I think Stephen has it right.

I'm a little bit out of the F16 scene lately but when I was heavily involved the Viper was discussed often in talks I had with AHPC/Greg. There was always one constant in that and that was that he assured everyone that a purpose build AHPC F16 design would come and that he felt that the class had great potential; on a par with the F18 class. The F104 concept never came up and I too believe it was a fluke. One that AHPC welcomes of course.

The same can be said with regard to the Viper hull. They did state regulary that they had learned things from the Capricorn design and would use that knowlegde in the Viper. I personally feel the two hulls actually look different as well. Sure they both have the raked back bow but there are also noticeable differences.

I really do feel it is a well build boat and the hulls appear to be right. One comment by a Blade owner crewing for Greg at the 2007 GC also hinted as that. The Viper has the right amount of dive resistance and can be pushed harder downwind. It is also a very clean wel thought out boat. The rig has some tweaks as well, like a higher houndfitting and thus a stiffer top. It should be a rush at the upcoming Alter Cup event !

Overall I really like it personally, but would love it if it had been a little lighter say 115 kg to 120 kg or so. That is enough to compensate for the F18 beams and boards as well as lower tolerances when building the hulls in Thailand. However, I can't say on the limited experience that I have that it is any slower because of it. My main fear has always been that its weight keeps creeping upwards. It is a well known fact that the 2007 GC boat was 137 kg ready to go, but also heavily damaged during transport requiring extensive repairs. In a contest between a lightweight boat and a fork lift truck, the latter wins.

If AHPC keeps building them at max 125 kg or under then it will be a great boat in my own personal biased opinion. I even think that they have chosen the right business model for it. Using the same beams etc for as the F18 is economically smart. There is no denying that. And I think Greg is right, weight is less a factor on these boats then many think (or that it is on the A's). The spinnaker has shifted the race far more to the crews with superior sailing skills then it already was. The limits encountered now are far more related to aerodynamics and not so much to overall drag. Meaning, that lower overall drag doesn't really improve speed any more whereas refinements in the sail drive (aerodynamics) does. It is the reason why 180 kg + 155 kg = 335 kg F18 combo's are at the top of their game despite being one of the heaviest combo's ever to have been launched in the beach cat scene. That was one lesson learned by AHPC in the F18 class as they explained to me. Get in the ball park and then concentrate on getting the motor (the rig) dialed in right. Afterall, underweight teams in the F18 class always try to make the limit for the larger rig even if that means carrying the maximum amount of lead on board. Teams that can't make that limit are noticeably disadvantaged even if they are 20 to 30 lighter then 155 kg combined. This was indeed the reason why we took out the double rig setup of the draft F16 rules back in late 2001. Even as far back as then it was becoming clear that the second smaller rig for light crews wasn't worth the added cost. All this is to say that I feel AHPC is right. Some weight can be traded off against economic benefits. That does not imply however that I favor raising the F16 minimum ready-to-sail weights however !!!

Anyway, this post is getting long so I'll quit

Highjack off !

Wouter