I think that without a min. weight sailors without a $$ limit would displace us that do not have unlimited resources. I agree that as the class progresses, we should leave the option open for an unlimited version of the class.
I also belive that in order to keep it as close as possible while still being a developmental class, a max. beam should be in place. Otherwise we will need to come up with a handicap system just to keep people interested. I think that this would still leave the class rules very open for development. With length = $$, I think this class has great potential to bring fresh blood and brains into the design/ development of small cat-sailing, and perhaps help revive garage built boats and rip the trophies from high dollar mass production shops.


Thanx
Ricky

Not NO but Uh,uH!
(place head shaking icon here)
Which is it? Development class, or other?
You can't develop a boat within limitations, and make significant progress. If you want to do that, go race monohulls, and compare silly tweaks ad nauseum. Adding a hull is a no-brainer, but do they do it?
It is pretty embarassing that, in my opinion, the big improvement in sailboats (that have been adopted) since BC are the sail batten, and maybe rotating masts (although still not universal yet). Sorry if this tone seems combative.

David couldn't agree with you more. Make it developmental...there are plenty of classes for those that feel the need to be boxed in and protected from the mythical rich sailor...

Bob

Hi Ricky, I just voted on the proposed class rules and I also support a beam limit; 8', in fact. However, I think this is not a big deal because even when I race my Mystere 4.3 single-handed, it has to blow hard to be overpowered with just my 170 pounds on the wire with a 7.5' beam. I think anyone who puts a beam wider than 8' is quickly going to learn that they are at a disadvantage against boats with less beam. The M-4.3 has a 23.5' mast so even at the max length of 24' the leverage would not increase much as we already use a flathead main. We have never had two trapezing, even at a combined weight of only about 300# because the leeward hull gets so depressed from the resistance with one on the trapeze and the other hiking that it actually gradually slows down. Also by that point, we have to have our weight literally as far back on the hulls as we can physically place it to keep the bows from submerging even while going upwind. I have experienced this same reaction on Corsair trimarans in big wind all the way up to the F-31 (there, it tells us it is time to reef). So adding beam to add speed has definite limits as Bill Roberts has explained more than once. Some will almost have to learn this the hard way I suspect!

Mike

Hi Mike…

You may be correct in saying the Mystere 4.3 would not gain any advantage by increasing the beam…but I thought this was a F 14 class…There will be many different hull designs used in this class…why should beam/mast height/weight/sail area be limited to what works the best on one particular hull design? Is this a Mystere 4.3 class or F-14?

I keep hearing people say that this doesn’t work or that won’t work…but these same people want the rules to prohibit these same options…If you truly thought that increased beam was of no advantage across the board, you would not be concerned with it. What I read between the lines is…”My boat won’t be able to effectively use more beam/sail area/a taller mast, so I want it illegal so no one can develop a faster boat utilizing these features.

You can always sail one design if you want to sail against the same old, same old...

Keep the options wide open…and maybe we will finally get to sail out of the doldrums of mediocrity….

Bob

Hey, Seeker. You need to read my post again. I was referring NOT to adding beam to the M-4.3 but to any 14 footer. I wrote that it was not a big deal and then I explained why. I also concluded that some will probably have to learn this the hard way. So knock yourself out and learn the hard way!

It is a moot point now since the vote is in and the rules are set, so take it easy! I also don't understand the rush to do this but that doesn't matter either. Seeker, make whatever you want and good luck with it. Just have it at the Spring Fever regatta!

Mike

When i posted earlier i wasnt totaly refering to performance limitations. When i refered to beam limit i just ment, that i would feel more comfortable if all boats in the class were trailerable... hence 8'2" max

Ricky

Isn't trailerable width 8'6"?

It was last time I hooked up my 5.5SL and went somewhere.

You can bet that when my F14 is ready, it will be the lightest thing I can build that will hold up. Reason being, I'm 6'4" and tip the scales @225. You won't have to worry about me guys

Hi Theo

The development of design ideas and concepts will be one of the fun aspects of this F-14 class as currently proposed ,
though believe its a matter of time before a min. boat weight and more complete box rule will be needed as sub category F-14 class.

same size here , 6,4 --225 {plus a little} -{to much good food lately } --the effects of boat weight and crew weight being interesting and fun to speculate on in this 14.3 length size open rule Formula class .

Lighter is faster ,--no question ,--to the point of being completely overpowered by the forces on the sail or sails after depowering all sail controls and tuning techniques to depower ,--for most design that is in the upper range approaching 16 to 20 mph winds and up ,--.-The only conditions where added crew weight are a plus rather than minus . The heavier crew is at a disadvantage except when extended out on the wire using every bit of that crew weight , and the boat design allows you to push the boat harder without pitchpoling over the bows, thus proper volume calc and design for a given L optimized for a given crew and boat weight with sail area forces,-

The only type cat design where lighter crew weight has not been a significant advantage has been the larger L classes where the relative size and weight is less of a total percentage of the total design formula .--The I-20 in N A added 15 sq ft of main in a larger sq top ,-over the iF formula rule --This other factor of added sail area and limited beam at 8,6 on 20s make crew weight more of a non factor sooner , though lighter crews still have advatages in lighter conditions , under 6 mph up and about 10 down .

No question ,- An existing Taipan 14 or home built fold up ply cat design weighing 150 Lbs will have much better speed potential than a production cat weighing 250 . {100 lbs more}

It would be much the same as racing an A Class cat at 160 Lbs -http://morrellimelvin.com/a2/specifications.htm

vs a N 5-5 uni at 340 Lb s --{80 Lbs heavier}
http://old.cruisingworld.com/ssbk/nacra55u.htm-and reducing its sail area from 172 to 150 ,--
IT WOULD BE NO CONTEST -given equal skippers ability on them .

Why would any doubt or challenge this, some expect to get out and beat lightweight HT types on the race course on their heavier production 240Lb boat ,--It is a matter of getting a lighter boat and equal sailor on it to just sail away around a course on the lighter boats speed potential ,per proven design formula and examples.

It is a matter of when this occurs not if --
and a 2nd production class category needed ,-with more defined box rules and min boat weight .

In the 14 L the lighter boat will need a little more beam
8 to 8,6 to achieve similar stability and enough volume in hulls ,-and near the bows ,to carry a spin downwind . This could be accomplished by larger bow sections -wider or deeper in combination ,or also -by moving the CE of the sail plan further aft ,-by mast rake ,-or moving the mast location in combination , also designing in proper helm balance with CLR and CE .

a REAL interesting design challenge in 14.3 ft Length .

NOW Place a 230 Lb crew in the design mix .

It is very difficult for a 225 or more Lb crew to sail any 14 L boat against a 100Lb + or- lighter crew , again the relative size and percentage of total weight in design formula is much greater in this 14 L . Place both skippers on light weight boats 150 Lbs-and the lighter crew will have a huge advantage in this 14 L,- given both on the same design hulls and sail plan .

How to use crew weight to any advantage in a 14 ft Length ?

The only aspect of the rule that may help a heavier crew is the 300 sq ft sail plan {any sail plan configuration }

This would include a genoa type headsail that could be carried upwind and down by a heavier crew .
Double the sail area upwind over production type spin rigged 14s , and not having to set or takedown at marks .

A genoa -hooter type,--the ideal being set on a furler and being able to partially reef it if overpowered .
just as per big boats .
A number of other design solutions are also possible ,some listed in the rules thread.

Coresponding design problems are now --enough volume in hull design to carry the added crew weight and forward sail forces towards the bows in a 14 L ---and enough beam to corespond to added sail area .
In moving and raking the sail plan aft ,helm balance becomes more a concern though offset by a genoa .

A larger crew weight on 14 may consider this hooter furler sail plan on more substantial mast section allowing a taller 7/8 type rigging or masthead rig with hi aspect genoa .

If this will compete with the lightweight HT types in this L is an unknown , my guess is it will , more in waves and any reaching leg .
It is going to be lots of fun finding out ,
Looking forward to seeing some fun 14s ,
and trying one myself .-

off subject ,-or expanded subject -
There was great interest in the 18 sq Class
or potential of reviving it also as a more open development class , this potential after 14s get established for future years and sailors wanting to develop larger versions of experimental sailing craft in an open rules context.