Dags att välja (entyp) klassbrädor!!!

[swe-16]

Vissa restriktioner (på gott och ont) finns redan.
Brädan får inte vara bredare än 1005 mm
Brädan måste väga minst 8,5 kg med fotstroppar och fena (in a clean wet state)
Fenan får inte vara djupare än 70 cm (du får dessutom inte registrera in fler fenor än 3 st)
Seglet får inte vara större än 12,5 m2 (11,0 för damer och ungdom samt 8,5 för juniorer – du får dessutom inte registrera in fler segel än 3 st),
Masten får inte vara längre än 6250 mm
Bommen får inte vara längre än 3000 mm

Att det är så stor skillnad mellan fjolårets brädor och årets känner jag inte igen. Vissa framsteg sker ju givetvis hela tiden, men du skall ligga på en mycket hög nivå för att du skall kunna skylla på att det är brädan som gör att du inte placerar dig bättre.

Personligen tycker jag det var bättre förr när det bara fanns regeln, max en bräda och max tre segel. Det drev på utvecklingen mer. Tänk om vi hade lagt in dylika restriktioner när seglen var 9,0 m2 och brädorna 75-85 cm breda. Då hade vi inte kunnat segla lika mycket som idag. Vem vet var utvecklingen hade fört oss om 2-3 år om vi låtiti bli att begränsa klassen. Visst blir det dyrt att hela tiden byta prylar, men segling är och kommer att förbli en prylsport, oavsett vad vi tycker. Att omforma klassen till OS-klass (som är syftet med alla restriktioner) kommer definitivt INTE att göra det hela billigare.

Ju förr dess bättre 😉
mvh
Per

[anonym-anvandare]

Hei.
OS brett vil bli Mistral med senterbord.Funker mye bedere enn noen formulabrett i 2-3 msek,som det nesten alltid er under et OS.OS i Athen mittsommer = nesten vindstille.

At Formulabrettene fra 2001 ikke følger etter, i forhold til årets,stemmer vel ikke helt.
X.Fanatic F-90 *175, BIC 90,og sikkert flere også,seiler nesten.. like bra i 5msek ,og i mere vind kansje raskere om det er grovere sjø.Smalere er = mere fart.
Troe heller ikke at det er noen fordel å sette begrensninger ennda på utstyret.
Tenk om,som Per sier,om det ble satt inn begrensninger for 3 år siden …

[swe-16]

Tja!
Ett förtydligande…det är inför OS 2008 jag menar. OS i Aten är ju redan klart att det blir Mistral One Design.
mvh
Per

[anonym-anvandare]

Hej,
Lite intressant info hittat på Gaastra webben angående OS 2008:

Hi, just received some info , felt like I wanted to join this info with all you out there. It is good to get the whole picture about windsurfing and the olympic games.
It is now even more clear that FW and olympics don’t match togetcher.

“ROUTE MAP” TO THE SELECTION OF THE 2008 OLYMPIC EQUIPMENT

AIM
The aim of this report is to
a) define the IWA (and thus its membership) recommendations on the selection of Olympic windsurfing equipment to be used at the Olympic Regattas of 2008 & 2012;
b) so that a unified lobby can be made of the ISAF National Authorities (MNAs);
c) to ensure that windsurfing retaining its Olympic status for both men and women;
d) and that the most appropriate equipment is put forward by the IWA for selection by the MNAs. This report therefore aims to set out criteria and a design brief so that an additional development path be considered in parallel with the IMCO and FW formats. The development path herewith proposed would allow the IWA/ISAF to consider a wider choice of alternatives in the light of the critical factors highlighted in the background section.

KEY ISSUES
a) It is very important that the majority of MNAs agree that windsurfing is included in the Olympic Regatta and support the ISAF Windsurfing Committee’s recommendations on the most appropriate Olympic windsurfing equipment to select:
b) All windsurfing classes and the PWA actively promote a unified policy on the “2008 equipment”. No class or class official should express a dissenting view in public.

BACKGROUND
Windsurfing has been an “event” within the Olympic sailing regatta for almost 20 years. There are currently two sets of medals, one for men and one for women. It is currently the least expensive Olympic sailing discipline; therefore apart from being a potentially spectacular to watch its inclusion ensures that a lot of developing nations can take part (60% of the entry in 1996).
Whilst remaining very technical equipment with a well-developed & valid format, IMCO is losing its sparkle. It is fair to say that the majority view within the current Olympic class is that the Mistral One Design should be replaced after the 2004 Olympics and that more than one manufacturer should produce the replacement equipment.
Here are some background facts that help the reader to understand more fully the reasoning behind the conclusions of this report:
a) The ISAF President has already stated that he believes that the class selected should be Formula Windsurfing but that the equipment to be used at the Games should be One Design;
b) There is little enthusiasm amongst the FW racers for a One Design format as evidenced by the low number of registrations for the so-called “One Design Formula” event at the 2002 ISAF World Sailing Games.
c) – The Spanish Sailing Federation (RFEV) made a submission last year stating that both the equipment and the class should be changed for 2008.
d) The President of the RFEV has since written to the ISAF saying that he has changed its mind and now does not support the Formula concept but does support a change in the equipment.
e) The historic data for wind speeds in Qing Dao for July & September may not support a proposal to move the whole Olympic Games to a date in September. It is therefore unlikely that the political momentum for a change of dates will build up inside the ISAF or the IOC.
f) It is believed that in certain areas, the waters in Qing Dao have quite strong currents and that the historic data for wind speeds in July show a low average wind speed.
g) Any proposal to change the dates requires the summer sports federations to convince the IOC that a move is necessary. The IOC would then be required to re-negotiate its TV distribution & media rights deals. July is a more valuable period from the point of view of the value of media rights than September. BOCOG will not make any requests to the IOC themselves. A decision to move the Games is therefore unlikely.
h) There is now a written threat from a powerful MNA (France) to lobby against windsurfing as an Olympic event.

PROPOSED EQUIPMENT CRITERIA
It is recommended that the selection of windsurfing equipment is based on the following criteria:
a) Racing is possible at the same time as other Olympic Sailing Classes;
Reason:
· In many major Olympic Class Regattas worldwide, the Olympic windsurfing class has to compete at the same time and in the same conditions as the other sailing classes;
b) The likely conditions to be expected in Qing Dao 2008
Reason:
· Not to do so would be impractical;
c) It is a strictly controlled restricted class;
Reasons:
· This goes a long way towards supporting the position of the ISAF President, whilst permitting differences between items of equipment within very tight tolerances;
· This will be more interesting to manufacturers than a “One Design” concept;
· The Olympics should be a test of talent not technology;
· To maximize commonality between men’s & women’s equipment (KISS);
· To strictly limit the cost of participation;
· Production licences to be controlled and issued by the ISAF:
d) The decision on the actual equipment is made at the 2004 ISAF November Conference
Reasons:
· To allow racers and MNAs to build up a long term experience of the chosen format;
· To allow MNAs to invest in new equipment with confidence;
· To allow MNAs to plan long term development programmes with confidence;
e) The existing criteria established by the ISAF Events Committee in November 1999
being:
· Must allow athletes around the world, of different size and weight, male and female, to participate;
· Must achieve the IOC objective of a minimum of 30% participation for women;
· Must give the best sailors in each country the opportunity to participate in readily accessible equipment;
· Must combine both traditional and modern events and classes, to reflect, display and promote competitive sailing.

General Design Brief for NEW OLYMPIC EQUIPMENT:
1. The equipment definitions for both men and women shall be the same where possible;
Reason:
· to enable women to reach high levels of performance by training and possibly racing with men on equal terms;
· to maximize development opportunities;
· To reduce the number of equipment components required to establish a viable Olympic programme and thus reduce the overall cost of such a programme;
2. The equipment shall conform with the criteria specified above and?
· be supported by a global distribution network or networks;
· be accompanied by clearly defined measurement rules & tight tolerances;
· be restricted to 1 board, 2 fins, 1 centerboard & 2 rigs per competitor.
3 The method of construction employed shall be durable and of a consistently uniform high quality whilst offering the best trade off between weight > performance > price.
4.The ideal weight band for men should be 70>82 Kgs and for women should be 55>70 Kgs;
5. Safety shall be considered so that
· competitors will be able to sail home unassisted in sub-racing or quickly increasing winds wind speeds;
· boards are designed to perform in large waves and chop in a “well-behaved” way;
· each rig is as durable & as light as possible whilst being easy to rig/derig at sea;
· The fin shall be easily demountable without the aid of tools;
6. Attention should be paid to the possibility of using the same hull(s) combined with smaller rigs so that a global junior racing programme can be established at minimal cost.

Design brief HULL:
a) Easily transportable by normal scheduled airline as passenger’s excess baggage;
b) Max Weight bare hull weight 12 kg/ minimum bare hull weight 9kgs;
c) Retractable centre board allowed;
d) 2 production fins, easily removable without tools;
e) Strong Durable Construction; Positive flotation in case the board is holed;
f) Easily repairable on a regatta site;
g) Construction method and materials to be identical around the world.
h) Price around USD 1200 retail

Design brief RIG(s):
a) Two rigs for women, each of a different defined size;
b) Men to use the same two rigs sizes if possible;
c) If not, men shall use two rigs, each of a different defined size;
d) Same carbon mast for all rigs (commonality of components);
e) Same Carbon boom for all rigs (commonality of components);
f) Each rig to have the maximum flexibility in terms of wind range (trim systems);
g) The largest women’s rig (max. size) to be easily manageable by someone of 55 kg;
h) Sails to be made ” as visible as possible ” to the naked eye from a great distance;

DESIGN AND TEST EVENT
Option A
That the ISAF invite key manufacturers/brands to participate in a design competition leading to a test event in order to select one board prototype with two matching rig sizes around which tight tolerances can be defined so that new equipment can be selected for use at the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games that meets the above criteria. Manufacturers/Brands who participate in this development will have the right to build/market the Olympic equipment.
Option B
That the ISAF make an “open invitation” to any board shapers whether they be involved with a current “known” production board brand or not to put forward one prototype each at its “intended production weight” for evaluation at an ISAF test event in order to select one board prototype with two matching rig sizes around all of which tight tolerances can be defined so that new equipment can be selected for use at the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games that meets the above criteria.
Conditions:
i) The winning board/rigs will be made in established factories licensed by ISAF; Said factories will be subject to a regular manufacturing audit to ensure that the building specification is being tightly adhered to;
ii) To stimulate the custom board shaping community, the IWA should establish a sizeable prize fund for the best proposed board in the opinion of the ISAF evaluation working party put forward by a custom shaper not already associated with a board brand with a registered production board on the ISAF list;
iv) Any board that later becomes a “production board” registered on the ISAF List shall pay the associated fee; Registration regulations for all such boards will be strengthened;
v) Brands who wish to market the selected board/rigs may do so by paying a sponsorship fee per unit sponsored to the IWA for their logo to be put on the Olympic board. This will allow
a) Sponsored riders to compete on equipment branded with their sponsor’s logos In all regattas except the Olympic Games where the board shall be “white” (no logos);
b) Sponsors from the wider world of commerce and industry to participate.
NB – The selected option should be initiated as quickly as possible;
– The prize fund suggested under “Option B” would be established by drawing down funds from the balances accrued by the classes managing the Olympic equipment over the last 20 years.
KEY ISAF DEADLINES
1) 2002
a) IWA classes submit this report to ISAF with a list of MNAs by July 31st
b) ISAF agrees the selection criteria for Olympic equipment at their November Conference
2) 2003
a) IWA classes make a submission to ISAF that “Windsurfing” is an Olympic “Event” for men and women with a list of supporting MNAs by July 31st
b) ISAF select the “Events” for the 2008 Olympic Regatta.
3) 2004
a) IWA classes make a submission to ISAF that the criteria, which best meets the criteria be selected for the 2008 Olympic Regatta with a list of supporting MNAs by July 31st
b) ISAF select the “equipment” for the 2008 Olympic Regatta