Scott,

There hasn't been a decision as of yet and probably won't be one until we have a class meeting in September.

The point behind my suggestion was based on the fact that materials available today are much stronger than the old nylon materials that our rules were based on. By the old rules you hvae to use an equivelent AIRX material that is quite overkill for our boats. Especially in the really light air that you guys in Detroit probably see more than us.

In reality the gain you will probably see on the race course is probably pretty minimal. Once you screw up a gybe you have just lost all the gains. But I think it is time to update the rules to keep pace with the advances in technology.

On the other issue of masthead kites, I don't know when that was put into affect. I would recommend you talk to Ralph Deeds to have a meeting to discuss its existance and whether or not it is still necessary. Being your own fleet you guys can easily modify the rules locally to meet your conditions.

Hope this answers your questions.

Cheers,

Jason

:: Is there a decision about the spinnaker material issue?
:: I am in the market for a new kite and was wondering when
:: is the earliest a decision would be made. I would prefer
:: to keep the 0.6 oz rule if for no other reason than to
:: keep from penalizing those without a lighter kite. Worse
:: yet it will further penalize us detroit guys who have a
:: local one sail a year limitation. Even worse yet I need
:: to buy a new kite this year. I don't want to get stuck
:: with a new heavy kite! Is the fraction of a difference
:: in sail material weight really worth making everyone buy
:: new kite?
::
:: While I am on my soap box... What is the history behind
:: the detroit masthead kite anyway. We only use them to
:: race one design. Phrf kills you for using the thing.
:: When did that rule come out? What is the point? I
:: understand it makes the boat faster but if all are
:: faster then why? Can you tell it is time to replace the
:: mast head kite too?
::
:: :: Dan,
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: To answer your questions 1) It isn't cheaper to go with
:: :: AIRX500 and 2) it is much more durable than .6oz poly. I
:: :: am not trying to promote that everyone go buy a new
:: :: spinnaker made out of AIRX500 (though that is probably a
:: :: good sales tool idea) but rather to adjust the rules to
:: :: keep up with the new advances in sail cloth technology.
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: I think we might want to think about adjusting the rules
:: :: to not limit us to a certain weight of sail. I think we
:: :: should still be limited to the number of sails we can
:: :: carry on board and to how many new sails you can buy
:: :: every year (something we currently are not limiting). I
:: :: think this was the purpose of the "one used and one new
:: :: spinnaker" clause in the rules but it could be written
:: :: better by limiting a certain number of sails per year
:: :: instead.
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: Just some suggestions at this point and I really like
:: :: the fact that everyone is providing some valuable input.
:: :: KEEP IT UP!
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: Jason
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: Dan Pruzan on 1/21/103 10:44 AM said:
:: ::
:: ::
:: ::
:: :: >>Jason,
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>My only concern with completely removing the weight
:: :: restriction on spinnaker cloth is that it would be a
:: :: real temptation for people to have a light air spinnaker
:: :: and a separate heavy air spinnaker. Currently, the class
:: :: rules are written to explicitly prevent boats from carry
:: :: different special purpose spinnakers.
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>With respect to allowing AIRX500, I have two questions
:: :: 1) is it cheaper than 0.6 oz poly, and 2) is it more
:: :: durable than poly. I suppose the lighter weight would
:: :: make AIRX500 better in light air, but is the added
:: :: performance worth having everybody get a new spinnaker?
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>Thanks
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>Dan
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>Jason Crowson on 1/20/103 3:35 PM said:
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>>>Well that is one vote for updating the rules. Any
:: :: other E27 owners have an opinion?
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>>>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>
:: ::
:: :: >>