From: Paul Bieker (pbieker@serv.net)
Date: Thu 21 Oct 1999 - 17:14:41 BST

• Next message: Ted Rogers: "Re: Thoughts on the rule proposal"
• Previous message: Spragg, David: "RE: Thoughts on the rule proposal"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I forgot to say that I was for all of the proposed rule changes other than
the rise of floor stuff which I think doesn't do anything to alleviate the
existing loopholes in the rule. Sorry for not making myself clear Tom.

There seemed to be some misunderstandings on my proposed beam. I calculated
that 86" (7'-2", not 8'-6") would be equivalent to our old power to righting
moment.

As far as the old rules optimum weight: light guys tended fastest in light
air, medium guys were fastest in medium air (Ian Walker in Kingston), and
heavy guys in heavy air (The MacDonalds in SF). But there was a lot more
overlap than there is now - a properly tuned light crew program could
compete in a breeze.

• Next message: Ted Rogers: "Re: Thoughts on the rule proposal"
• Previous message: Spragg, David: "RE: Thoughts on the rule proposal"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4.