New low-cost "hardware store" racing class; input on proposed rules

The only reason Bolger got called in was an example of the difference between a PD racer and a real boat.

When will we see the rules?

 

RE: final rules --Thats a good question--when will we see the final rules?--I hope petros sees this post as I would like to offer 1 more suguestion before finalization.I would prefer to carry my ballast in the lowest part of my boat on each side of the daggerboard trunk--I cant do that if I have to put it in an ice chest ( unless I cut a slot in the bottom of the chest and fit it over the trunk)--how about just putting thre required weight in sandbags?--that way you can put where ever it does the least harm/most good?-

 

I see this thread has become active in my absence (I have been traveling in June). We have not quite finalized the rules yet, and all constructive comments are still welcome.

We hope to finalize them in the next month or so.

I want to address some of the recent comments with general statements: There is no requirement that the same person design, build and race the boat, it can be the same person, or it can be a group of people with different talents. And if someone has deep pockets, they can hire someone to design a boat, and have it professionally built, and hire someone to sail it as well. The only requirements are that the materials costs stay within limits, and they make arrangements with the designer to have the plans available for resale after the first season. Also, an existing design can be used if it fits within the rules and cost limits (or an adaptation of an existing design). Of course this would leave the builder to experiment with improvements to the design as well.

As far as the cargo box, the intent of the rule is to keep the boats practical. the cargo box can be located anywhere in the boat, there just has to be room for it. If you want to place ballast in the boat low next to the keel, that will have to be done separately from the load in the cargo box. My personal choice for the location would be low in the hull right behind the mast, perhaps in front of the dagger board location, but there is no rule restriction on where it goes, just that it has to be included.

The rules we are still in working over are the following, comments and ideas welcome:

some way to index the build cost from one year to another: I was thinking that to make up a "sample" list of typical building materials that equals the $600 limit, and than just doing a comparison of those costs from year to year. This could also work to normalize expenses from different parts of the country if the contest should go national. A simpler approach would be to just index the cost to the national inflation rate.

Another thing is if we should just combine multi-hull and mono-hulls in one class, or only start with a monohull class and add the other when enough builders commit to having a multi hull class.

 

Re:cargo box--I understand the intent of the cargo box is to to keep the boats practical,and also to act as a storage device for the weight necessary to equalize all boats within the 500 lb payload.But a heavier skipper would not need the same size box to hold the extra ballast as a lightweight skipper.With this in mind,and knowing that all practical daysailers dont use the same size cooler to carry their picnic lunch/beer or whatever,would it be permissible to use 2 smaller cargo boxes to carry the same amount of weight? Ive been working on some preliminary designs,but without knowing the dimensions of the required cargo box,I dont know if the place I want to carry it is large enough or not.Having the option to break it up into 2 smaller boxes would let me proceed with my design.Otherwise,I'll have to wait til that aspect is finalized.One other note:the use of professional builders may result in a high performance economical design that is THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE to be home built,but not practical.Whats the point of only spending 600.00 on materials if you have to spend 3000.00 to get a competitive hull built?

 

I do not see having two small cargo boxes as something within the intent of the rule. Coolers come in a lot of different sizes, so I guess we will have to pick one for the sake of the rules, just one. And I do not see it being a very large one, but a typical medium size that is likely to be in a small boat.

Some crews may have an advantage because of their weight difference, but it works both ways. the different types of events hopefully will negate any advantage. Consider a heavy crew will not be at an advantage on the events where the cargo box rule is not invoked.

The rules specify that the construction method has to be suitable for home construction, not using expensive tooling, etc. I do not anticipate any advantage to hiring someone to build the boat, I have seen many hobby wood workers do better work than professionals. I also do not see very many people hiring professional builders-so I doubt it will be an issue. If this type of racing becomes popular and if too many of the competitive designs are costly builds, we might consider limiting that with a 51 percent amateur built rule similar to what homebuilt aircraft must meet. though I would not anticipate it being an issue, I will bring it up at our next committee meeting.

 

Ask Igloo and Coleman for the most popular 2 6pack +/- cooler they sell and use that as a standard. Make the cooler "one-design" and get the cooler company to sponsor the class.

Your welcome

Ideas are free

(and worth every penny)

R

 

re:coolers--Ok,Ill be waiting to see the size cooler I'll have to build around.I cant see,however,how a heavier skipper would not be at a considerable disadvantage UNLESS the compensating weight is carried in EVERY event.(unless,of course,the wind is really howling-then he might have a slight advantage)I would prefer not to carry ANY additional weight as I usually sail single handed,but I understand that a design that can carry 2 people would probably have more widespread appeal than a single-hander.I find I am designing more rocker into the hull than I am used to in order to support the 500 lb payload.In a 14 ft loa I would normally design to carry 1/2 that weight.--Let me know as soon as cooler size is finalized.

 

just checking:---has there been any further thought given to which cooler might be used?-I found the dimensions on the internet for the 2 most common 36 qt coolers:--coleman--22.68 l,13.75 w,and 18.75 h--for igloo, the respective dimensions are 24.25 l,13.56 w,and13.00 height.(all dimensions in inches).The igloo would seem to have the lower center of gravity,while the coleman might be more comfortable if it is to double as a seat.

 

Great, thanks for the info. I also noticed that they handles and hinges are slightly outside the "box" of the cooler, do we need to make accomodations for that? Should we call out a brand and model? Or just call gross dimensions like 24"x14"x20" box?

We have taken up the discussion recently with developing the first set of rules. What I am undecided is on what to do with multi-hull vs. mono only, and since I want to keep them simple boats to allow lifting foils, spinnakers or traps. My temptation is to keep them simple mono-hulls, but OTOH, I do not want to stifle new ideas either, so the rules should reflect the goal, not the means.

 

Hey, petros:If we use gross dimensions for the box that might allow more freedom to build your own box---large enough to put a coleman or igloo in,but wouldnt necesitate buying a cooler if you dont already have one.--I see nothing wrong with a separate multi class as long as monos and multis race separately.Cant see putting the family wagon up against a rail dragster

 

Here my thoughts on the HardwareStore boat *challenge*... and I'm liking my ideas enough to (almost) want to build the boat...

Rule 1. No mast stays or shrouds
Rule 2. Mast(s) must be stepped within 1 foot of Bow or Transom
Rule 3. Build materials - the boat must be built from 1 standard ply-skinned door and 2 8*4 sheets of 3mm plywood and 3 sticks of 1 1/2 by 3/4 clear timber 8 foot long
Rule 4. The boat will have a box-keel that the skipper sits in
Rule 5. Ballast will be carried on board to bring loading up to 150 kg INCLUDING the weight of the skipper - the ballast will be in the form of cast-iron barbell weights, properly secured - swedish rounding will allow a tolerance of +2 to -3 Kg of the target weight
Rule 6. The box keel will conform to an NACA profile
Rule 7. All Joints must be properly glassed
Rule 8. all exposed timber must be epoxied and/ or painted
Rule 9. No composite or alloy materials to be used in the mast or hull, excepting rule 7
Rule 10. All sails are to be made from Tyvek or equivalent, and sail battens can only be made from high tensile nylon crate packing tape
Rule 11. All sundry components are to be purchased from retail outlets, no materials are allowed from Chandlery supplies
Rule 12. All fixed joints on the boat are to be 90 degrees


And thats it. No limits on numbers of masts - or rigging format - so Cat, Ketch, Gaff are allowed - mast height without stays and shrouds will limit ultimate mast length, but no area limits on sails - clipper is a possibility, as is a big no.1 chute for the clinically inclined.

Straight plastic is allowed, and I envisage alot of PVC used - curtain track for sail track, pipe fittings for rudder bushings etc etc.

How the materials are used will be challenging - as it will ostensibly be a U section boat - single or multi - but those material limits will impinge nastily on multi's.. Yes, you could build a naca canoe with sails... but right now I have a *flat cat* pencilled out that would work in the rules... and thats what these suggestions are about - providing a material boundary to provide low cost sailing that is easily built in a garage, without lots of technical difficulties, with lots of scope for variety.

Contests will be scored on appearance, ease of use and a slalom course - windward-leeward... so straight liners would live their lives in penalty...

Just my thoughts

Owen

 

I personally hope the the senselessly simplistic and confining "rules" above are not adopted for the sake of those who have some actual originality and cleverness.

"all fixed joints are to be 90 degrees" is a concept for builders of dog houses and rabbit cages, not boat builders.

What a step back.

Ballast? on a 14' boat - archaic and a waste of time.

Lets specify a 2" wall thickness for safety.

 

to upchurchmr:I agree wholeheartedly,--I'm not crazy about petros' requirement for a 500 lb payload capacity either-I could design a much better boat without it-but Im willing to accept it if everyone else has to deal with the same burden.Sounds like Owen 423 wants wants everyone to sail some version of a pd racer or a brick-HO-HUM!

 

those rules are way too restrictive and have no rational basis. When we finalize the rules my hope is they allow maximum flexibility with the rules only setting the goal of a simple low cost, but good all around performing sailboat.

I see no point in rules for the sake of rules, they only limit innovation. The rules need to support the goal of a good all around performing practical low cost sail boat.

 

Inspiration for this definition came from PD racers, until I started looking at Sharpies, slab-dories, cat boats and more. They were crystalised in part by the realisation that a wingsailer could be made to fit the definition, and a free boat plan called "Missile"

http://www.svensons.com/boats/?p=SailBoats/Missile

with minor adaptation - re-jigging the keel and either a kerfed or W transom, it could be made to fit the rules.

90 degree joints - you could build a coracle within that definition, or a peapod - a catboat, or more, dang it even approximate a 29'er or a foiling moth! Stem riser of 90 degrees - a PD racer has 2, but there is nothing in the rules to say that you need to have 2 or 52, is there.? You could have only a transom joint... like an old stylee sailboard

The key is a kerf (which isnt a joint) its a woodworking technique to enable tight curves in solid timber...

So do the rules it suggest that the panels being joined need to be flat.?

Maybe that is why there is plenty of scope for originality - there's an infinite number of ways to spin a right-angle.

Also note the NACA box keel... its clearly specified, and this is only the exception to the 90degree joint rule (trailing edge) - no restriction on its size, only its base must of course be 90 degrees, and the joint to hull, 90 degrees... I can forsee the protests flying on *what's the definition of a hull* in reality.

To address the ballast point - 2 youths of 75kg in a small boat, or a large skipper and a chunk of something, is very akin to the actual handicap system adopted by horse-racing - the idea being, it opens up the class to allcomers.

But then, if you can only imagine a brick on these rules...

Owen