Discussion of possible changes Discussed in Napier

[John.L.Best]

Dear Sailors,

This is John Best, The Spanish Inquisition, I am floating some of the ideas that came up in conversation in New Zealand, for general discussion among class members. I would like to get a feel for what the class members think about the ideas presented. There is and will be no compulsion to make any or all of these changes. If you guys want the boat to be just as it is now, then that is fine, but it is my job to float the ideas that came up in the dinghy park and in the competitors forum in Napier. Over to You.

1)The possibility of "looking at "adopting the 5o5 larger spinnaker for the Flying Dutchman Class.

A)I have spoken with a few of the FD Cognoscenti and their opinions are divided, some think that we should behave ourselves and leave it alone.

B)Some the others think that we should encourage the adoption of the new 5o5 spi as an alternative and allow people to measure in 2 spinnakers at international events, one conventional 5.5 metre leech spi and also one 6.0 metre leech 5o5 lookalike spi.

C)Others believe that we should adopt the 5o5 spi as the class "norm" to replace the current 5.5 metre leech spi.

Notes on this topic. The 5o5 class experience seems to have been that it changes the course that sailors like to race on. The classic Olympic course might become a thing of the past, as it would probably prove more difficult to sail classic 3 sail reaches with the "new spi".
There is also a possible problem with mast inversion, unless the spinnaker halyard continues to emerge from where it does at present and the Spinnaker pole fitting is lowered down the mast somewhat. The 5o5 Spinnaker has leeches that are 0.5 metres longer than our present spi.i.e. the 5o5 spi has 6.0 metre leeches.
What is the mood of the class, we measurers await your views with interest ??

The second item is the Current FD rudder. There has been a great deal of discussion around dinghy parks all around the World about the FD rudder.

2)The design dates back to the beginning of time, and should probably have been modified when the 1993 spinnaker was adopted. There seems to be little concensus on what a "New Rudder" should look like, your thoughts please.?

3)The third item is the Electronic Compass issue. Currently, many sailors have Tack Tick type compasses, of either the large or small variety. Currently, the small one is legal, the larger one with the Knock / Lift bar graph data on it is not, it is thought to carry out too much of the Helmsperson's mental work for them. It does, However, have much bigger numbers, allowing older sailors to read it and making it more visible from the trapeze. The current measurement response is to tape over the Lift / Header bar on the larger Tack Tick compass, which none of the measurers actually like doing. There is no question of going to linked instruments and outside sensors for boat speed and wind direction, that would, I think be several bridges too far.

A) would the class like to leave things as they are, and allow the full use of the advanced Tack Tick for 'normal regattas' but taping it over when racing in an International Regatta.

B)Change our rules to permit the unrestricted use of the advanced and larger Tack Tick Compass, even though not everybody has one.

There are a couple of notes that I will add to perhaps permit more informed discussion.

One) Other classes, the Etchells, the Finn and I think the 5o5 have adopted the small Tack Tick as legal, but the larger Tack Tick is not.

Two)The Advanced Tack Tick is expensive and according to some competitors the built in and NOT replaceable battery quits after about 3 seasons, meaning that one has to spend another EUR 600 or $900 to get another one. I have no details of the battery life of the smaller Tack Tick Compass.

Go to it Guys and Gals, no kicking , no gouging and positively no handbagging.!!

Regards, John Best Chief Measurer IFDCO

[Sjors]

Hi John,

thanks for opening the discussion on these tough subjects on our forum. The changes that were put forward at the NZL competitors hearing would mean a lot of new costs for the members, and a greater differance in boat speed between the first and last boat to finish. Still I think that evolution is something that comes natural to the Flying Dutchman Class. Therefore every progressive idea must be discussed.

My personal opinion on the matters at hand:

1) The bigger spi would make sailing in light winds more fun. In heavy winds the reach will be harder, but straight down wind it will be even more spectacular. I'm not against the idea, however; I think the bigger spi should be tested by 4 or 5 top teams before I can make up my mind.

2) The shape of the rudder right now is completely arbitrary, I really feel that the FD could be a lot faster with the right shape of rudder. The same goes for the centerboard. The thing is; changing the rules on these two items would change the entire appearance of the FD. For now I'm mildly against this idea because the image of our boat in my mind is too strong. I'm looking forward to more opinions though.

3) I say; make the big Tack Tick legal. I believe the winning teams in our class won't be winning because the instrument doe their thinking for them. Instruments giving the other data you mentioned, like windspeed and boatspeed should indeed stay prohibited

Looking forward to more thoughts of sailors,
Sjors
NED 334

[Jonathan Clapp]

1) I dont care for a larger spinnaker, really. There are still boats sailing in the States and elsewhere I guess, with the pre-1993 spinnaker. But Ill go along quietly and buy Lin's first second-hand one.
The 505s have adressed the inversion problem thus: they added a piece of gear to the mast to accomodate the higher spi hoist; they move the trap attachment points up there with it, so as the need to hike increases, the force of the crew on the trap is nearly opposite the force from the spi. then, when going up wind they have a set of "trap twings", little lines lead out through the old trap wire holes, each with an eye around the trap wire, and a line inside, down to the base of the mast. The crew can pull them tight to the mast, so that his weight is at the hounds, as formerly. Just another thing to remember at the leeward mark.
* The spi-pole will need to be made longer too..?

2) Id like to see the underwater shape of the rudder and CB open, but within the existing envelope.
In otherwords, you can do an eliptical, or what ever you like, but it cant be deeper than now, and also all old blades remain legal. I dont think it would harm the look of the boat, no one see it except
* I think the weight of the blades can be safely lowered also..?

3) I dont want one but I dont care if anyone else wants one.

Jonathan Clapp
USA-7

[Flyingdutchmansailor]

First, a confession: I have three FD, a 1958 Dutch-built home-finished mahogany restoration project (like Haig said, there's light at the end of the tunnel), a 1976 or so, built by Silenzi, Italian, mahogany basket case, and a 1978 Mader needing a deck and reassembly. Our house dates from 1855. Our 'big' boat is a Bill Tripp-designed, 1970 Dutch-built LeComte North East 38. My newest digital music playback equipment was built in 1903, and uses not a single electron (except for retaining its atoms). My oldest analog music playback equipment also dates from 1903.

The FD is hopelessly outdated by modern confections, but not outclassed by anything. Modern boats look entirely different in most every way. Nothing we could do would change its basic nature. Very little we could do would improve on its excellent habits or materially change its speed, or make it easier to sail.

We sail these things because they're still way out in front of nearly everything else on the water, in nearly every way. Gorgeous, fast, and delightful; what's not to love? Let's not fix what ain't broke!

[jalgert19073]

I would like to deep the current spi size, but the larger spi would be ok, especially if we can measure two.

Both blades could abviously be better, but I think the rudder is the only practical one to change, and I'm all for it.

I'd rather keep the the small tack-tick, but I'd go along with the majority.

[Longshot]

Regarding the larger spinnaker, I think what we have is big enough. Sailing in San Francisco, we either have not enough wind to get crew on the wire, or too much to launch a huge spinnaker comfortably. What we have is big enough; going to a larger spinnaker will only increase the gap between the Very Good and the rest of us, and could lead to a drop in fleet participation.

I do think we need to upsize the mainsail. The skipper always has the sheets in hand, so how often are capsizes caused by the mainsail? I think this is an excellent place to upsize. I have done the math for this at http://www.CalFD.org under Specifications -> Performance. Essentially we would need to add about 10-15 feet, added as additional roach. The beauty is the extra sail area can take care of itself almost entirely (with good sail design). This is also a reasonably priced option, and moves the boat up the performance curve relative to the 5o5, and does so at lower speeds. The boat would start planning at lower speeds, and be faster in all conditions, while remaining controllable in heavy wind. This is a good all-purpose change, that everyone would enjoy, not just fleet leaders.

Although I agree the rudder design is dated, if the rule was changed, I would probably not bother to change my rudder. Essentially the bottom/trailing edge needs to be made elliptical. But I don’t think this will result in any performance change: the boat does not stall as is, and I doubt the current design actually causes excessive drag in normal use. So I suggest leave the rudder be, or just let people mess with it. Make a box, and the rudder has to fit in it.

The centerboard could be updated with a straight leading edge and elliptical bottom/trailing edge. The benefits are twofold: the blade would fit MUCH better in the trunk when fully raised, and drag would be reduced when the blade is partially raised (on a reach/run). I suggest we make a box, with leading and trailing edges like what we have, and the bottom edge (of the box) at right angles to the leading edge (instead of the current trailing edge), resulting in a maximum depth comparable to what we currently have, and no rules regarding how to shape the blade. If someone wants a higher aspect (narrower or smaller) blade, with less surface area, let them. Since many boats can’t go to a thicker blade, I would not suggest a change that allowed thicker blades.

Regarding the larger TacTick, I have one, the battery died, and TacTick is not warranting it. I opened it up and replaced the battery, without luck. So I am out a $500 compass. They are useful, I never used the header lift info, and if you can’t figure that stuff out on your own, I don’t think the compass is going to make a difference. I say allow digital compasses, since everyone is using them anyway, but outlaw TacTicks.

Doug McWilliams, http:www.CalFD.org webmaster.

[PScoffin]

Thanks for the link Jonathan,

Spinnaker: I am definitely against raising the spinnaker size again. I agreed with the change to carbon masts as this was a direction that was eventually inevitable. Increasing spinnaker size is a wholesale change and will come with many side issues associated with it. Even despite the size increase I do not believe it will be much of an improvement overall, but it will surely change the way the boat needs to be raced effectively. People who sail the FD have already chosen it for what it provides, there are other classes that have chosen the high hoist spinnaker as an option and simply copying this direction just isn't necessary for the FD. In it's present form the FD handles well and is managable and fast, across the full spectrum of conditions. I enjoy the three sail reaching aspect of the boat as it is at present. I do not believe in change just for the sake of change.

A real danger in making this unnecessary change will be that it could quite possibly alienate many of the day to day sailors. I strongly believe the association should be helping and encouraging more FD's to particpate at events, not to intiate a potential split in the class. Having a strong stuctured base is important in giving the sailors the confidence that they have indeed made the correct choice of boat. It is therefore important I believe, that a full cross section of all members have their say, no matter whether they sail on only their home lake, or travel the world racing.

I simply can not see people clambering to join the class because the spinnaker hoist hase been raised 0.5 of a metre.

Compasses: I personally will not purchase a data processing model from purely the cost aspect alone. The small Tacktick Micro is a perfect tool for me in that the display is large, it is easily removed and doesn't suffer the "southern dip" that the card compasses display when changing hemespheres. I am concerned about the life expectancy, as even the Micro isn't cheap. An article in the "Bulletin" by someone with knowledge on this subject would be invaluable in helping me and I'm sure others, to make a more informed decision.

Best regards,

Paul Scoffin (USA-1458)

[FDGorilla]

Ok, I know I haven't been around the circuit for a while so possibly don't count but, for what it's worth:

1) Having used the 5oh kite, make the change and don't worry about it. Lighter crew's in the 5ohs haven't lost out and we quite happily (ish) used the kite in 25+ knots. This is something that should've been done years ago - the FD 'big' kite is admittedly larger than the old one but is still woeful given the size of the boat. Downwind, 5oh's are fun. The FD is boring in comparison. Upwind we're unrivalled as a sailing experiance but this currently all evaporates at the windward mark. OK so the reaches may get flicked from events and we won't walk with dinosaurs sailing triangles - in 10 years time no-one will know how to do reaches anyway... This means that the windward / leeward sections of courses can be bigger than they currently are - lots of fun!
Increase the hoist height and people can use twings (or whatever you want to call them) if they feel it appropriate - it's no great drama and it's the helms problem anyway so why worry? There are several 5ohs who don't use any additional mast support fot the kite and don't lose the rig over the front so don't imagine problems where there are none. We could certainly lower the pole position as required but this is down to individual setup. As for the longer pole, didn't we do that already?
If people want to measure in 2 kites then fine, 'cos that worked so well during the transition to the big kite didn't it....
Just cos something was made/designed years ago doesn't make it better - there're these little things called evolution and progress. The FD was once quite good at those.....

While we're at it, let's stop pretending and allow unlimited pumping, ooching etc above 14 knots. ISAF says we're athletes so let's allow the crews to be athletic.....

2) Change the rudder. It's prehistoric, rubbish and about as advanced as a steering board on a longship. Make it the same depth as the centreboard and allow toothpicks if people think they can control them. Leave the CB alone though - there're minimal tweaks that can really be made here without substantial changes to the hull so why bother?

3) Small tacktick's are fine. Big ones are cheating. If you can't mentally (re)calculate the median and track the shifts you're sailing the wrong class.

[Jonathan Clapp]

Ok, I know I haven't been around the circuit for a while so possibly don't count but, for what it's worth:

once an FD sailor always an FD sailor. by all means come and sail with us once in a while.

1) Having used ...
There are several 5ohs who don't use any additional mast support fot the kite and don't lose the rig over the front so don't imagine problems where there are none. ...

glad to hear it. the carbon spar should be even less vulnerable to such forces, and can be disgned for.

While we're at it, let's stop pretending and allow unlimited pumping, ooching etc above 14 knots. ISAF says we're athletes so let's allow the crews to be athletic.....

I think youve gone beyond the scope of this discussion. start a new thread if you want to promote umlimitted pumping and ooching. I have an opinion as well.

2) there're minimal tweaks that can really be made here without substantial changes to the hull so why bother?

discus interaction of CB shape and hull shape please.

[Jamie]

A bigger Kite for the FD. Not sure about this one to be honest.

The Adrenalin loving speed merchant in me says yes yes a thousand times yes.

The bit of me that owns a boat built in 1983 sees only bits of splintering wood and kevlar and says no thanks.

The bit of me which likes playing with string and rigging says oh goody please yes.

The student in me who is living on only the money in my overdraft says thats going to be an expense too far no thanks.

I will admit that one bit of me did spend the afternoon, while fixing my boat, wondering about rigging my spare mast to take a 505 size kite. (It's a Proctor E and I suspect several backstays and other bits of ancilliary rigging would be required to keep the thing in the sky.) There is also a bit of me which remembers watching a 505 GBR nationals fleet a couple of years ago loosing several rigs over the front (admittedly it was windy and lumpy, but still). We can't be under any illusions about the extra pressure that a kite of this size will do to the rig. Luckily for us the 505's have already done the rig breaking for us and subtly stealing their ideas will not be too much of a problem. The 505 systems for dealing with the problems are not drastically complicated from what I have seen.

As regards to the foils. I would tend to think that we can't do much with the c/b to change it much from what it is now. The reason being that this may require the boats c/b slot to be changed. I for one am not into doing major surgery on the boat to accommodate a wider or longer board. On the other hand I have absolutely no problem with the principle of freeing up the rules over the rudder. Setting a max depth and min weight (for whole rudder and tiller assembly) rule would seem to be enough. No adjustment would need to be made to the boat other than perhape moving gudgeons about on the transom, which is no big deal.

Anyway, that's just my back of the fleet, campaign on the cheap and in it for the beer perspective.

Cheers.

Jamie