| Author |
Topic: so.. new rules.. who's changing what... |
 |
Guy Beckett |
Posted: 18-May-04 15:52 |
|
|
|
I expect most of you have got Bob's email about the rule changes. Our decision to liberalise poses lots of questions; so it seemed, with 2 weeks until the nationals, like a good time to discuss:
what are you planning to change on your ISO?
& have suppliers been found for new fittings? (booms, rudder stocks etc) |
| |
|
Pete Lindley |
Posted: 18-May-04 19:35 |
|
|
|
All I am changing are my ropes - they need renewing anyway.
Fittings - if they are working at present, then why change?
Currently there are no recognised / authorised suppliers of carbon & or rudder stocks.
If you keep capsizing or are just slow, then I suggest people look at their boat set ups and sailing techniques as well as their boat handling. (Training course would be the best place to spend your money!)
Pete
[Edited by Pete Lindley on 18-May-04 19:36] |
| |
|
Ian Moss |
Posted: 18-May-04 21:29 |
|
|
|
There is a recognised supplier who makes a carbon boom though, Superspars. They make one for the blaze which is almost identical in every way to the ISO one other than it doesn't have a slidy track for the main clew or the outhall cleat. It is also a couple of inches longer.
Question is can that be used on the ISO?
For:
1, It is made by a recognised supplier.
2, It is fundametally the same design as the ally one except it is made of carbon.
Against:
1, Not specifically made for the ISO so *could* contravene the one class rule.
2, I have one and you don't!
More importantly, can we use it at the Nationals?
Other than that the only mods I am making are??????????? |
| |
|
Pete Lindley |
Posted: 19-May-04 07:18 |
|
|
|
But do you think the carbon boom will make you go quicker Ian? Can we expect to see you leading the fleet when we do allow the SuperSpars Carbon boom in?
PS: Please make sure my crew gets to the nationals on time - even if it does mean leaving at 04:00 on Friday morning! |
| |
|
Ian Moss |
Posted: 19-May-04 07:58 |
|
|
|
No I don't at all, however at KGSC@datchet my boom was flexing alot when I was putting lots of kicker on when it was windy. Even Tim commented and was concerned it was going to break!
My real point is that I have a carbon boom from a recognised supplier, can I use it? I would feel much happier using it, especially if it is windy. Of course, if you don't think It'll make the boat faster their should be no problem.
Do you really think I'll get V and Annie up at 4.00 on Friday! 9.00 may be more realistic but even then I am not holding my breath!
|
| |
|
Tim |
Posted: 19-May-04 08:59 |
|
|
|
Come on Ian, crack that whip !! I'm sure you can get them out of bed it your really tried. As regards booms, if Ian can use his carbon one then we have two just in case. Better have another boat on the water than two very frustrated people sitting on the shore surrounded by bits of broken ally !! Or are you scared Pete... Grrr!!!
Oh, what our rules changes are there? Not (quite) a member of the association yet(!) |
| |
|
Guy Beckett |
Posted: 19-May-04 10:43 |
|
|
|
I'd like to change to rope instead of wire trapezes - not because I think it'll make me go quicker but because a) I'd like to change from the original handles to discs b) I think rope is (marginally) safer because I could conceivably cut it in an emergency.
However I don't have a clue how I would rig rope trapezes - how do they attach to the mast etc...? Anyone else planning this one? |
| |
|
Pete Lindley |
Posted: 19-May-04 13:02 |
|
|
|
Regarding scared - nope.
Regarding trapeze strings - you need to keep the existing hooks and chop the wires short (3" from the hook) Then put the strings onto the eye. You are not allowed to alter teh top fitting.
As for the best system for the strings, it is easier to show than explain, but as a result, you will have two adjusters per trapeze - a coarse and a fine adjuster. Play with the fine whilst on the wire, but if the wind changes strength, come off the wire and adjust the coarse to enable less or more leverage with fine adjuster.
Like I said, much easier to show you, so bring over long lengths of D12 with you and I'll demonstrate.
Pete
|
| |
|
Ross Ashton |
Posted: 20-May-04 13:45 |
|
|
|
Surely there are no approved suppliers at the moment? My assumption was that the Iso Class Committee would have to approve a specific supplier for a specific item, and to my knowledge they haven't done that yet.
Personally I won't be changing anything - but of course I'll be cursing when my boom breaks in Race 1! |
| |
|
ISO 653 |
Posted: 20-May-04 23:28 |
|
|
|
As the 'supplier' who prepared the boom / wings / rudder prototypes for the ISO prepared for the Dinghy exhibition for discussion we would also like to know what exactly is going on in the class. It costs somebody (us in this case) considerable time, money and effort to pull the stops out to do all this at such short notice when requested.
I know it was appreciated by many of you - however we have heard nothing officially from the committee since and frankly we wonder what the committee led class objectives are currently. What exactly is the strategy ? Is there one ? If so what is it ? The 'vote' was taken late and was of extraordinary drafting and seemed 'loaded' in its emphasis in many respects. IMHO.
We produce high quality, fully developed class specific equipment alternatives in discussion with associations at very reasonable cost where it is wanted. But we need official committee led feedback and discussion - it is notably absent from this class. Race Marine exists to develop equipment with class associations and manages to do this with several other classes very sucessfully.
We enjoy sailing the boat ourselves (as revisionists of course!) and will no doubt continue to race '653' occasionally in the future but have now decided to concentrate our efforts on other classes where there is a much clearer direction for us.
Votes that lead nowhere are a waste of everyones time - both prospective suppliers and owners. Either appoint a proper constitutionally run technical committee, make your own grown-up decisions, or leave such things to Topper who are at least decisive.
Mike Lyons - Race Marine
|
| |
|
chris780 |
Posted: 25-May-04 10:41 |
|
|
|
ah so now we see why iso 653 was keen to get the rules changed.... he's selling the bits!!
I used to sail Isos way back in the days of '95 and still sail one occasionally and I reckon its a good boat as it stands. Dont go changing things for the sake of changing things. I say keep it as it is but then I dont get a vote...
For the record, i broke more masts than booms when I sailed my Iso, though a couple of those were down to the original poor bow design by topper rather than the wind and after buying the newer style boom with strops never had another problem with them. I can understand changing bits if their is a problem with suppliers (as we had to do in the Boss class with our masts) but dont just change them because you want a "cool" black stick. An Iso is a really great buy for the prices they are going for now and wouldnt it put people off if they had to start buying extra new stuff when they got the boat home because they thought they needed to stand a chance of getting anywhere near the front of the pack.
|
| |
|
ISO 653 |
Posted: 11-Jun-04 22:11 |
|
|
|
Hi Chris 780
A bit of a delay in responding. Yes I can supply bits and pieces if 1) they are allowed by the related class association 2)They are needed (nobody is forced to buy!). In the case of the ISO I was approached by 'senior' figures in the association because of the work we had put into other classes in recent years. Solutions were sought for problem items such as the rudder stock and possibly booms and wings - hence the work we put into the show boat at alexandra palace. I'm afraid no apology for a commercial interest - that is what works in the real world if you want to actually get things done rather than just talk. Given the reception from some quarters we have however decided it is not worth seeking class approval for any item for the ISO at this time - too much potential hassle is anticipated and we do not see any real commercial advantage. However the stocks we supply for the 420/470 classes will be on many boats in Athens this summer and the 470 one is probably suitable for the ISO anyway - and our reading of the 2004 rules is that virtually anything is now permitted, so no need for a specific ISO development there. Might just see one on 653 though when we do an open sometime (commitments elsewhere permitting)
As for carbon booms - why not ask around and see what works elsewhere. Our view is that the best option is Proctor tubes with superspars end fittings and wavelength webbing. Why ? This works and we have the experience of other classes to fall back upon. Light wall or poorly constructed tubes WILL break when used on the ISO (our judgement anyway) and the attachment of fittings is critical with carbon. I supply a number of classes already and it's well known where we source the tubes from - Proctor or a specialist supplier in France. You don't need carbon tubes anyway for competitive racing - but when you break an alloy one for the first time you might just see it as a safety issue yourself. Ask anyone who has broken a tube in any real wind.
Wings - No apparent demand or need at the moment..... therefore no development justifiable commercially. In time though our belief is tha that the class may revisit this issue as early wings become increasingly unservicible.
Your last charge was related, if I'm reading it right, to cheque book sailing. None of the items we looked at above intrinsigly make a boat faster - so are not needed to maintain competitiveness. The cost of a new suit of sails is already more than the market value of many boats. The cost of a new set dwarfs any of the items discussed here and IS much more likely to influence your success or otherwise. Want to do better? - Buy new sails as often as you can afford, especially jib and spinni. That's where I'd use my cheque book first to improve performance, not fiddling around with rudder stocks and booms which will not make any difference. The justification for this class requested investigation was to replace knackered stuff on the boat or where the original manufacturer cannot supply suitable replacements at reasonable cost.
Regards - ISO 653
PS - I'd also suggest sailing a few other mainstream classes before seriously suggesting that the ISO is well nigh perfect as it stands. It's goodish but things have moved on a bit since 1993. Learning from others costs so little.
|
| |
|
chris780 |
Posted: 14-Jun-04 12:00 |
|
|
|
ok - i think its bad to jump to conclusions on a board like this as its so difficult to tell peoples previous sailing experience etc etc.
so presuming i havent sailed anything other than an ISO ever could i just say:
I owned and sailed an iso from 1995 through to about 2000 (no 521) whilst Lindley was still wearing nappies and sailing buzzes and throwing other peoples crews off the main bridge in Weymouth harbour etc etc..... In that time believe me we broke our fair share of masts and booms, 1 centreboard, and rudder stocks - even the part of the tiller that clamps round the rudder blade at the top snapped during a memorable race at Leigh on Solent nationals in choppy solent force 6! So i'd say i have had my fair share of breakages. However, having sailed a boss for the past 4 or so years, i can also say that the only bit of rigging to have broken of its own accord was my boom. And I can also tell you which sounds the most scarey, the relatively gentle groaning of an alloy boom bending till it fails, or the point blank shotgun bang of a carbon boom snapping clean in two. Nearly enough to knock you off the rack.
Due to the lack of popularity of the boss fleet at present I have been working out what to sail next from 49er right down to RS300, and have sailed a vast majority of the "current" boats around at the moment (RS800, B14, 49er, RS300, RS400, RS700).
As you say quite rightly, all boats have their differences and I would never expect anything designed over 10 years ago to be as near to what we may describe as perfect today. However I should point out that while not sailing my Boss due to a sometimes, depending on wind strength, unwilling crew (sorry about the near heart attack stuart) I have been sailing other boats but keep coming back to use Stuarts Iso. It is a nice boat to sail well and can be controlled in almost any wind strength and still is capable of putting a smile on your face. All i was saying was that the boat i sail is bog standard (and pink) and is great as it is. If people started to see boats becoming different it may put them off altogether. And believe me the topper classes need all the help they can get with the RS boats now becoming more available on the second hand market and Topper still seemingly unwilling to support anything done by the classes. (Quick question I wasnt at the nationals but was anyone from Topper?) And was the Iso 10th anniversary celebrations anything like the recent RS Hayling Island ones or did I miss them altogether - but im getting off the point here and more down the road of why the topper boats are where they are at now, tupperware international were always more keen to sell their lunch boxes than the iso/boss/buzz.
Rant over. Sorry.
As for non availability of items, have superspars gone belly up - can they not supply alloy booms anymore - I should think with people still sailing ISos and buzzes there would never be any danger of superspars going bad? Isnt the rudder stock and tiller off a hurricane catamaran that topper made at the same time they were developing the boat - can you not still get these?
Just a thought and a question to Pete: are there any other people sailing in the Topper fleet (though I have to admit to not so far this year) that have sailed them as long and hard (ooh err) as we have? |
| |
|
ISO 653 |
Posted: 14-Jun-04 19:11 |
|
|
|
We all agree the boat still has a lot going for it - both you and I. The only reason for change is if the current version of something is really not that good in the first place and/or becoming unavailable at reasonable cost. The ISO was the first of its type - and it would be a massive surprise if it did not carry at least some problems with it from that starting point. That is why I believe some of the committee wanted to investigate alternatives a few months back. An up to date parts availability/pricing matrix on the website might be useful - just a thought ....
As for alloy booms 'gently creaking' well if that was the way they 'went' safety would not be an issue. When they go they often do so instantly as well and in my experience are worse than carbon ones. They break in the middle and usually the boat capsizes to windward of course. You then right the boat and the outboard end in particular flails around the boat and heads of the crew - the edges are razer sharp and take chunks out of anything they connect with. That's you, the crew, clothing, boat etc. You have to get the sail off the mast PDQ to stop serious injury and lots of secondary damage. The point about selecting an appropriate carbon tube is that it is much less likely to break in the firstplace. You can simply go too light with both materials (alloy and carbon) and IMHO the current alloy one is not strong enough and would be excessively heavy if a 'fit for use' grade was selected. (Or you have to use a lot less mainsheet tension - not likely given the current approach upwind !)
The carbon tubes used on the Boss were generally 'pultrusion' ones from memory. These are not as strong as any 'fibre wound' ones weight for weight however. Nothing wrong with 'pultrusion' as a technology but the tubes have to be a wee bit thicker in the wall and as you say they can 'explode' also with a clean break. This type of tube is less than half the cost of a fibre wound one, hence its atractiveness to many boat builders. It really does not matter who supplies the tube provided it is adaquately specified is the point.
Remember very few spar makers actually extrude their own alloy, and many more still do not make their own carbon tubes. Most shop around on the world market, select and badge and you are not to know !! To my knowledge there is only one maker of any scale in the UK who fibre wind their own tubes for the general dinghy market - Proctor.
Regards - '653'
|
| |
|
SpellerMike |
Posted: 14-Jun-04 21:37 |
|
|
|
Wow, this debate is getting quite exiting… Firstly to answer chris780, whilst I have had a bit of a break (excuse the pun) from ISO sailing, yes there is someone out there that has been sailing ISO’s since B4 Pete or you were in nappies…. ME (Pete came to my 40th at the weekend so can vouch for the fact I’m old, let alone my aches and pains whilst we sailed the 49er together) I owned a few ISO’s in my time, my first being 528 … I have had six ISO’s since that boat…. I agree with some of the earlier comments from Pete regarding boat set-up and boat handling, and also ISO653’s comments (who I presume is Mike Lyons) regarding what actually make the boat go faster (eg decent sails) rather than those that have a perceived performance gain, (rudders and booms). I cannot see why Chris780 is blaming his ISO mast breakages on the poor bow design, if he did indeed own ISO 521, as that was originally part owned by the guy who crewed me this year in the Nationals and had the bow mod done in 1993…. An example of Topper listening to the views of the sailors albeit it did take a while.. However they were all changed FOC. Masts were also changed – the spreaders were lowered following work done by Jon Turner, John Caig, Rob Burridge and myself. This helped to reduce the number of mast breakages, however, there is no quick fix for experience and ability.. I broke masts simply by not handling the boat correctly and digging it in the putty… It won’t necessarily break on the capsize but a few weeks later when you’re least expecting it…. It’s then blamed on poor design…. Crap…. Bad sailing and poor boat preparation I’d say.. Yes the boom take off’s were replaced by strops, another example of Topper listening to the Class, this probably had the single biggest impact on breakages in the fleet… There were subtler changes made in the early years as well but haven’t got time to go into them now…. What’s my point I hear you ask??? Get the facts right… I’m not writing this to piss any one off, just that I think we (yes I’m now a member of the Association again) are in danger of biting off the had that fed us all those years ago…TOPPER... I recently (two weeks before the Nationals) acquired an old ISO – 593, which lacked sails, strings, wings (OK so I don’t need them) a large proportion of the fittings and a boom. I then had just over a week to get it prepared for the Nats.. So I was quite pleased that the strings (wires) and fittings were de-restricted, however, I would hope that anyone who was buying a new(ish) ISO would not feel that he had to ‘spec’ everything up just to compete… Let the committee (and Technical committee if there is still one) do their job in the interests of current (and future) members.. I think they should have the views of most by now… |
| |
|
Ian Keam_George |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 09:32 |
|
|
|
A healthy debate about the future of the class is very welcome although it does raise tensions sometimes especially when using the written word rather than a face-to-face conversation.
Having been involved with the class since 1997 and now on my third ISO I strongly believe we have a great class and a very good boat. Sure it's not perfect but then what is? Pound for pound it provides damn good racing with a great bunch of people and surely at this level that's what it's all about.
It's clear that we're not all in agreement over the recent changes or the way we should implement them; nevertheless we should all remember that (1) these changes were put to the members as a result of pressure from the members (2) they were voted on by the members and carried by a decent majority. So where's the issue?
The idea was to allow flexibility where there was no impact on preformance and improve reliability/availabilty/quality in specific areas like the rudder.
The only outstanding issue is the adoption of the carbon boom which the Technical Commitee under the chairmanship of MIke Perry will be addressing quite soon with a view to providing a list of approved vendors in accordance with the rule voted for by a majority of members.
This variation of specification was made solely due to breakages on aluminium booms many of which are starting to corrode around the pop rivet hole where the kicker strop is attached. I don't share Chris's view that aluminium booms break gently. Mine broke in 25 knots at Hoo, without warning and with a big bang. Problem was we were left with two very sharp ends thrashing around which was both dangerous and did some damage to the gel coat inside.
The committee is open to input from association members and potential suppliers (we need the latter and don't have a problem with their need to make a reasonable profit).
Rest assured the outcome of this process will be beneficial to the class as a whole...that's our goal.
|
| |
|
chris780 |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 10:42 |
|
|
|
ok im sorry if i seem to have touched a few nerves here - Mike sorry if you got annoyed at what I said.
I agree with Pete and Mikes comments that the sails and actually sailing the boat properly are better than trying to get new bits to make you faster - dont get me wrong, I am trying to keep the Iso as it is!!!
I suppose looking back on it in the first year or two we had more breakages than toward the end of the Iso days, for the very reason Mike said - poor sailing etc etc.
Again im sorry if you think I am talking "crap" as you say but I am stating the facts as I see them - i did have 1 mast break because of the poor design of the bow fitting. I did have Iso 521 (and admittedly never sailed it to anywhere near the standard mike s did) and my insurance company can verify that the bow mod was not done to my boat before it broke as they wouldnt make a payment - kinda crippling as we were students back in the day. They said Topper were aware of the problem and as our boat hadnt had the recall/mod done it wasnt for them to get a new mast, but as we bought it second hand we werent even aware there was a mod to do!! The mast is actually still lying at the top of my dads garden as a constant reminder!
And once the boom was sorted with strops as i said earlier we never had another problem. So ironing out little niggles is not a problem and should be encouraged as far as i can see and is actually a damn good idea on behalf of everyone that sails the boat. So thank you to Speller/Burridge/Caig/Turner et al for that.
I didnt say alloy booms broke gently, i said in my experience they went relatively gently compared to the carbon ones. Its relative i think - they both made a v loud bang.
Ian I also understand a need for people to make a profit - thats obvious, but what inspired me to write my initial post on this topic was ISO653's tone. He seemed to be blaming the Iso committee for not making a decision in their own time which has damaged his profits. To me this didnt seem right thats all. Obviously deciding such a thing could seal the Iso's fate and so needed to not be taken lightly.
Ok as im not actually an Iso class member (the danger i guess of sharing a discussion board) i'll leave you all to it now and go continue sailing stuarts standard Iso (maybe someone might be able to persuade me to join and come and have another race)! Then there would definitely be someone for you to all beat.
All i want is for the Iso to stay the same as it is a good boat & I like it...
TTFN
"chris stands back as the most hated by iso sailors, opens the flood gates and hopes noone throws darts at him...." pls im not trying to offend anyone im just campaigning to keep the boat as it is.... |
| |
|
Ian Keam_George |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 11:37 |
|
|
|
Chris: Input from all quarters is always welcome especially people who've been sailing/still sailing the ISO or other associated classes.
Personally I reckon a healthy debate is good and if you feel strongly about something then say so. I'm pleased that you still enjoy sailing the ISO and appreciate it for what it is.
Our objective (as a committee) is to allow sensible evolution without people feeling they have to get the cheque book out to get to the front of the fleet and where problems occur to address these in a responsible fashion. As we all have day jobs sometimes we don't get it quite right in our desire to respond. This is why a technical committee has been re-formed to work out a strategy to manage change that the class members/ISO owners want.
Keep sailing the ISO (when not in the Boss) and keep the comments coming. How about taking an ISO to Italy if you can't get the Boss guys to play?
Cheers
Ian |
| |
|
SpellerMike |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 13:01 |
|
|
|
Ian/Bob, please email me if I can be of any assistance on the Technical front...
Chris - Just to clarify which Bow mod you are talking about?? Originally the boats had a StSteel fitting at the bow that the space frame tube coming from the mast gate went through and encroached into the kite chute... a nightmare for catching the sheets on a gybe and shreading the kites on a drop.. as far as I know All boats produced at the time, 521 included, were modified to the current tube layout at the chute mouth. However, this still used a st.steel eyebolt to attach the jib which over a period of time bent and eventually broke and was then replaced with the st.steel plate we have today. Is it the eyebolt you are talking about? Or the original bow mod?? |
| |
|
chris780 |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 13:49 |
|
|
|
yeah sorry, i admit i forgot about the original original bow issue, yes you are correct of course, it was modified to have the prodder thingy removed, sorry if i implied it hadnt, like i say i forgot about that one, its the eyebolt that broke and thats when we were informed it should have been changed to a plated arrangement like you guys have now.
So if any of you guys have an eyebolt at the bow check it now - at that time in our state of unknowledge, i.e. we didnt know better we sailed with a forestay. However this wasnt much use as it was attached to the same bit that broke. |
| |
|
Bob Ladell |
Posted: 15-Jun-04 23:29 |
|
|
|
Ian - nicely summarised. Our objective is indeed measured evolution and not revolution; partly to ensure we don't have a cheque book arms race and partly to keep the ISO clearly identifiable as a one design boat - although not as strictly so as originally launched 11 years ago.
There is no intent for anyone to *have* to change anything to stay competitive and / or have a good time. Rules changes over the last 2 years have been driven mostly by item availability and permitting 2nd source use where it has been prudent to do so. They remain directly compatible with the original strict one design.
We are remaining cautious about a carbon boom for just the reasons that Mike Lyons has described. The wrong choice and we have booms breaking causing the danger we are seeking to avoid and pushing up insurance premiums. I for one don't wish to see either.
All changes proposed this year were the subject of a questionaire at the Dinghy Show. Based on that enquiry - and subsequent Message Board dialogue - the Committee drafted the Rules 2004 and put them to the members vote. The results - a majority, not a unanimous vote - were e-mailed to members and posted on the Board for all to see. Dig back a few weeks, they are still there.
Neither new wings nor a new sail plan were included as a) there was a clear view expressed that they were not wanted at this time b)they are both contrary to the evolutionary approach we've adopted c) they are expensive changes requiring a cheque book, also contrary to our approach. They remain items for future consideration.
Take a look at the recent Y&Y Roll Tacks column - the view there is that we are being more adventurous than necessary. But nevertheless supportive of the changes implemented.
Eye-bolts - a definite change to the plate needed. Same applies to the shroud bolts. If you have the old style 4mm chrome rings get rid of them and put in the stainless bolts from the Buzz - not forgetting a bit of Duralac to prevent electrolysis between the stainless and alloy space frame. Simple mod, cheap, will save you and the insurance company a mast - and all of us increased premiums !
In closing - Chris - I don't know where this term "hated" comes from. It isn't in the ISO vocabulary. Everyone is welcome at the ISO / BOSS / Buzz / Spice events - which have been known to include the Blazes on occasion and perhaps will do so again ?
See you all at Sheppey and Garda ??
|
| |
|
Stuart ISO 1008 |
Posted: 17-Jul-04 18:34 |
|
|
|
I know here the 'hated' bit comes from.
Im the poor sod who gets forced to sail with him in the Boss when its blowing gales. He never wants to go out when its sunny!! I get my own back though when the Boss is in bits as we get to sail the PINK ISO!!
Boss is broken again from last weekend so we will be out in PINKY again on Sunday!!
Sorry we have not been on the circuit this year but family is unwell at the moment. Hope to see you soon.
Stuart ISO 1008 |
| |
|
Colin Snook |
Posted: 05-Aug-04 22:24 |
|
|
|
Have decided to get back to sailing, just registered.
Just to say I am delighted to see the rules have been relaxed a bit - I will definately be getting a new rudder stock as I really hate that horrid useless lump of grey metal. Any suggestions on what to fit/where to get/price?
Anyway SpellerMike may be vaguely interested to know that 528 (which I bought after him via JC) was at Grafham until 98 then Weston then Langstone until I exchanged it for 1190 a couple of years ago. Was still going ok... but I hadn't realised how slowly until I got 1190.. probably mostly down to old sails.
Colin |
| |
|
Pete Lindley |
Posted: 06-Aug-04 12:17 |
|
|
|
Good to hear you're coming back to the action Colin, look forward to seeing you on the race track.
As far as rudders & booms are concerned, our technical department are dealing with the development etc. Nothing is confirmed as yet.
Pete |
| |
|
Ian Paterson |
Posted: 09-Sep-04 20:29 |
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me the dimensions of the carbon boom talked about above? We are wondering if it might also fit a Spice - for display purposes only @ Dinghy show 2005 - but who knows after that?
Ian Paterson Spice 346 |
| |
|
Bob Ladell |
Posted: 09-Sep-04 21:17 |
|
|
|
Apart from same size as the current alloy one, certainly in terms of length, no.
But I know a man who can - our Technical Officer - Mike P ????
I'm sure we can find something for the Dinghy Show though. |
| |
