I did not see my response to Bram come over the list. I don't know the
over-all length of my board but it is 48" from the bottom of the boat. I
think that would make it somewhere in the 61" - 62" range. To some extent
I agree with Keith. We can make things so restrictive that you would be
hard pressed to call it a development class. I don't know if my board is
faster or slower than Bram's. I do know that tea bagging is slow. Until I
can make it around the course on Bram's tail without swimming, I will
worry about my ability first. One blown tack, one blown jibe, one blown
toss, etc. will have a greater bearing on my place that if my board is a
little longer.
As for the trailing edge. I'm not sure. I only been cut once by a board
and that was falling off a 420 while trying to watch what the rookie was
doing who caused the capsize in the first place. The trailing edge would
have been in Bram's tolerance. I was cut because it was an impact tear on
my shin. Thankfully we do not have bailors on the bottom either. Same boat
different rookie left me with a scar in my thigh. I guess there is a
certain amount in inherent risk in sailing and it should be up to the
sense of lack there of for the owner/operator to manage.
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 22:33:04 -0600, <BDally6107@xxxxxxx> wrote:
To our class officers and members,
I would like to propose an amendment to our class rules. The primary
objective is to limit the length of centerboards with a secondary
objective of
blunting the trailing edge to something less than razor sharp for
safety reasons.
Recent developments in other high performance have led to extremely high
aspect blades that are nearly two feet longer than the longest Swift
blade I've
seen to date. While it may be OK for boats with crews to deal with this
extraordinary blade, launching a Swift alone while trying to deal with
a blade
this long would be difficult for seasoned skiff sailors and impossible
for
everyone else. While landing on beaches, these blades will be equally
tough to
deal with alone.
The problem would normally be self correcting, however, I fear that these
blades will become necessary in light to medium air if a sailor hopes to
be
competitive. Without an amendment, someone is certain to develop a long
board
and I feel it would be counterproductive to wait till that happens to
decide to
outlaw them. That process would discourage future blade or rigging
development because those who spend their time and money working on
improvements
would not be inclined to continue. Faster, easier, cheaper, and more
durable
should always be our goal.
The trailing edge issue is simply an issue of safety. A sharp blade
will
likely be imperceptibly faster than a blunted blade. There is a very
real
danger that a Swift sailor could seriously cut himself during the
righting
process and not get to help in time. I would suggest that the rule
contain the
following language: Blades shall be built in such a manner that when a
spacer
gauge with parallel sides 2 mm apart is placed astride of the trailing
edge,
the gauge shall not be penetrated more than Ââ.
It is my hope to persuade our executive board to move on this before it
becomes a problem. I would appreciate it if your input is posted on
the mailing
list so everyone can hear any arguments to help them make a decision.
I'm
inclined to use 55â as the maximum finished overall length unless boards
already exist that are a bit longer.
Bram
--
Don't be good. Have LOTS of fun.
Live large, love life, and sail fast.
This is the Swift Solo mailing list. For unsubscribe instructions,
visit here: http://catzooks.com/swift-solo/
|