Page 1 of 1

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2003 11:10 am
by Guest
I find it interesting that there has not been much discussion about the Rule Change Submissions for 2004. To review these proposals you need to log in, click on Members Only, click on Class Bussiness, and review Rules Submissions that were posted on 6-20-03. Have a look and lets see what you are thinking.

Craig White

PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2003 6:25 pm
by Guest
How do you log in? Username? Password?



PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2003 11:36 pm
by Guest
I wrote some comments which I email to Karl on July 11, but I have never received a response, so I will republish them here for general comments:
I was reading through the proposed rules changes published on the J/80 web page and I noticed the proposed weighing of sails in leou of defining cloth weight and I felt a need to make a comment. I don't know if you know, but I am a VP Asst Measurer in the Lightning Class. The Lightning class had similar discussions about the sail cloth weights for the all the sails. As you know, it is very difficult to determine the weight of the cloth used. The ISAF does have an accurate method, but it requires sampling the cloth by punching a small hole of predetemined size and using an analytical scale. Of course the holes would have to be repaired. The ISAF also has a less accurate approved method using a micrometer where one folds over the sail cloth and measures...the heavier, the thicker.

Of course there are problems even with this method (beyond the obvious hole in the sail). The weight of cloth will change over the course of time and will absorb moisture (especially nylon). The weight is not always uniform over a single roll let alone from lot to lot. Then there are the problems of how sailmakers define sail cloth weight...finished and unfinished...sailmakers's yard, British yard, Metric weights etc.

In the end, we stuck with using the finish weights. The Lightning Class Rule was change in April of this year to read:
73.1: General: Mainsail, jib and spinnaker are the only sails permitted. Sails will be measured in accordance with published procedures.
Cloth: All sail cloth shall:
a. be made of a woven polyester, nylon or cotton.
b. have a finished sailcloth weight of
i. not less than 158.5 gm/m2 (3.7 ounce for a 36" by 28.5" piece of cloth) for the main and jib
ii. not less than 36.4 gm/m2 (0.85 oz for a 36" by 28.5" piece of cloth) for the spinnaker.
c. have a supplier's specification with an average (actual) weight for the finished cloth:
i. not less than 158.5 gm/m2 (3.7 ounce for a 36" by 28.5" piece of cloth) for the main and jib
ii. not less than 36.4 gm/m2 (0.85 oz for a 36" by 28.5" piece of cloth) for the spinnaker.
d. As required, the ISAF procedures will be used for validating compliance.
Compliance. The sail manufacturer is responsible for assuring that the specific cloth used to produce a sail meets class specifications. Sail makers may request approval from the measurement committee for the use of a specific cloth product prior to making sails from the cloth. The measurement committee will periodically review the cloth used to produce sails. (April 2003)

We in the Lightning class discussed weighing the sails, but decided against it because there are too many unknown factors. On the main and jib, sail makers would be tempted to put heavy panels down low and lighter up high which might be an unintended consequence. Or heaver cord at the luff. Some owners have sails have slugs, some don't. What happens when a sail ages and loses weight because of lost resin on the sail. The sails weighed in they were new when new but now that they have ages does the owner have to put weight on the sail (like the hull)?

To be quite frank, this is really a issue that needs to be worked out between the sailmakers and the class. The J/80 class already has rules restricting how many sail can be bought in a year. The reputable sailmakers are not going to be making light weight sails...they won't last in the class. If there is a doubt about the sailcloth weight, if should be the responsibility of the sailmaker to prove the sails he sold meet the class rules. And in the end, the ISAF rules can be used to determine sail cloth weight.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2003 9:56 pm
by Guest
I agree with Terry.
I rely on the sail makers expertise to comply with the rule. And the rule does not specify sail hardware restrictions, so how do you pick a sail weight that is fair?

PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:44 pm
by Guest
Terry & Greg
Thanks for the feedback. The question is do we want to have the current rule that states sails must be certified by the sailmaker as being built with cloth that is of an approved weight with no specific way to test a sail except to put a hole in it or do we want to establish a minimum total sail weight? We will either stay with the current rule or go to a sail weight. The problem with the current rule is at what point do we remove cloth from someones sail and at what point will the cloth be removed from on the sail. Some sails have extra reinforcement in some areas and little reinforcement in other areas. Now where do we take the test material from? This is something to think about. This scenario is the justification for the rule change proposal. On the other hand, there is no definite rule on allowed hardware that can be fixed to a sail. Will there be reef points in Mainsails that will obviously raise the mainsail weight? The intent of the rule change is to be able to come to a conclusion at major regattas.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 23, 2003 12:48 pm
by Guest

As you stated.. "The problem with the current rule is at what point do we remove cloth from someones sail and at what point will the cloth be removed from on the sail. Some sails have extra reinforcement in some areas and little reinforcement in other areas. "

Sail makers are free to design at will.. using a miniumum cloth weight, correct?.

I think the issue is to weigh or not weigh...

Has the level of class compitition been elevated to a point where 5+/- lbs of dacron can effect the outcome of a series??

If you guys are <font color="ff0000">•</font><font color="ff0000">•</font><font color="ff0000">•</font><font color="ff0000">•</font> bent on going forward with this level of pre-race scrutiny, could we require the sailmakers to include a yard of cloth used to make each sail with it's matching royalty label number attached??

Also, a Royalty label attached with stitching, as required by rule, is not good enough to ensure the patch matches the sail.. Any patch could be placed on another sample or sail if re-sewn by hand using the same holes in the label.

I would suggest a metal tag that has a formed-in rivit. It is then rivited onto the cloth sample with the matching royalty number stamped on it. It can not be applied twice without damage.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:50 pm
by Guest
Here's my take.

Submission # 2 Substitution of Hardware
This proposed rule states:
Substitution of blocks, cleats, turnbuckles and boom vang by non-standard manufacturers, provided that the replacement part is of similar size, weight, power ratio and performs the same function.

As worded, this rule prohibits changes that are currently normal and accepted practice. For example replacing a standard Harken block with a carbo block that weighs 30 –50 percent less would fail the similar weight argument. Similar arguments could be made for size between various manufacturers component. This wording actually prohibits the removal of shackles from halyards. A knot is not the same size or weight as a shackle, which is why we are removing them. Why are we still requiring a Harken roller furler? Further, what constitutes a “non-standardâ€

PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2003 11:30 pm
by Guest
Is Submission #3 relating to "Builder's Weight" aimed at getting the builder to be more consistent in producing boats that weigh the same?

There is no provision for grandfathering existing boats that weigh more than 1,450 kg in the Builder's Weight configuration. It is easy enough to add corrector weights to a boat that is too light but it may not be practical to lighten a boat that is too heavy.

With the exception of needing to change the word "or" to "and" the existing wording in C.5.1 of the Class Rules seems to be simple enough.

Alternatively, the following wording might clean up the existing C.5.1 wording:

The weight of the complete boat, dry and in racing condition, shall not be less than 1,495 kg including all Mandatory Equipment required under C.4.2, Mandatory Equipment Not For Use (outboard motor) as required by C.4.3(a), all Optional Equipment allowed under C.4.3(b) that is permanently mounted and the required sails under G.1.1.

I think the proposed wording relating to Builder's Weight should not be added to the Class Rules and if there is a problem with the weight of boats coming from the builder then JBoats should get more involved with quality control and inspecting the product before it is sold.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2003 1:00 am
by Guest
Thanks to Steve Strout and to everyone else who has reviewed and commented on the submissions for rule changes. The reason for posting this information on an open forum is to solicit comments and input from the general membership of our National Class Association. Such input helps guide the class leadership as to consensus of the members, which can then be conveyed to the international Executive Committee. I have copied each submission below with my own thoughts and comments. These opinions are based upon experience as an owner, as a competitor, and as a class officer. Historically, the Class has operated under the guidance of “Don’t attempt to fix what isn’t broken.â€