Jump to content

Chris Harris

MYA Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Chris Harris last won the day on November 18 2019

Chris Harris had the most liked content!


2 Neutral

About Chris Harris

Personal Information

  • First Name
  • Last Name

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Gents, Apologies I haven't replied sooner, birthday etc got in the way. Firstly, a very famous designer/builder once said to me and other -- "have thy not heard of preventative maintenance lad" -- (Thanks Uncle Bill) Surely it is very easy to remove a mast stub, wash it, spray it with a Lubricant. If you sailed a Radio class, or even your vane Boat in Salt water, I would imagine this is the first thing most people do. If we want to promote the 36 Class at both vane and radio, surely it should be down to the Class Owners/Clubs/Class Captain to promote the events coming up. Think of the state of the RM Class a few years ago, then through hard work, finding out owners with boats, promoting events brought the class to been well very supported. If you look at last years nationals at both Birkenhead and Guildford, the class went to venues that had not held events for a while, the numbers remand around the same as previous years, but with different individuals competing. If you want to convert that stat, then you need to build on these foundations with clubs who have a good fleet. But also encourage others to get there boats out there garages, sheds etc to come and compete and that they will be competitive and make events special, so that others will talk about the race for all the right reasons -- i.e -- Six juniors at Birkenhead competing and beating seasoned skippers. Roger, I have sailed a Realistic owned by Mark Dicks with Aluminum tapered masts, this was built in the early 1990's. still very competitive against the new breed of 36. A boat designed in the 1970's, and has stood the test of time. Since the restriction on the length and weight was removed in I believe the early 2000, from memory, there has only been three designers completed new designs, each very different, but still successful in there own way in either format. As this is still a box rule, unclear what designers can do to expand on a hull that is 36 " long, max of 9 " wide, and 12 " deep, the only un-restriction now is the height of rig, I do believe that an owner did ask that rigs heights be restricted, but this was turned down. David, you put this proposal in, may I ask why you only want to have a Top rig in Carbon?? You asked why I feel this would possibly kill or reduce the numbers in the class, as stated above, we need to get skippers to get there boats out, do you think this will encourage either club guys or others to come and sail, as they will feel there rigs or boat or package may not be competitive. I do also have another question, if this ruling gets voted on, when will the rule change be adopted?? As this is to be voted on in February, the class has it's Radio National in March, will it be implemented for this event?? I have other questions, but need to have a discussion with other before asking more?? Chris
  2. Dave, I have read the proposal, and have come up with the following: - With this proposal, the question would be how would this effect the average club member, if some one did turn up with Carbon rigs and your club member turned up with his aluminum masts, would he be prepared to spend the money on Carbon, generally no. Does this mean that there would be a two tier class?? Those who want carbon, and those that don't!!! The 36 is a simple box rule class that has been around for along time, the boats are not the easiest to sail and some designs have been around for along time and are very successful with there current rigs, speaking to an owner this evening and asking the question would he change his masts to carbon, he said most definitely no!! The question is, would the current fleet be prepared to change to a new rule??? If you look at the vane fleet from last years nationals, there were ten competitors with boats dating from the 1970's to current designs, all competitive in there current format -- with all the skippers that were missing from the race, there is a potential for over 20 entries for this years national, but if this current proposal is accepted, I would think that well over half that number would not enter. The proposal of wing masts -- to make them more powerful -- question is why, as these yachts are so unbalanced at times, a wing mast and sail similar to what they use on the Americas cup would make a simple design potentially awful to sail -- and the cost of this would make the class expensive. I have looked at the costing, and have a few queries, how come you think that we only use 1 meter lengths of tube, I have currently two vane 36's to build, with top rig mast of 1815mm in length, if you then want to build a tapered carbon mast, using the Carbon Fibre Profile prices, just to buy the carbon would cost about £31.00 for one mast. If you want to go to another supplier and get the best carbon (which some people may choose to do), sorry would not even bother to price it up, as you looking in excess of £70.00 for a top rig. Or you can buy an Aluminum mast from a known supplier -- 2 meters in length for under £15.00. This then doesn't include the time to put together a Carbon Mast, gluing and carbon toeing. -- Having to build 12 rigs for two vane boats is going to cost in excess of £270 if this proposal is put through, or £120 if use Aluminum masts. That's then doesn't include the Radio 36 I have with another 5 rigs I would have to rebuild. You are also stating that this will be voted on by the owners, as there is no owners association for the class, wouldn't this rule change have to be approved by the MYA AGM. Question would be, would this kill the 36 class in the UK for both vane and radio?? There has been a proposal by Dave Kent to amend the class rules and the MYA Technical Team under Roger Stollery have been asked to prepare a report on the subject. The proposal is to remove the restriction on spar material in rule F.1 A copy of the Technical Teams Report is attached for your consideration. Registered owners wishing to make comment are asked to do so on the MYA Forum, and there is a section set up ' Rule change Carbon Masts' within the R36 section. We are allowing 2 weeks for discussion to say 1st February, and any useful comments will be taken on board by the Technical Team. Following this we will be conducting a vote of the Owners as to whether they wish to make this rule change. This vote will be conducted by e mail. Details of the Proposals are being put on the MYA website, and if you are aware of any owner who has not been e mailed please ask them to contact me. Peter Moore Class Captain 16th January 2017 36" class rule review - remove spar material restriction? - Technical team review The revision of this class rule in 1991 rule added the restriction on the materials for spars to aluminium or wood. In the objectives for the rule review in 2004, removing the restriction was considered, but it was rejected. At that time carbon spars were used on all the other classes apart from the IOM. It must have been considered then that the extra cost would not be in the best interests of the class. Since then the price of carbon has dropped considerably and carbon tubes no longer attract a cost penalty and are more readily available from many sources. As there is almost total freedom in the class rules, apart from the requirement to fit in the measuring box, isn’t it now appropriate now to reconsider this question? Dave Kent has put forward a proposal to remove the spar material restriction in the 36” class rule F.1 and this is what has prompted this review. There are many considerations to be taken into account and some of the advantages and disadvantages of carbon against aluminium are listed at the end of this document. You need to decide what you want from your class. Currently, it is at a low ebb with a few more radio boats being registered than vane boats. It is a fun boat to sail, not very stable and needs a lot of rigs to compete in all conditions. The most important feature is the design freedom with the chance to experiment in rig design, with almost total freedom outside of the measuring box. In a world of boring one design and more restricted open classes, opening up the freedom in the 36” class may attract more designers wishing to develop ideas for more performance and push the class forward. The use of carbon in the rig throws up more opportunities than just replacing aluminium tubes with carbon tubes, because wing masts and wingsail rigs could enhance performance in stronger winds and make the boat more exciting and even more fun than with the current restriction. Comparing the advantages and disadvantages there are a lot more advantages to the use of carbon, so shouldn’t we consider very carefully restoring the original 1930s rule and remove the relatively recent, but now outdated restriction of 1991? Before considering the comparative advantages of change etc in the table below, Graham Bantock provided some useful comparative information. For the record, SAILSetc carbon tubes have a material stiffness of 190-210 GPa, whilst the commonly available tubes are typically 80-100 GPa. To put the above figures into context; aluminium alloy has a material stiffness of 70 GPA and a density 70% greater than carbon. The inference is that cheap carbon tubes are twice as good as alloy, top quality carbon tubes four times as good as alloy. Cost wise a 1 metre length of IOM spec aluminium 11 mm tube is in the order of £8, whereas a basic carbon 10 mm tube from Carbon Profiles is £7.56 and SAILSetc’s stiffer 10mm carbon tube is £39.50. However, with relatively short rigs in the 36" class, unlike tall rigs for Marbleheads, the extra stiffness is probably not needed. This review document is for an owner discussion on the MYA forum. After a two week period, any useful comments will be taken on board and a voting paper sent out to all owners by the class captain, Peter Moore. Roger Stollery on behalf of the Tech Team 2016-12-23
  • Create New...