The current issue that is up for debate is total
<br>> weight. Ie combined boat and crew weight.
<br>>
<br>> Here's my two cents on the subject.
<br>>
<br>> For example:
<br>>
<br>> Boat Boat weight Crew weight Total
<br>> N6.0 425-440 lbs 325 750-765 lbs
<br>> I20 410-425 lbs 325 735-750 lbs
<br>> H20 375-425 lbs 295 670-720 lbs
<br>>
<br>> Now if we standardize sail area and set a total all up
<br>> weight. Then another manufacturer such as Boyer could
<br>> build a NA F20 boat (he will not build an iF20) that
<br>> is light, affordable, durable and competitive. Then
<br>> as technology progresses the assoc can lower the total
<br>> weight accordingly (several years down the road).
<br>>
<br>> So if you look at it this way every boat can carry a
<br>> maximum sail area of "x" all with standardized width,
<br>> length and mast height restrictions than any boat
<br>> sailing at say 750 lbs would be competitive on any
<br>> given day. And the door is still open for development.
<br>> Realistically how many people sail at crew minimums?
<br>> I know that everytime I hit the water we are between
<br>> 10 and 75 lbs over minimum (on a good day) does the
<br>> extra weight help in heavy air(not really) Does it
<br>> kill us in light (you betcha). If we were all even
<br>> would it matter -- no. With the advances in sail
<br>> design and the ability to work a downhaul anybody can
<br>> be competitive up to survival wind levels -- and at
<br>> that time we should all be on the beach anyway.
<br>>
<br>> The weight we talk about in the boyer example is boat
<br>> weight at 350 lbs plus crew at 380 lbs totaling 730
<br>> lbs. If we got smart about total weights and really
<br>> refined these rough examples than I believe we could
<br>> really make this very level. Leaving only two things
<br>> open to chance.
<br>>
<br>> 1. Best hull shape for the water on that say.
<br>> 2. Skill of sailors on boat.
<br>>
<br>> Which is where we all want to be anyway.
<br>>
<br>> What are your thoughts?
<br>>
<br>> Steve
<br><br><br>

Steve,
<br>
<br>First off I don't know of any H20's that weigh anywhere close to 375#. Mine is a 2000 and it weighs 427#. My guess is they all weigh about the same in the 420# area. At the last Nationals where they weighed boats most came in right around 420#. My thought is that the H20 is about the same weight as the I20 and about 15# lighter than the average 6.0. If you want to take one of the slower boats and try to make them add more crew weight to come up to the other boats you are barking up the wrong tree.
<br>
<br>I think to be successful we need to leave boat weights and crew weights up to the Class Associations.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791
<br><br><br>

Mike,
<br>
<br>Your taking this the wrong direction. I'm not looking to make any existing boat add weight. Well, maybe I am in the form of crew. I believe that with open formula rules you can take a H20 and change the mast and main to make the boat more than competitive. Basically, the H20 is a Tornado hull and we all know how competitve the T is.
<br>
<br>As for H20 weight my '97' weighs 384 lbs all up.
<br>
<br>This is part of the problem overall -- no two production boats weigh the same, couple that with the differences in crews and you have a nightmare.
<br>
<br>Basically, if we take a page from the monodullers and weigh both boat and crew for a static minimum it closes the gap some. Do heavier crews have an advantage in heavy air (18-20+ knots) you bet they do. Is it an unfair advantage -- No, not if the lower weight crew learn how to depower. Look at Randy Smyth. He is not a big guy, but he knows how to work the rig. Is it beyond anyone elses knowledge of how to do it. NO! Hell, just ask the man he'll tell you what to do. God knows he's the best person at spreading knowledge and also if he was asked he probably support what I'm saying here for a few reasons
<br>
<br>A. you can make any boat competitive with the right training and sail plan.
<br>
<br>B. Anyone can be fast in larger air if they know how to depower
<br>
<br>C. open sail plans give alot of sailmakers the opportunity to make a living and expand the envelope of design.
<br>
<br>D. Minor changes that we have discussed can be readily reversed for one design class racing.
<br>
<br>Anyone who thinks that we are all going to recut our stock sails is niave. You,I and the rest of us know that we are going to get new sails and keep the old ones for numerous reasons.
<br>
<br>Did you get your main recut? Most of us did. Is that recut class legal for Hobie? NO its not.
<br>
<br>We all just need to throw off the yoke of manufacturers self interests and work together as catsailors to broaden our sport. If we as a group stand up the manufacturers will support us. They have to if they want our money! Its one of the basic prinicples of a free market economy.
<br>
<br>I am all for one design racing but it is sadly dying. We can all enjoy it while its still here and start by planting seeds that enables other future sailors options in what they want to do. The sixties are over! Let's just let the thought processes of that eras sailors go that way also.
<br>
<br>My humble two cents worth
<br>Steve<br><br>

Steve,
<br>
<br>As I stated earlier. If you are going to make me add crew weight to an H20 (slow boat) to match a min. weight on a faster boat I believe you are going in the wrong direction. If anything you should allow an H20 to remove weight to try to get it up to speed. I just don't understand your logic at all.
<br>
<br>You are correct. No two production boats weigh the same. I'd have to see it weigh in at 384 to believe it. Unless you are talking about without the mast and board and rudders and sails then I might believe it.
<br>
<br>On a multihull movable ballast is much more important than on a monohull. Bigger guys do better in heavy air. Just ask Larry Harteck at the last Altercup in San Dieago. He took all bullets after the wind picked up.
<br>
<br>A. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
<br>
<br>B. Anyone can be fast but there is a point where you run out of downhaul and that's when heavier is very slightly faster.
<br>
<br>C. Totally agree. I would love open sail plans.
<br>
<br>D. Yep, minor adustments can be reversed easily.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791
<br>
<br><br><br>

Mike,
<br>
<br>You can buy my H20 if you want to! Just kidding.
<br>
<br>Where in your logic does a boat get to ADD sail area and then remove crew weight??? Is the H20 that bad of a design? Evidently not, we BOTH sail one. I sail my H20 usually at the 345 crew weight range my 200 lbs and my crews 145 lbs. Are we quick -- usually. Would we be quicker if we lost weight -- no! If we added sail area -- Hell yes. After sailing this boat design for six years I would like the ability to soup up this hull shape rather than hop designs.
<br>
<br>This becomes the focus of the issue if you let an engine builder (sailmaker) build the best engine for you and your "car" and you know that everyone else out there has the same basic "chassis". Your still going to kick butt! Have we ever ran out of downhaul (even thought we are team beef) Yes. Have we ever wished for more wind to keep up with those skinny bastards? YES! Total weight combined with proper saildesign makes an even formula. And makes it less a rules play of weight versus sailplan for your weight class == too complex.
<br>
<br>Will somepeople get more than they can handle YES, will they get it fixed after they crash out of control -- you betcha.
<br>
<br>What are the thoughts regarding a conference call for everyone to discuss this issue.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Steve,
<br>
<br>You sail at 345. In 5-15 knots you would be slightly faster at 305. At anything above 15 knots you will be the same speed. Look at H20 Nationals this year. We had a good mix of weights in the top five places because it blew stink all five days without ever a light air race.
<br>
<br>H20 Nationals this year places.
<br>1. Light
<br>2. Light
<br>3. Medium
<br>4. Heavy
<br>5. Very Light.
<br>
<br>These places would have been different if it hadn't blown stink everyday. We would have seen the top five places in the light catagory. I guarentee it!!
<br>
<br>I am open to a conference call on the issue.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791wishing I had a 384# cheater boat .
<br>
<br><br><br>

good discussion -
<br>
<br>-problems -with total weight rules
<br>
<br> 1- when it was upgraded in the future as mentioned it would obsolete the entire existing fleet .
<br>
<br>-2- the same total weight boats with a 80 lb heavier crew on the wire has a huge advantage and some 500 ft lbs more righting moment counterbalancing the wind force and sail thrust.
<br>
<br>-3-problems mentioned with numerous variables in each mfg. boat weight .
<br>
<br>-note -
<br> Once you modify the 20 and add a large chute it becomes a very different animal ,-David and I sailed the Worrell 1000 along with several other very competitive teams at around 400 lbs .
<br> <br><br>

I agree that in some cases there will be an advantage but when you look at how many days/regattas are sailed in certain conditions the heavier crew is only at a slight advantage about 3-5% of the time. Versus the opposite end of the weight equation.
<br>
<br>If we always sailed in extreme conditions such as the worrell (on certain days/legs) than it would really be an issue. Since we do not than it is not.
<br>
<br>Do we as an assoc. say "when the wind is above XX knots there are no races"? From a legal standpoint YES. From a sailing aspect MAYBE.
<br>
<br>There has been many times when it came down to sailors discretion if a boat should race. I can remember 96 hobie 20 nationals as a good case when a part of the fleet raced and the rest sat on the beach. One thing we must consider. Some day someone is going to drown at regatta. When it happens, all hell is going to break loose with the regatta staff, sponsoring club, the assoc. and the manufacturer of the boat getting sued. (thanks lawyers)
<br>
<br>If we place a clause in the bylaws that state "any race should not start when the winds exceed XX knots" and "if the wind builds beyond that after the start than it is solely the discretion of the race TEAM whether to continue" then the assoc. has cleared itself of any legal challenge.
<br>
<br>With the top out of the way than it becomes a "restrictor-plate" issue. Keep everyone at the same basic speed. Then let skill take over.
<br>
<br>I do agree that a spinnaker changes the mindset of a boat. But so does a "hooter". I have won regattas because in light air I flew a hooter up and down the course. Is it legal? YES should it be legal? YES. Is it innovative? You betcha! Was it fun? F'n A right it was!
<br>
<br>Thats one of the reasons that I speak so loudly about basic rules and lets innovate. Remember back before 96 when the Worrell was still dead. NO ONE sailed a spinnaker on a cat, or a hooter, or god knows whatelse. Say what you may about the "bring what you got" school of racing which was the first few years of the Worrells comeback. But, it brought alot of new thoughts to the sport that we take for granted now. Every I20 sailor should thank Mike Worrell and those few sailors that ran the race in 97 and 98.
<br>
<br>Next person for the soapbox?
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

-Hi Steve -
<br>-Another major problem with the total boat and crew weight prposed rule would be -getting an excellent boat builder or mfg. to produce a lightweight cat and only having a buying market of 380 pound people -200 and 180 to sail it ,---no builder would be interested .
<br>
<br>-Also unless we can allow ALL designs equal upgrades and modifications it will be percieved as bias to individuals special interests.
<br>
<br>-The Worrell varies from year to year in weather and sea conditions ,-on average 70 % is sailed in light to medium wind conditions ,--Generally the mornings start off very light ,-sometimes starts are delays untill the sea breeze effect starts ,-by afternoon hopefully it kicks in ,--The exception is when a front is in the area effecting local conditions ,--as in the FL legs last year ,--the rest was unusually light air .
<br>-The perception that the Worrell is about heavy air is from the extensive media coverage and great photo opts of heavy air sailing .
<br> Again -as with all regattas ,-most are sailed in light to med.conditions ,-with 400 lb crews competing equally with some of the best ,-
<br>-I have not sailed or raced the H-20 extensively ,--it may be a crew weight censitive design with many boats being heavier than original design specs and volume calc, and its narrow bow sections which are very effective in waves and chop .
<br> One suggested modification to the H-20 ,-A foam core open type V stern extention could be glassed in to bring it to 20 and existing hulls could be refinished inside and out removing excess glass bringing the hull weight down to original designed weight.
<br>-Further modification may be a carbon mast and new sq top main ,-self tacking jib ,with large chute ,-{made as flat as you would like it } -With these modifications believe you will realize a much smaller effect of crew weight in total performance over what you are used to on these larger more powerfull cat designs .
<br> All the best -
<br> Carl
<br>-<br><br>

Weight on a cat does have an effect, there is no doubt about that. The effects are different in different conditions. If the wind is steady and the water flat, the light weight guy who can tune his sail will have an advantage. In gusty conditions (especially prevalent where I sail) the heavier crews gain a significant advantage. In short chop and boat wake, the heavier crews drive much easier also. Either way weight placement is critical to how the boat really performs. Having a light crew fix dead weight adjustments to their boat is somewhat double jepardy. Not very many people live where the wind and wave patterns are the same every time we race. Who has the advantage over the season is still outweighed by skill of those driving. The argument over weight has become the cat sailors crutch and I see this as being the biggest hurdle to overcome on choosing the formula.
<br>
<br>I disaagree that it can be changed in the future. If the formula class is truly viable then maybe when there are sufficient people to intriduce a new "higher performance" class the parameters can change. The short term goal is to just get it started.
<br>
<br>The other issue here is Mikes discussion about the H20. Most Hobie sailrs race Hobies not because it is the best boat but it is an active one design class. The H20 is fast but putting it on an even keel with the I20 will take more than just a recut main. The boat was not designed for spin racing. You can put one on, but the boards and ballance are not right. Race down wind on the I20 with out the chute. The boat doesnt drive nearly as smoothly.
<br>
<br>I am 100% in favor of having a development or formula class started in the US for the 20 foot boats. I just see too many hurdles to overcome by creating a class around the I20 and expecting everyone else to change their boats. As I said the goal has to be just get it started. Look at the formuls sucess in Europe. They did not create their formula around 1 boat. It was a compromise to include the most people. Formula racing is an attempt to create a one design atmosphere while including many builders. Hobie and NAHCA are the only current long term organizations in the US. They have to be a pretty good model for what the new formula class need to do.<br><br>

Matt,
<br>
<br>I agree with you. And I agree in part with the other posts.
<br>
<br>If you look at it this way. We will all one day switch boats right?
<br>
<br>Well, if you can go to the best hull design for your area, weight, wind conditions etc. Then have the ability to choose your mast and sail configuration. AND THEN race heads up with who ever else comes to the show. Isn't it all then even and the arguements over who's boat gets what is moot.
<br>
<br>I sail an H20, love the boat, love the hobie fleets I have had the pleasure to sail with. I have also sailed in most of the country. Do I think the H20 is the best boat --- NO. But, if I could change the mast and sails it would be faster. Does it handle well with a chute? About as good as a 6.0NA. Is it an I20? NO. Could it beat an I20? with the right mods -- YES. Any boat can be beaten in the right enviorment and with the right crew/training. We see that at every race we go to.
<br>
<br>Basic open formula works. Just look at the A class. What I'm really tired of is buying a new boat every few years because of poor workmanship and materials. A formula class after time will force builders to build quality due to the level of open competiton. The bad thing about one design is that you have to go back to the source to buy that design. Plan obsolesence -- didn't work in Detroit -- shouldn't work in catsailing.
<br>
<br>Total weight just levels the field on most days. And on light days a crew weighing 295 lbs on a 400lbs boat is faster than a 380 lbs crew on a 400lbs boat. -- Thats the facts. Are these crews that much different in medium air -- nope. In heavy air? well, we are all just hanging on then anyway.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

I don’t think your right about the Euro F20 rules. The rules were tailored to the I20. The I20 measures to the maximum on almost all dimensions. Look at who started the rules, Nacra sailors. Hobie built the Fox to compete against the I20 using the new rules. How many, non-I20s, were racing under the F20 rules the first year? None. Foxes arrived on the scene last year. If the Euro F20 is a good model than then why wouldn’t we follow their lead? Take what is good about the class and change what hasn’t worked. If it is all working well than we should take the Euro rules and add a rule to allow the snuffer and go with it. I am personally willing to buy a 18sqm. main but many are not. So do you tell the 200 inter sailors to cut their main down or do you make the rules so they all fit. It’s an instant class. That’s what happened in Europe. They had about 4 F20 races the first year and the Inters raced on their own the rest. Remember that the I20’s would have to add weight to get to the F20 class minimum if the Euro rules are used. I weighed my boat and it came in at 388. That’s a ton of weight to add and reduce sail area at the same time.
<br>It’s not like we as I20 sailors aren’t “giving up anything”.
<br><br><br>

Hey guys lets table the topic of cutting sails for right now.
<br>
<br>Lets figure out weight formulas and then go on to modifications to comply.
<br>
<br>Or lets get an idea of how basic we want the rules first.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

If US I-20's don't want to cut their mains, okay then let them have their mains and cut their genakers. Use ISAF rule calculator to find out which size they need to rated back to the other designs (iF20 rating?)
<br>
<br>Something has to be done Matt Mhas a very good point : if the I-20 sailor can keep their complete rigs (And thus PC will win with their marketing ploy they've started 2 years ago about the enlarged US inter rig) than I don't know how you could argue your US F20 case to sailors of Hobie 20, Nacra 6.0, Prindle 19, Tornado's, Mystere 6.0's and Hobie Fox. I guess this list ALSO contains about 200 or 300 crews !
<br>
<br>How can you forcethem to heavilyinvest in mods when I-20's don't and under a ruleset that obviously is tailored to the PC US I-20 anyway and thus arguably favours that the US I-20 setup.
<br>
<br>I must be really mistaken if a skewed setup like this will work. And I don't see why the group of Hobie 20, Nacra 6.0, Prindle 19, Tornado's, Mystere 6.0's and Hobie Fox can't created a viable F20 based on the iF20 without the I-20. Will this exclude the nacra sailor who want a new boat ? No, for they will just buy a I-20in the iF20 setup (which also has goodies like carbon mast etc) Eventually that group of 200 (?) US I-20's will die out in time without must harm done.
<br>
<br>My point is here that this group of US I-20 may well not be that much of a power as they would like themself to be and Im certain that a viable iF20 in the US can be setup without them and I think they should be made aware of that.
<br>
<br>If the project group doesn't do than they will control eveything completely using the same argument and effectively make a US I-20 class under a different name to which Hobie unlikely to join. Hobie will loose to much if they did.Withoutout hobieonly Mystere is left and mystere is more involved in Eu than US already so they won't be really umping to join the US F20 (US I-20 class)
<br>
<br>Just my analysis, no personal offense intended
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

The Equal Performance class rules option proposed ALL designs being rated higher than existing -meaning ALL existing designs may be modified or upgraded in performance levels equally {inc .the i-20 }-slightly larger chute ,and also to include existing N-6/0 S with larger chutes ,---EVERYONE MODIFIES AND UPGRADES if desired.
<br>--Some exs. designs will adopt to chutes better than others , there are always coresponding design modifications that are required to any design. -
<br>
<br>--{looking for exact specs on those E-Coast N 6/0s -chute -pole jib and main sizes ,-with exs.{heavier } mast weight }-
<br>--
<br>
<br>--Setting a higher max target rating in ISAF -Texel -allows us to use and adopt existing accepted means of design calc. and measurement and also gives a max. rating -{again higher than exs. }---we should list all specs in Impl and metric ,--we can model or propose modifications to each exs.cat design to this max.rating inc. exs F-20 designs and allow new H T lighter 20 designs with proportionally smaller more efficient sail plans {equal performance } to evolve -
<br>
<br>-note -The last thing any of us would want to occur in this new 20 class is 16 and 18 ft designs sailing by us at higher speeds.-Several top sailors who have sailed the new 18s are already claiming that they are faster in certain conditions .
<br>
<br>-Crew weight -always contriversial ,--{remember fat boy allowances }--In establishing the class we need it as inclusive and simple as possible ,--we can add complex crew weight factors into class rules if they are deemed necessary in the future based on race results . -They are not required to get this going and eliminate pages of rules specification and elaborate measurement verification with various jib spin and weights required dependant on who your crew is and what your crew weight might be that particular regatta or distance race weekend .-
<br>-As Steve mentioned the KISS principle should be applied when possible -
<br> The proposed design formula EP20-C would only require one boat weight and measurement check, a certificate and sail sticker could be issued ,builders could publish specs and recieve a class sail stricker or emblem,
<br>
<br>-Please take a look at this concept proposed .
<br>-
<br>Please excuse my poor eyesight combined with typos ,
<br>-Thanks
<br> Carl<br><br>

Wouter,
<br>
<br>Good points but you miss the most important point.
<br>
<br>If you set up a set of rules that no boat currently adhears to and no manufacture is committed to build too, then who do you think is going to sail in this class?
<br>
<br>Answer is: Nobody.
<br>
<br>You have to start somewhere with a group of committed sailors to the F20 rule. The only group of sailors right now that seem interested are I20 sailors.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br>H20 #791
<br><br><br>

Ok guys what about this thought process.
<br>
<br>We adopt a rule set that allows two catagories of sail area. Main/jib and then spin/gennaker. Outline a vague rule that states "the combined sail area shall be XXXX sq foot to be comprised of main jib and spinnaker/gennaker or ANY combonation there of."
<br>
<br>Couple this with a rule that states "the maximum mast height shall be XX , watertight and be built out of any material commonly available"
<br>
<br>Spinnaker poles are class legal but should not exceed XX ft. with any hoist/stowage system being classified as acceptable (pending safety review)
<br>
<br>Safety review --- the assoc. has the sole descretion of decertifing any boat, gear, or sail plan as unsafe to the class, user or assoc.
<br>
<br>If we take these approaches then most of the complicated issues will be worked out on the race course. A few people will try to innovate. GREAT it brings new ideas, interests, and people to the sport. But, most will take minimum steps to modify their boats to make themselves "feel" faster.
<br>
<br>We can run models everyday to try and make everything equal but, at the end of the day there are just too many variables. Wind, weather, sailors, boats, training, wave shape, if the idiot remembered to put the plugs in, etc, etc, etc,
<br>
<br>Lets just make a real simple set of rules that can be gradually added to on an annual basis (with the approval of the voting class) to get this beast started.
<br>
<br>Sponsors are willing to bring dollars to the table which will fund interest into the class. Which in turn will bring sailors and then manufacturers.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Well Mike, is that really true what you're saying ?
<br>
<br>I mean, I'm sure that I can walk up to any Hobie or PC dealor and order a iF20 design. Fox is pure iF20 and apart from the stick the I-20 is pure iF20. Havinf said the last, PC builds also the EU iF20 so they must be in a position to sell that one to a US customer too. I know for sure that they sell the Inter -18 in both configurations.
<br>
<br>So this clearlyare two design that are readily sold by the main dealor networks.
<br>
<br>From what I can tell, the H20 is pretty close to the iF20 rules, not more than 1% or so away on the performance producing parameters. Nacra 6.0 has more sailarea, but also more weight and these two might well cancel out eachother.
<br>
<br>The iF20 rule exist and more manufacturers are committing themselfs too it. PC and Hobie are there already. Cirrus and Mystere are giving it a shot. Tornado sport is only 1 % faster. And the races I've seen in NL the Tornado sport and iF20 are regulary battling it out.
<br>
<br>So the obvious basis is there. Most aother designs (prindle 19, nacra 5,8, etc) can be modified to the iF20 rule performance. US I-20 performance will only be further away if it does have higher performance.
<br>
<br>Who will sail the class. Good question, if it is only the US I-20 sailors than why create a F20 ? Create a I-20 class. Is there any indication that other WILL enter when the F20 rule is drawn up around the US I-20 ? The case for this is just
<br>as weak if your point is true.
<br>
<br>If I-20 sailors are being difficult about costs than just let them have their mains and heigher mast and take their jibs away. No cost ast all and they will be slowest enough but not drasticaly. Set a sail limit that is less than the main and jib of us I-20 together and force this.
<br>
<br>Well this is the last I'll say about this, no disrespect, if it doesn't land now it will never land. And it is not my concern anyway.
<br>
<br>regards,
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br><br><br>

Wouter
<br>The mast is the same on all I20. The only differences are the sails. The jib is the smallest under iF20, Spinnaker is the largest under the rule and the main is larger than the 18sqm allowed. Other than that the boats are the same.
<br><br><br>

BTW - Where are the specs on the US and EU versions of the I20 coming from? The PC website lists only 1 set of specs (the EU one?). Has someone measured the boats to get another set of specs? If so, who/when/how?
<br>
<br>Since most of our discussions revolve around sizes, lengths, and weights, it seems we should all have a clear idea of where these are coming from.
<br>
<br>Alan Thompson
<br>I20 - San Diego
<br>
<br>P.S. For other boats as well, has anyone measured them closely to see if they match the mfg-supplied specs?
<br><br><br>

Is that ALL !?! Ahh just leave it then
<br>
<br>US I-20 will have an small advantage over iF20 in light airs
<br>
<br>US I-20 will have a small disadvantage over iF20 in heavy airs
<br>
<br>just make sure that the ratio between light and heavy air is equal and you'll cancel out any differences over a season.
<br>
<br>This minor difference should not be significant. only 5 % on the mainsail in rated sailarea (carl !) when sailing with 3 sails up this is decreased to something of 2,5 % and when the square root is taken (power to speed conversion) you are left with 1,5 % speed advantage. Or about 1 minute in one hourin I-20 favouring conditions. I say ACCEPTABLE as a grandfather margin. Any speed margin around 1 % are to be expected between the different designs and I expect the P19 and H20 to have the same margin on their side in heavy air.
<br>
<br>Just dispensate all I-20 's before 1 januari 2002 and require all new I-20's to be of iF20 compliance and you're set. Problem solved. Those sails will eventually blow out and everybody will be full compliant then.
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

That's all. I plan on measuring my mainsail soon to get an accurate measurement. The US main may be only slightly bigger. The US main has a flap on the bottom that can be taken off. Wouter, are they're any used I20 mainsails for sale in our club. I have a Kooji (sp?) jib and would be interested in getting a used main for fun.
<br>My average wind speed for all races sail this past season was 8.7 kts.<br><br>

That flap doesn't really do anything. It only benefit is that it smooths out turbulence around the bottom part of the mast. I do not consider that flap area to be of any use with respect to produced sailpower.
<br>
<br>In light air the wind has a very strong gradient along the mast and hardly blows near the mastfoot. So any area there is usely, you want it up high in the mast.
<br>
<br>In heavy air you'll fly a hull and a large part of the flap is in the turbulence of the raised hull and in these conditions the amount of sailarea is of secondary importance. The shape and depower controlls are far more important.
<br>
<br>These are the reasons why I say, forget about that larger main and dispensate all boats before 1 jan 2002 and use the iF20 setup for the US.
<br>
<br>Barry, you have an e-mail from me in your box about 2nd hand mains.
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

Thanks guys, all good points.
<br>
<br>The basic idea of a formula class is to provide one design style racing. All boats will be theoretically equal. It is very possible that a new better smaller boat will some day be beating whatever formula is decided upon. If this is truelly a concern, set up a developmental class of 20 footers with parameters open enough for sailors to choose boats for their weight, local wind conditions etc.
<br>
<br>Im personally a huge supporter of 1 design, and hence favor the tru intent of a formula class. I agree with Wouter that the current slant (my interpretation of the forum posts) of the class being constructed around the I20 US will not attract the attention that we would like to see.
<br>
<br>I am very interested in how this keeps shaping out.
<br>
<br>
<br>Matt<br><br>

Matt
<br>What boat do you currently sail?<br><br>

I think it is time to bring all of us back to earth. We seem to be content on arguing about Rules and details, which boat will work with which sail, heavy boat light crew… but no one can see the next hurdle in front of us. This Association will Fail without an existing infrastructure i.e. We Need ICA (Inter Class Assoc.)& NACHA Let me rephrase that We stand a much better chance of success working with these Organizations then with out them. Try to picture yourself organizing Regattas and setting a National schedule maybe even a National Championship, finding Measures, Committee & Pro’s, publishing Rulebooks…starting from scratch, it just won’t happen as much as I would like to see it work I think we are fooling our selves. We seem so bent on Reinventing The Wheel we can’t see what is right in front of us iF20 iF18 (I20-Fox/I18-Tiger) of Europe (concentrate on these four boats for now). Lets See? Rules… Done! Class Organizations to Host Events…Done!, Printed Rulebooks… Done! Manufactures building boats to Formula Rules... Done! . Both Performance & Hobie have Direct contact with the right People in Europe.
<br> If both ICA & NACHA adopted the Formula classes (allowing Both Boats to race at each others Events) we could be racing tomorrow. Lets see what’s left Oh ya! That silly Sail Area problem that keeps popping up If you Don’t want to race Formula then keep your 5% more Sail Area and Race One Design.
<br>Now, I see all the same hurdles you do but you think this seems hard Just Try and get everyone to Agree on one set of Rules.
<br>
<br>P.S. If you insist on rewriting the Book then I agree with Matt M Leave the Rulebook wide open (“A” class). I don’t think the Best Thing for the Cat Sailing is to bastardize the One Design classes we do have to fit some Unknown Formula!
<br>
<br>
<br>Mike B
<br><br><br>

Mike B
<br>
<br>Good point! Are you volunteering to talk to both of these assocations??? I do not agree with the rest of what you say in whole but, I think if we had dialogue it would get somewhere with these assocations.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Steve
<br>
<br>Yes! I will contact both Organizations But What do you want me to say? So far we can’t even agree on a Set of Rules. I think we should form a Committee (Not a Class Association) to discuss how we see this is going to work (I20 vs. Fox & Tiger vs. I18) and how this is going to Benefit Both Associations And a long signature list to convince them we mean business
<br>
<br>Unlike Europe we don’t have 20 manufactures to work with we have 2. I am convinced a Formula class where boats from Different Manufactures can Race Head to Head is what the US needs, but we need to keep our One Design Classes in tact.
<br> Lets see if we can accomplish this first then see what happens! This is only the first Step!
<br>
<br>Mike B
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>

Barry,
<br>
<br>I predominately race a H16. It has been where the best competition is around here, and in a huge blow is still my favorite boat. I have owned and raced the H20 on and off and as they are finally starting to become more prevalent at races here I will probably switch back to it permanatly. This spring I will also have a 3D -20 that I will use for distance racing, local portsmouth and long weekend sailing.
<br>
<br>Whatever attracts the biggest starts is the boat I will be racing.
<br>
<br>
<br>How about you,
<br>
<br>Matt
<br><br><br>

Mike B.
<br>
<br>Excellent post. I agree with you 100% on all points. I especially like your rules are done idea. Except for the snuffer we could use the iF20 rules and F18 rules as they stand. What ever rules we come up with we would have to get a list of sailors that would sign on as committed to the rules. Once we have that we would see the manufactures adjust their appoach to give us boats and sails that we are looking for. Then we go to the current associations and gain their support also.
<br>
<br>This seems like a way to get this moving forward.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br><br><br>

Hi Mike B
<br>-With so many of us with so much enthusiasm believe we will succeed , as you mention ,it is very difficult to get people to agree , think mainly because we have not yet clearly understood the problems .
<br>
<br>Your offer to contact Hobie and Performance is I,m sure greatly appreciated by all .
<br>
<br>-Also believe we should refrain from using very negative overly dramatic terms like "bastardizing " in rules discussions , there is no faster way to turn potential class members away from this class ,-we have a very different set of existing circumstances in N A ,--Our intent is not to bastardize anything , but to promote a more inclusive better higher performance developemental form of equal racing in the U S ,---SO " back to earth "-
<br>
<br>- 1-We have Nacra with 200 existing Inter 20 s with a 14.5 sq ft larger mainsail . We took basic measurements 2 years ago when we first considered F-20-The headboard and top batten are much larger than existing F-20s along with coresponding roach {trailing edge of the mainsail }.Nacra's goal as with all mfg is to sell boats , the boat dealers are active and do a tremendous amount to help support racing .
<br>
<br>-Hobie has the Fox with comptip . there is no large active Fox class to date.
<br> Both companies goal is to promote and sell their product .
<br>-Mainly because of the Hobie family "{ wonderfull people} " and the early success of the H-16 , The H-Class has maintained the vast majority of the catamaran market .
<br>-Hobie needs to improve the Fox , but there is currently no motivation for them to do so , as we continue to hear directives of Hobie first oriented regattas .The class Assoc. over the years has brought thousands of people into sailing and racing ,and has been great for the sport .
<br>
<br>-The extent of support the new N A Formula Classes will recieve from Nacra ,-Hobie or any boat mfg. will be in direct proportion to the number of boats sold , The real support for the class will be in boat dealers who race themselves and may sell several brands of catamarans , also from the many various sailing clubs around the country , including Formula starts in their regattas , distance races and general organization, and mostly from enthusiastic avid racers like ourselves willing to organize and promote the class ideals and bring new people , new events, and life into the sport.
<br>
<br>-There currently is no way to keep both H fOX and I -20 as they are , One has a carbon fiber mast and larger sail area.One has a comptip.
<br>-We have numerous existing active racing 20 ft catamarans in the U S in ranging weights and sail areas that we can not ignore either .
<br>
<br>-Please propose a comprehensive SOLUTION , because of the existing described set of conditions we have in N A -existing formula rules developed in Europe in 93 will be largely ignored in the 20 ft class ,--
<br>-The 18 Class will have some success due to the Tiger , Nacra F-18 and several other cats developed specifically to the F-rule , Many racing sailors wanting those specifically drafted structured rules will be attracted to that class , It is the perfect size for husband -wife type teams ,and the majority of sailors , now along with a new HT F-16 Class, allowing one up or 2 up racing.
<br>
<br>-Maybe the 20 Class in the U S should take the lead and become more of a combination of Formula and developement class encouraging and allowing faster ,safer , designs to evolve .
<br> It really depends on what type of sailing you personally enjoy . If your perception of the 20 class is a strict type of one design allowing different mfg. that,s great , but believe this leads back to a one design fleet with one mfg.boat dominating the scene with little variation between boats .
<br>-What many others may envision is more of a developemental 20 class allowing more individual innovation geared to racing enthusiasts ,similar in rules structure to the A Class , but allowing more developement through a range or boat weights and sail plan configurations , and also including all the existing various active racing 20s .
<br>
<br> Carl <br><br>

Matt
<br>I currently race an Inter 20 in the summer and a Hobie 14 (frostbite fleet of 20 boats) in the winter. I started racing cats as crew on a Hobie 21. This was the first real spinnaker boat in the US. I leaned the fine art of sailing a cat with a spinnaker in buoy racing. A year later I purchased my own Hobie 21. We had a class of around 10 boats the racing was great. The class was starting to dwindle and Hobie decided they didn’t want to support the class anymore. I got out while my boat was still worth something. At that time the Hobie 20 class was the biggest, but shrinking, 20’ boat. The Nacra 6.0 fleet was gaining momentum. I felt the competition was going to end up in the 6.0 fleet so I purchased a new 6.0. I hated racing without a spinnaker, I had a spinnaker for distance racing and fun sailing. It still left me wanting to sail around the buoys with a spinnaker. When the I20 came out I was a little hesitant to jump ship on the 6.0. We had a big class and very good sailors. I sailed the I20 once and I had to have this boat. The balance and feel of the boat was so sweet. I bought an I20 in August of 1999. Raced in the 1999 at the Performance North American a month later. I came in second to Matt Struble after only two regattas on the boat. I also hadn’t raced against any other 20s until the NA’s. The local class has 4-6 boats at all of our races. Four of the boats can win any races at anytime. The others are catching up fast as we have been coaching them on spinnaker handling. We race one-design class most of the time and start with the 6.0’s. I have sailed the Hobie Fox and I am sailing the Tiger at the Alter Cup in June. I am interested in sailing F18 also. I sail the I20 at close minimum, we would be under weight right now, and could get to f18 weight easily.
<br>I have been a fleet commodore and also a NACHA Division Chair. I don’t have an allegiance to any boat or manufacture but I believe there is a boat out there that can fill everyone’s needs. I have been personally attack on the other Forum, but I was from people that don’t know me. I have spent a ton of time giving back and helping all sailors. Mike Hill could back me up on this. This weekend I will be helping a youth sailor get his rudder system fixed on his 14.
<br>I think I am done.
<br>Matt thanks for the reply. It’s always good to know a persons background to better understand where their view come from.
<br><br><br>

Hi Carl
<br> Thank you for taking the time to write me such a nice response letter, sorry about that “Bastardizing” thing I promise not to use the “B” word again I guess my enthusiasm ran away with me.
<br>
<br>In any type of racing where more then one Mfg. is involved you run the risk of one Mfg. becoming King (with Any Set of Rules You Chose) the Excitement comes in dethroning the King.
<br>
<br>Mike B
<br><br><br>

Thanks Mike ,-
<br> I am over reacting a little ,-sorry --do you know what the inside scoop is in Hobie class politics now , --all the references to the king ,and holding Hobie oriented regattas only , and dictating how local fleets conduct their regattas .
<br>
<br>-Raced H-18s for a decade ,then H-21s, but I,m out of the loop so to speak .The Fox seems to be not well accepted , the Tiger may be their only active current marketing push .--Can you suggest any way for this new 20 class to work with them .
<br>
<br>-Believe it would be best if they rethought the Fox and built a lighterweight higher performance version , --but doubt that this would happen , --it would save that class ,
<br> The Fox is an excellent basic design ,but at that weight and alum mast competing even up with c f masts , --well .
<br> The marketplace and direct competition will demand greater effort from ALL mfg, and builders for better lighter higher quality cats.<br><br>

Hi Carl
<br>
<br>Yes I am sure Nigel is out Rich is in , but our Fleet is always going to have an Open Class Regardless of Who’s in Charge and I am reasonably sure most fleets feel the same way.
<br>
<br>I hope with a little work we can make the Formula Class work for everybody Yes Everybody, but first lets take this in smaller steps, the start of a Production class (I20, Fox, I18, Tiger, Nacra F18)and really there are only small differences between the Fox & I20 Using if20 Rules (for the most part) there is a weight limit for the mast and the boat (Hobie cat of Europe ships all boats at minimum 190 kg. they add weights to the front cross bar, Performance Ships to Europe at min. 190 kg ) you can use carbon you just have to add weight. Hobie has claimed (Hobie Cat of Europe) that their mast (all Alum. From Europe) is just as light but more durable then Carbon. So we are right back to that Silly Sail Area Thing and I would love to see it come down to just one Thing. If we can get a Production Formula Class to work Your HP Class will Be a Snap.
<br>The hole thing goes Crazy when we try to be all Inclusive, but the funny thing is all the boats you want to Include can work within the Production Formula.
<br>
<br>One step at a Time!
<br>
<br>Mike B
<br><br><br>

The mast weights are not the same. I own an I20 and raced (and setup) a Fox last year. There is a big difference.
<br>FYI The mast I used had a comptip.
<br><br><br>

Update: Both the Fox & the Tiger can be Purchaced with an all Alu. Mast from Hobie Cat of Europe.
<br>
<br>Mike B
<br><br><br>

Carbon mast versus alu mast (no biggy)
<br>
<br>Carbon mast IS allowed under IF20 and Hobie decided that alu was better for their design. Personally I don't expect any performance difference between Carbon I-20 and Alu Fox mast. Both are prismatis sections. Real benefits come from non prismatic carbon masts. Picthing is not really a problem on a 20 foot boat no matter what kind of mast. And Can any of you quantify the benefits of the carbon mast ? I think not.If you do some Research you will find that A-cat name the following two points as benefit to carbon.
<br>
<br>- Better trimming
<br>- Less weight up high
<br>
<br>For the first to become effect you first need to learn to trim properly or even really well. How many of you do That ?
<br>The second is of minor importance on 20 foot designs. Is alu much lighter ? Example T4.9 alu blank is 13,5 kg, T4.9 carbon blank = 9,5 kg's, not that mush is it ?
<br>
<br>Drawback of carbon.
<br>
<br>- Less flexible than alu, more difficult to depower
<br>- Smaller sailshape control span
<br>- expensive
<br>- Needs more care.
<br>
<br>I say PC and Hobie made different choice based on the pro and cons given and I wouldn't go as far as to say the PC carbon is a better choice. This despite the fact that carbon is a better choice in A-cats, but there te carbo mast are non prismatic and non constant in layup. I very much doubt wether PC carbon masts are.
<br>
<br>Hobie and Nacra battle it out here, What more reasurrence do you want for equality between these two designs.
<br>
<br>Please correct me when I'm wrong
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

Thanks Mark B --Barry ,--Majsteve ,--Wout --
<br> -Realizing you are right , I may be reaching too far with an idealistic weight to sail area formula that the vast majority of sailors will not comprehend .
<br>
<br>-The next best alternative is to have the Fox and Hobie Europe agree to build it to the same specifications as the existing Inter ,-same mast weight , same boat weight =390,-same sail area {added 14.5 sq ft main , as well as all other boat mfg. for the N A market .
<br>-Majsteve has been preliminarily working on this in contacting some at Hobie to discuss the Formula classes , along with potential major sponsors for future events .
<br> Having participated in Prosail and the Ultimate Yacht Race events in 88 on H-21S , this is very exciting stuff , but the top levels will take a new direction in the future.
<br>
<br>-iF we can set those basics -mast weight ,-boat weight ,-sail area , then we can proceed through the rest of the rules , allowing snuffers , pole length , min.weight , crew compensation factors , etc ect ,
<br> Then the difficult task of which existing cat designs to allow dispensation , or special consideration to , allowing them to race basically as they are for a limited period of time with the same chute sizes -270 -within the 20 formula class,--
<br>
<br>-As Mike suggested we can add a progressive boat weight reduction annually allowing lighter boats gradually over a period of time .
<br>
<br>-Lets form a strategy and assist Hobie in promoting a higher performance lighter larger sail area version of the Fox ,
<br> As I said ,if the 2 major cat mfg. in NA had built their new 20s the same , we may have formed a Formula Class 2 years ago .
<br> A more developemental formula class would interest me more but , no one is going to have everything they want ,-
<br>
<br>-hhmmm -developement formula 22 , -{-just joking }
<br> All the best
<br> Carl
<br>
<br>-<br><br>