I hereby propose that the J/30 Class Rules be amended as follows:

1) "Rule 5.12.6 Spinnaker" be amended to read "Rule 5.12.6 Spinnakers"
2) Rule 5.12.6.1 be amended to read "Two primary spinnakers may be carried, one of minimum cloth weight 40 grams or 0.75 oz. nominal and 0.9 oz. actual weight, and one 32 grams or 0.5 oz. nominal and 0.7 oz. actual weight. Spinnakers must be made of nylon. Airex 650 is one of several approved cloths that meet the 0.75 oz. requirement, Airex 500 is one of several approved cloths that meet the 0.50 oz. requirement."
3) Rule 6.2.1. be amended to read "The number of sails on board during a regatta series or race shall be a minimum of four: #1 and #3 genoas, mainsail and 0.75 oz. spinnaker. Two additional spinnakers may be carried: a 0.5 oz spinnaker which may be used at owners discretion, and a backup 0.75 oz which can be carried, but only may be used if the primary .75 oz. spinnaker is damaged. The #2 is optional."
4) Rule 6.2.4 be amended to read ": "Except as provided herein, each class sail may be replaced a maximum of once in a calendar year; spinnaker purchases are limited to one per calendar year (One .5 and one .75 may be purchased in the first year of this rule change) . If a new sail is damaged beyond repair, it may be replaced only with the approval of the local fleet governing body. Local fleets may further limit replacement of sails and restrict the use of old sails after they are replaced."
Rationale:

1) The J/30 is notoriously speed challenged in light conditions. Having the option of a
0.5 oz. spinnaker in light conditions would improve the quality of the one design competition by keeping some races from devolving into drifters, in which finish order is often based on luck.
2) As the fleet has aged, more boats spend a greater proportion of the time racing in PHRF handicap fleets. Having a 0.5 oz. spinnaker will improve the competitiveness of the J/30 in light air PHRF racing, which should make the boat more attractive to purchase for PHRF racing (as well as making the boat more fun to sail in light air).
3) By limiting spinnaker purchases to one per season, this change would not have an impact on the cost of ownership, while still adding to performance as noted above.

Implementation:

This rule change would take effect for the 2016 season

Charlie Stoddard
J30 Class Measurer

I second the proposal.

It's an important change among a couple of things I think we should do to make us more competitive in PHRF including:
- ditching the oven rule
- allowing movable jib cars
- removing the restriction on mainsail cloth.

BTW I dislike PHRF racing but its probably what most of us do, most of the time.

I strongly support this rule change.

What is the process to rule on this?

In my opinion, we don't need this rule change for one design and we don't need this rule to help to be competitive in PHRF.
I own a composite main, a 1/2 oz spinnaker and an A-sail. All are used for PHRF racing. Only one, the composite main is additive to my costs of racing one design. the others are incremental costs that I decided I needed for PHRF.
Since all boats have the same inventory in one design, all have the same advantage/disadvantage in light, heavy or whatever wind conditions. If this rule is put in place it will greatly increase the cost of one design racing. I would then have to buy a 1/2 oz spinnaker for one design and another for day to day PHRF racing (I have a one design sail inventory and another for PHRF/day to day racing).
My suggestion is to leave the one design rule as is and for those of us that want to buy additional inventory for PHRF - spend the incremental money

Michael,

Class rules paragraph 1.7 states:

1.7 These Class Rules may be amended, altered, added to, or repealed by a majority of the members of the Board of Governors present and voting at a meeting called for such purpose on at least 30 days notice. A quorum shall consist of 40% of the Governors who were serving at the time of the notice, and no action shall be taken without a quorum.

The way it has worked in the past is the District Governors get inputs from their constituents and vote at a properly called election.

Since this was an action from the BOG meeting held 24 Sept at the NAs in Marion, the Class Measurer posted the proposed rule change for the class to comment on. A special meeting of the BOG will be scheduled to hold an election.

Russ-the problem is that in some PHRF districts, we are required to use only class legal sails in order to maintain our one design based rating-so carrying a 1/2 oz. is not an option (nor is an aramid main). It seems to me that if you time your sail purchases so that a new 1/2 oz. is delivered just before the NA's, you could then "retire" that chute into your PHRF inventory. That would save the cost of duplication.

FYI-my general strategy is to get whatever new sails I can afford just before the NA's, and then I use that inventory for the next season's PHRF sailing (although I've been sailing with the same sails for the last three PHRF seasons and the last two NA's that I attended).

I had forgotten about the PHRF one design rule in your area. I looked it up awhile ago and understand your issue - though I believe it to be only a local issue - others can weigh in on that one

My concern is that it appears that J/30 one design racing will continue to decline I.E nationals. Adding another sail to the inventory for one design will increase the cost and potentially further deter involvement. I think I am qualified to say I'm invested in one design, 4 nationals, 2 mid winters (800-1000 mi one way trips). The cost for me is huge already; an extra main - my choice, maintaining an inventory of good sails for 1 design, a trailer, vehicle to tow it, cost of transporting the boat across country (fuel-permits-time $2-3k transport cost each trip). I really don't want to have to buy another sail

Further, as mentioned, I have a 1/2 oz kite, sail in a light air arena, and hardly ever use it. Not sure I'd buy another for PHRF racing

Bottom line I don't want to and won't fight this fight. I'm committed to one design, you bums are like heroin dealers, I'm hooked. I'm 68 on a fixed income now and not sure how many more nationals I have left - need you folks to go easy on me

:-) Maybe your current 1/2 oz would suffice for use when needed for one design?

it would be like going to a gun fight with a knife. I had an old #3 that we carried - you saw how that worked out for us last year. Our 1/2oz sail is 7 to 10 years old. Over the years, one problem we found with the 1/2 oz kite has been that we put it up in drifter conditions, wind fills in and we determine its better to keep the kite up than to change it. My 1/2 oz kite is blown out from time and use in wind conditions beyond its range. That's probably one of the reasons we don't find it very helpful anymore

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.

Ah. I thought when you said you hardly ever use it, that meant it would be in usable condition. Before our local PHRF added restrictions, I briefly had a 1/2 oz chute and I loved it. It was perfect up to about 10 true and flew full in almost nothing.

It sucks racing PHRF watching other boats sail by with full chutes while we are hanging 3/4 ounce laundry! And for that matter-it sucks in one design when conditions are extra light and everyone hangs laundry and the race has to be abandoned or becomes a complete crap shoot.

Russ-if you had a new 3/4 this year, I suspect it will still be quite competitive for next year's NA regatta. So maybe just focus on buying the 1/2 oz for next season (if the rule change passes)? Unless my work picks up quite a bit, I am probably stuck with my 3 year old 3/4 for next season but will (hopefully) be able to pick up a 1/2 oz...

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.

Excellent suggestion Bill. I completely endorse it.

Hi Carl-my thinking is that the cost should (other than for the first year of the rule implementation) be exactly the same, since purchases are limited to one new chute per year (regardless of weight). And having two chutes availbale might even extend the usable life of both chutes, since the half would rarely be deployed in conditions where it would be under stress, and the 3/4 would get significantly less use and would not get in situations where it is hanging/chafing against rigging when wind is near 0...

As one who sailed with somewhat tired sails at my last NA's (and for the last three seasons) for financial reasons, I understand the concern over cost of upkeep. But I really think this shouldn't have much of an impact.

Here's my thinking on the cost
In 2015 I bought a new 3/4 oz spin for the nationals.
I'll use it for at least one more national (2 year rotation)
In 2016 I would have to buy a new 1/2 oz. In 2017 a new 3/4 oz and in 2016 another new 1/2 oz., etc. If I go three years on the rotation, I still have to add one more sail to the inventory On a three year rotation net/net the cost is 2/3 of double.
Perhaps if you use "new math" the cost is the same. Hopefully someone can explain it to me

excuse the fat fingers - previous note should have read, and in 2018 (not 2016)

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.

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...)

PS-Bill, I think your idea has merit, but would make sail inventory management more difficult. Using me as an example-I hope to be able to "stretch" (pun intended) my 3/4 to last through next season by using the new 1/2 oz (if allowed) when possible. But if the NA organizing body decides to restrict the sail inventory to just the 3/4, I would be stuck using a four year old chute for all racing at the NA's, and would then have prioritized my sail purchasing (without realizing it) for PHRF.

No matter how you divide up costs, we may be getting beyond what people want to spend or can afford. Participation in PHRF is so far down it is not worth sailing. If a few people come to the NA's with a whole inventory of new or near new sails, people with lesser means say the hell with trying. We got around pro boats with best amateur award for years to try to mitigate the PRO problem & encourage amateurs to have a goal. Rod Johnstone last year stated he was against changing our rules for sail inventory. He certainly knows how to grow a fleet & keep 1 together.

You can rebuild a boat yourself as Bill showed us all. BUT, you can't make sails

Again-I do not believe this rule change has any impact on cost of ownership except during the first year of implementation (and then only if an owner wants to have both chutes brand new).

Carl, I understand your arguments about broader cost issues-but I don't think there is much more that the class could do to limit costs. We already limit sail purchases to one set per year, and we still are not allowed to carry aramid mainsails. And about the J/70 class sail/cost limitations-they can buy as many sets of three sails as they want in a calendar year (my understanding is that the top boats buy a new set for every major regatta)and can carry as many pros as can fit-and the class is thriving because the level of competition is so high.

You are correct that if/when boats bring all new inventory and a pro to the NA's,there will be many boats that won't be able to compete at that level. But I don't think we can do much to address that problem unless we switch to an arrangement like the one used by the J/44 class, where the fleet buys full sets for the entire fleet on a regular schedule and sails are rotated between boats. But that only works for the 44's because they are all east coast based and have a pre-arranged one design event calendar.

I believe the "top amateur" trophy was dropped when fewer boats were bringing pros and the winning boat also was top amateur boat. Maybe we should bring it back?

Ok so here are my thoughts as an Ex J30 owner
* After the 2008 N/A's I bought a 1/2 Oz to use for my PHRF tuesday night races which typically are in the 12 knot and down conditions. The though process was use the 1/2" and save the 3/4 for the big wind and for the N/A's which worked out well as I got 5 years out of the 3/4 oz

The half oz really does allow you to go deeper in the light air so if your area is mostly PHRF its a big help
I like the idea of setting up the class rules to allow for it so it doesn't hurt the guys who have issues with the local PHRF rules

As for the N/A's it really doesn't matter if everyone is sailing with a 3/4 oz as its going to be how new and crip (i.e. how much salt is on it) as to how deep you can push the boat

At any rate now I'm in an asym having to push big angles !
Charlie

I actually like the idea of having the 1/2 oz for one design as well. Races become complete crapshoots when the air goes very light and the only available sail is the 3/4. Having the 1/2 oz to go to would keep racing fairer (and more enjoyable)even in one design as the breeze drops...

By boat standards, J/30s are pretty cheap to buy. I would think that the majority of people buying them to race will spend most of their time handicap racing (PHRF in the U.S.) and therefore feel that the class should do what it can to make them as competitive in mixed fleets. Hence Bill's suggestion is a good one. When we meet as a Class for National Championships, we can set whatever restrictions we like (with a goal to increase fairness and participation).

My view is that the Class ought to establish a one-design rule that is expected to be used in National and other 1 design events - not a rule change to satisfy one local PHRF area or to satisfy how an owner might sail the boat in a PHRF event. If you go down that path then how do you deal with some using a 1' shorter pole, a smaller spinnaker or a 155% jib - let alone a 1/2 oz spinnaker.
If a sailor wants to be competitive in PHRF, one can think about buying a composite main, an A sail, a number 2, a 1/2 oz kite, a 155% jib, cutting down the pole, buying a smaller 3/4 oz spinnaker, or some combination of the above. Yikes - wouldn't it be absurd to ask the class to change the rule so all these choices could be made?

If the class wants to make it easier for one design rules to benifit PHRF then change the rule on the main to allow composite mains - that way one doesn't have to buy two mains to sail both 1 design and PHRF (I'm not here to fight that fight any longer, just making a point of reference re the 1/2 oz kite)

The Tarten 10 one design rule includes only a working Jib, no overlapping head sail yet the PHRF racers go out a buy inventory. Similar situation to the J/30 1/2 oz kite.

Agian, in my view, we should be discussing how a 1/2 oz spinnaker can improve 1 design sailing not how it will help PHRF.

Russ-if you look two posts up, I specifically address how the 1/2 oz. would improve one design racing.

As far as other possible PHRF changes you mention-many are permitted under one design since they would only serve to make a boat less competitive. If you want to sail with a smaller chute, jib and pole at a one design event, no one would stop you (and a #2 is already expressly allowed). And if you do so in PHRF, many regions would give you a rating boost. We've gone around and around on the aramid main issue-I believe the only real benefit of aramid is shape longevity, and the many adjustments that can be made to the main can compensate for a sail losing some shape (I'm currently racing with a three year old dacron main and speed seems pretty good when I get rig tune and settings right). The 1/2 oz. chute option offers a unique speed enhancement in light air that would improve one design competition in light stuff (see above) AND would enhance performance in PHRF-which in turn would keep the boat more competitive and therefore enhance resale/potentially help keep more boats actively racing. While it is true that this is a discussion regarding a one design rule change, this forum is for disussion of all issues around J/30 ownership-and enhancing PHRF performance for the boat is a perfectly valid aspect to be considered (in my opinion).

Finally-as I have mentioned earlier, in some PHRF districts (including ours where we have 6 active 30's racing) ANY deviation from one design configuration INCLUDING sail selection exposes us to a potential rating appeal/hit. Obviously that is not the case where you sail. I suspect if it were, you might see the value of this proposed rule change in a more positive light...

And Mike-I think if we implement the change allowing the 1/2 oz. and adopt the "Kneller clause", any regatta host would have to stipulate whether the 1/2 oz will be allowed to be carried WELL in advance (six months prior to racing?) so sail purchases could be planned/managed accordingly. Most boats schedule purchases to be timed to arrive for the NA's-it would suck if a boat decided to only buy a new 1/2 oz and live with an existing 3/4, only to find that they couldn't use the new sail at the last minute.

Since this is really for those PHRF districts where they take a hit for not complying with the one design rule, why not change the rule to this instead.

Two additional spinnakers may be carried: a 0.5 oz spinnaker which may be used at owners discretion, but only for PHRF racing; a backup 0.75 oz may be carried, but only may be used if the primary .75 oz. spinnaker is damaged. The #2 is optional."

It would change the one design rules to allow the half ounce to be used for PHRF racing. It would not impact those of us fortunate enough to have one design competition.

Staying with a discussion about 1 design, I'm in Carl's boat on this one.

A person could argue that increasing the allowable 1 design inventory to include a 1/2 oz spinnaker would improve the boat performance in light air. However it also would increase the cost of participation - both points made above

My position is that if all boats sail with a 3/4 oz sail they all sail with the same performance advantage/disadvantage but at no increase in cost.

To me, keeping the cost down is more important than adding to the inventory.

Also my opinion, any discussion about changing the one design rule should not be about how this rule change would help only one PHRF area

I'm not sure that would work-any thoughts anyone? And I truly believe that having the 1/2 oz for one design would greatly enhance the light air racing for the fleet (and actually might make it possible to extend the racing life for both chutes as I mentioned earlier in this thread). Since the one chute per year limitation would still be in effect, there is no cost impact on ownership (each chute would likely get used about half as much, so they would be usable for a longer calendar life)-and competition would be enhanced both in PHRF and one design. I am not seeing much of a down side to this-am I missing something?

I challenge each of you to focus on the solution. The problem to solve is increase one design participation. I wonder how many sailing programs have .5 oz spinnakers to remain competitive in PHRF racing fleets. Of these sailors, how many do not race one design regatta(s) because they have a .05 oz spinnaker but not a .75 oz due to limitation of funds.

I personally think, if we have two sail options upwind, why not have two sail options downwind? We have both .5oz and .75oz spinnakers, so there is no cost impact for Team Zephyr with this rule change.

My $.02 Dave@j30.us

David,

I agree with your conclusion, but think that OD participation is only part of the equation. The other is how to make the boat more competitive (and fun) in mixed fleets. Hence my support for the proposal.

Within the class rules (if adopted) the only cost impact of this for anyone would be in the first year of implementation (if they choose to buy the two chutes in the same year).

It is obvious that we have 2 camps here with different goals. I have thought of fleet building & participation and not fun in no air & PHRF. We should poll all the dues paying members. If passed, suggest have the change take place after next years NA's allowing purchase during fall boat show discounts.

I actually believe the addition of the 1/2 oz also has a significant fleet building component-anything that helps the boat stay more competitive in PHRF also helps make the boat more attractive to potential buyers and may encourage current owners to stay with their boats for longer. This is more true now as the fleet ages and fewer boats are able to sail primarily in one design than it has ever been before.

Ok this has inundated my email for some time now.
Can we please put this to bed.
None of the boats in the northwest really care as we have migrated to PHRF even when doing one design class in races.
As well many boats are migrating to A sails to improve the poor down wind performance.
So for us we have already bought a 1/2 and 3/4.

Vampire,

Is this a Yay or a Nay to the motion? Sounds like you are already voting Yay with your actions.

Yes the NW are in favour of a 1/2 once spin.
although you may need to look at the new fabrics as some new light weight fabrics and light weight high modulus line give great light air performance and can be flown in high winds when its spicy out.

So if we do this i see every one going to these new fabrics. why Cary two kites when a new light weight Airx kite would replace the 1/2 and 3/4. and go to all dynema line and your good up to 30+ kn of fun.

this conversation is a generation behind.
now how does the class feel about A Sails? just kidding. i wont muddy the waters with that.