New post from the TC on NA website.
IDNIYRA Technical Committee: Sail Material Determination
Submit a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
New post from the TC on NA website.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Karol Jablonski Olsztyn 3.02. 2020
P 36
Ka********@***il.com
+48 508308736
Technical Committee of the DN Class
Subject: sail cloth.
Dear Technical Committee Members
I would like to ask you for an opinion regarding the sail cloth specification Point G 1 of 2016 IDNIYRA Official Specifications.
In the letter dated 2.3.2020 the Chairperson Jeff Kent wrights that
Only the specific unbalanced construction meets our current DN Class Specifications. This leaves us with 2 Class‐legal cloths which have been used for years: Dimension Polyant 280AP HTP+ 250x 410 Contender 6.5 Polykote 200 x 440
It confirms that the construction of Contender sail cloth is 200 x 440.
The IDNIYRA official Specification in the Yearbook 2016 says that:
Sail cloth must be made with either of the following cloth constructions: 6.5 oz cloth with 220 denier warp and 440 denier fill yarns or280 AP…
How it is possible to declare that Contender Sail cloth meets current DN specs. ???
It is obvious that it doesn’t, because the construction is 200 x 440 and the specs clearly define that it must be 220 x 440
So I would like receive your explanation before the 2020 worlds why it has been decided this way.
Karol jablonski
.
Kind Regards
Karol Jablonski
While not a member of the TC I realize it is not my place to answer your question Karol. But as I happen to work in the sail making industry I guess it may be of some general interest to the DN sailing community to hear my comments on a question regarding sails.
1.
I am sure you are aware of the TC interpretation dated January-99. That interpretation specifically allows Contender 6,5 PK to be allowed in DN sails.
That interpretation makes the cloth legal.
You asked WHY the cloth is legal and the simple answer is: because there is an interpretation making it legal.
2.
You addressed your question to the CURRENT TC. Personally I would imagine these guys may have some problems knowing all the reasoning for and against that the TC of 1999 may or may not have had. Should your question not be addressed to the TC of 1999?
3. I am guessing your real question is why one cloth that is not 100% according to the specs has been allowed (by a former TC) and not some other cloth.
On this point I agree with you. That IS a good question given the fact that cloths do evolve and change over time.
Lastly I might add that I dont expect any one to answer this post. Primary reason for this comment is that I believe it is good for each and every one of us to know about the TC inerpretation of 1999 which respectfully in my opinion answers your question.
On a more general note, I do believe the class may be heading towards an situation where we need to think about re thinking the current cloth specs.
Best regards and respectfully
John Winquist