I was wondering ?, were the i550's  are based  in the u.s.? I am on the
west coast (los angeles area) and basically want to know if we can get
a fleet going out here? I would like to race class ,but if theres no
one out here ,I would have to extend the boat to 20 ft. to satisfy
phrf.then I be competing with the open 5.70's which is the smallest
boat thats allowed ! presently I have a holder 20 with plenty of spare
sails if I go bigger , will use the same rig other than using an A-
kite instead of a spinnaker. I really want to keep it class legal,
thank's    ray

Good astute question.
The centerline cut to remove material is 108 inches in length total,
measured from the bow end of the bottom panel. A study of drawings
8,9,10 show the bottom of the hull to have an angle built into the
frame centerline. At frame 110 (drawing 11) the notation reads;
bottom transitions to an arc shape here. To ease the transition I end
the centerline cut at 108 inches and drill a 6 mm hole the that point
to spread the bending force and help transition to an arc.
For purposes of buiding the boat the cutting line from the bow to
108" should be be cut as a straight line. The full size lofting does
develope a complex spiral curve but it is absolutely unneccesary to
do so for our purpose.
As always ask any questions you may have. We are always happy to
share and clarify.
Tim Reiter



--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Roberto" <robertoazayas@...> wrote:
>
> Hello again Tim,
>
> I am still looking at the same drawing (5 of 31) and would like to
ask
> you a few more questions.
> I am trying to layout the bow section and have a missing dimension:
>
>
> 1.Up at the bow, is the inside line of the panels a straight line
from
> station 0 to station 71.7 (vertical dimension 17.79)?
>
> 2.If not station 71.7, at what station does the line start to taper
> toward the bow?
>
> 3.If the answer to questions  1 & 2 is that it is not a straight
line,
> is it an arc?
>
> 4.If it's an arc, what is the radius and at what station does it
> intersect the center line?
>
> Sorry for being such a pest but as an engineer that I am, everyday
I
> look at construction drawings and have to think of what I need to
show
> on them to be able to build my structure, in this case the i550
> structure bow section and get as good a fit as I can.
>
> Thanks again
>
>
>
> --- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Reiter" <set@> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. we will send the
> > information to all the plan sets sent tso far.
> > This correction is to the hull bottom panel at the stern of the
boat.
> > The last three dimensions are 23.75, 23.75, 23.75.
> > The corrected version has the changes noted.
> > The difference is about 3/32" or 3/16" across full beam.
> >
> > Regards,
> > TR
> >
>

Hello again Tim,

I am still looking at the same drawing (5 of 31) and would like to ask
you a few more questions.
I am trying to layout the bow section and have a missing dimension:


1.Up at the bow, is the inside line of the panels a straight line from
station 0 to station 71.7 (vertical dimension 17.79)?

2.If not station 71.7, at what station does the line start to taper
toward the bow?

3.If the answer to questions  1 & 2 is that it is not a straight line,
is it an arc?

4.If it's an arc, what is the radius and at what station does it
intersect the center line?

Sorry for being such a pest but as an engineer that I am, everyday I
look at construction drawings and have to think of what I need to show
on them to be able to build my structure, in this case the i550
structure bow section and get as good a fit as I can.

Thanks again



--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Reiter" <set@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention. we will send the
> information to all the plan sets sent tso far.
> This correction is to the hull bottom panel at the stern of the boat.
> The last three dimensions are 23.75, 23.75, 23.75.
> The corrected version has the changes noted.
> The difference is about 3/32" or 3/16" across full beam.
>
> Regards,
> TR
>

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. we will send the
information to all the plan sets sent tso far.
This correction is to the hull bottom panel at the stern of the boat.
The last three dimensions are 23.75, 23.75, 23.75.
The corrected version has the changes noted.
The difference is about 3/32" or 3/16" across full beam.

Regards,
TR

FWIW, I have set #151 and found the same thing.  Wonder if you have
an official list of drawing dates and revision numbers that
constitute the current correct set of plans.  I'd hate to find out
too late that I was working off an earlier drawing.

Thanks,

Quinn

--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Reiter" <set@...> wrote:
>
> Whoops,
> Apologies are due, Roberto.
>
> The answer is 23.75 for the last four coordinates.
>
> There is an early version of the plans which has been relegated to
the
> history file and I sent on the un corrected file.
> I am available by phone also for any questions or inquiries about
kits,
> Hardware groups and Glue et cetera, between 7 am and 9 pm Denver,
> Colorado time. (GMT -8)
> 970-946-3117
>
>   Tim Reiter
>
>
> --- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Roberto" <robertoazayas@> wrote:
> >
> > I got my set of dwgs recently (hull no. 150) and was just looking
at
> > the hull panel 1 drawing and noticed that the last 4 stations
near
> the
> > stern show dimensions 23.75 23.64 23.62 23.75 .  Are these
correct or
> > should they all be 23.75?  I emailed Tim Reiter of Watershed
> > Sailboats but haven't gotten an answer yet.  Does anyone know
what
> I'm
> > talking about?  Any input. . . Thanks
> >
>

Tim I had asked if there were any fleets here in southern  california?

Inland we got the best lake in the world IMO but no sailing fleet currently,
they last one was a good Hobie fleet but that shows how old the interest has
been.

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: i550@yahoogroups.com [mailto:i550@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
Reiter
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 9:00 AM
To: i550@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [i550] Timely responses to questions



I looked back through emails and I didn't find the Question from
Roberto. If anybody runs into this please try a second time to get our
attention, you guys and gals are very important to our small company.

This morning we received an inquiry from Brazil and it looks like the
Brazilan fleet will grow to 4.
Total number of plans sold is approaching the 160 mark and momentum is
growing with a number of launchings expected in 2009. This is
remarkable progress since Spring of 2007.

Keep up the good work and solid enthusiasm.

Tim Reiter
Watershed Sailboats
set@skywerx. <mailto:set%40skywerx.com> com







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I looked back through emails and I didn't find the Question from
Roberto. If anybody runs into this please try a second time to get our
attention, you guys and gals are very important to our small company.

This morning we received an inquiry from Brazil and it looks like the
Brazilan fleet will grow to 4.
Total number of plans sold is approaching the 160 mark and momentum is
growing with a number of launchings expected in 2009. This is
remarkable progress since Spring of 2007.

Keep up the good work and solid enthusiasm.

Tim Reiter
Watershed Sailboats
set@...

Whoops,
Apologies are due, Roberto.

The answer is 23.75 for the last four coordinates.

There is an early version of the plans which has been relegated to the
history file and I sent on the un corrected file.
I am available by phone also for any questions or inquiries about kits,
Hardware groups and Glue et cetera, between 7 am and 9 pm Denver,
Colorado time. (GMT -8)
970-946-3117

   Tim Reiter


--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Roberto" <robertoazayas@...> wrote:
>
> I got my set of dwgs recently (hull no. 150) and was just looking at
> the hull panel 1 drawing and noticed that the last 4 stations near
the
> stern show dimensions 23.75 23.64 23.62 23.75 .  Are these correct or
> should they all be 23.75?  I emailed Tim Reiter of Watershed
> Sailboats but haven't gotten an answer yet.  Does anyone know what
I'm
> talking about?  Any input. . . Thanks
>

I got my set of dwgs recently (hull no. 150) and was just looking at
the hull panel 1 drawing and noticed that the last 4 stations near the
stern show dimensions 23.75 23.64 23.62 23.75 .  Are these correct or
should they all be 23.75?  I emailed Tim Reiter of Watershed
Sailboats but haven't gotten an answer yet.  Does anyone know what I'm
talking about?  Any input. . . Thanks

Are we getting closer to a pre-cut kit?

I started a LinkedIn group for all i550 builders, owners and sailors
([url]http://www.linkedin.com/e/vgh/911717/[/url]).

If you have not checked out LinkedIn it is an amazing networking site
where you can get connected with business contacts, classmates and
friends. Its kinda like facebook for adults.

(No, this is not a commercial.)

Anyway, if you would like to join in its free and easy and its a way
to keep up on people's contact information.

TexLex
Hull #030
Peregrine

Hi,
Thank you for your response.

--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Broughton" <fireballmatt@...> wrote:
> It's damn near impossible to take an
> existing design for a different class and adapt it to the mini rules
and
> expect to do decently against other minis.

I wasn't exactly thinking about blowing up micro to mini size.
I was wandering if it's doable to design a sharpie type mini that might
be a competitive boat; I mean a completely new design…
I know it is not a mini forum and not a boat design forum either.
I just like the idea of i550 and I like minis too…

Thank you,

M

This was brought up about a year ago, as people liked the design because it
looked sort of like a 'mini' mini.

However, once you look at the plans and materials (firsthand!), you really
quickly realize that this boat was designed to go fast within fairly
protected waters.  I definitely would not trust it to the open ocean for any
length of time nor would I ever try to adapt the design to fit within the
mini-class rules.

There is too much that needs to be added, materials would need to be
changed, weight would become an issue...there's a reason that mini's cost a
lot...they require a lot of thought, design, and a talented crew to
construct to get the best weight.  It's damn near impossible to take an
existing design for a different class and adapt it to the mini rules and
expect to do decently against other minis.

If it's a mini you want, go with a mini design (Dix has one that has been
home built and comes in kit form) or hire someone to design you one.

Just my $0.02

-Matt



On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 1:00 PM, svfrolic <svfrolic@...> wrote:

> I like the i550 design and I am curious if anybody thought about bigger
> (6,5meter/21ft) version which might be build under mini class rules…?
>
> Matt
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I like the i550 design and I am curious if anybody thought about bigger
(6,5meter/21ft) version which might be build under mini class rules…?

Matt

post@...

Editor: Ole Henrik Nissen-Lie
Tlf: +47 66 76 49 50 Faks: 66 76 49 51
e-post: ole@...

Mvh, Kvedja, Kind Regards,
Ragnar Thor Mikkelsen
www.designdata.no
www.MBOATS.no

To: i550@yahoogroups.com
From: set@...
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:24:10 +0000
Subject: [i550] local sail magazines




















             Send me the names of your local  sailing magazines and I will getr
in

touch with them about the i550. The model for guerrilla marketing of

our beloved i550 seems to be on the most local level.

Also, if your local clubs have a newsletter send the contact

information, too.

Tim
























_________________________________________________________________
Hold kontakten med Windows Live Messenger.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/msnnkdre0010000003gbl/direct/01/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.seilmagasinet.no/id/24482  (emails to editor and journalists)

www.seilas.no (temporarily unavailable at the moment)

Mvh, Kvedja, Kind Regards,
Ragnar Thor Mikkelsen
www.designdata.no
www.MBOATS.no

To: i550@yahoogroups.com
From: set@...
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:24:10 +0000
Subject: [i550] local sail magazines




















             Send me the names of your local  sailing magazines and I will getr
in

touch with them about the i550. The model for guerrilla marketing of

our beloved i550 seems to be on the most local level.

Also, if your local clubs have a newsletter send the contact

information, too.

Tim
























_________________________________________________________________
Hold kontakten med Windows Live Messenger.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/msnnkdre0010000003gbl/direct/01/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Send me the names of your local  sailing magazines and I will getr in
touch with them about the i550. The model for guerrilla marketing of
our beloved i550 seems to be on the most local level.
Also, if your local clubs have a newsletter send the contact
information, too.
Tim

Thanks for the nudge, look to your email in box, Scott.

TR

--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" <chully_bun54@...> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> you seem like the perfect person for this. i was asked if i could
cnc them but i just do not
> have time to organize everything and shipping. you guys specialize
in this kind of thing. i
> hope tim gets ontop of this immediately! we have a powerful little
australia wide selling
> ability here with kits from you and rigs from me. all we need is a
glass/epoxy supplier to
> get onboard!
>
>
>
> --- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "scott.mckellar39" <mckellas@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "montylang2004" <montylang@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Has there been any progress on the possibility of kits in
Australia?
> >
> >
> >
> > Well Having sat on the sidelines for quite sometime now I feel I
must
> > enter the i550 debate regarding the cutting of kits in Australia.
I
> > have attached an email I sent to Tim on the 31/7/08 and although
I
> > recieved an initial response expressing interest, I have heard
> > nothing since. I would appreciate any comment.
> >
> > I have recently read a Yahoo i550 digest (#282) in which you
express
> > and interest in licensing the production of i550 kits to
Australia. I
> > have been following these discussions with great interest as
sometime
> > ago I purchased hull plan 114 and fully intend to start the build
in
> > the very near future. As the owner of  Industrial Laser Cutting
and
> > an avid sailor I immediately saw the application of laser
technology
> > to the production of the i550 hull parts. As we speak I have one
of
> > my programmers converting the plans to CAD and have locally
sourced
> > high grade marine ply to use. We already cut a lot of ply so it's
> > really a no brainer. On the sailing side I currently skipper a
Farr
> > 11.04 (Current Magnetic Island Race Week Champions (PHS)) and
> > moonlight on a Flying Tiger 10. My sailing resume includes stints
on
> > T7's, Bavaria's, a muum 30, and I crew on a 505 most
weekends.Yacht
> > racing Saturday, dingy racing Sunday. Yeah I'm into sailing. So
hence
> > my interest in a business arrangement pertaining to the licensing
of
> > kit production here in Australia. We are located in tropical
> > Townsville and through my business, freight many tonnes of parts
all
> > over Australia so shipping would not be an issue. In fact I
believe
> > that we could provide high quality kits to most of the Asia
Pacific
> > region. In closing I see many synergies should we be able to
reach an
> > agreement, as we intend to use the boat as a promotional vehicle
for
> > the business ("look at what we can do with a laser!") and as such
it
> > would be great promotion for the design as well. I hope you will
> > consider my proposal and I look forward to discussing future
> > opportunities for the i550.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Scott McKellar
> >
> > Managing Director
> >
> > P 07 4753 3700
> >
> > F 07 4774 5773
> >
> > E scott.mckellar@
> >
>

Scott,

you seem like the perfect person for this. i was asked if i could cnc them but i
just do not
have time to organize everything and shipping. you guys specialize in this kind
of thing. i
hope tim gets ontop of this immediately! we have a powerful little australia
wide selling
ability here with kits from you and rigs from me. all we need is a glass/epoxy
supplier to
get onboard!



--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "scott.mckellar39" <mckellas@...> wrote:
>
> --- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "montylang2004" <montylang@> wrote:
> >
> > Has there been any progress on the possibility of kits in Australia?
>
>
>
> Well Having sat on the sidelines for quite sometime now I feel I must
> enter the i550 debate regarding the cutting of kits in Australia. I
> have attached an email I sent to Tim on the 31/7/08 and although I
> recieved an initial response expressing interest, I have heard
> nothing since. I would appreciate any comment.
>
> I have recently read a Yahoo i550 digest (#282) in which you express
> and interest in licensing the production of i550 kits to Australia. I
> have been following these discussions with great interest as sometime
> ago I purchased hull plan 114 and fully intend to start the build in
> the very near future. As the owner of  Industrial Laser Cutting and
> an avid sailor I immediately saw the application of laser technology
> to the production of the i550 hull parts. As we speak I have one of
> my programmers converting the plans to CAD and have locally sourced
> high grade marine ply to use. We already cut a lot of ply so it's
> really a no brainer. On the sailing side I currently skipper a Farr
> 11.04 (Current Magnetic Island Race Week Champions (PHS)) and
> moonlight on a Flying Tiger 10. My sailing resume includes stints on
> T7's, Bavaria's, a muum 30, and I crew on a 505 most weekends.Yacht
> racing Saturday, dingy racing Sunday. Yeah I'm into sailing. So hence
> my interest in a business arrangement pertaining to the licensing of
> kit production here in Australia. We are located in tropical
> Townsville and through my business, freight many tonnes of parts all
> over Australia so shipping would not be an issue. In fact I believe
> that we could provide high quality kits to most of the Asia Pacific
> region. In closing I see many synergies should we be able to reach an
> agreement, as we intend to use the boat as a promotional vehicle for
> the business ("look at what we can do with a laser!") and as such it
> would be great promotion for the design as well. I hope you will
> consider my proposal and I look forward to discussing future
> opportunities for the i550.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Scott McKellar
>
> Managing Director
>
> P 07 4753 3700
>
> F 07 4774 5773
>
> E scott.mckellar@...
>

--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, "montylang2004" <montylang@...> wrote:
>
> Has there been any progress on the possibility of kits in Australia?



Well Having sat on the sidelines for quite sometime now I feel I must
enter the i550 debate regarding the cutting of kits in Australia. I
have attached an email I sent to Tim on the 31/7/08 and although I
recieved an initial response expressing interest, I have heard
nothing since. I would appreciate any comment.

I have recently read a Yahoo i550 digest (#282) in which you express
and interest in licensing the production of i550 kits to Australia. I
have been following these discussions with great interest as sometime
ago I purchased hull plan 114 and fully intend to start the build in
the very near future. As the owner of  Industrial Laser Cutting and
an avid sailor I immediately saw the application of laser technology
to the production of the i550 hull parts. As we speak I have one of
my programmers converting the plans to CAD and have locally sourced
high grade marine ply to use. We already cut a lot of ply so it's
really a no brainer. On the sailing side I currently skipper a Farr
11.04 (Current Magnetic Island Race Week Champions (PHS)) and
moonlight on a Flying Tiger 10. My sailing resume includes stints on
T7's, Bavaria's, a muum 30, and I crew on a 505 most weekends.Yacht
racing Saturday, dingy racing Sunday. Yeah I'm into sailing. So hence
my interest in a business arrangement pertaining to the licensing of
kit production here in Australia. We are located in tropical
Townsville and through my business, freight many tonnes of parts all
over Australia so shipping would not be an issue. In fact I believe
that we could provide high quality kits to most of the Asia Pacific
region. In closing I see many synergies should we be able to reach an
agreement, as we intend to use the boat as a promotional vehicle for
the business ("look at what we can do with a laser!") and as such it
would be great promotion for the design as well. I hope you will
consider my proposal and I look forward to discussing future
opportunities for the i550.


Regards

Scott McKellar

Managing Director

P 07 4753 3700

F 07 4774 5773

E scott.mckellar@...

Has there been any progress on the possibility of kits in Australia?

I'd be happy to be involved in the class organization as well.

Kevin.  #074.

--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, Chris Farmer <caribeansoul@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry Matt, didnt mean to leave you out! Thanks for all the work!
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Matt Broughton <fireballmatt@...>
> To: i550@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 7:44:08 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: Or not... Re: [i550] i550 materials
>
>
> Heh, I built a website for it...you can count me in.
>
> -Matt
>

Sorry Matt, didnt mean to leave you out! Thanks for all the work!





----- Original Message ----
From: Matt Broughton <fireballmatt@...>
To: i550@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 7:44:08 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Or not... Re: [i550] i550 materials


Heh, I built a website for it...you can count me in.

-Matt

On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:00 AM, caribeansoul@ yahoo.com <
caribeansoul@ yahoo.com> wrote:

> I think, with the exception of the attribution of the  malicious intent for
> the rule change recommendation, I think Chris agrees with you that we need a
> class association to govern and direct the future of the class.
>
> I think Tim and Chris are obviously going to be involved.  I have
> volunteered to help organize movement toward association, who else is
> willing?
>
> TexLex (Chris)
> Peregrine
> Hull # 030
>
> George Biery wrote:
> >             If ply hulls are clearly superior to glass boats, why allow
> them?  These two sentences are very telling:
> > The rule was not opened up to create superior boats but to allow for the
> potential of mass produced hulls to supply market demand and compete with
> similarly sized sportboats.  if you feel threatened by a hull that's the
> same weight and shape with a structurally inferior overall standard Im not
> sure what to say.
> > One of several objections is that the rule was changed by Chris, probably
> in consultation with Tim or another builder without the input or approval of
> a class association or even the owners of hull numbers.  I'm not suggesting
> that he will, but what is to stop the designer from changing the rule at a
> later date to say that only glass hulls are allowed?  This is no way to
> manage a "one design."  Besides the small number of folks that are simply
> looking to build fast and fun boats, most folks want to build a boat that
> they can compete with on a fair basis - and this change does not encourage
> this participation.  I'm sure that you'll find that until an association,
> bylaws, and procedures are adopted, many folks will be unwilling to start
> their build.
> > GB
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: Christopher Beckwith
> >   To: i550@yahoogroups. com
> >   Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:30 AM
> >   Subject: Re: Or not... Re: [i550] i550 materials
> > Tom
> >   by nature I am not a home builder but a competitive sailor. I'm a
> >   home builder out of the fact that I'm building this boat. I have
> >   experience and resources to build the boat out of any material
> >   available on the market today and at that do it at cost. I could have
> >   built an all carbon boat with Kevlar reinforcement and honeycomb core
> >   for the same price as building a kit boat. I could have built a glass
> >   boat for much less.
> >   in my build, I've chosen in my opinion and experience the best
> >   options on every component. What I'm building is exactly what I have
> >   stated to be the best option here. The rule was not opened up to
> >   create superior boats but to allow for the potential of mass produced
> >   hulls to supply market demand and compete with similarly sized
> >   sportboats.
> >   if you feel threatened by a hull that's the same weight and shape
> >   with a structurally inferior overall standard Im not sure what to say.
> >   A glass/ carbon hull loses it's initial stiffness within the first
> >   year of sailing. Wood has a much longer longevity from cyclic loading.
> >   I think I've explained it from an engineering and a practicality
> >   standpoint enough that it should be painfully obvious that to allow
> >   composite hulls is to grow the numbers not diminish my investment or
> >   yours or anyone elses. Plywood boats are muchuch stiffer and will
> >   remain stiff forever. Unlike the carbon glass equivalent.
> >   I think we've created a very level playing field here and I hope
> >   you check in on the next year or so when more boats are sailing so
> >   that we can confirm your fears were not quit ok par with what the
> >   outcome is.
> > Happy sailing
> >   Chris
> > On Aug 28, 2008, at 7:50 AM, "cruising.sailor"
> >   < tom@cruisingsailor. org > wrote:
> >> I couldn't put my finger on what was concerning me about this
> >   > conversation until the last few posts... the current press to develop
> >   > an i550 association first with class rules coming second is what did
> >   > it... so here goes.
> >   >
> >   > Speaking as a non-plans-owner I am now unlikely to get into this
> class
> >   > as the rules are shifting to more specifically allow any materials
> for
> >   > hull construction. To me, that's the opposite of why I was so very
> >   > interested to begin with. The original (implied) rule of basically
> >   > 1/4" 'ply' construction was actually the feature that insured a level
> >   > playing field for the home builder with a low budget campaign.
> >   >
> >   > Chris made an impassioned case for plywood actually being the best
> >   > choice for this boat (my interpretation of his earlier post),
> >   > explaining the technical aspects clearly. Then to my surprise, he
> made
> >   > the proposal to change the rules and make materials choice completely
> >   > open/unrestricted. While that may be consistent with his arguments -
> >   > to my way of thinking it does inject substantial uncertainty for the
> >   > home builder with a small budget.
> >   >
> >   > I was disappointed because if I now started an all ply build with
> >   > hopes to launch in a year - I could have invested my time and money
> in
> >   > a boat that might be automatically relegated to the back of the
> field.
> >   >
> >   > So... maybe you as a group do need the rules set first - so that
> those
> >   > interested in the class actually know what there are getting into.
> >   > Yes, I can afford to build a 1/4" plywood i550 - what I can't afford
> >   > is to take the risk to have one that turns out to be considered
> >   > non-competitive and therefore have no resale value after all the work
> >   > is done and money invested.
> >   >
> >   > It's just my feeling, but the uncertainty that swirls around the
> >   > consequences of open materials will do more harm to the class and
> slow
> >   > the commitment of others to take the step and begin building the boat
> >   > just as it has done for me.
> >   >
> >   > The original definition (see the i550sportboat. com website) "It's
> ease
> >   > of building for the amateur builder with "stitch-and- glue" method
> >   > ensures a light, solid hull, and a quick build for even those with NO
> >   > boat building experience." was what brought me here. (Not the "NO
> boat
> >   > building experience" part, as I have built a few boats in wood/epoxy
> >   > already, so I do actually believe the 'hype' that this clever design
> >   > can actually be built pretty easily by a pure novice.)
> >   >
> >   > As an aside... there already is an organization in charge - Tim
> >   > legally and Chris parentally, so until they give away their control -
> >   > it's their baby so to speak.
> >   >
> >   > Sorry to have ranted so long, it's just the disappointment talking,
> >   > tom151
> >   >
> >   > --- In i550@yahoogroups. com , "caribeansoul@ ..." <caribeansoul@ ...>
> >   > wrote:
> >   > >
> >   > > I agree that is a great idea. If we get a class association,
> voting,
> >   > (boats in the water), etc. That will be a great starting point. Once
> >   > we get some organization, then we can make decisions as a group
> >   > instead of a mass of people who may or may not have plans, a boat, or
> >   > even ever have a boat.
> >   > >
> >   > > I volunteer to help organize the class association if we want to
> get
> >   > one started.
> >   > >
> >   > > Seems to me, that at this stage, to be a member of the class
> >   > association, you need to have purchased an official copy of the plans
> >   > and have a hull #. I'm sure Chris and Tim have a list of these
> >   > individuals we can use as a list.
> >   > >
> >   > > Thoughts?
> >   > >
> >   > > Chris Farmer
> >   > > Peregrine
> >   > > Hull #030
> >   > >
> >   > > Matt Broughton wrote:
> >   > > > After visiting Chris this weekend and seeing how well
> >   > his build was
> >   > > > progressing (with him building by himself no less), as well as
> >   > talking about
> >   > > > Thistles, boat work done in the past, and general building
> >   > ideas; I'm
> >   > > > inclined to agree with him here. The guy does know what he's
> >   > talking about,
> >   > > > and by building an i550, he's putting his money where his mouth
> >   > is.
> >   > > > It's way too damn early to be concerned with an arms race,
> >   > especially with
> >   > > > the new rule changes to define a min weight (not to mention all
> >   > the
> >   > > > discussion lately, it's in the back of all our minds...I think
> >   > everyone will
> >   > > > see it before it happens now!) Given the youth of the i550, the
> >   > current
> >   > > > lack of any formal class association (and related bank account),
> >   > lack of
> >   > > > officers, voting, and most of all BOATS, it's premature to dwell
> >   > on. We've
> >   > > > got MUCH bigger fish to fry (see previous sentence) than worrying
> >   > about rich
> >   > > > folks with cash to blow on carbon and nomex raining on our
> parade.
> >   > > > How about we discuss something productive rather than go back and
> >   > forth
> >   > > > about building materials... for instance, actually defining a
> >   > class and
> >   > > > bylaws. Getting officers and measurers voted in, defining
> >   > procedures, and
> >   > > > best practices during regattas...you know, stuff that we'll
> >   > actually NEED
> >   > > > within a year or two, $your_deity willing!
> >   > > > -Matt
> >   >
> >   >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Make that three of us... I have a 4X8 Shop Bot and Rhino CAD.  Would
like to import DXF files rather than make my own off the plans!

new blog created for hull 36 at i550paninaro.blogspot.com

enjoy
-Chris
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Chris Farmer
   To: i550@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 2:48 PM
   Subject: [i550] Chris's New Build Updates


   Chris:

   Progress on the boat looks great! But, please, for us simpletons, could you go
into more detail about what you have done/changed, etc.

   We all follow you like sheep, and I dont want to get lost. :)

   TexLex (Chris)
   Peregrine
   Hull # 030
   http://i550peregrine.blogspot.com/

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello.
   I have the cutouts for the long cockpit version, cabin trunk available to
anyone that would want them for free. please send me a message directly if
you are interested.

   -Chris

I too would like to cut my boat out with a cnc router. Do you hae the
plans in autocad(.dxf) format?
>

George
I brought up the subject of the materials rules change with Chris B.
Direct your ire at me if you feel the need.

First, I intend to do my best to make the i550 a true benchmark in
small sailboats. It is a remarkable small boat combining low cost,
high performance, simplicity of build and allows for individuals to
innovate within limits.

Second, all of us are in the beginning phases of a new Class. There
will be plenty of time to sort through issues as they come up. At
this point I am inclined to say "If it looks like an i550 and is
close to the right shape and size it is." We need boats on the water
to establish the Class.

Third, lots of boats is more fun and a more viable class. It follows
that getting a lot of boats on the water means someone will be
buuilding commercially. The wood versus FRP argument (in this size
range) was settled a long time ago. Wood is better. It follows that a
woodie will hold its value better than an FRP. The costs of building
a mold(s) for FRP are beyond the financial scope of everyone in this
discussion. That is why I've asked for ideas pertaining to production
tooling for WOOD boats. I have received lots of inquiries about ready
to sail boats. These people are not inclined to/or cannot build for
themselves. The costs for a boat will be in the 25 to 27 K range in
wood on a trailer with sails and strings. Building in wood is a labor
intensive prospect with attention to detail necessary. It is possible
to find labor to fulfill the role but it is tough.
Production tooling will speed and simplify the process which is why
your ideas are more than welcomed and encouraged.

Tim Reiter
Watershed Sailboats











--- In i550@yahoogroups.com, Christopher Beckwith
<christopher.d.beckwith@...> wrote:
>
> What I envision is essentially if you've bought plans or a kit
etc.
> You're a member of the class. After your first year or maybe two.
A
> nominal fee of ten bucks to cover websites measurement forms
decals
> sail logos etc. Maybe we keep it free. That's to be decided. Maybe
> free until such a time that we can't afford to keep it free.
>
> For now I think a class president and regional Vps are the way to
go.
> A chief measurer to clarify rules interpretaions and tackle
anything
> new that comes up.
>
> Keep it simple. Any paid plans member is allowed a vote in any
votes
> needed. Voting occurs once annually.
>
> We can work up actual by laws etc moving forward and should we grow
to
> individual national class organizations we can address that as
well.
> Fleet status is comprised of three or more boats.
>
> Any?
>
> On Aug 29, 2008, at 8:44 AM, "Matt Broughton"a
> <fireballmatt@...> wrote:
>
> > Heh, I built a website for it...you can count me in.
> >
> > -Matt
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:00 AM, caribeansoul@... <
> > caribeansoul@...> wrote:
> >
> > > I think, with the exception of the attribution of the
malicious
> > intent for
> > > the rule change recommendation, I think Chris agrees with you
that
> > we need a
> > > class association to govern and direct the future of the class.
> > >
> > > I think Tim and Chris are obviously going to be involved. I have
> > > volunteered to help organize movement toward association, who
else
> > is
> > > willing?
> > >
> > > TexLex (Chris)
> > > Peregrine
> > > Hull # 030
> > >
> > > George Biery wrote:
> > > > If ply hulls are clearly superior to glass boats, why allow
> > > them? These two sentences are very telling:
> > > > The rule was not opened up to create superior boats but to
allow
> > for the
> > > potential of mass produced hulls to supply market demand and
> > compete with
> > > similarly sized sportboats. if you feel threatened by a hull
> > that's the
> > > same weight and shape with a structurally inferior overall
> > standard Im not
> > > sure what to say.
> > > > One of several objections is that the rule was changed by
Chris,
> > probably
> > > in consultation with Tim or another builder without the input
or
> > approval of
> > > a class association or even the owners of hull numbers. I'm
not
> > suggesting
> > > that he will, but what is to stop the designer from changing
the
> > rule at a
> > > later date to say that only glass hulls are allowed? This is
no
> > way to
> > > manage a "one design." Besides the small number of folks that
are
> > simply
> > > looking to build fast and fun boats, most folks want to build
a
> > boat that
> > > they can compete with on a fair basis - and this change does
not
> > encourage
> > > this participation. I'm sure that you'll find that until an
> > association,
> > > bylaws, and procedures are adopted, many folks will be
unwilling
> > to start
> > > their build.
> > > > GB
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Christopher Beckwith
> > > > To: i550@yahoogroups. com
> > > > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:30 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: Or not... Re: [i550] i550 materials
> > > > Tom
> > > > by nature I am not a home builder but a competitive sailor.
I'm a
> > > > home builder out of the fact that I'm building this boat. I
have
> > > > experience and resources to build the boat out of any material
> > > > available on the market today and at that do it at cost. I
could
> > have
> > > > built an all carbon boat with Kevlar reinforcement and
honeycomb
> > core
> > > > for the same price as building a kit boat. I could have built
a
> > glass
> > > > boat for much less.
> > > > in my build, I've chosen in my opinion and experience the best
> > > > options on every component. What I'm building is exactly what
I
> > have
> > > > stated to be the best option here. The rule was not opened up
to
> > > > create superior boats but to allow for the potential of mass
> > produced
> > > > hulls to supply market demand and compete with similarly sized
> > > > sportboats.
> > > > if you feel threatened by a hull that's the same weight and
shape
> > > > with a structurally inferior overall standard Im not sure
what
> > to say.
> > > > A glass/ carbon hull loses it's initial stiffness within the
first
> > > > year of sailing. Wood has a much longer longevity from
cyclic
> > loading.
> > > > I think I've explained it from an engineering and a
practicality
> > > > standpoint enough that it should be painfully obvious that
to
> > allow
> > > > composite hulls is to grow the numbers not diminish my
> > investment or
> > > > yours or anyone elses. Plywood boats are muchuch stiffer and
will
> > > > remain stiff forever. Unlike the carbon glass equivalent.
> > > > I think we've created a very level playing field here and I
hope
> > > > you check in on the next year or so when more boats are
sailing so
> > > > that we can confirm your fears were not quit ok par with what
the
> > > > outcome is.
> > > > Happy sailing
> > > > Chris
> > > > On Aug 28, 2008, at 7:50 AM, "cruising.sailor"
> > > > < tom@cruisingsailor. org > wrote:
> > > >> I couldn't put my finger on what was concerning me about this
> > > > > conversation until the last few posts... the current press
to
> > develop
> > > > > an i550 association first with class rules coming second
is
> > what did
> > > > > it... so here goes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Speaking as a non-plans-owner I am now unlikely to get into
this
> > > class
> > > > > as the rules are shifting to more specifically allow any
> > materials
> > > for
> > > > > hull construction. To me, that's the opposite of why I was
so
> > very
> > > > > interested to begin with. The original (implied) rule of
> > basically
> > > > > 1/4" 'ply' construction was actually the feature that
insured
> > a level
> > > > > playing field for the home builder with a low budget
campaign.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris made an impassioned case for plywood actually being
the
> > best
> > > > > choice for this boat (my interpretation of his earlier
post),
> > > > > explaining the technical aspects clearly. Then to my
surprise,
> > he
> > > made
> > > > > the proposal to change the rules and make materials choice
> > completely
> > > > > open/unrestricted. While that may be consistent with his
> > arguments -
> > > > > to my way of thinking it does inject substantial
uncertainty
> > for the
> > > > > home builder with a small budget.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was disappointed because if I now started an all ply
build
> > with
> > > > > hopes to launch in a year - I could have invested my time
and
> > money
> > > in
> > > > > a boat that might be automatically relegated to the back of
the
> > > field.
> > > > >
> > > > > So... maybe you as a group do need the rules set first - so
that
> > > those
> > > > > interested in the class actually know what there are
getting
> > into.
> > > > > Yes, I can afford to build a 1/4" plywood i550 - what I
can't
> > afford
> > > > > is to take the risk to have one that turns out to be
considered
> > > > > non-competitive and therefore have no resale value after
all
> > the work
> > > > > is done and money invested.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's just my feeling, but the uncertainty that swirls
around the
> > > > > consequences of open materials will do more harm to the
class
> > and
> > > slow
> > > > > the commitment of others to take the step and begin
building
> > the boat
> > > > > just as it has done for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > The original definition (see the i550sportboat. com
website)
> > "It's
> > > ease
> > > > > of building for the amateur builder with "stitch-and-
glue"
> > method
> > > > > ensures a light, solid hull, and a quick build for even
those
> > with NO
> > > > > boat building experience." was what brought me here. (Not
the
> > "NO
> > > boat
> > > > > building experience" part, as I have built a few boats in
wood/
> > epoxy
> > > > > already, so I do actually believe the 'hype' that this
clever
> > design
> > > > > can actually be built pretty easily by a pure novice.)
> > > > >
> > > > > As an aside... there already is an organization in charge -
Tim
> > > > > legally and Chris parentally, so until they give away
their
> > control -
> > > > > it's their baby so to speak.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry to have ranted so long, it's just the disappointment
> > talking,
> > > > > tom151
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In i550@yahoogroups. com , "caribeansoul@ ..."
> > <caribeansoul@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree that is a great idea. If we get a class
association,
> > > voting,
> > > > > (boats in the water), etc. That will be a great starting
> > point. Once
> > > > > we get some organization, then we can make decisions as a
group
> > > > > instead of a mass of people who may or may not have plans,
a
> > boat, or
> > > > > even ever have a boat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I volunteer to help organize the class association if we
> > want to
> > > get
> > > > > one started.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seems to me, that at this stage, to be a member of the
class
> > > > > association, you need to have purchased an official copy
of
> > the plans
> > > > > and have a hull #. I'm sure Chris and Tim have a list of
these
> > > > > individuals we can use as a list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chris Farmer
> > > > > > Peregrine
> > > > > > Hull #030
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Matt Broughton wrote:
> > > > > > > After visiting Chris this weekend and seeing how well
> > > > > his build was
> > > > > > > progressing (with him building by himself no less), as
> > well as
> > > > > talking about
> > > > > > > Thistles, boat work done in the past, and general
building
> > > > > ideas; I'm
> > > > > > > inclined to agree with him here. The guy does know what
he's
> > > > > talking about,
> > > > > > > and by building an i550, he's putting his money where
his
> > mouth
> > > > > is.
> > > > > > > It's way too damn early to be concerned with an arms
race,
> > > > > especially with
> > > > > > > the new rule changes to define a min weight (not to
> > mention all
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > discussion lately, it's in the back of all our
minds...I
> > think
> > > > > everyone will
> > > > > > > see it before it happens now!) Given the youth of the
> > i550, the
> > > > > current
> > > > > > > lack of any formal class association (and related bank
> > account),
> > > > > lack of
> > > > > > > officers, voting, and most of all BOATS, it's premature
to
> > dwell
> > > > > on. We've
> > > > > > > got MUCH bigger fish to fry (see previous sentence)
than
> > worrying
> > > > > about rich
> > > > > > > folks with cash to blow on carbon and nomex raining on
our
> > > parade.
> > > > > > > How about we discuss something productive rather than
go
> > back and
> > > > > forth
> > > > > > > about building materials... for instance, actually
> > defining a
> > > > > class and
> > > > > > > bylaws. Getting officers and measurers voted in,
defining
> > > > > procedures, and
> > > > > > > best practices during regattas...you know, stuff that
we'll
> > > > > actually NEED
> > > > > > > within a year or two, $your_deity willing!
> > > > > > > -Matt
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >  nsor .ad{ padding: 8px 0; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{ font-
> > family: Arial; font-weight: bold; color: #628c2a; font-size:
100%;
> > line-height: 122%; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{ text-decoration:
none; }
> > #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{ text-decoration: underline; }  #ygrp-

> > sponsor .ad p{ margin: 0; } o{font-size: 0; } .MsoNormal{ margin:
0
> > 0 0 0; } #ygrp-text tt{ font-size: 120%; } blockquote{margin: 0 0
0
> > 4px;} .replbq{margin:4} -->
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I'm all for getting a class association started.  I'm willing to jump in and
help out.
First question is can we qualify the class as a tax exempt entity (501c
perhaps)?  This will allow those donating thing to the class to do so and
get some tax benefit from their generosity.  Also mileage to the annual
meeting which coincides with the annual regatta would also be
tax deductible.

I think free is a great idea, but maybe not realistic completely.  If we
want a class owned and maintained scale for instance, we'll need some money
for that.  Also, I think a few perpetual trophies would be good.  We already
have the D'oh award.  It seems that a nominal fee of 5 or 10 bucks a year
wouldn't be that big of a deal to most of us.  Also, in order to have
voting, we will need to define a minimum number of votes needed to be a
valid vote.  That will require some way of distinguishing between active
owners and those that thought it was a good idea, but now have filed their
plan set and that's the end of it.  One easy way to do that is have dues and
if you haven't payed your dues, then you are not active.  (I like the 1 or 2
year due exemption for new plan set owners).  I also think we want to allow
proxy voting.

There's a few ideas.  I'm sure this will be a long discussion.  Maybe we
want to use our class forum to continue this...

Kevin #074.






>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

What I envision is essentially if you've bought plans or a kit etc.
You're a member of the class. After your first year or maybe two. A
nominal fee of ten bucks to cover websites measurement forms decals
sail logos etc. Maybe we keep it free. That's to be decided. Maybe
free until such a time that we can't afford to keep it free.

For now I think a class president and regional Vps are the way to go.
A chief measurer to clarify rules interpretaions and tackle anything
new that comes up.

Keep it simple. Any paid plans member is allowed a vote in any votes
needed. Voting occurs once annually.

We can work up actual by laws etc moving forward and should we grow to
individual national class organizations we can address that as well.
Fleet status is comprised of three or more boats.

Any?

On Aug 29, 2008, at 8:44 AM, "Matt Broughton"a
<fireballmatt@...> wrote:

> Heh, I built a website for it...you can count me in.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:00 AM, caribeansoul@... <
> caribeansoul@...> wrote:
>
> > I think, with the exception of the attribution of the malicious
> intent for
> > the rule change recommendation, I think Chris agrees with you that
> we need a
> > class association to govern and direct the future of the class.
> >
> > I think Tim and Chris are obviously going to be involved. I have
> > volunteered to help organize movement toward association, who else
> is
> > willing?
> >
> > TexLex (Chris)
> > Peregrine
> > Hull # 030
> >
> > George Biery wrote:
> > > If ply hulls are clearly superior to glass boats, why allow
> > them? These two sentences are very telling:
> > > The rule was not opened up to create superior boats but to allow
> for the
> > potential of mass produced hulls to supply market demand and
> compete with
> > similarly sized sportboats. if you feel threatened by a hull
> that's the
> > same weight and shape with a structurally inferior overall
> standard Im not
> > sure what to say.
> > > One of several objections is that the rule was changed by Chris,
> probably
> > in consultation with Tim or another builder without the input or
> approval of
> > a class association or even the owners of hull numbers. I'm not
> suggesting
> > that he will, but what is to stop the designer from changing the
> rule at a
> > later date to say that only glass hulls are allowed? This is no
> way to
> > manage a "one design." Besides the small number of folks that are
> simply
> > looking to build fast and fun boats, most folks want to build a
> boat that
> > they can compete with on a fair basis - and this change does not
> encourage
> > this participation. I'm sure that you'll find that until an
> association,
> > bylaws, and procedures are adopted, many folks will be unwilling
> to start
> > their build.
> > > GB
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Christopher Beckwith
> > > To: i550@yahoogroups. com
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 5:30 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Or not... Re: [i550] i550 materials
> > > Tom
> > > by nature I am not a home builder but a competitive sailor. I'm a
> > > home builder out of the fact that I'm building this boat. I have
> > > experience and resources to build the boat out of any material
> > > available on the market today and at that do it at cost. I could
> have
> > > built an all carbon boat with Kevlar reinforcement and honeycomb
> core
> > > for the same price as building a kit boat. I could have built a
> glass
> > > boat for much less.
> > > in my build, I've chosen in my opinion and experience the best
> > > options on every component. What I'm building is exactly what I
> have
> > > stated to be the best option here. The rule was not opened up to
> > > create superior boats but to allow for the potential of mass
> produced
> > > hulls to supply market demand and compete with similarly sized
> > > sportboats.
> > > if you feel threatened by a hull that's the same weight and shape
> > > with a structurally inferior overall standard Im not sure what
> to say.
> > > A glass/ carbon hull loses it's initial stiffness within the first
> > > year of sailing. Wood has a much longer longevity from cyclic
> loading.
> > > I think I've explained it from an engineering and a practicality
> > > standpoint enough that it should be painfully obvious that to
> allow
> > > composite hulls is to grow the numbers not diminish my
> investment or
> > > yours or anyone elses. Plywood boats are muchuch stiffer and will
> > > remain stiff forever. Unlike the carbon glass equivalent.
> > > I think we've created a very level playing field here and I hope
> > > you check in on the next year or so when more boats are sailing so
> > > that we can confirm your fears were not quit ok par with what the
> > > outcome is.
> > > Happy sailing
> > > Chris
> > > On Aug 28, 2008, at 7:50 AM, "cruising.sailor"
> > > < tom@cruisingsailor. org > wrote:
> > >> I couldn't put my finger on what was concerning me about this
> > > > conversation until the last few posts... the current press to
> develop
> > > > an i550 association first with class rules coming second is
> what did
> > > > it... so here goes.
> > > >
> > > > Speaking as a non-plans-owner I am now unlikely to get into this
> > class
> > > > as the rules are shifting to more specifically allow any
> materials
> > for
> > > > hull construction. To me, that's the opposite of why I was so
> very
> > > > interested to begin with. The original (implied) rule of
> basically
> > > > 1/4" 'ply' construction was actually the feature that insured
> a level
> > > > playing field for the home builder with a low budget campaign.
> > > >
> > > > Chris made an impassioned case for plywood actually being the
> best
> > > > choice for this boat (my interpretation of his earlier post),
> > > > explaining the technical aspects clearly. Then to my surprise,
> he
> > made
> > > > the proposal to change the rules and make materials choice
> completely
> > > > open/unrestricted. While that may be consistent with his
> arguments -
> > > > to my way of thinking it does inject substantial uncertainty
> for the
> > > > home builder with a small budget.
> > > >
> > > > I was disappointed because if I now started an all ply build
> with
> > > > hopes to launch in a year - I could have invested my time and
> money
> > in
> > > > a boat that might be automatically relegated to the back of the
> > field.
> > > >
> > > > So... maybe you as a group do need the rules set first - so that
> > those
> > > > interested in the class actually know what there are getting
> into.
> > > > Yes, I can afford to build a 1/4" plywood i550 - what I can't
> afford
> > > > is to take the risk to have one that turns out to be considered
> > > > non-competitive and therefore have no resale value after all
> the work
> > > > is done and money invested.
> > > >
> > > > It's just my feeling, but the uncertainty that swirls around the
> > > > consequences of open materials will do more harm to the class
> and
> > slow
> > > > the commitment of others to take the step and begin building
> the boat
> > > > just as it has done for me.
> > > >
> > > > The original definition (see the i550sportboat. com website)
> "It's
> > ease
> > > > of building for the amateur builder with "stitch-and- glue"
> method
> > > > ensures a light, solid hull, and a quick build for even those
> with NO
> > > > boat building experience." was what brought me here. (Not the
> "NO
> > boat
> > > > building experience" part, as I have built a few boats in wood/
> epoxy
> > > > already, so I do actually believe the 'hype' that this clever
> design
> > > > can actually be built pretty easily by a pure novice.)
> > > >
> > > > As an aside... there already is an organization in charge - Tim
> > > > legally and Chris parentally, so until they give away their
> control -
> > > > it's their baby so to speak.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry to have ranted so long, it's just the disappointment
> talking,
> > > > tom151
> > > >
> > > > --- In i550@yahoogroups. com , "caribeansoul@ ..."
> <caribeansoul@...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree that is a great idea. If we get a class association,
> > voting,
> > > > (boats in the water), etc. That will be a great starting
> point. Once
> > > > we get some organization, then we can make decisions as a group
> > > > instead of a mass of people who may or may not have plans, a
> boat, or
> > > > even ever have a boat.
> > > > >
> > > > > I volunteer to help organize the class association if we
> want to
> > get
> > > > one started.
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems to me, that at this stage, to be a member of the class
> > > > association, you need to have purchased an official copy of
> the plans
> > > > and have a hull #. I'm sure Chris and Tim have a list of these
> > > > individuals we can use as a list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris Farmer
> > > > > Peregrine
> > > > > Hull #030
> > > > >
> > > > > Matt Broughton wrote:
> > > > > > After visiting Chris this weekend and seeing how well
> > > > his build was
> > > > > > progressing (with him building by himself no less), as
> well as
> > > > talking about
> > > > > > Thistles, boat work done in the past, and general building
> > > > ideas; I'm
> > > > > > inclined to agree with him here. The guy does know what he's
> > > > talking about,
> > > > > > and by building an i550, he's putting his money where his
> mouth
> > > > is.
> > > > > > It's way too damn early to be concerned with an arms race,
> > > > especially with
> > > > > > the new rule changes to define a min weight (not to
> mention all
> > > > the
> > > > > > discussion lately, it's in the back of all our minds...I
> think
> > > > everyone will
> > > > > > see it before it happens now!) Given the youth of the
> i550, the
> > > > current
> > > > > > lack of any formal class association (and related bank
> account),
> > > > lack of
> > > > > > officers, voting, and most of all BOATS, it's premature to
> dwell
> > > > on. We've
> > > > > > got MUCH bigger fish to fry (see previous sentence) than
> worrying
> > > > about rich
> > > > > > folks with cash to blow on carbon and nomex raining on our
> > parade.
> > > > > > How about we discuss something productive rather than go
> back and
> > > > forth
> > > > > > about building materials... for instance, actually
> defining a
> > > > class and
> > > > > > bylaws. Getting officers and measurers voted in, defining
> > > > procedures, and
> > > > > > best practices during regattas...you know, stuff that we'll
> > > > actually NEED
> > > > > > within a year or two, $your_deity willing!
> > > > > > -Matt
> > > >
> > > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  nsor .ad{ padding: 8px 0; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{ font-
> family: Arial; font-weight: bold; color: #628c2a; font-size: 100%;
> line-height: 122%; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{ text-decoration: none; }
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{ text-decoration: underline; }  #ygrp-
> sponsor .ad p{ margin: 0; } o{font-size: 0; } .MsoNormal{ margin: 0
> 0 0 0; } #ygrp-text tt{ font-size: 120%; } blockquote{margin: 0 0 0
> 4px;} .replbq{margin:4} -->


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]