Rossiter Pintail Mortagne sur Gironde, near Bordeaux |
![]() |
Laser 28 - Excellent example of this great design Hamble le rice |
![]() |
Laser 140101 Tynemouth |
![]() |
List classes of boat for sale |
Proliferation of single handers |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 123> |
Author | |
DRLee ![]() Newbie ![]() Joined: 05 Apr 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 4 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 01 Feb 05 at 10:01pm |
Actually the Merlins haven't banned winged rudders, although this was proposed at our 2003 AGM. However, the general point is correct, the Merlin rules are intended to promote evolution rather than revolution and the boats tend to have a long competitive life. |
|
![]() |
|
Stefan Lloyd ![]() Really should get out more ![]() Joined: 03 Aug 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1599 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'd say there are key differences in attitude though. International 14s view themselves as a development class. Change and development are good unless proven otherwise. Merlins want incremental change which does not fundamentally change the boat or make recent boats obsolete. So consider winged rudders as an example. Both sets of rules initally allowed them. I14s embraced them while while Merlins quickly moved to ban them. |
|
![]() |
|
I luv Wight ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 28 Jan 05 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 628 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Which can be another way of stamping on breakthrough developments which are faster but perceived (by some ) as undesirable. |
|
![]() |
|
Scooby_simon ![]() Really should get out more ![]() Joined: 02 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 2415 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
In concept F18 is fairly simple : Max length 5.52m Max beam 2.6m Hull platform 130kg Boat ready to sail 180kg Mast and beams must be Alu. Mast (actually sail height above the platform) is limited Some crew weight compensation Sail area is limited Main 17sqm Jib depends on crew weight, as does kite.
and so on
If you really want to know, PDF here : (via tinyurl : http://tinyurl.com/4y6gq ) Edited by Scooby_simon |
|
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
|
|
![]() |
|
Chris 249 ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 May 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2041 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
My info (from research for an article I did for Aust. Sailing mag on
F18s) was that the F18 association will knock back developments that
they consider will give one boat an advantage, even if it fits within
the rules. The Aust. class president says it's not actually a
development class because they don't WANT development (although
retro-fittable mods are considered OK), they merely want boats from
many different manufacturers to be able to compete.
Obviously there IS development (Capricorns etc) but class policy is that a breakthrough design like Andy P's narrow Moth, the explosion in beam in Merlins, or double bottoms in N12s - anything that obsoletes all the older boats - will be stamped on good and proper, EVEN IF IT FITS THE RULES AS WRITTEN. |
|
![]() |
|
JimC ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6662 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'm not familiar with the Cat formula class rules, but there's no intrinsic difference between Moth, Merlin or N12/Cherub/I14/12ft Skiff/18ft Skiff rules. All consist of a list of arbitary measurements and descriptions that you must not breach, otherwise the boat doesn't measure as an xxx. Its just that different classes limit different things. On sail area for instance, the 12ss and 18s don't limit sail area at all, the 14s only limit upwind area, the Merlins limit area and have some restrictions on the proportions. The 18s have a one design hull, the Merlins some maxima and minima and the clinker requirement, the Moths a beam restriction and a ban on multihulls. No one class is consistently more restrictive or less restrictive in all areas of the rules. Each Class has evolved different sets of restrictions over its history, there's no especial logic about restricting one thing or another, its just how they evolve. Yet classes can have ferocious debates over whether or not say banning longer or shorter masts is a good thing. And of course if you change the rules in one area it can have a knock on effect on everything else - the classic quote was from 14 designer Paul Bieker "everyone said two trapezes would be a cheap way to go faster - then we all got to chuck our hulls". So in some ways you've got to admire those classes like the Moth and the Merlin that have felt little need to make major rule changes for many years. Both Merlin and Moth rules sets are such that boats built in each class at the moment are basically very similar, but older boats can be quite different in shape, the Moths probably more so. And the optimum Moth shape does look a bit more extreme to the outsider of course. Taking a cursory look at the F18 ruleset it looks pretty much like a development dinghy rule except that there are some measurements related to crewsize where different weight crews carry different amounts of lead and maybe different sized kites. Edited by JimC |
|
![]() |
|
Rupert ![]() Really should get out more ![]() Joined: 11 Aug 04 Location: Whitefriars sc Online Status: Offline Posts: 8956 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re A class cats. The class dates from 56, but the current rules were based on the A-Lion design of 63 ish, when the IYRU decided to set limits on length. Can someone please explain the practical differences between a development class like a Merlin, and a Formula class like the F18? Both appear to have rules designed to allow gradual development rather than radical leaps, unlike say the A Class or Int Moth, where almost anything goes, so what's the difference? |
|
![]() |
|
Scooby_simon ![]() Really should get out more ![]() Joined: 02 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 2415 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
John, I do not understand this. Do you mean that some cats that fit the 'rule' are not so desirable, in which case of course this is true as designers come up with new ideas that work, so old designs fall off the back.. |
|
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
|
|
![]() |
|
John ![]() Newbie ![]() ![]() Joined: 16 May 04 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 12 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Could work well as the slower classes within each formula would be less desirable and die a natural death. Of course it would be up to a body outside of the current company builders to organize the formula circuit, it's rules, registration, fees? etc. |
|
![]() |
|
Chris 249 ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 May 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2041 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The Formula thing sounds great to me. It would also be interesting to
see a loose rating rule perhaps, with a sliding scale of measurements
so you could trade off length for weight or something. Obviously,
there's a hard balancing act for rulemakers and the raciing would be
condition-dependent but to some extent that's what happens in many
classes today.
It wouldn't be as close as a stricter class, but it could be interesting. You could, for example, have Formula classes that allowed boats as diverse in design but sort of similar in performance as (say) a Scow Moth, Blaze and Contender to race together as a class, with separate OD results. The Assy Canoe, RS 700 and MPS would form another group. It wouldn't be perfect, but perhaps it would be better than just handicap racing. |
|
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 123> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |