Laser Class Statement on the Development of New Rigs: 10 Comments
Here are ten comments about the January 21 announcement by the Laser class "Information for ILCA Members About New Rig Development" Also, if you have not read it yet, check my article "The Laser at the Cross Roads"
1. The Laser class announcement is not in line with the vision of the class president, who clearly states in a June 2018 video that white sails and aluminium rigs don’t belong to the future of the Laser. Now we are told that the 4.7, Radial and Standard, with their white sails and at least partly aluminum rigs, will stay. But also that the c5 will still be deployed to be further tested, and that the selection of the other rigs will be sorted out by the market. This is vastly different.
2. The justification of the c5 rig is the lack of adoption of the 4.7 in some countries. But is it the fault of the rig? The 4.7 is in fact hugely successful in many countries. What happened in countries such as Canada and the USA is that there was no real effort to promote the 4.7. The manufacturers also have disseminated for years misleading information regarding the optimum sailor weights for each rig - suggesting that it’s ok to sail the Radial from 121 lbs / 55 kg, which is actually the minimum realistic weight for the 4.7. And the usual explanation is: well it’s usually not windy, so why sail a slow 4.7, especially in a joint fleet with the Radial, where it has no chance to win. Recently, some clubs have been successful in 2018 in building 4.7 fleets, for example in Halifax. The sell is pretty easy: buy a secondhand radial, get a 4.7 bottom section and a sail, and use the 4.7 after the Opti, for one or two years. For non-class equipment, this is a total purchase of US$250 (150 for the bottom section, 100 for the sail). With class equipment, it’s more expensive, with a total of US$800: $200 for the bottom section, and $600 for the sail. You may want to read the article I co-authored about Jumpstarting the Laser 4.7 in North America.
3. Will people really go for a much more expensive fancy colored rig, sailed by very few initially, instead of going for the 4.7? Don’t forget, most of the sailors are out of the Optimist, and they have been used to an old design with white sail for years. Moving to the Laser is a relief, as there is no bailing involved any longer. But the 4.7 is a tough enough rig out of the Optimist, for the sailors between say 110 and 140 lbs. Why change something as simple and that works so well in the many places where the right efforts have been done. This involves separate 4.7 and Radial fleets; and coaches advising to go to the 4.7 out of the Opti rather than offering the choice between the 4.7 and the Radial. Here is a suggestion however: it would be interesting to test some new designs of the 4.7 sails, as there may be significant improvements to achieve. That should be done under the auspices of ILCA. And the idea would be to phase out the 4.7 sail and replace it with a better design, in a similar way it was done to phase in the MKII sail for the Laser Standard.
4. The c5 rig has been tested for 4 years according to the release, yet the class considers it’s now right to deploy it « as a test to see how they perform in racing conditions in active fleets. » This is suggesting not only that the rig may not be fully ready, but also that ILCA may be backing the c5 rig for regattas, which will be a cause of concern, as this has not gone through the membership. This rig is in direct competition with the 4.7, and will undoubtedly weaken the 4.7 in those places where it is released. And the transition from the c5 to the Radial will not be that obvious either, as these are very different rigs, with different types of tuning. Anyway, why would a competitive sailor use a rig for which there are no regional or world championships? There will be confusion, and fragmentation of the fleets. And it’s just the beginning, as the c7 and c8 rigs are next, and next May, there will be also the ARC Standard and Radial by Laser Performance too.
5. As for the suggestion that the new rig may attract new sailors, it’s certainly worth testing, even though this is coming real late in the game. Remember, in the UK, there has been for a long time a non-class Rooster 8.1 rig, for heavier sailors, which has never caught up worldwide. But for light weight female athletes, the weight of the hull is also an issue. And it’s why the RS Aero 5, with both a light hull and a small sail (even if white), seems appealing to these sailors. Maybe a solution for the Laser class is to restrict access to the c5 rig to adult sailors - and to attempt bringing new such adult sailors to the class - to avoid disrupting the 4.7.
6. The market is unlikely to resolve this multitude of rigs. People are not going to buy 2 or 3 rigs to find out which one is better, and also figure out which one to use, depending on who is sailing it locally. Clubs will be in a similarly awkward situation. People sailing one-design single-handed boats are really not interested into this. It’s a turnoff more than anything else. Actually, with the advance in technology, it would probably have been possible to reduce the number of rigs to 2, instead of 3, as the new rigs are supposed to support a wider sailor weight range.
7. What the market is more likely to resolve is the choice between a Laser and one or several of its competitors. In the UK for example, there are growing fleets of RS Aeros and D-Zeros. In the USA, both the Melges 14 and RS Aero are growing. The multiplication of rigs with the Laser class is more likely to fragment and weaken the Laser fleets, while at the same time offering a compelling argument to opt for one of the competitors - something that many mostly master Laser sailors have already done.
8. The assertion that the Laser provides a low cost boat is not really true any longer. The 3 competitors to the Laser, as selected by World Sailing, offer what is generally seen as higher quality boats, at comparable or just somewhat higher prices. One of those new designs is even cheaper than the Laser, on the European market. And we know that non-class equipment (spars, sails, etc.) are way cheaper than class-legal equipment, with mostly similar quality. There are big mark-ups involved. The Laser sails are particularly onerous for what they are, especially the 4.7 and Radial - as the MKII for the Standard brought some improvement and is said to last longer.
9. The lack of knowledge by ILCA of what Laser Performance does is a bit surprising. Why such a close relationship with the Australian class and the Australian manufacturer, and apparently no clue what Laser Performance - by far the dominant producer of Lasers - is doing in terms of rig development? It seems that there was a missed opportunity to get everybody to work together for the future of the Laser. Instead, there are disparate, competing initiatives, which may actually not bring about the desired outcomes.
10. And then maybe the most critical aspect from the statement. The Laser class now confirms that it will only show up at the World Sailing Sea Trials, part of the decision process for the 2024 single-handed Olympic dinghy, with their Radial and Standard (white sails, partly carbon, partly aluminum) rigs. The three competing new designs - M14, D-Zero, RS Aero - are expected to be significantly faster. Using 2018 Portsmouth Yardstick numbers, one can estimate that, for a one hour race, the Laser would arrive around 4 minutes after the RS Aero 9 or the D-Zero, and the Radial about 4 minutes after the RS Aero 7. Of course, it will all depend on the wind and the abilities of the various athletes. But this provides an idea about what may happen at sea trials if the boats compete against each other. Such lower speed may impact the decision making, although it’s not an explicit criteria. There are also indications that the sailor weight range for at least some of these new designs is significantly wider than for the Laser, for which the weight range is notoriously narrow, both for the Radial and the Standard. Sailor weight range is one of the criteria set out by World Sailing. So, despite 4 years of new rig development, the Laser rigs to be presented for 2024 will be the ones we all know. It will be a tough contest to win for the Laser, despite its present global dominance as a the largest single-handed dinghy class. And if the Laser is not Olympic in 2024, this has huge consequences for the future of the class - as discussed in my article — The Laser at the Crossroads.
Note: Portsmouth Yardstick numbers used in the UK in 2018: D-Zero: 1029; Laser Standard 1098; Laser Radial 1142; RS Aero 9: 1019; RS Aero 7: 1068. For a one hour race, expect RS Aero 9 and D-Zero to arrive first, close to each other, and then about 2 minutes later, the RS Aero 7; 4 minutes later the Laser Standard, and 6 minutes later the Radial. There are no yardstick numbers for the Melges 14, it can be expected its speed will be about that of the D-Zero and the Aero - i.e. significantly faster than the Laser. So there is about a 4 min gap between the new and old designs. This is less than 10%, which actually shows how the Laser was really groundbreaking 50 years ago. But it's a 2024 single-handed Olympic dinghy that needs to be decided upon of course.
Read the Laser Class Statement: http://www.laserinternational.org/blog/2019/01/21/information-for-ilca-members-about-new-rig-development/
 |
| In Europe, the Laser 4.7 is Highly Successful both for Male and Female Junior Athletes |
2. The justification of the c5 rig is the lack of adoption of the 4.7 in some countries. But is it the fault of the rig? The 4.7 is in fact hugely successful in many countries. What happened in countries such as Canada and the USA is that there was no real effort to promote the 4.7. The manufacturers also have disseminated for years misleading information regarding the optimum sailor weights for each rig - suggesting that it’s ok to sail the Radial from 121 lbs / 55 kg, which is actually the minimum realistic weight for the 4.7. And the usual explanation is: well it’s usually not windy, so why sail a slow 4.7, especially in a joint fleet with the Radial, where it has no chance to win. Recently, some clubs have been successful in 2018 in building 4.7 fleets, for example in Halifax. The sell is pretty easy: buy a secondhand radial, get a 4.7 bottom section and a sail, and use the 4.7 after the Opti, for one or two years. For non-class equipment, this is a total purchase of US$250 (150 for the bottom section, 100 for the sail). With class equipment, it’s more expensive, with a total of US$800: $200 for the bottom section, and $600 for the sail. You may want to read the article I co-authored about Jumpstarting the Laser 4.7 in North America.
3. Will people really go for a much more expensive fancy colored rig, sailed by very few initially, instead of going for the 4.7? Don’t forget, most of the sailors are out of the Optimist, and they have been used to an old design with white sail for years. Moving to the Laser is a relief, as there is no bailing involved any longer. But the 4.7 is a tough enough rig out of the Optimist, for the sailors between say 110 and 140 lbs. Why change something as simple and that works so well in the many places where the right efforts have been done. This involves separate 4.7 and Radial fleets; and coaches advising to go to the 4.7 out of the Opti rather than offering the choice between the 4.7 and the Radial. Here is a suggestion however: it would be interesting to test some new designs of the 4.7 sails, as there may be significant improvements to achieve. That should be done under the auspices of ILCA. And the idea would be to phase out the 4.7 sail and replace it with a better design, in a similar way it was done to phase in the MKII sail for the Laser Standard.
4. The c5 rig has been tested for 4 years according to the release, yet the class considers it’s now right to deploy it « as a test to see how they perform in racing conditions in active fleets. » This is suggesting not only that the rig may not be fully ready, but also that ILCA may be backing the c5 rig for regattas, which will be a cause of concern, as this has not gone through the membership. This rig is in direct competition with the 4.7, and will undoubtedly weaken the 4.7 in those places where it is released. And the transition from the c5 to the Radial will not be that obvious either, as these are very different rigs, with different types of tuning. Anyway, why would a competitive sailor use a rig for which there are no regional or world championships? There will be confusion, and fragmentation of the fleets. And it’s just the beginning, as the c7 and c8 rigs are next, and next May, there will be also the ARC Standard and Radial by Laser Performance too.
5. As for the suggestion that the new rig may attract new sailors, it’s certainly worth testing, even though this is coming real late in the game. Remember, in the UK, there has been for a long time a non-class Rooster 8.1 rig, for heavier sailors, which has never caught up worldwide. But for light weight female athletes, the weight of the hull is also an issue. And it’s why the RS Aero 5, with both a light hull and a small sail (even if white), seems appealing to these sailors. Maybe a solution for the Laser class is to restrict access to the c5 rig to adult sailors - and to attempt bringing new such adult sailors to the class - to avoid disrupting the 4.7.
6. The market is unlikely to resolve this multitude of rigs. People are not going to buy 2 or 3 rigs to find out which one is better, and also figure out which one to use, depending on who is sailing it locally. Clubs will be in a similarly awkward situation. People sailing one-design single-handed boats are really not interested into this. It’s a turnoff more than anything else. Actually, with the advance in technology, it would probably have been possible to reduce the number of rigs to 2, instead of 3, as the new rigs are supposed to support a wider sailor weight range.
7. What the market is more likely to resolve is the choice between a Laser and one or several of its competitors. In the UK for example, there are growing fleets of RS Aeros and D-Zeros. In the USA, both the Melges 14 and RS Aero are growing. The multiplication of rigs with the Laser class is more likely to fragment and weaken the Laser fleets, while at the same time offering a compelling argument to opt for one of the competitors - something that many mostly master Laser sailors have already done.
8. The assertion that the Laser provides a low cost boat is not really true any longer. The 3 competitors to the Laser, as selected by World Sailing, offer what is generally seen as higher quality boats, at comparable or just somewhat higher prices. One of those new designs is even cheaper than the Laser, on the European market. And we know that non-class equipment (spars, sails, etc.) are way cheaper than class-legal equipment, with mostly similar quality. There are big mark-ups involved. The Laser sails are particularly onerous for what they are, especially the 4.7 and Radial - as the MKII for the Standard brought some improvement and is said to last longer.
9. The lack of knowledge by ILCA of what Laser Performance does is a bit surprising. Why such a close relationship with the Australian class and the Australian manufacturer, and apparently no clue what Laser Performance - by far the dominant producer of Lasers - is doing in terms of rig development? It seems that there was a missed opportunity to get everybody to work together for the future of the Laser. Instead, there are disparate, competing initiatives, which may actually not bring about the desired outcomes.
10. And then maybe the most critical aspect from the statement. The Laser class now confirms that it will only show up at the World Sailing Sea Trials, part of the decision process for the 2024 single-handed Olympic dinghy, with their Radial and Standard (white sails, partly carbon, partly aluminum) rigs. The three competing new designs - M14, D-Zero, RS Aero - are expected to be significantly faster. Using 2018 Portsmouth Yardstick numbers, one can estimate that, for a one hour race, the Laser would arrive around 4 minutes after the RS Aero 9 or the D-Zero, and the Radial about 4 minutes after the RS Aero 7. Of course, it will all depend on the wind and the abilities of the various athletes. But this provides an idea about what may happen at sea trials if the boats compete against each other. Such lower speed may impact the decision making, although it’s not an explicit criteria. There are also indications that the sailor weight range for at least some of these new designs is significantly wider than for the Laser, for which the weight range is notoriously narrow, both for the Radial and the Standard. Sailor weight range is one of the criteria set out by World Sailing. So, despite 4 years of new rig development, the Laser rigs to be presented for 2024 will be the ones we all know. It will be a tough contest to win for the Laser, despite its present global dominance as a the largest single-handed dinghy class. And if the Laser is not Olympic in 2024, this has huge consequences for the future of the class - as discussed in my article — The Laser at the Crossroads.
Note: Portsmouth Yardstick numbers used in the UK in 2018: D-Zero: 1029; Laser Standard 1098; Laser Radial 1142; RS Aero 9: 1019; RS Aero 7: 1068. For a one hour race, expect RS Aero 9 and D-Zero to arrive first, close to each other, and then about 2 minutes later, the RS Aero 7; 4 minutes later the Laser Standard, and 6 minutes later the Radial. There are no yardstick numbers for the Melges 14, it can be expected its speed will be about that of the D-Zero and the Aero - i.e. significantly faster than the Laser. So there is about a 4 min gap between the new and old designs. This is less than 10%, which actually shows how the Laser was really groundbreaking 50 years ago. But it's a 2024 single-handed Olympic dinghy that needs to be decided upon of course.
Read the Laser Class Statement: http://www.laserinternational.org/blog/2019/01/21/information-for-ilca-members-about-new-rig-development/
