Dear readers,

This is the official confirmation that, on the initiative of mr. W.F. Oliver (e-mail) and mr. Nacracando (F16 forum), the Formula 16 class has documented and is currently processing the request to include the Bimare javelin 16 catamaran in the Formula 16 class.

The answer on this request is expect later this week; right after the all Formula 16 class officials have confirmed the official answer to that request.

The specifications used in the request are the ones that have been copied from the Bimare website in januari 2002 (Bim 16) and 1 november 2002 (Bim Javelin-16).

With kind regards,

Formula 16 class

Wouter,

After researching Bimare and their two boats in the F-16HP range, I think that you are being wise by softening your stance on excluding the Jav 16 through rules changes.

A policy of inclusion, rather than exclusion, should help this class grow. Besides, excluding the Jav 16 would probably start a war in which the Javelin 16 proponents would form their own class.

The Javelin 16 is basically the same as the BIM 16 that W.F. Oliver imported last year except the hulls have been updated to wavepiercers. This type of hull is the latest and greatest in the A-Cats and could offer your class a choice of such a design.

Are you still coming to the inaugral F-16HP National Championships in Key Largo?

I totally agree with your post but I want to get one thing perfectly clear.

That Jav 16 has been unknown to the class during the evaluation proces despite e-mails to the Bimare yard inviting to give us their comments on the issues discussed. By completely ignoring us we had nothing to conclude then that the BIM yard was absolutely not interested in the Formula 16 class. Hence we worked out the proposal for the new rules with all parties and sailors who were interested.

Than suddenly and right after ending 6 weeks of negociating to arrive at a compromise to the satisfaction of all involved ; Bimare suddenly finds out that she has a Jav-16;

And now I'm being accused of trying to exclude that design by having the rules changed ? Man, apart from the announcement that appeared on the bim website in the springtime but that was also quickly removed I never knew a single thing of that design. That despite my inquires to the Bim yard to supply me with specs or any data that I would need to "take it into account"

With the succes of the Jav 2 I pretty much accepted the "fact" that the BIM 16 or Jav 16 was way down the priority list of Bimare if at all would be designed.

I think this is a typical case of where it takes two to tango.

But, indeed, we are in communication with the Bimare yard about this subject and we face the problem with an open mind.

We, The class officials and I, will keep you posted.

Wouter,

I am confused! I have done a lot of research pertaining to the F-16HP Class and Bimare's 16-foot cats. The latest version of the Bimare 16 (pre-Javelin 16)came with a 9m carbon mast and weighed 95 kg, including spinnaker/spinnaker gear. Your proposed rule modifications would not only exlude the Javelin 16, but the latest Bimare 16 as well. So your claim to not have prejudice against Bimare's 16 foot designs is not truthful.

In fact, the new Javelin 16 has the same specs as the latest version of the older-style Bimare 16. Apparently, the major difference between the new Javelin 16 and the most recent Bimare 16 is the hull shape. If the Bim 16 is a F-16HP "foundation boat", then the Javelin 16 should certainly be granted "legal status".

Enough about that issue. What are the major regattas currently planned for the F-16HP Class? How many class members are going to the Nationals in Key Largo? Is the class planning to do the Tradewinds Regatta as a class? What F-16HP designs will be participating in these two events in the Keys?

Looking forward to your comments.

Bim never confirmed they were going to make a F16. When asked, they did not answer. so they got ignored. No offense, but if you choose to ignore the questions of the class, you don't get complaining rights. Without the NEW Bim in the scenario, there was really only one 9meter Bim that the class knew about.
This is not "prejudice" against Bim, it's a decision the class must make about mast height. Where did you come up with this stuff?
Michael C.
T4.9#32

Michael,

First, my research shows tht Bimare boatyard made their first BIMARE F-16 in 1990. When did you get involved with the 16s? Next, the 2001 Bimare 16 was the first time that Bimare went with the 9m carbon mast. I saw this information on an old East Coast Catamarans website and also read about it on the F-16HT (before it was HP) forum, Catsailor forum and on the old Bimarecatamarani.com site. What would make you think that Bimare would revert to a shorter mast? This is where I got my information, so maybe you should do some more research yourself?

Besides, I am in contact with Steve Jones who is standing by for a discision from the F-16HP class on the new rules proposed by Wouter. Mr. Jones and several of us are planning to go with the Bimare Javelin 16, regardless of the F-16HP classes' decision. We would love to be a part of the F-16HP class and help it grow.

Micheal there are at least three 9 meter rig boats that were planned before or sailing the new rules.. Mine, W's an the original BIM F16

"catsailor1,"
I'm aware of the history of the Bim's, and frankly, I have no real gripes about racing against any Bim currently built. Those boats would probably be grandfathered with the new rules... so where's your gripe? What research is there.
Re. the new boats: What really ticked me off is you saying there's some sort of "prejudice" against Bim. Again, I ask you, where did you get that stuff? And again, I reiterate that Bim and Bim's rep. DID NOT choose to give their standpoint until just now. They chose to ignore requests for info. on whether they had new designs forthcoming. All of the other manufacturers participated in this planning, and Bim did not take this opportunity. I'm sorry, but what is the class supposed to do, wait on a manufacturer on the off chance that they decide to do something?
That said, Personally, I support grandfathering the Bim16 and the Jav16... this would protect Bim's investment. Stuart, others, I'd say the same for you.
Once they redesign, they will be fully aware of the rules, and should have no rational reason for "needing" a bigger mast to make their boat fast enough to be competetive with the other designs.
How's that for compromise?
Michael Coffman
T4.9#32

"catsailor!"-
Welcome to our forum! We like to use our real names here so everyone knows who everyone really is and what their "agenda" may be, especially when they are challenging and/or antagonistic in their posts (and name other people). We do not want any "secret" agendas here. We wish to be inclusive and that is why the BIM yard and dealer were contacted in the past but did not respond. The single, solitary BIM 16 in the United States is in the possession of their dealer. Have you seen this boat yourself or sailed it or weighed it? It's available for the F 16HP Nats coming up but no one has expressed any interest in sailing it there and the BIM dealer is probably not even going to bring it. Yes, the "BIM 16" has been around since 1990 but even BIM admits it's had at least 3 different mast configurations since then, presumably culminating in the 9m. It also had a quite small spinnaker last time I saw it sailed, at Cat Fight- I believe about 13 sqm., but I wouldn't expect it race another F 16HP without adding a larger spinnaker since that spi was developed prior to the F16HP rules. Regarding the "facts" about that boat - I would ask that you contact Darline Hobock at US Sailing about the specifications she was provided for this boat, as it was rated SLOWER than a Taipan 4.9 unirig with NO spinnaker (although the BIM did have a spinnaker for PN calculations). Everyone here on the forum might like to know what you find out regarding this, it was never explained to me why the BIM got such a "gift" number. Personally, their old BIM 16 looked like an interesting, fast boat but even the dealer quoted me weights above 95kg for it. I'm personally all for bringing more F 16HP boats in here (the US) and had hoped the old BIM 16 would have been sold by now or at least sailed more but I know the dealer is very occupied with the Jav 2. Again, welcome and let's stay friendly and not be accusing here, the whole point of a Formula class is to allow different types of boats (and their owners!) to race together fairly and that is what we are trying to do.

Kirt
US F 16HP representative

Kirk,

I have been setting back and reading all the recent posts on this forum and agree with one poster on the F-18 forum that the posters should go out and sail! I agree that "catsailor" should sign his name to his post and I know who he is, however it is his decision to make. He does make a couple of points that I agree with.

First, everyone keeps mentioning that the "dealer" (me?) did not respond to questions about the Bimare 16 or Javelin 16. THIS NOT TRUE! I have responded to every e-mail from you or Wouter. You know that you cannot say the same, can you?

That said, "catsailor" has tested the BIM 16 and probably would have bought it, if the Javelin 16 had not been announced. Unfortuntely, our class trailer is full of Jav 2s and A-Cats for the trip to Key Largo. Besides, all of the sailors that I have contacted, regarding sailing the Bim 16 at Key Largo, are not interested in sailing against 4 or 5 other F-16s. They are all electing to sail F-18HTs or A-Cats, against the likes of Randy Smyth (multi-time world champ/Olympic medalist), Brian Lambert (2 time Worrell 1000 champ), John Tomko (current H-20 NA champ), Bob Hodges (A-Cat ace), Wiliam Sunnucks (Texel winner), Chris Brown (former 5.8 Nacra champ), Mike Krantz (Melges 24 contender), Dave Lennard, myself, and others.

Until the F-16 class gets some regattas with 10 or more boats racing as a class, then it will be difficult to get these established sailors to participate. This achievement of "critical mass" is paramount to the success of the F-16HP class and I hope that the inclusion of the Javelin 16 in the class will help get to this point more quickly.

Remember, it was I who suggested that the F-18HT and the F-16HP combine our initial North Americans. The concept of lightweight formula racing succeeding in the USA is what keeps me striving to make our class better. The A-Cats, F-16HPs, and the F-18HTs all sailing in Key Largo during the same time period is truely exciting for me.

I remain optimistic that the F-16HP class will include the Bimare 16 footers in their future plans and the the two lightweight Formula Classes (F16HP and F18HT) will continue to grow and prosper.

W.F. Oliver

WF-
Thanks for your input. I'm not sure what you mean by "You know you can not say the same, can you?" - Are you meaning I have not responded to you? Could you please explain or cite examples as I have tried to respond when I had something to respond about. I am sorry if I have not always been able to be totally prompt about answering you but I have always called you eventually when asked. I have been dealing with an illness with my spouse for the last 11 weeks and I apologize for that distraction but one has to have priorities. I'm sorry if I indicated you had not responded to questions, I believe the point was there were discussions and requests for input regarding the new Jav 16 and the review of the rules that might have precluded this whole "issue". I even mentioned in my post that you personally (and the BIM yard?) have been (rightly so) very occupied with the F 18HT class and the Worrell. Hopefully in the future you and BIM will stay more involved in the class so this will not happen and we do not repeat all the confusion and bad feelings that apparently were engendered.
I applaud the competition in the upcoming F 18HT and A-class regattas and I admit I will be a little disappointed if we only get 4-5 F 16HP boats, but one has to start somewhere and in the present climate having 4-5 boats for a Nationals is not that bad compared to some other domestically made and promoted boats that could not even get that many to participate in their Nationals.
I appreciate your vote of confidence in the class and look forward to seeing you in two weeks! We DO need to get that BIM 16 sold and on the water- If there is anything I can do to help please let me know.

Sincerely,
Kirt

WF,
For my part, I can honestly say, my apologies - I was not aware that you had notified the class of the dimensions of/plans for the Jav16 when the 8.5m mast situation first came up.
On another topic - I think that all of us want Bim in the game - even if it means that they (and current homebuilders)are grandfathered in an extra "privilege" that the rest of us are not (9 m. mast). I cannot see how this would not be considered cooperation on the class's part.
Your point is well-taken about the rock-stars sailing the A's and F18ht's. The F16 is probably going to take longer to get going. But a lot of us are willing to go for a class based on dedicated, average sailors, and take it a bit slower. In the 18ht class, the rockstars were there from day one, before ANY races. I think that you should consider giving someone like Randy or Matt a Jav16, though
And what about Jav16's for the Worrell!
Just joking - I'm aware of the realities of the situation, but I hope you see why we are not likely to evolve in the same "instant rock-star boat" way as the 18ht.
What it boils down to is this: The F16 class is a sailor-based class. We've all been putting a great deal of effort into promoting our classes (F16 and one-design). But this is the first year. If you go into it with the attitude of "I'll support it after it succeeds" then it will never succeed! Why not, as a dealer, push the F16 class with the same tenacity and brilliance with which you've sold the 18ht class?
I would love to race Catsailor1 on his new Bim (although I'd rather call him by his/her first name). And yes, I plan to be at Tradewinds this year. And Spring Fever. Hopefully we'll show up in numbers. And maybe be allowed to race with the "big boys" this year at SF?
Thanks,
Michael C.
T4.9#32

p.s.
Good luck at the Nat's

.F.,

The F-18HT NAs will be a battle, but you left out Hobie 18 Conteniental Champion Ken Marshack from you list of F-18HT racers.

Looking forward to checking out the Jav 16 next summer.

Stewart that indeed true, but neither my 9 mtr. rig or your 9 mtr. were declared to be production designs. Naturally the Bim 16 footers are intended as production designs.

Wouter

The problem at this time is that research has presented a few very important and sometimes amazing discrepancies.

One of the more expressive ones is this one :

Maurizio (forum okt 2002) : In this time some 250 boats have been built and sold mainly in Italy, but also in France, Spain, Germany, Switzerland etc

Valerio Petrucci (reply on my request for bim 16 class rules dec 2001): "... a few years ago, we tried to start a BIM 16 class, but without too much success. Therefore is no use sending you its class rule"

In this matter I choose to believe Valerio as he has always supplied me with info that has checked out in later research.

With regard to weight, about which Kirt too has made a in the other post, the only official measurements of this design are supplied by both Texel and ISAF handicap systems.

Measurement ISAF (SCHRS : www.schrs.com) system :
Length 4,96
weight 103 kg's
mainsail 13,26 sq.mtr
mainsail luff 8,25 mtr. (indicative of a 8,5 mtr. mast ?)

The Texel system has measured one Bim 16 but identified it as a one-off measurement as the boat had been modified. I'm in contact with the owner of that craft and she has supplied me with the data of her Texel measurement form
Here the weight of the platform (ex spin gear) was measured at 110 kg's.

With respect to making the mast 9 mtr. in 1999 or 2001 (quotes differ on this too) does that mean that by far the biggest bulk of those 250 boats sold have compliant rigs even under the new proposed rules ?

I don't know you tell me !

With respect to replying to W.F. mails ; I confirmed his e-mail indentifying his vote (by replying) and asked for an official quote of the Jav 16 specs, what I got was a reply of accusations and extremely demanding requests. Needless to say I received no official specs. Now, I didn't ask for his view of the world, merely for data that can be confirmed and checked and be used in the official procedures of the Formula 16 class.

Without such data the class will use the data she has been able to confirm independently for dispensation or grandfather requests.

To proof our good intentions in this respect the class announces that she grandfathers the individual Bim 16 design of Sandra on the Texel measurement specification sheet for her boat as supplied by her. This ruling is valid for double handed sailing as several other specs are non compliant with the rule set too.

Furthermore the class confirms that she is in contact with Valerio Petrucci of the Bimare yard again to discuss the future of the outstanding issues. The class recognizes Valerio as the official spokesperson for the Bimare yard in this matter and will not seek contact with others in order to avoid more conflicting comments that could cause further damage the reputation of the Bim yard and Bim product.

I trust that we won't see more of the "unintentionsal mix-ups of facts, lapses of memory or unfortunate typos" that we have seen thus far in some e-mails and posts or that have been expressed to to private persons.

With kind regards,

Wouter

Micheal C my second crew is a ex-rock star!! Was involved in the "Masters Aprentices" group years ago... Cant sail, cant really sing now either.. I keep telling him its all those groupies he was with.. *takes tongue out of cheek*..

W not fair.. its a production run of umm one or two... Have almost as many hulls as the new production boats...
When we get beated I'm threatening to have Brendon sing in the bar afterwards!!!! Should make the T4.9ers consider doing multiple 360s to keep behind me!!!