Pocock Shells

[Simon Barbour]

A quick one from an interested Brit - I like to watch US College
rowing, and I think in pretty much every IRA varsity 8 final I've
watched at least one crew has rowed in a Pocock 8. Most other North
American boat makes have made it across the pond with a lot of success
- at every domestic regatta I'll see lots of crews in Hudsons,
Vespolis, Resolutes and Fluidesign small boats, however I've never
seen a Pocock boat being used in England, even at Henley.

Given they're appear as such top events as IRA finals, they're clearly
quality shells, so does anyone know if there's a reason they dont't
seem to have hit the UK market like other makes have?

[Robin]

Post by Simon Barbour
Given they're appear as such top events as IRA finals, they're clearly
quality shells, so does anyone know if there's a reason they dont't
seem to have hit the UK market like other makes have?

One possibility could be that for a long time they were very focused
on the US West Coast - being based in Seattle while most of the other
manufacturers you've mentioned are either in central Canada or Eastern
US. Anecdotally it used to be relatively commonplace for University
coaches in the US to use local makers and to stick with them
religiously, so penetration of Pocock boats eastwards (and the other
manufacturers westwards) was a slow process until relatively recently
except for among the top schools where import of a vessel from further
afield or overseas such as a Carbocraft / Empacher etc could be
afforded to get that era's "best" equipment. Likewise, transport
costs probably made it more likely that only the very top East coast
Universities would take their own boat over to Henley, while other
more westerly and less affluent crews left the Pocock at home and
rented something local.

Speaking as a cox while over in Vancouver BC I really enjoyed coxing
Pocock boats - they steer well and seem both extremely well built and
stiff owing to the construction, even in older composite boats (late
80s onwards). The only real foible I found was that the bows snap off
relatively easily in the first 30-50cm of the boat if you have docking
dings or overlapping bow / stern collisions, and while doing repairs,
it seems that the breaks almost always occur at a point behind the
bowball where there is an internal step in the thickness of the
composite skin, so I began to wonder if this was a designed in feature
to avoid nastier splits in the hull further along the bow in
collisions of those types. The E-hull boats I think were based on a
late-80s Empacher shape, and handle nicely for head races and the odd
sprint (as well as being good beginner boats), while the V8 boat I
coxed a couple of times in regatta season and seemed to both sit up
very nicely and handle a MHwt crew pounding away for 1000m without
really being affected much by wind or chop, while being finger-tip
sensitive to steer.

[John Davis]

Post by Robin

Post by Simon Barbour
Given they're appear as such top events as IRA finals, they're clearly
quality shells, so does anyone know if there's a reason they dont't
seem to have hit the UK market like other makes have?

One possibility could be that for a long time they were very focused
on the US West Coast - being based in Seattle while most of the other
manufacturers you've mentioned are either in central Canada or Eastern
US.  Anecdotally it used to be relatively commonplace for University
coaches in the US to use local makers and to stick with them
religiously, so penetration of Pocock boats eastwards (and the other
manufacturers westwards) was a slow process until relatively recently
except for among the top schools where import of a vessel from further
afield or overseas such as a Carbocraft / Empacher etc could be
afforded to get that era's "best" equipment.  Likewise, transport
costs probably made it more likely that only the very top East coast
Universities would take their own boat over to Henley, while other
more westerly and less affluent crews left the Pocock at home and
rented something local.
Speaking as a cox while over in Vancouver BC I really enjoyed coxing
Pocock boats - they steer well and seem both extremely well built and
stiff owing to the construction, even in older composite boats (late
80s onwards).  The only real foible I found was that the bows snap off
relatively easily in the first 30-50cm of the boat if you have docking
dings or overlapping bow / stern collisions, and while doing repairs,
it seems that the breaks almost always occur at a point behind the
bowball where there is an internal step in the thickness of the
composite skin, so I began to wonder if this was a designed in feature
to avoid nastier splits in the hull further along the bow in
collisions of those types.  The E-hull boats I think were based on a
late-80s Empacher shape, and handle nicely for head races and the odd
sprint (as well as being good beginner boats), while the V8 boat I
coxed a couple of times in regatta season and seemed to both sit up
very nicely and handle a MHwt crew pounding away for 1000m without
really being affected much by wind or chop, while being finger-tip
sensitive to steer.

[John Davis]

Pocock use an interesting hull shape. The V of the bow extends well
back amidships. But what is most striking are the flared and
castellated gunwhales. The carbon or aluminum wing riggers are set
between the rises in the gunwhales. The flare makes the boat very
roomy inside and they are very popular with US college women. As for
the bow problem there have been 2 instances where fairly minor
collisions have snapped off a couple feet of the boat. The most famous
was the Chinese at the Head of the Charles a few years ago.I think
Robin is correct on his diagnosis of the problem. And they are made
from closed cell foam, not honey comb. Their workmanship is otherwise
excellent perhaps the best in North America. It should also be noted
that Pocock works closely with Boeing and shares technology. Word is
they are about to come out with a new boat w/ both a new shape and
some interesting construction methods. They will use crossbracing made
out of high modulus carbon fiber.

Post by Robin

Post by Simon Barbour
Given they're appear as such top events as IRA finals, they're clearly
quality shells, so does anyone know if there's a reason they dont't
seem to have hit the UK market like other makes have?

One possibility could be that for a long time they were very focused
on the US West Coast - being based in Seattle while most of the other
manufacturers you've mentioned are either in central Canada or Eastern
US.  Anecdotally it used to be relatively commonplace for University
coaches in the US to use local makers and to stick with them
religiously, so penetration of Pocock boats eastwards (and the other
manufacturers westwards) was a slow process until relatively recently
except for among the top schools where import of a vessel from further
afield or overseas such as a Carbocraft / Empacher etc could be
afforded to get that era's "best" equipment.  Likewise, transport
costs probably made it more likely that only the very top East coast
Universities would take their own boat over to Henley, while other
more westerly and less affluent crews left the Pocock at home and
rented something local.
Speaking as a cox while over in Vancouver BC I really enjoyed coxing
Pocock boats - they steer well and seem both extremely well built and
stiff owing to the construction, even in older composite boats (late
80s onwards).  The only real foible I found was that the bows snap off
relatively easily in the first 30-50cm of the boat if you have docking
dings or overlapping bow / stern collisions, and while doing repairs,
it seems that the breaks almost always occur at a point behind the
bowball where there is an internal step in the thickness of the
composite skin, so I began to wonder if this was a designed in feature
to avoid nastier splits in the hull further along the bow in
collisions of those types.  The E-hull boats I think were based on a
late-80s Empacher shape, and handle nicely for head races and the odd
sprint (as well as being good beginner boats), while the V8 boat I
coxed a couple of times in regatta season and seemed to both sit up
very nicely and handle a MHwt crew pounding away for 1000m without
really being affected much by wind or chop, while being finger-tip
sensitive to steer.

[Robin]

Post by John Davis
Pocock use an interesting hull shape. The V of the bow extends well
back amidships. But what is most striking are the flared and
castellated gunwhales. The carbon or aluminum wing riggers are set
between the rises in the gunwhales. The flare makes the boat very
roomy inside and they are very  popular with US college women.

I did wonder, based on many posts Carl has made here about the
interaction between bow shape and fin/rudder combination if the long
wedge-shaped portion of the V8 bow contributes to the excellent "grip"
of the front end of these boats in cross winds compared to other boats
I've steered.

It is worth noting that the much broadened and stepped gunwales -
apart from their advantages in for the comfort of the rowers (the cox
seat also benefits from VIP internal room!) also can make them a
bugger to load right for transport if your trailer suits shells with a
narrower gunwale-to-gunwale width such as a recent Vespoli or even a
classic-shape Pocock. Likewise, if the shelf spacing doesn't quite
match the spaces between rigger mounting points evenly you have to
tinker with lumps of timber to support the boat when tied down. North
American trailers being bigger are generally more tolerant of this
than a normal UK trailer would be, but it is still a consideration.

Going back to the original question about why they are rare in the UK
I can think of another issue : unlike a lot of boats builders out
there, certainly on the 4s and 8s I had experience of maintaining they
also use unique parts and shapes / sizes of bolt-on components in
footstretchers, seats, rigging, steering etc that they either source
or make themselves, with their own advantages and disadvantages and
maintenance foibles (the bloody axle-bearer cups on their plastic
seats, for instance!!!). This could result in them being more
difficult to maintain for the average UK club boat-man because you
would have to stock a complete set of unique spares which wouldn't fit
anything else and couldn't be easily sourced from one of the usual
supply places in the UK - most people just don't go to that kind of
effort for something different to an average Janousek etc.

Re links to Boeing - their website suggests that they have close ties
with the composite prototyping arm of Boeing (Pocock being involved in
engineering of 737 wingtip extensions etc) - but this seems to be a
long-held link : I was told years ago that the original Pocock
founders were based in Vancouver BC but were then poached south to
Seattle by Boeing to build floats for early sea-planes a century or so
ago before moving back into boat-building full time. Will be
interesting to see what they come up with as they tend to produce new
shapes and innovations relatively infrequently and quietly compared to
some companies that pop them out with enormous fanfare every couple of
years.

[Carl]

Post by Robin

Post by John Davis
Pocock use an interesting hull shape. The V of the bow extends well
back amidships. But what is most striking are the flared and
castellated gunwhales. The carbon or aluminum wing riggers are set
between the rises in the gunwhales. The flare makes the boat very
roomy inside and they are very popular with US college women.

I did wonder, based on many posts Carl has made here about the
interaction between bow shape and fin/rudder combination if the long
wedge-shaped portion of the V8 bow contributes to the excellent "grip"
of the front end of these boats in cross winds compared to other boats
I've steered.
It is worth noting that the much broadened and stepped gunwales -
apart from their advantages in for the comfort of the rowers (the cox
seat also benefits from VIP internal room!) also can make them a
bugger to load right for transport if your trailer suits shells with a
narrower gunwale-to-gunwale width such as a recent Vespoli or even a
classic-shape Pocock. Likewise, if the shelf spacing doesn't quite
match the spaces between rigger mounting points evenly you have to
tinker with lumps of timber to support the boat when tied down. North
American trailers being bigger are generally more tolerant of this
than a normal UK trailer would be, but it is still a consideration.
Going back to the original question about why they are rare in the UK
I can think of another issue : unlike a lot of boats builders out
there, certainly on the 4s and 8s I had experience of maintaining they
also use unique parts and shapes / sizes of bolt-on components in
footstretchers, seats, rigging, steering etc that they either source
or make themselves, with their own advantages and disadvantages and
maintenance foibles (the bloody axle-bearer cups on their plastic
seats, for instance!!!). This could result in them being more
difficult to maintain for the average UK club boat-man because you
would have to stock a complete set of unique spares which wouldn't fit
anything else and couldn't be easily sourced from one of the usual
supply places in the UK - most people just don't go to that kind of
effort for something different to an average Janousek etc.
Re links to Boeing - their website suggests that they have close ties
with the composite prototyping arm of Boeing (Pocock being involved in
engineering of 737 wingtip extensions etc) - but this seems to be a
long-held link : I was told years ago that the original Pocock
founders were based in Vancouver BC but were then poached south to
Seattle by Boeing to build floats for early sea-planes a century or so
ago before moving back into boat-building full time. Will be
interesting to see what they come up with as they tend to produce new
shapes and innovations relatively infrequently and quietly compared to
some companies that pop them out with enormous fanfare every couple of
years.

That's an acute remark, Robin, on bow shape's influence on steering
control. Thanks.

Some boats with incising bows, which cut & engage the water. When you
apply rudder, such bows lock in to resist any sideways movement, so to
turn the boat you have to slew almost the whole boat's length sideways
across the flow because it tends to pivot about a point almost at the
bows. So there is lots of drag from the slewing hull and lots more from
the over-worked rudder. Or, if the stern is light and the fin stalls,
such boats may tend to continue turning despite normal steering corrections.

There are some shells, OTOH, with shallow &/or rounded bows which will
slide around whether or not you are steering, especially in cross-winds,
& start to slide sideways a lot when you really are steering.

And there are some which lie in between those extremes & whose steering
characteristics can be very dependent upon crew weight & how this is
distributed along the boat.

In 2000, along with our AeRowFin steering foil (which applies science to
turn the steering process, for the first time ever, into a precision
operation), we also developed for the GB HWt 8+ our bow or Canard Fin.
This small, fixed foil (of proper aerfoil section, of course) mounts
under bow's seat & completely stabilises both the straight line _&_
turning performance of any shell.

Our Canard efficiently generates lateral lift forces whenever the boat
travels other than dead straight, thus stabilising the boat's alignment
down a straight course despite wind & waves. And when you make a turn
or correction, our Canard Fin prevents the side-slip (leeway) which
normally develops as the immediate response to any steering input.

In a normal steering, applying rudder first swings the stern sideways.
Shells are long & narrow for a good reason - to minimise their drag.
When you swing the stern out, the momentum of the boat + crew carries it
on in the direction it was originally taking. This is now somewhat
sideways, which greatly increases the hull drag & wastes large amounts
of energy. Shedding this energy slows the boat along its along its
original direction, while the crew's continued work input brings the
boat back up to speed once the turn is made.

Thus, every time you steer a shell it must side-slip ( make leeway) &
then be brought back up to speed. This is a costly exercise - typically
a steered shell loses >10% of its velocity, & ~ 20% of its kinetic
energy, during any significant turn. And it goes on losing speed &
energy with every minor deflection from its intended course.

With our Canard Fin users find 2 crucial gains:
1. They lose almost no speed during even quite large turns.
2. Their boat is so much more manoeuvrable, stable and controllable -
both on the straight _&_ when taking turns, bends & emergency manoeuvres
(as when dodging obstacles at short notice).
And that better course holding makes the boat more stable too.

I never cease in my surprise at how rowers love to do everything the
hard way - even at the cost of needlessly losing important races. Here
we have a combination of affordable steering & control devices - our
Canard Fin & our AeRowfin steering foil - which can save you more time
on any course than the latest in blade shapes, snazzy kit, supposedly
magic footwear or hull colour. But most rowers kid themselves it's all
too good to be true & say (as do their coaches) "Well, we could always
pull a bit harder".

I always though the quiet application of science ought to be easily
understood by the bright folk who populate our rowing clubs, yet they
prefer to handicap their coxes with dysfunctional kit. For some
blinkered reason they don't see that it makes vastly more sense to equip
cox or steers with steering & control gear which genuinely enables him
or her to demonstrate their true prowess to the crew's advantage? It's
a funny old sport!

Cheers -
Carl

[Robin]

Glad that you were able to find time to bring in some detailed
observations with the benefit of knowledge rather than my arm-waving,
Carl!

Is there any chance you can update the CDRS website with some Canard
fin information - or direct us to it if I've overlooked it? I
remember you commenting on the fin used by the Sydney GB VIII in
anticipation of wind at the rowing venue, although I've never seen any
images of the fin in situ - the videos of that crew in training only
feature the boat without a bow fin from any angle that I've seen when
out of the water.

I seem to recall US posters commenting that some boats made by King
maybe 20 years ago also featured small fins near to the bows, although
again I've never seen any images of the equipment set up that way.
Now that the King shape VIIIs are back in production (by Wintech?) -
it would be interesting to hear any further comments about whether bow
fins will make a come-back!

best.. Robin

[Carl]

Post by Robin
Glad that you were able to find time to bring in some detailed
observations with the benefit of knowledge rather than my arm-waving,
Carl!
Is there any chance you can update the CDRS website with some Canard
fin information - or direct us to it if I've overlooked it? I
remember you commenting on the fin used by the Sydney GB VIII in
anticipation of wind at the rowing venue, although I've never seen any
images of the fin in situ - the videos of that crew in training only
feature the boat without a bow fin from any angle that I've seen when
out of the water.
I seem to recall US posters commenting that some boats made by King
maybe 20 years ago also featured small fins near to the bows, although
again I've never seen any images of the equipment set up that way.
Now that the King shape VIIIs are back in production (by Wintech?) -
it would be interesting to hear any further comments about whether bow
fins will make a come-back!
best.. Robin

Many thanks, Robin, for your kind remarks.

Getting our website up to date is, let's say, a work in (slow) progress :(

Helping rowers with the best equipment & support is what we do best.

Unfortunately, in that view we are at this minute opposed by the
obsessive idiocy & power of a £300 millions/year crew of inept
government statisticians, AKA the ONS. Their so-called help-line had
the temerity to tell me that their squeezing monthly (I kid you not)
statistics out of the 2 small exporting businesss in this tiny sector of
British industry will be put to the slightest beneficial use by HM
Government in helping UK exports. As we all know, that's a lie. But we
also know, as sports people, that it is so much easier to win an
international race when yours is the only team which has to run with a
well-paid & risk-averse government statistician sitting on its back.

I may return to the ONS some other day (you've been warned!). For now
please note that, last year, it published comprehensively incorrect
stats for the construction industry's quarterly growth, putting it at
2.3% rather than the more probable (but still by no means certain)
<0.5%. This so skewed the national statistics that it was admitted to
have caused markets to move. The error was pointed out by a journalist
at the ONS' press conference announcing its figures. A few hours later
ONS had to admit the journo was right & they were hopelessly wrong. A
subsequent 3-page report exposed that they'd used the wrong data, with
the wrong spreadsheet formulae, via cut-&-paste, had done this through
lack of proper management & supervision, which was happening because
senior management had failed to implement clear written instructions to
get their house in order. But that's OK.

I'll find the relevant link if anyone cares about the damage the demands
of such idiots do to the smallest of industries. It is actually more
demanding, in total man-hours, for us to generate their required data
than it is for the nation's largest company - yet ONS' own guidance
notes say the burden of data collection on its sources must be
proportionate to its value & to the resources of those providing it.
Tell that to the marines!

For the '86 World Rowing Championships in the UK, our Post Office (then
about to be sunk by a bunch of preening "entrepreneurs") produced a
commemorative stamp. It showed an identifiable yellow shell, with
identifiable carbon oars, crewed by wearers of identifiable 3-striped
sports kit - none of them UK-made. Great free advertising! Indeed, the
maker of the boat proudly displayed a blow-up of that stamp above the
caption to the effect, "Even the British think we're best". In the UK
we just love to dump on our own, & complain only (too late!) when,
"surprise!", we ourselves become the next victims of such folly. Yet
government "needs our (irrelevant) statistics to help UK industry"? No!
No UK government has ever helped small manufacturing exporters. And
they never will. Because we lack the wealth to fill politicians'
pockets, so we are not worth listening to.

Sadly, that's miles off topic. Yet it fills in a corner of a complex
picture of strange, once great amalgam of small nations (we call it "UK
& NI") from which honest initiative is being slowly squeezed by the
prissy, powerful little people who will never do one useful day's work
in their lives.

Still, that which doesn't kill us makes us stronger.

Carl

[SingleMinded]

Post by Robin
Glad that you were able to find time to bring in some detailed
observations with the benefit of knowledge rather than my arm-waving,
Carl!
Is there any chance you can update the CDRS website with some Canard
fin information - or direct us to it if I've overlooked it?  I
remember you commenting on the fin used by the Sydney GB VIII in
anticipation of wind at the rowing venue, although I've never seen any
images of the fin in situ - the videos of that crew in training only
feature the boat without a bow fin from any angle that I've seen when
out of the water.
I seem to recall US posters commenting that some boats made by King
maybe 20 years ago also featured small fins near to the bows, although
again I've never seen any images of the equipment set up that way.
Now that the King shape VIIIs are back in production (by Wintech?) -
it would be interesting to hear any further comments about whether bow
fins will make a come-back!
best.. Robin

Regarding extra fins, I have a friend who claims to have rowed in an
eight that actually had a second rudder near the bow. His former club
apparently had some connection with Stampfli that meant they got
various "experimental" Stampfli projects, and this was one of them.
Apparently it was quit tricky to put back together after it had been
split into sections for transport.

[Paul Flory]

Post by Robin
I seem to recall US posters commenting that some boats made by King
maybe 20 years ago also featured small fins near to the bows, although
again I've never seen any images of the equipment set up that way.

One of those wooden Kings is in the Harvard boathouse. I saw it just
the other day. Two fins set one on either side of the hull, on the
curve so that they point diagonally downwards, somewhere near bow or
two seat I think. What I heard was that the idea was to make the boat
narrower and then rely on the fins to stabilize it. Apparently they
didn't add enough stability.

[m***@gmail.com]

I own a nearly-new Stampfli quad/four, fitted with Carl's canard/aerofin arrangement. It works beautifully. To quote myself from a similar post a few months ago:

"I CAN vouch for Aerofins, I have one on a 4x/- I jointly own. It is
also fitted with a speedcoach. We acquired this boat quite recently,
and until we did we were using whatever boats the club coaches
allocated to us, often "top" boats made by Empacher, but with the
conventional steering set-ups.
On using the new boat, two things immediately became obvious:

1. Applying the rudder round the Molesey bends costs a visibly large
amount of speed in the conventional steering setups, perhaps 4-5
seconds/500m during steering. Using the Aerofin, the speed change
often does not register on the speedcoach. When we're mixing it with
other crews, we often get comments like "you did a push on the bend
didn't you?".

2. We can perform "steerabatics" inconceivable with a conventional set-
up. For those familiar with the Molesey reach, rigged as a 4x we can
steer at full pressure without breaking stroke from behind Taggs
Island, through the gap between Taggs and Ash Island and on to Molesey
lock. With a normal set-up we would have to stop and hold at least
once to get throught that gap.
We can also steer from behind Taggs all the way round the island and
back up the Cut at light pressure, i.e. through a tight 180 degrees
without breaking stroke. Again even less possible with a usual
arrangement.

Although this is not hard scientific data, I don't need any more
convincing.

However, because I am still racing I would prefer everyone else to use
the old arrangements please :) "

[d***@gmail.com]

Post by m***@gmail.com
"I CAN vouch for Aerofins, I have one on a 4x/- I jointly own. It is
also fitted with a speedcoach. We acquired this boat quite recently,
and until we did we were using whatever boats the club coaches
allocated to us, often "top" boats made by Empacher, but with the
conventional steering set-ups.

And further (because it stuck in my mind):

Post by m***@gmail.com
1. Applying the rudder round the Molesey bends costs a visibly large
amount of speed in the conventional steering setups, perhaps 4-5
seconds/500m during steering. Using the Aerofin, the speed change
often does not register on the speedcoach. When we're mixing it with
other crews, we often get comments like "you did a push on the bend
didn't you?".
2. We can perform "steerabatics" inconceivable with a conventional set-
up. For those familiar with the Molesey reach, rigged as a 4x we can
steer at full pressure without breaking stroke from behind Taggs
Island, through the gap between Taggs and Ash Island and on to Molesey
lock. With a normal set-up we would have to stop and hold at least
once to get throught that gap.
We can also steer from behind Taggs all the way round the island and
back up the Cut at light pressure, i.e. through a tight 180 degrees
without breaking stroke. Again even less possible with a usual
arrangement.
Although this is not hard scientific data, I don't need any more
convincing.
However, because I am still racing I would prefer everyone else to use
the old arrangements please :) "

[Rebecca Caroe]

Robin

very interested in your observations fron doing repairs. Would you be
interested in writing a guest article on the Rowperfect blog about
repairs and what clubs buying second hand gear should look out for?

We've had some nice stuff from Mike Davenport in the past - but the
point of view you can offer seems unique, I've never seen it written
about before.
get in touch via Rowperfect dot co dot uk/contact website please....

Rebecca