scooby_simon,
Weight [color:"blue"] SCHRS takes account of this [/color]
Beam: Righting moment [color:"blue"] Point taken, SCHRS does not take this into account [/color]
Efficiency of kites: very quick development here [color:"blue"] so design fast mainsails [/color]
Regular updates to keep the development classes in check with the one design classes
In the F18's class the Capricorn when measured to SCHRS comes out with a number well below the F18 101.
Tornado's, F18's, F16's etc have moved forward with speed but the likes of the Dart 18's etc have not (nature of one design) but the ratings have not kept up.
No system will every be perfect, but if you have a statement saying "The purpose of these regulations are to enable trampoline multihulls of various types to race together on a comparative basis, and to protect the interests of the owners in keeping development under control without hindering further research"
You need to keep your finger on the pulse
How did you hear that they are looking at changing SCHRS? has ISAF payed for more development?
How did you hear that they are looking at changing SCHRS?
All I can say is that I have some things on an unofficial basis.
As for keeping current, yes, this is why SCHRS should be changing.
The actual problem was that the F18's were just given a blanket rating. IMO the F18 (and other formula classes that allow development like F16, F14, Tornado etc) should [color:"red"]
not [/color] be given blanket rating and should (as the A class do) have to have the boat measured and a measurement certificate stamped with the SCHRS rating.
Finally, most of us agree that measurement systems are the best. Come up with something better !
