April 26, 2012 at 2:56 pm #1879
Its that time again. If anyone wants to see anything changed or added to the Olson 30 Class Constitution please speak now. We will use this forum for discussion of any changes. Per the class rules any change must be published 30 prior to the General meeting. This years meeting is on June 23 at 8:30 am at Alamitos Bay YC. So the deadline to publish any amendments will be May 25th 2012.
Please put any ideas for forum discussion here. They will be monitored and formally written and taken to the General meeting for vote. Paid members of the association that will not be at the General meeting will be able to vote by proxy here in the forum.April 26, 2012 at 3:07 pm #2754
Disclaimer: I’m not a paid member..my Inboard and keel mods keep me out of One Design and thus the Constitution.
Modified Pushpit: There was a brief forum on modifying the pushpit to allow a wire or high tech lifeline across the back of the stern. This would allow a gate access to the stern.
This could be useful for retrieving a MOB or just convenience of operating the outboard. Stern docking would be improved.
The present ‘single bar’ does little but provide aft safety (that a gate would replace) and possibly structural help to the sides of the pushpits. It may require a stanchion brace to each side, which is an easy fix.
Since this is not a performance enhancement, permission should be easy to approve.April 26, 2012 at 5:48 pm #2755
Thank you for the response. I too would like to see that modification. I will make sure it is brought before the board.April 27, 2012 at 1:07 am #2756
I do know of a boat that has done that. There is also an arguement that the bow pulpit be made two piece, being open in the front allowing a really low pole for asyo sails. There will be a windage and a slight weight savings in the ends of the boat with this modification. We are a development class and have allowed several things that some sceptics say is too much. This may be one of these.
Lets write it up and include the bow and stern pulpit in it. Let the class vote!April 27, 2012 at 1:16 am #2757
If we are going to open up the design of the rails, I would suggest we might want to open up materials for the rails as well. It could be as simple as “pulpit(s) and pushpit(s) shall be X inches off deck, contain a minimum of X inches of tubing” or something like that.
I would also like to see the constitution allow stiffening of the deck. Currently, we are not permitted to do anything besides rebuild soft decks. If we were to allow some stiffening members, it could cut down on a pile of work, and could be preventative.April 27, 2012 at 2:57 pm #2758
Stiffening of Decks: Because none of us are Naval Arcatects or Hippies from Santa Cruz, I think we should leave this one alone..I do know if we allow random stiffening of the decks we may see the boats fail in other places. If you stiffen one spot another spot may take too much load and fail.. These boats are getting old and soft. When she dies she dies.May 4, 2012 at 4:46 pm #2770
Todd, is there any reason not to bring up the topic of Asymmetric kites and allowing those who have them to use them for class events? I know many one-design classes have allowed both to be run. Maybe make it “a boat may run either an asymmetric or asymmetric kite but not both during a class regatta”? ThoughtsMay 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm #2773
Jason, Yes there are too many reasons to be listed in this semi-public fourm.May 5, 2012 at 3:04 pm #2774
I disagree…the forum is the perfect place to discuss this!
The primary reason that assay’s have been voted down in the past is due to costs. We are already playing keep-up with our current quiver of sails, which in some cases are worth more than the boats. Adding another sail or three to the mix is a deal-breaker for several people.
That being said, I have an assy for phrf events, and do agree there is a nice sweet spot. But, I would not want other members to feel forced to invest in more cloth in order to remain competitive.May 5, 2012 at 4:47 pm #2775
I have 2 Asails now. A1 & A3. PHRF does not penalize in our area. The SF has to be less than a Sym and in most cases they are. They do penalize if you get near a CODE O.
As far as one design…if courses are W/L..the A sails are slow. Maybe the NOR for a port to port would allow the A sails in the class?May 8, 2012 at 3:14 am #2778
I wasn’t implying that you would need to purchase both styles, just that those who have switched to the A sails would be allowed to use them without having to go and purchase a new kite. A few of the local Olsons have gone to all Asymmetric’s for PHRF and I wanted to see if there was a way to include them for class events.
I know they are not as effective on W/L courses, but many times they can compete pretty well. Anyways food for thought I guess.
One more idea for the constitution, restrictions on standing rigging materials. So far there is nothing to stop someone from going to PBO or Carbon rigging. Can we add something saying only wire/rod are allowed? Thoughts?May 8, 2012 at 3:33 am #2779
Regarding the A-Sails, those owners purchased the assy’s knowing full well they are not legal for OD. Their choice. But, if the constitution were amended to allow them, a perceived need to own both would undoubtedly appear. As I said before, I am not against assy’s at all, but do not think that we should be allowing them for OD. If your local fleet wants to allow them for OD events, then go for it! But I would be against changing the constitution to reflect it.
Regarding standing rigging, the primary reason for switching would be to save weight. We already have a minimum mast weight (inc standing and running rigging), and a minimum CG, so that should take care of any composites.May 9, 2012 at 10:53 am #2790
I was just reminded of something else I would like to see amended. I think that the MOB pole should be removed from the “dry weight shall include” list.May 14, 2012 at 2:50 pm #2798
Scot, Regarding MOB pole. It has always been included. Are you guys up there planing to weigh boats? We have 1 boat here that would be under weight without the MOB pole.May 14, 2012 at 2:56 pm #2799
We have not weighed boats here, as we don’t have the easy access to the hoists that you guys do. Most of us have to crane in.May 19, 2012 at 9:40 pm #2806
Gentleman, this is my first post in this site, I have been mostly an observant here. It has been a great pleasure surfing thru this site learning about Olson 30s, my new passion. The wealth of information is absolutely fantastic. Since becoming an owner last year I have done a great deal of TLC work to my boat Hellion, to bring her up to her mighty glory. My excitement still growing every time I spend in the water with Hellion tuning her and finding out what has made this boat so famous. This is one the best boats I’ve ever sailed, no wonder it has such a great reputation. Everyone I came in contact with in my sail community speaks highly of Olson 30s. It’s great fame continues to live on today. My boat has never been campaigned or overstressed in competition before. There are no failures anywhere in it’s structure and it’s integrity is sound, what a blessing. The core and riggings is in excellent shape considering it’s age. Most of my rigging was in “as delivered” state then when I took over with most standard hardware and sails being original. She is not too far from being pristine now and it has been a great pleasure to have her. I carefully built her a new trailer, made new stainless stanchions with dyneema lifelines, replaced most running rigging with higher end sheets and halyards paying close attention to comments and suggestions posted in this site as well as the old Sailpix. I’ve taken carefully measured steps avoiding making mistakes others have made in the past and still there is more to learn and do. Looking forward into the future I would be delighted to participate in some competition events. However the high costs of the latest and greatest sails will be a hard act to follow. These costs alone will definitely keep me away from being competitive as will most other owners in the fleet. Most of us cannot justify the large purchase price of the latest technology. I was in absolute shock to find what a new set of high end 3DL loadpath carbon sails cost, and in that tone alone will far exceeds the value of my entire investment. The constitution has failed to addressed this very important issue to my surprise. Other classes have realized that from the beginning and have successfully implemented rules to keep costs down. Most of these fleets remain together by implementing smart rules making competition among themselves fair. Here in the San Francisco area the fleet presence is no longer active. So I was told by the owner of Think Fast another veteran Olson 30 owner and racer about the history of our fleet and issues like this that have caused the fleet to virtually vanish. Some boat owners here with unlimited budget will always walked away from the rest of the fleet for this reason and will discouraging the rest of us from participant in a challenge. I think it would be to the best interest of the fleet and fair competition to lower the cost of racing by specifying white sails or introduce a handicap system or a combination of both discouraging investing such an astronomical high price of sails into this ever escalating costs of the sport. Let us compete with skills from the captain, crew and tactics, not by unlimited funds. I think until this very key factor is addressed the inevitable outcome is imminent. Far and far less boats are engaging in one off races and boats are being sold away to other parts of the country scattering the fleet everywhere. Proof of it is shown right here in this site by the number of owners available and willing to participation in racing events. I would love to see the return of an active fleet to the San Francisco area and the return of one off racing events here. I think amendments to The Constitution addressing this issue would be to everyone’s best interest in order keep the fleet alive and perhaps encouraging more owners to keep their boats and compete. My own two cents worth.
Regards, NelsonMay 20, 2012 at 1:09 am #2807
I am glad to read about your excitement for the boat!
I completely understand what you are saying about the cost of our sails. Please bear in mind that carbon 3dl’s are going to be at the top end of any budget…there are many less expensive alternatives. Todd Downey would be a great person to go into more detail on this front.
From what I understand, high quality racing dacron is really not that much less expensive than kevlar. The amount of labour is pretty much the same, so costs are similar. Unfortunately, unless you invest in the best dacron, your headsails will suffer in shape fairly quickly, which means that you would need to replace the sails more often, netting a greater expense. Even with the best dacron, you have to be very careful with storing and handling (no flaking or folding), or else it will break down quickly.
A few years ago I spoke to a large number of sailmakers and cloth makers looking for the most cost effective approach, looking for the best cost/performance ratio. For mains, hard racing dacron was good, kevlar or carbon likely better but less tweakable. For overlapping headsails, it became apparent that the more high tech you can afford, the better it will be, which goes along with what you were writing. BUT, the difference between a dacron #2 and a kevlar #2 was about $400. So, if you can get an extra season or two out of the kevlar, then you are much farther ahead.
One option that is available if budget is a real concern is pentex. Pentex is probably more user friendly than racing dacron, but not as good as kevlar.
Partially because of these reasons, I doubt that you will find much support for amending the constitution to limit sail materials. Trust me, I would love to see cheaper sails, but I don’t believe the immediate savings would result in any real savings over five years.
This issue has been debated in the past, and the approach the fleet has taken is to limit new sails. From part C, paragraph 8: “Only three of the declared sails may be purchased within the current calendar year, unless the boat was purchased within the current calendar year, in which case six sails may be new.”May 20, 2012 at 2:38 am #2808
Just purchased a ‘plastic’ main. The cost was about the $400 more than a good dacron. The dacron will be shot in two years..might get double that (shape wise) from the Aramid. As far as North…the carbon sails are way too expensive for this league, but they are your choice. I think the 3dl 600 would do and is way less money I’m guessing. I’m a fan of Quantum and their pricing is more reasonable for higher tech sails. Carbon..noo way. Load path Aramid should do it.May 21, 2012 at 12:37 am #2809
I haven’t owned my Olson 30 for about 10 years, but I’m still a huge fan. The problem you brought up is common with any boat that was seriously raced. There are very few classes, if any, that don’t have this problem in one way or another. Even phrf classes face this in one form or another. I’ve seen local one design fleets deal with this issue by having only one or two new sails a year only to have to buy more new sails when competing outside of their local fleet. The only way to deal with this is to buy a smaller boat to have sails you can afford or plan on not being at the top of your class competitively.
BillMay 23, 2012 at 4:31 am #2812
Thank you for all the replies and the suggestions. My researches leads me to some incredible deals. Island Planet Sails for instance have UK licensed Kevlar tape drives at Dacron prices. The Constitution however still wide open to possibilities of expensive carbon technology finding its way when least expected and would be out of reach for most. I’ve consider all aspects of technology low and high priced. Carbon at exorbitant prices eventually will be used at some point. As Scot pointed out, for a little more than $400 Kevlar is a viable and cost effective option over high end Dacron and Bruce’s 3DL 600 suggestion from Quantum as well. I’m happy to know of great possibilities out there. As more sail maker competitors come up in the market there will be more possibilities and choices within reach.
ISAF OFFSHORE SPECIAL REGULATIONS addressed a similar issue on carbon sails:
4.26.3 Materials a)aromatic poly-amides, carbon and similar fibers shall not be used in a try-sail or storm jib but spectra/dyneema and similar materials are permitted. ** b)it is strongly recommended that a heavy-weather jib does not contain aromatic poly-amides, carbon and similar fibres other than spectra/dyneema.
I thought they were right on the money by introducing this amendment and perhaps a guide line for future consideration to others facing a similar issue. My question is really aimed to the open Constitution and position on Carbon sails and the best investment I can make to stay reasonably competitive.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.