Barry, That is a very nice turn-out and neither the I-17R class or the One-design Taipan class have to be ashamed of there turnouts for their 2002 Nationals.

With respect to the Formula 16 Nationals well Steve, you come across a little too trigger happy. Each event will attract the number of competitors proportional to the attractiveness of the venue. This attractiveness is determine by more than one factor and in case of the Formula 16 nationals we overlooked a few important factors. We went along on the confidence created by the factors Spi enthousiasme, Formula 16 class attractiveness and the attractiveness of good racing provided by Rick White (many thanks again). We forgot about others important factors like costs, travel distance, left-over holliday time and the wifes. One of these factors could have been negociated by the eventually non participating crews but all three factors combined was simply to much and one crew after another cancelled. When both events were scheduled the class was looking at equal attendence numbers for both events. Tampa retained that attendence once the details were made public, F16 nationals didn't.

An unfortunate setback, indeed. For 2003 the class will make sure that all factors are into account.

But having said this, people must also be careful not to read to much into it. It may be an unfortunate turnout but the class is definately not in decline or something like that.

A counter example: For the rule ballot 44 boats worldwide registered. And I do mean boats with verified sailnumbers, not sailors. For example Micheal C. and his wife Theodora were only allowed one vote as they crew together on one boat. And not all who satisfied the conditions to be allowed to vote registered. Whern counting all the crew seriously interested in the Formula 16 class or the crews that have already participated in a F16 race ; the total number comes out at over 50 boats worldwide. And this I would consider a very encouraging result after a shy 2 years since the absolute beginnings and only 12 months of an operational rule set.

In that time we have been able to link 3 builders to the Formula 16 rule set. And after the Stealth F16 a the second fully optimized F16 design will be launched in 2003 = The Blade F16. And a third is in the pipeline when these optimized designs proof to be enough challenge to the grandfathered designs. In addition to this the class is being approached by builders that have thus far quietly followed the Formula 16 class over the last 12 months; It will take a little while before these will go public with their interest but more important is that they are taking the Formula 16 class really serious. They wouldn't do that if they didn't think the class had a great potential.

Some sailors and builders are already envisioning a World Championship within a few years. Now, I'm daunted by the amount of work needed to get there, but together I'm sure that such a feat would certainly not be impossible.

AHPC support has already materialized in their offer to allow the Superwing mast to used on any Formula 16 design against cost price. Stealth Marines support has been invaluable right from the start. And I have received confirmation that the ISAF handicap system has accepted our proposal on how to handle the boards measurements they need to calculate a handicap rating.

Contacts with the Texel committtee are excellent and the S-PN number is simply a peach even the Australian VYC rating (A statistical system just like the US PN system; Link = http://www.humpybong.org.au/CCQ%20Yardsticks.htm) rates the Taipan 4.9 spi at no more slower than 3 % in relation to a Hobie Tiger. The US PN gives a rating that is 7.5 % slower than a Hobie Tiger While Texel and ISAF predict equality. Micheal C. at the Round The Island race corrected out over even Randy Smyth by quite a margin. Now I respect Michael C. ALOT ! But I'm quite sure that Randy is of a different caliber and Taipan 4.9 with spi have not been raced that often in Australia.

But were are getting of track here. Main issue is that I understand that hearts may grow weak over time and especially after a setback like at Ricks, but this doesn't mean in anyway that the foundation is weak. From what I know, but can't say in public, the foundation is a whole lot stronger than may be apparent from a casual glance.

The basis for the Formula 16 class is already better than the one on which the iF20 class has been build. You know Steve, if you would help us get started in South Africa than ISAF status could be very near in the future. And it won't be long at all till a fully optimized homebuildable Formula 16 design is available to you guys in SA. It will surely solve your problems with the building costs of boats produced outside SA. I mean this is a good example on how several smaller groups in the Formula 16 class are working at practical solutions to make the future of the Formula 16 class happen in various parts of the world. And this fact that multiple sailors and builders are "pulling the car" will make sure that this class will succeed.

Now I'm sure we all would rather have F16 designs overnight and available in large numbers or charter at a great number of events. But that would be a bit unrealistic in only 12 to 18 months and ofcourse we are talking about fully optimized designs and not some quick and dirty design that has been rushed from prototype to production version.

So how about lending us a hand in SA and be part of the succes ?

Regards,

Wouter