International 14 Mailing List
| 14 | ||
From: Alan Laflin (alan.laflin@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Fri 16 Aug 2002 - 05:49:24 BST
Subject: Rule Changes
<p>> As two of the oldest active 14 sailors around, Eric Arens and I would like
> to make a few comments on the up-coming vote for rule changes. I've been
in
> the class since 1961 and Eric since 1969, and we've been a part of lots of
> rules changes and the debates leading to them.
>
> Boat designers are almost always for change as it tests their mettle and
may
> get their names in lights, so to speak. Uffa Fox, Ian Proctor, Bruce
Kirby, Chis Benedict,
Paul Bieker and dozens more have started out sailing/designing/building I
14's. And the class is better off for their involvement.
>
> Boatbuilders, sailmakers and spar makers are always for change as it means
> more sales and opportunities to make better products that will help their
> businesses. And the class is better off for their involvement.
>
> Rich people and the truly dedicated near-professionals are usually for
> change as it is in their best interests to get their name in lights. And
the class
> is better off for their involvement.
>
> But not every good idea should result in a rule change. If we wanted to
get radical, we could change enough rules immediately
>to become windsurfers and be done with it.
>
> We have a foiled rudder and yes it did help our performance relative to
> those that don't have them. But as soon as they get theirs, the status
quo will have
> returned. We bought ours used (Kris and Jamie's) for $750 USD and are
> looking at another $250 to modify the tiller angle so it fits our
particular
> boat. But that is still cheaper than the $1250 to $2400 that a new one
would
> cost.
>
> But now that the winged rudder is a foregone conclusion, we can start
> looking at development just in this area; and it won't be cheap. Sure, we
> might (if the US proposal passes) limit the size of the foils, but
> development will occur in the areas of: angle of attack, positive or
> negative dihedral, placement on rudder fore and aft as well as up or down,
> not to mention the length of the gantry or pod behind the boat. This in
> itself is a designers dream.
>
> Now, if we increase the beam and extend the crew position aft to keep
> the bow out of the water, can anyone tell us that the bows aren't going to
> be finer as well? Now the race for new hulls takes on a whole new
> dimension.
>
> We foresee a 14 hull that is a needle forward and has all it's beam in the
> last four or five feet of the hull because it can be offset by the winged
> rudder and the crew (offwind) essentially behind the boat. Remember, it
was
> the designers that gave us speed bumps back in the late 70's, and they'll
do
> it again, somehow.
>
> There are already two options for those who want to go faster (the 49er)
or
> be easier to sail (the 505).
>
> Personally, we think we should slow down the "development by rule change"
> and get back to the premise that we can make faster boats within the
> existing rules and keep the boats more affordable for at least a while
> longer.
>
> Enough said.
>
> Alan Laflin & Eric Arens
USA 1144
San Francisco Fleet
>
>
>
>
>
>
<p><p>----------------------
International 14 Mailing list
To Subscribe: <mailto:14list@i14.org?subject=subscribe>
To Unsubscribe: <mailto:14list@i14.org?subject=unsubscribe>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4.