You wrote :




Can you please clearify what it is exactly that you trying to say here ?

Wouter

Rick-
But Dave's obviously got the "sailing genes"!!
That was a fun time and a great regatta- Thanks again!
As for the mid-girth "rule", I'm sure it is derived from a monohull based definition of what a "spinnaker" is-
But the reality is at the current time (and certainly when we were setting up the class rules a few years ago) this is the "definition" and the ratings for the Hooter would hit the class hard, at least in Europe.
I just got an "experimental" spinnaker from Goodall myself so someone else can pony up for the Calvert this year.
If no one has by next season and my current one doesn't work out like I want I may give it a try. You know I'm not afraid to try new things- Bought the first US Taipan 4.9 sight unseen.

Kirt

Hi Kirt,
It really is a crying shame that we cannot get a class of F16s going here in the U.S. Calvert has gotten away from beach cats in the last few years because so many classes require factory-supplied sails.
Just had lunch with him the other day and he would love to get back into the beach cat scene, but the factory sails is a killer for inventive and creative sailmakers.
I told him how the F18 classes is really taking off and they are wide open for sails. I wish I could have told him the same about the F16 or the F14, but alas, I could not.

He is willing to sponsor a team with new and creative sails, if it is in a class that is growing, shows up for events, and has good exposure. Otherwise, there would be nothing in it for him.

I know I was really excited about the F16 Class when I first got my 4.9, but that bubble has since been busted.
We really need to do something like the F18 Class and get folks out sailing.
The best way I know of is to get an email list and keep in communication so we all agree as to what events to attend.

As it is, my poor 4.9 just sits there gathering dust and mildew.

On another note, Kirt, since you are so up on the Taipan 4.9, have they ever improved the rudder system? I have probably lost more races with this boat than any I have because of the rudders.., HOLD ON! The worst was the Mystere. But both are close.

For example, while racing in the Miami-Key Largo Race against about 300 boats, I had a great start and was 20-miles in to the course and close to the lead boats (SC30, RC27 and the like) and started slowing down due to weeds on the rudder.
So, yanked up on that dumb rudder stick (the one with the downward pin that goes into a hard-to-find hole) and the entire rudder came off the pindle.
That was some sort of fun trying to line up those holes in rock and roll seas. I was at least 45 minutes in doing so. Needless to say, my finish was not that good.
And one time I hit something and instead of the rudder popping up, the stick bent.

The best rudder system I have ever seen was very simple. The Nacra 6.0 had a foolproof system that basically used ropes. It always worked.
In fact, that is what my Taipan 5.7 uses and it works great.
Apparently, in Australia, they must not have sand bars, kelp and only sail out of Yacht Clubs.

If you hear of any improvements, or if you have any suggestion, I would love to hear from you.., or anyone, for that matter.

Thanks,
Rick

Hey Rick, does Jennifer Lindsay does this already? If not, I think its time we start doing it. I can take it upon myself to do so. Although, until I get my blade, I cannot do anything about it.

Where do you think I should post it? F16 forum, or CABB forum?

Do we want it to be a local FL thing? or open up more to the GA folks as well? Let me know, I am willing to do it, if no one else is.

Um sand bars? kelp? sailing not out of a club? I'm shocked... The club has hot showers and cheap beer!

Most YC folks don't have much tolerance for cats. The Tornadoes do enjoy the YC atmosphere, but the rest of the cats are considered nomads, living in the sand of the beach.

Here we need kickup rudders that work. However, I just discovered a way to use the Nacra semi-circle prismatic kickups on a square tiller. That will solve all the problems and I will have a useful boat again.
Rick

In my city.
We have two cat only clubs. Both sail offshore, one has an acre or so of grass to rig up on and a no wave beach to sail out from. The other is beach based with waves. There are three other ocean based clubs in the metro area.. One has at least one cat class not sure about the other two. Both have sand/grass rigging areas. All are wave free. Then there are 3 mixed clubs on the river. One has around 3 acres of lawn... All have hot showers and cold cheap beer. The river also has 2 skiff clubs and 6 skiff/cruiser clubs.

In addition there are 4 clubs within what I call the greater metro area. Its been some time since I visited these but back then they all had cats. In addition most regional clubs have a cat fleet.

Rick-
Well, there are more Taipans and F16HP's in Florida than anywhere else and that's where they are growing the fastest so you are in the right state! I'm sure those folks would love to see you out! Are you going to compete in the upcoming F16HP uni race Jennifer is planning?

As for sails, I don't know why you would tell Dave the F16HP's or Taipans do not have "open" sails? Both the Taipan class rules and F16HP class rules allow any sailmaker or you can make your own. There are a number of different sailmakers in Australia supplying Taipan class sails such as Redhead sails or Ashby sails, etc. and you can order a boat without sails if desired. In the Taipan class in order to compete in National/International class events you do have to pay a slight fee and get an official "patch", but this is fairly common. As for the F16HP sail rules, anybody can make them and they just have to fit the class rules.
As for rudders- they have upgraded the old bent aluminum tube rudder boxes with carbon fiber boxes and newer rudder shapes (just like the Aussie Flyer rudders and boxes if you are familiar with those- Jennifer has these) but still use a rod although it is stiffer and stronger. HOWEVER, the Taipan and F16HP rules are pretty open on rudders so you can put (almost) any kind of rudder system on there you want. The "ideal" system IMO would be a takeoff on the old NACRA "remote" pull down system with bunji uphaul (you know- the one that used a cleat on the rear beam so you could kickup and then lock down your rudder from the other side of the boat- Murrays used to sell a kit to upgrade to this. I have used a similar system with the Clamcleat #CL257 "auto-release racing mini cleat" which is a selfcontained sort of version of the pivmatic clamp and the release tension is adjustable. The only "issue" I have with them is they are fairly expensive (~$22 USD) and hard to find but they work well. You could use your current rudder "hole" in the back top of the rudder for a bunji uphaul and drill a hole in the rudder and rig the downhaul line ala the Nacras and either use this cleat on the tiller arm or mount it on the front of the rear beam and run the remote line through the rear beam to it.
When we were doing the Worrell on the 5.7 we converted the rudder system (as I am sure you are aware since you had one of those boats!) to Nacra style for launching through the surf- Beware of trying to steer if the rudder is not fairly down in the rudder box or you will break a rudder.

Regards,
Kirt

Kirt,
Rick worded that sentence a little awkwardly, and I can see how it could have been misunderstood. He and Calvert both know that the F16 and F14 classes are open as far as sails. What he was saying was that he was sorry he could not tell Calvert that those two classes are "taking off," as the Formula 18 has.

I'm sure that will be changing soon for the F16, now that we have a U.S. builder. Very exciting!

And, yes, Rick is going to the uni regatta.

"A while back I talked to a sailmaker about this, and he said the term gennaker can be ambiguous, so if somebody orders a gennaker, he has to have them clarify exactly what type of sail they are talking about. I think the term "spinnaker" is universally understood, which is why I suggested using that word in the rules. Not everybody is going to go down and check the definitions if they think they already know what a word means. It would be unfortunate if somebody ordered the wrong type of sail for this class just because of a simple word misunderstanding. "

Mary, it would be impossible to make a sail that doesn`t conform to the class rules, as long as you actually READ them first !
The rules on a spinnaker / gennaker / hooter are so simple it would be incredibly difficult for a sailmaker to get it wrong such that your sail doesn`t measure. Whether you call it a gennaker, spinnaker, hooter, screacher, reacher, code 0, or an inverted apex g-string bikini really doesn`t make a difference.(My apology to all skydivers or parachutists, and ladies who floss behind).

What matters is that your max. hoist height is 7,5m, your max. calculated sail area is 17,5sqm, and your mid-girth measurement is 75% of the foot length. (Unfortunately the measurements are metric, and the method of calculating sail area is done according to ISAF calculations, so I can see a lot of resistance from American sailors to want to belong to a class that works according to International methods, and doesn`t do things the American way.) There`s also a rule on pole length, which will determine the max. aspect ratio to a certain degree. The fullness/flatness, position of max. draft, luff, leech & foot lengths and a host of other design variables (most of which I`m too stupid to understand, and that`s why I`m no sailmaker), are just that - variable. A sailmaker who knows how to make catamaran sails and claims he can`t be creative within the class rules has no clue on what he`s doing. But I`m going to assume your sailmaker won`t get it wrong.

I think the term Gennaker came about when, on keelboats, cruising people started putting spinnaker type sails on their boats without a spinnaker pole, and you gybed it as you would a normal jib ie you turn it inside-out, and it was assymetric, meaning it`s leech & luff lengths were unequal. It made things a lot easier and hence hit the cruising market first. It was called a "gennaker" by sailmakers first, so I`m dumb-founded as to why THEY would be the ones who think it`s an ambiguous term.

I think you can sum it up as follows:
Spinnaker : symmetrical foresail, gybed such that the leech on one gybe becomes the luff on the next gybe, and is set on a gybing pole. Has a port & starboard clew, rather than a tack and clew.
Gennaker : assymetrical foresail, is turned inside-out when gybing, and has a tack and a clew. (meaning the tack is always fixed at the pole end while set.)
If I`m half-way right on these definitions, what we sail with is called a gennaker, unless you gybe your pole as you would on keelboats. I think the term spinnaker has crept in and got used by sailors, not sailmakers, and it`s what we got stuck with, even though it might not be correct terminology. Who really cares ?
Steve

Hi Rick,
Regarding Calvert Sails :
"He is willing to sponsor a team with new and creative sails, if it is in a class that is growing, shows up for events, and has good exposure. Otherwise, there would be nothing in it for him. "

I agree - no sailmaker or boatbuilder is going to give away free anything unless they can see a return on their investment, even if it is only goodwill and support from the class in question. On the other hand, if he shows support for a young class and helps it grow, he might just be the beneficiary when it grows up.

What he might consider is what we have done here - we had a 50% split of sailors who had spinnakers and those who didn`t. We approached the Sailmaker (North) who makes most of our sails for our class and gets good business out of our class, and asked them to sponsor a spinnaker. Our class association then put in the rest required to build up a kit, ie snuffer and blocks, ropes etc. We then put the carrot out : the first non-spinnaker boat at the next Nationals would win the spinnaker kit. (had to be a boat that did not have a spinnaker yet, we didn`t allow spin-equipped boats to sail without kite for the prize.)
The result was one happy guy who didn`t have a kite before, a mention of thanks to the sailmaker at the prize-giving, and a growth in number of spinnaker-boats in our class from 50% to 90% - at the prize-giving, 7 new spinnakers were ordered ! Now THAT is a good return on investment.

Now I know Calvert doesn`t get much cat-sailing business thanks to SMOD classes, but this would be a good way to get in with a class that allows any sailmaker. He could make a sail (main, jib, spinn, or even a "creatively designed hooter type sail" (that fits the measurements in the class ) and have it as a prize at the next F16 Nationals. And the beauty of it is that the sail would fit a Taipan OR Blade, or any other F16 design boat, since they are all built close to max. specs and are so similar, so he wouldn`t have to make a class-specific sail, just one that fits the F16 rules. Perhaps it could go to the most improved skipper, to stop the hotshots from walking away with the most goodies !

"I know I was really excited about the F16 Class when I first got my 4.9, but that bubble has since been busted.
We really need to do something like the F18 Class and get folks out sailing.
The best way I know of is to get an email list and keep in communication so we all agree as to what events to attend. "

Rick, surely the best way to acchieve this is through the F16 Forum ? It is public, I`m sure ALL Taipan / Blade / F16 owners check in here at least once a week (Hell, I`m a day-by-day junkie ! )
You guys all know where and when the next open-class regatta is happening, it only takes one of you to start a post saying "lets show up at there this weekend."
If nothing happens in the class you only have yourselves, collectively, to blame. YOU are the owners of F16 boats, so who else should make it happen if not the owners ?

Now if you combined both ideas : Get Calvert to sponsor a sail, and give it away at the end of a season to the sailor who is the most improved skipper / most consistent / whatever, AND has attended 80% of the regattas, you might get better attendance at the events ?

Steve

Glenn Ashby supported us in the beginning and sponsored the New South Wales F16 challenge trophy

I think he sold over 20 F16 sail sets by now.

I seem to remember Irwin sails sponsored the Victoria F16 challenge prize. A discount voucher on his sails. And a few sailors seem to go his way.

Goodall sold even a lot more spinnakers than that as he is still the best spi maker for the F16 class. Even Glenn refers to him if somebody asks him for a spi. Greg handed out a few spi sails in the beginning just to have people get a feel for spi sailing and to get some feedback on his initial design.

If you want to earn money then you have to develop new markets. I mean 2 years ago F18 class in the US was small as well. Any sail maker that put in the effort in back then is now on full speed. Any sailmaker that still must get up to speed now is behind. Also in these classes you better make sure you have a testing system giving you feedback as your sails must be good or you won't survive the competition. Often the sailmakers actively involved in the class come out on top simply because they put the effort in in the beginning and thus don't start out with a tail end position.

Wouter

At this time (12:43 PM) and date 26 februari 2005 I, the chairman, close the voting on the mast tipe weight rule. The vote was open for 1 month, from 25 januari till 25 februari.

The final result on the proposal to delete the mast tip weight rule alltogether by the onlin vote is :

10 in favour (52 %)
9 against (48 %)

This is insufficient to force a decision out right.

The second (verified) voting on this topic was, to be honest, a disappointment. Formula16class(at)hotmail.com received only 5 e-mails. 3 against deletion and 2 in favour.

There was one e-mail giving 3 more votes in favour of deletion of the rule but these were thrown out as it was REQUIRED that each crew would take the effort to send in his or her vote personally and would supply additional information. As a class we don not accept voting by proxy. We can't verify the truthfulness of such voting, that is the reason. So I'm sorry to this person, nothing personal, but it is the way we have always done out voting and we will always require this procedure.

The situation is clear.

We have a deadlock, but only one where some 75 % of the class implicetly indicated that they would accept any decision made by the class authority. They did this by not sending in their votes. I think this is the first of such a result in any class vote we held over the last 3 years.

So we have to go to the class rules to see what is next :

Rule 2.7.2 has been satisfied. The body of F16 sailors has been consulted. No clear result is available so this leave the F16 class Authority to break the deadlock with a decision. Rule 2.4.1 puts the chairman in the position to break at deadlock. It is up to me now the give an "interpretation" of this deadlock and end with a decision in this matter. I, the chairman, will have to consult the F16 class authority about this. I already have, but will do so one final time. The first contact time with the class officials pointed towards the benefits of a compromise.

But first I seek for guidence on this matter in the class rules :


I refer especially to :

Rule 2.3.1.

Formula 16 class rules are mildly restricted class rules indicative of a controlled development class.This means that small advancements in handling and general behaviour of the designs are allowed as long as the spirit of the rule is preserved and the continued existance of the class is assured.


Here: I take note of the allowance of small advancements and the importance of the spirit of the rule and the continued existance of the class

Rule 2.6.2.A

Preserving general equality in overall performance between crafts of different make, accepting small variations, in order to garantee fair racing between designs of different make.

Here : I take the fact that fair racing must be garanteed.

Rule 2.6.2.B

Maximizing the freedom to optimize a design to personal preference and to improve the performance of a given crew and craft through refinement

Here : I take the requirements that refinements are allowed; refinements meaning small increases in POSSIBLE performance.


Rule 2.6.2.C

The allowance to gently improve, by design, the handling and overal behaviour of a craft in small controlled steps which don't upset the balance in the class to the extend that the continued existance and growth of the class are no longer garanteed.


Here I see a combination of the facets named above. Small refinements are allowed as long as continued existance is garanteed and as long as level racing is not compromised.

One poster wrote that perception of the class and class rules may be just as important to the continued existance of the F16 class as real performance and equality between makes. As a chairman I agree, carbon masts still have a magical ring to them even though in physical models the choice of material is only a very limited influence. Especially with the Tornado carbon masts and the way these rules are worded so that alu mast are noticeably penalized with respect to carbon we must have a way of reassuring the potential F16 sailors. No matter how much I personally believe that tipweight is not a significang performance influence in the F16 class because of our really lightweight alu mast, I think that keeping the tipweight rule is a very good way to reassure less educated potential F16 sailors.

Such a tipweight rule is a convincing and short answer to any expressed doubts. We, as the F16 class, limited the differences that may exist between alu and carbon to a neglectable level when looking at boat performance. This will still allowing refinements in righting of the boat and improvements in durability because of having to reinvest all weight savings in the mast in other parts of the boat. This should be enough to still any "but's". Another good argument is to point out the F18's class shows tipweight differences between masts of around 1 kg as well. Nobody thinks twice about equal level racing there. So why should anybody doubt that with the F16 mast tip weight rule in place ?

So in basis I, as the chairman, will decide to keep a tipweight rule in the F16 class rules. And note that I wrote A tipweight rule. The question now becomes whether that is he current one or a new one.

As indicated above ; The class rules allow small improvements over time as long as they are slowed down enough to keep boats competitive over many years. I think this provides us a key to solving the deadlock.

By lowering the tipweight rule limit from 6.5 kg to 6.0 kg we breng back the bulk of the Stealth F16's back into compliance. And the change is also small enough to qualify as a small improvement that in itself will be unable to upset the class in any serious way.

Any boats still under this limit are considered to be remarkably under (tip) weighted for the current rule of 6.5 kg and they must ask themselfs how they became uncompliant like this in the first place. An offset like this can't not be put down as caused by a natural variation during production.

Also by lowering the tipweight from 6.5 to 6.0 kg we reach out out to them, it will be their duty to reach back out to us.

With respect to the wording of the rule, I as the chairman, decided that the current wording with the lowering of the tip weight creates just the right situation. The best masts are then the ones right at the minimum allowed tip weight. The others, after fitting corrector weights, slowly move-away from this optimal points only to increase the disadvantage with increasingly non-compliance. This dependency is a curve, meaning adding the first X kg of corrector weight makes less of disadvantage then the increase of the next X kg of corrector weight. So around the optimal point we have rather flat dependency that only curves upward after significant tipweight is added. This facilitates mast production as accuracy in mast tipweight will not be very important as long as it is abve 6.0 kg.



So the compromise that is worded in the chairmans intepretation of the situation is :

Replace the wording of rule 1.4.5 :

"The minimum mast tip weight of a fully fitted mast, excluding standing rigging, is
set at 6.50 kg's for reasons of seaworthyness."

By

[color:"red"]"The minimum mast tip weight of a fully fitted mast, excluding standing rigging, is
set at 6.00 kg's for reasons of seaworthyness and garanteeing fair racing." [/color]


I will now send the last mail to all class officials for confirmation. Also class members may express their objection or support but ONLY really pressing arguments will sort any effect. I as the chairman fully accept that the class can not satisfy everybody, it is trusted however that this change will satisfy, by far, the most members.


One final comment will need to be made however.

This time the F16 class reached out to a group of owners and a builder that allowed their boats to swing into non-compliance. THERE WILL NOT BE A SECOND TIME !

Any builder or owner of a non-compliant boat after this day WILL seriously risk being banned from the F16 class. The F16 class rules are to be adhered to. With our growth and formalisation of late we have no choice then to be firm on this and we will be.

Wouter

Please read post

http://www.catsailor.com/forums/sho...;o=14&fpart=&vc=1&PHPSESSID=

For the result and the follow-up path.

Wouter

Compromise has been accepted.

From the 8 class officials 6 supporting votes, 2 abstinations and 0 votes against the compromise.

No comments were received from normal class members.

With this the compromise of adjusting the tipweight rule by lowering the limit and adding the words "and garanteeing fair racing" has been accepted.

I think we have a really good compromise here. We can show potential F16 sailors that we have a rule in place that will limit any advantage that a carbon mast is perceived to have. It will allow the bulk of the Stealth F16 owners to be compliant again. New boats will adhere to this modified rule. Also 6 kg for a minimum tipweight is pretty low and will allow a 60 kg and over skipper to right the boat singlehandedly by only using a righting line. It is also low enough to keep carbon mast builders happy while adding some glass to the layup to get up to weight. This glass layer will add to the seaworthyness of the carbon mast and you can do a pitchpole with that under spi without fearing snapping it as some A-cats sailors do. The continued use of the aluminium AHPC superwing mast is also garanteed with this rule as its tipweight is close enough to the limit.

I think this is a good compromise in all and all builders seem to agree on that as well as the class heads.

I'm happy to have brought this puppy to bed.

The new rule is effective from 1 march 2005, that is now !

Wouter

Well Rick If you could just talk Mary out of the car for the evening, you could come to the Tommy Whiteside Regatta and Duke it out with the Blade and another Taipan. We decided last night with the permission of the F-18 class we would start F-18's and F-16's together, Scored separately since this is part of www.powergroovesailing.com 's F-18 Carolina's Cup Series event.
BUT, the F-18's and F-16's can race the same course, in the same time, and there will be evidence of how well the heads up comparison of the Two classes perform against each other. Would be nice if we could get Matt McDonald up here too. I think Dave Powergroove is gonna ask him. We've had all this discussion of the Comparison, it's time to see it in action. You also can do a bit on the comparison at Catsailor, it's time to show up and promote the F-16 boats, cause we don't want this class to be a bunch of backyard trailer cats or lawn ornaments just sitting around "collecting dust and growing mildew".
Any of the rest of you want in?, or you gonna get out your dustrags for the season?
Cary
PS You Aussie Guys are respectfully excused from attendance in this one, We'll raise a glass in your honor.

BEWARE! Shallow water