Old Chestnut - rotating DBs?

[tedcordall]

[quote by=rick_perkins link=Blah.cgi?b=Cool,m=1164220275,s=3 date=1164273964]
Isn't the point of a development class to develop new ideas within the rule set to create advantage rather than to chase a set of moving goal posts.

If you keep moving the goal posts all you do is create obsolete boats faster ... evolution not revolution...

Rick[/quote]

Interesting point.
How much evolution has happened, say in the last ten years/five years?
How different are the boats now to the boats then?
 
It is only time to think about rule change once the evolutionary changes start to become incrementally smaller. Then the performance benefits tend to be small and the development costs high.

Is this that point?

Until then, rules stability encourages development as innovators can iteratively work towards a best solution knowing that their work won't suddenly be wasted by a rules change.

TC

[rick perkins]

[quote by=Mikey_C link=Blah.cgi?b=Cool,m=1164220275,s=9 date=1164305470]Hi Rick,

When the 12 was invented its intention was to be as fast and affordable as possible, Uffa was the king (pun, heheh) of making small boats that would piss of the owners of bigger more expensive boats. I think that has been lost somewhere down the line and he would probably turn in his grave if he could see the amount of lead in my last boat. [/quote]

I suspect Uffa would have been equally dissapointed if the weight limit were lowered such that it was no longer possible to home build to minimum weight.

Gavin has my full admiration for his home build of F'in Boat and I believe it's overweight ... and I belive he plans to put the boat on a diet over the winter.

Would lowering the weight make 12 building the preserve of the expert professional?

Rick

[Jimbo41]

John, they look like 12's with a hard on!

Ted,
there's this thing called punctuated evolution in my trade. Long stretches where there's no external pressure for change, followed by a crash in numbers due to some disaster. Then a few surviving members of the population come out of the bottleneck with (drastically) altered characteristics - 12 foot skiffs for example (ahem) - and they're off again at a normal deveopment rate. The question is this - what's the pressure on the 12 to change? Is this pressure from without or within? Are we heading for a bottleneck? If so, how long have we got before we need to sprinkle viagra on our bows like those 12 foot skiffs? Hopefully not until I pop my clogs.....

Final question. What would the class then be called - flying flat iron? Or that was Uffa King 12 just flying by?

Jim N3130 and N3470

Oh, and another thing. Restricted/one design classes such as lasers, solos, phantoms and others without kites and whathaveyous are doing ok. Even mirrors are (still) in a state of revival even though their performance and/or design concept is out of the Dark Ages.  I think classes have their high times and their low periods. (Still) time to reflect I think. We don't have to drastically alter our class just 'cos a bunch of Aussis decide to export their Pfiser sponsored rigs to Blighty. We can take a leaf out of these other classes and do it via marketing. What say you Rick?

[tedcordall]

Jimbo,

Your reply seemed to assume that by rule changes I was heading towards kites. Anything but. That niche is already filled, as I said in a post a few days ago, by the 29er, the cherub and the 12 foot skiff. There are other rules.

Back to the original topic. Are hatchet boards  rotating DBs using bits of string rather than a bolt to control the position of the board?

TC
(my only use for wood is for fires and furniture)

[Mikey C]

A home build can be built easily with 7+ kilos of weight in, and still last. Aardvark Issues is still going strong now, and I didnt ask anywhere near as many questions of the builders at the time as I could have.

My crew, and really myself dont want to trapeze thanks.

Ted (and Rick from a while back). I have done an article for the newsletter explaining Hatchets.

F**in boat could have been lighter, Gavin built a lot of structure into the boat to cope with things that are no longer there. Even a boat that size should be well underweight. He is pulling bits apart this winter and I'm giving him a hand rebuilding it, should easily get it underweight.

[Jimbo42]

[tedcordall]

[Simon Nelson (Guest)]

Innovation in 12's is an interesting thing. I bleive that over the years, if you are too innovative, it gets banned! I can only talk of my era but in the 1980's it was the daggerboard and in the 90's, it was Rob's attempt at a double bottom boat.

Almost all other developments seem to me to evolution. That is what the class is really after for stability. Innovation instantly makes other boats obsolete. Evolution doesn't as it is a slower process.

The biggest innovations have occured due to rule changes, be it "one plank" boats or double bottoms. It is far harder to make rule changes which lead to slower, evolutionary changes.

Looking specifically at the changes people most often discuss, what would really be the effects of them. Weight reduction needs to be fairly extreme to get a change in design. 10kgs drop probably wouldn't lead to new designs. I have sailed a 12 without 12kgs of correctors, so I have experienced it. You wouldn't get planing upwind. The boats would be nicer to sail and a bit quicker, but not a major difference. This would not attract new sailors either.

Daggerboards are exactly the same. A little bit of extra speed maybe. Easier to build, yes. But new designs? No. However, I don't think it is soemthing people should be as afraid of as they are. Most modern boats have correctors and therefore you could easily block off the current case with foam and convert to a daggerboard case. The weight would be in the best place, so no problems. Whether it is desirable is another matter!

Rotating masts is the final thing. This is the one that would lead to the most innovation. New masts, new ways of controling them and completely different cut of sails. And the boats would be quicker. However, it would take time and many would be put off. You cannot use current sails witha  rotating mast and to make the whole thing work would take time and effort during which the guys with their conventional rigs would probably be faster. Eventually somebody like Tom would make it work and the all the top boats would need them. The boats would be faster and a lot more complicated to tune. That would put new people off..................

I personally believe that there are areas of current boats that could be better. Nobody has taken jib control as far as it could and there are ideas that would make the boat neater and easier to sail while giving more control of the jib. Foils are another potential area and an adjustable winged rudder might spark hull development. However, this needs to be looked at as a package. When teh 14's went over to this, it made a bit of difference but it wasn't until boats were specifically developed for the system that the biggest gains were realised.

Only problem is, if you do outclass everybody within the current rules, you run a danger that they will change the rules....................