• 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.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JimC

  1. Build a dinghy first by all means. Apart from anything else its affordable and doesnt take up space, and youll probably need one. But dont spend too much time agonising over what order you're going to do things after. Cross each bridge when you get to it. After all you may find you don't like boat building that much...
  2. 1937 Olympic **Canoe Sailing** !! That's a new one on me!
  3. Think you'll find that rule isn't in the ISAF book anymore. It got dropped, as I recall, because it was too difficult to define what a safe trapeze harness was. There might be a rule in your NA prescriptions or even national law I suppose.
  4. It shouldn't be impossible to find a similarly sized boat that has a scrap hull for minimal money. This would be an ideal source of all the bits you need. Until one turns up suggest just using it for rowing!
  5. Conventionally one of these:- https://www.westmarine.com/buy/sea-sure--rudder-retaining-clips--P011020104?recordNum=1 Fastened onto the transom above the top fitting so that the fitting on the rudder is held in place by it, and then you push it in to lift the rudder off. The cheaper metal one is probably the right choice. Another point. There should be a groove on the back of your mast, and the rope on the front of the sail should be fed into it so that the rope is in the groove all the way up. You'll find the sail works much better like that.
  6. The jury being discharged is the end for this trial. See http://ukcriminallawblog.com/what-happens-if-juries-cant-agree/ The case could be dropped or there could be another trial. 'course I have no idea how reliable that blog is.
  7. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40609661
  8. There must be hundreds of sailmakers who would make you a new kite for the 59er. Its just that you won't get one off the shelf, but so what. Hand over the old kite, and say you want one like that was when new.
  9. You can't change part 2 rules in the SIs. But if the line *between* the buoys is the continuing obstruction, do you need to? Brass is the man for this stuff, but would you be better describing the obstruction as a zone bounded by the marks and two points on shore?
  10. Its not strictly necessary to protest every boat that may have broken a rule, as long as there's a valid protest the PC really ought to invoke 60.3a2 to protest any other boats involved in the incident that may have broken a rule. Obviously it makes things easier if every boat that may be a party is listed. I do find it surprising that there's no mention in the facts found of Pronto versus Awl Wrench. They appear to have decided that Awl Wrench left sufficient room for Pronto and Kodachrome to get round the mark and give Rowdy mark room without breaking any rules, which isn't how the diagram looks.
  11. Approaching the *leeward* mark??
  12. Much more important, arguably, is epoxy versus polyester. Kevlar has some significant advantages, and one big drawback, but carbon is better in almost every respect and now affordable, which is why you don't see much Kevlar.
  13. Mmm, but Case 63: "At a mark, when space is made available to a boat that is not entitled to it, she may, at her own risk, take advantage of the space." I agree that it doesn't look as if Blue was setting up to make a legal rounding, and a lot's going to depend on the evidence, but with mauve/purple/red creating such comprehensive chaos I'd be inclined to believe a credible story from her victims.
  14. Presumably the prohibition of sticking your nose in. AIUI under vanilla RRS19 if you can stick your nose in and get an inside overlap you are entitled to room, but if its a continuing obstruction you are not.
  15. Seems to me that if you're going to disqualify anyone other than mauve/red then you have to demonstrate that those boats had an alternative with Mauve/Red steaming in. If we take position 3 - or maybe about 2.9: Blue will argue that it was still possible for her to luff across Green's stern to give green mark room, and that it was likely at this stage Red/Mauve would break a rule, which although she is not *required* to anticipate she is not prevented from so doing. Naturally if she takes avoiding action which breaks a rule and Red does not then go on to break the rule she is in trouble, but maybe better that than T boned. Yellow will argue that she could have taken black's stern or nipped between black and the mark if Blue hadn't been forced into her. That might have resulted in a position 4 like this, in which no rule is broken. You can imagine Mauve somewhere outside Blue if you like:-) Black and Green are unchanged.
  16. Red penalised for sure. I'd be inclined to exonerate Blue on the grounds that the chaos Red was creating left very few options, and if Red had not been charging in she might somehow have been able to manage to give everyone their mark room. Astonishingly harsh to penalise black, anyone's mark rounding might be a little less than precise with that massive clusterf*** coming up behind. And had black been closer to the mark it would have made next to no difference. What should black have done differently? Most likely her wide mark rounding had a lot to do with the bunch of idiots coming in fast with no mark room.
  17. Its a pretty reasonable assumption that if black had been overlapped with any boats when she entered the zone the model would have shown it. She's not overlapped with anything at position 1, and it would require her to have come into the zone at a considerable angle to her subsequent course for an overlap to exist. If that had been the case any sane PC would have included it in the diagram.
  18. Oh I agree, I was thinking of a Case 63 situation where Yellow wouldn't be breaking any rules by nipping between Black and the mark >> Green has not given anyone room to clear Black, although only Yellow has mark room. > The rules don’t provide anyone with an entitlement to ‘room to clear’ another boat. > As I’ve said, G is giving B ample room, if it were not for R being in the middle there. > Specifically what rule might G have broken, and how? The way I was thinking is that it would be perfectly reasonable for Yellow to take Black's transom in order to give mark room to Black. Even though there's potentially room for Yellow to turn inside Black I'm not sure that Yellow must. She is, after all ROW boat and may pass the obstruction (black) on either side. From the model I wasn't convinced that Green had left enough space for Yellow to comply with her Part 2 obligations, even if Red and Blue hadn't been there. But Green can argue that if it hadn't been for Red and Blue failing to give Mark room to Yellow she would easily have been able to give Yellow room, and as you say, by position 4 it can be argued that no matter what she wanted to do Yellow isn't going to be able to go behind black. I'd also be interested in contact, since the need to balance Red 4 on top of Black 3 may lose accuracy. The other thing is that it must have been clear to Green from position three that Blue was not giving mark room, and soon after that Red was not giving mark room either, so turning towards the mark in position 4 was a potential breach of rule 14. Its odd that in position 3 she has gone slightly wide, presumably due to the imminent chaos inside her, but at position 4 has closed up again. >> Blue will claim that Red piling in made it impossible for her to give mark room to Green without getting T boned, and may get exonerated if she's lucky > I don’t follow: B is nearly 1 BL away from G, and jammed up with Bl and Y and the mark, while G goes round the outside: > How is B not giving G the room she wants? The way I see it, if you take Red out of it, between position 2 and 3 Blue needed to luff up and perhaps slow down and take Greens transom in order to give Green mark room to sail much closer to Yellow. Otherwise she is not giving Green room to sail her course. But I think Blue would claim that she could see Red coming in, and it was very clear Red was not going to give mark room, so Rule 14 required Red to hold her course and become overlapped inside Green, even though she had no mark room.
  19. Try again... At Position 1: Black is in zone clear ahead of Yellow, green, Red, blue. Everyone owes Black mark room At Position 2 Yellow and Blue are overlapped Green is in the zone and overlapped with Yellow, Green owes Yellow mark room. Red owes Green mark room Green is in the zone and clear ahead of blue. Blue owes Green mark room Red is clear behind everyone At position 3 Yellow and Blue are in the zone and reached it clear ahead of Red. Blue owes Yellow mark room. Red owes everyone mark room Black has taken a wide mark rounding At position 4. Yellow has not been given mark room by Blue Yellow has not fouled Black (?yet?) due to wide rounding Blue has not given Black mark room, and is inside Green but owes Green mark room. Blue has not given Green mark room. Green may have contacted Red. Red has not given anyone mark room Green has not given anyone room to clear Black, although only Yellow has mark room. Red failed to give mark room to anyone and is penalised Yellow contacts Blue but is exonerated if there's no damage Blue claims she failed to give mark room to Yellow due to Red and is exonerated. Blue will claim that Red piling in made it impossible for her to give mark room to Green without getting T boned, and may get exonerated if she's lucky Green will claim that if it were not for Red and Blue Yellow had room to pass either inside Black or behind Black and so was given mark room. She would have to be extremely lucky to get exonerated. If she contacted Red and there was no damage she may get exonerated.
  20. or possibly some treated it as a mark and others didn't, hence confusion...
  21. > already exist is not a precedent we want to set. Doesn't set a precedent does it. It all depends on the circumstances of the individual situation. I don't see how 19.2c applies: the overlap was made before the boats reached the obstruction. The rules make no mention of zones for continuing obstructions, one must assume deliberately so. In the UK see RYA Case 1968/11. So the PC must decide whether in this case A (and B ) were able to give room when the overlap began. If A was able to give room and failed to they should be penalised. If A was not able to give room then C is not exonerated for breaking the SI and should be penalised. This will doubtless depend on (amongst other factors) whether the boats were travelling at ten boat lengths per second or one boat length per minute.
  22. It all depends on the circumstances really... And this is what a good local PC should know. Are we talking about an experienced crew trying to game the system, or is this just an entry level crew who declared NS with the wind whistling through the rigging on the way out to the start, but, when they got to the windward mark, maybe with the wind having diminished a bit, thought, that, this doesn't look too bad and it would be a shame to dog it down this long leg without the kite. I think the SIs need clarifying to say you can't undeclare NS, but if this was a tail end crew thinking "hey it will be more fun to put the kite up after all" that's one thing, but if its a front of fleet crew trying to game the handicaps for competitive advantage that's quite another.
  23. I imagine the idea when the SIs were written was that entry level crews who were frightened of setting the kite in strong winds would still go sailing, and it didn't occur to them that people might attempt to game the system for competitive advantage...
  24. It doesn't really matter what rule you protest someone under, you can list any rule you like. Its down to the PC to sort out what rule if any was broken. I'm with Pete_nj, SIs don't seem to prohibit changing from NS to S partway through the race, so accept it this time and change the SIs.
  25. Standard boat dolly wheels are also standard wheelbarrow wheels...