Part 8 of the proposed Sabre Charter

[BruceG]

I want to promote some discussion on a part 8 of the proposed Sabre Charter that deals with building FRP boats from moulds. I believe the charter will be put to vote sometime in the near future.
As you may or may not know I have purchased the original YMS moulds. I intend to use these moulds to build a Sabre for myself and hire them to capable builders at a reasonable price. The aim was to achieve 3 main things. 1 To build a competitive boat at a much cheaper price than a good used boat. 2 To provide a facility for like minded people to do the same. 3 Build the local fleet.
The hire fee will, over time, help return the cost of the moulds back to me. I do not believe I will ever actually make a profit from these moulds. It would be profitable if I produced boats for sale but this is definitely not my plan. I also plan to make the mould available to professional builders.
The proposed charter will prohibit me or other amateur builders from producing FRP Sabres on the pretence that it will protect the value of professionally built FRP Sabres. As far as I can see the only way the value of a professionally built boat could negatively affected is if Myself or other amateur builders build a superior Sabre. As the shape can only be as the mould allows and materials are already restricted the only way I could build a superior Sabre would be through skill. I do not see how I could possibly build a better boat than Brett from YMS.
I also believe that the Sabre was intended to be an amateur built boat and to place this type of restriction on the Sabre class will only lead to the class becoming just like nearly every other class. Do we want a class that is dominated exclusively by high price professionally built boats?
Please post your thoughts on this only keep the discussion about part 8 of the Proposed Sabre Charter. I would also love to hear from the authors or those that proposed the charter.
Play nicely people.

Craig

[Paul Matthews]

HI, my views …
1. Part 8 should not be in the Charter – my logic: a charter should not have content that relates to the detail of measurement
2. Class rules pertaining to measurement of boats should not be based on whether the activity relates to the individuals income – it will always be disputed eg definition of income, tax etc.
3. Who can be a builder (FRP or timber) – should either be by builders who have passed some review/assessment/contractual agreement (eg Laser, Spiral classes) OR be open to any builder …. the Sabre class has in the past had the target of encouraging amateur builders (cost, interest in building etc). This underlying principle (amateur vs non-amateur) at a high level is an appropriate statement in a charter (the detail then in the class rules)
4. The concern regarding an individuals ability to develop a hull that meets the measurement rules but deviates from the “look” of a Sabre, aka development in the NS14 class some 20 years ago, needs to be addressed separately in the definition of class measurement, not in a charter statement
My thoughts,
Susan

[BruceG]

Susan. Thanks for your input.
I agree that Part 8 of this charter should be left to measurement details but is probably appropriate as it is only for a limited but undefined time. It could easily become permanent if no other set of rules are voted on and passed. This point should be a major consideration when deciding your final vote.
The idea of who can be a builder being based on income is absurd. Consider my friend who builds boats for for a living. He is a boilermaker, never used fibreglass in his life and has rarely stepped foot on to a yacht but by definition of the rules he can build an FRP Sabre!
I agree that there needs to be control over the building of FRP Sabres but needs to be based more around design and construction rather than who can build. Licensing is something best left to 420s and Lasers.
I also agree with your point 4 but is dealing with another part of the proposed charter. I think it is wise to discuss each part seperately otherwise this discussion will become very convoluted.

[Paul Matthews]

Craig,
Part 8 proposes that a persons main paid occupation must be building boats for them to be able to make a FRP boat from a mould – so I do not think the boilermaker guy in your example can make one.
As Part 8 is stated, I guess a retired person, with no paid occupation COULD make FRP boats?

I disagree with any class rules being based on a persons income – paid or whatever source!
Part 8 should NOT be in the charter.

An alternate approach for amateur FRP builders would be (in the Class Rules, not a Charter):
a) specification of materials and requirement for a mould,
b) mould for FRP to be inspected by a State Measurer prior to use (ascertaining general compliance with intention of measurement rules for a one-design class within stated tolerances),
c) where a State Measurer would need to travel further than 80km (or other specified distance), the inspection may be executed using electronic visual media.

BUT – the underpinning question is … does the Sabre class want amateur builders?

Sue

[BruceG]

As long as the correct controls are in place anything that could make a Sabre more affordable is going to be beneficial for the class.
Has anyone else got anything to say on this? The more people that get involved in this discussion the better.

[Author]

Posts