Take a look at this picture :





[img]http://www.boats.com/common/display_image.jsp?picture=%2Fpublished%2Fimages%2Fsm_49er.gif&caption=%0D%0A&type=content&backlink=%2Fcontent%2Fdefault_detail.jsp%3Fcontentid%3D1070&headeractivity=&headersubactivity=&x=52&y=89[/img]



and



[img]http://www.geocities.com/f16hpclass/AHPC_taipan49_small_line_drawing[/img]





We had some discussing about going to a longer pole length than what we finally decided on which is the ISAF / Texel allowed max length of 0,8 mtr. past the bows, mainly imspired by the longer pole lengths of the skiffs. In case of the 49 the pole is 1,7 mtr. (pictures)



What we didn't realize at the time is that the rig of the 49-er is more in front of the boat. And that that catamarans mostly have a piece of 0,5 to 1 mtr of bow in front of the bridle wires. Now 0,8 past the bows means that the genaker luff is some 1,3 to 1,8 mtr. in front of the jib luff JUST as it is in case of the 49-ers. And this slot distance determines to a large extend the genaker performance



So in effect via a back door we arrived at pretty much the same setup as this succesful monohull !



So guys it seems that we got it both ways without realizing it.



Just something I wanted to share with you all.



Wouter

Wouter-

Interesting observation- about the F16 HP SLOOPS- But what about the unis? Does this mean it should be better to actually use a SHORTER pole if sailing uni since the "slot" would be considerably larger with the same length pole (no jib so no "double slot" effect)?? Or would it be better to perhaps have TWO "spinnakers" if sailing uni and split the 17.5 sq. m between them?? One basically small and set between the pole ends w/ another, larger one, set at the pole end- (Would this even be "legal" under our rules??)



Kirt

The slot effect is something special. This describtion allmost exclusively used to describe the interaction between the jib and the mainsail. It is very dependendable on a proper setting/tuning. The slot between the genaker and mainsail is very much bigger and I seriously doubt wether there even is a noticable slot effect between the genaker and the other sails. There is undoubtably a skewing of the airflow which has a positive effect with respect to preventing stalling the main, but the performance enhancing slot effect that the jib provides is something different. This is caused by a jet of fast moving air that is produced very near to the surface of the mainsail. This jet prevents macro turbulence to come into contact with the mainsail and thus lowering the sucktion force. Typically the slot of the jib is some 0,3 to 0,1 mtr wide (a foot or less). The genaker slot is at least a 1,25 mtr. wide and probably even more. I don't think that this much larger slot is capable of producing anything near as effective jet of air as the jib does. If your jib sheeting is a little off then this slot effect is quickly lost.



Having said this I would like to answer Kirts question.



I should have written The distance from the jib forestay to the genaker luff And the distance between the daggerboard and the genaker luff between the 49-er and F16HP are very similar. I should not have used the word slot.



With this similar distance the capability of carying equal sized genaker is secured as well as the fact that that both rig harvest the same crosssection of wind when they're both moving equally fast. Also the lee/weather helm tendencie will be comparable.



In effect there is no BIG theoretical difference between a LONG poled skiff rig and a SHORTER poled F16 rig (with respect to this point)



That is what I weas trying to say.



Kirts idea effectively adds a jib to the boat and I would consider that in violation with the rule that says the 1-up sailing mode sailplan comprises of a mainsail and genaker only. On the other hand, I won't protest it for I'm quite sure that the disadvantages are bigger than the advantages.



Further I don't think that a shorter pole is needed for 1-up sailing. Mainly because the only reason to do this is the jib slot effect and only a proper cut jib can provide that. The other effects of a genaker, like it's contribution to skewing of the airflow will be much the same between a sloop rig and a uni rig.



I hope answers the question.



Wouter

try this site instead. The first one didn't work



http://www.geocities.com/f16hpclass/F16HP_boat_show_ahpc_taipan49.html

1.7 meters from the bow is nothing.. sheesh its only what a 14 foot "javelin" uses.. the I 14 has a 2.7 meter pole .. 12s have 12+ and 18s have 18..

Gotta say I was a little disappointed in the short pole idea of the F16 Class. I think it will hamper boat speed off the wind and perhaps even upwind.
Some examples:
In trying to develop a simple add-on to the Hobie Wave to make it good Youth Class Design, I did a lot of R&D on the subject of how open a slot should be.
At first I had a relatively short pole (relative size that is the rule for the F16) and went up the mast only fractionally from the hounds. The boat did perform slightly better than a stock Wave in speed tests.
Then I designed a sail that had its turning block near the masthead (stiff mast and no breakage problems with the Wave) and again it was a bit faster in tests, but not awesome.
Then I put on a longer pole, kept the turning block at the top and really opened up the slot. Zingo! Shazam! It suddenly began sailing at speeds comparable to a Hobie 16.
DPN for a Wave is 90, and H16 around 77 -- that is a big jump in speed.
Also, with my Taipan 4.9 sailing with a Hooter, I havre a 15' pole, yet due to what I think may be a fragile mast, I placed my turning block only about 30" above the hounds. And with that rig I was only about 200 yards behind some top Inter 20s, and Onsgard's N6.0 with a huge spinnaker after a 10 mile downwind leg.
This set up allowed for a very open slot and still throws a lot of flow back across the main. So much so that the traveler rarely goes out more than 6-8 inches. What happens is the telltale on the end of the spin pole is pointing just aft of 90-degrees. But the telltale on my windward sidestay is point so far aft it looks like a close reach. This means the main is sailing a close reach all the time (very fast).
In my opinion the 4.9 is much faster with a Hooter (smaller, flatter sail, but does not meet the mid-girth rule -- too bad we have one), than with the new spinnaker I just had to buy.
So, while we have to stick to rules of some kind, it is too bad we cannot have rules that will allow the class to be faster.
Some have pointed out how much slower the F16 Class was in comparison to the F18 Class this past week while going downwind. And it was pretty apparent. Dave White rounded the A Mark and hoisted his spin, and then shortlly after that John Tomko on the F18 rounded and hoisted his spinnaker and it looked like the F16 was parked. In a one-mile leg the F18 started out 200 yards behind and finished 400 yards ahead. They should not be that much faster.
Again, I understand you have to have rules, but then again the A-Class has rules, too. And they are very simple.

Guess I am concerned that a faster rig is simply ignored because traditionally the monohulls all used to have full, big-shouldered spinnakers and had mid-girth rules.
Yet cat sailors have led the way in speed technology and understand that the leading edge of the sail is more important than having lots of sail area (also known as high-aspect sails)

If you get a chance sometime, just try speed testing with short poles and long poles and discover the results.

Anyway, these are just some observations.
thanks for listening,
Rick

With a background in skiffs, I agree with Rick White. Check out the poles on the I-14s, 18' Skiffs, and 49ers and you will see some very long poles. If people in your class already have longer poles, then why make them change their rigs?

I see that the F-16HP rule is prone to change rules often. This is not a prudent practice and could damage your class in the long run. Inclusion is far better than exclusion. The best designs will prevail and the class will benefit as a result.

I think that Rick was discribing the speed differences in the F-16HP and the F-18HT (not F-18) at their combined North American event. This apparently HUGE speed advantage (approx. 38% as described by Rick White) of the F-18HTs over the F-16HPs has been discribed by several other posters as well. Allowing a little experimentation will determine the best layout for the 17.5 meter spinnaker allowed by the F-16HP rules and subsequently could help narrow this significant performance advantage. On a side note-it is curious to me that the F-18HT were so much faster than the F-16HP in the higher winds (15-20knts). I expected this advantage in lighter winds only.

The F-18HT class seems to be on quite a roll and I don't see why the F-16HP class should not take advantage of the momentum of this similar class. Maybe, one of the reasons is their very simple rules. The A-Class cats also enjoy simple rules and seem to be on a roll in the USA as well. Something could be learned here, don't you think?

KISS
(keep it simple, stupid)

effectively what the new rules push for is much more limited scope for any designer..
The "back door" bungle will force designers to place the main beam at only one position.. Forward an you will need to increase wetted surface area to balance the CB.. Aft and you may as well not bother with the genacker..
The "in front of the bows" allows the main beam to slide up and down the boat without effecting the rig in any large way..

Your comparision doesnt work either.. The 49er as most skiffs have their jib luff in the deck! Cats have theirs on the bridle as you described!.. If we raised the jib on the 49er as high we would be on the cat we would be what up to half a meter too short!!! So this example is a complete slippery lop argument.. Doesnt work in logic or theory..

If we are "parked" as compared to the F18 as described by Rick.. We are in serious trouble...38% as against the 18hts???? and 600 meters in a leg (not sure how long we are talking) against the F18s.. Im concerned we wont sail against F18s here with parity..

Rick,
Following this thread with some interest, having asked about the Hooter on the open forum, some interesting points raised there too. I believe the only way to establish which headsail is best would be to race against F16 Taipans with your Hooter, as Wouter says you can request to do. You may not be counted in the results, but the results will speak for themselves. If you consistently beat the F16 compliant Taipans, your theory will have proven itself, perhaps then the F16 class will re-look at the spinnaker rule.
I believe it would be in the best interest of the class to maximize the speed potential of the boat, especially since the hooter probably costs only a bit more than a standard assymetric to set up.
The issue of handicapping would have to be resolved, though. If ISAF & Texel rate the sail as jib area, you`re stuffed.

Cheers
Steve

Steve, the cost of the Hooter and rigging is far less expensive than a spinnaker with a Snuffer. That is why my poor son did not use a snuffer in the Nationals. And he and I could not even afford a spin bag on deck -- instead he just stuffed it under a goodie bag. Go figure!

Here is the post I place on the Open Forum on this subject:
My first question is about the class itself. Is the F16HP Class international, or U.S.? If this is a U.S. Class, then why are we having to comply to ideas of another continent that has different wind and sea conditions? Not knocking anything, but just wondering.
Sorry for the digressive questions.
Back to the Hooter debate. So far I cannot see that an answer has come forth on why Europeans do not consider a Hooter a headsail. I know in the U.S. they certainly are. At one time the typical spinnaker had a bigger hit than the Hooter because is had more sail area, was fuller and was supposed to be faster.
Then after myself and a few others with Hooters started winning races, it soon became rated the same as a spinnaker.
How it could be considered a jib of any kind I am not sure. But if it is considered a jib in the eyes of the F16HP Class, then there should be no reason that a single person could simply sail a Taipan 4.9 with main and jib (only the jib would be a Hooter). Should there?
The thing that has bothered me about the banning of the Hooter (and, in essence, it is a ban if the unfair hit is so heavy that it cannot compete -- sounds like someone is scared as hell of such a sail design) is how they can do so when the sail is smaller and even has a concave leech often.
At this point the F16 is set up to be fair racing, but I cannot see how using a Hooter (smaller and easier to use) would make things unfair.
And cost-wise, there is no comparison So, let's look at the advantages.

• The Hooter itself is less expensive that a standard spinnaker because there is less material and can be cheaper material
  
• the Hooter is more durable -- it can be made of heavier material and is alway rolled up neatly, not stuffed and crinkled in a bag
  
• Roller furling equipment is very inexpensive in comparison to Snuffer equipment, the pricing of which begins at around a couple thousand dollars, instead of a couple hundred dollars.
• The whole idea behind the Hooter was too allow more boats to fly headsails (spinnakers) and to be able to include more women and youth in the sport (remember the furler is so much easier to use than standard spinnaker set, jibes and drops -- I am still feeling sorry for poor Mavis Harnden in the heavy air at the F16 Nationals.., it was all she could to get the sail out. In fact usually she had to take the helm and Chuck had to get the sail out)
• Amost every F16HP at the Nationals with spinnakers started dropping their spins really early (hundreds of yardds before the leeward gate) because they were having so much trouble, while Dave (standard drop) was carrying his right to the mark and dropping during the jibe). However, a furler could also have been used right up until the gate without troubles.
• Windage of the furler has been under criticism, but doesn't a snuffer bag hanging out between the hulls also add a lot of windage. And tightly-rolled furled sail probably has less windage than the whole sail inside a bag hanging openly a foot or two over the water.
• The Hooter allows the deck to be very clean since there is only one line that is used to handle not only the deployment of the sail, but it also is used to retrieve. The Spinnaker requires a tack and head halyard and then a retrieval line.
• More on a clean deck -- you can set the retrieval system up so that the excess sheet wraps around the furled sail and takes all of that excess sheet off the deck.., and the sheet that is rolled around the furled sail insures that it will not start unfurling and causing drag.

Wouter says that the Hooter puts more load on the platform.., and this is true if you are using it upwind, but the loads are the same off the wind. The cost of adding a dolphin-striker to the the bow sprit handles the load on the platform, however. That cost is far less than the huge investment in snuffer equipment and all the spider-web line required to run it.

In reply to the post:
Can anyone do the same for the spinnaker? I doubt it.
On the other hand, I have been on the boat that has many times cleaned up on standard spinnakers.
The first time when we knew we had something going here was during the Bay to Ocean Race in Marthon Florida a few years ago.
I was defending my title of the perpetual for the event that year and when we arrived we found very light air that was a close reach up one side of the island, and then the course went through a bridge and came back down the ocean side of the island. I happened to have an old reacher that Randy Smyth had made for me to use on the Nacra 5.5 Uni. So, I decided to use that instead of the spinnaker. My thinking was that I might have large enough lead with the reacher that I could hold off the big spins down the ocean side. Also the wind was forecasted to clock to the right -- that would make the ocean side a beam reach.

Well, we never made the ocean side. About 2/3 of the way to the bridge, the RC saw that we were not going to make it in time (the wind was dying even more) Most of us were hugging the right side of the course thinking the new wind would come from the right side. All of us except Robert Ongsgard and an F-31.
The RC dropped a turning mark right in front of Onsgard and the F-31 (not very fair to the rest of the fleet, by the way). They rounded and headed for the finish line some 20 miles behind us.
The rest of the fleet had to sail upwind to get to the new mark. I was third around the mark and a good nine minutes behind Onsgard sporting a huge spinnaker. Right behind me was Clive Mayo who also was flying a large spinnaker.
I warned my crew, "We are going to be rolled by Clive any minute now with that big spin." But, lo and behold, I heard nothing coming up behind me. I looked back to see that we were tracking better and walking away.
We soon passed the F-31 (huge spinnaker) and reeled in Onsgard. We finished 20 minutes ahead of Onsgard.
And that was when I became a believer.

Well, this is my essay for the day. Sorry it was so long.
Rick

Hi folks,
First, let me say I'm so new to the class(s) having just bought a Taipan 4.9 so my opinion is based on my limited common sense, not experience. Having qualified it, here it is:
The term genoa and spin combine to form Wouter's term for the sail.
The hooter seems to be a combination of the two, also.
The object of both sails are to increase performance downwind, are they not?
Why not limit the sail area for both sails and let the competition decide? Who's hurt? If you prefer the spin, fine. If its the hooter, great. Run whut you brung and to use a phrase from my highschool street racing days: Lets check'em out.
Personally, the specter of trying to launch/retreive a spin is so daunting that I can't forsee trying the F16 class. A hooter, on the other hand isn't so scarry to this novice.
The more sailors attracted to a class for whatever reasons is better for everyone.
The class has seemingly (on this forum anyway) jumped through their rear ends to accomodate WF and his agendas with a boat that appears at this point to be vapor ware.
Why not allow a different design of downwind competition, too.
Ok, too much already. Sorry
Thats my already qualified opinion.

For us uninitiated, would you spell out the dimensions of these two competing T4.9 setups please? Rick, tell us about your hooter. Three Mikes, tell us about your new spins. Wooter, what are the class rules?

1. Hooter vs Spin - Luff, foot, leach, mid-girth and area?
2. Pole lengths?

If both are now sheeted from the sidestays and use a similar pole length, how different can they be? Shoulders only? Luiz is right, the two are becoming one.

I recall a similar silly arguement from a Kirk/Spock era Star Trek where Frank Gorshen's character says about his mortal enemy, "Isn't it obvious? He's black on the left and I'm black on the right! His kind of evil must not be allowed to exist!"
(see attachment)

I can't give you the class rules on the measurements right now.

The ballot on the rules is closing this wednesday and therefor we're sort of in between rules. Have to wait till friday till I can give you a run down of the rules governing the gennaker setup.

Sorry about that.

Wouter

Guys ,
while I'm not opposed to the hooter idea in general, and I'd love to have Rick's boat race with everyone to really test all this stuff, 3 things MUST be dealt with before we make any permanent decisions:

1. The added rig loads. This is the lesser problem, and while I don't want it on my boat, that's just personal choice. But the fact remains that it takes a LOT more rig tension for every reacher setup I've seen.
2. Here's the big problem: the hooter is, at least in light air, upwind sail area. The rules have a limit on the size of the jib, and if you're sailing with a big triangular tight-luffed sail upwind, that's called a genoa -a jib. The only solution I could see would be to make some "class rule" limiting the points of sail, which seems ridiculous, difficult to enforce, and meaningless for distance races.
3. No prob. in the U.S., but since the boats have to be sold overseas as well to be profitable, Texel views problem #2 the same way I just described it, and nobody over there will be willing to take that kind of hit.

Just some stuff to think about. And I really do love the idea of having Rick's boat rigged with a hooter to "test and tune" against at a couple of races.

Michael Coffman
t4.9#32

Be sure to send me the test results !

I'm very interested from a personal point of view.

However as the chairman of the Formula 16 class this experimentation is no prelude to altering the rules to allow hooters.

The evaluation proces is over and the ballot ends this coming wednesday and the registration time to be allowed to vote as already past. The outcome of this ballot will fix the rule set for the future. Any proposels to alter that ruleset will need to present well documented experiments and sufficient number of trails.

Wouter

ever heard of a flattie? The skiffies light air genacker.. Cut very flat for uphill and downhill sailing.. I see no reason under either the current rules or modified rules to stop this cut happning

Rick,
The rolled single luff flattie was very popular in the 60-80s on skiffs.. Especially skates and VJs (both not technically a skiff but sharpie hulls).. Believe some of them still use them..
Ease of use fantastic..
ultra quick on shy reaching..
gives way to a fuller genacker on deap runs..

I dont believe either of the rules bans roller-furling the kite.. But then I could be wrong..

There is no need to worry about the upwind or downwind speed of this class. I'd just like to add my experiences with spinnakers to the debate.

Last year I sailed all season with a Stealth R, 17.5 sq m spinnaker and short pole. We consistently had very similar downwind speed to F18s (Tigers, inters etc.)

We won the Uk cat racing series, we sailed off handicap of 102, F18s use 101, so we could only afford to be 1 % slower than the F18s. The only time I sailed against any F18HTs was at Carnac regatta, there were three of them in the long distance race, which started with a 1/2 mile beat then a 15 mile run, we had taken the wrong spinnaker, an old 15 sq m one with holes in it. The F18hts were behind us all the way round, and finally finished about 30 minutes after us. The f16 is not 30 % slower than the 18HT, and is about the same speed as an F18. I have never used a hooter so I can't comment on that.

regards

john pierce

Thanks for info, John.
Now I`m confused - at first I thought I only had to choose between an assymetric spinnaker & a flat reaching assymetric.
Now I`ll also have to consider a 15sqm chute with holes in it ! Sounds quick. LOL !!
I think it`s hard to compare different boats with different rig types, when you have different sailors with different skills on
each boat. As someone once told me - it all comes down to the nut on the tiller.

Cheers
Steve

Stewart,

You are right no rules prevent roller furling. Only limits on headsails are :

Area = 17,5 sq.mtr. when calculated using the ISAF formula

midgirth = 75 % of foot

Apart from that anything goes; Full cut ; flat cut, snuffers, furlers, etc

Wouter