A few befriended sailors and F16 sailors discussed the finer points of the rule change in more depth.

The earlier posting correcting some mistake on my side is a direct result of that.

With these corrections 2 of my counterpoints have fallen away. A new appreciation of my stance is therefor in order.

I have/had two remaining counterpoints to the proposed rule change and again I state that I'm in agreement with the intention to change the rule ! I just disagreed with the a detail of the new rule.

In fact my contention focussed entirely on whether to use the full length of the mast or just the 8.100 mtr measured that is the maximal allow luff length a F16 mainsail may reach under full downhaul tension.

The two remaining points are :

-1- The new proposed rule links up several rules that were fully independent before. In the past changing your mast length didn't affect your allowed sail area in any way; with the new rule it does, albeit in small terms. I strongly favour maintaining the original orthogonality (mutual independence) of the class rules unless absolutely necessary. For reasons of clarity, maximum freedom of design, minimizing unintended consequences.

-2- From the start the F16 class was setup to only rule on real issues based on hardnosed science. It is scientifically well understood and without a doubt that a leading edge WITHOUT a restoring curve behind it (= the sail cloth) will NOT produce any benefits (= forward drive). Reasons for this are twofold : first the leading edge (by itself) has a NEGATIVE angle of attack with respect to the apparent wind as such it will produce negative lift which is directly translated into negative drive, meaning drag. Secondly, without the sail cloth behind the leading egde completing the wing curve, the airflow over the leading egde will stall because of a to abrupt change in airpressure. The resulting macro turbulance and its drag addition will totally negate any benefical suction zones. In effect; a mast profile rotated to act as a leading egde to the whole mainsail will produce no benefical drive on the parts that are not followed by the sail itself.


Interestingly enough I feel that both points remain valid and that I've been able to explain them sufficiently in the discussion.

I feel the others found no faults with these points. The discussion then focussed on another consideration in the discussion and that is how sailing organisations like ISAF, builders and sailmakers prefer the sail area to be determined.

It was argued that between these groups a concensus was formed over time that the mast area should be determined by multiplying the overall length by the halve of the circumference. Apparently the important cat classes like F18, Tornado and A-cats have accepted that concensus and as a result it will be in our interest as F16 class to do so too.

I can personally find no fault with that reasoning.

So the question now becomes which of the two conflicting perspectives should be weighted more heavily.

The engineer in me says :"my perspective", the former class official in me says :"their perspective"

....

After taking a little time to contemplate this dillema I feel that I should weight the analysis and the conclusions of the current acting Governing Council more heavily. Afterall they did confer with all named parties (especially the really important ones) and it is they who need to implement the F16 growth and policy over the coming years. It is best to have them make the decision that they feel will allow them to be succesful at this.

Also I now feel that my remaining points are by themselves too weak to continue this discussion. Point 2 is not important when all F16's suffer from the same drawback. That leaves only point 1 against the drawbacks of rowing against the (ISAF, F18, Tornado, A-cat) current. That is not enough in my view.

So I desist my opposition and I must say that I feel that the GC has convinced me of the merits of their proposal (c.q. compromise).

Considering the overall situation, it is the best that can be done.

And that is that.

Wouter