New Zealand’s Bowsprit Is Another in Line of Wrinkles : Sailing: The second jury is still out on its legality. Kiwi designer believes there’s no reason to worry.
Observers of the early America’s Cup races have wondered why as many as nine of New Zealand’s 16-man crew sometimes sit behind the helmsman, Rod Davis.
Apparently, it’s not only to balance the craft but to get as far as they can from the controversy raging around the other end of the boat: The Bowsprit.
All recent Cups have featured feuds over how someone built his boat--with a winged keel in 1983, out of fiberglass in ‘87, with two hulls in ’88. This one has settled on the Pinocchio-like projection on New Zealand’s little red sled.
It’s no coincidence that all were fast boats perceived as formidable threats to their rivals. Why make a fuss over a slow boat?
“It’s a compliment, I suppose, in a backhanded sort of way,” said Bruce Farr.
Farr is the Annapolis-based New Zealander who, with associate Russell Bowler, has designed all of the Kiwis’ Cup boats, from the fiberglass “plastic fantastics” in ’87 to the aircraft carrier-like K-boat that lost to Dennis Conner’s catamaran in ’88 to the radical entry this time.
The boat was 6-1 in the first round of the Louis Vuitton Cup challenger trials, losing only to Il Moro di Venezia through a series of blunders that the winning skipper, Paul Cayard, termed suspiciously “uncharacteristic.”
The Italians challenged how New Zealand uses the bowsprit before the challengers’ international jury, to no avail, and now the defenders have taken it to their international jury, which will oversee the final Cup match in May.
Until then, no matter what the defenders’ jury rules, the Kiwis are in the clear.
Farr poses the question, “You’d expect the same results from another International Yacht Racing Union jury, wouldn’t you?”
Who knows? The rules are complex and vague enough to allow conflicting interpretations--but when was the last time a boat was thrown out of the America’s Cup?
Anyone with a smart innovation also has been smart enough to establish its legality early in the design process.
“That’s probably a fair thing to say,” Farr said.
The problem started with the new International America’s Cup Class rule that permitted spinnaker poles to be 35% longer than the distance between the mast and the headstay, making jibes awkward in handling the oversize pole.
Farr had a better idea. In November 1990, Farr asked Cup measurer Ken McAlpine of Australia if a bowsprit would be OK. McAlpine said yes, but added, “Attention is drawn to the (IYRU) rules in relation to setting and sheeting sails.”
So Farr designed a bowsprit onto the boat so that during a jibe the Kiwis could tack their gennaker firmly to it at an extended distance from the bow, instead of pulling it back to the bow while the spinnaker pole is switched to the other side by swinging it inside the headstay.
By using the bowsprit, New Zealand is able to keep the sail extended and filled and loses no speed during the maneuver.
According to Philippe Briand, who designed the French boat, Ville de Paris, “the loss of speed is (normally) about 1 knot.”
New Zealand’s rivals say they are cheating by running a sheet through an outrigger (i.e., the bowsprit), which is forbidden by Rule 64.4 (a). The Kiwis say neither a sheet nor an outrigger is involved.
“It’s trying to call something what it’s not,” Farr said, “to suggest that something that’s pointing forward is an outrigger, when outriggers go transversally.”
The challengers’ jury agreed that the line wasn’t a sheet but a guy, and Farr said, “The IACC rule clearly says in several of its interpretations that you can use a bowsprit for a foreguy.”
The defenders still insist the line holding the sail to the tip of the bowsprit is a sheet.
Their case is led by Tom Ehman, executive vice president/general manager of the America’s Cup Organizing Committee. Ehman himself is a certified IYRU international judge who has served with most of the members of these two juries, as he will in the Olympics at Barcelona this summer.
Ehman also doesn’t pretend to be neutral, since the ACOC’s mission is to keep the Cup in San Diego. To his credit, he is pressing the issue now rather than waiting to ambush the Kiwis in May, when they would have less time to adjust if they lost the case.
But if the defenders’ jury also clears the Kiwis, there’s a possibility of bowsprits sprouting out like dandelions around San Diego this spring.
“I don’t know that they would,” Farr said. “(The other boats already) do everything exactly the same as we do, anyway, through a jibe or a set. The only difference is their foreguy goes onto the bow and ours goes onto the bowsprit. They have their bows (instead of a bowsprit) out there.”
New Zealand’s boat is shorter than the standard 75 feet of the others, by about the length of the bowsprit. At least the snub bow gives that appearance.
“You’re right,” Farr said, evasively. “The boat does look short. It might be short.”
A syndicate spokesman said earlier that the bowsprit was one meter (39 inches) long.
“One meter?” Farr replied. “You know more than I do. I couldn’t tell you how long it is without measuring it.”
The K-boat also had a bowsprit, which was never an issue.
“That was used for the same purpose: for tacking sails,” Farr said. “On the two-legged (windward-leeward) course we used it to jibe. And the catamaran had a bowsprit sticking out there, too, with a gennaker tacked onto it.”
America 3’s Bill Koch said, “We could retrofit our boats for a bowsprit and could put a bowsprit on our new boat.
“But it’s an added expense and added training, and we think it’s unfair to some other syndicates that (don’t have the means to adapt). It’s just another way to push a rule to a point.”
It’s interesting that Appendix 4, Section B, Paragraph 1.7 of the Match Racing Rules says: “A spinnaker may be set without a pole”--effectively deleting Rules 64.2 and 64.3 regarding spinnaker poles.
But 64.2 and 64.3 were retained in the rules governing the Cup match in May.
“Under the conditions of this event, that freedom has been taken away and you are required to use your spinnaker pole in the same way as you are in fleet racing,” said Graeme Owens, chairman of the challengers’ jury.
New Zealand sees it as a smoke screen for their rivals’ concern that Farr has outsmarted them all--at the least hoping the fuss will distract the Kiwis from their business.
The expense isn’t Koch’s most serious concern.
“Just another $100,000 on top of $45 or 50 million,” he said. “We thought of a bowsprit, but our interpretation of the rules was that it wasn’t allowed.”
Funny, but that’s the same thing New Zealand said about the catamaran in ’88. Did Farr turn the tables this time?
Glossary
Some definitions that may be helpful to non-sailors:
Bowsprit--A pole, stick or spar extending forward beyond the bow of a boat.
Guy--A line attached to one of the lower corners of the gennaker or spinnaker, holding it to the end of a spinnaker pole (or a bowsprit).
Sheet--The line attached to the loose corner of a sail to control the trim.
Spinnaker--A large, billowing headsail used downwind; also called a “chute,” as in parachute.
Gennaker--A smaller but billowing, asymmetrical headsail used for reaching.
Reaching--Sailing at a right angle to the wind.
Jibe--While sailing downwind, executing a turn that requires switching the sails from one side to the other.