• 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.

fredhall

Members
  • Content count

    215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About fredhall

  • Rank
    Anarchist
  • Birthday 05/12/1977

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    fred.hall1

Profile Information

  • Location
    Hamble / Singapore
  • Interests
    Light displacement big boat racing
  1. TP100 Rule. Big sailing teams, doing big sailing maneuvers including lots of sail changes. That I would watch.
  2. Here is RM arriving in U.K. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1594911723857385&id=495375953810973
  3. Just noticed the trimmer is facing forward, but the load direction is aft: Which reminds me of.... The DEATH TRIANGLE!!
  4. Can we get this podcast on app stores?
  5. Pipboat: Orbital DA will definitely leave visible cuts into gelcoat. Sebyseb: The most important rule is to power it up with the sander pressed against the boat already - otherwise the disk over-spins up to several thousand RPM and cuts like a knife. This is definitely what the guys in the yard have been doing. User error - and lack of supervision by the yard. Gettem to re-do the job, but this time adding a coat of epoxy primer (the cuts will set you up for future osmosis issues): then a coat of high build, before long boarding and finally an even spray with anti-foul. Anything less and you're getting robbed and being left with a lot of future speed and cost issues.
  6. Yes. However, they still need the right number of crew in each watch to sail the boat - so they should revert back to the old crew number regime.
  7. Double the screen (pixels), halve the number of zooms... From my perspective there is generally an unbalanced distribution of risk that wouldn't be acceptable in my industry. I know the DNA of the sport says that outside assistance is forbidden and that the risk lies with those on the boat, but even if it is, a watchful eye from shore is surely cheap insurance against what has happened. Protocols could be set up so that a warning could be given; if a warning is given then a penalty could be applied. I find it very hard to see the logic of position plotting each boat every 10 seconds (can someone confirm this?) and then doing nothing other than produce graphics with that data. As an insurer I'd want to know who saw that data from shore, when and what they did about it. I think it's pretty obvious that if the data was available publicly, even at a slight delay, then a pair of eyeballs somewhere in the world would have seen the problem before the impact. Can you imagine what the competitors' inboxes and penalty list would look like if you were to implement such a plan? Imagine the fleet short tacking up a shoreline - where 'tack on my mark' commands are given within just a few boatlengths of the shore? Unworkable.
  8. There's a VO70 sitting in Abu Dhabi on the hard as we speak. Maybe ADOR will let Vestas borrow that for a while. Agree it would be osum, however it would swiftly show up speed differences between VO65 & VO70, which wouldn't be popular. Not commenting on what they might be (can of worms and Monster Project in the RBIR doesn't count).
  9. Definitely not, since VO65 crossover will include MHO / FRO, Trinquette (or staysail), ballast configurations, reef and possibly cant and/or much more. These are usually generated in-house at Norths and with wind speed axis inverted so J1 is at the top. For most teams, adjustments are made in collusion with the Norths agent / loft. Also, they don't carry A1/A2 and start at A3
  10. I've got to ask - who on earth are you? Your opinions differ so far from everyone elses (mine included) that I'm begining to get fascinated. We've plainly got a lot to learn from a sage like yourself, not least of which where we get to 'look closely at the prospective rhumpline'. In fact, if you'd kindly send me your sailing CV, I'd happily hire you - it would save me having to pay for my insurance policy anymore - simply wouldn't be needed. Shame no one else would want to sail with us though....
  11. I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res. I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt. Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts. MauritiusZoomedOut.jpg midzoom.jpg Zoomed.jpg Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts. I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions. Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference. You miss the point - the question doesnt relate to chart accuracy (and it's been estabished that contrary to the warnings, they're not that bad). The question raised here, is how far would they have needed to zoom in, before realising they're gonna need wheels. We're all used to charts which show shoal after shoal, all of which can be ignored, however - sometimes you zoom in and a whole load of crazy appears out of no-where.... Like a magic trick. At what point did we decide the chart accuracy was "not that bad", the part where they took the soundings in 1846, or the part where the chart datum is "undetermined"? The accuracy has ultimately been determined by 6 VOR competitors accurately shaving the archipelago (on either side) and the 7th accurately verifying the position - by force - slap bang in the middle. not only that- their point of foundering is accurately corroborated and verified by the charting. Suggest you flick back through this thread to see some pictures.
  12. A few snapshots from my screen: Thanks for posting VESA - if that's the clarity the nav desk was seeing, then I find it much harder to understand what has gone on here. So won't speculate. No doubt, time will tell. BTW - at this time, it's customary for me to haze the newbie - however I wont right now - and, you've done me a favour....
  13. I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res. I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt. Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts. MauritiusZoomedOut.jpg midzoom.jpg Zoomed.jpg Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts. I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions. Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference. You miss the point - the question doesnt relate to chart accuracy (and it's been estabished that contrary to the warnings, they're not that bad). The question raised here, is how far would they have needed to zoom in, before realising they're gonna need wheels. We're all used to charts which show shoal after shoal, all of which can be ignored, however - sometimes you zoom in and a whole load of crazy appears out of no-where.... Like a magic trick.
  14. I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res. I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt. Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts. MauritiusZoomedOut.jpg midzoom.jpg Zoomed.jpg Yeah - I think they must have a higher level of detail on board, as you say. If this is all they were getting, they'd all be aground. Many thanks for posting.