| Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: scooby_simon]
#119065 10/07/07 04:35 PM 10/07/07 04:35 PM |
Joined: Aug 2005 Posts: 221 Netherlands Hans_Ned_111
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 221 Netherlands | Dear F16 sailors,
In order of this discussion going on there is some clarification needed i think.
Quote: The Technical committee should be keeping themselves aware of what is going on outside of the class and outside of the class rules. Only then can proper evaluations and advice be formulated when asked to do so. With blinders on such a committee can only rehash in class dogma's and that is not valuable.
The TC is just an advising committee to the GC because they are all sailors, measurers, builders and they know what is going on in the sailing world and know what the latest things are going on. If people have the idea that new experiments mentioned on this forum are disapproved then they are wrong, it is good to know about the experiments and take to you as information, if the rules are clear on the subject why should there be a TC to investigate the whole issue again if the outcome is already known. But the information can be put in the archive of people who wants to store this info.
As maybe a few people know a lot of us are working full time and also have a family with kids and wife on there side, so it will take some time to modify or add things in the little spare free time there is, we do not have all the possibility to work behind the pc for 16 hours a day and response on everything right away, we ask there fore some patient from people.
The point about the Catsailor forum is that not only F16 sailors are responding on posts which are put on that forum, and the bad thing for the class is that these people are stirring up the pot with not any advance for the class itself but only some loud discussions with people who are embarrassing others with only one result, that people interested in the F16 class, are turning there back to the class. This has already happened in the way up to the first Global Challenge at Zandvoort., there where people not coming to this event because of this bad way of discussions. I think this will harm the class a lot when people are saying “F16 is that class who shout to each other at the Catsailor forum” and when that is happening nobody is getting the feeling of “be inclusive”.
If somebody thinks that the Catsailor forum is banned then there is a misunderstanding, everybody can put on that forum what he wants of course. And if somebody sees the failing from the GC to support on active communication then there is probably a wrong point of view. For example, the ballot done earlier this year. After a short note about this there was a lot of comment to do this via the internet tool because the class was set up on the internet. In response on that the GC did a huge amount of work to achieve this, only the response from the members was very disappointed, even a bit frustrating. The whole agm meeting points will be published on the internet so everybody can read what was discussed. Indeed the Agenda was not ready on time and published on time, this is a point on improvement next year. This was the first time ever that a set up like this was used in the F16 and of course there is enough space for improvement in the coming years. There is also a worry about the fact that the GC should act like a dictator committee, but the only thing what they are doing is trying to put all the loose ends in more structured way and keep a very close eye to the rules on doing that. We try also to listen to F16 sailors as much as possible and even to non F16 sailors because they can have good ideas which will fit in the spirit of the class. I think the post “self-inflicted”made is exact the thing where we all should be worried about, it has already happened, this is a missed change.
At the moment we have a GC with all dedicated people on board who are only looking in the favor of the F16 class and working hard to make the F16 class a success in the future.
Best regards, Hans Klok Chairman Governing Council. | | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Hans_Ned_111]
#119066 10/07/07 06:10 PM 10/07/07 06:10 PM |
Joined: Oct 2001 Posts: 915 Dublin, Ireland Dermot
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 915 Dublin, Ireland | I have been registered on catsailor.com for 6 years since October 01. The 2 forums I regularly check are the Open Forum and the F16 Forum. I was involved with Wouter’s "David & Goliath F16 Series" in the very early days.
I have to disagree with Mark's statement: "I'm also sorry Wouter, but like the tail wagging the dog this public forum can never dictate to the F16 Governing Council. Yes it is a very good tool for the F16 Class when used correctly but don't kid yourself too much I wouldn't have thought that many people have bought an F16 on the back of it.".
I believe that the growth and credibility of the F16 Class is almost entirely due to this forum. Maybe every so often things get hot and people say more that they should (and Wouter gets over protective and has to let go), but this forum is the heart of the F16 class. I am very happy to race a Spitfire, which was once welcomed and "Grandfathered", but is now a rival. It does not stop me from believing that the F16 concept is going to succeed. The relatively small numbers of F16 sailors may be out there doing it, but if the rest of us were not seen to accept that the class was viable, by our constant reference to F16 when we mention existing cat classes, then I do not believe that numbers would be growing as they have. I really believe that this forum (with Wouter and the original group) is what made it all happen. Continue the good work, back off on the public arguing and the class will grow.
Dermot Catapult 265
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Dermot]
#119067 10/08/07 12:11 PM 10/08/07 12:11 PM |
Joined: May 2003 Posts: 4,451 West coast of Norway Rolf_Nilsen
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451 West coast of Norway | In view of the current discussion, I have some opinions I want to express. I agree fully with what Dermot wrote. The F-16 class would be nowhere without this forum. The forum is not the only thing of importance of course, but what got this class going was the forum. In my own case, I have been acting as an ambassador for the class here in Norway for the last years, making sure F-16s and the F-16 concept was mentioned as often as possible. I would not have become interested in the class unless the forum existed and was run the way it was. I am certain I am not the only ambassador recruited this way. Changing the succesful way the class have been managed, which encourages involvement, is very risky in my opinion. The gains from creating a forum closed to outsiders are minor compared to the advantages of an open forum as far as I can see. Unless somebody have hard numbers on how many are recruited vs. how many are turned off or are indifferent, we are playing with the continued success of the class. Are anybody going to say that the class have not been a success so far? If not, why change a winning recipe? I wish the GC communicated what they were working on and what direction they are going more often. I have all respect for the need to earn money and put food on the table. I also wish the best for the class, and all I am saying is what I think is the best for the class. Pretty much we are all working for the same goal, but we see different ways to reach it. If confrontations like we have seen over the last two weeks are to be avoided, communication is needed! Implementing a new strategy of which just a select group is informed is not a good way to bring about change. Trench warfare is usually the result. I, as an F-16 homebuilder and ambassador, want to be involved with, and informed about what is going on in the class. I firmly belive the best way to do so is with open communication on this forum except under very rare circumstances. The F-16 class is not a business with business secrets, but a gathering of like minded sailors. The AGM was discussed earlier in a thread: http://www.catsailor.com/forums/sho...96&an=0&page=3#Post99496 and nothing much have changed since then. I think the class itself should be allowed to decide on what direction to go and how it should be run. That is what ballots are for, and running a ballot is not time consuming or difficult once the infrastructure is there. A last and more personal note. I was so outraged by the behaviour of members in the "F-16 wings" thread that I would have deleted my profile and left the forum and possibly the class for good if technically possible. Some might feel it's a pity I did not leave, but I think the kind of behaviour seen lately to be far more damaging to the way our class is percieved than any open discussion. We recently put our Tornado on the market and we are now three sailors building our own F-16 Blades in strip plank. Interest for F-16s is quite large up here now, but the used boat market is too small for growth. When the prices begin to drop, we will have a class up here. I would not have engaged in the class if it was run another way, and the class would be as unknown here as it is in France. Transforming the F-16 class into a blueprint of e.g. the F-18 class will make the class far less interesting to me, and I might just as well have stayed on the T. | | | Importance of the F16 open forum
[Re: Dermot]
#119068 10/08/07 01:18 PM 10/08/07 01:18 PM |
Joined: Jun 2001 Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe Wouter OP
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe | Just two weeks ago a Spanish couple visited me at the Zandvoort sailing club to get a test ride on an F16. They became aware of the F16 class through the internet and after following the discussions on the F16 forum for a while they decided that the F16 was the best boat for them. And we had many go through this route.
I can give names of many F16 sailors and sailors still looking to become F16 sailors who were and are attracted to the F16 class by sole virtue of its internet presence and specifically because of this forum.
We would never have sold boats to sailors in locales like Arizona, New Mexico, Dubai, Shanghai, Finland, Sweden, Singapore and a score of other places not being UK, NL or Florida if we hadn't had this forum.
There is a reason why FX-one and I-17 are doing badly despite having much nicer full colour brochures, well establish dealor networks, vastly superior brand familiarity (who has never heard of Hobie or Nacra ?) and significantly superior sailors like Booth, Curry and Vink showcasing these boats.
I don't just think the forum is the most important tool in attracting new sailors, I actually know it for a fact because I'm still answering several mails a week where people tell me that. And the only place where you can get my personal e-mail adress is of my catsailor.com forum profile.
Wouter
Last edited by Wouter; 10/08/07 01:20 PM.
Wouter Hijink Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild) The Netherlands
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Dermot]
#119071 10/09/07 07:19 AM 10/09/07 07:19 AM | Anonymous
Unregistered
| Anonymous
Unregistered | I have to disagree with Mark's statement: "... Yes it is a very good tool for the F16 Class when used correctly but don't kid yourself too much I wouldn't have thought that many people have bought an F16 on the back of it.".
Strongly agree with your disagreement!! | | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: ]
#119072 10/09/07 07:22 AM 10/09/07 07:22 AM |
Joined: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,348 fin.
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348 | Let's have a vote:
Who was strongly influenced by this forum to buy (or build) an F16?
Aye.
Last edited by Tikipete; 10/09/07 07:23 AM.
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: fin.]
#119073 10/09/07 07:38 AM 10/09/07 07:38 AM |
Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. Timbo
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. | Me as well. If not for this forum and Wouter's F-16 concept insistance, and Matt McDonald's efforts (and I'm sure he found Phill Brander through this forum and/or through Wouter and this forum) I would never have considered these boats.
In fact, when I first crossed over to cats from Mono's, 10 years ago, it was largely because of the information I learned on this forum, and all the great people I met through the Catsailor forums.
With the internet, it is truley a small world. Now, since we all are like minded, can we stop throwing crap at each other, see all the possitives that come out of this and let the negatives go? Thanks.
Blade F16 #777
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: fin.]
#119074 10/09/07 08:12 AM 10/09/07 08:12 AM |
Joined: Jun 2001 Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe Wouter OP
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe | TC, GC. How many divisions do they have?
That is just the issue. We don't know officially because nothing is being communicated through the forum or the webpage. I feel this is the core of the problem. The F16 class as a whole may well agree with everything the GC does (even when I don't) but the GC needs to argue their case to us all here on the forum/webpage and allow the membership to exercize its rights of oversight. Currently that is not done (whatever the reason for that are) More importantly the GC would be wise to seek and acquire majority support for their idea's and projects before initiating and implementing them. That saves us all alot of emotional arguing when members find out "after the deal is done" that they are not in agreement. That is the F16 tradition. Also I can't agree more with what Rolf has written down so effectively. I too have been more vocal in private about leaving the class altogether. I finding that I'm unwilling to cover for the GC in private mails and discussions anymore. I too have grown dessillusioned with the preceived drive towards an old-school class structure much like the F18's and A's as well as lack of GC responsiveness. I'm sorry but that is just the way things are at my place. Piss off a few more ambassadors like that and the F16 class is in for a real adventure. Wouter
Last edited by Wouter; 10/09/07 08:39 AM.
Wouter Hijink Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild) The Netherlands
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: fin.]
#119076 10/09/07 08:24 AM 10/09/07 08:24 AM |
Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. Timbo
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. | Discussion is good. Argueing is bad. Let's discuss issues, not argue them.
Blade F16 #777
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Timbo]
#119077 10/09/07 08:30 AM 10/09/07 08:30 AM |
Joined: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,348 fin.
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348 | Here ya go.
I can comfortably afford to maintain my Blade at it's current technological developement. I doubt if that would be the case if we went to "full" developement philosophy i.e. wings and foils.
I suspect the A cats are about to reach the upper cost limit that their members are willing to accept. We would do well to monitor them.
I know a lot of you guys like wings and foils, but I don't think I can afford them.
Last edited by Tikipete; 10/09/07 08:32 AM.
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: fin.]
#119079 10/09/07 08:41 AM 10/09/07 08:41 AM |
Joined: Jun 2001 Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe Wouter OP
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582 North-West Europe |
The discussion has nothing to do with : "wings and foils" anymore. The responses to those topics was merely the drop that spilled the bucket on a larger issue.
Wouter
Wouter Hijink Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild) The Netherlands
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Rolf_Nilsen]
#119082 10/09/07 09:20 AM 10/09/07 09:20 AM |
Joined: Jan 2005 Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. Timbo
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,049 Sebring, Florida. | I don't want to see wings or foils in the F16 class either. But I would be interested to watch some other class develop them, see if maybe some day years from now, they could be fitted to other boats for improved handling and performance. I can understand the A class not wanting to see them either, those boats are already very expensive, who needs the added cost of new toys? So maybe (as I alluded to in one post) there could be a new class called, Mini C class, a one man, foiling, wing-sail, open development yet box rule (with a fixed hull length, width, wing area) class.
It took someone some kind of development to get from a Hobie 16 to the F-16's we have today, so I am not against development, but I also can't afford to do it myself. If Ben Hall wants to lead the way, more power to him. When he gets it all sorted out, and prices are affordable, maybe then we can add wings or foils or what ever. Just not today...
Blade F16 #777
| | | Re: Something for the F16 technical committee - NO
[Re: Matt M]
#119084 10/09/07 09:41 AM 10/09/07 09:41 AM |
Joined: Feb 2006 Posts: 3,348 fin.
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,348 | | | |
|
0 registered members (),
724
guests, and 115
spiders. | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | Forums26 Topics22,405 Posts267,056 Members8,150 | Most Online2,167 Dec 19th, 2022 | | |