than in earlier eras.

The 500m sailing speed record was 31.8 knots in 1975. In 1993, the "boat record" was 46.52 knots, or an increase of close to 1% per year. Although Vesta's last record upped the ante a lot, overall since 2000 then the record has increased by only about 1.5% per year - and it's not improved at all for a decade. Not much evidence of increasing rate of change there.

You raise some good points.... And to be fair I wasn't saying that the rate of change now is faster than before. Just that it is still bloody quick.....

But to counter, consider the 24 hour speed record.

Taking your 1975, 2000 and now data points as closely as possible.
Outright 24 hour run was still held by the clipper ship "champion of the sea" at 467 miles until 1984.... When Formula Tag went 512.
In 2000 Club Med went to 625.
In 2009 Banque Populare went to 908.

So a much, much bigger jump from 2000 to now than 1975 to 2000.

I do agree to a point with the point that boats - of a type - are not a lot faster than they used to be. Though I think if you look at the 109 and the 112, your estimations are a bit off. A 109 typically rates about 1.005 on IRC now. A 112 about 1.050. Which I make about a 5% increase. Both rating seem very fair - see this year's RORC IRC nationals as an example! The previous generation J35 are only a fraction lower than the 109, some are higher...
But J are an interesting company, as they also have their more performance range... The 88, 99 and 111. The 111 is a significantly faster boat, than the 112 or 109, despite being the same size. Rating more like 1.090.

What has been more interesting I think is that the 112 exists, given it was launched after the 111. Clearly their market research has indicated to them that quite a lot of their customers didn't actually want a faster boat... Although also noticeable that the 112 is a lot more competitive on IRC...
So maybe the boats could develop faster than the sailors want them to....?

 

[mrming]

The larger “performance” J boats sit in a weird place imo as they are too heavy to get up and plane unless it’s blowing cats off trees, yet carry the potential for that in their IRC rating every race. For UK racing I would rather own the 97 or 109 which are even heavier but liked by IRC.

For comparison, you could buy a boat around the same size, with similar performance, in 1985.

J/99, 2019
3,817kg
SA/D 22.15

First Class 10, 1985
3,130kg
SA/D 22.94

Granted the modern J/99 is much more user friendly, but performance is not hugely different with the Beneteau maybe planing a fraction earlier and upwind speeds being very similar.

 

[flaming]

The larger “performance” J boats sit in a weird place imo as they are too heavy to get up and plane unless it’s blowing cats off trees, yet carry the potential for that in their IRC rating every race. For UK racing I would rather own the 97 or 109 which are even heavier but liked by IRC.

For comparison, you could buy a boat around the same size, with similar performance, in 1985.

J/99, 2019
3,817kg
SA/D 22.15

First Class 10, 1985
3,130kg
SA/D 22.94

Granted the modern J/99 is much more user friendly, but performance is not hugely different with the Beneteau maybe planing a fraction earlier and upwind speeds being very similar.

Not really an especially fair comparison... First is a couple of feet longer and designed primarily as a fully crewed boat, J99 is primarily aimed at the shorthanded section of the market. Compared to the others in the "performance" range the 99 is actually significantly less "performancy". The 88, which is 3 foot shorter rates higher and has a much higher downwind speed potential. The 111 is a fantastic boat in the light, and in 18kts +. But in the 12-18 bracket it can find itself out waterlined by boats that rate about the same. I occasionally go for a play in one, and sitting at 15 knots downwind on a 36 foot boat is pretty good fun....

The 99 is actually in a real sweet spot for IRC rating, but for inshore stuff it really needs a symetrical kite and the straight keel option. There are a fair few appearing now, though they seem to be concentrating on offshore more than inshore for the time being. If I was looking for a new IRC boat in that size range, it would be on the shortlist.

There have been any number of 32-34 foot fully crewed boats that are significantly faster than the first class 10 in recent years. But what's really happened in that size is the almost total disappearance of the cruiser racer. So you either have proper race boats, or cruisers.

 

[mrming]

I think one of the differences here is that I mainly race crewed, inshore IRC in a size bracket down from you, so the competition is slightly different. In the range of boats from say .910 to .970 ish there are a lot of highly optimised, well-sailed older boats that are difficult to beat in a J boat or similar. Agreed though a sym kite should help and we’ll hopefully be trying that next year in one of the smaller “performance” Js I sail on regularly outside of the Solent.

 

[flaming]

I think one of the differences here is that I mainly race crewed, inshore IRC in a size bracket down from you, so the competition is slightly different. In the range of boats from say .910 to .970 ish there are a lot of highly optimised, well-sailed older boats that are difficult to beat in a J boat or similar. Agreed though a sym kite should help and we’ll hopefully be trying that next year in one of the smaller “performance” Js I sail on regularly outside of the Solent.

There is a timebomb of an issue in smaller "racing boats with a lid" in that none are currently getting made. So at some point the supply of good second hand ones is going to run out.

I've said it before, but it's probably worth saying again... I think we're due a big reset in yacht racing, but what that might be I'm not sure!

 

[Chris 249]

Sorry I misinterpreted your post, Flaming.

Yes, the 24 hour record is an outlier as far as the rate of change. It's notable, though, that (1) there's been no change since 2009; (2) the size of the yachts holding the record has increased from 60ft to 130ft so a change in "class" rules has been a big factor and (3) at times the same boat has increased the record by a knot or two, so a lot of the increase could be due to technique or simple probability; the more often a 130 footer is out there the higher the chance the record will be lifted. Arguably the first and second factors, in particular, explain why the 24 hour record is an outlier rather than an accurate indication of a wider change.

Regarding the Js; to get away from the effect of boats being optimised for IRC, I used the recommended PHRF speed figures given by J Boats themselves. PHRF Handicaps for J/Boats Models. In its "stock" form as designed the J/109 has a 150% overlap whereas I think the boats you're referring to have gone to short overlap. The 112e has a short overlap as designed and therefore the "stock" or "as designed" 109 carries significantly more sail in light winds.

It is interesting to bring in the previous generation of Js; J Boats themselves rate the J/35 as faster than the much later J/109 when both are in one design setup. The even earlier J/36, basically a J/35 with fractional rig and full interior fitout, rates only 3-4% slower than the J/112e according to J/Boat and ORC figures despite being designed 35 years earlier.

Even the J/111, a great boat IMHO, is only 5% quicker on J/Boats figures than the J/35 which is a 1983 modification of the 1981 J/36 and sits in the same "racer/cruiser" bracket as the 111. Given that 1ft of extra length is responsible for about 1% of that 5% increase, the real speed gain is pretty modest.

IMHO you picked it when you said that most people don't really want a faster boat. The other thing is that it's not really possible to design a dramatically quicker boat without increasing costs dramatically; I know that some major designers have bemoaned the problem. Reducing weight means paying for high-tech materials. Throwing more weight into the bulb increases structural issues, the higher righting moment requires more expensive structure and sail controls, etc etc etc. And marketing and mooring costs are driving builders towards putting more freeboard onto the same length hull, which increases weight and costs again.

About the lack of "cruiser/racers"; what do you define as a cruiser/racer and why doesn't a J/111, Sun Fast, JPK or similar fit the bill? Is a J/112e really a "cruiser" when it's competitive under IRC?

One of the lessons I learned from working in the industry is that those who listen to and respect the owners are the ones who succeed. For the past couple of decades a lot of other people in the industry seem to have been telling owners across the sport what they SHOULD do, and that normally involves moving very large amounts of money from the owner to the industry, just so the owners can finish earlier and get less sailing with more complication. The simple numbers show that the types that many people in the industry are promoting are failures, as far as achieving significant popularity. I think you're right, a day of reckoning is coming for the sport, but perhaps after that the hypesters will stop screeching and start really thinking and listening, and then sailing can grow again.

 

[oldbloke]

I have a great respect for Chris, who has put a lot of time and thought into matters sailing. (if you haven't read his Sailcraft blog on the history and development of modern boats then it's about time you did) and his views on what people seem to actually want as opposed to what "they" think we should sail make alit of sense.
However, bringing people's choice and the foibles of rating systems into this thread is a bit of a red herring.
How about, Hustler 30 v SJ30 v Cape 31 for a progression. Or British Moth to Skippy to current foiling moth?

 

[flaming]

Sorry I misinterpreted your post, Flaming.

Yes, the 24 hour record is an outlier as far as the rate of change. It's notable, though, that (1) there's been no change since 2009; (2) the size of the yachts holding the record has increased from 60ft to 130ft so a change in "class" rules has been a big factor and (3) at times the same boat has increased the record by a knot or two, so a lot of the increase could be due to technique or simple probability; the more often a 130 footer is out there the higher the chance the record will be lifted. Arguably the first and second factors, in particular, explain why the 24 hour record is an outlier rather than an accurate indication of a wider change.

The 24 hour record I think will fall pretty soon to one of the Ultimes. But the issue that they now face is that they're so fast that finding 1000 miles of runway with fairly even breeze is the issue... Foiling has fairly considerably changed that game! No longer are they looking for a depression to get the highest average. They actually want about 15 knots and flat sea....

About the lack of "cruiser/racers"; what do you define as a cruiser/racer and why doesn't a J/111, Sun Fast, JPK or similar fit the bill? Is a J/112e really a "cruiser" when it's competitive under IRC?

I think the last heyday of the cruiser racer, at least in the mid 30 foot region, was the early 2000s. We had boats like the Elans, the Bavaria Match series, X-yachts, Dehler, Beneteau Firsts, J's etc etc... Dozens of boats that were being bought both by people who wanted to race and also by people who wanted a fast cruising boat. If you look at that list, only J are still making competitive C/Rs. (Ok Beneteau have just launched the 36, but the Jury is out on its competitiveness on the race track).
I sail a JPK, and I love the boat, really love it, but if you lined it up next to a contemporary cruising design there is simply no comparison in terms of the creature comforts.
The issue is that racing has to an extent benefited from trickle down from the top end of the sport. So even at our level we are using carbon sails, multiple jibs, inhaulers, code sails etc. And a lot of the latest launches from JPK, Sunfast, J, Beneteau etc expect to plane when the breeze is up. Which does mean a certain paring back of interior fit. Much more than when 35 foot cruiser racers were not supposed to plane, so lugging a hot water system around really didn't matter....
Meanwhile cruising boats have gone in totally the opposite direction. Ease of sail handling meaning roller furling jibs, big cockpits but not designed at all for race crews. All the mod cons on board, hot water, fridge, 2 heads in 35 foot boats, electric heads at that, air con on the options list.... And at the same time beam has been pushed out and wetted surface area increased in the name of interior volume, which is actually ok performance wise when the breeze is up, but can make light wind racing seriously painful.
I went on a charter holiday a few years back, 10 of us on a 47 foot Jeanneau. One of the best "group of mates" holidays I've ever been on. What an awesome boat that was for a holiday! What an appalling boat to sail it was...
So when you go to a boat show, and you're looking for a boat... It's a very particular sort of person that is going to look at the J112 and think that this is exactly the boat for them... When the same money could get them something a lot faster (a cape 31 for example) or something a lot more comfortable.

One of the lessons I learned from working in the industry is that those who listen to and respect the owners are the ones who succeed. For the past couple of decades a lot of other people in the industry seem to have been telling owners across the sport what they SHOULD do, and that normally involves moving very large amounts of money from the owner to the industry, just so the owners can finish earlier and get less sailing with more complication. The simple numbers show that the types that many people in the industry are promoting are failures, as far as achieving significant popularity. I think you're right, a day of reckoning is coming for the sport, but perhaps after that the hypesters will stop screeching and start really thinking and listening, and then sailing can grow again.

I think you're slightly wrong there. You shouldn't listen to the owners who stay in the sport as much as the ones who either didn't take the leap to get in, or who left.

But I also think that expecting "the industry" to fix it is doomed to failure. The fix will come from people who's only motivation is that they love the sport and want more people to race against. To an extent this is the story of the Cape 31 in the UK... Though at a rather "grand prix" level. Mind you, 20 boats expected (16 currently entered) at Cowes in their 3rd season (when the 1st was during the pandemic) is quite an achievement....

And then you look at the pressure that modern life is putting on people's time, especially the people who can write cheques for new boats, and you start asking "who are the people who can afford the time to both race and go cruising?" Are there really enough of them any more that we should be looking to them for participation growth?

Would we get more growth in the sport if we gave up skewing the handicap models towards C/Rs and instead promoted boats that have zero pretence that they are going cruising... Would that make the offering more attractive to potential owners who are currently not jumping in? Maybe people who've been sailing dinghies but fancy something a bit bigger and to sail with more people? Has the offering of hull speed cruiser racers been attractive to them in the past?
With the small number of people who actually cruise the boat they race.... Would we actually lose many competitors if the rating office stopped protecting the C/Rs?

 

[Praxinoscope]

The suggestion that the ratings should stop ‘protecting’ the C/R’s (flaming #29), may be practical in areas with large numbers of boats i.e. the Solent area in particular, as there is bound to be a relatively strong percentage of boats/owners that see racing as their primary activity, however I’m not sure this works outside such areas, I accept that our harbour and our nearest neighbouring harbour are not typical we probably represent a fair balance of percentage of C/R’s to racing only boats.
Out of our combined fleet of yachts, which is admittedly small, of about 50 sailing boats (diversion here, sorry but I rarely use what I think is the American term ‘Sailboats’) , only one is specifically racing only, 10 -15 C/R’s race regularly, and a further 6 or 7 will enter one or two of the annual races and the Regatta .
I haven’t competed in the RTI race for many years, but certainly when I did I seem to think the major proportion of competitors were C/R’s, and it is the C/R’s in my view that actually keep racing alive.