Messages

I have just reported 'Wondering' to the moderator
Hmmm... perhaps we should put the rules up on a wiki and allow anyone to edit them!
Survival of the fittest or intelligent design?

Philip

Philip, let's not bring religion into it as well!!!!!:o
Jim.

No. In my opinion this rule is unnecessary. The way I personally see it, unless something is expressly forbidden, it's allowed. If it's expressly allowed, everything else would be forbidden. The dangly pole replaced the traditional jibstick thingy. Both are represented in this rule.

If you’ve stopped to think about any of your questions yourself, or if you’re just spouting?

I think wondering is just confused, not interested.

Heh Mutt!
Don't get discouraged by the wondering minority. They're usually so cowardly as not to want to disclose their identity.
This forum is meant for such things as well. Wondering is obviously badly informed. Wonder who he/she is?
Cheers!
Jim.

http://shop.pinbax.com/index.asp?selection=detailed&uid=10672&itemtitle=Speed%20Boxers
 
"Helping him point higher?"
Jim. (Double the cheese, please   )

If the class is to recover in any sort of numbers then it needs to do somthing clearly visible that the sailing public will understand, tinkering with the 3/4 height will go noticed by no-one. 
...

Well, that's not the only suggestion that's been made on this discussion foren... see previous.
Cheers!
Jim.

I guess we will be damned if we do something and damned if we do nothing.  I get the feeling that there the desire within the class to move our boat forward is gaining momentum and I would urge the powerbrokers to make it happen.
     

Let's try sailplan and rig first, hull later. A 1/3 - 1/2 increase in sail area, fully battenend, passive .Sailplan low set, but enough to start planing well to windward, wing mast deck stepped with boom arrest arm (NS14/TASAR type). Mast flexible enough to bend significantly along ist entire length, just with the kicker and independently of the amount of pull on the mainsheet. Daggerboard no probs with water displacement - never mind the resail value. Certainly not boring and worth trying.
Remove the prohibitions/inhibitions.
Just a thought.
Jim.

[Let the people try before they decide, rather than decide before they try.]

I think that there is a substantial myth about those at the front of the fleet with newer boats not being prepared to invest.  Antony speaks for 3514, I speak for 3515 and I assume that Derk you speak for 3510.  So that means 3 of the last 8 boats registered dont have problems with change...?
Meds

Ok. Two of those boats are built to a plan from 1996. I don't know how yours differs Meds, but if it is a true weight carrier, it must be fairly radical. .
As for real design changes, I agree with Rick re. some kind of rotating rig setup, fully battened and a 1/3 increase in effective sail area. I personally would like it set reasonably low, so we don't have to use a trapeze. NS14 have it high up to compensate for their 9.3 sqm. The wind speed is higher up top in laminar flow.
I really like 12s, but we're going to have to do both marketing AND redesigning to get away from the pontoon and avoid ourselves getting "Boxed in" by rules. ('scuse the pun . Otherwise we should get used to the accusations that we're really a restricted class (design, viewpoint, whatever) and then take the rap and a long, slow run downhill. I think designer dispensations should be the order of the day. We have been able to accommodate all sorts of different viewpoints, designs and subdivisions into the class. Dispensation enables a boat to be built, tested and sailed afterwards, even if it is a flop. Let the people try before they decide, rather than decide before they try. Oh, and no more "you can't have that" type of rule.
 
Jim.
 

[DO]

Well said. In a nutshell you sumed it up.

Design changes DO have a place in a development class. Cherubs develop quickly, we go at a snail's pace. Why? Possibly because those who sail a 12 are perhaps a little more conservative?
The last major design change to the class was the introduction of DB fully self-draining boats. Did anyone stand in the way of this and why? One interesting posibility would be to allow wing masts, diamond spreaders and a moderately increased sail area. Somone mentioned the use of dispensation certificates. I think we should use them now. Anyone who is prepared to take a risk in investment for the class' sake should be applauded, especially if it results in an interesting avenue to be explored. I also think the debate about daggerboards or not is a load of tosh. The dagger is more efficient and there are many classes with them. Either you bash up the dagger, or you rip your rudder off, either way there's expense involved. Rather that than having to compromise on efficiency. The classes with them don't have problems with resale, possibly because the boats are not overpriced in the first place...
Braindumping again.
Jim.
 
 
 

[forced]

I am a heavyweight in the class. I don't mind not winning. I just like to compete and join in the fun and games and good beer afterwards. This class is quite special because it has a long history and it will continue. What we need to do however, is to consider the reasons for decline from the aspect of other classes that have declined and then make a comeback. One good example is the Tasar. This is a one design, two sail, two crew ISAF recognised boat with a very efficient rig that has essentially not changed for 30 odd years. Over the past 4 years the numbers of actively participatiing European boats (Uk and Continental Mainland) has increased from around 95 to 400. The message that they put over is very simple: two sails, no cheesewire trapeze, no hassle sailing 'em. They also have the advantages of wing rotating masts, but that aside, there's not a lot more to it. EXCEPT they do have a MINIMUM CREW weight. That levels the playing field somewhat in regattas....
One of the comments from the guys whom I'm yet to meet are that in a one-design class, any development tends to ruin racing, since the idea is to make sure everyone has very similar chances from the boat handling point of view. What matters is boat skills. In a class like ours, (aside from losing weight in my case :-/ ) designs are there to make a difference. As well as boat skills. In other development classes, a new design doesn't necessarily make an older one unsaleable. If anything, it attracts more interested sailors to the class (provided it's interesting enough). The answer is not to be too greedy when wanting to resale. Also, don't accept too high a price for a new yot. As I've said elsewhere, we need to keep designing to keep on being interesting. Imagine if we were forced to still sail TRUE clinker boats, no offence to those of the vintage fleet, (not stuck on the side of plastic like the Merlins - some interpretation of style in a very leery yot). We also don't need "oh that's not in the spirit of the rule" thing. We're sailors, not lawyers. The class has to get upwind of this and fast.
As to Rick's comments about the NS14, the reason why the Tasar was designed was to eliminate the problems associated with light crews sailing better than heavier crews and driving all the heavier crews out to other classes, (even if they were more boring). The increased sail area enables the Tasar to plane upwind and still point reasonably. This combined with a minimum crew weight of 133 Kg (or carry weight correctors) makes skill a max. factor in a race. Actually, NS14 have an effective 9,3 Sqm sail area (i.e. less than ours) making it even more likely to be of an advantage for light crews. The wing mast makes the rig more efficient, but then this is just an advantage for light crews, who just plane away first from the heavy-enders at  the fleet's tail end. With only 9.3 sq m no one planes to windward under any conditions with a VMG better than displacement sailing and pointing.
So their you have my brain dump on this. I've tried to get rid of most of the garbage before it it the screen. Please excuse the rest - I was late to bed last night. Couldn't have slept anyway, with half of the street celebrating over the Portugal defeat by Germany.
C U all out on the water some time.
Jim N3470, 3130 and Tasar1293
 

Now I really think the papparazis of the boating world should restrict themselves to publishing photgraphs taken exclusively above the waterline!!!!
 

Hi folks!
I think that the motto is not really what the class does and this is just paying lipservice to it. The motto "Dare to be different" is misleading. All the classes differ from one another, hence the definition of a class.
Aside from that, what do we mean by the motto? That we allow development? However, the only boat that appears to be running up at the top in the sea racing is the foolish and that since 1996(?) or thereabouts. It attracts a great following. If we got rid of all the other boats, we would have a restricted class, but would anyone really notice? I think not. Ok. we have other builders and designs, but how far do they get on in the results? The motto "evolution, not revolution" also comes to my mind. However, there have been no significant changes to the boat's speed capability or any other characteristic over these past 12 years. It might have something to do with the innate fear of everyone who invests in a high quality, expensive boat that any increases in speed etc that are caused by a relaxation of rules would render their boats unsaleable at the prices they'd like to have. I'd like a return to honesty and have us called a restricted class again, since at the moment we're just a restricted class playing development drag with a lot of people, lake and river sailors and the like with older designs around the edges.
So, to return to the question, what do we do that is different and where are we daring? Let's put that in the motto....
Jim. (Don't hit me for this)
 

I'd recommend a stock made out of anything other than carbon. Carbon - esp. tubular, hollow carbon - breaks too easily, as  I found out to my cost last season when I accidentally lent on it too hard whilst getiing in over the transom after a capsize. It's a veritable pain in the wallet to get repaired.
Cheers!
Jim.

Handbags at dawn me thinks;D

No, but I'm screwing on my brass cannon to the bow..... Sour grapeshot at the ready:P
Jim N3470, 3130 and Tasar 1293

No takers - but I must admit I sailed it very badly - put it down to lack of practise as well as it being quite a bit different to the ACs I've sailed.  Did much better this Wednesday out - and beat all the plastic fantastic 3 sailors - mostly Xenons sailed by a couple of bigish blokes - so a 12 would not be of much interest to them...

Must admit I'm too big for my 12 too, but I still like 'em!
Jim.