I would like to comment on Carbon masts on F16s, I need to start by saying that I have a personal interest in carbon masts as I build them for F16's.

Firstly the debate should only be about the pros and cons for losing the tip weight, not about the durability or competitiveness of the 2 materials.

Argueing that we must have a weight to guarrantee durabilty is silly since no other part of the boat is governed in this way.

Sure someone could put an A mast on that is too weak, but they could put an aluminium one on that is too weak, or a wooden one, or they could build the hulls in paper. Our rules don't limit materials so why should we specify how much material is used for individual components.

The fact is that a very durable carbon mast (stronger than current alumium ones) can be built with a tip weight under 5kgs, and this is likely to come down with time. Adding 1.5 kgs to the top of a mast requires an extra 12 kgs or 24lbs of body mass to right the boat.

So what are the pros and cons for removing tip weights.

Cons

The only con is the percieved competitive equaility of bolting the lead to the top of the mast, but 90% of the advantage of a carbon masts comes from the abilty to develope a bend characteristic to suit the boat and the crew weight. So there is only a small speed hit to the carbon mast with 1.5kgs of lead on the top, and this is only in choppy conditions upwind.

Pros

Again only 1 in my opinion, and that is righting the boat, I know that many of my customers bought F16s because they are easy to right single handed, some sold FX1s and inter 17s for this reason and no other. Make no mistake for a lot of people this is important, in almost every demo I have done for a single handed sailor, he has insisted on capsizing and righting the boat on his own.

Does bolting 1.5 kgs of lead to the top a mast slow the boat down? not so that you would ever notice, but if you weigh 70 kgs it makes it bloody hard to get the boat up after you fall in the sea.