-new F-18 N A web site has been up a few days -- http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/naf_18/
<br>
<br>The socialogical aspects as Mark S brought up , potential sponsors and racing as majsteve knows are there potentially for us , ALL THE ENTHUSIASTIC RACING SAILORS AND EXCELLENT BOAT BUILDERS , ---and THEN the opposition,--the terrible confused existing set of conditions we are attempting to address , combined with mfg. Class division that continues , along with the general decline of the sport , dead boat classes ,-open racing alternatives . –How do we revive the sport and encourage a new active racing 20 class to emerge in respect to existing cat designs and newly formed Formula 18 and 16 Classes in N A .
<br>
<br>-Should we attempt to lobby Hobie Europe to meet Inter –20 specifications to equalize their actual speeds and set up a similar set of rules , basically a Formula Class for larger people , --what percentage of sailors are left for this class .
<br>-This would be simple to set up , if H were to agree , but is it needed or wanted , Total performance and ratings indicate that the 16 and 18 classes will actually be faster within a wind range and given set of conditions. I have already found this to be true on the race course.
<br>
<br>-Should we attempt to address these problems as well and go the direction of a developemental class to solve these problems allowing a jump in total performance to the 20 class requireing more sail area , more beam , and less weight be allowed to develop within a class rules structure .
<br>-It may be one logical way to proceed
<br>
<br>In attempting to establish a weight to sail area average performance scale we have several factors that are not calculated exactly in ISAF -TEXEL OR that need exact definition, -rating systems rate all boats to an av crew weight and av conditions through a much broader range ,--we only need to compare and attempt to rate 20 ft. class cats equally using the two other main variables of weight and sail area.
<br>--The ISAF uses a standard assumed crew weight, and believe Texel uses 75kg av. on all ratings. We of course actually have various crew weights, mostly larger on the 20s.
<br>-We have wind strength variables {beaufort scale} and the effects of righting moment which varies in each wind category, and crew weight, from it being a non factor in below 6 to 8 mph winds, except in relation to sail area to drag --{light air sailing}-
<br>
<br>We have the various effects on total performance of the sail areas separately of main -jib -and spin through the ratio.
<br>
<br>-We have L AND B as a set standard for the 20 class –should we reconsider total beam and allow wider cats like the Tornado in the class ,-or go beyond and allow racks to be added to increase total performance r
<br>How to formulate an accurate fair weight to sail area scale that factors or ideally requires larger crew weight, wind strength, righting moment, with defined sail areas and their effects individually in relation to weight and total performance factors through this range.
<br>
<br>-There are performance ratings of ISAF and Texel, --there are more precised individual boat performance prediction programs used by designers, but none describe in exact terms an average number applied to relate sail area to weight as described above, such a number is at best an estimate or average, -inaccurate at the extremes of design or wind strength parameters.
<br>There are no existing classes or historically that have a rating based on sail area to weight only that can be applied to cats. -We have a Portsmouth system of rating providing average performance of existing cats that may give us insight, and the basic experiences of racing numerous similar cats in open competition.
<br>We have specifications of existing cats that we wish to include as a basic guideline.
<br>
<br>-ISAF ratings indicate existing heavier cats with proportionately larger sail plans than newer lightweight cats with smaller sail plans currently as proposed rate faster indicating a bias towards the older heavier cats within the scale, and should be refined to some extent. --Again ISAF does not include heavier crew weight or it's added righting moment. -I believe individual boat performance predictions through the range of wind strengths would show a performance curve overlapping between light and heavy air sailing, favoring the lighter cat designs with smaller sail areas and equal crew righting moment as the wind increased, -contrary in this upper wind range to ratings.
<br>Additionally options of furling jibs are reefing mainsails are within existing rules instantly changing all rating equations and rating numbers .-Many other intangables also come into play when racing –actual conditions , waves current and effects, -and all the human elements of racing.
<br>--Should we attempt to propose a 20 ft –larger beam with added racks -weight to sail area racing class, when no one else has, what are the benefits.
<br>
<br>-A large existing number of potential active racing 20s that according to ratings would be and remain very competitive for many years, unlike the new Formula classes that seem to be comprised of only new 418 LB iF boats. -
<br>All existing 8.5 B 20s can race as they are or modify as they choose.
<br>A younger sailor could refinish any existing 20 or 20 platform at reasonable cost and race this class. -
<br>-New development can occur within the class allowing new lightweight designs and innovation, geared towards less but more efficient sail areas in relation to existing but modified cats, and lighter safer faster sailing cat designs.
<br>
<br>-Can existing iF CLASS racing fall within this weight to sail area formula as they are proposed, yes -
<br>Could this weight to sail area be applied to other length categories and keep existing if class racing within, -yes.
<br>Could this concept be applied to all spin length categories if found preferable by the majority of racing sailors ---yes -
<br>Could these 3 length spin classes 16 18 and 20 easily relate to each other and race together,-- yes. –
<br>
<br>-We can formulate a sail area to weight ratio rule , we have a niche in the Formula classes for heavier crews , required for the added moment needed on these larger sail area more powerfull cats .
<br>Should larger beam cats be allowed , then coresponding racks be allowed ?
<br>
<br>Currently this is as far as thinking takes me , certainly do not have all the answers ,-
<br>
<br>Carl
<br>
<br>Marc -your currently building 20s and have optional racks ,-
<br>can you provide costs , attachment , basic design , and performance increase est .
<br> Many of us have sailed H-21S OR 17S with wings ,--the mystere has racks available , what else is currently available .
<br>
<br>-Also -a history and discussion of developement type classes may be welcomed .
<br> A-Class --18 Squares ,--B Class ,---French 60 ft tris --C-Class ,-etc .
<br>THANKS
<br>
<br>
<br><br><br>