| Re: SL 16 might expand the Formula 16 Class?
[Re: Dermot]
#97463 01/30/07 04:45 PM 01/30/07 04:45 PM |
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia C2 Mike
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia | I doubt if anyone would have the neck or nerve to take out a measuring tape, if a SL16 turned up at a F16 event <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Doesn't the class have an official measurement cert for each boat??? If not, how do you know if *any* boat complies with the rules? Tiger Mike | | | Re: SL 16 might expand the Formula 16 Class?
[Re: Wouter]
#97464 01/30/07 05:05 PM 01/30/07 05:05 PM |
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia C2 Mike
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia |
I think Mary is absolutely spot on here.
In all the sail measurements I've seen over the years it is not uncommon at all to see the sails cut 0.05 sq. mtr to small by sailmakers. They often do this to not have their sails made uncompliant by a measuring official who pulls harder on a measuring tapes then his collegues. And to allow for some stretching of the sail over time.
Most sailmakers try to end up at 0.03 sq. mtr. smaller the absolute limit. I think many may find that the SL 16 jib will actually measure in under F16 rules if the sail is measured when absolutely new.
I have seen alot of jibs that were between 0.05 and 0.15 sq. mtr. smaller then the absolute limit. There were even a few that were no less then 0.30 sq.mtr. smaller (some sailmakers can't read measuring tapes properly themselfs.)
So indeed while technically some are correct that 3.75 sq. mtr. jib is not a 3.70 sq. mtr. jib I think we may find that 3/4 of the SL16's measure in as F16's just the same.
Wouter
I'm guessing that the rules are written that sails shall have a maximum area and stipulate as to how they are measured??? From there surely the sailmaker would be expected to use that number as a maximum figure and build any tolerance to be in the smaller direction when they are assembling their sails??? If the class deems that a larger jib to be acceptable then change the rule so that all sailors can take advantage of it. The simple answer would be for any SL16 owner wanting to sail as F16 to measure their jib and modify it if it is oversize (shaving a few mm off the foot should be enough). In most classes it's the skippers responsibility to ensure that their boat complies with the class rules at all times and this is one rule that should also apply to F16. Cheers, Tiger Mike | | | Re: SL 16 might expand the Formula 16 Class?
[Re: Matt M]
#97465 01/30/07 05:08 PM 01/30/07 05:08 PM |
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia C2 Mike
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 337 Victoria, Australia | This seems like a lot of discusion for something that is pretty straight forward.
If the boat is measured and does not violate any formula limits then it is a fully compliant F16. Theoretical performance has nothing to do with it.
For non-national/World level racing, where full complaiance should be mandatory, bring on anyone who wants to race. A well sailed SL16 will end up beating a poorly sailed F16, and with the exception of a hand full of people in the world this will be the case on any boat.
Exactly! Tiger Mike | | | Re: SL 16 might expand the Formula 16 Class?
[Re: C2 Mike]
#97467 01/30/07 08:21 PM 01/30/07 08:21 PM |
Joined: May 2002 Posts: 1,037 Central California ejpoulsen
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,037 Central California | The simple answer would be for any SL16 owner wanting to sail as F16 to measure their jib and modify it if it is oversize (shaving a few mm off the foot should be enough).
Exactly. The F16 class rules don't need to specify this or that boat is "in" the class or not. If any boat shows up and fits within the formula (okay to have a shorter mast, etc), then it can sail as an "F16."
Eric Poulsen A-class USA 203 Ultimate 20 Central California
| | | Re: SL 16 might expand the Formula 16 Class?
[Re: Robi]
#97468 01/31/07 09:23 AM 01/31/07 09:23 AM |
Joined: Nov 2002 Posts: 5,558 Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH... Mary OP
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558 Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH... | Robi, I did not word my initial post very well. At that point I should not have used the word "accept," because it was thought that the SL16 was totally conforming, so it did not need any "acceptance." All I was trying to say was that an invitation should be extended to the SL16 class so they are aware there is a class they can race with until they have enough boats for their own class.
Now that it appears the SL16 is NOT totally compliant because of the jib situation, it is important that the F16 class "accept" the SL16's to race with them.
It would not be appropriate for them to be added to the existing list of non-conforming boats that were grandfathered into the class originally. So I hope that is not what you thought I was suggesting.
And I also think the Hobie 16 with spinnaker should be invited to race with the Formula 16's. Both of these youth boats will continue to be used for quite some time because either one or the other will be used for ISAF Youth World Championships, depending on which boat is most available in the host country.
Both the SL16 and the Hobie 16 with spin are misfits on their own and the F16 class is the only one I can think of that they can race in on a boat-for-boat basis.
It would be a nice contribution by the F16 class to youth sailing if these two youth boats can be invited to race in all F16 events except for Nationals or North Americans.
I hope this clarifies my thinking, fuzzy though it may be. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> | | |
|
0 registered members (),
496
guests, and 30
spiders. | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | Forums26 Topics22,406 Posts267,061 Members8,150 | Most Online2,167 Dec 19th, 2022 | | |