NACRA 17 into final stage for selection

I sent this email to the F18 Eastern Area list:

All,

As many of you know, the equipment for the mixed multihull and women's skiff events will be selected this week at the ISAF mid-year meeting in Italy. In March, ISAF conducted an equipment trial for the candidate boats for both events, as well as an evaluation of the suitability of kiteboarding to be included in the Olympic program. Following that event, the evaluation committee published a report from the trials discussing the merits of each boat, and the remarks from the trials participants (sailors nominated from each MNA to attend the event and offer feedback). The reports from the trials can be found at the bottom of the page here: http://www.sailing.org/committees/2009-2012/26218.php

For the mixed multihull, the evaluation panel recommended the Nacra 17 and the AHPC Viper. Of the two the Nacra 17 received higher marks from the trials sailors, and was the first choice of the evaluation panel. For the women's skiff, the evaluation panel recommended the RS 900 and the Mackay FX (49er hull with smaller rig).

Earlier today, the ISAF Events committee held a vote on both the mixed multihull and women's skiff. The winners of that vote are then recommended to the full ISAF council which meets over the next two days. While being recommended by the event committee certainly carries weight, it is not binding and the full council has made surprising decisions in the past.

From the vote this morning, the events committee selected the Mackay FX with a strong majority for the women's skiff. For the mixed multihull, the Viper and Nacra 17 tied, with the committee chairman casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of the Nacra 17. Therefore the event committee recommendations are:

Women's skiff: Mackay FX
Mixed Multihull: Nacra 17

I will be watching the proceedings closely, and will send another update when a final decision has been made. Personally, I feel both the Viper and Nacra 17 are excellent, modern choices that will allow for competitive racing by mixed crews.

Best,
Jeff

Nice summary Jeff..

I would add that the evaluation panel judged all of the cats acceptable and recommended two boats. The skiff panel eliminated some boats from consideration. This recommendation was based on sailing properties.

The events committee vote is the first vote that considers all of the factors in selecting Olympic equipment that were speced out.

The council, of course, represents a broader range of views and that is the reason that the final outcome may differ from these recommendations.

Thanks!!

source : http://www.facebook.com/pages/AHPC-Australian-High-Performance-Catamarans/10150116138925627

The ISAF meeting is underway.... And the latest news from Bundy:

The events committee were very divided on the decision for Olympic Equipment for mixed Multihull.
Votes for Nacra 17 were 8
Votes for Viper were 8

Committee chairman gave casting vote to Nacra.

So it's still very close. It will be exciting tomorrow in Council for the final decision.

Have faith, the council will come up with something else...

Of course, I was completely wrong about the keelboat vote. Still in denial about that, actually...

Mike

Final vote delayed till tomorrow following today's 19-14 decision on the women's skiff. Interesting that at 17,000 euro the Mackay FX they have selected is the most expensive of the boats evaluated and slightly more than the 16,750 cost of the first 100 Nacra 17s. OTOH there are lots of second hand hulls available since it uses the 49er platform with a new rig.

Wow... 19 -14...

That is much closer than I would have thought... given the consensus that the FX bid had developed in the comittee process..(10 to 2) if I remember... The FX is the biggest of the skiffs.... some worry that their small woman won't be able to push the boat... therefore... not competitive... 19-14 ... means it will be a real cluster on the multihulls.... The fubar that was the process has resulted in a 5 to 5 tie with the chair voting to 6-5..

I bet Pete Melvin would like these words back

Pete Melvin:

"The F16 is on the small end of the scale for the crew weight range specified (120 kg to 140 kg) and, in our opinion, would be more exciting and challenging to sail for Olympic-caliber sailors if it had a more powerful sailplan. The F18 typical crew weights exceed the range specified by ISAF. The F18 is also quite a heavy boat for its length and could be made lighter, but the hull volume and surface area would be needlessly large for a lighter Olympic spec F18 platform.

So... the N17 designer says... Ah... we reject the weight range that ISAF called for.... Too light... Most of the F18 sailors can't play....
So.... WE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM WE WANT.... Replace the F18 class with a lighter better faster boat.

You choose!

Place your bets.... ladies and gents... place your bets

(The little birds tell me that the US is voting N17.)

 

What I just love about Pete's comments (mr Melvin) is how he designs a boat that is not full spec under F16 rules (25kg overweight) using a F18 mast that is too stiff for a wide range of winds (flat sails) , gets beaten left and right by Vipers and Falcons and then blames the F16 class rules for not being up to spec for 120-140 kg crews.

Drop 25 kg on the platform and gain an extra 10 kg on the wire. Wham, ideal crew weight problem solved ! Shouldn't be to hard to figure out. He did also design an A-cat at min weight right ? Or was it 100 kg ? I can't remember.

If Falcon marine can do it ... ... ...

Wouter

Selecting the 49erFX was a sound decision in my opinion. Indeed the purchase prize is steep and it does weight a bit, they noted it as such in the report, but find convincing argument to take these hits in the area's of availability and the the fact the females can cross train with the males using very similar equipment sharing most spares.

A sound balancing of conflicting criteria.

With respect to the N17 ... ... slightly different story. That thing is just expensive without providing any concrete benefits in return with respect to availability, cross training, etc.

Or at least that is my opinion.

Woter, as far as I understand the class rules, there is no such thing as a boat that weighs too much to be an F16 (assuming all other measurements are in spec.) Hell, a Mystere 5.0 XL, at 143kg, fits the F16 spec (actually I think the jib is just a bit too big, but otherwise...)

You misunderstood Wouter's comment - he just meant it's not designed to the limits of the rule.

Is that a reference to Carnac, or are you talking about some results from elsewhere? I wasn't aware that the Nacra F16 had been seen much in competition yet. Were there some at Carnac?

19 to 14... for the FX... but, the amazing thing is that the 14 was for the 29ner XX which was not recommended by the event committee. So council pulled that boat up. with the RS getting just 2 votes.

per Goodall... the issue debated was supply and fun..

the two choices were both rig upgrades to existing platforms.... (29ners are a bear in 20 knots... just to get around the course).

I surmise that supply eliminated the new design of the RS900.... While the fun factor and team size split the votes 19 to 14 for the FX and 29nerXX

So much for rubber stamping the event committee... which was strongly for the 49ner FX. Wow, How do they look at the fubar cat document that was essentially tied at the event committee...

Supply could be an issue in cats as well. The council may not want to chance a N17... and the fun factor is probably about the same for the viper and N17... Could the council pull up the Hobie 16??? and vote that boat against the Viper ...

The dog that has not barked... the Hobie 16 ? Really?

Wouter-
Pete doesn't need me to defend him but I want to let you know that all 5 of the M&M designed A cats that my wife and I have owned over the past 15 years have been minimum weight. The A3.5 I took delivery of last week- beautifully built by Lars Guck- is 4 kg light and incredibly stiff.
Jay Glaser

Wouter should contact Pete directly and give him the heads up and perhaps some advice on how to design a good boat... I'm sure it will be very helpful and maybe even some of Wouter's advice will show through on the ETNZ AC72....

hmm since wouter is pissing off all things pete made (he also seems to know that the mast is to stiff -macca, you were involved in the discussion desciding on that mast section- next time call wouter.)and he is spinning all data towards the viper, my guess he is allready hired via bundock by the Orecale design team. To bad for etnz.············

What a joker

btw i love f16, i take delivery of one next week. I ordered it because i want to start sailing with my 12 year old daughter. Nice concept but no olympic boat. Period.

Nacra 17 is the new Olympic multihull...

Macca why is it you have to have a dig at everything that Wouter says, he is just one of many on a forum giving an opinion. He is a highly skilled engineer and gives opinion based on research unlike many who pontificate on this forum.

In some ways he gives a far more honest unbiased opinion than yourself, at least he doesn't flip flop from one opinion to another depending on who your association with is at the time.

There were several at the thai regatta in januari, sailed by capable crews like gunnar etc, then of course they were raced at the trials and there we also two racing at Carnac in the C1 fleet. of course in the latter case the big boys were on F18's but still amateur crews on Vipers and Falcons passed them, so this piece of race data may still be valid. Then we also have the race data from springfever this tear were Joseph Bello raced the nacra F16, Joseph sailed Viper earlier. His video's are on youtube Incl. his springfever racing.

So yes the nacra F16 is getting around and has raced now in Asia, USA and Europe in a few big regatta's.

Sorry Mr Jay G.

That was a bit of European cynism. Of course I know that those A's were at minimum weight , that was exactly the point. By extention I imply the question

why isn't his F16 at or close to min weight

. If he has proven that he can design a winner that way then there must be some other reason why the boat isn't full spec. Note that its mainsail is quoted as smaller then the Vipers in the ISAf document as well. And why use F18 masts etc.

As such this says more about the design choices made with the Nacra F16 then about the validity of the F16 class rules.

Simply put. Want to create a well performing F16 for crews in the given weight range ? Design a full spec F16 using components optimized for F16 sailing.

Hence my later question, if Falcon marine can do it ... ... why not M&M / Nacra ? Those €19.000 ex taxes or delivery for the N17 will also be sufficient for a full spec carbon F16.

I think this has nothing to do with what class rules allow or not, in contrast what Pete says. It has everything to do with decisions made within Nacra. Why not say so ? There is nothing to be ashamed of there.

wouter

because Wouter seems to think that he knows more about multihull design than Pete Melvin....

I dont flip on my position, I have always said that the F16 is not the right boat for the games, the evaluation sailors agreed as did the events and equipment committees and finally the ISAF council members.

I have NO association with Nacra, In fact you could even say that I am anti nacra as there is still outstandings to be settled and until then I have no desire to support them or their products. I have simply made my thoughts known on what I consider to be the best solution for sailing in the games.

Macca,

Give me Petes mail adres and I will !

Thinking that carbon masts are not allowed inside the F16's and saying so in public as a F16 boat designer is just simply wrong.

Blaming the F16 class rules in public for your own

underperforming

design choices incorporated in the Nacra F16 is also lamentable. If the nacra F16 doesn't fit 120 kg - 140 kg then that is NOT an F16 problem as proven many times over at Alter cups sailed on Blades and Viper F16's (3 times) etc.

Lets face it, this is a critical time and Pete must have understood that his comments would immediately have been read as critiques on the Viper bit. As such he himself has chosen to enter the political fray. Now he either does that thruthfully and is respected or he does so using verifiable untruths and will get called out on those.

You don't have to be einstein to work that out.

Wouter

info@morrellimelvin.com good luck, maybe he will get you on the first flight to Auckland...

Macca, using just one criteria that of the F16 Olympic campaign ( which you have always stated is the wrong boat for the Olympics ) is a bit like saying that what went before my latest campaign isn't counted.

I do admire your eloquency and choice of words in your writing but then most politcians have that trait and unfortunately having a way with words doesn't always have the best long term interest for the masses, it just keeps the politicians in a job.

Does anyone know how much the N17 weighs?

142Kg....

Thanks!

Ooouch,bit of a porker then.

I stand by my word so read below a copy of the mail I have just send :

Dear mr. Melvin,

I write to you in relation to the comments you made with respect to F16's. I refer to the series of comments as published at the following location.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nacra-Sailing/215545338553

You wrote :

... we were considering adding performance-enhancing features like a carbon mast and curved daggerboards. The F16 class and F18 class rules do not allow either of these features.

This is patently untrue. The F16 class has always allowed carbon masts and indeed a good number of them (about 75) are sailing / racing with one. In fact, different winners of past F16 championships used one with other winners using aluminium. I admit that I'm a little surprised that a F16 designer is not aware of that fact.

You also wrote :

The F16 is on the small end of the scale for the crew weight range specified (120 kg to 140 kg), and, in our opinion, would be more exciting and challenging to sail for Olympic-caliber sailors if it had a more powerful sailplan.

This may be the case for the 131 kg heavy Nacra F16 that was presented at the trials with a combo of an alu mast section optimized for F18's and an (undersized ?) mainsail of only 13.35 sq.mtr (ex mast area), but much less so for a full spec F16's with a minimum class weight of 107 kg, an optimized F16 mast and a mainsail (excl. mast area) of 13.72 sq.mtr (combined 15 sq. mtr.)

The F16 class rules were optimized for that particular set of dimensions and maximizing it to those specs will already lift competitive crew weight by more then 10 kg. I also think it to be instructive that past Alter Cup events on F16's (3 in total) do indicate that the fullness of that range is indeed competitive, even when using the Vipers. Same conclusions may be drawn from the various F16 European and World championships. In fact, in those events the range of 120-140 kg was itself considered to be at the low end.

I desired to write to you about these statements since they now have entered the public domain and you are seen as an authority in cat sailing and cat design. I admit that opinions are opinions and one can endlessly argue about those, but the statements above are clearly based on misintepretations of the F16 class rules. As such these hurts the F16 class needlessly and there also appears to be ample room to lift the Nacra F16 performance. Both points compel me to write to you about this.

With kinds regards,

Wouter Hijink

(Co-founder and first chairman of the Formula 16 class)