I read someplace yesterday that AUS ran their own code zero in a prelim race in 3-4 knots...trounced the fleet easily. So the principle is sound....will come down to wind ranges.

Also read that USA will be sailing the exact same boat from the '04 games "SilverBullet". Charlie is quoted as saying these boats stay stiff forever, only needing an occsional beam-reseating to bring back the factory freshness. Hagara is planning to run his same boat from the '00 games. That's just amazing!

Yes, it's utter bollocks that the T is an expensive boat to sail!!!

We know it is bullocks, but it doesnt help as long as it fits with the decision makers feelings and agendas. Ref: =160&tx_ttnews[backPid]=12&....de/news0.html?&am...Hash=d87a4d7ae8

It's been a little while since I reviewed the rules, but that code 0 could also trickle it's way to F18 as I don't believe the rules stipulate anything about spinnakers other than the area measurement.

It is an intriguing question.

I could have used the code zero during a recent distance race (Milt Ingraham 'round Anacapa Island). Winds were less than 3-5 kts for the first 4 hours, upwind leg. Got thrashed pretty soundly by one of the two I20's by the upwind mark. We were more than 1.5 miles back when we put up our chute. Wind came up just a little and amazingly we were able to reel in the leader and passed him with less than a mile to go.

Not sure the code zero would have been able to catch up like that...but if we'd had it on the upwind leg, we might not have needed to.

From F18 Class rules

C.4.4. SPINNAKER
4.4.1 Definition of a spinnaker
All triangular sails not complying with the definition of a mainsail or a jib are spinnakers, on
condition that the girth at mid-height is equal or greater than 75% of that of the foot.

The Tornado class has a max girth requirement but no min girth. I think this girth requirement means any F18 gennaker will not look quite like the Tornado ones (which look like they have a shorter girth). An F18 class legal gennaker will probably be less efficient than the Tornado designs when the sail is sheeted hard up wind (the larger shoulder will be unstable).

Chris.

I feel i have hit my "MAX GIRTH" limit... i think its time for slim fast!

Actually the Tornado class is the odd one out when it comes down to regulating spinnakers.

All other formula classes (F20, F18, F16) have ruled out "code-zero's" (or rather; very large jibs) from their inception. The Tornado class never did. Now they are paying the price.

Wouter

I have designed, built, or sailed with several versions of what could be referred to as a “Code 0”, “Asymmetric 0” or “Masthead Genoa” since 1992 and I have done this within both Symmetrical and Asymmetrical measurement rules.

For asymmetric, when constricted with a 75% girth restriction, the sails are effective but not very much fun. Generally you need to run a upwind sufficient cloth for the body of the sail but a lighter false leach (attached to your designed shape leach) which will allow the sail to measure but then generally flaps when sheeted hard for tight reaching or even upwind.

This is fine on bigger boats like a TP52 but it is not so flash (or legal) in one designs where there are generally spinnaker cloth restrictions (I have not looked but I am sure laminates and heavy nylon are not legal in the F18 guidelines).

The best example of this is to find a photo of the W60 Tokio from the 1993 Whitbread before Code 0s were legal.

All-up, I think this would be aweful on a F18...

Re code zero



http://sailjuice.squarespace.com/home/?currentPage=2

There is a company doing code zero for f18, not sure if it's class legal for not.

<<http://www.fwd-sailing.com/Reacher%20FWD%20Sailing/Reacher%20FWD%20Sailing.html>>

May ask them to do one for my F16.

Would make the low wind sailing more fun <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />, not sure if I would use it for racing though.

John,

from the pictures that sail dont look like it would measure in under F16 rules, not enough shoulder. If you carried it to open regattas, you would have to compete on handicap I think. Perhaps not a big problem in Switzerland (yet, but one day <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> )

I would like to have such a sail myself, but it would spoil me if a class regatta was held in low winds <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

And have to acquire your own seperate handicap rating with a payed for measurement certificate. You can't you the standard (F16/F18) class handicap number as your boat won't measure in as one. I can already tell you that your handicap number will take an ENORMOUS hit as all the spinnaker area will now be regarded as jib area. For example on the F16 :

Standard sloop F16 Texel = 102, SCHRS = 1.01
Code-0 sloop F16 Texel = 88. SCHRS = 0.831

I don't believe those rating numbers are doable with a Code-0, you have to be 7 to 9 minutes faster around the course per 1 hour race and you are not going to point as high as a normal sloop. Note, that you have to carry this sail in all conditions and so will get the hit even in winds above 8 knots where you really can't carry a headsail this large.

I think we must regarded the code-0 as it was always intended, a specialized light winds headsail that can be sailed above a beam reach. I'm sure Booth is going to drop this sail for the next event that is expected to be above 8 knots of wind. His boat/rig for this Olympics is the sail suit version of a "single-gear race car". It only works on the specific track it was intended for. This is fine for large mono's as they are allowed to change sails while racing, but now of the cat classes allow this and so the overall benefit will be dicey.

Wouter

So Bundy and Ashby measured in today. Did they measure in the Code Zero????

The Tornado rule is extremely strict (in many areas tolerances are a few millimeters or grams).
Therefore I think that the Tornado class deliberately omitted to include the mid girth rule after the revision followed to the 2000 Olympic Games.
Don't forget that Mitch Booth is the father of the "TORNADO SPORT".
From a performance point of view I consider the mid girth rule SILLY.
Most likely it was introduced by the founders of the F18 class.
For sure the first F20 rule (the one agreed in 1989 by Lallo Petrucci for BIMARE, Enrico Contreas for MATTIA & CECCO e Christian Favre for VENTILO) did not include this rule.
I remember that many sail-lofts such as Oxosails developed very nice code Os in a very light mylar cloth available at the time.
Since all we catsailors love to go faster and faster, I would let all the catamaran classes to test these new code Os.
If they prove to be faster than the existing asymmetrics then we should adopt them.
So all my praise to Mitch, Charlie, Jay and Pablo who dare to introduce this new weapon!
I am firmly determined to contact Ullman Sails immediately after the end of the Olympics to have one Code 0 made for my boat

The T rules start off with.



Should the code zero be outlawed under this rule

Also, is it a flat cut spinnaker or a second head sail???

That link also says Gashby and Bundy went with normal kites.

I did some maths over at SA which I can't be bothered re-doing that suggests that if 2 of the 6 days aren't suited to the C0 then you'd be better off not using it.

That is not true. This mid girth rule was already present in the measurement based rating systems like Texel and SCHRS (and FFV predessor) when the F18 class was founded. Basically, it is there to distinguish between a (normal) jib and an asymmetric spinnaker. Without this rule there is no fundamental difference between the two. Of course a measurement based rating system has to distinguish between the two to arrive at acceptably accurate rating numbers.

But even under this condition, no rating systems bans code-0's explicetly. They only state that when a headsail has a mid girth of less then 75% that then the headsail area is to be included in the total upwind sailarea (as as such is effectively regarded as a normal jib). Obviously this is the correct way of looking at the situation as the code-0's can indeed be carried upwind.

The trick where everything falls down is that the code-0 is in basis a very limited upwind sail. It is mainly a reacher and can go somewhat upwind in rather light winds. Allow such a sail in your class will simply kill it off in direct handicapped comparisons to other boats. This is a promotional nightmare for a fledgeling catamaran class as we all do so much handicapped racing in the first few years. I know this was the consideration in the F16 class to copy the 75% rule in its ruleset, I dare say it is exactly the same for the F18 and F20 classes. The latter does not refer to the "original" F20 class (Bim, Ventilo, Mattia) apparently.



Personally, I would love to see any crew bring a code-0 (hooter, screacher) to an F16 regatta on a experimental waver and show its potential over a range of conditions. In my time as a chairman there was an outstanding invitation to any crew to do so. Nobody took us up on this offer and I think the invitation has effectively been withdraw by the new F16 leadership. I still think this sail is much less then a "new wapon"; even Booth didn't dare "bring it on" in Athenes 2004 because even he says it is a risky option when the conditions can not accurately be predicted to be light in advance.

And what is the point of a faster sail in really light winds when you'll get trashed in anything above 8 knots by normal gear ? I'm not at all convinced it is a "faster" sail altogether, especially not when 2-up crews are already double trapping in 10 knots of wind and have to shed power. So I'm hoping that this olympiad has a few normal wind days as well. Then we can see what a code-0, hooter, screacher really does.

Wouter

I agree. Rude behavior all round.