Now there's not much sailing going on it's time to have endless discussions about how to improve the boat on the forum.  As the weight issue has been done to death what about other tweaks to the boat?

When are we going to see the 1st adjustable hull shape?  Have a space frame instead of decks, crank it out to max beam for going for a windy sail on open water, pull everything in a bit to reduce heeled wetted area for that drifter on the river.  If you were good with hydraulic systems you could run the whole lot from a master cylinder somewhere in the middle of the boat with another one-string system.  I'm not sure how you would tweak the transom yet, but if you had the engineering expertise maybe you could also alter the rocker to lift it a bit.  And it's all bound to weigh less than the 20kg of lead in the present lot of Winder boats and gives you yet another thing to blame when you lose.

Andrew 3511

The way to go is to have a narrow merlin with out riggers to give it stability in a breeze. As demonstrated by a well known merlin crew in the design below.

Can I have hydraulic knees too, to make hiking easier?

Well, we could go to a narrow hull and two sliding seats, international canoe style. If it is good enough for Jim Champ ....

p.s. the picture isn't of Jim C by the way

No you can't Alan it is specifically forbidden in the rules.

I am thinking about twinning lines but can't decide whether I could work them or not. It 's another thing to remember but I always have trouble getting the spinnaker sheet until the reaching hook when it's windy.

Any thoughts?

I was under the impression that by teh title 'silly seaon', you were going for rule changes, not whta can be done within the rules.

It is also forbidden in the rules that the weight can not be below 98 kg. 

But I guess that wasn't your first post's purpose, and in fact you were trying to create adjustments within the existing rules by creating a bendable boat? If you can build it in wood it sounds like it could be legal.

Been trying to think up mods within the M/R rules, based on experience with many other classes, for ten years now, but no dice. However, if you want a rule change that will power the boat up a bit and cost less in the long run for everybody in every design, reconsider fully battened MODERN mainsails and forget the old trial ages ago. The sails will last much longer and set better. So they will power up when you are trying to launch - learn to live with it. How do you think Moths, Canoes, 14s and etc. cope?
Also, an answer for Minx from a North Sea boat with a slow 66 year old helm and an, ahem, very mature, lightweight lady with considerable damage to back and knees from chucking big horses over big fences:- twinners are brilliant. Hoist the kite then bang on the guy twinner easily a bit later. Twin both sides to control a heavy weather gybe or drop. But be aware that a fast, strong, young crew can beat you by a few seconds, until such time as they swim!

Twinners as a single line right across the (narrower) boat are good and easy to grab and pull down both sides before a breezy gybe!

Why only the (narrower) boat? Same thing works perfectly well over any width and you can get that distant sheet under control on the leeward side whilst sitting out on the windward side.

AND, of course vice versa

It was my usual motivation for posting, to create a diversion from having to think about work.  I'm surprised anyone took it as a serious suggestion but anyway, let's have some more suggestions.  The Bloody Mary entry forms ask if your boat has hydrofoils, anyone fancy taking the lead out and putting a couple of foils under a Merlin?

The only vaguely serious suggestion I have came from Laurie Smart who suggested we allow a tolerance fore and aft for the rise of floor measurement so that the max waterline beam can be further aft along with centre of buoyancy rather than mid-length.

Winged foils are banned in the rules, but what about canting foils? Lots more lovely control lines, mmmmmmmm.....

As the Bloody Mary is not run by the class association if you want to compete in a boat that does not comply with class rules you can negotiate with the race organisers as was done with the A Rater flying a Contessa 32 spinnaker a few years ago, which must have been Jeremy Kearns and very likely Guy Wood trimming it.

My reading of the rules can find no winged rudder prohibition.  Please can you direct me.
Thanks.

Talking of Guy "ALLLLLEEEEEEEEZ" Woods, he was Father Christmas at Hampton Sailing Club last weekend and vey funny he was too, arrived by boat with all the gear on...class!

I think I'm right in saying there is still nothing in the rules to prohibit winged rudders, although banning them was discussed at an AGM a few years ago (Abersoch?).  

I also seem to recall PK and Kevin trying a winged rudder on Gangsta at the Weymouth Silver Tiller ???? years back.  I guess there were some issues because the idea never took off.  Ahem, OK, I'll get my coat......

Hey Andrew, my suggestion about fully battened sails was perfectly serious. We could even retrofit them on old mylar sails with a bit of double-sided tape.
Re Foils: At Whitstable the Merlin fleet is slimming down slowly, whilst we have 3 new Cherubs with foils and no lead. Different strokes for different folks.

It wasn`t me honest cos he still exists!!! Please tell me so!!! But many thanks to all "Elfs" involved incl Charles Anderson and Suzie Bell who upon seeing the pillow to padden out the outfit (not that I need one) very kindly said Santa feels cold and lent me a suitably positioned scarf to hide the padding?? PS First time did it Suzie was being given presents to and young Mr A might even have still been an apple in his Father`s eye?? No seriously loads of fun if not still a little nerve racking with all the lil ones expectations but sounds like did a good job Cheers student Bum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What about cutting the centreboard in half down the middle so each half has one curved side and one flat side? On a beat you just put the windward half down - surely that'd give you more lift to windward? Be a bit of a hassle and need plenty more string so each half could be operated quickly and easily but surely if you could make each half strong enough then it could work... or would it be illegal??

I like the thinking. Has it ever been done in other classes? Would it actually work?

Regarding the rules, the rules only refer to centreboard in the singular, and I think this could be interpreted as a double c/board. If a double c/board was allowed down the 50mm slot and withing th 8kg weight limit, then each could be optimised to give the best lift on each tack.

There is a vague catch-all in the rules, just after 'double rudder', which I think would need clarification if some one did create such a device.

"(a) The following are prohibited:
Electronic aids, double luffed mainsails, mainsails passing round the
mast and attached back on themselves, inside ballast, bowsprits,
bumpkins, outside channels, outriggers, bilge-boards, double rudders
and similar contrivances,"

Tom & Alan, I did just that in the winter if 1964-5 (Three, then, RYA measurers were consulted Robin Fowler, Cliff Norbury and John Nicholls all said it was (They thought.) legal, when asked.) we could detect no difference in performance and it was in the wise words of, David Tucker, my then crew "a right pain in the arse" I suspect in many ways! So we went back to the gybing board which we, at least, "thought" worked!

I have a feeling that an assymmetric foil generating lift will also increase drag from the famous principle of physics about there not being such a thing as a free lunch (i.e. you will only generate a force, lift, from energy derived from something else).  I can't see it being any better than the gybing board and has substantial drawbacks, including both fragility and complexity.

It was as you describe!

Surely you are just reducing the drag on one side of the board though? The energy is already being taken in the current situation but not put towards anything over than slowing the boat down.

Being bored and unemployed I managed to find this on the internet - think it is debating the same issue but would be lying if I claimed to understand it all:

http://hem.bredband.net/b262106/Boat/Sym_vs_Asym.pdf

Conclusion would imply it could work in some circumstances unless someone with a better understanding than me can explain it more simply...

clearly the rules as written are the rules and there would be no need for any "clarification" whatever this might be about any innovation or is the idea to make a Winder Boats restricted canterbury tales variant dinghy?

recent experiments of hinged centreboards that I have seen in other classes have not been too successful.  I note that many classes are doing a lot with winged rudders but not so far the Merlins.  I might have to get one - the rules allow!

The rules as written ban 'similar contrivances'. Is a double c/board a similar contrivance to a double rudder? Is a winged rudder a 'similar contrivance' maybe as it has multiple surfaces? The words 'similar' and 'contrivance' are open to interpretation, that is why I presume AG asked multiple measurers for an opinion before creating a double c/board.

I do believe winged rudders have been tried before but dropped. I am sure some one knowledgable about the efforts will post shortly.

Best regards, Alan

Merlin beam... I do not know the rules regarding rise of floor etc. I do not know the rules for racks either. However, it would make sense to me to have a more slender hull in line with the RS300. This would have the same clinker construction, just flatter and more 70's moth or RS300 style. Alan was talking about outriggers, but if the hull could be made slender enough, it could have solid racks as part of the hull 49er style at max freeboard height to the maximum beam. Sort of a cross between a 49er racks and a B14 hiking system. This would provide a tippy platform that would have considerably less drag than current designs and could still incorperate all current design mods such as 1 string. This combined with mike fitzpatricks idea of a fully battened rig would possibly need a t-foil with the hull being finer at the bow with less bouyancy all around and more prone to nosedives. What do the rules say on hullshape and the possibility of 49er style racks incorporated into the hull? Having tried to find the rules, the link is unavailable.

here are the rules

http://www.rya.org.uk/assets/technical/Web%20Documents/Class%20Rules/Class%20Rules%20Merlin.pdf

rule 6 is centreboards

there does not appear to be a rule about rudders.  i cannot see how a centreboard could ever be a similar contrivance to a double rudder.  a rudder is clearly a foil used for steering!  The only reference at all in the rules to rudders is that fittings must be within overall length and that rudders are not within total weight.  sounds like there is lots of room for lots of ideas here.

btw the rules on the RYA web site are the rules as at 2003. If I reemeber the 2008 AGM correctly, the committee asked the members for clarification that the MROA has accepted the various rule changes since 2003 that have not been reflected in the version shown by the RYA but are in the Merlin year book. (For instance permitting electronic digital compass and clock)

I believe there was general acceptance. It does mean, however, there is no definitive online version of the rules.

Unfortunately (?) the no-hollows rule, plus the nothing extending the hull, plus the construction of hull (all the same stuff) rules, would make B14/RS300 ideas impossible within the rules.

Dear rules. Your simplistic view on rules is indeed simplistic.

Try and answer this simple question, does 'and similar contrivances' apply to just rudders or the whole paragraph (which includes bidlge boards, which are indeed similar to c/boards)?

Both interpretation and reasoning is required in the application of rules. Every rule is formulated within a certain context but does not explicitly reflect that foundation.  The background comprises the elements of the time, the place, the reason, the process, and the people who make the rule.  Once a rule is written down in the form of language, it loses its background simply because of the inherent limit of language.  In this sense, a rule is not indeterminate, it is too determinate.  

As a rule cannot possibly register all elements of the context, it is, in effect, possessing only a suggestive function; whereas the real substance of rules dwells in the background. This linguistic double jeopardy has made the application of rules all the more difficult, if not totally impossible.

Hence the need for consultation and continued revision.

I respect Alans intentions as much as anyone, but what is he going on about? It reads like one of Sir Humphreys diatribes from Yes Prime Minister.
Alan’s latest post may be easier to understand in Danish, 
Allerkærest love jeres simplistic se på oven på love er i sandhed simplistic. Prøve og besvare indeværende simpel afhøre gør ligedannet indretning henvende sig til netop rudders eller den det hele paragraf hvilke inkluderer råd hvilke er i sandhed lig centreboards. Begge to inrerpretation og ræsonnement er krævede i den overførelse i love. Al mulig liniere er formulere inde en bestemt kontekst men gør ikke tydeligt genspejle at oprettelse. Den baggrund indbefatte den elementer i den gang , den opstille , den anledning , den oparbejde og den jurist hvem gør den liniere. Når først en liniere er skrevet nede i den skema i sprog sig taber den baggrund simpelt hen af hensyn til den iboende ramme i sprog. Heri fornemme en liniere er ikke ikke-tidsbestemt men bestemt. I regelen kan ikke eventuel indskrive al elementer i den kontekst det er mode indvirkning sidde inde med kun få henstilling funktion ; medens den sand indhold i den love beboelseslejlighed i den baggrund. Indeværende sproglig jepardy fik skabt den overførelse i love en hel flere besværlig hvis ikke helt umulig. Heraf den savn nemlig samråd og fortsat omarbejdelse.

After some pressure from Moses, God got it down to ten simple rules which whilst we constantly break them are non the less the gold standard.
KISS, oh yes and Happy New Year & Good Sailing!

why cant they put the rules in english

I think the problem with the merlin rocket hull shape is that it is too forgiving. You can sail it at any angle and still go along in a straight line. This reduces the skills required for boat handling considerably. You will see people sail the merlin on its ear comfortably going pretty much the same speed as people sailing upright. In most other classes this is not the case, where sailing with heel will dramatically reduce straight line speed. The cost to sailors nearer the front of the fleet is that the result of boathandling becoming less important meaning that they are working harder for almost no gain. Take for example the RS300 again, this goes upwind a little slower than a merlin, yet a friend who owns one tells me that heeling over upwind reduces speed by a third. The merlin is nice to sail but just not as nice as it could be with a bit more of a tippy RS300 style hull making the run actually require skill rather than the crew actually just sitting there. The merlin could be so so so much faster with a nicer hull shape.

A combination of a high dosage of pain killers and too much cutting and pasting from the internet.

The point I am trying to make, it is very difficult to write things down clearly. If it were, then there would be no need for most of the legal profession.

or in Danish

En kombination af et h�jt dosering af smerte mordere og alt for meget opskaering og enten fra Internettet. Det, jeg fors�ger at g�re, er det meget vanskeligt at skrive det ned klart. Hvis det var, s� ville der ikke er brug for de fleste af de juridiske erhverv.

if it were 'easy' ...

AG,

For a bit of fun ....

Your point on the 10 commandments is well made, and supports the issue perfectly. As you can see from the link below, 4 different interpretations, in fact are there 10 or 9 or 11?  Rule 5 or is it 6, Thou Shall not Kill, or is it Thou Shall not Murder, depends on the interpretaion of the translations.

I don't buy this.  In fact not keeping the boat as upright as the people at the front is one of several reasons for not being there.  The decrease in speed is not as great but it is certainly significant and important.  And are we really wanting boats that are not as nice to sail?  I don't.  Vice-free handling so you don't need wings on your rudder to stop the boat nosediving seems to me advantageous.

The good news was Moses negotiated him down to 10, the bad news adultary was left in!

Interesting debate.  I think you will find that those using wings are only trying to do the impossible - ie nosedive upwind.  They then switch them off to ensure that they don't nosedive downwind - which we all know is very possible...  They then have the final setting of negative which does then push the bow up which seems a jolly good idea.  However the MR question still remains.  Winged rudders are clearly not banned by the rules (2003 version anyway) - indeed a rudder does not even seem to need to be presented to get a measurement certificate.  However the Danish interpretation of the rules suggests that they are not legal

I really would not pay too much attention to the Danish versions (A bit of fun.) the MR is only a British National -RYA- class not Dansk Sejunion or ISAF.
or
JEG woukld honorere for meget attenetion hen til den Dansk tekst den er bare lidt i sjov den Merlin Rocket er langt fra Dansk Sjeunion Klirre heller ikke ISAF