• 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.
    • B.J. Porter

      Moderation Team Change   06/16/2017

      After fifteen years of volunteer moderation at SA, I will no longer be part of the moderation team. The decision to step aside is mine, and has been some time in the works but we did not wish to announce it in advance for a number of reasons. It's been fun, but I need my time back for other purposes now. The Underdawg admin account will not be monitored until further notice, as I will be relinquishing control of it along with my administrative privileges. Zapata will continue on as a moderator, and any concerns or issues can be directed to that account or to the Editor until further notice. Anyone interested in helping moderate the forums should reach out to Scot by sending a PM to the Editor account. Please note that I am not leaving the community, I am merely stepping aside from Admin responsibilities and privileges on the site.
jack_sparrow

Brisbane 2 Gladstone 2017

185 posts in this topic

Wow..they must be smiling at Norths. Australia is starting to look like the House of RP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the drop to cat 3+ a big factor for entries? hull construction standards would be a problem for many potential entrants I would guess. What else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the drop to Cat 3+ does that mean Saltash II will make a comeback and clean up again. It still gets very nasty at Breaksea Spit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saves heaps, especially if you don't do much Cat 2 racing.

No HF radio

No Liferaft

No 2nd GPS
No Grab bags with GPS, EPIRB, Flares, SART

Storm Jib & Trysail

Individual PLB

No Fixed Sat Phone (so they can call you if one of the PLB's go off)

Also the certification for ISO 12215 Category A constuction

 

Thats tens of thousands saved for what is essentially a coastal race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saves heaps, especially if you don't do much Cat 2 racing.

No HF radio

No Liferaft

No 2nd GPS

No Grab bags with GPS, EPIRB, Flares, SART

Storm Jib & Trysail

Individual PLB

No Fixed Sat Phone (so they can call you if one of the PLB's go off)

Also the certification for ISO 12215 Category A constuction

 

Thats tens of thousands saved for what is essentially a coastal race.

the saving arn't quite that great as some of those items have been added back in. You still need a life raft 2nd GPS, sat phone or HF and storm jib. But looks very well thought out. In QLD I would guess for many B2G would be the only offshore race many would do or consider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat 3 + upgrades Bill E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Saves heaps, especially if you don't do much Cat 2 racing.

No HF radio

No Liferaft

No 2nd GPS

No Grab bags with GPS, EPIRB, Flares, SART

Storm Jib & Trysail

Individual PLB

No Fixed Sat Phone (so they can call you if one of the PLB's go off)

Also the certification for ISO 12215 Category A constuction

 

Thats tens of thousands saved for what is essentially a coastal race.

the saving arn't quite that great as some of those items have been added back in. You still need a life raft 2nd GPS, sat phone or HF and storm jib. But looks very well thought out. In QLD I would guess for many B2G would be the only offshore race many would do or consider

 

Apart from the B2K race which as had bigger fleets for the past 3-4 years. This is the first time in history that any sport has ever dialed back safety standards to increase participation. As someone who has appeared in coroners inquiry's as an expert witness I can describe the dialing back of SSSC training in one word.

Insanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now that it is a cat 3 race should this thread really be in Ocean racing anarchy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LB it is modified Cat 3 and added SSSC in as follows:

 

"At least one member of the crew on a boat shall have completed an Australian Sailing Safety and Sea Survival Course. or an approved equivalent. It is strongly recommended that skippers ensure two crew members have completed the course. (For Short Handed all crew members must have attended the course but the second member can have attended the course within the last ten years.)"

 

Sounds pretty reasonable approach towards getting the thing going after years of being on life support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow..they must be smiling at Norths. Australia is starting to look like the House of RP.

Will be great to see a few head to heads against oats, best way to test the actual "improvements" made over the last 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow..they must be smiling at Norths. Australia is starting to look like the House of RP.

Will be great to see a few head to heads against oats, best way to test the actual "improvements" made over the last 10 years.

I think you'll be seeing most of WOXI's mods done. He obviously wants a shot at LH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

Dont go snowflake on me LB. How many people died in a B2G before the introduction of SSSC's? However I take your point and they should have at least 2 SSSC's on board for obvious reasons and if only to mimic their SH requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

99% of crews will have more than one. The changes are exactly what the skippers wanted LB. Maybe QCYC didn't ask you or your current CAT2 Keppel brethren .... because you are already CAT2 compliant. It's an overnight coastal jaunt up the coast in warm waters. Even with a few scale backs it's still much safer to do this race now than ever before with trackers, GPS Epirbs, every crew has their own GPS on their phone, tethers that open at both ends etc etc.

 

Risky for QCYC to take a step back but no doubt well researched & with approval from all authorities. I am glad common sense has prevailed. If you wanted to buy an RL24 & sail it over the race course on that day(s) you are legally able to do so without most of the safety gear required by the race regulations anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

99% of crews will have more than one. The changes are exactly what the skippers wanted LB. Maybe QCYC didn't ask you or your current CAT2 Keppel brethren .... because you are already CAT2 compliant. It's an overnight coastal jaunt up the coast in warm waters. Even with a few scale backs it's still much safer to do this race now than ever before with trackers, GPS Epirbs, every crew has their own GPS on their phone, tethers that open at both ends etc etc.

 

Risky for QCYC to take a step back but no doubt well researched & with approval from all authorities. I am glad common sense has prevailed. If you wanted to buy an RL24 & sail it over the race course on that day(s) you are legally able to do so without most of the safety gear required by the race regulations anyway.

 

Yep, yacht construction, weather forecasting, tracking, navigation equipment and communications have all improved dramatically, so not surprising that reace organisers are starting to listen to owners regarding winding back responsive safety measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wow..they must be smiling at Norths. Australia is starting to look like the House of RP.

Will be great to see a few head to heads against oats, best way to test the actual "improvements" made over the last 10 years.

Also very circular and Tasmanian. I think Bob wanted to buy Alfa Romeo but Croaky wasn't interested, Harburg probably wanted WOXI and Sandy said no...so he goes and buys Alfa....and I suspect won't simply like it as is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

99% of crews will have more than one. The changes are exactly what the skippers wanted LB. Maybe QCYC didn't ask you or your current CAT2 Keppel brethren .... because you are already CAT2 compliant. It's an overnight coastal jaunt up the coast in warm waters. Even with a few scale backs it's still much safer to do this race now than ever before with trackers, GPS Epirbs, every crew has their own GPS on their phone, tethers that open at both ends etc etc.

 

Risky for QCYC to take a step back but no doubt well researched & with approval from all authorities. I am glad common sense has prevailed. If you wanted to buy an RL24 & sail it over the race course on that day(s) you are legally able to do so without most of the safety gear required by the race regulations anyway.

 

Yep, yacht construction, weather forecasting, tracking, navigation equipment and communications have all improved dramatically, so not surprising that reace organisers are starting to listen to owners regarding winding back responsive safety measures.

 

Other clubs to head down this route are the DSS - the Launceston to Hobart race is Cat3+ as well. And most of that course could be boat breaking on the wrong day.

It would seem the competitors are voting too, with nearly 50 entries last year. Meanwhile, the Cat2 Melb - Tassie/Hobart races are suffering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone done a tally of what the net difference is between cat 2 and the new cat 3+? Iirc the biggest difference was in medical supplies (no more expensive drugs) and the scantlings requirements.

No scantlings potentially opens it back up to small, light boats again, although inboard is a pita for most of them

Satphone/HF requirements are a side issue: precedent of races addressing that one as a specific requirement to cat 3+ or cat 2 -.

I'm with LB on the sssc requirements. There are precious few other races of any distance in qld, so this is the first coastal for many people. One trained person means they will be off watch for quite a bit of the race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on it is only an overnighter ,the furthest you are going to be offshore is perhaps 50 miles ,do overnighters have watch systems ? if they do they wouldnt be racing too hard.

Most of the race is in Internet contact also they have a tracker

We are not racing across the atlantic.

i am sure when you jump on a yacht there a few crew competent or the owner wouldnt sign up, also there would be induction onboard regarding emergency procedures

I competed my first gladstone race in 1980 in those days it was D.R. and radio signals, also a radio relay vessel bet Wistari has been updated in nav software mater of fact charts were used ,nowadays it would be hard to find a completed chart on board with fixes or plots or even crew who would hang around for the piss up and delivery.

Reduce the expenses ,perhaps the crew should contribute like the old days,

Racing in the old days was fun we were part of a team not a profession

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we jump to conclusions, why don't we survey yachts at the finish & see how many have certificates. I think it will be a lot higher than you think.

 

It's not like a whole generation of yacht owners & crew just popped up without any clue and are all going to enter this race for the first time. The pool of crew is only so big, most will have done the race numerous times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LB is on the money about the mandatory aspects of SSSC being a bit undercooked. Regardless if your 500, 50 or 5 mile off the beach, if there was a catastrofuck many couldn't stay afloat unassisted for more than 5 minutes, swim more than 50 metres and would drown in 30cm of water with their PLB beeping away....and that he/she probably happens to be the only one with SSSC!!!

 

That aside great job by the RC for breathing life back into this race.I thought it was destined to be a gonna after this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree Jack - hoiw many people can swim 5 miles in their w.w gear, lifejackets etc - done 4 SSSCs now and highly recommend to anyone outta sheltered water

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree Jack - hoiw many people can swim 5 miles in their w.w gear, lifejackets etc - done 4 SSSCs now and highly recommend to anyone outta sheltered water

Thanks Cloud ...BTW I did my first B2G I think 60 or so years ago and LB's mum was on board....fuck I have never done the maths until now....fuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree Jack - hoiw many people can swim 5 miles in their w.w gear, lifejackets etc - done 4 SSSCs now and highly recommend to anyone outta sheltered water

I have never heard anyone complain about the course, even the grumpy old arseholes at my club. The in water is a great wake up to the fat fuckers about self rescuing, and oldies about the increased risk of hypothermia. Everyone over 60 was shivering after 1 hour in a pool in late summer.

 

The faster boats with experienced crew run all hands on deck, the slow boats with novices need watches to stop making dumb choices while sleep deprived.

Wistari is many things, but fast is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we jump to conclusions, why don't we survey yachts at the finish & see how many have certificates. I think it will be a lot higher than you think.

It's not like a whole generation of yacht owners & crew just popped up without any clue and are all going to enter this race for the first time. The pool of crew is only so big, most will have done the race numerous times.

Mate it won't be a lot higher than I think, I know exactly how many Certs there are, who has them and who is in date. This dialling back of safety standards is designed to attract exactly the people you are talking about. Those with a new jeaneau and little or no offshore experience going for the first time. Their crews aren't in the crew pool now they are newbies to the sport and they don't know enough about safety to know what they don't know. That is the sole and only reason that QCYC have done this. to increase partisipation, not safety. prior to this year were we too safe? That is why OA's need to set guidelines and help foster a culture of safety, not dial it back.

There are many reasons why this race was dieing, but the cry of too expensive is just a myth and a mantra. It has always been an expensive sport and we have carried most of this equipment in one form or another in the 40 years I have been racing offshore. The differance is now that the equipment is more fit for purpose but the big differance is that the coroner decided that people should be trained in how to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes jack I am well aware of what the sailing instructions say. Re read my post, or perhaps have an adult explian it to you and get back to me. Personally I am very pleased to see the fleet grow again- I have been doing the race since 1978, but one person on board with survival training is completly inadequate in the moderen era and I will be the first expert witness to take the stand and testify to that. The reason the race started to die has nothing to do with cost - it has to do with being treated like shit when we got there, moving the raftup to the marina and that the race has become an orphan, sitting alone in the qld racing calendar offseason. Nigel and the team have done some great work to promote and get the race going again. Reducing safety is not one of them.

99% of crews will have more than one. The changes are exactly what the skippers wanted LB. Maybe QCYC didn't ask you or your current CAT2 Keppel brethren .... because you are already CAT2 compliant. It's an overnight coastal jaunt up the coast in warm waters. Even with a few scale backs it's still much safer to do this race now than ever before with trackers, GPS Epirbs, every crew has their own GPS on their phone, tethers that open at both ends etc etc.

Risky for QCYC to take a step back but no doubt well researched & with approval from all authorities. I am glad common sense has prevailed. If you wanted to buy an RL24 & sail it over the race course on that day(s) you are legally able to do so without most of the safety gear required by the race regulations anyway.

Actually you are not. True no one will stop you but if you did this and required assistance you would be charged with not complying with your general safety obligation. Cruising and racing are very different things. You can choose your weather when you cruise.

The total savings under this are fuck all in fact - maybe a couple of grand at most. about a third of what owners happily slap down for a new headsail. Of course many have saved a weekend by not having to attend that troublesome SSS course... As for reducing the stability requirement - boy might that come back to bite them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on it is only an overnighter ,the furthest you are going to be offshore is perhaps 50 miles ,do overnighters have watch systems ? if they do they wouldnt be racing too hard.

Most of the race is in Internet contact also they have a tracker

We are not racing across the atlantic.

i am sure when you jump on a yacht there a few crew competent or the owner wouldnt sign up, also there would be induction onboard regarding emergency procedures

I competed my first gladstone race in 1980 in those days it was D.R. and radio signals, also a radio relay vessel bet Wistari has been updated in nav software mater of fact charts were used ,nowadays it would be hard to find a completed chart on board with fixes or plots or even crew who would hang around for the piss up and delivery.

Reduce the expenses ,perhaps the crew should contribute like the old days,

Racing in the old days was fun we were part of a team not a profession

Yes and shooting guns in the backyard was fun in the old days as well. By this argument you must feel that taxi drivers should have a greater road safety awareness they recreational drivers? Your argument that you are not professional is true - you do sound like a complete amateur - but neither the Sea, nor the coroner cares whether you are being paid or not. In the professional maritime world we spend our lives looking for ways to improve safety to make it of maximum standard. Those appalling this want safety to be reduced to the minimum standard. And we all know who you will expect to bail your arse out when it goes pair shaped. The competitors who took safety seriously. I did my first in 78 and have done 28 since. It was fun back then and it is just as much fun now. Maybe not the piss up at the end but the boats are a lot more fun to sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

agree Jack - hoiw many people can swim 5 miles in their w.w gear, lifejackets etc - done 4 SSSCs now and highly recommend to anyone outta sheltered water

Thanks Cloud ...BTW I did my first B2G I think 60 or so years ago and LB's mum was on board....fuck I have never done the maths until now....fuck
Not my mum jack. She hates racing. I did the 30th, 40th, 50th, 60th, and god willing I will be on the start line for the 70th next year.

I hope it is a cracker and we get 100 odd boats. I also hope nothing goes wrong. After dialling back safety if a boat winds up on its roof because of a low AVS and someone dies getting in the raft because they weren't trained, then it is all over for the race and the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LB it had gone to far & needed to come back a step. Respect your position & understand professionals such as yourself are always improving safety but when the red tape Nazi's go too far, common sense will prevail at some point.

 

Skippers were involved & surveyed at length, starting years ago and QCYC delivered. I'm sure they did not do it lightly & it was well researched. I think the safety standards are acceptable for the race & that the race is safer than ever.

 

I'd be a prime example, my SSSC is out. I don't think I'm a liability to my skipper or crew should it turn to shit. General safety obligation exists whether racing or cruising. MSQ equipment list is a lot less for same voyage. Would you set out in an RL24 in 30 knots, no. Would you set out in a BH41 in 50 knots, no. QCYC has right to deny any unsafe entries & reading the current entry list stability or seaworthiness is not an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute BS from LB15.It's people like him that started the demise in offshore sailing by piling on the 'safety' rules and consequent expense. This isn't anything other than a coastal race with assistance reasonably available. Granted there are other compelling reasons for the decline but this safety BS pushed a lot of us out. And it's a truth that no amount of safety courses ever make up for experiencing the real thing. And, surprise ,surprise most of us survived !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute BS from LB15.It's people like him that started the demise in offshore sailing by piling on the 'safety' rules and consequent expense. This isn't anything other than a coastal race with assistance reasonably available. Granted there are other compelling reasons for the decline but this safety BS pushed a lot of us out. And it's a truth that no amount of safety courses ever make up for experiencing the real thing. And, surprise ,surprise most of us survived !

You survived the real thing? You have abondonded Ito a life raft? You have been winched into a helocopter? I didn't start anything dickwit, the higher safety regulations were introduced by YA on the recommendations of the coroner. I don't know how I started the demise of offshore racing giving that I have introduced more people to offshore racing in this state than anyone else in history. At least half the people crewing in this years B2G race will have done some form of training at my school. Why do you think skills like abandoning to the life raft, deploying a SART, or recovering a MOB are any different in a coastal race, than in the middle of the Atlantic? i dont know who you are but i know one thing for sure. You clearly are not very experinced. I think your log on name is perfect for you. Did you pick it yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LB it had gone to far & needed to come back a step. Respect your position & understand professionals such as yourself are always improving safety but when the red tape Nazi's go too far, common sense will prevail at some point.

Skippers were involved & surveyed at length, starting years ago and QCYC delivered. I'm sure they did not do it lightly & it was well researched. I think the safety standards are acceptable for the race & that the race is safer than ever.

I'd be a prime example, my SSSC is out. I don't think I'm a liability to my skipper or crew should it turn to shit. General safety obligation exists whether racing or cruising. MSQ equipment list is a lot less for same voyage. Would you set out in an RL24 in 30 knots, no. Would you set out in a BH41 in 50 knots, no. QCYC has right to deny any unsafe entries & reading the current entry list stability or seaworthiness is not an issue.

Mate if you haven't done the SSS course for 5 years then whilst I agree that you will not be a liability but you are not giving yourself the best chance of surviving an emergency situation. Lots have changed in 5 years, new Lifejackets, new life rafts and new techniques have been developed. I did my reval last weekend. If nothing more than it reminds us of how difficult it is to swim around for 2 hours, board a raft from the water and help save the life of the fat useless cunts that think they are too important to give up a week end to be properly skilled. The 'it won't happen to me' philosophy only goes so far. I was one of the owners they spoke to obviously and have been deeply involved with the same discussion going on at RQ for the Keppel race. It should be understood that when you sign the crew declaration for the Gladstone race you are agreeing that you (or your widow) will not hold the Club responsible for anything that happens out there. (You are also handing over the IP of your image to be used to promote the race and the sponsors products.)

The owners and the skippers will be held completly responsible. It might be worth recommending to all crew that their wives put the owners lawyers phone numbers on speed dial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 years ...... ah it's a little longer. I'll do it before B2K.

 

Crew dec tries to limit exposure. Some crews sign one with the owner as well. Can't sign away your significant others rights though - well some. Same declarations in motor racing, skydiving etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't sign away rights that you are entitled to by law, ie you can't sign a contract that makes you a slave as you are entitled to freedom by law, unless it is a marriage certificate, they seem to be exempt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly but owners and skippers need to understand the implications of all that when assessing the risk. Personally I think all this 'legal responsibility' driven culture sucks but we have no choice in these troubled times. I have always preached that if one looks after your moral duty of care the others should all be covered. In '79 the sport got its biggest wake up call and 19 years later it got its next big on in '98. And that was 19 years ago this year. :) along the way there have been others, the JOG disaster in '83 when 4 people died and two boats sank a mile east of Ben Buckler for fucks sake! Flinders islet, and others boats abandoned and sunk but also the number that get into strife on the way home.

But it won't happen to me.

Each time inquires were held, recommendations made, and the culture of safety improved. The great myth of the 'paperwork' began.

Well I can not remember a time when you could just roll up to the jetty at sandgate on good friday morning and pay your entry fee.

We have always had to spend time compiling the entry documents and preparing the boat. We have always had to carry pretty much the same stuff, but now it is far better and costs more. Cry me a river anyone who's bar bill at Hammo for a week would pay for a full cat 2 fit out.

 

Let me be clear, I applaud what Nigel and his team have done. They have breathed life back into this iconic race with great promotion,

Simplifying entry requirements and reviewing eligibility requirements. And with over 30 entries it is a job well done. I am of the view and have been for many years that the definition of this race and the B2K race boarders Cat 2 and 3 in the YA/AS definitions but these are not fit for purpose when they seek to apply to the long and varied coast line that girts this vast brown land!

One mans safety net of being only a few miles from land is another mans lee shore.

Crew training and stability should not be determined by distance from a helicopter base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the purpose was to get the non Hamilton island players back to Gladstone & offshore, looking at the entry list that hasn't really happened, but word around the camp fires north of the river is go for the 70th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Life Buoy - if this training is so important and critical then you must also have been horrified at the prospect of the race being Cat 2 - because at that level only 30% of the crew needed the training. Why was Cat 2, with 70% potentially not having done this course, so much better than the requirements now with maybe 85% of the crew not having done this course? To me both scenarios aren't too different in that potentially the majority of the people on the boat haven't done this course. It seems you are a skipper of a regular boat in the race - do you insist that 100% of your crew have this training?

 

Keep in mind that the organising committee always have the ability to refuse entry to any boat or crew that they think is unfit to partake in the race, and also that the skipper has ultimate responsibility for the safety of the boat and crew and therefore needs to satisfy themselves that their crew are capable of what the race (or any other sail or cruise for that matter) may inflict on them. There are other mechanisms to ensure that people stay safe other than formal training - it is just one avenue. Individual's common sense may actually be required! Regulation and enforcement of formal training are unlikely to make inherently dangerous people or craft suddenly safe.

 

I am not trying to suggest that the SSSC course has no value - of course it does and I would be among those to recommend that people do it. But I am against the notion that enforcing onerous safety rules and regulations is some kind of substitute for common sense.

 

I think that formal training only forms part of the overall safety picture of every boat and crew. A part is also played by technology with things such as trackers, PFD's, PLB's, strobes, sat phones, waterproof handheld radios and rescue capability all of which have improved dramatically in recent years. A part is also played by the vessel construction and maintenance history and a part by the crew experience, skill, intelligence, fitness, physical capability and common sense. A balanced approach must be maintained to ensure that all of these parts fit together well - but excessive emphasis on only one is unhealthy.

 

A well trained crew who are physically decrepit sailing on a tired old boat are not going to be safe. Training is one aspect but not all, the balance must be found and the onus for this ultimately comes back to the skipper not the race organising committee - who can only promote a culture of safety and set a reasonable entry requirement. I think the approach taken this year strikes a good balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with most laws and rules, the key isn't more of them but rigorous enforcement of those that do exist.

I've only done a few races north of the border as skipper but in no case was a completed safety audit form ever checked.

Locally, the clubs won't accept your entry w/o a completed audit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Life Buoy - if this training is so important and critical then you must also have been horrified at the prospect of the race being Cat 2 - because at that level only 30% of the crew needed the training. Why was Cat 2, with 70% potentially not having done this course, so much better than the requirements now with maybe 85% of the crew not having done this course? To me both scenarios aren't too different in that potentially the majority of the people on the boat haven't done this course. It seems you are a skipper of a regular boat in the race - do you insist that 100% of your crew have this training?

 

Keep in mind that the organising committee always have the ability to refuse entry to any boat or crew that they think is unfit to partake in the race, and also that the skipper has ultimate responsibility for the safety of the boat and crew and therefore needs to satisfy themselves that their crew are capable of what the race (or any other sail or cruise for that matter) may inflict on them. There are other mechanisms to ensure that people stay safe other than formal training - it is just one avenue. Individual's common sense may actually be required! Regulation and enforcement of formal training are unlikely to make inherently dangerous people or craft suddenly safe.

 

I am not trying to suggest that the SSSC course has no value - of course it does and I would be among those to recommend that people do it. But I am against the notion that enforcing onerous safety rules and regulations is some kind of substitute for common sense.

 

I think that formal training only forms part of the overall safety picture of every boat and crew. A part is also played by technology with things such as trackers, PFD's, PLB's, strobes, sat phones, waterproof handheld radios and rescue capability all of which have improved dramatically in recent years. A part is also played by the vessel construction and maintenance history and a part by the crew experience, skill, intelligence, fitness, physical capability and common sense. A balanced approach must be maintained to ensure that all of these parts fit together well - but excessive emphasis on only one is unhealthy.

 

A well trained crew who are physically decrepit sailing on a tired old boat are not going to be safe. Training is one aspect but not all, the balance must be found and the onus for this ultimately comes back to the skipper not the race organising committee - who can only promote a culture of safety and set a reasonable entry requirement. I think the approach taken this year strikes a good balance.

You are wrong on so many points that I wouldn't know where to begin. It appears that you have chosen your log on name well. . I am doing the keppel race with my two teenage lads and their mates this year. Naturally that is just part of their training for the race. Now what you describe as 'enforcing onerous safety rules and regulations ' and 'an unhealthy excessive emphasis ' , ( having all crew members formally trained in Sea survival) I call 'Common sense. I know who I would rather getting into the raft with. You see my self proclaimed clueless friend, being able to peel headsails, trim kites and grind winches is a fine thing to be able to do. it is part of the skill set that goes towards becoming a seaman. But remember your own advise 'excessive emphasis on only one is unhealthy'. :)Have you done a SSSC course? All that wonderful technology you list, have you ever used any of it? Or when the time comes and you have water lapping around your balls will your common sense show you how? You get taught all that in the SSS course in case your Common 6th sense fails you when you need it. It would make common sense to do the course one would think..

And pray tell how does the race authority check that each boat complies with your common sense requirement? Is there a certificate you can get? Would one per boat be enough? Maybe 30% of the crew should have to prove they have common sense when it comes to safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Life Buoy - I made no assumptions about you and your capabilities and history yet you make assumptions about me and mine and start abusing me as you have abused others in this thread. I've probably shared a drink with you somewhere at a bar before or after a race over the years and I would try not to abuse you then, just as I am trying not to abuse you now.

 

Yes I have done the SSSC course. Yes when I do the Brisbane to Gladstone race or similar offshore style sailing I ensure that I have a suitably capable and trained crew with me and yes part of that was ensuring that many had done the SSSC course. As I said I would recommend that anyone interested in sailing offshore does it. Yes I have been in some prickly situations where my experience, common sense, fitness and training helped me out. That is not my point.

 

My point is that I think the approach the race committee have taken is a balanced one given that technology improvements etc have occurred over the years. Cat 3 races are by definition offshore races across open water, most of which is relatively protected or close to shore lines. Arguably this is a good description of the Brisbane to Gladstone race, which also benefits from the fact that there is good mobile coverage over a large part of the race course, relatively regular commercial and pleasure boat traffic and that the water temperature is relatively benign.

 

Any race committee would be within their rights under these definitions to say that the race was Cat 3 and that no crew therefore require SSSC. They haven't - they have instead adopted a balanced approach. I commend this. People can always themselves adopt safety standards of a higher category, and the race committee will never stand in their way. I respect your position on this if you personally want to adopt a higher standard and wish to also encourage others to do so. (And as an aside categories 0-4 are intended for offshore racing and therefore this event still can happily reside in the offshore racing forum!).

 

My other point is that I think that the common sense of owners, skippers and race committees should be enough to determine what level of preparation people take and that onerous or unnecessary rules and regulations do not encourage people to participate and may not actually improve the safety or safety culture of the entrants. I am not saying that the training shouldn't be done - just that the requirement for it shouldn't be enforced at a level greater than the definition of the appropriate safety category indicates. I resent the lowest common denominator approach to safety, having worked in such an environment for much of my life. To argue against something that is in the area of safety does not automatically mean that the person arguing is unsafe or is suggesting that others should be unsafe. It is OK to express a negative view about safety "initiatives".

 

Your views may differ to mine on these points and I respect that. I am just trying to bring balance to the thread by offering my view too, in the same way that I think the approach to safety needs to be balanced.

 

What prompted me into posting were comments along the lines of "testifying as an expert witness that safety standards had been reduced" and that "wives should have speed dial numbers for the owners lawyer". These comments don't seem to help the race or our sport or the safety culture that we should all be trying to build. What prompted me to type this second reply is your misrepresentation of my approach to safety and the points that I was trying to make. (And I do understand that this is after all Sailing Anarchy and none of us should get too precious about such things!). I hope to share a drink (or another drink as we likely have already) at a post race bar with you some time down the line as well!

 

Let's not choke the Brisbane to Gladstone thread with this discussion (and yes I recognise that I am currently contributing to any such choking!).

 

The main thing is that people can get out there and enjoy these sort of events and I am glad that the entrant numbers are up this year and that therefore more people are doing so! I'm looking forward to seeing lots of boats on the start line!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't want to get into this as I have been dealing with it for weeks but here are my thoughts on the race categories. This was written in respect to the B2K but it applies equally to the B2G.

 

Interpretation of Sailing Australia race categories

The proposed NOR calls for a downgrading from Cat 2 to Cat 3 race. Here are the definitions of these races.

2.01.3 Category 2: Offshore races of extended duration along or not far removed from shorelines or in large unprotected bays or lakes, where a high degree of self-sufficiency is required of the yachts.

2.01.4 Category 3: Offshore races across open water, most of which is relatively protected or close to shorelines.

It is my professional opinion that these definitions are too broad, to open to interpretation and not fit for purpose for a coastline as varied as ours. There are so many variations that one definition cannot apply to a country with the longest and most varied coastline on earth.

Whilst competitors will not be exposed to conditions in the B2K race that may be encountered in the S2H race, our race has its own inherit challengers not encountered in the S2H race.

 

Whilst the B2K fleet will not encounter and East coast low or cold front, ridges can firm in a matter of hours to bring gale force winds, accelerated wind strengths under clouds and in storm cells and wind against tide factors can produce conditions that are every bit as arduous with the additional factor that competitors are not expecting nor prepared for them.

Also whilst our race is shorter in duration than the S2H, this in itself creates crew fatigue issues due to many yachts not bothering with a proper watch system resulting in sleep deprivation that is not present when crews have settled into a watch system over several days.

The SA definitions of ‘close to shorelines’ as misguided as an indicator of safety. The proximity of the Frasor island coast is not a safe feature, it is a hazard all of its own that the S2H fleet don’t have.

The rumbline for these races takes competitors close to the island and should a dismasting or lose of steering occur the crews must act very quickly before they are swept onto this dangerous lee shore. Much quicker than if they are halfway across Bass Straight when it happens.

The proximity of the coast offers no safety, quite the opposite. In heavy conditions that may disable boats the Frasor coast offers no sanctuary and crew would perish should they attempt to swim or take a life raft there. It also does not offer rescue services, these must come from Round hill head, Bundaberg or tin can bay, but this would only be if the wide bay bar is navigable in the prevailing conditions. This means if anything, crews in the B2K race should be better trained and drilled in emergency procedure than in the S2H race as they may have to act faster to save their boats or their lives.

RORC (The Uk’s governing body for offshore racing) quantifies race categories by the distance to a safe haven. There is a position on the B2K course (Just south of Indian head) where a competitor is virtually as far from a safe haven as they are anywhere in the S2H race, except the same furthest point in the S2H race is miles from a lee shore. In the B2K rumbline the beach is only a few miles away, perhaps an hour or 2 in a drifting disabled yacht.

By SA’s definition a cat 3 race is in waters that “most of which is relatively protected or close to shorelines.” Given that the ‘close to shorelines.’ Interpretation is not relevant, nearly half the race course – some 100 miles, (from Indian head to Cape Capricorn) can hardly be described as “relatively protected’ waters in anyone’s imagination! The boats in are not sailing within Hervey Bay but in the ocean north of it.

In a south easterly wind there is a still a fetch of 45 miles and in winds from the north the fetch is unlimited. In addition to this there is the wind on tide effect that can produce significant wave heights in excess of 5-6 meters in this area, and should a vessel experience something like rudder failure the closest safe haven is Bundaberg that may be 25 miles upwind.

My point is that for the B2K race to fit within the description of a cat 3 race takes some stretching of both the imagination and indeed the truth. It is my opinion given the reaction time required that more of the crew should be trained in emergency situations than in the S2H race.

Help may be available in the form of a tow from another competitor but untrained people attempting to get a tow line to another yacht in a large sea state and strong winds is a recipe for disaster.

I would recommend a minimum of 50% of the crew as a benchmark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't blame me, I had absolutely nothing to do with this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have the full support of Australian Sailing and I thank them for their assistance with the project”.

 

That is funny!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Perhaps you could read threads before posting. You know - saves you from looking like a dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But to answer your question 3 deaths in the Gladstone, 7 in the Hobart. In 1972 winds exceeded 96 knots and a further 5 people died on non competing boats in the same area. If you look at the number of deaths vs the number of competitors, you are statistically more likely to die in a Gladstone race than in a Hobart. Mainly because the Hobart boats are better prepared and crewed by more experienced sailors because they don't see the Hobart as a 'overnighter up the coast'. Like the flinders Islet race...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

I am not the race chairman and haven't been for 3 years. I have no commercial skin in the SSSC game as we don't deliver that course.We do on sell it for other schools but if it is a tiny piece of our business. Interesting that you see the value in doing the SSSC course yourself, but don't see the sense in encouraging everyone to do it. Why is that? Although I now have very little to do with the B2K race apart from being a competitor, there is no need for changes to increase participation because its fleet has continued to grow. When I was chairman i did everything I could to encourage BOTH races to work together and to grow. Since you admit to having required assistance (and yes we were towed in from S2 in 92 after losing our rudder at Elliot, but we did sail the boat to the harbor entrance with a jury rudder) you should see the value of training AND understand that it can happen to you. I am actually very supportive of most of the changes. The last thing I want to see is more logs in the path of people taking up offshore racing,

Your comments that you would be happy to wash up on Fraser are clearly not very well thought out but i will put those comments down to ill conceived bravado. The problem with many offshore crew is that despite being highly experienced in offshore racing in there own minds, they are in fact fairly inexperienced in offshore sailing.

say 25 B2G races x 2 1/2 days is 63 days offshore which is less than what a decky on a fishing boat does in the first few months of starting work.

but to dial back training because some competitors say they don't feel like doing the course is not the way to encourage a culture of safety. A requirement that one SSSC or one first Aid cert on board is absurd to the point of being useless. May as well not have any. One of the areas that I believed could be dialed back until two days ago was the medical kits, particularly the dangerous drugs carried on board. But on Thursday I was attending the funeral of a well known Brisbane yachtsmen and after at the wake his Son (a many times B2G skipper) got up to get another drink, tripped on a low step and collapsed to the ground, his foot bent at 90% to the way it should be, his ankle and leg broken in two places, the bone protruding from his leg and blood pissing out. Luckily there were two doctors present and the Ambo's were there in about 8 mins. It took them almost an hour to stabilize him, manage his pain and blood loss enough to lift him onto the gurney and take him away. As the ambulance drove away another very experienced offshore sailor said to me 'Imagine if that had happened half way up Fraser island'. Yes the ONE 1st aider with his 2 year old St Johns apply first aid cert might be a little out of their depth. Even worse if it is he or she lying their bleeding. As a result I am now convinced that the severe pain management drugs are essential, and even though my first aid cert is in date, i am going to do a refresher so that if required I can administer these drugs. Safety at sea (like safety in the workplace) needs to be constantly reviewed and improved. Not dialed back because a few self proclaimed hero's believe it won't happen to them.

Again your comment on how you can all relax once around break-sea is a worry. Ever been there in a northerly gale against and ebb tide? If you had you would see how stupid these comments are. Remember Andrew Short thought that the Flinders Islet race was just a over nighter up the coast. You do know what the coroner found as the cause of death don't you? Drowning due to not wearing a life jacket. What lesson can be learned from this do you think?

And mate there is no need to move this to a private conversation.

I don't hide who i am on here like some and this is a discussion that needs to be had in plain view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

Yes but this won't happen to the naysayers on here. And if it does they will be fine because of their fitness and common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have the full support of Australian Sailing and I thank them for their assistance with the project”.

 

That is funny!

Stand-bye for some serious back pedaling shortly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall after doing my first SCCC and going close to hypothermic in a fuckin swimming pool in the middle of summer that there was no way I ever wanted to see the inside of a liferaft again. I get the shakes just seeing roadworkers in high viz orange.

 

It reinforced the thought that a well prepared boat and my own experience and that of those around me was the best way towards seeing that wish fulfilled.

 

Unfortunately experience comes in many guises. I have seen RTW cruisers who couldn't trim a hedge and offshore racers who adopt the foetal position at 50k.

 

With these relaxed regs the RC would be doing themselves and everyone a favour if they carefully audited experience and advised those who were undercooked in that department to go up a notch or they wouldn't be starting. It is the cheapest and most effective form of insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes jack I agree. I did the reval last weekend and it is a sobering reminder of what can go wrong. YA have gone to a huge amount of trouble to develop this course, train and update instructors as a direct response to the coroners findings to help make our sport safer.

For clubs to turn their back on this just to increase the number of starters is appalling. Remember that is the sole reason for this. reduce safety to improve the number of entrants. Not to increase safety, not as the result of a risk management study that proved the race to be too safe, simply because a few good old boys said they didn't feel like doing it. For supposedly experienced people to dismiss the course as not being worth while is even worse. 19 years between the Fastnet and the Hobart disasters. 19 years since the 98 hobart. complacency seems to work in 19 year cycles. But hey it's only the Gladstone race so nothing will go wrong...

 

Will there be any auditing? Will there be any snap inspections to ensure boats are compiling? Will boats that break the rules, say for instance don't have the reserve water they are required to carry, be penalised? Would a boat that has violated the rules be allowed to win the race?

If you set standards and some competitors use this as a reason for not going then the obvious thing to do is lower standards. Yep the competitors to listen to are the ones that aren't serious about safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you picked your water up from the Race committee after you left the bay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the entries in then do random pings on everyone pre start. Easy to appologise "sorry we got insurance dramas last minute" thandrag bodies out of the brine, or see 3 starters as everyone scared off. Once compliant more entries down the track and bonus safer normal racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you picked your water up from the Race committee after you left the bay.

They should just give it out with the beer at the finish. Save going out twice. I wonder why less people felt like doing this race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes jack I agree. I did the reval last weekend and it is a sobering reminder of what can go wrong. YA have gone to a huge amount of trouble to develop this course, train and update instructors as a direct response to the coroners findings to help make our sport safer.

For clubs to turn their back on this just to increase the number of starters is appalling. Remember that is the sole reason for this. reduce safety to improve the number of entrants. Not to increase safety, not as the result of a risk management study that proved the race to be too safe, simply because a few good old boys said they didn't feel like doing it. For supposedly experienced people to dismiss the course as not being worth while is even worse. 19 years between the Fastnet and the Hobart disasters. 19 years since the 98 hobart. complacency seems to work in 19 year cycles. But hey it's only the Gladstone race so nothing will go wrong...

 

Will there be any auditing? Will there be any snap inspections to ensure boats are compiling? Will boats that break the rules, say for instance don't have the reserve water they are required to carry, be penalised? Would a boat that has violated the rules be allowed to win the race?

If you set standards and some competitors use this as a reason for not going then the obvious thing to do is lower standards. Yep the competitors to listen to are the ones that aren't serious about safety.

 

I think SSSC compliance should remain what it was previously - its not that fucking hard to get crew to do it. Then audit every boat that enters - ala CYCA Syd Hob. This makes sure that all boats are carrying the required gear, if not the required beer, the crew are trained and have the gear (Cat 3 safety audit). The difference then between Cat 2 and 3 is not that great

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This LB15 guy sure is WOTT .It's easy to understand his message but ....... ad nauseam like this (and other threads) .The abuse he levels at anyone that disagrees with him indicates he could have some hidden agenda ? Methinks he doth protest too much. The point some others are making is that despite all the gear and expense that is no guarantee there will be no incidents and consequences. Sailing carries risks. Like walking flying driving etc. The most dangerous part of most sailing is getting to the boat. Organisers are to be commended for weighing up ALL factors ,applying common sense and encouraging participation. Skippers will make the final call. Well done to all concerned for a positive move

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

winding back SSSC requirements seems like a backwards step to me.

should be encouraging more people to get trained up, not less.

 

Cost and time isn't huge, particularly given it's only once every 5 years.

if your crew aren't interested in doing that in the interests of their own safety and others, well I'd find better crew.

 

changes like this will only put the more vulnerable at risk.

unlikely to change things for the more experienced boats who understand safety regulations as being minimum requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But to answer your question 3 deaths in the Gladstone, 7 in the Hobart. In 1972 winds exceeded 96 knots and a further 5 people died on non competing boats in the same area. If you look at the number of deaths vs the number of competitors, you are statistically more likely to die in a Gladstone race than in a Hobart. Mainly because the Hobart boats are better prepared and crewed by more experienced sailors because they don't see the Hobart as a 'overnighter up the coast'. Like the flinders Islet race...

 

And LB 15 Quote......

"Remember Andrew Short thought that the Flinders Islet race was just a over nighter up the coast. You do know what the coroner found as the cause of death don't you? Drowning due to not wearing a life jacket. What lesson can be learned from this do you think?Remember Andrew Short thought that the Flinders Islet race was just a over nighter up the coast. You do know what the coroner found as the cause of death don't you? Drowning due to not wearing a life

jacket. What lesson can be learned from this do you think?"

 

 

None of this belongs here....

The boat and crew were totally CAT 1 offshore prepared.

Would life jackets have prevented the deaths...??? Not you, the coroner or me (and I was there) will ever really know. .... but I suspect not.

Mistakes were made but nothing i've read in this thread, safety wise, would have prevented the Flinders incident so you are best not referring to it here....imho...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But to answer your question 3 deaths in the Gladstone, 7 in the Hobart. In 1972 winds exceeded 96 knots and a further 5 people died on non competing boats in the same area. If you look at the number of deaths vs the number of competitors, you are statistically more likely to die in a Gladstone race than in a Hobart. Mainly because the Hobart boats are better prepared and crewed by more experienced sailors because they don't see the Hobart as a 'overnighter up the coast'. Like the flinders Islet race...

 

And LB 15 Quote......

"Remember Andrew Short thought that the Flinders Islet race was just a over nighter up the coast. You do know what the coroner found as the cause of death don't you? Drowning due to not wearing a life jacket. What lesson can be learned from this do you think?[/size]Remember Andrew Short thought that the Flinders Islet race was just a over nighter up the coast. You do know what the coroner found as the cause of death don't you? Drowning due to not wearing a life [/size]

jacket. What lesson can be learned from this do you think?"[/size]

 

 

None of this belongs here.... [/size]

The boat and crew were totally CAT 1 offshore prepared.

Would life jackets have prevented the deaths...??? Not you, the coroner or me (and I was there) will ever really know. .... but I suspect not.

Mistakes were made but nothing i've read in this thread, safety wise, would have prevented the Flinders incident so you are best not referring to it here....imho...

Agree total mate I only brought it up in response to the comment that because its only a relitively short race doesn't mean things won't go wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This LB15 guy sure is WOTT .It's easy to understand his message but ....... ad nauseam like this (and other threads) .The abuse he levels at anyone that disagrees with him indicates he could have some hidden agenda ? Methinks he doth protest too much. The point some others are making is that despite all the gear and expense that is no guarantee there will be no incidents and consequences. Sailing carries risks. Like walking flying driving etc. The most dangerous part of most sailing is getting to the boat. Organisers are to be commended for weighing up ALL factors ,applying common sense and encouraging participation. Skippers will make the final call. Well done to all concerned for a positive move

Sadly I don't know what a Wott is so your insults misses its mark. Of course safety preparation doesn't reduce the risk of an incident you moron, the whole concept is to better prepare yourself for it if it does. Troubling that you needed that explained to you.If it does go wrong the gear and expense of training don't make it safer? Seriously? And what hidden agenda might that be? I don't hide who I am or what I do. I have been teaching safe boating and seamanship to people going offshore for 25 years. My agenda is a safer culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

Yes but this won't happen to the naysayers on here. And if it does they will be fine because of their fitness and common sense.

 

That's why everyone here is so quick to jump on the blame game when a tragedy occurs. They can ease their fear by convincing them self that it wouldn't happen to them because they are, smarter, better prepared, fitter, prettier......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

 

I'd never normally put "B2G" and "lost souls" together... my memories of the race have been wet and fast (like Gladstone girls), but never life threatening (unlike Gladstone girls).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How very kind of the Oatleys to act as a test bed for the new Black Jack.! The slightly beamier Esmit/Alfa might also come in handy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

 

I'd never normally put "B2G" and "lost souls" together... my memories of the race have been wet and fast (like Gladstone girls), but never life threatening (unlike Gladstone girls).

Fast Jas? Most of them look like the couldn't get get up the stairs to the biggest loser auditions. Never go clubbing in Gladstone without a wingman. Humour aside - so in the Gladstone nothing can go wrong?

 

 

And in 1972 cyclone Emily was a late season cyclone so badly forecast that the prawn fleet was also caught at sea and at least one boat lost all crew bar one.

As I understand it the centre passed north of break sea and south of Elliott but never made landfall.

A race committee send a fleet into the path of a cyclone?

More of a concern is the strength of a ridge as the course takes you along it.

Last time I got caught out the 20 knot south easterly turned into 48 true from the north east.

All good but not in the script

 

Yes but this won't happen to the naysayers on here. And if it does they will be fine because of their fitness and common sense.

That's why everyone here is so quick to jump on the blame game when a tragedy occurs. They can ease their fear by convincing them self that it wouldn't happen to them because they are, smarter, better prepared, fitter, prettier......
Bingo! But it won't happen to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How very kind of the Oatleys to act as a test bed for the new Black Jack.! The slightly beamier Esmit/Alfa might also come in handy.

I thought they were off the same mould but seems the Esimit is wider and lighter according to ORC certificates

 

WOXI

Maximum Beam 5.092m Displacement 28,422kg Draft 5.895m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/66843.pdf

 

 

Esimit

Maximum Beam 5.202m Displacement 26,826kg Draft 5.048m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/64934.pdf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How very kind of the Oatleys to act as a test bed for the new Black Jack.! The slightly beamier Esmit/Alfa might also come in handy.

I thought they were off the same mould but seems the Esimit is wider and lighter according to ORC certificates

 

WOXI

Maximum Beam 5.092m Displacement 28,422kg Draft 5.895m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/66843.pdf

 

 

Esimit

Maximum Beam 5.202m Displacement 26,826kg Draft 5.048m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/64934.pdf

 

 

So I'm missing something - the new BJ is planned to be .... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

OK Now awake ...

 

Esmit will need a major makeover as its still in its original CBTF configuration. No small job, especially if they go down the "Shift the bow forward 2 metres" route

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How very kind of the Oatleys to act as a test bed for the new Black Jack.! The slightly beamier Esmit/Alfa might also come in handy.

I thought they were off the same mould but seems the Esimit is wider and lighter according to ORC certificates

 

WOXI

Maximum Beam 5.092m Displacement 28,422kg Draft 5.895m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/66843.pdf

 

 

Esimit

Maximum Beam 5.202m Displacement 26,826kg Draft 5.048m

http://data.orc.org/public/WPub.dll/CC/64934.pdf

 

 

 

Yes you are missing the story. Alfa Romeo (Now Esmit) was built first and apparently there was some sort of gentlemen's handshake between Bob and Neville to acquire Alfa down the track? That went wrong so Bob decided to go to Reichel Pugh directly and ask for the same but faster. Hence the slightly narrower boat. That's how I understand it but I'm sure there is a more accurate account of what happened back then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

OK Now awake ...

 

Esmit will need a major makeover as its still in its original CBTF configuration. No small job, especially if they go down the "Shift the bow forward 2 metres" route

 

 

Perhaps Dick but what we really don't know is which of the modifications accounted for what improvement? Richo always touted how much the boat went better every time but as I understand it they wanted to stop the bow burying? There maybe other ways to skin the cat with Esmit and the extra beam may come in handy for RM changes if needed? Early days let's see what eventuates? I'm tipping there will be no chopping the boat up.!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope they keep the all white crew uniforms, they were super !! :wub:

 

Any guesses at how much would have sealed the deal for the sale ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

OK Now awake ...

 

Esmit will need a major makeover as its still in its original CBTF configuration. No small job, especially if they go down the "Shift the bow forward 2 metres" route

 

 

Don't forget after some mods to WO, Nev came back from conquering the world with AR and handed it to WO in the Hobart.....Although i at the time put it down to Croaky's crew who were polished from many OS races...... I had my very first Hobart punt with $ on AR and was rewarded handsomely....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... I'm tipping there will be no chopping the boat up.!

Not sure about that Terra..if so it will be the first boat he hasn't substantially modified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet would be. New bow & stern (mast therefore further back) new keel & new daggerboards as a start.

 

WOXI's on her 3rd rig this one was 200kgs? lighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

... I'm tipping there will be no chopping the boat up.!

Not sure about that Terra..if so it will be the first boat he hasn't substantially modified.

 

 

Hope he goes all out..! Good for the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

OK Now awake ...

 

Esmit will need a major makeover as its still in its original CBTF configuration. No small job, especially if they go down the "Shift the bow forward 2 metres" route

 

 

Perhaps Dick but what we really don't know is which of the modifications accounted for what improvement? Richo always touted how much the boat went better every time but as I understand it they wanted to stop the bow burying? There maybe other ways to skin the cat with Esmit and the extra beam may come in handy for RM changes if needed? Early days let's see what eventuates? I'm tipping there will be no chopping the boat up.!

 

Sure but we do know that CBTF isn't seen as a winning concept for offshore sailing - excellent upwind and on short courses but a major drag penalty from the non-retractable front rudder at speed.

 

And on the RM front the stability numbers on the ORCi certs in the post above say that WOXI is more stable than Esimit. Narrower, yes, but much deeper draft and a couple of tonnes more displacement makes a big difference. No doubt that Esimit will need a new keel to get anywhere near WOXI stability numbers.

 

I can't imagine Harburg won't mode it for S2H success so I'd be surprised if it didn't end up configured like WOXI though I personally reckon there's scope to reconsider DSS to get RM numbers closer to Comanche / Rambler 88 territory reaching and downwind. Upwind, I doubt there's much to do as even on these monsters boatspeeds aren't high enough to generate enough lift for a significant stability boost unless the foil is huge. Lift from a DSS foil is more or less proportional to the square of boatspeed so at 26 knots it's generating 4 x the lift it does at 13.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with most laws and rules, the key isn't more of them but rigorous enforcement of those that do exist.

I've only done a few races north of the border as skipper but in no case was a completed safety audit form ever checked.

Locally, the clubs won't accept your entry w/o a completed audit.

They do check boats, only ones they are sure will comply 100%. I think we were audited 3 years running, competitors who were notorious for weight savings and skimpy boat prep never had a look in

 

I would love to see a few on here bodysurfing into Fraser with some breeze and swell running, in foulies, after swimming for hours. Apparently the near incapacitation after 2 hours in a swimming pool I've seen in sssc courses is unrelated to the surf skills of the average sailor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The race organisers should consider safety audits after completion of the race on the boats which score podium positions. This will sort out the boat owners who remove the heavy safety items after the pre-race audit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So 1 SSSC & 1 bronze medallion per crew?

 

Why would you swim for hours Rant. The only boat that will be hours from the fleet will be Black Jack. You're either close to the lee shore & on the beach immediately or far enough away to be rescued. Can you guys make your mind up, I need to make peace with my maker ahead of time.

 

Chucky, race directors contact info is on page 18 (last page) of the NOR which has been available for 2months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet would be. New bow & stern (mast therefore further back) new keel & new daggerboards as a start.

WOXI's on her 3rd rig this one was 200kgs? lighter.

Don't forget new sails. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My bet would be. New bow & stern (mast therefore further back) new keel & new daggerboards as a start.

WOXI's on her 3rd rig this one was 200kgs? lighter.

Don't forget new sails. :)
Sails..fuck me.. MC and guys at Norths have been driving and signing all the new/rejig orders for big boats in Oz (with cheques signed by others) for a long time now...great business model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My bet would be. New bow & stern (mast therefore further back) new keel & new daggerboards as a start.

WOXI's on her 3rd rig this one was 200kgs? lighter.

Don't forget new sails. :)

And the paint job :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Wake up Dick. The RP/Mc Esmit Europa ex Alpha the Romans are coming....well apparently anyway.

OK Now awake ...

 

Esmit will need a major makeover as its still in its original CBTF configuration. No small job, especially if they go down the "Shift the bow forward 2 metres" route

 

 

Perhaps Dick but what we really don't know is which of the modifications accounted for what improvement? Richo always touted how much the boat went better every time but as I understand it they wanted to stop the bow burying? There maybe other ways to skin the cat with Esmit and the extra beam may come in handy for RM changes if needed? Early days let's see what eventuates? I'm tipping there will be no chopping the boat up.!

 

Sure but we do know that CBTF isn't seen as a winning concept for offshore sailing - excellent upwind and on short courses but a major drag penalty from the non-retractable front rudder at speed.

 

And on the RM front the stability numbers on the ORCi certs in the post above say that WOXI is more stable than Esimit. Narrower, yes, but much deeper draft and a couple of tonnes more displacement makes a big difference. No doubt that Esimit will need a new keel to get anywhere near WOXI stability numbers.

 

I can't imagine Harburg won't mode it for S2H success so I'd be surprised if it didn't end up configured like WOXI though I personally reckon there's scope to reconsider DSS to get RM numbers closer to Comanche / Rambler 88 territory reaching and downwind. Upwind, I doubt there's much to do as even on these monsters boatspeeds aren't high enough to generate enough lift for a significant stability boost unless the foil is huge. Lift from a DSS foil is more or less proportional to the square of boatspeed so at 26 knots it's generating 4 x the lift it does at 13.

 

 

Why wouldn't they go straight for the FoiL AssisT (lol) as in Vendee Globe style...? Too narrow..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They already have Doug signed up and he is moving to Brisbane !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As with most laws and rules, the key isn't more of them but rigorous enforcement of those that do exist.

I've only done a few races north of the border as skipper but in no case was a completed safety audit form ever checked.

Locally, the clubs won't accept your entry w/o a completed audit.

They do check boats, only ones they are sure will comply 100%. I think we were audited 3 years running, competitors who were notorious for weight savings and skimpy boat prep never had a look in

 

I would love to see a few on here bodysurfing into Fraser with some breeze and swell running, in foulies, after swimming for hours. Apparently the near incapacitation after 2 hours in a swimming pool I've seen in sssc courses is unrelated to the surf skills of the average sailor.

 

I've only ever done Hammo in Qld, never B2G. Hammo organisers didn't even check the form, let alone the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They already have Doug signed up and he is moving to Brisbane !!!

He is doing it in partnership with Brent I heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to be big foils to get 26t to fly vs 8t imoca !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon Kay article in Seahorse mentions that Wild Joe is going DSS, and intimates there are other retro fit projects underway. As a skinny, light 100 footer Esimit ought to be a candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Gladstone is heading to fifty entries this year, hope they get there.

 

Nothing to suggest that the RQYS Keppel Race will listen to owners so no change.

 

But last year about 220 boats sailed past their race to get to Airlie and Hammo and they picked up maybe 8 boats outside the local fleet.

 

Might be a message there somewhere!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure it is 70's S2H footage but I can't quite help thinking that it is sorta the B2G is going back to the future....very nostalgic....

 

..Oh and LB features right at the end and b4 he got sick of being a media mogul.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck, some of those people are still alive!

Bet you LB still has some orange Marlin PVC wet weather gear somewhere.

Most likely with a packets of Camel still in the pocket.

Maybe we should do a full retro race, orange wet weather gear, get thrown in the Gladstone watch house.

You know the drill.

It is not like anyone is getting younger!

 

Hang on , fuuuuck I still have the white Line 7 PVC from 1981 Hobart that I wear fishing!

Not sure about the aviator sunnies though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck, some of those people are still alive!

Bet you LB still has some orange Marlin PVC wet weather gear somewhere.

Most likely with a packets of Camel still in the pocket.

Maybe we should do a full retro race, orange wet weather gear, get thrown in the Gladstone watch house.

You know the drill.

It is not like anyone is getting younger!

 

Hang on , fuuuuck I still have the white Line 7 PVC from 1981 Hobart that I wear fishing!

Not sure about the aviator sunnies though!

Damn

 

I thought I was the only one with a white Line7 jacket from 81! Mines in the garage in case it rains and I get caught out. Replaced the zipper a few decades ago, that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now