RYA National Hornet Association Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Public > Technical
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Spinnaker rule. AGM proposal
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Spinnaker rule. AGM proposal

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Strangler View Drop Down
Committee
Committee


Joined: 05 February 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 494
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Strangler Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Spinnaker rule. AGM proposal
    Posted: 10 August 2011 at 12:17

Comments below on the spinnaker proposal-       hope it all fits in comment box.

Toby Barsley-Dale [North Sails]
Any sail more than 6 months old (or reasonably used) should not have a panel added. The difference in stretch in the material will not do it any favours. We'd not be happy replacing a whole panel as a repair like that so we'd certainly not want to do it to an perfectly good spinnaker!

I guess my real arguement is that does the class actually need a change that will potentially split the fleet? This rule change gives three options
1. Buy a new kite (£450-500)
2. Mod an old kite (£150-300 as a best guess)
3. Keep old kite

How many people will change to option 1? Best guess, top 4-6 boats and maybe a couple of others? Net result front of the fleet are further ahead, reducing quality of racing and one or two with large cheque books artificially promote themselves up the fleet.

Option 2 potentially reduces this risk I agree, however this does assume that this can be done to kites from all manufacturers. MMac's cross cut sails are not too bad but thos of us with radial or mixed panel layouts will find it harder. It won't always be possible to add the extra in in the best position so the kite is further compromised. Will there be a performance gain? Minimal to my mind. net result spend money, go no faster

Option 3 leave alone. Get beaten by those with bigger kites, drop off the circuit.

Non of the above takes into consideration that the boat is narrow with minimal righting moment and a bigger kite will be hard for smaller teams to use. there are many small teams and lady crews, is this a good idea?

All these thoughts are prompted by experience with the 505 fleet who made the same change. It has taken a long time for them to recover the numbers in the UK and they had a much stronger position to build from. The 505's have re invented thir courses to suit the big sail but it is so impractical for club racing their handicap has hardly changed....

At the end of the day, I don't care if the rule goes through as there will be potential for a load of sails to be sold which is great for us, but I'd hate to see it at the detrement to the future of the class.

The boat is a pretty boat, if it's being changed purely for asthetics then don't bother!

As an aside I accept that the option of change in cloth could also impact on performance, but the percentage gain will be a lot smaller and Dacron sails do offer longer life so you can balance your outgoings and do what suits you (we have got Dacron sails coming not laminate although I was tempted!!!!)

As a newcomer to the fleet I'll not stir up anything, but if asked I'll have to voice an opinion and don't want to cause upset

John Shelton-

Excellent input - can I suggest you post this also on the public forum if Toby doesn't mind?

I'd make the following comments, not in any particular order:-

What's being proposed is nothing like the scale of the 505's - such a thing would certainly be detrimental to the class

I understood (but I may be wrong, being a relative newcomer) that the spinnaker change was the third prong after the pole lengthening, and the snodder removal. It's a completion of the process?

Personally, I think the change is more than mere aesthetics - if it were, then I agree, why bother?

The increase in area won't make the sail more unmanageable - if anything, it lowers the centre of effort. It won't (IMO) affect the ability of the boat to sail on standard triangular courses

The halfway house of adding a panel is, I agree, not the best solution, but it does keep some options for those who don't want to commit up front. But come on, why should others be held back because of them? By the way, Mac is of the view that adding the panel will probably cost around £70, so a little cheaper. Certainly cheaper than changing the mainsail cloth.

Also, do you think people would drop out of the fleet because they are left behind by a new sail? I venture to suggest they will drop out of the fleet because the class is moribund - they are far enough behind on the water as it is.

OK, I make it sound like I'm a great supporter - actually, having tried the sail for a limited period, I'm quite ambivalent - I really don't think the sail will be vastly different, until perhaps, a sailmaker starts from scratch with the new rule, and then we will maybe see some improvement. The purpose of the change is not to add panels to our existing spinnakers, it's meant to bring about the development of a better sail. If that's unlikely, then the input of a sailmaker is very welcome

However, I think we should sh*t or get off the pot. This discussion has been going on since before my prodigal return, and I was toying with the idea of adding another motion to say that we should not reconsider any spinnaker rule changes for another 10 years.

Back to Top
Harry Ashworth View Drop Down
Members
Members


Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: wolverhampton
Status: Offline
Points: 735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harry Ashworth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 August 2011 at 20:42
this email from Mike Mac, published with his kind consent:

Harry,

The purpose of this e mail is to apologise for a mistake I have made about
how the half height width of a Hornet spinnaker is affected when increasing
the height of the sail by 300mm.

In my various conversations with Tom and John I said that there was no need
to modify the cross width as it would not be unduly affected. I was wrong
because using the existing measurements  could  lead to a reduction in area.

The situation is that  by increasing the overall length by 300mm the half
height is measured approx 150mm lower than it is at the moment when the
edges are folded in half.The sail is rapidly getting wider at that point. On
the  sails that I have measured the cross width at the "old" position was
3250mm whilst at the new 150mm lower position it becomes 3400mm.The width is
therefore bigger than  the tolerances of Rule G,5.1 (2830-3350mm). The
effect of this is that
 a spinnakers made to my current design will be illegal and will have to be
made narrower.
Back to Top
Harry Ashworth View Drop Down
Members
Members


Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: wolverhampton
Status: Offline
Points: 735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harry Ashworth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 August 2011 at 12:30
Please note:

The spinnaker size increase proposal was DEFEATED

The proposal to permit free choice of mainsail cloth was CARRIED

The proposal to delete the requirement to have sail numbers on the spinnaker was CARRIED

These amendments are subject to RYA ratification and so are not yet effective
Back to Top
Toby B-D View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 18 August 2011
Location: Southampton
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Toby B-D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 August 2011 at 13:57
Just for reference, do we know when the rule changes will be submitted to the RYA and any hoped for implementation date for the rules to come into effect?

Thanks

Toby
Back to Top
Harry Ashworth View Drop Down
Members
Members


Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: wolverhampton
Status: Offline
Points: 735
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harry Ashworth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 August 2011 at 15:22
done, yesterday, response awaited
Back to Top
evbcinj View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 17 October 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote evbcinj Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 October 2011 at 01:56
  Thanks for sharing out so much of your precious opinions, see you after heated discussion: I feel that learning to many. Thank you!

----------------------------------------
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.18
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.092 seconds.