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  <1234 11>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Scooby_simon View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 02 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2415 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Scooby_simon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: New Development Classes
    Posted: 03 Feb 06 at 1:59pm

Is there anyone here who knows how the formula Cats were set up? Was it started by the manufacturers or someone with an idea or what? Chris (AUS) do you know this?

 

See here http://www.f18-international.org/history.htm

 
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
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: 03 Feb 06 at 2:02pm
Originally posted by Stefan Lloyd

Don't really agree. I did quite a bit of work on rule changes and cleanup for an OD class


For an OD Class its a much more challenging job. That's because you're attempting to define a set shape rather than provide a framework.

And trying to use the ISAF Equipement Rules of sailing for a development class would be a fair bit of trouble: I took a good look at them and all the definitions and things are so one design oriented it would be quite a challenge. But for a development class I'd take the Cherub and IC rules and construct something in between with the numbers you need. I might knock something up later. The only thing from to add to that would be to take a very good look at the F18 rules to see what they've got in there - glancing at it its very restrictive in some areas, but you can't argue that it doesn't work.

I think you'd also want a lot of input from prospective manufacturers and preferably two or three lined up to have boats ready to sail at the class launch.

Dimensions wise I would ave thought close to the NZ Javelin, although longer would probably be popular. Maybe a bit shorter than ISO and Laser 4000 to give them a chance... how about

Maximum Length 4.6m (maybe require a raked bow?)
Maximum Beam 1.8m
Minimum Weight 70kg
Main and Jib 15m2
Gennaker Area 18m2



Edited by JimC
Back to Top
Ginger_69 View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work
Avatar

Joined: 04 Jun 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 481 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Ginger_69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Feb 06 at 2:35pm
Originally posted by Chew my RS

Originally posted by Stefan Lloyd

History shows you need a very well written rule to stop a development class becoming extreme.

True, and therein lies the difficulty (but not impossibility).  The difference is that the Cherub is conceived as an extreme boat (twin trap, BIG kite, carbon hulls etc), my idea was for a more managable concept. 

well i duno if u have see it at chew but their is a cherub as ur drive in on the left in yellow one that says whaam down the side, she doesnt have a huge kite and doesnt have twin wire and also is very managable!!
Chew valley lake s c
Topper(RED)-29412
I14 1209
lightning-168
Whaam (cherub)
Atum bom (cherub)old crew (the 1 in the youtube vids)
Will be arup skiff crew aka marmite
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: 03 Feb 06 at 2:44pm

For an ISO/L4000 style class (i.e. single trapeze, gennaker), those figures look about right.  The ethos should be to retain the SMOD-style simplicity and ease of sailing (hence the raked bow?), whilst allowing the different manufacturers to put their own slant on things.

Personally I'd rather see RS200 and RS400 derived classes (no trapezes)...
Back to Top
Pabs View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king


Joined: 05 Jan 05
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 177 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Pabs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Feb 06 at 2:50pm

Chew my RS wrote:

Stefan Lloyd wrote:
History shows you need a very well written rule to stop a development class becoming extreme.

True, and therein lies the difficulty (but not impossibility).  The difference is that the Cherub is conceived as an extreme boat (twin trap, BIG kite, carbon hulls etc), my idea was for a more managable concept. 

well i duno if u have see it at chew but their is a cherub as ur drive in on the left in yellow one that says whaam down the side, she doesnt have a huge kite and doesnt have twin wire and also is very managable!!

 

Thats true but wham is a cherub which is out of date. I belive it is pre 97 rules boat so a small kite, small main and jib and no snout. this boat is also wood so would hazard a guess at it bing over weight and does not have a carbon rig so would be sailing no where near the class handicap and would cost a fortune to ungrade to the current rules cant see the point
Back to Top
Ginger_69 View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work
Avatar

Joined: 04 Jun 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 481 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Ginger_69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Feb 06 at 3:05pm

well she isnt the best in light wind but is bloody good fun in anything above a f4, and i think the main isnt much smaller than cheese b4 bedtime's 97 rules one and the kite is 13-14 sqm. but will (cherub chairman) gave it a handicap of 1150

 
Chew valley lake s c
Topper(RED)-29412
I14 1209
lightning-168
Whaam (cherub)
Atum bom (cherub)old crew (the 1 in the youtube vids)
Will be arup skiff crew aka marmite
Back to Top
m_liddell View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 27 May 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 583 		Post Options Post Options   Quote m_liddell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Feb 06 at 3:10pm

I can see what you are trying to do here but I have always thought the majority of people into dev classes want to be extreme. They don't want a boat that is the detuned "street legal" version, they want the full on holding nothing back rocket ship



Edited by m_liddell
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: 03 Feb 06 at 3:14pm
Originally posted by Chew my RS

Personally I'd rather see RS200 and RS400 derived classes (no trapezes)...



Howsabout

Maximum Length 4.6m (maybe require a raked bow?)
Maximum Beam 2.1m
Minimum Weight 73kg
Main and Jib 14m2
Gennaker Area 17m2



Edited by JimC
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: 03 Feb 06 at 3:24pm
Originally posted by m_liddell

I can see what you are trying to do here but I have always thought the majority of people into dev classes want to be extreme. They don't want a boat that is the detuned "street legal" version they full on holding nothing back rocket ship

I don't agree.  Moths and 14s might be like that but they are small classes.  The popular ones like the Merlins are not extreme (except in price).  Anyway, to some extent I see this appealing more to existing SMOD owners than development class owners.  People who like buying their boats without spending effort sourcing sailmakers/spar makers/foil makers but still want something fairly leading edge.  Perhaps the kind of person who bought an RS400 in the mid 90s, because it was bang up to date at the time, but has now drifted back to the Merlin/Fireball because they have advanced whilst the 400 is stuck in time.
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: 03 Feb 06 at 3:35pm
Originally posted by JimC

Originally posted by Chew my RS

Personally I'd rather see RS200 and RS400 derived classes (no trapezes)...



Howsabout

Maximum Length 4.6m (maybe require a raked bow?)
Maximum Beam 2.1m
Minimum Weight 73kg
Main and Jib 14m2
Gennaker Area 17m2

Yeah, about that - wouldn't want to outlaw the 400 though (or make it too much of the pace), so maybe reduce the kite a little (17 seems quite big for a hiker?) and limit beam to 2m.   Interestingly some of the Aussie classes set the kite limit by perimeter, not area.  Not sure why, except it is easier to measure.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>

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