Proposed Class Rule Changes - voting now open!!

Discussion in 'Laser Class Politics' started by SFBayLaser, Feb 3, 2006.

  1. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    See http://www.laserinternational.org/rules2005.htm

    The major proposed rule change is for the "John Christianson Boom Sleeve" which has been discussed on The Laser Forum before. The other rule changes either help fix common problems (e.g. the centerboard stop coming off) or fix "interpretations" of current practice.

    The voting period extends until July 31, 2006. Please let me know if you have any questions about the proposals.

    Tracy
     
  2. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    PS The results of the 2005 ballots are posted below the link in the previous post.

    NOTE THE LOW NUMBER OF VOTES IN RELATION TO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF LASER CLASS MEMBERS (> 12000 WORLDWIDE)!!!

    YOUR VOTE COUNTS!!!!
     
  3. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    PPS You need to be a Laser Class member for your vote to count (and the time it takes between the end of the voting period to the announcement of the results is how long it takes the international office to check with Districts as to whether voters are class members - so they do check!). Join today at http://www.laser.org/join-the-class.php
     
  4. gouvernail

    gouvernail Active Member

    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Obviously, this is not a secret ballot! How else could ILCA remove your vote if you are not a member??

    There was only one rules vote while I was the NA Secretary. ILCA did not check to see who was or was not a member.
    I must admit, I didn't ask them to check up either. I didn't really offer a roster and the one time the subject came up about," How do you know who is a member or not?" I was asking about countries and world's berths.

    It seems the ILCA merely has always just "assumed" the number of paid ILCA fees (4.5 pounds sterling per member) was equal to the number of members in a country. ILCA did not ask for name and address rosters.
    If memory serves me correctly, countries with a minimum of 60 members in 1999 got 1 berth at the Laser worlds in Cancun.

    The genesis of my question was the ILCA website where there was a description of how worlds berths are issued. There "just happened" to be 60 members from many countries.

    There also were no countries with 62, 63, 67, or similar numbers. I am all for having lots of sailors from lots of countries and if ILCA gets some extra dough playing memberhip fees into the equasion, I am OK with it. I also don't want to see our real guys sitting home while "money only" members are represented at the worlds.

    Of course every one of the 1999 North American members who were considered by the ILCA for those berths had a name and face. I whined and we procured a couple extra berths for our gang in each of the subsequent worlds including 20 at the Hyannis worlds.

    I would continue about the pathetic NA representation, expecially US sailors, at the last worlds but someone might see that as a slam at what I see as a total lack of mamnagement of our NA resources and this is a thread about voting.

    It just "happened" some of the votes in 2000 came out exactly on the numbers needed for passage. coincidence happens. Probably the numbers of votes really cast were as described. Did anybody see the preliminary results and suggest somebody else campaign a bit more?? I don't know and I sure as hell am not making ANY accusations. I am just trhowing out some facts and asking others to think about what may have happened and what could happen.

    Go on line. Vote and (wink wink) don't vote unless you are a member of the ILCA because "they will check." In fact, if two voters claim to be a member from some r country and use an actual name, I am certain the ILCA check up squad will take the time to determine which of the voters really is that fellow and only cast the ballot form the real Stosh Stefanowitz Urbikowsky.

    Seriously, go vote. A sufficient number of good old honest votes will usually cause an election to come out as it should.
     
  5. LooserLu

    LooserLu LooserLu

    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Just a remind for the ILCA-officials, that perhaps read here at TLF:

    There are also several other ambigious parts at the ILCA By-Laws and their official "interpretations", that really need to be corrected in future, please. Which one that are is known well, since drLaser discussed them here with us all very intensive in 2003/2004. More to that you find somewhere at the archive.org or search at the related TLF-replies of TLF-member 'drLaser' and threads at TLF.
    I can imagine, no one really likes to do such boring work, but it has to be done - no way goes beside to that. Thanks for your attention.

    Ciao
    LooserLu
     
  6. Merrily

    Merrily Administrator Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Hey, have any of you guys who are good at reading and picturing this stuff read these rules? It all looks good to me, but are there any cons to these rules? I'd like to see some discussion before I vote.

    Merrily
     
  7. vtgent49

    vtgent49 Member

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hi,

    Are the '05 channges now in effect? Or do we have to wait for some official pronouncement?

    Also, RE:

    5 Rule 14(d) to be added to as follows:
    "One layer of general purpose self adhesive plastic tape of maximum 2mm thickness and of
    a maximum size of 30mm x 30mm may be applied to the hull at the top front corner of the
    centreboard case."

    Has anyone tried this? I tried UHMW tape (hardly "general purpose"?) and didn't like it. It seemed to agravate the tendency for the board to ride up. Maybe duct tape or other tape is better?

    Al Russell 182792
     
  8. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18

    This was another topic at the World Council meeting. A big question is whether to keep "cleaning up" the rules as written, or to just plain rewrite them to reflect the interpretations (but, importantly, NOT to change them). The problem with the former is that it continues to bandaid things, but the latter is considered a huge undertaking. Either will, of course, require membership approval.

    Adam French, the ILCA Technical Officer, is going to try to take a serious look at this issue and report back to the WC, I hope before the next meeting in South Korea in September.
     
  9. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Taking them out of order:

    2) People have been removing the self bailer drain plug for years (since many people, myself included, tend to kick it closed on those windy days - you know, from the beginning of March through the end of October). Some go the extra step and then tape the pin down to the cockpit floor. Currently this falls into the category of not explicitly allowed and not mentioned (or, really, thought of) so, therefore, illegal under the fundamental rule. But... its one of those things that makes sense when its windy so why not?

    3) Another big problem: when the adrenalin is pumping it is common when you slam the centerboard down at the leeward mark for the stopper to pop off. Then you have no stopper which, of course, is illegal. If this happens to you in the first race of the day and you keep racing the 2nd and later races, you are technically violating the rules and could be thrown out of those races. Ok, I'm digressing here a bit... Since the builders seem to be unable to fix this problem (at the WC meeting it was declared a solved problem but the "new" fittings were coming off regularly during the Master's Worlds), an obvious solution is to allow people to do something to more permanantly attach the fittings. Some people already do this... again, not explicitly allowed but not really talked about in the rules so technically illegal. But, again, why not?

    4) Hmm... I'm realizing that I'm not saying anything new here that isn't already said on the ILCA web page describing the rule changes... So, perhaps I'm not being helpful? As it says on the web page, its become somewhat common to see people loop the shock cord around the bow to keep it enough away from the mast that it doesn't catch the vang fitting.

    and... back to
    1) This is really the biggest rule change of the four since it allows for a new "builder supplied" fitting. This fitting falls into the category of something that many sailors have asked for in the past few years. It will make it easier to attach and detach your sail, it will make it easier to adjust the outhaul while sailing. However, it will do nothing to make you faster. I've sailed with the prototype here in SF Bay in all sorts of breezes and, personally, really like it. But when I line up against the standard group I go no faster, no slower, etc., except that I can get my sail off faster at the dock. I've not had the sail come off even in some very massive deathrolls and roundups. Finally, my recollection is that Chip thinks this will be a $35-$45 builder supplied part which is less than a good mainsheet these days.

    We have discussed the JC Boom Sleeve on TLF before but, as someone who used it extensively, I'm happy to answer questions if people have them.
     
  10. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18

    As I understand it, the rule changes came into effect at the change of the year and the ILCA Class Rules were "missing" from the ILCA website while they were updated. I just checked (http://www.laserinternational.org/rules/ilcarule.htm) and the old rules appear to be back online. I'll enquire to ILCA as to when the new text will appear.
     
  11. LooserLu

    LooserLu LooserLu

    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Tracy, I'm sure you now will find a small way, that will bring us better rules. It's hard and needs time, yes. But, it would be more terrible for common-Laserites like f.e. me to let the rules like they are in the moment.
    Especially if the logic in reason of the language takes one to a wrong self-interpretation of the rules. You can see this f.e. in Shevies famous TLF-threads of 2004 f.e. about how much shackles are allowed to attach at the Outhaul-camcleat. (There you can see what native speaking English Laserites (f.e.: Shevy) understand under the word "a shackle" and such aliens like me "a=1 schackle (<-that is not correct)"... Mr.French not should forget to have a visit at drLasers-words (Bradley surely knows to find them at TLF and at the archive.org), about that rules/interpretations and related-TLF trheads. Maybe there is something useful.
    Good work and thanks for the good information
    Ludwig
     
  12. WestCoast

    WestCoast New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    voted. Boom sleeve would be a nice piece of kit to replace the clew strap/hook system others use.
     
  13. LooserLu

    LooserLu LooserLu

    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I rembered to a TLF-thread of drLaser to the John-Christianson-Tie-Down (John is also a member of TLF):
    http://www.laserforum.org/showthread.php?p=5037&highlight=Christianson#post5037

    Unfortunately, most of the 2004 drLaser backups at archive.org are deleted now and the photo of that JC-Tie-down, too. Only the ones at the laserinternational.org are online, I guess.


    For the centerboard-shockcord, I remembered to a nice website, one of the TLF-members made a hint to, some time ago. I hope it adds a bit the comment of the ILCA related new rules text.

    http://www.swetka.net/laserfleet/images/LaserRig3.jpg

    Ciao
    LooserLu
     
  14. rock steady

    rock steady New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Some good ideas here. Thanks!
     
  15. gouvernail

    gouvernail Active Member

    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The sleeve>>>

    I sailed with it for an entire winter. Since I used it it has been improved to make the sail be held closer to the boom and be less likely to come loose. Thge old fitting pictured in the photos linked below had a hook from which the clew could be wiped loose by the perfect capsize.
    The sleeve rocks!!! I do not know why a stainless sleeve slides freely over an aluminum pole but it does and it does not harm the boom in the process.

    Look at the rig on my photo site and be aware the new proposed system is even better. I cannot imagine why we would vote to deprive ourselves of its convenience.

    http://schrothfiberglass.com/RiggingforLaser.htm
     
  16. vtgent49

    vtgent49 Member

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Just got this:

    Laser Class Rules

    Proposed Rule Changes
    If you are a class member please click on the link to our web site for
    proposed class rule changes and please take a few seconds to vote on
    the changes. Do not rely on someone else!
    www.laserinternational.org/rules2006

    Revised Rules
    Previously published interpretations and the changes approved in 2005
    have now been included in the 2006 rules that are available in pdf
    format on the following link: www.laserinternational.org/rules/ilcarule
    Regards
    Jeff Martin
    Executive Secretary
    ILCA
     
  17. rock steady

    rock steady New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just voted "YES" to all.
     
  18. Georg W.F.

    Georg W.F. Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    OK, the boom sleeve looks great and seems to make life a little easier. Yet, the formulations "manufacturer supplied" raises some issues for me. Yes, you want a manufacturer for the hull, and the sails so that the one design status is held intact. But, why should every single part of the boat be manufactured by the same supplier. Will a vang or the cuningham and outhaul deck fittings manufactured by Company Y will make the boat any faster than the ones produced by the official supplier? No, but it might create a bit more compeition, so that the products become either cheaper or better. Look for example at the different excellent carbon tillers that have been produced. Since it is not strictly regulated the free market mechanism is at work here, which means better inovative products. The same should apply to this boom sleeve: not a single boom sleeve will make the boat faster, but less regulations, will provide products that work better and people can make their own if they want to.
    GWF
     
  19. Merrily

    Merrily Administrator Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Yes, I'm curious as to why the boom sleeve needs to be manufacturer suppled, as well. Is there some reason, other than to line the manufacturers pockets, that they should supply it?
     
  20. SFBayLaser

    SFBayLaser Member

    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18


    I lifted this quote out of the "Upper Mast" thread because I think it really belongs here.

    John Christianson claims to have studied the boom sleeve thoroughly, indeed I know that he has worked on it for a number of years (the photos on Fred's pages date back to 2001-2002!). He says he has pretty thoroughly studied the problem trying a large number of prototypes (composed of many different materials and of various shapes and sizes) before arriving at the present design. So, the claim is that, yes, a stainless strap works best, both for friction and the ability to get the clew as close to the boom as possible.

    The prototype versions of the strap that I have (and have been showing) are not very heavy, and certainly not heavy enough to make any sort of difference to anything. Meaning that I'd be surprised if you could make anything enough lighter that it would be faster (and, in fact, I doubt that the strap itself will make anyone "faster" on the water, just a lot faster at rigging and unrigging!).

    Finally, I don't know what the retail price will be. I can say that the builders were very much opposed to this strap until they determined they saw how well it worked and determined that it could be sold at a reasonable price (they don't want to be forced to stock up on something that they then can't sell). I have **heard** the number $35 used but I **can't** say that is what it will retail for.

    Tracy
     

Share This Page