axolotl

Members
  • Content count

    1,217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Kiss-ass

About axolotl

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    San Diego
  • Interests
    Sailing, Camping

Recent Profile Visitors

4,867 profile views
  1. Correct. The PHRF certificate numbers are exactly the same as the boat manufacturer's numbers and determine where the bands are placed on the spars. A sail larger than P & E would be illegal for racing. The sailmaker did visit the boat, but only to determine the tack pin setback, track slugs type, etc. When I told him the new main couldn't be hoisted to the top band he said the top band must be wrong, measure up and place it at distance P. After lowering the band the main fit perfectly.
  2. Probably the most common certificate rule broken in club fleets in this area. Either they're absent, ignored, or (rarely) at the wrong location. Though not necessarily deliberately; my boat had bands when I bought it, a year later when I bought a new main I couldn't hoist it to the band. Turned out the band was 6 inches higher than P! Previous owner was a cheater.
  3. axolotl

    Go or No Go

    In my bizarro world it's the light air start conundrum. Sea breeze courses with the wind coming up around 10:00am and dying circa 5:00pm, or not . . . Often the Cat in the Hat pops up and the fleet drifts for an hour before the RC abandons, or it fills in to a paltry 1 to 3 knots with massive holes. Competitor(s) with blazingly fast boats will hoist and sail back and forth past the committee boat with iron stares. Sometimes I think it affects the Cat in the Hat coming down. Is that trying to influence an RC decision?
  4. axolotl

    Eligibility to Race

    I assume "hurt the overall event" concerns -> if Mr. X races, 2 or more others won't, which decreases the total number of boats racing. Is fleet size the criterion of how successful an event is? The idea that 2 or more competitors can threaten to pick up their jacks and leave if Mr. X isn't booted and prompt the OA to boot him smells like a witch hunt to me. And you're missing key parts of the 76.1 process. No courts would be involved. Mr. X, if he wanted to push it, is entitled to a PC hearing (Rule 76.3) concerning his entry rejection, which, one would assume, be a findings of fact affair and could get messy if Mr. X demands the complainers are called as witnesses, as they should be because they're the reason his entry was denied. It'd be embarrassing if the OA refused to proffer the complainer's statements, saying only that "little bird(s) told me so." If the PC upholds the entry rejection, Mr. X is entitled to Appeal (Rule 70.1) to his national authority (US Sailing) contesting the PC's decision or its procedures. One would think he would, having just acquired a faster boat. Believe me, having been through an Appeal (we won), it's a big hassle (although apparently it can be done through videoconferencing & emails, etc., now), involves massive paperwork from all involved, and takes time (four months in my experience). I'll go out on a limb here and state that based on your hypothetical situation the NA would overturn the OA's rejection of Mr. X's entry. Riley's original scenario ("We determine Mr. X can't handle his boat and doesn't know the rules"), after further contemplation I'm on the fence now. The NA's decision would probably hinge on whether the stated reason for rejection was arbitrary. Are other competitors in Mr. X's fleet poor boat handlers and hazy on the rules? If upheld, it would set a precedent that an OA could reject an entry on a whim by simply stating they think a Mr. X is a lousy sailboat racer, even if the real reason is he's an asshole or an OA official has a personal beef with Mr. X. Quite the can of worms if you ask me. OTOH, maybe Riley is right and Rule 76.1 has no teeth; fundamentally an OA can reject any entry by going through the motion of stating a reason other than race, religion, etc. I'd be interested to know the answer, and might cough up $25 and request an interpretation of Riley's intended 76.1 action to the NA per Rule 70.4.
  5. axolotl

    RRS, room, and appropriate number of crew

    From my limited experiences in crew of two/singlehanded races it's always an offshore affair and all competitors give wide berth to other boats during maneuvers so the issue of what's seamen-like or not is not worth considering. I suppose a boat could push the rules and force a competitor to foul by not responding in a "seamen-like" manner but it's not in the shorthanded offshore racer's DNA.
  6. axolotl

    Eligibility to Race

    Oh, but I do have every right to participate in your race assuming my entry is valid! That's why Rule 76 exists. Booting me using Rule 76 better clearly state the reasons more than I'm "dangerous", incompetent and/or not a rules expert. How will you defend yourself if I request a PC hearing? A litany of hearsay concerning my bumbling incompetence in the past? I'll riposte' by illuminating the past incompetence of others in my fleet. And if your PC upholds the Rule 76 booting, it's appealable to my national authority. Think you'll get validation there? Being a lousy sailor is not a reason to deny my participation. You do not have every right to not accept my entry; rather, you must accept all valid entries or initiate a Rule 76 decision, which in this case will not hold water. If you prevail, it'll establish a precedent that Clubs can look beyond the applicant's entry form for incompetent behavior in past races, hearsay, "we don't want this guy around, he's dangerous" blather, etc. We've all done dumb stuff on the racecourse and I'd be disheartened if some Club denied entry to me because of past transgressions. I mean really, has this guy killed anybody? Has he been in contention for season honors? Does he pay for damages to other boats he's caused (BTW, don't go after the owner for damages if he's an asshole, deal directly with his insurance company)? So, Mr. X is getting a bigger faster cooler boat. Irrelevant; I've crewed on boats with minus PHRF ratings and the competition is much more savvy, but the fleet still has its bumbling incompetents which dominate DFL and are generally only a problem at the starts. It could be a blessing for all as Mr. X gets repeatedly spanked by the competition, has trouble t-boning anybody because they dodge him and pop the red flag every time. Different than the Wet Wednesday bottom scrapers who think yelling is equivalent to hailing protest, and don't have the balls to follow through with a protest because, well, they're not rules experts. One question. You imply your insurance company has the right to demand a particular competitor's entry for a given race be denied. I've been on the Board of a local yacht club for over a decade and not once heard of such an action. I call bullshit.
  7. axolotl

    Eligibility to Race

    I assume Rule 29 is the supposed "fix" for the "bumper boat style competitor's" problem. I don't like it. It changes Rule 14, 44.1 and 44.3 without so stating. It requires a quick judgement call of how much it'll cost to fix damage by the competitor. It allows the "Fleet Captain" (not defined in the RRS) to DNE boats based on some magical detection of contact not reported by the competitors involved. It creates the requirement of additional form submittals assuming no protest is submitted. Basically, there's only three post-race interactions with the OA and Committees competitors may pursue: Retired after Finishing, Request for Redress, or Protest. Taking a scoring penalty is accomplished by flying a yellow flag as you cross the finish line, not after some post race decision which requires submitting a form. The key here is any contact between boats necessarily implies a rule was broken which burdens the R/W boat to hail and file a Protest which must be heard (or if minor, and the rule breaker does her turns, the flag comes down). Serious damage requires the boat which broke a rule immediately retire, no exceptions. The DIYC Rule 29 seems to be an attempt to pussyfoot around what's already in the Racing Rules to avoid the rigmarole of an actual protest hearing, ostensibly to decrease collisions. Lame.
  8. axolotl

    Eligibility to Race

    If that were the criteria for rejecting an entry (especially the rules thing) half of the boats in some of our Classes would be bootable. Also, be aware 76.1 would have to be invoked for each race or series; you can't ban the offender from submitting an entry, only reject the entry. There's no rule that requires competitors adequately handle their boat while racing; one would assume if they can't they'll either be DFL soon after the start or be protested when they break a rule. It's not the OA's or RC's job to make judgments concerning a competitor's skills or rules knowledge and 76.1 reject his entry. Note that Appeal 53 concerned the suitability of the competitor's boat, not the competence of the competitor. The onus is on the other boats in the fleet to protest your problem skipper *every time* he fouls them, and follow through with the protest. Yah, it's a hassle, but it's the only way to reign in rule breakers, both the intentional assholes and the blissfully ignorant. I suspect the real problem here is Mr. X is involved in too many collisions, a valid safety and expense consideration. But it takes two to tango; the right of way boat is also required to avoid contact (Rule 14); maybe others in the fleet need some polishing of their boat handling skills and rules knowledge. Ya' don't have to grind fiberglass before throwing up the red flag; instead, give way to Mr. X *before* contact and flag him.
  9. axolotl

    Be carefull with Yanmar !!!

    5 years ago a friend had his 4-cylinder Yanmar blow up with about 3,500 hours on it. A connecting rod punctured the crankcase. Yanmar inspected the engine and determined a rod bolt had failed. The owner had meticulous maintenance records. Although the engine was 5 years out of warranty Yanmar replaced the engine for 50% of retail price, installation costs borne by the owner. Kudos to Yanmar.
  10. axolotl

    required navigation tools

    Be aware that GPS time is presently 18 seconds ahead of UTC (Coordinated Universal Time), which is the time standard to use for celestial observations. It's because leap seconds cannot be accounted for in GPS time (technical reasons); GPS Time and UTC were exactly the same in 1980 (when GPS was born) but as the decades have passed they've been drifting apart. You probably mean the time as displayed on a GPS receiver. The receiver *should* account for leap seconds and correct the GPS time from the satellites and display UTC, but there's some caveats: The satellites transmit almanac data, which includes the present leap seconds correction so your receiver can correct to UTC for display purposes. But the complete almanac download takes 12 1/2 minutes, up to 30+ minutes if the satellite is repeatedly briefly blocked by an obstacle, like your body or rigging, because the almanac download has to start over. If it's been months since you've turned on your receiver it may use a stored old almanac until it downloads the current almanac. The number of leap seconds may have been changed in the interim so your clock display will be off by one second or so. If the batteries died in those months of disuse and the receiver lost the almanac (cold boot scenario) your time display could be off by 18 seconds until a new almanac is downloaded. The clock display driver circuitry typically has a low priority (especially in old receivers) so the displayed time may not always accurate to the second. The takeaway is to actually check your GPS receiver is displaying UTC to the second before using it for celestial observations. This is easily done by comparing it with the shortwave WWV time signal. Beware the "atomic clock" style clocks and wristwatches; they only synchronize with WWV once a day (typically around midnight when there's less interference), then use a Timex style crystal mechanism (which could drift 1/2 second or so per day) until the next synchronization. If they haven't synchronized for days or weeks because of interference or a weak signal, they could be off by many seconds. Better quality ones will display a "missed synchro" warning if they miss a synchronization. The easiest way to eliminate timing errors is to set a wristwatch (even the cheapest will do) to WWV on your shortwave, then go on deck and make your observations. If you're connected to the internet, you also can find out eggzakly what time it is: NIST Time
  11. axolotl

    Dennis's take on recent developments

    Correction, the presser is unclear. From the Protocol:
  12. axolotl

    Dennis's take on recent developments

    Sort of. From a presser last November: "Teams will be allowed to build two boats, but only one at a time, which the exception of the defender, which is allowed to two-boat test during the challenger selection trials."
  13. axolotl

    Dennis's take on recent developments

    Works great for me if I click on it in my post, don't know what to say.
  14. Dennis is always worth listening to. His take on BAR's sponsorship coup and the possibility of a Canfield challenge. Also some publicity to sell his latest furniture boat. Dennis speaks