AGM Proposals [Bob Carter]

[Archive]

Bob Carter wrote:

The following are some proposals I have submitted for discussion at the AGM. They will be included in the next m,agazine but I am putting them on this chat line so that they might be adequately comprehended and discussed.
Cheers
Bob

Proposals for 2002 AGM.

Please find below a number of proposals that I submit for voting at the AGM at Whitstable. A number of small issues have arisen and as our previous AGM deliberations have not been adequately documented, I am taking the opportunity to clarify and legalise some details.
I hope we do not get involved in too much debate, but just nod them through.

Proposals

1) Toe Loops
It is proposed that the plastic tube toe loops on the sides of the hulls are optional. Boats are deemed to comply with class rules if they have 0, 1, 2 or 3 toe loops per side. No other toe loop type is permissible. Proposer: Bob Carter Seconder: Simon Farthing.

Explanation:
Old Sparks had one toe loop per side. When the boat was re-launched as a Dart 15 with jib and trapeze (at sail number 1200) then 3 toe loops were fitted as standard. The toe loop is only any use if the boat is used for Sprinting and can get in the way if sailing una-rig. A number of owners have bought new boats and had the toe loops left off. The standard configuration Dart 15 from the Laser Centre has just the 2 aft toe lops fitted/side at the request of the Dart 15 committee ? because it is particularly the forward mounted toe loop that gets in the way. This proposal legalises all these options and has minimal effect on boat speed.

2) Grippy Tape
It is proposed that grippy tape can be applied on the sides of the hulls to facilitate better grip when trapezing, within class rules. Proposer: Steve Sawford Seconder: George Carter.

Explanation:
This was requested by a number of the sailors at the recent Sprint National Championships at Instow. It is cheap, easy to apply, facilitates safer trapezing of the boat and makes no difference to the standard format sailing. Many Sprinters have already applied such tape and this proposal legalises their boats.

3) Downhaul
It is proposed that 3 purchase downhauls are permitted by addition of an extra pulley block and rope to the standard block and cleat (RWO) but other cleating arrangements are not deemed to be ?in class?. Proposer: Bob Carter Seconder: Nick Dewhirst.

Explanation:
At a previous AGM we voted to accept 3 purchase downhauls but were not specific about the blocks or cleating arrangements. Recently there have been a number of boats that have had a more sophisticated block and cleating arrangement such that the rope can be led astern and the downhaul applied from an aft position. This was debated at the Sprint Nationals at Instow and it clearly advantageous to not have to risk burying the bow when moving forward to apply the downhaul. Thus we must deliberate which one we accept. The proposal to limit it to the use of the standard block is in keeping with our principles of simple, cheap and of limited performance difference.

4) Jib Sheet fitting
It is proposed that the carbine hook and spliced rope with two pulley blocks (which go between the jib clew and the jib sheet) can be replaced by an optional lighter weight (3mm minimum) rope with no carbine hook. The jib sheet must remain as per standard equipment. Proposer: Carl Blenkinsop Seconder: George Carter.

Explanation:
The carbine hook and rope assembly is too heavy for light winds, especially when sailing single handed when there is no crew to support the weight and set the sail. Also the carbine hook bangs and marks the mast when tacking. A number of the Sprint Fleet have replaced the assembly with lighter weight rope and no carbine hook. The change is simple and cheap.

5) Tiller extension for Sprinting defined
It is proposed that the maximum length of the tiller extension for Sprint Format should be 8 feet (2.133M). The tiller extension should NOT be the adjustable length type. Proposer: Bob Carter Seconder: George Carter.

Explanation:
Some time ago we approved long tiller extensions to be acceptable for Sprint format, but failed to specify the length. Additionally we did not deliberate on adjustable tiller extensions. This proposal just formalises the position.

6) Trampoline Tracks
It is proposed that Dart 18 type trampoline tracks with incorporated jib tracks are accepted in the class rules. Proposer: Tim Dieu de Bellefontaine Seconder: Bob Carter.

Explanation:
Some time ago we approved that optional jib tracks can be fitted to a Dart 15. More recently the Dart 15 trampoline tracks have been splitting and falling off. Your committee raised the issue with the Laser Centre and it was agreed that as Dart 18 trampoline tracks are much stronger they would fit them to Dart 15s henceforth. All new boats since approximately number 1935 have been supplied with Dart 18 tracks. This proposal legalises the position.

The following are not formal proposals (as they constitute no changes) but are worthy of discussion.

A) Tiller extension for Standard Format
It is proposed that the length of the tiller extension for the Standard Format Dart 15 should unchanged from the standard equipment on boats to sail number1900.

Explanation:
Recently the Laser Centre have taken to supplying Dart 18 length tiller extensions (tube length 1852mm ? 1856mm) instead of Dart 15 length (tube length approximately 1660mm). They did this without consultation with the Dart 15 Association or requesting a change of rules. This means boats from approximately 1910 ? 1967 have longer tillers than older boats. We should either force compliance with our rules or accept a range of tiller lengths from 1660- 1856mm tubes. Discussion welcome!


B) Praddle or Paddle
It is proposed that the Praddle should remain standard equipment for the Dart 15.

Explanation:
Recently the Laser Centre have taken to supplying Dart 18 long handled paddles with the Dart 15 instead of the Praddle. They did this without consultation with the Dart 15 Association or requesting a change of rules. They claimed that the Praddle (which fits neatly in the Dart 15 cocktail cabinet) was no longer available, which is blatantly not true (as can be seen from any chandlers catalogue). The Dart 18 paddle does not fit anywhere on a Dart 15. Discussion welcome!


Bob Carter
5 June 02

[Archive]

Simon replied:

I would like to formally propose the adoption of a set of drawings
illustrating the standard size and specification of the Dart 15 and its
parts. I understand that such a set may exist (as with the 18) but in the
absence of such a set existing that they be commissioned. These should then
be the basis for any proposed alteration and as a point of reference for
scrutineering boats.

As to the proposals already made I agree with the suggestion relating to the
toe loops as I see no material benefit or change whether you have them or
not. As to the Praddle this could be formalised among the drawings. As to
the balance I am in opposition. I can see no sensible benefit in having a
downhaul which can be adjusted from the wire. The standard 3:1 is perfectly
adequate to place an appropriate amount of downhaul on. As to the balance
of changes I feel that whilst some make little or no change to performance
they are the thin end of the wedge towards ceasing to make this a one design
class. The net result of these changes is that if you buy a boat from laser
centre it will differ from other boats on the circuit. Dart sailing should
not be about who has the lightest part or the quickest boat but who is the
best sailor in any given set of conditions. I think we should be seeking
to preserve the Dart not update it.

Cheers

Simon

[Archive]

Bob replied:

Hi Simon,
A some further thoughts about your reply:
I'm not sure that you have read the proposals adequately. The majority of them were writen to limit change not encourage change. This particularly applies to the downhaul, the tiller extension (both types), the praddle,
etc.
A few were written to legalise what has already happened. This applies to the toe loops and the Dart 18 tramp tracks. The Dart 18 tracks was an essential change to address a major failure mode of the boat. Many recent boats have had trampoline track failures where the track tears off the hull
splitting along the rivet holes. This is expensive and highly inconvenient.
It happened to 1864 & 1869 more than 2 years ago - so it will be approaching on yours and Stuart's boats, anytime.
The last two are true changes. The grippy tape should not matter unless you are a Sprinter and lots of the Sprinters want it.
The jib sheeting is a creeping elegance change - probably of the type that you are concerned about, and we need to have the debate at the AGM.

Cheers

Bob

[Archive]

Mike Rainer replied:

Thank you for your list of proposals sent to Joe. I have now had chance to discuss these and we are in favour of all of them. This should then regularise things and stop any little niggles. On the downhaul they would like to make it clear that this must not be able to operated from the back of the boat.
Good luck
Mike Rainer, Instow

[Archive]

Robin Leather replied:

Hello Bob,

I would like to propose some alterations to the downhaul and jib sheeting system (The jib sheeting system alteration is designed to complement your existing proposal). I assume that this is enough notice for the meeting.
The seconders will be Laurie and Carl

If I am unfamiliar with any of the required Association rules, I apologise.
Please let me know where necessary so that alterations can be made in plenty of time.

I would also like information of establishing the correct way to get proxy votes registered as it is possible that a large number of Sprinters may not attend the Uni-ring Nationals.

Dart 15 Sprint Modifications Proposal

Downhaul

Nature of Modification
1. The use of replacement blocks including optional camcleat style jamming
mechanism to allow a 3:1 purchase and mode of operation that allows
adjustment from further aft than the 'standard' downhaul. See example
illustration (Example RWO part (blocks) cost between ?20 and ?25). Barton
also do similar parts 860042 (fiddle swivel, bracket & camcleat blocks)
?25.95 and 860035 (single swivel block and bracket) ?8.50.

Reasons for modification;
1. Safety. Allow adjustment of downhaul without moving weight to the mast.
Less risk of capsizing at leeward marks
2. Fairer racing. Remove an element of chance. (i.e. Will or will not
the helm be hit by a gust when they should be adjusting the downhaul'.)
Chance is not a part racing that should be unnecessarily accepted.

Particulars;
1. Maximum purchase 3:1 (any block manufacturer)
2. Optional camcleat style jammer attached to top or bottom block (any
cleat manufacturer).
3. Original fitting points (existing eyelet in sail and loop on bottom of
mast) and use of swivels (optional).
4. Any line size and length
5. No additional 'non standard' fittings or lines to be utilised in the
fixing of the 'tail' of the line.

Aims of particulars;
1. Limit purchase to agreed limit
2. Allow any manufacturer to reduce cost
3. Cheap
4. Retro-fittable
5. No boat speed gain
6. Improving to boat making it more acceptable to new users



Jib Sheeting

Nature of Modification
1. Allow the use of smaller jib fairlead blocks (see picture).
2. Allow the use of slimmer jib sheets

Reasons for modification;
1. Reduce the weight of jib sheeting system to allow jib to fill in lighter
winds.

Particulars;
1. Minimum sheet diameter to be reduced to 4 mm.
2. Sheet manufacturer left to owner
3. Block size can be reduced to fit new line diameter.

Aims of particulars;
2. Allow any manufacturer to reduce cost
3. Cheap
4. Retro-fittable



Thanks

Robin

[Archive]

Nick D replied:

Hi Simon
Comments
1. Such a set of drawings exists and I have it. Panthercraft produced it and the Laser Centre never updated it for the various amendments passed by our various AGM.
2. As I understand it, the downhaul proposition is a clarification of the original amendment made by Bob and myself some years ago. The clarification is to prevent the complications to which you raise objection (and which I
belive we generally share)
Regards
Nick Dewhirst

[Archive]

Bob replied:

Hi Mike,
Thanks for the comments.

Once the proposals are published in the magazine, you need to make sure that any of your members who are not coming to the Nationals submit a postal vote.

Cheers

Bob

[Archive]

Bob replied:

Anyone wanting to make proposals for discussion at the AGM must sent them to Simon Farthing to print in the magazine in the next few days.
Cheers
Bob

[Archive]

George Stephen replied:

Laser Centre's disregard for D15 One Design Class rules is a right pain. It is a shame that the wrong length standard tillers weren't spotted in time to be sent back to Laser Centre for exchange for one of the right length. I guess we either require owners of the currently out of class longer extensions to cut them down to size (or get Laser Centre to exchange/do the work), or we change the rules at the AGM to allow (fixed length) tiller extensions of "at least 1660mm", and we do this for both Standard and Sprint classes.

Had we been starting Brand New Dart 15/Dart 15 Sprint classes I would have favoured an adjustable tiller extension with set maximum and minimum lengths, making the one tiller extension that would be supplied with the boat cope with both requirements. But we're not, most sprinters already have long sticks, and some of us don't want the D15 to become a development class where we find we're always needing to spend some more in order to avoid losing too much competitive advantage.

So I'm in favour of restricting tiller extensions to exclude the adjustable length types, on 2 grounds : 1 they are more expensive, and 2 they can clearly give an advantage over fixed length types, allowing shortening/lengthening on the water to suit conditions (eg shorter when on the tramp/hulls, usually in light conditions/off wind, and longer when out on the wire in stronger breezes). If some one has an adjustable type at present, then I think they should be required to "fix it for each race" to remain in class.

I'm not convinced that a restriction on length is necessary. I use a Dart 18 single-handed tiller extension, which is 9 feet long. I don't really want to cut it down as I still nurture a wish to sail a D18 occasionally and still be in class, despite the fact that its 9 foot length is a curse in light conditions on a D15 - getting this 9 foot stick down between the shrouds (and especially the trapeze wires) and the mast can be more fiddly than you might think! So I think that restricting the length to 8 feet is an unnecessary restriction.

So I'm in favour of both standard and sprint class rules allowing tiller extensions of "at least 1660mm", and at least "x" gm weight.

But bith my thoughts and George Carter's original sprint proposal ignore a further point. Should sailors (especially sprinters) be allowed to vary their choice of tiller extension (eg to choose the standard D15 extension for light conditions and a longer one for when sailors expect to be out on the wire) from race to race within a regatta, or within a series, or should they have to stick with their original choice (with Race Committee approval of a change where there are reasonable supporting arguments)? I think we should allow any length of stick from the standard D15 issue upward, without restriction, as being practical and simple.

George

PS I haven't sent any of this to Simon, I thought it best to discuss the notions before going into fixed proposals.

[Archive]

Bob replied:

I'm not sure that anyone is campaigning for adjustable tiller extensions. I was just keen to clarify that they are not allowed. They are expensive and break quite often when capsizing so can considerably increase the cost of sailing. They are not consistent with the spirit of sailing a Dart 15 (cheap racing in a one design boat).
I'll save the rest of the points for the AGM.
Cheers
Bob

[Bob Carter]

Just to show that the search facility works OK.
Cheers
Bob