I'm sorry Wouter, I really can't let this go.
6.1 The head of a local Formula 16 class organisation may give dispensation (called grandfathering) to a particular design or class and allow them to become part of the Open Formula 16 class under the following conditions.
I'm particularly unhappy that just one individual - 'the local head' is able to 'grandfather' a whole class. Rule 6.1 as written is a bad rule. I believe that the intention of the rule as outlined by you is misguided. You can't build a class by just allowing all and sundry to join in. We're either the F16 class and everyone knows what that is, or we're the Open F16 class and noone has any idea what boat is in and what isn't without a ruling from 'the local head'.
I also don't see the introduction of a new boat from a recognised Formula boat builder that doesn't comply with the Formula 16 rules but is very close to them as something to be pleased about. You have to ask "why didn't they build a fully compliant F16, just as they have one of the recognised F18 designs in their stable?"
Do Cirrus not believe in the value of the F16 class? I suspect not. That is worrying. Rather than welcoming such a boat into racing with us we should be seeking to push the F16 compliant boats ONLY. Therefore I believe that we should only allow pre-existing boats at the time of the inception of the F16 rules to be 'grandfathered' as opposed to the 'foundation' boats which will always be part of the class.
In fact I would go as far as to say that the door on 'grandfathering' other classes should now be closed. Rule 6.1 should be scrapped. I still believe that it does nothing to further the (genuine) growth of the class.
This is the official F16 forum, so can we please have a sensible debate on this subject, Wouter?
