Does anyone know where to get the F-20 class rules? I'd be interested to see the specs on this. The F-18 class rules are readily available, but the F-20 class rules are much harder to get a hold of. I've seen them before and I'm trying to dig them up again. Thanks.

Do you mean the european iF20 rules? the ones that the inter 20 and the hobie fox were designed around?
I have them on paper

Yes, that would be a start! Would you mind typing them up, citing where your information is from (sorry, I'm not trying to put a research paper on you) and posting them? If there are no rules available here in the States, then we will have to go with the European F2o rules and take it from there. For example, where did you acquire your copy of the F20 rules? We need a foundation for F20 in the U.S. Many thanks.

Its about 20 pages downloaded from the old iF20 association website, so i am not in a rush to type them out, but i might try and get them uploaded to the website when i find someone that can!

Pretty similar stuff to the F18 rules, just with different measurements that now won't fit any boat.

Your best bet is to take the up to date F18 rules and tweak them to fit what you want.

Thank you Paul. I didn't realize they were so long. Perhaps if you have access to a scanner, whenever you have time you could scan them and email them to me at mniggiljr@yahoo.com. I don't want you to spend time typing up 20 pages, especially if it's possible to send them another way. I'd also be willing to cover the cost of mailing a copy to me if need be. I am primarily looking for the specifications as to what makes up the F20 class. For example, what are the specs for maximum main sail area, spin area, etc...? Was there ever a maximum head length? Mast height? I can't seem to locate any official governing body for F20 in the United States, so I'd like to use the specs from Europe and go from there. Any help you are able to provide is greatly appreciated. Thanks again.

Hello

Many tried to get the foundations of a F 20 class going but the main problem was the Inter 20 in the US which was the predominant 20 for years was very different from the H Fox which was designed to the F 20 EURO based CLASS RULE .

The inter 20 had 15 more sq ft of sail area in a larger sq top main sail - was 30 to 40 lbs lighter --and had other minor advantages .

I think the new 20 ft cat by NACRA may be a better basis of basic sail area --beam --weight and length from which to establish a F 20 class of the future .

Many design based rules and classes are based on what is refered to as a basic BOX RULE --the sides of the box being basic class dimentions measurements and specifications of length --20 ft --beam ? --sail area ?--min weight ?.

Other tops and bottoms of the box can be added from there with fold overs added ;]

HERE IS SOME BASIC INFO ON THE NEW 20 FT CAT

Here is a link to the Texel ratings site:
http://www.waterspor...29&mid=&mnu=241
Then click on the link "complete list with all details."

Here is a link to the Schrs site:
http://www.schrs.com/ratings.php
To find out the specific rated measurements for a class click on the class name.

In Europe a ready to sail F20 C comes in at around €7,000(including tax) less than a ready to sail Marstrom Tornado!

http://www.nacra.co.uk/Nacra_UK_Home.html

I see the differences you point out in the Nacra 20 vs. the Fox. However, the Nacra 20 seems to be the predominant 20-foot catamaran competing in regattas in the United States and has been for the last decade. It doesn't look like that will change any time soon.

To establish United States Formula-20 Class specifications I am looking at simplicity. Let's start with sail area. I have seen several posts rating the Nacra 20’s sail area somewhere between 192-194 sq. ft. for the main sail (without mast), 53-57 sq. ft. for the jib, and 270 sq. ft. for the spinnaker. This appears to be an accurate perception based on what I’ve seen except for the jib, which I feel tends to be closer to 53 sq. ft. Is there anyone that would like to chime in on these specs for a proposed F-20 class in America?

Also, I found an old post of interest. It comes from a member named “Sail6000” in 2001. I thought it might provide some insight, although like I said I suggest we establish a sail area similar to what is described above and move on from there.

“-It has been recommended to base the class largely on existing Inter 20 specifications –of main sail 208 –jib 53sq ft. spin 270 sq. ft. as a guideline with more than 200 existing in the U S presently.

-SAIL AREA notes; -All designs may trade equal amounts of sail area from main to jib to allow sail plan design options and existing modification.
-All teams will be allowed one additional sail of each type.for any race or regatta as a replacement,.
-All sails to be labeled per size in 2 inch easily readable form at the tack next to the sail makers logo, all new sails to be listed and signed over the sq. ft 2 inch sq. ft. number per sail maker.
Roller furling sails and reef points for the main are allowed, as is the spin snuffer.”

Rationale: I have been looking around the Internet and have found, essentially, no discussion about the F-20 class pertaining to the United States. Yet there are many sailors of 20-ft. cats looking to join an F-20 class. The F-18 sailors have had much success at this, but the bigger guys (like myself) who enjoy cat sailing are limited. Why should such limitations exist? F-20 rules can and should apply much like F-18 rules.

“Sail6000” posted some notes about crew weight which I deleted from his post because, based on the development of the F-18 class, seem irrelevant in 2010. It’s up to the sailors to maintain their maximum efficiency sailing weight.

I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on the suggested sail area specifications.

Mike
Team Poison Girl

I would consider narrowing my Supercat 20 to a 10' beam to fit a box rule but I would never drop it all the way down to 8' 6". The Tornado and the new Nacra 20 are both 10' wide.

There are enough 8' 6" wide boats out there. If you are going to have a F20, you really need to separate it from the crowd. Many have built tilt trailers to make transport easier and we are looking to build one in the near future.

So are you suggesting a beam specification of between 8'6" and 10' for the F-20 class? I can agree with that. Reason being that there are so many Nacra 20's out there, but the new Nacra F20 Carbon has the 10' beam and, like you said, there are the Tornado's to consider.

Let's talk sail area specs. I wrote "I have seen several posts rating the Nacra 20’s sail area somewhere between 192-194 sq. ft. for the main sail (without mast), 53-57 sq. ft. for the jib, and 270 sq. ft. for the spinnaker. This appears to be an accurate perception based on what I’ve seen except for the jib, which I feel tends to be closer to 53 sq. ft. Is there anyone that would like to chime in on these specs for a proposed F-20 class in America?"

Comments?

I am saying that 10' should be the beam. You should take into account that there are three major 20' boats with 10' beams":
- Tornados were once the olympic catamaran with lots out there
- Marstrom 20' not a lot out there but very fast
- Nacra F20 the latest 20' on the market

I would take the specs of these boat and use the largest numbers for the outside of your box. This way all these older and newer boats would be automatically eligible and they could be developed to the new specs over time.

Also if the Inter 20's and the Supercats etc... wanted to join the class, they could develop their boats as such. I think the Inner 20 would perform well with a 10' beam and I think my Supercat 20 would perform well with a 10' beam.

The NF20 is 10'6" wide

Thanks for the correction. Strange number, wonder why not 10' or 12'? They must not want to play with anybody. If you are going to go wider than 10' they should have gone to 12'.

Personally, I LOVE the 12' beam and would never go back to anything below 10'. I would love to see the 12' as the box rule. I stated the 10' because of the existing 10' beam boats.

F20 Link:
http://www.utahsailing.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Nacra-F20-Carbon.jpg

That was my post from 2001 as sail6000 , I had raced 5 Worrell 1000s and two Tybee 500s at that time then added 3 or 4 more Tybee 500 races after that .

As you can see many of us tried to reach a concensis on Formula 20 rules but the 20 ft cats themselves were all over the board in basic specifications and variables in design .

I think you are on the right track and should just float a trial very basic set of formula 20 rules based on more updated newer designs being able to fit within it .

Ignore the negative feedback and naysayers and get a small group together that want to race Formula 20 and go for it ---others will follow if boats are readily available that can fit within the rule .

Good going in starting up the quest again for a F 20 class .

How about splitting the difference on the 12' and 10' beam and say 11' max. That would make the new F20 legal and the 12' beamers wouldn't give up that much righting moment.

Check out the 12' beam on a non race day. I can fit 8 adults comfortably. Racing it is great righting moment.
Supercat 20 cruisin' >>>

As per your quote, Carl, "I think you are on the right track and should just float a trial very basic set of formula 20 rules based on more updated newer designs being able to fit within it" I think you're right and that's the way to go.

It should be flexible enough to allow boats that are out there today. As a rule, we should go with an 11' beam (or is there a motion to make it 12'?) to allow the new F20 Carbon, but I noticed on the link sent by Cyberspeed that the sail area on the new Nacra F20 is 226 sq. ft. The sail area on my Inter-20 is about 192 sq. ft (without the mast), so is the 226 number on the F20 Carbon with or without the mast? Does anyone know?

I imagine the Carbon would blow the Inter 20 away for several reasons, including the additonal roughly 32 sf of spin area. But I'll propose that we worry about that when Carbons start showing up in the U.S. on a regular basis.

There's some Inter-20 sailors I know here in Texas who are unhappy with main sails coming from E/P these days, thus the movement to go to F-20. "Stay within the specs and get your sails where you want."

For me "Wider is Better" but my boat is 12' 6" right now and it will be just as easy to make it 11' as 12'. I think it is easier to make a boat wider than narrower.

I think we should get a list of people together and do a vote. I will be willing to go with the consenus. If we get 5 boats together to do some distance races we would have a fleet. Even the Tybee 500 will accept a fleet of 5 boats.

I'm not familiar with the beam on the Supercat 20. Are you saying it is 12'6" but it can shrink down to 11'?

No, my particular SC 20 has a 12' 6' beam. The telescoping beams were replaced with solid beams from another boat and the only way they the dolphin striker cable could clear the hulls were to add 3" each side. So I am taking a beam width hit for six inches on a 12' wide boat.

Ok, I have been giving this a lot of thought. What is wrong with going with "Outside Box Rules". IE: having maximum specs and allowing boats with less than the max be in the class. The exception being boat length. This gives the developers more freedom.

I am sure there is a reason for the Nacra F20 to have an 11' beam instead of 12' beam. You must remember the extra beam width does no good unless you are using it.

If you set the maximum values according to the largest factory parameters that are out there now, it allows all to compete in the class. Over time the manufacturers can increase their specs or offer upgrade parts/packages. Could mean additional revenue stream for the manufacturers.

The only issue I see is minimum weight. You might want to put different minimum weights on different beam widths. Obviously the wider you go the heavier it will be. If we are using the Nacra F20 as a model for many of the parameters, you will need to add a little weight for the extra foot of beam so manufacturers don't try to trim the weight off critical areas meeting that weight.

I'm just throwing this out there for discussion - I haven't put much thought behind it.

What if you developed the IYRU B-class catamaran rule (where the Tornado started)? Does it need to be as restrictive as F18 or would the 10 item long A-cat-like rule set work?

Hmmm. Development is key. Hmmm.

Hi Jake,

Welcome to the discussion!

I was thinking of a smaller list similar to the A-class. That class seems to do fairly well so the rules must be working for that class.

I did a search and could not find any information on the B-Class.

Original B Class spec:

Length 20'
Width 10'
Sail Area 235 square feet
Crew 2

One more attempt to focus the discussion., (having played in the past only to see the effort fall apart which drives the question... what did I miss)

Why do you want a Formula 20 rules set.... Obvious answer... to establish the conditions for FAIR RACING between 20's of different builders.

Next question... What races or regattas do you want to compete in?

The major distance races are contested now on measurement handicap... most view this as fair.... especially given the unique circumstances of any particular distance race.. (The old horses for courses argument). Why would a formula 20 rule improve this kind of racing...(versus the limitations it would impose on design) How many 20's are racing these days in the big distance races that would even be interested in a formula rule race replacing handicap.

Bottom Line Question... Why do you need a Formula class rule for Distance racing?

Seems to me... you only need a formula rule for short course buoy racing... (See F18, A class and C Class racing) The critical mass problem of getting enough boats to one event is enormous (see C class racing)... Only the 18 footers have solved the problem of numbers...

The Fair racing problem and participation in short courses has been solved by SMOD one designs (VX40, Decision 32, and the xxx27's) These purpose built boats are meant to compete in one circuit. The 20 footers HAD the Tornado with spin as the gran prix class (and now it is one design). ... but without the olympics... it's cratered. This evidence supports my point that it's the EVENTS which drive a class not the boat itself

I don't care how neat the boats are... it's the race or circuit which drives interest in the boat class. EG... the America's Cup drove all of the interest in the boats... Consider how limited the interest was in the maxi tri's out there breaking world records.... So... Amerca's Cup > XXX round the world > trans atlantic record. There is no obvious circuit for a F20 class

My point.... Given the investment... Why would a formula rule at the 20 foot level generate more interest in short course racing?... Or put another way... How much better would short course racing be over handicap or level racing given the numbers?

I answered the question and came to the conclusion that the F20 rule was simply too close to the f18's in experience and culture.. and you could just not make a strong case for a F20 rule.

So, without a good reason for existing... a class of people interested in pushing a F20 rule class just never materializes. The formmula 20 rule is simply a tool.... With out agreement on what the racers want to build.... even a perfectly marvelous rule will go unused.

Your milage may vary

Some of the distance races have class scoring as well as open scoring. I would one day like to do the Tybee 500. Right now they only allow classes of 5 minimum. I very much doubt I will get 5 supercat 20's to do it so this would be a good step toward that direction. There are other instances that it could be helpful to have multiple boats under the same box rules.

So we agree that specific races are driving the interest in a formula 20 class.

I suspect that the Tybee would allow an open class if you had 5 boats interested. Moreover, I believe the racing would be fairer on a measurement handicap rule then fitting your existing boats into a formula box and asserting that the racing will be fair under the formula.

Remember, The proof of a formula rule is on the water and knowing that it's fair is a precondition to getting good participation for an expensive to compete distance race.
The F18 rule is proving to be fair, Even the very pro development A Class formula rule is proving to be pretty fair... a (Flyer I pulled a top 10 finish in a Race at the worlds. The F16 rule on the other hand generates controversy and boats that have different ratings.... time will tell if the controversy that we see now is just noise or the rules need tweaking. I don't think you can underestimate the need for boats allowed under the rule to actually BE level.... not just mathematically equivalent.... otherwise... your race turns into a tour.

The Tybee will not allow an open class. They require 5 boats in the same class (Portsmouth Number).

Without a set of rules, new boats will be built to what ever specs they want. You have to have a starting point for builders to build to. One of the keys would be to talk to the manufacturers and get them onboard. That might even be a good starting point getting feedback from them so they feel part of the system.

I've owned a Supercat 20, 12ft beam and a nacra 18sq, 11 ft beam. I'm a bigger guy than the f-18 skippers usually are and I think a wider beam (12') 20 foot cat is a great platform. I just saw the 2nd Nacra 20 Carbon to come to the US up close this past weekend and I think a box rule that is a maximum (less than max ok) is a good idea, with a simple list of rules like the a-cat it will foster development.