Chris,
Thank you for the NZL rules sent yesterday. I recall these the same as when we visited a fews years back.
I remember clearly you pointing out at the pond the width, weight of the hull and the smaller rig were needed for the sailing conditions there. Indeed, it was blowing that day and I retreated to a sheltered cove at the north end while someone demasted at the south end. It was an interesting observation from my expertise at the time.
My good guess is that the US boat would sail well there restricted to our B rig. However, the NZL boat is likely to be at slight disadvantage in the US even with a larger rig like our A. This would be from the total weight in our generally lighter air. Nonetheless, we are close and not so far that a very good helsman could not overcome.
Following the time I visited in your home and then at the home of Brian Hogg with his family and your sailing group, I spent two days in Nelson. I was of the feeling that I could sail our A rig there easily. It may have been the time but also felt the same when in Christchurch. Has the larger rig been tried, Chris?
Yes, we do have grandfathering as you have stated. This consideration was given when the Hull Standard was established in the late 90's and was restricted in timing by the rules as the class moved toward a one-designed hull. This huge effort toward manufacturing standardization was to illiminate differences that began to proliferate around the country with no controls on manufacturing but the perception of the rules. The use of daughter plug hulls off the master Puritan plug by manufacturers to produce their own molds was positive step forward. The recent program that is coming to fruition is for the class to produce the molds from one master/daughter to be used by all authorized preventing the sometimes understandable interventions by builders. The effort has not changed the standard of the hull but standardised the base manufacturing properties of the hull. We think the program is about as close to a true one-design hull we can achieve here in the US at the present. Our goal has been to level the playground as much as possible so that we, as individuals, will make the difference on the water. To us here that is fun.
By the way, the refinement of the Hull Standard was an indepth effort of many to bring the EC12 begining design to a nexus from engineering and architectural design. Much of this is seen in the two EC12 manuals written during the time.
I like what Brian has written; the way he has framed it and the constructive points. I particularly like item 7, which shares my views that have been stated here several times. There needs to be an understood <u>need</u> to proceed otherwise, it would seem a useless effort and just a chat. I have also taken a position that a general open forum is not the place to produce an intelligent proposal. There would be too much volume leading to a chaotic affair of disorganization. However, a proposal produced by another means should certainly be presented to all for comment and discussion. I would urge and argue these points for I feel this is correct.
...94