<blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by Peter _Birch
So am I to understand that this “official” knows nothing about multihull’s?
<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>
Peter - according to Doug, this AMYA official has based his “opinion” on: <blockquote id=“quote”><font size=“1” face=“Verdana, Arial, Helvetica” id=“quote”>quote:<hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”>Originally posted by Doug Lord
one mans judgement based on <u>his own experience</u><hr height=“1” noshade id=“quote”></blockquote id=“quote”></font id=“quote”>
What is extremely interesting, is that I’m not sure how this AMYA official could base it on “experience” - since I have no AMYA officials registered in the F-48 Class, and none appear in the “Open Class”. I also checked and there seems to be no one registered in the MultiONE Class that is an AMYA official.
Considering that no D4Z or X-3 multihulls have been sold/delivered, I question whether this conversation/viewpoint really took place? Considering that some “phantom owners” were registered with the F-48 Class (and never were able to be tracked down to confirm their ownership or registrations), it seems to me that Mr. Lord, may once again be using ficticious persons to futher his cause to promote and post his theories on foilers and moving ballast boats. After all, it lends credibility to his arguements if he can tie it to a “conversation” of an un-named AMYA official to the perception that multihulls are unstable. What a wonderful opportunity to bring forth (yet again) the subject of foils and moving ballast? I’m not suggesting that an AMYA official can’t have personal opinions, but when it is posted as it was, it gives me pause to wonder !
As Roy notes, to lay such a comment on an AMYA official, makes me concerned of how much discrimination is taking place within the AMYA administrative ranks.
Are efforts to develop a 1 Meter and a 1.2 Meter Multihull Class going to continue to be an uphill battle?
Will this AMYA official be helping or hindering our efforts to establish a class?
Why would not this official ask for clarification or voice his opinion directly from/to the classes that are trying to be developed? There are still acting secretaries for both MultiONE and F-48 Classes - and since we “ARE” associated with the AMYA “Open Class” it would seem he would be know to inquire or comment directly with the class.
Also, as Roy states, why would one add a “tag” to a personal conversation if not to elicit either an automatic acceptance of the statement by the reader, or to open the door to forward, once again stability solutions?
The persons on the forums who have had questions and opinions in the past have had the courtesy to sign their names to their undirected questions. It allowed me to at least respond. If some of them still don’t accept the concept of multihulls, I could care less, but at least they were mature enough to include their name with their opinions. To not include a name so further questions could be asked, or opinions could be shared does a great dis-service to those attempting to develop multihull classes here in the U.S., and it also casts negative shadows on the AMYA and it’s officials if they make “hidden” remarks such as this - regardless if in official or un-official capacity.
For whatever reason, I really have questions about the validity of the supposed comments, about who made them, and just “how” they happen to be about stablity and made to the person well known for trying to promote foils and moving ballast on multihulls. Of course, I’m positive that a solution to carry a more realistic (less) amount of sail, or add a lead keel while learning to sail was also discussed as an alternative. After all, it would allow this AMYA official to sail what he is used to sailing - an underpowered, lead-added monohull with side supports. Doubt that alternative was proposed or discussed - and have doubts about the conversation.
In conclusion Peter, I feel strongly that if true, we need to consider an alternative organization to align ourselves with that is “Multihull Tollerant”. If un-true, I guess we can simply chalk it up to the person who posted it, right? Isn’t it interesting the original post was a pretty straight statement that the Bruce Numbers compare weight to power of a multihull, yet when pressed, it is later admitted that it is NOT a conclusive number and is good only when comparing similar boats. Now to my way of thinking, if it isn’t a conclusive number, then the ONLY WAY to compare similar boats is on the race course. Posting numbers that really don’t mean much seems to more confusing to new owners, that helpful. Using the concept of comparison, we now are looking at boats with different platform dimensions, so again, the BN means little! Accordingly, my MultiONE shows more power to weight than your Mini40 - but it now looks like it doesn’t mean anything because the boats are physically different. Man ! [:-headache]