Michael

I really don’t understand your comment about all the US Taipan sailors having to buy new masts…With the exception of Kirt…didn’t all of the US Taipan owners buy them after the F-16HP concept was brought into being? Didn’t all of these owners buy their boats with the 8.5-meter mast knowing full well it was not the maximum length? (This is a question, as I do not know the exact date that the 9-meter length was adopted)…



Why all the sudden, would any US Taipan 4.9 owner want to buy a new mast? And make his boat non-legal for Taipan one design? If you are in the optimum weight category why would you buy a longer mast if it was going to give you inferior performance to lengthen it? Would you buy one just for the privilege to say you had longest mast that the rules would allow? Bragging rights? I don’t understand? Please explain.



To take into consideration a parallel issue…I have not heard of a stampede to buy new cross beams/trampolines/standing rigging because the Taipan in not maximum width. Why would one do so with the mast? Especially when it has been the rule from the beginning? I don’t think that argument holds any water…



In one of the former posts, Michael I see your weight at 135 lb…if this is correct…putting the average sailor weight at about 165lbs you have a -30# advantage in light air… Wouter would have to do the math…but I would suspect it would take close to an additional ½ meter of mast to equal that out for the 165 lb sailor in light conditions…any comments?



As far as my being against the Taipan being optimized…nothing could be further from the truth…that is the very thing that set me …(and from what I understand Wouter) on the path of creating our own F-16HP. I am all for it…we just see it form different sides…you favor the rules to be tailored to the existing boat…I favor making a boat to fit the new rules…I concede that your way is the most cost effective way from the stand point of a existing Taipan owner…but I though this was to be a new class?…Why for example should I build a boat who’s design criteria was to fit in the standard width of an Australian garage when I live in North America with no such constraints? Does that make any sense to you?



I am starting to believe it is all in ones perspective of what constitutes one design, and what constitutes boxes rules…maybe I am the one who is out of focus on this issue…maybe I am looking at it as more developmental than its creators had intended…or it may be that I am coming at it as one who enjoys the design/build aspect as much as the sailing itself…I must admit if I had never been involved in boat building and trying to push design parameters, then like you Michael, I would probably be more inclined to gravitate towards a more homogenized approach…not saying one is better than the other…just two very different perspectives. I can appreciate that you spent $11,000 + on a boat that is class competitive, and have a very real fear that someone is going to make a major break through that could turn your thoroughbred into an also ran (as I was told happened in the 18 square class).



I in no way want to inject anything that would fracture the integrity of or “split the class” I am just honestly sharing some concerns I have about the future of this potentially awesome catamaran class. Personally I am disappointed that we chose to limit our performance to that of the F-18 class. But I understand why the class took that tactic, and accept it as such.



I find it refreshing that the class has been set up in such a way that I even have an opportunity to express these viewpoints.



The majority has ruled in every issue put before this group …and it will in this case as well, I am sure. Since the Taipan owner represent the lion share of the participants, it will be decided by them…that is the way it works…and I have no problem with that. The case that I am arguing is one for maximum freedom of design…if the class chooses to limit that…so be it…at least you know where I stand.



I might add that I doubt that my boat will come in a 100 Kg. Or even 105 Kg. As I have added additional freeboard compared to the Taipan…so I have nothing to gain personally…I would like the freedom to use a 9 meter stick, if that is what I thought would work to my best advantage…but I will abide whatever the class chooses.



I didn’t quite understand Kirt’s reference to the production boats coming in lighter than the Timber ones… the information I heard said just the opposite…That a Timber boat built with care and an eye on watching the weight going in may actually come in under weight and need correctors. Who’s right? I don’t know…



Peace