While I do not consider myself an idiot, I am quite ignorant of some safety
issues and well as issues of things potentially breaking. My ignorance is a
function of having a very limited experience sailing. Getting information on
how to avoid getting hurt or seriously killed is pretty important to me
especially since I am the type to go out on my own in a November gail...
...Gues that does make me an idiot:)
Bottom line-- safety information is good.
Chris Rudesill
Keith <keith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My vote would be to allow a maximum surface area (rudder and
daggerboard) and let the individual determine how they wanted to
distribute the surface area allotment. If someone wants to make a 10
foot board and swim the boat the last 1/4 mile (about 1/2 a km in
Greg's more enlightened measurement world), they should be allowed to
build the 10 foot board. And swim their heart out.
Rousseau often argued for general community laws with the small points
being handled by individuals. I think this is a perfect case. We
should not put forward an amendment simply because something "might"
happen and someone "might" have a problem and it "may" create a
difficulty bringing in the boat to the beach. And something "might"
get broken.
All those "might/may" issues are "owner/designer/idiot" issues and not
"class" issues. The Class Rules are for building the Solo and designing
appendages within a box. Not for protecting a builder from
him/herself. In this amendment there is a measure of class protection
of members that is not called for anywhere else in the rules.
Do we start putting rubber bumpers on the boom so we can call it a biff?
Leave it alone and let's move on to issues that have import now.
Keith
On Jun 15, 2005, at 6:51 AM, BDally6107@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
> From: BDally6107@xxxxxxx
> Date: June 15, 2005 6:50:37 AM PDT
> To: Christian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: an ammendment to the class rules
>
>
>
> Christian,
>
> Good to hear from you
>
> Once a few 7 foot long 6" wide boards have been made by Swift owners I
> personally will fight like hell to convince the class
> that they should never be banned. It is unjust to those who go
> through the trouble and expense of doing the R&D to change the
> rules in the middle of the game when it can be avoided with simple
> planning. I currently have a boat with a cut down 49er blade and one
> with a 53" blade and can tell you with certainty that when landing
> or starting from a beach, the longer 53" blade is significantly more
> difficult to deal with alone. Add a couple of feet and only those of
> us who are lucky enough to sail several times a week will get good
> enough to beech the boat without breaking vang arms and tearing the
> cheeks out of mainsails when the wind is up.
>
> It could be argued that the difficulty of using the longer blade will
> be self limiting, however, I fear that you may have no choice if you
> expect to have a chance to win in light to medium air.
>
> The "faster, easier, cheaper" principle was intended to be taken in
> context. I could have designed the Swift in the beginning to be
> significantly faster if we were willing to give up "easier" Honoring
> the principle means that we should strive, whenever possible,
> to accomplish all three simultaneously. With the extreme blades we
> will significantly reduce the number of people who can sail the boat
> competitively.
>
> This proposed rule change should not discourage people from
> experimenting with blade planforms or sections. It is, I believe, in
> keeping with the spirit of the class there remains a lot of other
> potential worthwhile experiments within the 55" limitation. Even open
> development classes have limitations and it is often
> those restrictions that lead to real innovation. It has been an eye
> opener to see the latest I-14's become as fast as well sailed 49ers
> that are 2 1/2 feet longer and 2 1/2 feet wider. I'm more convinced
> than ever that the Swift is the fastest single handed trapeze skiff to
> date and the longer blades will likely add 1/20th of a knot of boat
> speed in light to medium winds (this amounts to 50 yards for every
> half hour of racing).
>
> If the class rejects such a rules change, I am the first to admit that
> I will begin development of a seven foot board. I will redevelop my
> mainsail to eliminate the cheeks and move the vang back to the top of
> the boom to facilitate hoisting the blade 30 inches in heavy air (the
> very latest I-14s are doing this). Since I mostly sail from a dock in
> very deep water, it is not a problem for me or others here in
> Seattle. We do need to decide if this is in the best interest of the
> class.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bram This is the Swift Solo mailing list. For unsubscribe
> instructions,
> visit here: http://catzooks.com/swift-solo/
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
|