trap 80 feature

CHRISTMAS RACE 1979
Palamos Spain
December 28,29,30

Total ---Results--- Points 1 KC 17 McLaughlin 8 0 14 0 22 Bastet 2 OE 334 Seidl 14 11.7 0 14 39.7 Eisl 3 US 109 Loeb 0 21 5.7 17 43.7 Duane 4 US 106 Taylor 21 5.7 13 13 52.7 Penfield 5 I 1018 Ferrarese 19 14 3 26 62 Nazzaro 6 I 1020 Savelli 3 8 8 50 69 Gazzei 7 F 174 Salou 17 29 10 19 75 Didier 8 E 35 Abascal 50 10 15 3 78 Noguer 9 D 19 Moller 16 31 11.7 21 79.7 10 G 1613 Konig 18 26 26 10 80 ... Konig 14 US 300 Burton 20 19 25 30 94 Burton 15 US 145 Diaz 5.7 20 50 20 95.7 Reynolds 19 US 180 Foster 10 24 50 18 102 Green 27 US 83 Elam 35 17 21 50 123 Gouch

The following report was sent to us by Steve Taylor.

REPORT TO THE US OLYMPIC YACHTING COMMITTEE AND THE US FLYING DUTCHMAN CLASS
    by Robert H. Hopkins, Jr.
    Flying Dutchman Coach

Forty Flying Dutchmen attended the Palamos Christmas Regatta this year. For the first time, the international fleet included six American boats. They competed against sailors from all of the European countries, save the Iron Curtain countries and England. Their finishes of 3,4,14,15,19 and 27 represent the latest stage in a chain of improvements in the US Olympic effort for the 1980 Games. After summerizing the regatta and subsequent practice session, this report will examine some contributing factors in our rapid improvement in international competition.

Palamos.
Palamos harbor is a deep water port surrounded by foothills of the Eastern pyrenees to the north and west, and by the Mediterranean Sea to the south and east. The Olympic circle is only one kilometer beyond the breakwater in thirty meter deep water. This exposed venue should have lend itself to a big sea from the south, but as it turned out, relatively flat water conditions prevailed during most of the time we sailed. In the winter months, Palamos' climate is much like Newport in the spring, though the nights can be bitter cold when the mountain air descends to the sea. A daily thermal breeze can establish itself in the early afternoon, building from calm in the morning to as much as 18 knots by 1630, provided that the cloud cover does not choke it in the early afternoon. Two race days were hindered by this very phenomonon --a choked southeast thermal breeze battling a weak northwest frontal breeze. We could sometimes predict which way the wind would shift by the air temperature and by the amount of cloud cover. Once the sea breeze has established itself, though, it is quite reliable. On a sunny day, the thermal arrives by 1300 and dies by 1700. The other important wind direction is a northwest Spanish version of the Mistral that swoops down from the Pyrenees at 40 to 60 knots. This unsailable condition is usually preceeded by the formation of a high pressure system in the mountains and a corresponding, low pressure system in the Mediterranean. During the day of the Mistral, the sky is crystal clear over the mountains. Since lunar tides do not exist in the Mediterranean, currents in Palamos Bay are very minute. The strongest current that I measured was only 15 feet per minute, and since it was constant across the course, it was tactically insignificant. The water level varied as much as two feet over 24 hours, probably the result of barometric pressure variations.

Coaching Equipment.
I used a small Zodiac dinghy with a 25 horsepower Evinrude engine. Both had their good points and their bad points. The Zodiac was dangerous in a breeze unless two people used it together, because it could flip end over end sitting still if a big enough puff hit. If conditions broke a 14 knot, two foot chop limit, it was impossible to keep up with the FD's upwind, except in spurts. In these conditions, peering at genoa leeches, steering the Zodiac and staying on board at the same time were difficult to accomplish. The 25 horsepower engine was danerously overpowered when used by only one person, but when loaded with gear and two people or when towing boats, it was very helpful. I used a tiller extension when I was alone to help keep the bow down. In the Zodiac's favor, it was very manuverable in tight spots, was fuel efficient, did not mar FD's lying alongside, was surprisingly dry on a plane, and of course was small enough to fit in part of the back of a station wagon. After working with Joe Duplin in Kiel last summer in a 20 foot V-shaped 55 horsepower glass Mako-lookalike and observing other countries' coaching boats, my preference is for the mid-sized Zodiac with a fiberglass bottom, steering wheel, windshield, and bucket seats. It is reasonably portable, provides a steady photographic platform, and does not hurt sailboats. Its V-shaped fiberglass double bottom fills with water at slow speeds for displacement cruising, and self bails on a plane. Failing this, any Zodiac is better than any fiberglass boat, since it is so important for the coach to be able to raft at sea with an FD during sail changes or discussions.

The rest of my equipment included a 35mm camera, towing bridle (indispensible with a Zodiac), notepad, extra water for the competitors, anchor, binoculars, and a tide stick. The camera was a Canon FTB with a Vivitar 85-205 zoom lens, well wrapped in plastic to protect it from spray. This combination allowed me to take the enclosed black and white (tri-X) sail shape pictures [unfortunately these originals are not to be found in the Trapeze archive and 21st century viewers must be content with the reconstituted halftones from the printed Trapeze ed.] . A Nikon OS equipped with a 35mm wide angle lens has proven valuable in the past for taking onboard sailshape photos, but I was unable to borrow one for Palamos. Onboard photos provide twist, rake, luff sag, heel, fore and aft and side bend data. My 7x35 binoculars were of no help in reading sail numbers, and unecessary besides. My tide stick was a used banana or orange peel, affording me the advantages of high visibility, low windage, disposability, and good taste.

Coaching Duties.
My day-to-day chores during the regatta were as follows: I began by gathering weather information from a number of sources. The official forecast put out by the race committee amounted to inaccurate news paper maps with captions. The usually reliable local source, an airport, is in Gerona, an inland city unaffected by the sea. Its location, coupled with the ill repute of Spanish meteorologists and the usual telephone and language barriers, made the airport report as unusable as the newspaper's. In the end, I relied heavily on the Spanish team members' before-race guesses. These were quite accurate. I left the dock each morning with the competitors' spare genoas, clothing, lunches, weight jackets, and drinking water. Before the start, I followed pairs of US boats, determining which was faster and then relaying the differences in rig and sail trim to the slower one, so that they could decide which changes they may want to consider. This procedure can cut 15 useless minutes out of an FD's pre-race tuning session, since it is easy to set nine controls correctly, forget the tenth, and waste time figuring out what the problem is. Between the warning and preparatory signals, I stationed myself just beyond the starboard end of the line for last minute sail and weight jacket changes. This location is preferable to others, because it is free of the fleet's windshadow and it allows the US FD's to preserve their starboard tack advantage when returning to the line. After the prep signal, I either watched the start from below the middle of the line, or from the pin end. The former position allowed me to observe various sail shapes at the point in the race when I could be closest to the action. The latter allowed me to see how many boats were over. The race committee, after many recalls throughout the regatta, resorted to sailing races where half the fleet was over at the gun, recalling at the most a token few. During the race, I took photos where possible. Each night, the team met to compare notes on the day's racing.

During the ensuing practice sessions, the potential for my usefulness as a coach was much greater. We practiced as a team every day from 1200 to 1700, and met for an hour each night. Since it was our purpose to learn from foreigners as much as we could, we invited all of those who stayed after the regatta to sail with us. As usual, only the best competitors seemed to feel that they needed more practice. The result was that we were able to draw on the talents of Diesch, McLaughlin, Steidl, Abascal, and others in the post regatta days. Our practice fleet numbered eleven boats.

The format of these sessions approximated the familiar USYRY clinic curriculum. We borrowed marks and ran medium length races for the first part of the afternoon. During the other half, we ran rigorous tacking drills and tuned against each other. Since six boats is an unmanageable number for effective upwind tuning, we split into pairs, sailed upwind for exactly fifteen minutes, returned to a predetermined buoy, rotated tuning partners, and repeated the process. I followed one pair at a time in the Zodiac, taking pictures and offering suggestions. With this system, we were able to preserve the advantage of a large pool of pairing combinations while still tuning one on one. I could spread my time evenly among the boats and keep an eye on all of them for safety purposes. I think, though, that fifteen minutes was not enough time by the end of the week, when our tuning sophistication became quite heightened and the complexity of the issues we wanted to resolve would have leant itself to a longer time period. Our basic technique was to sail on one tack for seven minutes and then on the other tack for seven minutes so that all six boats would arrive at the same spot upwind. We then returned as a group back to the starting point, discussing what we learned and determining new pairings. We learned once again that it is especially important in an FD to be able to drive off for speed, and that this sometimes gave the leeward boat an advantage. In order to prevent the windward boat from falling into the back wind of the leeward boat and to better gauge speed differences, we lined up abeam of each other instead of evenly with respect to the wind, as on a starting line. We switched windward and leeward positions frequently to compensate for either's advantage, and stayed within two or three boatlengths so that speed differences could be easily observed. Boat to boat communication is the key to valid tuning --if both skippers change controls haphazardly, nothing is learned. After the first few minutes for breaking in, the pair should decide which boat remains constant, and allow the other to experiment, relaying its alterations to the constant as they are made.

Team Attitude.
The most irritating and exciting part of the day was the team meeting. Possessing no special knowledge of FD's myself, and having no desire of doing all the talking night after night, I encouraged an across the room question and answer style meeting. In order to participate, each person has to be willing to ask and answer questions candidly and truthfully. The responsibility for the success of the meeting rests with the team as a whole. This pre-Olympic setting demanded nothing less than unflinching altruism on the part of every team member, if charges of secrecy were to be avoided. I feel that everyone contributed to the best of their ability. Nonetheless, those who tended, by virtue of their personalities to be more reserved in a give-and-take situation were criticized for their reticence. There is no denying that sailboat racing is in most respects an individual's sport. However, individuals benefit from alliance, and herein lie the strengths of a college or Olympic teams. The Olympics attract many collegiate sailors who want to preserve their team involvement after graduation. I think that the single most important contributing factor to our recent successes has been our strong team attitude, and that this is the result of an influx of recent collegiate sailors.

Sails.
We learned a lot about sail shapes in Palamos. For the first time, many of the US boats were competitive in most wind ranges. This is the result of a move away from automatic imitation of the top Europeans' sail choices to a studied investigation of the rationales behind their sails The following is a compilation of comments I have heard over the last few months. Many top FD sailors have thought that it is necessary to have a heavy and a light air mainsail. The heavy air main is typically cut with more luff curve, heavier cloth and somewhat flatter sections than the light air main. Of all the differences, the most important is the need for more luff curve on the heavy air main, since masts always bend in a breeze; and less on the light air main, since there is no way to prebend the mast without tearing the foredeck out of the boat. With the onset of the 505 mentality, though, all purpose mains began to appear with a medium amount of luff curve Loeb/Duane and Taylor/Penfield can control bend more readily than most with a set of lowers that meet the mast at about 10" below the gooseneck, and a temporary 2:1 wire prebender for use in light air. The North main is designed to be sailed on a less bent mast than usual in heavy air in order to better support rig tension and thus lessen genoa luff sag. This is possible because the lowers can support a straighter mast than a deck level ram can. In light air, the ease of prebending makes this medium amount of luff curve easy to take out. Another important feature on the North main is its lens foot, which makes the outhaul more effective and more critical at the same time. the ability to flatten the lower sections and control the tightness of the lower leach should add to its all-purpose capability. The only inflexibility inherent in racing with one mainsail is that it can only be made out of one cloth --NYT in North's case. In light air the NYT makes the leach much more sensitive to vang/mainsheet tension than a comparable medium-firm cloth main, such as the Fogh. In practice, the skipper has to pull quite hard with mainsheet on the Fogh leach in order to get it to stand up in light and medium air, but if he cranks it in, small differences in mainsheet tension will not have much effect on the twist, in light of the many pounds that have already been applied. Puffs and lulls automatically open and close the leach due to the stretchiness of the cloth, and more time can be spent on tactics. The North main -lowers -vang sheeting combination, on the other hand, adds up to stick shift control and responsibility over mainsail shape in light air. NYT cloth transits small changes in leach tension to big changes in leach angle, so the skipper must pay much closer attention to his vang. The problem is aggravated by the greater than average amount of broad-seaming cut into the North leach, which adds power in light air and critical-ness too. According to one theory, a mainsail with a round leach and a flat middle gives as much power for less drag than one with more overall depth and a flat leach. Most mains forego this theory, because FD's used to rely on mainsheet tension to straighten the genoa luff. Mains such as the Fogh let you carry plenty of sheet tension without closing the leach. Finally, soft cloth looks cosmetically better in light air than NYT cloth, but I doubt the wrinkles hurt boatspeed much.

The leading spininaker design this year is Musto's spherical cut and its copies. The name of the game in an underpowered FD downwind is to carry as much area as possible while still preserving a nice flat and stable shape. Musto's chute has a large foot skirt and one of the largest head angles around. It seems to violate the rule of thumb that broad shouldered chutes have to be deep or else they become too unstable to fly on a reach. During reaches and when the wind is not strong enough to support the shoulders, hundreds of tiny wrinkles radiate away from the head patch to absorb the unwanted area --a much better result aerodynamically than the elephant's ass other chutes display. North's latest chute takes Musto a few inches of shoulder girth farther by exploiting a head patch design that draws the cloth into many small wrinkles a little better than Musto. It uses 1/2 oz. dynac for a flatter reaching shape than is possible with ordinary nylon. Though North's chute looks fast and big, the actual speed difference over Musto downwind seemed immeasurable, and we had no good tight reaches at Palamos to test the Dynac.

Genoa design theory is the most elusive of all. Sensible goals for the FD sailor are to use only two genoas most of the time, a light-medium and a heavy-medium, with a blast genoa in reserve. Unfortunately, it is far more common to have to choose between two light-medium genoas, depending upon the amount of chop. The world's reigning light air (up to 12 knots) flat water genoa is the Musto Code One. It features a full bottom, round leach, fine entry, draft aft down low, draft forward up high shape. In choppy water, many prefer the Cheret Jumbo, which is similar, save that it has more luff curve and a rounder entry, allowing for more margin for error and footing ability in a sea. Its disadvantage is that it can not carry up as well as the Code One, the limit-ing factor being the speed with luff sag adds excessive fullness in the entry. The North L-2 is a compromise between the two. In heavier air (up to 22 knots), the Musto Code Two, the Storer Medium, and the Cheret Medium all perform well. They are flatter all around, have a little more leach hollow to reduce slot interference, and have a flatter exit. The Code Two has a longer leach on the fatalistic assumption that most FD mast control systems can not rake back enough in a breeze to open up the slot. More modern heavy air genoas are actually shortening the leach to encourage more rake for aerodynamic reasons. Not much thought has gone into the right dimensions for a blast genoa, since FD's race so rarely in 25 knots or greater breezes. As we prepare for the Newport Trials in particular, time spent on blast genoa design may be time wasted, since it is doubtful that we could race outside if such heavy conditions existed before the harbor start. But in California the water temperature changes the story considerably. If we were to speculate on a fast genoa for the future it might include the following features. area reduced substantially to produce a higher aspect jib with little overlap sheeted forward and inboard to 9-11^o; full lower sections for drive, flatter upper sections for less drag; draft at about 40% aft; and profile designed for maximum rake. The enormous area reduction would not be that great in actuality, because one could carry propertionally more power in the main, which flogs continually and causes drag with normal genoas. Furthermore, this combination would give weather helm at a time when extreme rake and a twisted off main leach oftentimes cause lee helm. The higher aspect profile would be incredibly fast upwind. The extreme rake depowers the rig very effeciently by lowering the center of effort, reducing the chord lengths of the mainsail at the upper battens, dropping the main leach back to vertical, and giving the rig more leverage over the genoa luff. But it could backfire on a screaming two sail reach when the wind is too strong to fly a chute.

Lead Position.
Taylor/Penfield first sailed with inboard leads during the post regatta testing at Palamos. Others intend to do so soon. The early results are very encouraging, and should prove interesting even to those who continue to sheet outboard. The argument for inboard leads goes as follows: Compared to offshore boats with efficient underwater surfaces and overlapping genoas, FD's carry their leads unusually far outboard. The angle to the rail is slightly over 13^o, while IOR boats carry comparably sized genoas in as close as 7^o. In every dinghy class during the past few years, sheeting angles have been getting smaller and smaller. The most obvious sign that FD genoas are sheeted too for outboard is in the total incompatability of the two twists. Taylor/Penfield's most inboard track reduces the sheeting angle to 10^o, still conservative by most standards, yet more than double the distance achieved by Biancchi's adjustable bar. If the leads are also adjustable fore and aft, foot depth can be controlled as easily as on a Laser sail. Since a major difference between the Musto Code One and Two is foot depth, it is conceivable that one genoa can be made for almost every condition. The procedure from light to heavy air would be from forward to aft to flatten out the foot, and from inboard to outboard to open up the slot. Of course, in drifting conditions, when everyone is close reaching upwind, the lead goes out to the rail. The heavy and light air genoas could be of exactly the same design, but cut out of different cloths and have slightly different luff curves. They would be optimal in their respective conditions, and highly usable in the wrong condition.

A look at the Code One demonstrates how Musto has made his genoa seem to sheet farther inboard than it actually does. When the sheet is pulled hard enough, the upper sections close down do look quite similar to those of a genoa sheeted inboard. Down low, the luff curve cuts back severely to give a very fine entry. This narrow angle of attack simulates inboard sheeting on the one hand, and also aligns the genoa with the headed airflow it sees below the boom and far in front of the main. The full entry and more draft forward shape up top is necessary because the main bends the wind in front of the mast, so that the higher up in the genoa we go, the more lifted the airflow becomes at the luff. Vertical wind shear accentuates this to some extent. See diagram 1.

Diagram 1. The Genoa sees different apparent wind angles at different points on its luff.
At the tack, the wind is unaffected by the mainsail. At the head, the velocity field of the mainsail bends the wind to a lifted angle of attack.

If we actually twisted the entire sail to harmonize with the apparent wind's twist, the slot would be way too open because the bottom starting point is too far outboard. Thus Musto's shape juggling approximation. The draft aft shape down low is partially the result of using a fine entry shape without flattening the sail. You simply have to move the maximum draft point back until the flat curve of the entry meets it. Conversely, a rounder leach must be designed because there is less distance remaining to get back to the chord line. The round leach and fine entry down low is again an approximation of inboard sheeting. The round leach is a good clue that the sail should be sheeted farther inboard, since in many classes sail designers strive for flat exits. The round leach's main effect is to pretend to close the slot down low more than it really is. When you move the lead forward, the shape of the sail assumes a catanary curve, like a hammock. Thus you are limited to one sort of fullness that you can add down low by moving the lead forward, while any shape at all can be broadseamed into the sail. Luckily, the Code One's broadseamed shape in the foot happens to be close to a catanary curve. If we always used outboard leads, we could switch from a Code One to a Code Two simply by moving the lead aft. Taylor/Penfield intend to do this, but they also plan to move their lead inboard. I am not sure that the correct curve down low will prove to be catanary with inboard leads. The argument for a catanary curve in the Code One is specifically linked to its effort to overcome the dis-advantages of outboard sheeting. One thing is for certain; you can not sheet a Code One inboard successfully. The reason why nobody else in the world sheets inboard is because they have not redesigned their genoas with a full understanding of why the Code One looks like it does. In Taylor/Penfield's favor, though, is the probability that they will not need such a full shape in the foot anyways, since the depth is also a result of outboard sheeting compromises. Besides moving their leads inboard, Taylor/penfield have also moved their shrouds 3 1/2" in and shortened their spreaders accordingly. Mast support seems to be just as good as before.

Rigging Advances.
Loeb/Duane and Taylor/Penfield's boats sport a number of new and borrowed rigging ideas that could easily be adopted to standard double bottomed hulls. As usual, the Europeans had practically no original and workable ideas, their time being more on the water and less in the shop. Refer to the photographs for clarification.

The attachment point for the lowers has been dropped 10" below the goose-neck in order to promote a little more low bend (especially when used with vang sheeting) and to put a little automatic transmission into the system. Now an increase in vang tension closes the leach and bends the mast, instead of just the former. Taylor/Penfield have even attached their lowers to the shroud levers, in order to prevent the bend from increasing when the mast is raked back, and vice versa.

Taylor/Penfield and others have also added an above deck prebender that snaps on for light air use. As mentioned above, this control is crucial when you intend to use just one mainsail. Without it, the only way to bend the mast in light air was through raw rig tension --hardly a good idea when you would rather sag the genoa luff. In the same way that Taylor/Penfield and others can use one luffcurve for their mainsail, they can also use one luff curve for their genoas, because they do not have to carry rig tension in light air. The prebender is lighter than a deck level system and much less traumatic to use. It does not hurt tacking speed too much.

Loeb/Duane inaugerated the use of internal halyard locks in FD's, an old Star trick. The Burtons have since welded in the ultimate lock to their Beta+, which fairs smoothly into the spar. The advantages are less compressive load on the mast, and lighter weight. If we could splice 3/32" wire into a 1/16" wire tail, even more weight could be saved, since only the first foot of the halyard is under load when sailing. Loeb/Duane have just rigged a mast with Gibb-Henderson T terminals and backup plates for the shrouds, trapeze wires, and lowers. A weight saving improvement over other methods, and much stronger in a Beta+ than Z Spar hook terminals, considering the wall thickness.

In order to go quickly from inboard to outboard leads, Taylor/Penfield have modified Harken bullet blocks into snatch blocks by cutting and welding, and switched down to 5/16" pre-stretched for the sheets. Penfield says that they are thick enough so far.

Loeb/Duane and Taylor/Penfield have installed "Buchan strings", after the original in Carl Buchan's 505, to automatically uncleat the spinnaker halyard during the douse. Once tension reaches a certain point on the retrieve line, a small wire with loops on both ends pops the halyard out of its cam cleat. By adjusting the length of the Buchan String, you can regulate how collapsed the chute is before the halyard releases and avoid a leeward mark disaster. Taylor/Penfield use wire to reduce stretch and weight. The photos show three unnecessary blocks on the centerboard cap that were left over from an old system. A tiny shock cord on the halyard side of the Buchan string prevents the bullet block from capsizing.

Other spinnaker system ideas include a 505 style diaper to keep water out of the launcher tube, and the use of plastic needlepoint screening for the launcher sock. It reduces friction because the chute can not wet-out the sock the way it does with a sailcloth sock. Though its dry weight is more than sailcloth, its sailing weight must be less because of its quick draining properties. Its stiffness forces it into a tubular shape automatically. Unfortunately, this material may not prove to be very durable.

Seidl from Austria has plans to install an automatic twing cleanup system on his FD, which he described as follows: Put a Harken through-deck block in the bottom of the mouth of the glass launcher tube. Pass a shockcord through it with a small ring spliced into the forward end (lead the other end back to the twings). Pass the retrieve line through the ring and then to the center patch on the chute. The tension of the shock cord should position the ring at the bottom of the mouth of the lancher, while the retrieve line slides through it easily as long as the chute is flying. As you douse the chute, the retrieve line snakes through the ring until it fetches up on the sail patch. Now it is pulled down the launcher just ahead of the chute, while the other end sucks up the twings! Seidl was not sure how to rig the twing end of this affair. I am not sure that you do not need both the shock cord retrieve and another line in order to pull the ring into position and cleanup the twings as well. But the concept is interesting, and even has potential for a halyard cleanup system.

Taylor/Penfield have adopted the Russians' use of an upwind foot loop for the crew. By swinging forward against it so that the forward foot is in compression and the back foot is in tension, about 4" can be added to the effective height of a six foot person. Remember to place it somewhat aft of your regular trapezing position to allow for the corresponding forward shift in weight.

Foster/Grant and Elam/Gough are using elegant, if expensive, anti-geyser-on-the-reaches centerboard slot plugs. [homemade versions of these are now known as "foamies" ed.] They were made by a surfboard builder.

Taylor has designed a twing system incorporating a 2:1 disadvantage that speeds cleanup and jibes, and cleats the twing automatically. See photo for description

Clothing.
Crew clothing will be critical this spring in Newport. The problem is to dress warmly and lightly, so that the maximum weight can be carried up high. Penfield has found that it is impossible to carry more than 16 pounds of water and still weigh in under 44 pounds. [the use of any water ballast is of course now illegal ed.] He wears Romika boots (stickier sole, lighter, warmer than Aigles), wool socks, 8mm White Stag long john wetsuit (only 3 pounds), a cutaway Javlin jacket that comes down to the bottom of his ribcage, a lightweight Musto suit, a wool hat, sailing gloves, underpants, a Sally harness, and a two bladder water baby. It would behoove all crews to make positively sure that they are legal at the trials if they want to avoid a spoiler protest. We should also be prepared to object to competitors who carry too much water at the Games. The two Austrian crews wore six bottle weight jackets that looked like astronaut life support systems and probably weighed more! The best way to save weight is by picking out a thin unlined wetsuit, a lightweight jump suit, a lightweight harness and boots.

Masts.
The Z Spar is still the most popular mast in the class, but many Americans have switched to a Proctor Beta+, and for good reason. It is significantly lighter, just as stiff fore and aft and about the same sideways. Of course, it does not bend as readily down low since its track continues below the gooseneck to the step. To allow for this you can either recut the luff curve or do a number of things with the rig to artificially increase bend. The latter route is in my opinion the more likely to be successful. Until the "low bend is fast" argument has been disproven, I would not want to design a main that prevents me from carrying low bend. No one who saw Steingross win in a breeze at Kiel with a little rake and an unbelievable amount of bend will soon forget how bend can deceive the rig into acting like it is raked much more than it is. The two potential improvements over the Beta+ are about to be explored by Loeb/Duane who have begun to rig the lighter Beta-, and Taylor/Penfield who are rigging the smaller Alpha+.

Conclusion.
Today it seems almost certain that the United States will boycott the Olympic Games. I am positive that if we had been permitted to race in Tallin, we would have won a medal. It would have been quite an accomplishment after so few years of intensive effort. The Gold Medal in Los Angeles will be ours if we continue to generate good ideas at the same pace as we have in the previous two years. For my part, I hope that the Olympic Yachting Committee's reaction to the boycott is to search out funding even more aggresively than before --starting now. With a redoubled effort on the part of competitors, coaches, and committee members, we will surprise the world as rudely in '84 as we should have in '80.

Rigging pictures

11a)-- Taylor/Penfield's inboard jib leads. Lead can be adjusted fore and aft on all three tracks. The snatch block hangs off of a short pennant inside the seat tank when not in use. Note position of upwind foot loop.

11b)-- Detail of the modified bullet block. The lower stainless cheek strap has been replaced by a heavier one, welded to a bolt that passes through the center of the block and out the other side. The nut is spot welded onto the other cheek to prevent it from spinning around.

12a)-- Taylor/Penfield's twing system. When the chute is flying, the rope handle hangs conveniently behind the mast. Before a jibe, the crew pulls it, and the old leeward twing cleats automatically. Uncleating is the same as always.

12b)--The shroud lever with upper and lower shrouds attached at the same point. Note delrin skid pad to eliminate play, and spinnaker sock material.

13a)-- The retrieve side of the "Buchan string" on Taylor/ Penfield's boat. The halyard leaves the launcher sock in the lower left, passes through a cheek block, through the block at one end of the Buchan string, through another cheek block, a bullseye, and aft to a turning block.

13b)-- The halyard side. The halyard comes forward from the turning block, through a bullseye, a cheekblock,
a cam cleat with roller, the Buchan string block, a cheek block, and forward to the mast. The Buchan string passes over the top of the trunk. Shock cord prevents foul ups. Photos were taken with chute set. To douse, the skipper pulls the retrieve line until tension on the Buchan string pops the cleat.

13c)-- A spinnaker diaper to keep water out of the launcher tube. The shock cords dead end on the gunwhales just aft of the edge of the photo.

14a)--Two prebenders. A magic box mounted on a custom Burton Bros. sliding bracket for two-way action...

14b)-- A detachable 2:1 wire babystay [mast ram] on Loeb/Duane's boat.

14c)-- Elam/Gough's centerboard trunk geyser stopper.

Sail Shape Photos

15a)-- Taylor Penfield with inboard genoa sheets

15b)-- Taylor Penfield again

15c)-- Diaz/Reynolds with Musto Code One genoa

15d)-- McLaughlin/Bastet in a breeze