I am a little confused. Can someone give me the whole story?

This is what I know:

1. The F16 is a fun boat to sail
2. The sail plan/platform is a good fit for many sailors
3. Under the right hands it is a very fast boat
4. The class has grown, but not at the expense of the professional classes (F18, A nd T) - if anything the class has brought more boats to the line where I live
5. The platform is cost competitve in comparison to performance

This is what I have inferred from the last few years discussion:

1. Macca is a professional sailor (kudos, this is a compliment)
2. He is sponsored by a manufacturer who does not have a platform that matches F16 minimums
3. He is a very accomplished sailor/competitor in various classes
4. He is well repected from a knowledge and experience standpoint

My question is:

Why does he demean the F16 class, its leadership and its rule set? I would think anyone in the boat building/sailing business would applaud and help any initiative that brought more people to the game.

Maybe I am disconnected because I do this for fun and he sees it as a business. Can anyone explain to me the animosity between F16 and Macca (besides personal conflict)?

I could understand his concern about the box rules and the future of the class IF he were actively campaigning F16 with an investment of time and money - but he is not. I can only assume he is working an angle for his employer.

Again, I respect Macca's opinions and his results worldwide (if he is who I think he is), but he seems only concerned with tearing down the F16 class as opposed to growing catamaran sailing in general.

I don't claim to know much (especialy after happy hour), but a lot this type of discussion is a bummer.

I guess I wish I coud sit down with Macca over a beer (or ten) and figure how to promote classes instead of impeding progress (the Lord knows each class has its own problems without outside pressure).

Personally, I'd like to see this thread progress with as much name calling as possible.

btw, if you think I am picking on Macca....

I AM ALSO PISSED OFF AT WHOEVER STOLE MY FLOTATION DEVICE AND SAILING GLOVES (I am not sure it was a cat person). My Zhik FD, hat, gloves and trap harness were on the line at BSC and someone took the gloves and Zhik FD - I am so dissapointed in our sport. Yes, I am a dumbass for leaving them out, but I don't deserve to be out $100+ either.

I only called one name. I'd like to know why Macca cares what happens with F16.... does he or his employer feel some sort of grass root threat? Surely not, F16 is a regional thought - but I'd like to hear it from them.

It is a small world, Tom. That stuff will show up sooner or later and Karma is a bitch.

It damn well better.. asshats. I was rushing around to get everyone taken care of and left them on the line. They took the new golves and the FD - left the 15 year old harness and hat.....

Tom,

Your point about the class being cost effective is only relevant whilst the boats on offer are not being built to the optimum afforded by the rule. As soon as somebody builds a boat to the rule then you will see the most expensive 16ft beach cat in history, As one manufacturer in the class has said: It WILL cost more than an A class...

That is my only beef with the current situation, sort that out and you have the makings for a very successful class. Leave it as is and you will have a lot of Vipers sailing their own class events and some other minor builds hanging around the fringes. That would be a shame because I honestly believe the F16 is a great idea, it just needs to be taken to a stage where it can reach its potential.

Macca you keep on inferring things like building a boat to the rule without any real detail ( something we all hate about our politicians, all inference and no exact detail ). Perhaps it maybe time to state openly what your thoughts are, on what exactly a F16 built to the F16 rule would be.

My understanding is that at the moment you have no allegance to any one manufacturer ( ie not being directly employed ), so it may be an appropriate time to put your years of thinking on this subject to good use and expand your thoughts into a bit of exact detail.

*reaches for the popcorn*.. this is going to be highly amusing..

seeing current builders have already proven his past rantings wrong.
Cant build a F16 down to weight.. tell that to the Formula Cats.
Carbon will create be too expensive.. tell that to the Stealth owners...

*reaches for the rum*

Actually Stewart, The largest builder in the class agrees with my point of view.and has stated so (check youtube for the interview)

Wayne, I have already stated the details of my concerns but will sumarise here:-

The unlimited use of carbon will push costs up well above what customers are prepared to pay (sure you can quote stealth as an example, but when they built a quick boat I will listen..)
The most suitable hull shape for the usage is much larger than first envisaged and hence the surface area and hull weight are much larger than initial thoughts. The result is a weight limit that is unrealistic for the best hull shape, forcing an unfortunate compromise.

Carbon masts are an expensive piece of kit, why have them??

Carbon beams... same problem

The fact is, if someone actually built a boat that utilised all the freedoms afforded by the rule you would without a doubt end up with an F16 that costs in the region of an M20 to build, Do you as a class want that?

Does your racing get any better with boats that cost 25k EURO to build?

Tom, it's always about money. Every F16 sold is a sale lost for another class. Whether we like it or not,we are in direct competition with everything else that floats!

Those are tired arguments Andrew.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that an F16 that costs as much as an M20 will be ANY faster than a 'standard' F16.

If that turns out to be the case, since we are assured by the class founders that it will be, then why on earth would anyone spend all that for no real gain?????
And furthermore, if they did, would it really matter?

The "largest builder" has also asked the T4.9 class to increase its weight. So I guess the 4.9 has also increased its hull specs by your reasoning.. Then again it could also be a commercial decision.. Which is well with in their rights as designers builders..

Ok so we cant use any design that you think isn't fast.. The fact is its a design that according to you should be the class killer.. So please explain how its so price competitive!!

be that as it is... I guess I could throw my resources behind a "ultimate" F16.. Which means I would then be the worlds bestest yep the biggest bestestester bestest F16 sailor.. no matter how old and slow I am now.. Now do I believe I would beat Ashby on a Stealth (because they are according to you the slow boat) nope.. I am sure he is quaking in his booties at the prospect..

The Tornado and the F18 are over weight.. So are you stirring to get them to shed lard? If so please point to the discussion.. I need a good chuckle tonight..

HINT: They can't build the Taipan to spec anymore as their boat builder retired several years ago (the sail maker is still around but he's forced to farm the work out and it is not of that caliber). This is also the reason why they do not produce A class boats anymore.

Naturally they will want to force everybody else into mediocrity because of their own limitations but their is some resistance especially coming from the camps with the ability to produce the lighter boats. Unfortunately AHPC no longer has that capability.

As a heavy weight the F16 loses much if not all it's appeal over the N17, F18 or even the H16 for that matter! I predict in the event of amending the class rules to reflect this trend towards mediocrity the class will be dead and buried within three years maximum.

Are we talking about the same AHPC? As someone who owns an AHPC product and someone who has raced both the Blade and the Viper against the best in the US, I find the Aussie boats to be the best-built production catamarans in the world. F18 weights are incredibly consistent and (as Macca notes) on the light side of the line every single boat I have seen since 2006. Greg says he chose to go a bit heavier on the Viper so it could be driven harder off the breeze. The boat is doing very well in the F16 fleet. This, IMO, is not indicative of "mediocrity" as you assert, but instead a design and build decision balanced between cost and benefit - which is a positive feature of the class.

While Boyer has moved on to other projects that hold his interest, I can say there is absolutely zero difference in build quality between the Capricorn I had with Boyer's name on it and the 2009 boat I have that doesn't. Jim is amazingly talented. It is legitimate to say so. But you are simply wrong in your assertion that Jim's amicable departure has changed how AHPC makes boats or resulted in dropping the A-cat from their line-up because they are incapable of making one.

Whooa up here abit, AHPC produces an over weight F16 by choice, they have the ability if they wanted to, to shed quite a bit of weight, as the other manufacturers have done and have gone down the larger volume route because they think it makes a faster boat. Nothing wrong with that and that is their choice. Would the larger volume and by consequence, heavy hulls suit the single hander, that I would doubt.

Andrew keeps bringing up the issue of carbon, it is not the panacea everyone thinks for keeping weight down, there are limits to how thin the hull thickness can be before the stresses of launching and banging into things takes its toll. The biggest weight reduction programs would be in the ancillaries such as beams and more importantly the diet of beer and chips that the crew member eats whilst at a regatta.

but Andrew said I would be the he worlds bestest yep the biggest bestestester bestest F16 sailor if I get the "ultimate F16"!!! He pwomised!!

Macca has a relationship/affiliation with Nacra?

I would think that it would be much easier to have a boat that is difficult to build to weight, than one that has to be artificially brought up to weight. None of the manufacturers are building a F16 at minimum. Right now the cost just can't be justified for mass production, but at some point the technology will be cheap enough to do so. I may be wrong on this but I don't think you'd find too many F18 sailors that wouldn't want to shave 50lbs off of their boats, which at this point could probably be done fairly easily and cheaply, but getting something as major as that changed in the rules would be difficult to say the least.

I think having the weight as low as it is, is a good thing. Allows room for growth, and the ability to take advantage of new or existing technologies as they become more affordable. When Brand "X" starts producing a model that is at or below weight, and does so at a competitive price, it forces the others to up their game. That is most certainly a good thing.

A low minimum weight makes the small, artisan builder competitive with large mass production builders.