Something for the F16 technical committee :

Over at Sailing anarchy they are discussing the conclusions concerning full foiling.

Steve Clark (Cogito C-class) wrote :

Steve Clark




So making full foiling work is not as easy that a throrougly dedicated C-class team (who also made the victorious Alpha !) could get it to perform better then a plain old displacement hull.

This is an indication of what to expect to F16's. I know full foiling has been banned in our rules already but the fear may have been premature.

I think we should note this down for future reference.

Additional info is found in this discussion on sailing anarchy :

http://www.sailinganarchy.com/forums/ind...9168&st=300

And here some addition info on a unrelated project coming to the same conclusions :

http://homepages.rya-online.net/ejcchapman/

Wouter

Wouter

Sorry wouter, do not agree.

They only got the foils sussed before the regatta, they have only been sailing the boat on foils a short while.

I was very surprised they were as close as they were to the other boats for an untried platform etc.

Comments on SA (don't have time to find them) said (paraphrase) that they "showed bursts of speed"

I'd suggest that with time (and money) it would be quicker on foils.

In the same Sailing anarchy discussion it was said by one the foiling "Rocker" team members that their foiling project was not a last minute attempt, but rather a well planned and thoroughly executed sister project. They really intended to make this craft their flagship.

I think their own comments are telling, They don't feel that there is enough potential in the full foiling concept to continue developping it for the C-class cats.

Wouter

I have to disagree with you Wouter (and I suspect others do too <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> )!

There is nothing here for the Tech Committee at all. It doesn't affect F16 one iota. The F16 class rules are perfectly clear and a foiling F16 just couldn't qualify within the rules. So, nothing to see, pass along please! <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

What a bunch of easily frightened little sailors we have become lately.

I just wanted to input these C-class experiences into the class technical data archieve (and F16 sailor conciousness) so we can possibly retrieve it at a later time when possible required to evaluate a new development or F16 proposal.

The Technical committee should be keeping themselves aware of what is going on outside of the class and outside of the class rules. Only then can proper evaluations and advice be formulated when asked to do so. With blinders on such a committee can only rehash in class dogma's and that is not valuable. I venture to claim that similar things apply to the class members as well.

I get the impression that even the mere investigating of new developments and experiences on this forum is strongly disapproved lately. All under the mantra of not scaring any (new) class members.

I fear that I will strongly dissapprove of such a policy if indeed that is the new policy.

And what is up with ;"So, nothing to see, pass along please!"

What a great way to start a new rumour <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Wouter

NO; it is a way to STOP one.

F16 is not going foiling as the class rules do not allow it.

Is there actually a class technical committee? On the website I can only find mention of the Chairman, Secretary and Treasurer.

Yes there is. I'm pretty sure it consists of Peit Sarsberg (spelling ?) John Pierce, Greg Goodall, Phil Brander and I believe they would also like to co-opt Andrew landenberger. If these details are in correct I do apologies.

Wouter,

If you had gone to the AGM at the Global challenge (I am sure you can come up with some sort of excuse - but the fact is the meeting was held literally in your back yard & I know of several people who could not get there), you would been party to discussion that tabled how technical issue would be dealt with & who somebody with a tecnical query (builder, owner or whoever) should approach.

Now it may be that the F16 website needs some updating, but this forum is not the place for this type of discussion.

Marcus

Where are the minutes from that meeting? It's great that you all decided "who somebody with a technical query (builder, owner or whoever) should approach", but if the information isn't published then you can't blame anyone who doesn't follow whatever process was decided.

Yes it is! Personally, I'll say anything I like, anytime I like, and any where I like. If you don't like it, don't join in!

John,
I agree. Lets move on we have a lot of work to do.
Rehards,
Phill

I know where you're coming from Pete but sometimes "There's a time and a place" In the future there will probably be a F16 users forum on our Official website, so rather making every criticism or other derogatory remark open to the public you can do it behind closed doors so to speak.
I'm sure you would agree that this is better for the F16 Class rather than airing our dirty washing for all current and prospective Cat sailors to view.

True.

It would be nice if this information reaches class members sooner, than later.

Looking forward to a privatley owned and run forum. I consider myself an expert in VB software, so if you all want a volunteer to install/run/setup a vB forum let me know. I willing to do it.

I have setup two, that are still running strong and I currently administrate one with over 5K members.

Count me in for that project.

point out you were instrumental in tightening up the rules to exclude many areas..
Including the foiling ban... Ban on non-removable beams etc..

Then I'm a box rule guy..

I never banned the discussions.

Wouter

I don't think it's good to have two forums for the F16 class. One for blah-blah and one for the real concerning topics only for F16 members. It was always said that this forum here is a part of the success of the class, so it would be better to think twice before posting dirty washings, than to separate the forum for this reason.
Nothing against an objective argument here, and when the discussion makes a digression we have the class officials to point us in the right direction.

Ever consider that open discussion attracts people rather than repels them? The more that the F-16 Class is included in various topics of discussion, the more attention it will receive...remember "out of site...out of mind".

A person of integrity who speaks the truth in the open should not be feared.

Regards,
Bob

I really do agree with Holger. I don't think we can understate the positive impact of the forum on the success of the class and I think anything that diverts part of the community dialog to a different environment would have unintended negative consequences.

And honestly I think it is unnecessary. I do understand the nervousness people have about the effect some lines of discussion may have on perceptions outside the class. But really, I think these tensions arise either because people aren't clear on the basic principles of the class (Rules 2.3 and 2.6) or because they think others don't understand or respect those principles.

It's not impossible for the class rules to change if there are compelling reasons (though the restricted development character of the class should make that a pretty rare event imo). And we can have good vigorous discussions about them when the need arises. But if 2.3/2.6 were to ever change (and kudos to Wouter for putting them there - if anyone understands them he does), imo, we could all pack up and go home. But I think as long as the people involved in these debates clearly understand them to be framed and constrained by the class's basic founding principles, and are careful not to mistakenly give a different impression, we should be fine.

Hi Holger
I think I should just clarify that the suggestion of a F16 members Forum was just that 'a suggestion' but this point does raise the issue of integrity. Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned this fact at all as it was just a chat with a member of the Governing Council. I'm not to know if this was a personal or political idea?
However, I do understand the views of people who think we have nothing to hide and this Forum can be used for any business we see fit to post. I personally have certainly ruffled a few feathers in the past!! which to some people wasn't in the best interest of the Class and there are a couple of others who also aren't backward in coming forward as well.
But in saying all this I would agree with a F16 members forum. I'm positive it wouldn't take anything away from this forum but would enable me to discuss good and bad issues which affect the F16 Class and those persons directly involved. Only then can true integrity (1 honesty. 2 the quality of being whole or united) be adopted otherwise we will carry on with a form of censorship which I feel exists on this particular forum.