Currently the F16 rules state that :



The mast :



The length of the mast, excluding the mast foot, shall not be more than 9 mtr.



There shall not be more than 0,1 mtr distance between the bottom of the

mastsection and the top of the forebeam.



The circumference of the mast section shall not be more than 0,500 mtr.





The new proposed rule is (also reworded) :





The mast



The circumference of the mast section shall not be more than 0,500 mtr.



The distance between the base of the mast section and the top of the forebeam may never be more than 0,1 mtr. This distance is referred to as "the mast foot"



The distance from the base of the mast section to the top of the mast may not be more than 8,5 mtr. This distance is referred to as mast length.



A piece of mast section and fitting, combined no taller then 0,075 mtr, with the sole purpose of hoisting and holding up the mainsail may be excluded from the mast length measurement when the distance between the highest point of the hoisted mainsail on the mast and the base of the mast section is no more than 8,5 mtr. This part of the mast is referred to as "the mast crane" and it must be clearly and visibliy seperated from the mast section that is measured to be 8,5 mtr. The mainsail may never be hoisted past the marker.





As you can see the wording has changed somewhat too. However the meaning of the rules has remained unaltered with the exception of the lower mast length ; te proposal states that this should be reduced from 9 mtr. to 8,5 mtr. The extra rule concerning the mast crane is to allow the mainsail to be really hoisted up to 8,5 mtr. This is done to equalizes the Hobie masthook fittings with the ring and hook fittings.



The reason for the reduction in mast height are :



-1- All modern 16 ft designs come out with 8,5 mtr. masts anyway. The Stealth, The Ventio zipo 16, the Spitfire Cirrus Energy, etc. It looks like this is the optimal rig length for a 16 foot platform anyway. The new F16 design from an undisclosed party will also use a 8,5 mtr. rig.



-2- The sailors currently involved have expressed that they feel the 8,5 mtr. rig is powerfull enough and that a taller mast isn't needed. Several tests with very capable (but undisclosed) sailors have shown that the 8,5 mtr. rig wasn't much slower at all with regard to A-cat rigs even in light winds.



-3- The analysis of Elliot Tonkes (Taipan nationals 2000/2001 and 2001/2002) showed the 8,5 rig to already put the competitve weight around 135-140 kg's. Going for a taller rig would only shift the optimal weight to higher crewweigths and decentre the optimal crewweight in the 120 to 150 kg's that was its intended crewweight range.



-4- The 8,5 mtr. rig will immediately level out all of the grandfathered boats and new boats with respect to the rig. As far as I'm aware only the Bim F16 from W.F. and my own Typhoon F16 boat have 9 mtr. tall masts All other boat owners sail with 8,5 mtr. masts anyway; this includes the other Bim F16 sailors that are involved. I'm willing to cut down my own mast when needed.



-5- It would be a great gesture towards the great crews of grandfathered boats that have helped create the class and have been so instrumental in its growth. For example; this rule in combination with the 105 kg's proposal will garantee that grandfather boat sailors like the Taipan 4.9 spi crew will stay competitive indefinately. It will also lock in the Aussie grandfathered F16 boat sailors into the class and not clash with their other one-design aspirations. The last is no small advantage.



-6- The reduction ofs the mastheight will strongly decrease the number of different rigs that the F16 class boats couldl harbour. The rigs in the class will more resemble one -another and thus increase fairness of racing as well take away the cause of some nervousness that this issue seems to work up here and there.



Anyone against; Anyone in favour ?



Lets here it