Rule Change Proposal: 21-03 Knav Allowance

This change to the rules is needed for everyone who has to suffer through light air summers. There's no reason not to, and the boat is safer with it in place. If the main halyard breaks or comes loose a boomkicker will also keep the boom from crashing down on you.

The boom kicker (I would prefer this wording instead of knav) is an uncommon rigging among the International Classes recognised by World Sailing. Strictly speaking it is useless if the RoC are respected, but it may happen that during a race the wind speed slows down under 5 knots and the race is not abandoned before the time limit expires.
In that case the kicker helps to keep the boom high and open the main leech giving extra speed to the boat. Those who have the kicker will have a dramatic advantage over those who have not, making the new rigging mandatory.
But, I would suggest a different wording for the proposed new rule. Instead of the current text: "Boom knav exercising upward force only, providing it is attached to the mast below the gooseneck" the following might be better: "Any non adjustable boom kicking system exercising upward force only connected to the vang attachments". The suggested wording will limit the possible systems and the consequent unpredictable cost increases.
One question: although the kicker isn't a heavy rigging, should it be weighed with the boat or not? If not, it could or couldn't be carried on the boat, if yes it should always be onboard. With the current rules, if nothing is specified in the new rule, it shall not be weighed.
One final note: the rules weren't changed to prevent its use. Those using it introduced a new rigging whose compliance with the rules was requested to the Rules Committee who had to specify what should be considered a vang. Once the definition was approved, the kicker wasn't contemplated. As everybody knows, our rules are closed class rules and when anything new is introduced it must be specifically allowed. The proposed new rule covers this aspect. But, being a new rule, it should also respect the Constitution: "Changes can be made at times other than the specified four-year intervals where the Board considers them to be of extreme urgency".
To decide if the boom kicker is of extreme urgency is a Board's matter, of course.

Antonio Bari

Rules Committee Chairman 2013-2020

As a snipe sailor, I want to comment some and disagree with others of Antonio´s comments.
I use the boomkicker since saw it on Commodore Lee Grifith´s snipe in USA in 2011 and I can say from extensive first hand experience that is much more useful downwind than upwind.
I almost don't use it upwind, except in the conditions mentioned by Antonio, but the range downwind is much higher and useful. Some times as high as 8-10 knots, when the main leech is not opening well by itself.
I f you are a light crew and use a flat sail, there will not be much change, but if you sail very heavy like I do and use very full sails, ... to open the main leech is a constant nightmare !
I use it all the time downwind until permanent vang tension is needed. The boomkicker with the vang helps me also to prevent the boom up and down movement with waves when is choppy and not much wind.

I think that if approved, it will be added to rule F7.2 ("optional running rigging) and of course it must be weighted with the boat, as any other optional running rigging included in that rule. No measurer in the world takes out the vang, the hicking straps or the barber when weighting a boat.

Even when they are optional rigging and the rule says nothing regarding they should be weighted or not, if you install it, you may weight with it, but cannot ever take it out the boat.

Our class weights "bare hull" boats. And a "bare hull" boat according to WS includes running rigging.
What is described in F7.2 as "OPTIONAL", is inside rule F7 "RUNNING RIGGING".
This is my view regarding the rule but it must be looked at by an expert.

In my case, my boat is weighted both with boomkicker and barbers, and up to 15 knots boomkicker is installed and barbers are removed and stored, and above 15 the barber is installed and the boomkicker stored.

As Commodore I must add that I always felt that our sailors (myself included ...) like ver much to do their own personal rigging, develop and improve stuff to get the boat faster or just because they like it more. The mast ram, the pole launcher and many other rigging was born like this.
I think that if is not something that changes the boat dramatically or interferes with the rules, any cheap device (this one costs less than 150 including all the adjustable system) should be allowed to make the boat more attractive.
Is cheap, helps the boat in some conditions, looks great ! I can't see why not !
Let´s not forget that is OPTIONAL, so there is not much point on debate if it's good or not for sailing faster, or if you like it or not.
Nobody is forced to use it !!!

The Snipe Class has always been ground for experimentation, innovations and personal rigging, and this has kept the boat updated and constantly upgraded. This doesn't mean that all new ideas have automatically been approved. The current Class Rules are closed class rules (and the previous General Restrictions alike) so that the permission to use new rigging or materials not mentioned in the rules must be approved before they can be used. The common idea that "if not forbidden, is allowed" goes back several decades. Things have changed in the years (and several editions of the General Restrictions).
The boom kicker is a great add-on to the boat, like, to name only a few, a smaller daggerboard, a GPS tracker, the forced top batten or the all time adjustable shrouds. Many other fittings, rigging or stuff could be a useful improvement to the boat. Their introduction, as new rules, must follow the established Decision Making Process. This proposal does.
But, we have a Constitution, too. The Constitution states that changes to the Class Rules shall be authorized at established intervals only. Amendments can be approved only if urgent (such as for security issues) or if the rules are unclear or unfair. Can the kicker be considered urgent? Does the new rule clarify a current rule? Or, has this new rule the goal to satisfy the request of those very few sailors (according to one of the motivations included in the proposal) who already purchased a kicker with the consequence of forcing every sailor to buy one, giving this rigging and undoubtable extra speed in extreme low wind conditions?
According to the Constitution, the Technical Committee shall give the Board a suggestion about the proposed rule, but it's the Board's decision to approve it or not. At the same time it's up to the Board to preserve the Constitution.
Antonio Bari