An amendment to the Class rules has been implemented today, 18th March 2011.  The latest version can be viewed on the RYA's website.  The following statement from the RYA Technical Manager explains the reasoning behind the changes.
Dan Alsop, Committee Member, Rules

RYA STATEMENT
During conversations relating to the construction of National Merlin Rocket Class sails over the last few months, a number of anomalies relating to the use of secondary reinforcement in laminate sails have been identified across all the class’ sailmakers. 

In order to resolve the situation, and to take account of modern sail making methods, a solution which broadens the use of secondary reinforcement has been accepted for immediate ratification and implementation by the RYA in its role and jurisdiction as the National Authority. 

This move will ensure that all existing certified sails remain legal and will eliminate the possibility of grandfathering of existing sails being required. It does not allow any further development of the sail construction rules, which in turn will be put forward at the class AGM for further discussion and voting.

Constraints have been included to protect the profile of the mainsail and foresail, which are considered to be a significant aspect of the class’ brand, along with the clinker finish to the hull.

The Merlin-Rocket has been an RYA National Class since 1951 with over 3700 boats built and is considered a restricted development class where ingenuity within the constraints of the class rules are rewarded

Sebastian Edmonds
RYA Technical Manager

So that means my new sails, bought earlier this year, and so far not measured or even used, to the old rules are now superceded and will be slower than those due to be made from now on !!!!

Hi Dan, 
Still a bit confused over this. 
Is this the rule change to allow current sails,' that may not be currently strictly legal' to be legal. Or is it to allow Aero web sails?
If it is only to amend the rules for the current sails, would it not have been a good idea to 'tweak' the rules enough to cover the Aero web sails as well?.
Just a idea. 

Matt.

I can only see rules dated 2010 on the RYA website....

Sorry, I don't understand a word of that.

Shall I start a discussion about folding flat causing creases (hence everybody rolls sails) which are permanent,detrimental 'damage'? This rule actually means that, unless you can iron the creases out (cotton), all modern (since the '60s) sails fail at the first hurdle!

Shall I start a discussion about folding flat causing creases (hence everybody rolls sails) which are permanent,detrimental 'damage'? This rule actually means that, unless you can iron the creases out (cotton), all modern (since the '60s) sails fail at the first hurdle!

Guys,

real names only again please.

Nothing personal Mr IO, but as you probably know these discussions have a habit of getting out of hand!

Thanks

How can the discussion get out of hand when there appears to have been no consultation or discussion.

A clear explanation of the change is showing the old rule with the words deleted and the words that have been added to get to the new rule would be very helpful to start with.

I don't see what was wrong with the old rule apart from not allowing Aeroweb sails.  I can imagine that a number of sailmakers are thrilled with the observation that they have apparently been making illegal sails for a number of years.  Would it be possible to explain why the sails were previously considered to be legal and therefore exactly what the oversight was?

John, correct, IO to me summed it up. I don't really understand what is going on. To my mind most of the current sails are illegal, why else a quick rule change? Chris, IO comments were spot on, this should have not been deleted. To me there does seem to be a bit of a 'cover up'. It's a shame as I always held the MROA in high regard. How things can change!!!

It's not a cover up, and i'll happily put IOs comments back under my name - my gripe, as usual, was the anonymous post.

Please remember what happened last time we went here.

IO's comments as promised :)

10 SAIL CONSTRUCTION
(a) Except in way of stiffening as detailed in rule 10(b), the body of the sail shall be capable of being folded flat in any direction without permanently damaging the sail or its reinforcement.
(b) Reinforcement having the effect of stiffening the sail permitted only at each corner of the sail and at Cunningham and reefing eyes (or reef points) adjacent to the luff and leech. This reinforcement shall be within a distance from the relevant corner or Cunningham or reefing eye of 250mm plus 3% of the length of the luff of the sail.
(c) Other reinforcement comprising not more than two additional layers each not thicker than the body of the sail is permitted, provided it can be folded as described in rule 10(a). This additional reinforcement shall not exceed more than 900mm in any direction.
(d) Glued seams shall not be considered as stiffening provided that they can be folded as described above. Normal tabling at the edges of the sail is permitted provided it is not additionally stiffened

I think what they mean is that virtually all the laminate sails were contrary to the secondary re-enforcement rule probably due to an outdated rule and this has been tweaked to allow current practices. 
But Aero-web sails are not covered by this amendment and they would have to be voted through at the AGM.

So who was the first legal boat at the Nationals, Salcombe & Silver Tiller then ? Dacron sails anyone ? ;)

Please note this was a statement by the RYA, not the MROA. I'm sure Dan will be along and explain things further, but i would imagine that the RYA were happy to tidy up the existing rules, but would not sanction a more major rule change without a members vote.
Speculation but it makes sense.

As I said earlier can we please stick to real names.

Thanks

Chris

My comments so far, for what they are worth:

1.  The RYA can do this - they own the copyright and when approached by the MROA can impliment "emergency" rule changes without consultation. It's rare and I believe that has only been used once or twice in the past with MRs, one example quoted to me was when someone tried to build a daggerboard boat .... there has also been limited consulation on this and other issues, but certainly not with the wider membership.
2.  Aeroweb sails - see my point 3 below.
3.  Where is the 900mm length referred too? Is this 900mm from a corner or does it refer to 900mm per reinforcing part? So could I have a sail stiffened with 900mm strips or patches of material (what is the length of an Aeroweb reinforcement tape?)? Is this one 900mm bit per sail?
4.  If anyone is so aggrieved, they can propose a resolution at the AGM to reverse this Rule change. You have until 16th May to get something proposed & seconded to the Hon. Sec. of the MROA.
5.  Sails designed to the previous Rule (like Rob H's sails) may be at a performance disadvantage as the new Rule allows 250mm + 3% luff length of reinforcement at each corner. You could also now have the two additional layers. However, the two layer Rule now has limitations to 900mm which might actually reduce the stiffening of the sails. Not sure about the nett effect of this.
6.  I can see nothing that changes the "profile shape" of the sails, so squared off jibs are still OK.
7.  Are depth stripes allowed?
8.  The new Rules do not touch Bilge Keels.


Glad I held off ordering my new sails.

The 2011 Rules still do not match the Yearbook - Rule 4n iv b still there, so any mould modification greater than 10mm requires remeasurement of the mould.

Maybe that got missed in the tidy-up exercise that has obviously been going on - I note with gratitude that the rest of the Rules seem to correlate now.

Can anyone explain to me what rule 10d means? What is 'normal' tabling at the edges?

To Andy Hay: 
As I was the one who was having a MR built with a dagger board, it was the Merlin Rocket Association that changed the the rules at an emergency meeting when the boat was built. They did not refer to the RYA before doing so. Good to see that they have go the procedure right this time.

A glance at the year book tells us that Rule 10d Refers to glued seams and tabling.

"Glued seems shall not be considered as stiffening provided they can be folded as described above".
My tailor tells me "tabling" (I assume this to be a generic sewing phrase.) is the turning over of an edge and sewing to hold the fold in place or the sewing of a folded single piece of cloth over an edge essentially to prevent chafe damage or fraying.

Hope this helps.

I think Dan and the other measurement rules guys n gals are to be aplauded in their attempts at simplifying and clearing up what has clearly been a contentious issue before it got totally out of hand, discretion and thus what might be seen as uneccesary "secrecy" was I guess essential if only to be even handed to all parties, and the delay was probably not down to them.

A glance at the year book tells us that Rule 10d Refers to glued seams and tabling.

"Glued seems shall not be considered as stiffening provided they can be folded as described above".
My tailor tells me "tabling" (I assume this to be a generic sewing phrase.) is the turning over of an edge and sewing to hold the fold in place or the sewing of a folded single piece of cloth over an edge essentially to prevent chafe damage or fraying.

Hope this helps.

I think Dan and the other measurement rules guys n gals are to be aplauded in their attempts at simplifying and clearing up what has clearly been a contentious issue before it got totally out of hand, discretion and thus what might be seen as uneccesary "secrecy" was I guess essential if only to be even handed to all parties, and the delay was probably not down to them.

Barry - thanks for the clarification.

Barry, if you had fitted the dagger board, would this have saved your rudder and transom when Bungy told you that the "mudbank at Gerston had moved since last year", a quote still etched in my memory

Etched in my memory as well. At least he replaced the transom and rudder for the next days racing. He was agreat boat builder. I wonder how that daggerboard would have performed and where the class would be be now if the class had allowed it.

Out of interest: At Shoreham, we did fit a Merlin with a trapeze and a larger spinnaker (off Alans Tempest) and did have a most exciting afternoon trying to stay upright. Planing to windward was a whole new experience.

It is clear from several posts following on from Friday's official statement on this issue there is some misunderstanding of the events leading to the current sail construction rule which came into force on Friday 18th March 2011.

In June 2010 the MROA was approached to see if Aeroweb sails would comply with class rules.  This was referred to the RYA (our national class arbiters), to which they came back with a negative response. As a consequence of an examination of the wording of the Merlin Rocket Class Rules, it became clear that a significant number of laminate sails currently in use might fall foul of certain clauses in the rules, an embarrassing situation for all concerned.  Problems were relating to secondary reinforcement and discrepancies between the MR rules and the ISAF definitions. The discrepancies were either cosmetic or resulted in stronger sails and were considered to have no implications performance wise. 

Following consultations with owners and class sailmakers, the Committee resolved in January 2011 to seek to change the class rules to overcome the difficulties with existing sails and to allow for the Aeroweb method of construction. This was not as straight forward as we were led to believe, sorting out the wording proved to be intricate and time consuming.  The RYA declined the Committee’s proposal on the grounds that Aeroweb construction represented a significant development and as such this would need to go to a membership vote and the RYA requested a revised proposal merely correcting the situation for the existing sails. This was duly drafted and finally approved only last Friday as previously announced.

A comparison between the new and old wordings can be made by consulting the 2010 Year Book and the RYA website. It is most unlikely that the rule change will result in the outdating of the sails currently in use.

The Committee's resolution has been overtaken by events and the matter will be reconsidered at its next meeting on 6th April.  Without prejudicing what might then be decided, the timing of the meeting allows further propositions relating to sail construction, or on any other matter, to be formulated and submitted for consideration at July's AGM. 

The class officials involved in this matter have acted absolutely properly throughout this protracted exercise.  The process has highlighted that committee meetings minutes have not been available to the membership, we are working on getting these up on the website, hopefully then class association members will be more fully informed.  I would like to emphasise that I am always happy to discuss issues or answer queries by telephone or Email.
 
Dan Alsop, Committee Member, Class Rules

Dear Marge

When Mrs Trout said that I could buy a new suit of sails this year, I was delirious.  The first 'new' new full suit of sails for 25 years.  Finally I could ditch the transparent spinnaker and holey main.

Now I just don't know what to do.  Carry on in the pit of despair with knackered rags or buy a new 'Heritage' suit of sails and then grind my teeth when the Aerowebs become legal in July...

I need your advice

Confused of Smethwick

It does need to be clarified when aerowebs will become legal, if any proposed change to the rules is passed. I suspect that this will happen after the committee meeting on April 5th.

Personally i'd just buy new sails - in fact i did!

I did too and they are great. I decided that Aerowebs were really not going to make that much difference to my boat speed so just went for it.

“Sailgate”

The Merlin Rocket class owes a debt of gratitude to Dan Alsop in the restrained and quiet way he has handled this matter with grace and authority.

It certainly did stir up some feelings within and without the class.

He himself suggests ways it might be done better, with open minutes of committee meetings and maybe a discussion on the site. It is not my business if this be a good or bad thing.

CM Alludes that the committee meeting in April MIGHT go further than the current emergency tidying up of the rules, I hope I do not misunderstand Dan’s very clear statement that any further things that may or may not be performance issues; depending on where you stand or what you think about the Aeroweb or other constructions; will have to be referred to a quorate General Meeting to satisfy both our own committee, the rules generally and good practice always, and the RYA who oversee the Merlin Rocket Class as a National Class, and act as wise advisers and a check and balance.

No doubt in the end the Class will have a sounder set of rules and longer lasting sails.

Does anyone know whether the Aeroweb reinforcement is longer than 900mm? If it is not, then it might now be legal.

Personally, I am just waiting for North 3DL dinghy mould to be up and running and then I can get a legal set of 3DL sails ... I think that the missus might have something to say on that though!

I have already expressed my gratitude to Dan on this and other Rules issues. Dan, GGGGG, Lou and indeed Bas Edmonds at the RYA have been working very hard on our behalf to resolve these and other issues. Remember that they all have day jobs! Although, I am not overly keen on how some elements have gone, the intention was always to do the right thing and for that they deserve our thanks.

Heritage sails it is, then.

I would echo the sentiment of those thanking Dan et al. They are all volunteers, and do a great job on behalf of the rest of us, for the love of the class and with its best interest at heart. 

Also wholeheartedly endorse CM's stand on the open-ness in contribution to the forum.  Any contributor should have the courage to name themsleves and accept whatever feedback they provoke.

North are already using 3DL for five-ohs

should I upgrade from cotton to terylene, or go straight to dacron?

"CM Alludes that the committee meeting in April MIGHT go further than the current emergency tidying up of the rules"

No i did not. I alluded to the committee possibly making a formal proposal to be voted on at the AGM. We can't make an arbitary change to the rules on this matter without consulting the membership. This has not been decided yet, the meeting is 6th April, please watch this space and be patient.

So for some it's back to the drawing board.  For others of us (cotton sail users) it's back to the ironing board and check those folds.

Up until I looked closely at my sails last Sunday I was still unsure why current laminate sails were a problem. On closer inspection I noted that inside each seam a white tape in laid and then this is sewn into the sail to strengthen the seam. I guess this falls foul of the original rule that states that "reinforcement shall be not more than 2 layers of the same cloth as the body of the mainsail".

Are you sure it is not double sided sticky tape to hold it together whist it is being oversewn?
Ask the sailmaker maybe?

I went to get my sils measured this wekend and the measurer also noted the reinforcement 'sticky tape' on the seams - something which can be seen on many of the mylar film different makes.  He says this is to help stop the stitching tearing the mylar.  However he won't measure my sails until this is clarified by the RYA as he feels that technically this makes them illegal, although sensible, not reinforcing and gives no performance gain.  He is making representations to the RYA technical and measurement people as he thinks in is another oversight that need correcting with this recent rule wording!

The spam robots have found this thread. I'm closing it, otherwise i'll be deleting posts all day!