Sign in to follow this  
Tornado_ALIVE

A Class Worlds - Classic Division

Recommended Posts

On 3 December 2017 at 9:43 AM, A Class Sailor said:

You are right. Nosediving has never been a problem on C foil DNA's if they have winglets :D

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT28SKV_fYht8DIgHQXiAf

Nothing to see here ACS just Bradshaw posing for the cameras again. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Rawhide said:

So do they have age divisions in classic, or is it just assumed everyone is a great grand master, or deemed as such. 

Fear not there is a spot for you should foiling should foiling be beyond your weary old bones! See Nats NOR!

Interestingly of the four redesigned Classics on their way, three are for people not included in the oldest category including one for a junior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, samc99us said:

What's the deal on the redesigned classic Exploder??

No photos yet as they are currently sitting on a dock at Tanjung Pelepas Malaysia. 

Modifications compared to the AD3 are as you would expect. Beam and centreboard positions changed, constant curve C boards as per class specification, hard sealed tramp, double skin, winglet rudders and additional volume. They'll  be locally fitted out with modified DS and booms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, samc99us said:

Interesting choice to go for the boom. Reason?

Otherwise the boats sound great. Do you mind sharing a rough price figure?

Bit busy with some big boat rigging work right now so I'll go in to the boom/Boomless issue later. Difficult decision but short answer is it's about down wind difference between classic and foiler. 

Around 13 Euro platform ex Poland. So add shipping taxes and duties. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently tried sheeting a big head classic sail and had forgotten about the sheet loads.  Maybe there is more to it, but it sounds like a smart choice and hope you love the boat.  Several people here are keen to see how they go and what they look like.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

I recently tried sheeting a big head classic sail and had forgotten about the sheet loads.  

Very strange. With the old big head classic sails on a boom, we used to use a 9:1 mainsheet and loads weren't that bad. Now we are using 10:1 on the DS rig with no boom and I am seriously struggling with the load, mainly uphill when trying to foil. I struggle to both pull it in and to hold it in once pulled. 

 

3 hours ago, WetnWild said:

Around 13 Euro platform ex Poland. So add shipping taxes and duties.

Considering the first DNA's were that price 7 years ago, that seems pretty good value for money. Currency has gone against you a bit over that time, but overall, not a bad deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Class Sailor said:

Very strange. With the old big head classic sails on a boom, we used to use a 9:1 mainsheet and loads weren't that bad. Now we are using 10:1 on the DS rig with no boom and I am seriously struggling with the load.

Without the boom. Your main sheet is being a Vang and an out haul.  With the boom it was just a Vang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I don't find the sheet loads on the boomless sail higher than with the boom. This is on an 8:1 boomless setup and the same cut of boomless DS Stevie took to Worlds. This includes sailing to weather and upwind foiling work. Setup is 8:1 Harken blocks with a harken 57 carbon autoratchet on the tramp (center sheet). I definitely see the need for higher purchase on a big head classic sail, on the F18 we run 10:1 and sometimes that isn't enough. This probably explains why boomless may not work on a non-foiler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DS on a classic boomless boat is what I'm running at the moment.  It really made the boat a lot simpler to sail and not have all the strings laying around.  I run a 9:1 mainsheet (rearsheet for now) and have no issues sheeting the bugger.  The sail is by Randy Smyth.  The trick on the classic DS setup is the head width and fullness placement.  IMO, anything less than 28" head width (711.2mm) will be very slow downwind against the big heads in winds less then 7kts.  7 kts and up they appear even at 28".  It will be very interesting to see what Landy comes up with!  In light winds, you must control the rotation with the downwind rotation lines.  Above 7kts just let it go!  4 lines simple:  mainsheet, traveler, cunningham, rotation on the front beam.  Classic never looked better.

38287101532_0eb457527b_b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob,

  Great looking boat and sail. I agree that the boomless is much simpler, plus less risk of mast breakage, which is why I'm a big fan. I suspect that the sheet issue is related to the clew attachment point, not a lot of sail builders get that right and its different for different platforms.

-Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely looking good, Bob.  

When did Randy first start doing A-Class boomless?  2000s?  1990s?  I like the way he has the sail dialed in so that the sheeting angle is at the leech.  He's always done that from the sails I've seen of his.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam,

You are right about the "custom" clew from boat to boat!  I had him raise it a bit and take out the area from the bottom angle batten to the clew.  Makes for easy passage when rear sheeting.

Bailey,

Randy has been doing boomless sails for a long time!  When I reached out to Stevie about a boomless classic sail, he recommended Mr. Smyth.  I performed my normal batten tuning and have it quite dialed in since that pic was taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bob Curry said:

The DS on a classic boomless boat is what I'm running at the moment.  It really made the boat a lot simpler to sail and not have all the strings laying around.  I run a 9:1 mainsheet (rearsheet for now) and have no issues sheeting the bugger.  The sail is by Randy Smyth.  The trick on the classic DS setup is the head width and fullness placement.  IMO, anything less than 28" head width (711.2mm) will be very slow downwind against the big heads in winds less then 7kts.  7 kts and up they appear even at 28".  It will be very interesting to see what Landy comes up with!  In light winds, you must control the rotation with the downwind rotation lines.  Above 7kts just let it go!  4 lines simple:  mainsheet, traveler, cunningham, rotation on the front beam.  Classic never looked better.

38287101532_0eb457527b_b.jpg

 A little bit of a comparing...... I sailed against a foiling DS in the weekend. The winds were light 5 - 9 knots with a choppy sea. Up wind DS Pros - 7 - 9 faster and could point higher same speed down wind. Cons very sticky in the light stuff and was left behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bob Curry said:

The trick on the classic DS setup is the head width and fullness placement.  IMO, anything less than 28" head width (711.2mm) will be very slow downwind against the big heads in winds less then 7kts.  7 kts and up they appear even at 28". 

I am really surprised by this conclusion. Although it is hard to compare like with like, because we do not see big and small headed DS's sailing together to compare, I have seen no evidence that in sub 7 knots, head size makes any difference. It seems to me that it only makes a difference when it comes to trying to pop a hull, with the bigger head sail doing so in slightly less wind.

The picture is really blurred because in most cases today, the big head sails are on classic boats which have an edge in the lighter winds downhill due to less foil drag.

I do agree that for a classic, you probably want a bigger head size than for a foiler, but that is to promote early hull lift. If I was guessing at the best size, i would probably go for 650mm (25.5 inches) unless you sail in predominantly light locations, say sub 10 knots for the majority of the time. Here in Australia, to focus on light winds like that would be rather foolish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha. Say hi to Ray L for me. I’d love to sail my Taipan next to your A cat, and see if I can talk myself into getting an A. Do you ever come over to sail with LMSA on Lake Monroe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sail next to the A cat will last a whole 5 seconds!!!

I'm up in the panhandle so I don't get to central Florida much anymore.  There is an all-class race in St Pete in January.  Bluster on the Bay.  Try to make it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks, I am considering doing some work on the daggerboard cases on an older 25 feet catamaran (KL25). Some people suggested I should cant them then too. The boards are symmetrical, actually from the Ventilo M2. Does any one here recall from the times the A-cats went through this change as well and could share his knowledge? Is there really any noticeable benefit in canting a straight symmetrical board and would those benefits be more noticeable upwind or downwind? I am considering canting the boards inwards by some 15-18 degrees and someone more knowledgeable person than me suggested to also toe in by 1 degree. Is this all worth it? Thx!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taipan 5.7's had a centreboard chanting kit we could retrofit with the later 5.7's hulls coming out of the mold cantered with no ability to straighten them. At the same time Boyer was canting his A Classes, my thoughts having owned the factory cantered and straight Taipan 5.7's is that there is no benefit to those boats except in the exact wind range that they are optimised for. In light wind a lot of energy is used in the foils fighting each other trying to lift the boat instead of going forward as the boards are splayed outward not like a foiling boat would have the boards. Just my thoughts good luck with your project

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks madboutscats! Interesting to hear! Unfortunately my last A-cat was a Flyer 1st gen. and I left the class before the canted boards (and the C boards and nowadays variations) emerged, so never saw the difference.

Anybody else here remembering a similar experience, that canting symmetrical straight boards is not making a noticeable difference over a range of conditions?

Thx!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure, my F16 had canted boards in ( and T foil rudders ) and although I had no direct comparison as it was a one off ( A Class shortened ) above about 10knots it was very noticeable that the hull was almost out of the water. I say almost, just skimming. At slower speeds if you could get enough wind to lift the windward hull excessively you could almost skim the hull again on its side. The other F16's about Nacra, Viper and Stealth were no faster and it always came down to skipper error rather than boat speed. It was only the Nacra F16 which was the first of the bunch with high aspect boards that seemed to be able to pull away in very very light airs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the classic division another example of A class rules, expediting exactly what they were meant to restrict? Watched a brand new "classic" A foiling for a few hundred metres quite stable.  Not as fast as a full foiler but foiling nonetheless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Rawhide said:

So is the classic division another example of A class rules, expediting exactly what they were meant to restrict? Watched a brand new "classic" A foiling for a few hundred metres quite stable.  Not as fast as a full foiler but foiling nonetheless. 

No. 

Lost has posted the reference. The Classic discipline is not based on a change to the class rules. It is the result of the world wide membership voting on a proposal developed by the Technical Committee to recognise and support the large part of our family who want to enjoy the class in its classic configuration while still allowing the great discipline of foiling. Someone you know quite well drove the change even though remaining a foiler. 

Those who breach the trust outlined in the parameters quoted by Lost will be taken around behind the shed and have the shit beaten out of them. 

Fast Classics are also an incentive for mediocre foilers to practice more!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope.... you say you retire....  because  it's a game and you honor the rules of the game that you choose to play  QED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, WetnWild said:

No. 

Lost has posted the reference. The Classic discipline is not based on a change to the class rules. It is the result of the world wide membership voting on a proposal developed by the Technical Committee to recognise and support the large part of our family who want to enjoy the class in its classic configuration while still allowing the great discipline of foiling. Someone you know quite well drove the change even though remaining a foiler. 

Those who breach the trust outlined in the parameters quoted by Lost will be taken around behind the shed and have the shit beaten out of them. 

Fast Classics are also an incentive for mediocre foilers to practice more!

Yes, but do you appreciate the irony that creating a non foiling discipline has resulted in new C board boats being built which take advantage of the latest foiling advances and are now capable of stable foiling in some conditions. It seams very unlikely this would have occurred otherwise.

Just like deja vu all over again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rawhide said:

Yes, but do you appreciate the irony that creating a non foiling discipline has resulted in new C board boats being built which take advantage of the latest foiling advances and are now capable of stable foiling in some conditions. It seams very unlikely this would have occurred otherwise.

Just like deja vu all over again

Yes I agree. Entirely predictable of course because both disciplines are subject to the same set of class rules. The difference between the two is the sailor endorsed condition set out in the link posted by Lost.

Sailing is a self regulated sport and this is a perfect example. We as a class have decided to have two disciplines within our overall class and it is now up to us to ensure it is successful within the limits we have set. If we fail I believe we lose around half our family of A Class sailors around the world. People have put a lot of energy in this attempt to embrace all parts of our class including the person you saw foil a bit. I’m in regular discussion with him on these matters.

Up to the sailors now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not knocking it. Just somewhat amused. The concept worked very well at the nationals, will be interesting to see how the worlds turn out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rawhide said:

Yes, but do you appreciate the irony that creating a non foiling discipline has resulted in new C board boats being built which take advantage of the latest foiling advances and are now capable of stable foiling in some conditions. It seams very unlikely this would have occurred otherwise.

Just like deja vu all over again

It is like deja vu all over again, but not for the reasons you state. Before we saw the development of "proper" foils, there were people, mainly in Europe, who were getting reasonable flight with C foils. This was one of 2 factors that led to the development of foils more suited to foiling. Once it became clear that A's could foil with C's, the race was on to find a more stable solution. People forget that there was a time when DNA were telling people not to foil on C foils because they weren't strong enough

I would suggest there is a way of looking at this that is the flip side of the argument. One problem that some or maybe even many encountered with C foilers was that you could end up with too much lift and the boat would jump out. That was because the amount of lift was not adjustable. Another issue was that the winglets being used weren't really big enough and worked at their limit. Although they did a great job of reducing pitchpoles, when they let go, there were some pretty wild pitchpoles including the now famous picture of Brayshaw posted above.

By adding sliders and modern foiling rudders, you overcome both the problems. The sliders mean you can keep the foils in a range where the boat doesn't foil and the rudders really do reduce or even stop pitchpoling. Overall, the adoption of these bits of "latest technolgy" can be used in one of 2 ways. they can make non foiling significantly better or they can be used to make an attempt at full foiling. The difference is that now it is under the control of the sailor. The important thing is that the latter is cheating. The good thing is that unlike other forms of cheating where self regulation and honesty is important, in this case it is pretty obvious if somebody cheats. Common snse needs to prevail. If a boat leaps out the water because they have too much lift and then crashes back down, that isn't "foiling". If you sail for 100 metres with the hulls out of the water, it clearly is. People are making too much of the grey area. If you really do have enough skill to be able to sail consistently with just a bit of the hull in the water but you are not foiling,. you probably deserve to win.

The person everybody seems to be concerned about is Landy, but he is going to kick butt whatever the non foiling rule is and there is part of the problem. It's not his great adjustable foil set up and rudders. He will probably dominate the non foiling boats because he is the best sailor. The other thing to remember is that Landy sailing a non foiler even with straight boards and no winglets would still beat most of the foilers and we shouldn't confuse the equipment with the skill of the sailor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

It is like deja vu all over again, but not for the reasons you state. Before we saw the development of "proper" foils, there were people, mainly in Europe, who were getting reasonable flight with C foils. This was one of 2 factors that led to the development of foils more suited to foiling. Once it became clear that A's could foil with C's, the race was on to find a more stable solution. People forget that there was a time when DNA were telling people not to foil on C foils because they weren't strong enough

I would suggest there is a way of looking at this that is the flip side of the argument. One problem that some or maybe even many encountered with C foilers was that you could end up with too much lift and the boat would jump out. That was because the amount of lift was not adjustable. Another issue was that the winglets being used weren't really big enough and worked at their limit. Although they did a great job of reducing pitchpoles, when they let go, there were some pretty wild pitchpoles including the now famous picture of Brayshaw posted above.

By adding sliders and modern foiling rudders, you overcome both the problems. The sliders mean you can keep the foils in a range where the boat doesn't foil and the rudders really do reduce or even stop pitchpoling. Overall, the adoption of these bits of "latest technolgy" can be used in one of 2 ways. they can make non foiling significantly better or they can be used to make an attempt at full foiling. The difference is that now it is under the control of the sailor. The important thing is that the latter is cheating. The good thing is that unlike other forms of cheating where self regulation and honesty is important, in this case it is pretty obvious if somebody cheats. Common snse needs to prevail. If a boat leaps out the water because they have too much lift and then crashes back down, that isn't "foiling". If you sail for 100 metres with the hulls out of the water, it clearly is. People are making too much of the grey area. If you really do have enough skill to be able to sail consistently with just a bit of the hull in the water but you are not foiling,. you probably deserve to win.

The person everybody seems to be concerned about is Landy, but he is going to kick butt whatever the non foiling rule is and there is part of the problem. It's not his great adjustable foil set up and rudders. He will probably dominate the non foiling boats because he is the best sailor. The other thing to remember is that Landy sailing a non foiler even with straight boards and no winglets would still beat most of the foilers and we shouldn't confuse the equipment with the skill of the sailor.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like a long winded way of agreeing with me that with the advances over the last few years, C boards now foil much better than they used to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rawhide said:

That looks like a long winded way of agreeing with me that with the advances over the last few years, C boards now foil much better than they used to.

We would be in agreement if that is what you said, but you didn't. I am not sure how you would expect us to understand that from your comment

3 hours ago, Rawhide said:

Yes, but do you appreciate the irony that creating a non foiling discipline has resulted in new C board boats being built which take advantage of the latest foiling advances and are now capable of stable foiling in some conditions. It seams very unlikely this would have occurred otherwise.

Maybe you are unaware that before we got J or Z foils, there were people making A's foil with C's in some conditions. It had already occurred and didn't need to take advantage of the latest foiling advances. If there had been a rule to make sure we couldn't advance more than C foils, banning J or Z style foils and only allowing constant radius C foils or straight foils, we would have reached the position Landy is now in pretty quickly, because we were already most of the way there, if we hadn't already.

Rather than focusing on history, the real question is how we ensure that people do not abuse the non foiling rule. Is it really breaking the rules if you "accidentally" foil for, say, 20 metres before managing to get the hull back down and then adjusting the amount of rake/lift on the boards? Do we say that because people can adjust everything that there is no excuse at all for foiling? What about those on old DNA's  who cannot adjust the foils who "accidentally foil for a short distance? In theory it is fraught with problems.

The reality is rather different. The A Class is one of the good classes where we do not get people cheating deliberately and where we self police pretty well. I believe and hope we understand enough about foiling to know when somebody is deliberately trying to gain an advantage with a non foiler by foiling and when it is unintended. In the same way, I have yet to meet an A Class sailor that i believe would deliberately cheat. I would be very surprised if a mix of self policing and peer pressure isn't enough to ensure good competition. Otherwise, we need to change the rules and make it so that you can only use straight foils, because that is the only way to stop all foiling beyond doubt.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

We would be in agreement if that is what you said, but you didn't. I am not sure how you would expect us to understand that from your comment

Maybe you are unaware that before we got J or Z foils, there were people making A's foil with C's in some conditions. It had already occurred and didn't need to take advantage of the latest foiling advances. If there had been a rule to make sure we couldn't advance more than C foils, banning J or Z style foils and only allowing constant radius C foils or straight foils, we would have reached the position Landy is now in pretty quickly, because we were already most of the way there, if we hadn't already.

Rather than focusing on history, the real question is how we ensure that people do not abuse the non foiling rule. Is it really breaking the rules if you "accidentally" foil for, say, 20 metres before managing to get the hull back down and then adjusting the amount of rake/lift on the boards? Do we say that because people can adjust everything that there is no excuse at all for foiling? What about those on old DNA's  who cannot adjust the foils who "accidentally foil for a short distance? In theory it is fraught with problems.

The reality is rather different. The A Class is one of the good classes where we do not get people cheating deliberately and where we self police pretty well. I believe and hope we understand enough about foiling to know when somebody is deliberately trying to gain an advantage with a non foiler by foiling and when it is unintended. In the same way, I have yet to meet an A Class sailor that i believe would deliberately cheat. I would be very surprised if a mix of self policing and peer pressure isn't enough to ensure good competition. Otherwise, we need to change the rules and make it so that you can only use straight foils, because that is the only way to stop all foiling beyond doubt.

 

None of that has any relevance to my comment on the irony that we are seeing new c board boats which now foil well/better/more stable which exist only because of the advent of a non foiling division or discipline. 

I guess appreciation of irony is as uncommon as comprehension

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rawhide said:

None of that has any relevance to my comment on the irony that we are seeing new c board boats which now foil well/better/more stable which exist only because of the advent of a non foiling division or discipline. 

I guess appreciation of irony is as uncommon as comprehension

 

Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but the problem is that your premise is wrong. You are implying that before the non foiling division, C foil boats didn't foil as well/ foiled worse/were less stable. than they are now. That is not correct. Before the J and Z foils, there were some people foiling reasonably on C foils, like we are now seeing, and that it was their efforts that were one factor in the development of the foilers we now have. I particularly remember Landy sailing in from racing at the Wangi nationals in 2012 and he foiled for about 400 metres. I don't believe we are seeing anything new. The other factor is that while the C foil boats and their ability haven't changed very much, what has changed is the understanding of foiling, so when Landy jumps on his new C foil boat, he can foil it even better than he did back in the day. If you put him in his 2012 Scheurer, I bet he would foil just about as well as he is now.

The other thing that stands out to me is that the C board era was relatively short and mot never learnt to sail those boats to their maximum. Only a few people were trapezing downwind pushing as hard as they could as most still believed that sitting in, going wild and deep was the answer. There was really only 1 world championship (Islamorada) where the top guys were pushing downwind that hard before the foiling age. Before then, we had only seen occasional downwind trapezing from the likes of Glenn Ashby but not to the extent that was to follow.

Overall, the big change is in the sailors rather than the boats.

Surely the irony is that it took the creation of a non foiling division to highlight to a wider audience the foiling potential of C foilers, a potential that was always there and which some knew about. The other irony is that the creation of a non foiling division has created a problem that didn't exist of how to ensure C boards don't foil. The intention was to create a level playing field for a different type of sailing and what it has done is created just as wide a difference as we see on foilers.

Maybe we are arguing the same things. I am trying to get the history right, because I place some importance on that. Knowing how we got to where we are today might help us decide where we want to go from here. From that viewpoint, focusing on the boat seems wrong. It is really about the sailors. If you want to control this, limit what the sailors can do. If there is a concern that the current rule is open to abuse, how about a rule that you cannot trapeze downwind after you pass the wing mark. That would be the biggest leveller of the lot. I know that has practical problems, such as what happens if you overstand the lay line to the bottom mark or there is a wind shift, but it would tighten up the racing. Bring in that rule and WnW would give Landy a run for his money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, A Class Sailor said:

Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but the problem is that your premise is wrong. You are implying that before the non foiling division, C foil boats didn't foil as well/ foiled worse/were less stable. than they are now. That is not correct. Before the J and Z foils, there were some people foiling reasonably on C foils, like we are now seeing, and that it was their efforts that were one factor in the development of the foilers we now have. I particularly remember Landy sailing in from racing at the Wangi nationals in 2012 and he foiled for about 400 metres. I don't believe we are seeing anything new. The other factor is that while the C foil boats and their ability haven't changed very much, what has changed is the understanding of foiling, so when Landy jumps on his new C foil boat, he can foil it even better than he did back in the day. If you put him in his 2012 Scheurer, I bet he would foil just about as well as he is now.

The other thing that stands out to me is that the C board era was relatively short and mot never learnt to sail those boats to their maximum. Only a few people were trapezing downwind pushing as hard as they could as most still believed that sitting in, going wild and deep was the answer. There was really only 1 world championship (Islamorada) where the top guys were pushing downwind that hard before the foiling age. Before then, we had only seen occasional downwind trapezing from the likes of Glenn Ashby but not to the extent that was to follow.

Overall, the big change is in the sailors rather than the boats.

Surely the irony is that it took the creation of a non foiling division to highlight to a wider audience the foiling potential of C foilers, a potential that was always there and which some knew about. The other irony is that the creation of a non foiling division has created a problem that didn't exist of how to ensure C boards don't foil. The intention was to create a level playing field for a different type of sailing and what it has done is created just as wide a difference as we see on foilers.

Maybe we are arguing the same things. I am trying to get the history right, because I place some importance on that. Knowing how we got to where we are today might help us decide where we want to go from here. From that viewpoint, focusing on the boat seems wrong. It is really about the sailors. If you want to control this, limit what the sailors can do. If there is a concern that the current rule is open to abuse, how about a rule that you cannot trapeze downwind after you pass the wing mark. That would be the biggest leveller of the lot. I know that has practical problems, such as what happens if you overstand the lay line to the bottom mark or there is a wind shift, but it would tighten up the racing. Bring in that rule and WnW would give Landy a run for his money.

I think you’re both right. 

It is ironic that skilled foilers going back the classics are faster. 

And it is their experience in foiling that is allowing better use of C boards. 

The challenge for the expert foilers going classic is to skim and not foil. That’s where the speed increase is available without contravening the agreed sailing style which underpins the classic discipline. 

ACS I have two point of difference with your analysis. 

Firstly I think Islamorada is a poor example for the point you are making. (Incidentally that was a regatta where we all spent a lot of tine out of the water but mostly going to windward off the top of waves!) Landy and Mischa were in a class of their own in that regatta. Downwind Mischa in his usual style sailed hot and hard on the wire in the very rough conditions. Landy often reverted to sailing low and by the lee. They often arrived at the bottom mark at the same time. Just both sailing cleverly to their strengths. 

Secondly I aim to beat Landy when we are both in nursing homes playing paper boat races while enjoying a nice cup of tea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ita 16 said:

Landi use or not rudders with foils ? 

Winglets of course. I doubt anyone serious about sailing a Worlds in the last five or six years would sail without. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WetnWild said:

Winglets of course. I doubt anyone serious about sailing a Worlds in the last five or six years would sail without. 

I remember tha Winglets arent legal in A cat Classic Association  in Italy and France , this because the boat can not fly without winglets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ita 16 said:

I remember tha Winglets arent legal in A cat Classic Association  in Italy and France , this because the boat can not fly without winglets. 

Now that really is ironic. They ban the best feature to have been introduced into A Class sailing this century to make the boats better to sail :unsure: Forget foiling for a moment. Rudder winglets transformed the A, making it safer and faster because it reduced the chances of pitchpoling. It's also wrong that a boat cannot fly without winglets. The Nacra 17 boys managed it with the old C foils. It just makes it harder and it means that those with better skills have even more of an advantage.

I fully support the classic division but not the Classic Association. For all the concerns about boats flying, I think it will police itself and that it will be clear cut when somebody is breaking the rule and when they are not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but the problem is that your premise is wrong. You are implying that before the non foiling division, C foil boats didn't foil as well/ foiled worse/were less stable. than they are now. That is not correct. Before the J and Z foils, there were some people foiling reasonably on C foils, like we are now seeing, and that it was their efforts that were one factor in the development of the foilers we now have. I particularly remember Landy sailing in from racing at the Wangi nationals in 2012 and he foiled for about 400 metres. I don't believe we are seeing anything new. The other factor is that while the C foil boats and their ability haven't changed very much, what has changed is the understanding of foiling, so when Landy jumps on his new C foil boat, he can foil it even better than he did back in the day. If you put him in his 2012 Scheurer, I bet he would foil just about as well as he is now.

The other thing that stands out to me is that the C board era was relatively short and mot never learnt to sail those boats to their maximum. Only a few people were trapezing downwind pushing as hard as they could as most still believed that sitting in, going wild and deep was the answer. There was really only 1 world championship (Islamorada) where the top guys were pushing downwind that hard before the foiling age. Before then, we had only seen occasional downwind trapezing from the likes of Glenn Ashby but not to the extent that was to follow.

Overall, the big change is in the sailors rather than the boats.

Surely the irony is that it took the creation of a non foiling division to highlight to a wider audience the foiling potential of C foilers, a potential that was always there and which some knew about. The other irony is that the creation of a non foiling division has created a problem that didn't exist of how to ensure C boards don't foil. The intention was to create a level playing field for a different type of sailing and what it has done is created just as wide a difference as we see on foilers.

Maybe we are arguing the same things. I am trying to get the history right, because I place some importance on that. Knowing how we got to where we are today might help us decide where we want to go from here. From that viewpoint, focusing on the boat seems wrong. It is really about the sailors. If you want to control this, limit what the sailors can do. If there is a concern that the current rule is open to abuse, how about a rule that you cannot trapeze downwind after you pass the wing mark. That would be the biggest leveller of the lot. I know that has practical problems, such as what happens if you overstand the lay line to the bottom mark or there is a wind shift, but it would tighten up the racing. Bring in that rule and WnW would give Landy a run for his money.

You certainly are reading a lot more into my post than is either stated or implied. And I don't agree with your opinion that C foilers are no more stable than they used to be. the measure is not whether there used to be times of stable foiling, but the ease of doing so and extent of loss of control, there has been a substantial improvement in this area. Mostly but not entirely due to advances in winglets and the ability to easily alter rake while sailing. 

Also you might not go back this far, but trapping down wind started to became common around 08/09. I first saw Ashby do it in a nationals at Belmont where in some races he was a lap ahead of everyone. most near the front of the fleet at least followed pretty quickly, but with varying success. This was well before C boards came along. 

As to whether the rule is open to abuse, I frankly don't care as long as the class stays strong which I don't see as a problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

Now that really is ironic. They ban the best feature to have been introduced into A Class sailing this century to make the boats better to sail :unsure: Forget foiling for a moment. Rudder winglets transformed the A, making it safer and faster because it reduced the chances of pitchpoling. It's also wrong that a boat cannot fly without winglets. The Nacra 17 boys managed it with the old C foils. It just makes it harder and it means that those with better skills have even more of an advantage.

I fully support the classic division but not the Classic Association. For all the concerns about boats flying, I think it will police itself and that it will be clear cut when somebody is breaking the rule and when they are not. 

Au contraire ACS. I agree with ITA16 on this. I’m currently well advanced with a proposal to establish a Vintage discipline within the A Class. It would be perfect for a dodery old codger like myself. I’ve had discussions with the Technical Committee Whisperer (TCW) who was the architect of the smarty pants Classic discipline. I’ve found Classics to be too technologically advanced and have purchased a proper Vintage boat. Sturdy alloy beams, boom and crossbar, as well as decent low profile centreboards make me beam with pride. No tricky winglets to gather weed and make it hard to sail to and from a beach. The centreboards are perfectly straight and fit nicely in my 1982 trailerbox. Australian Sailing (AS) agree with me and have provided a nice comfortable yardstick allowing me to beat those pesky foiling thingys on a regular basis. Life is good. 

The only problem I see is getting someone to build these things again. With BIM closing down who would rise to the challenge?  Perhaps I could approach DNA to produce a new model. We could call it the DNA F1x -. 

Now all I need to do is get ACS, ITA16, TCW, AS, BIM, and DNA all on the same page. 

Singapore summit anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WetnWild said:

Au contraire ACS. I agree with ITA16 on this. I’m currently well advanced with a proposal to establish a Vintage discipline within the A Class. It would be perfect for a dodery old codger like myself. I’ve had discussions with the Technical Committee Whisperer (TCW) who was the architect of the smarty pants Classic discipline. I’ve found Classics to be too technologically advanced and have purchased a proper Vintage boat. Sturdy alloy beams, boom and crossbar, as well as decent low profile centreboards make me beam with pride. No tricky winglets to gather weed and make it hard to sail to and from a beach. The centreboards are perfectly straight and fit nicely in my 1982 trailerbox. Australian Sailing (AS) agree with me and have provided a nice comfortable yardstick allowing me to beat those pesky foiling thingys on a regular basis. Life is good. 

The only problem I see is getting someone to build these things again. With BIM closing down who would rise to the challenge?  Perhaps I could approach DNA to produce a new model. We could call it the DNA F1x -. 

Now all I need to do is get ACS, ITA16, TCW, AS, BIM, and DNA all on the same page. 

Singapore summit anyone?

Now you're talking sense WNW!

I could track down my old Mk III with its carbon stick and go back to the best sailing I've ever had.

BTW how does an unmolested C-board DNA compare to a new Exploder Classic speed wise?  The possibility of racing a Classic for sheep stations and having a crack at foiling when I feel like a swim is becoming more and more appealing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Phat Buoy said:

Now you're talking sense WNW!

I could track down my old Mk III with its carbon stick and go back to the best sailing I've ever had.

BTW how does an unmolested C-board DNA compare to a new Exploder Classic speed wise?  The possibility of racing a Classic for sheep stations and having a crack at foiling when I feel like a swim is becoming more and more appealing

Go for it Ffat Boy. I’ll see if they’ll bring back the reach for you too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Phat Buoy said:

BTW how does an unmolested C-board DNA compare to a new Exploder Classic speed wise?  The possibility of racing a Classic for sheep stations and having a crack at foiling when I feel like a swim is becoming more and more appealing

It's a very good question.

I suspect the biggest difference is in the sailor. Landy would be ahead of everybody with either.  I think the new boat would be faster, but the real question is what would it take to make the DNA as good. Can we assume they have like for like rigs, because the rig will make a difference and I assume if you want to compete you will get a new sail anyway. Then you need to add a system to be able to adjust centreboard rake on the go, which really shouldn't be very hard to fit as the DNA has sliders already. The "big ticket" item is new rudders. IMO, it's not so much the winglets although they are better, but the deep high aspect rudders do seem to be a step forward.

Those are just my thoughts and I look forward to seeing what happens for real. I suspect WnW will have a better perspective as he has sailed both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WetnWild said:

The only problem I see is getting someone to build these things again. With BIM closing down who would rise to the challenge?  Perhaps I could approach DNA to produce a new model. We could call it the DNA F1x -

:lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If many sailor do not like foiling but prefer classic A why use rules that allow foiling also with c boards ?.

Better make rules like UACC classic A cat . 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, A Class Sailor said:

:lol:

 

Bim was close ryght , but now the brand restart production in france , Bim France will  bourn in France in september . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 9:13 PM, ita 16 said:

If many sailor do not like foiling but prefer classic A why use rules that allow foiling also with c boards ?.

Better make rules like UACC classic A cat . 

 

WTF are you talking about. The classic division specifically bans foiling. 

At the moment, a very few people are getting worked up about the potential for people to cheat when nobody has cheated. Why don't we see how it works out before we demand that people in the classic division modify their boats, particularly as the modification suggested, the removal of rudder wings, makes them worse to sail. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ""question"" was, why have 2 different boat that they can fly both , on same class ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ita, The answer is found in the words "same class"  The advantages of keeping a single organization and keeping the community together  at the same events and on the same starting line are thought to out weigh the legal beagle rigor of two classes.   You could form an association like the IHCA which manages all of the Hobie one design classes to mitigate the forces that split the group apart.  A second factor in mitigating division was the fleet promotion structure  (C fleet, to  B Fleet and then up to A fleet) to keep their popular class together. So, even though you might start A and B fleet together.... the class ribbons on your sail indicated your competition on the race course.  Giving a boat in an other class a pass does not undermine the competition.  Following an association model like the IHCA or a two separate one design model ( two starts or a shared start)  would cause division on the race course for A class foiler and self regulated classics.  ... (basically.... the ... get out of my way... i am not racing you....   let me pass! conversation that is not fair competition within the same class)

The alternative model is the Opti class.   They have a single class and award trophies to the fleet, X deep for a fleet of upwards of 50 to 100 boats in some regions.   They also award trophies in 3 divisions set by age of birth (in the USA... Red, White, and Blue).  For A class with two divisions.. scored overall and two divisions, there is no question about the competition....all boats are competing on the same playing field and start line . So, the top three sailors walk away with an overall trophy.

The opti scoring keeps your finish position and then sorts your results into one of two divisions... Foiling and self regulated Classic.   This is just a mechanism to distribute trophies based on objective race results.... and usually published at the completion of the regatta (It delivers the message that all boats are racing in the same fleet)    If a classic sailor allows 7 foilers to pass uncontested (for whatever reason) (They choose to degrade their position of e.g.  40 to 48)  while another classic in 41st position races their entire fleet and holds off 2 of the 7 foilers.... (having their position of e.g.  41 go to 46)   they will win the Classic division.   The integrity of the competition is preserved and that is essential to the integrity of the game.

Both structures can work and they do so because they do not compromise the integrity of the competition.   IMO, the Opti approach matches the goals of the A class.  Foilers and self regulated classics are competing boat for boat on the race course..  There are no issues of giving a boat a pass "because you are not racing against them:     It helps that conditions on the race course favor one division over the other on any given day making the overall competition interesting.

IMO, the A class should have implemented this approach the day after the Takapuna (sp?) worlds.... but ok... here we are ( just too late for me)...  In addition to the rules already quoted... they should spell out the exact scoring system and trophy schedule so that the class can hand  the OA a standard set of language for the NOR that spells out the game.   I visited the local regatta on Saturday and nobody seemed to know exactly what the scoring rules were on saturday night....   (sigh)  (half assing this serves no purpose... even at the local level!!!)

Now ITa,  if you insist that a self regulating rule.  (your boat must have one hull in the water at all times) can't work.... and you insist on a technical rule set that makes this so.... the Opti solution simply won't work for you and you have to go with a straight board measurement rule and two classes as you suggest..   Simon and I argued this point about Honor and racing rules ad nauseum.   My point of view was that Corinthian sailors can HONOR the rule.... Simon's point was that Honor is not a factor here.... basically it measures in according to a set of standards or not.      I seem to remember that he argued that ISAF would not tolerate and international class rule set with an Honor the rule  standard like self regulated classic.   Does anyone know if world sailing has had to pass judgment on this class rule modification for a worlds or continental championship that is founded on Honor the classic rule of one hull in the water.???

I have to say....  

Quote

WTF are you talking about. The classic division specifically bans foiling. 

At the moment, a very few people are getting worked up about the potential for people to cheat when nobody has cheated

A Class Sailors point of wait for an issue to emerge before doing anything... is just another half assed way of managing competition and the class.    Its a reactionary position....    The same kind of feckless thinking that ran the class post takupuna.

Why not stand on the principle  Honor means HONOR....   Self police and figure out how to set your boat up properly to not foil in the conditions.  Proscribe class arbitration prior to filing a protest on this issue.  Spell out the rest of the rules... eg scoring. get it sanctioned by World sailing    QED.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tcatman said:

 

A Class Sailors point of wait for an issue to emerge before doing anything... is just another half assed way of managing competition and the class.    Its a reactionary position....    The same kind of feckless thinking that ran the class post takupuna.

Why not stand on the principle  Honor means HONOR....   Self police and figure out how to set your boat up properly to not foil in the conditions.  Proscribe class arbitration prior to filing a protest on this issue.  Spell out the rest of the rules... eg scoring. get it sanctioned by World sailing    QED.

You seem to be confused. We are saying the same thing. It is an honour system and I am suggesting we stick with that until we know it isn't working. You call for the principal of honour and that is exactly what is in place. The competitors sign the following declaration 

Quote

The discipline is built on the base of trust and ethics from the competitors involved to ensure the criterion is met and for all to enjoy fair racing in a non-foiling mode.

Competitor’s Declaration:  I declare that when racing in the classic discipline my boat whilst under my control will have at least one hull in the water at all times. 

What more do you want? It seems to me that exactly what you want is there, so we must have the same position. Let the honour system run and if there is a problem, then we need to change the rules.

The whole point with the classic rule is that people can take their existing boats and that they don't need to modify them in order to compete, while still giving those who want to the opportunity to keep developing their boats because this is not an "old boat" rule.

6 hours ago, Tcatman said:

In addition to the rules already quoted... they should spell out the exact scoring system and trophy schedule so that the class can hand  the OA a standard set of language for the NOR that spells out the game.   I visited the local regatta on Saturday and nobody seemed to know exactly what the scoring rules were on saturday night....   (sigh)  (half assing this serves no purpose... even at the local level!!!)

The world association should not prescribe language and scoring systems for local regattas. In the case of the local regatta you mention, the problem is with either the regatta organisers or the national association. To prescribe a standard language is never a good idea. many clubs run a standardised set of NOR's and SI's to ensure there is a consistency in the race organisation. Maybe a standardised set of A Class rules would work at some of your clubs, but it would stop the A's being invited to others. This is not a difficult issue Local or national class reps should be able to sort it out with clubs and need the flexibility to implement whatever suits the fleet and the club the event is being held at. It's not hard to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Acat... you are correct.... we agree on the big picture here..

We disagree on the leadership from the world association.   I would reference the IHCA which published and distributed an official set of rules at every local run hobie regatta run throughout the USA.    There is great value in standardization....  If the local OA wanted to make changes... they just posted a change notice (usually about marks).  The IHCA made a point that the standard rules established expectations  for a Points regatta and a sailor could just show up without having to figure out a quirky idiosyncratic attempt by the PRO who is running his first regatta in years using the same paperwork they had 4 years ago.

Mind you...  as a US sailor... I suffered trying to wrap my head around such things as the A class Intergalactic division along the way.

Quote

This is not a difficult issue Local or national class reps should be able to sort it out with clubs and need the flexibility to implement whatever suits the fleet and the club the event is being held at. It's not hard to do.

and yet... it seems to not be standardized.  ....   It seems that  A class sailors don't spend a lot time on this organization and race management / competition thing.  

You highlighted the problem.... Somebody... (national, local, club, or a Pissed off asshole sailor)  should do it... and of course... that means nobody..

based on one's interpretation of the class guidelines... .   an OA could simply run two classes sharing a start line....Or run two classes and two starts. ... or run one class with scoring divisions.  Again... you need a published consensus for the fleet as well as the OA.

My solution... Write up the basic NOR and SI's,  get the IHCA stamp of approval and allow that "Somebody" to forward the text for inclusion in the race documents.... I assume that they can forward an attachment...  The happy result is that it creates an expectation of what to expect at the regatta and make it easy for the OA to meet the needs of the class they invite.  Much easier to warn an OA that changes may have unintended consequences.. so  think any changes through....... Take our guidelines and write a NOR and SIs. is extra work for no reason.

Last point on expectations...  I was always besieged by the larger (stature)  A class sailors who got Pissed off... when the breeze came up.. and a large chunk of the  fleet chose to DNS and  so the Race Committee runs a token heavy air race  for a fraction of the fleet and comes in off the water.   They want me to do something...  especially when the published scoring system decided to score DNS's as finishers plus one... not Entrants plus one.  OOPS!   Again... its much cleaner if the expectations for wind ranges, number of races, scoring, divisions,  etc etc are down in writing and reinforced by the class  fleet captain of the day.   Nothing has to be binding... just a coherent rule set that works together and serves as guidance!

YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Tcatman said:

You highlighted the problem.... Somebody... (national, local, club, or a Pissed off asshole sailor)  should do it... and of course... that means nobody..

based on one's interpretation of the class guidelines... .   an OA could simply run two classes sharing a start line....Or run two classes and two starts. ... or run one class with scoring divisions.  Again... you need a published consensus for the fleet as well as the OA.

You keep asking for standardisation when there is no one solution fits all. Each example you give is valid under certain circumstances. What you are saying is that local or national association officials (in the USA?) are unable to sort this out themselves, even though this is what we do in Australia with no problems and I am pretty sure most other countries have no issue either.. 

1 hour ago, Tcatman said:

Last point on expectations...  I was always besieged by the larger (stature)  A class sailors who got Pissed off... when the breeze came up.. and a large chunk of the  fleet chose to DNS and  so the Race Committee runs a token heavy air race  for a fraction of the fleet and comes in off the water.   They want me to do something...  especially when the published scoring system decided to score DNS's as finishers plus one... not Entrants plus one.  OOPS!   Again... its much cleaner if the expectations for wind ranges, number of races, scoring, divisions,  etc etc are down in writing and reinforced by the class  fleet captain of the day.   Nothing has to be binding... just a coherent rule set that works together and serves as guidance!

There is a very clear guidelines from the international association on wind limits. If those wind limits aren't in your NOR or SI, don't blame the international association. If the wind is within the limit, racing takes place. If the wind is above or below the limit, it does not. As for scoring, divisions and number of races, I don't think I have ever been to an A Class event in Australia where those aren't specified. If it isn't happening where you are, don't blame the association. Blame the individuals whose job it is to do these things. If the organisers deviate in the scoring from Appendix A, why wasn't it pickled up on before racing even began? Again, it is somebody not doing their job. These are basic things that need to be done and if you cannot write and/or read through a NOR or SI to check they are OK, you really shouldn't be organising an event. The class has a very good set of championship rules which act as a starting point.

I really find it extraordinary that you are demanding such a level of class association prescription. It says there is something very broken in the USA if events are that far off course in their organisation and there is nobody in the national association capable of keeping an eye on it. We certainly don't need that level of interference here in Australia and i suspect the same is so in most countries. I do not hear a constant outcry about these problems. I suspect the situation is rather different from what you are describing, or else why isn't there a big outcry from the US sailors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said.....   the US  created the intergalactic class at the national level.    I found real value in the International Hobie  Class association way of running things and made the case.  Obviously different then your way.   Anyway... the US foolishness wore me out... the regatta scheduled dropped to three regional events and my patience for half assed organization is minimal these days.... too many other boats to sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this