Well, we were out there as well, just sailing in front of the nosediving Nacra F18, downwind without the chute up!
Winds at that time were about 25 knots pretty consistent, however a little later when we hit the finish line and reached for Gilberts it was a little more so topping some 28 knots (32 mph). The pictures don´t show that all but the "submarining" TIGER 1452 gives an impression on how much wind was there.
On IWINDSURF you find the readings for Molassas Reef (attached Pic), which is 10 NM South of where we sailed. There we had around 30 plus miles at 1300 local, which means that we had the wind increased at around 1200. That was about last race, it then increased more around the finish time of the last race/ heading for the beach.

Kind regards

Fritz
TIGER 1531

Fritz, it was alot of fun when we finally were able to run with you guys. Hope we have a lot more of that in the old Div 9 series. BTW, I saw you guys monday morning in Florence as I was pulling into work, you must have drove all night like we did. We got in at 2am, made for a long day after racing and swimming!
Thanks to my able crew, we were able to survive the puffs up until the last down wind leg, on the last day, in the last race(go figure) It was blowing the dogs off the chain when we rounded A mark, and we dumped everything but still buried the leeward hull to the point of no return. We had 3 other buries but popped back out of them. The boat runs well with the spin up, but jib reaching on the NACRA F18 is a handful.
All in fun though, and it was certainly a good time. Rick And Mary did an excellent job, and thanks to Chip for taking us back to our boat. When it flipped, it basically sailed away from us, way too far to swim, and was moving with only the tramp in the air at at least 5 knots.

The Blade looks to be an awesome boat, and Matt and Gina are super nice people, should be a good dealer for this boat.

See you next year!

Dave Mosley
yeah that was me upside down!

The results were posted this morning, in case you haven't found them yet. Rick put a link in the story, down almost at the bottom. (They are NOT on the results forum.)

Hey lets hear it for able crew!!
I was quite impressed with the F-18. I had only sailed it in light air before. Was expecting to be dissapointed. Dave Mosely & I outran I-20's on several occasions upwind, & I noticed by the time a moments inattention cause us to Flip, Herendeen was out on his I-20. Course we couldn't help it, Our Fellow Team Seacats Boat put the HooDoo on us before the last race, shaking their native JuJu bones and chanting mystical curses at us between races.
"Matches" finally beat us in one, guess it took magic to slow us down.
Cary

Could someone go into the Aluminum vs CF mast options and performance? I love the weight of my CF Stick on my I-20, but there's the trade off of when will my stick break with CF. Wouter sez" Don't let yourself be fooled to think that a carbon teardrop shape mast is better than an aluminium wing mast; you'll be proven wrong. The gains are the result of the wingmast shape much more than of the any use of carbon fibre."
I realize the weight advantage, but is there something else with shape they can do in Aluminum but not in CF?
Cary

I know the question is not directed at me but I think you misunderstand my post

There is no shape that an alu mast can be made in that can not be be done with carbon. That is not the point I was making.

The point I was making is that some people think that ALL aluminium masts are inferiour to carbon masts. This is false. I can give a direct comparison between an alu WING mast and a carbon TEAR DROP SHAPED one of the same length featuring the sail sailarea on a similar platform were the alu mast is seriously superior to the carbon one. This is because the behaviour of a wing mast is so much better. A carbon wing mast is slightly better still BUT less so than the difference between a teardrop shaped mast and a wing mast of the same material. The case I'm refering to is actually a very funny one as the carbon mast is even heavier than alu one. In in this particular case the expected gains that people have of carbon were simply not there. But the warm glow they received from the word CARBON made them part with alot more money then they had to.

The list pretty much goes like this;

-1- Carbon teardrop mast = better than alu teardrop mast
-2- Wing mast = better than teardrop mast
-3- Alu wing mast = better than carbon teardrop mast
-4- Carbon wing mast = better than alu wing mast

But the gains decrease in magnitude when going from -1- to -4- . The last step is actually the most expensive one for maybe very small gains indeed. Especially when class rules specify an overal minimum and the platform is considered stiff as it is. In this particular case positive effect of the weight savings are gone as well and we are only left with a better weight to stiffness ratio with respect to gusts. But an Alu wing mast can be designed to have the same ratio. So what we are really left with in the end is the fact that this ratio can be optimized for your crew weight with carbon while alu is "one ratio fits all". At this moment we have really began to look at 0.5 % performance gains or less (about 20 second per hour racing). Enough for Olympic sailors and alike to justify spending money on but for recreational sailors ? I don't know. No the big wopper is made when going from -1- to -2- (or -3-) Here the gains are measured in several %.

I hope this clarifies my earlier post

Wouter

I guess the real question in my mind is that I've never seen a 30 year old CF mast. My 1999 Inter 20 is on it's third mast. One of my considerations in downsizing to a more controllable boat for my weight is that I really did not want another CF masted boat. F-18's= aluminum mast, I'm glad for that one.
Guess since there is the option of an Aluminum or CF mast in the F-16 class, I'm glad to have that option, but I don't selecting that option to make me choose a significantly slower boat, either. How do they design a weight specific mast when you can sail the boat either solo or double handed anyway?
Hard enough to stay competitive with the frequency with which you have to replace chutes & sails, etc., without adding the expense of CF mast replacement into the equation too.
CARY

Cary,

My crew and I have a combined crew weight between 285 and 290 lbs and that seems to be a good weight for us on the Tainpan 4.9 when sailing F16. We sailed this past weekend at the Tradewinds on a Hobie Tiger using the small F18 sail plan and came to the conclusion that the boat is too big for us. We are certainly competitive on the Tiger in light to moderate winds but as the wind inceases above 15 mph, we just can't keep the boat driving to stay up with the bigger crews.

Jennifer
Taipan 4.9 #262
Tiger #870

Jennifer,

If Kathy can learn to sail well heavy when it's light, then you and Kelly can learn how to sail fast when it's heavy!

There were several light teams sailing well on Sunday, Alex and Patsy for sure, and I think Jason and Kelly and Tom and Tina are on the light and were still up at the front.

It was just one day on one race.

Dave

I think the biggest advantage of a CF mast is the fact that I'm able to solo-right the I-20 with only a righting line(with the CF mast) whereas the N6.0 (alum mast) I could tug and lean and pull and still not get it up.

Jennifer, I thought you guys sailed very well in the heavier air, just a little more "saddle Time" and you guys will be up front as usual. Dave and Kathy sailed thier boat well also, its all new to us too. But we gave the Old Timers a good run!

David

I must admit that the superwing aluminium wing mast was us getting lucky without truly knowing it at the beginning of the class. Of course we thank AHPC for allowing other builders to use that section on their boats. It was one of the best things they ever did. It largely nipped the drive for carbon masts in the butt. I have the alu mast on my own boat and I can truly say that I'm very happy that I never got a custom carbon stick. It made my homebuild seriously cheaper and I really don't see any significant disadvantage of having one. The cross section shape taps into the extra performance very well without being made of carbon and the overall weight is very low. The Superwing mast is really a good piece of engineering not seen in 95 % of the other alu mast, I'm sorry but it is true.

Maugan is right.

Let me give you a quick comparison between the alu mast of an existing modern 17 foot singlehander and the superwing mast. Both are the same length and feature the exact same mainsail sail area.

Unspecified modern single hander

Length 8.5 mtr. with about 15 sq.mtr. mainsail area
Weight bare mast section About 17.0 kg / 8.5 mtr = 2.00 kg / mtr
main axis = About 0.155 mtr
small axis = About 0.085 mtr
Weight fully rigged = 19.8 kg (measured data)
Tip weight = about 9.05 kg


Superwing

length 8.5 mtr take typically about 15 sq. mtr. mainsail area
Weight bare mast section 13.5 kg / 8.5 mtr = 1.59 kg / mtr
main axis = 0.15 mtr
small axis = 0.063 mtr
Weight fully rigged = 15.5 kg
Tip weight = 7.3 kg


The lightest carbon mast for the F16's (the lighter ones broke)

length 8.5 mtr take typically about 15 sq. mtr. mainsail area
Weight bare mast section 9.8 kg / 8.5 mtr = 1.15 kg / mtr
main axis = About 0.15 mtr
small axis = About 0.063 mtr
Weight fully rigged = 12.0 kg
Tip weight = 5.5 kg

Note how the superwing is closer in overall weight to the minimal carbon mast than it is to an aluminium mast of its competition ? The fact that it is also of the same crossection shape as the carbon mast makes it very similar in behaviour.

Also note that it will take about (9.05 - 7.3) * 8.5 mtr / 1.2 mtr. = 15.5 kgs ! (= 34 lbs) more on the righting line to right the heavier alu mast over the superwing section. From Superwing to minimal carbon F16 mast is another 12 kg's. But getting back to the alu masts.

The mast of the single hander betrays its orgin with the 2 kg/mtr weight of the bare section. It is an F18 mast section that was cut down for use on the singlehander model. This is what is typically done with singlehanders. The builder takes the boards, mast, beams and other stuff of their much heavier F18 model and uses those to assemble an "optimal" singlehander. Often the area and length of the daggerboards are way off and the mast is too heavy and too stiff to allow proper depowering or gust responses.

One other thing to note is that the alu superwing rig is only 3.5 kg heavier than the carbon one. That on a total of mast , sails, stays, halyards, boom, trapezes etc of about 29 kg (64 lbs). I'm sure that lighter is always better but I'm not so sure wether saving 3.5 kg on 29 kg in total is worth its cost in terms of gained performance. On my own boat I have no troubles with dive recovery what so ever. And that is the point that is arguably most helped by a lighter rig.

One extra advantage of the alu mast is that you can let that one stay on the boat when it is parked somewhere waiting for you to return next weekend. No damage due to the wind vibriting it to bits or UV degradation. The first is a typical problem with very light carbon masts.

Wouter

I would like to address one problem with this year's Tradewinds that was mentioned on (I think) the F-16 forum: The fact that some people were not able to get to the race course on time for the first race on Saturday because of having to go to the skippers meeting and then having to get back to their launching area and hightail it out to the race course.

The problem this year was that boats were launching from at least five different locations. In addition to Gilbert's, boats were launching from Rowell's Marina and Neptune's Hideaway Motel. PLUS, the Sharks were launching from a private residence, and the Waves were launching from a homeowners park. The problem was compounded by the Jewfish Creek Bridge opening and delaying their return to their launch areas after the skippers meeting.

I anticipated all this might be a problem, but too late to figure out a way to handle it. The best way probably would have been to have the sailors at the remote locations not have to go to the skippers meeting in person, but for the race committee to have a "runner" go to all the launch sites and hand-deliver the information about order of starts and which classes were to sail which courses.

I thought about doing that myself, even though I was racing, too, but for all I knew, there may have been other launch sites, as well, that I was not aware of. So we just left it at as published so people were responsible for getting the information themselves.

Next year we may have less of a problem and more of a problem, because it sounds like Gilbert's will no longer be available at all for races, since their plans are to tear down the motel and build townhomes. Another regatta site lost!

We are working on another location for next year's Tradewinds Regatta. If we are successful, the whole event will be much more consolidated in one close area. Keep your fingers crossed, because it is going to be a tough sell for us.

In addition, Rick is right now down at the County Courthouse testifying in a jury trial lawsuit involving the Caribbean Club property, which used to be one of our primary launching areas for regattas. We have not been able to use that area for the past two years for any sailing events because of an electrocution accident (no death, but a hand had to be amputated) that involved the electric company's power lines and a Hobie 16. Both of us are actually on the witness list to testify that sailing has been going on at that site since at least the early 1980's.

Apparently, the electric company is claiming that if they had known there was a launching ramp there and if they had known sailboats ever launched there, they would have raised their wires higher across the front of that property.

I will let you know what happens with the lawsuit.

Hey now, I was able to right our Nacra F18 with aluminum mast, not only solo, but with my 200lb crew still on the windward hull high and dry! I weigh 170lbs. We had an onboard camera that would have captured most of it but the tape ran out 3 minutes before the capsize.

On a side note - I don't think winds ever reached 25knots while we were out there. It was more like 15 sustained with gusts to 20k...I usually get concerned about boat damage at 20k or better and I am either getting more comfortable with high wind or am wrong (which is certainly possible). Rick, do you have a record of windspeed for the end of Sunday?

From what I understand, there has been debate over the CF vs. Aluminum mast in the Tornado community. Most T drivers "try" several different masts until they find one that best "fits" their sailplan, style and weight. I believe this has something to do with the aluminum extrusion process.

With CF, it is said that they can actually design the mast to fit whatever profile the sailor wants, rather than having to experiment with several masts to find the best fit.

There have been a few comments that the F-18 aluminum mast is a bit too bendy, but I can't verify those comments, as I don't have an F-18.

If you're on your third CF mast, what happened to the first two? I've heard that I-20's break masts with spins up and too little mainsheet (or in distance races - no preventer on the rotation) or things of that nature. I would consider that more operator error than design issue. I would think that this would also damage an aluminum mast in the same situation.

Speaking of that, I've seen a handful of aluminum (Nacra 6.0) masts break in similar conditions.

If you're pitchpoling at speed, I'm not sure it would matter what your mast is made of, there's probably going to be some damage...

The first mast was due to a bad mast. The upper tang pulled out and down came the rig. It was not due easing the main too much. Cary may not know this but I was driving the boat that day. Not sure about mast #2.

Mary,

How bout smoke signals for the skippers meeting? Just teasin'!

They do call it a skippers meeting, skipper and crew do not have to attend, leaving one with the boat and the other to get the info. As long as the mast is up it can be a one man job....... I do it all the time.

How about assigning "launch place" captains and use mobile phone to relay any last information to the "launch place" captain who can then take it up in their local skippers meeting. Asking a few experienced sailors for this job and agreeing on a few guidelines should be enough.

Wouter

That would work also. The rules are usually similar to the last race. However, there is usually something that needs to be clarified with the inner outer or orange and red course or the pn classes sometimes get made at the last minute depending on when everyone gets registered! (my bad)
In retrospect, the skippers meeting is needed, we need to figger out how to get off the beach on time if we are not on ground zero.

Oh, and by the way... Rick, Mary, John, Oriel, great freakin job.... Very selfless and coool that you forgo the race to put it on. I will replace you next year in some form. Count on it.

E

I wish people would stop including me in their thanks, because I have nothing to do with organizing or helping with this regatta. I raced in it.

Linda Jo Nicholson is the one to thank. She comes down every year from Tampa Bay to help out by singlehandedly doing registration and all the scoring input on the computer.

I didn't even see anybody this year except when you guys were whizzing past me out on the water -- you were literally a blur.

As far as the problem of skippers meeting when there are various launch areas, that was a unique situation this year. I explained in an earlier post that Gilbert's probably will not even be available next year, so it's a moot issue.

And in future situations like this here or anywhere, an easier solution would be to just hold the skippers meeting earlier or start the races later.