This looks great. Simple and easy.... I have a diagram in word I will send to Wouter as I can't attach.



With the comments and weights currently being discussed it would only require 200gms to be added to the Stealth mast to make it compliant under the 7.4kg tip weight being proposed.



200gms is pretty easy to add structurally for Stealth to the tip when a new batch of masts are built by just increasing the reinforcing that is used for the halyard lock. (Think JC had 7.5kgd which is what we think the Average is of the AHPC Alloy mast)



That would not cause any safety issues and would be able to be concealed in the old masts easily within or as part of the plug.



It would stop, which is the purpose of the rule, "New" / one off manufactures developing lighter mast that would be a greater performance advantage and then super seed the current masts. Hence greater cost to the class and the durability issue. It's the extreme we are proposing to penalise and stop, not current designs and mast manufacturers.



We all want to see development and that is enabled but it ensures three things. Money can't buy speed, the current boats, Stealth and Taipan will not be obsolete quickly and the carbon mast can be maintained at a weight that ensures durability and insurance / breakages can be limited.



The Tornado has used the tip weight for many years and very successfully. Most masts used to carry between 300 - 400 gms. That was seen as optimal. It stopped the class trying to develop lighter mast that would be fragile in the search of reducing rig weight.



It ensured people had the flexibility to develop mast bends and profiles that suited there weight however ensured weight performance issues were maintained across the class. And therefore it was not beneficial to develop fragile/ light masts just for weight reduction.



Rule as proposed by JC.

With the mast in a horizontal position, supported at the bottom end of the

extrusion and at the bottom edge of the top measurement band, the weight

measured at the top band shall be not less than ??7.5kgs. (Proposed to be

an average of 100gms lighter than the current AHPC mast (15 mast to be

measured))



The mast shall be weighted in the following condition;



1. Running rigging and normally attached diamond rigging shall remain

attached to the mast.

2. Shrouds, forestay and trapeze wires and their shackles shall be removed

from the mast.

3. Halyards shall be fully hoisted and their tails coiled and attached to

the mast heel.

4. Sail attachment fittings shall be placed in there normal hoisted sailing

position.

I believe your thinking is wrong.. The F16 is a formula class. Its reason to live is development within a set of rules..

Otherwise we would have promoted an one design class..

If someone can develop a structurally sound light weight mast that can last a multiple seasons .. Then great!!! The question is how to make sure this happens..



Rather than choosing arbitarily a mast weight why didnt you ask the C mast builders and see what they consider is a viable mast weight.. Ask them what weight they can build a stick down to and still get seasons of life from.. Ask them what they forsee with changing technology what is the next mast weight?

What I see happening is we get stuck in a time warp just as the F18 seem to be going down.. New fibre or resin technology appears and because we are set on the "alloy standard" we miss out because it would obsolete an alloy stick..



Ask yourself if your only allowed one registered mast how fragile would you really go?

How light would I go or how light would someone go to win a World Championship that is the question.... There is nothing under ISAF or our class that restricts someone who breaks a mast (Misses one race) and then requesting to use another mast.... It currently happens and will continue to happen. You cannot restrict someone to one mast per season or regatta...



My understanding is that F16 is not trying to be an open development class. It is a formula class. The F18 has been so successful and continued to grow as it has not segmented due to the restrictions it has. Yes we all agree there are changes to the F18 that could make it lot faster boat however that is not what it is about. Our rules are proposed to allow significant enough development with the mast being the only key aspect that in my opinion needs a restriction to ensure durability. Have you ever looked at the F18 rules in comparison to the F16 rules.



If you look at the figures the AHPC / Taipan mast is very light as an alloy mast. It’s tip weight is 7.5 kgs and the Stealth mast is 7.2kgs. Hence the current Taipan alloy mast is close to the current carbon techniques. If you look at Stealth’s website they claim they can build a carbon mast 40% lighter than alloy. Obviously that’s not the case in comparison with the Taipan mast, it is comparing it to a standard alloy mast, eg Hobie or Nacra. We are a performance boat already, why try and make it fragile....



From the above Stealth obviously beleive they have a good mast. I am sure I can get a comment from Scott Anderson over the weekend plus comment for the Aust. Carbon mast builder that AHPC uses. However we are not looking to be the best and the fastest forever. We want to build a strong class that enables development within a set of rules and promotes durability.



The biggest area of concern is that it is usually the top end of the fleet that have limited breakages and would more likely not break a fragile, lighter section. The less experienced sailor would beleive and want the best. Hence the first good capsize they would probably break the mast. That is not good for the class perception, insurance and making even competition.



I would be interested Stewart what you current involvement is and has been with Catamaran sailing and therefore why you believe you are in a position to comment and help steer the direction of the F16 class. Do you currently own a compliant F16 or do you intend on entering the class????? Have you every raced a catamaran at a worlds before???

I have currently almost completed a F16.. Fully complient to the current rules.. Although it may not measure under the "new rules".. But then Im not going to modify my boat now to fit any new rules.. So guess Im not "intending to enter the class " now am I?



Cat at worlds no (have you?).. But raced Tornados at state level when the best Au crews were from here.. At international level I have raced a various line-up of skiffs.. Built a few hulls personally..



As for sticks.. Did you know that Alex Vallings has a wing mast as second rig on his 12.. It is masthead and holds 30+ m2 of rag.. Held up in 35 knots when he won the R class titles two years ago..

As for restricting one or limited numbers of mast and sails.. yep.. some skiff classes already do..

Hi Stewart,



Sorry about the tone of the last post.. That's fantastic to hear you are going to race F16...(Have come into the forum a bit late) I think that is the best part of F16 if we can convert some skiff sailors across.



Drop me a note to my personal email [Email][email protected] As it would be great to have a chat offline rather than over the group..



Your question, "have you?" sailed in a Worlds. Yes 4. Tornado's and A Class. Not all that successfully however I have worked as part of the association and committee for the T's and Taipan's since 95.



Cheers



Willy