|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
Forums28
Topics3,945
Posts18,946
Members1,002
|
Most Online223 Dec 17th, 2019
|
|
|
Re: proposed changes for Spinnakers to allow for a 0.5 oz
[Re: cstoddard]
#16570
11/04/15 02:56 PM
11/04/15 02:56 PM
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,661 Portsmouth, RI
Rhapsody #348
Past J/30 Class President
|
Past J/30 Class President
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,661
Portsmouth, RI
|
Not that I have a dog in this hunt anymore since I sold Rhapsody but I am sympathetic to Russ's comments. I owned a 0.5 oz spinnaker that I used for PHRF because I could afford it and PHRF-NB did not penalize the OD rating due to cloth weight. All along I have been sensitive to those who did not want to spend the money for an extra sail, so did not want to force it, but would have been perfectly happy for the rule change if people wanted it. One thing to consider to maintain a reduced cost for OD is to allow the 0.5 oz spinnaker in the sail inventory but take a slightly different approach for the NAs and Midwinters. Something like "The 0.5 ounce spinnaker shall be allowed for all OD racing. The J/30 North American and Midwinter Championships shall only require the use of a 0.75 oz spinnaker, unless the race documents specifically authorize the 0.5 oz spinnaker." This has the effect of making the 0.5 Oz spinnaker allowable for everything (including PHRF), but supports those who do not want to purchase an extra spinnaker for the NAs and Midwinters. The race documents for these events can add the 0.5 oz spinnaker based on polling the participants.
|
|
|
Re: proposed changes for Spinnakers to allow for a 0.5 oz
[Re: cstoddard]
#16575
11/07/15 08:19 PM
11/07/15 08:19 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6 Waterbury, CT
Carl Sherter
Immediate Past President, Treasurer
|
Immediate Past President, Treasurer
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6
Waterbury, CT
|
As one of the oldest owner and having done the most NA's I feel strongly that adding a 1/2 oz spin is a bad idea. It will add a minimum of 2500$ to a sail inventory. Our boats are getting old and we need new young blood to buy, fix up and race. We should keep the expenses to a minimum so these potential young owners can afford them. They already can't afford new sails yearly or even 1 sail a year. This was notable in the last few NA 's where I saw a lot of tired sails. If we all have 3/4 oz, we all will suffer the same.
Fat City
|
|
|
Re: proposed changes for Spinnakers to allow for a 0.5 oz
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
#16580
11/09/15 09:01 AM
11/09/15 09:01 AM
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 135 Summit, NJ
Michael L
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 135
Summit, NJ
|
Excellent suggestion Bill. I completely endorse it.
Michael
|
|
|
Re: proposed changes for Spinnakers to allow for a 0.5 oz
[Re: cstoddard]
#16585
11/09/15 03:25 PM
11/09/15 03:25 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6 Waterbury, CT
Carl Sherter
Immediate Past President, Treasurer
|
Immediate Past President, Treasurer
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6
Waterbury, CT
|
The Governors especially have got to look at the goals of the class. It should be to grow the fleet with new young members. Part of J/70 success is cost. 3 sail limit. I'm with Russ on the math. I can certainly afford a sail but when big fleets are noticing big losses of participation, we MUST address this. 2 J/30's did not register for CPYC 1 design regatta because of cost. Smiles is using an old FAT CITY spin as backup.
Fat City
|
|
|
Re: proposed changes for Spinnakers to allow for a 0.5 oz
[Re: cstoddard]
#16586
11/09/15 04:24 PM
11/09/15 04:24 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 456 Highland Park, NJ
Steve Buzbee
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 456
Highland Park, NJ
|
I think the cost of ownership depends on a lot of variables for an aging class such as ours. Different boats have completely different sail inventory management strategies, so it is hard to compare precisely. For example, I don't use two sets of sails one for OD and one for PHRF, and I don't have a uniformly scheduled replacement protocol like Russ does. I buy whatever I can afford to buy each year shortly before the NA regatta, and then use those sails for all my racing activity until they wear out/lose shape-and then I replace them as seems warranted by condition and as I can afford to. So this coming year I am definitely replacing my three year old #1-but may try to survive with my three year old 3/4, and hopefully (if this change goes into effect and if I can afford it) pick up a 1/2 oz before the NA's in the fall. I believe the only possible way to measure/assess the cost impact of a rule change such as this one is to assume that a class boat going all out (and without other-i.e. personal/financial-restrictions) would buy the maximum number of new sails permitted by the class rule. The class rule is designed to limit the MAXIMUM expenditure possible-and with this change that maximum expenditure per season would not change (except for the first year of implementation). No new math required. Carl-did the 2 J/30's that didn't enter the CPYC OD regatta refrain from participating because boat maintenance is too expensive, or because regatta costs are too expensive? My general impression is that participation is down because the class is aging out/moving on-not because of upkeep costs such as sail purchasing (although general maintenance costs of the hull and deck clearly go up as these boats hit their senior years...)
|
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
40
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|