Rules

[Dave]

The Paper Tiger already does have less sail area than a Maricat or a Windrush, even when these classes are in cat-rigged mode.

Dave.

[ZAX]

No answer on the spinnaker rule? Oh well, guess the F14 is still only on the forums and not yet on the water for now

[Darryl J Barrett]

Why would anyone want to have a spinnaker pole that extended more than 1 mtr forward of the bows of a 14' cat?? That is "about" the limit that the F16, the F18 and the Tornado have their poles at, and anything more than that on a 14'cat would seem a little "over kill".

[ZAX]

Daryl,

I have a kite pole longer than that now. If you look at the sail area possible even with a square top sail on a standard mast for a Hobie/Maricat/Windrush then look at the extra sail area available under the rules of F14 basically you can use a sizable kite as I do. If I shorten the length of the spinnaker pole I reduce sail area or have to change sheeting position further back which also makes it harder to gybe.

Basically the rule favours a taller mast, I rather use my existing mast.

Why not just allow a longer spinnaker pole? Why does it have to be a metre? I don't really want to change my setup.

Possibly my setup can be improved or it can be argued that I am using a spinnaker which is too big. Well, I think it works ok and I like the big kite out the front. Why stop an existing boat from competing when there are not so many on the water? Guess it does not always pay to be an early adopter. I really think the rule stops a retro from the possibility of competing against open F14.

John.

[Darryl J Barrett]

No one is stopping anyone from doing any thing that they would like to do on an "F14" cat, as long as any NEW F14's are designed within the box rule. For any existing make of cat that falls approximately within the pre existing size that was loosely termed "14'" ie Mari's Hobies, Windrush's, Paper tigers, Arrows, etc, etc, whatever they like to do whether it be cat rigged, sloop rigged, with spinnaker or without, just as long as their "OVER ALL" sail area falls less than the (slightly less than) 300 sq ft, then they can sail with/against the "NEW" F14's either for "across the line first wins" or on an appropriate handicap for a win on corrected time.

It's any new designed F14 that is designed within the box rule that only sails against any similar new F14 for across the line only regardless of who makes them.

[Darryl J Barrett]

To be quite honest ZAX, it would not really matter what anyone did to any of the pre existion 14' cats, they are never going to get within cooeee of an F14 designed within this new box rule, unless they can sail around a course and beat a well sailed Hobie 16 by at least two legs (or more) and beat one of the top two or three sailors on Mosquitoes over the line WITHOUT EVEN USING THE SPINNAKER. So I don't think that anyone sailing a new designed F14 has any concern at all about how any existing 14' cat is rigged.

None of this is conjecture or supposition either, these are the results that we are getting right now sailing a new F14 still in a relatively untuned condition

[ZAX]

Well, since there is no concern why not change the rule

Since we have no chance to get close as you say, it should not matter.

[ZAX]

Daryl,

sorry, did not read the post above the last one. So I can still race ZAX in retro class as is? then I have no problem and no wish to request a change to the box rule for new F14s.

In future I will probably like to get a more high tech boat anyway but for fun and practice the modified mari is ok. Your boat looks great and I would love to take a sail on one in future. It does not suprise me that you are able to perform so well against the H16s etc with your boat. I would not expect ZAX to get within cooee of your boat but still like to enter in the races. It is nice even to see the faster boats on the course.

It was raised by a modified H14 sailor that my spinaker pole is too long under the rules that is why I brought it up. We are getting a few people interested to toy in the area of F14. Even though we are starting in retros still have an interest in the pointy end of the fleet and watching where the high tech well designed boats like yours can push the limits to.

John.

[Emmessee]

Just to make it clear, there still is no set F14 rule.

It is all just discussion.

[Darryl J Barrett]

ZAX's is it your Mari that has a new "square top" mainsail made by Geoff Adams?? If it is I have heard a lot of good things about the performance of the cat with that new main.

This thing about "retro" F14's can be slightly confusing but it all boils down to a few simply facts. Firstly none of the existing 14' cats can completely "re design" their shapes and are limited by just what can be done to them to "improve" their performances ie you cannot take a twenty year old Mari and suddenly "loose" twenty kilo's of weight! so about the only things that can be done is to re design the sails so that the existing 14' cats have some thing to aim at. By encouraging them to play with their sail plans and compete against a completely new formula it should achieve some very interesting future results (particularly for the existing 14'ers), and it is the cheapest way for an owner of an existing 14' cat to "get into the game". There is a line that has to be drawn for the perimeters for any "new" F14" formula and, as far as the pole length is concerned, one metre is as good a place as any to set that limit. For existing 14'cats, the only limit that is recommende is that, as I have said earlier, the TOTAL sail area is kept below 300 sq ft, every thing else is "open slather".

Darryl J Barrett

[Darryl J Barrett]

That is not quite right, there is a regustered and incorporated F14 association, The IFCA for short and the class rule, regulations

[ZAX]

Darryl,

Yes, I have a full carbon squaretop sail made by Geoff Adams and also a jib now that has improved upwind performance made from the same material, it is larger and different shape to a standard maricat jib. The boat absolutely flies for a retro and should be rated quicker on yardstick than a standard H16 I think (I also sail H16s).

I would say that as far as Retro's go ZAX must be fairly competitive and it is well tuned but I would not expect it to get near a new F14 designed and built from scratch. That would be my preferred progression later on to get a full F14 as I like sailing 14 footers and like the extra performance which adds to the pleasure of sailing. I don't just sail a 14 because it is less expensive than a larger boat.

Geoff has put a big effort into the sails for ZAX and think that is the main reason for the extra performance. Actually even in standard trim ZAX goes ok, recently finished 1st in the Maricat Nationals in the cat rigged class. So as a retro I have started with a good platform.

[Darryl J Barrett]

We have used Geoff Adams sails since the early 80's (when it was Flower and Adams) and although we have used many other sailmakers over the years, Geoff's sails are the only ones that have always been right "first up" and his quality of finish has always been spot on and consistant from then right up to the present

I cannot recommend him more highly.

[ZAX]

Darryl,

Could not agree with you more on the quality of sails from Geoff.

Would it be possible to get an update on how things are going with your new boat? Are you still developing this or ready to produce more boats now? Some ideas on pricing and what stages you consider to sell these in i.e. hulls only or fully rigged?

Is it better to take this offline or answer here as others no doubt would also be interested?

regards,

John.

[ZAX]

One other question. I am one of those people that prefers not to have centreboards if possible. Do you have any concept on a more modern design than a mari or hobie that can be high performance but not include centreboards? That is one of the things I like about the mari and H16.

[berny]

Seeing as this question has remained unanswered for yonks, I'll have a go at it.

Realistically, a boat without c/boards will go ok speedwise but will not point nearly as high as one with boards. As I remember it, the Nacra 5.0m had skegs and although it was quick enough it just wouldn't go up hill. They put boards in it, called it the 14sq and they had a reasonably good boat except it was too heavy.

One of the reasons the 430 is so good is, it points much higher than most other 14ft cats and I'm talking about something like 5deg.+ higher than boardless boats. That's a lot of meters at the end of a windward leg. Just ask Garry Schnider (foam Windy SS) how much distance he has lost chasing me upwind.

Bern

P.S. I still don't understand the 1meter pole rule either.

[This message has been edited by berny (edited 10 November 2005).]

[Darryl J Barrett]

Berny is absolutely correct, there is just no comparison between a c/b cat and a non c/b cat, the c/b one will win every time. Many alternatives to c/b's have been tried over the years without success when compared to the efficiency gained with the simplicity of c/b's.

For a comparison at the extreme end try to sail a laser without a c/b, all it will do is sail sideways, drop the board and it points almost straight into the wind.

The 1m-pole rule that you are referring to Berny I presume is for the spinnaker pole on the F14? Well it was looked at in great depth by several people who have good experience with cats and spinnakers and the three main reasons it was made at 1m was that

1. Any further forward on a 4.3 hull length would severely "unbalance” the cat in a wide range of sailing conditions (fore and aft pitch particularly).

2. The "sums" indicated that a maximum spinnaker area of 11sqm was more than enough for a 4.3 cat so the pole just didn't have to be any longer than 1 metre in front of the bows to carry that area.

3. The further forward that the kite is carried the more likely that

the cat will develop "major" lee helm sailing with the kite.

One of the main concerns in the “box” rule was to set it out so that any cat built within it’s perimeters would be balanced, fast, responsive, and controllable through the widest range of conditions by one single person.

[berny]

Berny I presume is for the spinnaker pole on the F14? Well it was looked at in great depth by several people who have good experience with cats and spinnakers and the three main reasons it was made at 1m was that

1. Any further forward on a 4.3 hull length would severely "unbalance” the cat in a wide range of sailing conditions (fore and aft pitch particularly).

2. The "sums" indicated that a maximum spinnaker area of 11sqm was more than enough for a 4.3 cat so the pole just didn't have to be any longer than 1 metre in front of the bows to carry that area.

3. The further forward that the kite is carried the more likely that

the cat will develop "major" lee helm sailing with the kite.

One of the main concerns in the “box” rule was to set it out so that any cat built within it’s perimeters would be balanced, fast, responsive, and controllable through the widest range of conditions by one single person.

But the whole idea behind F14 was to allow for development. All the above are only opinions not facts and as I see it, to restrict any design area on mere supposition is to restrict legitimate development. Personally, I don't see the association's responsibility being in the area of prevention of possible builders making a mistakes. That is if having the pole further forward is a mistake which at this stage is simply conjecture.

[Darryl J Barrett]

It's not really "conjecture", Berny, as you are aware, there are many quite simple mathematical formulae that can be applied to the "overall" perimeter dimensions of the formula 14 "box rule" that will resolve the basics of "balance", and that has been done. But the real proof is in the pudding and we have already sailed the Alpha F14 with varying "pole" lengths, (primarily to satisfy ourselves), and the pole length that we have settled on and now use, is actually quite a bit shorter in front of the bows than that 1 metre. We found that the further forward we set a pole, the harder it was to respond to the spinnaker and the more dramatically accentuated the pitch in the gusts. With the pole at the maximum forward that we tested, the “lee helm” started to become a “real” problem as well.

I still can’t fully understand anyone wanting to have a longer pole? With the maximum area of the spinnaker being 11 sqm there is just no need for it. That 11 sqm even rules out the necessity to set the kite more than about 1 m above the hounds (on almost any 14’ mast) which makes the spinnaker loads less likely to put the integrity of the mast in jeopardy, and believe me when I say that 11 sqm of kite on a 14’ cat sailed solo is all the you will ever need or want.

[Darryl J Barrett]

This thing about "dimension restrictions" Berny, you have to have some defining dimensions for any specific thing and there are really very few when you look at the box rule for the F14.

There is the max’ overall length, the max beam, the max’ sail area, the minimum weight. And the spi’ pole length, (everything else is fairly much just “descriptive” and at the discretion of the individual)

I think it seems that you would be happier with something more like the old 18’ skiff rules – (the hulls are 18’ long and the racing starts at 2 pm) – Well, personally I would prefer something more along those lines for the F14, I.E. the overall length of the hulls are 4.3 m long, it is a catamaran without the use of hydrofoils, and the sails have to be of “fabric”. Anything and everything that anyone wants to race that complies to that can race for “across the line first wins”

That’s all well and good, but if you project that concept you soon come up with a lot more problems and “splintering” of ideas than you would get “good racing”. People need a certain “minimal” number of defining structured “rules” of any “class” of cat to relieve them of doubt and uncertainty concerning the class, for them to want to embrace it and actively participate within that class