Well, there _might_ be a new mast is a more proper way of saing it..
The class is voting over the new mast now, but it might go both ways. Remember that the class originally voted to keep the old rig instead of the new rig with double trapeze and gennaker. If ISAF had not insisted on a Tornado with larger sailarea, gennaker and double trapeze in the olympics, the Tornado would have stayed with the old rig..
What I'm missing is more information and discussion about the proposed mast. Is it faster, how much faster, are new sails needed etc..
While beeing a somewhat active Tornado sailor, I'm not sure if a carbon mast is worth the money if it doesnt make the boat significantly faster. With 180Kg on the righting line, we have no problems with righting 
It will be exciting anyhow to watch the results of the ballot!
Gee, wheres are all the anti-Carbon T people?
My impression from the Marstrom sight is that top teams regularly must purchase several alu extrusions to test sail them before they find one or two they like in flex characteristics. This because consistency with alu is very hard to achieve, where as with carbon this is not a concern. Flex characteristics can be set at layup time, making masts suited to the team's individual needs (of course with the context of the class rules). Though per unti cost is higher incarbon, if you only need one versus 4 or 5 alu...you've save money.
BTW, Marstrom lists a carbon mast for tornado on their site...for over a year now in anticipation of a class change.
Mike.
MauganH17: I guess they are on some inland lakes in middle europe, still grumbling about the new rig 
Marstrøm has made carbon T masts for quite some time, and he is all for the change (he is the one who submitted the proposal to the ITA). It is true that the masts differ, and that olympic teams buys different masts to find one they like.
But for the weekend warriors, and other T sailors who like to compete now and again it is a lot of money. These are the people who might vote against a carbon mast..
I would like to see the performance gains documentet before I shell out the money for a carbon mast. There has also been a quite long and heated discussion on the German T forum:
http://www.fly-tornado.de
If I were a weekend-warrior Tornado sailor, I'd be all for the carbon masts. All the "big money" teams would be snatching up the carbon masts and dumping their 4 or 5 aluminums masts at a price even I could likely afford 
Give me CARBON
As a weekend warrior, I would not upgrade to a carbon stick. I also have no delusions about competing against the Olympic pro's so that is not a problem. The problem comes up a few years from now when some of my weekend competitors have carbon sticks when they turn their boats over and now they have the latest in sail shapes which are built for the carbon mast. Now the class is split at the grass roots level and participation may suffer... In an extremley tiny North America almost non existant class the effect is magnified by such an expensive changeover.
Still, If the boat is going to remain Olympic... it probably needs to continually upgrade...
You mean like the Square Top, Self-tending Jib, Spinnaker & Pole have "split" the class 
I think it's a positive change...esp. since a lot of other classes are going this way (I20, F18, F20 etc).
Mike.
Still, If the boat is going to remain Olympic... it probably needs to continually upgrade...
Yes, the rig changes did split the class. It seems that 1/2 of the boats did not upgrade to the new rig and stopped racing the boat. EG, several of the Canadian sailors took the rig change as an opportunity to retire. The Detroit fleet also seemed to melt away after the rig change as well. There was at least one boat at the Michigan Catfight which was still using the old rig in a portsmouth race.
Remember, that the only class racing on the continent is the July-Kingston Unlimited, August-CORK II, December-Tampa, January-Miami, and February-Miami OCR event. The international sailors competed in the Florida races while the Canadian races drew at most 5 boats.
BTW, The I20 was always delivered with a carbon stick in the USA. The F18’s BAN carbon sticks. My point is that nobody was forced to junk their existing rig and upgrade to a new rig. The spin upgrade and self tacker were half the cost of this mast proposal AND you really increased the boats performance for your money. The mast CAN’T be that big a deal!
Still, I don’t think it’s a big issue in the US and Canada (unless you happen to own several alu masts). Only those teams on Olympic campaigns will switch over to Carbon and they are playing a different game then you and I, so it’s not a problem sailing against them. I think the international class should consider alternatives which address this pending competitive imbalance for regions where they do have a strong weekend warrior fleets (Like Germany. (Perhaps Gold and Silver fleets) Then again… that would be a novel idea for the class … addressing the concerns of the ordinary guy!
Proud member of the Society of Ordinary Tornado Sailors
Founded at the Miami OCR 2004
Take Care
Mark
interesting.
In the UK before the upgrade, the ONLY time T's were sailed was for the selection cycle and then they would flood the market once the trials were over. Since the rig change we now have a VERY good T fleet in the UK.
I'll be buying one when my son grows up if whe wants to sail with dad....Might be a few yearsm, he is only 3 at the moment......
There are some more information about the T Carbon mast and the vote on the German class butt. web pages.
Ref: http:/
If you dont grok german, http://babelfish.altavista.com is helpful.
Doesn't say anything about increased performance tough, only one-design considerations and safety..
I have to agree that the rig changes was a good thing for the T, but are not sold on the carbon stick yet. I would really like to see some performance comparisons between alu. masts and carbon masts first.
Dont get me wrong, if the carbon mast is consistently faster, I'm all for it!
Hello Rolf,
Carbon is not magic. A carbon mast alone is not faster than an aluminum mast. The only way that a carbon mast or any carbon part can make a sailboat faster is by reducing weight. The weight savings due to a carbon mast in the case of the Tornado class is going to be small because the aluminum Tornado mast has already had every excess ounce of weight squeezed out of it. Also to realize any weight savings due to a carbon mast in the Tornado class, the class rules, minimum all up weight, must be changed. If the minimum all up weight is not changed, it will be very difficult to find any boat speed improvement at all. Also any different material mast, especially carbon, will have a different mast bend characteristic under sailing loads. Then the boat will have to be reoptimized and new sails, diferent luff curve etc, will have to be determined. This will take a year or two to work out and many many suits of experimental sails, many dollars spent.
The Olympic Tornado is already faster than any other 20ft boat so why induce this major upheaval in mast rigging and sails for a maybe 0.001 reduction in PN?
Bill
Not so....
You will be able to design the mast bend characteristic(s) you require as the carbon can be layed up as required (eg more carbon wher fittings attach and less where there is little stress.
Bill: I was under the impression that carbon masts was better when beating into chop, as the leverage of the mast was less. I tought perhaps this was where the performance might be improved..
If you read the german class ballot information. They say that the carbon mast is neccesary to stay competitive, but dont present any empirical data for this.. I dont know any more.
They also say that it will indeed be neccesary to re-cut the mainsail. But that this is a feasible job to do on a present mainsail.
Regarding weight, this is information that is not finalized. It does not say anything about changing platform weight in the proposed rules (as far as I can se..).
Interresting times..
To Scooby and Rolf,
Scooby, I doubt there are any Tornado sailors who know how to specify a carbom mast layup schedule to acheive a desired mast bend. Carbon as we all know is very stiff. To make a carbon mast of the same section that is similiar in bend characteristics to the present Tornado aluminum mast section would require a major reduction in wall thickness. Thin mast section walls lead to crippling and local buckling problems on the compression side of the mast. Crippling and local buckling problems are stability problems associated with thin walled structers and can occurr long before the ultimate strength of the material is approached. The carbon mast wall thickness can be increased only if the section is made smaller which also makes the mast more bendy. A carbon mast section can be designed for the Tornado with similiar bend characteristics to the aluminum mast and no crippling/buckling problems but it will be in a significantly smaller mast section. This is the correct way to go from the structural and performance point of view but it has a major impact on the ONE DESIGN characteristics of the class. The politics of this question are BIG!
Rolf,
You are right in that a lighter weight mast would reduce the pitching inertia of the boat and the boat would go very slightly faster to windward in a chop. Also remember that up there with the mast are the wires and the sails and the battens. The mast itself is probably only half the "weight aloft".
A "recut" mainsail is down in area from a full size sail and I don't think many serious Tornado sailors would go for that.
Good Sailing,
Bill
As I recall, (it may have changed) isn't there a minimum tip weight of the mast.
Should the minimum tip weight be maintained? the advantage would not be all that much, if kept.
In other words, would or should the minimum tip weight of the mast be maintained?
http:/
k. With the mast in the condition given in 14(i), in a horizontal position supported at the bottom
end of the extrusion and at the bottom edge of the top measurement band, the weight
measured at the top band shall be not less than:
i. 10.5kg for masts with internal jib halyards.
ii. 10.25kg for masts with external jib halyards and locking devices that are not connected to
the mast in any way.
The proposed changes to the class rules on http://www.tornado.org does not say anything about the weight (as far as I could see). So we dont know much about the weight or tip-weight of the new mast.
I guess it will be lighter, as easier righting is used as an argument for the change (and the change would be meaningless if weight was maintaned, even tough the mast would become amazingly strong).
Bill: You are probably right about the re-cut. Unless the whole front panel of the sail was replaced (most Tornado mainsails has one panel running from the bottom to the top along the luff). The outcome would anyway be uncertain and probably not competitive.
If the mast is accepted in the ballot, it will be interresting to measure the performance between the two masts..
Regarding politics, yes this is a quite hotly contended subject. One has to wonder where all the messages on the German T-forum discussing this subject is. They all disappeared last month.. Politics ?
Interresting times!
I don't sail a Tornado so what do I know. But a couple of observations.
At the highest level, the inconsistency of one aluminum mast vs another is absolutely critical. Top Tornado sailors (and sailors in other Olympic classes w/ aluminum masts) talk about "finding" their mast 1 year ahead of the Olympics. And then they have to waste countless hours / days / weeks / months of valuable practice time learning to sail with their back-ups in case the break the first one. A mast can be the difference between winning and losing. At this level repeatability matters, and carbon is nearly perfectly repeatable.
Bill -- of course all sailors don't know how to specify layups, but that is a ridiculous argument. Sailmakers and sailors specify the flex characteristics and the engineers do the layups.
I don't know if the change is good for the class or not. I am sure there are trade-offs, but lets recognize valid arguments on both sides.
There is something called hoops when looking at carbon masts.
These are rings of carbon perpendicular to the length of the mast. These do not introduce significant stiffness to the mast but do increase wallthickness that is needed to prevent various buckling modes.
This amount of hoop (some call them loops) can also be used to get the mast to satisfy the mast tip rules that may be present.
Wouter
Regarding tip weights...my Marstrom Mast (alu) came with a .5 lbs lead weight rivetted to the very top. Surprised me! How can the carbon mast be promoted as "safer" since it's lighter...yes, sure it's safer than a alu stick with even more weight stuck to the top! Wouldn't it just be easier to change the tip weight rule and get the lead off if safety was the concern? I guess the intent of the tip weight rule is to prevent extra light/thin sections which would lead to failures left right and center.
There would need to be a change to the tip weight rule for carbon, as there's much less advantage if building to alloy weights.
Another thing I found quite intriguing about all this...if accepted Marstrom will be the only allowable builder of carbon masts section for 2 years, to help them re-coup development losses. This seems quite a departure from the "any manufacturer" nature of the the class.
Mike.
I guess it will be lighter, as easier righting is used as an argument for the change (and the change would be meaningless if weight was maintaned, even tough the mast would become amazingly strong).
Bill: You are probably right about the re-cut. Unless the whole front panel of the sail was replaced (most Tornado mainsails has one panel running from the bottom to the top along the luff). The outcome would anyway be uncertain and probably not competitive.
If the mast is accepted in the ballot, it will be interresting to measure the performance between the two masts..
Regarding politics, yes this is a quite hotly contended subject. One has to wonder where all the messages on the German T-forum discussing this subject is. They all disappeared last month.. Politics ?
Interresting times!
Hi Stranger,
It seems strange that the variation in aluminum mast bend from mast to mast is coming into question at this time. The Tornado has been around for a long time and there has been no question about mast bend inconsistency. Even if we start the Tornado history with the Marstrom Tornado, there has been no question about variation in aluminum mast bend until recently. Recently the position has come forward to put a carbon mast on the Tornado. Has a problem with the aluminum mast been invented? The two most important parameters affecting mast bend are mast section and wall thickness. The bend in the top few feet of the mast is very small reguardless of taper because the bending moment is still small due to the short lever arm in the top few feet of the mast. The region of max mast bend occurrs in the region below the hounds and above the diamond spreader. This part of the mast is untapered. If there is variation in aluminum mast bend/flex characteristics, it is likely in the extrusion die wearing out and allowing the mast wall thickness to increase. The solution is a new extrusion die.
As far as my comment about sailors specifying the mast layup, Scooby made the comment that sailors could "design their own masts to suit their needs".
If sailors design their own masts, it will be like the story of the three bears. The first one will be too stiff. The second one will be too soft and the third one will be just right.
Good Sailing,
Bill
It seems strange that the variation in aluminum mast bend from mast to mast is coming into question at this time. The Tornado has been around for a long time and there has been no question about mast bend inconsistency. Even if we start the Tornado history with the Marstrom Tornado, there has been no question about variation in aluminum mast bend until recently.
Bill, I think there has always been this inconsistency...see the Marstrom website for a discussion. It's just never been discussed at length because there was no solution to it other than testing many extrusions until you found one that best matched your sailing style/weight range (ie. flex characteristics). Again, this was only ever a concern at the top levels of the class, where minute performance advantages are sought after. Of course at this level, budgets are less of a concern as well.
From looking at my alloy mast under spinny loads, a lot of bending is happening above the hounds and in a leeward direction...it looks ugly-scary. This is with the older Marstrom mast (pre-2000). They have reported failures in these older sections and have increased wall thickness of the web on current extrustions. There is also an untapered option offered...but I'm not convinced this increases strength above the hounds...just the flex characteristics and obviously buoyancy after a capsize.
This is exactly what Marstrom claims as a primary cause of extrusion variation...but that is can happen quite often and leads to basically no two masts being identical in flex performance.
And once it's "just right"...they can make that same unit for all boats they buy in the future and the build can offer it to other teams on demand.
Bill-
You hit the nail on the head - the dies wear out! This is not a new problem - it is inherent in the manufacturing process.
As a result mast flex repeatablity is not up to the standards required by world class one design sailors. For weekend warriors (including me) it is fine, but I don't believe that is the issue. If the T wants to stay at the pinnacle of the sport, then there is a compelling argument for eliminating this cr_p-shoot.
How would you like spend 8 years training full time to get to the Olympics with a reasonable medal shot (that is what it takes and more natural talent than 99% of us), then you break your #1 rig on the first day of the Olympic Regatta? You would have to sail the biggest regatta of your life with a completely different mast: different numbers; different tuning; different sailing style. At this level that is a huge adjustment. And that is not to mention the cost of the extra training required to have the back-ups dialed in just in case.
And thank you Tornado for pointing out that once you get it just right then you can have it over and over and over. Yes the initial cost is higher, but the long run cost is much lower - one carbon rig (OK include a spare tube if you are really serious) vs. 3-4 rigs minimum to test for a serious Olympic campaign in some classes (and that is after you choose the section you want).
There may be good arguments for not changing the class rule -- status quo is important to keep from making boats obsolete w/o upgrades. But just because you are not an Olympic caliber sailor (maybe you are - I've never heard of you but what do I know) does not mean you shouldn't try to understand the basis for their arguments.
The good news is that all class constitutions have processes for amendments so the class gets to decide by what ever process they have in place.
OK, I don't even sail a Tornado so I will let it drop, the class will decide what it wants. But lets not put out too much bad information. Both sides have valid arguments.
IMHO
Hunt
With Tornado and Hunts.
This is simply not true.
There have been discussions within the Tornado fleet (and other fleets) for years about this. Back as far as the 80's people were talking about 'fast' masts and mast selection processes.
Bill,
I have to respectfully disagree on a couple of points. Static mast weight is not the issue. The carbon stick reduces the radius of gyration by a factor of almost 4 which reduces pitching moment of the hulls. Also, a carbon stick can be designed to exactly comply with the elastic characteristics of the aluminum mast. This is due to the orthotropic stiffness properties of the fibers. I have designed and built three carbon Tornado masts and use stock sails with no differences with the aluminum mast.
Kevin
>the dies wear out! This is not a new problem - it is inherent in the manufacturing process.<
Basically, the thickness of an aluminum extrusion can be controled by the temperature the billet is heated up to, and the pressure to ram it through the die(s), resulting in the exit speed of the new shape from the extrusion press.
As a die ages one can vary temperature and pressure to control thickness. Sometimes it ends up being a lot of scrap depending on the allowed tolerances. (we are talking plus/minus thousands of an inch)
A decade ago, it use to be more of an ART than a science to get the temperature and pressure right, maybe that has changed now.
Mike,
Once you get the mast "just right" for a lightweight team, it is too bendy for a heavy team. Once you get it stiff enough for for the big guys, it is too stiff for smaller, lighter weight, teams. There is no "just right mast" for all size teams. THAT IS THE PROBLEM! So, What is the solution? Different mast layups for different weight teams?
Where does it end? This question is really stickey!
Bill
>>I have to respectfully disagree on a couple of points. Static mast weight is not the issue. The carbon stick reduces the radius of gyration by a factor of almost 4 which reduces pitching moment of the hulls.
What exactly do you mean by that ?
"Static" mast weight (Do you have a thing called dynamic mast weight ?) DOES factor in COMPLETELY in Moment of enertia that is linked to oscillation of a platform.
You got me completely lost on your "radius of gyration" statement. Especially on how a reduction of radius REDUCES the pitching MOMENT of the hulls ?
Pitching MOVEMENT of the hulls maybe ?
Or else RESULTING radius of gyration given some reduction in mast weight ? This of course contradicts your statement of "Static weight is not an issue"
I guess there are some typo's in these statements that result in a very awkward statement otherwise you are completely off the chart with respect to dynamic of bodies.
Wouter
OK, Kevin and Sail7Seas definitely know more about the engineering than I do.
Bill- Again you got it right and again you didn't even know it!
Different weight crews want different flex characteristics -- but that is no different from today. The difference is that today they have to spend a lot of money buying masts and get lucky to find a particularly stiff or soft one.
Wouldn't it be an improvement to just get a mast / sail combo that is right for your weight? Just think how many more teams could sail the boat that way. A softer rig allows lighter crews to compete. Look at the A-cat where I am told there is a very wide range of competitive crew weights.
My wife and I sail an 18HT. We are about 40-70# lighter than a lot of the teams. We have our main cut for us which helps, but we sail with the stock rig because that is all that is available. If we were really serious (or if we had had a choice when we got the boat) we would have a softer rig (but we are strictly weekend warriors now).
The ability to engineer the flex is not necessarily bad for the weekend warriors, and it could in fact broaden the appeal of the class. And like a carbon epoxy boat, it is probably cheaper in the long run.
But you need to understand that flex characteristics of the individual spar matter to elite sailors whether aluminum cr_p-shoot or carbon repeatability. They need the right mast for their weight, and sailing style. It may not matter to you and me Bill, but it does to the top guys.