Mid

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Trickypig said:

I suspect #4 maybe something like if my VHF is working with repeater stations then my AIS is working; as in the case with the mandatory report in at Cape Raoul

Mate you are nearly there but you just need to be more specific (read the hints closely in conjunction with answer I gave to your MarineTraffic #2 Claim) to claim this one. It doesn't have to be a mandatory report via VHF. I just used that as an example of a VHF transmission that happens to be mandatory in S2H Race using a VHF Repeater on Duplex Channel 81 and the location and height of that Repeater is known. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh jack but you love it.

4 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

It may surprise you but I'm not sitting here ready to answer in 5 minutes dumb fuck questions.

Oh but you are.

And you do. 

Lol jacky you've got nothing else to do.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Feilberg said:

Oh jack but you love it.

Oh but you are.

And you do. 

Lol jacky you've got nothing else to do.

FeelMyselfVigorously your halyard really doesn't go all the way to the top does it.

I have done so I could politely tell you to now fuck off ..."now that I have provided you with 3 polite and very detailed responses, I would appreciate if you went and humped someone else's leg. Mine is worn out along with my patience because that is all contained upthread in my posts." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

FeelMyselfVigorously your halyard really doesn't go all the way to the top does it.

I have done so I could politely tell you to now fuck off ..."now that I have provided you with 3 polite and very detailed responses, I would appreciate if you went and humped someone else's leg. Mine is worn out along with my patience because that is all contained upthread in my posts." 

Nah i rather like keeping you busy.

Jack you are wasted here under that false alias you could have risen to number 1 poster by now if you were not hiding behind a puppet.

I know your busy trying to achieve number 1 on a number of forums which is great it keeps you active.

Can't wait for the book.

I'll lead you into teacher mode again.

There are 3 boats 

Boat 1 "sparrows fart"

Boat 2 " richos red rocket"

Boat 3 " buffalo girls"

All 3 are 50nm east of the tassie coast and within 2nm of each other  and none have sat data connections.

It's 2300.

How does "buffalo girls" navigator ensure their AIS is compliant with the AIS rules?

Also maybe some or most of the race yachts don't have the technical knowledge to trouble shoot electronics issues. I guess in your recommendation you'll advise that all yachts must carry a dedicated technician to check and maintain the yachts electronics?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not any technical knowledge to fix it if it turned off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

FeelMyselfVigorously your halyard really doesn't go all the way to the top does it.

I have done so I could politely tell you to now fuck off ..."now that I have provided you with 3 polite and very detailed responses, I would appreciate if you went and humped someone else's leg. Mine is worn out along with my patience because that is all contained upthread in my posts." 

 

1 hour ago, Feilberg said:

Nah i rather like keeping you busy.

Jack you are wasted here under that false alias you could have risen to number 1 poster by now if you were not hiding behind a puppet.

I know your busy trying to achieve number 1 on a number of forums which is great it keeps you active.

Can't wait for the book.

I'll lead you into teacher mode again.

There are 3 boats 

Boat 1 "sparrows fart"

Boat 2 " richos red rocket"

Boat 3 " buffalo girls"

All 3 are 50nm east of the tassie coast and within 2nm of each other  and none have sat data connections.

It's 2300.

How does "buffalo girls" navigator ensure their AIS is compliant with the AIS rules?

Also maybe some or most of the race yachts don't have the technical knowledge to trouble shoot electronics issues. I guess in your recommendation you'll advise that all yachts must carry a dedicated technician to check and maintain the yachts electronics?

 

FeelMyselfVigorously I have made it abundantly clear I'm not interested in answering anymore of your dumb fuck questions, particularly when I have furnished three (3) polite and very detailed answers. Answers that you neither have the courtesy or intellect to furnish an acknowledgement to. You just want to keep humping my leg continuing to be a rude cunt. . To add insult to injury you keep inferring I'm @LB 15 sock using Sailing School and post count references. Even a moron understands the SA 3 strikes and your out rule. Enough is enough.

Well its my turn to ask you a question as you don't mind revealing your identity on SA using your surname and achievements at large in offshore racing. 

On board "Noahs" the Chinese V70 (ex Ichi), your 2018 S2H ride, when you were pestering the Navigator telling him about your local and 11th S2H experience by saying; "He should go inshore towards Bondi after rounding the sea mark". What actually happened after this exchange when he simply handed you this piece of paper showing this "picture and linky' below? Did you:

A. Say that's not me, its my twin brother who likes my name more than his own; or

B. Curl up in the fetal position in the bilge for 2 days until you could slink off at Constitution Dock; or

C. Own up to being the Delivery Skipper of BBV that went "wheels down" on Kings Beach Sth of Byron Bay and gave the Navigator $100 if he promised not to tell the Owner and rest of the Chinese crew?

PS. I really look forward to your further advice about the S2H future SI's making mandatory activation or not AIS (a collision avoidance tool), on all future races. Your experience on this subject is virtually without peer.      

https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/stricken-yacht-owner-thanks-community-for-help/3213112/

Noah.png.60b326ad75e689b27a5dd3e1eecdcf16.png

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

 

FeelMyselfVigorously I have made it abundantly clear I'm not interested in answering anymore of your dumb fuck questions, particularly when I have furnished three (3) polite and very detailed answers. Answers that you neither have the courtesy or intellect to furnish an acknowledgement to. You just want to keep humping my leg continuing to be a rude cunt. . To add insult to injury you keep inferring I'm @LB 15 sock using Sailing School and post count references. Even a moron understands the SA 3 strikes and your out rule. Enough is enough.

Well its my turn to ask you a question as you don't mind revealing your identity on SA using your surname and achievements at large in offshore racing. 

On board "Noahs" the Chinese V70 (ex Ichi), your 2018 S2H ride, when you were pestering the Navigator telling him about your local and 11th S2H experience by saying; "He should go inshore towards Bondi after rounding the sea mark". What actually happened after this exchange when he simply handed you this piece of paper showing this "picture and linky' below? Did you:

A. Say that's not me, its my twin brother who likes my name more than his own; or

B. Curl up in the fetal position in the bilge for 2 days until you could slink off at Constitution Dock; or

C. Own up to being the Delivery Skipper of BBV that went "wheels down" on Kings Beach Sth of Byron Bay and gave the Navigator $100 if he promised not to tell the Owner and rest of the Chinese crew?

PS. I really look forward to your further advice about the S2H future SI's making mandatory activation or not AIS (a collision avoidance tool), on all future races. Your experience on this subject is virtually without peer.      

https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/stricken-yacht-owner-thanks-community-for-help/3213112/

Noah.png.60b326ad75e689b27a5dd3e1eecdcf16.png

  

Correct. But it's 12 hobart races.

2 bluewater pointscore wins in the last 10 years 1 of which was a clean sweep of all 3 divisions. A division win in there as well.

And you?

I have real world experience and i won't hide from any shit slinging jack.

A. The navigator didn't need any help but his communicating in English was not brilliant 

B. Nah i didn't sleep in the bilge

C. It's well know that i was the delivery skipper of bumblebee v that ran aground at broken head. 

Anything else jack?

Jack I've wasted more time winding up bigger dickheads than you so be my guest and carry on.

Must suck having all your intelligence, knowledge and skills trapped behind a sock puppet.

Remember jacky this is anarchy and if you go around as you do casting asparagus at people one day it's going to come back and get you. 

Be sure of that jack.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lydia said:

Does not any technical knowledge to fix it if it turned off

Lydia I disagree 100% with that inference WOXI's AIS TX was turned off. Once all five (5) AIS TX Tests are revealed here I will show you why from a technical viewpoint that they knew they were not transmitting a AIS TX signal and possibly even a VHF signal in accord with the Race Documentation.

In the interim I would not play golf with Richards in a heart beat. Vila (Navigator) I would stake my life on he not associating himself with any race boat on planet earth who would breech the SI's in such a manner. He is also across marine electronics with the best out there.

The question is in my mind knowing they had a crappy AIS TX Signal it came down to interpreting the Race Documents as to their being compliant or not. Simple. In other words a Skippers call, and the one who signs the Race Declaration. Then it all went pear shaped and was buried by a compliant or some may suggest complicit RC.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

42 minutes ago, Feilberg said:

Anything else jack?

Jack I've wasted more time winding up bigger dickheads than you so be my guest and carry on.

Must suck having all your intelligence, knowledge and skills trapped behind a sock puppet.

Remember jacky this is anarchy and if you go around as you do casting asparagus at people one day it's going to come back and get you. 

Be sure of that jack.

Hardly a picture of a piece of Asparagus here mate, which is real life and how people make judgement calls in our industry. That I am sure of.

You were warned but you kept going. The only way you, or anyone for that matter can hurt me, is if I get Dementia and your are allowed near one of my boats. Take your threats and stick them where they belong.

Goodbye

PS. If you continue to think i'm @LB 15 (who has a public profile) sock go take him on direct. He will burn you in a fucking heartbeat with that association you are claiming.

BBV Wheels Down.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump.

#4 has you name on it Tricky..hurry up before it is stolen from under you.

3 hours ago, Trickypig said:

I suspect #4 maybe something like if my VHF is working with repeater stations then my AIS is working; as in the case with the mandatory report in at Cape Raoul

 

2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Mate you are nearly there but you just need to be more specific (read the hints closely in conjunction with answer I gave to your MarineTraffic #2 Claim) to claim this one. It doesn't have to be a mandatory report via VHF. I just used that as an example of a VHF transmission that happens to be mandatory in S2H Race using a VHF Repeater on Duplex Channel 81 and the location and height of that Repeater is known. .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

 

Hardly a picture of a piece of Asparagus here mate, which is real life and how people make judgement calls in our industry. That I am sure of.

You were warned but you kept going. The only way you, or anyone for that matter can hurt me, is if I get Dementia and your are allowed near one of my boats. Take your threats and stick them where they belong.

Goodbye

PS. If you continue to think i'm @LB 15 (who has a public profile) sock go take him on direct. He will burn you in a fucking heartbeat with that association you are claiming.

BBV Wheels Down.jpg

Don't go off half cocked jack.

If you think for a second that your words can hurt you're wrong.

It's pretty typical of someone who has a lot to lose to hide in these places. Like u.

I'd be happy to tell the bumblebee v story as it's a cracker but you didn't ask you just tried in vain to stir shit again.

I'm not sure why you're referring to some lp bloke but you come across as a teacher maybe an old ham radio guy that does hf and vhf radio exams. If you don't you should because it suits you.

In any case you'll be uncovered at some stage.

Just give us an idea of your onwater history jack.

Which years do u claim as your many hobarts?

Try to get some credibility sock puppet

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just fuck off you Turnip. Your album will be used I'm sure in say a Master V Examination/Case Book Study showing where things can go terribly wrong post Award.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Just fuck off you Turnip. Your album will be used I'm sure in say a Master V Examination/Case Book Study showing where things can go terribly wrong post Award.  

Jack you don't own this place even though you act like you do.

Don't blow a valve... again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feel you just keep going depite every suggestion to shut the fuck up..but you don't...you just keep going and just don't get it do you mate. That's now bordering on Very Sad. But fuck you. Attacking my pending CYCA AIS Submission (outlining here slowly) was the last fucking straw.

1 hour ago, Feilberg said:

Jack you don't own this place even though you act like you do.

Don't blow a valve... again

Mate I don't own nothing here. Scooter @Editor does and if he cuts me a slice of the action for keeping his online business model alive he is nuts. I'm just a contributor here who donates their time and experience for free like many, but don't pretend to have a mortgage on intelligence, despite the tone of posts.

So your concerned about my blowing a valve?? I do know I have never blown the bottom out of an historic race boat "touch wood," so why are my valves at risk?

Have no idea if Owner/JC was happy with the fix via Insurance being any good after @Feilbergyour catastrofuck as  a Delivery Skipper, but the guys at Boatworks in SE QLD think they did a fine job.

FeelMySelfVigorously I'm the guy with the "last word" when I'm taken on by those of your ilk who with no fuckin respect and know shit do so. I'm sort of like the "Energizer Bunny" and something you haven't worked out yet, along with many things.

Wise up mate, you are murdering yourself each word you type..

https://www.theboatworks.com.au/flight-of-the-bumblebee-5/

BBV_BW Fix.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lydia said:

Does not any technical knowledge to fix it if it turned off

 

35 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Exactly....

Richo probably read the SI, saw the new AIS rule and thought "what a crap rule". He either forgot about it or deliberately decided to turn it off do the race business as usual.

I'll bet that owners and skippers of a few boats will be lobbying the CYCA to dump the AIS TX rule.

 

3 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Lydia I disagree 100% with that inference WOXI's AIS TX was turned off. Once all five (5) AIS TX Tests are revealed here I will show you why from a technical viewpoint that they knew they were not transmitting a AIS TX signal and possibly even a VHF signal in accord with the Race Documentation.

In the interim I would not play golf with Richards in a heart beat. Vila (Navigator) I would stake my life on he not associating himself with any race boat on planet earth who would breech the SI's in such a manner. He is also across marine electronics with the best out there.

The question is in my mind knowing they had a crappy AIS TX Signal it came down to interpreting the Race Documents as to their being compliant or not. Simple. In other words a Skippers call, and the one who signs the Race Declaration. Then it all went pear shaped and was buried by a compliant or some may suggest complicit RC.

Hoppy yet you slide over my reply to Lydia above whose views I have a lot of respect for that predated your post by hours pretending it doesn't exist? That's fine, but discussion? That is called Hoppy Dogma. Dogma from a man who has never raced offshore and knows not one owner/skipper, yet you now speak for them by betting their view? 

Hoppy don't you think you should before slandering Richards and speaking of those you don't know be a tad more circumspect with your viewpoint?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, hoppy said:

I know that you think that the CYCA, Australian Sailing, Donald Trump and Theresa May are following closely every word you write, but I don't think Richo reads what I write and if by chance he did, he wouldn't give a flying fuck about what I think, because after all this is just an internet forum. So I will say what I think. 

Hoppy like that FeelMyselfVigorously guy you don't get the hints when offered about being circumspect with the views you post. 

Firstly, you really underestimate who reads this thread both locally in your postcode and worldwide and by who that includes reading my and your words, 86K views or over 1,200 views here per day average and now rising again...as I said you don't offshore race and really haven't a clue.

Secondly, you thinking you can slander Richards/WOXI via an Internet Forum like SA with impunity? In your view saying "WOXI turned their AIS TX button off" and so "cheated" and also implicating all those on board. Read this linky one of many in your legal jurisdiction. Got the house in the wife's name there mate???

Take the hint about being circumspect about your views when it is offered. Knowing shit is not a defence.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/how-you-could-lose-your-house-to-australia-s-defamation-law-20181128-p50iwj.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

..... being circumspect with the views you post. 

Firstly, you really underestimate who reads this thread both locally in your postcode and worldwide and by who that includes reading my and your words, 86K views or over 1,200 views here per day average and now rising again...

 

Wise words I think Jack.

Sailing journalists have written a few very quaint articles about this affair which have been openly published and which have raised a number of questions and reports about what people have said and what has been done (and observed). Would these articles have appeared at all unless those directly involved understood the significance?

These articles have not to my knowledge been followed up by said journalists with any further articles which conclusively resolve the controversy, and the race organizer so far seems to have avoided resolving any of it by deciding the protest was invalid. All that can be said is that a question arose as to whether an SI was complied with or not and a competitor is reported as saying he was disadvantaged. My view is that some person or persons must know all the facts, but so far they have not publicly explained either what has been observed or followed through on what journalist/s may have quoted them as saying.

The matter is still of great interest and is, as I see it, is yet to be resolved. SA is the "go to" place and will surely remain so until what happened has been explained in a credible manner and that has not happened yet.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please someone get #4 AIS TX Test and steal it from Tricky who was almost there. Maybe if your kind you can share it with him? 

9 hours ago, Trickypig said:

I suspect #4 maybe something like if my VHF is working with repeater stations then my AIS is working; as in the case with the mandatory report in at Cape Raoul

 

8 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Mate you are nearly there but you just need to be more specific (read the hints closely in conjunction with answer I gave to your MarineTraffic #2 Claim) to claim this one. It doesn't have to be a mandatory report via VHF. I just used that as an example of a VHF transmission that happens to be mandatory in S2H Race using a VHF Repeater on Duplex Channel 81 and the location and height of that Repeater is known. .

HINTS APLENTY

21 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

So you lot have now got 3 out of 5 AIS tests on the race course and poor Richo couldn't even get fucking one.

So congratulations to @mowgli getting two (2) and @Trickypig getting one (1). So three (3) down and two (2) still to be found. But now its gets a bit harder and requires some nous.Though one is a no brainer and never picked up so far and it isn't this tip as follows. 

Hence I think I need to lay down some clues as I'm afraid tomorrow I will be run over by a CYCA bus driven by Richo and 2 media sycophants at the wheel and no one will know.

This is just pictures but maybe revisit my answer to @Trickypig winning answer upthread about "Propagation Path Losses"and then the SI (linky just a few posts up for your convenience) about S2H mandatory VHF communications as an example. However don't rush in as this is not as simple as it appears, so if you have watts power in your ears ignore them and think decibels (dB) both TX and RX end and any increase of 3dB is approximately a doubling of power or for each 3dB decrease the power is reduced by one half when expressed in watts power Those into maths well P to dB is; 10*log (P/1 mW).

Pending your answers I'm not going near a road that has a bus stop on it.

.

 

VHF Repeater.png

 

1673853595_SETasmaniaRepeaterNetwork.jpg.feb8b2ec1b47844884497bbe3f5d7da5.jpg

851140097_MtRaoulVHFRepeaterCh81.jpg.d9abe5af06e357323ad79235d070c72d.jpg

Mt Raoul VHF Repeater Ch 81_The Pot Distance.jpg

 

17 hours ago, Trickypig said:

I’m loath to put my hand up as I don’t profess to have anything like LB’s knowledge of AIS (he’d have these answers in a nanosecond for you Jack)

Could it be that long distance AIS targets are available via the shore repeater stations that require receiving a vessels transmission first in order to relay data? Ie WOXI would have had no long range targets showing on screen? 

 

13 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nah sorry Tricky. Got nothing to do with AIS Repeaters.

It is a word staring at you in the Hint starting with the letter "P" and this Test doesn't involve your AIS Transponder at all. 

 

11 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Hint: If you know the position and height of any VHF Repeater, Base or Coastal Station, the height of your masthead VHF/AIS antenna and that your VHF Radio produces 25w/44dBm of power and have a good idea of the VHF Receivers Sensitivity (also measured in dBm) at the above Stations, you can then calculate what?

 

10 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Hint for AIS TX Test #4 (Using VHF Radio)......The P words iare......

This is  "Propagation Path Loss" Curves of Field/Signal Strengths in dBm versus Transmission Distance for various antenna height over seawater.

Putting aside it is at 100 MHz which is outside the VHF Maritime Mobile Band of 156.000 MHz to 162.025 MHz, it is for a Vessel having an antenna height of 10 meters and the chart plots for received Field/Signal strength for various antenna heights between 10 - 1,200 meters at the Base/Terrestrial Station. Note: This obviously assumes there are no obstacles between the two antennas and both antennas are at heights having a Radio Horizon which is slightly more than Sight Horizon on account VHF radio waves will follow the curvature of the earth slightly. 

So you know your VHF Radio produces 25w/44dBm of Power and you guess the Base/Terrestrial Stations Receiver has a minimum Sensitivity somewhere around  -107 dBm typical or a really good receiver (like that of Repeater) a minimum Sensitivity of -119 dBm. Then you know the Received Signal should be at least 7 dB above the Receivers minimum Sensitivity for good signal-to-noise. So in those two Base/Terrestrial Station cases a Received Signal of say -100 dBm for a typical VHF Radio or say -112 dBm for a VHF Repeater.

So hey presto what do you know?  

Propgation Loss Curves_From ITU-R P.1546-5..png

HINTS IN TRICKYS WINNIING ENTRY FOR #2

On 3/9/2019 at 1:16 PM, Trickypig said:

Look at Marine Traffic website?

Although Gladwell's article says WOXI was only made aware of this site after the race ... which would have to be the bullshit statement of the century.

 

On 3/9/2019 at 4:46 PM, jack_sparrow said:

There is AIS TX #2 Test....3 to go

Yes AIS Online Providers which there are a number to chose from.

However this does come with four caveats.

Firstly you require Internet access, albeit most race boats don't leave home without it.

Secondly away from Terrestrial AIS Receivers (both public and private data sources for these providers) orbiting Satellite AIS Recievers will only receive when when in range leaving gaps in transmission by anything up to a few hours i.e. will be represented by straight lines between recieved transmissions.

Thirdly satelittes signal receipt is dependant on there being low line losses in the antenna installation for what is already a low powered Class B (2w) AIS transponder.

Finally the optimum weather conditions for a AIS satellite transmission is when boats are "heeling" over. This is because most marine VFF antennas are "omnidirectional vertically polarised" or in other words where the radiated signal is basically of equal strength through 360 degrees of and maximised in the horizontal plane and zero directly above and below the antenna like a "donut" as shown in Pics 2 & 3 below. 

Then there is the antenna Gain which is the ability of the antenna to improve transmission "efficiency" and "horizontal directivity" of the radiated signal which gives the "appearance" the antenna alone is increasing power which it clearly can't do. Most marine masthead antennas will have a Gain of no more than 3dB, in fact any higher will introduce impedance matching or VSWR issues with AIS. The horizontal oriented "nodes" of a 3dB antenna are shown in Pic 3 below.

So in short sailing "flat" is better for maximising AIS signal receipt by Terrestrial AIS Recievers. When out of their range sailing "heeled" over maximises AIS signal receipt by submarines and Satellite AIS Receivers. However this is only a generalisation so don't count it as a hard and fast rule.

As to quantifying the performance of your AIS TX transmission using a Online AIS Provider. Without going into too much detail and subject to the above.

The Online AIS Provider will provide the location of all their AIS Reciever network. If you can't see your vessel displayed Online when within say 4nm of that station you "definitely" have a problem with compliance with regard to race rules for your AIS and "possibly VHF. That "half" or 4nm is that prescribed for your minimum VHF performance by AS Special Regulation 3.25.4 (c) “Have transmission and reception with a base station at least 8 nautical miles distant,” Halving the distance to 4nm is to account for a Class B AIS Transponders Propagation Distance at 2w is around half that of the 25w VHF radio which that 8nm distance is based upon. Less than 4 mile you "definitely" have a problem.

Obviously if those around you are displayed Online irrespective of the Online AIS Reciever stations location and you aren't shown, you "may" have a problem with compliance.

Note: The "baseline" for actual AIS TX Propogation Distance is established at the pre-race S2H Radio/AIS Instalation Audit time. I will go into more detail how that "baseline" translates into falling below the minimum 8 mile compliance in my CYCA submission plus provide a quick method of calculating your Propagation Distance having regard to TX and RX antenna heights and the sensitivity threshold for RX stations. But for now assume most vessels will start with around a 20% or 1dBa VHF/AIS power loss. This translates into around 25% available headroom or where at a total power loss of 45% you are not in compliance with regard to AIS operation having regard to AS Special Regulation; 

2.03.1 “All equipment required by these Special Regulations shall: 

(a) Function properly.

(b) Be regularly checked, cleaned and serviced.”

As you can see from the above using Online AIS Providers can establish compliance under the self policing rules of sailing and is a valuable tool. However used by an RC for compliance monitoring is pretty much useless other than for very intermittent transmissions or if you didn't transmit at all between the start and the finish of a race. :-)

Three (3) more tests to go people..who is going to get that case of @Fiji Bitter

radiation-pattern-vert.jpg

vert-polar.gif

antenna-3db.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Bump.

#4 has you name on it Tricky..hurry up before it is stolen from under you.

 

 

Ok so you want to test your propagation distance on 25w and you have calculated what that is. You only need to know the distance to a VHF repeater station then WOXI could have checked its antenna by simply making a duplex channel call on the VHF through a repeater station since the repeater station needs to receive WOXI's transmission for it to respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not lead to a conclusion that there was no call to the mt raoul repeater jack and there no evidence there was not 

as you say my raoul is not an ais receiving station but my mangana and my Maria are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to Mt Mangana and Mt Maria, there is also Mt Nelson.... but you have to register, which is no big deal for  a block registration by CYCA?

Tas Maritime has a AIS receiver located at Mount Nelson. This receiver covers most of SE Tas and is linked back to a computer at our operation centre in Hobart. Here AIS transmissions are decoded and displayed on an electronic chart on a big screen. Data is also sent to the Marine Traffic website. If you decide to install AIS on your vessel and you are a member of Tas Maritime Radio, we ask you to include your RG Callsign in your vessel’s ID field, so that we can than see clearly where vessels registered with us are located.

http://tasmaritime.com.au/TMR/index.php/technical/marine-radio/item/342-ais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Bump.

#4 has you name on it Tricky..hurry up before it is stolen from under you.

 

No desire to steal this from Tricky, I already bought myself a case of that Fiji piss.

But here is the full answer, its a bit Tricky too. Since Jack's otherwise very commendable teachings are a bit confusing, to me at least, I dug out a short treatise I wrote for dummies when I was cruising the Great Lakes, and put it on my website. Hope this helps for a full understanding of this important subject. Go here, absolute virus free, but it might give you another headache:

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/antennaRange.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Trickypig said:

Ok so you want to test your propagation distance on 25w and you have calculated what that is. You only need to know the distance to a VHF repeater station then WOXI could have checked its antenna by simply making a duplex channel call on the VHF through a repeater station since the repeater station needs to receive WOXI's transmission for it to respond.

Sorry Tricky you no further advanced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lydia said:

Does not lead to a conclusion that there was no call to the mt raoul repeater jack and there no evidence there was not 

as you say my raoul is not an ais receiving station but my mangana and my Maria are

This is a method for testing to see if your AIS TX strength is above a VSWR of 5:1 which is at level it is experiencing power loss of 45% and going to shit using a VHF Repeater, Base or Coastal Station. Mt Raoul Repeater just being used as an example as of one many with a known height and on your charts and just coincidentally a mandatory call.

Any aspect of WOXI's mandatory VHF call is seperate matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sidecar said:

In addition to Mt Mangana and Mt Maria, there is also Mt Nelson.... but you have to register, which is no big deal for  a block registration by CYCA?

Tas Maritime has a AIS receiver located at Mount Nelson. This receiver covers most of SE Tas and is linked back to a computer at our operation centre in Hobart. Here AIS transmissions are decoded and displayed on an electronic chart on a big screen. Data is also sent to the Marine Traffic website. If you decide to install AIS on your vessel and you are a member of Tas Maritime Radio, we ask you to include your RG Callsign in your vessel’s ID field, so that we can than see clearly where vessels registered with us are located.

http://tasmaritime.com.au/TMR/index.php/technical/marine-radio/item/342-ais

Side that is a case of monitoring convenience for Tas Maritime Radio using info obtained from that repeater so better than satellite but only one part of the race course. Same info goes to online providers.

If RC wanted to monitor compliance they could also use a Online VHF Provider and simply establish a vessels to be monitored list. However for reasons explained for Test #3 above, I don't think a particularly usefull one other than for major TX outages by someone. 

The question of AIS needing compliance monitoring is horseshit. VHF is a key piece of safety equipment and it is not monitored to see if it is being used in compliance with Race rules as it is self policed. The only reason people are suggesting AIS requires compliance monitoring is the nonsense started by Richards that you couldn't test a AIS TX signal out on the race course. We have established 3 here already with 2 to go. There are actually more ways of testing your AIS than your VHF. 

Richards has done a grand job fucking with reality for self serving reasons not thinking about the wider consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hoppy said:

I do not view this as cheating. The AIS TX rule is there for a supposed safety benefit and not as a fairness in racing rule. As it neither put the crew of WOXI or other vessels in danger and it gave them no tangible racing advantage, then it is a non event. No other boats felt aggrieved enough to lodge a protest.

You probably turn your nav lights off on moonlight nights.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

No desire to steal this from Tricky, I already bought myself a case of that Fiji piss.

But here is the full answer, its a bit Tricky too. Since Jack's otherwise very commendable teachings are a bit confusing, to me at least, I dug out a short treatise I wrote for dummies when I was cruising the Great Lakes, and put it on my website. Hope this helps for a full understanding of this important subject. Go here, absolute virus free, but it might give you another headache:

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/antennaRange.html

Sorry hands off the beer as individual VHF station propogation charts are not available in Australia.  You are on the right track but only slightly further advanced than what Tricky has said. 

I will let keep it open until later in the day or take #4 myself 

I say did say this wasn't easy and converting technical to plain English is a challenge.

 

On 3/10/2019 at 3:13 AM, jack_sparrow said:

So you lot have now got 3 out of 5 AIS tests on the race course and poor Richo couldn't even get fucking one.

So congratulations to @mowgli getting two (2) and @Trickypig getting one (1). So three (3) down and two (2) still to be found. But now its gets a bit harder and requires some nous.Though one is a no brainer and never picked up so far and it isn't this tip as follows. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Feilberg said:

Try to get some credibility sock puppet

Mr Feilberg I would be most grateful if you leave me out of this. Jack is not my Sock - If you would do your homework you would see that jack and I have got on pretty well over the years but have had our disagreements on here in the past. It would take some pretty dedicated Sock puppetry to have created jack as a sock years ago , be a prolific poster under both names and then argued with myself. FYI i have had two socks in the past - 'Lonely girl 15' and G.O.D. - both are 'open socks' (meaning that i never hid that they were me) and both only used for shits and giggles. I am one of the few posters on here who doesn't hide his true identity as I am happy to own what I say. So leave me out of this. I will make the observation that, with the greatest respect, you do come across as a bit of a dick head in this thread. So pot, this kettle is calling you black. (: 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, staysail said:

Wise words I think Jack.

Sailing journalists have written a few very quaint articles about this affair which have been openly published and which have raised a number of questions and reports about what people have said and what has been done (and observed). Would these articles have appeared at all unless those directly involved understood the significance?

These articles have not to my knowledge been followed up by said journalists with any further articles which conclusively resolve the controversy, and the race organizer so far seems to have avoided resolving any of it by deciding the protest was invalid. All that can be said is that a question arose as to whether an SI was complied with or not and a competitor is reported as saying he was disadvantaged. My view is that some person or persons must know all the facts, but so far they have not publicly explained either what has been observed or followed through on what journalist/s may have quoted them as saying.

The matter is still of great interest and is, as I see it, is yet to be resolved. SA is the "go to" place and will surely remain so until what happened has been explained in a credible manner and that has not happened yet

Stay you say: "question arose as to whether an SI was complied with or not..."  I am actually trying to steer clear of delving into the WOXI Protest hearing that never occurred, (which if it had would have definitely answered a lot of technical questions) while we dispose of this aspect of how you test your AIS TX on the "race course?" 

This of course counters Richo's nonsense claim it can't be be done, where can see slowly unfolding here, there are five (5) tests (two yet to be revealed) it can. Not only is one automatic (Test #1), they can they be conducted involving no further technical understanding beyond those having the race mandatory radio qualifications, and they actually quantify whether the AIS TX signal strength complies with the SI or not.

This aspect of knowledge goes goes to the heart of WOXI's post race Declaration where there are only two check boxes on the Declaration, "Fully Complied" OR "Did Not Comply with Explanation". If the Compliance box ticked Richards is the view that Declaration is either quarantined to the race course and not via information obtained after crossing the finish line, or they believe their AIS TX signal strength complied. If the Non Compliance Box ticked either as the original Declaration or one amended, the RC would have had to conduct an investigation and separate to the Protest it made, and a determination made under the specific protest provisions regarding the nature of Declarations. One determination being a automatic penalty up to 15% without a hearing.

However the problem with a Declaration indicating a AIS problem is the RC could not then claim as it did in the Protest declared invalid, to have "no knowledge" of that WOXI AIS problem other than via the "conflicted" report of Black Jacks. I therefore think we can quite comfortably guess the nature of WOXI's Declaration regarding which box was ticked.       

These five (5) tests of AIS TX when hopefully considered by the CYCA Sub Committee given the responsibility of reviewing submissions, will be fundamental to their response about whether AIS TX can be "self policed" or not and just as occurs now with VHF operation involving no compliance monitoring by the RC. Their response will obviously guide the drafting of SI for this years S2H. 

SA is the "go to" place and just as the great Douglas Adams says as Tubby refers to.

On 3/9/2019 at 10:59 PM, TUBBY said:

The answers will be here. The great Douglas Adams has spoken!

There may be two more Adams quotes that apply to the Protest Hearing that never happened.

"To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity." and

 “I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hoppy said:

No other boats felt aggrieved enough to lodge a protest.

Been sitting in cave since Christmas? BJ was aggrieved enough to go bleating to the media. That is a good part of what got us here. There are pages analysing this from every possible angle in this thread. BJ said they didn't do protests. So I guess next time, when perhaps someone motors past them in the dead of the night, they will simply do another media dummy spit and decline to protest. The lack of protesting is not in any manner a justification for saying there is no case to answer. Rather the lack of a protest is another subsidiary problem that needs addressing. If no-one protests, it becomes a de-facto question of simply seeing what you can get away with, since the rules clearly don't actually apply. This is not good for the sport.

Bleating to the media and declining to protest is indefensible bad sportsmanship. IMHO the CYCA should address this with explicit additions to the media engagement rules in the SIs. Moan and not protest: mandatory penalty up to and including DSQ.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

since the rules clearly don't actually apply.

Disagree with that if you mean rule compliance is a grey area; they clearly aren't on a number of fronts.

10 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

IMHO the CYCA should address this with explicit additions to the media engagement rules in the SIs. Moan and not protest: mandatory penalty up to and including DSQ

We don't need more fucking rules, when clearly the existing rules cover both RC and Competitors responsibilities and the means for investigation and determination. No rule is going to cover things going pear shaped as has occurred here if both RC and competitor alike forget those responsibilities.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Disagree with that if you mean rule compliance is a grey area; they clearly aren't on a number of fronts.

12 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

It was intended to be more an ironic statement. If no-one protests, the rules become irrelevant. Those that decline to protest on some sort of honour argument are complicit in the rules becoming so, and thus for them, the rules don't apply.

Crews bleating to the media is a bad look. Sure it is a sad day when rules might be needed. But there are already a pile of media rules, and moaning to the national media is something that is not really within the range of the usual RRS. There should be no need for any rules with the media, Competitors should have enough sense and decorum to not cause problems. History shows that such an assumption is naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

It was intended to be more an ironic statement. If no-one protests, the rules become irrelevant. Those that decline to protest on some sort of honour argument are complicit in the rules becoming so, and thus for them, the rules don't apply.

Sorry Francis I'm sounding like I'm in disagree mode. That approach is founded upon their only being one source of protest being competitors. Providing they are not relying solely upon "conflicted" evidence both a RC and Jury can protest. For instance post race Declarations the heart of a self policing sport, other competitors never see.

11 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Crews bleating to the media is a bad look.

Certainly agree with that and BJ did no one any service by bleating then handing the RC a poisoned chalice that they then engineered a way out that would ensure no protest hearing occurred and then sullied their own reputation to boot. They would have been better off doing nothing just as Richo claimed they should have, which I agree with him, though his reasons are different than mine. Crazy people.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hoppy said:

I believe that BJ bitched to the media and did not protest because they believe the AIS rule is crap

Seriously? They got off the boat, having just lost the race to WOXI, and the first thing in their minds is a Machiavellian plot to have the mandatory AIS rule ditched? A plot based upon the happenstance that WOXI's AIS was off?

So the last few miles of the race aboard BJ was a conversation about how this whole mandatory AIS thing was really crap, and wasn't it lucky that they lost to WOXI, and such good fortune that WOXI's AIS was off, and Hey wow! we can use this to embarrass the CYCA.  Seriously? They were not just a little bit peeved at losing the race in murky circumstances? ANd they so hated the mandatory AIS rule that it mattered more than anything else? Whatever it is you are smoking, I don't want any. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hoppy said:

then why didn't they protest.

The lack of protest makes no difference to the argument. Protesting would have had the same effect as a media dummy spit. 

Moaning and not protesting is just being a dick. WOXI get no opportunity to clear their name, and the taint on their win remains forever (as it has.) Saying they "don't do protests" wraps the dickish actions in a veneer of honourable respectability.

Don't look for deep thought conspiracies when simple human nature can explain people's actions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, hoppy said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I believe that BJ bitched to the media and did not protest because they believe the AIS rule is crap and potentially disadvantages boats that make a tactical move that gives them an advantage. By bitching to he media they embarrassed the CYCA into acting, which they did. It will also give BJ & others more leverage on the CYCA to pressure them to dump the rule. The CYCA will either need to drop the rule or monitor compliance.

You sure know a lot about what sits in the minds of people you don't know. As for it being a "secret plot" between the 100' Club to have the RC lodge a protest that would never be heard by the IJ, resulting in everyone covered in shit and all designed to have a rule changed by the RO?

Man Hoppy what are on?.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoppy, what would you know about Ocean Racing and more importantly the mindset of the 100 foot owners.

You are truly stupid and talking about matters about which you absolutely no idea.

Shut the fuck up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hoppy said:

I do not view this as cheating. The AIS TX rule is there for a supposed safety benefit and not as a fairness in racing rule. As it neither put the crew of WOXI or other vessels in danger and it gave them no tangible racing advantage, then it is a non event. No other boats felt aggrieved enough to lodge a protest.

Case closed...

This is like doing using your mobile phone whilst parked on the side of the road, but you have left the motor on. (which is unbelievably as illegal as texting when driving)

Hoppy, you have a strange view of the world around us. By some strange confluence of events you claim that this whole affair justifies your view that AIS is a silly rule and should be protested. Apparently everything that has occurred since 1 hour prior to the start in your mind confirms this and Richo and Co are just your hand puppets.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Mr Feilberg I would be most grateful if you leave me out of this. Jack is not my Sock - If you would do your homework you would see that jack and I have got on pretty well over the years but have had our disagreements on here in the past. It would take some pretty dedicated Sock puppetry to have created jack as a sock years ago , be a prolific poster under both names and then argued with myself. FYI i have had two socks in the past - 'Lonely girl 15' and G.O.D. - both are 'open socks' (meaning that i never hid that they were me) and both only used for shits and giggles. I am one of the few posters on here who doesn't hide his true identity as I am happy to own what I say. So leave me out of this. I will make the observation that, with the greatest respect, you do come across as a bit of a dick head in this thread. So pot, this kettle is calling you black. (: 

Welcome back LB, you may be a cantankerous red neck but at least you speak mostly English.

 

 

3 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Stay you say: "question arose as to whether an SI was complied with or not..."  I am actually trying to steer clear of delving into the WOXI Protest hearing that never occurred, (which if it had would have definitely answered a lot of technical questions) while we dispose of this aspect of how you test your AIS TX on the "race course?" 

This of course counters Richo's nonsense claim it can't be be done, where can see slowly unfolding here, there are five (5) tests (two yet to be revealed) it can. Not only is one automatic (Test #1), they can they be conducted involving no further technical understanding beyond those having the race mandatory radio qualifications, and they actually quantify whether the AIS TX signal strength complies with the SI or not.

This aspect of knowledge goes goes to the heart of WOXI's post race Declaration where there are only two check boxes on the Declaration, "Fully Complied" OR "Did Not Comply with Explanation". If the Compliance box ticked Richards is the view that Declaration is either quarantined to the race course and not via information obtained after crossing the finish line, or they believe their AIS TX signal strength complied. If the Non Compliance Box ticked either as the original Declaration or one amended, the RC would have had to conduct an investigation and separate to the Protest it made, and a determination made under the specific protest provisions regarding the nature of Declarations. One determination being a automatic penalty up to 15% without a hearing.

However the problem with a Declaration indicating a AIS problem is the RC could not then claim as it did in the Protest declared invalid, to have "no knowledge" of that WOXI AIS problem other than via the "conflicted" report of Black Jacks. I therefore think we can quite comfortably guess the nature of WOXI's Declaration regarding which box was ticked.       

These five (5) tests of AIS TX when hopefully considered by the CYCA Sub Committee given the responsibility of reviewing submissions, will be fundamental to their response about whether AIS TX can be "self policed" or not and just as occurs now with VHF operation involving no compliance monitoring by the RC. Their response will obviously guide the drafting of SI for this years S2H. 

SA is the "go to" place and just as the great Douglas Adams says as Tubby refers to.

There may be two more Adams quotes that apply to the Protest Hearing that never happened.

"To give real service you must add something which cannot be bought or measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity." and

 “I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”

 

Jack, you amaze and confound me but I think I might have a handle on where you are going with this, please don't leave us hanging, my psyche might not survive.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hoppy said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I believe that BJ bitched to the media and did not protest because they believe the AIS rule is crap and potentially disadvantages boats that make a tactical move that gives them an advantage. By bitching to he media they embarrassed the CYCA into acting, which they did. It will also give BJ & others more leverage on the CYCA to pressure them to dump the rule. The CYCA will either need to drop the rule or monitor compliance.

I haven’t read down thread yet but Hoppy, step away from the beer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hoppy said:

So enlighten me, why did Harburg bitch to the media and not protest

 

Dunno...maybe for starters he saw what the last fella who protested WOXI from #2 position had to endure??

19C2D657-1591-4311-A901-17EB9CC8F8CD.png

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hoppy said:

So enlighten me, why did Harburg bitch to the media and not protest.

Perhaps enlighten us. Why not protest? What part of making public his displeasure about the lack of WOXI's AIS does not protesting make in your theory? He could have protested and not whinged to the media. It would make no difference to your theory. Indeed it would have been all the more difficult for the CYCA, as WOXI would probably have been stripped of the win the second year running. If you were of a mind to make the AIS rule a target, that would be your best tactic. Not having a sook to the ABC.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

He could have protested and not whinged to the media... If you were of a mind to make the AIS rule a target, that would be your best tactic. Not having a sook to the ABC.

Wouldn't that have been an interesting thing to watch with no place to hide and sprout nonsense about no means to tell if you're AIS TX is working or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tricky Pig this simple Diag should get you across the line for AIS TX Test #4 using just VHF. Shows the relationship between the maximum Propagation Path Loss and Range. Ignore the curve is at a frequency of 2.45 GHz not VHF Marine Band and make it one for any RX and TX antenna height you like.

0412WebEELairdFig1_0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Wouldn't that have been an interesting thing to watch with no place to hide and sprout nonsense about no means to tell if you're AIS TX is working or not.

517099777_Screen20Shot202012-06-3020at208_38.5220PM.png.2ed558235f63fd9a89c2e9fbb0f8428d.png

thats going to mess with anymans hair!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Seriously? They got off the boat, having just lost the race to WOXI, and the first thing in their minds is a Machiavellian plot to have the mandatory AIS rule ditched? A plot based upon the happenstance that WOXI's AIS was off?

So the last few miles of the race aboard BJ was a conversation about how this whole mandatory AIS thing was really crap, and wasn't it lucky that they lost to WOXI, and such good fortune that WOXI's AIS was off, and Hey wow! we can use this to embarrass the CYCA.  Seriously? They were not just a little bit peeved at losing the race in murky circumstances? ANd they so hated the mandatory AIS rule that it mattered more than anything else? Whatever it is you are smoking, I don't want any. 

Haha ... yep... agree

12 hours ago, hoppy said:

then why didn't they protest.

Harburg was perhaps pissed off that WOXI was not complying, but was not going to protest and win because of a rule he thinks is shit. 

Makes no sense

8 hours ago, hoppy said:

So enlighten me, why did Harburg bitch to the media and not protest.

Jack answered.... JC and team rightfully protested a blatant port and starboard in 2017 and copped plenty here and elsewhere from many labeling them bad sportsman... A lot of people (not me) don't like to protest. 

The other big boys clearly felt like they were disadvantaged  by WO's fortunate timing on their AIS "failure".

  PH from BJ, I believe, was very frustrated and tired after a long night when he said some things to the media. Did they discuss and plan this strategy..? I'm not sure.   I feel they should have protested instead but either way they made this issue public hence allowing us 42 pages of chit chat...

If MR and Oats want all this to go away, all they have to do is provide the evidence of the failed parts and we will all move on but they haven't and until they do,  the smell will linger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more for the next page. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, PIL66 said:

..........If MR and Oats want all this to go away, all they have to do is provide the evidence of the failed parts and we will all move on but they haven't and until they do,  the smell will linger.

^^^^^ This..... Except he now can’t, because he may not have declared it, in which case it is another SI breached.

 If MR could confirm that his (even amended) declaration included details of WOXI’s AIS problems/non compliance, then the smell would all belong to CYCA.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

 

35 minutes ago, PIL66 said:

..........If MR and Oats want all this to go away, all they have to do is provide the evidence of the failed parts and we will all move on but they haven't and until they do,  the smell will linger.

^^^^^ This..... Except he now can’t, because he may not have declared it, in which case it is another SI breached.

 If MR could confirm that his (even amended) declaration included details of WOXI’s AIS problems/non compliance, then the smell would all belong to CYCA.

 

The stench set in months ago. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, paps49 said:

Welcome back LB, you may be a cantankerous red neck but at least you speak mostly English.

Thanks for taking the time out from defending Lia's honor, Smear. I hope you didn't sprain your ankle jumping of that bandwagon. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hoppy said:

So enlighten me, why did Harburg bitch to the media and not protest.

Protesting WO is frowned upon. Harburg wanted to appear like one of the boys rather than a spoilsport,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hoppy said:

So enlighten me, why did Harburg bitch to the media and not protest.

 

3 hours ago, PIL66 said:

Jack answered.... JC and team rightfully protested a blatant port and starboard in 2017 and copped plenty here and elsewhere from many labeling them bad sportsman... A lot of people (not me) don't like to protest. 

 

2 hours ago, hoppy said:

its a bit sad if you let trolls, sock puppets and anonymous wankers affect your thinking. 

Hoppy you must have some terrible fixation wanting people who race offshore to keep shitting on your head.

1882914606_images(53).jpeg.e218618f55413917b78bf4325e42972b.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2019 at 3:13 AM, jack_sparrow said:

So congratulations to @mowgli getting two (2) and @Trickypig getting one (1). So three (3) down and two (2) still to be found. But now its gets a bit harder and requires some nous..

Hence I think I need to lay down some clues...

...revisit my answer to @Trickypig winning answer upthread about "Propagation Path Losses"and then the SI (linky just a few posts up for your convenience) about S2H mandatory VHF communications as an example. However don't rush in as this is not as simple as it appears, so if you have watts power in your ears ignore them and think decibels (dB) both TX and RX end and any increase of 3dB is approximately a doubling of power or for each 3dB decrease the power is reduced by one half when expressed in watts power Those into maths well P to dB is; 10*log (P/1 mW).

 

7 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

@Tricky Pig this simple Diag should get you across the line for AIS TX Test #4 using just VHF. Shows the relationship between the maximum Propagation Path Loss and Range. Ignore the curve is at a frequency of 2.45 GHz not VHF Marine Band and make it one for any RX and TX antenna height you like.

0412WebEELairdFig1_0.jpg.c012f7a1a1713b0cd623b231cd3f129f.jpg

 

Looks as though no one is going to get #4.

Are you people highly regarded or retarded? Even Hoppy could get this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PIL66 said:

The other big boys clearly felt like they were disadvantaged  by WO's fortunate timing on their AIS "failure".

  PH from BJ, I believe, was very frustrated and tired after a long night when he said some things to the media.

At the 2.00 minute mark.

Butters wasn't too happy either talking to the media ..and he looked pretty fresh.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PIL66 said:

Jack answered.... JC and team rightfully protested a blatant port and starboard in 2017 and copped plenty here and elsewhere from many labeling them bad sportsman... A lot of people (not me) don't like to protest. 

Pil, I am not sure if this quote is yours or Jack's but it has been stated long and loud that this was not a Rule 10 infringement but a Rule 13 infringement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PIL66 said:

Jack answered.... JC and team rightfully protested a blatant port and starboard in 2017 and copped plenty here and elsewhere from many labeling them bad sportsman... A lot of people (not me) don't like to protest.

 

1 hour ago, trt131 said:

Pil, I am not sure if this quote is yours or Jack's but it has been stated long and loud that this was not a Rule 10 infringement but a Rule 13 infringement.

trt that's Pil's quote referencing this one of mine about Black Jack not protesting and Comanche protest in 2017 race and WOXI's response below to that 2017 IJ Decision.

 

13 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Dunno...maybe for starters he saw what the last fella who protested WOXI from #2 position had to endure??

19C2D657-1591-4311-A901-17EB9CC8F8CD.png

The Full 2017 IJ decision started with R10 then R13 as follows:

"Wild Oats XI on port had to keep clear of LDV Comanche, RRS 10. Wild Oats XI failed to keep clear while tacking, RRS 13. LDV Comanche luffed to avoid a collision as required by RRS 14. Wild Oats XI did not comply with SI 20.1 (a) to do a two turn penalty for breaking a rule of Part 2 occurring prior to clearing Mark Z."

Staying silent for Over 12 months Richards now says (in Gladwell 31/12/18 Interview) this was his 2017 IJ Decision response : "My response was "..the protest was properly held. We were penalised like we should have been. It was the right result, and I don't have any bad feelings about last year's race"

Memory loss maybe??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trt131 said:

Pil, I am not sure if this quote is yours or Jack's but it has been stated long and loud that this was not a Rule 10 infringement but a Rule 13 infringement.

Noted........ It was mine and i was trying to simplify it somewhat for a couple here... thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Storm v Broncos preview

The Rundown

Key match-up

All this talk about Melbourne finally disappearing from the top eight landscape must have Cameron Munster keen to prove people wrong. Munster's battle with Brisbane five-eighth Anthony Milford could prove decisive.

For the Storm to win

The Storm haven't changed the basic game plan too much over the past 10 years years and if it ain't broke don't fix it. Still, the loss of Slater is significant and there's a lot of responsibility on the young shoulders of Jahrome Hughes.

For the Broncos to win

Brisbane have to match Melbourne in the forwards and experienced back-rowers Matt Gillett and Alex Glenn must provide steady leadership and guidance for the likes of Matt Lodge, Joe Ofahengaue and Tevita Pangai jnr.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Storm v Broncos preview

LB well spotted with your cryptic "Storm" post. Yes indeed Mumbles does do WOXI's PR and pending the release of his "inside story of the tragic 74th S2H", the weather here is not abating. I really hope he can type quickly.

x293.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Godamn, are you still harping on in this thread. It cant be healthy, go outside and for a walk or something. Anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Thanks for taking the time out from defending Lia's honor, Smear. I hope you didn't sprain your ankle jumping of that bandwagon. 

Nice to know you cared enough to listen in, certainly drew a few rock spiders out of their dungeons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, paps49 said:

Nice to know you cared enough to listen in, certainly drew a few rock spiders out of their dungeons.

Yeah I had a look at the 1st thread. Very sound SA shitfight I thought. Good work everyone. Wait...rock spiders? She looked over 18...maybe be all that rowing ages people prematurely. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now its back to work again...

2vth0x.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Now its back to work again...

2vth0x.jpg

LB why in the fuck would Richo enter politics and via the seat of Bennelong? A seat in the Aust Federal Parliament of Australia reserved for Sporting excellence. Like ex member and PM who wore great Wallaby tracksuits and the current sitting member a world class tennis player who has actually flashed his passport to participate in International big boy sporting events?? Something doesn't add up here? 

LB I'm fearful of CYCA Branch stacking and vote rigging happening here?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 DAYS GONE - TIME TO BUMP ...I'M PRAYING YOU LOT ARE NOT RETARDED

 

On 3/8/2019 at 7:01 PM, jack_sparrow said:

A. WHAT THEY SAID

Public comments about the use of the Automatic Identification System (AIS) in the 2018 Rolex Sydney to Hobart Race (S2H) and a Race Committee 2018 S2H RC WOXI Protest against Wild Oats XI (WOXI) that was declared "invalid" and Hearing that never eventuated. If there had been a Hearing and facts disclosed, then maybe some commentary might be different. Note: My "emphasis" in quotes.

1. Remember this Post up thread of FeelMyselfVigorously's (copied as I don't want to wake him up).

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of this race and other races, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

The sport is self policing and if you make a declaration you can only declare the known knowns jack"

2. And then we had this from Mark Richards in his Sail_World.com/nz 31 Dec Interview with Richard Gladwell.

"When you are on board the boat you've no idea whether you are actually transmitting or not. If the device says you are transmitting then you assume that you are sending a signal."

“The AIS had nothing to show that we weren't transmitting, and as far as we were concerned that was end of story. Our AIS was on for the whole of the race, " he reiterated.

"There is a light which shows on the AIS that you are transmitting, and ours was. The problem is, it is a VHF antenna, and I know from my experience in the powerboat building world, that if you don't have a perfect VHF connection, then the system becomes massively compromised."

3. Then in  Sails Magazine Feb/March 2019_WOXI Matt Allen, ex Commodore of the CYCA, the Race Organiser (RO) of the S2H, Race Veteran and President of Australia Sailing (AS) who is quoted as saying; "Its been a test to a new rule that probably needed more thinking about in terms of of how they were going to deal with the compliance of it." He goes on to say; "he believes boats should be notified that their AIS isn't working to begin with. I think that if there is a breakdown in the AIS system that can be valid excuse, as we know things do break down on boats."

4. The Editor Of Sails Magazine Scott Ale (who completed his 15th S2H this edition) asks the question; "So how can a boat tell if its AIS is working at full strength when its out on the race course? The answer is with some difficulty."

B. CYCA SEEKS SUBMISSIONS

The CYCA has invited AIS Submissions from interested parties “around rules, the use of technology and at all times the safety of competitors”

C. TEASER TO WAR & PEACE

My submission to the CYCA  is probably more a book as it is going to run to over a dozen pages. When complete I will post a linky on this thread. 

As Matt Allen alludes to above, non-compliance with Race Documents can obviously lead to protests either by other competitors or the Race Committee (RC). It is therefore essential to be able to demonstrate that you were compliant (or in the event of a failure, are aware of it) either in the Protest Room and to be able to make a proper and compliant post-race Declaration. The latter involving amoungst other things in S2H Declarations; "compliance with the SI’s and RRS" and disclosing "any other notable/extraordinary circumstance.” Furthermore automatic penalties whereby failure to meet the S2H Declaration requirements may incur "a scoring penalty up to 15% applied by the Race Committee without a hearing.” 

My submission will be indicating five (5) simple, quick AIS TX checks (2 requiring Internet access) covering most AIS brands that can be made on the race course and not including input from other competitors or the Race Committee for a AIS that is turned on and appears to be functioning. Any one of these five (5) checks, though some better than others, will tell you if your AIS Transmission (TX) signal is being transmitted or not at the "minimum range" in accord with Australian Sailing Special Regulations, which state as follows with regard to the "mandatory" activation of AIS when having a shared VHF/AIS Antenna: 

2.03.1 “All equipment required by these Special Regulations shall:

(a) Function properly.

(b) Be regularly checked, cleaned and serviced.”

3.25.4 (c) “Have transmission and reception with a base station at least 8 nautical miles distant.”

3.25.5  “The following emergency antenna shall be provided:

(a) An emergency antenna for each required radio.

(b) An emergency antenna where the regular antenna depends upon the mast.”

The  2018 S2H Notice of Race Appendix B: “Emergency aerials are required to have their mounting brackets and cabling permanently installed.”

In the event there is VHF/AIS antenna/AIS TX problem and the issue of non-compliance with Race Documentation arises, then obviously the remedy sits in Australian Sailing Special Regulation 3.25.5 and 2018 S2H Notice of Race Appendix B governing emergency equipment to be carried and operational.  

In light of this Teaser I find all the above comments about a piece of equipment that has been mandatory in AS Special Regulations for a few years now and its "activation" made mandatory last year, in not just the S2H, disturbing having regard for the caliber and standing of those making those comments. Mark Richard's comments the most extraordinary.

Anyone care to be more knowledgeable than Richo? I note two (2) AIS Tests are already mentioned upthread giving you a head start.

I will give first correct entry posted here listing all five (5) simple quick AIS TX checks , a case of  @Fiji Bitter 

War and Peace.jpg

 

NEXT AIS TX TEST #4

So no one of you can work out Test #4 let alone #5 after hints galore up thread for 5 days. To recap you lot have so far identified these three (3) so far:

QUICK RECAP

AIS TX Test #1 – AIS Hardware.

Done automatically by AIS every 30 seconds (Class B) when “AIS TX Signal Power Loss” is VSWR > 5:1 or >45% AIS TX Power Loss and so TX signal compromised. High VSWR is not the only measure of AIS TX issues, but arguably the most common AIS fault. For instance as reported by a WOXI commissioned “expert” in the latest publication of  Sails Mag FebMarch 2019_WOXI AIS.pdf. That “expert” says; WOXI “was transmitting on low power due to an antenna fault – high VSWR” and “the fault would have significantly limited Oats AIS operating distance down to as little as half a nautical mile- as opposed to 10 to 12 nautical mile if functioning properly.”   

A high VSWR/TX Signal Loss is alarmed by a LED indicator at all compliant manufactured AIS Transponders (via LED) and also at on board hardware showing the AIS data i.e. MFD’s via visual and audible alarms (on most same manufacturer hardware).

AIS TX Test #2 – AIS Software.

As for #1 but also in the form of Diagnostic Software that comes with the AIS Transponder hardware to configure it, i.e. vessel name, MMSI No, Call Sign etc., AND OR is available as online as “freeware” shared amongst popular AIS Transponder manufactures. It actually quantifies the “AIS TX Signal Power Loss plus faults in relation to GPS positioning received and transponder voltage vital to a properly functioning AIS TX signal. Furthermore it logs any faults for troubleshooting or even if need be as evidence in complying with any race rules about mandatory AIS activation.

AIS TX Test #3 – Online AIS Providers.

This requires Internet access. Using one of the numerous online AIS Providers such as Marine Traffic, Vessel Finder and BigOceanData who collect AIS Data from private and public terrestrial and satellite (long TX interval) AIS Repeater sources display a Vessels Name and details including their position, speed and course data. Obviously if either details not displayed Online when surrounding vessels of similar masthead antenna height. Also to quantify AIS TX Signal strength if it is shown only appearing at a lesser range than it should be (say 4 mile depending on respective antenna heights) from “known” location specific Terrestrial AIS Repeaters listed by that Online Provider.

So to AIS TX Test #4.

AIS TEST #4 – NORMAL VHF TX POWER/RANGE TO DEGRADED VHF TX POWER/RANGE      

I’m very mindful of @Fiji Bitter comment upthread about technical confusion so will only use the minimum technical detail in plain English to keep this explanation brief and as jargon free as possible, remembering this is where AIS/VHF share the same masthead antenna which most if not all race boats do.

This involves first knowing what your VHF TX “normal” range is between your masthead antenna and the distance to and antenna height of the VHF Receiver Station you are sending your signal to.......

Please someone finish off that sentence above so AIS RX Test #4 is nailed, otherwise I'm starting to think this place is full of Dribblers who have never ventured offshore in a sailboat let alone race one???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Alcatraz5768 said:

Godamn, are you still harping on in this thread. It cant be healthy, go outside and for a walk or something. Anything.

Nearly as exciting as 14,000,00875675 posts spewing the same shit on AC Anarchy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

16 minutes ago, wal' said:

Nearly as exciting as 14,000,00875675 posts spewing the same shit on AC Anarchy

Wal funny how your post of "non excitement" leads you to  posting here with no respect to those that do and you having never posted on this thread before. My guess...lonely guy or you just humping Alcatraz's leg ?? Actually who fucking who cares, just piss off you Kiwi dipshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look.  Someone's knickers in a knot.

 

Too funny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, wal' said:

Oh look.  Someone's knickers in a knot.

Too funny

Yes my knickers are in in knot as trolling useless little cunts like you who put down an entire thread don't amuse me..and I'm  more funny than you will ever be. So fuck off. That said if you want to contribute you are welcome here. If not fuck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then

 

Tell me  humorous anecdote

 

Crack me up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Wal, you crack me up.

What reason do you offer to entice anyone to counter your silly banter? Do you have something to add?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites