• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

bfp

Members
  • Content count

    448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bfp

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. I tried to take this offline but you can't receive PM's for some reason. I understand your enthusiasm for SSS training (other than the obvious commercial aspect of course) and agree of the benefits. But I think you are the one looking like a dick in this discussion. Sailing in the Brisbane to Gladstone race is nothing like sailing in the Hobart race. The chances of receiving assistance is significantly higher sailing up the coast than sailing across Bass Strait whether it is another competitor (everyone typically is in a straight'ish line, following each other), fishing boats, coastguard, water police etc. Of course there are things to hit sailing up the coast, but I would rather wash up on the beach on Fraser Island if something did go wrong than be in the middle of Bass Strait. And your comment about the dangers of sailing across the paddock in SE'er seem a little far fetched. How many times have you personally turned the corner at Breaksea and gone oh shit - here comes the hard part? - tactically yes. The risk of being lashed by waves in excess of 6m - come off it! Like you, I have been sailing in the Gladstone race for many years (since I was 11 and I didn't have any issues being less than 18 and not able to legally sign my own consent form). I may not have done as many races as you but I have done more than 30 of them. I have been fortunate enough to have been assisted by another competitor when things went a little poorly. I have done SSS courses since they started. I have seen people who have successfully completed the SSS course that are still a liability on a boat in the ocean. But if the QCYC can re-invigorate this race by making changes like this, then good on them. There needs to more changes than reducing the limit of positive stability for the boats and letting them go with 1 less person doing the SSS course, but they do seem to be listening. And good on them for that. Maybe the RQYS could take a leaf out of the QCYC's book and listen to what the competitors and potential competitors are saying about the races, instead of having the race chairman on a full rant on public forums about how the NoK should be pre-programming layer's numbers into their phones when they see their loved ones off at the start of the B2G race. That really is not helpful to anyone other than the lawyers.
  2. are you serious LB? How many people have died going to Gladstone verses doing the Hobart. They are chalk and cheese. Maybe stop trying to make mountains out of molehills and give the QCYC a pat on the back for trying to inject a dose of reality back into offshore sailing in Queensland.
  3. That makes no sense as tracker time never changed and that was consistent with progress on the tracker. Anyway BJ would have known the actual finish time so you saying the organiser knew about the error for over a day and did nothing. A one hour error on a system which gets the tracker data. Not buying this at all. N Does it matter if you are buying it or not? If you were watching the tracker that closely at 1am to know how quickly BJ finished the last 15 miles, then good on you. Maybe the guys on the boat had more of a clue than you? The time the race committee put in the system was out by an hour, BJ told the committee they had it wrong. The situation was corrected. I would suggest the tracker system does not enter the finishing time and it may be done manually.
  4. Would a "new" bulb mean that the existing Ti one that had been grandfathered by IRC not be allowed back on anymore?
  5. Am I reading that wrong? It looks to me like Comanche beat Rambler by 10 minutes.
  6. Supermaxi. How much quicker do you think the boat is than before the mods? I see you have shed 2 tonnes, but how much else has really changed? RM? Length? You can't have added too much RM or the mast would not deal with the mods, would it? I think it used to struggle to beat the 70 footers, (and therefore Beau Gest as well), let alone the old Loyal/Rags 100, so you would want to have gained a fair bit to move up that high in your rankings.
  7. Would a boom fix the rotation control issue?
  8. Is anyone else sick of Ian and Peter's continued rant about having to post you name, address, date of birth, phone number etc before being allowed to express an opinion in this topic. It seems that they both think that if they do not know who you are personally, then your thoughts are not just an attack on their product. This is SA guys.
  9. I wonder if there is much point testing a component to destruction unless the loads are being recorded as well, otherwise you do not know what you are actually testing.
  10. Possibly the "fat bummed" Loyal that this year went poorly in the light, actually went poorly relative to Oats because it was just too heavy, I understand it is close to 30% heavier than Oats (ie almost 8 tonnes more) If the fat-arsed boats weighed in a similar league to Oats (as this new boat apparently will), then the light air VMG running conditions that cost Loyal this year will not be such a handicap. Remember that Loyal had a significant lead on Oats after the first night of light air ( sub 12 knots anyway) sailing. If the new fat arsed thing was only say 1 knot slower rather than 4+ knots slower in the sub 10 knot VMG running conditions that were experienced on the second day, then it may well have been game over for the skinny boat. You might be surprised how most fast Loyal would VMG run if it weighed 20% less than it does. That is a lot of weight. I guess we will find out in time.
  11. You do understand that the flag officers and officials have had to stand up in the courts and justify their decisions as to the boats they allow to enter their races, on more than one occasion, don't you. When the results of the investigations into the deaths in this race clearly states that all boats in the race shall be self righting from 115 degrees, how would they explain letting multihulls into the race, directly contravening the results of the investigation. I am not sure saying that multi's have been allowed in other races so they thought it was ok would hold much weight if someone on an upside down multi died. We need to keep in mind both sides of the situation before getting too upset at their decisions. Safety is not doubt the reason for the decision. Possibly not the safety of the competitors though.
  12. In your opinion why did this happen? And why would it happen while similar-distance major races like the Fastnet and Middle Sea and Caribbean 600 have grown, or even exploded in size, with record fleets almost every year for the past five. One thing that Hobart is very different to these other, growing races is that the hobart is all in one direction and is into the approaching weather systems I feel the reason the smaller end of the fleet is shrinking for the Hobart Race is because the faster, bigger boats can now get to Hobart in the one weather system, rather than 2 that the less than 40 footers (in general - I know there are occasional downwind races) will face. This makes it very much more difficult for the smaller end of the fleet to have a chance winning, or even being competitive. If you are on a boat less than 50 foot, going to Hobart, then you generally are in it for the experience, not to win it (in general - I know the smaller boats occasionally have good years) The Fastnet, for example, you can win the race in a 30 foot production boat. That is very unlikely to happen in the Hobart race. A bit off topic of multi's going to Hobart though, and it will be a similar issue if they ever do.
  13. Well thank you for adding to the discussion. I am actually rather interested in the F22. I have sailed on a Sprint, which we raced against a tickled F22 (and actually beat more times then they beat us FYI). I now own a modified Grangier Tri (which we use for racing) and have recently been having discussions with the minister for finance about whether we purchase a Sprint/Dash type tri to keep on the boat ramp at home (race boat is not really practical for this) and cruise around on with the kids. The F22 would no doubt be part of the mix if it was available I am not calling into question Ian's designs, or the quality or practicality of the F boats. My issue is that Ian claimed that having no boom on his F22 design will make it faster than with a boom. The F-Boat groupies (of with I assume you include yourself) telling the world that because Ian says it is faster, so therefore it is, is so short sighted and defies logic. If I do buy an F22, I would go with the boomless option. But this would not be because it is faster. It would be because it is a simple and practical set-up that would suit the type of sailing I would do in the boat, But lets not bullshit about it
  14. Mate, if you seriously think that you will get more control of your sail shape without a boom, than with a boom, then I wish you all the luck in the world.
  15. You are kidding right? How many boats have booms? The evidence is in the accepted normal of racings boats of all sizes and types.