Thanks Carl.... Appreciate your comments ....... Unit!

I an looking at a big beam cat with a lot of horsepower that can be driven very hard off the breeze, un rig and de-rig quickly and be a pleasure to sail on the water.

"Keep it simple" ie

clean deck layout
quick release beams. - so you can have a big beam cat but de-rig quickly.
Big trailer box = all your gear can fit in easily and quickly including spin pole. (can mount racks inside for all gear)
Quick clap down "no tie" trailer
No boards (I did not say that) - Low profile boards so you dont have to keep rasing and lowering like on the F18. Taipan 4.9 and 5.7 have low profile boards as with the Tornado. You do not lift them when you turn downwind on a spinnaker run. Time wasted rasing and lowering would be better served getting the boat up to max speed and maintaining it for as long as possible. Also cleans the deck up not having boards protruding out top.

All this in aid of speeding up rigging and derigging. Dismantled = less windage trailering and narrower beam,

Rig combinations do take it to another level but imagine a cat you can race when it is cranking 30+ sustained. Perhaps best idea would be just 2 mains. The modern cat rig can depower so efficiently compared to it's monohull couterparts, more than 2 rigs would be unnecessary.

Others may have different ideas in what they would like to see in their beach act...... But this would be my ideal ride. I am very fond of the Big T.

I suggest you find a class that welcomes such keel development and go and prove your weight theory. Then try to sell it. Love it or hate it the F18 formula has proved extremely successful in developing class racing around the globe. Lightweight boats of various sizes have been built. There are obvious advantages to the singlehanded sailor which is where the F16 and A-class find favour. The M20 has proved to be a capable boat, at a price. The f18HT??????
If the F18 were to change and reduce the weight of the hulls and allow a carbon mast what would be the result? A substantial number of boats no longer being competitive and depreciating heavily, sailors leaving the fleet due to cost of upgrade and basically no longer being a competitive crew weight. Costs are contained when there is volume. You only have to look at the N20 mast issue to see what happens when low volume effects product viability.
If you want to 'develop' catamarans you need to be able to prove the benefits to sailors otherwise the idea is dead. With the advent of numerous high-performance skiff dinghies catamarans have changed considerably over the last 20 years. Racing cats are now almost universally spinnaker equipped and use daggerboards. That is development, and has been accepted. Don't knock what works. You do a disservice to people that have worked hard to develop the sport. Maybe the boat weight issue can be addressed by adjustable beam but until someone can prove it who will buy into it. Even then it may end up being a 'good but never made it' boat.

Cheshirecatman

Though I disagree with you Cheshirecatman when saying that weight limits crew weight (the Taipan 5.7 uses NONE of the so called exotic materials, it still weighs in under 150 kgs, and is was originally targeted at crew weight <150 kgs), that was not the point with this thread. This thread startet out specifically pointing out that weight not was a parameter that could be discussed, that's exactely why I took the F18 as an example!

Start your own thread if weight is what you want to discuss.

So what do you think Jimi, and have you found anything useful in this thread?

Jimi, I have no gripe about boat weight and my comments were only made in response to claims over the F18. I know you will always get people (usual suspects)discussing weight as you initially predicted. The weight issue works within the f18 design parameters, but such variability and acceptance still has to be demonstrated in light weight boats. I think a 5.7 was modified to meet F18 rules and still won texel. If having the weight is not an issue look to what is. There have been valid comments made in this tread. Let's hope the 'negative' posters do not discourage positive discussion.

Cheshirecatman

Improve sheeting systems. The fact that we're all still sheeting from the rear beam is somewhat silly since most of us have our crews triming main. At least market systems that allow both sheeting locations.

Make further strides in uncluttering the running rigging. Overtime, my N20 tramp has gone from simple, to spaghetti central.

Create a telescoping tiller system that doesn't use a crappy universal joint to connect to the tiller crossbar. I recently went to a solid tiller with a typical rubber connector and the response feeling was incredible.

Kick-up daggerboards. I like my N20 boards. I wish they'd kickup if they smacked a seaturtle.

A sarcastic cat list:

1. More pitchpoling!
2. Longer daggerboards/centerboards. Whacking sandbars and sea turtles -- and tearing up a $15K investment by simply cracking a sandbar ONCE. Two thumbs up!
3. The heavier the mast, the worst mast-raising setup!
4. Rope everywhere!
5. Vague trailer and beach wheel designs. Crack up the boat in the parking lot while off-loading onto beach wheels!
6. Nothing under 400 lbs!

Undecided, cat sailors who are experienced, want this:



There are two wish lists "to create a new and better cat design". Both wish lists are for performance cats. One is for experienced, the other at an entry level performance boat that will sell in volume and make bigger dealers.

No doubt for me that it is something in the 16' range, as I harp.

There is no doubt this is true.

Well, the kids did a great job on that boat. Very impressive. However, one of the hulls did crack about the second time out-repairable. That could be design, or build issue, or just bad luck. I have spent my like sailing in rugged water, and there is something to be said for a weighty designs affording a bit of durability that can lead to longevity. To wit, last year I got caught in too close between the committee boat on a start, and had to bear off, and was T-boned on the starting line (grrr!), but my Infusion was only dented (cosmetic). By contrast, some of those Acats look to be and many are, easily banged up, I don't think that a light design helps there.

yeah, there's a lot of differience between an Acat and a F18. My A is dinged up from racing and its all happened when I was just sitting around between races or when launching. My F18HT has held up pretty well and it sits on the beach full time and gets used by a couple differient people, but yes, I do agree that having a more well built hull is nice.

Mitch Booth just won the Aruba Regatta on a 2005 Tiger, sure Mitch is good but it does show how competitive well-built boats can be.

Well, I figure if a planing powerboat can go 240 miles an hour before it disintegrates -- and it does not even dig in and pitchpole -- we are doing something wrong with sailboats.

We should be able to get our center of effort and weight and power back far enough to go faster without pitchpoling.

So if the goal is SPEED, my idea is to have a fore-and-aft track for the mast, so we can move the power back as the wind increases. It's not enough to just rake the mast back farther.

Mary,

The problem with pitchpoles is related to CE height, not to fore and aft position. Powerboats have their CE just below the waterline level and its CE lever arm is small, so the torque generated is also small. Their problem is the reverse of ours: the propelller's low position actually raises the bow.

If you want more speed by means of reducing pitchpoles, it is necessary to add hull buoyancy as far forward as possible and to lower the CE height, but then, for the same area, the sail's aspect ratio is worse, so windward performance is sacrificed.

So what about hydrofoils to lift the bows? Luiz has some of those!

So I mention the "weight" word and all h3ll breaks loose? Some of you guys need to chill out some.

This is from the OP:
"I know all the F16 guys will say "make it 70 kilos lighter, and being able to sail one or two up". That's not the point here, I wanna hear propositions that can be applied to all cat designs and sizes..."

So where does my general comment not apply to all cat designs and sizes? I didn't launch an attack on the F18 specifically, and I don't even own an F16 (keep the overreactions up and just might get one though!) If the OP didn't want weight comments, he could have announced that clearly, but that would seem to indicate major prejudice, wouldn't it.
I can understand people not wanting their class destroyed by progress, but in the long run, the buck has to stop somewhere to let any real progress take place. Now hold your horses, I'm not saying we should dump F18! its hugely popular in the Netherlands and lots of my buddies are having a great time sailing their fine boats. I don't have a problem with that.
My comment about keels is that what is happening here, ie: the thinking, is very much like the way mono hull sailors reacted to cats in the beginning! What I'm saying is you can't talk about progress without considering weight, it's just not logical! Everyone needs to be honest about this AFAIC. Don't worry, I won't mention the W-word again in this discussion, it would obviously be pointless.

So I understand that this thread needs some clarification on some points.

DennisMe, stating that I did not want weight to be a parameter that can be discussed here is not the same as all hell brakes loose. It certainly was not ment as it... So let's both take a chill pill.

Of course weight is a MAJOR issue in terms of performance. The thing is that weight already has been discussed over and over again in the past on this and other forums. I wanted people to come with new design aspects that would increase performance without lowering the weight, like the designers at Hobie now are trying to do. I know it would be hard, but that's what make it interesting.

I myself sail a Taipan 5.7 which indeed is 50 kilos lighter than the F18, something that still would convince me to choose the T5.7 over a F18 if I was to buy a cat today.

I don't think that anyone would argue that the F18 class is both succesfull, and that the boats are heavy. Making things lighter would be number one on my list of things to do for all boats. Would slowly lowering the weight over 10 years, (or pick a time frame), allow the any of the classes a chance to lower the weight, while keeping older boats competitive through their usefull lives? I don't think we'll be seeing too many 40 year old F18's like we do with the H14/16. Lowering the weight slowly, year one 1 lb, year two 1.5 lbs, year three 2.5lbs, etc. Take 20-25 lbs off gradually as it becomes more viable, then start the process over. I don't think would really render anything obsolete that wouldn't follow that path in due course anyhow. As technology progress's some of the build techniques, and materials may be cost prohibitive now, but what about down the road? Ten years down the road how many of the semi serious teams will be campaigning a vintage boat anyway?

Jimi, I think a little more clarification is needed on this one. What was the original objective behind your thoughts on a 'new and better design'?

- Straightline speed?
- Manoevreability?
- Seaworthiness?
- Cost reduction?
- Control layout?
- An elitist class?
- Bigger fleet racing?
- Easy rigging?
- General crew safety?
- Sailing comfort?
- Easy righting?
- Required skill level - easier to sail or more difficult/demanding/test of skill?
- Different construction?
- Sail/rig design - layout?
- Durability?
- Weight/performance equalisation? (note: weight is only one parameter)?
- Environmental impact?

Cheshirecatman

I still remember the fight we had over the ready to sail F16 weight before we fixed it at 104kg/107kg.

I'm so glad that at that time I made the decision for these weights and stuck to it. For there is one thing I now realize to the fullest extend. There is no way to alter this weight at a later time without getting yourself in a heap of trouble and probably destroy the class at the same time.

Wouter

Great Point Cheshire..

I would add . Racing (class building/maintenace) or Sailing coupled to each of your factors.