 |
| Moth Class
Discussion - July 2003 |
|
1. National/State Association Questionarre
- Sail Measurement
It has been pointed out by some members of the International Moth
community that some square top Moth sails are designed in way to
gain a small amount of free sail area in the head of the sail. This
is considered legal, as rule 9.2.i in the current
Moth class rules specifically exclude use of triangulation the
area of the sail to get a more accurate sail area (Method B), as
apposed to taking measurements at 3/4 points to the leach (Method
A). Method B is refered to as clause 3.2.5.b in the ISAF Measurement
of Sail Area (can be found on the 'Constitution
& Rules' page of this web site or the Cherub
web site).
However, the first paragraph of the Measurement Manual - Section
XI Measurement of Sail area reads as follows:
1. General (1) The intention is to establish a reliable and
simple method of measuring the whole of the driving area of the
sail plan, including spars.
This is not excluded from the Moth rules but by excluding 3.2.5.b
we are preventing this intention being achieved. There is also one
other rule in Section XI which might be considered to apply:
5. Sail of Unusual Shape - The foregoing instructions assume
that the sails are essentially triangular. If a quadrilateral or
multilateral sail is to be measured the sail is to be divided into
suitable triangles whose area can be measured and added. The areas
of the luff, foot and leach rounds shall be added or subtracted
as the case may be. The measurer shall record the method he has
used to assess the area of the sail.
This is not excluded by the Moth rules either, but to use it would
appear in contradiction to the exclusion of 3.2.5.b.
However, thought must be given to the amount of square top sails
that are around at the moment that might breach this new way of
measuring them, the cost of fixing or replacing them, and the fact
that there may be other brands of sails that may also breach this
proposed rule.
Your association should also consider the following:
- time taken to measure sails using either or both methods
- possibility of a sail measuring over and under using either
method
- the potential sail area gains that may be made by a sailor by
only using method A
- The impact on the class and sailors if rule 9.2.i is removed
IMCA also recommends that each association uses both sail area
measurement methods on various sails used in their state/country
to see the difference in methods used and report any abnormalities
to IMCA.
This issue is now open to discussion within your association with
an official response submitted to imca-exec@moth-sailing.org
before the due date. Submissions after this due date will not be
considered. Please include in your response, your associations answer
to following question...
1. Does your State/National Moth Class Association think
that IMCA should begin to enforce the measurement of true sail area
using either method A or B in the ISAF Measurement of Sail Area
guide OR alternatively continue to use only method A as per the
current Moth class rules?
2. If IMCA were to adobt only Method B to calculate sail
area, would your association agree to an increase in sail area for
the Moth class, and if so, by how much?
| Responses... |
|
| Australia - NSW |
Either method A or B should be used at the
measurer's discretion, and the limit should remain at 8 m2. |
| Australia - QLD |
no response |
| Australia - VIC |
Method A only should be employed. No increase
in sail area if Method B is used. |
| Australia - SA |
Method A to remain based on, "The spirit
of the Moth class is for freedom of design and encouragement
of experimentation, therefore it should not introduce method
B". An increase to 8.3m2 if only option B was introduced. |
| Australia - WA |
The current sail measurement method (A) should
remain. |
| Austria |
no response |
| Denmark |
no response |
| France |
no response |
| Germany |
Lets stay at the simple method (A), but let
us keep the sword of Damokles (known overseas ?) hanging above
the head of all the potential rule-cheaters, that the measurer
himselfs decides, if he uses triangulation for the leach round
or not, because the sails seems "strange" to him or
not. This way of pushing the responsibility of judgement to
the measurer, who decides, if a sail is triangular or not and
by that chooses the way of measuring it (A) or (B). I think
this "chill of fear" will keep lots of potential rule-cheaters
away from making extreme sails. Sails should also not be bigger
than 8 sqm. |
| Great Britain |
The UK Assn believe that we should remain with
the current rules. Moth sails have been Multilateral for the
last 20 years, and therefore no sail constructed within this
time would have an area of less than 8m2 if the whole driving
area is measured. If however method B were to be adopted, an
increase would be necessary, otherwise older sails would have
to be "Grandfathered" (ie excluded from further measurement),
to prevent all sails currently in existence becoming illegal.
The cost and time involved in the re-cutting and re-measurement
of existing sails would be prohibitive. |
| Holland |
It is to the discretion to the sail measurer
to move away from the standard measurement if the sail has an
unusual shape. Since this opens a lot of discussion we propose
to adopt 3.2.5.b to close the loophole of overlarge tops (method
B) |
| Japan |
no response |
| New Zealand |
If you’re going to talk about sail measurements,
there is far more to talk about than just the roach/leach round.
After being at measurement in Europe and in the UK, and seen
it being done the roach/leach round is a minor thing. This leads
me on to the other ambiguous term having a "fair"
luff and leach round, who decides what “fair”! Maybe
the sail should fit inside a marked area.? Or change the way
the sail is measured say 6 points up the leech? Im sure there
are even more things like this…size of pocket luff width
of battern etc. |
| Sweden |
IMCA Sweden thinks that we should stick with
the current ruling, at least until we see some really strange
sail shapes. Large heads has been common for quite some time. |
| Switzerland |
We suggest to stick to method A; I haven´t
heard of any problems with "special" sail shapes in
the past although there have been a lot of sails with "big"
heads around. No sails bigger than 8 sqm and no increase of
sail area. Everything must be done to keep costs for people
as low as possible. |
| USA |
no response |
Previous Discussions and Online Polls...
|
