I think what we're seeing is the manufacturers becoming more involved in the internal machinations of the F18 association. Consequently there appears to be some manipulation of class rules for commercial protection.

By all means, let them be involved in the TC's but the final decision HAS to be made by the executive that MUST be acting in the best interests of it's members. What we're seeing at the moment is detrimental to the best interests of the members and unfortunately the class as a whole.

Paint vs Gelcoat isn't that big a deal performance wise however it is a very big deal manufacturing wise. (remember - total surface area of cats hulls is stuff all compared to a 100 foot maxi so spending big on a supposedly "faster" paint isn't going to provide a substantial benefit.)

Single cloth vs multi cloth sails - so long as the material being used is listed on the approved materials register then sail makers can make a cheaper sail with higher durability.

Why is it that the F18 association is only finding fault with Sail Innovation sails when all others are also technically illegal?

Why is it that the F18 association is only finding fault with Phantom hulls when many other hulls are also painted and have been for a long time??

Gav,

There is no "internal machinations of the F18 association".
Most of the WC members are F18 sailors elected by F18 sailors.
In November, 10 nations expressed themselves representing 74% of the worlwide members.

On the other hand Don Findlay (TC Chairman) write to open the last TC report (http://tinyurl.com/7u5gmhy):

"Many of the requests for change have come from commercial interests and not from National Class Associations".


At least for paint performance there is a doubt, marketing double speech does not help. We should believe marketing speech to WC or marketing speech to customers ?

TC people did not find consensus. Despite the fact that (from last TC report):
"Very strong commercial lobbying has been received by those seeking to be allowed to use paints in hull manufacture"

Here I do admit in the doubt the World Council choose a conservative way for the clarification (no extra rules indeed).
Way which is just confirmed by ISAF: paint is not allowed on new boat (you can use paint for "routine maintenance" only).

In a few word one hand requests for change come from commercial, on the other hand WC is conservative and now confirmed by ISAF.

Here, again :), the key point is the fair competition between boat builders.
That's why rules can change with one year delay notice.

Could you indicate why "all others are also technically illegal?" ?
If this is concerning luff and leech line, TC report answer to you:
"RuleG.4.2 (e) states” leech line with cleat” and G.5.2 (d) states leech lines”. Facts found relating to rule.
Error in writing. Both G.4.2 and G.5.2 should read “leech and luff lines” TC decision. Agreed unanimously."

As you see there is many point on the TC table.

"Here, again :), the key point is the fair competition between boat builders."

But it's not fair competition if the larger boat builders are using cheap asian labour to gelcoat their boats while builders in Europe and Australia have to pay much higher rates in labour for the same process. This is why Windrush, Phantom etc should be allowed to paint - the purpose is not to put a "faster" finish on the boat, merely finish it another way.

I'll ask again - why can't the WC simply stipulate which paints are allowed to be used on F18's? The same way as you have a list of approved sail cloths.

There are many rope manufacturers marketing their ropes are stronger, lighter, more durable than others - does the WC ban these ropes as well???

Where does it end?

To make sense, the complete paragraph is :

Here, again :), the key point is the fair competition between boat builders.
That's why rules can change with one year delay notice.

The second part is the most important for who want to be in positive action.

I point out that process to change rule can (should) start in National Class Associations.
Should start for me, because I do think that the guy who paid should make the rules.

The WC decision upon paint was only a clarification (no new rule indeed).

ISAF just confirmed that clarification: paint is not allowed on new boat (you can use paint for "routine maintenance" only).

If painted finish is allowed, with or without a paint list (after vote process, not only lobbying), all the builders should have time to organise their product.
Shouldn't they ?
It's like racing before the start you cannot cross the line...

You notice that no rule exist for rope, as before no rule exist for limiting daggerboard length.

Harken make lighter and stronger blocks than ronstan, so I propose that we ban all harken fittings

Gav is right. The rules are a mess and they are trying to control things that have no impact on performance.

No mess there: clarification of rule, and this particular one is confirmed by ISAF.
By the way, that is one item beyond many.

Check there that the rules is regularly in evolution: http://www.sailing.org/2129.php

Some years ago the textile trapeze were not allowed. Now they are. The rule change, with one year delay notice. Performance impact ? I don't think so, except when the line broke ;-).

As sales manager of a F18 brand you can ask to be part of the TC. You can see on last TC report (http://tinyurl.com/7u5gmhy) that all pro are not sharing your point of view.

More important for me is that F18 members should control the rules. This thread is an illustration for Don Findlay words:

"Many of the requests for change have come from commercial interests and not from National Class Associations".

Are painted graphics allowed?

You can paint your F18, it is just not allowed for your builder to paint it when the boat is being built.

So, you can ask them to paint it the week after it has been built.....

Or you can take to it yourself, or have your local repair guy/paintshop do it too.

franck,

You really cannot hide this as anything other than a witch hunt. Many boats have been and are painted. Mattia and Windrush have had painted boats in the class for years with no issue. Now all of the sudden this issue of paint is being raised to exclude boats from the class. According to the version of the rules I printed, gel coat is not specifically listed and hence is not legal as a surfacing material, either. This would apply also to vinyl stick on graphics too, so every boat with graphics should be banned as well. Pretty ridiculous – no, but this is what often happens when “universal” rules tried to get written. At the very least if someone feels there has to be a rules clarification, it needs to state paint be allowed from a precedence standpoint alone. Retroactively excluding boats that have been accepted for years reeks of poor sportsmanship.

How does the class make these decisions? There are a couple of primary builders, who I am sure want no part in changing their processes. I have never heard any complaints from a member or in any forum about paint, but now it has become a public mess. This at least makes me question the process here.

Hi Mini,

No witch, no hunt ;-) You're right, nothing to do except explain how it works (I'm very sorry if I repeat myself).

Here the key point is the fair competition between boat builders (that may explain that nobody complain on forum before)
That's why F18 rules can change, but with one year delay notice.

I point out that process to change rule can (should) start in National Class Associations.
Should start for me, because I do think that the guy who paid F18 should make the F18 rules, not the builders.
You may consider I'm wrong.

For the builders there is no consensus on this issue (not only a couple of primary builder indeed).
The builders/sail makers composed the technical comittee (TC), they take no effective decision.
Here the last report of the TC: http://tinyurl.com/7u5gmhy.

The world council (WC) is mostly composed by F18 owners elected by F18 members/owners.
The WC make decisions, the vote right are weighted on members: the more members there is in a country, the more vote it gets.
You may think, 10 nations, representing 74% of the worldwide members, during the last world council have taken a conservative option.
Then you'll be right.

But you have to consider that here the WC decision upon paint was only a clarification: no new rule indeed.
To open the rule, to change rule can (should) start in National Class Associations.
Not because a builder want to change the rule or have is very own intepretation.
May be is right, may be not.

And here we are: this storm in a very little glass of water is because the International Sailing organisation (ISAF) just confirmed last week the WC decision.
ISAF said: paint is not allowed on new boat (you can use paint for "routine maintenance" only).

More than this, you may notice, as far as I know: no F18 are banned... very little witch, very soft hunt.
For gel coat, no doubt, please consider the last files: http://www.sailing.org/2129.php

If painted finish is allowed, with or without a paint list (after vote process, not only commercial lobbying), all the builders should have time to organise their product.

Shouldn't they ?

Everybody can cross the line but not before the start.
The real mess is when everybody start when they want.

As word for the end I consider: the more F18 sailors/owners involved in National Class Associations, the better it would be.
If paint issue make F18 people move in this way that will be great.

Franck,
You just keep on going with this crap don't you!

Painted F18's have existed since day 1 of the class rule. It has always been legal to have a painted F18. This is not debatable, it is fact.

ISAF actually confirmed that all F18's (except painted ones) were not legal in their latest interpretation. So the class made an emergency change to try and fix the mess it created by itself.

Every time someone call you out on your biased actions you try to fall back on this fair for everyone crap, but in reality it is a witch hunt and you are at the very center of it.

Here is a good question for you:- The recent emergency rule change was made without the votes of members of the WC, so how is it considered to be a valid decision within the bounds of the constitution?

Andrew I'm so sorry that you keep making very strange affirmations.
I understand that to be involved in F18 business does not help to have a balanced position.
Let's go to try to make response point by point.

Macca said:
"Painted F18's have existed since day 1 of the class rule"

That is not true just check 2002 F18 rules. And all the first F18 were gel-coated (Alado, Hawk, Mattia etc...)

Macca said:
"ISAF actually confirmed that all F18's (except painted ones) were not legal in their latest interpretation"

Just read ISAF answers (as native english you should undestand difference between n° 1 formulation and n° 2 formulation: gel coat is not the only way to finish in the material list, that is very different to what you want to make believe:

Question 1:
In reference to class rule D.2.3(a) "Routine maintenance such as painting and polishing is permitted without re-measurement and re-certification" - Does this rule allow new boats to be supplied with a painted finish?
Answer 1:
NO.

Question 2:
In reference to class rule D.3.1(a) "The hull shells shall be built from polyester or vinylester resin, glass fibres.... Every material that is not expressly permitted is prohibited." - Does this mean that boats supplied from manufacturers should have a gelcoat finish?
Answer 2:
NO.

Macca said:
"Every time someone call you out on your biased actions you try to fall back on this fair for everyone crap, but in reality it is a witch hunt and you are at the very center of it."

I'm just a little tired to read only one sound. Admit there can be another point of view.

Please, one more time, when you have no more ideas you cannot help yourself to go to personnal attack. F18 deserved better. So sorry but I'm obviously not the center of TC (Chairman Don Findlay), WC (Chairman Olivier Bovyn) and now ISAF (here you're targeting who ?).
And by the way, It's nice to respect 10 nations expression representing 74% of the worldwide member.

Macca said:
"The recent emergency rule change was made without the votes of members of the WC, so how is it considered to be a valid decision within the bounds of the constitution?"

If You remenber well you start yourself a part of the ISAF process. You do not considered taht ISAF can make it's own way. Now you can attack ISAF as well.

Indeed ISAF there adjust the wording in order to suit to spirit of the rules: F18 are with gel coat finish.
Your brand is proposing gel coat finish. Ite missa est.

Franck,

You keep avoiding the questions:- How did the class make a rule change without the proper process as set out in the constitution being followed?

The class rule clearly states that all WC NCA's must vote on any rule change, yet in this case I have yet to find any NCA that was aware of the proposed change. So now it appears that there is someone inside the class able to change class rules as they see fit.... regardless if its a good change its unacceptable to have changes made without the proper process.

The rule change was made because ISAF clearly ruled that all gelcoat F18's were illegal. Yet you still believe in the "spirit of the rule" which as ISAF will tell you is not a concern when it comes to the rules and interpretation of them.

Painted hulls have been present in the class since it's inception and I have sailed painted F18's since 2005. Those boats have sailed at Worlds and are still sailing today. Paint is allowed in the class rules and that as I have told you before is not up for discussion. Its an accepted FACT and is confirmed by ISAF.

If you don't believe me I suggest you put your money where your big mouth is and protest me or any of the painted boats at the next regatta, how about Eurocat? Shall we agree to meet in the protest room there? I can assure you you will be disappointed with the outcome.

Andrew, as old man I can say that 2005 is not F18 day one... I notice you have changed your version in your different posts...

Existing painted boat, are not a clue. Are they refurb or not, because refurbish are allowed for maintenance routine...that doesn't mean it was allowed to build paint boat.

Indeed it is a very strange idea you're defending.
You can drive with speed over the limit, it doesn't mean it is allowed to do so.

For the process, just read november 2011 World Council minutes. Clarification of the rules on this very particular point has been voted: " The hull shells shall have an external gelcoat finish. "

You contest (loudly) the vote of the WC of november (by the way 10 nations and 74% of worldwide F18 members)
and appeal to ISAF to interpretation.

Last week, ISAF confirmed in 3 different documents (http://www.sailing.org/2129.php) what the WC voted and make a wording in accordance whith ISAF rules. Indeed that is not big deal.

ISAF never ruled that all gelcoat F18 were illegal... just read the interpretations (in my previous post) and make difference between wording of the 2 questions.

All of that is ok with our constitution (A.7), as I mentionned it's a team work.
I understand the result is upseting you.

Now you challenged me with a protest in next Eurocat.

First, you just forget that I'm not the MNA's measurer of this regatta.
I'm so sorry but, may be you will waste your time in protest-room, but it will be without me.

For me, Eurocat is a full fun regatta, so I prefer beer after racing on the water.
You're not class legal, that's your problem there. May be you should understand that I don't care.
I'll read on the official panel the results of all protest and kidding my poor friends OCS or BFD (or they will laugh upon me, it depends).

I'm not jury, just explaining here what is the decision process, because:
-it has to be explained, I agree it's not easy at the first time
-only one sound is not enough to have his own opinion (which I do respect whatever it is),
-your speech is very negative for F18 and by the way for your own business and market.

You want to challenge the rule, go for it !
For me it would be smarter to understand that you can change it, if a majority of F18 members, agree of course.
F18 rules are ours !

In the same time, Eurocat, is very important for commercial interest.
So, may be, your challenge will make sense for others brand representative, just read F18 Technical Comittee report to see that there is no consensus: http://tinyurl.com/7u5gmhy

Obviously you're present affirmation/challenge sounds in contradiction with the web site of your brand which is offering choice between paint or gel coat finish...
As a F18 customer I think it's pretty interesting
I'm ready to pay a little more to eliminated a potential protest in a very high sport event.

So I have a more interesting challenge to put my money: the price of any gel-coated F18 will be similar, as they are on the market.
Thanks to "FORMULA 18 CLASS RULES GUIDING PRINCIPLES:"

Being open to any manufacturer allows many builders and sail makers to compete and so keep costs to a minimum.
The Class remains aware to keeping development under control, maintaining a good balance between cost and performance."

Franck,

As I said, I am confident that painted boats are within the rules, they always have been and ISAF agree. And unless you would like to protest painted boats I suggest you shut the hell up about it. You do have a history of trying to ban boats... remember you lobbied hard to get all shockwaves banned from the class (after you sold your own shockwave first... nice guy.)

You have already been banned from Martin's site for your repeated twisting of facts and agenda, so perhaps you are not long for this site either...

See you in Carnac.

The cost for gelcoated boats are similar because they are all built using cheap asian labour - different brands are even manufactured in the same factory.

How is that a good thing for F18 development?? What I do know is that in your perfectly gelcoated world a European or Australian manufacturer who wants to actually BUILD the boat themselves can no longer provide a boat at a similar price because the labour costs involved in gelcoating in those countries makes it unviable.

You say banning paint is a good thing for the class because some marketing material says it makes the boat go faster. Yet you are now eliminating manufacturers from entering the class unless they send their boats to the same factories in Thailand that the major builders use.

That's crazy talk.

Gelcoated vs painted boats - Please prove to me there's a performance advantage.

Otherwise it looks very much like a cynical attempt to force out one particular manufacturer to the detriment of others.

Well most of the high end paint coatings you are talking about are polyester based resins anyway... From the AwlGrip website: "Type: Two Component Linear Aliphatic Polyester Polyurethane"

So, AwlGrip if used can be considered a "polyester resin" and therefore is allowed by rules.

This is a ridiculous argument, get over it. Paint can and should be allowed, even for new builds.

Andrew, personnal attack show that you cannot accept another point of wiew.

In the same move you just point out that you've got a poor argumentation.
You do not have argumentation against what I wrote ( previous posts without any answer, I'm disapointed ;-) so you try to attack me.
It's a typical way to admit that you are wrong...

It's not because I don't want to waste my time on a regatta that I will stop to present arguments.
The risk for protest is for you there. Anybody can do the protest. it is your case.
And if nobody protest, it's not so important.

You want to challenge the rule and made perturbation in a regatta, it's your choice.
You're confident in Eurocat jury as you were for ISAF decision. Keep going this way.

Plus you're tryin to intimidate me. It's not very serious and I believe F18 deserved better.
I'll be in Carnac with no particular emotion except sailing F18 with my kids and get money for the french association (you can give some ;-).

ShockWave are not banned, if you don't understand general meeting action I just don't care.
It's like ISAF attitude for the paint. You're wrong again.

For what you said about my own Shockwave it's so poor and ridiculous.
I sold my Shockwave in january 2010, the corecell issue was in july 2010 (I do see in the future ;-) and the WC you speak about (but you weren't there) in december 2010.

You can have good informations from Eric Proust the reseller and Guillaume Hemery the today owner of the boat and you will understand that you're embarrassing yourself.

Andrew, here you make me laugh. Happily I've sold no paint boat during the last 10 years. All you affirm is becoming grotesque.
Anyway, I will accept apologise.

Until there is no characterized cheating, grandfathering and derogation (RSS87) is the way used by F18 class to respect F18 members/owners money. You do not noticed that ?

The builders which do not break the rules do not like this balance.
To improve this I proposed a builder compliance certificat in order to increase customer trust in builders product and prevent such case.
Asking TC or WC to an interpretation of the rule if you want to do something is a smarter way.
Not only respect to F18 class and its community indeed.

Information is the key, but wrong information or only one sound isn't good.
Debating is not easy, we've to stay in idea field and respect people in front of us.
I try to do so with no particular expecting and some prefer to have only their own sound. I do not blame them.

I'm free, my business is not F18, it is just a passion, may be that's why I'm disturbing you.

Hi Gav,

Painting and one factory in a low cost country are not the same issue.
The same factory is the provider of several F18 brand, for the hull, that is an industrial common case.
Builders make choice, for the sails how many real factory ? A few indeed.

But as far as I know, I do not see painted F18 with a real price (not list price but the price you're paying) 10 or 20% off a gel coated one.

There is no consensus in the Technical Comittee about painting, I just add that double speech in marketing material did not help. Really faster, or not the painted boat ?

The paint issue is a clarification, not a new rule that's a key point.
Clarification voted by the last november World Council (10 nations representing 74% worldwide members).
ISAF confirmed that clarification and improve the wording last week (3 documents, not one).

And the rule can change. If you're involved in your National F18 Assocation, you can act for it !
F18 rules are ours, they are not belonging to anyone else that the F18 customers.

As a pro, you can share your advice with the technical comittee