Jump to content


NCORC posts draft Minimum Equipment Requirements


  • Please log in to reply
528 replies to this topic

#1 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 25 October 2012 - 05:37 PM

After a few months of preparation and procrastination the Northern California Offshore Racing Council Safety Committee has come up with a draft of the Minimum Equipment Requirements to be used starting with the 2013 season.

It is our hope that these MER are adopted by all organizing authorities that conduct ocean races within the Gulf of the Farallones. We think it is a pretty basic list.

The current members of the NCORC Safety Committee are:

Michael Andrews, Vice Commodore of Encinal YC, ran the Coastal Cup in 2012
Jim Antrim, Naval Architect, Pacific Cup YC
Max Crittenden, newly former Commodore of SSS
Chuck Hawley, US Sailing (and West Marine)
Andy Newell, OYRA President (and committee cat herder)
Jim Quanci, New SSS Commodore, OYRA board member

We think this is a good list, but we decided to publish this draft prior to calling it final because although we all sail here, many of you do too. We want input and constructive criticism from the SF area local sailing community. Please use this forum to begin that discussion.

The second file on the page is a draft of our inspection policy. Yes, there will be inspections.

http://norcalorc.org/safety-draft

#2 rgscpat

rgscpat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:New Mexico/southwest USA
  • Interests:sailing, racing, race management, Desert Sea / southwest USA sailing, future of sailing, travel, photography, hiking

Posted 25 October 2012 - 06:29 PM

To what extent can a VHF reliably substitute for a distress beacon?

#3 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 25 October 2012 - 06:40 PM

To what extent can a VHF reliably substitute for a distress beacon?


Google Rescue 21 and DSC

All races sailed under this set of rules are in the Rescue 21 coverage area.

We are planning on discussing this with the USCG before anything is final.

#4 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 25 October 2012 - 07:04 PM

Why on earth don't you just use the standard ORC requirements with a few changes (if you absolutely must)? Most people are used to these and they are quite frankly better than most home-brewed safety req's I have seen. Chicago YC does the same shit as you are trying to do and they have ended up with req's with some pretty big holes. By a quick read of yours I see some glaring ones as well.

#5 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 07:58 PM

Because one person's "glaring hole" is another person's extraneous requirement.

These are "Minimum Equipment Requirements" with the burden placed squarely on the skipper to determine what additional equipment may be required for a given race. It's not intended to be a nanny list, which is what the OSR's have become. There's an understanding that skippers will still have to apply some thought to how they equip their boats - and that's as it should be.

#6 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 25 October 2012 - 08:19 PM

Because one person's "glaring hole" is another person's extraneous requirement.

These are "Minimum Equipment Requirements" with the burden placed squarely on the skipper to determine what additional equipment may be required for a given race. It's not intended to be a nanny list, which is what the OSR's have become. There's an understanding that skippers will still have to apply some thought to how they equip their boats - and that's as it should be.


If you follow that thought process why have ANY safety req's at all? Safety is naturally always up to the skipper so just let it be a free for all.

#7 Boo-Yah

Boo-Yah

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 394 posts
  • Interests:Offshore and Star Boats

Posted 25 October 2012 - 08:29 PM

What about understanding how to sail and navigate?

#8 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 25 October 2012 - 08:55 PM

A renewed focus on training/preparation goes with this MER, as concluded by the Low Speed Chase report. LSC was not lost due to a lack of safety equipment. Communications were a problem and that will be addressed (hopefully) in these MER's and by the other NCORC sub-committees.

As you can see from Ahi's list above, I was not on the committee and I don't mean to sound as though I speak for them - I was close to the process and had some input.

#9 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 26 October 2012 - 12:25 AM

A renewed focus on training/preparation goes with this MER, as concluded by the Low Speed Chase report. LSC was not lost due to a lack of safety equipment. Communications were a problem and that will be addressed (hopefully) in these MER's and by the other NCORC sub-committees.


ABSOLUTELY!

The NCORC is made up of four committees. Communications, Race Management, Safety, and to drill into our thick heads what we learn from all this effort, Education.

In the LSC incident there were failures in all areas. Luckilly we don't get to test the system very often. Only by addressing each area are we going to be able to improve safety for SF area ocean racing. Everyone concentrates on the 'stuff I gotta buy" list but the other areas are at least as important.

#10 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 02:08 AM

Good job guys.

Personally I think this one could be eliminated - very ineffective.

20. 12" octahedral radar reflector or one of equivalent performance (4.10)

I also wonder about specifing a particular brand of equipment. There are other effective MOB recovery devices - should not it be the skipper's choice.

24. Lifesling (4.22)

The first aid kit is obviously needed, but is so vague that I wonder if it is helpful as worded (eg 2 bandaids = first aid kit?) . I wonder if you need some reference.

18. First aid kit (4.08)

I personally have come to believe that hard/near centerline clip points with short tethers, that combined will not allow you go over the deck, are much more important than traditional jacklines. Most folks do not go over when going up the deck (Whihc is when the traditional side deck jackline is needed), but either when working with both hands (at a work station) or when hit by green water (hiking or work station).

13. Jacklines that have a breaking strength of at least 4500 lb. and which allow the crew to reach all points on deck, connected to similarly strong attachment points, in place while racing. (4.04)



Not a big fan of the or clause here. The ability to place your feet securely (when heeled) is one of the true design essentials and a toe rail is essential for that. A low life line does not accomplish the same thing.

4. Toe rail of minimum height 3/4 inches around the foredeck from abreast the mast to the bow pulpit or an additional lifeline that is 1 to 2 inches above the deck.

#11 TJSocal

TJSocal

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 03:58 AM

Your life jacket requirement appears to exceed USCG Type I requirements (22 lb inherently buoyant, 33 lb inflatable). Would it make sense to just specify USCG Type I PFDs rather than defining your own standard?

Also, specifying when PFDs must be worn isn't really an equipment requirement. Not saying it isn't a good idea, just that it's inconsistent with the way the rest of the requirements are stated (for instance, no requirement for when harnesses must be worn, just that they be available).

Might also want to be a little more specific on GPS Receiver specification--otherwise an iPhone could qualify, and I don't think that's what you're going for. Even something like "GPS receiver suitable for marine navigation." might be better.

Finally, I'm not sure I agree with exempting pre-inspected boats from random post-race inspection. Seems like an invitation to cheat if there's little chance of being caught (particularly for a really weight-conscious boat). Random post-race inspection is primarily a deterrant measure, why not keep it in place for everybody?

#12 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 04:04 AM

20. If you're going to require a radar reflector, the standard Davis reflector (described) has proven to be one of the most effective. A bunch of us have them and as long as they're installed properly (in the "catch rain" position) they return a good signal - confirmed by a Matson ship that "saw me" on the way to Hawaii and commented on my signal.

24. Our skippers equip their boats (for the most part) from retail outlets. The Lifesling is a known item that in several tests has been shown to be effective in getting a MOB re-connected to the boat for recovery. On the other hand, the MOB pole, life ring, water-activated light, drogue (all tied together somehow for simultaneous deployment) has not been shown to be effective. We're working on this one.

18. Again, we expect some thought on the skipper's part to know what makes sense in a First Aid kit. He might be the one who needs it.

13. Agree and that's how mine are set up. Not all boats are created equal when routing jacklines.

4. Agree - I've never seen such a lifeline and I'm not sure where that came from. I suspect it's intended to be a work-around for the single-race entries from OD classes who don't have toerails.

#13 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 04:39 AM

I got timed out - here's a revised reply to #13:

13. My boat's jacklines run near the centerline on each side but not all boats are created equal. I do think you need to be able to go forward (sometimes quickly) without unclipping. Hard points alone don't allow for that.

#14 MSA

MSA

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Location:Perth

Posted 26 October 2012 - 10:43 AM

Does US sailing not have "special regs" that all races must adhere to?

Ie Cat 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 7. Cat 1 being Syd to Hobart. Cat 7 basically a River scenario 2 hour race.

I like how you are all for Inclusion.. but then opening the rules up to anybody to be able to enter, then putting the onus on the owner to decide what suits his boat... What a shit idea.. Please tell me what races you govern so I know never to enter/join a crew..

I have met some people, like the example above, think that a few bandaids and a box of panadol is a first aid kit.. I also know crew who are oblivious to owenrs actions.. Imagine if you lost finger at sea and the owner said, here take a Pandol and put a bandaid on it.. Its all I got..

And that's just on the Firstaid kit, the most simple lifesaving thing on a boat.. A Cat 3 kit cost about $100 and could save a life.... Don't get me started on the rest!

#15 MSA

MSA

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Location:Perth

Posted 26 October 2012 - 10:50 AM

Take note.. Copy, paste and implement.. All references are to the ISAF published Special regs.

Attached Files



#16 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 10:54 AM

20. If you're going to require a radar reflector, the standard Davis reflector (described) has proven to be one of the most effective. A bunch of us have them and as long as they're installed properly (in the "catch rain" position) they return a good signal - confirmed by a Matson ship that "saw me" on the way to Hawaii and commented on my signal.


I agree the davis type has proven to be 'one of the most effective' - although there are other more expensive models that test better at angles of heel - but the whole class of devices has proven (in repeated tests) to be extremely ineffective (see test1, test 2, test 3). If its the best of a bad set. The radar reflector requirement originated before AIS. If you want and anti collision system it should be AIS. You are not requiring a sextant (but its replacement the gps), so why require the reflector, which is essentially equally as obsolete.

Having a ship see you does not 'prove' the reflector did anything at all. They might well have seen your boat perfectly well without the reflector.

Stan Honey at one time did some work on reflector testing. You might get his input into this.

18. Again, we expect some thought on the skipper's part to know what makes sense in a First Aid kit. He might be the one who needs it.


Sure, but like you did with anchors, some minimum reference is needed otherwise you might as well not even mention it. Left as vague as it currently is it does nothing. Those skippers who would not carry one will still just carry two bandaids and those who would carry a decent kit will do so and be at a weight disadvantage. If you are going to have a requirement, it needs in some manor to have a minimum equal weight/cost penalty for boats. Here you are setting the minimum as two bandaids . . . if thats what you want, so be it.

Take note.. Copy, paste and implement.. All references are to the ISAF published Special regs.


MSA, the point (seems to be) was to create a much less 'gold plated'/'grand prix' approach than ISAF, and putting more emphasis on skipper discretion and responsibility.. One member of this working group is the HEAD of US Sailing's safety at sea committee (Who oversee the US implementation of ISAF) so they certainly are fully aware of the ISAF OSR's.

#17 MSA

MSA

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Location:Perth

Posted 26 October 2012 - 11:33 AM

Estar that's fine.. But trust the known.. Simple things like where knifes go, how long it takes/ is permit-able to deploy a life raft.. they have have all been implemented for a reason and IMHO they are not over the top..

Personal safety should be personal requirement.. That goes without saying.. but you can't write rules for people to use common sense.. Because clearly, there are plenty of people that don't have any and they can put others a risk. Some call it nanny state, others call it safety and covering the unknown.. Look at the Aegean case at the moment.. People suing people over life insurance..

You only have to look at mine site safety at the rules that need to be written to protect those who have common sense but get put in danger by others.

#18 MSA

MSA

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Location:Perth

Posted 26 October 2012 - 11:36 AM

And as for "Gold Plated/Grand Prix" Safety is safety, no matter what boat you race..

That's kinda like saying.. Helmets and fireproof suits are mandatory for The Sprit Cup but in Nationwide series, we don't need them..

#19 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 01:13 PM


they have have all been implemented for a reason and IMHO they are not over the top..



That's fine, I respect your opinion, but a lot of sailors and race organizers (at least in the US) disagree with you.

Also, again, just to be clear, the group putting this together is not some ignorant small club pick-up group. They are very well versed and aware of all aspects of the ISAF OSR's. They are making their recommendation with that full knowledge. They simply disagree with you about whether the ISAF OSR's are 'over the top'. If you want to engage them in discussion it would be best if you assumed they are informed and intelligent (because they are).

I have no dog in this discussion or group. But I think we all have a responsibility to help them create the best rule that they can. You think their in-going principle is flawed, and have contributed that comment, but IMHO that's not giving them much practical and effective help in making their rule as good as possible.

#20 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 26 October 2012 - 04:48 PM

What an approach like this unfortunately accomplishes is that prudent boats that bring things like storm sails, life raft/s, extra anchor, etc, which may be appropriate for a specific race will be at a weight disadvantage compared to the boats that choose to go with the minimum (and trust me there are always a number of boats choosing to chance it to gain a competitive advantage) - essentially rewarding stupidity by handing them an unfair (and dangerous) advantage.

#21 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

What an approach like this unfortunately accomplishes is that prudent boats that bring things like storm sails, life raft/s, extra anchor, etc, which may be appropriate for a specific race will be at a weight disadvantage compared to the boats that choose to go with the minimum (and trust me there are always a number of boats choosing to chance it to gain a competitive advantage) - essentially rewarding stupidity by handing them an unfair (and dangerous) advantage.


So what few most important extra items do you think they should add to the list?

You mention storm sails - that's a validly debatable point for the SF races. I suspect it was discussed and debate and concluded that it was NOT necessarily stupid to participate in the SF race circuit without specific storm sails. You may have a different opinion.

You mention life rafts - that's been extensively discussed in SF in the past and I am sure was again.

You also mention extra anchors - I suspect no-one thought that racing without extra anchors was 'stupid'.

You and MSA could make a helpful contribution here, but (both) your tone is simply critical. If you can, simply try to accept that they are looking for a lighter (than ISAF) requirement, and help them make that as good as it can be.

If you can't do that, fine you have made your point, your opinion is that ISAF OSRs is the gold standard and anything less is stupid and reckless. However, the ISAF approach, of requiring basically everything that anyone thinks could possibly be safety related, is simply not working for these guys.

#22 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,784 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:27 PM

???
They don't do the same job. A Lifesling is a RETRIEVAL DEVICE. If you can find the MOB, the Lifesling is ideal for getting a line to them. Anyone who has any time driving a water-skiing boat will be very familiar with how the maneuver works.

The horseshoe buoy with strobe and/or pole is a LOCATION DEVICE. Hopefully the MOB is hanging on to it, but even if not you get that over ASAP and have a datum marker to search around.

BTW, has anyone considered getting a VHF repeater put out on the islands? It would seem a great safety aid for more than just these races ;)

24. Our skippers equip their boats (for the most part) from retail outlets. The Lifesling is a known item that in several tests has been shown to be effective in getting a MOB re-connected to the boat for recovery. On the other hand, the MOB pole, life ring, water-activated light, drogue (all tied together somehow for simultaneous deployment) has not been shown to be effective. We're working on this one.



#23 TJSocal

TJSocal

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:54 PM

???
They don't do the same job. A Lifesling is a RETRIEVAL DEVICE. If you can find the MOB, the Lifesling is ideal for getting a line to them. Anyone who has any time driving a water-skiing boat will be very familiar with how the maneuver works.

The horseshoe buoy with strobe and/or pole is a LOCATION DEVICE. Hopefully the MOB is hanging on to it, but even if not you get that over ASAP and have a datum marker to search around.

BTW, has anyone considered getting a VHF repeater put out on the islands? It would seem a great safety aid for more than just these races ;)


24. Our skippers equip their boats (for the most part) from retail outlets. The Lifesling is a known item that in several tests has been shown to be effective in getting a MOB re-connected to the boat for recovery. On the other hand, the MOB pole, life ring, water-activated light, drogue (all tied together somehow for simultaneous deployment) has not been shown to be effective. We're working on this one.


Note that the list requires both a Lifesling and a deployable buoy setup, which makes sense--as you point out they perform different functions.

I think your quote from BobJ above was in response to a question as to whether it made sense to specify Lifesling specifically by brand name, or something more generic like "MOB retrieval system (Lifesling or functional equivalent)" in case skippers wanted to buy something other than Lifesling. The response was basically that if you go to West Marine you're coming home with a Lifesling, so why confuse the issue.

#24 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 05:58 PM

They don't do the same job. A Lifesling is a RETRIEVAL DEVICE. If you can find the MOB, the Lifesling is ideal for getting a line to them. Anyone who has any time driving a water-skiing boat will be very familiar with how the maneuver works.

The horseshoe buoy with strobe and/or pole is a LOCATION DEVICE. Hopefully the MOB is hanging on to it, but even if not you get that over ASAP and have a datum marker to search around.

BTW, has anyone considered getting a VHF repeater put out on the islands? It would seem a great safety aid for more than just these races ;)


I agree the Lifesling is a retrieval device (as I described above). There is ongoing discussion about the most effective way to locate a MOB. Taking your attention away from them (and away from handling your boat) to unleash a bunch of gear from the stern pulpit, sometimes well after the fact, is a questionable solution vs. immediately deploying a pole or (USCG required) Type IV - which a Lifesling is not BTW. Requiring all boats to have a MOM isn't going to be the answer. The focus is apparently on the MOB himself - adequate PFD, strobe perhaps and possibly a DSC-enabled handheld. Again, this is all second-hand - just what I'm hearing.

Yes - lots of attention on improving communications and VHF coverage.

Evans, regarding the radar reflector, does it change your opinion if AIS transceivers are not in the mix? Also remember it's foggy out the Gate much of the season.

#25 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 06:42 PM

The response was basically that if you go to West Marine you're coming home with a Lifesling, so why confuse the issue.


Primarily because it restricts others motivation to produce an improvement or innovation, and thus stifles safety improvement in the sport. I don't think we should ever single out one brand. It's easy enough to write a more generic prescription and then say "(like a Lifesling)" so that the sailor has clear direction.

Also I happen, after having had a life sling, to now be using a different solution that I think is better,for us at least.

Evans, regarding the radar reflector, does it change your opinion if AIS transceivers are not in the mix? Also remember it's foggy out the Gate much of the season.


No, not really.

First, I think (based on the tests and experience) the passive reflectors are so ineffective in the real world to be not much more than lucky charms.

And second, I think if you want to pick a piece of equipment which will dramatically increase collision avoidance safety (beyond keeping a good watch) that AIS (even receive only) is clearly it. It is simple huge if the other vessel has AIS. I know what some vessels will not have AIS, but a passive reflector is simply not going to do much good with them in any case.

All IMHO, of course :)

#26 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 06:49 PM

All IMHO, of course :)


As you know, I highly value your opinion.


It's interesting to note that the majority of the subject boats are single or double-handed. We hope it won't always be that way and don't really want to create a bunch of exceptions for shorthanders, but it does weigh on some of the options.

#27 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,784 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 26 October 2012 - 06:59 PM

IMHO - from 3,000 miles away - $500 for an AIS transponder is WAY more than 10x better for safety than a $50 radar reflector. Especially when the big boys are running mode S with the range set at 24 miles. All the reflectors I have ever seen for recreational boats are sized to mode X.
As for the VHF - what you need is the CG equivalent of an RCO. The FAA puts Remote Communications Outlets in places where you need to talk to them but can't on the ground or at low altitude.

#28 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:16 PM

You can get an AIS receiver for $500, not a transponder. But if we had transponders, there would be a high concentration of Class B AIS signals coming from our fleet within a fairly small area. I'm not sure a ship, especially confined to the SF entrance channel, could do much with that information. The same could be said of radar reflectors of course.

The longer races (LongPac, the Hawaii races, Coastal Cup etc.) may add some of this stuff - it doesn't make sense for the shorter races - but we still have the fog.

#29 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,784 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:31 PM

http://www.westmarin...&classNum=50183

$549 ;)

#30 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:39 PM

This accountant will note you can't get that one for $500 either, but only in jest - it's good to know the prices are coming down.

Like the MOM, I don't see AIS transceivers making it onto the list, at least not this year.

#31 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 07:54 PM

I don't see AIS transceivers making it onto the list, at least not this year.


I should note that I was not necessarily pushing for AIS to be put on the list. They don't weigh anything, so one can argue that decision can be left to the racer's prudent judgement. I was saying that if one felt that collision was a major problem/risk, and wanted to single out the most effective piece of gear to lower that risk, AIS would clearly be it.

I was arguing for removing the passive reflector as essentially useless, and a piece of clutter in the rig and in the requirements.

The short handed aspect does put a twist on things, particularly watch keeping (more equipment assistance might be useful) and MOB (more focus on staying on board rather than recovery) aspects. But the prime thing it drives is the need to be mentally more careful and disciplined.

#32 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 26 October 2012 - 08:54 PM


What an approach like this unfortunately accomplishes is that prudent boats that bring things like storm sails, life raft/s, extra anchor, etc, which may be appropriate for a specific race will be at a weight disadvantage compared to the boats that choose to go with the minimum (and trust me there are always a number of boats choosing to chance it to gain a competitive advantage) - essentially rewarding stupidity by handing them an unfair (and dangerous) advantage.


So what few most important extra items do you think they should add to the list?

You mention storm sails - that's a validly debatable point for the SF races. I suspect it was discussed and debate and concluded that it was NOT necessarily stupid to participate in the SF race circuit without specific storm sails. You may have a different opinion.

You mention life rafts - that's been extensively discussed in SF in the past and I am sure was again.

You also mention extra anchors - I suspect no-one thought that racing without extra anchors was 'stupid'.

You and MSA could make a helpful contribution here, but (both) your tone is simply critical. If you can, simply try to accept that they are looking for a lighter (than ISAF) requirement, and help them make that as good as it can be.

If you can't do that, fine you have made your point, your opinion is that ISAF OSRs is the gold standard and anything less is stupid and reckless. However, the ISAF approach, of requiring basically everything that anyone thinks could possibly be safety related, is simply not working for these guys.


Since it is for the "Northern California Offshore Racing Council Safety Committee" I assumed it was for races coastal/offshore and not in the bay????

If my assumption is correct I definitely find that storm sails, life rafts, extra anchor, etc. is appropriate. If you get cought outside in shitty conditions you could end up in dire need of these.

You can use ORC - just choose the appropriate level you want to play at. Take a look at ORC cat 4 - it doesn't require life rafts and you get away with a heavy weather jib (very useful in cali-land on occasion. You can also use a standard ORC cat and prescribe a few local changes. It is my experience that the ORC req's have had a lot of thought and experience put into them over the years - not saying they are infallable but pretty good. Using the "world standard" will also make it a lot easier for boats from the "outside" to get their safety items right.

I think it would be appropriate to use cat 3 or 4 inside the bridge and probably cat 2 outside -

#33 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 26 October 2012 - 11:13 PM

Since it is for the "Northern California Offshore Racing Council Safety Committee" I assumed it was for races coastal/offshore and not in the bay????

If my assumption is correct I definitely find that storm sails, life rafts, extra anchor, etc. is appropriate. If you get cought outside in shitty conditions you could end up in dire need of these.

You can use ORC - just choose the appropriate level you want to play at. Take a look at ORC cat 4 - it doesn't require life rafts and you get away with a heavy weather jib (very useful in cali-land on occasion. You can also use a standard ORC cat and prescribe a few local changes. It is my experience that the ORC req's have had a lot of thought and experience put into them over the years - not saying they are infallable but pretty good. Using the "world standard" will also make it a lot easier for boats from the "outside" to get their safety items right.

I think it would be appropriate to use cat 3 or 4 inside the bridge and probably cat 2 outside -


I am going to back off this thread after this since I am not in any way involved.

But, again, they are very familiar with the OSR's and what you are suggesting is essentially what the SF OYRA have done in the recent past - used cat 2 ISAF OSR with/US sailing prescriptions with a few SF ORYA prescriptions . . . and the resulting document was 22 pages long, somewhat confusing, not consistently applied across the various SF races and rejected completely by several of the key SF races. They tried tinkering with it. The conclusion after the LSC incident and various investigations was that it was fundamentally flawed for SF use and they should start from a clean sheet of paper. That's where they are now.

I think that the criteria they are looking for is not equipment that is not 'nice to have' or 'appropriate', but actually provably life saving. I have been aware or involved in most all the racing incidents that have happened in the past few years, and I can't think of one (in the SF area) where storm sails or an extra anchor would have saved a life (note: I am puzzled by your continued inclusion of the extra anchor item because that's not even an ISAF requirement and they have already included the equivalent of the ISAF anchor requirement). There may (or may not depending on how you interpret the situations) have been (a very few over the years) cases where life rafts (could have) saved lives - but it should be noted that all the races are within very fast USCG communication & rescue capability and that the USCG is requiring beacons.

#34 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 26 October 2012 - 11:58 PM


Since it is for the "Northern California Offshore Racing Council Safety Committee" I assumed it was for races coastal/offshore and not in the bay????

If my assumption is correct I definitely find that storm sails, life rafts, extra anchor, etc. is appropriate. If you get cought outside in shitty conditions you could end up in dire need of these.

You can use ORC - just choose the appropriate level you want to play at. Take a look at ORC cat 4 - it doesn't require life rafts and you get away with a heavy weather jib (very useful in cali-land on occasion. You can also use a standard ORC cat and prescribe a few local changes. It is my experience that the ORC req's have had a lot of thought and experience put into them over the years - not saying they are infallable but pretty good. Using the "world standard" will also make it a lot easier for boats from the "outside" to get their safety items right.

I think it would be appropriate to use cat 3 or 4 inside the bridge and probably cat 2 outside -


I am going to back off this thread after this since I am not in any way involved.

But, again, they are very familiar with the OSR's and what you are suggesting is essentially what the SF OYRA have done in the recent past - used cat 2 ISAF OSR with/US sailing prescriptions with a few SF ORYA prescriptions . . . and the resulting document was 22 pages long, somewhat confusing, not consistently applied across the various SF races and rejected completely by several of the key SF races. They tried tinkering with it. The conclusion after the LSC incident and various investigations was that it was fundamentally flawed for SF use and they should start from a clean sheet of paper. That's where they are now.

I think that the criteria they are looking for is not equipment that is not 'nice to have' or 'appropriate', but actually provably life saving. I have been aware or involved in most all the racing incidents that have happened in the past few years, and I can't think of one (in the SF area) where storm sails or an extra anchor would have saved a life (note: I am puzzled by your continued inclusion of the extra anchor item because that's not even an ISAF requirement and they have already included the equivalent of the ISAF anchor requirement). There may (or may not depending on how you interpret the situations) have been (a very few over the years) cases where life rafts (could have) saved lives - but it should be noted that all the races are within very fast USCG communication & rescue capability and that the USCG is requiring beacons.


I am not going on a crusade here - you left coasters can do whatever you deem appropriate - just don't come crying wolf when the shit hits the fan (and it probably will at some point).

I know that very good safety costs money and is a PITA - even seems like wasted energy/money in most cases. After having spent more than 150K miles at sea I will say that being prepared for "the unthinkable" to me is a prudent way to deal with the unknown that can be thrown at you at any given time.

Relying on the coasties to save your bacon when the pooh hits the ventilator is something I can only describe as totally irrisponsible if I am being nice - much stronger language would be more appropriate..........

Trying to change the "appropriate" safety preparedness mindset based heavily on one unfortunate incident (where there was a fair bit of recklessness involved) borders on stupidity

#35 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 12:46 AM

Sorry Christian, you're just going off at this point - no value added.

It's a Minimum Equipment List - not a check it off (like MSA's post) and call yourself "safe."

This takes some thinking, I'll grant you that.

#36 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 27 October 2012 - 06:21 PM

Sorry Christian, you're just going off at this point - no value added.

It's a Minimum Equipment List - not a check it off (like MSA's post) and call yourself "safe."

This takes some thinking, I'll grant you that.


I guess you haven't lost friends or ever been in serious weather......................maybe you will learn someday. Right now you sound totally ignorant!

#37 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 06:39 PM

I guess you haven't lost friends or ever been in serious weather......................maybe you will learn someday. Right now you sound totally ignorant!


Right . . .do you think i have never been in 'serious' weather?

Attached File  worldvoyagesilkhawkdatesbigcompress.jpg   273.94K   55 downloads

#38 VALIS

VALIS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 09:37 PM

(note: I am puzzled by your continued inclusion of the extra anchor item because that's not even an ISAF requirement and they have already included the equivalent of the ISAF anchor requirement).


FWIW, ISAF OSR Cat 1,2,3 monohull requires a second anchor for boats 28 ft and over. Both anchors must be "ready for immediate use", which in practice seems to be very loosely interpreted.

I have no real opinion on these new rules, but I do know that the people involved are doing their best to balance a lot of conflicting desires and requirements. They are definitely trying to improve what has been a confused set of rules, with the goal of making it easier for the local racers to compete in races being run by multiple organizations with at this point different safety-related requirements. I appreciate their efforts.

#39 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 27 October 2012 - 09:43 PM

I guess you haven't lost friends or ever been in serious weather......................maybe you will learn someday. Right now you sound totally ignorant!


I have been in serious weather and I have lost sailing friends in serious weather (have you? It sucks). I wouldn't have been asked to help with this critical project if I was ignorant of the issues.

Skippers with nicely checked-off OSR equipment lists have still had serious problems offshore. That's why we're trying to avoid letting lists create a false sense of security.


(You know, sometimes people will disagree with you, especially on this forum. It doesn't make them ignorant.)

#40 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:20 AM

Why does the new rules want so much fuel for 8 hours? That will be hard to do for most ULDB boats.as they don't have an internal engine, and would need to carry at least 2 four gallon fuel cans. For all of the racing that is done off the Ca coast, except for ones like the long PAC or the coastal cup, you are less than 20 miles off shore. And with all of these requirements, which most are already required, when is enough enough. Or do we want this to be a rich mans sport like Indy car racing? Then there is the requirement for a mast head VHF antenna, what do you want when one looses their mast, but another antenna mounted someplace else? And will this garantee that we will be able to call for help that we will get it?when can we use common sence?

#41 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 28 October 2012 - 05:19 PM

I'm with you on the fuel Jack. On the engine itself, about the only argument is to get out of the way of a ship when becalmed. Three ship traffic schemes cross the GOF, and you often aren't far enough offshore to have synoptic wind. Another point - even the SH TransPac doesn't require an engine.

If the Rescue 21/DSC option is as good as it sounds, I'd back off the masthead antenna requirement as well. Very few rescue scenarios include a dropped mast so I don't quite buy that argument (which I've heard often). OTOH, Rescue 21 is supposed to pick up a one watt transmission only 2 meters off the water, 20 nm out. If there's also a repeater on SE Farallon, we should be well-covered.

But you can see from posts above what we're up against. People love their lists.

#42 tolachi

tolachi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 224 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Interests:One Design Racing

Posted 29 October 2012 - 02:50 PM

Not a big fan of the or clause here. The ability to place your feet securely (when heeled) is one of the true design essentials and a toe rail is essential for that. A low life line does not accomplish the same thing.

4. Toe rail of minimum height 3/4 inches around the foredeck from abreast the mast to the bow pulpit or an additional lifeline that is 1 to 2 inches above the deck.


I will second this. I had planned to put a ~2 inch glassed in "toe rail" on the foredeck of my moore 24. However, making it go aft to the mast seems excessive/unwieldy. I think it would be superior to both the original low aluminum rail and a spectra lifeline. It seems that the molded in rails should qualify but apparently would not under this rule. A number of moore's have already installed this very sensible option (gruntled, eclipse, and many others). I would like to see this rule modified to include the excellent solutions already in place on many boats.

#43 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 30 October 2012 - 11:22 PM

Why does the new rules want so much fuel for 8 hours? Then there is the requirement for a mast head VHF antenna, what do you want when one looses their mast, but another antenna mounted someplace else? And will this garantee that we will be able to call for help that we will get it?when can we use common sence?


The longest race in the mix is 58 nm. You lose your rig at the Farallones and you are 29 miles out. Factor in a little current and round it up to 32 miles. We said 4 knots for 8 hours since that equals 32 miles. ISAF says square root of LWL x 8 hours and we just simplified since pretty much even a 5 Knot Shit Box can motor at 4. On my 35 footer 8 hours is about 4 gallons.

I don't know the math, but an antenna 50' up has much better range than one 5' up. We removed the requirement for a backup antenna in the event that the rig comes down but we do require a handheld in addition to the fixed radio. The handheld has much shorter range and less power, but it can leave when you do.

Yes, Rescue 21 is part of the mix, but in most of these races there are dozens of other boats out there with you. If every one has a decent radio installation and monitors 16 (and in time DSC) then we hope to take care of our own before an EPIRB signal even has time to work its way through space, to DC and back to the CG. Fleet rescue will always be our best option.

#44 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 12:33 AM

Tolachi, if the molded-in rails are 3/4" high I assume they'd meet the rule. Perhaps it's the location you're questioning and I agree there should be some flexibility for boats who've already figured out where toe rails are the most effective. OTOH, I worked with an Olson 30 that had nothing - the toe rails had been removed for OD racing, no grabrails on the cabin top, hiking supports vs. lifelines - and the guy was going to race solo to Hawaii. But there should be some middle ground here.

Ahi:

I question the need to be able to motor back from the Farallones. That's only one option to get the boat back to shore. Ruben jury-rigged a sail and sailed 500+ miles to Hawaii, and he wasn't the first to do that. What ever happened to such seamanship? Bottom line: If you choose to race without an engine you risk needing to leave your boat out there if you don't have a backup plan. It doesn't need to be an equipment requirement to have an engine (or all that fuel).

I supported masthead antennae before I knew about Rescue 21's range. Now I question the need (and MH antennae can be a pain to install, especially on smaller boats). It's the closer boats who will respond to a distress anyway - not those 10-20 miles away.

Note to others - I already have all this stuff so it's not that I'm trying to get out of doing any of it.

#45 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 31 October 2012 - 02:16 AM

Ahi:

I question the need to be able to motor back from the Farallones. That's only one option to get the boat back to shore. Ruben jury-rigged a sail and sailed 500+ miles to Hawaii, and he wasn't the first to do that. What ever happened to such seamanship? Bottom line: If you choose to race without an engine you risk needing to leave your boat out there if you don't have a backup plan. It doesn't need to be an equipment requirement to have an engine (or all that fuel).

I supported masthead antennae before I knew about Rescue 21's range. Now I question the need (and MH antennae can be a pain to install, especially on smaller boats). It's the closer boats who will respond to a distress anyway - not those 10-20 miles away.

Note to others - I already have all this stuff so it's not that I'm trying to get out of doing any of it.


Some of this came from the OSR's as you know, and most of it was a compromise. The compromise was that we reduced the speed at which the boat needed to travel for all boats and just said you had to have ~32 miles of fuel. It's 4 gallons in my Santana 35, and yes, I usually carry a little more than that, but it is not a huge weight factor. If somebody has a very inefficient outboard and needs more fuel so be it. I have a fairly efficient yet VERY heavy inboard. Yes, when you are 500 miles out nobody has enough fuel and you jury rig. 30 miles out, it is nice to get you back and check you off the list of boats that lots of people have to worry about until you get home. The new program is that other people don't sleep until you do.

Prior to LSC I had the required (for my sandbox) 25W with masthead antenna. I also had the requried handheld in the cockpit which is what we used to actually communicate (check in, monitor, etc.). After LSC I installed a remote mic for the 25w in the cockpit.

O M G what a difference! I used to have to wait to check in until I was west of Alcatraz, now I can do it any time after we are under way from Berkeley. After the last race we were in Berkeley in the slip. I heard and communicated with the race committee at StFYC and heard from 'tail end charlie' (CO'W) who was at mile rock.

NCORC was tasked with improving safety. Safety requires good communications (protocol and infrastructure). Good communications require a good radio installation which requires a masthead antenna. The little guys who put the mast up and down can run the wire up the backstay and can leave it off when inshore.

We carved LOTS of stuff off the list, but leaving this one was a no brainer.

#46 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 04:33 AM

20. If you're going to require a radar reflector, the standard Davis reflector (described) has proven to be one of the most effective


I had a good experience with mine last summer, I was spotted at a range of 15 nm by a Matson liner who I later hailed on VHF.

On the other hand, the MOB pole, life ring, water-activated light, drogue (all tied together somehow for simultaneous deployment) has not been shown to be effective. We're working on this one.


I've never been happy with this contraption. I carry my MOB pole on the back stay, and even with no solar panel a crew would basically have to stand up on the transom to pull the pin to free it. When doublehanding I have instructed my crew that she is not on any account to stand up and wrestle with that thing if I go over. I have heard that the self-inflating things don't work that well, in addition to being ridiculously expensive and expensive to recertify. What else might work here?


People out of the area should realize that this list is to be employed for every race that goes past the Pt. Bonita Buoy, just a couple of miles West of the GG bridge. In many parts of the country, most races are coastal ocean races, but that is the exception here.

Personally I would like to eliminate the GPIRB requirement in favor of a waterproof DSC handheld, as I believe a GPIRB is not going to be much use unless one also has a liferaft.

#47 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:01 AM

32 nm is barely 2 gallons for my little Yanmar 1GM so not a problem here. Outboards are pretty useless though if it's rough (like when you'd lose your rig), especially if transom-mounted. That's my point in all this (as you know) - let's think through the real-world effectiveness of some of these requirements. What actually works and adds to safety, vs. what seems like a good idea but in the real world probably doesn't do squat.

I just got a ram mic for the new GX2150 and yes, it's pretty nice to be able to hear (and do) everything in the cockpit. It even has the AIS display on the ram mic. The combo is a power hog though. I'm thinking of taking it apart and disconnecting the overly bright non-LED displays, just to see what that does to the draw. That damn VHF display was my cabin lighting for the SHTPs! Ahi, does a wire up the backstay count as a "masthead antenna?" That's news to me.

Pogs, same with me w/Matson. They thought I had a powered radar enhancer - they actually asked what I had because the ping was so large - it was just the standard aluminum Davis unit in "catch rain" orientation. I'd even taped all the edges so it wouldn't cut up my main. The diameter is just big enough that it still leaves 12" outside the tape. I hesitate to point this out, but the rules don't actually say it has to be mounted . . .

Re the crap on the stern pulpit . . . as I've told Andy, er Ahi, SSS requires just the pole. Grab it and throw it to mark the MOB's general position. But all the crap it's tied to makes it ineffective - and I've ended up dragging all that stuff inadvertently behind the boat 3 times I can remember, so I have to tie it down - so it's even less available. The small boats keep it all in the cabin anyway! I'm simply not going to fuck with it when someone's off the boat - I'm going to go get them and then use the Lifesling.

#48 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 31 October 2012 - 03:26 PM

We want a masthead antenna, not a backstay antenna like SSB. Max tells me he has the antenna on the top of his mast and ran the wire up the backstay rather than internal. I think that works. He can wait to run the wire inside the mast until he has it out of the boat for some other reason, if ever.

We are still awaiting approval from the USCG on whether a DSC handheld is a viable alternative to an EPIRB (PLEASE don't restart the discussion as to whether the USCG can require EPIRB, that water has long since gone under the bridge) but all of our research says it should improve safety which is the idea here.

We discussed better ways to mark a MOB like the new DSC device, small flares and strobe lights. The DSC device is still very expensive if you have to hang them on 8 crew, lights and flares are a night thing so we left it with what is pretty much standard now.

#49 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 03:47 PM

The Kannand AIS MOB device basically does not work with most receivers. By "DSC Device" do you mean a DSC/GPS/VHF Handheld radio?

#50 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 04:17 PM

We discussed better ways to mark a MOB like the new DSC device, small flares and strobe lights. The DSC device is still very expensive if you have to hang them on 8 crew, lights and flares are a night thing so we left it with what is pretty much standard now.


"What is pretty much standard now" doesn't work, and actually distracts the helmsman from doing his job during a MOB situation. I have never read one example of this stuff being successfully deployed and used to locate a MOB - not one - yet if you're walking into the store to buy this stuff it really adds up. I won't name names but three members of your committee have agreed with me via e-mail - I hope they speak up on this one.

A type IV (which is the USCG's intended solution) or the current pole but that's not tied to a bunch of other stuff - either one is a solution for daytime. The already-required PFD light and whistle is a better solution for night (it's on the person).

#51 4th place

4th place

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 04:46 PM

Will the US Sailing SAS requirement be the one day or two day class?

#52 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 05:24 PM

That's a different NCORC committee and I don't know where they are with the SAS requirement.

Since the current US Sailing version is inadequate, I was planning to attend one of Ashley's ISAF seminars to see how those work - but she's been in Nepal and last time I looked there wasn't much on her website about them. Now my November is filling up.

#53 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:06 PM

Just out of a little. Couriosity but when will enough.. Be enough? Ever wonder why there used to be lots of boats show up on the starting line.. And now there isn't? And funny thing.. The races were as safe as they want them today. Over the years,classes like MORA have disappeared, and it has slowly turned into a rich mans sport.. Funny thing , we didn't run into islands or sail into surf lines.. Maybe it's not the boat with all of this safety, but the person sailing the boat. All of these organizations want you to take their safety classes, but NEVER want you to take classes from the Coast guard aux. or the power squadron. When you dumb down something, all the safety will do no good. Sometimes you can't see the trees spite the forest.but jumping to want to make new rules when not always needed? What does one have to explain their job, or their title?

#54 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:16 PM

That's a different NCORC committee and I don't know where they are with the SAS requirement.

Since the current US Sailing version is inadequate, I was planning to attend one of Ashley's ISAF seminars to see how those work - but she's been in Nepal and last time I looked there wasn't much on her website about them. Now my November is filling up.


I'm attending the ISAF session at SFYC on Nov 10 - 11, if there is any space left local skippers especially should knock off this requirement.

As of 18 October there was still room for new signups.

The requirement for training will be phased in fairly slowly, but still.

I can't find a website announcement for this course, but interested parties might inquire with Ashley amperrin@racingyachtmanagement.com

#55 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:17 PM

Will the US Sailing SAS requirement be the one day or two day class?


Presently the requirement doc reads "US Sailing Sanctioned" so presumably the one-day flavor is OK. But maybe this will change in the final version.

#56 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:20 PM

And think of this one YOU say it will make things safer. And when there is another incident.. Those attorneys WILL come after YOU because you said that it won't happen,because you said it was safer. Just a thought.
Maybe there needs to be a new race association.. Let advertising on all of the races, Coast Guard requirements on the boat. And a radio.other than that You are on your own. If you feel safer with it, put it on. It's called thinking, and common sense. What is happening now is you are to STUPID to know and we have to tell you what to do, with rules and regulations.

#57 casc27

casc27

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,512 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:29 PM

Wow, that's pretty fuel efficient, Bob. I have to agree with one eyed jack about the 8 hour fuel requirement being onerous, especially for us smaller, outboard powered boats. (That's at least 6 gallons of gas at my usual 1.5 +/- burn rate.) And the things are nearly useless offshore unless its near completely calm. So, your argument about them being most useful for emergency ship avoidance is somewhat accurate. The fact that most of us take them off the transom and stow them below makes this kind of emergency use less practical.

Now I have to go measure my anchor line. 200 feet seems longer than I currently have...I think.

Edit: Bob, I'd love to hear what the mods do to the power draw on the gx2150. I have the same set up and like it alot but it is a power pig, to be sure. Hasn't been an issue for single day races. But you never know, I may go farther...

32 nm is barely 2 gallons for my little Yanmar 1GM so not a problem here. Outboards are pretty useless though if it's rough (like when you'd lose your rig), especially if transom-mounted. That's my point in all this (as you know) - let's think through the real-world effectiveness of some of these requirements. What actually works and adds to safety, vs. what seems like a good idea but in the real world probably doesn't do squat.

I just got a ram mic for the new GX2150 and yes, it's pretty nice to be able to hear (and do) everything in the cockpit. It even has the AIS display on the ram mic. The combo is a power hog though. I'm thinking of taking it apart and disconnecting the overly bright non-LED displays, just to see what that does to the draw. That damn VHF display was my cabin lighting for the SHTPs! Ahi, does a wire up the backstay count as a "masthead antenna?" That's news to me.

Pogs, same with me w/Matson. They thought I had a powered radar enhancer - they actually asked what I had because the ping was so large - it was just the standard aluminum Davis unit in "catch rain" orientation. I'd even taped all the edges so it wouldn't cut up my main. The diameter is just big enough that it still leaves 12" outside the tape. I hesitate to point this out, but the rules don't actually say it has to be mounted . . .

Re the crap on the stern pulpit . . . as I've told Andy, er Ahi, SSS requires just the pole. Grab it and throw it to mark the MOB's general position. But all the crap it's tied to makes it ineffective - and I've ended up dragging all that stuff inadvertently behind the boat 3 times I can remember, so I have to tie it down - so it's even less available. The small boats keep it all in the cabin anyway! I'm simply not going to fuck with it when someone's off the boat - I'm going to go get them and then use the Lifesling.



#58 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:32 PM

"What is pretty much standard now" doesn't work, and actually distracts the helmsman from doing his job during a MOB situation.


As I said above, I agree with this view -- but it is a trickle-down req from the OSRs. But then, so was 2 anchors and an emergency rudder, which got deleted. I know I spent a lot on my e-rudder when I started OYRA racing in 2009! I guess if you had 6 crew, then you could task one to push the GPS MOB button (not a NCORC requirement to have one, BTW), one to throw all the crap in the water, one to keep his eye on the MOB, and still some left over to sail the boat. The OSRs are definitely written from the fully crewed POV.

I think SC27s (?) have a built-in stern tube for their MOB pole, but I'm not drilling a big hole in the boat just for that!

I use my MOB pole for MOB practice, as I am VERY motivated to get this $160 item back on the boat. It's as good as using live crew! ;)

#59 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 31 October 2012 - 06:45 PM


"What is pretty much standard now" doesn't work, and actually distracts the helmsman from doing his job during a MOB situation.


As I said above, I agree with this view -- but it is a trickle-down req from the OSRs. But then, so was 2 anchors and an emergency rudder, which got deleted. I know I spent a lot on my e-rudder when I started OYRA racing in 2009! I guess if you had 6 crew, then you could task one to push the GPS MOB button (not a NCORC requirement to have one, BTW), one to throw all the crap in the water, one to keep his eye on the MOB, and still some left over to sail the boat. The OSRs are definitely written from the fully crewed POV.

I think SC27s (?) have a built-in stern tube for their MOB pole, but I'm not drilling a big hole in the boat just for that!

I use my MOB pole for MOB practice, as I am VERY motivated to get this $160 item back on the boat. It's as good as using live crew! ;)

i had an Express .. The MOB pole works out of the tube, to where we used to tie everything off . It would probably take a minute just to untie all of the MOB pole, ring etc to deploy.it was required but a total pain to just keep it on the boat. That is a good idea to use your pole instead of making somebody jump in for your drills.what happens if he does get into trouble?

#60 Delta Blues

Delta Blues

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,780 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:04 PM

For people like Christian, I would have prefaced this thread with:
These regulations are intended for Safety Equipment onboard, and their Operation. Some of this is preventative, some of this is reaction to a failure that occurs onboard.
It does not require Boat Selection, Boat Preparation, Picking Crew, Weather Courses, Navigation or Seamanship which are different disciplines than these regulations.

Carry on.

#61 casc27

casc27

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,512 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 07:13 PM



"What is pretty much standard now" doesn't work, and actually distracts the helmsman from doing his job during a MOB situation.


As I said above, I agree with this view -- but it is a trickle-down req from the OSRs. But then, so was 2 anchors and an emergency rudder, which got deleted. I know I spent a lot on my e-rudder when I started OYRA racing in 2009! I guess if you had 6 crew, then you could task one to push the GPS MOB button (not a NCORC requirement to have one, BTW), one to throw all the crap in the water, one to keep his eye on the MOB, and still some left over to sail the boat. The OSRs are definitely written from the fully crewed POV.

I think SC27s (?) have a built-in stern tube for their MOB pole, but I'm not drilling a big hole in the boat just for that!

I use my MOB pole for MOB practice, as I am VERY motivated to get this $160 item back on the boat. It's as good as using live crew! ;)

i had an Express .. The MOB pole works out of the tube, to where we used to tie everything off . It would probably take a minute just to untie all of the MOB pole, ring etc to deploy.it was required but a total pain to just keep it on the boat. That is a good idea to use your pole instead of making somebody jump in for your drills.what happens if he does get into trouble?


The MOB pole will work out of the stern tube on the sc27, too. I've experienced the "auto-deploy" in the past. Tends to really play havoc with your race progress.

#62 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 08:32 PM

Now I have to go measure my anchor line. 200 feet seems longer than I currently have...I think.

I'd love to hear what the mods do to the power draw on the gx2150. I have the same set up and like it alot but it is a power pig, to be sure. Hasn't been an issue for single day races. But you never know, I may go farther...


I also questioned the 200 foot rode and got an "amen" from a couple others on our club's safety committee - seems 150 feet is more typical. I think this may be up for review on the next round with NCORC. Let's say you drop the rig on the weather side of SE Farallon (or up in the Bonita channel) - how much rode will you need for at least 5:1 scope to stay off the bricks until you get the rig liberated? I haven't looked - it's an honest question. This is how we need to think and if the answer is 200 feet, I'll be the first in line at the cash register.

Re the GX2150, I'm reluctant to take it apart and void the warranty but I will at some point (before the next SHTP). For now I'll just unplug/turn off the ram mic when I'm not back on the helm, especially in lighter conditions when I can hear the main unit below. The fanciest 25 watt VHF isn't much good if nobody can hear it. You probably need to mount it in the nav area to be able to plug it into your GPS so the AIS and DSC functions will work. I used to have mine by the companionway so I could hear it and reach the mic, but now it's up forward.

I have to go out of town so keep stirring the pot. Ahi and the lurkers on his committee are listening, and I appreciate that.

#63 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 31 October 2012 - 09:07 PM

200' of rode and LOA/2 worth of chain is straight out of the PacCup requirements. Rode diameter and chain type/weight are specified per boat LOA and DSP, and the rode may not be spliced to make up the length.

I know, I bought 2 complete sets last spring.

The reason is the deep anchorage in Kaneohe (40+ feet) which may need to be used if there is no room in the marina. Our coast is pretty steep-to in a lot of places, so this one may be up in the air, though 150' is more commonly stocked at WM etc. Formerly, the spec was 'adequate' rode.

#64 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 31 October 2012 - 09:12 PM

Let's say you drop the rig on the weather side of SE Farallon (or up in the Bonita channel) - how much rode will you need for at least 5:1 scope to stay off the bricks until you get the rig liberated?


Here's the chart of maintop - soundings in fathoms. I would say that the anchor better hold in at least 6 fathoms to keep you out of trouble here (As you say, somewhere on the SE side). There is a 4-5 fathom bar/spot there you could try for, but if you are in trouble with a rig down I would give myself more margin for error than that (it's a judgement call how close you want to maneuver in before dropping the anchor). So, 36ft at 5:1 = 180' + plus some for cleating on deck. Even at the 5 fathom spot: 30' at 5:1 is 150' and you don't have any left for cleating and such. Honestly I think on this one they nailed it with 200'.

Attached File  far.jpg   222.81K   3 downloads

A question that has come up in the past about 'fairness' with respect to rodes is that the 'rich boats' may be carrying spectra string as rodes - strong enough but feather light and $$$$ - while the joe's will be carrying rather heavier nylon. Personally I would specify the rode as nylon to make it 'fair' to all.

#65 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 01 November 2012 - 02:00 AM

Just out of a little. Couriosity but when will enough.. Be enough?


I can see that you have an opinion and nothing I can say will change it. Fair enough. You are welcome to sail out the gate any time with only USCG gear (if you even want to have that) and I wish you fair sailing. If you want to make the effort to start a new group of people that don't want to play by others rules, be my guest. Let me know if you need the phone number for the USCG to get the permit that is required for any organized marine event.

You seem to forget that for a lot of racers (OYRA, Spin Cup, Windjammers, 11 of the 15 races) the equipment required is being drastically reduced. SSS will add a few things and the one timers for BAMA's DHF and IYC's DHL might have to add a few more things. (I did not count "things", it is an opinion) The list is a compromise. Many of the boats sail in multiple organizers races and this is an attempt to standardize so there is one list, not several. I am seeing nearly equal comments for stricter regs vs. looser regs so we must be pretty close.

#66 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 01 November 2012 - 02:48 AM


Just out of a little. Couriosity but when will enough.. Be enough?


I can see that you have an opinion and nothing I can say will change it. Fair enough. You are welcome to sail out the gate any time with only USCG gear (if you even want to have that) and I wish you fair sailing. If you want to make the effort to start a new group of people that don't want to play by others rules, be my guest. Let me know if you need the phone number for the USCG to get the permit that is required for any organized marine event.

You seem to forget that for a lot of racers (OYRA, Spin Cup, Windjammers, 11 of the 15 races) the equipment required is being drastically reduced. SSS will add a few things and the one timers for BAMA's DHF and IYC's DHL might have to add a few more things. (I did not count "things", it is an opinion) The list is a compromise. Many of the boats sail in multiple organizers races and this is an attempt to standardize so there is one list, not several. I am seeing nearly equal comments for stricter regs vs. looser regs so we must be pretty close.

you can have all the requirements, rules instruction to take etc and somebody will always figure a way to screw it up. Boating doesn't require a license,like a car. They have thrown that one around for decades. You can buy any boat you want and off you go. Like anything it just takes some common sense, but you read everyday where electronic this or that and never look outside the boat. Every time that there is an incident, yes it does need to be investigated to find out exactly what happened, if nothing else to let us know where somebody failed. It doesn't mean that more regulations or rules just have to come out. Now everybody will know not to cut the corner at the rock, and down south that there are islands that you can and could hit. We are not children. We don't need to have mom hold our hands while crossing the street. It is common sense that when a car is coming you might get hit. From what I have read, there are those that count on the coast guard to come rescue them when ever they get into a little trouble. One wants to be called a sailor, a seaman, so they need to act it. When something goes wrong , use your head to right it .No matter how many rules regulations, laws what ever, boats will sink, people hurt and maybe die. Just like crossing that street. That's unfortunately life. It is risk. What risk are you willing to take? Do you think the new bay bridge will not fall down in an earth quake? It should stay up in an 8.. but didnt japan have 9?so why not double the cost and build it for a 9?Risk factor. Even when everything is done right things still happen. It's been that way sinse somebody found that they could put up a mast and sail, and move that canoe or log or what ever. Just like crossing the street. Everybody has a level of skill to know what to do with out being told. And then there are those that are just stupid..you can have that boat on a trailer, with airbags completely around it and they will find a way to get hurt.Sometimes when something happens like LSC, everybody wants to jump on the band wagon and make new rules or laws.. Like in Colorado with that movie theater shooter. Right off everybody wanted to ban guns this or that. But none of it was done. One shouldn't use an incident to make bad laws, rules regulations.if they are nessesary why weren't they in place in the first place? Now we know not to run into islands, and not to cut the corner at the Farallons. But at least wait a while and not let the incidents make the rules.. Let emotions calm down and make good rules, not emotional rules. Racing is getting to be to expensive where there will be less and less participants.if that's what you want.. It will with more and more requirements that fits outside the risk factor. Just like that bridge that should stand a 10 earthquake.will we still cross it? Knowing that it might stand up or it might fail?risk factor. The one word that has since the beginning of boating is Captain..as in Master. The buck stops with them.their word is the last word. The total law. And when it hits the fan it's still his buck . Let us be our own master.As for the trying to get allof the racing requirements the same, what about the ORC category racing requirements with, exceptions. It is easier to take stuff off than to have to add it.and it will make it easier for out of area, state, or international people to be able if they want to race with us. As they would already have the required equipment.

#67 breezetrees

breezetrees

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 107 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:00 AM

How about flares? I set some off at a safety at sea seminar once and I remember thinking if I was ever as tired and scared as someone needing rescue, the last thing I would want is to start a fire that won't go out that you have to hold at arms length to keep from burning yourself or your boat. I'll use my strobe, flashlight and spotlight.

#68 Ahi Tuna

Ahi Tuna

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Location:SF bay and ocean

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:04 AM

Sorry One Eyed Jack, I don't know you. Do you sail in the SF area? Do you currently race any ocean races?

We are trying to reduce the equipment requirements that were in place and likely followed by LSC who was prepped for and practicing for Pacific Cup. At that time the OYRA which organized that race used basically the ISAF Category 2 Offshore Special Regulations with US Sailing Prescriptions and a few local ones to remove some of the more difficult and expensive items like life rafts. To at the same time argue for fewer requirements and suggest we use the OSR's seem contradictory.

We went through the Cat 2 list item by item to create our new local list. The group involved has tens of thousands of ocean miles and only added items that the group felt had a strong likelyhood of improving safety. Cost/benefit was part of each item discussed. A boat that meets Cat 2 will exceed almost all of our requirements with only a couple of exceptions, PFD type and use and anchor rode length.

I am not sure what your point is. The racing rules clearly state that the person in charge is responsible for everything and it is their decision whether to start or continue a race.

What are you trying to add to the conversation?

#69 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:13 AM

Jesus H. Christ Brendan, shut up will you? You sail out of Santa Barbara. None of this actually concerns you unless you want to come up here and race our OYRA series. All you're doing is pissing into our bowl of soup and I'm not into drinking it. The NCORC was faced with 7 different organizing authorities, EACH with their own M.E.L. It confused the USCG, and it confused the hell out of boat owners. The least noxious (and expensive) of the set of M.E.L.s was that used by the Single Handed Sailing Society. The NCORC used that as the point of departure for the requirements specified in that document above. There were additions from ISAF/ORC Cat II where it was deemed applicable. In addition, there are still a couple of races (e.g. Coastal Cup, Pac Cup)that fall with Cat I or II definitions where those M.E.L. requirements will still stand.

I can appreciate that you might have an opinion, but it would be nice if it were based on your participation in our series.

Gracias.

#70 4th place

4th place

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 06:08 AM

My boat is one of those who wants to race in the OYRA series or maybe single races next year. We won't because of the cost and hassle of the preposed requirements. If the SSS follows suit we won't race in those either. In the end ocean races will have fewer boats. That's the bottom line.

#71 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 06:20 AM

IMHO, that's the way it goes then. There are literally hundreds of races held each year in the bay in which you can participate following nothing much more than the USCG requirements, and the SF Bay YRA welcomes you to join in.

We wouldn't even be having this discussion in Europe. ANYONE racing offshore would be meeting ISAF/ORC Cat II requirements...no exceptions. Some of you guys don't understand the lengths that the NCORC is going to to make ocean racing accessible to you.

#72 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,683 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 01 November 2012 - 06:46 AM

My boat is one of those who wants to race in the OYRA series or maybe single races next year. We won't because of the cost and hassle of the preposed requirements. If the SSS follows suit we won't race in those either. In the end ocean races will have fewer boats. That's the bottom line.


Really, these reqs are no worse than what has already been in place for DH Farallones, and the SSS ocean races like SH Farallones, and SSS HMB. The former OYRA requirements (which for the last year or two were also used by Windjammers and Spin Cup) had a lot more stuff. As Ahi has said, there is really LESS stuff to get than previously. Even DH Lightship has required an EPIRB for the last few years.

Here are some big ticket items you no longer need:

1. Emergency rudder
2. Storm sails
3. Second anchor
4. No requirement for a hatch forward of the mast
5 No requirement for 2nd installed bilge pump
6. Lifeline requirement possible exemption for small boats where you stay clipped in the cockpit. ( Wow, I wonder what or who prompted that? ;) )
7. Only 1 fire extinguisher, not 2
8. Single hook tether OK
9. No requirement for a head or fixed bucket

OK, you might have to buy a 2nd bucket and splice an extra 50 feet onto your anchor rode.

The EPIRB is here to stay, there is an expectation on that from USCG and that's not one that is going to get re-fought.

So trust me, the barrier to entry in gong from bay racing to coastal racing (which is what we are really talking about) is a lot lower in cost terms, so there should be more people coming out, not fewer.

The training requirement will be something though that will keep people from deciding to do an ocean race at the drop of a hat -- I'm going to guess it won't be so easy to get some crews qualified, since the courses are offered so seldom.

#73 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:12 AM

Anchor rode length and fuel supply: These are clearly set based on our local geology in No Calif. The distance off-shore is not the guiding measurement for fuel, it is the distance to a safe port. Because N. Calif. has a fairly large distance between safe foul weather ports (often over 100 miles) and because the Farallon Islands are the distance they are off shore, the larger fuel requirement makes sense. Because it is generally deep off the N. Calif. coast, the longer anchor rode makes sense. There are plenty of places (even within SF Bay) where it can be 70' deep 70' from shore. Prior to sounding off on items like this, folks should read the charts of the area that this group is working in.

AIS vs Radar Reflectors: There has been a LARGE amount of discussion about this amongst ocean racers. Clearly, for those who can afford it, an AIS transponder is the obviously correct choice. This is particularly true now that folks will be required to have their antenna at the masthead (I'm hoping the AIS antenna is required to be up there). However, for all the reasons cited in this thread, it was decided that requiring an additional $500 to be spent was onerous. I'm pretty sure AIS will be mandatory as soon as the prices fall far enough. Estar, I agree that radar reflectors suck (I've read Stan's stuff on this.) but they suck less than no reflector at all.

First Aid Kits, Buckets, Heads, Storm Sails, MOMs: There is a long list of stuff that could be helpful, but isn't the "minimum" in the eyes of this group, and frankly I agree with them. Some judgement on the part of the crew is required - band-aid count for example. However, some is again based on local conditions and boats. Anyone who sails on SF Bay and across it's approaches realizes that they will be sailing in large waves and winds that frequently reach 35 knots. For example, a recent race to the Farallon Islands was STARTED in 40 knot gusts with sustained winds of 35 knots. The boats and crews that enter these races are quite capable of sailing in these conditions without storm sails; some crews chose not to race. These conditions would be cause for the cancellation of a race in many other venues, and could result in many crews breaking out storm sails if the race were sailed. Those venues need different rules. In addition, the local fleet includes many boats that are quite tiny and minimally equipped by many standards - it's why they are so light. Those boats would NEVER consider putting a head in the boat (yes they do have women as crew), nor would they seriously consider something heavy like a tri-sail, storm anchor, etc.... These same boats have successfully made the passage to Hawaii and back, down the coast to So. Calif. in 35 to 45 knots of wind, and one is now setting off on a circumnavigation (without a head). So they are well tested over 30 years of racing and are probably safer than many larger more heavily equipped boats. Again, local conditions and testing have lead to a conclusion that is different from the ISAF regulations.

Brevity and Standardization: In the SF Bay area there have been a plethora of "standards", sometimes mutually exclusive, that have driven racers nuts and reduced participation in races. Additionally, the "standards" that were in use required wading through pages (over 20) of "suggestions and recommendations" as opposed to "requirements". How does one conform to a recommendation? By making the list much much smaller and gaining a lot of support from the various organizing authorities, there is a better chance that one can equip a boat once and go sailing in many places. This, at least so far, has lead a number of sailors to indicate that they will join in races that they wouldn't have otherwise sailed. So, despite what some posters here have said, this standardization and brevity is leading to increased participation in racing - not the opposite. We will know in a year or two, but early indications are that it is working. Finally, to continue the quest towards standardization and brevity, many of us from the Monterey Bay will adopt the NCORC list as standard. The critical geographic and weather conditions are similar enough to the Gulf of the Farallons that this list will work quite well for Monterey Bay racing.

Training - not the topic of this thread: Finally, the NCORC - SAS training requirement is proposed to be phased in so that folks will have a chance to get educated. It is already required for the Bermuda Race and many others, so it should come as no surprise that this was coming. It is worth noting that the causes of the two fatal crashes on the California coast this last year were mis-judgements on the part of the crew. LSC sailing in water that was too shallow and Aegean not keeping a look out. There was probably no piece of "equipment" that could have kept these boats safe. After they crashed, then various other equipment related issues came to light. But the real root cause of the crashes was a lack of good judgement and seamanship. My understanding is that the NCORC will be making further recommendations in the area of training in the months to come; which I am looking forward to. Fortunately, no one was injured going to the aid of the crew of LSC or Aegean, but racing around sailors who don't exhibit good judgement and seamanship is dangerous for everyone - not just the sailors exhibiting the lack.

BV

#74 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:12 PM

Sorry One Eyed Jack, I don't know you. Do you sail in the SF area? Do you currently race any ocean races?

We are trying to reduce the equipment requirements that were in place and likely followed by LSC who was prepped for and practicing for Pacific Cup. At that time the OYRA which organized that race used basically the ISAF Category 2 Offshore Special Regulations with US Sailing Prescriptions and a few local ones to remove some of the more difficult and expensive items like life rafts. To at the same time argue for fewer requirements and suggest we use the OSR's seem contradictory.

We went through the Cat 2 list item by item to create our new local list. The group involved has tens of thousands of ocean miles and only added items that the group felt had a strong likelyhood of improving safety. Cost/benefit was part of each item discussed. A boat that meets Cat 2 will exceed almost all of our requirements with only a couple of exceptions, PFD type and use and anchor rode length.

I am not sure what your point is. The racing rules clearly state that the person in charge is responsible for everything and it is their decision whether to start or continue a race.

What are you trying to add to the conversation?

that there are some that you could give them all the training in the world and they still don't learn. When are you going to recommend that people may want to take at least the basic classes through the coast guard aux or the power squadron? And why are all of these recomendations coming out now? And not before? And yes I do sail in Northern and central California. And right now I don't have a boat but am getting one designed to be built when I am financially ready for it. But with the cost of everything that is required to be "safer" it will be questionable that it will be raced outside the gate. Tahoe sounds good. That is the sad part. And like I said what is the risk factor? And the skill level. That should be left up to the master.he is the one that is responsible for everything on that vessel no matter how small it is. And yes the racing rules state that the master is in charge for all decisions, but according to these recomendations, the race committee has the right to inspect the vessels to see if that master has all of the required equipment on the vessel, even if that master and crew deem that it isn't needed.. risk factor..and one day unfortunately it will all boil down in court. And not on the race course. YRA and the current convening authority of sail boat racing apparently doesn't want to help us financially by letting us have sponsers. Every boat that I've seen pictures of in Europe, have some companies name on the sails and boat. That would at least help make owning a boat and having all of the required equipment easier to purchase and maybe not having a fleet slowly shrink over the decades. That is my point. It's funny how people were able to safely sail and race before there were a massive amount of regulations and requirements.

#75 4th place

4th place

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:17 PM

IMHO, that's the way it goes then. There are literally hundreds of races held each year in the bay in which you can participate following nothing much more than the USCG requirements, and the SF Bay YRA welcomes you to join in.

We wouldn't even be having this discussion in Europe. ANYONE racing offshore would be meeting ISAF/ORC Cat II requirements...no exceptions. Some of you guys don't understand the lengths that the NCORC is going to to make ocean racing accessible to you.


This isn't Europe. Having a good MEL for the spring races like Farallones is fine. Having the same blanket list for a mid-summer race to HMB or Drakes is overkill.

#76 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:32 PM

You're kidding right? I arrived under the gate at midnight 9/10...after sailing for 150 miles in 35 kts, 10' steep, breaking seas on top of an 8', 8 second swell. It was the ONLY time in our 23 day passage that I became nervous. We were doing 12s with a reefed main and storm jib because our #4 turned us into an out of control rocket ship.

Don't kid yourself that late summer/early fall is benign. I can assure you that you can get your ass kicked out there.

#77 4th place

4th place

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 59 posts

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:53 PM

You're kidding right? I arrived under the gate at midnight 9/10...after sailing for 150 miles in 35 kts, 10' steep, breaking seas on top of an 8', 8 second swell. It was the ONLY time in our 23 day passage that I became nervous. We were doing 12s with a reefed main and storm jib because our #4 turned us into an out of control rocket ship.

Don't kid yourself that late summer/early fall is benign. I can assure you that you can get your ass kicked out there.


This is why I don't like forums like this. Anyway, I appreciate the council and other boards efforts and understand they are trying to help. I just hope they are open and listen to some of the other opinions and are flexible for the different races and in the end have rules that don't discourage future participants.

#78 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:52 PM

4th place,

I really can't see how a REDUCTION in the number of regulations and STANDARDIZATION of the rules so that the competitors don't have to add and remove stuff to fit the various incompatible rules could possibly reduce the number of participants. Given what has happened over the course of 2011 and 2012, it is pretty amazing that the USCG is allowing a bunch of sailors to define the standard, as opposed to just dictating the ISAF MEL.

Let's be perfectly clear, I just sat through a lunch presentation where the introduction was done by the USCG Captain, Stowe, in charge of Sector San Francisco. She made it painfully clear that this sort of thing gets sorted out to the USCG satisfaction or the race organizers don't get a permit. She's thrilled at the progress being made, and even approves of the significantly shorter MER as being reasonable.

Captain Stowe expects folks to get their stuff together and that will mean a standard list of safety equipment, training for the sailors and inspections of the race boats before anyone gets permits for an offshore event. She was quite clear that she's not telling someone they can't race - only that they can't have a USCG permit. The difference probably has more to do with insurance than anything else, but it effectively means that whatever gets standardized on in this process will almost certainly become "The Standard" for all races outside the SF Golden Gate.

My understanding is that the NCORC is extremely interested in listening to anyone who presents a well reasoned position that is supported by verifiable facts. They are not particularly interested in people's opinions based on their own personal experiences. I know for a fact that many of the members of NCORC read this thread and have discussed some of the position taken and points made here. So, if you have something to say, look these guys up and say it. But be prepared to defend claims like the one you made about a summer race to Half Moon Bay needing less equipment that a spring race around the rock pile - every member of the NCORC is an extremely experienced ocean racer and has been gathering precisely this sort of data for years.

BV

#79 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:57 PM

I'll be honest. I'm all for rules that flat out discourage the inexperienced, under experienced, or un prepared from racing out there. ISAF/ORC didn't come up with their MELs out of maliciousness. They started them as a result of the 79 FASTNET, and they've continued to evolve with each successive accident or technology rev. As far as I can see, NCORC is doing everything they can to develop an MEL that will work for ALL of our near coastal races; and one that shouldn't break your budget.

As for different lists for different races...I can't think of a better way to end up in a meeting with the USCG asking us to provide rationale for different MELs for the different OYRA races. We already have a standardization problem, we shouldn't add to it. IMHO, that dog won't hunt.

#80 tolachi

tolachi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 224 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Interests:One Design Racing

Posted 03 November 2012 - 03:03 PM

That's a different NCORC committee and I don't know where they are with the SAS requirement.

Since the current US Sailing version is inadequate, I was planning to attend one of Ashley's ISAF seminars to see how those work - but she's been in Nepal and last time I looked there wasn't much on her website about them. Now my November is filling up.


Last I heard from her the available classes had filled up.

#81 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,108 posts

Posted 03 November 2012 - 03:22 PM


That's a different NCORC committee and I don't know where they are with the SAS requirement.

Since the current US Sailing version is inadequate, I was planning to attend one of Ashley's ISAF seminars to see how those work - but she's been in Nepal and last time I looked there wasn't much on her website about them. Now my November is filling up.


Last I heard from her the available classes had filled up.


That's terrific. I personally am very happy to see the increased interest in training and the reduced list of equipment. I think that's EXACTLY the direction the sport needs to go.

Slightly off topic . . .

It sounds like US Sailing needs to step up and figure out a way to allow and create the delivery of more of the intense sort of training (that Ashley has been doing) - a process to create more 'approved' moderators (With the skills and experience to do this sort of intense training) to start.

I do hope the training focuses on 'better judgement, especially when fatigued (and seasick and disoriented, etc)'. Its useful to play with the safety equipment in the training, but we fundementally need to (IMHO) buld better judgment and decision making. I have wondered if there is some sort of mentor program/process that would be possible/worthwhile in this.

#82 tolachi

tolachi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 224 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Interests:One Design Racing

Posted 03 November 2012 - 03:36 PM

On AIS vs Radar Reflector. Would it be at all reasonable to not require boats that go ahead with AIS to also carry the reflector? It would make me feel a lot better about running that wire up my mast.

#83 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 03 November 2012 - 04:20 PM

On AIS vs Radar Reflector. Would it be at all reasonable to not require boats that go ahead with AIS to also carry the reflector? It would make me feel a lot better about running that wire up my mast.


Makes perfect sense to me.

The AIS equipped boat might still want the folding alloy reflector for when the AIS won't operate.

BV

#84 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 03 November 2012 - 07:31 PM

Why don't we do like they do in many parts of the west side of the pacific. You want to operate a boat. You will be a licensed captain. That will make everybody on a higher playing field in education and will be what everybody wants. To be safer, except then you are no longer in that faults sence of security. By having your license you have more than basic skills in all aspects of boating.and have like the Masters license have different areas of operation. Coastal, unlimited, and inland waterways. That way if you just want to be in the bay, you can go for inland waterways, and be good to pt Bonita. Unlimited you can go anywhere,and coastal, you can be up to 200 miles off shore. Would solve lots of problems.. Educationed in all aspects of being a mariner.but then again you still have licensed captains that still hit reefs and bridges.

#85 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:25 PM

Fucking brilliant. Have you gone for a drive in L.A. lately? That asshole that cut you off to take the next exit is licensed too. You're freaking out ov er M.E.L.s, but you think a USCG Auxiliary course is going to solve the problem? You're giving me a hernia I'm laughing so hard.

#86 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:41 PM

Fucking brilliant. Have you gone for a drive in L.A. lately? That asshole that cut you off to take the next exit is licensed too. You're freaking out ov er M.E.L.s, but you think a USCG Auxiliary course is going to solve the problem? You're giving me a hernia I'm laughing so hard.

so what is your briliant idea? It's funny how where mariners have a license, the incidents are close to nill. What's wrong ya don't think you could pass?or you wouldn't have said what you did. As for the ass hole that cut you off,did he even have a license at all? It sounds like you need to take some meds and calm down.and glad I gave you a hernia.its funny how the auxiliary or the power squadron have been giving safe boating classes for well over 60 years. And are still around.solving the problem? Some can't learn no matter how much training there is. That is where the masters license will wash them out. Where would you fit in?

#87 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 03 November 2012 - 10:12 PM

My brilliant idea? I like AMPerrin's enhanced SAS courses. I'm in favor of random post race inspections with draconian penalties for violations. I'm in favor of mandatory per season inspections for boats new to our OYRA.

I'm open minded though. Specifically what are we missing by not taking a power squadron course? Seriously, what do the power squadrons safe boating classes have to offer us? Our starting lines aren't exactly the perfect example of safe boating, so it starts there. Would they consider it poor seamanship if we set a kite in 40+?

#88 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,452 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 03 November 2012 - 11:16 PM


Just out of a little. Couriosity but when will enough.. Be enough?


I can see that you have an opinion and nothing I can say will change it. Fair enough. You are welcome to sail out the gate any time with only USCG gear (if you even want to have that) and I wish you fair sailing. If you want to make the effort to start a new group of people that don't want to play by others rules, be my guest. Let me know if you need the phone number for the USCG to get the permit that is required for any organized marine event.

You seem to forget that for a lot of racers (OYRA, Spin Cup, Windjammers, 11 of the 15 races) the equipment required is being drastically reduced. SSS will add a few things and the one timers for BAMA's DHF and IYC's DHL might have to add a few more things. (I did not count "things", it is an opinion) The list is a compromise. Many of the boats sail in multiple organizers races and this is an attempt to standardize so there is one list, not several. I am seeing nearly equal comments for stricter regs vs. looser regs so we must be pretty close.


As far as I know the NC-ORC is an advisory group not a regulatory group. The races are still the responsibility of the club sponsoring the race, the USCG on permits, YRA/BAMA for ratings. The clubs are governed by their BOD's, BYLAWS.

#89 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:01 AM

My brilliant idea? I like AMPerrin's enhanced SAS courses. I'm in favor of random post race inspections with draconian penalties for violations. I'm in favor of mandatory per season inspections for boats new to our OYRA.

I'm open minded though. Specifically what are we missing by not taking a power squadron course? Seriously, what do the power squadrons safe boating classes have to offer us? Our starting lines aren't exactly the perfect example of safe boating, so it starts there. Would they consider it poor seamanship if we set a kite in 40+?

why don't you check them out. They teach the basics all the way to sextant navigation, sailing ,weather etc.and why are starting lines unsafe?It is an organized mess. And setting a kite in 40 kt wind is up to what skill that you and the crew have, and if your boat can handle it. Anybody can go out and buy a sailboat this morning and go racing this afternoon with Absolutly no experience at all. Kind of like never riding a bike and thinking you don't need training wheels.there are some that think that they know more than they do.for example there is a well known computer guy.. Knows everything about how to design and build them.. Bought a twin engine plane , passed the pilots license, thought, well I can build computers, and thought the same about airplanes.. It was way over his head and he crashed the plane on landing. Same thing with sailing.how many people that race today can navigate their boat when the GPS goes down?or they loose power to their GPS? Or are really able to read a chart? Or what the ship is telling you when they blast their horn..

#90 Christian

Christian

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,110 posts
  • Location:Hopefully on the water

Posted 04 November 2012 - 01:47 AM

On AIS vs Radar Reflector. Would it be at all reasonable to not require boats that go ahead with AIS to also carry the reflector? It would make me feel a lot better about running that wire up my mast.

\

What are you going to do when the electrical system shits the bed?

#91 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:06 AM


My brilliant idea? I like AMPerrin's enhanced SAS courses. I'm in favor of random post race inspections with draconian penalties for violations. I'm in favor of mandatory per season inspections for boats new to our OYRA.

I'm open minded though. Specifically what are we missing by not taking a power squadron course? Seriously, what do the power squadrons safe boating classes have to offer us? Our starting lines aren't exactly the perfect example of safe boating, so it starts there. Would they consider it poor seamanship if we set a kite in 40+?

why don't you check them out. They teach the basics all the way to sextant navigation, sailing ,weather etc.and why are starting lines unsafe?It is an organized mess. And setting a kite in 40 kt wind is up to what skill that you and the crew have, and if your boat can handle it. Anybody can go out and buy a sailboat this morning and go racing this afternoon with Absolutly no experience at all. Kind of like never riding a bike and thinking you don't need training wheels.there are some that think that they know more than they do.for example there is a well known computer guy.. Knows everything about how to design and build them.. Bought a twin engine plane , passed the pilots license, thought, well I can build computers, and thought the same about airplanes.. It was way over his head and he crashed the plane on landing. Same thing with sailing.how many people that race today can navigate their boat when the GPS goes down?or they loose power to their GPS? Or are really able to read a chart? Or what the ship is telling you when they blast their horn..


Would you please try reading the crap you write before you hit send?

#92 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:13 AM



My brilliant idea? I like AMPerrin's enhanced SAS courses. I'm in favor of random post race inspections with draconian penalties for violations. I'm in favor of mandatory per season inspections for boats new to our OYRA.

I'm open minded though. Specifically what are we missing by not taking a power squadron course? Seriously, what do the power squadrons safe boating classes have to offer us? Our starting lines aren't exactly the perfect example of safe boating, so it starts there. Would they consider it poor seamanship if we set a kite in 40+?

why don't you check them out. They teach the basics all the way to sextant navigation, sailing ,weather etc.and why are starting lines unsafe?It is an organized mess. And setting a kite in 40 kt wind is up to what skill that you and the crew have, and if your boat can handle it. Anybody can go out and buy a sailboat this morning and go racing this afternoon with Absolutly no experience at all. Kind of like never riding a bike and thinking you don't need training wheels.there are some that think that they know more than they do.for example there is a well known computer guy.. Knows everything about how to design and build them.. Bought a twin engine plane , passed the pilots license, thought, well I can build computers, and thought the same about airplanes.. It was way over his head and he crashed the plane on landing. Same thing with sailing.how many people that race today can navigate their boat when the GPS goes down?or they loose power to their GPS? Or are really able to read a chart? Or what the ship is telling you when they blast their horn..


Would you please try reading the crap you write before you hit send?

damnant quod non intelligunt! Vir prudens non contra venture mingit

#93 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:31 AM

So basically you're suggesting a licensing system equivalent to that employed by the FAA for private pilots. Do I have that right?

#94 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:00 AM

So basically you're suggesting a licensing system equivalent to that employed by the FAA for private pilots. Do I have that right?

no. The coast guard has licensing for masters, mates etc. if you contact the safety office on coast guard island they can give you info. Or where to get information. For small private vessels it would need to be a little different than the normal masters license, as you need x ammount of sea days as one of the requirements for the masters now. Like for unlimited you need something like 720 days of sea duty. For us they could require that we have training and understanding of where we would be sailing. Most of us already have this information but have done it by experience not schooling . Most of us would be coastal, unless you wanted to do Transpacific or the PAC cup. Then it is unlimited. But yes it is basicly like the FAA has with pilots.

#95 Cirdan

Cirdan

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 610 posts

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:13 AM

"No" and "Yes" to the same question? In the same reply?

#96 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:35 AM

So, having already found my way to HI (2x) and from HI (3x), and having won the 2009 PHRO 1A series, I would need to have someone from the power squadron certify me as competent to race to Monterey? That's a fine idea.

#97 One eye Jack

One eye Jack

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:Reno,Nv. San Francisco Bay , Santa Cruz,Ca. Tahoe,Nv
  • Interests:Sailing. I shot a man in Reno.. Just to watch him die..

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:02 AM

So, having already found my way to HI (2x) and from HI (3x), and having won the 2009 PHRO 1A series, I would need to have someone from the power squadron certify me as competent to race to Monterey? That's a fine idea.

i didn't say that. If you could pass the test . Then you are certified. But how many dont have the experience or the training to be able to pass the test.that is where the schooling comes in.

#98 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:29 AM

So you really are leaning towards the FAA model. Single engine, multi engine, etc. It's ok, I just want you to say it.

#99 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,875 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:30 AM

Btw, who writes these tests?

#100 tolachi

tolachi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 224 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Interests:One Design Racing

Posted 04 November 2012 - 03:58 PM


On AIS vs Radar Reflector. Would it be at all reasonable to not require boats that go ahead with AIS to also carry the reflector? It would make me feel a lot better about running that wire up my mast.

\

What are you going to do when the electrical system shits the bed?


Use smoke signals instead of my vhf?

You have a legitimate point, but I'm not convinced that level of redundancy is necessary for racing in the gulf of the farallones on my 24 footer.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users