MERLIN ROCKET FORUM

Topic : Weight Reduction - the case for (only)

I thought that a for thread would help to give the plus side (can we keep this a list of perceived benefits)

This class is founded on the principle of obsolescence (development).

There are only about 180 competitive boats across the full range of conditions, with some special exceptions.

Weight reduction will have most impact in marginal planing conditions and will reduce the optimal crew weight. Heavy Hull = Heavy Crew; Light Hull = Light Crew

It is the easiest of the parameters to change and will outmode the fewest number of boats; it may precipitate some design changes may be revive some old designs - How would Joyrider work at -5 or -10.

You can argue that if you don't want change then get a Laser.

I think that the N12 has lost many potential members to the Merlin because of the controllability of the rig and the spinnaker. Events like Salcombe and the Champs make our class nearly unbeatable (IMHO).

Salcombe and the Champs are 60% Winder - just look at where 3554 is on the Salcombe entry list (30 up from the bottom).

Those who should be in favour
* Lightweights
* Designers
* New Builders
* Purists
* Serial Boat Changers
* Big Water Sailors

Those who would vote against
* Luddites
* Dave Winder
* Wood lovers
* Old Boat owners

What's the worst that could happen???

http://www.salcombeyc.org.uk/content/racing-results/%5Emerlin-rocket%5EMarchand_Petit_Merlin_Rocket_Week_2008/

Posted: 20/03/2008 22:24:09
By: -10kg
Don't get it; Archimedes and the rise of floor are the major limiting factors surely.


Posted: 21/03/2008 11:11:04
By: .
The worst that could happen would be extinction. The classes that have survived best and yes there are some that have been arround longer than the MR are boats like the XOD Class luddite maybe they still have wooden masts and until recently maybe now you couldn't use fancy modern paints and fillers. They have lots more boats than the MR at their Nationals too.


Posted: 21/03/2008 11:14:35
By: Tyger
Weight is a major issue in the removal of the speed bump or reducing the impact of it, but this also goes with design and rig. The speed bump is where the KD/IH designs fair well but if we were to reduce the weight, the likes of Gangster assuming she can remove said weight would possibly fair better than the Tales design. Joyrider, it would be a dream ticket and they would really fly as the transom would have less chance of sticking in the light stuff.
I believe we will have a weight reduction but as and when is another issue. As being one of the heavier members/teams at or near the front, we have a foot in both camps.
What is the benefit of removing weight, very little other than the overall performance and less weight to drag around the dinghy park/motorway. As long as we have the likes of 3639 racing for trophies, we have a moral issue to look after their interests and protect the overall welfare of the wooden boats. Most of the Chipstows will be able to loose the weight but the Turners and Drivers will not and this has to be taken into account in any decision. What is of more interest is weight distribution and this unfortunately is where the wooden boats loose out as the Winders have very little in either end.
Of greater interest to us is rig development and the options that are becoming available with the advancement of materials. This is where the real performance enhancement is going to come from and when it does, we will see a marked improvement in marginal conditions in said rigs.
XODS/Salcombe Yawls etc are a poor example as they are localised fleets that have a strong local following and tend to have a high percentage use to built numbers. Merlins by the very nature of their development are a different animal and the only similarity is £1 per foot length, lots of money. So roll on Salcombe and lets see how many make it to the Nationals.
Bye for now


Posted: 21/03/2008 17:20:40
By: Barnsie
There is one theme running through this very well supported thread, which is the Merlin Rocket is a fantastic Sailing Dinghy. Indeed I would go further and say it is the best. If it has a fault it is that it (At least the boats I sailed with so much enjoyment.) spoils one for all other boats. It is a very sharp tool alongside which all others seem blunt.

All of which beggars the question if it is that good why would you want to make a fundamental change?

Indeed you might want to consider restricting the move towards piling the weight into the middle of the “yot” and leaving the ends made of not a lot more than paper. I have been told a “Swing Test” was considered a few years back and abandoned as an idea as a measurement complexity too far. Well it really isn’t; it doesn’t take long to do; and goes a long way to ensuring the weight is built into strength all round and helps the longevity of individual boats, especially those with combatative drivers! It need not be retrospective “Grandfathering” boats of all classes as materials develop and rules move on is a long used practice in many classes. Sadly my bulk (I was always at the top end weight wise!) and dodgy knees preclude my sailing dinghys these days, but I can remember the joy of Merlin Rockets at sea or inland.
Floreat Merlin Rockets!


Posted: 22/03/2008 12:17:52
By: Ancient Geek
For fairness you might also include in "-10kgs" list of those who would be against weight reduction those who don't qualify as lightweights, whatever weight that might be.


Posted: 22/03/2008 20:05:32
By: Mike Anslow
If the boats lose 10kilo (something that I could not do in my turner frp tales) then all I have to do is find a crew 10k lighter to retain the status quo? But, will they have equal talent or 11k less which means that I lose out! If the boats were to sail without a crew and helm, then weight is an issue but, as they don't were is the advantage of a lighter boat? Surely if people are screwed up about lightweights Vs heavyweights then the only solution is a minimum all up weight of both boat and crew!


Posted: 22/03/2008 20:35:13
By: floppy toppy
The one thing that is keeping us from getting a Merlin is the weight, my wife does not want to pull one up the dinghy park. We would be on the light side for open water events, but inland, ideal, which is where we do most of our sailing. A 10 kg reduction would hopefully make the difference for this, I think unreasonable rejectioin. Will just have to join the RS200 Merlin wannabees till then.


Posted: 22/03/2008 22:21:19
By: wife wants a lighter boat
Question is does the wife have £15K to buy a new Merlin as if you have been following the other threads you will be hard pushed to find a second hand one with 10KGs of lead!!!


Posted: 22/03/2008 23:57:59
By: Jez3550
I suggest you help your wife pull the boat arround the park. Youre not being fair! 
PS. There is no comparison between a merlin and RS 200. Once you sail a Merlin you will see the light.


Posted: 23/03/2008 08:35:13
By: Jon
Lets remember why the merlin is still a successful class. It is becuase they have changed with the times and don't look like the originals. SO with that in mind I would love to see a weight reduction because I am getting old and don't like pulling an extra 20 kgs up and down the beach. The boats would plane earlier and go faster. It is simple physics! 

I would also like a double floor because I am not very tall and can't get my legs around the bouyancy bags on a close reach. I also struggle to see over the foredeck so a bit of extra height would help. It would make the boat stiffer, simpler to build and the water could run out of a double floor with no need for a transom and flaps.

Alternatively I could go to the gym and grow a bit but frankly neither are very likely.

Finally I think calculated gradual change is vital to sustain the class as desirable this surely has to include weight reduction.


Posted: 23/03/2008 22:26:40
By: chris lewns
she has the notes!
Seriously the boat that put her off was a wooden NSMII with a tin mast. Reminded me of my old Laser 5000 helping pull it up the ramp (may be a bit damp). Having seen the performance of the modern boats, and been seriously tempted, I was really suprised to find the weight had not come down already. Having said that, it is probably keeping your PY a little more honest than the phantom, as there is a performance hump. I doubt 10kgs would make as much difference as many have said. The biggest difference in reducing crew weights you have already gone for with carbon sticks. With a big rig the weight limit is always going to be the ability to hike it upright.
Moneybags will just need a bit more convincing.
Cheers


Posted: 24/03/2008 01:40:30
By: wife is a GP
in reply to chris lewns comment on a double floor, yes i do believe that this would improve overall stiffness, however it would also mean that each of the floors would have to be thinner to stay down to weight... especially if the possible 10kgs was lost. This would reduce the stiffness around non- supported areas, possibly giving overall weaker hulls. An example of this is on GP 14's. The new double skin epoxy designs are fast when new and even with their huge weight of materials and solid structure, they do go soggy after 3-4 seasons, losing height to windward as a result. No tests that i know have been done to check if there are advantages-disadvantages with this. Also, more weight would be up higher with a double floor. Of the winders that i have sailed, the older ones still feel very very solid and still give a great feel when bouncing around on the sidedecks. Without doing a test to check torsional stiffness (by holding boat solid around shroud and mast points and hanging a weight off one rear corner... Then measuring deflection... Then comparing to a new design) I could not prove this.


Posted: 24/03/2008 19:33:00
By: catgut
Come 2020, do you still want to be putting 25kgs of lead into every new boat?
By then:
- The current brand new boats will be 12 years old
- Around 150 new boats will have been built
- The early Winder CT Mk1s will be approx 20 years old.
- New ways of building boats will have been found that either reduce the weight further, or allow the current rotomoulded type boats to be built down to weight (Remember: 20 years ago, no one at the front of the fleet would have been seen in a GRP based boat. Now they are all clamouring for a W plastic Merlin).

If you drop the weight rapidly, then you will have a different class from that point onwards. If you publish well in advance a gradual weight reduction, you will give everyone the chance to understand what the changes will mean to them and their type of racing.

So, publish now that there will be a 5kg drop in each of the years 2010, 2012, 2015, 2020 and 2025.


Posted: 25/03/2008 11:06:46
By: Looking in
I am a 1964 built vintage Merlin that is considerably heavier than my more modern rivals, I am currently trying to compete (with limited success) against a Passing Cloud designed boat built in 2000, this boat is carrying lead and therefore has the ability to reduce it's overall weight, but not I.  I suspect the owner of this boat is almost salivating at the prospect of taking some lead out... I am afraid it would spell the end of the road for me and all other boats like me. 

Anybody got a match...?


Posted: 25/03/2008 11:54:22
By: Death Nell
I think this is a job for Old Al


Posted: 25/03/2008 14:13:34
By: Gift orse
This is possibly of no relavence to the current debate. BUT in 1968 one of the most devesating wins in any regatta anywhere was Rodney Pattison's first Gold Medal in the Flying Dutchman Class, as a perfect performance it survives in the Guiness Book of Records. Supercalifragilsticexpaladocious - K 163 - when scrutineered before the regatta was weighed in (According to Jack Knights report and several others too.) at 100lbs over the minimum and her mast (an Allspar.) was very heavy too. I believe Alan Warrren's Tempest was hardly light in 1972 either. So whilst it may not help the handicap can be overcome!


Posted: 25/03/2008 14:30:36
By: Ancient Geek
I specifically looked long and hard for a Mk1 Winder - I knew that after that it was all down to my ineptitude. I am absolutely in favour of weight reduction which is why I made sure that I bought a boat with scope to lighten. I also know in my heart that I won't beat RG in any boat even if it is 25kg lighter - closer maybe but not in front.

To Death Knell - I think that vintage boats should comply with Vintage rules and Luka is not a vintage boat (it's newer than my Mk1 Winder). Just be glad that someone still loves you if you were a 1964 GP or Ent you'd last have been loved on or around Nov 5th 1984.

As a development class we're supposed to be looking forwards - what would have happened if we'd banned carbon spars.

We can't realistically increase sail area, raise the rise of floor, shave off the lands or permit foils. Full carbon hulls is pointlessly expensive it'll just mean even more lead.

I we're going to do something then this is it - I'd like to hear from Dan and Davo, the two last bastions of Wood is Good. Would they worry - Dan certainly seems to excel is the very conditions that a weight reduction would affect (marginal planing) and Rong N' seems to be widely considered to be fortunately misnamed - both boats have had more than a fair innings in any class' terms.

I truly believe that the current class is so strong and well regarded that this will only make it better and more interesting - we've been fiddling with the rig for 15 years now let's do some hull twiddling again.

Now where's that chainsaw and my micro-balloons I'm off to the shed


Posted: 25/03/2008 14:37:31
By: Stud Muffin
I'll bet that the people who have new boats that can remove weight at no cost will vote for for a weigh reduction and those that have older or wooden boats that cannot remove the agreed weight will vote against. After all whose going to vote in a rule that will slash the value of the boat you own. 
There are clearly many many more old boat owners but will they be at the AGM when and where this happens ?


Posted: 25/03/2008 16:08:52
By: WP
Dear Stud Muffin, thank-you for your kind words but it does not lighten my mood, because even though my owner is a jolly nice chap, I am afraid even his patience would be tested.  I am relatively competetive now but these old planks are a little damp and an extra 10 litres would effectively consign me to the scrapheap. I'm not sure I would even put on a decent show come Nov 5th...


Posted: 25/03/2008 17:08:58
By: Death Nell
Final input on this one.
As it has such far reaching repercussions for of the membership, if the committee have any sense and the AGM attendees, confidence in the class, this one should go to postal, email vote with those wishing to notify their vote by email, forwarding it to the Chairman and one other that all will trust.
In the B14s we have held several class changing votes worldwide with email voting and can say it has proven successful and been accepted by all as the coordinators were trusted by all. I would suggest that the second holder of record if proceeding this way be JC, Pat or GGGG as none have a direct interest in the outcome.
Also it should be that the vote only be valid if a certain number of returns are received, ie at least 60% of full membership payees.
Also you could add a clause that if voting yes to reduction, 2 time scales of 5 KG. Say 2011 and 2016 or 2013 and 2018. This will offer a second option to those with having concern for current boats.
Anyway I have had my say and time for others.
BFN
Barnsie


Posted: 25/03/2008 19:54:05
By: Barnsie
Mark - in all the years I have known you I have never heard you say "I have had my say and time for others".  You must be getting old!

BFN

John


Posted: 25/03/2008 21:06:33
By: JC
I have no doubt that Barnsie will not be able to resist further comment on this thread ...


Posted: 25/03/2008 23:30:10
By: abc
I think that the current discussion focuses on the top boats being more competative than those say 10 years older (which will always be the case and is why people buy new boats), what I think people have so far missed is that currently a 10year old boat is still in the same league as a 20year old boat. If you have a weight drop, that divide/advantage is significant and will be there forever - you'll have two sub-classes, like the 12s. This risks screwing up future club racing for the benifit of the current top 30-50 boats, the vintage wing have enough discussion about tiered handicaps as it is!

Currently, there is good close racing at the front of the fleet in a class that everyone clearly enjoys. There are areas in which development will still push design forward. The rig developments will increase the power to weight ratio of the hull and this will in turn mean that new hull modifications would be benifitial (and that the marginal planing wind strength will decrease). So you're not out of things to fiddle with yet!

You've got a good product that does what it's meant to do.
If you want to go faster, there are faster classes.
If your that competative, get helm and crew to lose 5kg each.


Posted: 26/03/2008 11:56:55
By: &
Couldn't agree more, plus my owner has agreed to try and lose 5kgs (just the one chin) and I'm going to lose the other five by not leaking so much...


Posted: 26/03/2008 13:46:43
By: Death Nell

REPLY

To Reply, please join/renew membership.

Owners Association


Developed & Supported by YorkSoft Ltd

Contact

Merlin Rocket Owners Association
Secretary