IMPORTANT IDNIYRA BALLOT- FOOD FOR THOUGHT, PLEASE READ
There is an important ballot on the way to all current IDNIYRA members that needs your consideration and your VOTE!
I thought I’d share a few thoughts and get people thinking about how they will vote- When considering how you will vote I urge you to keep the following things in mind;
Will this change make it any easier to build masts or runners?
Will this change provide people who use gear built to the new specs with an advantage (real or merely perceived)?
Will this change make my current gear less competitive or even obsolete?
Will this change keep the cost of staying current from going up?
The four changes to the tech specifications on the ballot are as follows, with my own comments added:
1) Deletion of the existing specification of mast minimum weight;
-It’s been said that a lighter mast will be more responsive to gusts and lulls due to it’s having to overcome less inertia to react. There may be some merit to this- if true then masts built much lighter will have an advantage over the current generation…. To build a lighter mast even tighter controls and more rigorous construction methods will be needed, which could potentially drive costs up. Further, as builders search for the lightest solution there will be inevitable failures….
-Having a minimum weight in place discourages designers and builders from going too far to save that last gram and encourages a reasonably robust spar.
-It is worth noting that many older masts are currently competitive with new ones- The NA’s were won with a 2008 mast and I understand the mast that won the Gold Cup was not brand new by any means. A “next generation” of lighter spars may upset this equilibrium.
2) Deletion of the existing technical specification of minimum mast balance point height;
-Currently the mast has to have a balance point or CG 84″ from the base. Many current spars are built with the CG low enough that corrector weights are needed to address this. While adding these is a nuisance it also helps discourage designers and builders from going overboard with weight reduction and engineering- see above.
3) Amendment of the materials specification of the ‘wood type’ runner body;
-As I understand it this one would remove the requirement to use wood in the runner body- While wood and carbon runners have their issues they are also easily home built and wood is much cheaper and more widely available than carbon or glass in sizes suitable for runner bodies. Runners built only of carbon may potentially be only slightly stiffer than wood and carbon but at a large cost increase. Most runner failures occur at the glue joint between the steel and the body (the glue comes off of the steel) and this would continue to be an issue whether wood is the core material or not.
(4) Amendment of the minimum thickness of insert plate dimensions of the wood type runner with steel insert (insert runner).
-this will allow commonly available steel to be used for minimum insert runners- the steel is something like .0005 thinner than the current minimum- This would not render anything currently in use obsolete but it could potentially make it easier and cheaper to build minimum insert runners
So read the specs and notes in the ballot, vote your conscience, but most importantly VOTE!!!
Stay Tuned and THINK ICE!!
T Thieler, DN US 5224
P.S. If you are an IDNIYRA member in good standing you should have received ballot information via email earlier today with the subject line “Vote now: International DN Ice Yacht Racing Association – IDNIYRA Spring 2020 Technical Specifications Ballot”. If not contact Deb Whitehorse firstname.lastname@example.org
In professional cycling, they set a minimum weight for bikes, to prevent catastrophic failure and for the safety of the riders.
03/25/2020 at 7:18 pm