Discussion of possible changes Discussed in Napier

[Sjors]

Guys, we should try to stay on topic. Enthousiastic new ideas make us differ from the three issues posted by John.

Topics are:
1 Do we want a bigger spinnaker
2 Do we want a new rudder
3 Should the bigger TackTick be allowed or banned

If you would like to discuss any other change in the rules, please feel free to open a new topic.

Furthermore, this is to be an open discussion, so please don't dismiss someones opinion just because you don't agree with them.

By the way; I'm very glad to see that there's so much interest in this discussion.

[sparky]

I have open a topic on italian FD class forum about this changes.
When I will have a larger opinion of italian FDers,i will write on this board what think italian class about it.
For now I do not seem to be well received,especially the idea of a bigger spinnaker and the use of a big tacktic.
ITA 109 VP italian FD class (2° fleet in the world after germans)

[Sjors]

I'm sorry Sparky, but this forum is meant to be used by individual FD sailors. I don't think it would be a good idea for you to speak for the entire Italian FD Class. You'd better advise your sailors to go to this topic themselves and give their own opinion.

By the way, this topic is just a survey to get a general idea of peoples thoughts. And as long as no German (1st fleet in the world by more then 3 times) FD sailors are giving their opinion on these subjects we can't really conclude anything just yet.

[Neil Pye]

I'm sorry Sjors, but you can't have it both ways. If it's a forum for individuals, why do we have to have a German opinion for the discussion to reveal anything??

From a general point of view, I can't speak for anyone else, but I sail FD BECAUSE of what it is, not in spite of it. It doesn't matter what rudder is hanging off the back as long as it's the same as everyone else's. It won't make me more likely to stay in the class, and it won't attract new sailors. It'll just mean I have to spend money I can't really afford, that I'd rather spend on either new sails or travelling to Worlds or Europeans. For those of us who have to make these kind of decisions, the shape of the rudder and the size of the spinnaker are utterly irrelevant. The boat is what it is, and I love it. If you want something else, sail something else and leave our beautiful boat alone!
neil

[Derik]

From a general point of view, I can't speak for anyone else, but I sail FD BECAUSE of what it is, not in spite of it. It doesn't matter what rudder is hanging off the back as long as it's the same as everyone else's. It won't make me more likely to stay in the class, and it won't attract new sailors. It'll just mean I have to spend money I can't really afford, that I'd rather spend on either new sails or travelling to Worlds or Europeans. For those of us who have to make these kind of decisions, the shape of the rudder and the size of the spinnaker are utterly irrelevant. The boat is what it is, and I love it. If you want something else, sail something else and leave our beautiful boat alone!
neil

I don't own an FD at the moment (a situation to be corrected shortly, I hope!), but if I can offer an opinion I'd say: GIVE THAT MAN A CIGAR!

Why do we want to change the boat? The answer must be 'because it's not as good as something else'. But you will never improve on 'something else' unless you start afresh with a blank sheet of paper. Individual tweaks may improve particular aspects of performance - the move to carbon masts is doing that - but unless such changes are made across the entire fleet then carbon masts, changing rudder blades or allowing an even larger spinnaker will only make a performance change from one FD to another, risking fracturing the class in the process. It won't make any substantial improvement against (say) a skiff class which would tempt sailors out of that boat into an FD.

[Jonathan Clapp]

the FD is not really a one-design class. it is a development class. It cannot ever be a strict one-design like Laser or 470.
developments like superior construction materials and methods, superior sail design, superior rig control systems etc, have been allowed.
I agree that the FD is not a skiff , so we should not try to make it like a skiff. but changes that make the boat sweeter to sail should be considered oportunity for improvement, not creating split in the class.
It has always been so.

[brookesy]

As a 'new boy' to the class my opinion would not hold much sway, but the options to me are simple;
Firstly why do we need a bigger spinnaker, if we are fleet racing the existing kite seems pretty good to me, and if its to improve the performance handicap racing, Why, if you want to keep up with 49er's buy one. I think the larger kite would send us down the route of windward/leeward courses and thats not what I came to the class for.
The rudder is a cheaper and more acceptible evolution, but please, if we must, can we use the outline and width of the old one as the maximum size, so that those who do not wish to, can stick with what they have.
The Tactick question to my mind is also simple, the 'small' one only, should be used, or it opens the floodgates to various GPS systems and outrageous expense. I also sail the Finn and we are now only allowed this option and it seems to work. I prefer to sail myself, rather than let a glorified calculator do the work for me.

[Neil Pye]

Jonathan, I agree to a certain extent. There has always been some freedom in the rules to allow innovation in rig control and materials, but the rules have always controlled hull shape, foils and sailplan very closely. In this respect it's one-design, although maybe not in the strictest, Olympic sense. It seems to me to be a very big philosophical step, for a pretty small gain, to free the rudder shape and depth. The alternative is, as I said earlier, to find someone to design a new rudder. The whole thing seems to me a waste of effort. The boat is great to sail now.

A bigger spinnaker would certainly change the character of the boat. Whether for better or worse I don't know, but it would certainly be harder for the "lightweight" teams like us to race the boat, not to mention the financial input which some of us can ill afford.

None of this stuff is likely to make the class any more attractive to the sailing community as a whole, so we run the risk of fragmenting the class for what? I think we have to face facts, the boat is big and heavy. The extra sail area may well not make the difference to the FD that it did to the 505. Having said all that, it's all a bit theoretical until someone fronts up and tries it!

Neil

[JulianGBR380]

Hiya all

I have followed this discussion with interest, and I would like to say that, as I start to become an old conservative, my thoughts are similar to those of Neil Pye - what benifit would we gain by making changes which would involve considerable expense.

1 Spinnaker is quite big enough at present, any bigger and it will mean superhero crews only, or winches! I also do lots of 'real' coastal races and I do not want to restrict my ability to enjoy 5 km three sail reaches.

2 The rudder debate seems to be based around control problems with the potentially larger spinnaker, if you are using the existing spinnaker and keep the boat flat there is usually enough rudder to keep the boat underneath the rig.

3 Ticktack, well, the small one is outside my entire year's budget for sailing, and anyway I am an analogue kind of person anyway. The numbers on the card moving do shift spotting good enough for me.

If I wanted to be on the cutting edge of sailing - and I could afford it - and I was fit enough - I would sail 49er, but I enjoy sailing my FD very much and I am very happy with it as it is.

cheers, skol, prost, salute, iechyd da, etc to all

Julian Bridges

[Hideo]

In 1970s, during which I started sailing FD, we were the fastest dinghy among the boats visible around us. It didn’t occur at that time but it must have been a joy to sail on the fastest boat. I think that feeling had a significant role in people’s decision in taking-up/continuing sailing FD.
In recent years, we have seen more and more classes passed us in the speed category especially in spinnaker reach/run. I feel a bit frustrated by this.
I guess the drive for bigger spinnaker is prompted mainly by that sort of frustration and if many sailors among us feels the same frustration we need to think it seriously.

However, I don’t think the bigger spinnaker would be the right solution, the reason being;
1.It would require too many alterations on mast, boom and spinnaker pole in addition to the new bigger spinnaker itself like;
-raising the spinnaker halyard and/or lowering the spiro block
-longer spinnaker pole
-improved inversion bending mechanism on the mast
2. It would demand more skilled and powerful handling of the spinnaker.
This issue is very important to keep a good number in the class because we are seeing more and more old or female sailors and the skilled crew is becoming more and more scarce.
3.The improvement wouldn’t be huge enough to justify the downsides discussed above.

To go forward, I believe the gennaker would provide much better prospects because sailing with it should be much easier than handling bigger spinnaker, the improvement could be phenomenal, installation of gennaker system would be reasonably straightforward and the total cost will be no more than the one for bigger spinnaker. A new mast would cost less because no Spiro fitting or ring is needed.
However, I have to admit the above argument is mainly based on observation and theoretical thinking only. I would like to come back when I can discuss it further based on more reliable facts.

Regarding the rudder and centre board, I am not very keen to change the current rule, but if the class doesn’t mind the change, I would like to see much narrower centre board and thus narrower rudder because the internet search told me the width is far too wide for the maximum thickness of our centre board to provide good hydro dynamic characteristics. Making them narrower would also reduce the wetted surface area resulting in less drag.

For the compass, I want to see the current rule/regulation retained allowing only the simple electric compass.
Hideo – NZL 110