Translation missing: en.posts.shared.post_not_found

Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • ad 1: If we come to the conclusion that the gap should be closed, I can do that. 
     
    ad 2: We really should think how to keep it as easy and short as possible. There is a difference between 61.1(a) and 76.3. You could change each one of these two. For rules simplicity, I tend to change 76.3. For saveguarding the rights of an excluded person, I would tend to change 61.1(a), and I am with you in your #3. 

    If we consider that rights are more important than simplicity, we might follow that path. 
    In real life, I think we would not cut the rights of a person too much if we limit the right to request redress to boats. Remember: Any boat of the fleet is allowed to request the redress. 

    Any further ideas? 
    Today 19:08
  • I have the attached two documents from 2017 when Virtual Marks were being introduced.

    The guidance document, 2.4 says:

    (a) A waypoint is not a physical object, and

    (d) RRS 18 and RRS 28.2 cannot apply unchanged because a mark is defined as an object.

    Does anyone have any insights about the apparent philosophical change?

    AppendixWPRulesforRacingAroundWaypoints-[19996].pdf 25.4 KB
    GuidanceonRacingAroundWaypoints-[19997].pdf 373 KB
    Yesterday 22:09
  • Thanks Guys
    Yesterday 19:38
  • RYA's Casebook is at https://www.rya.org.uk/racing/rules/rya-case-book/
    Fri 20:08
  • Thanks everyone for your contributions. There is a clarity in my mind now with all the inputs given here. Now I will close this thread here.

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 Satish Kumar Kanwar 4.2K
2 John Allan 3K
3 Richard Jones 2K
4 Joan Noguera 2K
5 Andrew Lesslie 1.6K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more