Jump to content

Lasers - Applying a Blow Torch


Recommended Posts

Who said it's acceptable? It's crap. Always has been, no matter who's in charge.

 

Problem is that we don't elect the World Council - not directly. Each District elects a District committee. Then the District committee chairs elect a regional chair who becomes the World Council rep. The World Council reps then elect the President, etc. The sailors don't get to choose who is on the WC. We don't choose our own representatives. And they don't ask us what we think.

 

Odd thing is that the Constitution allows the WC to appoint any additional members that it wishes to. For example, the ILCA VP, Hugh Leicester, is a World Council appointment - the sailors didn't elect him, even indirectly. The WC themselves did. This isn't a criticism of Hugh, I barely know the guy. But the system sucks.

 

Imagine how different it would be if there were at least a couple of popularly elected WC members? You'd end up with people keen to engage with the sailors, that's for sure.

 

The system is set up to maintain the power in the hands of those who already have it. And the system gets to choose who has that power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When are they going to make a decision? I need to know whether I should be training in my RS Aero or my Laser for Paris 2024.     

@WCB  i seriously doubt there is a soul contributing to this thread who honestly disagrees with my perceptions or the reasoning behind my effort to establish an AERO fleet in Texas and at my home

That is one version of the story but there are other views. Today, many years later, who seems intent on controlling what happens to money that does not belong to them and attacking those elected by

Posted Images

Stop complaining.

The Laser and the Hobie are the original international SMOD classes.

They were set up by the manufactures to sell product, and running an association and sailing races is a means to that end. They keep control of everything. Giving the sailors limited influence just encourages them to sail the class and buy more product. Giving them too much power might errode their bottom line. Just accept that you will be kept in the dark, especially now, when the two manufacturers are not even talking to each other.

If you choose to sail a SMOD thats the way the game plays, (or at least until the factory changes its plan and moves its objectives elsewhere.)

And if one day they do move on (or send each other broke with legal fees), at least you all have a few hundred thousand Lasers to continue playing with, so its not all bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what if all this is academic as for sure the laser will drop out of the olympics as it looks stone-age and there are plenty of modern boats ready to replace it.

It will remain a great boat to sail like, Soling, Star etc but not inspiring for young sailors nor sponsors.

Dacron handkerchief ( that cost same as a windsurfer sail) belongs on an Opti

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gantt, let's just say I have a well placed source and leave it at that.

 

Not trying to mysterious, just that I'm probably breaching a trust by sharing the information. But the culture of secrecy embedded at the ILCA really pisses me off, so whatever.

 

I imagine announcements aren't far away, maybe waiting until after the WC meeting, and I've already seen a trickle of news from other feeds. Ask your local ILCA kingpin, see what they say.

What about the carbon top section? Same deal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with any membership asking it's organization questions, and yes, sometimes those questions are going to be tough. The right thing to do for that organization is to provide answers to legitimate questions. An organization that fails to do this, is not serving it's members.

 

With SMODs, the owner associations are usually entirely at the mercy of a single boat builder just as Phil S said. For the Laser, that may have been true if it were not for the designer, Bruce Kirby had set up the system of contracts the way he did. What it means is that the Laser builders were able to build Lasers only with a contract that was signed between the builder and the designer, plus Kirby formally gave powers to the ILCA through the ISAF agreement, by formally recognizing the ISAF agreement in the builder's contracts. It's clear that the original vision was to have multiple builders around the world, and part of that vision was to give those builder's the ownership of the Laser Trademark in the regions they operated. For new markets, what would happen is that Bruce Kirby would appoint the new builder, the trademark would be registered in that region. For many years this was successful, with builders appointed in North America, Europe, Oceania and Japan (Japan and South Korea). In recent years, the North American and European builders were acquired by the same owner, meaning this single owner owned the majority of the world's market share. This same owner registered the Laser trademark outside it's area, in Asia, prior to the 2008 Bejing Olympics, thwarting the way that builders had been traditionally appointed. It's clear that Laser Performance have been aggressive and at times difficult to deal with. Check out the number of times the ILCA NA minutes document Laser Performance's Bill Crane being difficult to deal with regarding sponsorship. That in itself is an issue, the conclusion is that Bill Crane has not been responsive nor clear with the ILCA-NA on the matter of sponsorship, which is pretty simple and important to the ILCA-NA. And Bill Crane sits on the World Council on the advisory council for Laser Performance. Sorry Bill, you have a poor track record.

 

Without the builder's contracts, or the ISAF agreement, I'm unsure what binds the parties together other than the desire to have consistency in the construction of the Laser. It does not address the issue of having an Asian builder, which is long overdue. If the contracts are not found to be legal, this contractual issue will need to be formally dealt with. Also what needs dealing with is what Bruce Kirby raised now several years back in his words, "estate planning". In this period there needs to be a road map for the future.

 

Aside from the structural and formal relationship issues, the ILCA World Council has become one that does not communicate with it's membership effectively which was highlighted by the fundamental rule change and issues surrounding it. It's difficult to talk about this, without talking directly about Tracy Usher. (Tracy is an active Laser sailor who among other things has been one of the main proponents of the new sail, I can recall he was involved with it back in 2011, and is obviously still involved with it. I believe Tracy to be good for the ILCA, that he is working tirelessly behind the scenes to make improvements to the Laser class and it's World Council. That being said, I don't believe things go entirely his way, and if Redstar is correct and the new sail is 25% more expensive than the old, then that is an excellent example.)

 

Prior to becoming President, and as President of the ILCA-NA, Tracy attempted to answer questions on behalf the ILCA World Council to fill an information void. The fundamental rule change was mishandled, mistakes were made and many questions were left unanswered by the ILCA World Council. A lot of Laser sailors became aware of at that time a political struggle, both with the builders Laser Performance, Performance Sailcraft and designer Bruce Kirby, though also internally within the ILCA WC with an obvious and public disconnect between Jeff Martin and the then President Heini Wellmann and the membership. I recall that Tracy communicated his best recollection of what Heini had said at a meeting. I believe that Heini did release some information, but it failed to address many questions of the time. The UKLA advised it's members not to rush into voting because of the confusion. Throughout all of this, we did not hear from Jeff Martin in spite of him being a central figure in this issue.

 

Bottom line is that I believe internal struggles within the ILCA's World Council may be a big factor in the lack of communication.

 

I believe that Tracy is naturally one who likes to communicate, the legal action can explain some reluctance to communicate on some things, however does not explain fully how little he has communicated since becoming ILCA president.

 

Here's the part from the ILCA constitution concerning the World Council:

 

 

World Council

6. (1) The Association shall be governed by the World Council comprised of the Chairman of each Regional Executive Committee from time to time holding office, the immediate Past President of the World Council, the Executive Secretary, the two appointed members of the Advisory Council, and such additional officers to be appointed by the Council for such term as it may from time to time determine. Each officer shall be a member of the Association.

 

(2) The World Council shall meet not less frequently than once per year and the first meeting shall take place within two months of the election of the Regional Chairmen. The time and location of meetings shall, if possible, coincide with the holding of a world or a regional championship meet.

 

(3) The World Council shall elect from amongst themselves, the President and Vice-President of the Association who shall hold office until their successors are elected to office; and the World Council may appoint Honorary Commodores from time to time as they shall see fit.

 

(4) The Executive Secretary shall be appointed by the elected members of the World Council and shall hold office for such term and upon such conditions as the World Council shall decide. He shall be situated at the Head Office of the Association and shall be responsible for the management of all business of the Association, subject to and in accordance with the Constitution, By-Laws and the direction of the World Council, including

( a ) the co-ordination of all inter-regional activities,

( b ) the organisation of all activities relating to World Championships,

( c ) liaison between the Association, the ISAF and all other yachting authorities, and

( d ) liaison between the membership and the Chief Measurer.

 

(5) The World Council shall appoint, for such term as it shall decide, a Chief Measurer for the Association who shall rule on all questions and challenges relating to the Rules, and shall issue Interpretations thereof deemed necessary by him. All such Interpretations shall be binding until approved, rejected, or modified by decision of the World Council, duly published to the members of the Association.

 

(Source = http://www.laserinternational.org/sites/default/files/Constitution.pdf)

 

By having 'Honorary Commodores' directly elected onto the World Council as Redstar suggests may be constitutionally possible (if it's the World Council's will), and may even be a good thing to do as it may however give Laser sailors a stronger voice where it counts.

 

But, it would not in itself fix all the issues that the ILCA World Council has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So November 1st, huh? Nothing personal, but we've heard this before. I'll believe it when I see it. If it does happen, please come back on November 2nd to gloat.

 

Don't worry, I share your scepticism. All I know is that people in a position to know about these things say it's done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

What about the carbon top section? Same deal?

 

 

Not sure, I haven't heard. I hope it's coming at the same time, but no word yet.

 

sound like repeating B14 history,

a Byte comes in 2 versions

surely not a carbon top with a dacron sail?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So November 1st, huh? Nothing personal, but we've heard this before. I'll believe it when I see it. If it does happen, please come back on November 2nd to gloat.

 

Don't worry, I share your scepticism. All I know is that people in a position to know about these things say it's done.

 

OK, will be serious for a moment. Heard same rumor from someone who is more likely than me to know.

 

View it as a positive sign on multiple fronts if true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What about the carbon top section? Same deal?

 

Not sure, I haven't heard. I hope it's coming at the same time, but no word yet.

sound like repeating B14 history,

a Byte comes in 2 versions

surely not a carbon top with a dacron sail?

Actually composite rather than carbon. Not intended as a performance improvement but a way of avoiding the existing problems with masts bending and breaking. Bend characteristics, weight etc are identical to the aluminium, just better longevity. We hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will it be more expensive?

 

Seems likely, if it's made of composite materials. I've broken three, a ruined a brand new sail once (while doing well in an ILCA official event long ago), the other times it was on older sails. There's a part of me that hopes it isn't, but another part of me that doesn't care and will get one anyway - assuming I'm still sailing Lasers which isn't a given.

 

Thank you Redstar for the updates!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Will it be more expensive?

 

Seems likely, if it's made of composite materials. I've broken three, a ruined a brand new sail once (while doing well in an ILCA official event long ago), the other times it was on older sails. There's a part of me that hopes it isn't, but another part of me that doesn't care and will get one anyway - assuming I'm still sailing Lasers which isn't a given.

 

Thank you Redstar for the updates!

 

Wow! It's been decades since I raced lasers, but in the (approximately) 10 years that I was active, I don't think that I saw a single broken top section. Clearly, the manufacturing techniques or materials used have changed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Will it be more expensive?

 

Seems likely, if it's made of composite materials. I've broken three, a ruined a brand new sail once (while doing well in an ILCA official event long ago), the other times it was on older sails. There's a part of me that hopes it isn't, but another part of me that doesn't care and will get one anyway - assuming I'm still sailing Lasers which isn't a given.

 

Thank you Redstar for the updates!

 

Wow! It's been decades since I raced lasers, but in the (approximately) 10 years that I was active, I don't think that I saw a single broken top section. Clearly, the manufacturing techniques or materials used have changed.

 

The main reason for the top sections breaking is because of the new vang and two block sailing techniques that are now being used. When I was racing Lasers in the 70s like you were, you simply couldn't put enough stress on the rig to do much to it. It was a beach boat but - for those days - it was fun, cheap and fleets built quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow! It's been decades since I raced lasers, but in the (approximately) 10 years that I was active, I don't think that I saw a single broken top section. Clearly, the manufacturing techniques or materials used have changed.

 

I think the top sections are much the same now as when I started racing Lasers in 1983.

 

The main reason for the top sections breaking is because of the new vang and two block sailing techniques that are now being used. When I was racing Lasers in the 70s like you were, you simply couldn't put enough stress on the rig to do much to it. It was a beach boat but - for those days - it was fun, cheap and fleets built quickly.

Wow! It's been decades since I raced lasers, but in the (approximately) 10 years that I was active, I don't think that I saw a single broken top section. Clearly, the manufacturing techniques or materials used have changed.

 

Funny thing is that all three that I broke was prior to the new vang system. The second one I broke was a brand new top section in 1985. I had too much vang on in about 20 knots, using the 'bounce' technique. It had jammed, couldn't release at the top mark after two attempts, so decided to just keep sailing. Bad move. It broke when I jibed.

 

I became more skillful at detecting stressed alloy, replacing them or putting the collar on the other end of older top sections. Also being gentle on them on the race course without sacrificing too much speed. Couldn't tell you how many I've seen break over the years - it's been a lot. Last one I saw break was 2012, though have done less sailing in 2014 and 2015.

 

I'm 100% in favor of the new vang system. In 1987 I had corrective surgery to my right shoulder which I had dislocated and stretched the tendons using the 'bounce' technique and have met others who had the same surgery for the same reason.

 

Motions hearing is just 5 days away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the long term strategy of the class is to shift from a cheap and cheerful beach boat that sold so many that folk couldn't help but race against each other, to an expensive, out dated shitbox?

Right on.

 

 

 

The vote for the new rigging was a scam. With the old system, it was almost impossible to break top sections unless you went beyond block to block.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rigging was pretty much outdated in 1969.

I do like the new rigging controls having owned an old style Laser in the seventies and a new one. I wouldn't want to go back unless I could also be young again. But the new sail and top section are long overdue. Classes have to evolve or they get left behind.

 

I bought a new RS Aero and it is so much nicer to sail than a Laser. There is no fleet in Vancouver but quite a few in Seattle now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the new kicker system, the bounce technique was a lot harder on the top sections. You would deliberately put too much kicker on, then let it off to suit. Bent a lot of top sections back then. My impression is that the new kicker is far kinder on the top sections.

 

 

6. Using one collar rivet rather than two and aligning that rivet to the side further decreases mast failure

 

The last top section I broke (in the early 1990s), it tore where the rivet was, I had been placing the rivet at the side. When I came in, I recall several of the guys saying that they have the rivet at the back, so it is always under compression which made sense to me. So that's what I did and I have not broken one since.

 

Also:

  • If the top section is bent for the first time, then I straighten it, remove the plugs, and 'end for end' it.
  • The second time I bent the top section, I simply replaced it.
  • Always used alloy rivets, replaced a couple of times per season - no electrolysis issues.
  • Always had a spare top section, so I could replace immediately (though haven't bothered in recent years).

My advice to all is to have the rivet at the back, when rigging, to line it up with the gooseneck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8. High speed downwind capsizes to weather destroy masts period. ) if you slam dunk you may break your mast or at least harm it in a manner that causes eventual failure.

I had my share of high-speed downwind capsizes to weather. Never once broke or bent a top section and I don't recall seeing a broken or bent top section, while racing in one of the larger fleets in the UK. Perhaps the top sections that were sold in the USA were not built to the same specs? Doesn't sound very believable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8. High speed downwind capsizes to weather destroy masts period. ) if you slam dunk you may break your mast or at least harm it in a manner that causes eventual failure.

I had my share of high-speed downwind capsizes to weather. Never once broke or bent a top section and I don't recall seeing a broken or bent top section, while racing in one of the larger fleets in the UK. Perhaps the top sections that were sold in the USA were not built to the same specs? Doesn't sound very believable.

 

Can't say that I've noticed differences between NZ/Australia and the US top sections, though I have noticed the plastic bits are white in NZ/Australia, and black in the US.

 

One difference I've noticed between sailing in NZ/Australia is that races are sailed in windier conditions, with races held in 25+ knots, whereas in the US they cancel earlier. Maybe that's a factor with the broken top sections.

 

Or maybe Gouv's engineer friends are right and it's the side versus the back. (I'm not an engineer either).

 

(Interesting capsize technique Gouv, makes sense).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will agree with you on this one Gantt. Word on the street that I always heard was rivet in back aligned with gooseneck.

 

Not convinced its the new rigging or super-vanging or block to block techniques that is causing the top section breakages we see today.

 

I have an older top section (like 169 series old) and have never had an issue and same is true for bunch of the older guys in our fleet with older boats. All of us have the upgraded rigging, sail block to block, and have had many (too many) down wind high speed capsizes to weather. And still our top sections keep going strong (just jinxed myself for sure).

 

On the other hand a kid in the fleet who is lighter than us old farts, and sailed in exact same conditions, busted 2 or 3 top sections in last winters frostbite series (without capsizing) and one more this summer I am told.

 

Might not be true but just seems like the newer top sections break much easier than the old ones.

 


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8. High speed downwind capsizes to weather destroy masts period. ) if you slam dunk you may break your mast or at least harm it in a manner that causes eventual failure.

I had my share of high-speed downwind capsizes to weather. Never once broke or bent a top section and I don't recall seeing a broken or bent top section, while racing in one of the larger fleets in the UK. Perhaps the top sections that were sold in the USA were not built to the same specs? Doesn't sound very believable.

 

 

There have been issues with top sections sold in the UK recently (last 2-3 years) with them bending very easily.

 

On my older boat I never had an issue, perhaps a different spec of tube is being used?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They should put a sleeve in the topmast and a sleeve in the bottom section as well while the're at it....

 

https://youtu.be/gmC2UyCQJO8

 

E

Nice video Emilio. Bottom section breakages are comparatively rate I think. Seen a few, possibly about six in 30 years. Whereas I cannot ever recall a season go by when I was racing regularly that several top sections have broken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email below received from PSA this morning...

 

 

THE NEW LASER STD SAIL IS COMING ! Pre order the all new radial cut STD Laser sail now.

Officially launching on November 1st 2015 and class legal for all AUS regattas except for Sail Melbourne World Cup.

PSA and its dealers are taking pre orders now so get in quick to make sure you are one of the first.

Initial stock will be arriving in the coming weeks and numbers will be limited.

All new STD Laser packages will come with the new sail included.

Click the link to pre order your sail today or contact your local dealer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the PSA email too. I clicked the PreOrder link and the price is $990 !!!!!!! I couldn't find any monetary exchange rate info - but if that is in USD, that's a freaking ridiculous price! I can buy 4-5 Intensity "practice" sails for the same money and have plenty of fun on my local pond. And… given the breathtaking absence of a "local dealer" in my part of the world, I didn't bother to inquire about shipping the damn thing half way around the globe from PSA down under.

 

Makes a guy wonder how much of that $990 is going into ILCA's slush fund…

 

Suffice to say, the 3 Lasers in our household won't be jumping on the new sail band wagon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fairly gobsmacked they feel they can make a change of this scale without putting it to the membership.

 

I seem to recall that some equipment changes can just be bought in by the builder/rights holder(s)/ILCA. As there is no need to update the class rules for this change there was no requirement for a class vote (the sail is still 'builder supplied' and is a like for like replacement).

 

The new sail controls required a class vote because several of the class rules had to be amended.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have missed this amongst all the noise, but who does approve these changes? Surely the builders have to all agree to it at the very least? And the ILCA? And, subject to legal proceedings, BK? And ISAF?

 

 

Have Rastegar and the Aussies reached concensus on this? Who has the IP on the new kit?

 

 

I can see that in any sensible world you wouldn't NEED the owners club to approve the change, but it sure would be sensible to consult rather than dump this on them. But then the ILCA is no ordinary owners club.

 

 

Can RS afford to run a scheme upgrading your Laser to an Aero for $1500?

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the relevant parties to the contract(s) need to agree so the builders and rights holders. I believe ILCA had a hand in developing the new sail (certainly Tracey Usher had been testing one for an extended period of time) but ultimately I would guess it was funded by the builders.

 

Anyone know if the sail is covered by the infamous construction manual?

 

ILCA need to agree to some changes too but ultimately have no veto IIRC (think Supernova and the change to epoxy, the builder who also holds the design rights dictated this to the class despite it creating a 2 tier class. In that case though the builder has offered an attractive buy back package).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fairly gobsmacked they feel they can make a change of this scale without putting it to the membership.

 

$1000 for a sail? Oh, they're putting to the membership all right.

 

I may have missed this amongst all the noise, but who does approve these changes? Surely the builders have to all agree to it at the very least? And the ILCA? And, subject to legal proceedings, BK? And ISAF?

 

 

Have Rastegar and the Aussies reached concensus on this? Who has the IP on the new kit?

 

 

I can see that in any sensible world you wouldn't NEED the owners club to approve the change, but it sure would be sensible to consult rather than dump this on them. But then the ILCA is no ordinary owners club.

 

 

Can RS afford to run a scheme upgrading your Laser to an Aero for $1500?

 

The World Council would be the approving party.

 

http://www.laserinternational.org/contact/worldcouncil

 

Supposedly the change has been held up for years because one builder wouldn't agree. As to which builder, the story has changed often.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't fully get it.

 

The WC seems to be made up of eight owners representatives (or at least people who do not make money from each boat sold) and one person from each of the two builders. There seems to be the potential for the Laser product to be altered by people who have no commercial interest in selling them. Surely the builder(s) should ultimately be the sole determinant of what their product looks like?

 

And why is BK not on (or looking to be on) the World Council? Even if the rights that he thinks he has are enforcable, he would still have more control if he had a (permanent) position on the council.

 

Does the launch of the new sail/mast mean that there is some movement in the law case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ILCA need to agree to some changes too but ultimately have no veto IIRC (think Supernova and the change to epoxy, the builder who also holds the design rights dictated this to the class despite it creating a 2 tier class. In that case though the builder has offered an attractive buy back package).

 

I worked on rule changes for a SMOD class association for a few years. The holder of the class rules ultimately decides, which in this case is ISAF. IME class rule holders are reluctant to make changes without a consensus e.g. builder, class association and rule holders technical committee all agree. Yes the builder has a lot of power, a SMOD class is a bit stuffed without a builder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So ISAF ultimately get to dictate what a Laser is (in terms of design and construction)? I can't think of many industries where the designer/builder/supplier/design rights holder/whatever hands over control of their product like that to a third party.

 

The problem is the whole thing is so fragmented that the builder doesn't have *enough* power. If Henry Ford had let the Detroit mayor control updates to the Model T, it would never have been the success it was.

 

A SMOD class association is a fan club, and its members are just like 1D/Beiber/Swift fans. They get to be entertained by parting with money. Nothing wrong with that, that's capitalist society. But they don't get to write the next song. You might consult them (possibly, for a gimmick) but you don't give them power. If they don't like the new album, they buy something else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My best attempt to provide some answers etc to the above.

  • $990 is in Australian dollars. (That's US$702 at the current exchange rate)
  • There is a patent held by the ILCA for this sail (from a reliable source - I have not verified this)
  • The ISAF did not have any input into the new sail design, this is 100% the decision of the members of the ILCA World Council
  • The ILCA have increased their 'tariff' to cover the cost of the getting the patent. I don't know how much they get.
  • The only change relating to Kirby's legal action that affected this was that PSA is no longer involved with the action, with LP's counterclaim against PSA being quashed. PSA previously stated that they could not approve the new sail while they had a legal case pending, following their legal advice.
  • PSA were a big part of proposing and original design of the new sail - my understanding is that they commissioned the design with the ILCA World Council's full knowledge about 6 years ago.

With regards to Laser Performance and Performance Sailcraft Australia reaching consensus, yes they have - though my take is that PSA are no longer standing in the way. Also, given Tracy Usher's previous statements, it's fair to say he has had to make compromises on cost and on the distribution improvements that he wanted (I can see no change to the distribution model).

 

The distribution model is: Sail maker --> Builders --> Retailers --> Sailors, with builders also selling direct.

 

I'd estimate that there will be about 6000 of these sails made per year for the first year, assuming that they will be the standard sail shipped with new boats. Remember that not all boats are shipped with standard sails, and some fleet purchases (colleges etc) are not shipped with sails at all, with some fleets electing to purchase 'practice sails' independently to reduce costs. My figure assumes there is limited market resistance based on price. My estimated figure of 6000 for the first year is intended to be a low estimate, and is less than the current numbers sold. Laser Performance have yet to announce the new sail, though sell a 'training sail' which is possibly the same design for US$375. They list the current standard sail for US$565 and if the 25% increase in cost is true, that will make the new sail cost US$706 (they may round down to $695 - I would).

 

If in any way the new sail is perceived to be better performing than the old one, more will be sold (and visa versa). I say this knowing the intention is that they perform the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So ISAF ultimately get to dictate what a Laser is.

 

That's pretty much the opposite of what I said, which was that the class rules holder (ISAF in this case) ultimately decides but IME only makes changes when all parties agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Laser Class Announces New Sail Design

 

The all new Standard Mark II Laser sail available on 1 November
9 September 2015
The International Laser Class Association (ILCA) is pleased to announce the release of a completely new class-legal design for the Laser standard rig sail. The release marks the first time in over 40 years that the Laser sail design has been substantially updated.
Known as the Standard Mark II Sail, the new patented design is the result of thousands of hours of design work and on-the-water testing involving the Laser builders, the Association, two major sailmakers and some of the world’s top sailors.
The Mark II features bi-radial panels, a heavier 4.5 ounce cloth and optimized reinforcement patches, all intended to maximize the sail’s competitive life. The sail also features tapered battens with Velcro batten pocket closures, a larger window for improved visibility and a patented re-designed luff tube to eliminate wrinkles at the mast joint.
“This is a quantum leap forward for our class,” says ILCA President, Tracy Usher. “For several years the number one complaint about the Laser has been the outdated sail design. We’ve put a lot of time and effort into this new sail design and we’re really happy with the result.”
As with all changes to the Laser, the new sail has been carefully designed to be backwards compatible with the existing equipment, meaning it was not designed to provide improved performance. Instead, the Mark II promises improved durability and ease of use.
According to ILCA Technical Officer, Clive Humphris, “The main objective of the design project for the Mark II was to create a sail with equal performance to the existing sail, but with better durability. We worked very hard to ensure that the Mark II was not a faster sail and wouldn’t make all the existing sails obsolete overnight. The original Laser standard sail will continue to be available through authorized Laser dealers and we fully expect to see the two designs racing side-by-side for a number of years.”
The initial run of class-legal Mark II sails will be available starting 1 November 2015, with worldwide availability by early 2016. Because of the timing of the release, by agreement with International Sailing Federation (ISAF) the Mark II will not be used in the 2016 Olympic Games or any Olympic country qualifying events for 2015 or 2016.
The use of the sail will be controlled by the Notice of Race for each event until after the 2016 games. After that time, the Mark II will be allowed in all ILCA sanctioned regattas along with the original standard rig sail.
“Because many of the Olympic qualifying events have already occurred, we’ve agreed with ISAF that we shouldn’t make any major changes to the equipment for the 2016 games at this time,” says Usher. “Our goal is to have the Mark II sail available worldwide for the start of the next quadrennium (four year period), leading up to the 2020 games in Tokyo.”
In coordination with ISAF and the Laser Builders, ILCA will make further announcements about the availability of the Mark II sail and its use at events over the coming months.

 

image001

image002

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So ISAF ultimately get to dictate what a Laser is.

That's pretty much the opposite of what I said, which was that the class rules holder (ISAF in this case) ultimately decides but IME only makes changes when all parties agree.

 

 

But none-the-less they can, in principal, force through changes against the will of the builders and those who have paid to own certain rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....^^...nice looking piece of kit!

 

I remember when the sail changed from 3.2 to 3.8oz or whatever it is,was. The shape and firmness made the sail feel more like a finn sail,, actually having adjustable shape.

 

Methinks the extra boatbux are sorta justified. The heavier weight and radial cut and especially the larger corner patches will maintain a stable shape -much- longer.

 

I can't believe the stuff about being 'backwards compatible' with the sail it replaces. IIRC the (old) new sail pointed like a SOB over the new sails in mid breeze, and left them cold in a breeze. I imagine the radial cut will be more effective shape throughout the wind range,, and just like last time, the heavier cloth will prove better in stronger winds and gust response.

Likely it's pretty close enough to what it replaces for weekend warriors.

 

Funny that sailors who hope,plan to attend the 2016 olympics have to avoid it for now.

 

 

...any talk of a topsection to replace 70's technology? ...otherwise what's the damn point?? :mellow: <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

The imperative to maintain obsolete performance and forbidding making old boats competitive with new ones coupled with the annoying manners of immature wannabe's wait its all coming back to me, rilly dont care anymore think I will buy a pram maclaren anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread pool:

I don't think there's anything at this hearing that's central to the dispute, but I reckon the judge will allow the motion to seal certain exhibits and deny all the motions for summary judgement with an outside chance of delay until December.

 

Its worth remembering if summary judgement is denied, it tells us exactly stuff all about who's winning or losing.

My understanding of your legal system is that all the most that might happen at this hearing is that any claims which are utterly ridiculous will get chucked out. Utterly ridiculous claims do seem to be part of the US system, after all you bill the client at the same hourly rate whether there's a 50/50 chance of winning the point or one in ten thousand...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since anyone commented on boat/rigging/equipment supply. Is anybody aware of ongoing issues? Seems to me there was a problem in some geographies to obtain masts a while back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since anyone commented on boat/rigging/equipment supply. Is anybody aware of ongoing issues? Seems to me there was a problem in some geographies to obtain masts a while back.

 

That was a few years back now (certainly in the UK). As far as I am aware there are no issues getting parts at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread pool:

I don't think there's anything at this hearing that's central to the dispute, but I reckon the judge will allow the motion to seal certain exhibits and deny all the motions for summary judgement with an outside chance of delay until December.

 

Its worth remembering if summary judgement is denied, it tells us exactly stuff all about who's winning or losing.

My understanding of your legal system is that all the most that might happen at this hearing is that any claims which are utterly ridiculous will get chucked out. Utterly ridiculous claims do seem to be part of the US system, after all you bill the client at the same hourly rate whether there's a 50/50 chance of winning the point or one in ten thousand...

 

What's 'central' about this motions hearing is that we can't see past it. Once it's out of the way we will then be able to see the next step or steps.

 

Agree that you can't read anything into the four motions for a summary judgement, and the single motion to dismiss. There is always the possibility of delay, the judge could fall ill or a number of things could cause further delay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly the ILCA website gas up to date news and someone on the half million dollar staff was tweeting reports from the courthouse?!?

 

Hmmm.... it is half a million dollars, but only in the currency I often think in, NZ dollars. US$397,621 is possibly made up of a long list of bit jobs. Non-members have no business know where that money does, members are justified in asking - BUT - regional reps should be provided a detailed report. EVERYONE on the ILCA World Council should know exactly where every penny goes. I am not confident that has been the case.

 

So people are left speculating, did Jeff Martin get the lion's share of the US$397,621? Or is he on a reasonable wage? Or is he paid a pittance? Does some of that money go to race officials for official ILCA events? Are travel costs included? Who appoints race officials and set their reimbursement - the Executive Secretary? Does that mean that Jeff Martin has been appointing himself as a race official and setting his own reimbursements? The answers to these questions might all be reasonable, I am definitely not the first person to have asked them.

 

Back to the cost of the new sail. One of the problems that the ILCA has created for itself is the way it's managing the cost of sailing for Laser sailors. My understanding is that they have raised the cost of the buttons, in part to pay for the intellectual protection costs. The problem with raising the cost of the buttons is that it raises the cost of the supply cost of the sail, which has margins added by the wholesaler (the builders) then again by the retailer. The ILCA's revenue posted Dec 2014 from sail buttons was $110295 from sail buttons and $135,815 from member's dues. I'm unclear how much the button amount was raised, however it's possible that if raising revenue was needed, then Laser sailors and the ILCA might have been better off by raising the membership fees, because of they are not impacted by reseller's margins. In any case, if the figures posted in December 2016 show a huge increase in revenue, (which the ILCA would have been assured of had the new sail been the same cost as the old sail taking away price resistance) then no doubt more questions will be asked. Earlier, I said that I'd conservatively expect about 6000 units of the new sail to be sold. If the price was the same, I believe the first year's sales could easily double, based on the number of sailors who buy and use sails less than two years old. Any forecast is complicated and ultimately a guess. I expect that there still will be practice sails that will be a factor, even though the new sail has a patent. The only way to combat the now fairly well established market share of the 'practice sail' is for the official sail to compete on the primary market driver for 'practice sails': cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of things to note.

 

One, the price I'm seeing listed for the new sail in the US is $530. That's actually slightly less than the legacy design, and hopefully not just an introductory come-on. Definitely a better value than the old sail, though still way more than the practice sails.

 

Also, a group of sailors in a neighborhing town are all running with various practice sails (and guess who shows up for their regatta with his worn-out class-legal sail). They told me they were all waiting for the new design to come out before investing in the cost of a new one, implying they planned to race with legal sails after that. This definitely make me think there will be a flurry of people buying when it first comes out, and maybe it ratchet down racing with practice sails. A tiny bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of things to note.

 

One, the price I'm seeing listed for the new sail in the US is $530. That's actually slightly less than the legacy design, and hopefully not just an introductory come-on. Definitely a better value than the old sail, though still way more than the practice sails.

 

Also, a group of sailors in a neighborhing town are all running with various practice sails (and guess who shows up for their regatta with his worn-out class-legal sail). They told me they were all waiting for the new design to come out before investing in the cost of a new one, implying they planned to race with legal sails after that. This definitely make me think there will be a flurry of people buying when it first comes out, and maybe it ratchet down racing with practice sails. A tiny bit.

 

I've been watching Laser Performance for a couple of years pretty closely, and this is the first time I can honestly say that they have got something right, even if it doesn't smell right.

 

The legacy sail is still listed there for US$565, and yes Torrid - the new sail is listed on their website for US$530. West Coast Sailing lists it for the same price, US$530 on their website.

 

That's the same as A$737 - so I'm wondering if PSA will react in any way and change their current RRP of A$990. I have to wonder difference occurred. Incidentally, the Legacy sail from PSA is $770 (US$553).

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the prices for sails are...

 

New Radial sail:

North America: US$530

Europe: British pound £395 (US$613)

Oceania: A$990 (US$712)

 

Looking like the two left hands are not working well with the right hand (or with each other).

 

Pretty sure the LP sail is shipped without battens and the PSA includes them.

 

Converted to US $ using today's exchange.

 

Plenty of time for 'readjustments'... dropping a price is far easier than raising it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
280 Filed: 9/21/2015, Entered: Order on Motion for Summary Judgment
279 Filed: 9/16/2015, Entered: Notice of Appearance
277 Filed: 6/18/2015, Entered: Sealed Document

 

278 is missing. I have no further information at this time.

 

http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/srr8dgkt/connecticut-district-court/bruce-kirby-inc-et-al-v-laserperformance-europe-limited-et-al/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing??

Plainsite says there's been an order on a motion for summary judgement, but no detail whatsoever. We need someone who has access to the Courts Pacer system to tell us what that says.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I pulled the 280 document down from PACER but don't see how to attach it here.

 

All motions for summary judgement (180, 184, 183, 186) and the motion to dismiss (174) are under being taken under advisement. Looks like the hearing was 2 hours and 17 minutes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I pulled the 280 document down from PACER but don't see how to attach it here.

 

All motions for summary judgement (180, 184, 183, 186) and the motion to dismiss (174) are under being taken under advisement. Looks like the hearing was 2 hours and 17 minutes.

Firstly, please get the Recap plugin and use that. It makes the files available to everyone. A little while after you download the document with Recap, it will appear on the archive.org page (http://ia601604.us.archive.org/30/items/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988/gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.docket.html).

 

I have attached the file. As you said, there are no decisions.

gov.uscourts.ctd.99988.280.0.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

To quote Spike Milligan,

"Then suddenly nothing happened, but it happened suddenly."

 

Not quite true.....

 

"...except a load of high paid lawyers billed for 2hrs 17mins plus travel time and other sundry expenses and went away smiling to themselves."

Link to post
Share on other sites

has to be tiny little OZ dollars

Those tiny little OZ dollars were worth more than the big US dollars about a year ago. Now, not so much(70 cents on the dollar).

 

The PSA guys changed the already outrageous price of $670 AUD for the original sail to $770 AUD. Apparently because of the massive exchange rate changes in currency. That is without $55 AUD of battens. The new sail is $1000 with the battens.

 

All products in AU are priced including 10% GST tax. Nonetheless it does seem like Monopoly money some days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I pulled the 280 document down from PACER but don't see how to attach it here.

 

All motions for summary judgement (180, 184, 183, 186) and the motion to dismiss (174) are under being taken under advisement. Looks like the hearing was 2 hours and 17 minutes.

So, what's next? And how long will we have to wait for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So, what's next? And how long will we have to wait for it?

 

 

At least a month, and unusual if its more than 6 months judging by some on line references I found. However a report I found: http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/cjra-8/civil-justice-reform-act-cjra/2014/09/30 suggests that the judge on this case has many more motions waiting over 6 months than most do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So, what's next? And how long will we have to wait for it?

 

 

At least a month, and unusual if its more than 6 months judging by some on line references I found. However a report I found: http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/cjra-8/civil-justice-reform-act-cjra/2014/09/30 suggests that the judge on this case has many more motions waiting over 6 months than most do.

 

Delays are good for the one party who's not paying royalties. It's almost an incentive to make motions, though to be fair they would not be doing their job if they didn't.

 

What we don't have visibility from the link above about the quality of the decisions - or whether or not motions in this specific case will be delayed for 6 months. Bottom line is that it's in the hands of the judge Meyer's office.

 

And so we wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Delays are good for the one party who's not paying royalties. It's almost an incentive to make motions,

 

That doesn't sound right. Surely if it is found that royalties were due, it would also include interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Delays are good for the one party who's not paying royalties. It's almost an incentive to make motions,

 

That doesn't sound right. Surely if it is found that royalties were due, it would also include interest.

 

 

The reference to the royalties was meant as an identifier, and wasn't meant to represent all that's at stake.

 

LP continues to building Lasers, and can move profits out of the company (which seemed to be a tactic employed by Farzad Rastegar in a previous dispute with another company he controlled). If with Kirby's action the court uphold the contracts, the court may order LP to cease building Lasers in accordance with the termination clauses. I can't predict what LP's reaction to that will be, or if that reaction would be supported by the ILCA in any way. LP is advantaged because in the scenario of LP 'winning', they get what they have 'already got'. Everything else from LP's perspective may be viewed as a 'risk'.

 

In the mean-time, we wait for the result for the motions hearing, and LP is advantaged by delays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted 21 Sept:

"Order on Motion for Summary Judgment"

 

The actual order hasn't been posted yet, when they have posted similar previously, there is a short delay, then the court posts the outcome (or the order). Seems that things are taking at little longer than previously. Also, I can't recall seeing it on the 24th/25th when I last looked. Perhaps the posts are being back dated. Will keep checking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, I just bought an old beat up laser standard for messing around and I was wondering:

 

- what should the all-up weight be ? LP's website says 59kg hull weight but doesn't mention anything about the rest

- what is the top speed people are seeing on a laser ? it was blowing 25kts the other day and i was broad reaching for speed, as close to the wind as my 90kg would allow and had the impression i was going really fast, but the real actual speed is probably disappointing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If memory serves correctly, Crossbiw and Crossbow II had to average their soeeds over a five mile distance.

 

 

500 metre in fact.

 

Speed is always a source of controversy. Its unusual to exceed about 14 knots in my IC, and yet I don't seem to be caught by Lasers.

Link to post
Share on other sites