| Author |
Topic: Rules Ballot |
 |
ISO 653 |
Posted: 04-May-04 23:20 |
|
|
|
Having just got the rules change proposals I feel compelled to raise a couple of issues.
Item 'N' refers to mainsheet strops .... is proposed as being unrestricted - except new holes may not be drilled in the hull. Well as an advocate of stern sheeting this seems to allow it. Item 'P' suggests '....the method and location of fittings for sheet or kicking strap take off points is unrestricted provided the take off points along the length of the boom match the design of the standard boom'.
In a stern sheeted system the 'take off point' for the mainsheet can be identical on the boom. Does this proposed change therefore now permit stern sheeting ?? In terms of wording it does of course. It will not make the boat faster either and therefore cannot breach any idea relating to 'intent' either. Any views ?
I will say that if you do try it you will find it a revelation - it gives the 'larger' (or less flexible!) helm a lot more room in which to get around and across the boat. I'd still like the freedom to cut the bottom 15cm off the clew but that's for another day maybe. (another suggested mod to make the boat nicer to sail if sadly no faster !)
All in all I think the proposed changes are a very healthy indication of the ISO's likely future. As a recent 'returnee' I think it has a lot of potential for improvement yet at virtually no or very little cost. It always suffered a bit from being the 'first' of it's type. A few modest liberalisations and modifications of the type proposed (plus a few more in time)and I'm convinced the class has an excellent future ! Well done all involved.
Cheers - Mike Lyons '653'
|
| |
|
Bob Ladell |
Posted: 05-May-04 23:39 |
|
|
|
No - the intent is NOT to permit stern sheeting or take off from the boom or anything else you would like to read into it.
The intention, as it says, is to derestrict the construction of the strops to all rope and with blocks if you so wish - as demonstrated very clearly at the Dinghy Show - instead of the standard fit wire and rope which can be a real fiddle to adjust. Other than that, strops and centre sheeting from the deck remain.
Same applies to the boom - it must "match" a standard ISO boom with the exception that it may be made of carbon or alloy - not alloy only as per the rules from 1993 to 2003.
There is no intention to infer anything else for either component.
Any other proposed changes are for another debate for 2005 and beyond. Newcomers and returnees may not have appreciated that we liberalised some items for the 2003 rules as part of the Committee's approach to a gentle, low / no cost evolutionary path whilst allowing some degree of freedom in an otherwise one design boat. There is no intent in the Rules re-write for either 2003 or 2004 to prevent anyone who wishes to maintain their boat in the original strict ISO one design format from doing so, although it should also be appreciated that some of the changes have been driven by components being replaced by the manufacturers. There are sufficient numbers who do wish to keep their ISO in the original format to warrant our conservative approach - and reign in those who wish to be rather more radical.
Judging by the continuing increase in event attendance it appears that our approach is pleasing the majority - which is one of the Committee's prime aims - so carrying traditional and modern views forwards together to increase the fleet.
Thank-you for your support one an all.
|
| |
|
ISO 653 |
Posted: 06-May-04 21:35 |
|
|
|
Bob
Sorry I seem to have touched a nerve there - no intention !! For the record MY boat is in perfect unchanged specification form and we even have wings that weigh what they are supposed to as well, no that we need them. Even has an nice alloy boom to boot, and is raced exactly as originally supplied. We even use the original (11 year old) sails as the ISO is a low cost alternative fun boat for both of us.
But could the appeal of the class be expanded even further by modest liberalisation ? ... changes that allowed some personalisation, that do not improve performance but simply makes the boat 'nicer'or easier to sail ..... well they just might. What is the fear or concern anyway ?
Cheers - Mike '653'
|
| |
|
Pete Lindley |
Posted: 10-May-04 21:48 |
|
|
|
Any idea when these new rules will be implemented?
|
| |
|
Bob Ladell |
Posted: 11-May-04 18:30 |
|
|
|
Funny you should ask that - just considering what a "reasonable" cut off date should be given the postal problems.
As requests for e-mailed copies have now dried up I propose that Monday 17th May is a reasonable extension so that we can publish a day or so later - well in time for the Nationals.
All in favour - do nothing
All against - *e-mail* me with your good reason(s) please |
| |
