My very poor command of the German language really stops me joining your discussions but still I recognise we have a lot to learn from you guys.

I understand that early this year Graupner introduced some more tooling to help the production of the RMM.
Supplies certainly seem better as a result.

However we have noticed the quality of the abs Hull and Deck is not so good.
Many people are having problems getting the hull and deck to align correctly and as a result the rudder and keel are not at the same angle.
I have email reports from AUS, NZ and USA as well as from the UK.

I was wondering if you were seeing the same problem.

To view these forums I use bablefish or Google translate so it is possible I do not fully understand what has been written.
However I think I did notice a couple of comments I'd like to react too.

Firstly there has been no editing of posts on the International forum for almost a year.
If there are no replies to a post it is because there have been no replies.

Secondly, proposed rule changes can be put forward by any country representative.
Currently we have one from Spain -the adoption of the carbon look and transparent ABS boats.
This is not a rule change in my view just an additional line in the appendix.
The UK has asked to introduce a recommendation of 60mm high numbers and letters. Not a change therefore just a recommendation as a change would effect many people and introduce a problem where we would have to monitor sails built before 2009.
Frankly we this is not something we really want to do.
The third proposal was from NED about restricting the position of the ballast on the keel.
Personally I'm not keen on this but many people seem to want to add this restriction.
We will see in the vote whether this happens.

Lastly has anybody actually written a true One-design rule for the MM?
Many new people from the emerging Nations ask and we say it's too difficult to manage but I've never actually asked if one exists.

cheers & happy sailing

Hello mike,

nice to see you posting here! to answer some of your questions...

as far as i can see from the forum in the last month we had no reports about badly shaped hulls and decks. either they're not existing here (maybe an older charge of boats is to be sold here) or nobody mentioned it.

about the rule changes i can just give you my comments and these comments are matching with almost every other comment here.
about the carbon look: we see no problem to legalize them.
about the sail numbers: if it's a recommodation nobody is going to care about it. we had serious problems to address the sailnumbers at the EC correctly because some of them were not recognizable in bigger distance. special case mike westons transparent sails with small black numbers. how should i address a penalty to somebody if i'm not able to tell his number? in spain sometimes we had to address it to the "white sails" which was in fact a white boat... usually sailnumbers are done with black markers. it's easy to remove them and easy to paint them new. if you're sailing icarex sails it's more tricky.
as long as you know your competitors boat by heart there's going to be no problem of course. as soon as there are some unknown boats you have to be able to read the number. my first idea went already that far to have the sail number written on the bow (at least for the EC). if there'll be no rule we should ask the next EC organisation to put it in the events rules. anyway from my point of view the argumnet about existings sails with number is a weak one.
about the keel: why to restrict it? either it has been already done by somebody --> see your argument about existing sails, it cannot be restricted anymore. or it has not been done until now --> why, maybe not effective?. in this case why to restrict it now?

it's difficult to see a structure for me... very sophisticated sheetings, riggs, goosenecks, etc are allowed. almost every kind of engeneering can be done doesn't matter how expensive or how freightening for others. as soon as you're underneath the water line it changes... the keel is easy to build (you have to glue together two parts!) and quite cheap, the riggs are almost double the price, complicated to build, many possibilities to make mistakes... so why to restrict the keel construction and not the rigg. as a beginner i would not be able to get this point as well as an experienced sailor.
you now me now from two events. i like sailing the mm even with these rules but for me it's not consequent. the idea not to freigthen beginners is a nice one but it's necessary to have this red line in your rules. by now (my own experience out of three different MMs) as a beginner i would rather sail the open rules than the international ones. we have many big boat sailors here and none of them was scared by the idea to change the keel.

IOD rules: we call it IOD because that's what has been the initial idea isn't it, anyway there's not a lot left of this idea. i know some clubs and groups in Germany and Luxemburg using a simple rule: the boat has to be build with teh components of the kit, full stop. that's the rule, it's not freightening somebody, all ships are the same. i asked what they do in case of stronger winds and the answer was we don't sail. i had both boats with me in Luxemburg and i asked them what they think of them. the answer for the german one: "nice engineering but to difficult for us", for the international one: "nice engineering but to difficult for us"... they wanted to have a kit boat with 3 different keels rather than to build different riggs... in the future the rule will be changed and experience is going to be integrated. they understood for example different lines would be better than the original one. the rudder may be controlled by a push rod instead of lines... time will tell.

i hope this answered some of your questions...


looking forward to meet you at the UK nationals next year. my international schedule for next year are the nationals from UK, SUI, FRA, NED, ESP/POR + the EC. are you going t go to some of them as well?


Henning

Hi Mike,

You know, my English is very bad, with two accents in it.

About the hull, I think after this summer, the hull isn't quit symetric.

In earlier times, I could assembled the boat without the parts together from one boat, now, I have to build the parts from one boat by/in this boat.
Also I've repaired some boats from new/starting sailors with the problem you've described.
Not only Keel-Ruder  in a different angle, also on port-side astern not enough hull for the deck by some kits.


In Thomas Topic about the maximum draught, ( http://www.mm-sailing.de/forum//showthre...8#pid28318 ) I ask how to measure, is because of this problem and I've reported it by Graupner.

So we'll see us on the water

Arjan

Thanks, I'm sort of glad somebody else has noticed this.
It is a worrying problem as so far we have never had to worry much about the quality of the kit.
I do hope Graupner fix this problem.

Henning - Yes, Cath and I intend to do more International events, starting with SWE in April.

Logic tells us that changing keels is the simple solution, I fully agree.
However perception and lack of MM experience tends to make the rigs a more favourable choice.

The Article that Thomas put together puts forward a very strong case.
However gaining acceptance across borders and now continents, is difficult.
In fact actually getting more than 5 countries to agree on anything is a difficult, getting 14 to agree is nothing short of a miracle.

The other problem with the keel is the availability of the various ballast weights.
Yes we could buy them from German sources but this is not a good strategy for non-Eu countries.

I actually think the rig situation will become more simple in the next year or so.
At recent UK events some good sailors over here have used simple flat cut sails and there appears to be little in performance.
Four rig sizes seem to fit most UK conditions.
Fat heads and masthead jibs seem to be the fashion.

Dieser Beitrag wurde zuletzt bearbeitet: 11.12.2008 18:12 von GBR Mike.

You talk about things You don't know. Why don't You try it and build Your own opinion? People often believe what they are told, especially if it's something new. In the past, different opinions have been deleted in Your international "forum". So You obviously haven't been interested in a fair discussion so far.

If there is a market, someone will offer it in any country people ask for it, be sure!

Christian, I think you misunderstand me again.

If somebody came up with an idea that made the MM 50% faster for little money there is no guarantee that the 14 countries that decide will accept it or not.
Logically they should but in practice they will not.
You have to go with the majority otherwise you end up on your own.

The International forum is not the place for discussion that inevitably leads to argument.
This creates a very bad impression to new people.
Argumentative posts were removed, not ideas set out in a reasoned way.
Personal attacks will always be removed no matter how good the argument.

If the "Class" has arguments this should not be done in full view of the public.
This may be the way in Germany but not in the UK.

There will only be a market if the National classes accept it.
I am certainly the most positive in the UK Class on looking at the heavy keels issue.
However the response is always  "No, it wouldn't work here" and "Nobody else is doing it" and from more experienced RC Yacht sailors "Look what happened to the Marblehead when the Germans got the keel rule changed!".
Now these may not be fair but that is just the fact of what they say.

From what I have seen, even getting a simple change in the rules generates tens of emails back and forth across the world.
Arjan is quite within hi rights to propose the Heavy keel to the MMI but I really can't see it being passed.

Maybe if he presented it each year, every year, people might come round, but do not hold your breath.

Dieser Beitrag wurde zuletzt bearbeitet: 11.12.2008 23:54 von GBR Mike.

Hi Mike,

to your first post:

I have not heard anything about new tools / moulds for hull and deck for production of rMM so far.

What I know and watched from all the years ago is that there is always a more or less big tolerance in the CNC manufacturing, which causes not only different widths of the hull flanges but also not correct positioned holes for the ruder stock either in deck and/or hull. On cMM it was easily visible via that small moulded slots which were in hull and deck but on rMM there are just the milled holes and noboby can check the correct positions easily.
I have mentioned that several times at Graupner as well as others things, but without any result so far…all is now listed in this document: http://www.mm-sailing.de/mm-hp/daten/rmm...rektur.pdf  - sorry, I have started a translation in english but not finished up to now as it takes time.

Fine.
If you rely on my comment about your from me so called “darkroom-area” on your mmi-forum then the translation should translate it also for the time of last year, when several threads and replies were moved away, as you know. Since then I for myself did not look very interested to mm.info and your MMI doing there.

Regarding my post about heavy keels on mm.info I do not think that there are any replies deleted.

But I do think and I also know from some that interested people in that subject will not write about it on this forum anymore due to what they have seen in the past but will test it on their own. From my point it is perfect ok, as I do not want to start a discussion there again. But as MM.info is currently the only international place for MM information all around I placed it simply there. I tried to mention that it is just an information about MM and its potentials it can give to customers, but at least Steven seemed not to read that intro or did not understood it.
Anyway, what customers of MM will do with it is left to them only. I promise you I will not start nor take part at any international discussions about your MMI and your rules anymore. Enough wasted time already with you guys there about that.

I (and you as well) only know that Portugal was sailing with MMs under their formal own OD rules in times before EC2007 with cMM. I also viewed that the group in FIN is sailing rMM under own defined OD aspects but do not know if they have made a document of their rules for that.
I do not know of a written version of a real MM-OD rule so far.
Yes, people sometimes ask for it and vote for it – but nobody of those who seems to be more or less interested in such a version takes the time to produce one, which is sad because with such a document as background they could better promote their favor of playing to others. But that’s to those who are  interested in that kind of MM-playing.
Well, at least, I am sure you still remember about my draft of a rule closer to your promoted OD spirits. It is still available: home.arcor.de/ger15/MMI_rule2008-draft1td.doc - (I have not made a german translation...)


To your second post regarding scouces for heavier bulbs:
Thats also why I have sent Graupner the same informations and my suggestion to add heavier bulbs in their range of MM parts.

Regards
Thomas


P.S. Btw, Babelfish produces quite funny translations of our comments:
http://de.babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_...etzen&vm=i

Forget that tool, it does not work with our in forums mostly used common verbal written language where we often do not mind about the rules of grammar.

GB is not anymore in the EU ?

what happens ?

Why a Forum than ? close it !!!

That should be no big problem. It is not very difficult to build a bulb. I made one for my own MM this summer.