Summary of the IM24CA Open Technical Committee Meeting

17.10.2024

October 17, 2024 - On October 14, the IM24CA Open Technical Committee Meeting was held in Zoom to discuss the submitted proposals and make changes to the draft as needed before the Annual General Meeting held on November 16, 2024. 

Participants: 

  • Mike Gozzard, Tech Comm Chair
  • Brako Parunov, Chief Measurer and Tech Comm Member
  • Duncan Stamper, Tech Comm Member
  • Arto Kiiski, Tech Comm Member
  • Jan Schmidt, Tech Comm Member
  • David Bartol, Championship Coordinator Europe
  • Laura Grondin, IM24CA Chair
  • Miles Quinton, IM24CA Treasurer
  • Michael Tarabochia, IM24CA Exec Comm Member Europe
  • Jens Wathne, Melges 24 Norway 
  • Dan Berezin, Melges 24 Canada, President
  • Mauro Melandri, Zerogradinord
  • Piret Salmistu, IM24CA Administrator

The team discussed various proposals and rule changes for the class, including the introduction of an outhaul safety line, changes to class membership categories, modifying our class rules to align with World Sailing requirements for advertising on the hull, tightening up the class rule regarding rudder hardware, modifications to B.2.2 Pro membership and the potential switch to a fixed forestay system on all boats. The team agreed to discuss these topics further in a Technical Committee Meeting before the AGM. The team also considered the impact of weight rule changes on the class after a season in use.

Next Steps

  • Technical Committee to review and finalize the proposal for the main outhaul safety line rule change.
  • Duncan Stamper to create a drawing of the main outhaul safety line for the rule change proposal.
  • Technical Committee to consider adding language specifying allowed parts/materials for the main outhaul safety line.
  • Technical Committee to review and refine the Croatian proposal for advertising rules.
  • Technical Committee to reconsider the rudder gudgeons proposal and gather more data on failures.
  • Technical Committee to draft a revised proposal for pro sailor membership rules, considering the associate membership option. Explore the possibility of allowing NCAs full autonomy regarding implementation of the Pro sailor membership.
  • Technical Committee to create a brief explaining the fixed forestay proposal, its pros and cons, and potential implementation plan.
  • Hein Ruyten to inquire with mast builder about Dyneema options for forestay and share findings with the committee.
  • Technical Committee to analyse crew weight data from recent championships and consider publishing findings.
  • Piret and Mauro Melandri to work on articles about the new weight rule impact and two-person leg-in sailing.
  • Technical Committee to schedule a follow-up meeting before October 24th to finalize proposals.
  • Technical Committee to prepare a summary report of the meeting discussions for wider distribution to NCAs and class members.
  • Piret to coordinate with Technical Committee on gathering input for articles on weight rule and two-person leg-in sailing.
  • Technical Committee to review options for addressing the jib halyard/forestay issue, including Dyneema and galvanized wire alternatives.
  • Technical Committee to consider how to streamline the process of identifying and registering pro sailors in the class.'

Summary

Attendees were introduced by Piret, including members of the Technical Committee and other participants. 

Safety Line Proposal for Main Outhaul 

Mike, Duncan, Branko, Arto, and Jens discussed the proposal for a safety line for the main outhaul. Duncan explained the purpose of the safety line as a backup system to prevent the main sail from coming free of the boom, especially in breezy conditions. The proposal was agreed upon as a necessary safety measure, and it was noted that it would affect two rules: F.4.3 “Fittings” and H2.51 main sail outhaul. Jens suggested adding a drawing to the class rule for clarity, and Duncan proposed creating a drawing for the rule change proposal. Jens also raised concerns about potential loopholes in the proposed changes. 

Sticker Placement and Sponsorship Discussion  

The conversation started with David discussing the challenges faced during the European event due to the placement of sponsor stickers, which led to a change in their position to avoid protests The team discussed the placement of stickers on boats, specifically in relation to the bow numbers and sponsor logos. David suggested that the area below the bow numbers could be used for sponsor stickers, but Miles expressed concerns about the visibility of the bow numbers and the potential for boats to lose their stickers when positioned close to the waterline. The team agreed that the area below the bow numbers should be reserved for event sponsors. They also discussed the need for the class rules to adhere to the advertising code from World Sailing. The team decided to consider the needs of sponsors in this matter, as they are crucial for the success of the event. 

Branko also suggested a new rule for advertising placement, specifying a minimum distance from the bottom of the number and a maximum height. The team discussed concerns about sticker placement and improving the sticker quality. The team also considered alternative options for displaying sponsor logos, such as boom stickers and banners. The Technical Committee was tasked with summarizing these thoughts and proposing changes. 

Rudder Fitting Proposal and Material Standards 

Mike discussed Zenda's proposal regarding rudder fittings. The team debated allowing existing titanium fittings or requiring adherence to the new standard. Branko raised concerns, while Mike suggested allowing registered titanium fittings. Concerns were raised about the quality of current rudder fittings, with some breaking due to overtightening. The team agreed stainless steel would be the minimum requirement and all agreed the fittings should be supplied under builder specification (licenced) as we do not want members thinking they can make their own hardware. They decided to address issues with the manufacturer to ensure no supply issues. 

Categorization and Membership Discussion 

Mike and Duncan discussed requiring Category 3 sailors to be full members. Duncan proposed a professional membership category. The team agreed the categorization remains unresolved. Jens emphasized growing the class and generating income across the class, not individual NCAs. Mike suggested a compromise to the current rule to accommodate both sides of the discussion. Branko noted the Italian class has higher fees, and additional costs could be detrimental. Piret raised concerns about lack of control and transparency in enforcing categorization rules.

Proposal and Membership Criteria Discussion 

The meeting focused on a proposal related to the membership of a class, with concerns raised about the dominance of professional sailors and its impact on amateur sailors. The proposal was deferred back to the Technical Committee for further consideration. The team also discussed the need for a change in the membership criteria and the competitive nature of Group 3 sailors in sailing events. The idea of associate membership for professionals was discussed, with uncertainty about the sentiment in Europe. The matter was deferred back to the technical committee for further discussion.

Boat System Issues and Safety Concerns 

The team discussed the issues with the old boats, specifically the fixed forestay system used in the Midwest fleet. They considered the long-term viability of the system, including the cost of replacing the mast and the need for custom fittings. The team also discussed the use of different materials that could be used in place of the current 7x19 SS halyard. They reviewed some experimentation already undertaken with different types of wire. They considered the safety issues related to the sailing class, specifically the broken halyards and the possibility of switching to a fixed forestay system. The consensus was that the fixed forestay system could be a viable solution to the safety issues, but there were concerns about its competitiveness in higher breezes. The team also discussed the potential need for a technical committee to review and address a problem that might not pass this year but could gain more support in 2025. They agreed to pursue a solution that would be economically feasible for most sailors. 

New System Introduction and Retrofitting Discussion 

Jens and Dan discuss introducing a new system to replace the existing one. Dan proposes a complete switch, while Jens raises concerns about cost and feasibility of retrofitting masts. The consensus is that the new system is manufacturer-approved for fitting masks. They also discuss retrofitting masts. Concerns are raised about reliability and insurance issues. Retrofitting to the fixed system is seen as a levelling of the playing field. There are approximately 300 boats that would need mast modifications and kits from the manufacturer. A grace period for implementation is debated, with the consensus being to avoid having two systems simultaneously through strategic planning. 

Fixed vs Flexible Mast System Discussion 

Michael and Jens discussed the advantages and disadvantages of a fixed mast system versus the 7x19 SS halyard. Michael expressed his preference for the fixed system, while Jens suggested that a bilingual system might be more advantageous. Dan shared his experience using both systems and expressed concerns about safety, suggesting a gradual implementation of the new system in continental and world events. Miles argued that they should address issues with their current system rather than switch to a potentially less flexible system. The team discussed potential solutions using new materials like galvanized wires or covering existing wires with Kevlar, and the need to explore more reliable systems already used by European boats. The consensus was that the class should seriously consider addressing the issue, with the next step agreed upon being to publish a brief outlining the facts and potential migration path for further debate and decision at the AGM. 

Weight Rule and Performance Discussion 

The team discussed the weight rule for sailing events, comparing the Europeans and San Francisco Worlds. Branko shared some data for further analysis. The team also discussed the weight of the crews and its impact on performance with a new optimal weight being found. They considered the impact of the weight rule change on the class was positive so far and agreed to revisit the discussion again in the future.

The meeting was adjourned with an agreement to revisit outstanding items over the next week and reconvene before the October 25th deadline for revisions. Next meeting is scheduled for October 22nd.