NACRA 17 into final stage for selection

After squeaking through the Equipment Committee by one vote, the NACRA 17 is in a race against the Viper 16 for the 'Council' vote.

I am guessing that is the collection of national ISAF delegates. Any one know for sure?

I sent this email to the F18 Eastern Area list:

All,

As many of you know, the equipment for the mixed multihull and women's skiff events will be selected this week at the ISAF mid-year meeting in Italy. In March, ISAF conducted an equipment trial for the candidate boats for both events, as well as an evaluation of the suitability of kiteboarding to be included in the Olympic program. Following that event, the evaluation committee published a report from the trials discussing the merits of each boat, and the remarks from the trials participants (sailors nominated from each MNA to attend the event and offer feedback). The reports from the trials can be found at the bottom of the page here: http://www.sailing.org/committees/2009-2012/26218.php

For the mixed multihull, the evaluation panel recommended the Nacra 17 and the AHPC Viper. Of the two the Nacra 17 received higher marks from the trials sailors, and was the first choice of the evaluation panel. For the women's skiff, the evaluation panel recommended the RS 900 and the Mackay FX (49er hull with smaller rig).

Earlier today, the ISAF Events committee held a vote on both the mixed multihull and women's skiff. The winners of that vote are then recommended to the full ISAF council which meets over the next two days. While being recommended by the event committee certainly carries weight, it is not binding and the full council has made surprising decisions in the past.

From the vote this morning, the events committee selected the Mackay FX with a strong majority for the women's skiff. For the mixed multihull, the Viper and Nacra 17 tied, with the committee chairman casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of the Nacra 17. Therefore the event committee recommendations are:

Women's skiff: Mackay FX
Mixed Multihull: Nacra 17

I will be watching the proceedings closely, and will send another update when a final decision has been made. Personally, I feel both the Viper and Nacra 17 are excellent, modern choices that will allow for competitive racing by mixed crews.

Best,
Jeff

Nice summary Jeff..

I would add that the evaluation panel judged all of the cats acceptable and recommended two boats. The skiff panel eliminated some boats from consideration. This recommendation was based on sailing properties.

The events committee vote is the first vote that considers all of the factors in selecting Olympic equipment that were speced out.

The council, of course, represents a broader range of views and that is the reason that the final outcome may differ from these recommendations.

Thanks!!

source : http://www.facebook.com/pages/AHPC-Australian-High-Performance-Catamarans/10150116138925627

The ISAF meeting is underway.... And the latest news from Bundy:

"The events committee were very divided on the decision for Olympic Equipment for mixed Multihull.
Votes for Nacra 17 were 8
Votes for Viper were 8

Committee chairman gave casting vote to Nacra.

So it's still very close. It will be exciting tomorrow in Council for the final decision."

Have faith, the council will come up with something else...

Of course, I was completely wrong about the keelboat vote. Still in denial about that, actually...

Mike

Final vote delayed till tomorrow following today's 19-14 decision on the women's skiff. Interesting that at 17,000 euro the Mackay FX they have selected is the most expensive of the boats evaluated and slightly more than the 16,750 cost of the first 100 Nacra 17s. OTOH there are lots of second hand hulls available since it uses the 49er platform with a new rig.

Wow... 19 -14...

That is much closer than I would have thought... given the consensus that the FX bid had developed in the comittee process..(10 to 2) if I remember... The FX is the biggest of the skiffs.... some worry that their small woman won't be able to push the boat... therefore... not competitive... 19-14 ... means it will be a real cluster on the multihulls.... The fubar that was the process has resulted in a 5 to 5 tie with the chair voting to 6-5..

I bet Pete Melvin would like these words back
[quote name='Tornado-Cat' timestamp='1336141327' post='3699435']
Pete Melvin:

"The F16 is on the small end of the scale for the crew weight range specified (120 kg to 140 kg) and, in our opinion, would be more exciting and challenging to sail for Olympic-caliber sailors if it had a more powerful sailplan. The F18 typical crew weights exceed the range specified by ISAF. The F18 is also quite a heavy boat for its length and could be made lighter, but the hull volume and surface area would be needlessly large for a lighter Olympic spec F18 platform.

So... the N17 designer says... Ah... we reject the weight range that ISAF called for.... Too light... Most of the F18 sailors can't play....
So.... WE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM WE WANT.... Replace the F18 class with a lighter better faster boat.

You choose!

Place your bets.... ladies and gents... place your bets

(The little birds tell me that the US is voting N17.)

What I just love about Pete's comments (mr Melvin) is how he designs a boat that is not full spec under F16 rules (25kg overweight) using a F18 mast that is too stiff for a wide range of winds (flat sails) , gets beaten left and right by Vipers and Falcons and then blames the F16 class rules for not being up to spec for 120-140 kg crews.

Drop 25 kg on the platform and gain an extra 10 kg on the wire. Wham, ideal crew weight problem solved ! Shouldn't be to hard to figure out. He did also design an A-cat at min weight right ? Or was it 100 kg ? I can't remember.

If Falcon marine can do it ... ... ...

Wouter

Selecting the 49erFX was a sound decision in my opinion. Indeed the purchase prize is steep and it does weight a bit, they noted it as such in the report, but find convincing argument to take these hits in the area's of availability and the the fact the females can cross train with the males using very similar equipment sharing most spares.

A sound balancing of conflicting criteria.

With respect to the N17 ... ... slightly different story. That thing is just expensive without providing any concrete benefits in return with respect to availability, cross training, etc.

Or at least that is my opinion.

Woter, as far as I understand the class rules, there is no such thing as a boat that weighs too much to be an F16 (assuming all other measurements are in spec.) Hell, a Mystere 5.0 XL, at 143kg, fits the F16 spec (actually I think the jib is just a bit too big, but otherwise...)

You misunderstood Wouter's comment - he just meant it's not designed to the limits of the rule.

Is that a reference to Carnac, or are you talking about some results from elsewhere? I wasn't aware that the Nacra F16 had been seen much in competition yet. Were there some at Carnac?

19 to 14... for the FX... but, the amazing thing is that the 14 was for the 29ner XX which was not recommended by the event committee. So council pulled that boat up. with the RS getting just 2 votes.

per Goodall... the issue debated was supply and fun..

the two choices were both rig upgrades to existing platforms.... (29ners are a bear in 20 knots... just to get around the course).

I surmise that supply eliminated the new design of the RS900.... While the fun factor and team size split the votes 19 to 14 for the FX and 29nerXX

So much for rubber stamping the event committee... which was strongly for the 49ner FX. Wow, How do they look at the fubar cat document that was essentially tied at the event committee...

Supply could be an issue in cats as well. The council may not want to chance a N17... and the fun factor is probably about the same for the viper and N17... Could the council pull up the Hobie 16??? and vote that boat against the Viper ...

The dog that has not barked... the Hobie 16 ? Really?

Wouter-
Pete doesn't need me to defend him but I want to let you know that all 5 of the M&M designed A cats that my wife and I have owned over the past 15 years have been minimum weight. The A3.5 I took delivery of last week- beautifully built by Lars Guck- is 4 kg light and incredibly stiff.
Jay Glaser

Wouter should contact Pete directly and give him the heads up and perhaps some advice on how to design a good boat... I'm sure it will be very helpful and maybe even some of Wouter's advice will show through on the ETNZ AC72....

hmm since wouter is pissing off all things pete made (he also seems to know that the mast is to stiff -macca, you were involved in the discussion desciding on that mast section- next time call wouter.)and he is spinning all data towards the viper, my guess he is allready hired via bundock by the Orecale design team. To bad for etnz.············

What a joker

btw i love f16, i take delivery of one next week. I ordered it because i want to start sailing with my 12 year old daughter. Nice concept but no olympic boat. Period.

Nacra 17 is the new Olympic multihull...

Macca why is it you have to have a dig at everything that Wouter says, he is just one of many on a forum giving an opinion. He is a highly skilled engineer and gives opinion based on research unlike many who pontificate on this forum.

In some ways he gives a far more honest unbiased opinion than yourself, at least he doesn't flip flop from one opinion to another depending on who your association with is at the time.

There were several at the thai regatta in januari, sailed by capable crews like gunnar etc, then of course they were raced at the trials and there we also two racing at Carnac in the C1 fleet. of course in the latter case the big boys were on F18's but still amateur crews on Vipers and Falcons passed them, so this piece of race data may still be valid. Then we also have the race data from springfever this tear were Joseph Bello raced the nacra F16, Joseph sailed Viper earlier. His video's are on youtube Incl. his springfever racing.

So yes the nacra F16 is getting around and has raced now in Asia, USA and Europe in a few big regatta's.

Sorry Mr Jay G.

That was a bit of European cynism. Of course I know that those A's were at minimum weight , that was exactly the point. By extention I imply the question "why isn't his F16 at or close to min weight" . If he has proven that he can design a winner that way then there must be some other reason why the boat isn't full spec. Note that its mainsail is quoted as smaller then the Vipers in the ISAf document as well. And why use F18 masts etc.

As such this says more about the design choices made with the Nacra F16 then about the validity of the F16 class rules.

Simply put. Want to create a well performing F16 for crews in the given weight range ? Design a full spec F16 using components optimized for F16 sailing.

Hence my later question, if Falcon marine can do it ... ... why not M&M / Nacra ? Those €19.000 ex taxes or delivery for the N17 will also be sufficient for a full spec carbon F16.

I think this has nothing to do with what class rules allow or not, in contrast what Pete says. It has everything to do with decisions made within Nacra. Why not say so ? There is nothing to be ashamed of there.

wouter

because Wouter seems to think that he knows more about multihull design than Pete Melvin....

I dont flip on my position, I have always said that the F16 is not the right boat for the games, the evaluation sailors agreed as did the events and equipment committees and finally the ISAF council members.

I have NO association with Nacra, In fact you could even say that I am anti nacra as there is still outstandings to be settled and until then I have no desire to support them or their products. I have simply made my thoughts known on what I consider to be the best solution for sailing in the games.

Macca,

Give me Petes mail adres and I will !

Thinking that carbon masts are not allowed inside the F16's and saying so in public as a F16 boat designer is just simply wrong.

Blaming the F16 class rules in public for your own "underperforming" design choices incorporated in the Nacra F16 is also lamentable. If the nacra F16 doesn't fit 120 kg - 140 kg then that is NOT an F16 problem as proven many times over at Alter cups sailed on Blades and Viper F16's (3 times) etc.

Lets face it, this is a critical time and Pete must have understood that his comments would immediately have been read as critiques on the Viper bit. As such he himself has chosen to enter the political fray. Now he either does that thruthfully and is respected or he does so using verifiable untruths and will get called out on those.

You don't have to be einstein to work that out.

Wouter

info@morrellimelvin.com good luck, maybe he will get you on the first flight to Auckland...

Macca, using just one criteria that of the F16 Olympic campaign ( which you have always stated is the wrong boat for the Olympics ) is a bit like saying that what went before my latest campaign isn't counted.

I do admire your eloquency and choice of words in your writing but then most politcians have that trait and unfortunately having a way with words doesn't always have the best long term interest for the masses, it just keeps the politicians in a job.

Does anyone know how much the N17 weighs?

142Kg....

Thanks!

Ooouch,bit of a porker then.

I stand by my word so read below a copy of the mail I have just send :



Dear mr. Melvin,

I write to you in relation to the comments you made with respect to F16's. I refer to the series of comments as published at the following location.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nacra-Sailing/215545338553


You wrote :

"... we were considering adding performance-enhancing features like a carbon mast and curved daggerboards. The F16 class and F18 class rules do not allow either of these features."

This is patently untrue. The F16 class has always allowed carbon masts and indeed a good number of them (about 75) are sailing / racing with one. In fact, different winners of past F16 championships used one with other winners using aluminium. I admit that I'm a little surprised that a F16 designer is not aware of that fact.


You also wrote :

"The F16 is on the small end of the scale for the crew weight range specified (120 kg to 140 kg), and, in our opinion, would be more exciting and challenging to sail for Olympic-caliber sailors if it had a more powerful sailplan."

This may be the case for the 131 kg heavy Nacra F16 that was presented at the trials with a combo of an alu mast section optimized for F18's and an (undersized ?) mainsail of only 13.35 sq.mtr (ex mast area), but much less so for a full spec F16's with a minimum class weight of 107 kg, an optimized F16 mast and a mainsail (excl. mast area) of 13.72 sq.mtr (combined 15 sq. mtr.)

The F16 class rules were optimized for that particular set of dimensions and maximizing it to those specs will already lift competitive crew weight by more then 10 kg. I also think it to be instructive that past Alter Cup events on F16's (3 in total) do indicate that the fullness of that range is indeed competitive, even when using the Vipers. Same conclusions may be drawn from the various F16 European and World championships. In fact, in those events the range of 120-140 kg was itself considered to be at the low end.


I desired to write to you about these statements since they now have entered the public domain and you are seen as an authority in cat sailing and cat design. I admit that opinions are opinions and one can endlessly argue about those, but the statements above are clearly based on misintepretations of the F16 class rules. As such these hurts the F16 class needlessly and there also appears to be ample room to lift the Nacra F16 performance. Both points compel me to write to you about this.


With kinds regards,

Wouter Hijink


(Co-founder and first chairman of the Formula 16 class)

+1

Give 'em hell Woot!

20-15 over the Viper - http://bit.ly/IB5pHD

Great news imo... less chance of negative impact on the F16 class.

True and minimal impact on growing the sport of sailing as well. I see it as a missed opportunity.

This council went big.... Big skiff... big cat and kiteboarding over windsurf with a core of 19-20 countries.
This group also tossed the keel boats.

Congratulations to Nacra.
I wonder how the regional championship systems will work out.

Now the F16 is really a FAD!!!

That has GOT to be the longest running joke in Cat Racing history!!!

Two points! Bob

Touche, Bob !

I never saw a downside. It'd give the mortals a chance to play with the gods of the sport. With the 17 they'll probably be in their own little world just like they were with the Tornado.

Isn't the Viper over minimum weight as well? I remember Goodall stating that you couldn't build a durable boat at that weight without starting to include expensive carbons and kevlars.

I'm sure the designers gave the manufacturer (Nacra) the full spectrum...a laminate schedule for a fiberglass boat that is over minimum weight or a boat using carbons and kevlar fabrics at minimum weight. I doubt M&M made that call.

While we debated Viper versus Nacra 17 for Olympic glory.. I suspect that the real challenge for getting the 20 and 30 something market will be the OTHER Viper..

Viper 640 just started marketing in Annapolis.. 35 K all up with trailer for a 3 person sport boat.

Compare that to a N17 at 27K + 2K trailer.

If your background is Opti, Laser and 420... then OPB... Which way do you go?

(the largest small boat NA's in the country are on 3 person boats.... Lighting's etc...)

Like I said, if falcon can do it ... (and others like stealth marine and amateur homebuilders too)

Besides, if there is money to be spend on C-boards then there is also money to be spend on carbons etc. It is just a matter of choice and €19.000 before taxes and delivery goes a long way. Many €13.000 ex taxes or delivery alu - glass F16's are already at 115 kg or less and have proven themselves over many years of sailing. Not using F18 components like beams, rudders, boards and masts drops weight considerably.

I agree that M&M probably didn't make this call themselves. But I also doubt whether mr Melvin was presented with a script not of his own hand and asked to put his name under it. His comments are his own and it contains errors / falsehoods.


With respect to the Viper, AHPC have proven the validity of the given weight range for their boats thus disagreeing with the opinion of mr Melvin. Additionally, they don't "slack" on the F16 specs when they themselves have chosen to not go full throttle on them. Neither do they make obvious mistakes as to state that carbon masts are not allowed.

Yea (roll eyes)....minimum weight F16's are real eggshells ...like Matt's Falcon here in the video. Maybe the naysayers need to hire Matt as a consultant to help them get their strength/weight/price issues sorted out. If he can build here in the US with the insanity of the EPA and other business killing government bureaucracy, the offshore crew should be able to do it for a fraction of the price using cheap labor, little to no environmental restrictions, and economy of scale to lower material costs...

http://vimeo.com/32382270

The Nacra 17 is a bit too powerful and too innovative for the (needed) renovation of the local SC15 and SC17 fleet. However, if the Viper was chosen, we would probably be able to convince people to buy a few. ISAF's choice close the doors to our dream of sending a cat to Rio 2016.

I guess the same will happen in other small countries.

Yeah a fad, eh?

Get Real, Bob . what boat do you think youth sailors ARE using to develop into potential Olympic sailors???

Some of the kids are out of your own yacht club, dude.

I bet your help building up the NACRA 17 Class will outweigh your antagonism with the F 16 Class.

Enjoy the day and always sail with Aloha,
Bert

Lighten up, Francis!

OR...

HTFU, mate.

AH come on, Bob dosen't hate the boat just the fact that he can't out correct it's number. Don't worry Bob they'll change the number soon enough and that will even the playing field some. ha ha

How come??? just buy the Vipers or Falcons for that matter, and train the same, cause if someone in your, or any other fleet will try to clasify for the Olympics they can get really good on an F16, and I think is the perfect boat to jump for the N17 afterwards without too much adaptation.

Right there is mistake in my view.

In ARG once having the F18 fleet, whichever boat was elected it was transparent for us, as the best guys can ride whatever you put them in front.

That is now, but with Lange-Espínola it was just two guys training alone in Europe with the Tornado fleet with no local multi fleet whatsoever.

Two examples that grass roots does not have a direct influence on the Olympics, but having them will elevate the possible new atlhetes.

The best thing you can do to form future Olympians is just buying those F16.

Yeah - I winced the first time I read Pete Melvin's statement. It would have been better to stick the N17 design elements than to venture into the marketing & selection campaign spin. M&M's designs speak for themselves. Thankfully to Wouter, he is more informed about the F16 class rules .

Yeah, I think that the selection of the N17 will indeed make it harder to attract new nations to the Olympics. So there Luiz is correct and the ISAF committees are wrong.

But on the other hand, ArgF18 makes a good point in my opinion. No-one is going to build fleets of N17's, not even the rich nations. Even if the will and money would be there then the timeframe is simply to short to be able to do that before 2016 and no-one knows what will happen after 2016. Therefore the growing and maturing of sailors is still going to be handled via the H16/Nacra500/SL16 -> F16/F18 route.

There is simply no alternative. Of course the F16's come closest to the N17 by virtue of both being much lighter then the F18's and the (allowed) usage of carbon masts.

Additionally the investments have already been made with respect to the F16's. All makes now have sponsored talent teams and training programs around them. Best we can all do now is to go full steam ahead with everything that we were doing and just see the N17 as a Tornado replacement. A boat of which each MNA will eventually have 2 or 3 in pocession for the final stretch to the big O. That is the only viable pathway.


See the two newest additions in maturing talented sailors (Falcon F16's in Belgium, Nacra F16's in NL)

Chalk it up to the lost art of repartee and political correctness.

No one should get a pass on their published comments. Had he expected to be scrutinized he likely would have checked his facts.

Unfortunately you have to check everything that comes from NACRA and their supporters.

Never forget we're in a trade war!

"Unfortunately you have to check everything that comes from NACRA and their supporters."

As indeed we have to do with everything coming from AHPC as well. And Hobie, ITA, Roland Gaebler, ... etc

It is incumbent to be critical with all spin/marketing statements, not just NACRA's. Some are better than others. Frequently, it is a statement that is true but leaves the reader to conclude incorrectly by what is not said.

For example, Jake's dredging up of the statement about "having to use expensive" materials to build a lighter boat that is durable. And.....It leaves the non-critical reader to assume wrongly that a lighter boat would be too expensive or corners would have to be cut to save in cost that questions the lighter boat's durability.

Well Florida, fortunately, has an excellent NACRA rep. I've never heard a bad word about him. I think and hope he'll sell a lot of F16s.

But nobody in the F-16 class would ever bulsh!t or put a spin on something, never. Just read any post by Woutster. Get over the sour grapes .The F-16 is probably WAY better off NOT being involved in the Olympics. Be glad you didn't get the nod.

That has nothing to do with it(though you may be right).

The concern is a misstatement of F16 class rules by a world famous designer. He should have known better.

And you or anyone else on this forum has never misstated something. It's only important to you guys, the rest of the world doesn't give a rat's butt ,probably including Pete M. So the the F-16 allows carbon masts ,stop the presses and let's lynch the best multihull designer in the US because he misstated that world changing fact. The F-16 class would be huge if it wasn't for a handful of you guys. I'm surprised you all haven't brought up slander charges. OOOOHHHHH the humanity. GET A F*CKING GRIP! You got free press by the designer of the new Olympic boat. Any press is good press.

I suggest keel hauling mr Melvin for his crimes against the F16 class.

Let the tribunals begin.

Maybe tar and feathering but use gelcoat instead . Of course if it were Macca, they will use paint ! Cast no stones from your glass house.

+1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEtPluUi0_U

Who's the rep for Florida?

http://www.keysailing.com/

There may be others, dunno.

JESUS! Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

There is a slight difference between the pack of idiots who post on this board, (myself included in that), and somebody who's in the biz, and making a presentation. He should be up on things, but its still not that big of a deal in my book. F*ck people, its sailing. Not a cure for child leukemia.
Settle down.

tback:

You can also get Nacra parts from Scott over in Cocoa/Rockledge.

My point exactly, so your pisser must have been the same as mine. Booger.

Okay guys, there may be a lot of pissing in the Wheaties going on around here, but for my own part... when someone who designed an F16 seems to not know the class rules regarding the boat, I have to wonder if the his boat was optimally designed.

How exactly would you change the hull design to use a carbon mast vs. an aluminum one? Pete Melvin is not the builder he designed the hulls.

Hmmm... I'm not a boat designer so I'm not sure what the answer may be. Are you saying that the design of the rig (including its weight,) has no effect on the hull design whatsoever? I defer to your greater knowledge on the subject (unless you start saying things that are obviously incorrect like "an F16s mast can't be more than 7m long," or "it can't be made out of carbon.")

That said, if someone tells me that the mast tip weight requirement makes building out of carbon fibre pointless, maybe Mr. Melvin's comment is defensible?

No, that would be wrong as well.

It would however make the carbon mast durable. Didn't Matt fly a carbon mast in that video of his crash on a sandbar ? Same situation as with "the trials" but different end result ?

Besides carbon mast bend can be tailored to a wide range of desires and that to may be a benefit making things worthwhile. Well, maybe not so much for amateur sailors but certainly for Olympic level crews.

This is clear to me, plus the F16 is the right boat for our type of sailing.

My point is: it would be easier to convince people (especially those with no Olympic dreams) to renew the fleet exclusively with Vipers if it had gained Olympic status. It would clearly be the perfect/obvious choice.

It's a marketing constraint, not a technical one.

As many have reported... for those on a campaign.. the cost of the boat is incidental.
The South American and Pacific Rim countries are now faced with getting teams in three unique boats. (a 29ner platform is not a 49ner platform.
A Viper/F16 is not a N17 and a windsurfer board is not a Kite).

This is just a lost opportunity for growing the sport.

true.