http://www.f20.nl/ -> click on "Reglement". That is as good as I know. As far as I know, there has been no news on this topic since 2005.. The "F20" rules you see on that webpage is tailored to the N20 in one of its versions (not trying to provoke anybody, I just know that there has been a few versions around the world). The Hobie Fox 20 was also supposed to measure in to the "F20" rules as you see them on that page. There is a lack of fitting designs, rules and most importantly, dedicated people to get a F20 class going.
http://www.f20.nl/ -> click on "Reglement". That is as good as I know. As far as I know, there has been no news on this topic since 2005.. The "F20" rules you see on that webpage is tailored to the N20 in one of its versions (not trying to provoke anybody, I just know that there has been a few versions around the world). The Hobie Fox 20 was also supposed to measure in to the "F20" rules as you see them on that page. There is a lack of fitting designs, rules and most importantly, dedicated people to get a F20 class going.
Why did you ask, SCHRS?
Yes, SCHRS; two raced at the ECPR and they had been measured and so had pukka ratings.
If there are no class rules then we need to get all the other "F20's" measured.
The White F20 will be on the site in due course and as it's the only boat that has been formally measured I can only use this value for the F20.
It rated 0.938 and for comparison the Tornado is 0.935.
How does SCHR work for one off and classes that are very small.
I would guess the one - off boat must be individually measured and he uses that rating for his events. No mention is made in the SCHR table.
But what about the F20.... no real class to speak of.... Is this what you mean about having to measure each boat that call's itself a f20 and now wants to race?
In order to produce ratings for classes like the F16 and F18, we can produce a rating for the class as the class rules control most or all of the data points, we can simply take the max and min values that make for the fastest boat. For SMODS, all boats should be the same (and the class rules state this) so again, we can, one a boat has been measured, produce a rating for the class.
There are however problems when a class rule set does not control all the data points that we need, and those that are not controlled can have an ever expanding effect on rating. The A class is a classic example as this class does not control the luff length of the mainsail; because of this we CANNOT provide a blanket rating for the class as it would be infinity as the luff length is not controlled; for the A class, ALL boats need to have a SCHRS measurement certificate. Please see Section D.
For experimental boats, or boats where there is no class rules, then each boat needs to be measured: See sections B.1 and B.1.2.
Thus currently as ONLY the White F20 has been formally measured, this is the only boat that has a rating.
It is then down to the owner, or the owners representative to ensure the boat complies to the rating and measureemnt they are claiming; if someone suspects this not to be the case; a protest should be made.
The Nacra site states values for the Nacra 20, but are these backed up by measurement? I cannot be sure without the presentation of a measurement certificate.
The rating system is great -thanks for your time and work in it .
We had hopes of a F-20 class but found Hobie [Hobie Cat FR} matched the EU F-20 rules of sail area and weight but the Inter 20 introduced by NACRA in the US did not .
The F 20 EU rules were on Catamaran CO in the UK for a time as well as other sites years ago .
The Inter 20 class {I thinks it is an official class and has a measurement certificate and rating } not sure though , actually had 15 more sq ft in the mainsail measurement { they didn't include the mast area as the EU version did} and the US version had a noticabley larger sq top on the mainsail . The spin were the same at 270 sq ft .
The Inter 20 also weighed in sat 390 +- Lbs where the Hobie weighted 420 +-
The basis for class racing as equal F -20s did not exist due to these differences .
The prediominent class of 20s in the US was the I 20 which was used in the 1000 mile races and now the Tybee 500 race along with numerous other racing .
Add the T in the mix and other various 20s and its all over the board with different bean L SA design variations .
The best thing that could happen for a future F 20s CLASS would be a new design that took several steps forward in development and performance introduced into the marketplace that was affordable and ideal for all types of racing .
That would then be adapted by groups of racing sailors that would begin a F -20 class based on its measurements .
I understand the F 18 originally came from a group involved in the rating system that wanted an ideal 18 ft class based on it and measurements of typical cats .
The f-18 class in the US was mainly started by a group in my home club of racing sailors --CRAM --to follow siut .
The rating system is great -thanks for your time and work in it .
We had hopes of a F-20 class but found Hobie [Hobie Cat FR} matched the EU F-20 rules of sail area and weight but the Inter 20 introduced by NACRA in the US did not .
The F 20 EU rules were on Catamaran CO in the UK for a time as well as other sites years ago .
The Inter 20 class {I thinks it is an official class and has a measurement certificate and rating } not sure though , actually had 15 more sq ft in the mainsail measurement { they didn't include the mast area as the EU version did} and the US version had a noticabley larger sq top on the mainsail . The spin were the same at 270 sq ft .
The Inter 20 also weighed in sat 390 +- Lbs where the Hobie weighted 420 +-
The basis for class racing as equal F -20s did not exist due to these differences .
The prediominent class of 20s in the US was the I 20 which was used in the 1000 mile races and now the Tybee 500 race along with numerous other racing .
Add the T in the mix and other various 20s and its all over the board with different bean L SA design variations .
The best thing that could happen for a future F 20s CLASS would be a new design that took several steps forward in development and performance introduced into the marketplace that was affordable and ideal for all types of racing .
That would then be adapted by groups of racing sailors that would begin a F -20 class based on its measurements .
I understand the F 18 originally came from a group involved in the rating system that wanted an ideal 18 ft class based on it and measurements of typical cats .
The f-18 class in the US was mainly started by a group in my home club of racing sailors --CRAM --to follow siut .
I have read these in the past and they do not provide enough information to produce a rating under SCHRS. This is the problem for those that choose to race these boats in handicap events.
As there appears to be NO class rules for the F20, each boat will need to be measured in order to get an SCHRS rating.
The White Formula 20, I've only seen this boat once and was interested in the boards that go diagonally through the hull just in front of the side stays. For others who have not seen this I took a pic and you can see the slot with some tape over it to keep the sand out while rigging.
As this boat also has normal C/Bs how do you treat the extra set of boards on the White F20 in the SCHRS rating system?
Last edited by phill; 07/28/0806:19 AM.
I know that the voices in my head aint real, but they have some pretty good ideas. There is no such thing as a quick fix and I've never had free lunch!
Re: Formula 20 rule set
[Re: phill]
#149668 07/28/0810:08 AM07/28/0810:08 AM
Simon, SCHRS does use C/Bs specs when rating a craft do they not? Currently would you add the specs of the 2nd set of boards or just ignore them altogether? Just curious. Regards, Phill
I know that the voices in my head aint real, but they have some pretty good ideas. There is no such thing as a quick fix and I've never had free lunch!
Re: Formula 20 rule set
[Re: phill]
#149670 08/02/0811:07 AM08/02/0811:07 AM
Simon, SCHRS does use C/Bs specs when rating a craft do they not? Currently would you add the specs of the 2nd set of boards or just ignore them altogether? Just curious. Regards, Phill
we do currently rate plate aspect ratio; we do not rate the number of plates.
THese curved plates are smaller and have a lower aspect ratio than the "traditional" daggers and so are not rated. As I said above we are investigating.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.catsailor.com/bb_files/153177-IMG_9262.JPG)