J/30 Class Association Forums J/30 Forum J/30 Class Association Business Board of Governors (BOG) Meeting

Please tell us what you think including additional proposed class changes.

Lifelines:
The current class rule requires lifelines to be fully metal-to-metal, with tension provided by turnbuckles. Current best practice for offshore racing is bare wire lifelines tensioned with (strong) rope lashings. Since lifelines are about safety, not speed, I recommend that the class rule be changed to either (a) require conformity with current ORC rules and best practices in lieu of previous class rules or (b) require conformity with current ORC rules and practices for new riggin but grandfather existing rigging. Of the two, I'd prefer (b).

I do have a reasonable class legal #2, and use it probably more than BeBop does. I would not mind changing the material to allow kevlar so it can retain its shape better over time.

If I happened to drop my spinnaker pole into Loch Mich sometime, I wouldn't mind replacing it with carbon... mostly so my 118# son can handle it easier. This is a change I do support.

As to adjustable genoa cars, it seems to be an expensive change (if done correctly) with no real benefit.

PLEASE phase any sail changes in over time. Bob's chronology seems reasonable to me.

On lifelines... I've been on a Mumm 36 whose lifelines had rope lashings. The lashing failed and dumped one crew into the water in rather nasty conditions. I would hope we can continue with the current setup.

I think the proposed changes make sense keeping the class up to date and want to implement them for next season.
Other suggestions; why not lift the sail cloth restriction on the main, give the option of eliminating/relocating one set of secondary winches, lift restrictions of #/location of padyeys, extend the track for the pole to deck level.
Most of the proposed changes will not drastically change the performance of the boat and will only make sense when replacements are needed anyway or to customize the controls for the crew.
In my opinion a well sailed "stock J/30" will still be as fast or faster than a "tweaked" average boat.

'In my opinion a well sailed "stock J/30" will still be as fast or faster than a "tweaked" average boat.'

I don't really mean to start a debate, but I'm not sure how you reconcile that statement with allowing unlimited materials in the main especially? A kevlar main for a J/30 is rather pricey, and from the sailmakers I've talked with, not a big gain.

I hope the class will continue to keep the cost of racing my boat reasonable.

Is this forum working or just quiet?

It is working. My feeling is, liberalize sail restrictions first, but limit sail purchases to one or two a year to keep cost down.

The trend on deck hardware has been a slow easing of restrictions (witness pole track to the deck, solid vang, self tailers, windward sheeting travelers, hi tech halyards,two speed mainsheet systems etc.), and carbon poles and adjustable cars fit the trend.

Steve, I respectfully disagree with your characterization. The key difference, to my mind, is that the prior "liberalizations" have been made for good one-design or cost/benefit reasons. For example, you mention the spinnaker pole track to the deck. That decision was made in direct concurrence with our operating philosophy that equipment which came from the factory is, de-facto, one-design compliant. In that case, there were boats delivered which had the spinnaker track to the deck. We didn't "liberalize" the rule ... rather, the class was required to accomodate boats which were delivered that way, just the same as the fact that we don't require the dining table to be on the boat when racing -- it was an option at the time of purchase. Similarly, with the high-tech halyards, we used the "equal strength" provision to allow a safer and stronger material which had performance equal to the traditional wire-rope halyard. To me, the carbon spinnaker pole and adjustable genoa cars have almost vanishingly small benefits at a very high cost.

[This message has been edited by jmruzzi (edited 09-10-2004).]

According to previous topic from June -04 it is still not allowed to extend existing pole track, only the boats that came with the long track can keep it??? Has there been a new ruling?

You may find this thread in the OD Rules section where the official class measurer replies directly to this & any question with proper authority.

What happened at the BOG meeting in November? Did the proposed rule changes pass?