[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Radial mast Changes
Tracey,
What I'm still trying to understand is - if we defeated the original
proposal by membership vote, how is it that we are now being overruled and
the composite section introduced?
I'm not saying whether the section is good or bad - but what happened to the
process of approving significant changes in the strict one design rules?
What's next - a carbon fiber hull? Kevlar sails? Do we get to decide? Who
does?
Who really controls the Laser class today? Not the membership, or so it
would appear.
Your insights appreciated...Mike Schmidt
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-laser@cerebus.winsite.com
[mailto:owner-laser@cerebus.winsite.com] On Behalf Of Tracy Usher
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 6:45 PM
To: john@jdecm.com
Cc: laser@laser.org; 'Laser Masters E-Mail List'
Subject: Re: Radial mast Changes
John D-E wrote:
>My recollection is that the class voted down the composite mast section a
>few years ago. The claim that heavier sailors do not suffer a performance
>loss is "interesting". Its also interesting the Laser Class (i.e. you and
>me) having voted down the change now appears to be funding it. Also
>interesting that ISAF has to be advised and even vote on it yet the average
>laser sailor does not. The "Regulation/Racing Rule/Affected" is stated to
>be "Women's One Person Dinghy Mast".
>
>John D-E
>District 5 Sec
>Grand Master who wants to stay with full rig at Masters Worlds when he
turns
>65 in 2101.
>
>
>
You are correct... in the 1999 vote which brought us the "new" rigging
the then proposal for a carbon spar was, I'm told, narrowly defeated. At
that time no prototypes existed, no cost estimates or targets were in
place, etc., etc.
The claim that heavier sailors do not suffer is a characteristic of the
composite, versus aluminum, spar. The explanation given to me is that
the composite spar has a higher spring constant so "snaps back" faster
than the aluminum and so "feels" like a stiffer spar. The heavier person
has the same "fee" as aluminum, the lighter person gets the benefit of a
more flexible spar. I'll comment further if I ever get my 200lbs on a
boat with one though...
I think a lot of people want to believe that the Laser Class doesn't
listen to their complaints about problems with the boat. Here is an
example of the class listening and trying to find a real solution to
several problems: the competitive weight range of the Radial is
perceived to be to narrow and too high, the upper mast section is prone
to failure and develops permanent bends (both due primarily to riveting
the mast collar into place), etc.
Both the Laser and Radial are Olympic classes. It is standard in the
Olympic Contract between the Olympic Classes and ISAF that they have to
be informed of any changes to the equipment and does give them the right
to veto any changes they think are not in the best interest of the class
and the Olympics. For the RS-X boards I bet they are very pro-active in
this area. But do you think they are going to exercise that right with
the Laser Class? Especially when seen by everyone as making the Radial
even more accessible to more competitors worldwide?
Once again, I would like to encourage everyone who wants more background
information to go over to The Laser Forum (www.laserforum.org) and
search for the threads on the carbon spar. You can find a lot of
comments in those threads, from Vanguard representatives (who have
spearheaded the R&D effort) to feedback from people who have sailed with
the spars. And check out the Ned Jones Q&A in the Summer Laser Sailor.
There IS a lot of info out there about these spars!
Tracy
-----------------------------
Website for all answers: www.laser.org
Public Replies: laser@laser.org
To Unsubscribe: Send "unsubscribe laser" to majordomo@laser.org
Questions: will@laser.org
-----------------------------
Website for all answers: www.laser.org
Public Replies: laser@laser.org
To Unsubscribe: Send "unsubscribe laser" to majordomo@laser.org
Questions: will@laser.org