DC ballot

Use this forum to discuss the latest changes in the class
Post Reply
alanpowell
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:51 pm
Location: Shabbington UK

Post by alanpowell » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:44 am

Great idea to use theme songs Christian! Put me down for "I am the Walrus"! No lyrics to hand.

User avatar
Christian AUS
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Christian AUS » Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:09 am

alanpowell wrote:Great idea to use theme songs Christian! Put me down for "I am the Walrus"! No lyrics to hand.

Here it is, now your end of the bargain is to get the DC ballot through :D

http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/vanishing ... walrus.mid (cut and past the link)

User avatar
Christian AUS
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Christian AUS » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:26 pm

Any Swedish news yet?

User avatar
Christian AUS
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Christian AUS » Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:38 pm

Well, I got the news this morning (and sorry Alan for stealing your thunder, I'll let you post the detailed outcome) but the IC sailing community has surpassed the required 75% in support of the International Canoe class replacing their current measurement rules (Appendix 2 2005) with the current development rules (Appendix 4 January 2008).

Well done to Alan, and every IC sailor who voted, as well as to the DC pioneers. Over to the Committee now.

User avatar
Christian AUS
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Christian AUS » Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:57 am

As we await the outcome of the ICF Sailing Committee Meeting, I urge those committee members to consider the future of the fleet at an international level (after all, this is the International Sailing Committee Meeting and not a meeting of class Presidents - your task is to consider the future and well being of IC's at an international level).

Consider that AC's, whilst a strong and growing fleet are not international and don't look like achieving 6 nation status in the immediate future.
Think about the 2002 and 2005 World Championships and the number of Nations actually on the water competing in these 'World Championships'. And lastly look at the still in prototype DC, achieving 4 nation status a little over 12 months from inception. Look at the overwhelming support that it has received in the international ballot. Look at the momentum it has created within the class, look at the positive response it has received from the classes most active members - those that attend World Championships.
Whether you personally want a DC or not, whether your nation will embrace the new rules or not, these are not the issues - after all the sailors have cast their votes. As Committee members it is now your task to decide what is best for the IC's future growth, development and international competitive viability. Not just for the UK or Sweden, or Germany in 2011, but for the good of the International 10sqm Canoe globally.

Olle
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 1:56 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by Olle » Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:51 pm

First of all. Congratulations to Steve and the DC movment.
I do think it's very promising to have a common anglo-american view for the future of international canoe sailing.

I must admit that I changed my own vote to go against the DC proposition as outlined.
After hearing the views of the swedish fleet I saw it as a threat to international canoe sailing in Sweden.
As Christian pointed out, international canoe sailing and the well being of the IC in Sweden is coupled together.
I saw the effect of a DC=YES to push good ICs to take the AC route.
Another effect could be to push young swedish canoe sailors to pick a national swedish canoe class instead of the IC.

10 years ago I would have called Steve up allready and booked a test ride on a DC.
With growing age (and wisdom...) I feal a stronger wish for the wellfare of swedish IC sailing.
I have jumped in and out of the IC class more times than I can remember and often
been allowed to take a late back door into a swedish container going out in the world .
Maybe it's payback time for me..
Olle Bergqvist SWE-93

jimc
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by jimc » Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:07 pm

Olle wrote:I must admit that I changed my own vote to go against the DC proposition as outlined.After hearing the views of the swedish fleet I saw it as a threat to international canoe sailing in Sweden.
So what do you think we need to do to keep up things with the Swedish fleet? Even new to the fleet as I am I see it as important... The open rule IC sure looks like a good thing - perhaps only hope - in the english speaking nations, and the fact that La France did not have a vote this time speaks volumes for what was going on there, but we surely don't want to lose Sweden.

frank!
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:18 pm
Location: Oz

Post by frank! » Sat Mar 15, 2008 2:48 pm

for all that there has been a great rush of enthusiasm and creativity at (dare i say it?) the top end of the fleet (where else!) i have a concern which, in my inexperience and ignorance (coming back to competetive sailing after 40 yrs. absence) i am finding hard to articulate.

it seems that it would be so easy for the committee to endorse the activists' proposed change - but i suspect that there may be ramifications that would take the wisdom of Solomon to devise a strategy that really cuts to the heart of the future.

i assume that there was similar support for the Nethercott 30 yrs ago - is there anybody now who thinks that was the best decision?

as i see it, the proposal will result in a narrower boat and a lighter boat.
the gain is less than 5% in speed - very significant within the class, but really is it all that significant a gain on other classes?

ok, so changes which increase performance but do not have other possibly negative spin-offs are a no brainer good thing. the reduction ijn weight seems in this category. the lighter boats did not seem overly fragile, nor difficult to construct, nor more expensive.

however may i suggest that the reduction in beam is more problematical.
i see much discussion about flares and shroud base structures. to an outside observer would this be seen as a quirk in the class? its achilles heel? is the (marginal?) increase in performance worth that?

there seems little wish to have a really narrow boat like a moth or cat hull though i believe it has been tried so is a minor reduction in beam such a good idea?

sure, at the sharp end of the fleet, any advantage is significant; but if the downside is that those that build the fleet bulk, the also rans who flesh out any regatta, or those contemplating but not committed to the class are feeling more dismayed or disheartened because the boat appears tempremental or anorexic ................

...............ah! ive the uncomfortable feeling that i've put myself out on a limb here asnd also that if there is any relevance in this it should have been put earlier or elsewhere - if so, my apologies folks

hey i love my canoe and cant wait till my knees recover enough to give it another go. i am so glad to have had the opportunity to fulfill an old dream.

i wish the class many more years of success into the future.

frank
its a young world after all - well, maybe ... the two oldies scored 1st & 2nd (and 1st!) .........

Chris Maas
Posts: 110
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 10:45 pm
Location: USA

Post by Chris Maas » Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:34 pm

I don't think we need to be too concerned about the need for wings to support the chainplates. Nobody but me had them at the Worlds and everyone's rig stayed up just fine. My new boat has only the merest vestige of wings and with a little effort I could do with out them entirely. Either way it's no big deal.

Stability wise, any semi competent IC sailor could handle the new boats. Certainly my boat handling skills are not in the same league as Steve, Oliver,Hayden etc. yet still I manage to get around the course in String Theory, a boat that could be made much easier to sail by lowering the dance floor.

I think the performance difference is more on the order of 5% - 10% which is in fact huge. But more than the outright speed difference it's the way the new boats feel. To me there is just no comparison and as we all know the Nethercott is no slouch.

The adoption of the new rule is a tremendous step forward for the IC class.

Steve Clark
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 2:26 pm

Post by Steve Clark » Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:09 pm

Chris,
Thanks for saving me from myself.
I was about to go up in flames.
Frank, the minimum beam is based on the minimum beam allowed by the 1935 rules. As are most of the other values in the new rules. So yeah, I thought about that, and made a judgement consistent with the history of the class. This was my guiding principle.
I took the liberty of rounding down to 750 instead of 762, which is the direct conversion of 30 inches, because I thought it was kind of nice to have a nice even number as the minimum.
Other than that, I like the way the new boats sail, that they are still very much sailing canoes, and feel that they are a step forward that is consistent with our past.
I think it is impossible to predict how it turns out. But I firmly believe that a class moves with enthusiasm and tries to engage many people in their own brand of fun, will succeed.
SHC
Beatings will continue until morale improves

Phil Stevenson
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:54 pm
Location: Australia

Post by Phil Stevenson » Sat Mar 15, 2008 11:44 pm

I have been quiet for a while but my patience is waning.

I simply see no future for the IC if the vote is rejected.

All the new peple who have shown interest in or built DCs will go away (incl me). The old hands in the US and Aust who have DCs will continue to sail them at home but probably will not bother going to Germany to race themselves (like the UK AC fleet decided about coming to McCrae).

There will continue to be no new nethercotts built, and there will continue to be no new people coming into the class except for those who pick up an old second hand boat as a novelty, certainly not championship racers (like Frank?).

It seems that only in the UK is there any IC class racing on a regular basis, and this is tending to be a minor sideshow to the AC class. The national other fleets when there is any racing will continue to shrink. I suspect that already there are too few or too widely spread boats in most countries to have any IC racing except maybe once a year, (US, Can, AUS, Fr, Ger, Swe?)

So basically unless the IC gets a good kick along, attracting new people and interest, there is no class, the game is over. It would be a shame for the heriage to be curtailed when there is so much more that can be developed.

But never mind all the people with dormant redundant nethercotts, Olle obviously has a ready supply of buyers in Sweden ready to rebuild the canoe sailing world, amazing when no one else has? I think not?

Should I stock up with matches?
Design perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing else to add but when there is nothing else which can be taken away.
http://philscanoes.blogspot.com/

H Virtue
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Post by H Virtue » Sun Mar 16, 2008 6:56 am

Frank, the beam rule is extremly flexible if you think going as narrow as 750mm is not nessacry than you dont have to, if you really want you can build out to 1100mm max beam, although I doubt we will se a new wide boat. The performance potentail of the DC is huge we have only just started, I think its 100% the way forward for Canoe's the Nethercotts have been stagnet for a long time.

Phil my patience is also waning.

I hear negative vibes comming from Sweden and the ballot return in Germany was 50-50 yet other than "I/we dont think the DC is the way forward" I havent heard any reasons why its not. If they have valid reasons and a mechanism for the class to continue into the future (with growth) then I would love to hear their suggestions at this point all I hear is silence. So come on Sweden (in particular) and Germany what is your solution to the future of canoe sailing Im sure every IC sailor no matter what division they sail would like to hear your plan(s).

Some questions. If (and it appears unfortunatly the more likely outcome) the ballot doesn't go through than where do all of us who have committed to the DC sit for future international and national regatta's. Will the appendix 4 remain in place? will it be upto the organising nation of each Worlds to have the say on what divisions it invites or will it be driven via the ICF sailing committe?

Assuming the answer to my questions are Yes the appendix 4 remains in place and the DC's continues to be invited to Worlds and/or is driven by the ICF sailing committe to be included than all of us who have committed dont have a problem. I beleive we will get the numbers for Worlds Status in Germany I know of at least 2 Austalian DC's dead keen on being there, after all the DC's almost got across the line with enough in McCrae.

H.

jimc
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:45 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by jimc » Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:33 am

I think we can hardly blame Sweden and Germany for negative vibes - it seems to me we english speakers have hardly involved them. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. Excuse me if I am.

I'm very ambivalent about the principal of major rule changes, because it can cause a lot of damage, and I believe that changing rules is change, not development. It really irritates me when I hear folk saying we're a development class, we should change the rules so we can develop. Rules should only be chjanged if there's a major problem.

Nevertheless I think IC sailing in the English speaking Nations at least has that major problem, and returning the IC to the old box rule, with some tweaks in the matter of weight and some improvements in the other detail is the right thing to do. For us. I stress, for us.

I believe that those who won't learn from history are condemed to repeat it, and that the best mistakes to learn from are other people's. So let me inflict some history on you.

Back in the late 60s and early 70s my previous Class, the Ch***b, had 50 plus Championship fleets in UK, Australia and New Zealand. In Australia it was a teenagers intermediate class. In the UK, and to a good extent NZ it was a bit more young adults. By 1981 the UK fleet had droppped to half the size, and boat building was minimal. Sound familiar? Australia was just as strong as it had been. I think by then NZ was starting to suffer from a Yachting NZ policy to discourage the local classes in favour of IYRU International classes: in particular 420/470.

The UK fleet felt, rightly or wrongly, that the 70s revolution low rocker boats, dynamite in a sea breeze as they were, were too polarised for UK conditions... In the 60s there were Ch***b fleets at gravel pits would you believe! They put together a set of rules to make some changes, notably to relax a very restrictive mid length rise of floor restriction. They got some support from NZ, notably from class founder John Spencer, but none from the typically conservative Aus fleet. In the end the class split. The UK fleet collapse halted, but has never really looked like recovering to the sort of strength it had before. The NZ fleet, which probably had little choice but to follow AUS, is now pretty much extinct. Its many years since any boats were built. Aus has had their ups and downs, but still seems numerically strong, but maybe not as influential as in the days when Bethwaites, Beashel, Murray and Buckland where names going through the class, and do seem to be suffereing somewhat from 420s, 29ers and things.

No Australian Ch***b sailor would agree with me, but I reckon with hindsight adopting a moderate version of the UK proposals, in particular relaxing the rise of floor, back in the 80s would have kept the class together and there would still be International competition, and probably little need for a 29er class... I think the Australian fleet would be stronger and more influential for it, International competition might have kept the Kiwi fleet a bit more protected from NZ Yachting, and the UK fleet would be no worse off at the very least. The UK fleet might also have been tempted off its current route of ever more extreme rule changes, which have effectively turned it into something more akin to the NZ R class than the moderate sail area boat it used to be, and destroyed any hope of bringing the class together again.

Now I now almost nothing about Swedish sailing, but from what little this monolinguist has gathered Canoe sailing is stronger over there than most countries with quite a variety of classes. Its very easy to understand a worry that the box rule could just drive sailiors into other classes for no advantage.

Swedish and German Sailors - I think we need this change if there is to be International Canoe sailing for the forseeable future. Having International Sailing is much more than just a big regatta most of us might do once or twice in our lives. It brings all sorts of other live and interest to the class, and also helps us keep credibility with our National Authorities. Stay with us. It will be worth the pain.

Dunno
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:05 pm

Post by Dunno » Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:58 am

Correct me if I am wrong, but this is the impression that I have on the changes.

You are going from a 'one-design class' (with a strict hull underwater hull design, but flexiblibly in rig and top of the hull) to a 'development class' with basic hull design measurement.

Now you have to remember that for the whole, you are targeting to different types of people. Ones that want to get out there and fight it on the water, and those that want to spend time tinkering around with their boats/designs, building new gear/boats and then seeing how they go on the water.

H Virtue
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 4:34 am
Location: Australia

Post by H Virtue » Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:33 am

Dunno, the IC class has attracted people who like to tinker in their sheds proof of this is the vast difference of each boat. Your luky to find 2 IC's the same, even each of the Joise hulls have differences and most of Robbo's AC have all had their owners personal touch added at some stage.

One bonus of the new rules is we will have development/tinkering which can be done at a lower cost by the hulls being simpler construction with less material used by the simple fact the hull is approx 75% the width of the Nethercott. As development happens those who have the cabality to keep tinkering with ideas will be off loading their old boats (some cases could only be a year or less old) which will provide entry level priced boats which is a problem we have in AUS lack of second hand boats.

We all still get out on the water and do battle and have some great racing, the ones who win are those who tinker/develop the best and more so practise. The new rules will reward the person with the best boat, however I strongly beleive it wont always be the best boat the wins it will be the most complete package, helm included that will win.

Jim the Swedes and Germans all have internet and at least watch this forum. Its this forum and Sailing Anarchy where I have followed the progress of the DC's as well as information passed on via Christian. Its difficult to involve them when they dont post their thoughts where everyone else who has a vested and active interest in IC's are posting either postive or negative views. I guess also those of us who are convinced the DC is the future have got some what caught up in the enthusiasm and excitement of the DC developments and neglected to specifically find out what the Swedes and Germans see as the future for IC.

H.

Post Reply