Class Politics New standard sail

You give the impression of somebody willfully misinterpreting and spinning other people's statements in order to discredit their opinion. What Gouvernail said and what many here are saying is perfectly reasonable and not at all what you make of it. It's not about allowing one sailmaker for each country, not about changing the class rules to define specs only and allowing any sailmaker or anything the like. It's only about one slightly different dacron design - nobody here suggested kevlar or mylar or the like - with a decent quality for a reasonable price by one or a few class approved sail makers. That's all. No need to paint it black and predict the end of the Laser class as we know it. The new control lines might prove to be a greater perfomance boost than the new sail design.

I can't see why we would need more time and effort for measuring boats than we need presently either. LP would simply have to buy a different sail, maybe from different sail makers than the present suppliers. Or, if LP cannot meet the needs of the class, we could buy directly from one sail maker who would guarantee sustained and equal quality.

Most of us worldwide would probably have to pay something for shipping - just like we are paying for shipping and other distribution costs right now when buying a class legal sail from LP and it's affiliates. Those costs are included in the price of very many consumer goods presently. You pay for shipping costs when you buy pretty much any T-shirt, sock or tie worldwide. Most consumer products are made in Asia, India or Central America.

If Intensity can make a profit by making a similar and more durable sail that sells for 200 Dollars roughly, plus extras, there's a lot one can afford to pay for shipping until you reach even half of the price of the current official sail.

I don't think I'm misrepresenting Gouvernail's comments. I think you are just misunderstanding what I've said, so I'll repeat in a different manner.

I do not see why if we're opening up the sail market, why one company should be given a monopoly to supply "replica" sails, particularly as they are not the manufacturer and do not have a supply chain outside North America. There are already it seems at least 10 different suppliers of replica sails and more suppliers are likely if there is any official or unofficial opening up of the sail market.

Setting up a distribution network and getting sails manufactured in China and other countries is pretty simple. There is no reason why anyone in any country can't do it. If this was to occur, then companies like Intensity would be likely to be unable to compete with local suppliers, who can ship locally for free, compared to costs of shipping internationally, this is partially why Rooster have offices in Australia and New Zealand who distribute Rooster Products.

Most people realise that these sails are being manufactured in China and not by the companies supplying them. There is nothing that prevents the Chinese directly supplying these sails over the internet and cutting Intensity, APC, Rooster, i Sails, Insails, Bitz, MSB, Dynamic Sails et al out of the market, supplying sails for probably for significantly less than the existing companies are charging.

So what happens when you get to a regatta and there are 20 or 50 different replica sails, most from brands you've never seen or heard of? Either you have to measure them or force people to use only replica sails from brands you recognise.
 
Here's the thing though, if you make intensity an official sail maker, they then have to join the supply chain. LP buys the sail, sells to dealers and then to us. The cost of the sail goes up to where it is now because of the supply chain.

We don't know how much a sail costs LP when they buy from the sailmaker so for all we know, that sail sold to LP could cost as much as Intensity sells their sail for to us.

Spot on. Replica sails are cheaper largely because their makers are not constrained in the same way the official sailmakers are. It's naive to think that Intensity or any other replica sailmaker could sell their sails anywhere near as cheaply if they were brought into the official fold.
 
Here's the thing though, if you make intensity an official sail maker, they then have to join the supply chain.

Why do we need to have LP in the supply chain? Each person in the chain is the cause for the price difference between the class sail and the non class sails. Why do you think North moved it's One Design production to Sri Lanka?
 
Why do we need to have LP in the supply chain? Each person in the chain is the cause for the price difference between the class sail and the non class sails. Why do you think North moved it's One Design production to Sri Lanka?

That's the way the Laser class distribution works, you cannot buy sails directly, they come from LP. They won't remove themselves out of the supply chain. The builder owns the design of the Laser and license others to make certain parts for them including sails. Because of that, they make money on every Laser Specific part made.
 
Change the rule to: "The builder-supplied (o-rings) Sail
may be substituted with non builder-supplied alternatives from supplier X and Y provided the basic function of the (bailer) Sail is unchanged.

Vote on that...
 
One question: Who holds the design for the sails ? Because if somebody was to OK a 3rd party that party would presumably need the true sail designs to manufacture from. The specs for an approved sail could hardly be based on "we purchased a few class legal sails and copied them". So there would need to be specifications and tolerances, etc. and then there would need to be somebody doing some sort of QA/compliance checks (on some sort of sample - checking against the design). So this is all additional costs and who would pay for that.

I wonder how LP would feel about releasing the designs so a 3rd party could manufacture with them excluded from any margins.

Ian
 
Change the rule to: "The builder-supplied (o-rings) Sail
may be substituted with non builder-supplied alternatives from supplier X and Y provided the basic function of the (bailer) Sail is unchanged.

Vote on that...

Notice how there is no section in the rules for the sail except where to apply numbers and such.

That won't be put to a vote.
 
@AlanD:

I am really surprised at how complicated you make it. It's really rather simple.

Presently we have 2 manufacturers (North and Hyde), 1 wholesaler (LP) and hundreds of retailers worldwide (Your local store), for what LP says are close to identical sails (everyone knows they're not, there are differences between the North and and the Hydes and they cannot always get the exact same quality cloth over a period of 20 years and do not produce the exact same quality with every sail etc. but for the sake of this argument: let's forget about that for a moment).

We do not like the product they are selling us. Too expensive for the value that we get, could be had a lot cheaper, somewhat cheaper at least, and surely in much improved quality, without significant performance gain or loss. Replicas have been around for some years now and I have heard exactly no one seriously claim they are better or worse.

We, the Laser sailors, could, through ILCA, ask any manufacturer to do for us what LP and it's suppliers North and Hyde are currently doing. We could ask one or several companies. Several would make sense if we want to use competition to our advantage. But that does not mean we have to grant the right to supply our class legal sails to all manufacturers out there or for the existing designs, like the Intensity and Rooster replicas. We - ILCA - can chose the one that fits our demands.

Therefore we - ILCA - could chose one or many worldwide suppliers. We - ILCA - could of course consider the economic situation of the company; we do not want them to go bankrupt on us. We could of course consider whether they seem capable suppliying sails to retailers worldwide in sufficient numbers. We could grant the right to supply our class legal sails under the condition that they sell them through retailers only because we want to support our local stores. We could tell them we want the sail sold with battens and numbers and a free snack or whatever.

If we don not like the offers they make: turn them down. If the offer says they will only sell at vastly differing prices worldwide due to shipping, turn them down. We are a strict OD, want to stay that way, do not want significantly different efforts for competitive racing in different countries, we want to race with equal equipment. I think that is pretty much consenus in the class. I have heard no one ask for a development class or evening softening the strict OD principle. It's only about who will supply the sails. Not a boat named Laser, not the SMOD spars, SMOD foils etc.

I have yet to hear one single convincing argument why we couldn't or shouldn't ask others to do better for us than LP is doing currently. We - the ILCA - need not accept the high price and bad quality that LP is offering. We can at least try and get something better than that.

Maybe in the end the best offer will LP's, using another cloth. Who knows? If we don't ask, we will not get an answer.
 

Who is the we who are going to undertake this work ? Who is going to administer the approved sailmakers (e.g. check they are making a constant product to whatever specifications the "we" draw-up. If fact who is the "we is going to draw up specifications for what these 3rd parties are going to make such that when in a competition they can be checked against something). Somebody in the "we" is going to have to undertake random check on different batches to check the material, shape, etc.

I assume that the "we" is going to undertake all this work for free because "we" cannot afford to have any additional margins added to the cost of these low cost sails.

etc.

Rather than complicate everything with additional unregulated sailmakers making whatever they want and still trying to call it all "strict one design" why not get the builders to pull their fingers out and provide a sail that lasts better at a sensible price. Of course they will not be able to make one lasting longer than knock-offs nor will their's be cheaper than the knock-offs but provided they get to a reasonable longevity and reasonable price we cannot really ask for more - and maybe we can restoreone aspect of what the Laser is about (strict one design).

Ian
 
@AlanD:

I am really surprised at how complicated you make it. It's really rather simple.

Presently we have 2 manufacturers (North and Hyde), 1 wholesaler (LP) and hundreds of retailers worldwide (Your local store), for what LP says are close to identical sails (everyone knows they're not, there are differences between the North and and the Hydes and they cannot always get the exact same quality cloth over a period of 20 years and do not produce the exact same quality with every sail etc. but for the sake of this argument: let's forget about that for a moment).

We do not like the product they are selling us. Too expensive for the value that we get, could be had a lot cheaper, somewhat cheaper at least, and surely in much improved quality, without significant performance gain or loss. Replicas have been around for some years now and I have heard exactly no one seriously claim they are better or worse.

We, the Laser sailors, could, through ILCA, ask any manufacturer to do for us what LP and it's suppliers North and Hyde are currently doing. We could ask one or several companies. Several would make sense if we want to use competition to our advantage. But that does not mean we have to grant the right to supply our class legal sails to all manufacturers out there or for the existing designs, like the Intensity and Rooster replicas. We - ILCA - can chose the one that fits our demands.

Therefore we - ILCA - could chose one or many worldwide suppliers. We - ILCA - could of course consider the economic situation of the company; we do not want them to go bankrupt on us. We could of course consider whether they seem capable suppliying sails to retailers worldwide in sufficient numbers. We could grant the right to supply our class legal sails under the condition that they sell them through retailers only because we want to support our local stores. We could tell them we want the sail sold with battens and numbers and a free snack or whatever.

If we don not like the offers they make: turn them down. If the offer says they will only sell at vastly differing prices worldwide due to shipping, turn them down. We are a strict OD, want to stay that way, do not want significantly different efforts for competitive racing in different countries, we want to race with equal equipment. I think that is pretty much consenus in the class. I have heard no one ask for a development class or evening softening the strict OD principle. It's only about who will supply the sails. Not a boat named Laser, not the SMOD spars, SMOD foils etc.

I have yet to hear one single convincing argument why we couldn't or shouldn't ask others to do better for us than LP is doing currently. We - the ILCA - need not accept the high price and bad quality that LP is offering. We can at least try and get something better than that.

Maybe in the end the best offer will LP's, using another cloth. Who knows? If we don't ask, we will not get an answer.

What makes you think that LP isn't looking around for other sailmakers to make the sail? We were not told which companies were making prototypes.
 
I am really surprised at how complicated you make it. It's really rather simple.

What you're proposing is not what Gouvernail seems to be proposing. Gouvernail proposed appears to be approving a non builder supplied sail, i.e. a sail that is not sourced through the existing supply chain. Essentially an official replica sail.

The ILCA and Builders need to work together for the stability, if the ILCA suddenly opted to take the Builder out of the equation, then the builder might start making design and spec changes to the boat without the approval of the ILCA, that relationship needs to be properly maintained and his flows onto the dealer network. So then what Gouvernail proposing would need to be done at the district level and each district would be able to choose which ever replica sail(s) they wanted.

What you are proposing is essentially the status quo with different manufacturers, which will still meet up with the current price because of the existing supply chain. Further, what you're proposing can't be achieved because Intensity et al would need to revert to a sail cloth which North and Hyde would rather not be using.

You really think North and Hyde want to be using a mid 80's spec sail cloth? You don't think they have much more durable cloths available? They specially manufacture this cloth, just for the laser class. Why is the class still using the cloth is because the technical committee didn't revue the cloth for a long period and are no forced to deal with the large impact of using a modern cloth which will have a significant impact on the sail design if the performance of the sail is to remain un-altered. Intensity et al can chose any cloth they want and performance of the sail is irrelevant because they aren't worried about making existing class legal sails obsolete, something the ILCA technical committee and manufacturers are concerned with.

I'll repeat what I said six months ago.



There are two issues running with sail manufacturing situation, whilst they are associated, they are different issues.
  • The cost of the sails is largely related to the supply chain. The builders need to address this issue, so that their sails become more affordable.
  • The quality of the sail needs to be addressed by the ILCA. They have permitted the existing sails to be manufactured to long with sail cloth chosen in the mid 80's. What was an acceptable cloth in the mid 80's has now been superseded, but because of the way the ILCA works, it's difficult to do significant changes ,sail cloth and sail design needs to be altered every 4 years and not 25 years as it becomes more difficult to end up with the small performance with big changed.
It will be impossible for the existing supply chain to match the price of replica gear, but if durability is improved and the price does fall, with an active Laser Association at all levels, clubs etc, then the hopefully people will prefer class legal equipment, where at least those in the supply chain contribute something back to the class and sole motivation isn't a quick profit.
 
...
It will be impossible for the existing supply chain to match the price of replica gear, but if durability is improved and the price does fall, with an active Laser Association at all levels, clubs etc, then the hopefully people will prefer class legal equipment, where at least those in the supply chain contribute something back to the class and sole motivation isn't a quick profit.

I agree with many of your prepositions. We are simply drawing different conclusions.

All serious racers prefer legal gear. Because they must in order to race and be scored. It's not about abandoning that principle but rather about a different implimentation.

I don't believe we need to order everything that LP serves up. Why should they alter the boat significantly to the point were older boats wouldn't be competitive anymore? They would risk their monopoly. LP has - and even without supplying the sail would keep - the retail a monopoly for the essential Laser equipment, a monopoly that is - and would still be with only one exception - granted to them not by the intellectual property and exploitation rights that they own but by us, the ILCA members. Because we can define anything we want as our class racing standard.

There are considerable benefits from the relationship as is, no doubt. We should weigh those benefits against the disadvantages though and the disadvantages have become considerable, considerung current quality and cost of the boat and it's parts.

In my view, the supply chain isn't an asset of the LP-monopoly anymore. There has been a considerable reduction of the number official Laser dealers world wide recently. In Germany it seems we are down to one and it hardly makes a difference if I mail order from 300 kms or from 3000 kms away (well, to the enviroment it does, but that's a different story).

I wouldn't expect LP to meet Intensity's price. However, at three times the price of a replica for the official sail (including battens, numbers, telltales) they should have a margin to either lower the price considerably or provide better quality.

Sure they are required to use cloth from the 80ies. However, as I understand, it's not the ILCA that is asking for that cloth. There's nothing I can find in the class about it. And there's no indication that the cloth the replicas are made of offer a performance advantage. The replicas have different characteristics. But so do new and old legal sails. As long as it is legal to buy a new sail for each regatta, why shouldn't we allow more durable cloth with equal performace characteristics?

Since the Technical Committee is reviewing the specs I though they might as well review the suppliers. That's all.

Last but not least I believe that competition can be good for the LP business too and that we might profit from negotiations either way. Sooner or later another boat builder will try and break into the Laser market. The Rooster project X looks promising, but it might come from a completely different direction, who knows. Class and builder will only survive if they stay competitive.
 
I agree with many of your prepositions. We are simply drawing different conclusions.

All serious racers prefer legal gear. Because they must in order to race and be scored. It's not about abandoning that principle but rather about a different implimentation.

I don't believe we need to order everything that LP serves up. Why should they alter the boat significantly to the point were older boats wouldn't be competitive anymore? They would risk their monopoly. LP has - and even without supplying the sail would keep - the retail a monopoly for the essential Laser equipment, a monopoly that is - and would still be with only one exception - granted to them not by the intellectual property and exploitation rights that they own but by us, the ILCA members. Because we can define anything we want as our class racing standard.

What things do you think LP made or is making that makes the older boats non competative. I'm sure you'll mention the new control lines but what else?
 
Sure they are required to use cloth from the 80ies. However, as I understand, it's not the ILCA that is asking for that cloth. There's nothing I can find in the class about it. And there's no indication that the cloth the replicas are made of offer a performance advantage. The replicas have different characteristics. But so do new and old legal sails. As long as it is legal to buy a new sail for each regatta, why shouldn't we allow more durable cloth with equal performace characteristics?

Since the Technical Committee is reviewing the specs I though they might as well review the suppliers. That's all.

It is the ILCA that has agreed to the spec cloth being used. The sail makers can't suddenly change materials, shape etc without the apporval of the ILCA technical committee. As I've said before, what' s gone wrong is that no change has occurred for so long that it's difficult for similar performance between the existing and potential new sails to be achieved.

As for the replica cloth not offering a performance advantage. I was speaking to one of the top sailors in our district today and he has two boat tuned against another top sailor in this district, both with what would be considered new sails. Their findings were that the Intensity sails offered significant performance advantage in strong winds. The sails set up completely differently and Intensity sail can be de-powered far more effectively.

You'll hae to ask Tracy, nut I'd be surprised if other suppliers were not approached in the current review of the sail.
 
One thing everyone needs to understand about a manufacturer's one-design class like the Laser vs. an open one-design like the 470 or 505. The only reason the class exists, and the only reason the manufacturer continues to build boats, it because the manufacturer has a monopoly on the class.

I'm not defending LP and the current mess with the class-legal sail. However, my experience is a mnufacturer's one-design class is cheaper in the long run than an open class. Hardware wars drive the costs up and make it harder for the Average Joe to compete.

The builder may have a monopoly over the Laser class, but still has to compete against other classes when customers chose to buy a boat. This helps keep the overall price in check, despite the "monopoly".
 
As this thread spins closer and closer around the drainhole of absurdity...

please realize..

Builders especially take note.

If the builder supplied Lasser sail were a fantastic long lasting sail, nobody would be tolerating all the "other suppliers."

the problem is the builder supplied sail is garbage and sometimes even shows ugly wrinkles on day one.

We want to spend our money of a really nicely buiilt and durable sail.

We are sick of being married by our own rules to some of the crappiest sails used in any form of sailboat racing.

The builders could have spent $100 of the $400 they pocket on each sail to build something of which they could be proud and we would be happy to use.

But.

nooooo

They have abused our faithful trust for nearly 40 years and we have finally given up and begun to seek alternatives.

It isn't too late. A truly fine long lasting builder supplied sail would shut off all the replical builders instantly.

But...

But.

Hell I don't know but what?? I just know the builders brought this upon themselves.

Thye sails that come with Lasers suck!!

There's no excuse for building suckwad sails in 2010. Theres absolutely no excuse for using 1960s technology to produce suckwad sails for a premium price in 2010.

There was no excuse for the garbage sails in 1980.

There was no excuse for the garbage sails in 1985.

There was no excuse for the garbage sails in 1990.

There was no excuse for the garbage sails in 1995.

There was no excuse in 2000. There is no excuse that is going to be created next year.

If a company with a guaranteed clientele of no fewer than 10,000 customers per year cannot produce a better product than competitors building a few once in a while, the company with the guaranteed clientele deserves to fail.

There are literally hundreds of entrepeneurs eagely waiting for a chance to replace th4e current laser builders.

I am looking foreward to the day when the Laser builders decidet o produce the very best possible product for the very best customers...Who happen to be US!!!
 
Back in my Lightning Class days, we had multiple builders and sailmakers. Regional and National and similar events had Official Measurers. If your boat and sail measured, you were good to go. At the local level, we used the products of those same multiple builders and sailmakers and unless some average sailing all of a sudden started winning all the silver, no one cared much. I'm relatively new to the Laser Class.

What steps would allow the Laser Class to operate the same way?
 
Back in my Lightning Class days, we had multiple builders and sailmakers. Regional and National and similar events had Official Measurers. If your boat and sail measured, you were good to go. At the local level, we used the products of those same multiple builders and sailmakers and unless some average sailing all of a sudden started winning all the silver, no one cared much. I'm relatively new to the Laser Class.

What steps would allow the Laser Class to operate the same way?

Dear God. I hope none! When ws the last time you were in a lightning? Do you know what a new lightning costs these days? Hell, just a mast for a Finn is over $ 3,500.00.

This is about the SAILS not the whole flipping boat.
 

Attachments

  • hell.jpg
    hell.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 39
Back in my Lightning Class days, we had multiple builders and sailmakers. Regional and National and similar events had Official Measurers. If your boat and sail measured, you were good to go. At the local level, we used the products of those same multiple builders and sailmakers and unless some average sailing all of a sudden started winning all the silver, no one cared much. I'm relatively new to the Laser Class.

What steps would allow the Laser Class to operate the same way?

Here is what would happen if the Laser class was opened up to multiple builders.

The Australian builder seems to be regarded as making the highest quality. They would survive by catering to Olympic and high-end Masters sailors. The price of their boat would double overnight.

Sailing seems fairly popular in Europe, so a builder would probably come online to also cater to elite sailors. Again, probably double the current price.

The US market would be served by imported hulls from China. The price would be competitive, but the build quality inconsistent.

This is about the SAILS not the whole flipping boat.

Yes, completely about the sails. There needs to be trust between the builder and the class, and the current rag is poisoning that.
 
None of the aforementioned horrors happened back in the day of multiple Lightning builders and sailmakers. There are fewer nowadays.

I'm betting the Finn mast is more complex than the Laser mast.

I'm not sure how multiple builders will cause an inferior product as I thought the monopoly on sailmaking in the Laser class was the reason for the inferior product.

I'm just asking what hurdles there are to allow multiple sailmakers in the Laser Class. Have measurers at major events and get over it at the more local level.
 
The only thing stopping us from running things like the Lightning class is we don't want to run things like the Lightning class.

The new sail is being tested. Hope it fits the bill and comes out soon. I want to buy one.
 
I'd buy two if they weren't so expensive. One would be for me and the other for my son who is getting interested. With the difference in price between the Intensity's and the class approved sail, with the money saved buying less expensive sails, I could buy another nice used boat for my other son.

By the way, I haven't been active in Lightnings since the 60's and 70's and that is the era which had the competition of multiple suppliers. It was a great bunch of folk then and seemed extremely well run. Sorry you don't seem to like the way it is run now.
 
None of the aforementioned horrors happened back in the day of multiple Lightning builders and sailmakers. There are fewer nowadays.

I'm betting the Finn mast is more complex than the Laser mast.

I'm not sure how multiple builders will cause an inferior product as I thought the monopoly on sailmaking in the Laser class was the reason for the inferior product.

I'm just asking what hurdles there are to allow multiple sailmakers in the Laser Class. Have measurers at major events and get over it at the more local level.

It's not the way the class is designed. It's there so we know everyone has the same equipment. The Lightning isn't owned by a builder, anyone can make one as long as it is measured. Lasers are owned by the builder so they can say who makes what.

Measuring 70 boats at a Lightning NAs is completely different than measuring 200+ boats at a North American/world championship.
 
Thanks for the concise answer.

I'm new enough to the class to not know the builder owned the whole class. Apparently that must work or else there would be an exodus to another class. I was sailing before Laser and Force 5 were invented and having not sailed one against the other, I wondered why the class boat which seemed exceedingly more durable and better behaved upwind boat, the Force 5, was not nearly as successful as the less durable, more thrilling downwind boat, the Laser.
 
I think it's important to remember the business model for the Laser class is 40 years old. Sailing was a much more popular sport, outsourcing manufacturing across an ocean was cost prohibitive, and there was no internet to bypass the dealer network. I would think support from the dealer network was a prime reason for the success of the class.

Thisi is obviously a challenging time for both the builder and the class.
 
Thisi is obviously a challenging time for both the builder and the class.

When people talk about "the builders" whilst there is a long term company who are "the builders", the individuals making the decisions change (as people move jobs, retire, etc.). Whilst in the past "the builders" may have operated the Laser well and made a great success of the class, it was actually the individuals within "the builders" who were making the good decisions.

Those people who are currently making decisions are not the same as those of the past. Where there were capable people in the past the same is not necessarily true today. This ongoing fiasco with the sails is a clear indication of the capability of "the builders" to address issues of major importance in a timely manner - i.e. they are showing themselves totally incompetent or totally disinterested to the significant detriment of the class.

If the builders cannot or will not do something then they should step aside and pass the responsibility on to others; at least that way things might actually happen. I would prefer the builder do something but the current situation is doing so much damage and still the builder does nothing ...

In summary, that "the builders" have done things right in the past" does not mean they are doing things right now because the people are different and I think most people can form their own opinions of capability of the current employees from the action they have taken over the sail problems.

Ian
 
I think you're being a little harsh there Ian. The builders are doing something about it, but these things take time. The Laser Class has always been slow moving and conservative. I'd prefer they take three years and get the new sail right than rush through a bad change we'll have to live with for 20 years. I actually think it's a good sign that they're taking the time to get it right despite the hit their business must be taking from the replica sailmakers.

Also, remember that when we refer to the "builders", we are actually mean a group of independent businesses. Not as many as before, but there is still LP in the US and Europe, PSA in Australia, and the Japanese builder (are they independent of PSA?). All have to agree on any change, and the ILCA have to be on board as well. Getting agreement between these groups wouldn't be straightforward.

My main criticism is the lack of real information from the ILCA, i.e. our representatives in all of this. If we didn't have Tracy giving occasional teasers to NA sailors and (mostly NA) forum users, we would be completely in the dark. Ninety percent of the current discussion is speculative and misinformed, but without a better information flow, what can we expect? I think much of the angst about the current sail would go away if there were regular updates from the ILCA, but there's not a single word about the new sail on their website, and only the briefest mention in a Laser World last year.

I'm sure there are commercial reasons for some of the secrecy, but that's only justifiable up to a point. There just isn't enough transparency about what is going on at the ILCA level. The class website has improved out of sight in the last couple of years, but apart from regatta reports there is very little real info, especially for people already sailing in the class. It would be an ideal way to get this kind of information out quickly and cheaply. But that's a whole different thread.
 
Simple question here...Does anyone know or have information, links, design plans, etc... of the new proposed Laser Standard sail?

Thanks!
 
Simple question here...Does anyone know or have information, links, design plans, etc... of the new proposed Laser Standard sail?

Thanks!

There is some two year old info here - http://www.ilcana.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=479&Itemid=47

The current prototype is different to what's in this article, but this gives an idea of where it's heading.

What we know is that the new sail will be identical in overall dimensions to the current sail (it needs to be to comply with the measurement diagrams in the class by-laws), but with a different panel layout, better reinforcing, heavier cloth, and a larger window. Beyond that, there isn't any accurate information in the public domain. Just speculation. Rumour is it will probably be available within the next few months.
 
When people talk about "the builders" whilst there is a long term company who are "the builders", the individuals making the decisions change (as people move jobs, retire, etc.). Whilst in the past "the builders" may have operated the Laser well and made a great success of the class, it was actually the individuals within "the builders" who were making the good decisions.
Those people who are currently making decisions are not the same as those of the past. Where there were capable people in the past the same is not necessarily true today. This ongoing fiasco with the sails is a clear indication of the capability of "the builders" to address issues of major importance in a timely manner - i.e. they are showing themselves totally incompetent or totally disinterested to the significant detriment of the class.

If the builders cannot or will not do something then they should step aside and pass the responsibility on to others; at least that way things might actually happen. I would prefer the builder do something but the current situation is doing so much damage and still the builder does nothing ...

In summary, that "the builders" have done things right in the past" does not mean they are doing things right now because the people are different and I think most people can form their own opinions of capability of the current employees from the action they have taken over the sail problems.

Ian

I think you're being a little harsh there Ian. The builders are doing something about it, but these things take time. The Laser Class has always been slow moving and conservative. I'd prefer they take three years and get the new sail right than rush through a bad change we'll have to live with for 20 years. I actually think it's a good sign that they're taking the time to get it right despite the hit their business must be taking from the replica sail makers.
Also, remember that when we refer to the "builders", we are actually mean a group of independent businesses. Not as many as before, but there is still LP in the US and Europe, PSA in Australia, and the Japanese builder (are they independent of PSA?). All have to agree on any change, and the ILCA have to be on board as well. Getting agreement between these groups wouldn't be straightforward.

My main criticism is the lack of real information from the ILCA, i.e. our representatives in all of this. If we didn't have Tracy giving occasional teasers to NA sailors and (mostly NA) forum users, we would be completely in the dark. Ninety percent of the current discussion is speculative and misinformed, but without a better information flow, what can we expect? I think much of the angst about the current sail would go away if there were regular updates from the ILCA, but there's not a single word about the new sail on their website, and only the briefest mention in a Laser World last year.

I'm sure there are commercial reasons for some of the secrecy, but that's only justifiable up to a point. There just isn't enough transparency about what is going on at the ILCA level. The class website has improved out of sight in the last couple of years, but apart from regatta reports there is very little real info, especially for people already sailing in the class. It would be an ideal way to get this kind of information out quickly and cheaply. But that's a whole different thread.

I’ll try to address Ian and Tony at the same time. I agree Tony, you're being too harsh and your criticising the wrong people anyway.

I think there is a lot of confusion between the roles of the builder and the ILCA specifically the technical committee. From my understanding the builders essentially look after the hull specifications and the supply chain including the price. But changes in the specifications of boat fittings, spars, boards and the sails are largely controlled by the technical committee. Whilst few specifications would be made without the knowledge of the other group, they are independent of each other.

I’ve mentioned this several times already, but my belief of why it’s taking so long to get the sail right is because the change is so big. Since the introduction of the 3.8oz standard sail, there have been one change in supplier (from memory as Hardstick(sp?) started making the 3.8oz sails), but there have been no design changes since 1985. On the other hand, the Radial sail which was introduced after the 1985, has had at least 6 design changes, plus the short lived M rig. Basically, the technical committee is busy updating something which is 25 years old and trying to give the new sail similar performance to the existing sail, for this reason, I suspect it’s a difficult task, far more than if the changes were only small like those of the various radial sail changes, where a small change isn’t really going to have a major impact if the technical committee gets it wrong. Hopefully this will be kept in mind, so that an update of the new sail arrives in 4 or 5 years, so that we’re never have to go through such a big and slow change again.

Tony is correct. The builders are independent of each other, as are the other suppliers of equipment like sails. It takes time for them to agree to changes and from my understanding they only meet once a year at the Masters Worlds as does the Technical committee, but you’d assume there are a lot of emails and phone calls during the year.

As for information, the ILCA will make an announcement when things are set in concrete. How many years have we been waiting for the carbon top section for the radial, I know they’ve been weeks away from going into production, only to have some new problem arise, where they’ve had to abandon the project and start again. A new sail is in the pipe lines, but it has to be right rather than announce it will arrive on a certain date, only to be delayed for another 6 months.

In addition, the sail makers will need to have a large supply of them quickly as demand is going to be great. I believe the typical order for new sails from LP is in the order of 1000 so they get the volume discount. A thousand sails take longer to produce than just a week and I’d guess there is a demand worldwide well in excess of 3000 new sails. The new sails aren’t going to be announced until the estimated demand can be for filled.
 
I think you're being a little harsh there Ian. The builders are doing something about it, but these things take time.

(I accept I may be being critical of the wrong people through my lack of knowledge of who decides what - so for "builders" read "whoever is responsible for the sail decision").

Quite possibly being too critical - just it is very frustrating when each weekend you end up sailing against mostly non-Lasers because of this issue. Frustration is made worse by the fact that this is not something that has sprung-up from nowhere and caught everybody unawares. The builders have been aware of these issues for ages yet shown little sign of being proactive (maybe because of the profit they were making on poor sails ?).

What makes everything more frustrating is the lack of information. Rumours suggest something is being done but different rumours suggest different things. Rumours have been around for ages so the earlier rumours were obviously not based on fact and so there is a suspicion that without categoric statements in a few years the current rumours will prove to have been baseless. Now there are rumours that even if the builders have something agreed and ready nothing will happen until after the 2012 Olympics. Lots and lots of rumours and total silence from the builders.

At least if the builders said we are doing <whatever> and will have a solution on sale by <whenever> we could have some confidence.

I purchased a Laser largely because of the strict one design yet end-up sailing against boats mostly breaking those rules "officially" because clubs think the builders offering is too expensive/poor quality. So my reasons for having a Laser seem to be invalid thanks to the builders inaction - hence my frustration.

If we are to wait 4 or 5 years for a solution I will be selling my Laser this winter because in practice on the water it is no longer a strict one design. If I am going to sail a boat that allows such variations then I have a far more open choice (I like the Solo so may get one instead).

Ian
 
(I accept I may be being critical of the wrong people through my lack of knowledge of who decides what - so for "builders" read "whoever is responsible for the sail decision").

Quite possibly being too critical - just it is very frustrating when each weekend you end up sailing against mostly non-Lasers because of this issue. Frustration is made worse by the fact that this is not something that has sprung-up from nowhere and caught everybody unawares. The builders have been aware of these issues for ages yet shown little sign of being proactive (maybe because of the profit they were making on poor sails ?).

What makes everything more frustrating is the lack of information. Rumours suggest something is being done but different rumours suggest different things. Rumours have been around for ages so the earlier rumours were obviously not based on fact and so there is a suspicion that without categoric statements in a few years the current rumours will prove to have been baseless. Now there are rumours that even if the builders have something agreed and ready nothing will happen until after the 2012 Olympics. Lots and lots of rumours and total silence from the builders.

At least if the builders said we are doing <whatever> and will have a solution on sale by <whenever> we could have some confidence.

I purchased a Laser largely because of the strict one design yet end-up sailing against boats mostly breaking those rules "officially" because clubs think the builders offering is too expensive/poor quality. So my reasons for having a Laser seem to be invalid thanks to the builders inaction - hence my frustration.

If we are to wait 4 or 5 years for a solution I will be selling my Laser this winter because in practice on the water it is no longer a strict one design. If I am going to sail a boat that allows such variations then I have a far more open choice (I like the Solo so may get one instead).

Ian

Hang in there Ian. It's the introduction of the "replica" sails that, (IMO) has brought this matter to a head faster than it ever would have with out. LP is losing money to the replica builders and will continue to do so until they come up w/a better solution than the current 25 year old sail material. I"m impressed with the traffic and number of postings on this thread. Hopefully the right people, (like Alan and Tracy) are reporting our frustrations to the powers that be and our voices will be heard. We just have to keep making noise!
 
It's the introduction of the "replica" sails that, (IMO) has brought this matter to a head faster than it ever would have with out.

I suppose that is one of the weaknesses I see in the builder/ILCA (whoever). It was always a likely thing to happen (given how old, expensive, short-lived, etc. the sail was). Most businesses (at least those who want to stay in business) analyse risks (SWOT analysis - Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats).

At least in other classes they may not be strict one design but there are rules and people comply with the rules and whilst e.g. sails might be from different suppliers, they have all been measured and comply with the rules. Whereas in Lasers we have vast numbers of boats racing with gear (sails) that has not been measured, not manufactured to a design, etc. It is a complete free-for-all in a class supposed to be a strict one design !! Even a development class have stricter rules than are being applied to Lasers (at club level).

In business, a company that lacked such foresight would go bust and nobody would be surprised. (But my comments are directed at whoever has responsibility for the sail, not necessarily the builder).

Ian
 
At least in other classes they may not be strict one design but there are rules and people comply with the rules and whilst e.g. sails might be from different suppliers, they have all been measured and comply with the rules. Whereas in Lasers we have vast numbers of boats racing with gear (sails) that has not been measured, not manufactured to a design, etc. It is a complete free-for-all in a class supposed to be a strict one design !! Even a development class have stricter rules than are being applied to Lasers (at club level).

Even at club level it's not necessarily a "free for all". Some clubs, "(including mine) have approved the use of the replicas for club races only. However, it appears there may be a shift in process where some clubs are opening up for even open events. You are correct though. I've noticed a real lack of measurings at even National level open events. At the last Masters NA's I went to one of the front running competitiors was using what are now, (and were then) non-class approved blades. As far as I know no one said a word..... I also think through ignorance a lot of competitors use illegal set ups on their outhauls and cunninghams. Those kinds of things could be sorted out w/boat inspections and pre-race sail and blade checks, but that ads a whole new element to the regatta management.
 
A small correction to above. Laser sails are measured in-house at the factories, in addition Cliff is responsible for overseeing each manufacturing facility to ensure that they are following the class specifications. Other Olympic and International classes are moving towards this licensed, in-house measuring arrangement (personally I think they are nuts).

As for the quality and quantity of measuring, it's a significant part of the reason why I very much doubt I will renew my ISAF measurement status in 2012/2013 when it runs out. The district associations comities aren't interested in supporting us in terms of running measurement, disciplining those that deliberately infringe measurement rules, maintaining the measurers qualifications by paying to do the courses we're meant to do or even having the comity members' own boats being legal. Further, all this replica gear is making the job far too hard and if we miss something other competitors will get upset at me, rather than the competitor using the gear, or the suppliers of this illegal equipment. In the mean time, effectively I stopped measuring at any events. Why should I care when no one else does?
 

Back
Top