Its always the parents that write about whether the Nationals/worlds
were good bad or ugly. So I thought I would put down my thoughts in
bullet form and hope that the sailors will add comments,whether they agree or disagree.
Venue
I thought the venue was great,what a a great view of the Bay for spectators although the racing was a little far away to be of visual impact.The Clubhouse and grounds were well set up and thought the slipway logistics and boat park pretty slick.
Wind,courses & racing.
I think the wind played along nicely apart from one nasty squall which in retro-spect was well handled by the organisors. Apart from some unhappiness about damage caused by the rescue teams no one was in particular danger. One lesson though, we need to educate or at least have a chat to the rescue crews before big events on how to handle a Dabbie in trouble. we must bear in mind that most rescue teams are made up of volunteers which have one thing in mind the sailor.
Parents/sailors
I met some great people mostly new to the Dabchick world. I think we are very like minded with a mission to ensure sailing,good competitition and plain good clean fun for our young sailors. I see great things happening in the Western cape, thanks to all involved. Alan the spoon is going back to you next year,we are in training.
Mylar/Dacron
The first 2 finshers were Mylar sails. But having said that apart from Leo who was moving like a rocket young Tim Manley was biting at his heels, Gareth(dacron) and James Stock (Mylar) was hot & cold so in my mind – I still dont know.Time & testing will tell.
2009 Must be a year where we recruit, recruit recruit. To do this we need to demonstrate what a great boat we have and especially what a great bunch of sailors sail them.
VIVA LEO DAVIS
Before I close well done to Leo, you really sailed well,consistent and fast, a well earned win congratulations.
All credit to last years winner, James Stock who staged a last minute come back to gain 2nd place,with Tim Manley in 3rd and Gareth 4th.
Owen Baxter
DASA Chairman
I agree, the venue and the weather and sea water temperature in Mosselbay in December was really good, my family and I had a great time. Thank you to all involved with the organisation and running of the regatta.
Regarding the technical specifications of Dabbies. At the regatta we saw a number of areas where the boats components were being altered, and where, I believe, the alterations are not covered by the existing rules and specifications. Examples of these are “pointing” centreboards, a mast with extra stiffinning, sails that measure correctly but can then be pulled back beyond the boom bands, etc. The new fibreglass boats are now reported to weigh about 32 kg – how much weight can be leagally added to bring a boat to the correct weight?
My concern is that it would appear that the rules and specifications governing the class are not keeping up with the rate of the changes taking place? Should it not be made a rule that the Technical Committee must provide at least provisional approval before new parts, not covered by the current rules, may be used in regatta’s, especially the Nationals? And as soon after that as possible the rules must be altered to recognise or reject the proposed new component?
Hi Tony,
The rules do not dictate how stiff a mast should be. For years lightweight Dabbie Sailors have been making masts which bend easily so that wind is spilled making the boat more controllable for them. Sails may not be stretched past the bands whilst racing and other competitors should protest if this is the case. I wonder however, if stretching the sail is good for the shape any way.
The bottom line is that all the boats were premeasured and passed. Should there be any unhappiness with the rules as they are, proposals should be put to the National Techincal committee and changes voted on.
I know of 2 boats with pointing cetreboards, both measured and I am not sure if they gave any advantage.
Best regards to you and the family, we can debate these issues further should you so wish.
Owen
Hi Owen, thank you for the response.
I am in no way questioning the measuring process and have complete faith in the prople who so selflessly volunteer to do the measuring. Nor am I unhappy with the rules, just raising the question to better understand the process.
My question revolves around the fact that, as you say, the rules do not dictate how stiff a mast may be. They do not recognise pointing centreboards, etc. There is no doubt that these components are legal according to the rules as they are currently stand. Maybe such equipment should be specifically dealt with in the rules, maybe not. What however should trigger their consideration for specific inclusion in the rules? Any set of rules is written at a point in time and encompasses the known technology at that time. There are always going to be new developments, so there must be a process to deal with them?
How do the rest of the sailors find out about these developments? How do they get to compete on an equal footing if they cannot make or buy the parts?
Kind regards
Tony
I totally agree with Tony.
I am a ex dabbie dad, past chairman and builder of 3 boats ( 3358, 3365 & 3366) and I must admit being one of those who pushed the limits as the boats performance shows.However I never broke the rules.
The boat is meant to be fun and inexpensive ( not like that plastic bathtub)
The rules are there and if skippers break them they must be protested.
Re masts the stiffness factor must not enter the equation as different size skippers and different sailing conditions must be catered for. In most senior classes numerous systems are used to control mast bend which are not available in the Dabbie.
However I firmly believe that we are pushing the limits too far now.
if we want to encourage new skippers the Dabbie must be kept inexpensive and no too hi-tech.
As regards the plastic dabbie there is a rule as to how much weight may be added and where. However history has also shown unless the plastic boat is very hitech it will either be overweight or soft ( which is fatal for a dabbie) which is a flat planing hull.
We must remember that Koper’s intent when designing the boat was to design something simple that father and son/daughter could build together at reasonable cost.
Having been out of SA for 7 years and now having returned I am concerned that we have lost focus about what it is all about with the enivatable consequences that come with this.
Ian mitchell
( ex DASA Chairman)
Hi Ian & Tony,
Jack Koper’s intent of designing a home built boat for young sailors to have fun on is one of the underlying principles that we strive to not move away from. Rules were put into place to govern hull size sails etc but fitting placement etc was not dictated on. You must remember that the dabchick is not a strict one design boat but allows for certain amount of development within certain parameters, having said that the Dabchick is still the most cost effective trainer around and we will strive to keep it that way.One of the factors that allowed Mylar sails to fly is that there is, unlike a few years back,very little if no difference in the cost compared Dacron.
The Maximum removable weight that may be added to a Dabbie is 5 Kilo’s. The emphasis is on removable. If for example you build at 32,6 Kg you could add expoxy to the weight which will make the boat heavier and use lead weighing less than 5 kgs to bring the total weight to 38,6 kg’s.
I do not believe that any focus has been lost, in recruitment maybe, which we are working on, but we need to take into account 3 things :
1) What do the sailors want – Koper was adamant that the sailors should control their class ,not us.(Mylar was voted in by the sailors)
2) It must remain cost effective ,not forgetting who foots the bills.
3) We must never lose sight of our heritage.
The bottom line is that in terms of what has been outlined the rules have not been broken. If changes are required, the sailors – not the parents must motivate these to the Technical committee for review.
I have asked our Technical guys to review our comments and add if they feel its necessary.
Owen
I’m always amazed at how rumours get out and at how incorrect they are. Our new glass boats are about 5 kg underweight before fitting out and are built with 8mm foam and 5mm foam internal reinforcing. The boat is vacuumed using polyester resin and is more cost effective for us to build than a ply boat. I have built over 80 Dabbies this far and the only problems I have had with measurement is that a lot of measurers do not know how to use a tape measure correctly or how to read the very rules that they are trying to enforce. If a measurement station is 3300 from the transom then you will not find that station by running a tape around the bottom curve of the hull!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The only concern that I am hearing about at the moment is the use of packing in the back of the CB case. This to me is wrong in that it shortens the usable length of the case and therefor alters the relevant measurements, ie transon to aft of cb case.
Thanks Steve, I have no issues with what you are doing and wish you every success.
Owen
In response to Ian’s comment “that history has also shown unless the plastic boat is very hitech it will either be overweight or soft”. Having built a couple of grp Dabbies, not using high tech materials, and seen that they are not overweight, one was purposely built ‘extra-strong’, or soft, the validity of that statement is somewhat questionable. Having also witnessed the manufacture of numerous Unicorn A Class cats, by Gordon Rowe at Kayak Centre, in the 70’s and 80’s. Take note that on this boat each hull weighs only 22 Kg’s at 18ft long, straight grp foam sandwich, the evidence is clearly to the contrary. I respect that Ian has made a few timber boats, however the capabilities of an experienced builder and standard grp materials are capable of providing a down to weight boat as both Stephen and I have done. Jaap Constant, who built the first grp Dabbies in Durban during the 70’s, used 30mm refrigeration foam in his boats, and you can still find a couple lurking about!! He also never put in a single bulkhead, there was only a large stringer down the centre! Certainly not the required production standard, however, that some of those boats lasted as long as they did, is testament to the characteristics of grp, even when poorly applied. To further add some history, I still have a grp Spearhead built by Jack White in 1979. The boat is down to weight, 82Kg’s, stiff and still full of go.
Gents,
I have no complaints whith what anyone has said.
I have been out of SA for 7 years and was very disturbed to see on my return the demise of the class. Indeed I believe there are virtually no Dabbies in Natal.
I have no objection to any design of boat as long as it complies with the rules.
What concerns me is that maybe we are losing focus as to what the class is about.
I have no complaints with Stevens or Waynes comments as times change.
It is however a fact that the class is steadily getting smaller.
If you talk to some old members of HMYC they will tell you of Nationals with over 100 boats. When I was last involved at national level we were down to 60 if we were lucky.
Where are we now ( 30/40)
I think that instead of all getting excited about the boat design it is for all to focus on what made the Dabbie the great boat it is and to try and devise a way forward to recreate the class and grow it.
I am very pleased to see the amount of response to this discussion, may it continue.
I believe we all wish the class to grow and I think the current committee must concentrate on this and not start a squabble abt the technicalities.
If the Technical Committee is happy with the rules so be it as long as it does not inflate the costs beyond what is reasonably affordable. We all know there are parents who will throw any amount of cash at a boat if they think it will help their child to win. We do not want to get to a stage where Oppies cost in excess of R 30,000 which was the case when I left SA
Positive comments Ian, however, I do remember you brought in a number of French manufactured rolled aluminium sailboard masts to fit on Dabbies, and that these cost quite a bit more than the standard tapered Sigma section! Anyway, we all are keen to see the Dabby back in its place as the premier junior dinghy in SA. In KZN the pressure has come from the Laser 4.7 crowd. They tote an International class and all its benifits. This went in a number of cycles that saw the youngsters move onto 4.7’s, then get horribly wasted in some big breezes in the bay. There would be swing back to Dabbies for a couples years, then the process would repeat itself. The cost, and shortage of second hand Lasers, is sure to open up the way for Dabbies again, and we have to respond pro-actively to that.
Hi Wayne,
The only reason we brought these on ( 10) was that we could not find a suitable mast at that stage locally which was flexible enough. We had tested GRP sticks but they were like soggie spaggetie. maybe if somewone cold have come up with a better option we would not have to have done it. besides we were not the only people to do this and variants of this design were freely available locally at that time. In fact my first boat ( 3358) I soucred the mast in JHB.
Ian
PS, they were only abt R800 ea anyway so not expensive.