CONTESSA 32 ASSOCIATION Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Committee and Association Discussion > Comittee and Association Matters
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Changes to Sail Rules
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Changes to Sail Rules

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
George Isted View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2009
Location: Solent
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
Post Options Post Options   Quote George Isted Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Changes to Sail Rules
    Posted: 19 Aug 2011 at 3:00pm
Originally posted by Alastair Pugh

I wish to recant my misinformed and ultimately pointless comments on the new rule.  In a moment of inquisitive contemplation I made the effort to look at what the new size rule for genoas actually means and my conclusion is - diddly-squat! 

I don't think I've got the arithmetic wrong, but please check it yourselves and point out my errors:
  • Present No1 can vary from 29.28-33.56m**2  (roller furling min luff of 35ft)
  • Present No2 can vary from 26.84-30.19m**2
  • New No1 rule has a max of 32m**2
Why on earth does the committee think that such a minimal change in the sail size is going to make an iota of difference to encouraging non-racers to join in?   Most No1s, almost certainly if roller-furling, may already comply with the new rule and any No2 is going to be smaller than the new max area by more area than any existing No1 is bigger than the new size.  I must apologise for not realising the deckchair-shuffling-on-the-Titanic nature of this change before and wasting my and your time. 
 
Your calculation of size looks correct to me.  The reasons are numerous but include making the standard racing boat much closer to cruising spec, i.e. roller furling. Therefore a boat that is in cruising trim can try racing without having to buy a set of four headsails. Cost of entry is lower as is ease of entry.  Allowing more modern sail materials also means that sail will stay "fast" for longer due to lower stretch.  The lack of stretch also means that the headsail can be used in a much larger band of wind speed. 
 
Originally posted by Alastair Pugh


If the change is mainly to allow laminate sail material then why did the AGM accept the polyester only amendment? The IRC gave up on controlling sail materials for very good reasons. 
 
I agree, IRC does not controll sail materials or let sail materials have any input to IRC ratings for very good reason.  The proposed sailplan developed by the comittee allowed free choice of materials, however there was an amendment proposed that restricted this to Polyester only and the amendment was carried by vote. 
 
Originally posted by Alastair Pugh


However, if the change is to permit reducing the sail wardrobe when roller furling is used, why bother with the rest?  I can actually see the point in this and it would remove a restriction on entering class racing.
 
Alastair
 
Reducing the sail wardrobe to make life easier for all is one of the objectives. 
 
 
 
George Isted
Contessa 32 "Concerto"
Co32 Class Captain and Measurer.
Back to Top
christophe View Drop Down
CO32 Members
CO32 Members


Joined: 08 Sep 2009
Location: Antwerp,Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 37
Post Options Post Options   Quote christophe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Aug 2011 at 5:58pm
Originally posted by Alastair Pugh

I wish to recant my misinformed and ultimately pointless comments on the new rule.  In a moment of inquisitive contemplation I made the effort to look at what the new size rule for genoas actually means and my conclusion is - diddly-squat! 

I don't think I've got the arithmetic wrong, but please check it yourselves and point out my errors:
  • Present No1 can vary from 29.28-33.56m**2  (roller furling min luff of 35ft)
  • Present No2 can vary from 26.84-30.19m**2
  • New No1 rule has a max of 32m**2
Why on earth does the committee think that such a minimal change in the sail size is going to make an iota of difference to encouraging non-racers to join in?   Most No1s, almost certainly if roller-furling, may already comply with the new rule and any No2 is going to be smaller than the new max area by more area than any existing No1 is bigger than the new size.  I must apologise for not realising the deckchair-shuffling-on-the-Titanic nature of this change before and wasting my and your time. 

If the change is mainly to allow laminate sail material then why did the AGM accept the polyester only amendment? The IRC gave up on controlling sail materials for very good reasons. 

However, if the change is to permit reducing the sail wardrobe when roller furling is used, why bother with the rest?  I can actually see the point in this and it would remove a restriction on entering class racing.
 
Alastair
The reason that there are not much co32's racing is simple, here in the Lowlands the CO32 is concidered as a cruising boat not a racing boat.  For the moment we are one of the few who race on regular base, meaning more than 15 regattas a year.
People who want to race buy other types of boats, this is also happening in the Solent area, they buy eg First 31.7 or J80 for one design racing and Half Tonners, J24's or more modern designs for racing under IRC or local handicap.
I was always a big Contessa fan, from the age of 12 already..so my choice was easy Tongue.
Back to Top
waratah912 View Drop Down
CO32 Members
CO32 Members


Joined: 17 Dec 2010
Location: Lymington
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 98
Post Options Post Options   Quote waratah912 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Aug 2011 at 8:11am
If there's so little difference, why not allow both configurations for racing, maybe initially in two divisions until the lack of difference is proven or until one configuration is predominant?
 
However, a furling genoa is always going to be a compromise other than in a fairly narrow wind range for which it's ideal when fully set.
Earlier this week we failed to sail out through Hurst Narrows against the tide with a new furling genoa - with a full number one we'd have made it. This year we're sailing with a furling genoa because we can sail more often and don't want to spend so much time folding sails. However for long offshore passages in light winds, I still strip off the furler and set the number one.
For the past 10 years we've sailed with the appropriate genoa for the weather conditions, and it's far more satisfying than the compromises of a roller genoa. Racing is about getting the best performance from your boat, with a furling compromise you'll never achieve it. Prior to that we had a number one on a roller, nice for light winds but absolutely hopeless once you put more than a couple of rolls in it.
Having retired, I'd hoped to join the racing fleet on occasions, but this sail change puts me off completely. I've a good set of sails and really don't want to buy another and make 3 perfectly good sails redundant.
I strongly suspect the reason people aren't racing in Contessa's is that they are racing somewhere else - look at the JOG / Fasnet fleets - the average boat size is much bigger than 15 years ago. The CO32 was just about the smallest boat in the Fasnet, and definitely lowest handicap. If you're racing round the cans, then look at the size and growth of the sport boat fleets - people who learned in the fast modern dinghies want the same speeds from their yacht racing.
 
Anyway, rant over, it's still one of the best looking, best handling boats afloat, we won't be selling ours and I've no desire to sail in a boat where the keel falls off or the mast falls down if you pull to hard on the backstay!!
Back to Top
George Isted View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2009
Location: Solent
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
Post Options Post Options   Quote George Isted Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Aug 2011 at 11:42am
Originally posted by waratah912

If there's so little difference, why not allow both configurations for racing, maybe initially in two divisions until the lack of difference is proven or until one configuration is predominant?
Both configurations are allowed for racing, at least for the time being.  As there is so little difference we are doing this on a level-rating basis.
 
Originally posted by waratah912

However, a furling genoa is always going to be a compromise other than in a fairly narrow wind range for which it's ideal when fully set.
 
Yes it can be a compromise but with the use of more modern, low-stretch but still affordable sail materials such as Pentex you can keep the headsail fully out in a much wider wind band.  By flattening my furling headsail as the wind speed increases I can quite happily race with it fully out up to 25-30kts  
Originally posted by waratah912

Racing is about getting the best performance from your boat, with a furling compromise you'll never achieve it.
 
I partly agree with what you are saying but the counter argument is that in one-design racing, as along as we are all racing with the same sailplan then what matters is boat-on-boat or crew-on-crew performance, not outright performance.
 
Originally posted by waratah912

Having retired, I'd hoped to join the racing fleet on occasions, but this sail change puts me off completely. I've a good set of sails and really don't want to buy another and make 3 perfectly good sails redundant.
 
There is nothing to stop you racing with the existing sails you have now, the planned switching-off of the old sailplan is not due to happen until the end of 2012, there has been a suggestion that this may be extended by 12 months.
Originally posted by waratah912

I strongly suspect the reason people aren't racing in Contessa's is that they are racing somewhere else - look at the JOG / Fasnet fleets - the average boat size is much bigger than 15 years ago. The CO32 was just about the smallest boat in the Fasnet, and definitely lowest handicap. If you're racing round the cans, then look at the size and growth of the sport boat fleets - people who learned in the fast modern dinghies want the same speeds from their yacht racing.
 
I suspect you are correct, times have moved on and despite the Co32 fleet offering some of the best one-design racing you can get there are more modern and faster boats that attract the racing crowd.  Most folk who own or desire a CO32 are doing so with cruising in mind.  Perhaps with the new rule as and when cruisers buy a hew headsail they will do so with the new rule in-mind so that they easily try racing if they wish.   The chances are the existing furling headsail will meet the rule anyway.
 
Originally posted by waratah912

 
Anyway, rant over, it's still one of the best looking, best handling boats afloat, we won't be selling ours and I've no desire to sail in a boat where the keel falls off or the mast falls down if you pull to hard on the backstay!!
 
Can't argue with that!
George Isted
Contessa 32 "Concerto"
Co32 Class Captain and Measurer.
Back to Top
Alastair Pugh View Drop Down
CO32 Members
CO32 Members


Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Location: Scotland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 34
Post Options Post Options   Quote Alastair Pugh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Aug 2011 at 9:00pm
Originally posted by George Isted


Yes it can be a compromise but with the use of more modern, low-stretch but still affordable sail materials such as Pentex you can keep the headsail fully out in a much wider wind band. 


Now I'm getting confused. 

The new rule says "Polyester/Dacron".  There is a variety of "polyesters" - all the word means is polymers which contain the ester functional group in their main chain, and that covers everything from resin for boat hulls to cling-film.  "Dacron" is a Dupont trade name, licensed to other manufacturers for Polyethylene Terephthalate (try saying that after a couple of drinks!) also known as PET.  "Pentex", a trade name of Honywell, uses Polyethylene Naphthalate, known as PEN with  Mylar or Melinex, both BoPET (biaxially oriented PET), as film, and on it goes.

What I'm trying to say is that "Polyester/Dacron" is ambiguous and has no place in the sail specifications.  I'm not entirely sure what the material amendment to the motion at the AGM was meant to achieve but already we have PET and PEN which are different in chemical make-up and in their physical properties and there is a myriad of other possibilities.  Looks like we are back to "material authorised by the Technical Committee" if control is really wanted.

As for the reduced sail wardrobe - it only makes sense if a furler is being used.  Would it not be more practical to maintain the full set of headsails unless a furler is being used, in which case the No2 and No3 can be dispensed with?

Alastair

Back to Top
George Isted View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2009
Location: Solent
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
Post Options Post Options   Quote George Isted Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2011 at 5:16pm

Hello Alistair,

I agree that the wording is not ideal (we have already discussed the difficulties of sail material specification and how IRC deal with this above), but having sought the advice of two major sail makers it was the best that we could collectively come up with.   Essentially the rule makes it “illegal” to use very high modulus fibres such as Kevlar, Twaron, PBO, Carbon, etc for in-class racing.

George Isted
Contessa 32 "Concerto"
Co32 Class Captain and Measurer.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down