|
|
2003 AGM MinutesMike Anslow - August 2003 |
2003
AGM Minutes
Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the Merlin Rocket
Owners’ Association held at 1.
Notice of Meeting 40 Full Members of the Association and 2 Associate Members
were present and signed the attendance list. 2.
Apologies for absence Apologies were received from Lawrence Tosh,
Graham Williamson, John Bell, Julian Parry and David Proctor. 3.
Minutes of the AGM held at Whitstable on Will Rainey proposed that the minutes of the AGM held in
2002 be accepted, and this was seconded by Peter Scott. This proposal was carried unanimously. 4.
Chairman’s Report Pat Blake said that he had taken on the job of Chairman with
some misgivings. He had found the Class
in very good condition. He had been
involved with the Class for many years and the boat was now the best
non-trapeze 2-man dinghy in the world – this was down to the people in the
Class. Pat was pleased to be here and to
say that he was proud of our 60 years of development. We might get some ideas as to where we were
to go by looking at what happened in our development in the past. We had a Class, which could cope with the sea
– four miles offshore today at Abersoch – and also
inland venues such as Hollingworth, Shustoke and river sailing.
Merlin sailors, young and old, were special and the boats they sailed
beautiful. It was his own opinion that
continued small developments were good for the Class. Big steps that made most of the fleet
obsolete would be disastrous. The Class Association ran like clockwork with Committee
members doing a lot of work. Some of
these were key people. He thanked them
all. The Association currently had 460
Full Members. So far this year 140
different boats had taken part in Silver Tiller events. 100 boats had attended Salcombe Merlin Week
and there were over 60 here at the Championships at Abersoch. 5.
Treasurer’s Report Demelza Mitchell said that the Annual
Report and Accounts had been published in the summer edition of the
Magazine. She had nothing further to add
and she asked for questions. There being
no questions from the floor Phil King proposed that the Report and Accounts be
accepted. Judith Massey seconded the
motion, which was carried unanimously. 6.
Appointment of Auditor Phil King proposed that Clare King be appointed as
auditor. This was seconded by Hywel
Perkins Jnr. and carried unanimously. 7.
Election of Officers of the Association Pat Blake said that there had been discussions regarding the
improvement of computer systems used to record membership details and
income. It had been agreed between Chris
Clews and Demelza Mitchell that a better way forward
would be to combine the current two sets of records under the control of one
person. Demelza
had offered to take on the job of looking after membership matters and Chris
Clews was helping her to combine the records over the next few months. Therefore, there would be no need for a
separate person to fill the role of Honorary Membership Secretary. Pat took this opportunity to records his thanks, and those of the Association, for the 27 years of
tireless work put in by Chris and Beryl Clews for the Association, and he
thanked Chris for the work he was currently doing to combine the records. Pat then went on to propose that the following be appointed
to the relevant offices for the next year: - Mike Anslow as
Honorary Secretary Demelza Mitchell as
Honorary Treasurer Judith
Massey as Honorary Keeper of
the Class Records Graham Williamson had seconded these nominations. The meeting voted unanimously in favour of
these appointments. 8.
Election of Committee Members of the Association Will Rainey proposed that Pat Blake, Richard Battey and Magnus Smith, all of whom had been co-opted onto
Committee during the last year, be elected onto Committee. Mike Anslow
seconded this proposal, which was carried unanimously. Duncan Salmon retired from Committee at this meeting after a
number of years’ valuable work for the Association. 9.
Proposed changes to Measurement Rules At this point in the meeting it was noted that there were
now insufficient members in the room to vote on changes to the Rules – a
minimum of 40 Full Members being required.
Other business on the Agenda was dealt with first in the hope that
sufficient numbers might return. This
did not happen however, and the Chairman adjourned consideration of Item 9 on
the Agenda until a suitable time later during the Championship Week – see
end of these minutes. 10. Report on investigations into weight
distribution Andy Jones reported on the investigations authorised by
Committee into the effect of lightening the ends of boats and adding further
correctors in the middle to compensate All the possible ways of controlling the weight distribution
had been considered by the committee and it was considered that only the
introduction of a ‘swing’ test would work. The committee had undertaken a test in which four boats had
been swing-tested – 2 wooden and 2 FRP, with varying amounts of correctors or
none at all. He went into the technical
details of the test and the theory behind it. The committee felt that the
results did show a small difference but the problems associated with the test
far outweighed any advantage. How
significant was the removal of weight from the ends to the middle of a
hull? More important was the fact that
each boat had between 130 and 180 kgs of moveable
weight (the helm and crew), how this weight was used mattered greatly. The advent of carbon rigs and Mylar sails,
with their lighter weight, had had a much greater effect than the move to
lighter ends and more correctors. The conclusion was that the swing tests had been an
interesting exercise, but it would be impractical to use swing tests as a
matter of course in measuring hulls and could, if adopted, lead to other
undesirable design trends. Members were
reminded that Committee had undertaken the swing tests to address concerns over
lighter ends in hulls. The related issue of a reduction in minimum hull weight had
already been discussed. The committee thought that this might be desirable at
some future time, when most competitive boats have considerable amounts of
correctors in. Perhaps in 5 years time a reduction of say 5 to 8 kgs should be considered. Pat Blake said that this decision should be taken by a general
meeting then, as any decision made now would not be binding. He was not in
favour of a stepped reduction of say 1kg per year as this would be very
difficult to administer meanwhile discussion should be encouraged. There were a couple of boats at these Championships with 25 kgs of correctors but there were concerns that corrector
weights might increase. Linton Jenkins
thought that it might be possible to increase the weight of correctors to more
than 30kgs in 5 years’ time. Richard Dee
commented that the newer “lighter” hulls had not yet been around long enough to
test their durability. 11. Any other business Pat Blake wished to discuss systems for the flights and seedings at Salcombe Merlin Week. There was the option of seeding from the
start, but several alternative systems had been proposed. However, he would not be keen to go back to
the old system where numbers were limited. Will Rainey pointed out that 3 years ago 120 boats had
entered and the whole system had been changed to take account of this. If the entry fell below 92 boats, then we
could go back to the old system with 46 boats on the start line. He wondered whether the Harbourmaster would
be prepared to accept an entry of up to 100 with 50 boats on the line. Under the present system, with an entry of
100, you could have 4 races per day with 25 on the start line – an alternative
would be to have 3 races with 33 starters.
He felt that the present system with no pre-qualifying was good and was
largely accepted with comparatively few dissatisfied. Dave Townend issued a word of
caution. Everyone thought we could go
back to the old system with 92 entries.
The Harbourmaster might not be prepared to allow 46 boats on the start
line any more. Richard Whitworth thought we were indebted to Will Rainey
for changing the system, but felt that pre-seeding was essential with gold
fleet boats sailing against other gold fleet boats all the time. Phil King said that Salcombe Yawls split
their fleet into two based upon the age of the boats, as did Flying
Fifteens. He thought we could do the
same. A survey should be undertaken to
find out what Class members thought.
William Warren agreed that we should encourage classic and older boats,
and he thought we could encourage them to attend the National Championships. Dave Townend said
that by splitting into 2 fleets the Yawls had created interest in the older
boats. However, people still felt that
they should sail in the “big boys’ fleet”.
Dan Alsop suggested that the classic boats
fleet could sail their races on a handicap basis. Simon Blake, who had already prepared a paper for Committee
on the subject of Salcombe seedings and races, felt
that a requirement to pre-qualify (partially through good Silver Tiller
results) could encourage attendance a ST events. Linton Jenkins agreed. Mike Calvert and Dan Alsop
felt the gold and Silver fleets should be split on a
50/50 basis according to a ranking list. Will Rainey felt that the 4-race option should be retained
as it allows for predictability. Finally, Alan Warren commented that the Association could do
better to have its AGM at Salcombe during Merlin Week. The meeting was adjourned at this point. -------- Minutes of the adjourned part of the Annual General Meeting
of the Merlin Rocket Owners’ Association reconvened at 9.
Proposed changes to Measurement Rules Pat Blake reconvened the AGM in the presence of 44 Full
Members and 2 Associate Members. He
explained that the AGM had been opened on Monday with a quorum of over 25
members, but that it had not been possible to deal with proposals to amend the
Measurement Rules as, at the time, there were less than the 40 Full Members
present required to vote on such changes.
He pointed out that any change to the Rules would have to be carried by
a minimum 75% majority. He also proposed
to take the amendments in reverse order. PROPOSAL
5 – Marking measured spinnakers
To amend Rule 14 Section (i) as
follows: “The following shall be written legibly and indelibly
in metric units not less than 20 mm in height: The
actual area of the foresail shall be marked adjacent to its tack. The
foot measurement, F, of a mainsail shall be marked adjacent to its tack. The
measured area of the spinnaker shall be marked on its clew.” Proposed by Graham Williamson and seconded by Will Rainey. Pat Blake said the purpose of this amendment was to identify
a sail as a Merlin Rocket spinnaker. Ben Jennings thought
this was sensible. This amendment was
approved unanimously. PROPOSAL
4 – Easing the amendment of moulds
To amend Rule 4n(iv) as follows: Delete Section (b)
and renumber the remaining Sections to suit. Proposed by Graham Williamson and seconded by Will Rainey. Pat Blake said that
the Rule intended that frp boats should conform to a
plywood shape. This Section was not
really necessary to achieve this aim.
Guy Winder agreed that this requirement was well regulated elsewhere in the
Rules. The meeting voted unanimously in
favour of this amendment. PROPOSAL
3 – Corrector Position
To amend Rule 5
Section ( c) as follows: Delete words: “be
located above the approximate waterline and” Proposed by Graham Williamson and seconded by Will Rainey. Pat Blake said a few people in the Class had commented that
some boats without thwarts had weights fixed lower down on the centre
moulding. However it appeared that boats
pitched about a point which was above the waterline. It was thought that there would be no
advantage in having correctors low down in a boat and could even be a
disadvantage. Lawrie
Smart pointed out that when a designer completes a new design, he doesn’t know
exactly where the waterline is. Phil
King thought the Rule was unenforceable and should go. 43 voted in favour of the amendment with one
abstention. The amendment was carried. PROPOSAL 2 – Clarifying the
interpretation of “Total Weight”. To amend Rule 5 (b) as follows: “The TOTAL WEIGHT of the boat including centreboard,
buoyancy and its fastenings, fixed fittings rigidly attached to the hull, fixed
bottom boards and correctors, and adjustment tackles for shrouds, lower
shrouds, kicking strap and jib halyard, but stripped of sails, spars,
rudder, tiller, pump, sheets, standing rigging and all other gear shall never
be less than 98 kgs.” Proposed by Graham Williamson and seconded by Will Rainey. Andy Jones pointed out that currently, during scrutineering of boats at the Championships, measurers had
to make a judgement as to how much the control lines for adjustable shrouds,
lowers, kicker, etc. actually weighed in order to decide whether a boat was
under weight or not. The proposed
amendment would resolve this situation.
Ben Jennings felt it would be a good move to save measurers having to
make a judgement. Lawrie Smart said that the additional gear
in question could weigh as much as 3kgs and Ross Jackson enquired whether this
could mean that some boats could now take some correctors out. Robin Charles was concerned that this would
disadvantage those boats which had no correctors to remove. Steve Watson said that there were still a lot
of competitive boats around which were several kilos overweight. Ben said that he had measured Jon Turner’s Seventh
Heaven some years ago after a string of successes, and the hull had
weighed 105 kilos. The proposal was put to the vote and 37 voted in favour, 2
against, with 2 abstentions. The
proposal was therefore carried. PROPOSAL
1 – Banning Winged Rudders
To amend Rule 17 (a) as follows: “The following are prohibited: Double luff mainsails,
mainsails passed round the mast and attached back on themselves, inside
ballast, bowsprits, bumpkins, outside channels, outriggers, bilgeboard,
double rudders, winged rudders or similar contrivances, etc. …..” Proposed by Graham Williamson and seconded by Will Rainey. Will Rainey said that a number of people had experimented
with winged rudders, which were used by the Int. 14 and Moth classes. Wings had been of various widths – some fixed
and others variable. The cost of such a
rudder would be around £1000. In the
Int. 14 class the effect was to make the waterline length a bit longer than the
hull. He thought it unlikely that there
would be a benefit to the Merlin Rocket class at our speeds. Adjustable wings might be effective, but
there would have to be a change in hull design to take advantage. Ben Jennings asked if 14s used them in all conditions, and
Tom Stewart said they did, though it wasn’t a requirement. Linton Jenkins agreed with much of what Will
had said, though he thought a rudder would cost less than £1000. There were many advantages to winged
rudders, amongst which they gave a nicer ride.
He and Simon Blake had tried one, but it required more development. Tom said that Int. 14 rudders cost £1000, and
Dan Alsop was concerned about the expense – we should
give plenty of thought as to the cost implications. Also, did “adjustable” wings mean wings that
could be altered on the water, or only off it?
Julian Parry thought a cheaper, fixed wing version could be used
effectively on present hull designs and the main advantage would be the
additional stability it gave the boat.
Linton asked the members not to ban the winged rudder – we didn’t know
enough about it yet. Another comment was
that recent developments in sails and spars had been costly and this could mean
another significant cost increase. It
was not clear that winged rudders would suit a Merlin, but we didn’t know
yet. Guy Winder and Lawrie
Smart were concerned about the possibility of a significant increase in costs,
and Lawrie thought it could ruin the versatility of
the class. Tom Stewart said that 2 Nat 12s had tried fixed wings and
another 2 had tried variable wings, though none had been used at this year’s
championships. John Cooper asked for a definition of a fixed wing
rudder. Will said that it would be
possible to introduce a Rule that a rudder blade should be able to pass through
a “letter box” 4 inches wide. “Fences”
were allowed – the RYA thought our definition allowed the use of “fences”. If this proposal was approved, he thought we
should go back to the RYA to check our definition before it was put in the
Rules. Linton said that if winged
rudders were banned, no development would take place. If other classes went ahead and we changed
our minds later, we could find ourselves playing catch up. Pat Blake said that Int. 14s were using winged rudders
because their hulls were really too short for the huge area of sail they
carried. The strength of the Merlin
Rocket was in the places we sailed and he didn’t think that winged rudders
would be good for the Class considering the wide variety of venues. The proposal was put to the vote. 17 members voted for, 10 against and 13
abstained. The proposal was not carried. Pat Blake said that Committee would continue to look at this
question and if necessary bring forward proposals to the next AGM. He asked for
plenty of input from members. There being no further business, the Annual General Meeting
was closed. |