JimC

Members
  • Content Count

    7,686
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

423 F'n Saint

About JimC

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.devboats.co.uk
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    South East England
  • Interests
    Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Recent Profile Visitors

16,107 profile views
  1. JimC

    A very one design, the rebuild..

    Subject to correction by people who know more, I think its more complicated than that... My loose understanding is that if you're going in a straight line the lift from the keel exactly balances the lift from the sails. However there's also drag, not only from the keel, but also from the hull, and in order to produce lift from the keel it will be sailing at an angle of attack, which we call leeway. So if we increase the lift on the keel then drag from the keel also increases - with lift comes drag - but because the lift needs to balance the sails we either keep the same track with less 'leeway' - in other words less drag from both hull and foil - or else sail higher so again the lift reduces back to equilibrium. Which is the better thing to do probably depends on more variables than I can possibly get my head round...
  2. JimC

    A very one design, the rebuild..

    My very minimally informed guess is that the trouble with a trim tab would be that the relationship between the leading edge and the hull doesn't change. So effectively what it gives you is like trailing edge flaps on an aircraft. More lift and more drag, but not a major change in water going past the hull. Like a lot of these things, its probably not hard to get it working a bit, but very hard to get it working properly all the time. I also have a vision of tacking up the river Ant and and having to tack the keel as well... On the other hand one can imagine dialing up a high and slow mode to get round a bend in the river, which we already do with rigs, but I'm not sure if the difference would be measureable. You need someone who knows a *lot* about low speed aerodynamics I suspect.
  3. RS subsidise and support their CAs to a massive extent. If you don't think that expense ends up on the price of a boat then may I interest you in this bridge?
  4. If it lasts more than 4x as many races as the tin ones do you'll still be ahead!
  5. Easy to found a new class association. Rather harder to make one work.
  6. Didn't they try something like that before?
  7. Think through it. World sailing are not only not 'higher up', they are not party to the contract between ILCA and LPE at all, and I suspect they aren't even supposed to have access to the construction manual, let alone be expert in it. And conventionally a contract is a contract, you aren't allowed to unilaterally add extra conditions to it. And one might note that transparency and impartiality have never formed any part of the Laser situation.The only reason most of us have any idea what was in various contracts has been what's been published in court documents. Traditionally its all been a swan situation where we haven't known what's going on under the water.
  8. That *is* refusing an inspection.
  9. But the superficial appearance is that he repeatedly pulled the rug under himself. The builders were protected by a mesh of contracts that made it almost impossible to dislodge a builder who was fulfilling their contractual obligations. First LPE appears to have broken their contractual obligations to the design owners by ceasing to pay the not especially huge builder's royalty, but they were given a pass on that by firstly ILCA making the fundamental rule change in their favour, and secondly by the US legal system apparently making the contracts effectively unenforceable. Secondly LPE appears to have broken their contractual obligations to ILCA by refusing the not very onerous factory inspections, which have ILCA very little choice but to pull the plug. The Laser is nothing if its not identical boats. This is what's so mystifying about the whole thing. LPE may well have decided that everyone was out to get them, but surely if you think everyone is out to get you the one thing you do is to make sure that the other guys are the ones to break the contracts. Unfortunately everyone is so addicted to spin and fake history that we'll surely never know what the motivation was.
  10. Your memory serves you badly. LPE had one of the biggest stands last year, https://www.rya.org.uk/dinghy-show/whats-on/Pages/map.aspx. Interesting that UK Laser had a separate stand though.
  11. What looks even more interesting is that the UK Laser association appear to have their own stand, separate from that of either manufacturer. Typically the manufacturer led classes have their stand integrated with - and paid for by - the builder. When a show map appears it will be most interesting to see where the three bodies concerned are located (at the moment for some strange reason the 2019 layout is still up on the show website.
  12. Seems to me that's all part of the stuff that was in the mesh of contracts between builders, designer and CA that were supposed to control the class. Amongst other things, you may remember, it required that if any builder stopped being an authorised builder they were required to stop building boats and sell tooling to an authorised builder. All that seems to have turned out to be uneforceable under the dysfunctional US legal system, aided by the fundamental rule change in favour of LPE that ILCA made. I've always felt that the process of appointing new builders was going to be problematic since a replacement set of contractual obligations was going to be required that was better proofed against US legal shenanigans, and especially in the case of LP LLc it seemed to me they were likely to be extremely reluctant to sign up for anything that imposed restrictions on their freedom to do exactly what they wanted.
  13. I think probably subsidiary was the wrong word. Companies House is talking about a UK *establishment* of an overseas company. I expect there's a vital difference, but I have not the slightest clue what that might be. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/FC035491/filing-history
  14. Anyone? I'm not clued up enough about this stuff to offer a useful opinion, although I don't recall seeing many LLCs.
  15. The Laser Performance Website is now labelled Copyright © 2020 LaserPerformance LLC. Laser Performance LLC appears to have been set up in the UK in 2018 as a subsidiary of a US company. We've discussed this before.