Boatmad.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-04-2010, 07:44 PM   #21
Moderator
 
Mike Lloyd's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Cornwall.
Occupation: Retired.
Interests: Golf & liquid lunches with friends.

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cornwall.
Posts: 2,303
Interesting - still an awful lot of info missing - not much time left and what about the exclusion zones, any info on them or is that going to be all last minute?
__________________

Mike Lloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2010, 09:56 AM   #22
Registered User
 
Country: UK
Location: Berkshire
Occupation: Powerboat Racing Photojournalist
Interests: Powerboat racing & Rallying

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 87
Yes the exclusion zones were mentioned, but to be honest the route that Richard and Justin have planned by-passes them by some distance. They are not as numerous as RB08. The only headache that could cause an issue is the 10 mile trip up the river to Waterford, where on some stretches there is a 10 knot speed limit, but that is in place due to boats moored up at the bottom of peoples gardens. At all the other race venues, you blast past the finish line and the marina or harbour is just 100 yards away and then you tie up right across from the hotel.
As for ferry costs to Ireland I undersatnd that these will be taken care of by the race organiser, unless as Justin said you are bringing over a 90 foot yacht.
Just because this information isn't on a website yet dose not mean it dosen't exist. Justin is very happy to talk to anyone who still wants to get involved. When asked about the latest date he would accept entries his answer was the Wednesday before the race start. The race will happen whether he ends up with 20 boats or 40 boats, it's not being funded by just the entry fees.
__________________

Chris Davies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-04-2010, 04:58 PM   #23
Registered User
 
TomLinley's Avatar
 
Country: UK
Location: Exeter
Boat make: 9m RIB

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Exeter
Posts: 244
Did anyone video it like the RB11 meet?
TomLinley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2010, 07:13 PM   #24
Registered User
 
Tremlett 15's Avatar
 
Country: Northern Ireland
Location: Bangor Co Down
Occupation: Quantity Surveyor ( Retired )
Interests: Boating & classic speed boats
Boat name: Tremlett 15
Boat make: 1973 Gunning/Tremlett 15' & Ribeye 4.5m )
Engines: 1976 Mercury 500 50hp ( & Yam )
Cruising area: Ireland

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bangor Co Down
Posts: 208
Any more update on this ?

how many / who from here is taking part ?

I will be in Bangor ( my home town ) hope to see the boats arriving



Tremlett 15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 03:33 PM   #25
Registered User
 
Tony Davis's Avatar
 
Country: Job Centre
Location: In a box
Occupation: Chaos's gofer
Interests: Skiving
Boat make: Spectre 30
Engines: 2 x Promax 225
Cruising area: In the bath

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: In a box
Posts: 5,201
I heard that 2 boats have withdrawn their entry in the last week! How many does that leave now?
__________________
Chaos for Moderator.
Tony Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 08:39 PM   #26
Registered User
 
Goinglean's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 137
Tony,

Our photo is still up on the website but we had to pull out some weeks ago. The Fountain requires too much ballast to compete, it became unstable, we could not achieve Marathon weight requirements

We may still go over to watch the boats start....
Goinglean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 09:58 PM   #27
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinglean View Post
Tony,

Our photo is still up on the website but we had to pull out some weeks ago. The Fountain requires too much ballast to compete, it became unstable, we could not achieve Marathon weight requirements

We may still go over to watch the boats start....
Don't you mean boat
hunton69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 10:38 PM   #28
Registered User
 
PhatFrank's Avatar
 
Country: Norway
Boat make: Nothing fast...

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinglean View Post
The Fountain requires too much ballast to compete, it became unstable, we could not achieve Marathon weight requirements
I've asked around regarding this. Apparantly the minimum weight requirements are there to "eliminate flimsy designs". What it actually does is eliminate fuel efficient and light hulls - which could be what offshore racing needs to attract more positive attention in these eco-friendly days... For our part it may compromise RB11/RB12 - no point in spending lots of £ on a fast light boat with moderate power when we have to stuff it with loads of weight (and more power) to meet the marathon rules...

As an example, neither the Goldfish 29 or the Goldfish 36 (i dare anyone to call them flimsy...) are - by my calculations - heavy enough for the new rules...
__________________
_________________________________

"If it has tits, tyres or a transom, it will have issues"
PhatFrank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-05-2010, 10:47 PM   #29
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhatFrank View Post
As an example, neither the Goldfish 29 or the Goldfish 36 (i dare anyone to call them flimsy...) are - by my calculations - heavy enough for the new rules...
No, but you can buy a small country for the price of a 36!


The limits are indeed to eliminate flimsy designs, and also to eliminate cheque book racing, because to build a light boat that isn't flimsy, IS expensive, the Goldfish is a good example of this.

Because the goldfish is good (VERY good) doesn't mean other light boats would be as durable. They could be just as light, maybe lighter, and maybe much, much cheaper, but it's less likely that they'd stay in one piece if they're a budget build. The rules were intended to be a 'leveler' to make it of no advantage to build hugely expensive boats. They won't please everyone, that's for sure. If you wanna build a high end, exotic race boat, no expense spared, and intend that investment to get you to the front, go for P1, or the US. But if like the majority you'd like to come and compete on a fairly level playing field, without a massive budget, with a boat you can also use for pleasure, rig one for dependability with a bit of brains, and you could be a winner in class in the Marathon series, and feel like you've actually been somewhere at the end of a race. (As we actually race in rough conditions, that 'somewhere' might feel like Hell & Back!)

Fantastic, lightweight, advanced, and expensive boats are wonderful, but there are loads of types and classes of racing where they can take part and excel. Marathon isn't one of them! Marathon's intended as a series for the masses, where affordable boats can be competitive and have dual use, race & pleasure. This may be seen by some as a step backwards, but no one is forcing anyone to take part if they think the class's / rules are shite.
I think thats why it's had the interest its had. If we can urge the RYA not to engulf the class in rules, fees & aggro, it could be very good indeed.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 09:22 AM   #30
Registered User
 
dowdy's Avatar
 
Country: shropshire england.
Location: oswestry
Occupation: Retired
Interests: Yodelling
Boat name: Veni Vidi Vici or Conked
Boat make: G.P.14
Engines: 4h.p. Mercury
Cruising area: Cap de Agde

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: oswestry
Posts: 1,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
No, but you can buy a small country for the price of a 36!


The limits are indeed to eliminate flimsy designs, and also to eliminate cheque book racing, because to build a light boat that isn't flimsy, IS expensive, the Goldfish is a good example of this.

Because the goldfish is good (VERY good) doesn't mean other light boats would be as durable. They could be just as light, maybe lighter, and maybe much, much cheaper, but it's less likely that they'd stay in one piece if they're a budget build. The rules were intended to be a 'leveler' to make it of no advantage to build hugely expensive boats. They won't please everyone, that's for sure. If you wanna build a high end, exotic race boat, no expense spared, and intend that investment to get you to the front, go for P1, or the US. But if like the majority you'd like to come and compete on a fairly level playing field, without a massive budget, with a boat you can also use for pleasure, rig one for dependability with a bit of brains, and you could be a winner in class in the Marathon series, and feel like you've actually been somewhere at the end of a race. (As we actually race in rough conditions, that 'somewhere' might feel like Hell & Back!)

Fantastic, lightweight, advanced, and expensive boats are wonderful, but there are loads of types and classes of racing where they can take part and excel. Marathon isn't one of them! Marathon's intended as a series for the masses, where affordable boats can be competitive and have dual use, race & pleasure. This may be seen by some as a step backwards, but no one is forcing anyone to take part if they think the class's / rules are shite.
I think thats why it's had the interest its had. If we can urge the RYA not to engulf the class in rules, fees & aggro, it could be very good indeed.
Beg to differ on some of the above,particuarly on "affordable" and "for the masses",you go for a basic marathon boat with twin in/outboards doubt you will see much change out of 50k and again it certainly would not be a family recreational craft for an afternoon out with the kids,the"masses"can barely afford a little fletcher,ring,phantom or whatever,hence all the rebuild threads on here,its only a priveleged dozen or so who can go "Marathon".
__________________
when in doubt trim outCARPE DIEM
dowdy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 10:28 AM   #31
Registered User
 
dowdy's Avatar
 
Country: shropshire england.
Location: oswestry
Occupation: Retired
Interests: Yodelling
Boat name: Veni Vidi Vici or Conked
Boat make: G.P.14
Engines: 4h.p. Mercury
Cruising area: Cap de Agde

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: oswestry
Posts: 1,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunton69 View Post
Don't you mean boat
Down to 7 ribs and a ex r.n.l.i craft now,shame really,certain people have put a lot of no reward hours into this,would have been there only for the Shakespear adventure.Going over for some of the fun and games tho,The All Ireland Stone Throwing Worlds and the 165ft bungee jump and a ballast tank full of the black stuff,bring it on.
__________________
when in doubt trim outCARPE DIEM
dowdy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 10:55 AM   #32
Registered User
 
PhatFrank's Avatar
 
Country: Norway
Boat make: Nothing fast...

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 127
I do see your point, Jon, but I don’t believe it is this black and white. As far as costs are involved, you can’t make me believe that a boat like the Buzzi 55 that won RB08 is less expensive than for example the Goldfish 36. In addition, the entry fees for races like RB /CTC are dependent on hp, and a similarly fast boat to the GF36 that is compliant with the rules would need at least another 500 hp. That’s £ 6.250 extra for RB12… Also, the fuel costs are dramatically different. We used 1 500 litres of diesel in RB08, and although it still is a shitload of fuel I don’t think any other boats used less. At least not that were close to our speed. The 36 ft Goldfish used around 2 500 litres of diesel, which for a front runner is amazing.

I’m not saying that offshore racing should go all green, but I strongly believe that more fuel efficient boats are the way forward. New and young racers need to be recruited, and this generation is much more focused on this aspect than many of us. As such, merely putting a minimum weight requirement doesn’t put pressure on boat builders and racers to “push the envelope” on boat design. Imagine if the car industry didn’t have the benefit of learning from F1 just because some guy named Sheldon was building a kit car in a shed that – big surprise – was crap.

In my opinion, many of the classes could of course remain under the minimum weight rules, but the faster classes should have these removed. Leave it to the scrutineers or the RYA to remove unsafe boats from races, and let racers who want lighter, efficient boats spend their money on the boats rather than entry fees and fuel. I agree that other classes of racing allow these boats, but we don’t want to race in other classes. Marathon Racing is wonderful, exciting and by far the most demanding of races, and I believe it has the potential to attract the interest that P1/Offshore 1 et al has failed to do. We just need to rethink the rules…

There, rant over…
__________________
_________________________________

"If it has tits, tyres or a transom, it will have issues"
PhatFrank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 11:06 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
Adam's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Warsash
Occupation: Boat Designer
Interests: sport
Boat name: Santana

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Warsash
Posts: 1,838
For me too - the current marathon rules are out of date and don't reflect the real world and what is happening / will be happening.

I can see perhaps the need for minimum weights - but generally they have been set too high and based on very old build standards / techniques. Crazy when we are having boats with ballast being added etc.

I think over the years one of powerboat racings biggest problems has been it's failure to move with the times. Comparing to car racing - you will see the classes constantly changing rules and up-dating to reflect the saftey, economic and increasingly enviromental issues. I don't see why powerboat racing should be any different. We seem to be stuck in a cycle of old fashioned rules - especially with the larger classes.

Enviromental reasons are very important and designers / manufacturers are/should be working towards increasing efficiecny - but the rules are not really promoting this. I think there should more emphasis on bringing down fuel useage / weights - or at least giving the options and incentives. Powerboating could be doing so much more as a sport and bring itself into current times.

Just my thoughts......
__________________
www.adamyoungerdesign.com
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 01:42 PM   #34
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Well I guess we stand directly opposed.

Racing has failed miserably for many years, during those years light boats have been allowed in many other classes and technology has been allowed to be at the forefront, it didn't seem to slow the decay down any, and Marathon seems to be a popular concept, so I think it should stay as is, for a while at least.

There is always someone there to say where we're all going wrong, but VERY few classes in the last 20 years had had the interest shown in them that marathon has...go figure.

I believe the talk of high end, state of the art boats is all very exciting and will appeal to a few wealthy owners & builders, but the man on the street, who's numbers 'en mass' we need desparately to make events happen, want an affordable, fair, competitive class structure. it's no good having an 'elite few', they don't make an event. And if the elite few always win, no one else will show.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 02:14 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Adam's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Warsash
Occupation: Boat Designer
Interests: sport
Boat name: Santana

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Warsash
Posts: 1,838
I wouldn't day directly opposed - and as I stated I agree with weight limits - but they need to be realistic. We have the case of some pretty low tech construction boats having to carry considerable ballast - and I think that shows the rules are wrong / out-dated.

I don't get the thinking that other classes have failed because of a high tech approach compared to Marathon. I'm not really seeing high tech in any of the other classes or even super light weight boats? There is currently in powerboating mainly a medium level of construction and composites - but if people really wanted to spend the money, things could be taken a whole lot further. But nearly all racing has weight limits in place - so comes back to having sensible weights in my opinion. I think the minimums have been set too high. Maybe we should have minimum weights based on power, not length - or a combination of all factors?

Also it is great to see the interest in Marathon racing and hope it long continues. But I do feel that racing in general needs to look at the world as a whole and try to promote lower fuel useage, more economy, more efficiency and be in tune with current issues.

Agree with all about fair classes, want to see consistency of rules and not too much change unless necessary.

As an example - a potential foreign competitor (not one of my clients) - wants to race a very light weight craft with relatively low horsepower to prove their construction, design and build. But they will not race because they will have to add considerable ballast. I don't think this is good for racing. Just one example but there are more.

At the end of it 'rules are rules' and we will all race to them - but still would be better in my opinion to see rules develop and evolve where necessary.
__________________
www.adamyoungerdesign.com
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 03:01 PM   #36
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Maybe we should have minimum weights based on power
Don't get me started on that! I believe power to weight rules are ridiculous and laughable. Cheque book racing again. we've been over that a thousand times.

The fact is, the other classes haven't had the kind of weight limitation seen in marathon, and I haven't seen all the fancy builds that the current marathon rules are apparently 'strangling'. So why not? me thinks the amount of people who'll build super light, fancy stuff are few & far between, but just a couple of fancy, light, quick boats winning all (which a big bucks team could easily do) will really put off the average joe racer who has a mortgage and normal life from even bothering.

If this foreign competitor wants to prove his craft, why not find a class that isn't such a dinasour? Everyone wants to jump on the bandwaggon of a succesful series, and change it suit themselves! And that really ticks me off. If you like it, enter, if you dont, dont. shimples. everyone wants to fix summat that aint broke.
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 05:12 PM   #37
Registered User
 
Country: Sweden

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
Don't get me started on that! I believe power to weight rules are ridiculous and laughable. Cheque book racing again. we've been over that a thousand times.

The fact is, the other classes haven't had the kind of weight limitation seen in marathon, and I haven't seen all the fancy builds that the current marathon rules are apparently 'strangling'. So why not? me thinks the amount of people who'll build super light, fancy stuff are few & far between, but just a couple of fancy, light, quick boats winning all (which a big bucks team could easily do) will really put off the average joe racer who has a mortgage and normal life from even bothering.

If this foreign competitor wants to prove his craft, why not find a class that isn't such a dinasour? Everyone wants to jump on the bandwaggon of a succesful series, and change it suit themselves! And that really ticks me off. If you like it, enter, if you dont, dont. shimples. everyone wants to fix summat that aint broke.
Mikko Oikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 07:45 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
Adam's Avatar
 
Country: England
Location: Warsash
Occupation: Boat Designer
Interests: sport
Boat name: Santana

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Warsash
Posts: 1,838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Fuller View Post
Don't get me started on that! I believe power to weight rules are ridiculous and laughable. Cheque book racing again. we've been over that a thousand times.

The fact is, the other classes haven't had the kind of weight limitation seen in marathon, and I haven't seen all the fancy builds that the current marathon rules are apparently 'strangling'. So why not? me thinks the amount of people who'll build super light, fancy stuff are few & far between, but just a couple of fancy, light, quick boats winning all (which a big bucks team could easily do) will really put off the average joe racer who has a mortgage and normal life from even bothering.

If this foreign competitor wants to prove his craft, why not find a class that isn't such a dinasour? Everyone wants to jump on the bandwaggon of a succesful series, and change it suit themselves! And that really ticks me off. If you like it, enter, if you dont, dont. shimples. everyone wants to fix summat that aint broke.
The thing you are totally missing John - I'm not talking about fancy builds - just good light weight that could easily be lowered still further for that matter. There are medium tech built boats that are having to add ballast and that to me seems out of date.

The foreign competitor mentioned will not race and is not that bothered - just an example. No big deal to him - but a lost competitor / manufacturer to the sport and an example of how the sport of powerboating could be seen to be moving forward and embracing craft that are more economical / use less fuel / less emisions etc.

I'm not saying things are broken - just that improvements / tweeks could be made. I'm certainly not trying to change things to suit myself - unlike some others - but looking at things from the best of sport in my honest opinion.
__________________
www.adamyoungerdesign.com
Adam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 08:27 PM   #39
numbskull
 
Jon Fuller's Avatar
 
Country: United Kingdom
Location: South
Occupation: none
Interests: none
Boat name: Leviathan
Boat make: Phantom 28
Cruising area: South Coast

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
The thing you are totally missing John - I'm not talking about fancy builds - just good light weight that could easily be lowered still further for that matter. There are medium tech built boats that are having to add ballast and that to me seems out of date.
OK, give some examples. (with numbers, and actual boats, not supposition)

Who has actually had to add enough weight to mess things up, or would have to in order to race, and how much weight exactly?
__________________
.

"I Agree with everything you say really!" - John Cooke to Jon Fuller - 26-01-2013
Jon Fuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-05-2010, 10:06 PM   #40
Moderator
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,041
Saving Wt

What Jon has said re the thinking behind the rules is quite correct,snag is, there are so many factors that have a bearing on what is affordable ,safe and competitive,we could be here all night debating it.
A 38ft tin boat with construction dating back to 1970,would probably still only be 30% heavier (500kg),than say the latest plastic job,then add the lightweight engines and more efficient fuel consumption and before you know it ,you have a boat maybe half the weight of a older boat.I know Cinzano wasn`t far off the min wt,using this as a base.
To my mind Marathon racing is popular because we have been starved of true offshore for several years,not so much looking at suitable craft to fit the rules,so being flexible in the boundaries is almost part of the equation,and that means hp,wt,class defintion.I could bore you rigid with past boundaries for this,and these boundaries were continually modified as the years went by.
I bet there are many competitors who just want to go racing for the love of it,rather than be hamstrung with rules that can be restrictive when looking at a lot of craft that are affordable,safe and competitive but outside the rules.
So there will come a point when excluding say lightweight U.S. hulls will just leave us with revamped older craft to keep the flag flying,and as they say `incorporate new technology or die.`
Trouble is,anybody who sets out a set of rules will be constantly challenged by the detail,not because it`s wrong but to improve what is already there.
__________________

FLYING FISH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×