Translation missing: en.posts.shared.post_not_found

Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • While I think Tim is wrong in this case (later), it's an illustration of how difficult it is to write Cases.

    When we are down to interpreting official interpretations...

    Anyway, simply Tim,

    You are making the error of applying the facts for Questions 2, 3 and 4 to Question 1.  Actually, Question 1 is standalone and needs no facts. Question 5 is standalone and has its own facts.

    Therefore, Answer 1 applies to any obstruction.

    No one (including Case 150) is presenting that the obstruction was in SRs path. (I haven't even considered the other answers. Q1 is sufficient.) 

    R19 applies between pairs of boats! So long as one boat's course is influenced by the other boat and a obstruction at the same time, the pair are considered to be 'at' the obstruction for the purposes of R19. 

    Tim also said that PE is not constrained by the obstruction. This is true, but Answer 1 says 'influenced' not constrained. 

    The influence is that PE physically is not able to sail the same path as SR because of the obstruction. 

    So to reiterate, using Case 150 Q1 only, the pair are considered to be at the obstruction and R19 applies. 

    As for Tim's suggested new rule, I think I went there about a million posts back! #20160

    Today 00:50
  • I'm not sure that the recent revisions involving hull have been an improvement. We have the situation where bowsprit doesn't count for over the line or hull length, but does count for overlap. And ERS isn't that helpful when it comes to hull length. If you take a modern 18 or other similar craft there's a nominally vertical stem, but a tube projecting from that, with bracing structure both beneath and to each side. Throroughly part of the hull. OK, count it as bow sprit. Maybe. But in other classes you have exactly the same, but a solid construction. Look at these two. Where, in ERS terms is the bow on each, and how on earth do you tell who is over if you are sighting a busy startline? 
    bows.jpg 67.9 KB
    Yesterday 13:25
  • Very practical method Alan - and 'refreshing' (for the routine ones I have PC experience in, we just did the corection calcs within ourselves - this case a major one) - for ourselves, easy enough to submit to the PC, when national level racing, as we always log all such baseline performance & tracking data from the onset of every race (and event YB Tracker always used etc).

    Yesterday 00:15
  • Gary, the issue is not whether the spinnaker is asymmetric or not. It is about the attachment of the pole to the sheet or clew of the spinnaker (RRS 55.3).

    Old sailors might say 'one clew of the sail must fly free'.

    In your 18 footer illustration, the tack of the spinnaker is on the pole, however complicated the guying/bracing arrangement of the pole may be, but the clew and the sheet are not attached to anything exerting outward pressure.
    Fri 23:14
  • Andreas, I don't agree that illustrations of flags used should not be included in SI.

    RRS Race Signals includes pictures of all flags referred to.  That indicates that the SI, when prescribing a new flag signal may do the same.

    I've frequently seen flags to be used, and actual marks, being displayed at Competitors' Briefings.

    Why is this a bad practice?
    Fri 22:37

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 John Quirk 8.4K
2 Benjamin Harding 3.45K
3 Tim OConnell 2.8K
4 Jim Champ 2.8K
5 John Christman 2.4K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more