Catsailor.com

Increased weight

Posted By: pgp

Increased weight - 11/12/12 11:53 AM

Did everyone receive Hans's email this morning?
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 12:36 PM

A couple of days ago.
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 01:00 PM

No
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 02:13 PM

I guess he's stepping down because their seemingly is a movement afoot to increase minimum weight.

I can't see that it matters to anyone but the uni sailors and we are a vanishing breed. Hopefully any change would include grandfathering for existing boats.
Posted By: pitchpoledave

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 02:14 PM

The major manufacturers are trying to push this through..
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 02:17 PM

I'm sure. But does it matter for the sloops, which constitute the vast majority?

The boutique builders will still build a superior product but with a heavier minimum they will simply be more robust.
Posted By: tshan

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 02:44 PM

What are the reasons? Cost? Durability? I do not get the emails anymore, but can the email be posted (or is it class info only)?
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 02:59 PM

I saw his post on the class website. Since it is a class issue I suggest any discussion be kept over there.
Posted By: tshan

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 03:02 PM

I certainly can respect that. Hope it works out best for the class.
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by pgp
I guess he's stepping down because their seemingly is a movement afoot to increase minimum weight.

I can't see that it matters to anyone but the uni sailors and we are a vanishing breed. Hopefully any change would include grandfathering for existing boats.


Let me see if I understand this correctly:

* F16 Class has a rule for minimum boat weight
* All manufacturers are aware of this rule
* Some manufactures can't, or won't, build their boats to this rule
* Therefore, "these" manufacturers (stated in this thread as *all*) want to increase the minimum boat weight so as not to be *disadvantaged*

And we think that's fair?
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 03:26 PM

okay I'll go check out the F16 Class Forum.

Posted By: Stewart

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 03:43 PM

this was predicted years ago.. Its very very sad and a bad reflection on the manufacturers.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 03:46 PM

(stated in this thread as *all*) Where? I certainly did not say all.
Posted By: pitchpoledave

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 04:34 PM

There are 2 issues..
1st is the cost of addressing warranty issues on lightly built boats so the heavier the less claims.
2nd is the retooling cost.. if the weight of the class is increased then it will potentially create costs for the builders who are already building at minimum.. new extrusions for eg.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 04:53 PM

I don't think anyone has weighed a boat in more than two years so I doubt if any are min. weight. The Viper is known to be over minimum and it hasn't hurt the boats performance or sales.

My interest had always been keeping the boat's weight low for ease of movement on the beach so that it would be attractive to single handed sailors but the demand just doesn't seem to be there. Besides, Karl seems to be the most active single hander and he doesn't seem to have any problem with his Viper.

I suspect this will become a non-issue.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 04:54 PM

I read the post from Hans on the F-16 forum. It is in the open forum so everybody can read it.

I have more questions after reading the message than before. But I have to wonder what this means
"I will direct resign my job as President of the class and give the job back."
Give the job back to who? I choose to understand this as a resignation from Hans and that the class will have to elect a new president at the next AGM.

About the discussion on increasing weight. This is no surprise. The last iteration of the class rules before they where changed to be ISAF compliant had a safeguard on this. Under these rules (which are now gone) there were a 5 year (?) period where only emergency changes could be done to the rules. This is now down to a one year notice period I see.

I dont remember if it was 3,4 or 5 years, but at least it was several years. The intention was to stop or at least slow down this exact scenario.
From a verbal report a manufacturer argued that they would build overweight and in a certain amount of time they could more or less control the class rules as their boat owners would be the majority and vote in their own best interest.
As a matter of opinion I dont fear this as long as regular sailors of several brands are part of management in the class.

The section on racing under a rating system indicates that the old discussion on racing as an F16 or an F102 (or whatever the rating system name was) still goes on. The only thing I have to say about that is "Full steam ahead with F16 racing".

Some insight on management which I have learnt to be true over the last years is that there will always be competing agendas, hidden agendas, backstabbing and idiots around. Dont accept any management position without being prepared to deal with this and in a strong way. Sometimes a leader have to climb into his tank to have his targets reached. Then there will be some damage left behind.. I say it is time to bring out the tank! But even the armour of a tank will not be enough if exposed to fire too long without support and backups.
One other insight is that technically minded (gifted) people often make poor leaders. The killer instinct and motivation to go through social conflicts to reach the objectives are quite often not there (or the tank is blasted off the battlefield).
The right leader makes all the difference in the world when it comes to management.

Macca and I had some really heavy (and sometimes outright bad) discussions about class rules, weight and changes. Perhaps this is one of the decision points for where the class is headed. Will be interesting to see!
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:11 PM

Am I to conclude you are offering to fill the position?
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by pgp
Am I to conclude you are offering to fill the position?


My post was very carefully worded to not open that discussion. I am no class member as I have not paid dues while boatbuilding and I dont want that job. I dont currently have room for that job in my life either. Make your own conclusions, but I hope you end up with a "no"
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:24 PM

laugh Lots of that going around.

I said over a year ago the F16 class will disappear inside private clubs, at least in the U.S. That seems to be happening because they are the only people who care about the class. It will change as they see fit.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:28 PM

Yeah, ask me how many hours I spend in front of the idiot lantern on average for a week.. Typed this up while cooking dinner, just to give you a hint.

If I change jobs I'll seriously consider running.
Posted By: tzilinski

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:29 PM

Just curious where the all the boats come in on the weight spectrum. Looking over older posts, it looks like the weights for 2-up are approximately:
Viper: 130
Falcon: 112
Blade: 107
Taipan: 107
Nacra: ?
Raptor:107 (per website)
Bimare:122 (per website)
Cirrus: ?
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 05:48 PM

I don't remember and I tossed all my notes some time ago.

We weighed Blades and Taipans about two years ago. Only the Taipan came close to min. at about 2 lbs. over.

Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 06:18 PM

Fragmentation of the class in open events due to different weights we can live with. If the hotshots race as F16 this issue goes away and additional classes offers additional honors to those who choose to race as one design or under a rating system. No need to worry.

Tampering with class rules to make a lot of boats obsolete and "dumbing down" the class is the real issue.
The intention was to have a high tech class and increasing min weight certainly is not following the founders targets. Increasing min weight is only a move to increase profits. All kind of good intentions can be argued like "making the class accessible to more sailors", "evening out the playing field" etc. Take this argument to the extreme and we soon can argue about sailing bathtubs with bedsheets for sails becouse it is so even and fair.

In the end the class about sailors, the sailing experience and social interaction, not profits. I definately dont want the targets of the class to change just to increase profits of one or several manufacturers. I would rather keep the experience as it is and support those manufacturers stepping up to the challenge of building to min weight at a reasonable price.



Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 06:40 PM

I would never agree to raising minimum weight. Eventually the latest greatest cloth or resin will come out making carbon, or epoxy obsolete.

Next year Pete, I'm all uni. Including nationals.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Karl_Brogger
I would never agree to raising minimum weight. Eventually the latest greatest cloth or resin will come out making carbon, or epoxy obsolete.

Next year Pete, I'm all uni. Including nationals.


Then you'd better step up to the Presidency!
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 07:20 PM

Sadly market forces will dictate in the end, the major manufacturers have become the majority and in any democracy the majority should rule.

Whether we disagree that raising the weight simply because it suits the major players in making their boats easier to build and they are able to use components from other ranges to cut the costs down, is beside the point, a majority of F16 boats are now in the 120 - 130kgs bracket and suited to dual crews.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 07:30 PM

Market forces are all under regulations. That is where a class structure and ideology comes into the picture.

The manufacturers are not an majority. Those who bought their products might be a majority. That will be confirmed or not as part of a potential vote if speculation becomes reality.
Posted By: Hans_Ned_111

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:21 PM

I do see a lot of comments and some are done logical wise but not completely valid. Weight is one thing but the reason for the increasing is something different. It is very strange if i would open the **** box here but the reason of my step down is quite logic if you know the details.
Yes i am maybe not the perfect manager but more a technical guy but i do know which step needs to be done before the next step to make a system work. I can tell you all that i have been fighting the last 2 years to keep the class as much as possible in the way as it has been set up by the founders but this struggle was consuming more time which better should have been used in set up of the organization and this was simply not possible.
I build a strong and stiff Raptor in glass/epoxy at this moment below 107kg and the reason why i did try to achieve this is because as a sailor i would always ask a builder for a product to the class rules. I have found out that in the F16 class the majority of sailors are not really asking this from the builders, this is odd in my opinion, and a key element what causes the problem for the F16 class.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by pgp
I said over a year ago the F16 class will disappear inside private clubs, at least in the U.S. That seems to be happening because they are the only people who care about the class. It will change as they see fit.


Please don't repeat this and give the "Fad" folks more ammo...
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:27 PM

You're interpreting this the wrong way. It insures the class will flourish.

Beach catting in the U.S. is dead. Those classes who are adopted into formal settings will continue to grow for a long time. Those that don't are done. A class being the possible exception.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:28 PM

that makes me feel a little better... thanks for the clarification
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Rolf_Nilsen

The manufacturers are not an majority. Those who bought their products might be a majority.

If all the manufacturers make boats at 120kgs then only boats can be purchased at 120kgs and therefore the manufacturers control the vote.

AHPC set out and marketed their boats well, they had top class sailors win events, they discounted and made sure their boats were seen at events. They gave good backup and had a good design, albeit probably 20 kgs over weight. They had good manufacturing processes in a cheap labour environment, they took the marketing of there boats seriously and because of that they are now the dominating manufacturer.

I say well done, you deserve to be top dog and now you can dictate to what should be a long running class. Every other manufacturer out there dithered about or didn't have the budget to really push their products and thus lost the marketing campaign.

Remember history is littered with great design being over whelmed by inferior design simply by marketing nous and expertise, the best doesn't always succeed.

If the class was to vote I would actually vote to increase the weight further to about 130kgs, its at this point the F16's suddenly start to become competitive in SCHRS and Texel handicap systems. At this weight the performance is not lost on handicap and it gives good margins on build durability.

The ironic thing is that if the weight is increased to 125kgs, it will have the opposite effect to what the manufacturers hope, that of sealing off the market to just 1 or 2 suppliers. At 125 kgs the likes of Hobie and others will all have boats on the water within 12 months, afterall all they have to build is hulls and use components from within their own range for ancillaries such as boards and masts. Cheap cheap development and a no brainer to at least be part of a probably the biggest growing market in small cat sailing.
Posted By: PTP

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Karl_Brogger

Next year Pete, I'm all uni. Including nationals.

awesome. I hope more people move this direction... at least up here
Posted By: Nick F16

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 09:19 PM

I think raising the minimum weight will end up in breaking up the F16 class, especially if Nacra will be able to provide enough of their Olympic 17s
Almost same price and not too much difference in weight then...
I chose the F16 besides I wanted to enter a challenging class that, although I´m a light Helm (68kg), I ´m able to right my F16 solo, so even whem my Helm doesn´t got time, I don´t have to stay on shore. IMHO I wouldn´t be able to right a 125kg boat without aids.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 09:33 PM

Righting is not an issue whether its 107 or 120kgs, its the mast weight and sail weight that does most of the damage.
Posted By: Nick F16

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 09:51 PM

will a 120-130kg F16 still have a carbon-mast? I dont think so an alloy mast is cheaper - especially if a manufacturer uses a shortend F18 mast...
Posted By: Bob_Curry

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 10:07 PM

Raising weight? There goes all the uni wannabees. Ya know, as we age, there is a need for a good lightweight uni/sloop-spin boat. But there is already a ready-to-go heavy sloop class out there--- F18.

Have fun.
BC wink
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/12/12 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Nick F16
will a 120-130kg F16 still have a carbon-mast? I dont think so an alloy mast is cheaper - especially if a manufacturer uses a shortend F18 mast...


Sure. Why not?
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 12:55 AM

Originally Posted by Bob_Curry
Raising weight? There goes all the uni wannabees. Ya know, as we age, there is a need for a good lightweight uni/sloop-spin boat. But there is already a ready-to-go heavy sloop class out there--- F18.

Have fun.
BC wink


Agree with Bob +1,0000

Disagree with Wayne from a previous post....about AHPC being Top Dog because they have more boats out there that are over weight and should therefore dictate rule changes.....so some of the other manufacturers built to the F16 specs and now we want to punish them with a rule change ... I don't think that's the class I want to be a part of.



Posted By: Mike Fahle

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 01:16 AM

I agree with Bob and Tback. I never did understand why owners did not demand the lightest boat that could be built under the rules, especially for the amount they were paying. The fact that it is close to minimum weight is the primary reason I purchased my Blade. It is a critical element in defining the F-16 class. Any discussion about the classs minimum weight this long after the class forming should be about how much and how quickly it should DECREASE! I propose the class weight decrease 1 pound a year for the next ten years as a sarting point.
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 01:46 AM

I like Mike's thinking.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 02:39 AM

Mike?

Cat sailing has been a trade war since the Hobie and Prindle days, probably always will be. If this problem goes away, another will pop up.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by Bob_Curry
Raising weight? There goes all the uni wannabees. Ya know, as we age, there is a need for a good lightweight uni/sloop-spin boat. But there is already a ready-to-go heavy sloop class out there--- F18.

Have fun.
BC wink

Yup the higher weight will be a problem for the Uni sailor pushing the boat around the beach, but not on the water where it will make very little difference and in some ways helps the handicap rating. Now a nacra F17 at 140kgs was as I am lead to believe by those who have sailed them, a bit of an early generation dog that didn't do very well ( hence the myriad of sail and mast changes to try and make it work ), Hobie FX1 at 150kgs was not a good boat single handed so I guess we know the limits as to sail area/weight ratios single handed.

Those pushing the higher weight limit have no interest in single handing nor manufacturing a boat suitable as their target market is the lightweight crew of about 140kgs of which there are plenty. With the Olympic boat now being a mixed crew, starting in the F16's rather than the F18's will be a no brainer. Even the lightweight F18 crews will probably drop back to the F16 if racing fleets become big enough to interest them. Out of all this melee the F16 class will be stronger than ever and the F18 fleet smaller than before.

Don't want to say I told you so but this has been coming for some time and I would guess dropping the single handed weight and option of racing single handed can't be far off the agenda.

As I have often discussed in other threads, maybe it is time to produce a dedicated F16HP single handed boat and perhaps a dedicated class to go with it.
Posted By: Nick F16

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 10:26 AM

I agree with mike!
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Mike Fahle
I never did understand why owners did not demand the lightest boat that could be built under the rules, especially for the amount they were paying.


Sadly I did understand and have voiced this for some time. If a boat is uncompetitive under SCHRS and Texel at 107 kgs, but is competative at 130kgs without seemingly any loss of speed for carrying those extra 23kgs, then its a no brainer which boat is going to be the one I will spend my money on.

It wasn't our rules persee but the fact that other more powerful outside influences were contradictory to our rules which has caused the problem. I'm pretty sure if the Viper hadn't been as sucessful as it has been in Europe under the handicap ratings, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by tback
Originally Posted by Bob_Curry
Raising weight? There goes all the uni wannabees. Ya know, as we age, there is a need for a good lightweight uni/sloop-spin boat. But there is already a ready-to-go heavy sloop class out there--- F18.

Have fun.
BC wink


Agree with Bob +1,0000

Disagree with Wayne from a previous post....about AHPC being Top Dog because they have more boats out there that are over weight and should therefore dictate rule changes.....so some of the other manufacturers built to the F16 specs and now we want to punish them with a rule change ... I don't think that's the class I want to be a part of.





Seemingly very few wish to be part of the class. Prior to nationals there were only a half dozen of us who had paid their dues.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 05:16 PM

would increasing the minimum weight allow for those precious few with the skill, time and inclination to home build?

Or can you home build an F16 at current weight minimum?
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
would increasing the minimum weight allow for those precious few with the skill, time and inclination to home build?

Or can you home build an F16 at current weight minimum?



First plywood boats where already pretty close to min weight back then without Carbon masts and beams.

Taipan glass boats where also very close to min weight.

There is no secret to building light but clean work and careful design under good quality control systems.
Posted By: mini

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 09:50 PM

Originally Posted by tback
Originally Posted by Bob_Curry
Raising weight? There goes all the uni wannabees. Ya know, as we age, there is a need for a good lightweight uni/sloop-spin boat. But there is already a ready-to-go heavy sloop class out there--- F18.

Have fun.
BC wink


Agree with Bob +1,0000

Disagree with Wayne from a previous post....about AHPC being Top Dog because they have more boats out there that are over weight and should therefore dictate rule changes.....so some of the other manufacturers built to the F16 specs and now we want to punish them with a rule change ... I don't think that's the class I want to be a part of.





I have a hard time understanding how the general public can be quite so gullible.
1 manufacturer elects to enter the F16 market on the cheap by recycling their current F18 parts, placing them on a pair or shorter hulls, and then subbing out the build remotely to Asia and then putts a marketing spin on it, telling the world that you “have to have these things to make it cheap and strong”

I am a boat builder, so I cannot begrudge anyone for making money without having to spend a lot, but poor design work and building techniques are not a reason that I would ever consider a valid excuse for a class to change its rules.

Yes in 1 part of the world there is a handicap system that punishes the light weights. Again why would there be a discussion about changing a class just to meet a handicap system that is not universally used, or long term stable.

There are a bunch of internet and whiners complaining about inequality in the class, but I only see that as yet another excuse to not join, as we change that, then there will be something else wrong. If weight is the all important factor, some make it out to be, then shop around and you can purchase a min or very near minimum weight boat from a variety of different builders. If you chose 1 of the heavy models, then that should not be valid reason to punish other owners.

I believe the intent of the F16 was to be an owner’s class, not a manufacturer’s class. I chose to buy a lighter boat because that is what I wanted. I do not care if someone else buys another brand, but it does bother me that they then want to tell me I will have to carry weight, just because their boats builder elected not to build a true F16, but some franken 18 JR
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Rolf_Nilsen
First plywood boats where already pretty close to min weight back then without Carbon masts and beams.

Taipan glass boats where also very close to min weight.

There is no secret to building light but clean work and careful design under good quality control systems.


Given your comments, I would agree that I'm not quite sure what the rationale is for a heavier boat, other than to beat a rating system.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 11:02 PM

It doesn't matter. The rank and file don't pay their dues so they aren't class members. They don't get a vote, have no standing to question a vote.

If you're really concerned about it, pay your dues.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/13/12 11:07 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb

Given your comments, I would agree that I'm not quite sure what the rationale is for a heavier boat, other than to beat a rating system.


There was no rationale regarding the handicap system, the Vipers use of F18 parts were simply an economic solution to "dipping ones toes in the water" of F16 sales. By almost an accident it produced a boat that fitted into an antiquated handicap system.

With all the factors of good marketing, a reasonable design, good race results and fitting into a handicap system, the Viper has suceeded where others have failed.

One can think of the VHS and Betamax as a typical example of consumer nievity in not picking the best product.
Posted By: daniel_t

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by pgp
Seemingly very few wish to be part of the class. Prior to nationals there were only a half dozen of us who had paid their dues.


I won't be re-uping next year. I paid my dues immediately after buying my boat in January and have received absolutely nothing for it. Not even a "thank you." I take that back somewhat... After several months of complaining, I was eventually allowed to read the private forums...

Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 01:50 AM

There was a National Championship regatta.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 12:07 PM

Ask not what the class can do for you. What can you do for the class is the question.. smile


I think this thread have taken a different, positive, direction now. What is expected of the class and what is expected from the members.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 01:31 PM

OMG! You're really gonna get it now. I was trying to avoid telling people that if they don't like the way something is being done, perhaps they should get off their butts and do it themselves; or at least pitch in and help. But I decided not to 'cause that's much to inflammatory.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by pgp
OMG! You're really gonna get it now. I was trying to avoid telling people that if they don't like the way something is being done, perhaps they should get off their butts and do it themselves; or at least pitch in and help. But I decided not to 'cause that's much to inflammatory.



I have the (sometimes) advantage of not having english as my native language. I must have pressed one of those buttons which are unknown to those not natively speaking english or living in an english speaking culture.. Becouse I dont see how what I wrote would be inflammatory. There were no accusations in my statement, unless some decides to interpret&compile what I wrote as accusatory. If anybody feels accused of not contributing that was certainly not the intention of my post.


Some sailors expressed that they are not seeing much benefit in being class members. I think being a class member means that you will get some benefits of being a member, and also that this puts an obligation on the individual class members. My question was really as simple as that. If it is unclear what is expected in this mutual relationship, no wonder that there is frustration or perhaps even worse, indifference.

I think I will take this to a different thread..
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 02:34 PM

I made a new "class neutral" thread for discussing expectations and deliverables regarding classes and class memberships in the open forum..

http://www.catsailor.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=254712

Please, lets take the discussion there.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 03:06 PM

It was a joke, sarcasm! Few people are will to do the work necessary for a viable class association, yet almost all are willing to complain if the class doesn't operate as they feel it should.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 03:11 PM

Sarcasm? On the internet??!! You got to be kidding.
Posted By: PTP

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by mini

I believe the intent of the F16 was to be an owner’s class, not a manufacturer’s class. I chose to buy a lighter boat because that is what I wanted. I do not care if someone else buys another brand, but it does bother me that they then want to tell me I will have to carry weight, just because their boats builder elected not to build a true F16, but some franken 18 JR

yeah, what he said
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/14/12 07:49 PM

Then you better check and be sure you've paid your dues. What happens is, the people who want to change the rules, wait until activism within the class has quieted, then they can make whatever changes they want without opposition. All organizations are like that.
Posted By: Hans_Ned_111

Re: Increased weight - 11/15/12 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by pgp
Then you better check and be sure you've paid your dues. What happens is, the people who want to change the rules, wait until activism within the class has quieted, then they can make whatever changes they want without opposition. All organizations are like that.


This is a key comment and actually happening. I did not get the enough time and support from the secretary to work together with him on further structure work for the class ( he was basicly working on changes for the class ) . There is a basic plan made from the time working with John but needs to be fine tuned and approved.

Hans
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/15/12 11:17 AM

This is probably the single best reason for paying dues. It shows you're awake and have a vested interest in what happens.
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/15/12 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by waynemarlow

If all the manufacturers make boats at 120kgs then only boats can be purchased at 120kgs and therefore the manufacturers control the vote.


I guess I don't understand this logic. Class rules state a minimum weight of 107kg; therefore boat manufacturers are okay to build any product they beleive is sellable and marketable regardless of weight (albeit it must be > 107kg).

Using your logic if all boat manufacturers built boats at 107kg then only 107kg boats would be sold ... but that's not consistent with Class Rules. I believe, all manufacturers of F16's today are in compliant with Class Rules

Originally Posted by waynemarlow

AHPC set out and marketed their boats well, they had top class sailors win events, they discounted and made sure their boats were seen at events. They gave good backup and had a good design, albeit probably 20 kgs over weight. They had good manufacturing processes in a cheap labour environment, they took the marketing of there boats seriously and because of that they are now the dominating manufacturer.

I say well done, you deserve to be top dog and now you can dictate to what should be a long running class. Every other manufacturer out there dithered about or didn't have the budget to really push their products and thus lost the marketing campaign.


I'll give AHPC (and their distributors) all the praises for executing on a sound business plan. They're building and marketing a boat that fits the F16 Class Rules.

However, I don't think it reasonable that we make a major modification of Class Rules because a Manufacturer should be able to "dictate to what should be a long running class".

I think most of us had parents that encouraged us to participate in sports, theater, music, academics and to try as hard as we can to be the best that we can WITHIN THE RULES--NOT CHANGE THEM to fit our strengths.

Is there a valid reason to change our rules other than "top dog and now you can dictate to what should be a long running class"?

Maybe every years winner of the F16 Worlds should be able to make rule changes ... clearly they are the Top Dog.


Originally Posted by waynemarlow

If the class was to vote I would actually vote to increase the weight further to about 130kgs, its at this point the F16's suddenly start to become competitive in SCHRS and Texel handicap systems. At this weight the performance is not lost on handicap and it gives good margins on build durability.


From the Formula 16 HomePage:
The F16 is designed to sail equally well 1-up and 2-up, and what's more both configurations race each other on elapsed time.

"....race each other on elapsed time."

When did we care about SCHRS and Texel ratings?

Shouldn't we be building this Class for the benefit of the F16 sailors to race against each other.

Are there really regattas that a fleet of F16 show up and they don't race 1st across wins?

Originally Posted by waynemarlow

The ironic thing is that if the weight is increased to 125kgs, it will have the opposite effect to what the manufacturers hope, that of sealing off the market to just 1 or 2 suppliers. At 125 kgs the likes of Hobie and others will all have boats on the water within 12 months, afterall all they have to build is hulls and use components from within their own range for ancillaries such as boards and masts. Cheap cheap development and a no brainer to at least be part of a probably the biggest growing market in small cat sailing.


I say again, if we're part of "the biggest growing market in small cat sailing", what benefit does the weight addition really provide for us ... the sailors or the Class?
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Increased weight - 11/15/12 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by tback

When did we care about SCHRS and Texel ratings?



At least someone finally said it! Building a boat to a handicap rule is the quickest path to the dead boat society. I gotta get out of here before my head explodes.
Posted By: Hans_Ned_111

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by tback

When did we care about SCHRS and Texel ratings?




At least someone finally said it! Building a boat to a handicap rule is the quickest path to the dead boat society. I gotta get out of here before my head explodes.


That's one off the arguments i tried to tell the people who wanted to change the rules to meet rating systems. It has been a fight for the last 2 years.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Originally Posted by tback

When did we care about SCHRS and Texel ratings?



At least someone finally said it! Building a boat to a handicap rule is the quickest path to the dead boat society. I gotta get out of here before my head explodes.


To be honest if you are prepared to bury your head in the sand then by all means then we probably won't miss you.

If you think that any class can survive outside of the Texel and SCHRS then you are living on past times. The 1 boat that has done well in F16 guise, the Viper is over weight by some margins and knowingly then uses its 104 guise in most handicap races. In those races which usually have far more publicity than any of our own F16 races, it can do well under the more forgiving handicap than if it used the F16 rating. Winning events means sales, consumers are yes gullible enough to not see through the short term and plan for the long term. just look how many people have bought the Iphone 5 when it wasn't really much of an upgrade on the 4S

Now wake up everybody, winning races outside of purely F16 races is probably more important to the class than winning a purely F16 race at this time. We simply do not yet have enough boats on the water to not race in handicap events, but that will happen.

How about we then plan for the long term, swallow a bit of pride ( and yes I am an advocat and have fought hard to keep the lower weight over the years )and say yes bring the weight up to 120kgs and really really get the class established. In truth it probably only effects few manufacturers and they probably with everything onboard are around the 110 - 115kgs anyway. 5kgs of ballast is neither here nor there.

Once the class is established in numbers then perhaps the members ( who are the voters, not the manufacturers )could perhaps do what is happening now and lower the weight, a few more enlightened people may well open there minds perhaps and see that the original weight may have been a good thing.

We still have a problem though with AHPC and the Viper, if they don't get their way and raise the weight to more match their boats ( the majority of potential voters afterall ) they will begin to set up OD races excluding all other F16 boats. It will probably mean that Hobie and others will not enter the fray, meaning higher prices and less choice. We either bite the bullit now and raise the weight to compromise or we simply accept that Viper and Nacra will be the only players in town.
Posted By: Tom Whitehurst

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 01:42 PM

For those not aware WHY you should vote YES for an increase in the min weight!

Ya need to send a lot of money for a all carbon 107k boat. The mfg's making production fiberglass / epoxy / Alum spars are much heavier 125kg/275lbs.

So if you want to be competitive for all the average joe to go sailing ya need to increase the weight.

Go ask Matt @ falcon what a min carbon F16 costs.

So....
107kg a boat weighs 235lbs
129lg a boat weighs 284lbs ( advertised weights ) I asked Robbie Daniel and the last time they weight a V16 they averaged 275lbs

If you don't think the 50lbs is critical on this boat your only kidding yourself.

Yes this is a development class but AT WHAT COST!
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 02:21 PM

Totally agree that an all carbon boat would be ideal and no a F16 at 107 kgs is not all carbon, just look at the Vision, almost all glass hulls and just carbon mast.

We have hacked the weight cost / issue to death over the years, but little did we appreciate that 50lbs makes very little differnce in speed and yet softens the harshness of low weight in handicap ratings.

This is something that has escaped most of us used to more V shaped hulls of past generations of boats and something that the controling authorties such as ISAf have yet to catch up on ( although they are aware that boats are no longer fitting into existing computer models and adjusting them slowly ).

It is also something that most internet sailors just cannot comprehend and it would seem that the few who are actually sailing these boats are now beginning to understand.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 02:23 PM

Wayne handicap numbers are NOT engraved in stone. By your own statements you believe the heavy F16 has a very favorable rating. You have to know that situation won't last.

The idea of increasing the weight only to lower it later doesn't make any sense at all. If you think AHPC will have a successful OD fleet you're wrong. There is only one successfull multihull fleet and that's the Hobie 16, all the others are dead or dieing. To go down the OD path now is fleet suicide.

If the fleet does vote to go heavy what is to prevent the light F16 owners from creating an F16HT class? If I had light weight F16 there is no way you could convince me that strapping lead to my boat is good for the class because some the owners want to dominate handicap races (due to a soft number).

Hobie will NEVER build a F16 light or heavy. Hobie is a kayak company and building beach cats just doesn't make the same $$. I'd also predict that the Wildcat will never be replaced and when sales don't justify the production cost they will get out of the F18 game.

I know I'm not going to change your mind and I have no cat in this fight but some of the things you say just have to be challenged.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by David Ingram
Wayne handicap numbers are NOT engraved in stone. By your own statements you believe the heavy F16 has a very favorable rating. You have to know that situation won't last.

I know I'm not going to change your mind and I have no cat in this fight but some of the things you say just have to be challenged.


One thing for certain is, I'm not saying the Viper has a favorible handicap at all, what I am saying is that at 1.018 it is competitive with other modern boats such as the F18's and Hurricanes ie with the right skipper and wind ranges it sometimes comes out on top. At 0.989 ( F16 ) it is a real task to get in the points such is the competition at the top level. My guess is that the Viper is about right.

For a long time I have voiced that the ratings are still too biased over weight and are behind the game / missed that the rigs are now having more of an impact than what we think. There are a number of classes that have recently updated the rigs with great success and rejuvinated old boats and then wonder why they are doing very very well in handicap racing. I would guess ratings such as SCHRS will eventually catch up, but it does great damage along the way, designers can now design and introduce boats faster than the ratings are willingly changed.

Do agree on the Hobie issue. But there are others out there who will probably step in.
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by waynemarlow
Originally Posted by David Ingram
Wayne handicap numbers are NOT engraved in stone. By your own statements you believe the heavy F16 has a very favorable rating. You have to know that situation won't last.

I know I'm not going to change your mind and I have no cat in this fight but some of the things you say just have to be challenged.


One thing for certain is, I'm not saying the Viper has a favorible handicap at all, what I am saying is that at 1.018 it is competitive with other modern boats such as the F18's and Hurricanes ie with the right skipper and wind ranges it sometimes comes out on top. At 0.989 ( F16 ) it is a real task to get in the points such is the competition at the top level. My guess is that the Viper is about right.

For a long time I have voiced that the ratings are still too biased over weight and are behind the game / missed that the rigs are now having more of an impact than what we think. There are a number of classes that have recently updated the rigs with great success and rejuvinated old boats and then wonder why they are doing very very well in handicap racing. I would guess ratings such as SCHRS will eventually catch up, but it does great damage along the way, designers can now design and introduce boats faster than the ratings are willingly changed.

Do agree on the Hobie issue. But there are others out there who will probably step in.


Wayne,

I've witnessed here in the US, that with the "right skipper", the F16 can compete with the F18's and N20's on straight elapsed time.

Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 04:23 PM

Yup, we have N20's and F18's at my club and even I can whoop their ar*** at times. But and the big but, they whoop my ar** more times than I kick theirs. Over a summer series such we recently have had, you would have to expect that that would be the case.

Anyway water line length will always have a major impact on this sort of thing.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 06:01 PM

Wayne you are way to preoccupied with sailing handicap.

Sailors that choose their weapon based on how it works in the numbers are horribly fickle and always think the grass is greener. You guys are finally starting to build some great momentum please don't undo it by trying to promote the class through handicap racing.

Changing class rules to accomodate handicap racing just makes me feel unclean.
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 06:10 PM

I heart Ding. Preach it brother!

This is a completely asinine discussion. again.....
Posted By: mikekrantz

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 08:00 PM

Ding, What the hell are you doing over here? Have you been in the koolaid again?
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 08:30 PM

laugh
Posted By: mini

Re: Increased weight - 11/16/12 10:55 PM

Yes 50 or more pounds matter and because of that would I want no part in a class if it is going to requiring that kind of a weight. To me that kills one of the biggest attractions to the F16 class.

I bought a glass boat with a carbon stick that I weighed at 110 kg. (The mast by the way is 1kg over so I could be even less I guess) If I had wanted a heavier boat I could have gotten one. I do not begrudge those that buy other heavier boats. If the weight issue was all that important to them, then they could have easily shopped around and purchased a light weight boat.

Lazy building practices and selling things not designed for their intended purposes do make it better or right. Look at the Telefonica project. 2 Volvo 70s build by 2 yards with the same spec. 1 is heavy and breaks multiple times during its life. The other is light and sails around the world with no issues multiple times. Which 1 is better?

If you want to buy heavy, go ahead, but do not tell the rest of us we can’t. Using marketing hype as a justification is a bit misguided to say the least.
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 12:00 AM

Mini sounds borderline hostile towards the heavier boats. lol

I wouldn't call the Viper lazily built. Its stout.
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 10:21 AM

Guys do not get me wrong in advocating weight for weight sake, I am a real light weight advocate ( my own home built "almost" F16 compatible boat is around the 100 kilos and I could have made it lighter if I felt the need ( 5 kgs max of ballast ) ) and do consider the likes of the Viper just an economic but lazy way to build boats. I'm sure if the Viper used properly designed ancillary components then it would be pretty close to the class weight, after all I am led to believe the hulls are around the 26 kilos, which is pretty par to most other manufacturers hulls.

But I am a realist who understands that to move foward you sometimes have to bow to greater influences. At this time the rating systems and market forces are out of kilter with our class weights, to change that will take years and years to both alter the perception of the buying public and even longer to sway the likes of the SCHRS who by very nature of its business will be cautious and will generally lag current boat design, after all its not until there is a problem, can it react.

So on one hand I would say why bother at this stage to alter what is a pretty achievible weight and on the other I'm saying for the benefit of the class it is probably a need to accept that we may need for the moment to increase it.
Posted By: Rolf_Nilsen

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 12:16 PM

Wayne,

I dont see any significant reason to increase min weight and I dont see a need.
Raising min weight would be a very radical move back into the past.

You have presented some valid arguments for taking action and I think this have been an interesting discussion. But it is very clear, to me at least, that nothing needs to be done smile

If there is an agenda in the background to raise min weight we will know when the ballot is presented. It looks like I will have a boat next summer so I will be a class member again. I have not weighted my homebuild yet but whatever the finished weight will be I will not argue to have the class rules changed to optimize my boat laugh


Could we instead talk about CNC and stepper motors not moving as I want them to?
Posted By: waynemarlow

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 01:18 PM

Guys I might have to eat my words a bit, as part of Bitsa's " upgrade " I have it back at home and felt with all the weight issues being bandied about again, I would take the time to weigh it accurately ( I had only ever weighed it with rig and everything up fresh out of the workshop and its not the easiest at that stage ). Recently I have altered the original spinny concept and had a few ding repairs over the last season + had a water leak etc, probably a more representative time to do the weighing.

A porky 107 kgs or there abouts. I'm pretty sure I could have built it down to around the 104 pretty easily but always knew that weight was not an issue due to the majority of handicap racing that I do ( which I suspect most clubmen do ) and taken some liberties in beefing up the bottom of the hulls with extra layers of glass etc.
Posted By: mini

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by Karl_Brogger
Mini sounds borderline hostile towards the heavier boats. lol



Sorry, no hostility intended against the heavier boats. They elected to do things a certain way and that is fine with me. The people who purchased their boats did so knowing they were heavy. It is called freedom and I am all over it.

Now there is a movement in place to force heavy on everyone and this does make me hostile. There are affordable choices of lighter boats, so to say it cannot be done is BS. If no one buys the heavy models you better beleive a new light version will soon appear. (From the builders standpoint, why go the effort to do it if the public buys the one you already have). At the end of the day , who cares if Nacra or ahpc or any other builder makes an F16. As long as there are boats being bought, somebody will build them. If the class continues its growth, they already have an investment and they will figure it out - it is not that difficult.

This carbon cost thing is nothing more than scare tactics. I can go out and purchase a new full carbon 75kg state of the art A class cat for the same or less than a Fiberglass and aluminum heavy butt F18. If you ask me, (and I'm getting old, so its more important) the A class option is a much better value for what I am purchasing.
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Increased weight - 11/17/12 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by mikekrantz
Ding, What the hell are you doing over here? Have you been in the koolaid again?


I felt disturbance in the force and I kept getting drawn here and then there it was screaming at me, I couldn't stop myself.

Uh oh, sweetness just caught looking at the F16 forum gotta go.


Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/19/12 09:14 PM

Isn't she on an H-16 now?
Posted By: David Ingram

Re: Increased weight - 11/21/12 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Isn't she on an H-16 now?


Nope. She is sailing with me this weekend at DIYC and she's doing Hirams. She doesn't mind the H16 but I have ruined her for everyone else. What can I say, I'm special.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 11/21/12 02:59 PM

Like "Short Bus riding" special?
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 04:47 PM

The two food supplements I've been using since high school, to both gain weight and increase cerebral capacity are; Pizza and Beer.

The Pizza will put weight on you quickly. If on Friday night you find out it's going to be blowing on Saturday, Eat UP! You'll be 10lbs. heavier by morning!

And the beer will make you super intelligent, even quicker!

Just ask anyone, after their 5th beer...

But be careful, too much beer and you'll lose your Pizza weight!
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 04:50 PM

I'm so glad you're a pilot....
Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 05:13 PM

Just watched "Flight". I may never fly again.
Posted By: tback

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by pgp
Just watched "Flight". I may never fly again.


Pete, you're looking at this all wrong.

These men & women pilots are PROFESSIONALS (see Timbo's post above); as such, they can fly in all conditions (weather & personal).

I fully support our professional pilots!!

Posted By: pgp

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 06:15 PM

If you guys knew how many people are in AA, and how many should be, you'd freak!

...yes, been there done that.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Increased weight - 03/22/13 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by tback
I fully support our professional pilots!!


as Timbo and Orsen Wells pointed out, we'll all be ferried around by drone aircraft pretty soon.

So we can use our support toward single moms...and pole dancing lessons.

Matt can explain how the "good" ones can slide UP the pole
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Increased weight - 03/23/13 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Karl_Brogger
I'm so glad you're a pilot....


I thought we were talking about sailing, not flying.

But if you would like to talk about flying, and share your valuable input, and all your experience, with real pilots, here's where you need to be:

http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com
© 2024 Catsailor.com Forums