Ok, we generally acknowledge that the Uni boat is a bit disadvantaged, mainly through not having 4 hands and no jib. So if a sub class was to emerge what specifications would we desire.
16 ft seems a good length,
Spinny is it the right size
Mast, do we adopt the A Class knowledge and testing and go for unlimited mast length
Is 2.5 metres the right width.
Do we go for curved boards, they are becoming much more mainstream and costs are coming down
Do we want jibs.
Do we want 15sqm mains.
100kgs or even 90 kgs min weight ?
Just a few thoughts, this is only an academic excercise as the F16 rules are pretty set in stone, more a thinking of desirables, so what would you all want if you owned a dedicated 16ft single hander ?
If I were going to only race Uni, and if we had enough other Uni's to race against....I'd leave it as is, both to keep the costs down and still have the flexability to race it as Sloop or for resale value to a Sloop wannabee.
If money were no object, I'd build it like a full up carbon A cat and just add a spinnaker.
I want a boat able to compete with the two handers in the F16 class. Preferably in the same start <img src="<>/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile" height="15" width="15" />
Then I want this boat to be ready for two-handed racing in the same class just by adding or removing some simple equipment.
That is what I want.
If I can not have that, I want Glenn Ashby, Nathan Outteridge and some other top fast sailors to go solo against the best two up crews. If I can not have that either I want to win the lottery. <img src="<>/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile" height="15" width="15" />
When can you deliver Wayne?
I'd make it two feet longer.
I'd make it almost a foot wider
I'd lower the minimum weight to about 180lbs, maybe less. What the F, why not.
I'd put a taller rig on it, but keep it uni+spinnaker
I'd put some fancy foils on it, C boards, T boards, L boards, WXYZ boards
I'd no longer have a compliant boat either.
Dude, you know those new WXYZ boards are illegal in 3 countries, right?
I mean, yeah, they are fast, but at what cost? The best ones are made of Unobtainium, and that stuff is hard to find!
I'll get Tony Starke on the horn. He'll hook me up.
Now guys & gals, this thread is not about keeping it the same as a dual F16, the two are incompatible.
What its about is ideas for a very fast single hander, 16ft long ( although there is a huge argument to just simply go to 17.5ft and that would include all the out dated A's and some current high volume A's built of glass if we kept the same 100kgs weight )that can run under SCHRS handicap and if enough contenders, run with the F16 comps as either a sub class or off their own start.
I don't know what it would take staying within the current rules. I think a design with finer hulls, T foils to overcome the skinny hulls. Maybe moving the rig back a bit?
I do know nothing has been designed as a strictly one up boat for the F16's.
A friend and I were talking about the current generation of bendy mast's on A-Cat's and wondering what could be possible there for the F16's.
Well...I'm pretty sure both Nacra and Hobie have already
Been there, done that
with the Nacra F17 and the Hobie FX One, but neither one caught on, so what makes you think any new -Uni Only- class will catch on? What they should have done was get together and come up with some Uni Spin, F17 type class rules, and both build to the same rules, that might have helped them both sell more boats. They could have both done so with the 20's too, but didn't, now we see fewer and fewer Hobie 20's and I20's.
But does the world really need another, all new, catamaran class?
But does the world really need another, all new, catamaran class?
But of course! The world always needs another catamaran class. It is development and evolution.
As Buckminster Fuller always said: Evolution makes many false starts.
One dead branch of the tree of evolution is actually progress. Then we dont go out on that branch again..
Forget the current rule set, just design a 16ft boat along similar ideals to the F16 class.
What would I do, a chopped off DNA with inclined 20 degree boards ( C boards would be nice but to keep the cost down ), front beam moved foward slightly to cope with a 14sqm main and 2.5sqm jib, A class mast, 16sqm spinny, 100kgs all up to allow for a glass build.
The FX1 and I17 failed for very obvious reasons, they didn't sail well as a single hander and couldn't sail well with two crew on board and were over weight.
With all the F16 history, I feel that this thread would be more suitable in the open forum <img src="<>/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile" height="15" width="15" />
What matters to me is some room to experiment and some blokes to discuss and also sail with now and then. As such I would prefer a ruleset similar to the A class.
Set a lower weight limit. Limit sailarea and let the other variables be open. I dont see the selling point of such a class though as the A cat holds that niche. The two up/uni option was the big selling point for the F16 class in the beginning. What will single out and make a new class attractive?
Good luck.
I'm kinda with Rolf. Loosen up the rules, but I say that about all classes. But, I don't care to see anything that divides the class.
Are we actually talking of another class, I'm not. The F16 class is a good class that caters for alot of needs within the industry, it has a lot of merits for the dual handers, it has a lot of merits for the single handers, it just needs to tweak the rules a bit, but that is another day and another thread.
Back to boat design ideals please.
Wayne,
I do see were you want to go and i do think ( speaking on personal opinion ) that the uni can be made a lot quicker but within the F16 class 2 different models ( dim ' s ) except the 16 ft length is asking for more trouble then we are having already at the moment.
It would be a good idea to work it further out but then see it as a replacement for the Fx one or F17 uni.
Hans
Do we just accept then that one of the fundamental ideals of our class, that of uni and dual racing equally, is dead and buried and accept that all future comps will be on dual handers, all because asking a few questions may be
asking for more trouble then we are having already at the moment
We as a class are in a pretty good shape, growing numbers and acceptance by major manufacturers as a box rule to work within, what troubles do we have ?
I personally don't think that many changes are needed and at pretty little cost, hence the direction of this thread or attempted direction, which everyone seems to be taking as a direct threat of another class, chill out everyone, I'm just looking to see what everyone would want to sail as a single hander.
I think Karl_Brogger has made some good suggestions - finer hulls, T foils (rudders), and a specialized mast-sail combination for the uni config.
I thought the new A cat fore-aft flexible mast-powerful sail was partly for downwind trapezing. The spinnaker would change that. Rig is still a very important issue and a single-hander can use a more flexible mast.
The one foot wider boat comment could be most easily addressed with allowing beam insert racks - mini versions of the H17 type and removable for 2 up sailing. Would require a rule change, but that is the route I would go....
Taller mast isn't needed, as Uni is advantaged in light wind and overpowered in higher winds. More leverage, wider boat or wings would help there. Curved boards would be neat, but outside class rules and maybe hard for weekend sailors to get the benefit out of. I don't think self tacking jibs add much for a uni sailor, something more to adjust taking your concentration off the big issues. Lower weight is always good, but then you lose the 2 up, class compliant option.
Just thinking
out loud
, what I think you wanted.
Self tacking jib for unis to allow the unis an improved righting movement vs sailarea.
Taller mast for unis which could be used under two-up with a super-long shackel for the halyard to sail connection. This would allow a more efficient mainsail for unis.
As much as I would like curved or angeled boards, that would break the interchange from uni to two-up. However it is getting more and more clear that downwind these boards have an advantage.
If I had to change one thing, to make the Uni more competitive, it would be to add the jib. It costs nothing, you already have one in your box, you already have the self tacker, and it's really easy to trim, even single handed.
Sometimes it gets in the way, mostly at the A mark, when you now have to ease the jib, and the track, and the halyard, in addtion to all the other 'crew duties' you have to take care of: hoist and trim the spinnaker/main sheet/traveler/boards/rotator/downhaul strings you have to pull. The jib adds three more strings to pull, both at A and C mark, but going up wind in medium air, you should be able to pass most 2 up Sloops, depending on total crew wt. on each boat.
Now...if you go out alone, with your jib, in say 8knt winds...and an hour later it's blowing 17, you may wish you left it in the box!
How about the new Nacra 17 as a single hander?
I don't know if there is enough demand to support it, they already tried it once with the Inter 17, and Hobie tried it with the FX One, neither class lasted very long.
I think we are seeing a consolidation now to fewer classes, Wave, Hobie 16, F16, F18 and A Cat.
The F16 is a 'compromise' type class, right in between the Hobie 16 and F18, wich still allows you to race solo when your crew bails on you last minute, or if you can't afford an A cat, or if you and your crew are too light for the F18.
As they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
How many active single handers want any changes at all?
Show of hands please.
No changes for me please!
Tim, what is your average finish? Best finish? As a single hander.
Timbo, Pete, you keep hijacking this thread and turning it into a discussion on potential F16 rule changes. If you would like to start a thread specifically dealing with that, by all means, otherwise lets talk boats here and forget the rules until we establish what a good single hander might be <img src="<>/cool.gif" alt="cool" title="cool" height="15" width="15" />
The one foot wider boat comment could be most easily addressed with allowing beam insert racks - mini versions of the H17 type and removable for 2 up sailing. Would require a rule change, but that is the route I would go....
The wider boat will create havoc with more slender hulls creating immersion and lots of drag, from on the water playing with beam width, going narrower seems to make the boat better suited the 15sqm the solos are allowed with earlier hull lift off countered by the very effective downhauls when the wind speed goes up. The trouble with lots of downhaul is again the sail becomes very draggy and the boat tends to slow. Lots of balancing one thing with another I'm afraid.
Weight is not really such an issue.
No can do. This is the F16 forum. The boats you're suggesting aren't F16s.
If you want to suggest ideal single handers take the discussion to the
ideal single hander forum
.
I see this discussion undermining the F16 class.
Show of hands please.
Any kind of rule change for specs other than total sail area, no.
I would like to see something built that is not a good two up boat but an excellent singlehander.
Any rule changes I would want, I would want applied to both configurations. I'd like to see something other than straight boards.
[quote=pgp]No can do. This is the F16 forum. The boats you're suggesting aren't F16s.
Disagree, where are they not compliant to F16 rules, as to undermining the class then the class has a specific Class F16 forum limited to owners with registered boats, this is an open forum that happens to be titled F16, for all to use.