Hi Mary,
"P.S. What did you mean about Rick proving something about the Hooter? He has only raced one time against other Formula 16's, and he can't even remember whether he used the spinnaker or the Hooter, but he didn't do very well, because it was two men on the boat and crew weight was over 400 lbs."
My apology, I understood from reading Rick`s reports on the Hooter when using it on the Wave that it can be used upwind in light airs, as well as his write-up on the Hooter on your web-page in which he describes it`s benefits. I don`t know if he`s used it with success on the Taipan, but if it works on other boats it should do the same. Others on the F14 forum have also claimed similar benefits of the Hooter.

"I was referring to all the older and smaller classes that could fit into the F-16 class either as is or with modifications. The litany of rules and measurements is very intimidating to me. It sounds like an attempt to create a one-design class that happens to allow various hull styles from various manufacturers. Maybe that is the intent."

I think that the aims of the F16 class are exactly opposite of what you have in mind : With the rules as they are, based largely on the F18 ruleset, a "class" has been created which should allow boats of very similar performance to sail against one another on an equal basis. This means the rules need to be quite tightly set up & controlled. I really admire those who say "give me an open formula boxrule class", I`d like to see boats develop this route, but I would never get involved due to the costs. It`s working for the US guys now because they`re all modifying old H14`s at low cost, but if someone built an all-carbon boat to the max. specs allowed in the boxrule, it would be lapping the H14`s on the first lap, and that is not fair racing. It then becomes an arms race, and F14 disappears as fast as it was born. This is not what the F16 group wants to happen. This is why carefully chosen rules that really affect performance have been implemented, and why the minimum tip weight rule is now under discussion.

Regarding the "one-design" feeling you get from the rules, this is not the case at all - you can enter a 14ft boat that fits into the boxrule and satisfies all other criteria if you believe it would be capable of winning.
In reality all competitive boats will have similar dimensions and even hull shapes, rig configurations etc, as these have been proven over time. Some new ideas that have been tested in other classes will find their way into F16 boats, and maybe some innovations will happen in the class and be used by other classes.

On the issue of being ISAF compliant, even if we`re not a registered class, we have been issued an ISAF SCHRS recognised handicap, allowing us to race worldwide against a large group of other cat classes on an internationally recognised and accepted handicapping system. As far as I`m aware, the US is practically the only country that is still hanging on to the type of system you have - perhaps you guys feel it`s a better system, and I`m not raising that issue here, all I`m saying is that there are benefits from an international sailing point of view that the US system cannot accommodate, and which ISAF covers easily.
Furthermore the F16 class is essentially made up of several classes that are ISAF recognised such as Spitfire, Stealth etc, and so their class rules include the mid-girth measurement for their spinnakers. Should F16 allow Hooters and these prove to be superior to spinnakers, the sailors of these classes would have to own (and replace from time to time) both types of headsails in order to sail both class legal events and F16 events. This would push the cost of sailing an F16 boat up, which is not the intention of the class.
The fact that the F16 class is an International class of like-minded sailors on 16ft boats means that sometimes we just aren`t going to do things the American way !!

Cheers
Steve