|
I
must tell you, this was not one of the more fun InnerViews that I've done.
In fact it was a royal pain in the ass. Bruce Nelson and I just come from
different perspectives. A world-class sailor and a designer of note, he
has always struck me as being on the arrogant side. Granted, I'm a bit
of a slacker who would rather chat than work (hell, I've turned chatting
into my work), and he's more serious and would probably rather draw boats
and dispense with the chatting, so it is unlikely that we see many things
the same way.
Fast
forward to me commenting on some of his boats in less than glowing terms
on this site that I'm sure he didn't agree with, and Nelson's answer was,
as you all know by now, to push me in the water. And while I'll never
understand that particular move, I've decided to move beyond it for the
sole purpose of making lemonade out of lemons. What the hell else am I
going to do, challenge him to a draw? Instead, we'll look forward to perhaps
having a working relationship with Nelson - there may well be some design
articles from his office appearing on our site. That's not to say that
he won't find his ass in the water some day….
What
made this InnerView particularly arduous was the fact that he didn't want
to answer the tough questions, and even some of the easy ones. He's a
pretty private guy and not exactly an open book. So I did what I never
do, I let him re-write a couple of questions, and in the process he answered
a few of the tougher ones. It is a compromise for sure, because in my
estimation he wasn't nearly as forthright as I thought he should be, and
I'm sure he thinks I'm nosy SOB. And somehow, it's all perfectly fitting.
So
we went back and forth (You should see some of the e-mails - those alone
would make a good story), all the while I was this close to just saying
"fuck it - why am I wasting this much time on a guy who pushed me
in the water?" And I'm sure he was thinking, "why spend this
much time with a guy that I shoved in the water?" Finally, he agreed
to answer most of the questions, so I left some of his in, and what you
see is the result of it all. He truly made an effort to meet me halfway,
and that's fairly impressive. The Tempesta and Nelson Show - who knew?
Enjoy.
Seirra 26 |
Everybody
knows who you guys are, but tell us how you got started in the yacht design
business?
BN
Following
a successful college sailing career while majoring in naval Architecture
at the University of Michigan, I moved to San Diego and produced my first
design in 1977, a 25-foot Quarter-Tonner named Blivit. Two years later,
Bruce Marek and I formed the Nelson/Marek partnership and the business
flourished throughout the 1980's and '90's with IOR, MORC, IMS and America's
Cup design projects accounting for most of the work.
The
One World AC challenge started out strong, but then was ushered out rather
abruptly at the end. Honestly summarize what you think went wrong:
BN
When
the racing is that close the little things matter and Oracle seemed to
get more of them in their favor on those particular days than did. And
they also sailed extremely well, and avoided the critical errors which
we made on one or two occasions. I believe that if we raced them again
tomorrow, the outcome could easily go the other way - but that is pretty
irrelevant now.
How
many America's Cup design programs have you been involved with, and what
were the results?
BN
Starting
in 1984, I was a principal designer with DC's Cup-winning Stars&Stripes'87
team in Fremantle, then again on the Cup-winning catamaran design team
in 1988. In 1992 I was with the Stars&Stripes team one final time,
then with Young America in 1995, and AmericaOne in 2000 when we lost in
the LVC Finals 5-4. So the OWC effort was my sixth AC campaign.
Why
did the Stars & Stripes association not continue?
BN
Since
1992 we have elected to work for teams which showed a deeper commitment
to design research and development programs, which was a hallmark of the
1987 Stars&Stripes program but not the later ones.
How
did the OWC design team work together and compare with your previous AC
teams?
BN
The
OWC model involved the entire team in much of the decision-making process,
which differed from the teams I have previously worked with. This approach
enabled the broad wealth of knowledge and experience across the team to
be fully utilized and facilitated the rapid sharing of ideas and concepts
amongst the team, which worked reasonably well for us given the short
time frame we had to produce our two boats. It would have been nice if
we had more time to develop our designs, like TNZ had - time was our biggest
limitation.
How
difficult is it to design by committee? Do you each take different components?
How did the process work and what was your responsibility?
BN
The
process is not difficult when everybody agrees to work together as a team
and share openly in the process. We all worked together on the various
aspects of the design and each component was developed with the consensus
approval of the team. Mine was a shared responsibility with Phil Kaiko
and Laurie Davidson that the final design fulfilled the requirements of
the sailing team.
Now
that you've seen some of the innovations by TNZ (the hula, the extra length)
do you feel like TNZ has out-designed everybody else?
BN
I
feel that TNZ has created a loophole in the rule where it was assumed
by others that none existed - but exactly how much of an advantage that
may produce remains to be seen. If the TNZ boat is even a little better,
they will be tough to beat, but I think Alinghi may be more advanced in
sails and some other areas, so I expect the races will be close and hard
fought.
Okay,
then based on what you know, which has got to be a hell of a lot more
than we do, who do you think will win the Cup?
BN
I
think as the defender TNZ has conveyed themselves several advantages and
should win based on that and the strength of their program, but racing
on the Hauraki Gulf is rarely straightforward so each race will be up
for grabs by the team that sails better. I think it will be close, but
Alinghi will take the Cup away in the end.
Do
you think the current IACC rules need any tweaking, and if so what would
you like to see?
BN
Personally
I would like to see the ACC rules modified to produce boats more in keeping
with the original intent and preamble of the rule - more wholesome, lighter
and beamier boats which can be raced safely in winds up to 30 knots.
You
have seen a number of handicap rules come and go during your career -
what were the good and bad features of each, and some of your favorite
designs to each rule?
Yassou |
BN
The
MORC rule has been around the longest and still exists, although it is
relatively dormant. The MORC rule encouraged a 'big' little boat - heavy,
beamy, generous freeboard, sail area, etc - considered healthy for offshore
racing in such small boats (<30 feet). But the later trends towards
lighter modern boats made them unpopular in MORC, and vice versa. The
30 foot MORC International Champion Babe Ruthless (1984) was my favorite
MORC design, in part because it successfully bucked the heavy displacement
trend, although the heavier models Zoo (1993) and Invincible (1994) later
proved to be more powerful and successful. The good aspect of the IOR
rule was that it was internationally accepted and popular for quite a
while. The bad news was that it produced slow, unstable and uncomfortable
boats which became very expensive to build and campaign. My early IOR
designs Blivit, Rush (36 ft One Tonner) and Stars&Stripes'81 (39 ft
Admirals Cupper) were sentimental favorites, but later designs such as
High Roler (43 ft Admirals Cupper), Insatiable (45 ft Admirals Cupper)
and Infinity (50 ft Class champion) were better designs. Our early IOR
sleds Swiftsure, Prima and Saga (1-2-3 1985 Transpac) were really fast
and fun in their time, although the 55-foot versions (Lone Star and Strider)
were even more fun to sail. When introduced in the early 1990's, the IMS
rule was a breath of fresh air as it encouraged much smoother, faster,
more stable and more comfortable boats than IOR, such as Collaboration
(46 ft) in 1990 and Infinity (50 ft) in 1993. Unfortunately, subsequent
changes to the IMS VPP failed to keep pace with design exploitation and
boats with low performance features such as low stability, low sail area
and high prismatic began to dominate the results, driving the modern high
performance-oriented boats into PHRF.
Aside
from a handful of IRM/IRC and several new box-rule class designs, there
are far fewer new custom one-off boats being built these days - how does
today's design marketplace compare with the past?
BN
The
current absence of a widely accepted international offshore handicapping
rule is definitely hurting the marketplace and the sport in general, although
hopefully it is just a transition period as the rules catch up with the
fast developing new technologies in boat design and construction. Eventually,
an advanced new rule will emerge and gain wide acceptance and the game
will be on again - but it is a bit of a free-for-all right now with no
clear direction for boat owners and designers to follow. So individuals
are developing new boats in a relatively unrestricted manner which, while
interesting design-wise, is not conducive to large fleets and is placing
added pressure on PHRF and IRC - an unstable situation long term.
The
present trend in the US of primarily one design and PHRF racing must be
difficult for the yacht designers - what do you see as the potential long-term
solution?
BN
As
noted above, the present marketplace is very open and will dictate the
direction for future boat development. To be successful, a new rule will
need to embrace these new boat concepts and handicap them equitably with
the best existing boats. It is a mixed bag today, but the trend is towards
light boats with generous stability and easily handled rigs. The Transpac52
and maxZ86 class boats fall into this genre, so I expect to see more limited
box-rule classes developing which encompass these new boat trends, and
eventually a universal rule capable of equitably handicapping all of them
in the future.
There
is an effort in progress by USSA to create a new handicap rule - are you
part of that and what are your thoughts about it?
BN
We
are not directly involved with this effort, however we often discuss similar
rule-related issues with the USSA Offshore technical people and will continue
to try and help them develop a viable new rule. Obviously, it is in the
best interests of all yacht designers and the sport in general if they
are successful, so we'll do all we can to help them with this difficult
task.
Your
Transpac52 Yassou has been mentioned here frequently - what differentiates
that design from the other Transpac52's and other boats?
BN
Yassou's
hull form is quite different from the other 52's, and is based largely
on our Open40 design development research of several years ago. The result
is a hull with more volume near the ends and less amidships when heeled,
which translates into more length and speed in breeze. Offwind, all the
52's seem pretty similar in speed, but power reaching and upwind Yassou
has a decisive edge.
We
received mixed reports regarding the damage and repairs performed to Yassou
after last years PV Race - what really happened?
BN
The
hull shell was damaged on the port side forward, between frames, apparently
from an impact with some hard object - the starboard side had no damage,
despite being on port tack most of the way. Fortunately, the Kevlar skin
was pretty tough and no water ingressed the boat, and there was no damage
to any of the framing. Working with the engineers at High Modulus, we
devised a seamless method of replacing the damaged hull shell (a 6 x 2
foot piece) which Goetz executed beautifully and made the boat as good
as new.
ID35 |
We
have also discussed the 1D35 at length on this website - what were the
design concepts behind that class?
BN
The
1D35 was designed to be a fast, easily-handled and affordable modern one-design
yacht for offshore and buoy racing - stiff and fast upwind, fast on a
plane offwind, and easily trailered and dry-sailed. The adjustable headstay,
no backstay rig was developed to provide direct rig power control while
allowing an efficient roach profile mainsail. When properly tuned, complete
sail shape control can be achieved with the headstay, partners, vang and
V1's, without adjusting the D2's aloft. Large, symmetrical spinnakers
with long poles were chosen for downwind efficiency on W/L buoy races,
while reaching asymmetricals are utilized offshore. The fixed pole ring
position was specified to facilitate removing and attaching the pole while
gybing without being struck in the head - in hindsight, the spinnaker
luff lengths should be longer. The boats have fulfilled their design objectives
very well, both around the buoys and while winning trophies in Mackinac,
Transpac and Mexican offshore races.
Would
you then say that the class is effectively dead, particularly with the
introduction of the Farr 36?
BN
Not
at all, the class continues to enjoy great racing and is growing here
on the West Coast with another good turnout expected for the Nationals
in San Francisco this summer.
The
26Sierra is quick but does not utilize a sprit and seems highly priced
at $75,000 - in retrospect, would you have done anything differently?
BN
The
26 is remarkably fast and fun to sail, very quick to jump on a plane and
efficient upwind as intended, so there is not much I would change about
the design. The price was determined by the builder after completing the
first boat, and reflects the quality of the construction used. I expect
the cost for subsequent boats will be less. We will be testing a sprit
version against the pole version in mid Feb, which will be interesting
since the boats are so fast offwind. Most of the boats out there using
sprits today are really too slow and quite inefficient downwind - the
26 may be just fast enough for a sprit, we'll see.
The
Super Yacht genre appears to be all the rage with the extremely rich.
Are you drawing any of these behemoths?
BN
No,
despite the fact that our 98 ft design Locura won the AC MegaYacht Cup
Race in San Diego in 1995, we do not have any new super-yacht designs
right now - although I wish we did! We are currently developing a large
new offshore racer and several new offshore box-rule design concepts,
and wrapping up our work with the OneWorld Challenge effort.
What
does Bruce Nelson do when he is not involved in sailing?
BN
I
like spending time with my two kids, Bobby and Chelsea - attending their
baseball and soccer games, helping them with their homework, going skiing
or snowboarding, bike riding or playing games - the kids are fun!
Why
did you push me in the water?
BN
I
threw you in the water on behalf of all the people you have unfairly bashed
on this website and do not have the opportunity to throw you in themselves.
If
you had it to do again, would you?
BN
Definitely.
(grin!)
Thanks,
Nelson.
BN
Adios,
Scooter
|
