Team Philips

[Guest]

I have been in contact with Pete Goss about TP and was told that he would use the same design again given the time again, but also we have been in talks about a TP II or at least a GRB boat using the same design as the origianl TP but with a few minor modifications, also on the Team are possable Tracy edwards and Ellen Mc Arther, so we end up with a British designed and built boat with british crew and take it to THE RACE in 2004 run by Bruno Peyron and prove that pete was right to use that design and how good the boat and crew work.

i would like to hear peoples opinions and advice on this project, but it would be nice to hear something positive rarther than every one being negitive towards it, when she was being built we were all so very proud of her, where have all those people gone now,

Thanks John

 

[feathers]

Don't think that there's anything but "good stuff" that can come from this, as you say there was so much support and feel good factor behing the last attempt. Great fan of Gossy ("ballsy" is the word I believe) and well done him for following through his belief that it can work. In my opinion would be fantastic to see another "GBR Challenge". And if you can get the birds on board can't fail to make an impression. Crack on!

 

[Twister_Ken]

>when she was being built we were all so very proud of her<

Not sure I could agree with that. Many people who know a bit about these things felt that TP, whilst noble, was too much of a step into the unknown.

If you added up the technical 'firsts' incorporated in the boat, and combined them with a dire lack of testing, redesign and rebuild time, then only a 100% guessing record and a very substantial measure of luck would have got that boat to the finish. (Cliche alert!) And to finish first, first you've got to finish.

Will a similar design do better? Well at least PG et al have some idea of why the 'prototype' sank, so they should be able to engineer-out some of the potential causes of failure, but maybe not all of them. It would be safer to go the designer of Club Med and ask him to do the same again, but bigger/better/faster.

(as for Tracey and Ellen in the same boat, glad I won't be there!)

 

[feathers]

Someone forgot to mention a young Miss Richards if she's available by then, then you'd have a class act! Now, who else could you invite to the party?

 

[Jacket]

As a structural engineer, I was suprised at the time by the number of people (many of whom should have known better) who said that TP failed because the structure was too complicated, making it hard to design. The reverse is actually true - the stresses in the boat should actually be much easier to calculate than for a conventional cat, which should make the boat much more reliable.

Not long after TP was lost, I was at a conference attended by many of the top composite engineering companies, many of who have done a lot of consulting work on superyachts. The unanimous feeling was that the design was great, and was just let down by a lack of materials testing. This isn't to say that composites aren't up to it (after all, they're used for wind turbine blades, minesweepers etc, all of which can be highly stressed).

Hopefully, Goss and the design team will learn from their mistake, and spend more time on material testing (the cost of which is small compared to the cost of building and running the campaign). It will be great to see a TP II out there, proving all the critics wrong. And if anyone has any cpontacts, I'd kill for a ride on it!

 

[AndrewB]

Nah - you\'re kidding yourself.

TP really wasn't up to it. Whatever you suggest, there were an awful lot of sceptics who never thought so, but who were willing to suspend disbelief for the sake of what seemed a fascinating experiment.

But as Feathers says, Pete Goss is a gutsy sort of bloke who should be allowed to get back in again with a decent yacht, and prove he still has what it takes. Right now he needs TPII like a hole in the head. A second consecutive failure on a hairbrained project and he'll become a laughing-stock, the yachting equivalent of 'Eddie the Eagle'.

 

[WayneS]

I am behind any project that PG gets involved in. He took a huge hit over the failure of TP but he has come out fighting.

It's the like of him that should be an inspiration to us all.

Just because conventional cats fared better in The Race means nothing. I guarantee that all those designers have had a long hard look at TP and many of her design features will be seen an their new designs for the next Race.

If Pete does it again, I would like my name will be the first to be painted onto the hull.

Wayne

 

[Badger]

Have Philips Electronics agreed to sponsor again based on a few minor modificatons ?

 

[tim]

I hope he goes ahead. I did my best to support him by travelling down from the Midlands to buy what I could afford in his shop. I'd do it again, without doubt.

I think he just lacked enough time for testing. We should be proud of a Brit like him who doesn't give up - there aren't enough people like him.

The only thing I regretted about Team Philips was that I didn't get to have a go on it. Maybe he could help raise fund by allowing people to pay for rides during testing of TPII. I would like to think that with the 3 girls on the team he stands a good chance of raising the money.
Tim

 

[halcyon]

From a personal view point I would love to see it cross the line first.

From my designer/engineers view point I would love to see it win, but to build the boat again to the same design brings on nightmeres, mainly becaurse it broke were it should have broke. With changes to hull shape in one main area you could have a fair chance. But to assume the problem was contruction, not design, I have only negative vibes.

Sorry

Brian

 

[qsiv]

Not sure that a bigger / better /faster is actually that easy...

the constraints on the original Ollier 110 cats (and playstation) hinged around the size of sails and rig that could be managed by the available crew. Sure, next time around sails will be lighter - Cuben Fibres will be so common by then! The problem then is the power generated by the rig and how to keep the dynamic rig loads within the dynamic stability of the platform. As the rig generates more power, the loads go up geometrically but the crews potential energy is at a finite limit already.

What is needed is the ability to think laterally (or outside the box in modern jargon) and TP 1 was a good first design. The build process was patently flawed (it broke) and it is conceivable that the designs didnt allow sufficient safety margins. The rigs whilst complex evidently worked as the brief work up sail off Dartmouth showed.

If the engineering can be resolved and the build improved there has to be scope for a step change in performance. The work up time was woefully inadequate, and must be improved. Seahorse mag this month estimated the work up time for a new ORMA 60 multihull to be at least 12 months - and these boats are only incremental improvements over their predecessors - and look how many have lost their rigs / broken beams this year!

All I can say is good luck, and I trust they succeed. Wasnt it Tony Jacklin who said (when challenged after a US Masters) 'yes - the more I practice, the luckier I get'.

 

[tome]

I've no doubt that PG will have learned enough to make this a success. He plans well (witness his 4 stage rescue of Raphael D) and learns from his mistakes. TP1 was a huge leap for him, TP2 is merely incremental.

 

[summerwind]

I'm not a structural engineer so my opinion is obviously not to be taken too seriously. However, my boat was moored just across the Dart from TP when it was towed back from its first mishap off the Scilleys.

I had a very good look at the boat and the damage from my dinghy one Sunday morning, when I could take my time and there was no one about. From the damage I saw (and photographed) , especially the scour marks down the inside of the port hull and the way that the bows were broken off and damaged, I am convinced that they hit somethin off the North of the Scilleys. I would lay a fair bet that it was a container. My justification is that they were ramping along at a fair speed, it was just dawn and containers float with their top just at the surface (At least the ones I have seen were.)

I reckon that the repairs to the hulls simply didn't replace the strength of the original and that when severely tested south of Greenland, she broke up.

 

[Boathook]

I never saw TP except on the news and what a wonderful sight. PG has my support (wish I could offer money) & I hope that he succeeds in sponsorship & the race.

 

[Whiskey2]

No, it was Gary Player who said 'the more I practice the luckier I get' when a spectator said he was lucky to hole a bunker shot. Mel.

 

[qsiv]

Thanks, Mel

I'm pleased someone knew the correct story!<g>

At least I had the sport right!

 

[colvic]

Was berthed at Noss on Dart when she came down to Dartmouth for her masts. When comming round the bend in the river she was almost frightening with such a span.....much like a Clingon Warship from the STARTREK series. Look at the photo's or the video we shot and it still makes me go cold as it was such an awe inspiring sight.

Had the privledge of going round her when moored at Dartmouth...quite magnificent..but there was a flimsiness mixed with the sleekness. Could never work out why the hydraulic pipes were external as they crossed from one hull to the other.

Have been back to the centre at Totnes since and our boat carries one of Petes stickers.

Hope things go better this time round if it happens.

Phil

 

[rob]

I think if PG looked at the construction going to a yard with great expertise such as Pendennis Ship Yard in Falmouth would alleviate build problems encountered on the TP 1. Their knowledge of composite build techniques/materials etc. are well know throughout the industry, making large Carbon/kevlar Yachts (Wally Boats etc.) Windvanes etc. etc. with the final process of the curing in enormous, pupose designed and built ovens.
Whether Pendennis Ship Yard would take on the project of the building the Hulls would be another matter.

 

[Avocet]

I don't know enough about the design and the circumstances of the fracture to pass any useful comment but I quite passionately feel that the REAL failure would be not to try again. If we do that, any innovative design features will be lost - or worse still, someone else will learn from our mistakes! We simply HAVE to have another go, being careful to extract every last scrap of useful information from what we have achieved so far. I work in an industry that has seen its share of failures but thankfully we don't all still drive Morris Oxfords "because we stuck with what we knew would work".

 

[Twister_Ken]

Incremental

But between the Morris Oxford and today's family saloons, there have been 1000s of incremental improvements, not one giant leap into the unknown - which is what TP tried to do (in many areas). Where giant automotive leaps have been made (Wankel engines, puncture proof tyres, fibreglass bodies, for example) they have tended to disappear pretty quickly.

If you were ever involved in the speed sailing trials which used to take part in Portland harbour you will have seen many apparently brilliant ideas which failed to work becasue of lack of development time, lack of testing, the inability to scale an idea from models to full size, or just blind alleying. Each of the TP consituents should have been tested incrementally in isoloation, and then together, and developed and refined as necessary, before anyone was asked to put their life at risk.