Shop our Airplanes Products Drone Products Sales
Thread Tools
Mar 02, 2017, 09:42 AM
Registered User
My analysis of the proposed IRSA method of sail area measurement can be downloaded from here:

http://bit.ly/2mist7f

It's kind of long and nerdy, so I'll give you the bottom line: the assertion that the present ICA method has to be replaced in its entirety is not supported by either geometry or physics.

Cheers,

Earl
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 02, 2017, 10:26 AM
Registered User
Dave,

I have built my own RG's starting with a foam block, lofted my own sails, cast my own bulbs, and made a few rudders and keels... bought a few hulls from breaking wind as well... for those that are initiated, it is easy. but thats not norm.

Its not that I'm a fan of the DF, I'm really not keen on the boats, but I see them for what they are. a good solid entry level one design boat, and fill a gap. but that's another thread...
Mar 02, 2017, 10:34 AM
DF65/No Excuses, Just Sailing!
Windward RC's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidwood View Post
The great thing about the RG65 class is they pretty inexpensive to build. Tons of free plans on the internet and designers willing to support the novice builder. Racing the df is what got me interesting in building. While I certainly do not think my efforts are on par with any of the great builder's out there, I can say there is nothing like the satisfaction of seeing a boat you built from scratch out on the water.

As far as your comment on expenses, I can get a new hull or on the water for around $100 bucks lol.. If you are not willing to do the work yourself, then yes, it's going to cost a bit more than $400 for a modern design to get it up and racing. The labor is still pennies on the dollar for the amount of work involved lol. I am sure that if you ask any of the top folks designing or building, they are not getting rich off of your dollar. It's more of a love for the sport.

Go ahead and add up the basic costs of your DF with (now) A+, A, B & C rigs and sails (which, you would have made a huge mistake not making and bringing to a ragatta if you travel) the costs are not to far off lol. I am happy you like your df as I love mine, just don't bag on the class that got it started.

Cheers
David,

I dont think Marc is bagging on the DF65 class. He pretty much hit the nail on the head. The thing about White Rock is kind of true, many of us ( myself included) still sail Open RG65s and have monthly club RG65 racing along with the DF65 class, even last year we hosted the RG65 Region 5 Championship. But the fact is that the DF65 is our entry level boat, and that is certainly my "fault" for obvious reasons Let's PLEASE not get dragged off down the DF65
path on this thread... it has no relevance in my opinion

Your point about a home built RG65 being an inexpensive boat to build is true from a hull standpoint, look no further than Eric's Blue Splash kit, or building any hull you want from line drawings plank on frame... it's one of the things I love about the class. but beyond that this is where the cost goes WAY up.

Many people are ready willing and able to pay for a extremely well built hull out of anything from fiberglass to carbon fiber, and will pay top dollar to do it.
Any time you pay someone else to build your hull and/or rigs ( both highly technical skill sets) you are then talking about a massive jump in price... in any class! The nice thing about the 65 cm hull is that its less expensive.

For my part, I love the RG65 class, and look forward to defending my first US national championship later this year in San Diego with my Little Best...

The jury for me is still out on the IRSA proposal.

I just read RG65 USA's Class Secretary Earl Boebert's technical article on the RG65 USA COA site:
http://www.rg65usa.org/technical-articles---tools.html and he certainly takes IRSA proposed method to task! I also agree with Mr. Gibson about the fact that I don't like IRSA strong arming an existing class structure, but I do think that maybe some reasonable changes could be made to the existing RG65 ICA rules to regulate some of the current allowances like multiple keels, unlimited rigs, etc. ( I own 5 swing rigs for my Little Best FYI not an inexpensive proposition)

In the USA, do we really want another repeat of the Marblehead debacle?

Why can't the gang behind the IRSA proposal be a little more diplomatic here? I think it will go a lot further than seemingly bullying their way through an existing class structure to do whatever the hell they want
Mar 02, 2017, 02:18 PM
Registered User
You have to understand who you are dealing with. The people running IRSA believe they are the proper stewards of r/c sailing and we are their flock who need to be cared for and directed. They believe they know better and that what they are doing is both good and right. They are always ready to fill a void and take over handling anything we are willing to give up. On the other hand, they are also willing to constantly push back to get their way. They will work hard at putting like minded people on their committees and pushing dissenters out. They will hold meetings so often that you will be hard pressed to attend. They will quote rules and principles to justify themselves. They will organize national authorities to support them. Unless you are prepared to regularly and meaningfully stand up for what you want to achieve they will win....
Mar 02, 2017, 02:40 PM
Registered User
Dick L.'s Avatar
Where is AMYA when push back is needed, requested, or asking for vote input if/when
needed by the membership?
Mar 02, 2017, 03:07 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick L. View Post
Where is AMYA when push back is needed, requested, or asking for vote input if/when
needed by the membership?
Actually, they've been there when asked.

IRSA's tactic is to flood you with requests/demands containing unrealistic deadlines and then do what they want on the pretext that nobody responded.

Cheers,

Earl
Mar 02, 2017, 04:39 PM
Registered User
So. admittedly I've got blinders on as I only have access to Data from the AMYA magazine spanning information published in spring 2016 and fall 2016
Spring 2016 database population by Boat / population by member
RG65 239 / 213
IOM 190/ 137
10 rater 22 / 21
marblehead 239 / 149

Fall 2016
RG65 278 / 247
IOM 176 /129
10rater 20/20
Marblehead 228 / 146

so in a 6 month period in the usa . the RG class picked up 34 new members and 37 new boats and every class the IRSA manages lost member ship...

wht is the data like in other countries?
Mar 02, 2017, 04:46 PM
Registered User
Earl-- You are 1000 percent correct. To push back you need to be equally committed. You need to get to the USA reps on their committees. You need to lobby other national authorities. You need to rally class members and ask them to raise their voices. You need to understand IRSA rules and use them. You need to shine a constant light on what IRSA is trying to do behind closed doors. Ultimately you might have to organize to vote them out of office and/or take your case to World Sailing. It can and has been done. A joint effort between the US, Australia, the U.K. and others got Misters Gilbert et. al. out of IOMICA and so unpopular they couldn't get elected for anything, It can and should be done again!
Mar 02, 2017, 05:07 PM
Registered User
hiljoball's Avatar
Or the COA could get a lawyer to send a letter to the IRSA that the class name RG65 and the class logo and the existing class rules are copyright and to cease using them.

Under copyright, the IRSA can create their own 65cm class, but may not use the intellectual property of the existing RG65 class without their permission.

John
Mar 02, 2017, 05:28 PM
DF65/No Excuses, Just Sailing!
Windward RC's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiljoball View Post
Or the COA could get a lawyer to send a letter to the IRSA that the class name RG65 and the class logo and the existing class rules are copyright and to cease using them.

Under copyright, the IRSA can create their own 65cm class, but may not use the intellectual property of the existing RG65 class without their permission.

John

Maybe they could trade the Term "Worlds" in exchange
Mar 02, 2017, 05:32 PM
Registered User
John---It's an interesting suggestion but to make it work you have to be prepared to follow up. The IRSA leadership, although not lawyers, will likely respond with a legalistic argument that justifies their activities. They will keep responding that way to anything you send in hopes that you will give up. (At least that was their prior MO when confronted with a similar claim.) If in response to their push back, a formal legal complaint is prepared and World Sailing notified of impending litigation there is a chance IRSA will back down. Unfortunately, equally likely is that they will make you bring them to court and that can be expensive.
Last edited by Tom Corbett; Mar 02, 2017 at 06:13 PM.
Mar 02, 2017, 05:33 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
Wow!

Have just checked in to see what is happening as I have been getting a lot of emails from my ICA friends worldwide and it is brilliant to finally see more talk on the class rule.

Brad has hit it on the head (again), read what he has written and absorb, please!

Ok, so I am by far no fan of ISAF/World Sailing, however,( and that's always the part to read).

As I see it, and as is written in their documents, IRSA are proposing a rule update to help our class be more popular and clear!

They are pushing us ,yes. Pushing us to get our act together and make the rule clear usable and fair to home builder and boat builder alike.

Its not us and them.

We as RG sailors need to fix the RG 65 rule to make it clearer and do the best to continue growth of the class for all.

When I first designed rgs over 10 years ago it seemed clear to many that boats would be 650mm +/- 5mm overall length, my boats were 650mm , Marks 'Ice' came in at 655mm as did many other international boats I measured.

Then we measured the initial dragon force boats and the length was between 658 and 662mm.

Take in mind industrial tolerance , however also that these boats came with rg65 logos on hull and sails and were intended to race as enrty boats into the class.

A class over 40 years old, yes.

Ok, so dragons have done a lot, they have prompted a rule rewrite that helped clarify or assert that the over all length is now max 661.

So we have an Argentinian class given to the world for the g65, a 65cm boat that's now had a bow bumper added to that length and called a rg65, a 650mm boat that is 661mm!!

(seriously what a joke! maybe IRSA should start the 660 class as its more indicative)

We had a max rig height from the sheer line that is now measured from the sheer next to the mast.

The rule has a 5mm bow bumper that's hard for many home builders to make and if it is longer is it legal, I'm not sure?

With quite a few loop holes and changes why would you build a new boat that's not legal, indeed how do you tell it even is?

Overall length, but does it ever say floating on its lines?

Can the boat be tilted as in the Footy box measurement rule?

On the other hand we have been building rg65s with wingsails, they are legal currently however the IRSA proposed rule has soft sails only!

So this has us talking.

That is good, no it is Great.

We have people that do actually care and step up to look after sailing, writing a proposed rule to guide us and prompt us to action.

The challenge is as a class can we all come together and talk to evolve into something great with the help that is being offered?

We all have a chance to promote and inspire sailors in the future to come to or sport, some may stay in RGs, some may move through to IOMs, Marbeheads and big boats.

Indeed some big boat sailors may come back to rc yachting, we need something for people to come back to when the commercial designs drop off.

Remember the Victoria Class? the seawind, northwind and other awesome boats, how strong are they now internationally, compared to a class like the IOM?

Lets please not focus on different brands, more so the future of our class, what we can do and what others can do to help promote and keep it alive and stronger than ever.

A lot of work has been done by the RG65 ICA for the class, a lot of work has been done by the IRSA team for sailing, can we all direct our efforts together so that sailing wins over basketball ,cricket and nintendo as a chosen past time for many?

Once again, an opinion.

An opinion of someone who is prepared to work with you to further our class.

Through drafts of the irsa penned rg rule many of us have offered thoughts on rule clarity and what would work in a irsa class written rule and they have responded well.

Yes Earl, I agree that isaf often typically leave little time to respond, we can view it as a sinister take over , or a team wanting to get answers and affect change before the class, our class dies.

IRSA are prompting us to develop our rule to make it clear and then have the ICA administer the rule like the iom class does as a part or world sailing.

The downside?

You may need to be a member affiliated to ISAF.

Who pays for the racing rules of sailing?

If you are not a member of a club, who has liability insurance for when you go sailing?

Puddling about at the lake is fun, however for a full class a rule administered by the class along the lines of other international classes and free from the commercial influences of a single boat builder and allowing development and tinkering is what it is about for racers!

And of course, is it not fair if we are racing to help pay for the rules we use?

Some one needs to!

Don't even start me on the usage of the word 'world' titles and isafs bullying to scare people from using it, they (isaf, our employees(!) own the rules yes, the right to have world events, well we wont even go there to dicsuss that currently!

As much as we don't like it or may want the old days of sailing back, this frame work is a good thing, and should we choose to utilize the help offered it can be great for sailing first and the rg65 class worldwide!

Please read the draft rules, think about what is good, what is bad, how they would work and what we can utilize for our rule so that we can choose to(or not) improve the class with/or without IRSAs offered help.

Do it, do not procrastinate it needs to be actually done to affect change.

There will be many opinions and options, look, read ,respond and have input.

If you are happy sailing and just want to sail, don't complain you were not listened to if you don't have your say when you can!

This is a really exciting time for sailing and RGs, do not waste it, utilize it properly.

I'm going sailing now, that's what it is about after all!

Back soon!

Andrew
Mar 02, 2017, 05:55 PM
Registered User
hiljoball's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Corbett View Post
John---It's an interesting suggestion but to make it work you have to be prepared to follow up. The IRSA leadership, although not lawyers, will likely respond with a legalistic argument that justifies their activities. They will keep responding that way to anything you send in hopes that you will give up. (At least that was their prior MO when confronted with a similar claim.) If in response to their push back, a formal legal complaint is prepared and World Sailing notified of impending litigation there is a chance IRSA will back down. Unfortunately, equally likely is that they will make you bring them to court and that can be expense.
I suggest file a case in Brazil, in Portuguese.

JOhn
Mar 02, 2017, 06:06 PM
Registered User
Dick L.'s Avatar
I would venture a strong guess there are a lot more owners who could care less if their boat is recognized as an international class, even fewer who will commit to attending a World championship if it isn't in their home country.

For those wanting rule "clarification" sail an IOM or a MARBLEHEAD, or a 10R. Thinking that a rules rewrite will increase participation and foster class growth is just plain silly. If folks wanted a clear set of rules the above listed classes along with the A Class have enough (Too many ??) rules to keep the relatively small numbers of "rule wonks" busy. In the meantime, the remainder of RG65 and DRAGON FORCE owners will be content with what they have.........or they can move to one of these "rules heavy" classes.

Anyone who doesn't understand 650 cm in length needs a different hobby, or class.
Mar 03, 2017, 06:42 AM
Thomas Armstrong
Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
We as RG sailors need to fix the RG 65 rule to make it clearer and do the best to continue growth of the class for all.
Don't agree - rules do not need fixing - just to be read thoroughly and without expectations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
When I first designed rgs over 10 years ago it seemed clear to many that boats would be 650mm +/- 5mm overall length, my boats were 650mm ... now had a bow bumper added to that length and called a rg65, a 650mm boat that is 661mm!!
If you did this then it's because you did not read the rules correctly. 2010 version of rules said in 1.1 (purpose) that it was the intent to have 650+/-5mm, but the diagram (which is has the only other reference to LOA) clearly shows the bumber is outside this measurement.
Sorry for your confusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
Overall length, but does it ever say floating on its lines?
Rules say nothing, so LWL can be shorter than LOA, but not longer. I don't see any problem with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
Can the boat be tilted as in the Footy box measurement rule?
My current boat has a "tilted bow". Tilted back that is, like new catamaran bows. Not a problem here.
Regarding tilting the whole hull, I agree that some rewording may be needed. I know this has already been raised to the RG65 ICA for consideration.
But floating the boat for measuring? Or using a template that imposes underwater design restrictions? No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
A lot of work has been done by the RG65 ICA for the class, a lot of work has been done by the IRSA team for sailing, can we all direct our efforts together so that sailing wins over basketball ,cricket and nintendo as a chosen past time for many?
Exactly the point - why can't IRSA recognize the existing RG65 ICA and leave the class administration to the ICA? This way each group manages what they know better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom View Post
Please read the draft rules, think about what is good, what is bad, how they would work and what we can utilize for our rule so that we can choose to(or not) improve the class with/or without IRSAs offered help. Do it, do not procrastinate it needs to be actually done to affect change.
There will be many opinions and options, look, read ,respond and have input.
This was already done - ask Fredo or Earl. No feedback was ever considered by IRSA people. The draft rules by IRSA started circulating to NCAs more than a year before. My self I sent my personal comments back to the RG65 ICA. I voted into not accepting IRSA rules as proposed. Now some days ago IRSA published same draft with almost no changes saying that the committee already worked with sailors. That is the joke here - they are reading this and laughing at us!


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion RG65 Class: ZWERKZ RG65 3D Printed 20% Carbon hull zornzack Sailboats 19 Mar 23, 2017 10:00 PM
Discussion 65M Multihull Class - based on the RG65 size monohull Dick L. Sailboats 47 Aug 25, 2016 06:29 AM
Discussion sales promotion for 30 class,60 class and 90 class float ACCHOBBY Waterplanes 1 Apr 15, 2016 06:43 AM
Discussion RG65 class martin richards Sailboats 88 Nov 14, 2007 09:12 AM