Leaderboard

John, I quote: "This was put forward simply for the benefit of those who struggle with sail changes on the new round tube masts and feel disadvantaged by the process. The proposal is for ONE additional mast, as identical to that first measured as possible, within tight manufacturers and building tolerances. Outside of these tolerances, alternative combinations of tube size, length or weight are not acceptable." Line 1/. I have already suggested practical, easy to implement remedies to reduce any difficulties that individuals might have with changing a sail. Nobody is at a disadvantage when changing sail. there is no race on shore, no time limit to change. Skippers have been changing sail on the mast for a very long time, including when round masts (they are not 'new') were the only type available. We are closely aligned to the full size Six Metres. They have a crew of four besides the helmsman to do sail changes, so model yachts with two people, on land, making the sail change sounds right to me. So what has changed in 2025? Absolutely nothing. To be frank, prospective owners (should) know the rules before they purchase a boat. There are SEVEN other MYA classes to choose from if sail changing on the mast is really such a big deal. Line 2/. How are owners going to achieve these objectives? What tight manufacturers/building tolerances - simply the one percent, but anything else is fine? Well the reality is that the 2nd mast may well be rather less than 'as identical as possible'. How are you going to check and determine how owners have constructed their mast so as not to gain a performance advantage, or is that a disadvantage that you and one mast skippers just have to bear? I don't see why they should. Line 3/. "alternative combinations of tube size......are not acceptable". This is not in the proposal but you are now including it in your requirements. Well it's just pie in the sky anyway because anyone with a groovy mast is going to have a very hard time replicating anything approaching a groovy mast in round tube form, because nobody makes 12.7mm round tube in the UK, let alone any with the same, unique bend characteristics as groovy. Therefore they can only construct a second mast that is of a different diameter with significantly different in characteristics from their primary mast, and that mast will be of limited use as a spare because of likely sail mounting differences. Any first owners with round tube could comply if exactly the same materials are available and constructed identically. But owners could simply say that they are (perhaps legitimately) unable to source the same material as that used in the primary mast and construct one of their own design and specification while remaining within the 1% tolerances. Owners of second hand boats won't have a clue what they are looking at and what tube to use for their second mast to create a 2nd mast that is as identical as possible to the primary. Can anyone simply look at a primary round tube and know where it was sourced from, what modulus it has and then find that specification to buy in the marketplace? No. Will any owner,measurer or Race Officer/Protest committee be able to judge how the finished mast/boom compares to the primary mast and whether it is fair to other competitors, in the event of a dispute or protest? No. And we haven't even touched on another variable that the owner can introduce, namely differences to the position of shroud mounting points on the mast and the deck plus the spreader design, to influence mast characteristics and performance. Are we going to have rules for that too, so that single mast owners are not disadvantaged? There are none in the proposal. In conclusion, these 2nd masts are not going to be anything like identical in many cases. This rule change will benefit those with deeper pockets, or the builder who knows what they are doing making a rig, or the technically savvy owner who can design a superior mast for a given condition. And as a final thought, note that this 2nd mast does not have to be used as the vehicle for a sail change down due to higher wind speeds. There is nothing to stop it being used purely tactically, in what would be regarded as normal conditions. In fact, how do you know that, privately, an owner won't have more than one '2nd mast' available, each measured, with different characteristics to suit different wind and water conditions. How would that be policed? Just a thought. Welcome to the Rabbit Hole. Pay as you enter. It's dark. Dig at your own risk.