Mary,
Respectfully, I really think the spin/women thing is a non-issue. None of the female monohull sailors I've met are intimidated by chutes - only the women who have been hanging around catsailing long enough to remember Worrell chutes 3x the size of the f16 chute. Jennifer is kicking butt with her boat, and frequently sails with another girl. I've been able to take women out on my boat with 0 spin experience, and do well at local races. And roller-furling is perfectly legal, as long as the SHAPE is right.

49er (is that your first or last name ),
Number one: the Bim factory described the f16 rules when presented with them as "merely fair." Yet they refused to agree to them. Now, hmm, makes you think.
Number 2: I really don't give a damn what you think about Wouter. However, because of your opinion of him, you want to talk smack about the class. It is grass-roots. We are taking things slow, and that's o.k. with those of us racing. You apparently have something to gain by trying to make the class look bad. I'm not going to argue with you about crap that appeared on this flyer or that website. What matters is the current class rules, voted on by owners and manufacturers. I don't have an f18. Therefore I don't bitch about them banning a new design. Why don't you show our class the same courtesy when we limit mast height? I've also met individuals within other classes that I didn't like. Fortunately, I'm capable of distinguishing between those individuals and the class. Why aren't you?
If you want on one of the boats, let me know any time. If you buy a bim, I hope to get to race against you.

Wouter,
This little stuff isn't worth it. We're proving the boats at regattas. Don't try to argue minute details with these anonymous people - it just feeds the fire. I understand the frustration - but it's not worth it.

It was a long regatta - going to bed.

Michael Coffman
t4.9 #32

49er.. mate...
when the F16hp class rules were first talked about it did have a 9 meter rig (to include the BIMs).. (I have one to the old rules yes grand-fathered) However after the first year the rules were revued the rig was lowered to 8.5.. This wasnt supported by Wouter or myself.. But was supported by the T4.9 guys (AHCP and the crews) and the Stealth guys.. You can revue the discussion on the F16 forum..

Thus while Wouter is the president he doesnt control what the class members decide..

Wouter and I have had a few very heated discussions over rules.. BUT in the end its the majority decision..

Hi all,
finally I got some feedback about the first test sail of the Javelin 16 with a special regard to the furling gennaker. I can assure you that the gennaker utilized in the test is fully compliant with the ISAF rule (i.e. SMG >75% SF).
Therefore the Javelin 16 Portsmouth or Texel rating will not be affected and the boat will not be penalized in Open regattas.
Secondly, since the Javelin 16 gennaker is not designed for close reach, it is not going to put any more stress on the platform than a conventional (conventionally rigged) spinnaker.
With regard to the windage the Jav 16 spinnaker (when furled) has a diameter of 5 cm or 2 inches, so that it seems OK also from this point of view.
With regard to the weight the furling system is 1-1,5 kg or 2-3 lbs lighter than a common snuffer system (no need of snuffer, snuffer bag, spi halyard block, tack block, cleats etc)
The only modification needed seems a slightly modified spinnaker design (with a somewhat flatter luff).
If you consider that a furling spinnaker can be easily operated also by a single (quite unexperienced) helmsman and that you can hoist (unfurl) it while rounding the upwind buoy and douse (furl) it while roundind the downwind buoy...
The system looks so promising that it will be tested in the next few weeks also on the Javelin 2.
The system has only a drawback:
it works only on boats fitted with high masts (unirigged) and high aspect spinnaker (short footed).

"The system has only a drawback:
it works only on boats fitted with high masts (unirigged) and high aspect spinnaker (short footed)."
Strange comments. Looking at the photo`s the spinnaker looks more like it is short-luffed rather than short-footed. Perhaps the luff only looks short relative to the mast length (which looks rather long !) I`m surprised the hoist height isn`t a bit higher & the kite isn`t more high-aspect than it is, something looks out of balance with the design.Perhaps it`s just that VERY long stick. This is not negative criticism, just my personal observations which are not based on professional boat design, so don`t quote me or get anal about my comments. Overall it looks great, just the proportions trouble me a bit. I`ll get over it as soon as one sails past me.
In my experience it will be faster in light winds & become more difficult to sail as the wind picks up. At least it has 2 trapezes, finally I know the intended target market (2 up). So can you sail it solo, and how will that affect it`s rating ? According to ISAF the lesser weight will make it rate faster than the sloop version, since there is no jib to get rid of. I`d like to see a solo one outperform the sloop in more than 15 knots. It will take a special sailor !

Cheers
Steve

Rick, Wouter and all,

1. A main topic, which is a priciple of the matter, that is not discussed is.....DEPLOYMENT of the sail!
2. Would you not have the same rating, for example of a Euro I-20 if the main is DEPLOYED upside down?...of course this would look strange,but would it not be just as legal? I believe it is a valid point.
3. If DEPLOYMENT is NOT AN ISSUE,....why then does any ruling party care about it sometimes,...and other times not.
4. Headsails, on the end of a pole, deployed and retrieved by various manners, is the only point here.
5. So, I am asking for an answer to only that point. Why the confused rules on deployment?

..please do not bring in any points on sail shape, size, material, measurements and such,..for that is another topic.

regards,

Bruce
St. Croix

I don't quite understand the question but if I have to answer it then I reply that Michael described it the best.

"All is allowed and it doesn't matter how it is set or doused as long as the shape of the sail is correct."

And the only limits on the shape are the area, midgirth width and drawheight.

It doesn't matter when you fly it upside down, inside out, full of holes, from a bag, a snuffer or furl it.

Wouter

Bruce,
Neither Texel or portsmouth directly correct for the method of deployment of a headail in the rating number.

Any headsail sail with a midgirth >75% of the footlength is a spinnaker (or gennaker). It can be furled, snuffed, deck launched and it still counts as a spinnaker and is rated as such.

Any headsail with the midgirth =or< 75% of the foot length is not defined as a spinnaker. They are called reachers, screachers, hooters code 0's etc. They can be furled, deck launched, etc. both Portsmouth and Texel rate them seperately. these sails are typicaly designed to have a very tight luff and are more like big jibs. They can often be used in lighter winds for reaching and sailing upwind.

The portsmouth rating indirectly takes into acount the launch methods alowed by a class if it is rated with a spinnaker as standard. for example, the I-20 was sold with a snuffer. The snuffer launch method was faster around the buoy's and the results and therefore rating reflect this. However, and I-20 with a snuffer, and one deck launching the spinnaker have identical ratings.

Having a furling spinnaker is not a particularly new concept, I believe the Dart TSX circa 1994-5 had a furling spinnaker availible.

Eric Anderson

I was Irish agent for, and had a TSX in 1990. I never heard of a furling spinnaker being available on this side of the Atlantic. I sailed it twice accross the Irish Sea to Wales, trying to set an Irish Sea record. It was discontinued after only a couple of years.

Eric and Wouter,

Very well put!

Attention Rick White, here is your answer,..meet the measuement as stated and you are 'in like Flint' with a furler deployed head sail.....thanks all!

Here is another item for you to consider,..I-20, Tornado( probaly others too) have retro fitted self tacking jibs,...the reports are that they come out of a tack quicker,.....is there a rating adjustment for this?? Just wondering

Bruce
St. Croix

Dermot, I may be way out of wack on this one. I have only seen 1 TSX in the US and it had a roller furling headsail. It could very well have been aftermarket.

Eric