Carl,
<br>
<br>I'm starting to agree with you again! just joking have always admired your points if I have totally agreed or not.
<br>
<br>I see your points on different sail areas for crew weights. It does have merit. However, I ask this question.
<br>
<br>If we set a sa cap. then won't natural selection find what is best for the sailor/boat combination?
<br>
<br>Will it give lighter teams an advantage? slight one in light air. But also a slight disadvantage in heavy air. It is this trade off that the light crews have to make before the regatta. I have been at tons of regattas where one day it was 5 and the next it was 25. Hell, I've seen it happen in a few minutes.
<br>
<br>When we close the gap at minimums then your only talking about a 50lbs spread between boats. We are all use to seeing 100-150 lbs spreads between the boats. I think we should just cap it and go forward because this difference is small and to try and correct it only complicates the ability to run the formula at the regatta site.
<br>
<br>If you show up and have your class endorsements than all the RC has to do is figure where to start you. Simple.
<br>
<br>Light crews have to be aware that if they are weighed and the boat is not corrected (with weight) than they risk being DSQ from the class for the season. I think this should also be in the rules for all violations. Basically, if you cheat and are caught there are consequenses. Whether DSQ or a fine is levied remains to be discussed but, lets make a penalty and set a presedense.
<br>
<br>Thanks
<br>Steve (my spell check is not working)<br><br>

Hi Steve , -
<br> -The problem with the natural selection theory is if you set a 50 LB range between boats then set a 350 crew weight min ,
<br>
<br> tHE NATURAL SELECTION IS OF COURSE narrows only to THE LIGHTEST BOAT AND 350 LB CREW .
<br>
<br> All others are at a disadvantage or eliminated from ever partisipating ,--If you are 350 and have a light boat ,---{ like a lighter H-20 } -as example ,--You like this rule written to suit narrow specific needs ,--350 and a lighter boat ,-all others that do not will not partisipate ,--
<br>
<br>How many fit this ,-and is this fair equal sailing for all ?
<br> Think we can set a higher class average as a target -330 ,-but still allow all to race equally ,--Again under a sail area to total weight rule the heavier team is well compensated in sail area ,--a huge plus in light air ,--this is the best solutution ,and is no more complex than other formula classes , but much more comprehensive and inclusive ,-helping insure large partisipation and a successfull class.
<br>
<br>-One great difficulty we have is discussing one rule aspect ,with out the other coresponding rule aspects in place ,--polls and the rest are useless if no one understands basic concepts and all options available to solve these complex problems and existing conditions handed us ,in the best methode .
<br>
<br> Will try a FOX to INTER 20 comparison under the proposed sail area to weight rule ,--maybe this will clearify and demonstrate to attributes of it.
<br>
<br>-Any help with the Worrell effort in any sponsorship is greatly appreciated , we are seeking travel expences for the ground crew ,--and are completely open to any assistance at this stage -
<br> Though would not want it to conflict in any regard with this class ,--but do hope the Worrell would be run under 20 class rules in the future ,--Mike is currently considering FORMULA and will announce it in spring of 02 .
<br> Carl
<br> Carl<br><br>

Car; how many different sail sizes are you suggesting (main and jib) for the class?<br><br>

Whoa, I'm having problems here! I posted a response that did not update. So I'll try again.
<br>
<br>Carl, we are the ONLY formula class that is looking into grandfathering old boats. For this conversation lets not even think about the "new" I20 and Fox.
<br>
<br>As for the dead boat club. We are looking at seperate issues. Crew weight and boat weight. Boat weight 385 Minimum and crew weight 350 minimum (unless corrected to)
<br>
<br>You my friend are looking at this as the glass half empty.
<br>
<br>If you have a 405 lbs boat and weigh in at 330 then your ok to race. Your boat is a natural corrector. Will this bring in alot of existing sailors? YES.
<br>
<br>The rules are proposed to get the class down to the boat weights that you not so long ago where in favor of.
<br>
<br>The rules are also proposed to get the formula assoc's working in concert. SO that F16 will feed F 18 and then NAF20. Will people try to get to minimum weights. YES. But they already do! This just evens the racing out in to a sane area.
<br>
<br>The reason that most CWM's are in the 295-325 range is due to marketing. (Remember Carl this is my fort'e) And where set there to pull people off the H16's. Hell Hobie admits this.
<br>Is there any basis in what it takes to sail these boats? Nope, nada, negative, -- NO.
<br>
<br>If you layout several regatta lists and figure boat weights and crew weights you will find out that people on the average are already at what we are proposing when you look at spinnaker equipt boats. You can not quote the H20 weights because most H20 sailors do not sail a spinnaker and when we do we go with larger crews.
<br>
<br>Will the H20 have a weight advantage? No. since it still has to meet BOAT Weight minimums just like everyone else.
<br>
<br>If the boat weighs more than you can figure that into your crew correction. If it weighs less and you weigh more -- too bad add weight to the boat and go on a diet if your upset about it.
<br>
<br>350 (CWM) gives two 175 guys an even break on a 385 BWM boat.
<br>
<br>330 (CWM) gives a team an even break on a 405 BWM budget boat.
<br>
<br>This is still skewed towards the lighter teams but it is the fairest, cheapest, and easiest to regulate compromise that I have ever heard of.
<br>
<br>It makes since to the RC to have very little headache other than just starting and scoring. And all they have to do is carry a bathroom scale at a race to weigh crews at check in. As for the boat it should be weighed by the class anyway. How? well lets talk about that after we get to rules committee.
<br>
<br>Thanks
<br>Steve<br><br>

Hi John ,
<br>
<br> Please excuse all the infighting here , different diverse customs ,--We do all actually sail and race and have a good time .
<br>--It is open , the total boat and crew weight to sail area scale would ideally be in increments small enough to be fair ,--maybe as low as 10 LB between each ,--or as high as 30 for more simplisity. -
<br> You are more qualified than I also to establish the amount of sail area of each main -jib and spin .
<br> tryed 1-jib 3 main and 10 spin per each 10 Lbs of total boat and crew weight. as an example , believe this is close based on existing designs but need to be revised and corrected to ISAF rating numbers consistant for a class .
<br>
<br> I do not believe it is enough just to have them rate to an ISAF or Texel number as we are setting higher crew weights generally , and more sail area ,based on the U S version Inter 20 ,-which has 15 more sq ft of main sail area . --
<br> Believe they should rate within one point . -but may also run an individual performance prediction of the specific boats with various crew weights at each end of the scale .
<br> Was hopping for a total range from max 410 boat weights down to 320 ,-again in 10 20 or 30 increments ,--using an average 330 LB crew .
<br>
<br>-I design homes, extentions , and small commercial buildings , but am not a navel architect , we do really need someone with your expertise to advise and direct .
<br>
<br>--Thankyou John
<br>-Carl Roberts
<br> crdesignr@earthlink.net<br><br>

I ask the question how many diferent sized mainsails and jibs will be legal because it seems that there will be a lot, it is quite dificult to get accurately made sails to a specific area.
<br>
<br>we have just made the new f16 sails, they are computer generated, but the computer programmes are just not that accurate at measuring sails the way ISAF do it, so we had to have paper sails made first, then measure these, adjust the programme and cut the proper sails.
<br>
<br>All expensive and time consuming, add to this the fact that the luff of the main will shrink by about 1-2% after its been used a couple of times and I think that you may have dificulty in getting loads of differnt sized sails made. these will then need to be measured by a measurer. the cost will be high and policing it will be hard.
<br>
<br>If somone buys a suit of sails to suit an all up weight of say 700 lbs can they only sell this boat to someone else of the same weight? Of course not, they'll seel 'em to whoever turns up with the cash and that person will expect to be able to race without buying a complete suit of sails.
<br>
<br>I agree with your idea of an all up weight for crew and boat, but I think you need to simplify the weight correction and to have about 3 or 4 maximum bands, I would also leave all the boats with their standard mains and do the correction on jibs, and maybe have 2 spinnaker sizes.
<br>
<br>If you want to keep the 20s a lot faster than the 18s and 16s then you may need to have a separate class within the class.
<br>
<br>You could have standard NA20 based around inter 20 and NA20 turbo or whatever based around an boat that will outperform the 18s etc by about 6 or 7%
<br>
<br>I just think that you are trying to achieve too much in one hit.
<br>
<br>john
<br>
<br> <br><br>

Hi Steve
<br> Think the best vehicle for top level sponsored racing that is easily understood by the general public is one design ,
<br>
<br> This is how Prosail was run ,--on Hobie 21s ,--great fun ,
<br> the olympics are one design ,-and of course the Worrell has been one design , it eliminates rule problems ,though in this case for your purposes you would change the class min. to 350 LBs .
<br> The Inter 20 is ideal for large crews , and as posted under Inter 20 crew weight in several posts that refer to the Worrell and designers comments on how these cats are geared for larger crew you have the ideal vehivle for this purpose .
<br> More than 200 are in the U S sailing ,--all past and present Worrell teams have one .
<br>
<br>-Trying to force a 20 developement class to fit these needs leads to the rules complexity and comprehension problem the general public has as you,ve mentioned .
<br> To meet sponsors requirements lets just propose I-20 races at the breeziest venues at the right times of year for them , guarenteeing flips capsizes and crashes , again just as we did in Prosail . The fleet already exists of excellent top level sailors , we can potentially tie in the Worrell 1000 as one of the events as mentioned .
<br>
<br> Formula will really take a few years to get into full swing ,
<br>
<br> This should be a class for all people and a wide variety of 20 ft boats to race , -please look at the handwritting on the wall ,-F-18 vs F-18 HP ,--16 hp -16HT - WE NEED A COMPREHENSIVE INCLUSIVE 20 CLASS.
<br>
<br> Carl
<br> <br><br>

Thanks John
<br> Appreciate the imput , -The characteristics of the new sail material shrink the luff 2% , it must be difficult to design the ideal shape antisipating that shrinkage , only along the luff bias ,or all directions .
<br>-Hope the 16 is very successfull .
<br>
<br>-On the 20s we have the Inter at 388 Lbs , and some existing classes at 418 ,-a 30 Lb difference ,-one added weight catagory - 30 to a total of 3 weight catagories may be understood . --410--380 and 350 boat weights .
<br>
<br> The only other sailors who even comprehend the sail area to weight rule so far have been you and Marc , in the boat biz with design backgrounds .
<br>
<br>-I see F 18 , and now F-18 HP appearing and proposed for the U S market,--I would much rather own the 100 LB lighter better performance F-18 H P ,
<br>
<br> High Performance 20s can not be too far behind , though if a new 20 class is formed it should have larger beam or wings , - We need the increase of righting moment and better overall performance . -I would like a class that would include these and progress , but you are of course correct , one step at a time , maybe propose 3 catagories with a potential 4th in 2003 , but then again why not just include it now .
<br>
<br> Happy Holidays John
<br> Carl <br><br>

Carl,
<br>
<br>I'm going to go over this just one last time. I understand the weight to sail area formula completly. Hell, I understand it better than you know. I also jump (as in out of airplanes) as a hobby and have custom chutes built all the time. Since the formulas translate evenly. Actually, if you want to get in a conversation about lift, drag and bernoulis principle I could probably spend hours bending your ear about the benefits and detriments of adding/subtracting SA versus performed weight.
<br>
<br>The thing that you don't quite get here is this FORMULA IS FRICKIN' ONE DESIGN!!!! Just as much as America's cup boats are ONE DESIGN. I bow to your experience in the sailing world. However, I do not bow to your experience in marketing, business development and sponsorship presentation.
<br>
<br>If you really want to make formula simple -- you toss out every other boat except the TORNADO. YES you got it the TORNADO. It is the only boat that will perform the way a HT 20 should due to its beam and participation of sailors. Also, it does not have all the BS from PC and Hobie. The years of brainwashing and lax business practices. Also, then you build a development class around that boat as the "grandfather" boat.
<br>
<br>JESUS CHRIST you guys this is not brain surgery here. There are so many opinions and agendas here that you can't swing a dead cat (animal or sailing vessel).
<br>
<br>The box perimeters that have been layed out are fair, inclusive to all designs, and economical to start. They also move the class in a direction that allows all owners to get the invested dollars out of their boats before they fall apart. A 2001 boat only has three years of life before it needs to go to that big boatyard in the sky. FACT. Will 100 sailors go out today and buy a new HT 20 cat. F#@$ NO! Anybody that dreams tomorrow the sun will rise and we will all be sailing 300lbs boats needs to wait for the guys in the white suits to come and take them away.
<br>
<br>If we can field tons of boats that race a box rule NOW. Then in 3-5 years we can by attrition upgrade to the 300lbs boats and worry about how to equal crew weights then. At that time maybe we spin off the HT class for high performance sailing and use NAF20 as a feeder to that fleet.
<br>
<br>We need to get something moving and endless discussion about what if's is not going to accomplish anything.
<br>
<br>I will say this the next time someone suggest one design to me is going to be really pissed when we walk this hardwork over to a single manufacturers one design class and All sailing will suffer.
<br>
<br>Tired of all the Rhetoric.
<br>
<br>Steve<br><br>

Ok I'm sorry I told him he is an idiot. :-) :-)
<br>
<br>Wouter should have "a depth of knowledge" he is studying(maybe done) to be a naval architect.
<br>This frustration builds up from reading 2-3 years worth of 'Wooter posts' and if you have noticed he has been attacked many times by many but never by me before. The rest of my statement still stands.
<br>
<br>I applaud his enthusiasm and effort.
<br>
<br>Ok maybe he can help me with this ...
<br>
<br>Dear Wouter,
<br>
<br>Following the link that Carl gave me, I had a look at the Word document named 'ISAF_SmCat_Rules210501.doc". I am creating a program that will give an appropriate sail area per weight graph for NA F20 using the ISAF system of equations.
<br>
<br>The problem is that one of the variable I came accross is undefined and unclear.
<br>Under section :"C.3.3. Corrections and Penalties" there is an equation as such "BR = VLB2 / MAB".
<br>
<br>My question to you or any that can help is ...
<br>
<br>What does the variable MAB stand for ? And how is it calculated ?
<br>
<br>My guess is that it is "maximun authorized board area" or CB.
<br>
<br>chillin
<br>marc
<br>
<br><br><br>

im i reading you right? are you calling the iacc boats a one design class?<br><br>

To show you I'm a nice guy despite everything else
<br>
<br>BR = VLB2 / MAB".
<br>
<br>Board aspect ratio = Vertical length Boards squared / Mean or main area board..
<br>
<br>This equation can only be one thing and that is the calculation of the board aspect ratio that is used to determine the effectiveness of the total area.
<br>
<br>Compare it to the similar calcs performed on the sail area.
<br>
<br>Wouter<br><br>

What a guy ! - thanks wout ,--and thanks Marc for working on this sail area to weight formula and much needed valueable information .
<br> One huge problem we are facing here in the U S in promoting ALL formula classes is as I,m more readily understanding each day is a lack of general knowledge on catamaran design.
<br> People will not be likely to become interested in something they do not understand . There is no readily available information on cat design elements , or how they effect sailing performance . There is no readily available easily understood articles or information on ISAF rating , -though there is a brief explaination of Texel .
<br> We need some good articles explaining design elements and how they are measured . The board ratio calc . is a good example , most will not understand why a board calc. would be needed or how different a Hobie 18 board is from a more modern Inter 20 board , wetted surface areas their effectiveness , cord section etc .
<br>-I,ve build one cat and have a basic understanding of design , though do have an extensive cat racing background for practical application ,
<br>
<br> Promoting the formula classes will involve an educational process , the U S has used Portmouth rating ,--an average time system , they have added design modification factors in an ever growing list . --The rest of the cat sailing world uses ISAF -and Texel design measurement ratings so naturally people who are accustom to design elements as a basis for rating are more familiar with what aspects make a good fast seaworthy cat design.
<br>
<br> -Lets all try to work on making all information readily available for all formula cat sailors.
<br>
<br> Carl<br><br>

Thanx Wouter,
<br>
<br>Always thought you where a nice guy and I never said any different.
<br>
<br>VLB has already been defined as:
<br>
<br>"VLB = Maximum board depth below the hulls"
<br>
<br>in the very same document.
<br>
<br>You claim that 'MAB = Mean or main area board'. Would you say that this is the underwater surface area of the board ?
<br>
<br>I will have a look at the calc for sail area as you suggest.
<br>
<br>cheers...
<br>Marc
<br>
<br><br><br>

Wouter<br><br>

Only put in the surface area of one side of one board<br><br>

John,
<br>
<br>Thanks for the great input. Some new facts to mull over.
<br>
<br>Mike Hill
<br><br><br>