With regards to rigs I can't see myself supporting any option that limits choices and options where these choices are driven by different priorities. We're trying to create a one size fits all rule and I think we should be trying to be inclusive, not looking for things to outlaw or limit. The fact is that pretty much every spar maker has a suitable extrusion for this vessel if stayed (look for a mast tube used on a two person (one on trap) dinghy. My prefered option is currently the MG14 wing mast (approx AUS$400 for the tube. This mast will be less than 6kg fully rigged, a weight that will enable the young sailor to step it themselves. Having said that, I wouldn't conceive of suggesting everyone should use this rig as it is going to be more expensive than round tube.

We need to focus on keeping the rule open and inclusive. We should also look at drawing a line in the sand (ie 30 Nov) as a deadline for concensis so that designs can progress without being held back or becoming redundant.

Folks,
Something to think about with respect to keeping the rules open and inclusive -
We may find there will be practical limitations on craft depending on circumstances given
particular situations and localities. These limitations may range from the normal
prevailing sailing conditions to something as broad as the general affluence of the Area.

In strong wind areas wide beam and small sails could be the go while the reverse could be
desirable in typically light wind areas. Just like in affluent areas a flash production
boat may be better than a home built boat which may thrive in poorer areas.

It may be wise to just set down a hull length limit and leave everything else open or better
still, allow the other parameters to be set locally.
Afterall the right specs are the ones that get the most kids on the water.

I'm not sure if this would be a good approach or not but thought I'd mention it to see what others thought.


Regards,
Phill

Yes!!! absolutely in favor of this and better yet it gets kids thinking about how best they can improve their boat. The downside to this is out of hand development with $ which could hurt things, so we need a simple rule that reins in the $ spent......only problem with that is who is going to do the accounting and what sort of cap do we want thats in keeping with our goals?
Bottom line is I'm all for anything that keeps things as simple as possible.
RG

A reasonable weight is the easiest way to cap the dollars spent and not hinder the capable homebuilders either.
Aerynt

I wonder as whether the opinion to keep things maximally open is more inspired by not wanting to give up ones own "pets" rather then a serious evaluation of effectively launching a F12 class the world over. And yes, I readily admit to having my own pets.

I do however feel that Phill has made a great point about "the right specs being the ones that get the most kids on the water"

Still, I do not see much succesful precendent in allowing wildly different craft from succesfully launching a serious youth program. Afterall, there are 10's of different 14 foot classes and we still don't have a viable catamaran youth program. I think an very convincing argument can be had where large differences between boats of the same hull length is actually a major obstacle to success.

Remember the F12 project was intended to solve that issue as well. I should remind everybody here that the F12 project didn't start when Phill first mentioned his idea for a 12 foot with an unstayed rig some 5 years ago. His program is actually called the Blade 12. I changed the name a long time ago to seperate both programs. The F12 project here on catsailor started last winter, (dec 2006) because of a youth sailing program discussion on the main forum. I also underscore that this F12 project is not entirely the same as my own efforts in this field prior to dec 2006 either (the craft that I really like to own myself).

I fear we must all seriously consider letting go of some of our own pets in order to arrive at a well balanced F12 concept that actually solves the issue of a viable international youth catamaran program c.q. class that gets to the youth sailors early on and feeds them into the larger cat classes.

Allowing wildly open class rules does not have a particulary great potential of succes at that. Especially not in comparison to highly organised and regulated monohull classes in that age group. We'll look like a ragtag band of eternally disagreeing hippies in comparison.

This is not to say that the F12 class may not use surf rigs and other rig or construction alternatives. It just means that the basic class needs to be well balanced and possibly more strict in it international setup then allowing a wide range of different designs. At a local level the regulations can be relaxed if that improves youth participation as long as serious youths gravitate to a single F12 design when they get into more serious (away of their own club) F12 racing.

Wouter

Gato,

Please take a look at this posting :

http://www.catsailor.com/forums/sho...er=124554&Main=124554#Post124554

To understand how easily the named commercially available rig can be copied by a homebuilder.

I trust this takes away your concern.

Wouter

I Agree with Phill, Prevailing sailing conditions and local influences could play a large roll in design acceptance. For instance, here in East Coast Florida USA our summer season has predominantly light winds 6-8 mph. If you set sail sizes based on conditions in some higher wind areas in Europe or Australia the USA boats will end up being a dog. Vice versa, if they were set to the light wind standards of Florida USA the same boat may be vastly overpowered in the higher wind regions of the world. This has been a problem with other catamaran classes has it not? Where there was a European Rig and a Larger Rig for the USA?

Same might be said of hull design to a lesser extent. An area where a surf launch is necessary might need a different hull design (more freeboard/beam clearance) than some that sail on protected waters.

In the USA the trend seems to be more “Turn Key” as opposed to areas in Australia which seem more inclined to home build. The more options available to optimize for the local conditions, the broader the appeal.

Let the designers bring their a-game to the F-12 table. Let them build and test their prototypes against each other; the cream will rise to the top. The consumer will ultimately determine which designs they will choose to support. Problem solved.

Keep in mind that kids are all about “tricking out” what ever they are involved in… be it their clothes, skate boards, bicycles, school note books, and as they get older their cars…A boat that allows them the freedom to customize and individualize will be more attractive than some vanilla flavored ho-hum one size fits all. If this under taking is really about getting kids on catamarans then its main thrust has to be about the excitement. Forget the optimist class mono slugs…there is an opportunity to reinvent entry level sailing for kids, if done properly this could be huge…it is going to be mostly about PR…but the product has to be exciting enough to give the PR element something to work with.

While safety always has to be a major factor with any children’s event, remember kids this age are doing skateboard “kick flips while jumping over 4 or 5 concrete steps. The design must not be neutered by the “Nervous Nellies” to the point where it is so “safe” that it offers the excitement on par with watching the grass grow.

All that needs to be agreed upon is a maximum length.

With the power of the internet, and the generosity of Rick and Mary offering this web site, the possibilities are nearly limitless.

Regards,
Bob

Sorry Wouter, had mist that one...
Otherwise I think the idea good to keep the F12 close to OD.
And an other important aspect is that the boat must be very easy to build, and in the workshop the V shaped hull is very hard to outrun.

I have been working on that tangent, as you know of course, you helped me there.

Trying to get a deep V-ed hull for the F12 was actually the advice I got from Phill a long time ago and even though I dislike its looks I feel that Phill gave some very solid advice there. It is the reason I'm persuing this tangent.

I also admit that I was always a bit amazed at how well the deep V-ed hull of the Prindle 16 was performing. It outpoints the Hobie 16 upwind and the steering wasn't very sluggish at all.

Interestingly enough the exact Prindle 16 shape can be scaled down to a 3.75 mtr F12. So with your contributions and some smart stealing of other designs we may have a deep V-ed hull F12 design soon.

Wouter

Maybe a design contest is the way to progress things ?

Each team makes their own ideal designs together with full overview of weights and costs (both or parts and the whole lot) as well a sort analysis of building requirements (skill, tooling, etc)

We can then compare these designs to one-another and make the best of them the tue F12 ?

Or possible, combine a best idea's of a few designs into a new single F12 ?

Would that be an approach that the designers will be happy with ?

Wouter

I'm new to this, been following the designs progress. From my limited knowledge I know that what you are suggesting is the exact recepy for a one design class. I don't think the designers will ever accept that the "other one" is better for several reasons, but mainly because the "formula" stands for a more freedom of movement then the one design. BUt I might be wrong....

You might contact Hans Geisler, designer of the GCat family. He has created an incredibly fast deep V hull concept. He is still actively designing and sailing new boat models but I do not think he has gone smaller than 5.0 meters. He might offer great insight toward a tiny boardless design capable of good speed and pointing while perhaps home-buildable. He's a really creative and helpful guy. You can write him at
morningstarfishermen(at)earthlink.net

There is a lot more than competition on my mind. In the south part of Finland there is an archipelago with at least 12.000 islands were it’s possible to beach with a small cat, put up a tent and spend the night. The waters are sheltered but shallow, so for me no fixed part sticking out under the hull, it is a labours way to find stones.
We also travel a lot by ferries, so the whole thing should go on top of a small car. Pulling something behind is rising the price of the ferry ticket about ten times.
There are still very few cats here, so I really would like to get the kids out on the water…

You're gonna send kids out in surf?

ok....we gotta stop all this personal agenda stuff if we are to achieve anything. At this rate we will still be discussing who wants what 100 years from now.
Seeker had a pretty good suggestion in that we set a length and weight and let them evolve on a regional basis.
My personal belief is that if we go down the OD route we will stall the whole thing due to the fact there are too many opinions right here now, let alone all the future people we are trying to attract.
A good example is A-Class, simple rules are delivering more innovation and development than any other class (mono or multi) that I know of on an annual basis <granted its recent>
Whats so wrong with 4 rules, length, beam, weight and a sail area?
moreover, isn't it better to have a bunch of national or even regional designers promoting the class and involving all the people they can muster than a small association group trying to educate the masses ?
Ultimately success will get down to momentum....and that involves passionate people...narrow the parameters and your guaranteed to narrow the passion due mostly to self interest.
RG

Moths, C-class, F18 (spinnaker, selftackers)

Lets just see the A-cats for what they really are ; excellent lightweight singlehander racers that are both very expensive, have a continiously changing design and lay claim to a status that is larger then they really are.

It is also a common mistconception that the A-cat class rules are only length, width, beam and sail area. The only class that still has a simple setup like that are the C-class boats. For example the A-cats rules also rule on ready to sail weight and the forbid the use of any lifting foils. They also break their high-tech masts when they pitchpole in any decent wind.

Surprisingly enough cheaper boats like the F18 are actually outperforming the A's on the race course. To make the picture complete a 11.500 Euro F16 (without a spinnaker or jib setup) is only 5% slower then the newest 18.500 Euro A-cat. That is a whole lot of money (60% more) for a more fragile boat that is only 5% faster around the race course (3 min per hour).

In summery the A-cat is everything that a youth catamaran should not be. Expensive, relatively fragile, outdating older boats relatively quickly and is hardly seriously faster.

I like the A's for what they are but they are simple not a good example of what to do with the F12 youth catamaran. Neither are the F16 or F18 catamarans for that matter.

Wouter

Come on Wouter the A class is back to basics, at a beginner level you can build a fast boat, not world class but really cheap the sails arent dear. With clear decks, low working load, minimum sheets to change its light and super responsive, giving instant feedback on wether youve changed the right thing. Its ideal as a scaled down F12. My 7 year old lad was driving my A class in light wind last weekend, he was tacking, jibing mucking around, we deliberately capsised it and righted it for fun. As for colabsable poles, I reckon they should be an allowable option but not a requirement.
regards

I agree we should keep the rules open and simple. No rules that restrict one type of design, So I am all for length, beam, weight and sail area only.

The main object here is to get as many youngsters sailing cats as possible. Maybe a one design boat might emerge from this in the future but for the time being I want to see what everyone has to offer. So nothing to restrict creativity at this stage please.

Gareth

Gato,
That sounds like a great way to introduce kids to sailing. When they race there is only one winner. Use the boats to go camping and everyone one is a winner. They should love it and associate those memories with the sport for life.
Great idea.
There is no doubt you could build a simple deep V cat quicker than many other types. Just bear in mind that the deep V is not as good at carrying weight if you are moving camping gear on them.
We had deep V 12 ft Surfcats at our club with spade rudders that did not go down below the keel. The kids could sail them in water they could walk in.
However to make the design work the tramp was on a square tube frame and set well above the deck so it would still sail when the hulls were almost submerged. So if you are going for a deep V just be sure it will carry the weight you want to put on it. As you would know a round bilge hull or chined hull will carry weight better and the shallow draft can be achieved with skegs if C/Bs are out.
Which brings us back to building time. They can take a bit more to build although not that much more because you don't have to put much inside them which always seems to be where most of the time goes.
Good luck sounds like a great project.

Regards,
Phill

RG and Gareth,
Weight and length makes good sense but not so sure about beam and sail area.
I just think these would be better decided locally to get what is both safe and
exciting and this may vary depending on the conditions of the local.

My concern about setting a max sail area is people will always go for the
max and it may not be appropriate for that location. I tend to wonder if
this could be agreed locally.
The way I see it is that we don't even have boats on the water yet so
the fewer restrictions the better. Once there are a few boats sailng we
will be in a better position to decide if and what type of restrictions
are required.
Having said all this I'm not that hung up on all this and if everyone
else agrees to the 4 restrictions I'll go along.

Regards,
Phill