That's good news Darryl !

I will say one thing ... Or may a few more as well !

Anyway. I always wondered why people are so suspicious of numbers and calculation. Sure there are always inaccuracies but if such calculations can put men on the moon and harness the power of the atom then why would it be hard to produce a ball-park performance prediction for a sail boat ?

It is something I noticed as an engineer over the last couple of years; numbers and calculation don't seem to get the appreciation the deserve. Often gutt feelings win out over properly developped math. Of course there is alot of bad math out there, used to bolter questionable position but that is often linked to statistics not to math linked to basic engineering and physics.

I hope this example (another one) will show people that knowlegde of physics and mathematics still is a dependable tool to base expectation upon, while gutt feeling is less dependable. Of course I'm not saying that a well developped gutt can play on important role nevertheless, even in matters of science.

I think I agree with gary on the experience that F18's are harder to beat outside of the 7 to 10 knots range WHEN SINGLEHANDING. On the other hand the math is most accurate in these conditions as well because here the assumptions about wind and hull related drag are best satisfied here.

I fully expect your F14 (not the US versions) to end up at a rating around 74 under the VYC yardstick when singlehanding. The underlying ratios are just too dominant in the overall picture to be otherwise. It may swing up and down 1 or 2 points depending on the seastate and wind conditions but 74 will be a good (predicted) average.

Hey Darryl how about you building a full carbon Blade F16 under license for our Australian F16 wannabees. The design seems to take off in the USA and I feel Europe is on the brink of doing so. We only have trouble getting the Australian market serviced. Besides I gether you are close to Marcus Towell as well.

Wouter