Personally I wouldn't support voiding the Mozzie grandfather status ever. Loyalty must go both ways. I'm very impressed by the Mozzie sailors and their "Can-do" attitude. Basically they are sailing a sub optimal (with respect to F16 class rules) and making an impact. I think that should be high appreciated.

Indeed the Mozzies are underweight, but I think the South African ones are only by 10 kg or so. This is strong offset by the smaller sailarea total and other specs that are suboptimal.

Personally I think it is great to see the Cobra's enter the fun as well. I never envisioned a Hobie OD mentality for the F16 class. I don't believe "one size fits all". And such I welcome the continued participation of these boats in the F16 racing.

With respect to the claim that :"They are being included because if they weren't, there wouldn't be an F16 class in Australia (or South Africa either)" I want to underscore the fact that the sailors of these classes themselves approached us in order to become part of the F16 class. I saw no good reason to deny that request. And I still don't !

Wouter

Wouter,

Do you have the appropiate measurement points for the Mozzie to plug into the SCHRS calc. I'd be interested to see what they come out at.

Cheers

I'm currently putting F16 hulls under a Mozzie rig and beams, to later upgrade to full F16 rig and beams.

Problems with adding a larger rig and increased beam to mozzie hulls would be that it is no longer a mozzie, so it is not grandfathered, and the mozzie hulls are probably not big enough to support the minimum F16 weight.

The mozzie is only a grandfathered F16 if it measures as a mozzie. Are current measurement certificates required to prove this currently?

This didn't occur to me when putting a square head on my mozzie. As such, I wouldn't have measured as a mozzie and was wrongfully calling my boat an F16 without a mozzie or F16 measurement certificate. This will be fixed with the new hulls and spinnaker bringing me up to minimum weight, I think I need to change the jib and the mast tip weight also.

I used to have them till me harddrive crashed 2 years ago. This is one of those things that got lost. But I'm sure the Mozzie sailors can tell you.

Wouter

Hi Simon,

if you PM Tim he may be able to give you the measurments you need. I to would be interested what the SCHRS is like in comparison to other boats in the UK that we have in OZ. They are awesome cats for their rig size. Like the F16's in USA it appears the yardstick may be kind <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />. But we give the VYC as much info as we can and they have not moved the figure much, so we can't do any more <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />.

You should recommend them for those light weight F16 sailors in the UK, 65kg sailors can right them if all is well. They are just moulding another batch of hulls at the moment, as demand for new boats continue. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I think Steve_Kwiksilver once did the calculations, but I don't know what he concluded.

Steve?

The class rules are here
Mosquito Building Rules and Regulations

The spinnaker rule is not yet included in the document but reads like:

21 SPINNAKER
"Either the NMCC or a state authority may choose to run an event in which the use of a spinnaker is permitted, in which case this rule shall apply. This rule also applies to Mosquito class boats sailing with a spinnaker at any other events."
21.1 The spinnaker pole shall be attached to the centre of the main beam, and shall be fixed in a fore and aft position.
21.2 No part of the spinnaker pole or its fittings may extend more than 3030mm from the front of the main beam.
21.3 The head of the spinnaker shall not be hoisted more than 6380mm from the top of the main beam.
21.4 The maximum luff length shall be 6950mm.
21.5 The maximum foot length shall be 3500mm.

Tim, I do not have the time to wade thru the class rules to get the rating points.

What I need is the following:


1, No of crew
2, No of crew on Trap
3, Min Weight of the boat incl sails etc in KG
4, Overall length
5, Max Beam
6, Max mainsail and mast area combined
7, Vertical luff length of sail (luff len will do)
8, Jib Area
9, Vertical luff of the jib (Luff will do)
10, max allowed Spi area
11, Max authorised board area
12, Max allowed depth below the hull
Note if 11 and 12 are not controlled I use the max value withing the rating formula.

Lengths in M, area in sqm please

Cheers

Simon

Hi Simon
Here are the numbers (some are my estimates but should be good enough).

1, No of crew - Cat 1, Sloop 2
2, No of crew on Trap - Cat 1, Sloop 2
3, Min Weight of the boat incl sails etc in KG - Cat 85kg, Sloop 95kg
4, Overall length - 4.9m
5, Max Beam - 2.185m
6, Max mainsail and mast area combined - 13.4sqm
7, Vertical luff length of sail (luff len will do) - 6.9m
8, Jib Area - 3.3sqm
9, Vertical luff of the jib (Luff will do) - 3.8m
10, max allowed Spi area - 14.2sqm
11, Max authorised board area - .23sqm
12, Max allowed depth below the hull - .77m


The centreboard size has been reduced over the years on Mosquitoes. The measurements I've given are the maximums possible in the rules but in reality any boat built in the last 10 years is using boards which are much smaller than the maximum.

Similarly for the spinnaker, the size I've shown is the typical spinnaker size we are currently using and is less than the maximum possible. There's no maximum area rule and it would be possible I'm sure to make a bigger spinnaker that would fit the measurements. But the reality is that over the years of spinnaker development, smaller ones have proven as fast but easier to handle. Some Mozzie sailors believe we could make the spinnaker smaller still without losing any performance.

This brings Alter cup to mind… <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Funny but it seems the neophyte F16 builders still have much to learn when it comes to practical application… <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Boy, are you full of it Bob.

You really don't understand what you talk about do you ?

Wouter

Texel ratings

Mozzie 1-up 105 (with spinnaker) (rounded off from 104.81 as required by Texel)

Mozzie 2-up 109 (with spinnaker) (rounded off from 108.56 as required by Texel)


Official F16 ratings under Texel are :

F16 1-up 101 (with spinnaker) (rounded off from 100.68 as required by Texel)

F16 2-up 102 (with spinnaker) (rounded off from 101.80 as required by Texel)



F18 is at 101 (with spinnaker)

and A-cat is at 101 (WITHOUT spinnaker)


Seems to me that the Mozzie in 1-up mode is quite performant with respect to full spec F16's. The 2-up Mozzie noticeable less so. A 4 points rating difference is only some 108 seconds (1 min 48 sec) per 45 min race. The 3 points rating difference to the 2-up F16's is only 81 secs difference in the same race. Of course the standard Taipan with spinnaker is rated at 102 in 1-up mode and 103 in 2-up mode, so here the rating differences to the 1-up Mozzie are even smaller. A 2 point rating difference is only 54 sec difference on the finishline after 45 min of bouyracing. That is a time difference that can easily be found between good crews on identical boats anyway.

Wouter

Just plugged the numbers into the SCHRS Calc to give an indication of rating.

SCHRS – one up 1.033. (note if the maximum plate rating is applied this would fall to 1.022)
SCHRS – two up 1.075. (note if the maximum plate rating is applied this would fall to 1.068)


For reference an F16 one up is 0.994, F16 two up is 1.020, F18 1.005 and Tornado 0.935.


All the current ratings are stored here

If the Mossies would like a formal rating calculated and then put onto the site, if someone can send me the class rules and a document referring to the page/line where each of the rating points are defined I will formally calculate a rating for them.

No maybe you don't understand. My point is that practical application equals time on water. That’s where it really matters and that’s something these Mozzie sailors have a lot of…. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

What would the SCHRS and Texel rating be for Mozzie 1up and 2up without spinnaker?

Darryn
Mozzie 1782

Darryn,

One up 1.08 (1.073 with maximised plates)
Two up 1.108 (1.101 with maximised plates)

No, YOU don't understand Bob, because you have absolutely no frigging idea of how much time, testing and on the water validation went into those new "neophyte F16 builders" boards. Which, by the way, really aren't very new.

They are the result of many years sailing (10 - 15) in an internationally very competitive singlehanded class. Three guesses which class that may be.

But despite the fact you know nothing of their origin and the fact that you also make totally unfounded assumptions, you still you feel free to spout all kinds of obvious nonsense about them on this public forum.

You have a undeniable responsibility to check your facts and avoid peddling obvious falsehoods. This responsibility is even recognized in common law by the duty to avoid slander.

I can tell you again Bob, you are totally in the dark on this. And I really wouldn't say that if you even had the slightest foundation on which you could base your comments.

But added to this is the fact that your statements can even be call moronic. That is because the "new" boards are smaller then the older Taipan boards, just as the mozzie boards are. In effect these Alter Cup boards are another confirmation of what you find so interesting in the mozzie boards. But wait a minute, a few weeks ago you were claiming the new boards are all wrong ! Obviously you haven't made up your own mind on what you REALLY think is best, because you can't believe both lines of thought at the same time. Either the Taipan boards are better, but then you have to disagree with the mozzie experience. Or you find the mozzie experience valid and then have to consider the new F16 boards as superiour to the old Taipan boards.

This doesn't suprise me much however as it is was already clear that you haven't looked at the specs in detail, you just blubber off whatever comes to your mind at the time as long as it is negative to the new board designs.

But THAT, my friend, is not how we do business or hold discussions in the F16 class. Never has been and never will be.

Wouter

Thanks Simon, that SCHRS site you provided the link for is very interesting, link below for VYC yardsticks which use results rather then calculations for their "reliable" yardsticks.
www.vic.yachting.org.au/site/yachting/vic/downloads/Yardsticks06_07.pdf

Comparing Hobie 16 which VYC think is faster then a Mozzie but using SCHRS H16 is slower which agrees with my experience.
Relative skill level is the wildcard again.

Wouter, your reply to Bob was ridiculously over top and drags the standard of the whole forum down, why not just pm that rubbish directly to Bob?

Darryn
Mozzie
1782

Hi Darryn

I agree most H16s we come across seem slower than Mosquitoes but I have seen some in VIC that destroy the best Mosquitoes in winds above 15 knots. They need the breeze to do it so who knows what the handicap difference should be on average. VYC is supposed to be a comparison between "well sailed" boats of each class, so the slow ones are not supposed to figure in the setting of the handicap.

The other interesting thing is the way cats are always rated faster than sloops on SCHRS. In the VYC system I've never seen this happen. Maricats, Taipans and Mozzies (in SA) all have sloops rated faster than cats.

Anyone - are there any SCHRS numbers for Taipan 4.9s?

Yeah, a steep bit of chop seemed to kill my performance on a mozzie compared with the H16.