Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
When I was one of the younger owners, some 25 years ago, we lobbied for a rule change to allow the helm to sit on the side deck. At the time the older members voted it down at the AGM for fear of making helming too athletic for them. Now I am an older member myself and I still support the idea of the helm being allowed to sit on the side deck. As Andy says it’s so much easier to see the jib telltales, to rotate the torso as the boat heels, and to lean back to look at the main and windex without cricking your neck.
it’s about comfort and ergonomics not ballast on the rail. For that reason I am firmly against the crew being permitted to sit on the deck.What is the impact of Brexit on importing a Jon Mast from Denmark, including total cost when delivered to Falmouth?
Owners agreed at the 2012 AGM to purchase a pear-shaped John Mast 112DR as the class spare. In theory by now there should be 3 112DRs in use. When Mayfly drew the spare in November 2014 it was discovered to be an elliptical 116E, a similar shape to the discontinued Selden 4529 which had previously been the de facto one-design section. As was the convention, Mayfly replaced the spare like-for-like with another 116E. At the 2015 AGM owners agreed to invest some of the class’ funds in a second spare mast. This was the overdue 112DR. In April 2018 Wendy chose to draw the 116E spare rather than the 112DR, and duly replaced it like-for-like with another 116E. Pintail chose to draw the 112DR in 2020 and, rather than replace it, paid the class the full cost after it was decided to run down the spares holding following the adoption at Itchenor of a Selden carbon mast .
I support the principle of a one-design mast for the reasons given by Paul. Whilst it has never been a class rule, the Proctor/Selden 4529 was the de facto one-design mast for many years. Had it not been discontinued it still would be. Unrestricted experimentation in masts is extreme “cheque book racing” contrary to class policy.
However, for me the more difficult decision is whether the one-design mast should be aluminium or carbon. I suspect there is no appetite at Itchenor to go back to aluminium.
The AGM decided to identify a Sunday in June. The 6th is Tresanton Classics; the 13th is Falmouth Classics; the 20th is free but is the day after the big FSC 100th Anniversary Regatta which the class should support en-masse; and the 27th is the FSC IRC Regatta 2.
John, Liz & Melkin have confirmed that they are up for the 20th, and been provisionally booked. The question for the class is whether boats will turn out in decent numbers on consecutive days.St Mawes SC is keen to resurrect the Bomber Memorial Trophy. Instead of a normal club race it is supporting the idea of a “Sunbeam Super Sunday” – 3 races back-to-back in Carrick Roads over windward/leeward courses from Melkin on an ad-hoc date that best suits as many people as possible, especially the RO!
Super – someone other than me or my wife has accessed the forum!
The latter. The rule on internal ballast will not be changed – an outboard will simply cease being counted towards it.
It’s primarily an issue at Itchenor rather than here because they specify a fixed weight of internal ballast (250lb). So the current outboard rule requires internal lead ballast to be removed equal to the weight of the outboard.
Here in Falmouth the ballast rule specifies a permitted range of 250 to 450lb (don’t ask – it’s historical!). As far as I am aware we mostly have towards the lower end of the range so shipping an outboard is unlikely to take anyone over the total.
For us it’s more a question of whether we want the outboard rule to remain aligned with Itchenor. I can’t see why not.
