+plus plus+ |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 123> |
Author | |
JimC ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6660 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 22 Jul 05 at 7:45am |
Neither! The hull shell is to my design by Bloodaxe boats, mast and sail were commissioned specially for it, I did all the fiddly bits myself (which saves a heap of money over getting them profesionally done.) |
|
![]() |
|
TheSeaFalcon ![]() Far too distracted from work ![]() ![]() Joined: 04 Mar 05 Online Status: Offline Posts: 345 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
That is nice beyond nice! I love it, but sadly I have nothing like the money needed for buying it!
![]() |
|
x--x--x<x>x--x--x
Topper 41825 Cherub 2539 (going, going and not quite but nearly gone)! |
|
![]() |
|
JimC ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6660 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
For those who are interested in the beast there's a new photo I've just got on the front of the website that shows up the incredibly small bow wave I get on the beast(and my tasteful colour scheme [grin]. This is sort of forced mode/marginal planing speeds upwind. There seems to be a fineness of bow where you get this effect, I know Frank Bethwaite has seen it too. http://www.cherubpres.f9.co.uk/plusplus/. Oh and (shameless free ad) the boat is kinda for sale at the moment should anyone want a flawed but rather interesting one off. Could also be readily converted to a two hander with a jib (and kite). Doubt it would measure to I14 rules though.
Edited by JimC |
|
![]() |
|
mpl720 ![]() Newbie ![]() Joined: 15 Nov 04 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 23 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
When are the Blaze fleet going to come clean on this handicap - the added sail area, widened the boat and removed lead ... the PY should be adjusted Well if it was all factual that might be appropriate !! The sail size was REDUCED - repeat REDUCED to make it more manageable about 4 years ago. The original had far too much roach to be useful except offwind in light stuff. The boom was lowered to get a bit of the area back but its still much smaller overall than previously. The width is unchanged - the weights went years and years ago (never worked anyway and ripped your wetsuit to shreds). As for the handicap - if it blows we will be all over you given half a chance but if it's light there are a raft of boats that show us the way home. PN's are averages, after all, across a range of wind conditions. For instance the carbon masted epoxy Phantom is very fast when its light and medium but only the very best can still sail it to handicap when it blows. (Phantoms -please take this as compliment from someone who is too light for one). We don't set the PN by the way - return assessment is by the RYA - the last time THEY changed it it went from 1045 to 1047 - reflecting actual results. I think this 'easy PN' perception comes because people actually watch racing in blowy conditions when we do well and ignore it when its 100% displacement (those more boring times). The Contender is another class that can burn off nearly everything when its blowy but is less fast in the light stuff, ditto Moth and half a dozen others. Might make more sense to have light wind / heavy wind split PN's across the board (..cos I'd like to do better on light days as well !) We allow very limited changes which are reviewed periodically and are much tighter than most other 'one-designs'. Standard Hull, foils, spars (only M7 currently) and maximum width, minumum weight. No extra controls allowed but you can modify any that are there already. Early boats can be converted to the 'new' sail and no spar changes are needed. Go on - give one a try if you get the chance. If it's not for you fine, but it is getting increasingly popular for some reason or another. For instance we already have more than 20 pre-paid entries for the June 2005 Nationals and it's only mid-February...... Cheers - Mike Lyons (Blaze Class Association)
|
|
![]() |
|
Twin Poles ![]() Newbie ![]() ![]() Joined: 06 Nov 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 33 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Just reading through this topic and i've noticed nobody has brought up the RS300, which to me seems closer to the ++ than the Blaze. RS300 simlar length, again less sail area but also narrower than the ++. Wasn't the 300 also designed by a moth sailor that was too old and heavy for the International Moth, not that i'm saying that fits your description Jim. |
|
![]() |
|
JimC ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6660 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
No! Apart from anything else I lack the time to properly develop a one design. The task of designing a one design is quite different from designing a box rule boat. For a box rule you merely have to design the boat that measures within the box that will be fastest for the person who's going to sail it. For a one design you aren't nearly so worried about performance, but have all sorts of other things to consider from how cheap it is to build through to whether it looks pretty in the magazine photos. It would need to go through at least two more prototypes on the hull shape I guess, together with a whole lot f work on the rig - I don't believe that anyone (maybe with the exception of the new byte rig which I haven't saile with) has designed a good modern singlehander rig. There's a great deal of work to do in sorting out gyst response and so on so for a single sail boat so that you can drag a big enough rig upwind to be fast downwind. Maybe not all one designs go through that much development, but the Bethwaite ones certainly do - and you don't see everything the Bethwaite's try and abandon over here - and if you're not going to do it to a reasonable standard why bother! |
|
![]() |
|
Matt Jackson ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 21 Sep 04 Location: Darlington Online Status: Offline Posts: 962 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Jim Aren't you tempted to make it a one design and prove you development guys build better boats? You said yourself you're getting bored with boatbuilding. I, for one would give it a test sail as the range of boats for me is fairly limited because of my largeness - even thinking of taking Mike up on his 'Supersize me' Blaze idea. |
|
Laser 203001, Harrier (H+) 36
|
|
![]() |
|
Matt Jackson ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 21 Sep 04 Location: Darlington Online Status: Offline Posts: 962 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I think you'll find the sail area has been reduced - http://www.blaze-sailing.org.uk/ Isn't the point of the yardstick that it's based on real results but can be changed by any race officer? In which case just petition you RO and make sure Whitstable Yacht Club sends it's returns in - job done with the minimum of whingeing Edited by Matt Jackson |
|
Laser 203001, Harrier (H+) 36
|
|
![]() |
|
Guest ![]() Newbie ![]() Joined: 21 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Looks like a Blaze to me ... When are the Blaze fleet going to come clean on this handicap - the added sail area, widened the boat and removed lead ... the PY should be adjusted!! Rick |
|
![]() |
|
Blobby ![]() Really should get out more ![]() ![]() Joined: 07 May 04 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 779 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
very true - and I can see for the ++ it is doubly difficult as you are trying to prevent both very wide and very narrow boats... |
|
![]() |
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 |