Kids F12

I agree with Phill on this, I teach children in Optimists, at my club we have around 50 kids sailing them on a Monday night, my older children 5,8 and 10, all sail optimists. So selfishly I want the F12 to be a boat for them. I get the feeling that Wouter also wants the boat to be for himself!

i know when the concept was first talked about on the main forum a number of people expressed an interest in this concept for younger children.

It should be possible to have an f12 for 7-12 year old and one for 12+ by having different rigs.

Ultimately I believe the hulls should be rotomoulded. Sorry to mention the plastic word on this forum.

Have you seen the Open Bic? I bet that this is the future of Kids monohull sailing. They start off with an Optimist rig on this boat and then add the Bic rig for more performance. Can't we do this with the Kids F12.

http://www.openbic.com/



Gareth

I've actually done the math and modelling on the F12 and interestingly enough it is not suited to say 5 or 8 year olds.

If you scale the basic catamran design down to 10 or 8 feet then you run into other problems, like pitching resistance. The catamaran design doesn't lend itself very well to very short hull lengths. That is one of the reasons why the F12 is what it is now, geared towards 12-16 year old youths and light adults.

Other designers and project teams are invited to create and succesfully establish (smaller) cats geared towards smaller sailors, but I'm not going to do it.

Wouter

I didn't know that.
In spite of those problems, would it be possible in your opinion to design and build a cat under 12 ft able to beat the Optimist (even if marginally) in the relevant features:

speed
pointing ability
safety
fun
ease of rigging
price

What Math or Modelling can tell you that the design is not suited to 5 or 8 year olds?

Gareth

Well actually, they can sail it just fine as long as they crank on the ram vang. But people simply don't regard a 12 foot by 7 foot wide catamaran design with a 7.00 sq. mtr. rig as a good size for a young kid and they are probably right as the craft will be quite fast.

Placing a 3.5 sq. mtr. sail will go a long way in correcting these issues but then the platform will look weird as a 3.5 mtr. rig is very small on such a platform. It can still be done however.

But if you optimize a 12 foot catamaran to its maximum performance (why else go for the catamaran concept ?) then the 5-10 years are expected to be scared shitless. At what age do parents put their kids on fast dirt bikes ?

Wouter

I guess his answer will be a bit complex, but it probably has to do with righting moment.
The Optimist's weight range is from 38 kg to 54 kg only and the age range is from 7 to 15 years old.

Luiz,

It might interest you that a 40 kg kid will be able to match a Laser-1 sailed by a 80 kg adult and not feel more powered up then that 80 kg guy.

40 kg kids are on average 12 years of age. Of course there is nothing wrong with placing two 8 year olds on the boat who are combined 40 kg and pump out the same performance.

Wouter

Wouter,

Everything is about performance with you, but that is not a cats only virtue, to my mind a cats best virtue for 7-12 year olds is stability, and putting a small rig on a cat is exactly what I am suggesting. One of the main reasons the Optimist is so liked is its stability. Remember kids don't pick the optimist its the parents and clubs.

Actually its stability and maneuverability and this is a vice with a cat, especially a boardless cat and this could be the killer for the F12 for 7-12 year olds. I am sure that is why Phills concept had boards.

Gareth

There is -plenty of water out there...let Wouter do his thing with the teens and interested Adults. You do your thing with the 7-12 year olds. Build whatever you want, no one is stopping you... if the bickering keeps up, by the time you come to some sort of agreement (if ever) the current 7 year olds will be too old (big) for the platform that is being arguing for.

Here the best way to settle this…let all interested parties go out on their own, design and build their ideal F-12…then get them out on the water and see which ones perform…Not to be offensive but this “put up or shut up” approach could be much more productive than just arguing back and forth with “I Think” “You Think”

Those that do not have the expertise to design and build a proto type would do best to leave the decisions as to length/beam/weight/sail area etc. to the ones that are willing to put their money where their mouth is…either way, once they are on the water the fact will be quickly separated from opinion.

Best Regards,
Bob

First off, Wouter does not have his own kids so, parents, you all know he cannot just "get it" about kids. No insult intended, Wout, but you simply can't. Neither could I until at age 48 I had a son. Now Jack's seven and he's sailed with me a lot. I bought him an Opti because, well, I guessed that's how it's supposed to be done.

But we live in a beach town, beach cats drag racing to little islands, stopping at restaurants for a bite, ducking bridges and across shoals, simply playing like 7 year olds should. There is very little Opti racing and not until age 10. Jack's Opti gets little use.

Then I saw an ad for a used Hobie Bravo. We went and looked at it and WHAM! He is HOOKED! He thinks it is the coolest looking boat on earth and it is (but by a completely different mindset than Wouter and most glass cat racers). Slow? Heavy? No boom? No sail shape? All true and at age 7 he does not care one bit. The hope of beiing solo a catamaran captain is all he thinks about. What I want to teach him is sailing independence and a never ending need to be on the water. The Bravo seems to do that for him. Being rotomolded, he can't hurt it on oyster bars, it will carry all his pals, it's so stable he can stand and fish, and he should keep up with and maybe beat the large Sunfish fleet here.

Bravo, Bravo! Jack chose the boat, not me. It's like having a BMX bike but on the water. He snears at the Opti and tells me it's just a slow bathtub...and he's right. Do i want a competitive racer snob or a tan little beach rat? I'll take the swaggering, sandy beach rat kid any day! And 7 years from now he'll kicking butt in some faster cat, I hope.

Can anyone else suggest a starter boat for 7-10 year olds that gets them excited?

Have you compared the specs of the Bravo to the F12. Notice any similarities ?

But still you feel confident to tell us all that F12 is completely wrong. Will be very interesting to hear your argumentation.

People never fail to amaze me.

Wouter

Wouter, it's not "wrong" but you need to think like a kid, or at least run it by them first. Otherwise, you've built another boat for yourself.

How many times have I watched my son open a Christmas or birthday present, only to see him ignore the present and play with the really cool box!

Folks,
The fact you can teach 7-12 year olds on a 12 ft cat is fact because I've done it for several years at my old sailing club.
I even made sails for each of the 6 12 footers that we had. 80sq ft of sail area and cost me around $200 per sail to make including the cost of batterns.
So that was just basic material cost at wholesale prices.
It was while back now.

All the maths will do is put you in the ballpark or in this case conveniently out of the ballpark.

Interesting to note the 12 ft cats never pitch polled although my youngest at times did drive the crap out of them downwind when the breeze was up and with the spray coming off the front of the boat I was always waiting for him to stick it in. He claimed he knew what he was doing and had everything under control but from the standpoint of an anxious parent.........
The main draw back was the time it took to rig the boats and they were not pleasant on the eye and heavier than I'd like to move around.
You have to put this in context in as much as we had a bunch of Hobie Hawks at the club. (very small dinghy for young kids like the optimist dinghy.) That was our training boat until we got the cats. After the cats arrived we couldn't get the kids to use the Hobie Hawks. The Hawks were near new shiny and very colorful sails. Still they would fight over the old cats.

This whole experience is what prompted me to come up with the idea of a 12ft cat with a free standing rig because in order for me to go sailing I had to rig 3 boats. My own and one for each of my two sons.

So while lying on the beach one day looking out at my kids in the surf I was trying to come with terms of the enjoyment of sailing,the hassel of rigging their boats, what attracted them to the sport and what discouraged other parents after their initial enthusiasm at the sailing school.
Over a 2 week period I did some sketches to design a neat and asthetically pleasing way of mounting the rig.

Sinse then Wouter has developed the concept more in line of a boat for older children and himself.
This is quite different from what I originally started out to do and I will not be persuaded that I can not design a very good boat for 7-12 yr olds that meets all of the goals I'd set for the design.
For me this is about bringing cat sailing to young children,
between the ages of 7 and 12. It can be done, it has been done but in order for it to spread it needs to be done better.

Please feel free to disagree with me as we are all entitled to a point of view. I have just expressed mine and will let anyone who wants to crap on to do it unhindered. I have no interest in all this arguing.
Life is just too short.

BTW:-
I hope what Wouter is working on works out for him and anyone else in need of such a craft. Afterall this is about getting people on the water.

Regards,
Phill

I don't see any harm in building and targeting these boats towards kids. And I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be able to handle them. The speed of these cats is significantly lower than kids in the age group we are discussing already achieve on their skateboats and bikes and crashing a boat will have a far softer landing.

I also agree that a rotomoulded boat would be great, however, the cost of tooling up for one of these is very high and would require someone to take a serious punt.

I have had a few discussions "offline" with people about my f12 stuff I did earlier this year and I'm currently working up a price for a pre-cut plywood kit. What I would like is feedback from interested parties on a couple of design ideas with the target audiance of YOUNG kids in mind.

1. Centreboards. The dinghies I was tought to sail on (age 8) had them, why shouldn't a cat for the same age group.

2. Sail controls. Training dinghies usually have Vang, and mainsheet with cunningham and outhaul tied off. Is this ok on a training cat?

3. Free standing or stayed mast. The boats I learnt to sail on were a mixture of both and I believe the opti has stays. Given that a stayed mast will be lighter and therefor more likely to be able to be stepped by the young sailor which option is better?

4. Reefing. A lot of modern youth trainers can be de-powered by wrapping the sail around the mast. Do people like this idea and would wrapping around the boom be a suitable alternative if the mast was stayed? (would mean having a traveller and main rather than a main and vang).

5. Floats on mast. In an earlier discussion Phill suggested that having a float on the mast was a bad idea as it meant the boat may blow away from kids. I'm tempted to agree, what does everyone else think.

I'd also welcome any other feedback.

Note. these questions are with a sub 12 year sailor in mind and I'm not looking for ideas on boats targeted towards other markets.

edit:

Phill posted while I was typing and I agree with him on pretty much everything in his post.

I've tried a new Bic open thanks to Brett at Glasscraft the kids had a ball in the morning, easy righting, basic sheets and when the bullets were over 30 knots and the kids 420 was getting flattened with me at 105kg on the wire I took the Bic out. It was great fun and very robust I managed to hike out on it and it really impressed me BUT. Its not a car topper unless you have two adults it was really heavy and awkward to load for its size, it is no where as stable as a small cat I very nearly purchased one but didn't for the above reasons
regards

Just to be clear on this topic. I can only concentrate on one project of this magnitude at the time. I have a plan of how to link this design up with other classes of which the smallest boats are still the H16's, SL16's and F16's. The Dragoon is too small a class to really matter at this time. There is no F14 yet nor I expect it to be here any time soon if ever.

These limits do force me into the direction that the F12 is going now. It is as simple as that.

This doesn't mean in any way however that I will oppose or frustrate any other group designing a cat for kids in the range 7-12. I'm just saying that I won't be part of that and that I won't modify my F12 to suit that range optimally. My targetted range is 12-16 year old youths or crew weights in the range 40 -65 kg. Basically a cat based replacement for the laser 4.7 and laser radial. For people that want to know, I'm 90 kg myself.

Wouter

Phil, what general design parameters do you see being appropriate for the 12-16 age group - i.e. what would the kids on your proposed design graduate to in terms of size, sail area etc?

This may have been posted about before...but if not here it is...a 10' cat for kids...
http://www.kittencat.co.nz/

I had Aerynt's son Michael (13) call me last night for help with how to design a better boat than Wouter's shown in his first impressions post. After a few faxes etc I threw the following together which is what Michael and John(7) think their next boat should look like. Its just the hull, can only do so much in one evening.
RG

more pics, next few are of the hull flat paneled

another

another, rendered

rendered from above

rendered from below

Stern View

Bow View

3d from below

another from below

RG, will it have boards or no?

I like that, I can see a kid getting excited about a boat like that!

Rhinoceros ?

Nice one... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Ahhhh...Retiredgeek the right CAD tool in the hands of someone who knows what to do with it...great start...question....is there any reason why you did not put more volume lower in the hulls?... as has been the design trend lately? Your drawing shows the bow shaped (in profile) somewhat like a “wave piercer" (please no tangents on what constitutes a wave piercer from the peanut gallery)…but the hull volume distribution in cross section looks more "old school"... any particular reason for this? If I understand you this rendering is something you quickly threw out here as a starting point with refinements coming as your schedule allows. Nothing like a high quality, esthetically pleasing rendering to get things moving out of the doldrums.

Best Regards,
Bob

I would be willing to bet that the wave piercing hull is just for looks, I don't think that the boat will actually use the ability much, but it does look cool because it looks like modern boats.

Thought perhaps I should clarify a few things here, RG drew the hulls that my son's designed as a favor to me, the design is all their's and I seriously doubt it reflects RG's thinking.
What started out as me showing my son's Wouters preview drawing last Friday has now turned into a full on design project by them that RG is just assisting them with. Foolishly I said that if they really wanted new boats instead of my hand-me-down Paper Tiger, then they would have to build it (F12 like & wood) and figure out what worked, I have been seriously taken to task and Im sure my wallet will regret it.
What RG posted is no more or less than what my son's asked for help on and over time <perhaps not a lot> it will change, and given the chance Im sure they will probably totally redesign Wouters boat as they go <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
This is largely a product of having a single cat available for 2 sons that is often too powerful for even both of them to sail in much over 10 knots.
Happily, Im very proud that they have taken on the challenge, and are so eager to learn what it takes to design a boat, although at some point Im sure I'll regret having opened this particular can of worms <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Just so no one is without doubt, RG just posted this to show what my boys think and want and its a long way's yet from something I'll let them start building, none the less, its a hell of a good start.
Aerynt

The part I missed saying in the previous post is perhaps all of you who have kids should also get them involved in this, it is after all their boat and what they will sail and much to my amazement, they actually know exactly what they want, all they need is the technical help to make it happen.
As John my 7 year old observed after he looked at this forum (with lots of reading help from me) people sure write a lot and do very little.
Aerynt

Chris,

Earlier when you posted initial drawings of your F12 design you suggested a crew weight of 55-60kg. The weight data here suggests that that would make it perfect for the 12-16 y.o. range. Is this still your thinking or have you modified the design for the sub-12 y.o. market?

Seems my boys are shy when it comes to getting an account here so Ive been substituted in their place. This is a partial list of things they think they want, some I agree with, some I don't, but their reading skills are good enough to know if I leave anything out <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> These are in no order, just pages of stuff Ive been asked to sort through.

sails, they want to be able to use windsurfer rigs so they can match the sail to the conditions (probably because we have several windsurfers that they can utilise)

John mentioned thats its easier to plug in a windsurfer rig horizontally than a sail on a mast into a tube (probably higher than he is right now) in any wind.

Boards mean point and you always have to win, no matter who you sail against or when.

Reverse bows are just "sharp" <= cool> plus a lot of the A-Class have them

the mast brace can use the hawaiian boom clamp for a windsurfer rotated down 45 degree (had to look that one up)

end extensions for a windsurfer boom can be used for variable rake with different sails (on the braces)

braces can be mounted on hull with additional windsurfer mast steps

the above means you can rig the boat in wind and then just pull the rig up into the brace clamp

they want adventures, like sailing to some of the local islands to camp (haven't agreed to this yet) and want to be able to take the mast down easily, or the sail (something they can't do with the PT, mast that is)

Rig you can take down is good in emergencies, not something that is easy with a pocket luff sail

OK, enough for now, you get the idea that they haven't stopped thinking for the past 3 days

Aerynt, Michael & John

Yes, it is called styling.

If some-one can design the construction of this hull to be performed by an amateur in 100 hours or less then I propose merging this hull shape with my rig setup.

Wouter

I think the costs may well be very acceptable, take a look here :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/F12_weight_and_cost_push_rod_setup.xls


Of course keeping building cost as low as possible was one of the design goals. Had to cut a few corners here and there to get down to the current cost estimate (leading to clunkyness) but if your walleet is up for it then these corners can be put back on.




Feel free to do so, just note that I didn't sit down on an afternoon, drew some lines of a piece of paper and called it a F12 design. There are very good reasons why the design looks at it is now. And the fact that I'm working on a deep V-ed hulls have again very good reasons, mostly simplicity in homebuilding by an absolute amateur. The latter is important to get the class started worldwide.

Currently I'm working some more on the unstayed rig. I fear camber inducers are necessary if I we are going to used fully battened sails on this craft. Something I really want and probably need unless we want to put the ugly laser rig on the F12. Talking about styling.

Wouter

Body mass data for boys and girls can be found here :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/

Specific :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/Body_measurements_boys_2_to_20_years_old.cj41l022.pdf
http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/Body_measurements_girls_2_to_20_years_old.cj41l022.pdf


Just for interested readers that may want to review this data.

Wouter

My initial replies.




Is covered in the current design.

However, may not be allowed in strickt F12 OD racing on international level if we ever get to that. Decision here has not been finalized yet, wanting for more experience to have been gained before making this decision.





Current design used a sleeved sail and as such the sail is fitted to the mast when it is still laying on the ground. The bottom of the mast is then attached to the mainbeam by a bolt (or was already attached when the sail was fitted). The rig is then erected from the front and falls into the V-ed slot of the push rods and a single bolt secures the whole setup. Derigging in reverse order. As the design uses no stays the front of the boat is fully clear and it is easy for a person to manouvre here.




My calculations show a different situation. On a boat of this size boards may actually make a very small difference. The design decision here is whether the difference that exists justifies the additional costs, additional building effort, additional risk of damage (warrantee) and the additional weight.

I fully understand that people may do a different balancing but I eventually found that the small difference was not worth the other drawbacks. Remember the F12 as it is now will outpoint the Laser-1 dinghy already. Adding boards may only give an extra 3 degrees pointing at max. It can not be compared to say fitting boards to a 18 foot round bottomed beach cat design were a difference of 10 degrees can be attained.




My initial hull design had them as well; but I was not convinced that the additional building effort was worth it. If anybody finds an easy way to do it then by all means lets have it. I initially concentrated on making things as simple as possible trying to get the weight, cost and building effort down to a minimum.





Please explain further.

I do believe that I understand what you mean, I have such a setup on one of my landyachts, but I want to be sure. It is a very good idea actually although it will complicated errecting the mast. On the otherhand, the rig as designed now also allows the sail to be fitted when the boat is flipped on its side while the mast was prefitted to the platform. I tried to avoid this way of rigged as I'm told most sailors don't have nice clean grass lawns or sandy beaches to rig on.





These hard points will see about 500 kg of loading (comparable to stay chainplates) and I'm not sure that wind surf mast steps can take that amount of sideways loading. I suspect they don't. Also the design of these hardpoint is pretty straight forwards as we stand now. They use standardized marine eye bolts and threaded forks.





Can be done with the current design. The mast can be lowered towards the front by removing the single retaining bolt (or two clevis pins in an alternate design) and it will lay flat in front of the boat with the sail attached. It so designed the sail can be removed easily by pulling it forward. This is basically the standard rigging and derigging method. The mast itself can be taken apart into three seperate sections in the span of literally 5 seconds, just as with the laser dinghy mast.





That is the reason why the standard design doesn't use a windsurfer rig but a rig much like the class 5 landyachts. Basically this rig can rotate around the mast indefinately. As such it can completely weathervane. As it is fully battened it won't flap about. Practically, one can even leave the boat fully rigged without risk of flipping it or damage. In an emergency just unsheet the main sail and let it weather vane completely. I feel this is enough emergency precaution.





Can you tell that I've been working on this project for a while now ?

Seems my design is already pretty close to what your kids desire. Apart from some styling that is.

Wouter

... continuing ...

Jeff,

I want to learn more about the Bic rig.

It seems the Bic rig is a fully battened sleeved sail and I'm having trouble getting the right amount of draft into that rig in winds below 12 knots. I fear I have to use camber inducers to get the rig to perform well. I rather do without these.

How does the Bic rig solve this issue ?

Do you know or can you describe all the elements used in the Bic in detail ?

Thanks alot.

Wouter

It might be prudent to consider designing an F-12 something along the lines of Darryl Barrett’s outstanding F-14 Alpha Omega (a greatly simplified version of course). Any one who has seen the video of his boat would have to admit that he has the F-14 is dialed in…at first look it might appear as if his hull design is a bit boxy, but after studying the video you find that every aspect of the design is there for a reason… it is a good study on optimizing a small cat for maximum performance.

As a side note, anyone who wants to get kids interested in cat sailing should show clips of Darryl’s F-14 video, after seeing it flying around few kids would ever want to go back to an Optimist or Laser. It proves to the kids that you can go really fast on a small catamaran without an 18' + boat that weighs 400 lbs.

Regards,
Bob

G'day Wouter the Bic rig isn't that good with any weight on it the shape of the hull gets it plaining really easily with small kids or in big wind, guys that saw me have a hoot on it in conditions that the rescue boat didn't go out in couldnt get it going the next day in moderate conditions. Its just a windsurfer rig really. The reason I posted really was the fact that as a novice but enthusiastic sailor with 4 kids being encouraged to sail, I had tried it was looking to buy it but was put off by the supprising weight of it. I really want a stack of light weight easy to repair reasonably strong cats which keeps bringing me back to carbon and foam hulls, side stays etc
regards Jeff

Bob,
Like the Glider.
13 ft long with modern sail plan, sails well with or without C/Bs, uni or sloop rigged and even a spinnaker if you want.

The target weight was in response to the talk on the F12 forum at the time. I did that sketch and then did nothing as the F12 appeared to be heading (at a rate of knots) away from what I considered was something worth spending my time on. The return to a genuine kids boat has re-ignighted my interest and I've set aside approx 1 hour a day (until its done) to produce a finalised design. The kitset price as quoted is based upon the original files and will probably come down with the final product. The "optimum" weight for the newer hull is marginally lower (45-50) but not much, as I envisage younger children sailing the boat 2 up and don't want the boat to become unusable with a teacher and student on board.

With 4 designs currently on the go, assuming Phill is going to unvale a Scalpel (small blade), is it time for us as a group to re-visit a set of class rules for these boats?

But am I right that you advocate an unstayed mast? That must significantly constrain the design of the sail plan, yes?

Remember boards are not just for pointing ability.

When we were originally talking about the f12, the design was boardless and it was something that I agreed with, but having spent the last year teaching kids in optimists I can see that quick tacking and gybing are vital for a kids boat and for that reason I know favour boards. Altough I can see that it does add build time.

With that in mind what about leeboards?

Gareth

Mark,
There are designs already out there both with a normally stayed mast and the ugly things above the deck to hold
the mast up.

Not much point in doing anything unless it makes a difference.
So yes the unstayed mast does restrict the rig that can go on the boat.
The advantage comes in simplicity and speed of rigging along with good asthetics. Nothing on the market today that has all 3.

So far current designs are not making that much of an impression in getting the young ones onto the water.

Now if your looking at a boat for 12-16 yr olds they can rig their own boat so the unstayed rig is less important.

Its when the parents have to rig the kids boats the unstayed rig has the real advantage in getting boats onto the water.

This is where I started with the 12 ft concept and believe it is still the driver for such a design.

Regards,
Phill

Do you remember how the rig was made up. Was the sail just a sleeved sail with the mast put inside the sleeve with no other elements/parts being present. Was the mast very stiff, did it hardly bend when you cranked on the mainsheet. Did the battens pop easily when you tacked. In how much wind were you sailing ?

Wouter

I have two idea's with respect to this.

First I've run the math on a boardless design. Without going into mathematical details I garantee that the boat will steer and tack significantly easier and quicker by going to a shorter hull length. Disproportionate easier.

To give an example a 12 ft boardless cat with a deep V-ed keelline with tack/steer almost twice as easily as a 5 mtr. long boardless cat with a deep V-ed keelline like the Hobie 16's and Prindle 16's. That is a huge difference.

Bascially this results comes from the fact that the points of the hull furtherst away from the fullcrum contributed disproportionally to the "tacking/steering" resistance. This is aggrevated by the fact that fluid resistance is quadractically dependent on the speed through the fluid. Of course the bows on a 12 ft hull travel much faster sideways through the water when steering then the bows of a 16 foot hull. The difference being 35 % in speed and therefor result in 135*135 = 183% in drag force alone. Then of course the leverage of the shorter hull is less as well. And like that things really do add up.

Currently I'm going on the expectation that these effects will make the boardless F12 steer easily enough without the need to have daggerboards.


However when a need is found then the vertical sides of the hull will allow an external pivoting boards to be fitted on the inside (or outside) of the hulls. Just a simple bolt going through the head of the board and through the reinforced wall of the hull. With transporting or hitting something the daggerboard will just rotate to a horizontal position alongside the hull.

However, looking over the specs at this time I'm really not convinced that a daggerboards will add much benefit to the design. The line of think here is that that rig is relatively small, its overall area is disproportionally smaller the wetted surface area of the hulls are. The latter is fixed because of the need to carry the given combined weight. Basically you have all that area almost vertical in the water that also wants to resist sideways movement. Now any movement resisted by the hull will deteriorate the benefit of adding a daggerboard as the daggerboard needs some sideways movement to get at its optimal angle of attack of about 2 to 4 degrees.

So we are faced with a fork in the road here. Either we go for daggerboards and then we want the keelline to be as flat and rounded as possible with all related increases in denting and risk of damage. Or we go for the multichined hull that is very resistant to damage and much more easy to build and go for a boardless design. Combining a multichine hull with a daggerboards will mostly deteriorated the strong points of either to a level that may make either negligliable.

Wouter

I believe we are long past that point.

The unstayed rig have gotten more pro's on its listing since then :

-1- Easy to homebuild for much smaller costs then a conventional mast with a sailtrack
-2- Collapsable and easy storage.
-3- Easy homebuilding of the mainsail, sleeved sails are easier to make and recut then sails with bolt ropes.
-4- Less parts required and therefor cheaper
-5- Ability to completely weathervane the rig, that is a safety issue both on land and on the water





But these are so beautiful when you look at how the forces and stresses are transmitted through the platform. Gone is the requirements for having a dolphinstriker or even carbon beams. Gone are the stringers inside the hull and subdecks to make the bows stand up to the forestay loads. Gone is the reinforced bulkhead in the bow to take the bridle fitting. Because of the trampoline tension counteracting the loading of the push rod against the hull, the local reinforcement of the hull can be much lighter and simpler. When needed the same reinforcement can be used to fit the external daggerboard to. And so on and so on.

I know you feel the push rods are very ugly and you have always said so. It is why we diverged on the project. I looked at it from an engineering point of view and saw how nicely it solved many issues in one go.

Recently I visited the owner of the Semprit Skippy and he told me that he and his daughter actually liked these rods as it gave the crew (child) something to hold on to. It gave them an added sense of security. Not I don't believe everybody feels that way, but it is certainly worth taking into account.

Afterall esthetics only go so far, if it makes alot of engineering sense then one should use it even when it is not very esthetically pleasing.

Wouter

G'day again Wouter I would think that the mast was typical of a windsurfer, it was flexible up top stiffer near the bottom and plugged into a hole in the deck. The sail was sleeved and just slid on, the battens stayed in the sail when it was packed up. The boom was basic like an A. It had a vang and a simple to adjust centreboard held in place by shockcord going around it back to the mast this kept enough tension on the board to hold it in position. The main sheet was only 2 to 1 which was really tiring when I was out but the kids had no problem.
My youngest daughter was 8 then and she took it out accross the lake capsised it righted it, sailed it, battens popped easily, loved it probably 8-10knots. I was out in over 30knots when the gusts were so strong downwind that the main sheet was getting pulled out of my hands even then with no stays the mast held no problem as I said with me at 105kg I was able to plane for quite a long time hiked out but under 20knots it wouldnt be much fun for an adult or under 8knots for a kid with expectations. Not to stuff around with your idea but whats to stop somebody that starts their kids on your boat changing the mast and rigging later.
regards

Heres a picture of my then 3yr old son on my old boat, I know the sails are all wrong etc and its embarassing to post but he's the one who's going to sail the F12 and the first new kids on F12's who see adults on the wire will want to be out there. I was strict with him I didn't let him stear the boat from the wire until he was 4
regards

I think this is an interesting marketing question. Neither Wouter's nor Phill's proposed unstayed rigs would support a trapeze. For Phill's targeted under-12 market, that seems perfectly reasonable. For 12-16 I'm not so sure. Chris's design has a stayed rig, so a trapeze might be a possibility. I wonder what Michael & John think?

I think that I'm with Phill on having a boat that the kids can rig as I know the boys are often frustrated that I don't immediately jump when they are ready to go sailing (we live on the beach, so this is quite often). The other thing is that the boat has to be light enough for them to get it down the beach without my help. As for traps, they have ample experience with that and enjoy it, but I'd guess they'd hands down like the independance of going sailing when they want over having to wait for me (even once).
I don't see that unstayed rigs and traps are mutually exclusive as a trap wire would unload the rig when you need it most, will write an email to RG to see if he'll calculate that for me.
Speaking of RG, he sent me a whole new F12 design today to look at and comment on, is hands down the coolest boat Ive seen in a while and the boys agree, hope he posts it here for you all to see soon.
Aerynt

I've seen it as well and it is pretty stunning, so I do hope he posts it.

Gareth

Phill I tried doing a search on the
Glider but could not find any information...

Best Regards,
Bob

Bob,
You probably won't find anything on the Glider.
Designed to take crew weight up to 70kg.
If you were looking at the older kids or light weight adult market and were going to have a stayed mast it would be hard to go past.
I think I still have the specs somewhere. I'll dig them up and send them to you if you like.

Regards,
Phill

Mark I'm hoping that as long as the hulls look modern and can handle the unstayed rig, it wont be too hard to reinforce sidestay and forestay positions if neaded during the building process, to upgrade the rig anytime. Then I would have cats suitable from 7 up to learner adults. I have the tools, workshop and have committed myself to building at least one cat with traps next winter and would like to setup a production line for the club if possible. I already have Chris's option and would love to see RG's so go for it guys lets see your plans <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
regards

The tubular frame is also a good place to rig a spray and wind deflector if desired, at the cost of some aerodynamic drag.

Is there a way to make the frame somehow more atractive? Given enough time, the best engineering solution will become the standard of beauty, but in the short term style is a key marketing issue.

OK, here is my design, a bit modern for sure, but 11 kids have seen it now and all with no exceptions wanted one yesterday. Whether the rest of the planet is of the same mind, only time will tell.
I designed this so it will have 2 hull options, most of the pic's that follow are of the hard chined version because that is what I believed would spark the initial interest, the round bilge version (similar profile) is based around my new F16 design with the appropriate changes and is more geared to older kids, a conventional rig and traps, perhaps even a kite. I'll finish this version as time or interest permits.
To get the round bilge one out of the way, its the first pic, all the rest are of the hard chined version.
I should also note that everything is within Wouters posted guidelines except for the luff length which is just a bit longer.

Cheers
RG

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

The luff length as given by my was determined by the stiffness of the mast and what I know will work from my class 5 landyacht sails. It is not a hard boundery. I'm already thinking to stiffen up the mast to have it bend less and allow the battens to pop more easily in light winds. This desire coincides with the desire to use the same section for the beams and the bottom part of the mast.

How much is your luff longer ?

Wouter

Thanks for sharing RG. What's your target crew weight? Also curious about the narrow transoms. What's the thinking behind that? I know your A cat hulls are also narrow at the stern, but also through the whole length I think, so this seems like an interesting departure.

Mark,
65 kg would be the max if you raced it but I put enough in it so its comfortable at 120 kg (kid & adult) also. Best range would be 40-50 kg.
Hull transoms and/or narrow hulls have nothing to do with narrow, its all about slightly lower drag and minimizing the pitching. The 2 hulls show are actually quite different but both do the same thing more or less. The round bilge hull has more than 8% less WSA, is more than 6% fatter and almost 10% more WPA and a fatter transom than the hard chined version, yet the pitch rates are almost identical (within 1%) so just looking at physical sizes has very little to do with the dynamics. The thing you might have missed is that the chine goes downwards for a long ways aft before it rises again, is quite good for keeping the transom out without having a big fat shape at the back that just drags water. The other thing to remember is that if you can keep the pitching under control, you don't need a lot of reserve buoyancy at the back to counter stuff thats not happening.
Wouter,
197mm longer
RG

I would have thought that the narrow transoms would help sit the back down when your aft in a blow and make keeping the bows out easier, no ?
Aerynt

That's really great! I want one too! There are hundreds of positive things I could say, but they wouldn't help as much as some constructive observations:

1) That gooseneck looks like it would "bite" the fingers. Would it make sense to use the Laser standard system - and perhaps the same boom as well? Maybe another boat's standard system that fits?

2) Each mast support tube is curved near the extremity to enter the deck perpendicularly, when a straight tube cut in the right angle would be easier and cheaper to manufacture. Is this for aesthetic reasons, to provide a better holding point when hiking/trapezing, or for yet another reason?

3) Why the rudders seem to have no Ackerman compensation? It would probably facilitate manouvers.

4) I'd like to know if what Wouter wrote about daggerboards stands true with this design. How much would be lost if one daggerboard was eliminated? And without daggerboards? Would it still beat a Laser? In my opinion, the boat just has to outsail the Laser. Faster than that might be too much.

5) Is there anything else that could be done to simplify or improve its maintenance, use and safety?
Built in beach wheels that double as fenders/bumpers when raised? Hard tramp? A **** for safety? Back rests? Single rudder? More grab points for beaching? Butterfly nuts in the bolts that attach beams to hulls for easy assembly? Standard righting pole? Reefing system? A shark's mouth painted in one bow and a big smile in the other? (just brainstorming).

Great job!

Very interesting...great start.

Comments and Questions:

1) Any reason for not putting more volume lower in the hull?

2) The profile looks hot but the head on view makes the hull cross section look quite dated… As if you have a very up to date profile, but a 20 + year old hull cross section.
Is picture # 123637 depicting the same hull as shown in picture # 123641? It may just be an optical illusion… but the picture shown with the rig on it looks like a “stretched out version of the non rigged hull. The picture of the hull ( #123637) looks stubby in comparison to the hull in picture (# 123641)

3) If you are going to have dagger boards why would you want such a deep V hull section? Small mono hulls are fun because they tack “on a dime” Would not a flatter bottom shape make the small cat tack much easier?

Best Regards,
Bob

Luiz,
yup, the gooseneck is a mess but the piece it's mounted on is tricky, first the tube there is a clamp (2 half shells that open so you can rotate the mast into place, this just leaves the aft half to attach the braces to and you can't rivet anything to it, so whatever is there will have to be welded, next the right angle at the outboard end of the braces goes into a molded recess so the whole brace just drops in vertically, this gives us more bearing area and holds the brace in position while you rotate the rig up to the clamp, seemed like a better way than trying to juggle to pieces that can move at the same time.
As for the rudder compensation, I just hadn't got around to doing it yet, rudders came off the F16 design which has canted hulls and so its not necessary.
As for boards, a quick look showed that the leeway angle was excessive without them, so they got put in.

Bob,
Lower volume is no problem, just use the round bilge version of the hulls, I had thought that the reason to do hard chine hulls was so that it would be easy to make these from playwood and keep it all cheap? The hulls are all the same in the pic's, its just the perspective. As for the deep V, due to entry limitations that are inherent in what you can twist play into, the waterline sections in a hardchine boat are quite draggy, you can offset that a bit by keeping it narrower but that gets you a deeper hull. I don't think there is a perfect answer to this one, it really just gets down to your choices and what you want.
Cheers
RG

RG those hulls are fantastic what sail area are you considering to be maximum and minimum
regards

Jeff,
as per what appears to be the consensus here, sail is 7 sq.m but I could see going as high as 8.5 to 9 sq.m if you had a bit more weight on the boat.
cheers
RG

apart from the fact that it adds a little scale to the picture, every boat should be sold with one of these <grin>
cheers
RG

RG your a very naughty boy in two ways. Firstly my children and I would be ecstatic to hike out on that boat not really sold on the bars yet but happy without traps. Secondly I was hoping that boys would consider that rocket to be better than sex and therefore only be after my daughters for their boat <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Why have a gooseneck at all. The mast is non rotating and the boom can even be totally free handing.

I think it is actually a drawback to use a conventional gooseneck, it will only prevent the rig from totally weathervaning or even being sheet out fully when on a dead downwind course.

As the mast section is round, one can just have a fitting on the end of the boom that is a fork and have that slide over the mast. Well, at least that is how my design has it.

Wouter

Allow me to play the devils advocate.

I did some spec checking and I compared some aspects of RG's proposal to the stated design goals.

RG wrote to me that he used a copy of the Moth rig in his drawings. The Moth rig is not an unstayed rig and it is highly unlikely that an unstayed mast will remain as straight a given in the pictures when loaded up. The Moth rig is actually 8.00 sq. mtr on a 6.250 mtr mast. More specs of other boats can of course be found on : http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/

RG's design looks very well and is very succesful in attracting the sailors to the F12 idea. That is a very important development. Without some good promo the F12 project will be struggling. I too appreciate that very much.

Still, I'm a little bit at a loss in how to incorporate this design in the larger F12 scheme. Afterall it is basically his LR2 A-cat design scaled down in size with a Moth rig on it. Neither of these components is particulary inexpensive or easy to (home)build. But homebuilding is indeed regarded as the way to kick-start the F12 class till a more professional builder can be convinced to invest in the project. Of course the chined hull construction, as also shown by RG himself, is alot more in line with these design goals. It may be wise to focus on that part of the design and forget about the fully rounded version as I fear it will really problematic to prototype and build the class on the fully rounded version. We shouldn't give people to wrong idea by showing that version around to much either, for I fear they will never "get" the fully rounded version.

At this instance we must also appreciate how problematic it can be when the class is started and grown initiallly on the chined hull version only to have a professional builder do the rounded hulls later. Will all the boats build in the initial stages by outdated by that, how will their owners react to that, will they even consider building the boats when they are aware that such a thing may happen later. Such considerations are simply skipped over now.

RG comments on how chined hulls are draggy, or at least when compared to say his fully rounded hull. This may give further weight to the problems of transitioning from chined hulls to rounded hull later in the existance of the class. But I also believe it misses the F12 point somewhere. Indeed it stands to reason to expect the chined hull to be more draggy, but how important is this in the greater scheme. A Hobie 16 is seriously outdated in relation to say an F16 but the performance difference between them is only 15 %, most of it coming from the differences in the rig and overall weight. How much of that difference is the result of having inferiour hulls and lacking daggerboards ? Take a look at the Paper Tiger, a chined design that nobody regards as being slow.

This leads us to the following question, which is a very important one for the F12, how much additional cost and building effort is say 5% additional performance worth ?

It shall be obvious that I take a totally different take on things. I feel that it is far more valuable to have a very easily and inexpensively build F12 and work that quality into class growth. I don't believe that losing an X amount of performance (limited to 15% at max) is "worth it" if the class is strickt One-Design and will be beating a laser dinghy anyway.

At a certain point enough is enough and at that time there is more to be gained by optimizing the building time and costs. For a concept (sailing class) to be succesful, the whole picture must be right not just a few parts of it.

Welding ? Something I really tried to avoid in the F12 design. Homebuilders can not easily do it. It is also not needed. The same with bending the tubes.

Daggerboards have been covered already. Interesting to note is that assuming a chined hull is more draggy then it may well be more resistant to sideways slip ! I've sailed boardless cats for a long time and the pointing difference between say a nacra 5.7 and a nacra 5.8 wasn't very large at all. It is to us to decide whether the difference is large enough to decide to use daggerboards on the F12. In this balancing act we must not forget that daggerboards are a custom made item and do indeed add building costs and complexity to the design. They are also one more thing to get broken. To us the decision whether the advantages outweight the drawbacks.


Four of the more important design goals as stated explicetly last january were a F12 that could be build for 3000 Euro's or less by a relative homebuilder in 100 hours or less, fully rigged and derigged in max 5 minutes and fully assembled/disassembled in max 10 minutes. I still believe these to be critical for the succesful launch of the F12 class; otherwise I too would just have taken a CAD drawing of an F16 and scaled that down while replacing the 6 in the class logo by a 2.

Wouter

Interestingly enough the Moths have similar bars as well an nobody is critical of those. I think we have a case of obsessing over a single item here. Most likely nobody gives a damn once the design is sailing. Notice how the Moths even use a bar going forward to stabilize the bottom of the mast. Even 18 foot skiffs have used rods for the same reasons. And yes that is Rohan Veals new Moth design and he is sailing it in the second picture. Now everybody feels it is the epithomy of coolness.








Wouter

How much harder to make the rounded hulls? are we talking another day in the building or another week? That boat is fast out of the water! RG do you have plans on the building of it yet.

Yes my kids want one too! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
But the high aspect dagger boards are going to get whacked… I caste my vote for going with low profile boards (2/1 max.) for the kids.

Aerynt called me tonight with another angle, his eldest son thinks it will be a babe magnet and is very happy about it <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
RG

As a kid we used to have a half round welded to the boom that sat on an upturned oar rollack (plastic) that was riveted to the mast, vang held it in place and while it got chewed up in a season, could easily be replaced and was cheap. Problem here is that we have slip fit everything and you can't rivet into slip fittings....one way or the other even with this suggestion, you have to weld something
RG

Wouter,
the first pics you got were indeed a scaled moth sail, but in case you hadn't noticed I redid everything for the pics that were posted, so thats irrelevant.

No its not an LR2, even an idiot can see that, but it does use a few tricks from that, but more so from my new F16...Oh and btw, the 3 LR2's were built at home, just by 2 skilled guys <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

While the round bilge version will take more time and probably a bit more skill it will win races (and there will be some over time) and it does look nicer.

As for building an F12 in 100 hours, your dreaming, for your average homebuilder (first time round) I'd say 400 hours was optimistic if not impossible (and in case you didn't know Ive built over 30 boats over time....and I think about 14 of those were wood) In case anyone wants to see what's inside a Paper Tiger go here.... http://www.bur.st/~h20melon/other/building/The%20Building%20of.pdf ... and then tell me if after you have looked at the pic without the deck whether your going to build that in a 100 hours. And thats just 1 hull <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

As for the draggyness of hard chined hulls...your comparison is invalid cause they weren't hard chined and a boat's performance is always (no exceptions) the sum of the drag angles (read Marchaj)...under no circumstances does drag make you more resistant to slip or improve your leeward angle.
RG

The round bilge version would have to be done as a strip planked foam hull, then glassed and faired, in some ways quicker and in others slower, I'd guess that with 2 people a single cat this way is about 6 weeks work (500 hours approx) if your reasonably experienced. For a beginner I'd add another 200 hours.
RG

Can change the profile to suit in a blink, and yes high AR tips can get ground down, but if they forget to lift them, you just have a longer chord to repair <grin>
RG

for those thinking of building, here's a good link on whats involved in building a Paper Tiger

http://building.papertigercatamaran.org/

Now for the good stuff....some decent renderings of the hard chined version
#1

RG,

With all due respect from me as well, and heaps of appreciation for your participation and contributions.

Have you read all the previous posts begining with and including "Youth Recreation Trend" on the big forum from approximately one year ago?

While 100 hours may not be realistic for one amatuer on their first go, it should be an ideal, or easily attainable by a group of builders, i.e. a half dozen father/sons building a half dozen boats at the club over a weekend.

We've all let go of our "must haves" regarding catamarans (trapezes and the like) to strip ourselves down to #1) the mentality of child just learning to sail and about sailboats and #2) a parent who potentially is just learning to sail and about sailboats.

The daggerboards, and trunks, are a maintenance issue. A move in the wrong direction.

My two cents.
Thanks

hard chined #2

hard chined #3

hard chined #4

Now for the round bilge design
#1

round bilge #2

round bilge #3

round bilge #4

the last one
round bilge #5

Flatlander,
Sorry, haven't seen the "Youth Recreation Trend" thread, but I'll go look at it now.
I'm sure that boards are a pain as far as maintenance goes but you can engineer in some healthy safety margins also. If thats not acceptable I have done a couple of skegged boats in the past that had sort of adequate performance.
As for group building....thats great, but I still doubt you'll do one in a weekend....cuts into the beer drinking too much <grin>
Cheers
RG

I can't say that I understand the underlying logic here. I do know however that there isn't a single weld in my design. Also several fittings have been further simplified from the ones given in Gareths CAD drawing. As such I don't really understand why you feel that one "has to welding something".

No disrespect intended.

Wouter

Wouter,
send me a drawing so I can see what your talking about... just can't see how you can have a rivet bubble end inside a tube that needs something to slip into it, be it the mast/mast step tube, or the brace clamp.
RG

The main point I made was about the flexing of the mast that is the result of it being unstayed. That point still stands and it is hardly irrelevant. You loose sail area that way and alot of people were inmediately turned off by the bend mast in my (Gareth) CAD drawing. But at least that one was realistic if not conservative be showing the maximum mast bending.





Well I'm not getting into a pissing match with you here. Let me suffice by asking all the readers here about who will be seriously thinking about homebuilding this boat if it takes 500 hours or even more ?

Without homebuilding, how do we kick-start the class ?





You seem intent on misunderstanding my comments.

Let me suffice in saying here that there are many boardless catamaran designs out there that don't perform badly at all. As a matter of fact, the much heralded 49-er high performance skiff (with a large daggerboard) is rated the same around a race course as that boardless Hobie 16 or Prindle 16, both of which have less upwind sailarea then the 49-er and don't even have a spinnaker.

Now you may explain to all of us here what causes this remarkable result !

I'll give everybody a hint, it isn't the result of well rounded keel lines.

Additionally, if the idea is to outperform the laser dinghy and other dinghies, who are all much more narrow and also WAAAAAY slower then 49-er, then the Hobie 16 and Prindle 16 daggerboardless character may well hint that the F12 may do very well in comparison without a daggerboard as well.

Wouter

If I understand your reasoning right then your "plugs" are intended to be slid in and out when rigging or derigging the part/boat. First of all, this assumes that the connections can only had when such a fitting it used, this is not the case. There are non-plug-sliding alternatives. I'm using one of those. My setup uses at this time only eye/bolt and eye-bolt/fork connections. The latter being rigged/derigged by clevis pins.

But to answer your question directly. Bajonet fittings come very close to what you are describing. You can always route a groove in the plug with a straight angle in it. The bulb of the rivet then runs through this track and by rotating the plug you secure it axially. Securing the rotation of the plug is not needed in all instances but when it is then there are quite a few alternatives as well.

I'm still waiting for the Hawaian clamp description. But it it is what I think it is then that is also a way to secure the brace to the mast, this time without any clevis pins or bolts what so ever.

Of course one can always use clevis pins to secure part that slid into a tube and need to be taken out often. As the rods in the F12 design are most heavily loaded by compression the clevis pins don't have to take the real loadings as a simple rim on the end of the plugs resting on the tube endings will take care of that. Again, that is what my design is now using. That is another reason why the push rod setup is advantagious. Basically the way things are now the plug is most pushed deeper into the rod. Securing this has endless alternative. An additional brace running from the sides of the push rods and around the front of the mast will then be there to prevent the mast from being pushed out to the front on downwind legs. This brace can even be a simple lashing. I say "can" here as I personally prefer a stiffer method of fixation, but the point made is simple enough. You can actually use rimmed plugs that just slide into the push rods and have a single brace (=lashing) fixate the whole setup in one go. Easy, quick and inexpensive to make if we repeat setups like this often enough then we may well get very close to the stated design goals, the 100 hour building setup included.

I'm sorry I can't provide you with drawings of these setups as that will take to much of the spare time I can spend on the F12 project. However, I think these verbal describtions will suffice.

Wouter

Here are a couple of observations.

1) Too much emphases is being put on “home building”.
It has become the major force driving the design
Is the main purpose to get kids out on the water? Or is it to turn dad/mom into a boat builder? There is a difference between having the “option” to home build (a good thing) and having the whole class concept pivoting around every design being home build able in plywood ( a bad thing). If one takes off the “plywood glasses” the design options open up considerably.

Out of the thousands of Cat sailor forum users how many have actually built a boat from scratch? You can probably count them all on two hands. Realistically very few people have the expertise, time, tools, and work space (it takes all these things) to build even a simple F-12. How many of these “clubs’ exist that are going to crank out an assembly line of F-12’s?
What Club is going to want to take on the liability of inexperienced Kids and/or their Parents being injured with power tools at a Club sponsored build?


2) It is called an F-12…if it really is, than their will be multiple designs to choose from, even ones designed by the parent or child themselves, yet there is already questions being raised about a rounded bilge design making the hard chinned design outdated. If this is truly going to be a Formula class (which is one of the positive features of the proposed class) then this has to be accepted as the nature of the beast. Just as there are Blades, Tiapans, Vipers, Stealths etc in the F-16 class, their will be multiple designs for the F-12 as well…why is that a problem? I find it encouraging that at least three individuals are working on independent F-12 designs.

Best Regards,
Bob

Well said Bob, RG seems to be working on a boat that may lure kids to cats, Wouter and Chris seems to be working on a cheaper boat to lure kids to cats theres plenty of room for both. Keep posting your ideas guys whats wrong with building quick boats for the club and lovingly building a boat for 500hrs with your kid if your that way inclined.
regards

Plans are not started yet as I'm not sure if I have yet delivered what works for most people?
At the point we get to that place it should take about a week to knock out a set of detailed CAD building plans.
RG

RG, For your boat to work for me, optimize it for a 75kg crew! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I want one to sail myself! Oops, this is the Kid's F12 thread.

The field is narrowed to a few committed to build. Like you and Bob and Jeff have stated, why worry now? If Jeff's and his boy's are happy they can start building.

I propose the question may be not does this work for most people, but is it within the parameters of the Formula 12 and are those parameters fully defined or agreed upon? If not, this design may end up a one design. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Don't need to rush the plans for me our sailing season is only 4 weeks in so I can't build for 6 mths. If the F12 parameters don't encompass every type of 12 ft cat currently sailing its surely doomed because the ones out there are doing it already. As I am running our junior sailing my yardstick plans are a simple weight of crew and sail area.
regards

except for the luff length its within whats listed here as the parameters. To push the hulls out to 75kg is no big deal, but it won't fit the majority of the kids then, if you want a larger displacement version, I'll just customize it for you but it probably won't make Wouter happy <grin>.

As far as I'm concerned its already a success because my wife who is "NOT" a sailor wants one <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> see attached pics, she's already picked the colors to paint it <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />....not my choice but hell, its her boat. I'm sure Aerynt and his boys will build 2 starting in the next few weeks and a couple of local clubs just approached me about a joint build of 16-18 of them.

So long as the rules don't get changed I don't see much to stop anyone starting.

RG

Another of her paint job

Why is having a hull design that would be competitive with up to 75 Kg a problem?
The class would have a much larger appeal. Instead of dumbing down the platform, why not make the hull design with as high a performance level as possible. Reduce the size and simplify the rig for those with small children or those desiring lower performance. There could be as many as three different size rigs…one small simple rig for the 7-10year old children, a slightly more sophisticated mid size rig for larger children of 11-14 years of age, and a fully optimized rig for older teens and adults. I think parents would be more inclined to buy into a class that their son or daughter could make use of from grade school to high school and beyond with just a rig upgrade.

What novice sailor could not use the extra stability a slightly larger volume hull could offer? After all it is only twelve feet long regardless, and the weight penalty would be negligible. RG if you have the time it would be very enlightening if you could do a rendering of your current F-12 design side by side with your interpretation of an F-12 expanded to carry a crew weight of 75KG. With a visual of how small the difference would be maybe there would be less resistance to a 75Kg crew weight target.

Best Regards,
Bob

A thought came to mind while looking at RG's renderings. Have any of the people considering free standing rigs considered the option of using the dolphin as a socket. ie use an oversize striker tube and then run a X pattern of straps rather than the traditional St. Steel strip. It would then allow you to get rid of the struts.

I've also considered this, but instead of an X frame, a dolphin striker strap plus a strut running aft to the rear beam or a mid-tramp beam. Simpler because there are easier landings than for an X frame. One problem (sorry, "opportunity") is that you will require a main beam wide enough to take a hole for a mast to go through.

The only reason I can see for a stayless rig is for easy rigging. How about a compromise, lower struts for standing the rig, then stays for stiffening up the top of the mast...like a 420 with its mast gate. Very easy to rig.

Dare I say the talk here is tending towards a cat version of a laser...three freestanding rigs for a single platform...I like the concept.

btw, those moth photos are not of Rohan or his boat. It is a UK developed moth, home built actually! I think by one of the top UK moth sailors, he may've won the previous world championships between Rohan's wins.

I thought we had already seen the picture of your wife and was worried about opening that attatchment <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />. I noticed she doesn't want sidestays.
regards

Like ncik, I too was worried about the loss of section moment in the main beam if you put the mast through it, plus 4 attachments for the x-brace makes for a hassle if you ever have to tear the boat apart. Also, means 4 more attachment reinforcements to the hull.....just seems like a lot of fiddly stuff.

Personally, I'm not leaning in any direction, just find it fun trying to deliver something everyone wants, quite a nice brain teaser if there ever was one.

Did the 75kg crew hull, gunwhale is the same, profile the same, just changed the chine, was a nice surprise that the drag coefficient for the hull went down, but not as much as the wetted area went up, so nett gain is to drag (0.7%) but it does produce more lift (sideways) and the overall hull L/D is up by 1.3%, so point will be higher as will VMG

Jeff, my wife is 61, so its a safe bet she'll go for whatever is easiest....more amazed that after all this time she actually wants something I designed <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Pics of 2 hull comparison attached

Cheers
RG

2 hull comparison #2

2 hull comparison #3

Gero,
That is the system I'm using. It was one of the key points of my design back in 2003.
Since then I realised you don't need to make a hole in the main beam.

I have also considered non essential stays that could be used only when required to stabilise the mast for heavier crews.

I always intended a modern cat version of the Laser.
In more ways than you mentioned.

BTW:-
We have one of those cats with the struts above the deck at a local sailing club when I was there a few months back.
It was offered to me for $350, not that I was asking.
So anyone not wanting to build a boat and happy with the struts I know where there may still be able to get a boat.

Regards,
Phill

"Good" (using that term loosely) thing about a laser is that you don't need to lift the rig too high to get it in. Bad thing about lifting the rig is that it is pretty heavy.

How about a system like the existing cats where you lock the mast step into position and walk it up, but instead of having stays, have a gate at chest level that you can lock around the mast? It would be extremely easy to rig with very little chance of dropping it.

Might have to put my designing cap on for a couple of nights next week. Getting a bit bored of work related engineering.

I have an easy system to stand the rig which also doubles as means of helping the crew get back on the boat.

Currently the limits for the F12 are as I defined them a while ago. I had my reasons to settle on these specs but I'm not sure that this means that they are fixed and agreed upon.

I decided on the following specs.


Overall length 3.750 mtr
Overall width 2.000 mtr
Max mast length 6.000 mtr.
Max luff length 5.300 mtr
Max sail area 7.000 sq. mtr.
Min weight 60 kg

Optimal crew weight range 40-65 kg

For long while now I was steering toward an OD class setup much like the Tornado is now. Where the hulls are narrowly defined to a single shape. The same for some important elements like forcing the unstayed rig and the collapsable mast. Other things like sail design, rudders, stocks, trampoline design and the way the unstayed rig is supported were intended to be left open.

This is the only way I can see this design remaining easy to build and inexpensive to build while allowing enough freedom of design. I strongly believe that when the hulls are allowed to differ, as well as items like the mast, that then the class will only need a very short time to become prohibitively expensive. Or scare away the parents as they will believe, not without reason, that a rounded keel hull with daggerboards is more competitive then a hardchined boardless design.

Of course the more important design goals explicitely advice against such a situation :

-1- (home) buildable for 3000 Euro or less
-2- (home) buildable for 100 hours or less
-3- (de)riggable in 5 min or less
-4- fully (diss)assemable in 10 min or less

These design goals may appear arbitrary, but they were derived from the wish list as provided by the interested parties and the start-up planning for the F12 class.

I haven't seen any convincing arguments yet to let go of these limits/design goals. The argument giving mostly is increased performance or that an adult wants to sail/race this boat. I feel that other designs like the Hobie 16, F16, F18, A-cat and Tornado are the right classes for sailors with such considerations, not the F12 for youths and as a simple recreational craft for light adults. Otherwise the F14 sounds a lot more promising for these guys.

Wouter

I know everybody thinks I'm the reincarnations of the Devil, but I really don't care whether some person widens his F12 for himself. I actually adviced John (flatlander) to do the same last Januari.

It is just that I do believe that the F12 is for kids, it is an entry level cat, and I don't see how you can make it work equally well for 40-65 kg youths and 70-80 kg adults. It will be mediocre in both aspects or very poor in one of these roles. I personally choose to stick to the orginal F12 idea and go for a craft that is well suited to the 40-65 kg target group and refer the 70-80 kg sailors to the Hobie 16's, F14 or F16's.

For some reason people believe this conviction is some irrational opinion on my part. Weird. And then when I turn around there is another guy accusing me of wanting to make an F12 for myself and my own weight (90 kg). How can I be blamed of both at the same time ?!

It is an absurd experience.

Apparently it doesn't really matter what is said as long as everybody can blame dear old Wouter of something. Then everything is alright.





This basically means that you are splitting of the main F12 project here. Which is something you can do but would you mind changing the name of your design at the same time. I think the F12 project has to run on this forum a little longer before we have a concensus we can act upon. As this project predates your involvement, it is only fair to reserve the F12 name for this project only.

Wouter

Yes, Phills design is far more along those lines. I think he is also used in pod in which you can just drop the mast.

I eventually decided against this as the unstayed rig will need to be supported both along the centreline and perpendicular to the centreline. In effect you'll need to dolphin strikers then with one running along the centreline to the rear beam or something. I my opinion this comes close to have the famous kneeknocker bar of the old Nacra 5.2's. Also I feel this contruction is both more complex and more expensive then the push rod setup.

The push rod setup have other advantages as like much lover stresses in the involved components. But I won't go into detail here. The pushrod setup is also simpler and quicker to homebuild as it can be made up of plain parts like round alu tubing and standard marine hardware like eyebolts, threaded forks, plain bolts and clevis pins. There is no bending of straps or tubes involved.

Two added advantages of the push rods that I was after are the ease of sliding the F12 on its beams on the supports (plain plancks or beams) of a trailer or roof rack and the ability to grap this structure by the sailor when getting back on board or handling the craft.

Wouter

Yes, that is a possibility. In my opinion something like 3 mm dyneema line will be up to the job. The attachment points of the push rods to the hulls will provide a strong enough point to take these.

Limiting the sideways bend of the mast is one of the more promising performance enhancers.

The stay going to the front is a different matter but just as we do with spinnaker pole support wires we can easily drill small holes in the very tips of the bow and secure a twin forestay to those.

The more difficult item to solve is how to do the hound fitting on the mast with a sleeved mainsail on it.

In my opinion it is yet again one more thing. It is very easy to add parts to a design, but I'm not sure that is the best way to satisfy the stated design goals. I think that I strongly feel that the F12 is a "less is more" kind of concept.

Everything that is not stricktly necessary is better left out. This is one reason why I'm trying to get rid of the camber inducers as well. Afterall, each items adds both cost, building time and rigging time. These things do add up.

Wouter

This may be a good moment to familiarize yourself with the F12 design as it stands now.

With the pushrods, you secure the bottom of the mast to the mainbeam by sliding a bolt through the mast section and two eyebolts that are secured to the mainbeam. The mast is laying horizontal and parrallel to the hulls. The other mast sections are now inserted and possible the sleeved sail is slid over the mast. The whole rig can now be walked up and it will fall into the brace that the two pushrod together form. Slide another bolt throught the mast and the eyes and your are done. An alternative here could be a brace that rotates in front of the mast to lock it. I haven't decided here yet.

An alternative way of rigging would be to fit the mast and walk it up without the sail slid on it. Then the boat can be layed on its side and the sail can be slid over the mast that way after which the boat is righted again.

I have to move the rig into the pods on my landyachts and yes it can be done but I found that at my posture of 6 foot 2 and 90 kg that it can still be a muscle job. That is why I spend time on working out the above setup.

Wouter

That is it for me today, I'm off to work.


Wouter

Naughty, naughty Wouter, you changed the specs and didn't consult anyone that I'm aware of....you little Hitler

decided you need to consult people, but thats a tad hard to enforce, so I did something practical.

The following <because I don't want to run it> is free to anyone who wants to take it on with the sole exception of Wouter....Rick and Mary come to mind if they can stand the aggrevation as they appear to be the ones to started the forum to get this going.

Tonight I got the international trademarks, copyrights and web domains for the following:
Formula12 .net .org .us. .us.com .eu .eu.com
F12 .us.com .eu.com
F12cats .com .net .org .us .us.com .eu .eu.com

and further I have bids in and will probably have by tomorrow
F12 .net .org

Wouter....time to play nice nice and listen to those folks here and not tell them what to think

Everyone else....its party time, now lets do something useful with F12 that benefits the kids and the sport in general.

Suggestions for people to oversee this/run this are welcome cause I don't need another career.

Cheers
RG

Again with due respect, have you read all the previous links? I for one see nothing new in the information regurgitated by Wouter to you here, it is all previously documented.

Yes MAJOR thanks to Rick and Mary for starting this forum...as a direct result of the Youth Recreation Trend thread.

Maybe consider another thread "Alternate F12 design Mk II"? Woah, I've become a Wouter apologist <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Thanks RG for doing the comparison of the Original to the 75kg hull design…from what I can tell from the renderings it has confirmed my assumption…

The depth of the hull, width on deck and general design shape appear to be very near the same (at least at the cross section you provide) with just the width of the hull at the water line increased by about 1”…if this is the case, it is very hard to argue that increasing the F-12 design parameters to a crew weight of 75 kg would spoil anything in the way of safety, ease of use (weight), handling or performance for a younger child. It appears as if there is a mind set that sees all these little optimist sized cats flooding the sailing scene when in fact a boat capable of handling a greater crew weight would serve a greater variety of size kids, have a wider appeal to parents as their child will not “outgrow” the boat so quickly and as such, be more economical to own.

regards,
Bob

Bob,

Pretty much all F12 designs presented so far could carry more weight, but that doesn't mean that the competitive weight range is expanded to 75 kg.

Compare it to a F18 carrying over 200 kg (over 420 lbs). It can do it without any problems but you still won't be competitive with crews weight 145-155kg.

It is the same with the F12. The design was always intended to be able to carry more weight recreationally as it was agreed upon early on in the project that a parent with kid should be able to sail it (when the child first learns to sail it).

When we talk about a (competitive) weight range running from 40-65 kg than we are refering to youth RACING and not recreational sailing. Of course, adult can race this F12 as well but then to make things fair we need a minimum crew weight rules and split the racing in to groups.

the youths : 40-65 kg
the adults : over 65 kg

The adult will go around the course slower then the youth but as all adults will go slower by equal amounts the racing inside a group will be fair again.

And that is the end of my coffee break.

Wouter

Hey RG, I really like what you are doing with the F12 design. Many thanks for participating...<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Here is a video of the Open Bic that is being promoted by West Marine...They have totally beat the catamaran world to the punch with this concept and presentation. Set up in two minutes, easy to rig sleeve sail with freestanding rig, under 100lbs, near indestructible roto-molded, $2,700. US I know this boat has been talked about before on this forum, but I thought that a look at how they are marketing it would be of great value.

http://images.westmarine.com/video/OpenBicVideo1.html

Regards,
Bob

After watching that movie, I think I want to have kids so they can sail one of those!

Okay, so maybe not that much, but still it seems to be well marketed and alot cooler than the optimist, so now our cat has to beat that thing around the course.

gree2056... not only does it meet just about every criteria that has been set for the F12, other than being a catamaran...it is being manufactured and MARKETED by an established name in water sports with a huge world wide dealer network already supplying kayaks, surf boards, Sailboards, and now sailboats. This will definitely dilute the market share for the F12 catamaran. Those seeking a small high performance boat for their children now have a viable option to the Optimist.The F12 will have to take it up a notch in performance to stay ahead of the curve.

While watching the video it is apparent that they know how to market their product. The optimist was an easy target to shoot down... this Open Bic is going to be a lot stiffer competition.

Picture this, you take your 12 year old down to the sailing site...there is a home made, flat paneled, boxy looking F12 made of plywood...it has a "brushed on" paint job... with a rig that resembles some of the land sailor rigs posted...beside it is one of these sharp looking Open Bic's...He is a kid with no bias for or against catamarans, if you tell me he would not choose to sail the Bic over such an F12 you are lying to yourself.

The F12 better bring it's A-game, it will need to totally dominate on the water in order to overcome the media budget and maufacturing effeciency of scale that Bic has in play, in addition to overcoming the long established history of the Optimist..

Regards,
Bob

JeffS and his kids all took a spin on the Open last March. I've had my neighbors say they'd like to have one to, as advertised, be the next step past the Opti. Tough to justify the $1,300 hull only price when you think "how long will this 8 footer keep Johnny happy?" When will he be wanting for a Laser? Tough for just one of the bunch to justify buying Open hull only if the others don't make the move as well. They've got solid opti (OD) sailing and numbers, so why upset the apple cart? This is where the F12 will shine, I think it will satisfy a broader age span.

Agreed the Open looks sharp, some of these F12 designs look good too. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> The F12 must look fast to survive.

Mark II CTMD F12, sorry I'm not as good on rhino as RG. Jeff, yes you could use rotating centre boards, however I will show daggers as standard.

Chris, since you've stuck with a stayed mast and dolphin striker, are you considering the possibility of a trapeze?

And target crew weight is still 45-50kg, yes?

Mark,

target crew weight is still 45-50kg (I've left some extra freeboard in to cater for heavier crews or two people).

The concern with trapping is the extra compression load applied to the rig. The rig I'm looking at is designed for a two person, one on trap dinghy (MG14). With a 60kg person hiking on the cat the mast will experiance similar loads to what it would see with one person trapping on the less stable mono. I've gone with this mast at this stage because its similar in shape to most modern cat wing masts and because fully rigged it will be less than 6kg (a weight that will enable kids to rig their own boats). If you wanted to be able to trapeze its only a matter of talking to whoever you buy the extrusion off and discussing what section they would recommend (you'll propably end up a couple of kgs (4lbs) heavier at the most). The beams and dolphin striker as specified would be fine.

Ok thanks Chris. Presumably no expectation that trapezing is required from a righting moment point of view.

BTW, a question that I also asked of Phill a while back - what do you see as the next step for kids moving out of your F12, either in terms of existing boats or design parameters for a new boat?

Mark,

a 45kg kid sailing this boat would be approximately equivalent to a 70kg Paper Tiger sailor in terms of the ratio of righting moment to heeling moment. While obviously not required I'd also encourage people to build a reef into the main sail so that the boat could be calmed down when required.

Where to next is a difficult question. I competed in my first adult Hobie nationals as a 45kg crew at 12 years of age on a Hobie 18. The obvious answer is a 14' boot (F14) but for most of these you'd want be at least 65kg so depending on the kid and the location you would either keep them on the 12 until they become big enough for the 14 or put them on a 14 and be willing to lock them in the car on windy days.

In the southern states of Australia I can see a very beneficial development being...

F12 --> Paper Tiger --> Mossie --> A cat/ F16

Thanks Scarecrow great looking boat, I was really for traps as you know. We had a light day a couple of weeks ago and I let the kids captain the A, with me not recommending anything just sitting and getting them on & off the beach. They didn't want harnesses or to hike out they were happy with the speed sitting in. They wanted lots of turns, capsises and fun which they had, regarding the dagger boards that I was concerned about, they stopped the boat well of the beach to pull them and release the rudders, my plan is to have a few different length sets of daggerboards to suit experience and kick up rudders. Just from observation I think it was me that wanted them on traps <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />. The kids would happily sail your boat. As for me the Olypics decision has brought me forward and am currently getting quotes on bulk gear for a build starting early in the new year
regards

Just a stupid question. There is a lot of talk about crew weight, rightning moment and so on. Are you basing these on solid hydrostatic calculations or are you just preforming advanced guesswork?

Good question Gato <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

a composite set of hydrostatics for a couple of winning Uni-Rig boats would look something like this:

LCB 46.7% (fwd of transom)
LCF 45.5% (fwd of transom)
Cb 0.511
Cm 0.809
Cv 0.946
Cp 0.632
Cwp 0.754

My design which is geared more towards the heavier weights performance wise (to keep the heavier (50 kg+) kids from getting bored) looks like this right now:

LCB 47.3% (fwd of transom)
LCF 45.3% (fwd of transom)
Cb 0.393
Cm 0.619
Cv 1.432
Cp 0.635
Cwp 0.797

Would be interesting to see Grob's, Scarecrow's and Phill's numbers also if they have them. I don't think we need to hide these parameters as everyone will eventually see them anyways when we publish the plans and anyone can back calculate them. I would have included something similar to my design, but I don't have any lines handy from which to build a model to compare with, if anyone has a CAD model of something even close, please post it it and I'll throw a hydro's model together for everyone to look at.

Cheers
RG

Incase anyone isn't up to speed on the above abbreviations

LCB = longitudinal center of bouyancy
LCF = longitudinal center of flotation
Cb = block coefficient
Cm = midships coefficient
Cv = volume coefficient
Cp = prismatic coefficient
Cwp = waterplane coefficient

Cheers
RG

Just occurred to me that perhaps some others may not have some hydrostatics software, if so, just yell and I'll do what I can to help you out with getting some numbers for your hull. An igs file of your shape will generally get me started easily.

Cheers
RG

Hi Scarecrow

I actually really like the look of that, without me trying to study between the two, what changes have you made in regards to Mk1 to Mk2.

I'm all for centreboards and stayed rigs, I didn't have any trouble throwing up an stayed rigged aluminium rig when we were kids.

Are the plans available for this one? Also include a set of plans for a bigger shed, I think I'm gonna need it <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Regards

Makes sense, although a Mossie is an F16, right? If F12 is successful as a younger kids boat, maybe it could be the springboard Darryl and Bernie need for the F14, and from there people go to F16/F18/A depending on their preference and to a lesser extent on adult body weight.

Thanks RG, now the things starts to look more serious...

mk II

LCB 46.6%
LCF 42.4%
Cb 0.475
Cm 0.885
Cp 0.639
Cwp 0.721

For those who are a little new to this. Traditional theory is that keeping the LCF and LCB as close as possible will minimise pitching and keeping the LCF as far aft as possible will help prevent nose diving.

A high Cp is traditionally considered quick and a low one is considered easy to turn.

Matt Plans and kit are coming on line over the next couple of weeks (see pricing thread) the price will be slightly lower for the kit as I've eliminated one sheet of ply.

changes between two versions are a basic tidy up (first one was done very quickly) and a reduction in freeboard and some tweeks to the internal structure.

Chris.

I am avere that I might mess the things upp by this, but would it not be a good idea to go for a cat with a little bit more wolume like RG and for the rig to make it like Scarecrow. This would make the boat for a larger range of kids. Say small kids 2 up and older kids 1 up. That would make the platforme last a little bit longer, and also make it more adapted for raids.

Gato....already working on that <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Cheers
RG

One thing we should all be thinking about, and Wouter brought it up to me in an email because it hurts the F16 class, is a revenue stream so that those running the class have some funds to help promote and develop ideas/racing etc.

Wouter wanted to do this with common production of stuff like masts, braces, booms and sails etc with a small portion going to the class. While this is a great idea, its sorta goes back to limiting what all of us who are designing various stuff believe in.

My suggestion is that all of us designing each of these designs, add a small fee ($50 ?) that goes directly to the class treasury so they have some funds to pay for things like Scarecrow and I are currently helping to fund because we can. This also implies that we had better get our act together and elect some people to run stuff in short order, finish the class rule <whatever that turns out to be> and generally look a whole lot more like a class than a bunch of people who are in love with a concept.

Later, as the design and experience spiral narrows and we end up with more designs that incorporate more similar features, perhaps we can utilise some of Wouters idea's also.....or if any of you have other bright idea's for adding other possible revenue streams for the class, please speak up.

If you look at the F16 forum right now, they are having a discussion on how best to promote themselves further, but as a class lack the funds to do it in a major way....one of our primary goals as a class from the start should be to give those who run it, the tools (read $) to help get it started on the right foot.

Even small $ could get us the equivalent of the BIC video that we could saturate the web with and get the parents with the $ aware of what we are trying to do.

Cheers
RG

Sounds good to me, a small "licens" fee paid when you buy the plans makes it equal for everyone.

Gentlemen,

If the F12 Class Association is formally organized and this fine volunteer work converge to a one design class, I will buy plans to build at least one boat for my kids here and will also donate USD 500,00 to help with the class startup.

Afterwards, I will try to interest builders and start advertising/"marketing" the class in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay (and all Latin America, if possible) as:

1) A great double handed startup boat for a couple of kids (one F12 for two siblings is cheaper, safer and easier to rig than two Optimists);

2) The ideal singlehanded upgrade for kids bored with the Optimist;

3) Part of a worldwide youth effort to support multihulls and high performance sailing in general, in response to ISAF's controversial choice of Olympic equipment.

We should try to coordinate similar actions in all Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand, (South) Africa and (hopefully) Asia.

Keep it going,

RG,

great idea but the devil will be in the detail. We need to find a way to administer the class (and budget) internationally. The other thing to consider (assuming we get ourselves organised) would be to try and find a couple of association sponsors / benefactors.

Just a fundraising thought guys, what about when you pay your licence fee you get a hull number and F12 stickers to be attatched to the hulls (thereby adding value to your licence fee). On these stickers could be current sponsors name who would hopefully pay for the sticker and sponsorship of the class including a profile on the web page.
I told my daughter I am organising to build a catamaran for her and she looked really sad. I asked whats wrong and she said she wants a small A class. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> what a laugh

Good fundraising idea.

I have a 12 y.o. daughter who used to sail cats with me. She got bored in an Optimist after 5 times out, but couldn't handle a standard Laser and liked her only day out in an Europe.

I told her that we will build a cat designed for her age, size and weight, faster than any boat a parent would allow someone her age to sail - including the Laser and Europe. She loved the whole thing.

Maybe just copy the F16 class organization?
The first (and essential) prospect sponsors, benefactos AND BENEFICIARIES are the main cat manufacturers in each country. If they are minimally inteligent, they will understand the need to support an international entry level cat to train people to consume their products. Especially when they are free to build and sale the F12 too.

Luiz,
I think that before we hit the manufacturer's we should first demonstrate that we have a viable class, or they are likely to look at us as a lost cause before it starts
Cheers
RG

Final Hull, this is a compromise shape between speed and being easy to handle and the result of a whole heap of VPP runs....while it looks similar to the previous stuff, the transom is wider, rocker is changed slightly and is both wider and narrower in places (just a few mm here and there).
The really good news is that I now think I'll have (not a promise, just an optimistic guess right now) about 5 boats building by Christmas so about February/March we should have some on the water pic's and performance reports. Wish I could do it faster, but I think this is a realistic time frame. Will post pics of the builds as they evolve. As I was changing the hull up until yesterday, cutaway pics are still a week or so away.
Enjoy the new pic's
Cheers
RG

Latest Hull #2

Latest Hull #3

Latest Hull #4

Latest Hull #5

Latest Hull #6

Forgot to mention that I have 2 people interested in the round bilge version also, If Im lucky, the first of those might start building in Jan-Feb 08
Cheers
RG

RG, do you anticipate that the round bilge version will have different performance characteristics? How do you see the relationship between the two playing out in the market?

Mark.

Mark,
not sure how they will play out in the market, but I can tell you that the price point/work required to build difference makes the round bilge one maybe 3 times harder to sell...is for that reason why I did 2 designs....at the very least, the hard chine one will see at least a few more built :-)
As for performance, none sailing yet but my VPP (which often lies to me <grin>) says that the performance gain for the round bilge one is about 5-6% uphill and about 8% downhill, but you have to remember that its basically a scaled down A-boat and hence a lot more slippery.
Cheers
RG

this note comes under the heading of miscellanous thoughts....

In the course of trying to get a few people interested in building these boats Ive now had 7 "moms" say, hey, I'd like one so I could race with my son's/daughter's and the available other cats are too large for me. (ever noticed the large number of mom's on the beach <who can sail quite well> while the kids are out sailing?)

Where we run into a problem is weight wise (this has already been discussed a lot) but one easy thing we seem to have overlooked is what they do with the F-16's which is to add sail area to equal out the weight penalty.

After thinking this thru a bit, I don't see any down side to having a version for adults that has a bit more sail scaled to some weight formula, especially if those adults want to be able to race with their kids....in fact I think its a real plus as far as encouraging kids more.....what kid doesn't want to be able to beat mom or dad on a more or less even basis? <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Chances are that they won't cause mom/dad are better sailors, but I bet it will make them try a whole lot harder.

Just my ramblings for this evening

Cheers
RG

PS...this in no way means I want to change the rules as we understand them now....just add a bit of latitude to them to accomodate a broader range of participants based on feed back Ive had...the basic rule for the kids should stand as it is!!!!

JeffS, you've got PM. Well I think you have anyway.

Sure why not? The laser has 3 sail sizes and two mast lengths. The lower section of the mast is shorter for the 4.9 and the Radial (5.7) then the laser (7.0). <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

It is also a different mast section totally unlike the standard version except for the outer diameter.

Remember guys the rig is most costly part of the whole design. It will be better to use the same mast section and just fit a larger sail to it for adults (with less luff or leech curve)

Wouter

Absolutely. The sequence is:

1 - Preliminary: class rules / design
2 - Startup: class association / first boats
3 - Expansion: start marketing / races

RG,

If possible, I would like to know the following:

1 - Plan's prices (both versions) and royalties for serial production.
2 - Estimated construction times (hulls only and complete).
3 - Do you think the additional speed and handling difficulty of the round bilge version would scare kids away?(or parents!)
4 - Considering your answer to item 3, what version would you choose if you were to build the first boat in wood, take the molds and then (try to) build a fleet from those?

Thanks!

Luiz
I plan to get the plans out using http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat3d/ which allows you to render, slice, measure, dimension any part of the boat in 3D as well as print it all. While Adobe say its a secure document, its anything but secure, but it should greatly assist people in visualising the bits and pieces as they build the boat. As for price, it will be free (plus the $50 for the class association). Serial production royalties will likely be on a similar basis to other boats out there, so it will be very low, but I need to check on a few things before I commit to a number. Most royalties are on a sliding scale relative to volume, volume goes up, per unit royalty comes down slightly, my intent is to have a fixed lower one based on the optimistic assumption that we will inundate the planet with this class <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> LOL

For the hard chine boat I'd guess 8-9 weeks would be a reasonable time and the round bilge one because its a strip planked foam build, probably another 2-3 weeks on top of that. This assumes that your just doing it in the evenings and on the weekends. If I can get someone to scarf the sheets and precut the panels like Scarecrow is proposing, then you might be able to cut the build time down by a few weeks.

The round bilge boat is only just over 1 knot faster at the top end, so I doubt that will scare anyone. As for handling, I hope it turns out like some of my other recent designs which were all pretty benign. This version btw will be more pitch resistant that the hardchine version.

As for your last question, hands down I'd do the round bilge boat because I like it more, but in trying to sell a few of these, most of the kids tend to like the hardchine one....go figure? Think the choice is up to those who like one or the other design better.

Cheers
RG

G'day Matt you'd have PM too but the computer says youre not accepting it <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />. I hopefully sent a message to the e-mail address in your profile yesterday. Since our clubs are not far apart ( relatively ) I'd like to have similar cats.
I already piggyback a 420 on my cat trailer so I'm hoping to get 2 youth cats on instead
regards Jeff

Hi Jeff

No email, I just had a look my correct email is the profile, tiffmatt(at)bemail(dot)com.au

I've just changed the accepting private messages, I didn't realise it was on 'no' I bought a new computer a few weeks ago, and must have done something when I logged back on.

Regards

Thanks!

Maybe that is not so suprising if you look at modern sports cars, chines are in fashion <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />







Gareth

Let's follow the trend and make them MULTI chined... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

After reviewing the designs once again, it is clear (to me) that the stayed rig is unnecessarily expensive and complex. The free standing strut supported version simplify the rig, transport, assembly, storage, construction and structure. The struts are a good grab point and add safety for children. They make the evolution to a smaller or larger rig inexpensive and easy - if and when the class decides so. Mothers could even rig vinyl spray deflectors there for dryness and shade. I like them.

In the free standing rig version, if we place the gooseneck in the main beam, the sleeve could leave a gap where the struts are welded to the tube and be double velcroed around the mast below that point. This would solve the gooseneck problem and allows a small reduction in mast height.

Does it make sense to you?

What gooseneck problem are you refering to ?

Personally I would strongly prefer to have the boom above the attachment points of the push rods as then the rig can rotate fully around the mast which is very advantage (performance) when sailing deep. It also is a safety feature as any kid can let the rig weathervane completely when surprised by a squall or something.

A freehanging boom (possible with a fork at its mast end) is possible and most easy solution

Wouter

Not sure a reduction on mast height gains us much as its such a small triangle at the bottom that you gain, and that doesn't lower the COE very much. And I tend to agree with Wouter about letting the sail weathervane if required.
Also, don't see that the stayed rig is that much more complicated, but do agree that the freestanding is faster & easier to rig.
Too my surprise, most who I have talked to so far have elected to go after the stayed rig because it will allow trapezing, and these are the kids talking, not their parents who don't seem quite as sure about the whole thing. In the words of one kid.....why should I hike all day when I can trap and go "zoom"
Cheers
RG

The following attachments should give you an idea of how I think the hull jig should go together, this drawing is not yet complete....if any of you want changes, speak up.
Pic #1 the base box, made of 2x4 or 50x100mm, kiln dried so it won't warp and nice and heavy so it won't move.
Pic #2 plywood wrap, 25mm on top and 12mm on the sides
Pic #3 12x15mm cleats screwed to the box to attach the frames to
Pic #4 Frames get attached (12mm thickness)
Pic #5 Upper cleats are attached, these could actually be attached prior to attaching the frames
Pic #6 Frame beam is inserted
Pic #7 Hull in the jig

The front 3 frames that aren't attached to the base, I'll explain how that works once I get the rest of the drawing done.
The next 3 frames moving aft will be detachable and can slide aft when your ready to lift the hull off. This is required because of the tumblehome.
The rear frame is notched so you just have to sit the transom sheet in place to get it aligned correctly, all frames are notched on the outboard edge to help hold the side panels in place correctly.

Cheers
RG

Pic #2

Pic #3

Pic #4

Pic #5

Pic #6

Pic #7

BTW, forgot to mention that the frame beam has some fore & aft supports that are not shown yet so that the whole arrangement stays rigid.
Cheers
RG

I think this is extremely important feedback from your market. It would be interesting to know the ages of the kids you're getting these comments from, RG. It seems that most here have been fairly resistant to the trapeze idea, but I believe that clearly differentiating your product in the market is an important element of success. It's one thing to say "it has two hulls, two hulls are faster, you'll like it", but another for kids to actually see that there's something quite different and exciting about the experience of sailing this baby from their buddy's monohull. I understand the argument in favor of the unstayed mast, but I don't think you should ignore this issue.

You are both right. Besides Optimists, I sailed with fork type goosenecks in Penguins back in the 70's - with rotating wingmasts! It is very simple, efficient and inexpensive for small boats exactly as you say. Note that it was not possible to weathervane the Penguin due to the shrouds (unlike the Optimist), so the fork solution is ideal for the free standing rig only, not so for the stayed/trapeze rig.

Two divergent conceptual paths (trends) emerged and are being followed:

a) Simplicity oriented, with chined hulls, free standing rig, hiking straps, cheaper price. It is essentially the original F12, but I'll call it F12 One Design.

b) Performance oriented, rounded bottomed hulls, stayed rig, trapeze, normal price. It is essentially a Mini A Cat.

I guess it is ok to follow both trends until a clear winner emerges. Still, we already know that the Mini A Cat will end as a scaled down A Cat, so we could just as well follow the F12 One Design path only and in the end compare everything to a scaled down A Cat - including the class rules.

I made my own spreadsheet to rationalize the decision process and it indicates that the F12 One Design wins by a small margin, basicaly due to simplicity and costs. The other differences more or less cancel themselves. Sorry, could not upload the spreadsheet as is, just its picture.

It might not be necessary to assume that a trapeze version goes with the round hulls and higher construction skill.

I note that your spreadsheet indicates a target age range that spanning both Wouter's original target and the younger kids that others favored. Not sure if this is generally agreed by everyone else. Still interested in knowing the ages of the kids RG is talking to.

Also curious whether "one design" is still the consensus. My impression was that Chris and RG are both pursuing separate designs with the expectation that they will both fit into the box rule defined by the measurement form they put together.

Agreed. The end of the process is to add all positive features we can to the best concept, regardless their origin, but sticking to the chosen concept.




Yes, but note that I am spanning the original age range with two up.

As Wouter wrote, a cat that is optimal for 12+ year old kids is also a very good choice for a couple of kids under 12. This adds a very important marketing feature to the class, for then it will be a strong replacement/competition for both the Optimist and the Laser - while interfering little with the original goals.

Also, note that this is a tough feature to replicate in a monohull class: a Laser can be sailed by two small kids, but it is hard for them to keep the boat upright when tacking and jibing (have you noticed the high beam of the Optimist? It's no coincidence).

The cat's high initial stability makes life a lot easier for the small ones. I think we must use this advantage in our favour as much as possible, if anything because we can't get read of the inherent disadvantage: the tendency to go to irons when tacking.

The trapeze is a source of interference with the original goals. If we accept that it is indeed advantageous for the class to target this segment (startup boat for ages 7 to 12), we'll have to analyse this feature carefully, for it leverages the advantage that kids over 12 have against two smaller ones.




Good point.

The problem with a formula is that parents start competing to see who spends more on the kid's boat. This forced the Optimist to become a strict one design. Even with the narrowest possible rules, parents still find ways to spend a lot on their kids to give them an edge (buying high tech lines, gore-tex clothes, multiple foils, sails and hulls, etc.).

This is another interference caused by the increased age span. Younger kids' parents require strict one design rules, while older kids (and their parents) can live with a formula - and possibly have more fun with it.

As a consquence, first we must discuss if the "two up under 12 startup" use is a desirable feature for the class or not. Needless to say, I favour this feature. Here's why:

Even with Internet, I don't see a group of teenagers managing a Formula class. In most of the cases it will be their parents doing the work.

If parents must be involved, why not catch them earlier, at the same age kids start sailing Optimists? It is easier and it makes more sense to me.

If the class is sailable during a wider age span, the class organization becomes stronger. Parents managing the Optimist class usually help for 6 to 10 years, maximum. If the same boat was good for a couple more years (as would be our case), they would help for 8 to 12 years. We all know how difficult it is to find people to help, so this is a great benefit for the class.

I'd like to hear what others think before continuing, because I may be trying to convince the converted...

Kids I've spoken to range from 7 to 14, but most would be 10 and up
RG

Right now based on what parents and kids are telling me, I'd say that the only person who wants the round bilge design is me <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
So, if I follow exactly what those interested want (not counting those here), its a hard chine design, with boards, that can fit an age range from 7-8 thru 16+, that can accept either rig, although the majority appear to want a stayed rig.
To be fair, most of the kids Ive spoken to come from sailing families, most own or have sailed opti's (and are really bored with it) and one or more of the parents sail multihulls.
Just from my personal perspective, I see the ability to swap from one rig type to another as a design plus that gives the designs more utility over the age range and beyond, perhaps the easiest way to deal with it is just cap it around some age limit?
RG

Im looking at exactly the same age spread also hoping that some will go on to crew for adults or go to F14 from there on. I think I'll be able to get novice adults (read parents) out on these boats. My preference is multi design so that if a parent wants to get excited in the sport encourage them, I hope we can come up with a simple handicap system to encourage young enthusiastic sailors to strive for their maximum potential and nurture the ones just doing it for the fun. I can see two 7 year olds doing a roll tack and cackling the whole time.
regards

Just got a call from a father who sails an A-Class who has a 7 year old who wants a boat and his suggestion was use a boomless pocket luff rig with a curved (decreasing radius) traveller (so it cambers up automatically as you travel down) and this way kids can't bang themselves on the head with the boom if they aren't paying attention or it gybes on them when they aren't expecting it (which will happen). The cost difference for getting a slightly longer bent traveller is more than offset by not having to purchase the boom and it will speed up the rig/derig time.
cheers
RG

Had forgotten to give you people some floatation numbers, with a 65 kg platform and a 45 kg kid, on both hulls it will float approx 29mm below the tip of the bow, on one hull its exactly at the nose. With a 75 kg crew, it will sit down a further 36mm when on 1 hull. And for those extreme conditions where all the neighborhood kids pile on the boat and its sunk to halfway up the transom (110mm above DWL) it will support 221 kg on one hull .... thats almost 5 45 kg kids or 10 of them when it's on both hulls. Not sure the beams or the rig will standup to this punishment, so just don't tell the kids it can do it <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Cheers
RG

I guess the design could be made to accept either rig, obviously at the cost of adding specific structural reinforcements.
Can you estimate the weight increase, if significant?

The two configurations are:

- "School" configuration - free standing mast / two kids under 12 / hiking straps.

- "Competition" configuration - stayed mast / one kid over 12 / trapeze.

The question remains about the type of class rules: one design, formula or split? (split meaning one design for the "school" version and formula for the "competition" version).

If the class rules are made different for each configuration, two classes will be born - and in the end one will be a strict one design and the other a Mini A.
I guess this alternative can be excluded because (as I see it) we want to converge to one optimal class rule and/or design.

If one rule covers both configurations, it's one class with two purposes, much like the 420 (a one design class with two configurations: "club" and "competition").

I prefer the club and competition versions and to that end I have started to modify the way it's set up so you can run either configuration on the same platform, with the same mast and with a hybrid sail so you can use the same sail for both configurations as a "cheap" option for growth. Need to change things a bit, but should have some pics showing how its done by late tomorrow or the next day.
Cheers
RG

Luiz,
think I can get the weight penalty for the above to about 0.5kg or less, will know more after I have calculated the changes. Will let you know soon.
Cheers
RG

If you want the excel sheet uploaded to a website then send it to me and I will place it on :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/


Wouter

Another argument I found against trapeze is that is does add cost beyond its direct advantages. Mostly because you have to buy a kids harness which he or she will grow out of very quickly necessitating maybe a new harness 3 years down the line ? These kids do grow at a pretty impressive rate. In the end it is just another thing to buy when a kid starts out sailing these and it all adds up in my opinion.

I figured that it was better to just add a little more width to the platform and hike to get to the same overall performance.

Wouter

RG,

I serious doubt that the cost of a curved traveller is less then a those of a boom. Afterall the later is nothing more then a piece of plain round alu tubing.

The solution to this parent whishes is probably better served by a wishbone boom see picture on a landyacht.




Basically it is a windsurfer boom that is fitted higher up the mast. The wishbone boom can angle downwards towards the clew corner arriving at exactly the same mainsail surface area as a normal boom. This wasn't done on the landyacht as a person is sitting up straight beneath the sail and his head will otherwise be in the way.

The attachment of the wishbone boom is extremely simple. It is just a loop of some high strength line that goes around the mast. A single line at the rear (hook ?) sets the draft and the mainsheet is directly hooked to the sail and not to the boom itself.

It is not even hard to modify a boomed sail to take a wishbone boom. Just have to cut the sleeve open and reinforce it. The rest can remain unaltered.

An additional advantage of the wishbone boom is that the need for a kicking strap or ram vang has been negated. The luff of the sail itself will act as a kicking strap and prevent the boom from rising up to far when the mainsheet is released.


For enthousiasts and designer looking to use old windsurf masts. I have less then encouraging news. I've been trying such masts on this landyacht and found that nearly all plain windsurfer masts are far too flexible and will "pump" in unstable winds which is not a nice behaviour for a landyacht or sailboat. Basically these masts will have to be reinforced to make the stiffer. Inserting a second mast of same taper is one of the ways to achieve this. This does add weight and you will have to open the mast to take the local boom location reinforcing out.

Wouter

My comments on your spreadsheet.

I would like to add a few comments on the "OD F12" in your spreadsheet.

Trapeze/Hiking :

The given 7.00 sq. mtr rig on a 6.00 mtr mast (that is what we all agree upon right ?) will only be able to produce so much heeling moment. The OD F12 will resist this by hiking on a wide platform, while the trapezed F12 will resist this on a trapping on a more narrow platform. You don't win much by trapping on a wide platform, mostly because the rig will then not have you trapping unless the winds are really strong. That was the idea behind the hiking OD F12, just add a little extra beam width to compensate.

From memory I think that my design achieved 2-up trapping F18 equality at 2 mtr wide for a 53 kg crew.


Speed :

From what I know and have seen on the water, many will be surprised about how small the performance difference between a multichined and a round bilge hull will be when all else is the same. We are not talking more then say 3 minutes per hour racing at max here, which is pretty negligiable.


Stability/pitching :

My F12 design was to be fitted with T-foil rudders, especially the deep V-ed keel version. In my opinion this is the most simple and inexpensive way to get excellent pitching behaviour. As per what Darryll did with his F14's, the T-foil rudders use plain kickup rudderstocks. On the F12 the rudders and T-foils will be too small to develop enough force to break off the sterns or stocks anyway. On the Alfa Omega F14 did was already the case. As such the little T-foils are just permanently screwed to the bottom of the rudders. Plain and simple, easily replaced when damaged.

I think these points will increase the points assigned to the "OD F12" a little

Wouter

I added the requested modifications to the spreadsheet. The file should be in your hotmail direction by now. See the "2" sheet. A picture follows attached, so nobody has to wait for the upload.



I'd like to comment (and read other comments) on the features of Phil's Blade 12, as posted in the Open forum:

- The mainsheet and rudder crossbbar setups are great, ideal for kids. This setup should be mandatory.

The dolphin striker receptacle for the freestanding mast is neat, but I like the struts better because the dolphin striker can hit a child's head when righting the boat, while the struts help coming back on board - besides other advantages we already wrote about.

I hate to say it but this part of the design is also 4 years old now :

See below the artist impression I made for Phill Brander in late winter 2003.




Notice the mainsheet setup ?

Phill is going to be really pissed at me, but I'm going to say it anyway. The time has come to actually produce a design and not more artistic impressions. It is great to see Phill has found a new person with much more advanced skills to make these flashy pictures but in the end of the day these are nothing more then a bunch of glowing pixles on a computer screen. It is time to produce detailed cost and weight tallies. Work out the materials used and the individual dimensions of the parts. Many will find that a few more snags are encountered here and will need to be overcome.

I really love how Phills Blade 12 looks and indeed we discussed its OD status as far back as 2003/2004. I was surprising to see Phill come out for a more open class rules based F12 class on this forum knowing he was fully working towards his own OD Blade 12 setup. This is confirmed by his own admission on the main forum. His pod like setup for the unstayed rig will most definately work. The mast design I have presented in this post can be used for his setup without any modification. It appears his mainsail is basically the same area the same as the sail depicted in the photographs (5.5 sq. mtr).

But the flashy picture do mislead people a little bit. The Hulls for example. These "appear" to be scaled down Blade F16 hulls with a rounded keel. Not even Phill himself believes that these can be homebuild without a serious building effort, meaning multi panel construction that is steamed into a rounded shape. Basically these hulls will not be much different in building requirement then the Blade F16 hulls. A multichine hull or even a deep V-ed hull design are much more likely to be chosen eventually and as such it will be much better to show these in the CAD drawings, like RG does. At least then we all see what we are getting into.

Either that or Phill will do best to clarify how exactly these compounded hulls can be made with very simple tooling and small time investment.






It is interesing to note that the OD class rules that I have written up earlier actually do NOT rule out the pod setup that Phill prefers. Basically, in that OD class both the rod and pod setups can be used legally. I would like to stress once more that the OD class rules are not SMOD and that apart from limiting a few design features in a very strickt sense, like the hullshape and the requirement of an unstayed mast, other aspects are left completely open to personal preference. I don't see any reason to not allow design freedom in these ways.


I do really like Phill Blade 12 and I always have, even though I have differed in opinion on some design aspects. But when made well the Blade 12 will be a good design.

Wouter

Luiz,

Your stuff is now uploaded to the website :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/

direct link is :

http://www.xs4all.nl/~whijink/F12/Comparison_Between_Design_Trends_draft.xls


Wouter

Wouter,

I've posted some pics of a craft that I will build because I think it will work at attracting kids.
My suggestion is that everyone else build what they think is right to capture the imagination of the young.
Hopefully someone will get it right and kids will be drawn to the sport.

BTW:-
I will be posting building pics on my website.
Then people can judge for themselves regarding your claim that I am misleading people.
A picture is worth a thousand words.

Regards,
Phill

I like all your designs, ang I would like to vbuild them all.
But are we not about to forget one thing? The kids were supposed to build their cats? The designes and solutions start to be far to complicated for kids say around 12 to build, even a chained hull is not so straight forward to set up.
I am not an expert in any way in boatbuilding, but I have been working with kids on both wood and metal and my experience is that it has to go fast and change all the time...

Gato,
I have built many boats many different ways.
Provided you have well thought out building instructions the deep V should be the quickest to build.
It should keep the kids interested.

When I post my building pics you will see how much simpler the Blade 12 is to build when compared
to the method used on the 16. And while it will have a lower draft and carry more weight than the V
it would still take a little bit longer to build.

I wish you the best of good fortune and will follow your work in getting these kids involved with great interest.
Good luck.

Regards,
Phill

No war has ever been won when allies are also engaged in fighting among themselves. I think this gave rise to the saying "Divide and Conquer".

Basically I disagree with the notion that we should all do our own thing and have the market place sort us out. The end result will most likely be that we all fail and waste alot of effort and resources in the proces. More importantly even, we will fail to effectively compete agains designs like the Open Bic and 29-er.

I also think "hoping" is an generally bad strategy.

So the question becomes, are you "in" with the F12 project or are you more interested in doing your own SMOD thing ?

Wouter

Posting in the Open forum may not atract kids, but will certainly atract adult support for the general concept of a kids' cat. It also has the potential to atract support from builders.

I think it is positive to post from times to times some type of "progress report" or "project milestone reaching report" of the kid's cat concept in that (and others) fora, in order to familiarize people with the idea and atract further support.

I call this "internal marketing" and in the current stage it is even more important than normal marketing. And while we are at the subject of atracting support, I am sure that whatever plans Phil has for the Blade, he will also support this cooperative global project as well.

I see no need to press with binary "in or out" choices. As shrinks say, there are many shades of grey between white and black. He may be in and build the boat he likes. If this group does its work well and achieves a smart class with inteligent features and compromises, Phill might decide to change his boat to fit the class. And we may do exactly the same - as I already proposed with the mainsheet and tiller crossbar setup.

Wouter is right when he says that we need internal cooperation to succeed. I would only add that this must not necessarily limit personal initiatives. Things will progress well because we are all intelligent and cooperative enough to manage them without interfering negatively with the group's project. I fully trust this group's participants intentions, capacity and integrity.

Let's keep it going.

There is another thing that it's still worth to think about.
Is there people and clubs out there ready to build their boats, or do they want to buy them ready?
I have been doing some digging here and so far the interest is low for building even if I have promised to be the instruktor for the building for free!!!

If we want to compete with the Optimist, we must prepare to give the "customers" (clubs, organizations and individuals) the "product" they want (complete boats, kits, plans, builders list, etc.).

This requires atracting the big players, smaller professional builders, parts providers, etc. in order to reach all places where Optimists are used. "If it teaches sailing in Optimists, it can teach in a F12".

I believe it is best to start this work after the boat is defined and the class is minimally organized.

Cool beans RG. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Good to see such encouraging developments.

Please, do NOT start with that "Cool Beans" stuff, I'm hearing too much of it already from my 14 yr. old son... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I'm new to this internet posting stuff, so please forgive any overreaches in etiquette.

A couple of points. There seems to be some concern as to making these (f-12's) too dangerous. I'm not convinced that this is a real concern. We are talking 12 to 16 year olds here. Has anyone gone and watched 12 year olds racing 80 cc dirt bikes? Karts? Mountain bikes? Sailing is way, way safer. By the time they are 16 they are off the charts. The boats should scare 12 year olds ( a little, somtimes) and by the time they are 16 yrs old they should be a little bored, and be ready for something a little (lot?) quicker/scarier. It seems to me that any of the designs being batted around the site should accomplish this.

The other concern/focus in many ways appears to center on the SMOD vs OD vs very simple formula debate. This seems a tough nut to crack. In my experience in other sports, I tend to support simpler rules that allow more experimentation. The concerns are of course (though this is of concern in all the formulas, just to a lesser or greater extent) the risk of an "arms race" leading to higher and higher costs. Has anyone mentioned yet using a "claimer" rule to help stop this behavior.

For those not familiar with the concept. A "claimer" rule (these go by different names) works basically as follows. F12 boats should cost under 3000 Euros. Basically, any competitor can buy anyone else's boat at an event for a nominally higher fee. Say 3500 Euros. What sort of fool will spend 4000 Euros extra on his kids carbon hulls, when dad #2 can buy his "overvalued" F12 "special" for 3500 euros.

This works remarkably well in all sorts of motorsports where cheating is endemic. You see it especially in kids stock car racing where, for example, cars are supposed to cost less than $500. They have a $1000 claim rule. Everybody "runs what they brung", and costs stay relatively low.

I think a claimer rule would also help in SMOD and OD classes, as it would help limit the super-richies from upping the ante all the time.

This is further supported because (from what I have been able to read, anyhow) trying to spend money on the boat to make the thing faster is not nearly as effective as learning how to sail better. If your super expensive F12 special is just going to get claimed away, you might as well sail it stock, and learn to sail better.

Just a few thoughts.

Love the concept of F12 for the kids. I live in a place where there is no sailboat racing, and not that much recreational sailing (lots of power and PWC's though...). I might build one of these things for the kid though. I like the low cost, and the idea that they still go fast enough to get em excited with sail as opposed to power.

thanks

There is always a faster boat...even in one design...to have the "claimer" rule would just allow the more wealthy to buy the fastest boat at any given race...they would let someone else do the work and step in with a fat wallet and buy the fastest...you would make it easier for them, not harder.

Try explaining that to your kid who poured his heart and soul into building a boat… only to have daddy big bucks walk away with his pride and joy. The whole idea that you can keep the wealthy from buying speed is a false premise...even in one design they can buy a new boat every year of less if they so desire. The majority here are always saying that it is the nut behind the tiller, not the boat that matters…if you truly believed that…this topic of conversation would not constantly be in the fore front of nearly every discussion on class rules or boat design/construction.

Regards,
Bob

Cool Beans, Cool Beans, Cool Beans,....
OK, now I'll try to restrain myself. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

What is all this stuff about a war? You trying to claim credit for everything F12 is hardly a war unless you consider your ego as the combat zone... <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I'm not claiming "credit for everything F12", just the right to (commercially) use anything related to F12 even when contributed by others and the exclusive rights to my own design and to the class name and structure. The latter being largely the result of my work over the last 18 months as well.

There is definately a difference here !

At some point the rights need to be concentrated in one entity; otherwise growing the class and enforcing the class rules will be pretty much a impossible task. Some blowhards immediately equate this to dictatorship, but then again it is always easy to just blabber away without actually investing any time or money in the project.

I'm just interested in making this F12 project a succes and it is a rare occurance when a committee succeeds at something like this. They called me a dictator in the F16 class as well, and right now I'm not even a F16 class official anymore. Still the F16 class was succesfully launched internationally where many other miserably failed (Taipan class ?). Sometimes, if you want to get results, you just have to trust people.

Additionally, creating and building up a new class to critical mass takes literally 1000's of manhours. I think the F16 class costed me just over 4000 manhours in total over 5 years time. Don't you think that earns a person some ownership rights to the class ? If a company wants that kind of investment from me then they have to shell out at least some 60.000 Euro's in net pay. You bloody nitwit !

And I sure as hell am not going to spend the equivalent of 60.000 Euro's on the F12 class and have others walk away with the credit and earnings. That would make me a right fool.

Wouter

Welcome to the forums carlito. Look forward to hearing more from you in the future.

Note that not everyone involved in F12 is targeting 12+. Some are focused on the under-12 kids.

Its a good thing the disclaimer has absolutly no standing legal strength at all then, don't worry I checked it out.

Any wonder topics have moved to the open forum.

When your talking about engaging people to build boats for lots of kids under and over 12 years old, I don't think there is much commercial value. The value is from getting kids on the water then if they move on to serious competition as a young adult you can hope to sell them a serious boat.
I've ordered my first F12 kit and its not from someone claiming ownership of the F12 concept so sue me.

So your boat is not an F12 then, is it ?

We are still deciding with all people here (including you) on how the F12 design and F12 class will look like.

The guy who sold you your kit hasn't cross referenced it with us here, for all we know it may well violate one of the F12 class rules that still need to be finalized. If that happens then you are out of luck.

Apart from that you are free do to what you want.

And this is exactly why the rights claim was written down. We don't want every Harry, Dick and Tom to call their contraptions a F12, muscle in on the promotion done by others and confuse the wider public.

The F12 design will be what is decided upon on this forum, not what some "split off designer" thinks it should be. Any other design will most likely not be allowed in the class later on.

Who says so ? Well I say so ! And after putting in all those hours already I have every right to do so. On whose activities was this F12 forum started for example ?

Besides, distractors like yourself frustrated the F12 project last februari as well and when pushed came to shoove we couldn't dependent on these guys to do anything but complain all the time. So forgive me from considering this a passed station. Now, if any of you feels uncomfortable with me claiming rights to this F12 project then you are strongly invited to buy a Hobie rotomoulded boat, start your own class or just generally refrain from commenting. You had your chance to replace me as project leader several times , I even renewed that offer 2 weeks ago and there are simply no other takers (again).

So you are stuck with me (unless you want no F12 at all) and I'm not going to do all that work without coming away with some rights. Of course owning these rights still doesn't mean that I'll charge everybody for it. It just means the control of the project and class is well defined. Something that is important for a succesful launch of the class.

Wouter

Wouter you may want to get the latest issue (December/January) of Professional Boat Builder Magazine and read the article "A Primer on Patents" located on page 118.
Anyone can "claim" anything they want...you can fly over here to the US, stick a flag in the ground and declare it "Wouterland" but that does not mean you can enforce your claim in a court of law.


I understand to a point you wanting to be compensated for the time you put into this, or any other class...but what about all the other people who have contributed ideas and time? Blowing them off as being useless because they didn’t meet your narrow view of how it should be done doesn’t negate the value of their ideas. Their time is just as valuable as yours… If you are compensated, it only stands to reason that they should be too. How far do you take this? What is the real reason for the existence of an F12? It is looking like it is less and less about the kids all the time…

Regards,
Bob

You guys still don't understand do you ! ... And you probably never will, but here goes.

Without building a strong organisation around the F12 there will be no F12 class, just a bunch of amateurs fiddling around. We had that for 40 years now and no viable youth class was ever established for catamarans. You think there is a correlation here.

With regard to patents, nobody is asking for patents. Hell the laser dinghy can't not be patented in anyway, neither can the succesfully lay claim to the name Laser. But all that pretty irrelevant as you can' participate in any of the Laser class events unless you own a boat that is officially recognized by the class and a court of law can do absolutely nothing about that. There is no law that forbids an organisation from excluding you from the class if you do not satisfy the limits set in their class rules. Basically, legal jumbo is irrelevant.

You guys are all over the place and have no focus.

With a class hierarchy (and that includes laying the ownership rights somewhere) we simply don't have a class. If a design doesn't have a class then that design (and the concept associated with it) has a negligiable chance of succeeding.

All you guys are doing right now (contributions ?) is tearing the project apart like a bunch of wolves. And when it fails because of it we can all be very proud of ourselves that another opportunity was lost for a viable entry c.q. youth cat class again.

That is what we are talking about here. If I was getting off on power and control then I sure as hell wouldn't waste my time on creating a new sailing class. Such is project is more pain then it is really worth and I'm doing it because I can and I feel there is a need for it, call it passion.

For it to succeed I need control, I need to be able to control the creation of the class, its growth and the money flow so I can reinvest portions of it into the class. THIS IS ALL FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CLASS WE ARE CREATING.

I'm intending to use the money earned to fund the class organisation and sell the more expensive components against cost. I'm going for advantages of production on scale. It will be alot cheaper and more performant if the class designs and orders the mast sections and then sells it on to the sailors. For alu extrusions there is a minimal batch size of 250 to 500 kg. That is 30-60 F12 masts in one go with a upfront investment of several thousant bucks. If there is no control then I can't justify some private party of investing in this as the risks of you guys running around for alternatives makes this economically very risky. Same with sails, rudders, etc.

Then the so called contributions. Most are of the form :"Hey, why not have only 1 rule that regulates overall length and everything else goes ?"

Like that the best we can achieve is Grob coming with a 100 kg rotomoulded F12, Retired Geek with a 50 kg all carbon foiling F12, Phill with an underpowered F12 and Wouter with a 60 kg F12 made from commonly available materials and having a more crude deep V-ed hull.

What do you will happen we we go to some national sailing association to make them aware of our F12 youth class and ask for their support ? They will laugh us out of the room so hard that it will hurt for years to come. And to top it off we have ones again confirmed to the mono guys that cat sailors are crazed lunies that disagree amonh themselves so much that can't even get one thing like a simple class right.

F12 was always intended to be more then just what a private persons wants for his personal situation. It is intended to because the international youth class for catamaran sailing (and not for some local aussie sailing club project) and a feeder class to the currently existing international cat classes like the H16's, A's, F16's, F18's and Tornado's.

Also guys like Phill, Paul and Wouter have spend several thousand of bucks (out of their own pocket) to get the F16 class up and going. I for one will never see any of that back again. Phill has his building fees to recouperate some of his costs. I get posters dissing me for something they could never do or are even willing to do themselves. Maybe, you all should compare your "hey, what if ... " postings and drawings to persons actually putting in the time and money to work out the details of each design, build it and build the class.

Now I'm going to do another class creations project, I'm one of the very few who can and who is evem willing to do it.

Now are going to help me make this a success or not ?

Wouter

Wouter, I think the lack of clarity over the rights issue is compounded by a lack of clarity over the project status, and even over who exactly is on board and to what extent. I see a number of issues come up in discussion here reflecting different views on what seem to be fairly fundamental issues - target age & weight, OD or Formula, stays or not, trapeze or not, multiple sail sizes, boards or boardless etc etc - and of course in the process of developing the class concept it's perfectly fine that these debates should occur and different ideas get proposed. The problem is that I don't see these issues getting clearly resolved to a point where there is a well-defined core group of people who reach agreement and move on. I do see your own views very plainly and consistently expressed, but it's not clear to me how much of this has broad acceptance and how much is your contribution to debates that are still ongoing. Maybe the people actively participating in the class development have a clearer view than I do, but just as an interested observer here the picture seems quite cloudy.

My suggestion is that perhaps on a weekly basis you post a project status note on the forum, defining exactly the current state of what has been agreed (and perhaps by who) and listing the open issues currently under discussion. Over time this should help keep the project moving forwards towards a more and more well-defined state and avoid having to revisit old issues. Perhaps each open issue could spawn a separate thread that runs till agreement is reached and the issue is closed.

I think your point about the need for the class to have a point of control somewhere is reasonable, but it only makes sense if what you have control of is well-defined.

Wouter you don't get it, youve missed the group with the greatest need and growth potential the under 12's we need them bobbing around next summer, we already have F14 for teenagers.
Wouter the reason all these good looking boats came about was you posting your square design.
The person I'm getting my kit from contributed to this forum and it will be F12.

You just can't stand the fact that people are actually looking at designs from boat/yacht designers and couldn't really give a [censored] that it should beat a laser by 2.1553672 minutes around the course.

First you say that you can buy your mast section at any aluminium retailer, but then want to re-invest portions of any incomings to fund 500kg worth of masts.

Jeff and I are building the same design, we want the boats out there sailing around, not continually comparing them to a laser in yet some other mathematical formula on paper.

And I don't know if you realise how stupid it looks when you poke and prod at obviously successful boat designers to try an extract information that they obviously don't wish to share with you at this time, especially when they have to put up with you, guessing, assuming and then dumping on there creation.

Yes, of course. Again, life is not a binary yes or no: some will help a lot, some will help less, some may go overboard and some may involuntarily work in the wrong direction. Besides the shades of grey, expect to see "whiter" and "blacker" situations <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

As far as I know, you are the only person ever who successfully created a class through an Internet discussion group. Please do it once again. I am sure everyone understands the difficulty to do it in a foreign language, being at the same time precise, polite, subtle, etc.

In order to avoid repetitive suggestions from those who want to help, but are unaware of the current project status (it happened to me more than once), the proper reply is "we passed this point already" followed by the project's program/milestones. Do we have one? If not, I'll try to prepare the first draft.

All the best,

Listen here, you ignorant fool.

Among other certifications, I actually hold a Bachelor of Science degree (BSc) in Maritime Engineering. There is nothing that these "succesful boat designers" can do that I can't do. It will only take me more time to do it.

The subject of my Master of Science speciality is also alot more complex then anything related to boat design. Lets be honest here. Basic (sail)boat design is NOT a difficult field of engineering.

But of course, it is alot smarter to use the efforts of all volunteers in the field they are best at. That will also free others like myself up for other tasks. That is just plain smart project organising.

I don't know about the other designers and what "they obviously don't wish to share with me", but that is pretty irrelevant anyway. The only result they achieve by that is that it will take me a little longer to get the job done anyway. Like I said earlier, there is nothing engineering wise that they can do that I can't.

In addition to that I started sailing at 12 years of age and started out on monohulls. In the 23 years since then I sailed/raced/DIY-ed pretty much everything. Dinghies, small cruising mono's, sailboards, catamarans, skiffs, landyachts, a big cruising cat and even a bloody three-master tall ship. The latter being week long trip from NL to Portsmouth UK and Cherbourg France as part of the sailing crew.

I actually dare venture that my practical experience relating to a design like the F12 is something that may exceed that of the others.

I don't just write posts about the push-rod setup, I actually worked-up experience with setups like that while landyachting. I don't just muse on the possibilty of using old windsurfer masts for the F12, I actually have experience with the problems one will encounter with that (still have 7 masts in my shed left over from that). I have designed items like custom alu beams for high performance beach catamarans in the past (in actual use now). Back in the 90's, I have made a bulk head design for a bulk carrier, had to make the bloody technical drawing for it as well, using a Sun station CAD program called Medusa. Did finite element ANSYS analysis on various components. The list can go on.

And to top it off I have actually created a new internal catamaran class succesfully, how many people can say that ?

So don't start on questioning my sailing experience and boat designing skills here. Because you have absolutely no idea of what I have done and are capable off.


And what is up with you Aussies anyway ? During the F16 start-up, you guys (except Phill) were a bloody pain in the neck then as well.


Wouter

Mark and Luiz,

The basic project status at this time pretty much is that we have failed to reach agreement on any specs for the F12. More fundamentally we have failed to reach agreement on the goals that the F12 class and design should satisfy.

Phill Brander and some other designer that Mattaipan is refering to (Scarecrow ?) has decided to work on their own where Phills design will be an OD or SMOD setup. Neither of them have referenced with the F12 project lately, neither in public nor privately to me.

Gareth (Grob) says he has an active project but I haven't seen anything from it since the springtime earlier this year.

Retired Geek is both publically and privately referencing his designs and contributions with the F12 project. He is also helping other volunteers in this project with filling on some of the blanks. He is a team player.

All designers have stated preparing to prototype their designs starting in Januari this year. Note, that this is done without any F12 framework having been agreed upon. Basically the only common feature among all of these designs is that they are all MORE OR LESS 12 foot length. Most designs differ significantly in one or more important parameters like sail area for example.

If all persist at this stand-off then it will be impossible to form a single class organisation around these significantly differing designs.

Without a class, I don't fancy much the chances of any of these designs to become a succes outside of a very localized area.

Maybe we should just accept the split between the Aussies and the rest of us and continue the F12 project with Retired Geek (Grob), Gato, Mark, You and some US volunteers I haven't assigned any tasks to yet.

If any of the volunteers want a F12 for kids below 12 years of age then they are invited to join the Australian project with all others being invited to join the F12 project that is build around the above named persons.

Wouter

Listen here, you arrogant fool

At no time there did I question your sailing experiences or boat designing skills.

If theres nothing you can't do that these designers can do, then just bloody well do it.

And its not that they won't share their ideas with you or anyone else for that matter, but they obviously want time to prototype ideas and I don't see point of the guess work you throw toward other people designs, just wait til they tell people their findings or ideas.

And finally, us Aussies, well I guess we just like to make things happen, rather than study mathematically or from an engineering point of view every possible aspect that doesn't really make any difference to the design, i.e constant comparsion to the laser, we just get the boats on the water. When they designed the Mosquito, I doubt they constantly compared it the Fireball or the Tornado to a FD.

It just doesn't matter!

No-one has as far as I see, has split from the plan,I think it was you that referred to some sort of design battle, well fair dinkum mate, instead of polishing your gun, others have already fired a shot.

Who says I haven't done it yet, huh ? You think those detailed cost and weight listings come out of my butt ?

Right now I'm trying to build a F12 class that everybody feels is right and you guys are making things bloody difficult for no good reason.




Lets get one thing perfectly straight here, you Aussies haven't produced a darn thing yet except an artist impression and a whole lot of bitching. So don't go around pretending that you guys "make things happen".


Fricking unbelievable,

Wouter

Why blame the Aussies for your troubles? It seems to me the Aussies contributions to the sport have been significant. The F16 for example is nothing more then a slightly glorified Taipan. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

We don't need to pretend, the runs are on the board.

I was going to post, butt, I changed my mind.

Matt,
That is good news.
Hope it works out well. If there is anything I can help out with let me know. If we all take a shot one or more of us will hit the mark.
I'll try to get to Sydney to get my ply during the week.
Just hope they have what I need in stock.
I will probably build two boats to demonstrate the one set of plans can accommodate both building methods. I may end up donating both to the local sailing club when I'm finished testing. That way a couple of kids can sail against each other. It is predominately a mono club, but with a strong junior program, so it should be interesting.

I hope you guys keep us updated on how things are going.

Regards,
Phill

Well, it is official then.

The Australians have decided to go their own way and build boats before we have all agreed upon the F12 specs and rule base.

I don't even think Jeff/Matt and Phill will be building the same design even. So even in the local area of Australia there won't be any uniformity.

Ain't that the right side up.

What I don't understand however is why some persons still felt the need to post on this F12 forum and shake things up when they never intended to cooperate with the others in the world anyway ?

What was the point in that ?

Wouter

Gday Phill

Yes should be good, one of the conditions of building is to take loads of photos.
If you have no luck with decent ply try Boatcraft Pacific in QLD.
I know Jeff has kids of sailing age, but my youngens won't be ready for a few more seasons, so this will be the first of my donation to the sailing program.
And I'm looking forward to watching your progress to, thats a really good looking boat, be great to get all of them out there on water doing what they are designed to do.

Regards

LMAO

I fully intend cooperating with anyone thats interested in building their F12, thats why its posted here, because it is relevant.

Don't get me started with you and uniformity, again LMAO.

As much as you would like to think that it is yours, this forum and the F12 ain't, so its time to get your head out of the clouds and your feet back on the ground.

Have a nice day

Wouter, that might be a more pessimistic view than is necessary. If you go back and look at this post from Phill and the mini-thread that followed from it, there seemed to be some consensus that getting boats on the water was important before settling on all of the details of the class rule.

I'm not certain that everyone is on board with the need to converge eventually to just a single design, but I think there is at least some desire to reach consensus on a well defined set of rules that would allow the development of a single class.

Incidentally quite a few successful one design classes have gone through a period of prototyping and experimentation before full scale launch.

Mark.

I've just realised that the stupid aussies are only interested in getting kids out of 420's and pasers onto cats whilst the really clever people need lots of rules. To me F12 is just a club with a forum for kids to go, any 12 foot boat that fits local conditions is a F12. The more different boats the more kids on water, why would you exclude a 10year old who already has a 12ft boat from competing and chatting on line. We have agreed to build a genuinly cheap boat that looks good to suit young kids to teenagers and I encourage everyone to build whatever you can for young kids. Chill out a bit Wouter you've stretched 12 ft to 12ft 8 inch because it made it a better boat then told us that it is for teenagers not young kids this thread was started by Grob and this forum was started by Rick, I appreciate your engineering input but you really need a PR person.
regards

I don't mind people designing whatever they want, hobie can add 10 more small cats to their product line and I won't loose any sleep over that. Hobie will simply not succeed at making any of them into a viable class anyway.

The issue I see with prototyping before any agreed ruleset is that when all the prototyping has been done we'll get into a right "Battle Royale" about the rules. Afterall, at that time everybody wants the rule set to fit their boat as there is no point in wasting all that invested effort and money. When the designs differ significantly (as they are very likely to do) then well end up with no agreed rule set. Basically if we are having trouble now, think of the trouble we'll encounter then when designers are entrenched and more emotionally committed to their own specific design choices.

I'll give you an example that is not intended to diss anyone. Phill makes his boat narrower and with less sailarea then all others as he want the boat to fit between the Blade F16 hulls on his trailer and to be sailed by 8 year olds. I will make my F12 2 mtr wide so a 40 kg crew (12 year old kid) will be able to hold down the 7.00 sq. mtr. rig. Now when both boats have been prototyped and found to work (which is very likely) on which maximum F12 width and sail area shall we agree ?

If we agree on Phills specs then we can just throw out all the effort associated with the other projects like RG and myself. Most likely result is that we won't agree to that and form our own class. If we set the specs to suit my design then Phills design will be dead in the water with respect to any level F12 racing (= more serious racing for youths). It will significantly underpowered. We already know that Phill won't agree to entlarging his design and he will just continue as his own OD class.

Basically, we won't have a viable F12 class beyond the situation that we call any and all 12 foot catamaran a F12. This situation will be impossible to convert into a true international class like the optimist of laser 4.7/radial which was afterall the REAL intention of the F12 project.

Maybe everybody for himself will work in Aus (but I doubt it) but such a setup will most definately fail in the US and EU were organisation is of paramount importance. You will not be taken seriously by any organisation and sailing club if you don't have a real level racing class, either OD or formula.

Now we can indeed do our own things and have our own Battle-Royale-to-the-Death, where like the Highlander movies "There can be only one !" in the end, but I don't really enjoy competing other peoples efforts to extinction, I think it to be a great waste of resources and skill actually.

Wouter

Mark and Luiz,

While I agree with your points I think it is passed station at this time.

The others simply won't read these updates and brush then aside as more "useless mathematics". Several have even admitted to this by their own admission of never having read the F12 website.

Basically they have set their minds and trying to convince them of anything else is now a pointless endeavour, so why try ?

We can much better spend our own time on designing the craft we want.

I invite you two to decide which project you find most attractive and contact the leading persons to help out further.

I'll continue with my own F12 design along the lines I have layed out in the past, I'll probably rename it.

I extend the invitation to all other interested people as well.

Wouter

I think you may well be right. However regardless of whether it's the right or wrong thing to do, I don't see much evidence that there is strong support here for restricting the rule at this point, although there seems to be at least agreement on the basic length/width/weight/sail area parameters. I think the best you can hope for is that a design emerges that fits these constraints and finds some success.

I think part of the underlying issue is that there isn't sufficient agreement on exactly what the market needs are - and arguably this is because at this point we really do know less than we'd like to about exactly what features are actually going to make a junior catamaran class successful.

I think a key decision that needs to be made is whether the name F12 is going to denote any design that fits the current simple box rule or a specific design that emerges from the current mix of ideas or nothing at all. Though I know you don't favor the first option at all, I think it would be wrong to assume that it has no value at all. However, like you I see difficulty in getting a really substantial class off the ground on an international scale under this model. But I'm not sure if everyone sees that as the goal. It would be good to hear from RG, Chris and Phill in particular on exactly what their views are about the form they see an F12 class taking in the future. Personally I don't think the one design approach is dead yet, but there definitely needs to be some discussion on this. Gotta run, more later.

Here is a list of items that I hope we all agree upon.

1-The primary goal is to create a new cat class for kids.

2-The "ideal" cat configuration for this purpose is NOT a goal. One could discuss the "best features" forever. We agree to accept this natural limitation and to settle for a compromise in a democratic way.

3-Organized teamwork is a goal. The group is a resource to coordinate our efforts towards the primary goal and shall be replaced by the Class Organization in due time.

4-All participants are willing to work orderly towards the primary goal. Complementary skills are necessary, frienship is optional.

5-Politeness is a requirement. People have different capacities, opinions, skills and opinions that must be respected. We NEED our differences (complementary skills).

6-Wouter leads the project because he succeeded in a similar one and there's no candidate to replace him.

7-The timing is apropriate for the introduction of the class.

8-A lot of work has already been done and should not be wasted.

9-Life exists outside the group. Anyone can work in other projects as well.

0-Common sense shall be used in all times. (the "zero" is not a typo)


Please note that the draft proposal of our program was never questioned. It is basically:

-Preliminary (design / rules)
-Introduction (class organization / boat construction)
-Development (marketing / races)

In other words: despite the disagreements on some technical issues, we agree on EVERYTHING ELSE.

Maybe we should expand and detail the list of agreed items in order to continue from there?

I nominate Luiz for the role of project leader. (and I'm really serious)

My persona is now too controversial to continue as project leader, all rights and wrong aside.

You can start from a clean sheet and therefor be more succesful in bringing people back together.

If there is any need for some prior experience in starting up a class I can always advice you on specifics through private mails.

Wouter

Wouter,

a) Starting from scratch would waste the work already done.
b) The group may need some moderation, that's all.
c) Downgrading the leadership would probably replace known problems by new ones.
d) My post is clear: "there's no candidate".

Many thanks for the deference.

Luiz,
I have been thinking much the same as Wouter on this issue.
The polite and respectful manner in which you present yourself and address others on this forum would encourage people to return that respect and follow your lead.
In my own personal view this would make you a great leader.

It is a shame that there is so much hostility. I suppose that I see things quite differently to others. I see the work being done by Scarecrow, Gareth, Matt, Jeff and myself as complementary. While I can not speak for the others I believe that if I can catch youngsters when they are still very young and get them involved with cat sailing once they hit 12 they would naturally gravitate to another cat class and currently the model you guys are currently trying to define would be the natural choice.
Either way I will continue to do what I think needs to be done and hope it helps.

Regards,
Phill

Phill, what's your view of F12 as a concept (actually or preferably)? A loose alliance of people interested in junior sailing? A box rule? An international OD class? To put it another way, if Luiz were to take on the role of leader (not that I think that's likely, he's made his position clear), what exactly would he be leading?

How do you see the Blade 12 fitting in to the F12 picture? From your comments it sounds like maybe you see it as a feeder into an F12 that would be aimed at 12+ y.o.'s. Or do you see the Blade as a candidate F12 one design? Or one of several designs competing within a Formula class box rule?

Mark,
That is probably quite logical.
Regards,
Phill

Thanks Phill, that is consistent with the school of thought that F12 should aim at somewhere around 12 y.o. and up (or perhaps a couple of younger kids). And both RG's and Scarecrow's designs with boards and a stayed mast and the possibility of trapezing seem appropriate for the slightly older group rather than the very youngest kids just starting out. However it would be helpful to get comment from both of them on whether they see things this way.

Mark I'm aiming for under 12's with Scarecrows boat it is a very cheap basic design. Though Scarecrow looks like he's been chased off line he's doing a bit behind the scenes and at least 3 boats that I know of are to commence building shortly at 3 different clubs in a 700km stretch. So we have the start of a class down here.
regards

Do the existing F12 rules accomodate all the group's designs (Phill's too)? Is it necessary to widen the definitions so that everyone is "in"?

Also, I propose to vote the unified class rules rules as soon as possible, allowing only enough time to build and test the designs. I am afraid that if we take long too many different boats will be built, which would influence votes. Is three months enough?

We need everyone's support to go on with this. Remember: everybody will benefit if we converge to a reasonable class and all can support his own designs as well.

Agreed?

I agree with Wouter and Phil, I think you would make the perfect choice for leader of the F12 project. Wouter has done an excellent job in laying the groundwork with the class rules and there are a number of designs being built now, so much of the work has been done, I think you could just continue this work.

I hope you will reconsider.

Gareth

You are all too inteligent to really need a leader. I guess we can go on without one if we use our common sense and keep in mind that this is not a zero sum game: we will all win together.

What I can do is what I am already doing, try to keep things organized and moderate when necessary. I believe this will suffice to reduce frictions enough to achieve our goals.

I haven't been chased off line Jeff, just trying to avoid the need to put on staff 3 weeks before christmas. For those that are interested my design is basically ready to go I'll be printing out a full set of drawings this afternoon and checking them through before finalising them and sending them off to eager parties tomorrow. Its basically as per the renderings posted a couple of weeks ago although I have added an alternate deck detail for those who want a more rounded look to the topsides than stitch and glue construction allows (you know who you are).

With regards to rules, I know of approx 8-9 F12 boats (including Phills) due to go in to construction over the next month and the only one that falls outside the basic box of 3.75 x 2 is Phill's. As far as I know both mine and RGs fit the 4 rule box (length, beam, sail area, weight) although I won't be suggesting to the guys building my boats that they add weight at this stage. As stated before I don't see any value in mandating stay or stayless etc as I believe the class will settle into a "prefered" solution over time as it will for boards or skegs. My boat has stays because I believe this is easier for kids to rig on their own (its much easier to lift a mast and then pull a sail up then to do them both together). While it will be possible to fit traps to my design they are not part of the basic design and are by no means necessary.

Luiz, I'll add my vote to you being the first president of the International F12 Association. And will re-state my offer to host a dedicated web site. I've started drafting something up but really don't have much time so if someone else wants to do the work I'm happy to let them (don't all jump fwd at once).

What I would really like to see is someone from the US put their hand up to get moving (pick a design any design) as all the actual development seems to be coming from Australia (NZ is actually an Australian state we just don't always admit it as we find the kiwis a bit rough around the edges).

Here is where I'm at web site wise: Those whose emails are listed if you want them removed please tell be.

You appear to have been chased online Scarecrow <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />. Nice site and a great line up of boats, definately rounded look for me, cant wait to see some floating and those two 420's of mine gone. My new motto is every time kids sail a mono ISAF kills a cat.
regards

Now we are getting somewhere !





I know it is fashionable to discard the EU branch of the F12 (you know, the original one !) but we too are very active overhere <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> and that includes the building of a prototype in the new year.

We just don't have any slick CAD pictures. This is most the result of me being an old school designer. I like the combination of mathematics and pencil/paper very much. Maybe some of the other volunteer can us a one ?


We are working on a deep V-ed (boardless and skegless) design along the following lines :

length 3.75 mtr (ex. pintles/rudders)
width 2.00 mtr (ex T-foils and other fittings like the tiller extension)
weight min 60 kg
mast 6.00 mtr
mainsail area 7.00 sq. mtr (sleeved c.q. pocket luff)
mainsail luff length 5.30 mtr

Boat will have a collapsable unstayed rig (push rod setup) with a tapered aluminium mast made from prismatic alu tubing. Boat will also have twin T-foil kick-up rudders fitted to the sterns.

So it look like this design will be compliant with the limitations as specified on the webpage. It still prefer a tighter rule set though.

Wouter

Please feel free to use the email sysfx@yahoo.com for the "South America" contact and to reach me.

Whatever title you use, it won't make me able to design a "International F12". Only through your work it is possible to get a boat with real chances to become THE entry cat for kids.

We already have:

-The initial box rule
-Four years of work
-Four designers
-Four designs more or less compliant
-A website draft
-Many domains, if RG is not upset (is he?)
-This forum and its participants
-A list of common goals (to be expanded)
-A bureaucrat to list obvious things

We still need to:

-Build and test the design prototpes - 3 mths?
-Agree or vote (if unavoidable) the OD rules - a week?
-Start the Class Association - during those 3 mths, maybe?
-Build first OD boats
-"Sell" the class (marketing plan)
-Organize races/events
-Expand the previous items into a work plan.

Do we know how many people are following this group besides the designers? Anyone experienced in the preparation of work plans and/or marketing plans?

Luiz,

Based on your post, it sounds like you still see F12 as a OD class. Is this correct? I know this is what was being pursued for a long time, but based on the material on the draft F12 website, it looks like Scarecrow for one may not hold this view. And Phill has suggested that the Blade may be a feeder into F12.

These are fundamental issues. I think it's important to make sure that everyone is one the same page (or at least figure out if they're not).

Mark.

No, he is just busy with an unrelated project, he will be back in a short while.

Wouter

Just to be clear on this, I can work under these 4 rules but I strongly prefer a more strickt rules set that is not an exclusive OD class. I think the current 4 rules are still top open to really give ourselves a really good chance for a succesful youth class launch.

I really would like to see the engines be highly equalized by ruling on the max luff length and max mast length. That will go a very long way in forcing equal performance over the different makes.

I also feel that rule forcing the boats to be boardless is very good to have. It is just so much easier then boards and the performance difference of the boards is too small to really be significant anyway.

Wouter

We are just following the lessons learned from the Optimist class. They had to change into a very strict one design due to pissing contests between parents trying to buy an edge to their kids and raising costs exponentially in the process. One of our goals is that low price homebuilt cats remain competitive against more expensive serial production boats.




This is voluntary work and it is impossible to force anyone to do or not to do anything. It is ok to develop four similar boats around a core concept, test them and then decide what works best for a OD class.

If a given design also succeeds by its own merits, it means that it is a good design and more of its features should be used in the group's project. In the end, the more successfull a design results, the more it competes with this project - but the greater its contribution to the project's success as well. Fair enough?

Internal competition should not be a problem if we do our work well. The combined work of four designers should result in a better selling boat than the four originl boats. Maybe not in each designer's influence area, but certainly in the global market, which is our goal.

What I do worry about is the possibility that big manufacturers refuse to support the class and use the work published here to develop their own youth cat. We must protect the project from this risk.

The final class rules discussion and definition (or vote) can be done by email to keep the data non-public. At that time we should have the class association runing to register the rights as its property. Afterwards it will be safe to offer the plans for serial production in large companies.

Luiz

"What I do worry about is the possibility that big manufacturers refuse to support the class and use the work published here to develop their own youth cat. We must protect the project from this risk."

Is this a problem?
I thought the purpose was to get kids onto cats. Any cat

It's potentially a problem. I believe the thinking is that a single OD class may end up putting more kids into cats in total than the sum of those that might otherwise take to a number of smaller independent classes - due to the benefits of global critical mass. The attractiveness of a particular boat for racing is related to the number of other people for you to race against. Coalescing around a single design is more likely to generate sizable fleets that will attract more and more sailors.

We need an international entry level cat to compete with the typical monohull entry level dinghies: Optimist and Laser.

(A 12 ft platform with two sail plans seems to be a good setup for the entire age range covered by the two dinghies)

The Optimist and Laser are a lot more efficient atracting kids than Optimist-like and Laser-like classes. The reasons are many, we are just copying them to make an international OD entry level cat class, designed to atract kids to cats with more effiiency than "any cat" classes.

If a big manufacturer develops its own entry level cat, it will result in higher prices, restricted distribuition, impossibility to build at home, lack of competition to reduce prices/improve parts, etc.

We want to create the boat and the class association. Afterwards the association will offer the plans to manufacturers for serial and kit production, as well as to individuals for home construction. This will spread the class around the world faster and increase the chances of success.

Sorry for being away for a bit, but various stuff required most of my attention lately.

Don't think its very smart to put a time limit on the home builders as experience varies from some to none at all.

How did we get from 4 designs to an OD ?

Luiz...the sites are still available, chatted to scarecrow last week and we are all organised to get that started as soon as he finalises the pages.

Cheers
RG

Thats easy we have 4 OD, that keeps the OD people happy and the non OD happy <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Somebody can tell me if I'm mistaken, but I believe this whole effort was directed towards OD pretty much from its inception.

Not entirely, in the public arena it was definately started as a strict formula setup hence the name choice F12. Phill and I had discussed the concept in private for several years but that project had stayed inactive for several year as well. Phill always aimed at a OD setup, but I figures it wasn't going anyway after several year of inactivity and hence I started the F12 branch off when in late 2006 there were many discussions on youth boats on the main cat sailor forum. This F12 forum is a direct result of that.

My intention at the time was to come to a strict formula rule setup that was like the F16 setup with a few added rules to make the boats less complex and more inexpensive to purchase and own. I was thinking of rules to force unstayed rigs made from round tubing, force boardless hulls and not use specialized fittings like traveller rails.

Within these limits the design was to be left open and I still believe such a rule set still allows alot of designer freedom.

But when we failed to reach agreement in Jan and Feb of this year I left the project alone for a while to see who was really active. Turned out most posters were just interested in mouthing off rather then reaching a true concensus. So I continued to work privately on the concept that now differed significantly from Phill original idea and it had progressed way beyond the stage at which the orginal was when it allowed to dooze off. This august (after the F16 GC) I decided to give it another shot but now I stood more favourably to the OD setup as I wasn't expect to much valuable contributions (as based on my earlier experiences). I figured that more advantages were to be had by fixing the hulls design and all everybody to license build the design were the builders fee would be gethered centrally to allow the class organisation to reinvest it in things like charter boats and bulk production of some of the more expensive items and selling them on at cost. Of course this demanded tighter control of ownership rights. Exaclt, the thing many jumped on to revive their "bitching without contributing anything meaningful".

After that event I figured I was better off on my own and get a full OD class going as Phill intended all along. Then Phill came back with a recently revived Blade 12 project and Scarecrow showed to not have left the project to have gone underground with his own OD design. The fourth design is RG's and I don't think he has a choice either way yet. From my perspective I'm happy to work inside a true formula rule as long as it doesn't try to mimic the A-cat class because I know that that simply won't work. See the Optimist example here. If you start a mini A-cat class you will get exactly that; a 15.000 bucks A-cat that is only 12 feet long.

If the others persist at going at it alone then I will do so too. I'm currently giving Luiz all the support that I can and hope that somehow we can still get that strict Formula going or OPEN OD (like the Tornado of 2 decades ago) whatever you call it.

And that puts us were we are now.

Wouter

Personally I see very little value in going one design and here is my logic:

A few years ago a good friend of mine who was then quite high up in Macdonald's Marketing and I had a conversation about Mc-cafe (which I assume is in the US and Europe too) and what a success it had become. The interesting thing was the background behind its introduction. The logic is that in most groups of people there is one person who "doesn't eat fast food" as a result if they are a particularly vocal member of that group (or the parent in a family group) they can stop the whole group eating at Macdonalds. This person was known as the gateway customer as they were acting as a gate stopping other potential customers coming into the store.

The idea of Mc Cafe was that it would remove this customer's excuse thereby letting the other customers in. The Mc Cafes were originally intended to operate at a loss, as the loss would be more than offset by the added turnover over the main counter. The truth is they were so successful that they actually make money in their own right.

Ok, back to boats.

First of what is our goal: To get kids sailing cats rather than monos.

Double bottem line of the class therefor needs to be:

1. Design of boat should be attractive to kids both in terms of styling and performance.

2. Design of boat should be attractive to parents (harder to please) from a cost, styling, performance and safety point of view.

(in both of these I include rigging time in performance)

Why is my Mac's story relevent...

If there is one element of a boat that doesn't appeal to either the parent or the child, either one of them could become the gateway customer and say this boat is not for us and move on to the next class. By providing a range of choices (4 at last count) hopefully one of the designs will slip through and get the kid into the class.

From a market research point of view it is interesting that the designs that have grabbed people's attention enough for them to say lets start building have boards and when specifically asked that is the solution they want.

You will see local one design classes develop (as you do with f18 and other formula classes) due to conditions, what was their first etc, however at this stage trying to get a one size fits all boat will actually minimise (or slow down)its acceptance. In ten years if there are 100 boats turning up to a worlds and chequebook racing is becoming an issue then lets let the people running the class then handle it.

I'm happy to see the formula rules tighened (luff length, mast height etc) but as stated previously I could not in good conscience vote or agree to limit choices on rigging boards/skegs etc. For example I see a great case for a two child trainer with a reduced main sail area and a jib.

And just to clarify, I see this boat as a kids boat for under 12s.

My basic sailing history is.

Age 6. Crewed (sailed with) my dad on an Hobie 14 turbo (pulling on jib and trapesing in light conditions) at regionial regattas.

Age 9. Sailing lessons (club wouldn't let us do them any younger).

Age 10-11 single handed dad's hobie 14 between and after races at regattas (too big by then to crew with him).

Age 12 Competed in (as crew) and finished in top half of fleet (about 40 boats) Hobie 18 Nationals

Age 14 Still sailing Hobie 18s, single handing TheMightyHobie18 from trap with main and jib.

Adult hood, aside from keelboats and a period of sharpie sailing with the uni I've only ever raced or wanted to race cats. I'm the product we are after and it was started by getting me racing cats at 6 years of age.

That has to be the best logic I've seen so far for not going down the OD route....it gets my vote, even if scarecrow comes from that small island across the pond thats the other state of NZ <grin> <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Great post, great case study!

There is only one catch:
Getting kids into SAILING cats is not the same as getting kids into RACING cats.

If the goal is SAILING, it makes perfect sense to follow Scarecrow's advice and opt for a Formula.

If the goal is RACING, it makes more sense to follow the other logic (Optimist/Laser experience, pissing contests, etc.) and opt for a One Design.

If the goal is mixed, the decision depends on the priorities.

What is our primary goal: get kids into SAILING or RACING cats?

Getting them sailing should be the first priority...after you have them hooked you can "Trade Sheep" all you want. If its racing only, those that don't want to race will be alienated...If you are just trying to teach them to have fun on the water those that want to race will gravitate to that on their own…it will be a natural progression rather than something that is forced.

Regards,
Bob

These two goals are intertwined and difficult to seperate, not should we try to seperate them. Racing is whats attracts promotion, status and coolness. Recreational sailing is the breeding ground and the pool on which the builders achieve commercial viability.

To get from A to B a Model T Ford was succesful but this it was replaced by more performant cars over time. Car marketers always praise the sportiness of their cars not that it is succesful from getting you from A to B.

Think about that.

Besides I think we should really try to strike two birds with one stone.

Wouter

The F12 is for kids, so maybe we should think bikes instead of cars. Sportiness coupled with training wheels. Fast when seen by the kid and safe when seen by the parent.

Before the McDonald's cafe example I failed to realise that the reasons backing a One Design were based on giving priority to racing. Here are some possible explanations for the subconscient choice I implicitly made:

- Kids are competitive. The first thing they want after learning to sail is race with other kids.

- Races are probably the best way to keep kids interested after they can move around in a boat.

- Races are perceived by parents as safer than plain sailing or even regular classes because they imply supervision (RC), support boats (many teachers), parents' boats, bigger kids around to help, etc.

- Races make people gather during specific periods, forcing social networking. This helps make friends (and enemies). Social networking is considered positive for the development of kids (but some groups may be negative).

- Racing entry boats is comparable to doing tests at school: both activities accelerate the learning process and help measure the kids' progress.

- Racing requires skill. If a kid races or intends to race, he/she must receive more coaching and will become a better sailor sooner. Parents seem to know this.

- If we take plain sailing as the priority, prospect racers will migrate to another class soon (kids start competing almost imediately after they learn to sail). Early migration will translate into two entry classes, two entry programs, two entry groups - and half the number of kids in each group. It is reasonable to assume that both groups will receive a better and more focused trainment, but at the cost of nearly doubling organization and support efforts or catching less people. I believe we prefer quantity over quality in an entry boat.
Conclusion: I tend to agree with Wouter that it is preferable to target both sailing and racing with one class only.

Let's find more reasons to choose "sailing", "racing" and "both" as the main target so that we can make a list and decide. Short sentences will make the decision process easier.

And what makes boats built to a box rule [formula] unsuitable for racing?? F16, F18 aren't competitive? I don't understand. I would have thought the association with various different brands would increase the competitive nature of the game. What am I missing here?

I think Luiz's point (of course he can speak for himself) is not that a formula is unsuitable for racing in general (that's plainly not true), but that in the context of junior sailing, greater certainly of equality between boats will be more likely to convince parents of kids inclined to race to invest, since they will have greater confidence that their kids will be able to compete on equal terms.

In this context, perception may be more important than reality to an even greater degree than in an adult formula class. In the latter case most of us are comfortable with the idea that any difference in performance between different designs is less significant than differences in sailing ability. In a junior sailing context, with parents who may not be hard-core sailors themselves, a perception that you have to have the latest design to compete may be off-puting to parents who just aren't able or willing to buy the latest design.

Luiz, am I interpreting more or less correctly?

Having said all that, I get the impression that the consensus here on the forum is moving towards the formula approach - partly because of insufficient consensus about some of the important design features and partly for the reasons that scarecrow outlined.

Bob,
I agree, good post and it reflects what I have noticed teaching.
If we don't get them on the water and having fun we are not going to get them racing. Racing will come but if it is the focus you will lose most of them before they get hooked.
In a race there is only one winner.
The most enjoyable sailing classes for the kids that I've run is when we had the kids playing games in their 12 ft surfcats. They all come off the water happy.
When racing one or two were happy and the rest looked like they wanted to be somewhere else. Remember a competative child wants to win.
If you focus on getting them on the water and having fun the racing will follow.

Jeffs made a good post.
Nice and short and to the point.

I pick the ply up for the Blade 12 on Monday.
They have it in stock thank goodness.

BTW: 3800mm should be long enough.

One more point,

Racing among kids is different from racing full F18 courses that take on average 45 minutes to complete and go very close to the horizon.

A thing that worked really well with lasers a few times was to have short courses and short races. Say every 10 to 15 minutes as winner and then the next start. This was very succesful in getting the fleet going. If you screwed up one race then you could simply try again the next race and get lucky.

This format was even commericialized overhere by one guy. He has 12 laser standards and a pond of water and you could rent a laser for 2 hours including racing for I think 25 euro's. The water was about 1 meter deep (which is enough) and he would sail out to set some bouy out. Then from the jetty he would start and finish the races. Typically 2 laps, under 15 minute duration.

This concept became so succesful that he is booked for full a year in advance for every weeknight during the main summer months. There are groups of friends and groups from companies that have a fixed time and date on which they do their racing. Some groups even have small ladder competitions. The guys is able to make a living of this.

It sure helps that overhere the summer evenings have good daylight till 22:30 (10:30 pm) at night. He can bring in 500 bucks per evening and 5 days a week. So he can accept a few windless or rainy days.

Why ? Because the lasers are relatively easy boats to master and easily repaired while having enough performance to make racing fun.

I think a similar concept could well be had with F12's. Even more so as they will be easier to master still and even more performant. When they are boardlesss the damage risks are even less.

It was getting to concepts like these that kept me enthousiastic about the F12. I really think there is potential in this approach. Even towards youths. Just as they go out carting (also 25 buckes but now for a single 15 minute ride/race) they can go out racing sailboats on a nice day ! Racing as in 10 heats per 2 hours. And finish off a whole series in one go. Or just go broad reaching about, what ever they want. It is their 25 bucks.

If the kids are still very young and are put off by competitiveness then this concept will still work with "games" as defined by Phill. The fact that any parent can rent a boat for a few weeknight during the first summer is really important in lower the threshold. They will take to it and then a purchase will be justified or the kids gives it up after a few tries and then the parent is only what 200 bucks poorer (8 times trying) ?

Side effects are of course you'll get a stream of old charter boats being sold on each year and the fact that part of the eanings come from other groups then youths, who can be a bit undependable economically speaking. Basically the adult racing can be used to generate income that can be reinvested in keeping this program that is easily accessible to kids and youth alive and maybe even to reinvest the money on a larger skill with respect to kids like true coaching be a skilled sailor.

Everything costs money guys, so we will do well to design a proper income into this class and these boats.

If the boats are cheap enough in purchase and maintaince amd perform well enough with an adult on boards then I think this has real economic viability.

Wouter

I couldn't say it better, thanks.
Berny's confusion is caused by an apparent contradiction:

The application of tighter OD rules is more suitable for low cost racing even if they yield relatively slower boats (a feature that also helps selling to novice kids' parents).

A Formula gives more desin freedom, yielding better and faster boats, but costs will go through the roof when parents start their pissing contest.

It is more or less like production car racing, Nascar and Indy. Drivers start on strict OD production cars but may migrate to Nascar (= more freedom and expense) or Indy (= even more freedom and expense).

Mark's observation that the group tends to support a Formula is correct and I am sure this cuts the time lost in discussions, fights, votes, etc.

From my experience with the Optimist, a successfull worldwide youth Formula/loose OD will end as a Strict One Design anyway. But we are not forced to eliminate the Formula stage as they did with the Laser.

That's why I took someone's earlier suggestion to do both things: develop four boats under the Formula rule to be sailed as OD locally (or Formula internationally), and then compromise on a fifth boat as a strict one design, with an eye in the global market.

Saw a great 8 ft cat hanging in a shed not far from Darryl Barrett must be about 30yrs old and owned by a ex F18 owner. Darryl you know the boat the owners going to take some photos how hard would it be to make a plug of that one. The hulls had long skegs then small skegs just in front of the rudders to protect them. The rudders were small and the hulls would have been popped out of a mould then the decks put on. The rig was really heavy and with todays rigs it would look great, this is obviously for small kids but the design is so close to what were trying to do now.
regards

See, now that's the thing here. We're talking about getting young kids into sailing via a small cat class. The main aim I'm guessing is, or should be anyway, to put bums in boats but already we are having discussions about restricting the activity to an OD class which immediately excludes the many, many, many, existing small cats. There's plenty about, several here in Australia and I'm guessing elsewhere in the world and your master plan to achieve your objective is to make all these boats redundant. This is just BS. Why? I'll tell you why, it has nothing to do with getting kids sailing and everything to do with EGO!
If this was a legitimate effort, the main focus would be on the kids, but it isn't. They don't give a flying fig what sort of boat it is at age 8/10/12, they just want to have fun. And second you want to make all the efforts of people who've already done what you blokes want to do and make their efforts even more redundant than they already are, push them further into the background.
You'll expect support from the existing cat sailors but you have no interest in doing the same yourselves. No it's already become a pissing competition amongst all of you to see who has control, who can get the boat out into the public arena first, who can design the best boat and who can make a good dollar out of this. What a crock!

And have you done a market survey? I mean, is there a market for what you are doing. How many orders do you have? Are parents already lining up to buy or build this thing? I mean serious commitments to it? You've got the cart before the horse already, before you even get started.

And so the wheel turns and nothing changes except that there'll be more moulds rotting in back yards and more cats sitting in sheds and more sailing clubs going to the wall because what is needed is NOT another cat. The very last thing the cat world needs is another small cat!
What we need is people to support each other. We need people to get off their butts and help out at the club, help the kids and their parents by encouraging them to come down to the club and have a sail. Jumping in the rescue boats and coaching and organising fun races for the kids and to get this done, we should be making cheap boats available, like less than $1000, not $2000 or $3000 but $500 to $1000. Not 160, 180 200 hours in the shed building something which already exists. Cheap boats are there if you go looking but that's not cool, there no kudos in that.

No I'm sorry guys, this is just rubbish and all it will do is cause lots more people to become disillusioned with the whole silly mess and go bowling.

IMO Its not really rubbish Berny because I've been looking for a suitable cat but didn't know what was needed and whats not there for clubs is
Light weight
12ft
Easy to build
Rig to suit particular environment
The boat I saw is not perfect but is a great start. We all want different things out of this project. I will get some boats built as will others so it will get kids on cats off dinghys. If some want to get all serious and succeed in building a F12 class that only accepts certain boats good luck to them, it may be perfect in their part of the globe, but it wouldn't work in my part of Australia because its doing the Hobie exclusion thing which is crap.
I would never have seen the small cat without this forum because the owner lurks on the darkside but recognised my name from the posts. Sorry Berny cant go bowling with ya gotta clean the shed up to build some cats
regards

Berny,

There are very, very few about in the US, at least away from the coasts. What does exist are Bravos, outside of this the only thing available here are old H14's with soft decks and Waves (both 240# boats). The market here is the exact same population numbers that were available in the 70's and 80's (the baby boomer generation). The millenium generation, born between 1981 and 1995 is the market. There are large enough numbers to carve a chunk of cat sailors out of them, most of the older ones think Hobie 16's are cool. USA is primed and ready IMO. But I'm an optimist.

Sincere thanks for your views and inputs.

A Formula (box rule) is the way to go if the inclusion of existing cat classes is a goal. It certainly was a key goal during the development of the F16 class. I thought it wouldn't be the same in the F12 case because the four designs perform a lot better than the rotomolded cats, making inclusiveness of existing classes a formality: no kid would want the slower boats.

But if we focus on marketing instead of racing, manufacturers will certainly welcome the fact that one or more of their production cats is compliant to a Formula - something that can only happen with a OD class if they decide to produce it from scratch (i.e.: Hobie Tiger).

Berny,

you're coming across as tired and bitter. I'm not sure if this angst is because of your own experiance with the F14 or whether its because you don't think the people working here value what you achieved with that design or what.

Like many here I really like your boat and while I've not seen it in the flesh my understanding is that the performance is quite amazing. That being said, I believe if you were targeting youth catamaran sailors in the current market you missed your mark slightly. I was 18 before I could afford to buy a 15 year old Hobie 14 and until then I was stuck sailing other people's boats. As you are aware in the current situation most kids are learning to sail on monos and the ones who have parents willing and able to buy them new boats are as a result typically looking towards monohulls.

If the F12 initiative is successful then there should be a whole new market for F14 designs as kids grow out of these beginner boats and start looking for the next step. No-one is going to go from an F12 to an A Class.

It is my belief that the majority of people posting here are looking for a low cost entry level way to get kids sailing cats. Something which I thought was also a priority of yours.

In answer to your questions about market surveys etc the fact is that RG has 5 people about to start building his design and I have 3. This is all based on word of mouth and posts on this site. Once these boats are in the water they will then be able to be used for further promotion in magazines etc. But to have 8 people willing to spend their own cash based upon a concept alone suggests we are on the right track.

If you have actual valuable feedback, I'm sure it would be very welcome as you have in fact been there and done that, however, if you are going to continue to sit on the side lines taking pot shots at others please take it to Sailing Anarchy where that sort of thing is more welcome.

Regards

Chris Tucker

Hi all,
had a meeting this afternoon with the builders of 4 cats of my design and some changes were agreed to that I think will benefit everyone.
First, we swapped plywood for 6mm foam core with E-Glass skins that comes in pre-made sheets (or you can easily make them yourselves) and all of the internal stiffning will be replaced with sine wave stiffners, so we end up with just 2 bulkheads and the centercase inside. Next change is that it will be built in 2 halves in females frames. The last change is that we are going for a curved traveler track and a boomless rig. All of the above will ultimately make the boat cheaper and lighter and faster to build. Hulls have now been scaled to 3.8m along with some cosmetic changes to make the boat look nicer and float better. Will get some new pics finished shortly to show the changes.

Cheers
RG

I've just got of the phone with another "potential" customer who was asking about different sail plans etc for kids of different ages and experiances this is what we came up with.

Again this is to suit his requirements, not necessarily what I would recommend.

Ok i have searched the house and come up with the photos of the cat jeffs seen at my house. It's called a micro cat it's 8 feet long fiberglass uni rig and in the picture i was 7 or 8 years of age photo was taken at Milang in 1979. Dad told me it came from Western Australia and is the only one in South australia. so any one in WA mite no where they came from.

one more

underwater hull shape

Other stuff I've recently discovered....

Took a wander down the coast over the weekend to a little hole in the wall place that rotomolds canoes/kayaks as well as building carbon versions also.

The big surprise was a. that he reads this forum and b. he can build rotomolded boats that are 18' and are only 1.7 kg heavier than the same boat in carbon.

As you might guess....he wouldn't tell me exactly how its done, but they are almost as stiff as the carbon hulls and he can whack them out extremely quickly (4/day).

Seems the trick is that they have a very thin outer skin, a honeycomb core and then another thin inner skin....also has metal inserts for fixtures and he says he can mold centercases in at the same time if required.

This may be the way forward for cheap and lightweight boats for the class, and I intend to pursue this to see if I can't get my round bilge design done this way if the setup costs permit it to be accomplished.

Cheers
RG

Occasionally, I peruse some threads that do not really include me. And every once in a while I am awestruck and tickled by some of the postings. The post that is quoted below, really grabbed me and I think that it is very good living that allows people to experience such joy.



Isn't that just GREAT!

GARY

Great photo's and thanks for posting them Danny
regards

The cost of tools and moulds cost will probably be an issue. Still, if this type of construction results feasible, consider one boat for me instead of the plans to build it.

I think the vast majority of parents and clubs would prefer to buy an off the shelf boat or hulls if they cost less than homebuild even if it did weigh a little more. Indeed when I ran the F12 idea past my club they said they would not be interested in any boat for children that wasn't rotomoulded.

If you could get enough people interested then rotomoulding should be feasible for the F12 class.

Gareth

Forget about including any of the existing cats. There are none to be found in this range that are spread widely enough. The Taipan and Stealths were a good spring board for the F16's but in all honesty their are no 12 ft small and simple cat designs out there that could serve a similar purpose.

And yes I checked ! ( Berny !)

Tried to contact some of these classes and I concluded that they are completely dead as no reply was ever received.

And no the idea was not to get a specialized cat for young kids (8 to 10 year olds), that is the Blade 12 project. You can we please stop dragging that argument back in over and over again. That station has been passed.

An 8 year old is simply not going to sheet a 7.00 sq.mtr mainsail with only one hand (other being on the tiller). Two young kids just may be able to sail the craft with one on the tiller and the other sheeting the main with two hands.

Please Berny read the historic documentation on the F12's before making any more posts.

Wouter

This is what annoys me most about you Wouter, you say things like this as fact when I am sure you know it is just completely untrue. Of course there is a limit to how hard a seven year old can pull on a mainsheet just as there is a limit to how hard a full grown man can pull. But to try and say that is the reason you cannot have an F12 for children is just nonsense.

For another example of this kind of blatant mis information to support your own narrow point of view you only have to look at your first two posts on this thread.



followed by your next post



Just because you don't want a kids catamaran there is no need to post this kind of stuff. If you stick to telling us how good your ideas are and stop trying to put down evryone elses we are more likely to succeed with getting more people sailing cats.

Gareth

You are indeed right about the vang part, I had overlooked that part. Thanks

Fact of the matter still remains the F12 project was not started as a very young kid project and I was indeed the one who started the F12 project so I should know. It was started as a youth boat and as an entry boat to cat sailing. Otherwise I would have remained with the Blade 12 project which I specifically didn't.

And I do indeed resent the fact that in this project we have a tendency to cover the same points over and over and over again because someone like Berny is not up to speed on the status of the project. I also suspect that he is bitter over the problems his 430 encountered. I know that he publically blamed me personally for that partly, because influencial persons like myself (his words) didn't support it enough. So yes I guess I want him to shut up and lets things sort themselves out. Their is no reason why the F12 can't not succeed were the F14 failed. Reality sometimes works that way.

Now indeed, like others I think the AO-14 and 430 (F14's) are excellent designs, I just never really saw how they fitted in marketwise. I thought/think that they missed the mark in the balance between costs and what you got for it. Sorry, that is how I always felt about it. I also think that the very same danger is lurking the F12's, but that is another topic.



Despite my gaff earlier I still don't believe that the F12 as currently defined is well suited to kids (below 10 years of age) sailing it alone. If that was the goal then I would favour different specs altogether.

With respect to pretty much all the other stuff I write, I have full scientific proofs written out + experimental data to support it, others may call that "useless mathematics", so if I sound factual there then that is because I'm convinced that I am.

I appologies for my frustration showing through my writing. I know it is popular to jump the Dutch guy, but alot of it is not deserved. And I don't think others have the right to simply demand that F12 is now for young kids because they personally want it to be that way. This is sort of like the same thing you accuse me off but then in reverse. I know you want it to be for young kids, but I don't throw that in your face all the time, do I ? I guess I've heard you accusing me of "not wanting kids" more then enough by now,

Sorry !

Wouter

Now with the intermezzo by Berny and Grob (no hard feelings on my side were left, guys) can we please get on with the progress we were making.

Scarecrow was proposing to consider fixing other limits in the way we fixed the max hull length ex pintles to 3.80 mtr.

I appears there is an unspoken concensus on sail area max 7.00 sq. mtr. Can we confirm that ?

How about max mast length at 6.00 mtr and max platform width at 2.00 mtr ?

The discussion was focussing on setting a max luff limit that is shorter then having that fixed by the max mast length itself. Anyone want to comment on that ?

Lets get on with that approach, it seemed to be working well, things were getting decided.

Wouter

while I can't speak for RG, thats what he has given to all 9 of us here and thats what we are building, so at least 9 of us agree on something <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Aerynt

So Gareth, help us to have a more sensible discussion about this. What do you consider to be a reasonable upper limit on the sheet tension an 8-10 y.o. should be able to manage? Can someone provide some data on expected sheet tension as a function of sail area and wind strength?

Mark,

Harken have a calculator on their website that gives sheeting forces for a given sail size and windstrength (http://harken.com/calculators/MainsheetLoading.aspx), but the point is that is pretty irrelevant as the maximum forces are more to do with righting moment than sail area or windstrength. Also there are both sailing techniques and rig designs that allow you to overcome higher sheeting loads.

The whole point of me starting this thread was to see if people were interested in an F12 design that could accommodate a larger age range by having different rigs like the BIC dinghy does. I thought that people were interested in this. I am not trying to drive the F12 to be a kids boat only I just would rather it accommodate everyone.

Gareth

Sorry for going off-track, but what is a sine wave stiffener, and how does it work?

Since the sail area is about the same as a Laser and the speed slightly faster, sheet tension should be a bit more than the Laser. Harken offers a "not widely accepted" formula: here

All seems to indicate that the same platform serves for a wide age range.

If one wants to use the same F12 for 12- and 12+ kids, two scenarios are possible:

- F12 designed for 12+: buy a smaller sail for 12- kids or have them sail two up.

- F12 designed for 12-: buy a bigger sail for the 12+ kids.
(boats for smaller kids have wider safety margins, so the extra loads shouldn't be a problem).

I guess we will be happy anyway, so age is not a big issue for me.

Then it sounds like maybe you agree with Wouter (<img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />) that 7m^2 may be too big for the young kids. In your thinking, if there is an intention to accommodate that wider age range on the F12 platform, would it be appropriate to actually introduce a second, "junior" sail area specification into the class rules for the younger kids in addition to the 7 m^2 limit - along the lines of what Luiz was suggesting?

Back and forth...Round and Round...We need Rick to set up one of the fixed threads at the top of the F12 Page called specifications that only Luiz can post on (if he in fact is going to be the overseer on the F12) As the parameters are fixed, Luiz can post them on that "fixed" thread rather than beat these issues to death (on multiple threads)...come to a consensus...and then have some one who is not up to speed on all the discussions bring everything back to square one and start it all over again. That way everyone knows the fixed parameters.

To take this a step farther for the sake of organization, separate discussion threads should be started dealing with just one design issue. My suggestions would be (1) Hull Design (2) Rig Design (3) Sail Design (4) Rudder Design (5) Skeg/Centerboard/Daggerboard design. I admit there would be some issues that would bleed into one or more categories. If we kept things pertaining to one issue in their respective categories it would be easier to keep track and would eliminate much of the redundancy.

Wouter...This is not meant to ignore, negate, or diminish any of the work you have done on this project...I know you have done a complete description on your own web site representing your interpretation of the F12 (along with the ideas of many others)...however this forum appears to be the focal point of development and as such, it is necessary to establish a written record of things here which represent the agreed parameters of all contributors.

Best Regards,
Bob

Absolutely support that. I'm doing my best to keep up with what's going on but I do find myself struggling to know what's in and what's out.

Grob,

I agree with you on the different size rig.

It is always possible to fit a boat designed for larger weight and forces with a small rig. The boat will largely remain well behaved.

I'm indeed willing and interested to explore this tangent further.

Wouter

Seeker,

No offense or whatever taken by your comments I think they are excellent discussions. I remember having done the same for F16's in the beginning. For some reason it never occured to me to do it here again. Definately my dumb mistake, I should have known better.

Excellent idea's therefor.

Luiz, you want to run with this ?

Wouter

I just found another old attempt at a 12 footer, Canadian this time. It's a Mystere 3.7 skeg boat, 12 feet long, 6'6" wide, 19 foot stayed mast with single trap line, 190 pounds, 8.5 m2 sail area (but it has a jib).

The reason I'm interested in this is because I've owned a few Mysteres but better yet I just found one of these rare boats for sale! If I can "steal" it for few hundred bucks I'll grab it this weekend and have my 7 year old be the judge. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

EDIT: I just saw this boat and a salvage guy has it. Good sail, tramp, and straight mast but the rudders are lost. I just happen to have a set of M 4.3 rudders and castings. He wants $125 USD. Hmmmmm...I'll offer $95. My wife will kill me but it's gotta happen!

Mystere 3.7

Bloomin heck, to my untrained eye that looks like Wouters lines on his original design. Put the modern rig with light mast and I'd have that now.
regards

Ok - it is good to keep it ordered.

We had our Lobster Regatta this weekend 15km in 20-30knotts on a downhill run and had a 15yr old complete it on a 14ft Sundance. While I was screaming 3 to 4 km out to sea and back in he went straight downhill and wasn't that far behind my "A" really. But when he got to our rounding mark to do the last Km he couldn't get it to go up wind without centreboards, he was blown on to the beach where he dragged it upwind in the surf to complete the course. I give him a big tick for courage and am now totally sold on centreboards.
regards