Why does Macca hate F16s?

Im going for the

Massai

.. in tan!!

Macca should be in jimmy choos since he is the pro!!

Hey you must be my credit cards bank manager being so well educated on these types of items.. My GF has name brand taste... *mutters*..

how will anyone know you have crossed the line??? <img src="<>/confused.gif" alt="confused" title="confused" height="15" width="15" />

Since your so

in

with skunk works.. and thus must have a high security clearance.. can I ask a question?

who really shot Kennedy? <img src="<>/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin" height="15" width="15" />

and can I get an

aurora

? How fast do those babies do?
So many questions so little time.....

So let's look at some facts.

Why don't you announce the true boat weights at the past GCs. Or is that confidential F16 class information.

So as you say the Blade comes in at nearly 112. Is that correct. The Falcon is about 5 kg above min so that would make it about 117 kg. The Blade has been around for a bit now and they are building them lighter and lighter trying to get them down to min. Sure you can make them lighter if you use carbon mast beams and hulls, so why don’t they. I’ll answer for you. Because it would cost considerably more and price them out of the market. These are new boats and they are struggling to get them down to weight, let alone build them under by a few kg and bring them up to min weight which seems a standard with any other manufacturer. This would suggest the min weight is too low.

I originally suggested a 115kg min but now think a 120 kg would be more realistic. That way the Falcon is ideal weight and can be brought up to 120 with 3 kg of correctors. Older F16s that are heavier may be closer to the min as well. Ban the use of carbon in everything except foils (AHPC are not the only people in the world who can built alloy wing masts) and ensure the price of boats do not spiral out of control in the future.

Would it hurt to have a realistic min weight that reflects the true weight of the class, or is the class more concerned with giving the sailing world a false impression of itself, a 112 kg double hander that is as quick as an F18. That is all I hear from its internet racers. It is a great product, has unique versatility and has a very bright future if guided the right way. Don’t BS the sailing public, they are smarter than that.

TA, the facts are the min weight is 104 singled handed and 107 double handed. My boat, set up for singled handed weighed in at 105.5 new. It would about 106 now.

After talking to the builder of the hulls and foils further weight savings can be made not through exotic materials ( the carbon boat came in slightly heavier) but through more labour in the building process.

Maybe I missed Wouter's comment on the Blade, but I know he said earlier in the thread that the Falcon is 112kg.

107+5=117 ?

Sorry, got 112 min for 2 up stuck in my head for a bit.

107+5=112 So why not a 115kg min then?

See, that's the problem right there, you have here people makeing

sugestions

who are not even IN the F16 class, don't own a F16, probably never will, and they have no idea what the real rules and weights are, yet they think we should change the rules and weights...to suit...?

Whom?

It is 11.30 at night and I was at work at 6.00am. I'm tired, slipped up on the figure but does not change may argument other than by 5 kg.

I am not saying lift the weight to 130 to meet the Viper weight, but lift it to 115 to help meet the Blade and Falcon's weight comfortably. You can not tell me every Falcon comes out of the factory at 112kg. There will be variences, hence why you bring a boat up to weight with correctors.

and add 9kg of lead to my boat? No thanks. I'd have to give up chocolate and ice cream. <img src="<>/whistle.gif" alt="whistle" title="whistle" height="15" width="15" />

The arrogance is astounding. Do you ever see F16 owners on the Tornado or F18 boards telling you what your rules -should- be?

I sold my F18 a few years ago. I am currently crewing a Tornado for a friend. When we finish building our house, we will be looking for an F16.

The arrogance belongs to a few F16 internet racers. My views are shared by some in the F16 class and many outside. There is no point discussing with someone who has their head in the sand. Take the blinkers of and have a look at the real world of catamaran racing.

Well, since I actually own an F16, and have for 3 years, and I was at the last GC observing all the F16's, and I'll be measuring and weighing more F16's at the upcomming F16 National Championships (Guflport, Apr.9-11, shameless plug!) I don't think I have my head in the sand on this issue.

I never heard a single F16 -owner- at the last GC say,

Hey, let's all raise the weight to make it more fair!!

and that was with a mix of Viper owners and others, more Vipers sailors than others I think. Nobody thought weight was an issue.

In fact, if you watch the You Tube videos, you will hear one of the top US skippers say,

It's a Development class, let it develop...

in response to being asked that very question. And he was sailing a Viper.

Noted.

I can't speak for the class, and I'm assuming this has been discussed to death already (sorry I haven't been around much in a very long time), but I believe the general thinking is that any actual performance impact of those few kg is very small relative to other factors that we choose not to equalize such as crew weight and boat design as well as sailor performance. While setting the minimum weight a little above (someone's) factory weight as you suggest may be a common approach in other classes and could *in theory* enhance equalization a little, the magnitude of the practical benefit relative to those other factors is questionable while the cost of doing so is that it also reduces the motivation for some avenues of innovation. I think it's fair to say that philosophically the class prefers to remain open to a broader range of innovation than some other classes and places a higher value on this than absolute equalization of factors for mainly theoretical reasons. Of course not everyone in the sailing world will share this philosophy, which is part of why we have a lot of different classes.

You will get very little argument from anyone, there is a lack of tact from many posting on this board, and it is not limited to the F16 forum. Tim's argument, and I tend to agree, is that it is arrogant for outsiders to come in and and spout off about our class being wrong because it is different.

My view of

bliners in the REAL world of catamaran racing

is that there is a group with an unhealthy fixation, obsesing on boat weights. As if a kilo either way is going to make catmaran racing somehow magicaly equal. Not that it does not have some impact, but it is one of many factors and not the most important by far in comapring the equality of 2 boats.

I really hope you do look at the F16 when your house is complete. I still cannot understand why in the world you would want to buy a new boat that you would have to strap lead to though. There are min weight boats out there and several builders who can provide them, so it is not an imaginary limit, when you go to choose.

Matt

Best post I have seen in quite a while.

Tiger Mike

Thanks Matt, my point is that you want to reduce the variables in the boats and make it more about the sailor. As you note above, weight does play a part in this so why not resolve this issue. It is one of the easiest to do so.

I still cannot understand why in the world you would want to buy a new boat that is over minimum weight from the factory.

Building boats under min and brining them up to weight is the norm in most other classes except the F16 class. Whether it makes and impact or not (which I believe it does), it is the perception you give to the rest of the sailing world. It may not be important to current members, however if you want to grow your class, you do not want to turn people away with something so easy to fix. At the moment, it looks like the F16 class is amature hour and sailed by punters where a boats performance is of minimal impact to the racing. I know this is not true and there are some very good racers in the class, but it is the perception you are giving out.

Why would I want to strap lead to my boat? I want to know my new boat is below minimum. If the boat puts on weight through water absorption or repairs over the years, it will be nice to know it is still below minimum. Manufactures will also produce boats that are lighter / heavier than others by a few kg. Building underweight gives them a little more room to move. My Capricorn came in at 175.4 kg and was a lightweight amongst the Capricorns which I believe normally come out around 177 / 178. Strapping 4.6kg on the dolphin striker of the Cap was a zero issue. It does not make a difference between a 180kg boat and a boat brought up to 180kg with lead. Perhaps the lead is placed in n a better position of the boat though.

Now, could you please answer what you would believe would be a preferable situation

1 – A class weight where new boats are either struggling to meet min weigh or are over.
2 – A class weight where new boats can be produced without under building to achieve or addition of expensive options such as Carbon masts, beams, hulls.

I believe some people are more caught up with telling the world hey, our class min is 107kg even thought their boats are not.

Matt, how much would a sloop Falcon set me back with alloy beams, mast, spinnaker pole, glass hulls and carbon foils. And how much would this boat way.

Now how much would a sloop Falcon set me back if it had carbon mast, beams, hulls, spinnaker pole?

If a sloop Viper is so quick at 130kg, how much quicker would it be if it was 23kg lighter, had reduced weight aloft, out front (spinnaker pole), was as stiff or stiffer again?

Every time these questions are asked, people seem to duck and weave.

My proposal is why not set the min weight at 115 for a sloop. Restrict the use of carbon to foils, keep the price as low as you can. Grandfather in all current F16s, but lock out the potential for any full carbon big $$$ boats to be produced that will swing the racing more towards boat performance rather than sailor. 115kg is not a large increase and is still bloody light. The F16 class has done a good job getting to where they are now. If they want to take the next step and really establish themself as a popular International class, it is time to tighten up those rules and show the world you are as serious about equal competition as all other International classes.

I think the fixation on weight has more than a little bit to do technical bragging rights. Whilst the the F16 is doing well in certain areas it has been noted that this is not the case in Europe. Why?

Most club racing is done in mixed fleets. In Europe this routinely done under SCHRS or Texel. The light weight penalises the F16 under these measurement systems. Take a look at the success of the Spitfire (139Kg I think) or the Viper (125/130Kg?) These are competitive 16ft boats. If the average club sailor wants to have a bit of fun competing for club trophies would he chose an F16 if despite how well they sailed or how much they enjoyed the experience of of their particular boat they would always be walking around with the chip of a harsh handicap on their shoulders? Before anyone starts on me for that I do appreciate that in the right hands they can achieve excellent results but I am looking at things from the view of the average club sailor. If I wanted an F16 for club sailing it would have to be the Viper. I would however not sail it under F16 but under an SCHRS rating suitable to the boat. If it was going to cause issues I would just walk away and buy a Spitfire. You only have to look at comparable sales in Europe to see what sailors have actually done.

Weights and what/how it is possible to build have been discussed at length for a number of years and the F16 class has decided to stand alone. If the class does want to expand it needs to appeal to a wider market. Certainly within Europe there are a limited number of club sailors with the physical attributes, sailing skills and finances who will choose F16 to club race based on it's current appeal.

Maybe the F16 was pitched too far away from the market on the assumption larger manufacturers would design/build to the rule. This does not appear to be the general trend.
It is obviously the choice of the class association to decide on its direction and it clear there are vocal sailors both for and against change within the class. I suspect there are fewer sailors outside the class who support the current position, otherwise they would be probably be sailing F16 now.

Could the lightweight singlehanders cope with (maybe) 10/20Kg ashore without harming the class? It certainly seems that in practice 'actual' boat weights would not necessarily have to change that much.

Cheshirecatman

Steve - the F16 assocation has an official web forum for serious debate about class rules - discussing them here has zero effect.

I just want to make the observation that there are two quite separate issues here, and I think it's best to discuss them separately. One is whether the minimum weight should reflect the actual weight of the boats currently being built a little above minimum weight like the Falcon. This I believe is the point of Stephen's suggestion that the min weight be raised to 115kg. The second is whether boats should actually be built heavier, as implied by your comment about the impact of an extra 10-20kg of actual boat weight on singlehanders.

The latter is an important issue because as much as people are attracted to the class by the light weight relative to say an F18, they are also attracted by the flexibility to sail two-up or solo and because of the ease of handling a lighter boat singlehanded on shore and when it's on its side. I suspect some are opting for the lighter boats in the class precisely because they intend to sail mostly single-handed. I'm still hoping that Brett will offer an answer to my earlier question about the suitability of the Viper for singlehanded sailing.

This discussion would be more productive with more information... Stephen, taking the Falcon as an example and assuming for the sake of discussion a nominal weight of 112kg, what do you believe would be the actual performance impact (say minutes per hour, or equivalent delta Texel) of (a) decreasing the weight to 107kg and (b) increasing weight to your proposed 115kg, all other factors being equal?

Can I suggest that a more relevant question is how much Matt would charge you to produce a boat that is 107kg (or if you like, 3kg under)? (Also note that this question becomes even more interesting when combined with your answer to my question above.) A full carbon boat is an interesting idea but if it comes in way under weight it doesn't really help us understand the relative merits of 107 vs 115.

A fair question, but I think it needs to be answered in the context of some other pieces of information... e.g. how much of the Viper's 130kg is a consequence of the decision to use bigger components like beams and choice of manufacturing methods, what is the actual impact of beam size (and maybe other things) on stiffness and of that stiffness on speed, and compared with say a Falcon, how much of the increased hull weight can be attributed to the size of the hulls vs say materials or construction methods? (BTW your question about the 130kg Viper would still be valid relative to your preferred class weight of 115kg.)

Even if the Viper were a total lump of poo for singlehanded sailing, Brett isn't going tell you that. That'd be like me telling you to get cabinets from someone else.

I am happy to tell you that the Viper sails great as a one up. Its very easy to sail downwind in bigger breeze due to the big volume and you can easily trapeze downwind and feel comfortable pushing the boat.

Upwind you need to depower earlier than you first think, but thats the same with any boat you sail one up.

Oh, I am not being paid to say the above <img src="<>/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile" height="15" width="15" />

Even if

or

only if

<img src="<>/smile.gif" alt="smile" title="smile" height="15" width="15" />

Thanks for your comments Andrew. I'm still hoping to get some insight from inside the designer's head about how they were thinking about singlehanded performance when they made their design decisions. As Karl suggests, that may be an unrealistic hope, but you can only ask.

again all moot..
I suspect Greg has a business agenda. I am guessing he wants a class viable as a SMOD design. If I was in his position that is what I would be logically aiming for. If he produced a F16 killer Viper weighing 90Kg all up.. It would be a Viper SMOD killer..

My suggestion you and macca get together and build your

killer F16

..

I want in on the killer F16 too.

Stewart,

I have never had any intention of building a f16 to the full optimization possible under the class rules.

You may have noticed that my position in all discussions is focussed on promoting fair and quality racing. The simple fact that the class rules allow for such a boat to be built (and it will be markedly quicker) deny's the class the potential for fair racing.

can we just lock this fuggin thread...

I mean, it's like having kids say,

You are it....no, you are it...no I'm not, you are it

.

This is just stupid...

Everyone has had some valid points...I mean everyone has, but then those same people just don't care about someone else's view, if they don't agree with it.

Bunch of fuggin babies.....

If YOU give that much **** about the class, then YOU need to get an F16 become a member and decide on how and where it goes...

That's what I did...

So, until you do that, shut the kiss up!

Come on now Mike, you know we can't possibly survive without their -valuable- input...we're just a bunch of punters who need more pro's in the class to straighten us out.

I'd like to see just one of them write a check though...then they can bitch, and vote for a change. I've yet to hear a single F16 boat owner bitch.

And why are they even considering a F16 when the F18's are so much faster, even though they are heavier and have so much better rules that make their racing so much -more fair-? I think they should just stay on the F18, where their better rules provide much more fair racing, obviously.