All this discussion about changing, relaxing or deleting rules in their entirety seems rather inane…….. did we not all sign up to a 12ft long dinghy developed within a known set of parameters resulting in close fleet racing at a wide range of suitable venues around the country and sufficient freedom within these rules to experiment a little whilst ensuring the front of the fleet is not entirely dominated by those with the biggest wallets??
The rules controlling overall length, beam, minimum weight, sail area, mast height, rise of floor, sheerline et al make the 12 what is…. A 12 foot dinghy, responsive, competitive, fun and capable of being sailed by parent/sibling combination without the complication of trapeze or spinnaker.
Statements in various discussion threads that these things are self limiting are misguided, there may be the odd redundant clause but generally extremes of almost any one of the parameters controlled in the rules results in a performance improvement within a narrow envelope, resulting in boats optimised for a certain location, conditions or crew weight combination.
I for one do not want a National 13, or a Regional 11.5!! (or an International 14, Canoe or Moth for that matter) The proper place for rule debate is within the technical committee of the NTOA, in a calm considered and thoughtful manner, with due regard for the competitiveness, and therefore value, of existing boats. What will continue to make the 12 an enduring success is not wacky development at the extremes of (or beyond) the existing rules, nor constant tinkering with these rules, but affordable boats designed within a stable rules framework resulting in competitive fleet racing at a large number of venues and most importantly large numbers of us out there on the water visibly having fun; making 12 sailing something others want to get involved in!! That sounds like the class I signed up for, not a class in which the rules could change at any minute making our hard earned and modest investment in sailing completely valueless.
N3404
Ian
The most articulate post that I have read on this website in a long while. Hope to see you at one of our events soon.
John
Spot on well done Ian! It aint broke so lets stop trying to fix it, unless you want to go back to clinker build that is.
Howard C N2, 2266, 2769 and 3356
Quote from: 451Spot on well done Ian! It aint broke so lets stop trying to fix it, unless you want to go back to clinker build that is.
Howard C N2, 2266, 2769 and 3356
Well, one should stress that the design favours lightweights. Demographically lightweights are on the way out, except of course for adult/child like combinations or (no offense intended) people on the small side. This puts me under pressure, since I weigh in at 95Kg, (am quite normally proportioned at that, so loosing weight means losing muscle mass :-/).
I want to know how one might be able to increase the competitive range of weight in the class to include heavier people like myself. It must surely be possible. Were the discussions on this subject, held in camera, or are their any minutes etc to publish?
I already suggested allowing fully battened sails. Not everyone is forced to use them, for those who are often looking to depower. I get the impression that there is (ironically) a certain conservatism in an (even more ironically) development class which is not enabling the class to attract new members. At this rate we´ll soon be losing a few. Let´s be honest, we should be going back to calling ourselves a restricted class, because the same mentality as then apparently prevails.
Sorry to end on such a note......
Jim N3470
Very well said Ian.
Jim
Being a development class is not all about constantly changing the rules, nor about throwing out most of those that have given us the fantastic boats that we sail. If you prefer thr tiltle restricted class then so be it - that title hasn't held back a few other classes that we could mention. Yes it would be great to be totally competitive to the point where you have an equal chance on open water at 95Kg or so - the reality is that to be so you do need to find an lightweight crew - I know I've tipped thescales above that for long enough now, however it is still possible to get some respectable results even at that weight, especially on restricted water whilst hugely enjoying your sailing. Discussions aren't held in camera (though C.A.M.R.A. might be relevant!). Rule changes come about from the members. If you want to see changes the way to do it is by a proposal that then gets considered by the members. We could always add a bit of length, sail area, a spinnaker perhaps, oh and a couple of trapezes and we would have something which would favour heavyweights a lot more but I have a feeling that it just may no longer be considered a National 12!
Cheers
Quote from: 47Very well said Ian.
Jim
Being a development class is not all about constantly changing the rules, nor about throwing out most of those that have given us the fantastic boats that we sail. If you prefer thr tiltle restricted class then so be it - that title hasn't held back a few other classes that we could mention. Yes it would be great to be totally competitive to the point where you have an equal chance on open water at 95Kg or so - the reality is that to be so you do need to find an lightweight crew - I know I've tipped thescales above that for long enough now, however it is still possible to get some respectable results even at that weight, especially on restricted water whilst hugely enjoying your sailing. Discussions aren't held in camera (though C.A.M.R.A. might be relevant!). Rule changes come about from the members. If you want to see changes the way to do it is by a proposal that then gets considered by the members. We could always add a bit of length, sail area, a spinnaker perhaps, oh and a couple of trapezes and we would have something which would favour heavyweights a lot more but I have a feeling that it just may no longer be considered a National 12!
Cheers
David, Thank you for your comments. I might come over as a radical, but believe me I'm not.
I am in the process of training up my daughter to be a lighter crew. Yesterday I got the feeling how it might be to be lighter. I went out solo sailing in a 3, gusting 5-6! Everyone was out on the water and it seemed such a shame not to have a go myself, since my crew was doing optimist traiinng for the regatta next week. I passed several interesting boats, including dragons, numerous long hulls who usually beat me in the Yardsticks in the lighter stuff downwind and I even got Passion Pudding to plane upwind!
I love this class, really. What I don't understand is why, with the demographics on weight as they are, that we don't even it up for the heavyweights just a little. I don't mean trapeezes and spinnakers and so on, just options on sail area and battens which might make the rig extract a little more power for those who want/need it and for those who might have trouble shedding it, then they might want to stay with what they've got, if they're going fast enough for them and need to depower in the heavy stuff. For those of us who are looking for more power to keep up with the lighter ones out at the front of the fleet, why not investigate this angle? It would make the racing tighter and you'd get more people I'm sure. We should be looking towards expanding the niche, not maintaining its size, or even reducing it (efectively doing nothing).
I can't understand why people talk about increased investment costs. If they are happy with their rig etc. then so be it. I'm sure that the real reason is that they fear that any OPTIONAL changes would result in a reduction in their competitiveness. I've seen here and elsewhere comments about arms races being won by the thickest wallets. The best boats, rigs etc. ARE expensive, but that's the same all over. However, winning races is more about skill and determination. Well I have the latter, now it's time to develop the skill a little more. Maybe one day the class might consider favorable rule changes enabling such options. Then I might shift a little closer to the front of the fleet....:-/
Cheers!
Jim N3470 (Passion Pudding).
Yesterday I had a Jimboesque eureka moment when I sailed my Foolish singlehanded in a Club race as both of my regular crews (their weight range 9.5 to 10.5 stone approx) were both on duty. (My weight yesterday was just under 12 stone) Wind Speed was Force 0 gusting 0.5 and the race was a pursuit format. Because I was sailing a doublehanded boat singlehanded the Club routinely applied a 5% time penalty so I started at +25.5 mins instead of +22.25 mins. Normally I find the Foolish a bit of a struggle to move in a flat calm on our inland micro puddle but yesterday she absolutely flew (relatively speaking!)and I won the race making an absolute mockery of the additional time penalty, despite taking a wrong turning and having to do a time consuming unwind The boat felt completely different. and the stern of the boat was noticably higher out of the water with me sat in my helming position for doublehanded sailing.
In my time, I have sailed many other doublehanded dinghies singlehanded in a race, but have never noticed anything like the speed hike as in the Nat 12.
Not sure I can convince the crews to stay at home when the wind drops every time, but joking aside it seems to me that we may have got ourselves into a bit of a hole optimising boats to win major championships at the expense of other scenarios. Not sure if it is a good thing and whether or not we can make amends within current rule set.
I think that you will find that the optimum weight is driven by the laws of physics. 12ft is very short to carry much more than 22 stone. The options to enable carrying more weight are very artificial and would still not be perfect, or would disenfranchise the existing class. The positive thing is that 12's have different shapes, some suit heavier weights, some lightweights, so the range of competitive weights is quite wide. Developments in rigs in many classes has moved the optimum weights down, look at Merlins or even Salcombe Yawls!
David
Quote from: davidg (Guest)I think that you will find that the optimum weight is driven by the laws of physics. 12ft is very short to carry much more than 22 stone. The options to enable carrying more weight are very artificial and would still not be perfect, or would disenfranchise the existing class. The positive thing is that 12's have different shapes, some suit heavier weights, some lightweights, so the range of competitive weights is quite wide. Developments in rigs in many classes has moved the optimum weights down, look at Merlins or even Salcombe Yawls!
David
Agreed, displacement is still dependent upon that ancient Greek. But what options are we talking about here and how would other members of the class be disenfrachised? Why would these options be artificial? Surely, anything other than a change in length (no N11 or N13/14) would be a viable option.
OK Tommo and the rest...
What does clause 5.2.2 say then?
Philip
Is there one? My copy of the rules only has 5.2.1!!!!
Exactly, so why:
a) is 5.2 divided into a single subclause, and
b) is there a note about pre 1995 boats being able to ignore clause 5.2.2
Phil
Quote from: 40the class rules are fine! try spending more time sailing your boat (and making it go fast!) and less time debating how to make the boat more friendly to your individual needs. this conversation has been going on for years now and i for one am sick of it. oh and sailing more and debating less will probably help with the weight issue!!
sorry if you dont like this but i have had enough!!
Tommo,
I have never met you, so in your shoes, I wouldn´t assume anything about my motivation, which if you must know is to increase the attractiveness of the class and get more people on the water in a 12. As for your rather personal comments, the only thing that you need to know is that when I´m not on the boat I´m training 4 times a week in the swimming pool and with a regular training time over 2km of 36 minutes - not bad for - probably from your viewpoint - an old duffer of 44! As for sailing, it´s now up to twice a week @ 4 hours a time. Oh, and the fact that I have to inject insulin as a diabetic is more the reason why it´s difficult to loose muscle mass....
Back to the relevance of this thread (Puke bags provided at the rear and don´t forget to screw up the top - don´t want the place looking like an overturned porridge bowl, do we?)
Please excuse the excursion, I´ve had a long long day....
Jim. N3470 and T1293
the mystery of 5.2.2 (for those that care!)
5.2.2 until 1 May 2005 related to transoms (as did all of 5.2)
Effective 1 May 2005 the transom rule was deleted (due to 'popular' demand although we have yet to see the effect.....)
Old rule 5.3 Topsides was then renumbered 5.2, but this rule did not have a subclause 2 so there is no 5.2.2 anymore. It looks like the explanatory note survived the rule rewrite as any owner of a boat measured before a rule change should not be put out of Class by a subsequent rule change as it has a valid certificate. ie if you measured your boat in 1995 these need be the only rules that you comply to, if you elect to choose to do so.
It is complex, as were transom rules which were existed in order to make sure we all sailed 12 foot boats and not 12 foot boats with 2 foot transom flaps hanging out the back.
Ed Willett is the Class Archivist (number in the address book) and he may have some documentation about the change. Alternatively Michael Brookman could probably lay his hands on the AGM papers where such changes would have been raised and explained much more adequately than I could attempt to.
Hope this helps.
I know this is debating is really getting people worked up and I don't want to make it worse. But I am a heavy weight, 14 stone. I have sailed 12s on and off since a child and having sailed moths and lasers still come back to them. I have just got another boat and will race it singlehanded until my 4 year old is old enough to come out with me, next year maybe? Until then I will race it by myself. At 14 stone the boat absoultely flys and with enough mast bend and grim determination I can sail up to F5, just. Last weekend I was beating Lasers, Laser 2000s and RS200s and the like on the water, it was great!
I know the class has a strong history and it is a history of slow development. It is not the Cherub class!! If you want to be like them then there is an easy answer, go and get one... they are a very nice bunch. And I probably will when the kids are a bit older.
In the meantime why not allow singlehanders to attend Burton week. I know this heresy but look at this way, you may get more people sailing, more people going quick, it can be a seperate competition, no boats get devalued, nobody looses money, no rule changes, just more 12s sailing.
Whatever happens I will still be out there by myself and I know that if its just me I will never be over weight. It sure beats sailing a laser!!!!!
Giles
3393
Quote from: Giles (Guest)I know this is debating is really getting people worked up and I don't want to make it worse. But I am a heavy weight, 14 stone. I have sailed 12s on and off since a child and having sailed moths and lasers still come back to them. I have just got another boat and will race it singlehanded until my 4 year old is old enough to come out with me, next year maybe? Until then I will race it by myself. At 14 stone the boat absoultely flys and with enough mast bend and grim determination I can sail up to F5, just. Last weekend I was beating Lasers, Laser 2000s and RS200s and the like on the water, it was great!
I know the class has a strong history and it is a history of slow development. It is not the Cherub class!! If you want to be like them then there is an easy answer, go and get one... they are a very nice bunch. And I probably will when the kids are a bit older.
In the meantime why not allow singlehanders to attend Burton week. I know this heresy but look at this way, you may get more people sailing, more people going quick, it can be a seperate competition, no boats get devalued, nobody looses money, no rule changes, just more 12s sailing.
Whatever happens I will still be out there by myself and I know that if its just me I will never be over weight. It sure beats sailing a laser!!!!!
Giles
3393
Giles, I think that is a suggestion worthy of consideration. My wife would also feel relieved not to feel compelled to crew when my lightweight daughter is otherwise occupied in her Optimist. The day before our club championships we took Passion Pudding out to practice in a Force 4 and as a result of our lack of experience together and her nerves, we "kissed the water 4 times". It was cold, even in a dry suit. Since then she has not wanted to set foot in the boat. Can't blame her, but there it is. My daughter is absolutely keen, however.
I still think, that minor rule liberalisation medium term would result in the expansion of the class niche and this would be a reasonable way to go.
Jim N3470 and T1293.
So what de we know about 3519 in terms of pushing the envelope (See Dare's post below)?
We know that it’s going to make those who claim that no new development is possible within the current rules look more stupid than they normally do.
The IC has just been through a process of VOTING on their rules.
Quote from: Cat out of bag (Guest)We know that it’s going to make those who claim that no new development is possible within the current rules look more stupid than they normally do.
Who has claimed that? It is not a question of looking stupid. I think it's more a question of concern over the medium/long-term future of the class.
Jim.
Quote from: 49The IC has just been through a process of VOTING on their rules.
And the point of this comment is???????????
Any class member can put a proposal together for consideration at the AGM. None has been received for our AGM
Kevin
I get the feeling the IC vote had a much bigger franchise, that's all; and the outcome was a compromise!
Anyway, i'm sick of this as well, I don't have a particularly strong view either way about rule changes. I just tried to facilitate the discussion of rules outside this forum.
Thats my last word on the subject; and I suggest the forum get back to less enthusiasm sapping conversations!
Class Rules/Arbitary... I can speak as someone who's had a bit to do with Cherub rules in the past, and the new IC development rule more recently and also tried fraing a development rule set from scratch.
Yep, of course your rules are arbitary. Everyone's rules are arbitary... They're just a framework around which the class members agree to design and build boats. At any given time some rules actively restrict the shape of the boat and even typeform it, others may have no effect at all... Which rules are restricting at any given time can and does vary...
Writing rules is suprisingly difficult. Writing rules which don't typeform yet keep the boats within the basic style you desire without creating loopholes is damn near impossible. On that subject that's why boats built to hit every single limit in the rule and bend it as hard as possible are rarely successful: they're making the assumption that the folk who formulated the rules over the years knew far more about the future of sailboat design as could ever have been possible!
Rise of floor rules are especially problematic - the IC one had I think 3 or 4 people kicking ideas about for many emails before something half decent came out...
I reckon we've got the best current set with the IC, but we had the "advantage" that we'd deliberately chosen to outdate every current boat in the fleet without a spinnaker and return from one design hull to box rule. The old boats can be spinnaker converted, so there's a role for them and new boats without kites were not being built. Needless to say this was a very unusual situation and its certainly not your position. We had a very obvious problem so the big change was a fairly easy decision (and still only just went through). Whether it was right or not - well actually, no-one ever get to know what *would* have happened...
Quote from: JimC (Guest)Class Rules/Arbitary... I can speak as someone who's had a bit to do with Cherub rules in the past, and the new IC development rule more recently and also tried fraing a development rule set from scratch.
Yep, of course your rules are arbitary. Everyone's rules are arbitary... They're just a framework around which the class members agree to design and build boats. At any given time some rules actively restrict the shape of the boat and even typeform it, others may have no effect at all... Which rules are restricting at any given time can and does vary...
Writing rules is suprisingly difficult. Writing rules which don't typeform yet keep the boats within the basic style you desire without creating loopholes is damn near impossible. On that subject that's why boats built to hit every single limit in the rule and bend it as hard as possible are rarely successful: they're making the assumption that the folk who formulated the rules over the years knew far more about the future of sailboat design as could ever have been possible!
Rise of floor rules are especially problematic - the IC one had I think 3 or 4 people kicking ideas about for many emails before something half decent came out...
I reckon we've got the best current set with the IC, but we had the "advantage" that we'd deliberately chosen to outdate every current boat in the fleet without a spinnaker and return from one design hull to box rule. The old boats can be spinnaker converted, so there's a role for them and new boats without kites were not being built. Needless to say this was a very unusual situation and its certainly not your position. We had a very obvious problem so the big change was a fairly easy decision (and still only just went through). Whether it was right or not - well actually, no-one ever get to know what *would* have happened...
Jim,
Would you say the ICs fundementally changed the rules in an attempt to revive the flagging class or were there other motivations?
Quote from: 210
Would you say the ICs fundementally changed the rules in an attempt to revive the flagging class or were there other motivations?
Two things. One was not enough spinaketr free boats being built and the other was to make a big difference in downwind performance for the spinnaker free boats as spinnakers have not proved to be internationally popular.
Quote from: Giles (Guest)In the meantime why not allow singlehanders to attend Burton week. Giles
3393
No NO NOOOOOOO the National 12 is a double hander and should stay that way. If you want to get a single hander that's not a Laser invest in a Solo. Mike and I are 21 stone all up and sail a 15 year old Crusader and very few in our club can touch us! We are constantly practicing and striving to make the boat go as fast as we can WITHIN class rules. We have sailed big opens as well, such as Bala where we've won meetings, The Anglesy offshore where our best result was 4th (up against RS 400, RS 200 numerous GP's several Merlins and the odd 49er) Rock Camel regatta where we won the Rock Trophy( I won;t beging to list the boats we were up against there!) As mentioned before there are ways and means (IF you have the experience) of making a National 12 go damn fast, we should concentrate on that and not turning them into single handers. Most of the old (sorry) National 12 sailors can make their boats move by tweaking and practice and experience.
Just my two pennith
Janey x
Janey - I understand your point, I don't want to offend anyone and I don't expect the class to change. However opening the class up to single handers could increase the popularity without changing the boats and I don't see how the double handed boats would loose out. A singlehanded 12 is a much better boat than a laser, solo or phantom, in my opinion - but if the ideal weight is 18 stone it will remain 18 stone even for the singlehander.
Anyway I will keep on enjoying going out by myself, one day I might perfect a singlehanded roll tack? or fit a self tacking jib, or find a crew who is under 6 stone?
Giles
Quote from: Giles (Guest)Janey - I understand your point, I don't want to offend anyone and I don't expect the class to change. However opening the class up to single handers could increase the popularity without changing the boats and I don't see how the double handed boats would loose out. A singlehanded 12 is a much better boat than a laser, solo or phantom, in my opinion - but if the ideal weight is 18 stone it will remain 18 stone even for the singlehander.
Anyway I will keep on enjoying going out by myself, one day I might perfect a singlehanded roll tack? or fit a self tacking jib, or find a crew who is under 6 stone?
Giles
I agree. But forget the self-tacking jib Giles. That´s not a 12. I was out on the water soloing again, this time in a force 5 gusting 6, and it didn´t bother me one bit. The trick is to keep your head whilst tacking. Even gybing works. The feeling of planing upwind whilst leaning out on the last 1/4 of the boat even with the centreboard fully down(!) is just something else!! In all fairness, we´ve only heard lighter crews say that they don´t want to change the rules. Sorry Meds, but you ain´t heavy!
Cheers!
Jim. N3470, 3130 and T1293
Quote from: jimc (Guest)
Two things. One was not enough spinaketr free boats being built and the other was to make a big difference in downwind performance for the spinnaker free boats as spinnakers have not proved to be internationally popular.
The whole AC thing is a bit of a UK only issue as far as I can see so from an IC class view this is a very dramatic change to try and create a new phase of building and performance. Good on them for doing somthing ...