Should Power Assited Systems be Allowed?

Cbtf

Bob, it may interest you to know that Wild Oats, unfortunately, hit two sunfish during the race with it's forward foil(in one case it was doing at least 15 knots). The sunfish didn't do too well but nothing happened to the boat. My "Sunfish Gun"posts were meant to be humorous(and have since disappeared) but I've been an advocate for a long time of the need to solve some of the problems you mention. On some CBTF boats a spare forward foil can be carried but that isn't good enough. On boats that are REALLY fast like big tri's ,big cats and ,more and more, big hydrofoils, it will become mandatory to solve these problems. Some kind of forward looking sonar or sonar/radar or better will have to be developed to allow fast sailboats to use the oceans safely(for themselves and the creatures in the ocean). The technology is being developed ,in fact, it may already exist but it has to be available at reasonable enough cost for applications on super fast boats. When a boat going 30 to 50 knots has the ability to see far enough ahead to either turn or slow down then I would feel much more comfortable.
I think if you look objectively at IRC and the results of the Sydney-Hobart combined with the results of other canters like the Schock 40 under IRC in the UK and under PHRF in the US you might come to the conclusion that rating fairness is here now or almost here, at least.

 

Calling Formula One car racing a motor sport doesnt deny the athleticism of the drivers. It simply recognises the fact that they wouldn't get round a circuit as fast without the engine. Sailboats wouldn't go as fast without sails. Wild Oats etc. wouldn't go as fast without their diesel driven canting keels. Just as cycling is a different sport from running, I feel that using power assisted systems to operate a boat is a different sport from simply sailing. I dont understand why the S-H organisers would find it acceptable to use an engine to increase the righting moment of a boat, when they dont accept the practise of using an additional hull to do so.

 

Lorsail: Skippy, the essence of rudeness is to call Wild Oats or any boat like it a "motorsailer" or "power assisted" while slying trying to say that the power to move the keel is the same as power used to turn a prop.

Doug, I did not call canters "motorsailors", and I would agree with you that that term is innacurate. Calling canters "power assisted" on the other hand is just the simple truth, and to deny that is blindness. I also have never said that powering the keel is the same as powering the prop, so again, I would appreciate it if you could be polite enough to read other people's posts carefully rather than accusing one person of saying something that either someone else said or nobody said at all.

Lorsail: The essence of rudeness is your attempt to impugn my character and anyone elses character that supports the use of power to move heavy keels on boats where ,sofar, it is impractical to do it any other way.To deny or, again, impugn the"athleticism" of the great sailors enduring hell on the VOR boats is nuts. It shows a complete lack of apprecation of what it takes to make these great sailboats go fast.

Again Doug, you confuse yourself, who I consider very rude and inconsiderate, with other individuals who I may or may not know. There is nothing rude about describing my opinion of your character, which I believe you have demonstrated amply on this thread, other threads on this website, and even on SA. And regardless of how much you suck up to the crew of those boats, pushing a button on a motor requires very little athleticism whatsoever. I don't think any of those guys would deny that. The rest of the job may be physically demanding, and maintaining the motor and other canting equipment may be a mechanical challenge, but I have never denied any of that. All I or most people on this thread have said is that operating the motor itself is not athletic in nature, and goes beyond what most sailors consider their idea of sailing. Again, you're confusing one thing (operating the motor) with other things (trimming sail, maintaining equipment, etc.) in order to hijack the good reputation those other activities have to promote your own personal preference of using motors to operate the keel.

Lorsail: Your comments are almost as silly as Randy saying Wild Oats is not fast or equating canting keel boats with big power boats but his comments were in a humorous vein or at least tongue in cheek to some extent-yours weren't and were absolutely offensive ,ill informed and rubbish.

I disagree Doug, and again you have simply rephrased your self-serving propaganda without providing any explanation to support it. My statements are serious because I really believe them, and I have always explained why. You on the other hand still have not explained what I or anyone else here is not "informed" about that you have somehow acquired knowledge of. I think other posters on this website have been much too kind to you, given that you have repeatedly ignored or misinterpreted their posts, criticized them for saying perfectly reasonable things, and attempted to dictate to the rest of the sailing community what the definition of sailing is.

 

Alan M.: I dont understand why the S-H organisers would find it acceptable to use an engine to increase the righting moment of a boat, when they dont accept the practise of using an additional hull to do so.

Very well put. I think that says it in a nutshell.

 

"I think if you look objectively at IRC and the results of the Sydney-Hobart combined with the results of other canters like the Schock 40 under IRC in the UK and under PHRF in the US you might come to the conclusion that rating fairness is here now or almost here, at least"

What about the issue at Hamilton Island? The fixed keel owners were saying they wanted a separate class for the canters or they would not race.
And Doug, what are your thoughts about the Schock 40? They dont seem any faster than a normal 40 footer, indeed they may be slower than some. IRC doesnt rate "extreme" small boats well...i believe it is Full Pelt, a 36' design that has a rating equivelant to a supermaxi?

 

First to finish

I'm afraid that the answer may have to do with the reason why Oats and Romeo were built-to be first to finish. I think multies should be allowed to race in the SH and think it's unfortunate that they aren't.
Again, I think that canting keel boats can be fairly rated and that they are most definitely sailboats. I'm less certain about powered winches but perhaps the rigs are too big-I don't know enough about that. But all powered canting keels do is move ballast in much the same way it is moved on trapeze boats or on mini 6.5's except that these boats, at least until Randy's ideas are proven, are too big to move the ballast any other way. The powered keel generates zero motive force and simply allows big boats to do what small boats have been doing for years:SAIL like a bat out of hell! I think it's great!

 

It's a conspiracy!

Some folk will do anything, even use engines to sail faster, rather than give up on mono-hulled boats.

To me it seems a strange position to take.

Either you want to SAIL fast, or you want to SAIL a Mono-hull.

We're being asked to ignore the fact that the definition of SAILING means no power from an engine to increase performance.

So far I haven't seen any system that can make a mono-hull into a fast sailboat, with the possible exception of windsurfers and skiffs over short courses.

Arguing that using an engine is not motor-sailing because it doesn't turn a prop is like arguing that a woman is not a ***** because she doesn't charge for sex.

 

Schock 40

2, I haven't heard anything about the Schock 40 being slow; I have heard complaints that maybe IRC hits the boat too hard in the UK or PHRF hits too hard here. But the guy in the UK says that his speed is comparable to much larger boats and though the rating may not be good he is back in the club first most of the time. I've heard many similar stories about the speed of the boat here as well.

 

This goes back to my point about using this years S-H as an acurate measure of the handicapping. This time around, the first boats to hit Storm Bay and the Derwent River enjoyed almost perfect sailing conditions. They could have just as easily - as so many have before them - spent several hours drifting with the tide when the wind died. Then they wouldn't have even rated a mention in the h/cap results.
Look - I see no problem with having a separate class for the canters, but at the end of the day, there will always be a focus on only two results - line honours and handicap. If they're in the race, then they have to figure in both these results

Sharpi, usa2, skippy, alanm, rhough, roly - as I queried some pages back - where were you guys when water-ballast was introduced and allowed into the S-H - why were there no cries of outrage then?

 

"where were you guys when water-ballast was introduced and allowed into the S-H - why were there no cries of outrage then?"

A) i wasnt a member of this forum, nor did i read it then.
B) Nokia had an asterisk next to her record as "Water ballasted", and after that race water ballast was banned.
C)Having water ballast does not require the engine to run all the time, and also if the VO 60's so chose they could have the entire system run by gravity and water pressure.

 

If I had known about this forum and that power was used to shift ballast I'd have been screaming then too.

I was so ignorant that I just assumed that the manual power rule was not broken. I've failed to finish under the time limit more than once rather than use an engine during a sailboat race. I thought all sailors would rather not finish than use power to help. I was naive. It never even crossed my mind that any self respecting sailor would use power in any way to shift ballast or trim sails.

 

The Farmer and the Cowhand should be friends.

Bringing everyone together

This seems to be a very divisive topic - the knives are out!!!

My feeling is that it would be simple to add an extra division to the Hobart and other races.

Simply have a new division and trophy for the lowest fuel consumption in the race

BOATMIK
my web page

 

More like a resigned bleat on my part.
I'm less certain about powered winches but perhaps the rigs are too big-I don't know enough about that.
How can you be less certain on trimming----where is the distinction?
If you let the motor help you with two physical limits where do you stop?
Fundamentally, you hit humanly physical limits, then you use motor power assist and create a new class.
We are just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one as logic sure doesn't prevail.

 

Mono-hull

"Either you want to sail fast, or you want to sail a Mono-hull."
"So far I haven't seen any system that can make a mono-hull into a fast sailboat,with the possible exception of windsurfers and skiffs over short courses"
-------
Well, windsurfers hold the official world speed record so I guess it is possible. And for a sit-on boat almost nothing under 21'-mono's or cats- can beat an 11'(12.75') Moth. It's already been published that when they're sailing in good conditions for both types the Moth is faster than an A class cat,I14, 49er, and just recently a Tornado flying an asy spin was beaten by a mediocre(his comment) foiler Moth off wind.
Address:http://www.rohanveal.com/photos/2005_sirs/03DU9562B.jpg
This is real important stuff, in my opinion, because in small boats the Moth foiler has turned the whole multihull/monohull thing upside down. And I believe the use of hydrofoils on canting keel monohulls including the use of a "trim tab" for additional righting moment will have a similar effect on big race boats. But even now there are reports of Volvo raceboats exceeding 35 knots and some have commented that 40 knots is not unrealistic. Those speeds are in the vicinity of the highest I've ever heard of for Orma 60 multihulls.When the big mono's start using foils you may see some really surprising results.
But even now some of these big canters are just plain fast in any book-and the potential for going faster is huge.
--------------
Roly, if the rigs are so large that sheeting them w/o power is impractical and /or dangerous then I 100% support powered winches. I guess my philosophy comes down to equal rights for big boats:little boats have shown the power of movable ballast for years and have led the way in squaretop rig development ect. If it is necessary to have powered keels to achieve maximum righting moment on big boats I support it; same with powered winches: if the rig loads on a 120+' modern main are too large for practical or safe sheeting then powered winches are a good answer.

 

B) Funny - a whole stack of the boats in at least the last two years have run water ballast....

C) So, what now you're saying that it's ok to be 'power-assisted' some of the time but not all the time....:?: