Jump to content

Recommended Posts

OK, elsewhere the argument re longevity of Carbon masts and Square heads has been elaborated on, so I won't go over it again.

Countless examples, possibly the most vivid for me was 4   29erC's in Rizhao China, the boat had been sails 6 days a week, 6 hrs a day for 8 month and the jib was almost completely covered in sticky back, where as the main & the Carbon Mast looked almost pristine.   It took me aback.

So yes, very possible using new technologies to generate sails and spars that will last years of extreme abuse.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Inertia, so for years we have had boat builder trying to lighten the ends, so that there is less inertia, so the boat can contour the wave.

What is the part of the boat that is furthest from it CoB/rotation point???   In 99.99% of case it will be the top of the mast and again this is a X² law.

So if people thought that pulling 800-900gms out of the bow of a Laser makes a difference, then pulling 800-900gm out of the mast is far more important.

Do the maths, a Laser is 4m long, so reducing the laminate front and back, by say 1kg (each) so  2m² (CoB - bow/transom) = 4 x 2kgs = 8kgs/m² reduction in inertia

Then the Masts, going from a 10.4kg mast to a 4.5kg mast, and going from & going from 3m to 2.5m CoG of the masts, you go from alloy mast 3² x 10.4 = 93.6kgs/m² compared to 2.5² x 4.5 = 28.12kgs/m² which is less than 1/3 the alloy mast, and over 8 times more important that fiddling with the hull laminate.

So it is in waves that the real advantage shows for a light end boat, but even more so for a well designed Carbon Rig.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just to add a tiny bit of controversy here;

A boat doing hull speed, so Laser, Aero, 420, 470, (all full fwd sectioned nominally displacement boats) contour the waves, period!!!

Boat like 49ers, GP 18teens to a lesser extent I14's go fast enough that there simply is not enough time to contour the waves on many occasions.

So one could argue that carbon rigs offer greater benefits on Laser, Aero, 420, 470, than on a 49ers or GP 18teens.

29er, 5o5's and I14 are in the middle, and again the power to weight ratio graph has been canvased before.

The reality is that 49ers, 29ers both go up wind at 7-8-9 and even sometime 12 knts, so there is a 2nd sum coming into play, the changes in "weight aloft" speed, and that is why the Carbon Mast has been so successful on the 49er, and the Moth and just about every other hi performance boat. 

Being nostalgic, I do remember testing the 49er Carbon Rig back in 2012 maybe earlier, and we had one test to go, take it out in 20+ (closer to 30knts) and give it hell.     I draw the short straw, and my crew was Amish who is a exceptional pilot (I think the youngest commercial captain as in LHS ever) but was not what I would suggest a hardened skiff crew.

Cut a long story short, went out and gave it hell, some un-believable bearaways (what we used to call the mystery zone), round ups, spinnakers etc, and in 2 hrs we did not even capsize.

Not possible to test the theory, but I doubt we could ever repeat that with a alloy rig. 

As I have said before, Carbon is good fro RS, but its truly amazing for WW's!

                    jB

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The cost of misinformation As an ILCA World Council member, I am alarmed at some "news stories" in the The Sailor's Voice (Facebook), specifically those posted by Jean-Pierre Kiekens. His comments

https://www.sailing.org/news/90895.php#.YHkHCy2ZNN0 Laser Radial sailor Nethra Kumanan has become the first ever female Indian sailor to qualify for the Olympic Games.

And edition 40 of our 6 hour laser relay race (you switch every lap with your team mate) is close to having 40 boats (80 sailors). All that on a tiny lake in the south of Amsterdam. If you read D

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Gouvernail said:

The great success of the Laser came from putting lots of people on inexpensive toys that worked well enough and were all the same. 

We knew how to make tapered masts. We knew how to make fancy rigging. We knew how to make lighter stiffer more durable laminates.

The simple boat worked well enough and the huge fleets were utterly fantastic.

We all knew, for a higher price,  the boats could be made better.

We all knew we could “trick out” our own boats to make our own  boats better.

We decided to ban virtually all improvements so the boats would be both inexpensive and identical. 

Over the years, the people who simply don’t get it have continuously fucked up the game by fucking with the basic design. 

If you took a 2019 Laser to a 1990 regatta you would not just be thrown out of that event, your cheater ass would probably be banned from all sailboat racing for a few years. 

If we all still sailed the exact same boat as the first 10,000 Lasers, rugged exactly as those Lasers were rigged, we would still have a fabulous game 

in fact, the 3.2 ounce sail was much better for those who are now sailing Radials because the increased power of the heavier cloth forced them out of full rigs. 

The extra cost of the fancy rigs, carbon tillers, composite top sections, hiking strap cleat, centerboard brake, hiking pants, and even patented wind indicators has jacked up the price to have equipment just like the champions. 

As those who so love to be in charge are continuing to abandon the original market,  we are coming closer and closer to the day when some businessman / sailor will see and grab the market for a modern boat like the original Laser. 

I hope I am alive to play in the fleet of singlehanded sailing toys produced and marketed by an enthusiastic and well funded builder. 

$2000 at Walmart is possible. All somebody needs is about $20,000,000 to get the new game rolling. 

 

 

But people can’t make more money off that Gouv. 

New rig = more money. For ILCA, for WS, for the rig designers and builders.

And reduced access at the club level.

That said the class is clearly about Olympics, elite sailors, and growth from Asia and the path they are on aids that. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

The extra cost of the fancy rigs, carbon tillers,...

I must admit I have no idea WTF the ILCA of the day was doing when they didn't immediately ban low profile tillers or all those stupid loops and eyes on controls. Once that was accepted the rest followed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

If you took a 2019 Laser to a 1990 regatta you would not just be thrown out of that event, your cheater ass would probably be banned from all sailboat racing for a few years. 

If we all still sailed the exact same boat as the first 10,000 Lasers, rugged exactly as those Lasers were rigged, we would still have a fabulous game 

in fact, the 3.2 ounce sail was much better for those who are now sailing Radials because the increased power of the heavier cloth forced them out of full rigs. 

The same could be said about taking a 1990 boat to a 1974 contest.

Also, boats were less consistent in the 1970s. Those of us who sailed all knew that the boats with the sail numbers of 40,000 were 'better'.

We are on the third sail weight for the Standard.

---

The price issues are as a consequence of the system up until now.

Having builders compete in the same market will in my view lower the prices.

---

2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

$2000 at Walmart is possible. All somebody needs is about $20,000,000 to get the new game rolling. 

Go for it!

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

OK, elsewhere the argument re longevity of Carbon masts and Square heads has been elaborated on, so I won't go over it again.

Countless examples, possibly the most vivid for me was 4   29erC's in Rizhao China, the boat had been sails 6 days a week, 6 hrs a day for 8 month and the jib was almost completely covered in sticky back, where as the main & the Carbon Mast looked almost pristine.   It took me aback.

So yes, very possible using new technologies to generate sails and spars that will last years of extreme abuse.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Inertia, so for years we have had boat builder trying to lighten the ends, so that there is less inertia, so the boat can contour the wave.

What is the part of the boat that is furthest from it CoB/rotation point???   In 99.99% of case it will be the top of the mast and again this is a X² law.

So if people thought that pulling 800-900gms out of the bow of a Laser makes a difference, then pulling 800-900gm out of the mast is far more important.

Do the maths, a Laser is 4m long, so reducing the laminate front and back, by say 1kg (each) so  2m² (CoB - bow/transom) = 4 x 2kgs = 8kgs/m² reduction in inertia

Then the Masts, going from a 10.4kg mast to a 4.5kg mast, and going from & going from 3m to 2.5m CoG of the masts, you go from alloy mast 3² x 10.4 = 93.6kgs/m² compared to 2.5² x 4.5 = 28.12kgs/m² which is less than 1/3 the alloy mast, and over 8 times more important that fiddling with the hull laminate.

So it is in waves that the real advantage shows for a light end boat, but even more so for a well designed Carbon Rig.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just to add a tiny bit of controversy here;

A boat doing hull speed, so Laser, Aero, 420, 470, (all full fwd sectioned nominally displacement boats) contour the waves, period!!!

Boat like 49ers, GP 18teens to a lesser extent I14's go fast enough that there simply is not enough time to contour the waves on many occasions.

So one could argue that carbon rigs offer greater benefits on Laser, Aero, 420, 470, than on a 49ers or GP 18teens.

29er, 5o5's and I14 are in the middle, and again the power to weight ratio graph has been canvased before.

The reality is that 49ers, 29ers both go up wind at 7-8-9 and even sometime 12 knts, so there is a 2nd sum coming into play, the changes in "weight aloft" speed, and that is why the Carbon Mast has been so successful on the 49er, and the Moth and just about every other hi performance boat. 

Being nostalgic, I do remember testing the 49er Carbon Rig back in 2012 maybe earlier, and we had one test to go, take it out in 20+ (closer to 30knts) and give it hell.     I draw the short straw, and my crew was Amish who is a exceptional pilot (I think the youngest commercial captain as in LHS ever) but was not what I would suggest a hardened skiff crew.

 Cut a long story short, went out and gave it hell, some un-believable bearaways (what we used to call the mystery zone), round ups, spinnakers etc, and in 2 hrs we did not even capsize.

Not possible to test the theory, but I doubt we could ever repeat that with a alloy rig. 

As I have said before, Carbon is good fro RS, but its truly amazing for WW's!

                    jB

Do you (JulianB) have any insight about what the costs would be like if there were 1000-2000 carbon rigs manufactured per year?

This is uncharted territory because no other boat has ever made such a number - there are likely to be efficiency gains made from increased production runs.

---

In my view, there needs to be smarter ways to introduce new parts, at least smarter than what has been done before. Key to introducing new parts are:

  • Slow (say 4 years, so everyone has time to plan ahead)
  • Pre orders available
  • Lower cost for the first run

The objective should be to convert as much of the world fleet as possible, from club level up.

It is my view that the way the carbon top section was introduced can be significantly improved upon, and I'd question the merit of having an alloy and a carbon top section both being consistent with the original vision of the Laser. My preference is to have one only - and my expectation is that if produced in higher volumes, there is no reason that a carbon top section can't be made at a similar cost to the current alloy ones.

---

Current top section local NZ prices are:

  • Carbon NZ$1163 (US$748)
  • Alloy NZ$420 (US$270)
  • Alloy (Holt, not class legal) NZ$199 (US$128)

My expectation is that multiple vendors will reduce the cost of class legal spars.

As a point of reference, a complete Aero top section is £342 (US$415) - and since the Laser new boat production figures are 4 x current Aero, I would expect the costs to be lower. More so because the annual number of Laser top sections sold throughout the world is likely to be 5000+.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Just drove by...

 there still are not any. New ILCA approved toys at the local dealership 

17991274_1266900230032239_6395282066004224550_o.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_oc=AQkyqb45VArv5o8m0tkP7zajjmsNBGJnr3IaA2hGwyQ-Ibp4M-8LTsSIo8k3XnEmN4Y&_nc_ht=scontent-syd2-1.xx&oh=dbe46518545048d3e9da5f2449b76ba2&oe=5DDDF8FB

Nope, no Lasers. Just a few Hobies.

---

Gouv, there may be something wrong with your expectations, you have been posting the above most days. Was it your intention to promote yourself as having compromised logic? Are you OK??

The rule needs to change first. That happens once World Sailing Ratifies the change.

Then new builders are appointed - and then they need to build - and part of that is to have the boats approved.

---

My guess is that new boats will become available in North America via a new builder in Feb 2020. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

22 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

My guess is that new boats will become available in North America via a new builder in Feb 2020. 

Wow; Feb 2020 seems very optimistic. My guess is 'some time in 2021'. But what do I know?

I hope Fulcrum (Dave Clark) gets the go-ahead from ILCA. Or Zim (building in China?).

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

What does the Racing club rule have to do with a business violating another business’ Territory?? 

Are you really asking this Gouv? Come on, you should get this by now.

  • Rule change ratified by WS
  • Plaques issued to unbranded boats (Existing and new builders)
  • North American supply improves.

For the best part of a decade you Gouv have been one of the most vocal people about wanting to improve supply to North America. Can you please explain your position which seems to be against the improvements which are in process right now.

1 hour ago, JMP said:

Has West Coast sold all of their recent allotment? 

Last I heard, no. @WestCoast??

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

Isn’t it annoying how some people who fail to comprehend the positions  of others assign their own views to those others?

“i don’t understand you so here is your position and motivation.”

{Stand up and start reading out loud} 

You got it wrong!!

Funny thing is Gouv, I do comprehend your position and that of others. This goes beyond comprehension.

Exactly how have I gotten it wrong? With the contracts? How the trademark relates to the class?

Maybe I haven't got it wrong at all Gouv.

38 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Stick  to describing your own stupid ideas. (And parroting whatever it is you think will give the ILCA Officers hardons) 

Did it ever occur to you that i am sticking to my own ideas?

38 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Whatever  happened to voicing one’s own opinion and leaving  others to voice the opinions of those others??

The rise of misinformation, including yours.

39 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

I have never advocated for fucking over those who build our boats, sell our toys, organize our events, host our regattas, sail in our regattas, or in any way contribute to our game. 

Good on you. Nor have I. (This is part of how you are misinformed).

40 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

After 50 odd years of enjoying a mutually supportive, “We will use brand name only if you will support our game,” something in that relationship is broken.

Yes. It broke on the 22nd of December 2015 with a legal threat from Mr Rastegar to ILCA.

41 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

i am entirely in favor of sitting down with mr Rastegar and saying, “We have removed the fundamental brand name rule. We are still abiding by it. You can work with us and be our supplier or we will be forced to look for another supplier. PLEASE!!! Do not force us down that path. Your boats are great. Your game support in most cases is pretty darned good. We are failing miserably in North America. 

That ship has sailed. ILCA listened to YOU and others. Plus needed to respond to WS's requirements.

Get with the program Gouv.

43 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

So No!!  Mr Hudson, I have not changed my position one bit.  I want our ILCA officers to cut the shit!! Quit trying to be in charge and  start working as part of the team. 

You may not have changed Gouv, but the above indicates that maybe you could consider changes.

I'm not in charge - its a ridiculous proposition to think I am. How about you try talking to EF? 

Working as part of the team? Did you notice that I supported the yes vote?

You need to seriously evaluate what the actions of ILCA have been, and what caused them to react in the way they did.

46 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

The team still includes mr Rastegar. The fact he is not playing his roll in  a manner we like is not a reason to chop the noses off our own faces. 

Not any more. Mr Rastegar or his employees is part of the ILCA World Council, nor has anything to do with the LCM. The vote happened, and the changes are coming.

48 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

It seems the only person who is actually trying to make  things work is Alexandra. Everybody else seems to want to be in charge of something and throw somebody else out. 

You are 100% misinformed about the role of Alexandra.

49 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Until such time as we have a new set of rules and a new enthusiastic supportive builder, LP is what we have. 

We can pool our energy and make it work or we can act like selfish assholes while our game continues to die. 

“But they wouldn’t let us in the factory that one time.”

just fuck off!! Grow a set. Deal with Rastegar. None of us is perfect. Some are bigger assholes than others. Let somebody else win the asshole contest. Let’s get butts on boats ...

And we are in the process of getting new rules. Where are you going with this Gouv? (Hint: ILCA has already moved forward).

51 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Finally: We should tell World  Sailing to fuck off and go form our own world Singlehanded Sailing Authority. Maybe we should invite other dinghies in general. The authority that covers Keelboats, catamarans, kite boats, windsurfers, and Sailboats used in the Special Olympics has very little interest in properly serving Dinghy Racing. 

WS attempt to destroy the profitability of small boat manufacturing is a clearly aggressive act designed as an attempt to ruin our sport. 

We can simply set up a FRAND International Dinghy Racing authority. 

The sailors can choose which organization to support.

So your proposal is to replace World Sailing? Go for it!

Meanwhile, ILCA and others are moving in a different direction.

---

It is clear from the above Gouv that you don't understand what has actually happened, the significance of the contracts, nor the significance of the rule change.

---

Yes, let's get more butts on boats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, JMP said:

Buying and Importing one of the PSA boats back to Australia from Canada looked like it would save a few thousand over retail :)
 

With how much Rastegar wants to get rid of PSA, you'd think it would be easy for him under the new unrestricted trade world to come in and steal the laser market out from under PSA in Australia.  An easy start would be to sell class legal MKII sails at $700ish with battens and numbers instead of $1100+, that would effectively cease PSA's sales in that area.

An equivalent of LPE's "XD" ~$10,750AUD boat from PSA is $$12,124 (Carbon top section, Carbon tiller and extension), so if Rastegar wanted to sacrifice some margin they could easily undercut PSA supplying boats to Australia.  From the Sailing Illustrated interview he did, I got the feeling that there's not enough profit in the US market for him to bother, I'd take a stab and say the margins would be even less in Australia.  But that carrot of putting PSA out of the Laser business must be tempting for him :p

You have to also keep in mind that LP would have a siginificant tax benefit by exporting to AUS. 21ish% VAT in the UK vs 10% GST in AUS. That wipes another $1000 off the price of a LP boat

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

FIFY

Nope. You just THINK you fixed it for me. And in so doing promoted yourself as out of touch. 

Where are you getting your information from? Alexandra? Rastegar? Are you second guessing them by looking at the correspondence they authored?

Do you even understand the significance of what Rastegar did at the end of 2016? Don't take my word. You have connections Gouv, use them.

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

You have to also keep in mind that LP would have a siginificant tax benefit by exporting to AUS. 21ish% VAT in the UK vs 10% GST in AUS. That wipes another $1000 off the price of a LP boat

Excellent point, if RS Aero's can be sold in Australia for less than an equivalently spec'd Laser, I'm sure LP could do smash it out of the park

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Insignificant ... all of it. 

Nobody cares except for a few misinformed lunatics 

It is about sailing and who builds a boat.

really

nobody sane  gives a shit 

Right.

These changes are real Gouv, from those who license the building of the boat, to the appointing of new builders - and the rule change removing the requirement for builders to use the Laser trademark. Also changes to the LCM. And changes to who is on the ILCA World Council in March this year. Please wake up.

Some were made in good faith because of the issues YOU promoted about supply. Any faith in LP to fix the North American supply issues comes off the back of waiting a decade for LP to improve them. In that decade, particularly since 2016, things have worsened.

---

Gouv, you have made over 30,000 posts here on SA, plus the thousands you have deleted, plus the thousands made under other names. Hundreds are on the topic of Lasers, the Laser class, Kirby and Rastegar. You even phoned Rastegar - or so you have lead us to believe - and I don't doubt you did.

You are fooling nobody that you don't care, though the lunatic part? Maybe we are about equally qualified. However you definitely are more misinformed about whats happening. I'm not debating you here; this is on the basis of the statements you are making. You are trying to position it as a difference of opinion. Actually it is about your promotion of 'alternate facts' versus the facts which are a matter of public record.

---

Just because you think ILCA don't care about grass roots sailing - doesn't make it true - and your outrage is then followed up by characterizing it as insignificant? Come on Gouv, you are fooling nobody here.

I believe every single class association in the world cares about grass roots - and ILCA is no exception. Maybe they don't know what improvements can be made. Maybe their promotion of membership is a mess - and has failed to move with the times.

Yes, it is about butts on boats. However governance is important. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bruce,

#1 Up Marine dose not want to get into the retail boat business, we are not gear up for it, we are having way too much fun playing in the design field, and once bitten twice shy!

#2 Re the C-Rig, our contract is with Takao and as part of that contract he insisted that we be the "Last resort of supply".     So if your in Auckland and PSA can't get you a C5 topmast in a timely manner then we will supply it, un-encumbered.   (no levies or arrangements to any one, no territories)

If the HK students had not got a bit ancy, I would be in HK now launching a web sits to sell OEM C5s plus a few C6s rigs into Oceania.     There is presently quite a demand.

Re retail, Chris Caldecoat said a while back that he believed a C5 rig would sell for about $AUD3800 ($USD 2500) now what that comes with I don't know, I assume the Mast, Boom and Sail and from memory that is about $600-700 cheaper than a equivalent Alloy/Dacron rig.

But as I said, UM is about designing and facilitating the supply in MoQ's in multiples of 10-50 units at a time.

We are expecting there to be hubs, mostly manufacturing hubs, where the raw bits go to and are assembled, so tracks glued on, fittings glued/riveted into place etc etc.

The expectation is if you go to one of those places, and you have a order for 10 or more "rigs" then you will get them at a pretty reasonable price.

If you go there and ask for 1, and they have to "break a pack" then your going to get hit with atleast a 20% hick.      From bitter experience I know that breaking packs costs upwards of 17%.

Then the thing you have to remember is that anything under run's of 1,000 is cottage industry stuff, and you get charged cottage industry prices!     No one is going to invest in a run of 1000 widgets at this stage.     But if it goes well and we start to get towards trigger numbers, then 1000 orders will happen, and that then can start to sustain a dealer network without impacting on the price.

The whole dealer game has changed, Alibaba, Webo and Amazon are responsible for all of that, but dealers are hugely important, cutting them out is the dearth of any success.

We have strong ideas about that, that has been well tested, so we think we know what we are doing, and that you will find sometime after the 6th (Sept) if/when I get to HK.

                          jB

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

Isn’t it annoying how some people who fail to comprehend the positions  of others assign their own views to those others?

“i don’t understand you so here is your position and motivation.”

{Stand up and start reading out loud} 

You got it wrong!!

Stick  to describing your own stupid ideas. (And parroting whatever it is you think will give the ILCA Officers hardons) 

 

Whatever  happened to voicing one’s own opinion and leaving  others to voice the opinions of those others??

 

* For years, I have advocated for the removal of self imposed class rules which empower outsiders to control our game. 

I have never advocated for fucking over those who build our boats, sell our toys, organize our events, host our regattas, sail in our regattas, or in any way contribute to our game. 

My clearly stated reason for removing the self imposed subservience has been the exact same reason as Eric Faust stated in front of the mean nasty accusative grumpy old men in that video posted here a few months ago. 

We need tools for negotiations.

{Raise your voice volume and lower the pitch about half an octave}

After 50 odd years of enjoying a mutually supportive, “We will use brand name only if you will support our game,” something in that relationship is broken.

i am entirely in favor of sitting down with mr Rastegar and saying, “We have removed the fundamental brand name rule. We are still abiding by it. You can work with us and be our supplier or we will be forced to look for another supplier. PLEASE!!! Do not force us down that path. Your boats are great. Your game support in most cases is pretty darned good. We are failing miserably in North America. 

“We are going to find a way to fix the North American supply issues. Allowing generic boats is new territory into which the Laser Racing game has previously refused to venture. It is absolutiy risky. 

“There is  an old  American Saying:

I’d rather go with the devil I know than the devil I don’t know.

“Our relationship has not been wonderful. We have gone so far as to do without toys for an entire season just to make it clear, we are serious. We are tired of fighting to obtain equipment. 

“The ball is in your court. You can start flooding American dealerships with COMPLETE boats and stockpiles of spare parts or we will consider certifying certain generic boats  for our games. 

“We are here to help. We all want the EXACT SAME THING. We want more butts on more Lasers. 

“How can we team up? “

{Remove a shoe and start pounding each period on the podium} 

So No!!  Mr Hudson, I have not changed my position one bit.  I want our ILCA officers to cut the shit!! Quit trying to be in charge and  start working as part of the team. 

The team still includes mr Rastegar. The fact he is not playing his roll in  a manner we like is not a reason to chop the noses off our own faces. 

It seems the only person who is actually trying to make  things work is Alexandra. Everybody else seems to want to be in charge of something and throw somebody else out. 

Until such time as we have a new set of rules and a new enthusiastic supportive builder, LP is what we have. 

We can pool our energy and make it work or we can act like selfish assholes while our game continues to die. 

“But they wouldn’t let us in the factory that one time.”

just fuck off!! Grow a set. Deal with Rastegar. None of us is perfect. Some are bigger assholes than others. Let somebody else win the asshole contest. Let’s get butts on boats ...

... and tell Mr Rastegar, if you don’t team up with us and solve this supply problem, we are going elsewhere. 

{ Go to a more calm yet serious voice}

Finally: We should tell World  Sailing to fuck off and go form our own world Singlehanded Sailing Authority. Maybe we should invite other dinghies in general. The authority that covers Keelboats, catamarans, kite boats, windsurfers, and Sailboats used in the Special Olympics has very little interest in properly serving Dinghy Racing. 

WS attempt to destroy the profitability of small boat manufacturing is a clearly aggressive act designed as an attempt to ruin our sport. 

We can simply set up a FRAND International Dinghy Racing authority. 

The sailors can choose which organization to support. 

{Stand up look around and imagine the roaring  crowd. Raise your voice over them and point at the exits} 

Now!! Go make friends with all the other assholes you can’t stand and put butts on boats. 

What that post seems to ignore is that ILCA has been trying to deal with Rastegar in that manner for ages. You yourself proposed that ILCA find a new supplier if he didn't cooperate. He didn't, so ILCA did what you yourself say they should do.

Since ILCA did what you propose, why do you abuse them?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, JulianB said:

Hi Bruce,

#1 Up Marine dose not want to get into the retail boat business, we are not gear up for it, we are having way too much fun playing in the design field, and once bitten twice shy!

#2 Re the C-Rig, our contract is with Takao and as part of that contract he insisted that we be the "Last resort of supply".     So if your in Auckland and PSA can't get you a C5 topmast in a timely manner then we will supply it, un-encumbered.   (no levies or arrangements to any one, no territories)

If the HK students had not got a bit ancy, I would be in HK now launching a web sits to sell OEM C5s plus a few C6s rigs into Oceania.     There is presently quite a demand.

Re retail, Chris Caldecoat said a while back that he believed a C5 rig would sell for about $AUD3800 ($USD 2500) now what that comes with I don't know, I assume the Mast, Boom and Sail and from memory that is about $600-700 cheaper than a equivalent Alloy/Dacron rig.

But as I said, UM is about designing and facilitating the supply in MoQ's in multiples of 10-50 units at a time.

We are expecting there to be hubs, mostly manufacturing hubs, where the raw bits go to and are assembled, so tracks glued on, fittings glued/riveted into place etc etc.

The expectation is if you go to one of those places, and you have a order for 10 or more "rigs" then you will get them at a pretty reasonable price.

If you go there and ask for 1, and they have to "break a pack" then your going to get hit with atleast a 20% hick.      From bitter experience I know that breaking packs costs upwards of 17%.

Then the thing you have to remember is that anything under run's of 1,000 is cottage industry stuff, and you get charged cottage industry prices!     No one is going to invest in a run of 1000 widgets at this stage.     But if it goes well and we start to get towards trigger numbers, then 1000 orders will happen, and that then can start to sustain a dealer network without impacting on the price.

The whole dealer game has changed, Alibaba, Webo and Amazon are responsible for all of that, but dealers are hugely important, cutting them out is the dearth of any success.

We have strong ideas about that, that has been well tested, so we think we know what we are doing, and that you will find sometime after the 6th (Sept) if/when I get to HK.

                          jB

 

I don't think anyone has yet explained how the new rig's adoption will work at club or championship level.

So the C6 is adopted. X% of people buy them. Suddenly the Radial fleet (assuming it's the one affected) is down by X% overall. That's a bummer for those of us who like big fleets. But OK, those of us who race titles decide to go with the C rig. What happens to the one design class we used to have at class and regional level?  We are now divided into standard 7, Radial, 4.7, C5, C6, C7 fleets. My club's viable 8 boat Standard rig fleet is now down to a four Cs and four old Standards. The three beginners on Radials will no longer have an experienced small-rig sailor to sail with, because the fast small-rig sailor will move to a C rig.

In exchange for a speed improvement of maybe 1-2% that we don't actually want, we will have a reduction of about 50% in what we do want - a strong fleet.

Almost all of the experienced Laser sailors in my region moved in from fast classes, including development classes that will beat any 9er, and therefore no improvement whatsoever in a Laser will make it either anywhere like as modern or as fast as the boats we have moved out of. We know that, and we don't care, just like the fact that a 9er sailor rarely seems to care that a kitefoiler or a foiling cat is a much newer and faster way to race sailboats.

We sail Lasers because they are a tough, universally popular boat, and one that a club can use to offer beginners and those on a budget a great way into the most popular game in our sport. There are plenty of people in our club who cannot or would not spend an extra $2500 on a boat, therefore they will no longer have a class to sail in if the rest of us go to the C rig. Either we screw over our friends by adopting C rigs, or we lose the critical mass of our fleet, or we lose the ability to train at home for championship racing in big fleets. 

Given those options, the logical thing to do would be to leave the Laser class completely if the C rigs, or at least the larger ones, are introduced. After all, if being new and fast is what counts then no Laser is really going to cut it.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JulianB said:

Then the thing you have to remember is that anything under run's of 1,000 is cottage industry stuff, and you get charged cottage industry prices!     No one is going to invest in a run of 1000 widgets at this stage.     But if it goes well and we start to get towards trigger numbers, then 1000 orders will happen, and that then can start to sustain a dealer network without impacting on the price.

One thing that impressed me by being involved in manufacturing, was how higher runs influenced the design. Suddenly, things like the time it takes to manufacture becomes very important as a cost driver.

So back to top sections - if the only top section allowed was carbon (ie no more alloy), then that impacts not only cost but several other things.

Seems like the way the new sails were introduced was better than giving the option.

20 minutes ago, Curious said:

In exchange for a speed improvement of maybe 1-2% that we don't actually want, we will have a reduction of about 50% in what we do want - a strong fleet.

If there is not a way to do it without compromising the strong fleets, then we shouldn't do it. (So SA is the perfect place to discuss this.)

So is there are way to crowd source this, so that the first run of new rigs is for thousands of rigs all over the world?

I would imagine that the C5 is being talked about first, because the 4.7 isn't an Olympic class - and successes can be modeled.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Curious said:

 Either we screw over our friends by adopting C rigs, or we lose the critical mass of our fleet, or we lose the ability to train at home for championship racing in big fleets. 

Whilst all that is true, as you know classes in the past have successfully migrated to new rigs. It can be done. Classes having major rule changes that outdate the existing fleet is almost normal. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. 

I think Gouv is right that the changes that led to the XD gear were a mistake. All those loops and knots should have been banned. Now sails and spars self destruct at a rate they never used to, and the Laser changed from about the easiest boat in the world to rig to something that at one stage was nearly impossible without special training. 

Mind you, the biggest thing the Laser class could do for sail life would be a change that discouraged people from leaving their sails  flogging between races...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce and Curious, super interesting observations.

We know Kickstarter/Indigo campaigns very well.  Done about 5 of them to date, all successful.

A Kickstarter/Indigo campaign for the C5 & possible C6.

C5 is pretty cut and dry, the 4.7 works really well in Europe but has missed the mark in the rest of the world to a large extent.   Takao has been on my case for years about it's "inappropriateness" (the 4.7) for the Asian market and it took almost no convincing of him and my HK based/Asian partner to back this, Tracy saw the point almost instantaneously and the rest as you say is history.

Hmmmmmm, this has the the potential to break the nexus, that is slow start = higher than it needs to be introductory price which tends to linger.

If we got say 500 people to buy into C5 up-front at a "crowd source" price, then that in turn will = a "real price" without any baggage!

500 is above the trigger point~!

But we need to tie in dealers, because, at present they are still the back-bone of the sport.   And that wont change, nor do I think its good to change, we need a community!

Some late night are upon us/me.   I'm in HK on the 6th Sept.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a flip, most people say Death and Taxes are the 2 inevitability of life.

The inevitability of change and the inevitability of resistance to change, come well before death and taxes.

Alibaba, Webo and Amazon have completely change the way people do commerce, and iT is responsible for even greater change.   Think WeChat & Fb!

No one goes looking for a model T any more let alone a horse and cart, yet we want those kids who are most influenced by iT to sail what we sailed because it was cool for us.

This could be pivotal!   We should re-visit this, some interesting permutations!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BTW, totally agree that a 1-2% speed advantage is not worth it.    But 2 things,

#1 Dose not matter what we think, what matters is if the kids thinks it's faster.

& #2, more of the same but in a different vein, you have people paying a lot more money to sail something that the BS says is faster but in reality is much the same.    It's all about perception, so you are going to loose 1/2 the fleet if you do nothing, anyway! 

What you may do is get that 1/2 of the fleet to stay and possibly grow because you have done something.

               jB

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

How ironic that the easiest way to get these C rigs introduced would be to put them on unapproved Club Lasers!

Obviously the politics and logistics of changing/adding approved rigs for the Laser is orders of magnitude more complex than any other class, but I think they look great so would love to see them adopted soon.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JulianB said:

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BTW, totally agree that a 1-2% speed advantage is not worth it.    But 2 things,

#1 Dose not matter what we think, what matters is if the kids thinks it's faster.

& #2, more of the same but in a different vein, you have people paying a lot more money to sail something that the BS says is faster but in reality is much the same.    It's all about perception, so you are going to loose 1/2 the fleet if you do nothing, anyway! 

What you may do is get that 1/2 of the fleet to stay and possibly grow because you have done something.

               jB

Julian;

As well as being huge in Europe, the 4.7 is also about the 15th most popular class in the UK (far bigger than the comparable Aero) and the tenth most popular boat in Australia. That's not a bad performance for a small-rig version of a big boat. Where is the evidence that a new rig will take it right into the big league?  How will the new rig change the boat's weaknesses, which are generally agreed to be related more to the size of the hull compared to its target market?

If what the kids think is fast and new is so important, why are the fastest and newest Youth classes the least popular in many major sailing nations? The Nacra is the newest and fastest of them and seems to struggle for big fleets or major growth. The Techno is fairly fast and new, and is huge in Europe but far less popular than the 420, Radial and 4.7 in many places. The kites are a bit of a joke - if speed and being new is so important why did they have the smallest fleet at the UK nationals? Why did they have no fleet at all in the Australian Youth Olympic trials, for example? Why is such a tiny number of youth sailing kitefoilers, the fastest of all small sailing craft?

If it's all about perception, then why create the perception that the existing Laser rigs are outmoded shit? How is so effectively bagging out the existing boats going to assist with giving the class the right perception?

No one I knew ever thought the Laser was cool when we were kids. The cool singlehanders were the fat skiff Moth, the Windsurfer and perhaps an A Class - but the Laser was practical, had huge fleets on identical boats, and so lots of people bought them. "Cool" wasn't the word for my generation.

Where is the evidence that we are going to lose half the fleet? The class has been suffering enormous issues and still doing OK. Fix those issues and the future is bright. Sure, we lose kids - every organised sport loses teens. The big difference is that the Laser, like the Opti and 420, gets big numbers of them. The faster classes, much as I love them, do not. 

What major SMOD class has upgraded the rig significantly and grown? The Byte CII didn't - it lost way. The Hobie Tiger, once a significant class, did the same. In contrast the Hobie 16, 18 and 14 have kept their old rigs and are doing much better. 

If rig upgrades are so important, why is the Opti still doing so well? Why are the Hobie 16, Topper, Snipe, 420, Etchells, Star etc all doing so well with their tin rigs and dacron sails?

What objective, verifiable evidence is there that this enormous change will help the class? 

The Laser is not the Model T. The Model T lost its market lead - the Laser hasn't. The Model T was not a piece of sporting equipment - the Laser is. Sports and games run by different mechanisms to cars. The games that are growing are the ones that learn from the great games of the past and respect them, not those that try to change those great games or fail to heed their lessons.

I ask again - how will it help the class if the fleets are divided into two?Exactly how is it going to help the class if we turn up to the 2023 nationals and have the existing fleet cut in half? Where is the actual, verifiable evidence that the number of people attracted into the class by the new rigs is going to be bigger than the number of people like me, who will walk away because we came into the class to get good fleet racing amongst identical boats and we will no longer have that?

Will you come to my club and explain to those who do not have $2500 for a new rig that they can no longer play the same game?  Will you come and explain to us who can get new rigs why we have to lose the strong one design fleets that enticed us into the class? Can you explain to me why in 2022, I will be beating the good local kids even when they sail better, because I can afford a new rig and they cannot? Can you explain to me why I should be happy that an 8 boat fleet is now two four-boat fleets?

If we are all going to have to spend $2500 on a new rig, why shouldn't we just spend a bit more and get an entire new class? After all, if newer = better than the Laser isn't a viable option no matter what the rig is like.

By the way, I am NOT resistant to change. I have recently got into two of the newest major classes in the world (one from the ground up) and have yet again recently done an inaugural championship in a new class. As I said before, many of the people I sail Lasers against have sailed many fast boats and development classes - our experience covers a wider range of the sport than most of our critics have experienced. Change is not a problem - destructive change is the problem.
 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JimC said:

Whilst all that is true, as you know classes in the past have successfully migrated to new rigs. It can be done. Classes having major rule changes that outdate the existing fleet is almost normal. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. 

I think Gouv is right that the changes that led to the XD gear were a mistake. All those loops and knots should have been banned. Now sails and spars self destruct at a rate they never used to, and the Laser changed from about the easiest boat in the world to rig to something that at one stage was nearly impossible without special training. 

Mind you, the biggest thing the Laser class could do for sail life would be a change that discouraged people from leaving their sails  flogging between races...

I'm not aware of any large SMOD dinghy class that has had a rig upgrade of this size, with success.

I'm not actually aware of any actual evidence that such changes have the positive effect on fleet size that their fans predict. If there is such an effect, then those who are proposing the change should be able to show it to us, using some pretty solid and widespread evidence. If the fans for the change cannot show that sort of solid and widespread evidence, then why should we believe that their arguments are good ones?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Curious said:

I'm not aware of any large SMOD dinghy class that has had a rig upgrade of this size, with success.

Laser Radial perhaps? It certainly took sailors away from the full rig, but with an overall gain.
I don't think you could categorise the Byte change as either success or failure. 
The Laser M was a definite failure.
Seems to me that if PSJ want to introduce a new rig in their market then that's an interesting thing to see. I'm no fan of international competition in junior classes anyway. Too much too young.

But the trouble with evaluating anything like this is that you never get to know what would have happened. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is uncharted territory for sure.

There is no rig upgrade for a SMOD, though the Laser class is a MMOD.

The three classes: Standard, Radial and 4.7 are all successful in their own right.

The big question is whether or not to replace the rig or to introduce a new one - however before doing that, a proper investigation into the different scenarios needs to be undertaken.

So looking at the 4.7 / C5, in the long term, they are very similar - if the C5 can be sold at the same price as an alloy rig - and it lasts longer, plus supports a greater weight range - then it constitutes an advancement. 

How about if the pricing of a C5 rig was initially cheaper than the current 4.7 rig? (The thing about crowd sourcing is that it can be combined with other fleet based initiatives).

Can a crowd sourcing solution be achieved without cutting out local dealers? Can crowd sourcing packages include local dealers? (Bulk buying, also savings on freight).

Again, key to this is to proceed slowly, so that everyone has time to adjust to the change.

And sacrificing fleets sailing is not an option.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Julian, thanks for your comments. Other classes like Tornados have shown that olympic equipment can last very long, I don't know if you calculate the material costs for two Olympic campaigns per sailer for Tornado vs Laser which campaigns would be cheaper. I don't know for 49er either. Propably you better know how many hulls, sails and spars are needed for a 4 year olympic campaign in both classes, so you could do the math. 

But to the question: could "new carbon rigs" be designed to be equal in performance to the current rigs over the whole spectrum of windspeeds and waves your answer is propably no, as far as I understood what you said.

But the Contenders managed to do the transition to carbon masts without big problems. As far as I remember they have a class rule that says that the COG and weight may not be different than for the aluminium Mast. Just found an old material analysis of the 2008 worlds:

http://www.contenderclass.org/images/stories/worlds2008/worlds_2008_boat_data.pdf

In 2008 there were still a lot of alu masts in the top of the world championship, so it seems to be possible to change to carbon without having a boat that is faster. 

The material of the sails is free in the contender class, so you can use Mylar as well as standard dacron. Last time I've seen Max Billerbeck, the new Contender world champion sailing he used a standard dacron sail made by Clown Sails in Hamburg. Only few use mylar sails, and these do not last any longer than dacron, but the range of possible sail shapes you can get by using vang and cunningham seems to be smaller, cause there is less stretch in the sail. So, only to move from dacron to mylar does not make longelivety any better. 

 The only way to design a new sail that last longer is propably by using a fully battened one. 

To use fat head sails could improve performance a bit. 

But where to start and where to stop. If you want to make performance really better you need to reduce the weight of the hull, use sandwich instead of CSM, and finally a modern hull shape. Then you've got an Aero. Still does not perform much better than a Laser.. If you want a high performance boat you need to go for Schappis MPS, while some foilers still are faster. 

The Laser is not olympic cause it is the fastest singlehander, not the most modern, not the lightest or the best boat or whatever. It is olympic cause more than 200000 quite similar boats were sold. It makes sense to make changes to make the boat cheaper to campaign, to make the boats more uniform regarding performance related things like rake and weight, and make it a bit longer lasting. Increasing quality while keeping changes as small as possible. 

Any major change to the general concept is very dangerous for the class I believe. The 505 class is known as one of the most innovative classes. The discussion about changing to carbon spars is going on for 25 or 30 years. They still use alu, cause too many members still believe it will hurt the class, and they still don't use fattop sails. 

A clubmate sold his MPS last year, to join our low level racing circuit. He did not buy a Laser cause the boat is faster, better or more modern. He bought it to have some fun racing against others, and chose the Laser cause it is the biggest fleet. Maybe you can separate the guys who are really going to campaign for the Olymlpics from the rest of the game, but you can't separate the whole class in Old and New rig sailers without destroying the game. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JimC said:

Laser Radial perhaps? It certainly took sailors away from the full rig, but with an overall gain.
I don't think you could categorise the Byte change as either success or failure. 
The Laser M was a definite failure.
Seems to me that if PSJ want to introduce a new rig in their market then that's an interesting thing to see. I'm no fan of international competition in junior classes anyway. Too much too young.

But the trouble with evaluating anything like this is that you never get to know what would have happened. 

My understanding was that the Radial catered to a different group, the vast majority of them too light to be competitive under the standard rig. I have old pre-Radial newsletters around, complete with markings indicating those who qualified for the Under 70kg prize. There were very few of them, and most of them were women who were already a sub group. If the new rigs were slower than the old and catered for a different group in the way the Radial and 4.7 did, I'd have no issue with them. However, it seems that each C rig is aimed fairly squarely at those who sail a current rig.

The Byte CII was arguably a failure when compared to the aims as I understood them; I thought the intention was to spark marked growth and pose a serious challenge to the Radial. I actually wonder what would have happened if the class had moved the other way, towards a smaller Laser-style rig to cater for the 4.7 bracket, and tried to work with the Laser instead of competing against it.

While we don't know what would have happened, I'm 99% sure that we can look at a whole lot of classes where proponents of rig changes claimed that the new rig would spark growth, and that such growth did not occur. We can therefore say that we simply should not believe such claims, or certainly not as they are normally made. 

I think jgh66's route could be much more successful - maintain the speed and basic design but use modern technology to increase durability, reduce cost and perhaps even increase comfort with chamfered deck panels or something. 

It sometimes think that as we age, we forget how what seems modern to us is in many ways ageless to many kids. A kid sailing a 4.7 would have been born about 23 years after I first saw a monofilm fully-battened roachy sail, perhaps on a carbon mast, driving a high speed Kevlar hull. They would not have been born when the Lechner, the carbon-masted Mistral and then the 49er  took such sails into the Olympics. If the age of technology is relevant to modern kids (and many of them are fascinated by retro stuff) then a clear plastic roachy sail is arguably just as prehistoric as dacron. They were not around when either was new, therefore both of them are often seen as being of the same age. And the kids who are fashion tragics have probably never sailed and never will.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view, it is mistake to compare the Laser to the Contender or Byte/ByteII. 

Because in a bad year, the Laser sells 2000 new boats and there are 85 active countries sailing Lasers (based on who voted in the recent ballot) - plus the Standard and the Radial are Olympic. All of these make a difference - and means we are in uncharted territory. Plus there sheer number of boats. 200K makes a difference.

Also, the Laser has had a weird history with it's system of contracts resulting in very few builders (almost SMOD).

And now it is changing, with multiple builders about to be appointed.

Plus the world has changed - direct sales are possible which raises existential questions of dealers in the Laser equation. I think local dealers will survive, but it will be different. For example, it makes financial sense to freight multiple boats to a single location - and dealers are well placed to be that single location. Then there are all of the accessories - from spare parts to clothing, trailers, dollys - the list goes on.

Key to everyone is growing our sport. There are opportunities to reduce the cost of new rigs (and new boats). The question really becomes to what extent the Laser class will embrace what needs to be done in order to achieve that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

It is uncharted territory for sure.

There is no rig upgrade for a SMOD, though the Laser class is a MMOD.

The three classes: Standard, Radial and 4.7 are all successful in their own right.

The big question is whether or not to replace the rig or to introduce a new one - however before doing that, a proper investigation into the different scenarios needs to be undertaken.

So looking at the 4.7 / C5, in the long term, they are very similar - if the C5 can be sold at the same price as an alloy rig - and it lasts longer, plus supports a greater weight range - then it constitutes an advancement. 

How about if the pricing of a C5 rig was initially cheaper than the current 4.7 rig? (The thing about crowd sourcing is that it can be combined with other fleet based initiatives).

Can a crowd sourcing solution be achieved without cutting out local dealers? Can crowd sourcing packages include local dealers? (Bulk buying, also savings on freight).

Again, key to this is to proceed slowly, so that everyone has time to adjust to the change.

And sacrificing fleets sailing is not an option.

Bruce, I think you've omitted a key point here: A crucial, significant difference between the 4.7 and the other two existing rigs is that there is no legacy fleet. Virtually everyone who currently owns a 4.7 rig is expecting to offload it in the near future (you know how I know :-). Furthermore, many of those buying into the 4.7 are doing it at a transitional stage, so the economics and investment calculations are a bit different. This should make the transition less difficult than for the other rigs.

 This could be the "thin end of the wedge" but it's widely acknowledged that the 4.7 has some flaws that have limited it's adoption, so the crack into which that wedge can be fitted is wider than elsewhere, too...

Cheers,

              W.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What kids are complaining? All the kids I have seen sailing Optis and Lasers  are having a blast. Not many 9 - 16 year olds know a lot about the benefits of modern materials, can't tell the difference between travelling upwind at 4.8 knots vs 5 knots, and certainly have little interest in reductions in inertia. For the most part, they want to participate in a group setting with similar aged people and have as much fun as they can. A percentage of those are more competitive than others and will excel in racing. Do people honestly believe that a lighter boat with a clear sail and a carbon mast will attract more kids into the sport and make them life-long participants? So instead of 400 kids at Opti regattas there will be 500? And a new rig on a Laser will change numbers dramatically anywhere other than SE Asia (and I am from Missouri on that one)? I have never heard a group of kids huddling in a circle after a breezy race complaining about the bend characteristics in their rig. They are smiling from ear to ear talking about how much fun they were having. Even the ones from the back of the fleet! Most (not all) kids are social by nature and want to fit in with their pals. The most important thing to them in terms of gear is they have the latest Zhik kit!

Once a kid is up and running after a solid education in a couple older designs, they can wing off and join the adults in the wildly successful more modern designs that are now all the rage on a global basis. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

Bruce, I think you've omitted a key point here: A crucial, significant difference between the 4.7 and the other two existing rigs is that there is no legacy fleet. Virtually everyone who currently owns a 4.7 rig is expecting to offload it in the near future (you know how I know :-). Furthermore, many of those buying into the 4.7 are doing it at a transitional stage, so the economics and investment calculations are a bit different. This should make the transition less difficult than for the other rigs.

 This could be the "thin end of the wedge" but it's widely acknowledged that the 4.7 has some flaws that have limited it's adoption, so the crack into which that wedge can be fitted is wider than elsewhere, too...

100% agreed.

Also, the transitional nature lends weight to formulating a solution that allows for easier access (aka lower costs), then taking time (4 years?) to implement it.

4 minutes ago, bill4 said:

Once a kid is up and running after a solid education in a couple older designs, they can wing off and join the adults in the wildly successful more modern designs that are now all the rage on a global basis. 

Here's the rub.

Based on 2018 sales, the Laser still is the 'wildly successful' design which is "all the rage on a global basis".

According to World Sailing, the number of boats built over the last 5 years based on their 2018 reports:

  • 9359 Lasers (Standard / Radial / 4.7)
  • 2300 x RS Feva
  • 1832 x RS Aero
  • 1463 x RS Tera
  • 603 x 29ers
  • 505 x  49ers / 49erFX
  • 400 x Nacra 17
  • 88 x Musto Skiff

Also:

  • 1673 x 420
  • 1008 x Topper
  • 612 x 470
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2019 at 9:33 AM, Bruce Hudson said:

So to state the obvious, ILCA membership can be increased the following ways:

  • Existing sailors join ILCA (This is about the value proposition of membership)
  • New sailors (Butts on boats in the Standard, Radial and 4.7)
  • Clubs, coaches and sailing schools
  • New boats (like the Radial was, for the distant future).

There also can be initiatives at the country level.

The above listing (and the discussion on the same post of the current "benefits of membership" as presented by ILCA-NA, UKLA, the Australian Districts and NED' and the "steps for excellence") is somewhat missing the points that I thought I made earlier about how to increase ILCA membership.

  • The existence of various listings of the "benefits of membership" in ILCA-NA, UKLA, AUS, NED and other such regions or districts with already developed Laser class associations is irrelevant. What is relevant and important is the absence of such information in the vast majority of ILCA Districts. Ultimately, ILCA is responsible for this absence.
  • The listed "benefits of membership" mostly look like indirect fringe benefits, with very few of them (e.g., 10% discount for boat insurance in UKLA) as direct, tangible, localized monetary benefits that would compel a Laser sailor to consider joining the class association. Ultimately, it is all local Laser class associations who are responsible for the absence of such arrangements.
  • In addition to localized tangible benefits, there can and should also be globally relevant tangible benefits of membership developed/organized/arranged directly by ILCA. Examples may include a free "ILCA Hat", or a "5% discount by the Builders" on selected parts negotiated directly by ILCA. The absence of any such arrangement to date is the responsibility of ILCA.
  • The information provided by ILCA or the local class associations in publications like Laser World, Gybe, The Laser Sailor or other local magazines or flyers are not convincing. Laser information must have more organization, more scope, depth and permanence. ILCA must offer all its members of all levels of experience vast amounts local and general expert information (similar to the old drLaser website) in all languages of all its districts. It can be done with the contributions of all who love this class. 
  • Referring parenthetically to "initiatives at the country level" is missing the whole boat. MNA-level initiatives are the most important and productive steps of increasing global ILCA memberships. ILCA is responsible for all of the related "deficiencies" below:
    • First of all, ILCA must immediately ensure that in all MNAs without a class association, the 'Contact Person" must be a Laser sailor familiar with the Class Rules and does not simultaneously represent any other dinghy classes.
    • Secondly, ILCA must over time not allow any MNA not to have a local (constitutional) Laser Class Association
    • Third ILCA must confront all Districts which report the membership numbers untruthfully and devise the necessary means of achieving truthfulness in reporting.
    • Fourth, ILCA must revise the current implementation of "sanctioned events" and must ensure via the local class associations or class-representatives at the MNA that non-members do not participate in sanctioned events.
    • Finally, local class associations must ensure that non-legal parts are not used in sanctioned events.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, drLaser said:

The existence of various listings of the "benefits of membership" in ILCA-NA, UKLA, AUS, NED and other such regions or districts with already developed Laser class associations is irrelevant. What is relevant and important is the absence of such information in the vast majority of ILCA Districts. Ultimately, ILCA is responsible for this absence.

100% agreed. 

Note: "ILCA" is not just those who are elected to office. It is every single ILCA member. (Including me).

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bruce Hudson said:

"ILCA" is not just those who are elected to office. 

Sure. ILCA includes all its members, too. However, we members are not the ones directly responsible for the "absence of such membership benefits information" in a majority of ILCA districts. In a Districts which already has a class association, it is the officers of that local class association who are directly responsible. On the other hand, in those districts where a class association does not even exist, it is the officers of the International class association and the World Council who are responsible for letting such districts operate without a Laser class association.

As members, we are ultimately and indirectly responsible, as those who (directly or indirectly) elect the ILCA officers.

It is mind boggling that in a District like TUR (with 400+ avid Laser racers, with the most recent 4.7 Youth European Champion, a top contender in the most recent Laser Radial Worlds, etc), 92% of the Laser sailors have not even heard of "ILCA"', 98% have never seen any Class Rules document, and 100% (minus one) have not even heard of an "ILCA Constitution". The fault is not mine, not yours, but rests squarely on the shoulders of all past and present ILCA international officers.

The God almighty federation managing all sailing activities in TUR has reporting only 100 class members in 2019 to ILCA. A nice, round figure. Down from 300 to 200 and finally to 100 in 2019. They are cheating ILCA! If ILCA insisted on TUR having a constitutional Laser Class Association, both the number of Turkish ILCA members and ILCA revenues from Turkey would increase by 300% or more. Same goes for the 30 other MNAs in Europe without Laser class associations. Same goes for the 80 other active ILCA Districts (latter number made up, but I can count, if required) around the world without Laser class associations. 

It is VERY EASY to achieve the growth of the Class Association. If there is the political will and power. 

I have to be educated about why it has ben impossible for ILCA to insist on the establishment of local class associations around the world. Is there a clause in our Constitution that prevents us? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what you are saying, and where you are coming from.

(I have been 'corrupted' by being effective in my pursuit of change, and have 'incurable optimism' of the possibility of effecting positive change. This is a super power that in my view everyone potentially has. As an ILCA member, I am responsible for governance - albeit a small part.)

52 minutes ago, drLaser said:

I have to be educated about why it has ben impossible for ILCA to insist on the establishment of local class associations around the world. Is there a clause in our Constitution that prevents us? 

It is less about political will and choices.

Consider the possibility that it hasn't been on the table for consideration previously - and now there are rumblings - that these changes may be considered too hard - plus throw in misplaced notions of 'freedom' (how dare ILCA 'require nations act in a specific way? ;) ) - and we begin to paint a picture.

---

Changing the constitution is one avenue, are there other, better agents of change? (I genuinely don't know).

---

If there was a requirement for there to be a national body, with a constitution:

  • Are there other sports where this already is the case? (Setting a president is still good, just harder - and more exciting).
  • What are the risks?
  • What are the steps needed to be taken?
  • What other changes related to improve governance which can be made?
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

Quit mocking the Native Americans 

I'm not. I genuinely want to know how you got to think that what I said was "singular most ignorant statement ever put forth in these forums"?

Also, while I have your attention, what you have to gain by attempting to attack me?

You have a lot of energy Gouv. Using that for destructive purposes can result in responses in kind. I refuse to do that with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not attacking you. I am doing my very best to suggest you quit making an ass of yourself 

I have no idea why you feel compelled to spend endless hours serving as cheerleader for whatever it is you believe you are supporting. 

It is becoming more and more painful to watch as you serve your obsession.

it is the middle of the night and you are acting like an old man in government housing with a Twitter account. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

I am not attacking you. I am doing my very best to suggest you quit making an ass of yourself 

Like this?

1 hour ago, Gouvernail said:

Perhaps this is the singular most ignorant statement ever put forth in these forums. 

I hear you. You judge me as making an ass of myself. Go it. Others don't. 

So to be clear, you think you are communicating to me that I am making an ass of myself by making an ass of yourself?

9 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

I have no idea why you feel compelled to spend endless hours serving as cheerleader for whatever it is you believe you are supporting. 

It is an intersection of several topics which I am very passionate about. (I promise you, I don't spend endless hours. Lasering or this forum is not my primary focus.)

Also, my want is to make improvements to sailing's governance because it needs it.

13 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

It is becoming more and more painful to watch as you serve your obsession.

Then don't watch. (But then, that's your obsession, isn't it?!)

Again, how can what I said above be "singular most ignorant statement ever put forth in these forums"?

13 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

it is the middle of the night and you are acting like an old man in government housing with a Twitter account. 

Um. Are you seriously trying to draw a parallel between me and Trump? We see each other's FB accounts so we both know we have similar disdain for Trump. So, again, you are doing this to yank my chain? Was it your intention to promote yourself as someone who does that?

---

Where are you going with this Gouv?

Above, there are several people wanting to engage on the topic of making improvements to ILCA. Seems to me that you want to oppose this. You are bigger than to try to use negativity in the name of 'fun', so please stop. You worked in ILCA-NA governance. You have insights and energy. And your contributions are:

1 hour ago, Gouvernail said:

Quit mocking the Native Americans 

On 8/13/2019 at 2:35 PM, Gouvernail said:

Just WOW!! I cannot believe World Seiling Just rejected the rule change. 

On 8/16/2019 at 1:16 PM, Gouvernail said:

I don’t care 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Wess said:

LOL, just put him on ignore. 

Life is much better if you just ignore those who cannttt understand a joke, cannttt construct a logical argument, and cannttt resist trying to tear down those who do make constructive and insightful contributions to this forum like Wess and Gouvernail.

Now I am going to go and mow the lawn... and then go sailing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

How?

 

1 hour ago, Gouvernail said:

Quit mocking the Native Americans 

 

1 hour ago, Bruce Hudson said:

I'm not. 

  • Image result for something going over someones head
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, bill4 said:

 

 

  • Image result for something going over someones head

Come on man.  I am old.  Damn near peed my pants laughing. OMG I love this place!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, drLaser said:

The above listing (and the discussion on the same post of the current "benefits of membership" as presented by ILCA-NA, UKLA, the Australian Districts and NED' and the "steps for excellence") is somewhat missing the points that I thought I made earlier about how to increase ILCA membership.

  • The existence of various listings of the "benefits of membership" in ILCA-NA, UKLA, AUS, NED and other such regions or districts with already developed Laser class associations is irrelevant. What is relevant and important is the absence of such information in the vast majority of ILCA Districts. Ultimately, ILCA is responsible for this absence.
  • The listed "benefits of membership" mostly look like indirect fringe benefits, with very few of them (e.g., 10% discount for boat insurance in UKLA) as direct, tangible, localized monetary benefits that would compel a Laser sailor to consider joining the class association. Ultimately, it is all local Laser class associations who are responsible for the absence of such arrangements.
  • In addition to localized tangible benefits, there can and should also be globally relevant tangible benefits of membership developed/organized/arranged directly by ILCA. Examples may include a free "ILCA Hat", or a "5% discount by the Builders" on selected parts negotiated directly by ILCA. The absence of any such arrangement to date is the responsibility of ILCA.
  • The information provided by ILCA or the local class associations in publications like Laser World, Gybe, The Laser Sailor or other local magazines or flyers are not convincing. Laser information must have more organization, more scope, depth and permanence. ILCA must offer all its members of all levels of experience vast amounts local and general expert information (similar to the old drLaser website) in all languages of all its districts. It can be done with the contributions of all who love this class. 
  • Referring parenthetically to "initiatives at the country level" is missing the whole boat. MNA-level initiatives are the most important and productive steps of increasing global ILCA memberships. ILCA is responsible for all of the related "deficiencies" below:
    • First of all, ILCA must immediately ensure that in all MNAs without a class association, the 'Contact Person" must be a Laser sailor familiar with the Class Rules and does not simultaneously represent any other dinghy classes.
    • Secondly, ILCA must over time not allow any MNA not to have a local (constitutional) Laser Class Association
    • Third ILCA must confront all Districts which report the membership numbers untruthfully and devise the necessary means of achieving truthfulness in reporting.
    • Fourth, ILCA must revise the current implementation of "sanctioned events" and must ensure via the local class associations or class-representatives at the MNA that non-members do not participate in sanctioned events.
    • Finally, local class associations must ensure that non-legal parts are not used in sanctioned events.

I thought this was an excellent post, but as I don’t understand English I’m not so sure now ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2019 at 9:34 PM, JulianB said:

Bruce and Curious, super interesting observations.

We know Kickstarter/Indigo campaigns very well.  Done about 5 of them to date, all successful.

A Kickstarter/Indigo campaign for the C5 & possible C6.

C5 is pretty cut and dry, the 4.7 works really well in Europe but has missed the mark in the rest of the world to a large extent.   Takao has been on my case for years about it's "inappropriateness" (the 4.7) for the Asian market and it took almost no convincing of him and my HK based/Asian partner to back this, Tracy saw the point almost instantaneously and the rest as you say is history.

Hmmmmmm, this has the the potential to break the nexus, that is slow start = higher than it needs to be introductory price which tends to linger.

If we got say 500 people to buy into C5 up-front at a "crowd source" price, then that in turn will = a "real price" without any baggage!

500 is above the trigger point~!

But we need to tie in dealers, because, at present they are still the back-bone of the sport.   And that wont change, nor do I think its good to change, we need a community!

There are exciting possibilities about crowd sourcing in higher volumes. I think that there can be a great pitch made to a manufacturers who get the contracts for the initial order. Multiple manufacturers can be used, in fact may need to be to achieve the volumes in a short time. There are quite a few sail makers, but not so many composite mast manufacturers. (Most are set up for custom builds in the pursuit of speed - rather than mass production of the same speed).

@JulianB - I have no doubt you have run some numbers - are you able to share any without getting into trouble?

---

So here's a thought from the top of my head to tie in local dealers.

ILCA, along with national branches maintain a list of approved suppliers, which are set up in the following way:

  • Any dealer can apply
  • Dealers worldwide are listed on ILCA's website
  • Dealers must stock at least one new boat, with each rig available and spare parts. (Reorders must be made within 24 hours of running out of any item)
  • ILCA members get a 5% discount off all purchases

In return, the crowd sourced initial order for the new rig goes through the dealers who get a small margin (20%?) applied to the new rigs (for the initial order). This will make distribution a lot more efficient.

---

I'm thinking 500 would be easily attained and far higher volumes (3000+ ?) could be achieved - particularly if:

  • A long lead time (eg sailors had 18 months to order, after a years warning of the change)
  • the rig replaced the existing one
  • the cost for the new sail and composite spars was US$600 or less (based on 3000 plus orders)

---

Also, the worldwide distribution would be on the same month.

---

Note that this scenario is being developed to weigh up the best case versus not changing from the current rig. In my view, the new rig needs to be better than the existing rig - by better I mean:

  • Less expensive
  • Longer lasting
  • Expands competitive weight (which according to Julian is already achieved)

And approved by 67% of ILCA members.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

(I have been 'corrupted' by being effective in my pursuit of change, and have 'incurable optimism' of the possibility of effecting positive change. This is a super power that in my view everyone potentially has. As an ILCA member, I am responsible for governance - albeit a small part.)

Shazam!

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

Now I am going to go and mow the lawn... and then go sailing.

I am absolutely positive I didn't catch up on this thread until now, and having done so, am also absolutely positive that the time last week digging a lichens-and-moss encrusted '70s Laser out from its rotting pine-needle bed in the wilderness, evicting all the small woodland creatures that had made it their home (so they wouldn't be drowned!  C'mon, I'm not a sadist!), finding some duct-tape to re-locate the deck back to somewhere near the hull along with sealing sundry other holes, and then blasting around alone under a decades-old bagged-out sail was much, much better spent. 

I probably could have placed in a club fleet with that rig, but would have been protested for all the duct-tape and the improvised turks-head around the end of the boom to turn the outhaul, where rivets normally lurk.  Not class-legal.  Tsk tsk. 

I absolutely love the boats, and just got another boondock-boat to sail again.  But I positively hate the politics.  Cheers all.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but in my club no one is all that fussy about being class-legal. I suppose if someone was sailing circles around everyone else with an Intensity sail or whatever, that would be an issue. In practice that does not happen.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bacq2bacq said:

I absolutely love the boats, and just got another boondock-boat to sail again.  But I positively hate the politics. 

This post is not about politics. :)  Pretty good actually. Just the right amount of crazy in my view.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bruce,

I'm not avoiding your question, I just don't have the answers yet.

Caldecoat picked $USD2,500 for the C5 as a introductory price.

I don't know what is or is not in that!

And UM dose not want to build rigs, it dose not do that, so we have to find someone in China who can, because the target is Asia/Oceania.     Europe/America's even South America is a walk in the park, we have people knocking at our door daily.

Also what would really make a difference WRT a KS/Indigo is volume, so if say a club in southern China orders 50 rigs and another club in Singapore orders 10, then the price to China should be less than to Singapore but I don't know if we can do that with KS/Indigo.     And if 50 individuals in Singapore order rigs do we consolidate and give them a 50 rig price or do we give them a less (of a discount) because of the processing cost, etc etc.

This is above my pay-grade, some geniuses in HK need to work this all out!~    They have done it all before.

The normal rule of thumb is 20-25% off to do a KS/Indigo, and that's fair.       There are obviously conditions attached.     I remember Harry did one with some glasses and it was 7 months before they for-filled.       That was a-bit extreme but this could blow out to 3 months, depending on demand, but we want all our ducks in a row before we pull the trigger.

So bear with me, I don't want to go promising the world and only delivering New Zealand (pun intended)!

             jB

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JulianB said:

So bear with me, I don't want to go promising the world and only delivering New Zealand (pun intended)!

All good Julian. No rush, I anticipate that the new rigs won't be ready for some time - plus the approval process...

...unless the new rig can be made far cheaper without sacrificing quality and consistency - then the excitement may take over!

My assumption that they hadn't evolved from boutique manufacturing to proper production runs was misplaced. Achieving consistency drives cost up. (We might have chatted with the same guy about production ;) ) Anyhow, the uptake is that composite masts are more expensive than I initially assumed.

The current rigs, based on German reseller Ziegelmayer's website pices, right now costs (including VAT):

Standard

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €225 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €625 Sail
  • €55 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang
  • TOTAL: €2075 (US$2301)

Radial

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €215 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €625 Sail (MK2)
  • €35 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang (Is it the same?)
  • TOTAL: €2045 (US$2268)

4.7

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €190 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €495 Sail
  • €35 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang
  • TOTAL: €1890 (US$2096)

---

This is a low bar to beat. Having said that... with the new builders, these prices are in my view likely to drop.

---

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the typical sailor, of course, it's not a choice between buying a 2200 current rig and a 2500 new rig - it's a choice between keeping their current rig (perhaps spending 800-900 on a new sail and section) and spending 2500 to get a new one.

The C rigs were tested at the Royal Sydney Yacht Squadron - a place where the annual membership fee is about $1400 US. Of course, the testers were juniors, who are not paying for anything.

The typical Laser club around here has an annual membership fee of about $270 USD.  I'd suggest that common sense and experience indicates that is about what the membership will bear. There's a huge difference between what the average Laser sailor is happy to pay for club membership and what the rig testers (or those who pay for their fees and boats) were happy to pay. That surely has significance when it comes to looking at how much the typical sailor wants (or can afford) to pay, and how representative the rig testers were.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bacq2bacq said:

I am absolutely positive I didn't catch up on this thread until now, and having done so, am also absolutely positive that the time last week digging a lichens-and-moss encrusted '70s Laser out from its rotting pine-needle bed in the wilderness, evicting all the small woodland creatures that had made it their home (so they wouldn't be drowned!  C'mon, I'm not a sadist!), finding some duct-tape to re-locate the deck back to somewhere near the hull along with sealing sundry other holes, and then blasting around alone under a decades-old bagged-out sail was much, much better spent. 

I probably could have placed in a club fleet with that rig, but would have been protested for all the duct-tape and the improvised turks-head around the end of the boom to turn the outhaul, where rivets normally lurk.  Not class-legal.  Tsk tsk. 

I absolutely love the boats, and just got another boondock-boat to sail again.  But I positively hate the politics.  Cheers all.

Just imagine the situation in a couple of years, when someone likes you digs the boat out and finds that they can't place in a club fleet because the keen sailors are using different rigs that make their boats go significantly faster and have different tuning techniques.

The boat will probably stay in the lichens, because who would get an old boat out when they will have to spend about 2500 quid extra to get what they currently get (ie a one design Laser that is competitive in club racing)?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that this is hypothetical, about putting together the 'best shot' - as this is the Laser - it is not just about a good rig, its about one design values, about maximizing access (aka minimizing cost) and not mucking up the current fleet size.

I agree with all of your comments. Particularly this:

3 hours ago, Curious said:

For the typical sailor, of course, it's not a choice between buying a 2200 current rig and a 2500 new rig - it's a choice between keeping their current rig (perhaps spending 800-900 on a new sail and section) and spending 2500 to get a new one.

If I was trying to score points against you (and I'm not), then I would be pointing out that in time there will be a second hand market...

...the reason I won't is because:

3 hours ago, Curious said:

Just imagine the situation in a couple of years, when someone likes you digs the boat out and finds that they can't place in a club fleet because the keen sailors are using different rigs that make their boats go significantly faster and have different tuning techniques.

The boat will probably stay in the lichens, because who would get an old boat out when they will have to spend about 2500 quid extra to get what they currently get (ie a one design Laser that is competitive in club racing)?

The first way to mitigate the issue is by having a long period of time between it being announced, and the new rig (in the replacement scenario) being suddenly introduced.

You mention Curious that your local club has an annual fee of US$270. That is about 10% of most Californian clubs. The one I settled on using was US$660 per year. But also I spend time in New Zealand, where my annual fee is US$38 (plus annual race entry of US$45). It is one of the strongest Laser clubs around.

When you lower cost, you increase access - it literally increases butts on boats.

---

There are other ways to get people sailing - and to fund boats.

  • Club Boats: There are 20 boats for hire at RAYC. Basically you turn up to a club race day - pay a rental fee and go sailing. They got 45 people turning up at various times for Thursday twilight races over the summer. I'm thinking that every club should have a few good boats available always.
  • Charter company: Same as above but city / region wide. This could be crowd funded and set up as a not for profit.
  • Finance: With low or no interest. 

--- 

I'm sure there are other ideas.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, spankoka said:

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but in my club no one is all that fussy about being class-legal.

That's probably the universal truth. But that's also the reason why the individual sailor does not personally understand and experience the role of the Class Association on the water, on a daily basis.

Not caring about whether class-legal parts are used in inter-club, local racing is part of the reason why all of the Laser sailors do not have an interest in joining the Class. Currently, joining the Class does not affect the grassroots or club sailor who uses Intensity sails, OptiParts deck cleat bases, etc. However, joining the class and having a vote would allow them to have a voice in specifying what is acceptable, under what conditions.

The anti-trust drive of WS creates the perfect opportunity for giving a chance to all "non-legal" parts manufacturers to become legal.

This was the reason why I had included "ensuring the use of legal parts" as a means of increasing Class membership. It made sense to me at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bruce, I originally wrote a much longer screed in answer to you, and you comments re quality and consistency just hit a nerve.

With the 49er we have a bit of a philosophy that the sails should last longer than "X".     I'm not going to quote "X" because that will open Pandora's box but when we increase the downhaul on the 49er (because the FX girls had 6:1) and the boys started pulling the life out of the lower main, so we move pretty quickly to alter the construction of the lower main so the level of destruction was lifted above the norm, and everyone started being happy again.

But you have to use 1 jib, you can't have a heavy and a light and a medium and a wavy one etc etc, you have one "race jib" and it should last longer than "X".

We have already lift the life span of the masts from needing 3-4 in one year to them lasting 3-4 years, sails wont last that long, but "X" is not an event, or one breezy race.

So what I am going to post is the part of the screed that relates to that, which I wrote before.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hi Bruce.

The issue with sails is what do you want?

Starting at the beginning, what base cloth do you use, how well have the layers been bonded, what is the fibre, what is the accuracy of the Um tolerance. We have found huge discrepancies in sail material, even today we reject 15-18% of cloth.    Every bolt has to be tested at the loft in Shenzhen before it's used and if it does not meet spec, it's used on another product!  Do you want a sail that is made in a stack of say 3-5 layers, where the laser cuts the material relatively accurately and therefore the finished product is pretty accurate, or do you want a sail that is cut in a stack of 20 or 30 where the laser is fighting to get through so the one on the top is smaller, (because of the heat) and the laser goes off alignment etc etc.   And a Daisy wheel cutter is 10 x as bad.    Then you get into the treatment of the cloth pre-cutting.   Do you heat soak it at a specific temp and a specific humidity prior to cutting (because of the fumes it has to be cut "outside") and then only take those panels your actually cutting to the table for the shortest period of time, when the climatic conditions are about right,  then get them back into the Temp/Humidity controlled environment ASAP.  Then you get to the add on's. We specify a Spectra luff tape, its 10 x more expensive than a cheap Dacron one, but 100 x easier to pull up the mast and is repeatable when it comes to its down-haul tensions and the effects on the sail shape, and the alike.   And then you get into the control process of what tension you put the tapes on at.    And if you think that dose not make a massive difference, think again!!!!!!!!!!!   Then we get into computer shaped battens, and re-shrink wrapping them, so you have some sort of measurement control.        Dead easy to make a cheap sail, and 1:10 will be good, but that's 9 pissed off customers.       Our current hit is to have less than 0.5% (of pissed of customers) and quite often that is user error.    

And then you get into tweaking the sail, so one of the big things we do is not allow the sailmaker to deal directly with the client.   That way we can be relatively sure that there will be no collusion, touch a seam and the sail is illegal!  And then, we have a ability to maintain a dealer network, and as I have said  a few times,  Dealers are super important in that they make the community and you need to pay for them somehow.

Masts are actually far simpler.   Everyone has a Lynstrom machine.    We specify a 3-point test.   So, we support the section at the ends, push down in the middle and measure at the 1/4's.  And if you push down at 3 different loads, you can also get the action of the tube, rather than just it's stiffness.  Its repeatable, you can take a tube that has been made in NZ and test it in Valencia (and this happens all the time).      Presently we test 1:10 sections and provided they remain within tolerance, and tolerance is 1/4 - 1/8 of industrial tolerance then we don't touch a thing.   If they see the tolerance migrating one way, they massage the laminate stack to bring it back to centre.   Lots and lots of reasons why it will go one way or the other, and to date, other than a rash of rejections because some clown chose to measure in a different way, our rejection rate is absurdly low.

 So the reason I ranted on, is you need to be aware of what is you are buying.

Yes we could do it a whole lot cheaper, and possibly we should sell off the parts that don't meet spec at say 1/2 price because it will in-fact bring the cost of everything done.   They could not be used in sanctioned races off-course, but getting 1/2 price for a reject is better than getting nothing (obviously).   But to-date we don't do that!   And there are very few!

But the biggest differentiator is how many you buy.      You can't beat MoQ's.       So if there are say 50 Italians that want C5's then we ship 100 sets of bits to Milan, they are shipped directly and individually from source.   In this case Laminates from Australia, Sails from China, parts from HK and Fittings from (presently) USA.   That way you minimise logistics and duties.  And because they are coming in as parts and there is value adding in Italy, and you partially pay for a Italian to start the community.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mate, I'm too old to get into the cheap shit.   Happy to use my contacts and happy to consolidate orders and if people pre-pay and take all the hassle out of the purchase process then they become part of the process and as such deserve to pay a price as part of a process.

Where as someone who walks in off the street, buys one items and wants to talk the ear of Alberto for 3 hrs in the process, deserves to buy at a RRP price. 

Back to 29ers, very happy there are copy jibs, (Copying is the greatest compliment!!) but I get pretty upset when the ICA resists wanting to up-spec, to make it better, but that also happens and when they do, they knee jerk it through and make a mess of it, and you end up wearing the shit "because how could they be wrong"!    

At the end of the day, 90% of them are well meaning volunteers and should never be put in that position anyway, its the 10% that think they know everything that make the mess.

And then we get into Association structure, and if ever there was a siren call to look at that structure in today's Fb/WeChat world, it's the recent ILCA dramas.

The fat lady did not just sing, she screamed from the roof tops.   The umpire has spoken, just move on!!!!!!!!!!

Those that got it wrong, go away!     And those that got it right, the world is your oyster!

Anyway, that's my rant for the night!!

                    jB

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, spankoka said:

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but in my club no one is all that fussy about being class-legal. I suppose if someone was sailing circles around everyone else with an Intensity sail or whatever, that would be an issue. In practice that does not happen.  

If someone is sailing circles around you with an intensity sail keep letting them do it and ask them what they are doing.  Trust me.  It ain't the sail... and you'll become a better sailor for it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bruce Hudson said:

All good Julian. No rush, I anticipate that the new rigs won't be ready for some time - plus the approval process...

...unless the new rig can be made far cheaper without sacrificing quality and consistency - then the excitement may take over!

My assumption that they hadn't evolved from boutique manufacturing to proper production runs was misplaced. Achieving consistency drives cost up. (We might have chatted with the same guy about production ;) ) Anyhow, the uptake is that composite masts are more expensive than I initially assumed.

The current rigs, based on German reseller Ziegelmayer's website pices, right now costs (including VAT):

Standard

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €225 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €625 Sail
  • €55 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang
  • TOTAL: €2075 (US$2301)

Radial

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €215 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €625 Sail (MK2)
  • €35 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang (Is it the same?)
  • TOTAL: €2045 (US$2268)

4.7

  • €595 Top Section (Composite)
  • €190 Bottom section
  • €260 Boom
  • €495 Sail
  • €35 Battens
  • €315 Turbo vang
  • TOTAL: €1890 (US$2096)

---

This is a low bar to beat. Having said that... with the new builders, these prices are in my view likely to drop.

---

I'm not sure it's time to get too worked up about this.  The laser is approved for the Olympics through 2024 in it's current configuration.  That should mean, (with exception of the 4.7 rig) that there will be no rig changes to the boat, (significant changes/class votes) until 2023 at the absolute earliest.  As I'm typing this I just realized that's only like 3 years away....Damn I'm getting old.  Continue on... 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Curious said:

Just imagine the situation in a couple of years, when someone likes you digs the boat out and finds that they can't place in a club fleet because the keen sailors are using different rigs that make their boats go significantly faster and have different tuning techniques.

The boat will probably stay in the lichens, because who would get an old boat out when they will have to spend about 2500 quid extra to get what they currently get (ie a one design Laser that is competitive in club racing)?

But C, if you dig that old boat out of the weeds you're already stuffed because you haven't got a low profile carbon tiller or a set of XD controls or whatever... And if you buy all that gear its money straight out of the door because you've still got a clapped out old boat that's worth next to nothing. 

Personally I'd agree the time is wrong for new larger rigs, the new topmasts and new large sail design are far too recent. An alternative smaller rig for the areas where neither the ghastly 4.7 or the Radial cut it on the other hand is arguably a different matter.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Yeller said:

Could someone out there who is in favor of introducing the C rigs please list the top 3 or 5 reasons for doing so? Because I honestly do not see the need. 

I did not understand properly what kind of problems with the 4.7 exist in Asia, and for what ages and genders the C5  is meant to be.  Generally I don't think that it is good to destroy an existing class by changing to a rig that is different in regards to performance. That would be different if the majority of current 4.7 kids say that the 4.7 is shit, and either the class brings new rigs or they move into an other class. If the C5 is meant to form a new class for ages and genders that currently can't join the class and not to replace existing classes and there is no real competition between the rigs - why not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Yeller said:

Could someone out there who is in favor of introducing the C rigs please list the top 3 or 5 reasons for doing so? Because I honestly do not see the need. 

I suppose one reason would be that it would help keep people looking for higher performance and more modern kit in the laser game. However yeah; by the time the C rig would get Canadian taxes and duties applied.....it would cost plenty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Yeller said:

Could someone out there who is in favor of introducing the C rigs please list the top 3 or 5 reasons for doing so? Because I honestly do not see the need. 

Not sure I qualify as being in favour but the point of the C5 is that the 4.7 is underpowered for the hull and overly heavy for junior sailors to handle when capsized. It works pretty well when powered up in a decent breeze but isn't well balanced in light airs. For those sailors too light to sail a Radial (under 65Kg), the 4.7 is a fairly poor compromise.

 It's successful in Europe, where good winds are pretty common and the sailors are using it as a stepping stone to a Radial or Standard but has not successfully developed fleets of these transitioning youths in light wind venues nor fleets of small (under 65Kg) sailors.

 The C5 addresses this by being better balanced, lighter and more controllable but also more powerful. If successful, it would be the Go-To small rig for youths transitioning out of Oppies + other junior classes (Toppers, Bics, Zoom-8s, Starlings etc) and also for lightly built sailors (eg Asian Women). 

 The bigger rigs have a less well defined need (IMHO) but complete the set, offering similar "improvements" to bigger sailors and also including better lifespan, easier handling and other benefits of recent design & manufacturing developments.

 Hope that helps- JulianB, please correct any misapprehensions!  :-)

Cheers,

               W.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Old Yeller said:

Could someone out there who is in favor of introducing the C rigs please list the top 3 or 5 reasons for doing so? Because I honestly do not see the need. 

Again, list the top 3-5 reasons. Be succinct.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Old Yeller said:

Could someone out there who is in favor of introducing the C rigs please list the top 3 or 5 reasons for doing so? Because I honestly do not see the need. 

Again, list the top 3-5 reasons. Be succinct.
 

1.The future is not white sails on aluminum masts.

2. Kids like boats that look cool.

3. Everybody except Europeans hates 4.7 rigs.

4. Asian women are (on average) smaller than Anna Tunnicliffe.

5. There are 2.2 billion Asian women who don't yet sail Lasers.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Old Yeller said:

Again, list the top 3-5 reasons. Be succinct.

1. White sails are boring and clearly not the future

2. Short people got nobody

3. We've killed the sunfish so time to go after the Open Bic

4. Because we can

5. Asian countries are flooded with cash and will buy anything

Here's my go at it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Old Yeller said:

Again, list the top 3-5 reasons. Be succinct.

In order of importance, I'd say:

  1. Lighter rig, and hence 150,000 new potential light weight Far Eastern sailors who cannot currently handle the 4.7,
  2. 4.7 no longer under-powered and unbalanced (CoE) in light airs (whenever not block-to-block),
  3. Avoidance of block-to-block trimming and excessive vang loads, hence longer sail (and mast) life,
  4. Instead of replacing the upper mast every year, masts that remain competitive (reportedly) for 3-4 years.
  5. Mylar full-batten sails that keep their shapes much longer.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites