It might not be necessary to assume that a trapeze version goes with the round hulls and higher construction skill.
Agreed. The end of the process is to add all positive features we can to the best concept, regardless their origin, but sticking to the chosen concept.
I note that your spreadsheet indicates a target age range that spanning both Wouter's original target and the younger kids that others favored. Not sure if this is generally agreed by everyone else. Still interested in knowing the ages of the kids RG is talking to.
Yes, but note that I am spanning the original age range
with two up.As Wouter wrote, a cat that is optimal for 12+ year old kids is also a very good choice for a couple of kids under 12. This adds a very important marketing feature to the class, for then it will be a strong replacement/competition for both the Optimist and the Laser - while interfering little with the original goals.
Also, note that this is a tough feature to replicate in a monohull class: a Laser can be sailed by two small kids, but it is hard for them to keep the boat upright when tacking and jibing (have you noticed the high beam of the Optimist? It's no coincidence).
The cat's high initial stability makes life a lot easier for the small ones. I think we must use this advantage in our favour as much as possible, if anything because we can't get read of the inherent disadvantage: the tendency to go to irons when tacking.
The trapeze is a source of interference with the original goals. If we accept that it is indeed advantageous for the class to target this segment (startup boat for ages 7 to 12), we'll have to analyse this feature carefully, for it leverages the advantage that kids over 12 have against two smaller ones.
Also curious whether "one design" is still the consensus. My impression was that Chris and RG are both pursuing separate designs with the expectation that they will both fit into the box rule defined by the measurement form they put together.
Good point.
The problem with a formula is that parents start competing to see who spends more on the kid's boat. This forced the Optimist to become a strict one design. Even with the narrowest possible rules, parents still find ways to spend a lot on their kids to give them an edge (buying high tech lines, gore-tex clothes, multiple foils, sails and hulls, etc.).
This is another interference caused by the increased age span. Younger kids' parents require strict one design rules, while older kids (and their parents) can live with a formula - and possibly have more fun with it.
As a consquence, first we must discuss if the "two up under 12 startup" use is a desirable feature for the class or not. Needless to say, I favour this feature. Here's why:
Even with Internet, I don't see a group of teenagers managing a Formula class. In most of the cases it will be their parents doing the work.
If parents must be involved, why not catch them earlier, at the same age kids start sailing Optimists? It is easier and it makes more sense to me.
If the class is sailable during a wider age span, the class organization becomes stronger. Parents managing the Optimist class usually help for 6 to 10 years, maximum. If the same boat was good for a couple more years (as would be our case), they would help for 8 to 12 years. We all know how difficult it is to find people to help, so this is a great benefit for the class.
I'd like to hear what others think before continuing, because I may be trying to convince the converted...
