New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: New Development Classes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

New Development Classes
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
allanorton View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 21 Nov 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 228 		Post Options Post Options   Quote allanorton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: New Development Classes
    Posted: 13 Feb 06 at 5:41pm

Originally posted by JimC


I'nm putting stuff together for a draft rule framework, and doing some thinking, but I've come to the conclusion that I need to go round an RS400 and maybe a 59er with a tape measure before I do very much in order to get some base numbers. My thinking is that for a non-trapeze boat the rule should probably fit an RS400 and a 59er scaled down to the same sort of size, but possibly be a bit wider on the deck.

I think the basis should be a hull similar to an RS400, but about 15kg lighter, to be made by anyone & from any materials, with an open rules cockpit layout, maximum white sail area rule (so you can have a large tall main & small jib, or genoa and smaller main), max area spinaker (any design but assymetric), max length bow sprit rule, max length mast rule, any make of mast/sails/foils, & any shape foils but no T/hydrofoils.  Obviously, the hull shape would develope over time into some much better than an RS400 shape.
Back to Top
3600Matrix View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14 		Post Options Post Options   Quote 3600Matrix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 06 at 6:13pm
Sounds like a smooth skined, asymetric Merlin.
Back to Top
Blobby View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 04
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 779 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Blobby Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 06 at 5:35am
For the kite, why not leave it open? - don't define it as symmetric or assymetric.  That way you can keep everyone happy and have a lot of good arguments in the bar afterwards about how th ecourse was biased one way or the other and what type of kite is faster with a certain amount of hiking oommph.
Back to Top
Pierre View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 15 Mar 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1532 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Pierre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 06 at 8:35am
Originally posted by Blobby

For the kite, why not leave it open? - don't define it as symmetric or assymetric.  That way you can keep everyone happy and have a lot of good arguments in the bar afterwards about how th ecourse was biased one way or the other and what type of kite is faster with a certain amount of hiking oommph.


I like that idea.  Good call.
Back to Top
allanorton View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 21 Nov 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 228 		Post Options Post Options   Quote allanorton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 06 at 9:56am

Originally posted by 3600Matrix

Sounds like a smooth skined, asymetric Merlin.

How about a smooth skinned merlin (ie none of that clinker panelling look, this would surely simplify building, less weight) with symmetric & assymetric kites?!

Back to Top
Strawberry View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1337 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Strawberry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 06 at 12:00pm
Originally posted by Chew my RS

I meant to add "Thanks Jim, I'd like to take you up on that offer". 

Also, I don't think I've made this explicitly clear, but the way I envisage it is that once you have bought your boat from whichever manufacturer you chose you can't then tinker with it (beyond the usual SMOD restrictions).  In other words if you buy the RS400 you can't then get flatter sails made by someone else, or change the mast etc.  Equally if you chose Toppers offering, you can't modify that.  Your choice of design is made upfront.  The only exception to this would be if a manufacurer made a "class" change that changed the design of that particular sub-class of boat, in which case existing owners could upgrade,  i.e. design changes are made on a "sub-class" basis by the manufacturer, not by individual sailors to individual boats.

What happens to those of us who don't want to buy a boat from a manufacturer, but want to design and build our own boat within the formula? When are we allowed to tinker?
Cherub 2649 "Dangerous Strawberry
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6662 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Feb 06 at 1:34pm
Originally posted by Strawberry


What happens to those of us who don't want to buy a boat from a manufacturer, but want to design and build our own boat within the formula? When are we allowed to tinker?


All this is very much up for grabs as you try and work up the concept including talking to suppliers and so on. In the F18s Cats home builds are feasible, but they don't seem to happen very much, although I'm happy to be corrected by those who know more. I don't think the concept would work without some major manufacturer buy in, so what it takes to get them online would be a critical factor, which might disadvantage the real expert homebuilders some. If a bunch of enthusiasts homebuilders want to get together and form a true development class, there's never anything stopping them, but this concept might have to be too restrictive to suit the real tinkerers.
Back to Top
Chew my RS View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 790 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Chew my RS Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Mar 06 at 1:20pm

I thought I'd bring this topic up again.  I haven't had a chance to do much thinking over the last couple of weeks, but the idea is still live and kicking.

I would prefer to allow only asymmetric kites, for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, I suspect a traditional spinnaker may actually be quicker on a boat of this size - especially on restricted waters.  However, I believe it is a reality of the modern world that most people would expect a new design to be asymmetric.  They are simpler to use and give the impression of being quick.  To be a commercial success therefore, asymmetrics are probably essential.  Secondly, setting a fair course is always tricky in mixed spinnaker fleets, and one section would always complain! 

I don't see this as a tinkerers class - there are already classes to cater for this aspect of the sport.  It is important for a mainstream class to have the backing of the large manufacturers, and this concept allows them to bring out new designs regularly, without fragmenting fleet sizes.  Heck, they could even share marketting costs!  Small, specialist builders are likely to be able to produce more radical designs which may prove faster (and adapt them more frequently), however I don't see this as being in the interests of the class.  If the big boys are discouraged, the class would likely flounder. 

I have therefore been toying with the idea of charging a design registration fee, payable to the class association.  Basically, if you want your design to be considered as part of the F4 class (or whatever its called) you pay a fairly substantial fee to register it (£2000ish?).  Conceivably, when a set number of the design have been sold a partial rebate could be returned.

This has a number of advantages:

a.  It effectively blocks one-off designs/builds and encourages mini fleets of each design

b.  The money raised is used to promote the class

c. It would encourage manufacturers to get it right first time, with thorough pre-production testing, as each update will cost them

d.  Will discourage too many design changes, ensuring existing designs remain competitive for longer

What do you think?
Back to Top
gordon View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 07 Sep 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1037 		Post Options Post Options   Quote gordon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Mar 06 at 2:10pm

The National 18 used to be a development class - now I believe the hulls are one -design. the formula looks good to me - a se-worthy boat - one trapeze for the young crew, a hiking spot for the wily tactician and a comfortable seat for the tiller waggler. Maybe the class would go development againif a large number of new recruits came in.

 

Another interesting  boat - the Micro class - a dinghy with a lid. Still popular in countries were one-off/limited series boatbuilding is financially feasible. Originally they had a long race in each championship that limited the development of extreme boats

I don't see any point in bringing in a new twin trapeze development class - the I14 does the job more than adequately.

And don't forget the Marblehead - a"box" rule with virtually unlimited possibilities, and no need to get wet!

 

Gordon
Gordon
Back to Top
allanorton View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 21 Nov 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 228 		Post Options Post Options   Quote allanorton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Mar 06 at 3:19pm

Originally posted by Chew my RS

I would prefer to allow only asymmetric kites, for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, I suspect a traditional spinnaker may actually be quicker on a boat of this size - especially on restricted waters.  However, I believe it is a reality of the modern world that most people would expect a new design to be asymmetric.  They are simpler to use and give the impression of being quick.  To be a commercial success therefore, asymmetrics are probably essential.

I agree, does anyone remember the MRX that came out alomost the same time as the RS400?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy