Uni boat specification / ideas

Ok, we generally acknowledge that the Uni boat is a bit disadvantaged, mainly through not having 4 hands and no jib. So if a sub class was to emerge what specifications would we desire.

16 ft seems a good length,
Spinny is it the right size
Mast, do we adopt the A Class knowledge and testing and go for unlimited mast length
Is 2.5 metres the right width.
Do we go for curved boards, they are becoming much more mainstream and costs are coming down
Do we want jibs.
Do we want 15sqm mains.
100kgs or even 90 kgs min weight ?

Just a few thoughts, this is only an academic excercise as the F16 rules are pretty set in stone, more a thinking of desirables, so what would you all want if you owned a dedicated 16ft single hander ?

If I were going to only race Uni, and if we had enough other Uni's to race against....I'd leave it as is, both to keep the costs down and still have the flexability to race it as Sloop or for resale value to a Sloop wannabee.

If money were no object, I'd build it like a full up carbon A cat and just add a spinnaker.

I want a boat able to compete with the two handers in the F16 class. Preferably in the same start
Then I want this boat to be ready for two-handed racing in the same class just by adding or removing some simple equipment.

That is what I want.

If I can not have that, I want Glenn Ashby, Nathan Outteridge and some other top fast sailors to go solo against the best two up crews. If I can not have that either I want to win the lottery.

When can you deliver Wayne?

I'd make it two feet longer.
I'd make it almost a foot wider
I'd lower the minimum weight to about 180lbs, maybe less. What the F, why not.
I'd put a taller rig on it, but keep it uni+spinnaker
I'd put some fancy foils on it, C boards, T boards, L boards, WXYZ boards

I'd no longer have a compliant boat either.

Dude, you know those new WXYZ boards are illegal in 3 countries, right?

I mean, yeah, they are fast, but at what cost? The best ones are made of Unobtainium, and that stuff is hard to find!

I'll get Tony Starke on the horn. He'll hook me up.

Now guys & gals, this thread is not about keeping it the same as a dual F16, the two are incompatible.

What its about is ideas for a very fast single hander, 16ft long ( although there is a huge argument to just simply go to 17.5ft and that would include all the out dated A's and some current high volume A's built of glass if we kept the same 100kgs weight )that can run under SCHRS handicap and if enough contenders, run with the F16 comps as either a sub class or off their own start.

I don't know what it would take staying within the current rules. I think a design with finer hulls, T foils to overcome the skinny hulls. Maybe moving the rig back a bit?

I do know nothing has been designed as a strictly one up boat for the F16's.

A friend and I were talking about the current generation of bendy mast's on A-Cat's and wondering what could be possible there for the F16's.

Well...I'm pretty sure both Nacra and Hobie have already "Been there, done that" with the Nacra F17 and the Hobie FX One, but neither one caught on, so what makes you think any new -Uni Only- class will catch on? What they should have done was get together and come up with some Uni Spin, F17 type class rules, and both build to the same rules, that might have helped them both sell more boats. They could have both done so with the 20's too, but didn't, now we see fewer and fewer Hobie 20's and I20's.

But does the world really need another, all new, catamaran class?

But of course! The world always needs another catamaran class. It is development and evolution.

As Buckminster Fuller always said: Evolution makes many false starts.

One dead branch of the tree of evolution is actually progress. Then we dont go out on that branch again..

Forget the current rule set, just design a 16ft boat along similar ideals to the F16 class.

What would I do, a chopped off DNA with inclined 20 degree boards ( C boards would be nice but to keep the cost down ), front beam moved foward slightly to cope with a 14sqm main and 2.5sqm jib, A class mast, 16sqm spinny, 100kgs all up to allow for a glass build.

The FX1 and I17 failed for very obvious reasons, they didn't sail well as a single hander and couldn't sail well with two crew on board and were over weight.

With all the F16 history, I feel that this thread would be more suitable in the open forum

What matters to me is some room to experiment and some blokes to discuss and also sail with now and then. As such I would prefer a ruleset similar to the A class.

Set a lower weight limit. Limit sailarea and let the other variables be open. I dont see the selling point of such a class though as the A cat holds that niche. The two up/uni option was the big selling point for the F16 class in the beginning. What will single out and make a new class attractive?

Good luck.

I'm kinda with Rolf. Loosen up the rules, but I say that about all classes. But, I don't care to see anything that divides the class.

Are we actually talking of another class, I'm not. The F16 class is a good class that caters for alot of needs within the industry, it has a lot of merits for the dual handers, it has a lot of merits for the single handers, it just needs to tweak the rules a bit, but that is another day and another thread.

Back to boat design ideals please.

Wayne,

I do see were you want to go and i do think ( speaking on personal opinion ) that the uni can be made a lot quicker but within the F16 class 2 different models ( dim ' s ) except the 16 ft length is asking for more trouble then we are having already at the moment.
It would be a good idea to work it further out but then see it as a replacement for the Fx one or F17 uni.

Hans

Do we just accept then that one of the fundamental ideals of our class, that of uni and dual racing equally, is dead and buried and accept that all future comps will be on dual handers, all because asking a few questions may be "asking for more trouble then we are having already at the moment"

We as a class are in a pretty good shape, growing numbers and acceptance by major manufacturers as a box rule to work within, what troubles do we have ?

I personally don't think that many changes are needed and at pretty little cost, hence the direction of this thread or attempted direction, which everyone seems to be taking as a direct threat of another class, chill out everyone, I'm just looking to see what everyone would want to sail as a single hander.

I think Karl_Brogger has made some good suggestions - finer hulls, T foils (rudders), and a specialized mast-sail combination for the uni config.

I thought the new A cat fore-aft flexible mast-powerful sail was partly for downwind trapezing. The spinnaker would change that. Rig is still a very important issue and a single-hander can use a more flexible mast.

The one foot wider boat comment could be most easily addressed with allowing beam insert racks - mini versions of the H17 type and removable for 2 up sailing. Would require a rule change, but that is the route I would go....

Taller mast isn't needed, as Uni is advantaged in light wind and overpowered in higher winds. More leverage, wider boat or wings would help there. Curved boards would be neat, but outside class rules and maybe hard for weekend sailors to get the benefit out of. I don't think self tacking jibs add much for a uni sailor, something more to adjust taking your concentration off the big issues. Lower weight is always good, but then you lose the 2 up, class compliant option.

Just thinking "out loud", what I think you wanted.

Self tacking jib for unis to allow the unis an improved righting movement vs sailarea.


Taller mast for unis which could be used under two-up with a super-long shackel for the halyard to sail connection. This would allow a more efficient mainsail for unis.

As much as I would like curved or angeled boards, that would break the interchange from uni to two-up. However it is getting more and more clear that downwind these boards have an advantage.

If I had to change one thing, to make the Uni more competitive, it would be to add the jib. It costs nothing, you already have one in your box, you already have the self tacker, and it's really easy to trim, even single handed.

Sometimes it gets in the way, mostly at the A mark, when you now have to ease the jib, and the track, and the halyard, in addtion to all the other 'crew duties' you have to take care of: hoist and trim the spinnaker/main sheet/traveler/boards/rotator/downhaul strings you have to pull. The jib adds three more strings to pull, both at A and C mark, but going up wind in medium air, you should be able to pass most 2 up Sloops, depending on total crew wt. on each boat.

Now...if you go out alone, with your jib, in say 8knt winds...and an hour later it's blowing 17, you may wish you left it in the box!

How about the new Nacra 17 as a single hander?

I don't know if there is enough demand to support it, they already tried it once with the Inter 17, and Hobie tried it with the FX One, neither class lasted very long.

I think we are seeing a consolidation now to fewer classes, Wave, Hobie 16, F16, F18 and A Cat.

The F16 is a 'compromise' type class, right in between the Hobie 16 and F18, wich still allows you to race solo when your crew bails on you last minute, or if you can't afford an A cat, or if you and your crew are too light for the F18.

As they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

How many active single handers want any changes at all?

Show of hands please.

No changes for me please!

Tim, what is your average finish? Best finish? As a single hander.

Timbo, Pete, you keep hijacking this thread and turning it into a discussion on potential F16 rule changes. If you would like to start a thread specifically dealing with that, by all means, otherwise lets talk boats here and forget the rules until we establish what a good single hander might be

The wider boat will create havoc with more slender hulls creating immersion and lots of drag, from on the water playing with beam width, going narrower seems to make the boat better suited the 15sqm the solos are allowed with earlier hull lift off countered by the very effective downhauls when the wind speed goes up. The trouble with lots of downhaul is again the sail becomes very draggy and the boat tends to slow. Lots of balancing one thing with another I'm afraid.

Weight is not really such an issue.

No can do. This is the F16 forum. The boats you're suggesting aren't F16s.

If you want to suggest ideal single handers take the discussion to the "ideal single hander forum".

I see this discussion undermining the F16 class.

Any kind of rule change for specs other than total sail area, no.

I would like to see something built that is not a good two up boat but an excellent singlehander.

Any rule changes I would want, I would want applied to both configurations. I'd like to see something other than straight boards.

[quote=pgp]No can do. This is the F16 forum. The boats you're suggesting aren't F16s.
[quote]
Disagree, where are they not compliant to F16 rules, as to undermining the class then the class has a specific Class F16 forum limited to owners with registered boats, this is an open forum that happens to be titled F16, for all to use.

And I'm using it.

About jibs on singlehanders.. When going upwind/downwind the only adjustment neccesary is sheet tension in my experience. With the spi creating apparent wind adjusting luff tension and car position is of minor importance.


What is my experience here? Some singlehanded sailing and wednesday night beercan races on the Tornado - one up. The hardest part of it all was pulling the boat up the ramp at the club solo..

Pete, that really depends on the competition, ie. which regatta are we talking about, and who else was there? I'm happy when I'm sailing Uni, if the only ones in front of me are Matt and Gina!

I sailed Uni at the Nationals a few years ago in Gulfport, I think we had 23 total boats, of which about...8-9 (?) were sailing Uni. My single race best finish was a 3rd, but that was in the final race, and a couple of the top Sloop teams and one or two Uni's were already on the beach, using that as their throw out.

Overall, I think I was in the middle of the fleet. I'd have to go back and look at the results, if I could find them, but Ed, Mike, John Mac were also sailing Uni and we were all neck and neck, most of the time, again, in the middle of the fleet, most of which were sloops.

I get more satisfaction out of beating a good sloop team, when I'm sailing Uni, than the other way round, because I know as Uni, I had to work harder to do it, and I had to do 'everything right'.

I would never expect to compete with the top Sloop teams, as a Uni, unless I got a really, really, lucky string of wind shifts that only came my way, but I'm ok with that, and as I've said in this thread many times, all the Uni guys I know are good with that too, thus the Rum bottle reward!

That's about what I expected. How does it compare with your best sloop finishes? Is there any difference that concerns you? I'm guessing not.

What I see is that the better uni sailors are able to pick up crew for important regattas or when the wind is too high.

I've only raced it sloop a few times, with Andi driving at 3 Tradewinds, but there were no Uni's in any of those regattas if I remember right, so it's really hard to compare if there are no top knotch Olympic Quality sailors racing it Uni, against some Sloops. That's what I would like to see.

Ever notice that the Alter Cup is ALWAYS sailed on Sloops?

Why?

I say next year, do it on F16 Uni's, and record some of the leg speeds/times, see how that compares to some sloop times. If you could develop a database with exact leg lengths and wind strengths, etc. you could then do a polar, see if the Uni Polar is any different from the Sloop.

The Uni configuration puts much more emphasis on the skipper's overall ability, to both steer and 'crew' the boat, whereas a good sloop team can be comprised of an average crew, if the skipper is top notch, and vice versa, but if you put a top notch skipper AND a top notch crew together, you're going to get killed, if you are Uni OR sloop!

I'm waiting for some kid to jump on a Uni and figure the thing out. I think it will take younger reflexes, with an open mind to sail the uni on par with the sloops.

Yeah, probably. I'm out the door now, gotta go ride my bike and do some situps! You coming to Wildcat?

As of right now, I'll be Uni, I just hope it don't rain because I'll be in a tent and sleeping the truck really sucks!

See ya'!

So Wayne,

what do you put into the basket for the optimal uni?

Mmmm under what guise, handicap ( SCHRS Texel ), F16, dedicated 16 footer with its own class, sadly they will all be very different boats.

A most unsatisifactory answer.

I agree with Timbo on this one. If you want to go faster put your jib on. There is no class minimum crew weight so i wouldn't have a problem racing a one up boat with a jib.

Ah but very true.

As we are in the " F16 " forum and I did ask the question.

5m x 2.3m wide, quite a bouyant hull form not unlike the latest Nacra F16 which seems to skid across the surface with its bow ( and hence shorter water line length )well out of the water with only 1 on board, A class style rig 8.5m high ( without limits on the Leech length on the main ), 13 - 14 sqm main and 2.5 sqm blade jib. 16sqm spinny weighing in at 100 kilos. 6 degree angled boards.

With a change of the rig and sails it could be used for adult dual handers, leave it as it is for light weight dad and nipper. Sorry but the mast stiffness and aspect ratio of the sloop sails are just not suited to the lighter RM of the single hander.

Why the jib, I think we are all pretty much in agreement that the jib just makes setting the main just so much easier for the non expert sailor that with a jib on 75% of sailors will get to 75% of the efficency of the mainsail pretty quickly. Yes a Uni would be faster but only that top 25% of sailors will get the best out of them.If we don't run a jib then we may as well just buy a Shadow X http://www.shadowsailing.org.uk/the_boat_x.htm very very fast boat if you are around the 75 kilos with a strong class association and organised races, actually I'm surprised that 1 or 2 haven't been entered into F16 events already particularly if the wind looks like getting up. The shadow was originally only 90 kgs, not sure how fitting a pole and slightly larger sail takes them up over 100kgs, mmmmmm

SCHRS handicapping puts unreal expectations on the jib, a boat like the above would handicap out faster than a Tornado, simply unrealistic and thus one would have to go almost directly to an A Class rig with 17.5 sqm spinny ( which I think would be too large for the average single hander )

A dedicated 16 footer, simply chop off the rear of a DNA and move the beams and boards slightly foward, fit a 16 m spinny in a dedicated Y beam snuffer ( to keep the wind drag down ), A rig and C boards, about 90 kgs.

After 5 years of on the water testing on the Stealth and now Bitsa, thats where I have got to.

Everybody keeps talking about righting moment being an issue. That sloops go faster in stronger winds because the uni is on the wire too soon... It seems to me that if that is the issue, then the obvious answer is to lower the center of effort on the sail, for both configurations, which means a shorter mast, and possibly a smaller main.

The above is *not* meant as my entry into the fray. I don't know enough to add to the discussion in that way, but I do want to ask a question...

From the comments here, you would think that this is some kind of grand experiment, that there has never been a class that allowed both 1-up and 2-up sailing. Yet, AFAIK, there are several classes in Australia that do just that (the Taipan, and Cobra come to mind,) aren't there? How do they handle it?

A smaller main has been mentioned by several knowledgable people who have been around from the beginning.

I guess it's a "manhood" thing, no one wants a smaller one.

A shorter mast sort of complicates and makes the issues of RM worse off. By going to a shorter mast we lower the aspect ratio of the sail, making it less able to be depowered ( remember most modern sails and mast combinations are becoming more bendy in the roach and thus with powerful downhauls we can control the amount of power generation the top of the sail can produce, the A's are almost self governing now depending on batten strength etc. )and more " draggy " in higher winds.

There are also all sorts of issues with a lower AR sail also moving the centre of effort too far to the back of the boat causing tacking problems and all sorts of issues with the rudders and dagger board positions.

If anything we need to go to a higher AR sail where the uni can control the power of the sail better. One of the easiest ways would be to simply remove the lower sail limits out of the class rules, that way the sail could be made to almost come down to the deck, after all as an Uni you don't have to worry about a crew getting underneath the boom. Have a look at some of the ORMA Tris where the boom is mounted not on a tradional mast mounted gooseneck but on the deck behind the mast step.

Interesting about the Tiapan and Cobra having duals, but be aware that they are relatively old hull and sail shapes, we have moved on a bit in design and knowledge.

I agree on the topic of higer aspect mainsails being faster and easier to control than the same area in a lower aspect mainsail. Even across the windranges this holds true in my opinion.
Sails going all the way down to the trampoline is not a good idea in my opinion. The benefit is very minor and it makes it harder to get around on the boat (forget end-plate effect and factor in the turbulence + reduced airspeed down there).

I dont know the current status, but are Cobras and Taipans now sailing with a spi downwind in class competitions? They did not earlier and this is another factor to consider when comparing.

Agree having sail area down low is not ideal, but we have a problem of low aspect ratio sail area creating boat handling and design problems as a solo, so putting 1 - 1.5sqm down low ( think more windsurfer sail shape )generates a bit of power and keeps everyone happy that they still have 15sqm of sail on a 8.5 class legal mast with a higher aspect ratio not unsimilar to the A Class.

I think you'll find many uni sailors in agreement that the main is what finally puts the boat over, even down wind.

Speaking for myself, when a hard puff hits under spin I naturally drive down but hold the spinnaker for as long as possible. That can be difficult as the sterns start to lift. As a last resort, once it's clear the boat won't recover I dump the spin and make a stab at releasing the main. When I'm successful, the boat recovers nicely then it's just a matter of reversing the sheeting order and off you go. The total time is rarely more than 3-5 seconds.

The point is: that flat head sail, high up is the culprit. Imo, uni sailors would be better with something more like a pin head.

With all these ideas floating around.. We should actually build some of them and test them

The Tornado class allowed this kind of testing in class regattas as long as the mainsail had a big XX and the results was not valid for the awards or ranking.

My first main was a Redhead, built in Australia maybe. It was sort of a pin head. Maybe I'll take it to the sail maker and see if it's salvageable.

If he can't add more top to it, you could have him cut it down a little, off the foot, and use it for very high winds.

I'm not following you. The Redheads are the sails I started with. Rather than send them to the sail maker for repair I bought a new set of Goodalls that were fuller at the top.

my 2 cents. I can't make my boat go 2-up. Maybe that is because I always sail it solo so I have a different "vibe." In the few CRAM races I did this year, I did well solo. I did better solo than with crew on one of the days. In light winds I think uni wins out, but that is light air.

I was thinking you could use the Redhead main for a 'high wind' main, ie. get it cut down, flatter, maybe take some off the leach, shorten the foot a little too.

OR...if you'd rather make it bigger, have them add some to the square top, to make it more like your newer sail.

Interesting about releasing the main sheet, I always have been told the minute you release the main in an impending nose dive caused by the spinnaker powering up too much, it presents the top of the main more to the wind now coming from the rear, which simply makes matters worse as well as possibly putting even further stress on the mast which is now unsupported by the main sheet.

The really good sailors seem to never get into the position of the spinny over powering the boat and seem to be able to just go faster and faster all whilst on one hull. I remember John Pearce at a very windy second F16 champs I attended saying its better to get the windward hull even higher off the water in big breeze as it presents the side of the hull to the water and therefore has a better chance of not diving, as he won the event I have to probably believe him.

Part of a message I just send Rolf in a PM conversation:

I did quite a bit of work a couple of years ago on a design for a dedicated single handed F16 and couldn't come up with something within the rules that I felt would be competitive enough to justify committing the money to build. As you know there are a couple of issues. The not enough hands thing is the big one as righting moment can be worked around (A classes have less righting moment than an F16 but are faster around the course). Extra hands makes the sloop rigged boats not only faster at the marks but all the way around the course, upwind you can be playing main and Cunningham not one then the other, downwind you can play main and kite not just kite and with two hands the crew can play the kite, not just pull it on and hold it like you end up doing when cat rigged. This gives a big advantage, for example without a kite sloop rigged Taipans and 5% faster around a course than cat rigged.

I believe this issue was originally masked in the F16 class because of the nature of the early adopters, which could be loosely grouped into two brackets; the cat rigged boats were skilled/experienced sailors looking for the extra challenge/ thrill of using a kite and the sloop rigged boats were couples and/or parent child teams looking for a way to introduce a partner to sailing with the ability to go still go sailing on days they weren't interested. Now that skilled teams are becoming more common on the sloop boats the real status quo has become obvious.

Fixing the issue is hard, particularly if people want to maintain the ability to switch between modes on the one platform as any systems implemented to make sailing a cat rigged boat easier if successful will also be applied to the sloops. For example I played with the idea of having a furling kite. This could be easily hoisted on a 3:1 halyard from trapeze while approaching the top mark and as you turn the corner you just have to sheet on, reverse applies at the bottom mark, furl as you approach then drop once you turn the corner.

With this in mind we need to find ways to make the cat rigged boats 5% faster in ways that can't be immediately copied on sloop boats, which requires a relaxation of some rules for Cat rigged boats. At this stage it would be worth getting Mark S involved in the conversation as the SCHRS rating system can be used to calculated the returns on potential changes.

Some changes that could be considered:
1. Removing the tip weight limit on masts for Cat rigged boats which would allow people to use A class masts.
2. Removing 1/2 girth limit on kites
3. Dropping the minimum weight 10kg

Be wary of the SCHRS handicap in regards to light weight boats and single handers, the calculator does give some strange results, one only has to look at the present equal rating of the Uni and Sloop, on the water results would indicate otherwise.

If you get the chance try putting into the calculator the Uni's specs and then add a blade 2.5 sqm jib, gosh we would be the same speed around the course as a Tornado. Mmmmm

Wayne,

I think the issue with the Uni V's Sloop rating is based upon the theoretical performance of the two boats (like a calculated rating should be). The problem is that in the real world unless being raced by octipii you can't sail a cat rigged boat to the same level of its potential as a sloop rigged boat. The question is how close can you get? The VYC ratings in Australia are based upon decades of emperical data and suggest the cat rigged Taipan is 4% slower than the sloop rigged boats, I'm guessing with kites this would blow out a bit to 5 or 6%.

Now, if the calculationed ratings show (and I don't know if they do) that a cat rigged boat should be the same speed as a sloop then that means a crew of two can get about 5% more performance out of a boat and to get level racing you'll need to make a cat rigged boat theoretically 5% faster than the sloop, not the same. This way once crew skills are applied the two boats will in fact be equal. SCHRS or any other calculated rating (Texel) if at all accurate can be used to weigh up the options and see what cat exclusive rule change would produce that 5%.

Next question for those in the know (and I suspect I know the answer from another conversation) does the SCHRS equation really rate cat and sloop at the same speed or are they rated that way because the F16 class has asked them to be?

Up until 2011 the Uni was actually rated faster than the sloop under SCHRS. The SCHRS technical committee spent appreciable time investigating what many felt an onerous handicap for the single handers and in the 2012 review ( http://www.schrs.com/img/pdf/SCHRS_Improvements_2012_updated_29_4_2012.pdf )set about changing some of the parameters to at least equalise the two boats. To change the handicap further would have meant appreciable change and the technical committee felt that bringing the two boats into line was for the moment as far they wanted to go. Changing further also had other ramifications on other classes as well. Read the report and you will get the picture.

5% is probably about right around the cans, but how can you get those sort of gains, yes A Class masts and sails will help, but we have to get more drive down lower so that RM isn't the major factor. Allowing the use of a small jib is probably the only way that can be done and no, in my opinion widening the boat, will only create further problems.

At the end of the day, if we as a class acknowledge we have a problem, we can all work together and if as I suspect we reach the conclusion that no, we can never equalise the boats, then we simply adapt our class stratergies to suit.

Also I think that the differences in speed are dependant on wind strength. At lighter winds the Uni might even have an advantage and in heavier winds its a larger disadvantage. Where is the cross over point?

Trying to come up with one rating number that covers all the wind ranges might not be possible. What do you guys think?

I think the advantage of having enough hands to trim downhaul, jib, main, spi and helm is an advantage in all conditions. The difference is just more pronounced in stronger winds.

At least to me the really light up wind is more difficult for cat rigged boat because you have to be really forward on the boat and you must choose if you look up almost backwards (trim the sail and see the tell tales) or forward (to look where you are going and what's happening around you). Things get easier when there is more wind because then it's easier to trim the main based on flying the hull without looking it and concencrate on what's happening around you. For two man boat it's easier, the skipper can see the jib and drive based on that while looking forward and the crew can handle the main. Things are bit different when going down wind, generally the two man boat can always trim two sails at the same time, but there is definetely some times in lighter winds when the uni F16 is a rocket at least when comparing to the F18's which are the only cat's that I've sailed against.

It seems to me that making the jib smaller would solve the problem. It wouldn't affect the 1-Up boats at all (because they can't use the jib,) and it would slow down the 2-Up boats. The whole point of the jib in the class, as I see it, is to give a 2-up boat enough extra thrust to counter the extra weight. So if the jib is adding too much extra thrust, then reduce its size.

not sure I like depowering the two up boats. I sail HEAVY two up.

Y'all just need to man up. Sure there's conditions that I wouldn't go out singlehanded that I would two up, but for the most part I'm happy with how I stack up singlehanded against the two up boats. Its not easy, but I've done well singlehanded. I'd also say I finish more constantly singlehanded

Sailing heavy dual handed is probably pushing the weight envelope a little too far for a F16 boat, then you state that you do better more consistantly single handed, isn't that sort of supporting the argument that you may just need a bigger boat when dual handing..

Those in the heavier weight catagory as a solo can often find with all there sailing gear they are up around 100kgs often racing against a dual pair of 120kgs all up, with all the extra drive of the sail area, but then this is not unique in a lot of sport, where ones physique has far more impact than we would expect

"Manning up" is not going to help I'm afraid, the difference between the boats is just too wide at the moment. It would be an interesting experiment for the class to allow an open sail plan for the single handers up to the dual limits, for a few years just to see what the impact would be, nothing gained nothing lost to at least try it out.

Two up, my favorite crew weight has been 385 lbs. You lose a bit in the light air, but you're untouchable in heavy stuff.

Manning up is what you need to do. The absolute best I've ever sailed I was fresh off my pseudo divorce, and pissed off as kiss. I was angry, and whooping butt. Not super stiff competition, but not a case of beating up on a pile of slackers either.

Single handing is hard, and there's less room for error. all I see here is whining, and crying about things not being fair. Build a boat inside the rules that you think'll do it, and maybe I'll be interested in buying one. I've been kicking around getting into boat building for a while, but I've got enough on my plate as is.

Karl,

at this point I think it is an objective fact that the uni is disadvantaged when racing with the doublehanders. Trying to stick labels saying "whining", "crying", "man up" etc on those who dont agree with you undermines what arguments you have.

Okay. Fair enough. But I do think people like finding excuses for their ability to suck.

While I do agree there is an disadvantage hands wise, I don't think there is a disadvantage boat wise. Sure some things could be optimized a bit better with a purpose built singlehander, but you'd still be short that extra set of hands, and eyes. And, you'd probably end up with a boat that would suck balls with two people on it, or not even be able to handle having two people on it. Which is fine if you're okay with having big money stuck into two boats.

You either dissolve the F16 thing and start new, (not a fan of this option), or you work a bit harder to make up for that lack of someone to talk to. Maybe I'm an anomaly, but everything pretty much averages out for me where I finish in the two configurations.

Maybe next year I'll do F16 Nationals singlehanded and see what happens. That second set of eyes is why I typically do big events two up. You are blind when you are on the wire going downwind. I don't need a high speed collision to ruin my week, or worse someone else's.

Karl

Not sure those on this forum are lacking in ability nor " whining " because they are not winning, not sure where you bought that into the frame.

It would be interesting for you to try a comp as a single hander, as I would suspect you may be a little further down the order than what you would hope and by the way you say the boats are more equal than others are saying, don't blame the boat. Next year put into action what you are saying. I await the results.

I race singlehanded quite a bit. Just never done a big one singlehanded.

I currently have a Hobie16 but I wanted to add my thoughts on this subject, as I am researching what boat I would like to get next. Honestly I think the H16 is dated technology, nothing wrong with it, but I would like to get into a more modern platform for racing, etc.

My choice will be about flexibility. Often I can't find a lightweight crew (lady) for racing so I don't go, as single handed H16's are not allowed. I'd like to have some of my heavier friends (guys) crew for me, but why bother, as the combo would be to heavy and we'd be uncompetitive.

So its down to F18 (flexible for heavier crews with different sail and weight choices) or the F16 where I can plan on going to a race even if I can't find a crew.

For me its about being able to race, simply put. The less classes the better, don't mess with that part of it. If you separate the classes into two, then you get rid of the main appeal of the F16 to me as a consumer, being able to race both configurations. If that is going to be the case, then I'll change my choices to A-cat or F18.

If you separate into two classes, then it won't be long until there are F16 2-up regatta's only, or regatta's where there are not enough solo's to have a class, etc.

It would be better to tweak with the specs of the boat to ensure equality with the two configurations. I agree with the poster who said the boat's now been out long enough that perhaps some tweaking is needed.

Guys and Gals, this thread was all about boats, in particular 16ft boats and how to help their performance as a single hander.

Please if you want to discuss possible rule changes, discuss peoples lack of performance, or any other thing, other than 16ft boats and how to help their performance as a single hander, then do it in another thread.

Wayne,

I'm sure you meant that response to the general audience and not to coralreefer on his first post to the forum....right?

Coral,

Welcome to the F16 forum! You'll find lots of varying opinions and sometimes "emotion" on certain topics ... but overall a great bunch of people who share a common passion ... sailing.

If you have any questions on the platform, there are plenty of sailors here in FL that sail both two-up and one-up. timbo and pgp generally are always one up ... seth, jody and me usually have crew but also race 1-up (although I've had a pretty steady skipper for the last year or so).

As Wayne says, if you have some questions feel free to create another thread.

T.

Correct no ref to Coralreefer, nice to see the general philosophy of the class, that of a general racing all rounder for both Uni and light weight duals, is still current.

Now can we get back to boat design please.

Coralreefer, the flexability of being able to go one up or two up is what brought me to the F16 class. Racing Uni will never be "Equal" to racing two up, for all the reasons mentioned in this thread, but I like the challenge of doing it alone.

Like you mentioned in your post, if you are -always- going to be racing one up, get an A cat. If you are -always- going to have crew, either get an F18 or F16 if you and your crew are on the lighter side, and race it two up...but at least with the F16, if your crew gets hurt or is a no-show, you can still race.

I've often wondered why the Hobie 16 class doesn't allow racing solo. It's so easy on a non-spinnaker boat, I would think they would welcome the additional boats to their fleet.

Why not just let the 1 ups race with the jib. Yes lighter, yes not as many hands. Comes about even. But the rule should be you have to sail the entire regatta in the same configuration.

The H16 is a pig to right.

Then don't flip it over!

You know I've never seen an H16 with footstraps at the back for those screaming reaches, I wonder why not? I'm going to put some on my Hobie 14, just to keep my butt at the back when I'm going downhill in big breeze. That aluminum rack gets very slippery, even with the grip strips.

You just need to eat more grits yankee boy.

I never had any problem righting a H16 and it's a hell of a lot easier to climb back on one. My F16 has tried to drown me a few times.

By yourself? I couldn't do it, but I'm borderline with the Viper.


So have we come up with a list of desirable singlehanded boat qualities that fall within the current rules set yet?

For the moment can we forget about the current rule set and just propose a design for a good 16ft single hander, once we establish what are desirables then we can work backwards to how those desirables can integrate into the F16 rule set.

Something which is totally heresy to the class is weight, perhaps we need to be increasing the weight of the single hander to perhaps 125kgs or even more, hull shapes ( water drag ) don't seem to mind the extra weight, we would get a much more pitch resistance shape and suddenly the SCHRS handicap would reduce down to a point where the solo could be competitive.

Its not my ideal as I'm a weight weeny when building stuff but having now sailed a much heavier boat with a modern rig set up, I have to say I was quite impressed on just how it just trucked on through everything and rather than quick bursts of speed, just maintained a very high average speed. It was not a thrilling boat to sail mind you in comparison to the hotrods we sail.

On the other hand...is there any beach cat that can keep up with a good sailor on an A cat going upwind? Do the A Cat builders look for heavier or lighter boats?

So...wouldn't a 16' A cat, with a spin added, be a good 16' single hander for the purpose of this discussion?

As I have stated earlier in this thread, a shortened DNA would be almost the perfect single hander in my view. Not sure it would even need the front beam moving if a jib wasn't planned on being used.May need to move the C boards futher foward to allow for the spinny. Build it of glass and some carbon to bring it up to weight, job done, extra sales for DNA and a new toy enters the fray, dedicated as a single hander.

I think the SCHRS handicap calculator may have other views but then I guess we as solos are always on a loser there, so whats new.

Until someone builds a boat within the current rule set optimised for single handers I dont think you can assume that you wont be competitive.

By the way there are 2 very well sailed blades here in Australia that routinely beat sloops across the line and win races.

Maybe you should have a talk to those guys about bringing a one up f16 up to speed.

Starting with a boat that doesn't measure just to try stuff out and then working backwards to fit the rule, makes no sense to me.

The scientific way to do it would be, start with a boat that measures, change one thing at a time within the rules. Keep what works change what doesn't. Extra speed probably lies in setting up you boat to suit you and keeping things really simple.

And it wouldn't hurt to not think about stuff too much and have some fun.

I wonder how much money would be saved by building a 16' DNA out of glass, vs. the present 18' carbon hulls, and then using aluminum beams and mast, vs. paying for all the carbon stuff on the DNA.

I agree with Adio, more time spent out practicing will make you faster than trying to build a tweeked out uni boat.

In the end, you still have to sail it right, no matter what you build, and no specialtiy build is going to give you two extra hands when you really need them!

Screw that. Go full on Carbon. No reason to add weight, or take away strength and stiffness.

I think the DNA would be too fine a hull, but... Might work well. The question is would it hold up to the added loads of more sail area, and a spinnaker?

You're changing your name from Squidpig to Flying Turd Man?

I read somewhere carbon is brittle, see the AC72 thread maybe.

Making the mast in Ali is probably the wrong way to go, the A class have developed rigs and masts that are way ahead of ours at present, far better to just use that knowledge and leap frog the development time.

I think Wouter has put on this forum a number of times, calculations that put Ali on a par with Carbon as a beam, yes it won't be as light in weight, but in robustness and cost effectiveness to get similar bending moments,then a properly engineered Ali beam is fine.

As for Carbon in hulls, yes it will give a very low weight to strength ratio, but we probably have a 5kg weight per hull to find to bring the boat up to around 100kgs, why not just beef up the hulls to such an exent that they become really tough and long lasting. All to often I have punched a hole right through my A Class hulls ( all carbon )in launching and handling errors ( twice I have put the tip of my trapeze hook through on getting back on board after a capsize ) where if they had been made in more durable glass, would that have happened.

Do agree that practice and yet more practice will always give better performance gains than any boat upgrade.

you uni folk, where do you see the greatest disparity? Straight line speed or the transitions (tack/gybe, spin set/retrieval)?

I suspect the extra pair of hands plays a far greater role in overall performance than the additional weight.

It's not in straight line speed that they Uni is at a disadvantage, unless it's really blowing. It's at the spinnaker launch at A mark and even worse at the snuffing. There's a whole lot to be done there, quickly, and only 1 extra hand (if one is holding the tiller) to get it all done. If anything goes wrong, (spin halyard snags, etc.) you are screwed.

Kind of like a one legged man in an butt kicking contest!

Bingo.

and Pete, carbon is brittle. Brittle = stiff. Stiff = fast(er)



Retrieval isn't so bad. For me its the hoist. There's a lot more going on that you have to cool the boat down for. Especially if its moderate conditions where you can barely be on the trapeze. I can release the gross adjuster for the rotation on the wire, the downhaul, and the pull the tack, but you still have to slow it down, and come in off the wire hoist. Two up the skipper can stay on the wire all the way around the top mark and the offset.

Yeahbut...at the C mark, I want it all done now, (boards down, rotate mast back to upwind, downhaul on, outhaul out, traveler up, oh...and snuff the spin with one hand, while driving with the ohter) so I can round clean and close, trim in the main and get out on the wire, asap.

At A mark, I just ease the traveler out, then get the kite up fast, and do all that other stuff (rotator, cunningham, outhaul, boards) once it's up and going....if I can...without swimming!

I don't touch the boards. If I need them up, I've found I need them up all the way around the course. I'm sure some adjustment would be beneficial, but too much grip upwind, tends to be too much down wind. Same with outhaul, I don't touch it hardly at all. I pretty much set it on the beach unless something drastic changes. Outhaul doesn't seem to have much effect on these boats.

I also use a couple of set of boards depending on the conditions. I pull mast rotation back on, downhaul on a bit while the spinnaker is still up. Usually at this point I've cooled the boat down a bit, and I'm just about to douse anyways. All depends on the conditions, heavier air I'm cooling down sooner for the gate. If you get the sheeting right, and the traveller set right, the boat will actually round the mark while you are dousing. If you're too slow, or something goes wrong though, then it'll be on its way to going head to wind, and that's not fast either.



One thing I don't think we'll ever see, is a single hander flying a hull the entire time during a douse or hoist like the extremely good two up sailors can. I can't do it even with crew. That **** takes some practice! More time than I've got anyways. lol

Well...I just spent 5 hours in Sarasota Bay getting my butt handed to me buy a bunch of kids. I was sailing Uni, the only Uni there, all the rest were sloops. Two little girls on a new Falcon drove over me going upwind!

BUT...those two together didn't weigh what I way alone (about 200 all up), and they had their jib on, which I would have LOVED to have had out there, in the light air and slop, with occaisional puffs of medium wind (0-8, mostly 5, at most), but LOTS of big motor boat chop.

There is nothing worse than sitting in a hole going upwind getting tossed about by the many cris-crossing motorboat wakes, like being in a washing machine. And without a jib, very little 'drive' to get over the big chop, or get moving agian when you get stopped by the big ones, even when there was a little breeze.

SO...now my "Optimum Uni" would have a Jib of some sort. Wether you cut down the main, to add a jib, or just allow the standard jib to be used when Uni, I don't care which. But having a jib to help drive you over the humps that the motorboats throw at you would be very nice!

Oh, also, I kept count, I did lose at least two boats at every C gate, when there were groups of us there, due to not having enough hands to both drive and snuff at the same time... Several times I went in first in the group, and came out behind the others, as they were able to keep their speed up through the rounding while I was not.

When I was able to fly a hull downwind, and go lower, at the same speed the sloops were going (higher) I caught several boats on the runs, as I could sail a shorter course going deeper on one hull, than they could on two. If there had been a little more wind, I think I would have been more equal with them both upwind and down, but that miserable motorboat chop going upwind in light air, will stop a light, Mainsail only. boat very quickly.

I've always liked the idea of limiting sail area for the two configurations, not liming it to where it goes.

On the flip side, you don't see much for jibs in the a-class.

A lot of people keep quoting this little nugget. We have a very large jib out front called a spinnaker for downwind, the A's only have 14sqm of all up sail ( yes they can run a jib if they want ) and if say 3.5m of that as a jib is being obscured by the main in downwind mode then its best to just have 1 large Main. Randy Smythe revisited the A main / jib recently but found the upwind gains were more than lost downwind.

Another class would be the old F18HT which started life as a main only, most have now been converted to a main / jib setup for the very reasons we are talking about.

but did the F18HTs sacrifice main area to add the jib or increase their total sail area?