528 replies to this topic

[One eye Jack]

Ok yes no strings it could be like the FAA test, without a practical test.
I am a retired crane operator. With all of the accidents, and the one that happened in San Francisco 20 or 30 years ago with the tower crane that fell over. We now have to take a written test and a practical test on each classification that we want to be able to operate. From all of the bickering and sniveling that went with we need it but what, came one company out of Florida. They wrote the questions, and what is required to be a licensed crane operator. There were some that threw up unbelievable resistance as they just might not be able to pass.. When these tests were given it was more for personal knowledge, then the insurance companies took notice that the license holders just might be safer, and finally OSHA and the federal government took notice, and the states are finally passing laws requiring it. And this license is nationwide recognized, so I can work in any state with my card and what ever endorsements I have. Has this made this industry safer? I would say yes. There used to be some that thought that they could just hop in the seat and be an operator, but they thought. And then there were not the guys that ride horses, but cowboy types. It has weeded through these types, and yes I do think we are safer.
Now you say WTF does this little story have to do with sailing or racing? The above gives you something to think about how to maybe make sailing and racing safer,and maybe our insurance people might either give you a rate break or make others have this also. Most of us are good, lots of experience, safe mariners. But having to take this test will one hone us up on something that we might have forgotten, prove to others that we really do know what we are doing, and weed out, or train the think they are types and the cowboys, no horses.And yes no strings have lets say 50 basic questions like the FAA, where it is basic boating , then have a section in let's say basic navigation, chart reading , GPS, and radio operation, rules of the road, rules of racing, other than big boat rules etc. then if you want to go in the ocean have coastal,and off shore,have a short test of that knowledge that you need there.Like testing to make sure that people don't cut the corner of the Farallons. Maybe get a group of sailors, racers, coast guard, all go out some place one weekend with everybody's ideas, maybe have a few beers, maybe dinner and hammer something out. I have ideas, I'm sure that everybody does on what needs to be on this test. And try to come up with what may make sense on the knowledge of safe yachting. And this has to be flexible to be able to change as new things come out. Will this ever come about? 20 years ago the crane people never thought it would , but when it was hammered out with an actual test it took off like wild fire. Is this idea good for sailing and racing? I think it might. But it just can't be one person. I'm sure everybody has their views on something like this some negative and hopefully some positive. Right now this is just a thought of one person and hopefully interest from others. All I know is it is getting to the point where funerals and memorials aren't fun to go to. I do believe that we all are smart enough to realize that itis time for a change, but what?

[Estar]

Ok yes no strings it could be like the FAA test, without a practical test.

Just as an FYI . . . the bounty captain was a licesened captain (passed the commercial tests), the skipper of LSC was a pro captain and would know the answers to any reasonable written test, the captain of Ramblier was a top pro and would know the answers, we know less about the skipper of Aegean but he was certaintly an intellegent guy and if he did not know them already could have studied for a noight and passed any written test. So, looking back at the most recent offshore racing incidents I would suggest that this sort of licensening would probably not have prevent any of them.

However 'offshore racing' skippers tend to be more competent than the average boater, and this sort of licensening might well reduce incidents in say small coastal power boats (where most of the fatilities in fact are in any case).

I saw a statistic a few days ago that more people drowned at the steeing wheel of a car than from a sail boat.

[casc27]

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.

I have a strong feeling the reflector requirement will remain for the obvious reason of power failure. It's not an onerous thing to have to haul around. I agree it's a bit of a hassle but it works (as well or poorly as it does) until the boat stops floating.

[casc27]

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

Don't you dare make me get an instrument rating to race my sailboat, gawddammit! Crap, the SEL was pricey enough (but I do love flying tailwheel).

[One eye Jack]

Ok yes no strings it could be like the FAA test, without a practical test.

Just as an FYI . . . the bounty captain was a licesened captain (passed the commercial tests), the skipper of LSC was a pro captain and would know the answers to any reasonable written test, the captain of Ramblier was a top pro and would know the answers, we know less about the skipper of Aegean but he was certaintly an intellegent guy and if he did not know them already could have studied for a noight and passed any written test. So, looking back at the most recent offshore racing incidents I would suggest that this sort of licensening would probably not have prevent any of them.

However 'offshore racing' skippers tend to be more competent than the average boater, and this sort of licensening might well reduce incidents in say small coastal power boats (where most of the fatilities in fact are in any case).

I saw a statistic a few days ago that more people drowned at the steeing wheel of a car than from a sail boat.

Ok yes no strings it could be like the FAA test, without a practical test.

Just as an FYI . . . the bounty captain was a licesened captain (passed the commercial tests), the skipper of LSC was a pro captain and would know the answers to any reasonable written test, the captain of Ramblier was a top pro and would know the answers, we know less about the skipper of Aegean but he was certaintly an intellegent guy and if he did not know them already could have studied for a noight and passed any written test. So, looking back at the most recent offshore racing incidents I would suggest that this sort of licensening would probably not have prevent any of them.

However 'offshore racing' skippers tend to be more competent than the average boater, and this sort of licensening might well reduce incidents in say small coastal power boats (where most of the fatilities in fact are in any case).

I saw a statistic a few days ago that more people drowned at the steeing wheel of a car than from a sail boat.

rambler the keel fell off. And the bounty was over run by a rather large hurricane . Many boats make it through a hurricane. Ask hurricane Mc Naughten. He was in a 21 ft boat on his way to England to do if I remember the Ostar race and when into and out of a hurricane.there are millions of cars , so the odds of drowning compared to boats. Most of them are from sliding off roads from bad weather. the master of the Aegean was so good that he powered the boat into an island. Don't forget where ever he is , or what ever he's doing, or the shape he is in. ask that Captain of the Valdez. The master is in charge and responsible for everything on that vessel. And anybody can sail in the ocean.. Is it competence or just plain luck. That luck ran out on the crew of a rabbit that thought they would do a race from San Francisco to moss landing. And never seen again, or the boat. And then there are the think they are. That is a person who's brain out runs their skill level. And as far as I remember according to sports illustrated "James Bradford recognized that he didn't have the expertise to skipper the boat in such rigorous conditions ,and took care and pride in working with a captain and putting together a crew he joined as a hands on member". So he didn't have a masters license, but apparently the helmsman did. He drown from a lack of a flotation device. When they found him he had a device that didn't work on his waist. So that was an accident waiting to happen from the get go.and what type of license did his person have? Like I said before I've already have gone through the ones that think something like a licensing is demeaning , below them and the list goes on. I've also seen where it has worked before and it has washed out some, but they probably needed to be washed out. The problem with most anti licensing types, is they think that they couldn't pass the requirements, so they want to fight it. Funny thing is that most of them studied and most passed, and are proud that they are licensed.

[One eye Jack]

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

Don't you dare make me get an instrument rating to race my sailboat, gawddammit! Crap, the SEL was pricey enough (but I do love flying tailwheel).

no you won't need your instrument, but you'll need 5 hours in an acrobatic plane. Open cockpit is the way to go.especially a Great Lakes. Landings are just a controlled crash.

[VALIS]

So, OEJ, are you for mandatory testing / licensing, or are you against it? Most of your examples are cases where the license apparently wouldn't have made any difference.

[One eye Jack]

So, OEJ, are you for mandatory testing / licensing, or are you against it? Most of your examples are cases where the license apparently wouldn't have made any difference.

Where some body navigates into an island, or gets in to close to the shore this might have helped as you would need to understand a chart, and be able to have basic navigation skills. You don't make dirt a waypoint. As for the keel falling off no. That was a structural failure. But being able to go down to day and buying a boat, and getting the bright idea about heading out the gate because it sounded so romantic in that novel and not having a clue, would be like giving ones 14 year old the keys to the car and tell them to hope for the best, and don't hit anything without any training. Most people would have very little problem passing, and might polish up your skills on rusty things that aren't used very often. And it would catch the totally incompetent person. We all know somebody that fits in this category . They would either learn. Or not be able to operate a vessel. And maybe this might clear up those brain farts that one gets every so often. This so far has just been a thought of one person.. We all want to be able to go home after the end of he day in one piece. And what can we do to be able to achieve this. I hate regulations and requirement.. Must be that 60s thing .And this training and testing ,what ever is agreed on , might give us a higher level of the way the coast guard looks at us, and might be a little more permissive to do things, or maybe not have a stand down when there is an incident. The only thing is maybe this just might have saved those that have been lost. It's just a thought and would like to hear what everybody thinks either good or bad, all I ask is to have an open mind or any idea that you might have to deal with this . This has been my thought.. Now how about yours?

[K38BOB]

Pretty sure boat operator licenses are not on the short list of homework items from the US Sailing report and prior/ongoing interactions with the CG. That's the first priority.

http://www.sfbama.or... US Sailing.pdf

[One eye Jack]

Pretty sure boat operator licenses are not on the short list of homework items from the US Sailing report and prior/ongoing interactions with the CG. That's the first priority.

http://www.sfbama.or... US Sailing.pdf

maybe it should be. They require you to take specific classes. So why isn't it expanded. It is all for being safer. One can have all of the required equipment on board, and don't need to know how to use it..that make a lot of sense to me.

[casc27]

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

Don't you dare make me get an instrument rating to race my sailboat, gawddammit! Crap, the SEL was pricey enough (but I do love flying tailwheel).

no you won't need your instrument, but you'll need 5 hours in an acrobatic plane. Open cockpit is the way to go.especially a Great Lakes. Landings are just a controlled crash.

A Great Lakes is a pussy cat to land. And it's also the most fun wing-over airplane I've ever flown. I think the Citabria is more fun to spin but maybe just because I like the reassuringly assertive recovery response.

[casc27]

Pretty sure boat operator licenses are not on the short list of homework items from the US Sailing report and prior/ongoing interactions with the CG. That's the first priority.

http://www.sfbama.or... US Sailing.pdf

maybe it should be. They require you to take specific classes. So why isn't it expanded. It is all for being safer. One can have all of the required equipment on board, and don't need to know how to use it..that make a lot of sense to me.

You're right: equipment won't save people if it's not used correctly. But you need to accept practical realities here. Licensing will not happen as a part of whatever changes are enacted due to the events of the pat year. Licensing for racing skipper/boats only and not all boats operating on the water (wherever that water may be) likely would not survive legal challenges. Or it will happen on a state level. The USCG is not going to require licences for all boaters, regardless of any potential benefit. It might not even be in their control to do so. Congress would probably have to do it. So, the thing to focus on here is getting a good MEL and training requirements from the review process that provides real benefit at a tolerable level of expense and time. If you want to start a crusade for licensing boaters you will almost certainly need to wade into the morass of politics and contact your elected criminal element, er, representatives.

[Beau.Vrolyk]

While I certainly think that a case could be made for licensing boat drivers, which is already done for a large number of craft that carry passengers and various types of cargo, perhaps the need for such licenses should be based on the actual risks involved. We have the data which you can read through here. I would respectfully suggest that only a few decades after we get the truly high-risk watercraft drivers licensed should we even consider restricting racing sailboats as a class. Sailboat racing simply is not very dangerous.

I'm pretty sure you've got a much higher chance of being killed riding a bike along a city street - which doesn't require a license - than you are in any costal sailboat race and probably in almost all of the ocean races - even those that circle the globe. In the US:

Total boaters killed 2011 = 758.

Total boaters on a SAIL BOAT killed in 2011 = 28. (source above)

Total bike riders killed 2011 = 618 (source Here).

Let's focus on regulating things that are genuinely dangerous and leave racing sailboats alone.

[One eye Jack]

When the crane license first came out , it was more for personal satisfaction, sort of like I did it, I have it, what about you. And as the private company that started it became more and more noticed and respected, insurance companies pretty well told their clients, to start licensing all of their operators or no insurance, and about 5 years later politicians started picking up on it as they were finding that the licensed were safer operators and they got on the band wagon. This was all started about 15 years ago , and not all states require this license, but if you get a job there they defiantly recognize it.
Sorry for another story that doesn't have to do with boating. Today when you are out in your boat and a super tanker goes by, how would you feel if that master may not be licensed? But they have to be so you don't really think anything ,except having that feeling that they know what they are doing. Some states like Nevada requires you to take safe boating classes, California doesn't. And no sailing or racing sail boats shouldn't be singled out. I believe that anybody should be licensed, so that guy that you just passed in that boat, you will know that he knows what's happening. That deal in Lake county at Clear Lake might, I said might never have happened if that deputy had a license. Now lets get off subject and go with Personel watercraft. Being the most to have incidents and accidents. Any joker with money in their pocket can for what a couple of grand go out and buy one of these with no training..nothing .. They are everywhere. You may one day be sailing in Tahoe or where ever and one of these jerks might not be paying attention, and run into your boat as you are sailing or racing for example.
Like the crane license, having a license will give you self gratification that somebody else is telling you that you really do know, and maybe one day when that other boat hits you and you are in court, pull that license out and show the court that you do know how to operate a boat , and they don't. Who knows. And maybe the insurance companies will pick up on your knowledge , and then the politicians. Plus to begin with you can have bragging rights that you have one. Like I said before, it is just one persons thought,and trying to make everybody a little safer, and confident in others boat operators. Ignorance can't happen any more. Funerals and memorial services are a bitch.
And Beau: one death or injury is one to many.you have 28 sailboat incidents, why not shoot for zero? And most bikers do it to themselves buy acting stupid and blatantly not obeying the vehicle code.

[NoStrings]

Bikers are not cyclists, numb nuts.

[BobJ]

NS, you actually read all that? Good for you...

[pogen]

Just as long as he doesn't quote or repost, NS can waste his time how he pleases!

[NoStrings]

Sorry guys, sitting here on the beach after a bike ride with Linda wondering how OEJ would ever manage to herd all of the NCORC cats into some kind of licensing class without those same cats clawing his nuts off.

[NoStrings]

BobJ, all I read was ....cranes...blah blah blah bikers...blah blah blah. My brain takes shortcuts and still gets the gist.

[K38BOB]

[One eye Jack]

Damnant quod non intelligunt.

[Beau.Vrolyk]

One eye,

I agree that the loss of even one person is painful. However, resources are limited and regulations are onerous in many many ways. Why in the world wouldn't one focus on something that kills hundreds, as opposed to five or six. In some fantasy land perhaps one can do it all, but we don't live in such a world.

In the real world, we can only solve some of the problems. I, for one, would focus on the many many hundreds that are killed and maimed in drunken water skiing and wake boarding accidents; leaving the extremely rare sailboat accident for long after I had saved hundreds.

This is just my opinion, but the moral obligation is to save the many, not the few.

BV

[stranded]

in another thread, it was said that safety requirements are written in blood

isaf offshore requirements draw in large part from s2h and fastnet lessons

some people here do not seem to grasp the concept of their training, equipment and prior experience as an interdependent package

all these three elements have a role to play in the various categories.

any one who sees the need to exempt parts of this need to have strong justification, in my view.

[WHL]

One eye jack scares me with his ill conceived ideas for licensing, contradictions and generalizations. As you suggest NS, he needs to read before pressing Enter

[One eye Jack]

One eye jack scares me with his ill conceived ideas for licensing, contradictions and generalizations. As you suggest NS, he needs to read before pressing Enter

Damnant quod non intelligunt.

[pogen]

This is just my opinion, but the moral obligation is to save the many, not the few.

Well that's what Spock said at the end of Star Trek II, but Kirk refuted him at the end of Star Trek III.

[BobJ]

Damnant quod non intelligunt.

No Jack, I understand quite well. I condemn the idea because it's a bad idea.


Jumped the shark, this thread has . . .

[pogen]

Damnant quod non intelligunt.

No Jack, I understand quite well. I condemn the idea because it's a bad idea.


Jumped the shark, this thread has . . .

Clearly you haven't been following the 'Rebecca' thread on Cruising Anarchy, Bob. It just gets better!

Anyway, I'm thinking now of getting ready for the LongPac next spring. I recall that the SH Farallones or equivalent is a qualifier, but what else do I need? I had a quick peek at the NOR, it seems there is no life raft requirement?

[BobJ]

Rafts have been required. See 4.34:

http://sfbaysss.org/...LongPac RRC.pdf


No one has said yet, but I wouldn't be surprised to see SSS use the new NCORC MER's with some additions for LongPac (like the raft).

[casc27]

Pogen,

Last time around (2011) longpac required a raft, an actual epirb (plb not accepted for the longpac) and a minumum spec for battery at 80 amp hours (I think), food and water for 7 days and extra reserve water (again, I think, operating from memory here). Other than that if you were equipped and prepared for the SH Farallones you should be good for long pac. I expect the docs will be out in a few months, but you could always post a q or two on the SSS site. It's nice to know what's required early so preparations are not rushed.

I think BobJ's comment will likely prove correct about SSS adopting the NCORC MER's as a baseline.

[pogen]

Right, Bob's link to to the RRCs has that -- but note that the raft is to be stowed, if in a compartment, one that is "watertight or self draining". So, possibly the standard lazarette arrangement would not qualify. This language is from the OSRs -- I recall that the PacCup rules has some modified language that would permit storage in a conventional lazarette.

I actually own everything under the sun except the liferaft, satphone, and SSB, so I personally am not much affected by all this discussion of gear.

[casc27]

I think in a lazarette would qualify. On my sc27 I tucked it behind the icebox/step (if you are familiar with the layout) and lashed it down. As long as you can remove it and get it to and over the rail in the allotted time and the raft is securely stowed you should be fine. The longpac did not require ssb or a staphone, only a vhf. (Here endeth the hijack. Although, discussing MEL's for longpac is more in line with this thread than most of oej's nonsense.)

[pogen]

Hey nothing wrong with a hijack, this is Anarchy after all.

The issue with the lazzy is that when you open the hatch, on most boats the lazzy compartment drains right to the bilge, i.e. if it floods the boat will sink. On fancy boats there could be a dedicated stowage that was self-draining and not at all connected to the internal cabin volume. On more modern bigger boats there can be room aft of the rudderpost or on the transom for this stowage.

[BobJ]

I store the raft like casc27 does - under the companionway ladder. The LongPac is either SH or DH so you only need to rent a 4-man raft, so 60-70 pounds. I can get that to the rail in the required time. I like keeping it under the ladder for weight distribution, but also because I can leave the EPIRB in its mount (so it won't go off accidentally) and still have it close to the ditch bag, which should be tied to the raft. i.e. Everything is in one spot down below, but next to the companionway.

As Pogen suggests, you may not want to open an aft cockpit locker in conditions that are causing you to get out the liferaft.

[pogen]

Well on my boat "under the ladder" == "where the engine is" so no joy there. For PacCup we had the liferaft in the lazerette, the ditch bag in the quarterberth next to the EPIRB bracket, and the satphone was in the cupboard next to the nav station. Having the lazerette hatch open in very bad weather or such is obviously not ideal, but I thought it a better compromise than lugging it both it and the ditch bag up the steps. If you have lost your keel or something you are going to have an interesting time of it with either choice.

[tolachi]

Does anybody know when the finalized version of these guidelines will come out? I'd like to get my boat ready for some ocean racing next year. Rather know exactly what will be expected before I start buying things.

[casc27]

Going to hit a few birds with one stone (post) here:

Tolachi, the final version of the requirements will likely be some months off. These things have been known to change close to race day. But for the most part looking at the most recent version (BobJ posted a link) will cover most of your bases. That should keep you from having to wait to start prep work.

Pogen, if you are local to the Alameda area you might go talk to Sal at Sal's inflatables (not making a plug, that's just the place I know) and getting an up close look at the size and shape of the raft. The only other spot I thought might work in my boat was right on the very aft part of the v-berth. But, like BobJ, I preferred the weight farther aft.

BobJ, I like to think by the time I am getting in the raft the boat is already sinking so opening the laz hatch might be less of a concern. And just what are these lazarette and cockpit lockers of which you speak?

[BobJ]

According to yesterday's 'Lectronic Latitude, NCORC's MER committee wants your comments by 11/16. I read somewhere that they have one more meeting coming up in early December, so I assume they are trying to get it done by the end of the year. That should be possible based on the last draft. Likely tweaks are in the MOB gear and lifelines, but there could be others.

You can absolutely swing by Sal's with a tape measure and he'll let you look at the rafts. Or the 4-person valise rafts are similar in size - pick a couple online and check the manufacturers' websites for spec's. Sal typically rents the Viking Rescu-U so that's one to check.

My boat has a dinghy-style cockpit with no lockers and an open transom. The cabin portlights don't open and there are no ventilators. If the hatches are closed it's like a little barrel. Probably not a good boat for the tropics but great for around here.

[Ahi Tuna]

BobJ is correct. Our goal is to be final by the end of the year, hopefully before. We want you to be able to ask Santa for things you may need. We want to avoid any last minute changes and it has been suggested that once we have the final version we leave it alone for the year (2013).

Among the usual noise here and elsewhere we have received a few good suggestions, but nothing that suggests that we are going to add a new high dollar gadget. Most of the comments were positive, requests for clarification and some formatting notes.

The only areas in play are lifeline waivers, lifejacket definition and maybe MOB gear. All discussions are fine tuning and minor rewording at this point, I don't see new items or headings being added.

I would suggest that anyone use the draft list for planning purposes. Start doing your research and make your list. Buy it if you see a deal and if not you have plenty of time to wait for an after holiday sale or for your favorite retailer to send you a coupon.

Please remember that this list comes from SF area racers that all have boats and budgets and that we are trying to keep the list, the cost, and the pain to an absolute minimum.

[casc27]

Ahi,

Thanks to you and the rest of the comittee for trying to keep the MEL reasonable. When I saw the life line stanchion distance my first thought was "I wonder if the Express 27's meet that limit".

I still feel like the 200 foot anchor rode is excessive, mostly because to get a 5:1 scope more than 1/4 mile from the Farallones looks to require much more than that. I measured my own rode (boy does that sound like something a teenager would say) last weekend and it's 127 feet of 7/16ths 3-strand and 30 feet of chain. That already makes a VERY large bundle of line. But somehow I have a feeling the 200 foot requirement will stick. Will there be a requirement for line size based on boat size/displacement? If not maybe I can go a touch smaller and keep the coil a reasonable size. This is not a frivolous concern for boats like mine where the anchor must live down below and be brought on deck when needed. I can imagine this being less of an issue for larger boats with an anchor on the bow and a chain locker.

My biggest beef is the 8 hour fuel requirement, especially for boats like mine where the engine is useless offshore for all practical purposes. I really don't like carrying that much flammable liquid with me.

I did notice that your lifejacket floatation requirements would be impossible to meet. 33 lbs of floatation is the reg for inflatables. I did a quick search and was unable to locate a non-inflatable Type I jacket with more than about 23 lbs of floatation. (The spec per USCG says 22 lbs. http://www.uscg.mil/...asp#wearandcare ) That bulky jacket is going to require some wardrobe adjustments.

Thanks for getting this done in time for xmas lists.

[NoStrings]

The PAC Cup prep guide has rode specifications by boat length and displacement. Take a peek to see how your current set up compares...not that the NCORC is going to go down that road (yeah, did that on purpose).

[BobJ]

If it helps, I coil the anchor line in two halves, each tied off with a piece of cord. It's easier to move around that way and in shallow water I usually don't have to untie the second half.

Totally agree on the fuel (as posted above). I was hoping they'd structure things to encourage more of the MORC/MORA type boats to sign up for OYRA - if nothing else to give the Can some competition in their rating band. The outboard (and fuel) requirement will probably kill that. I'm not racing TOT in a division with a 273-rater. It's just a non-starter.

[U20guy2]

Hey nothing wrong with a hijack, this is Anarchy after all.

The issue with the lazzy is that when you open the hatch, on most boats the lazzy compartment drains right to the bilge, i.e. if it floods the boat will sink. On fancy boats there could be a dedicated stowage that was self-draining and not at all connected to the internal cabin volume. On more modern bigger boats there can be room aft of the rudderpost or on the transom for this stowage.

I recall the life raft on the Express 27 was always lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit. Trying to recall where we put it on the O34 - pretty sure it was in the same place lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit.

[K38BOB]

Hey nothing wrong with a hijack, this is Anarchy after all.

The issue with the lazzy is that when you open the hatch, on most boats the lazzy compartment drains right to the bilge, i.e. if it floods the boat will sink. On fancy boats there could be a dedicated stowage that was self-draining and not at all connected to the internal cabin volume. On more modern bigger boats there can be room aft of the rudderpost or on the transom for this stowage.

I recall the life raft on the Express 27 was always lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit. Trying to recall where we put it on the O34 - pretty sure it was in the same place lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit.

hard or soft case?

[U20guy2]

Hey nothing wrong with a hijack, this is Anarchy after all.

The issue with the lazzy is that when you open the hatch, on most boats the lazzy compartment drains right to the bilge, i.e. if it floods the boat will sink. On fancy boats there could be a dedicated stowage that was self-draining and not at all connected to the internal cabin volume. On more modern bigger boats there can be room aft of the rudderpost or on the transom for this stowage.

I recall the life raft on the Express 27 was always lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit. Trying to recall where we put it on the O34 - pretty sure it was in the same place lashed down in the bottom of the cockpit.

hard or soft case?

Hard case

The only boat I've seen that had a life raft stowed in a cockpit locker was the 323 the wife and I chartered and double handed in Croatia. I would never want to be in the situation where I needed it and face trying to wrestle that thing out of the locker. SF ocean racing where the raft is required makes far far more sense having it on deck vs buried some place under deck.

I don't recall the raft lashed to the cockpit floor being a problem for us on either boat.

[tolachi]

3. The deck including head stay must be surrounded by a suitably strong enclosure - typically
consisting of lifelines and pulpits - meeting the following requirements:
o Lifelines must be uncoated stainless steel wire or Dyneema/Spectra line with spliced
terminations. A knotted multipart lashing segment not to exceed 6” tying lifelines to pulpits
is allowed.
o Maximum spacing between lifeline supports (e.g. stanchions) is 87”. 10/23/2012 Draft version 1.04
o Boats 28’ and under must have at least one lifeline with 18” minimum height above deck,
a maximum vertical gap of 18” (a taller enclosure requires second lifeline) and a minimum
diameter of 1/8”
o Boats over 28’ must have at least two lifelines with 24” minimum height above deck,
maximum vertical gap of 15” and a minimum diameter of 5/32” for boats to 43’, and 3/16”
for boats over 43’.
o Trimarans are exempted from the lifeline requirement where there is a trampoline
outboard of the main hull, except that a lifeline must run from the top of a bow pulpit to the
forward crossbeam at the outboard edge of the bow net or foredeck.
o A boat may be exempted from the lifeline requirement if all crew stay seated in the cockpit
except for short durations during sail handling and are tethered to jacklines or fixed
clipping points at all times while on deck. (3.14)

I don't see pushipits mentioned as required here. Is their presence implied by the use of the word "surrounded"?

[tolachi]

16. Watertight, high-powered searchlight, suitable for searching for a person overboard at night and
for collision avoidance. (4.07)
17. Waterproof flashlight in addition to above. (4.07)

I am curious about what differentiates a searchlight from a flashlight. Would it be useful to put a minimum lumen output to qualify the searchlight?

[pogen]

Searchlight -- it's all about the cool looking pistol grip. I have one like this --

[VALIS]

FWIW, the "Octaplait" and similar plaited lines stow in much less space than the equivalent three-strand. I replaced my 5/8" 3-strand anchor rode with plait and it made a huge improvement in how it stowed.

[Ahi Tuna]

I don't see pushipits mentioned as required here. Is their presence implied by the use of the word "surrounded"?

Yes, the intent is that the working area of the boat is surrounded by the lifeline 'fence' and that can be accomplished with a pushpit or a series of stancions and lifelines around the stern.

[breezetrees]

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.

Either no one cares about flares or it was buried by the one-hi-jack. Would the committee consider rolling back the 5 solas flare requirement to the USCG requirement of 3 day and 3 night (not solas)? It would cut the cost in half I reckon, these need replacement & disposal every few years so it's not a one-time cost.

I also agree that 8 hours of engine runtime really penalizes outboard powered boats, and god forbid you go electric! But maybe this is the intention.

[BobJ]

Flares: With the homing ability via the required 406 device and electronic enhancements on rescue assets, I agree the flare quantities could be cut back. Inspectors love counting them and checking the dates but this is another area where we're living in the past. However if you're going to have flares (and we should have a few), the SOLAS type are so much better I think they're worth it.

The extended expiration dates allowed by OYRA and SSS make lots of sense and should be retained, but only if they're SOLAS flares.


PS: According to Robert Perry, there is no such thing as a pushpit. They are stern pulpits.

[pogen]

Hmmm I have a bunch of SOLAS parachute flares that expire 04/2013, I was going to donate a few to the SAS training this Saturday.

[BobJ]

Don't let my opinion sway you - I'm not a decision-maker. E-mail Ahi - his address is on the YRA website (under OYRA).

[pogen]

Well I'm holding off buying new ones until after the new rules come out and I see the demos. They are quite expensive, the good ones at least.

When I did SAS training (in April 2009, Vallejo) they did a flare demo using a whole big box of donated expired flares. The thing was, many, many of them would not ignite, or took some effort to get going. Years of storage in a damp closed boat had not do them much good!

[K38BOB]

Flares: With the homing ability via the required 406 device and electronic enhancements on rescue assets, I agree the flare quantities could be cut back. Inspectors love counting them and checking the dates but this is another area where we're living in the past. However if you're going to have flares (and we should have a few), the SOLAS type are so much better I think they're worth it.

The extended expiration dates allowed by OYRA and SSS make lots of sense and should be retained, but only if they're SOLAS flares.


PS: According to Robert Perry, there is no such thing as a pushpit. They are stern pulpits.

The flares are very good at assisting in fleet rescues (as is VHF DSC). 4 likely casualties in 2 Farallones races were prevented by fleet rescue. The fleet has the best situational awareness and response time for rescue. My understanding that SOLAS vs Regular flares is like night and day.

I'm not advocating DSC instead of EPIRB. I am reminding folks that the CG response time with EPIRBS is not likely as fast as a fleet rescue.

Another recent incident ( a keel fell off) on the South Shoal, other racers sailed by the distressed boat in the dark. VHF DSC would have been a benefit there too as would flares if they were on the person. Fortunately the VHF call and visual references allowed the CG and Pilot boat to have a successful rescue (in time- due in part to distance).

[BobJ]

(DAWG - I'm really tired of typing a reply and hitting Post, then getting the green bar at the top and it never posts. I've seen other complaints about this in the Q&A sub-forum.)

I attended the following year. I took several expired SOLAS flares (4-5 years past date) and they all fired fine. The difference in intensity and burn time vs. non-SOLAS flares was stunning, to where I decided I would not buy non-SOLAS flares again.

[K38BOB]

Anybody have experience with the laser devices?

[Estar]

(DAWG - I'm really tired of typing a reply and hitting Post, then getting the green bar at the top and it never posts. I've seen other complaints about this in the Q&A sub-forum.)

Damn yes. this interface is badly broken (And just happened again).

I attended the following year. I took several expired SOLAS flares (4-5 years past date) and they all fired fine. The difference in intensity and burn time vs. non-SOLAS flares was stunning, to where I decided I would not buy non-SOLAS flares again.

Solas flares are sure brighter, but the typical SAS testing is not representative of real rescue conditions - you are much closer to the flares and looking for them. If you fire off even the SOLAS flares at say 3nm, and are not looking directly for them, in any sort of daylight they are hard to see and go out (or below the horizon) pretty damn quickly. Remember in LSC they fired off a handful of flares from the island and no-one saw any of them. We have two sets of friends who fired SOLAS flares at night trying to alert passing ships and a total of 6 ships failed (apparently) to see them. Message. . . .sure carry some . . . but don't count to strongly on them, especially during daylight.

Anybody have experience with the laser devices?

Yes. Not all that much use for alerting other vessels. Don't know if it would be very useful to alert a helo or not - need some USCG SAR input on that. . . .but I strongly doubt they would want you shining a laser at their pilot. The ones I have tried are also hard to aim at any distance. Message . . . . seems more of a gadget.

Today . . . #! push your dsc red button, then #2 do a vhf 16 mayday, then #3 fire of the epirb/plb, then #4 call people on your cell phone, and only then start messing around with flares and such.

[K38BOB]

(DAWG - I'm really tired of typing a reply and hitting Post, then getting the green bar at the top and it never posts. I've seen other complaints about this in the Q&A sub-forum.)

Damn yes. this interface is badly broken (And just happened again).

I attended the following year. I took several expired SOLAS flares (4-5 years past date) and they all fired fine. The difference in intensity and burn time vs. non-SOLAS flares was stunning, to where I decided I would not buy non-SOLAS flares again.

Solas flares are sure brighter, but the typical SAS testing is not representative of real rescue conditions - you are much closer to the flares and looking for them. If you fire off even the SOLAS flares at say 3nm, and are not looking directly for them, in any sort of daylight they are hard to see and go out (or below the horizon) pretty damn quickly. Remember in LSC they fired off a handful of flares from the island and no-one saw any of them. We have two sets of friends who fired SOLAS flares at night trying to alert passing ships and a total of 6 ships failed (apparently) to see them. Message. . . .sure carry some . . . but don't count to strongly on them, especially during daylight.

Anybody have experience with the laser devices?

Yes. Not all that much use for alerting other vessels. Don't know if it would be very useful to alert a helo or not - need some USCG SAR input on that. . . .but I strongly doubt they would want you shining a laser at their pilot. The ones I have tried are also hard to aim at any distance. Message . . . . seems more of a gadget.

Today . . . #! push your dsc red button, then #2 do a vhf 16 mayday, then #3 fire of the epirb/plb, then #4 call people on your cell phone, and only then start messing around with flares and such.

My fondness for DSC is based on the real world example of a fleet rescue of 2 sailors not too far from the LSC location (and a lot less violent capsize of a 31 ft trimaran). The comment was that the flares (parachute) caused the fleet (behind them looking forwards to them) to turn to them which was a very satisfying visual for them and gave them hope. They were rescued by the fleet who received the US Sailing Hansen rescue at sea award.

VHF DSC is an electronic audible 360 enhancement of that experience with much greater range and announced position with precision/accuracy-including to the CG. A recent pacCup racer said they were in the middle of the ocean when an alarm went off that was impossible to ignore- they looked at every alarm until they determined it was DSC- everyone's first experience. Apparently a nearby freighter was curious and sent a "wakeup/interrogation call" to see if anyone was there. Sort of "fire recon" for military types. or cockpit wakeup alarm by the tower for pilots.

Another incident locally in DHLS when a boat opened up and went down quickly- the last boat in the fleet but not by much. Elderly gentlemen. I can't help but wonder if a personal DSC VHF would have been a different outcome with the next to last boat looking back. Personally I don't think a personal epirb would have been effective rescue due to response time. Epirb would certainly have enhanced recovery. Mandatory epirbs for local races was the result of that event.

Not sure if I agree with your sequence but its a reasonable one. Might be different sequences for different races here. Certainly worthy of investigation/discussion in conjunction with the other NC-ORC committees.

[Estar]

Not sure if I agree with your sequence but its a reasonable one. Might be different sequences for different races here. Certainly worthy of investigation/discussion in conjunction with the other NC-ORC committees.

In the Ensenada report recommendations, US Sailing was given a to-do to write up mayday signalling best practices - to include vhf/beacons/flares/etc (with an implication in the report that spot like devices should be quite far down the priority list). Not sure who or when that will get done - perhaps the SF groups can help lead it.

[K38BOB]

Not sure if I agree with your sequence but its a reasonable one. Might be different sequences for different races here. Certainly worthy of investigation/discussion in conjunction with the other NC-ORC committees.

In the Ensenada report recommendations, US Sailing was given a to-do to write up mayday signalling best practices - to include vhf/beacons/flares/etc (with an implication in the report that spot like devices should be quite far down the priority list). Not sure who or when that will get done - perhaps the SF groups can help lead it.

Noticed that.
Actually we put it on our list of suggestions already.

[Corvo]

... I agree the flare quantities could be cut back.

We made that change at the last F-to-F meeting. The requirement is now two parachute, two red handheld, and one smoke. All SOLAS and non-expired.

The extended expiration dates allowed by OYRA and SSS make lots of sense and should be retained, but only if they're SOLAS flares.

That went away as a tradeoff for the reduced quantity. If you keep a few expired ones on board, you'll be about as well supplied as under the old rules.

PS: According to Robert Perry, there is no such thing as a pushpit. They are stern pulpits.

Hallelujah! It's a faulty etymology. Pulpits have nothing to do with pulling, so why should there be pushpits?

[casc27]

There's nothing faulty about the etymology of "pushpit". The etymology just describes the origin and history of a word. Etymology has nothing to do with adding words to the lexicon. Common usage does that. Attempts to ascertain English died centuries ago. In the case of "pushpit" the etymology is short: the neologism is a humorous derivation from pulpit that first appeared in the 1960's. If I had access to the OED right now I would find it interesting to examine the publication history of pushpit's usage. That it rankles B. Perry just tells us that Mr. Perry is discerning and has his own taste for what feels right in language. I won't get started on my own list of things linguistic that have gained popular traction that rankle me. But please, don't say "very unique" within earshot!

[Corvo]

OK casc, would you agree that it's a folk etymology? Like chaise lounge? Still distasteful to me.

I like the turn this thread has taken!

[BobJ]

Here's his post. Given who he is, I respect his statements about the proper names for boat parts.

http://forums.sailin...6

[tolachi]

4. Toe rail of minimum height 3/4 inches around the foredeck from abreast the mast to the bow pulpit

I strongly feel that molded glass toe rails that many of the moore 24s have gone to should meet the toe rail requirement. From a safety perspective they seem completely superior to the 3/4" aluminum toe rails the boats originally came with. However, in no case that I have seen do they extend all the way to "abreast the mast." They stop 1-2' short as abreast the mast is a location where someone needs to sit and it would be painful to sit on them.

Am I misunderstanding the intended meaning of this rule or is there some reason that the molded toe rails should not be considered adequate?

Please see the below pic for an example. Gilles, forgive me for dragging your boat into this. And general apologies for posting twice about this.

[Presuming Ed]

[OTA]Everybody I know calls them pushpits.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/pushpit?q=pushpit
AFAIAA, nobody died and made Bob the Academie Anglaise. [/OTA]

[BobJ]

" . . . abreast the mast is a location where someone needs to sit and it would be painful to sit on them."

With big enough breasts that might be considered close enough - I'd ask for a waiver for starters. (Now about those lifelines.) The reality is that a smaller boat highly optimized for OD racing may not be a good candidate for conversion to an ocean racer.


Presuming, "everybody I know" frequently make errors with nautical terminology. That's no reason to perpetuate them.

[casc27]

OK casc, would you agree that it's a folk etymology? Like chaise lounge? Still distasteful to me.

I like the turn this thread has taken!

It looks like you are still ascribing baggage to etymology that it doesn't actually carry. Etymology just describes the history of a word and its meaning, which can change over time. Most words (we could say all words if we want to get philosophical about it) have "folk" origins because language evolves through common usage. There's no official body that issues new words. In general, words make it into the lexicon when they begin to appear in publication (news papers, magazines, books etc.). The interweb has undoubtedly had some effect on this but I have not done any research into how dictionary editors are setting selection criteria for new word additions.

In the case of the poor waif "pushpit" (gets no love it seems) somebody someplace coined the term and it stuck. I may be doing some work at UC Berkeley in a couple of weeks if I get a chance I'll poke my head into Doe library and see if the OED has any publication history on poor "pushpit." Meanwhile, you are never under any obligation to use a particular word. (Although, if I ever happen to meet B. Perry, I will almost certainly have to use dear old "pushpit" just for fun.)

[casc27]

" . . . abreast the mast is a location where someone needs to sit and it would be painful to sit on them."

With big enough breasts that might be considered close enough - I'd ask for a waiver for starters. (Now about those lifelines.) The reality is that a smaller boat highly optimized for OD racing may not be a good candidate for conversion to an ocean racer.


Presuming, "everybody I know" frequently make errors with nautical terminology. That's no reason to perpetuate them.

I like it when some breasts are sitting next to me near the mast.

And if they perpetuate the error long enough the "error" may very well become accepted usage. (And there are many currently accepted usages that really raise my hackles. But I'm old, so very, very old, sigh...)

[BobJ]

I, like, SO epic failed THAT! Instead of "Now about those lifelines" I should have written "Now about those stern pulpits."


Bob P wrote, "I think it is important for a few of us old farts to preserve the integrity of the terminology."

casc, you have a new mission in your nautical life.

[rgscpat]

oxforddictionaries.com says, of pushpit,


Origin:

1960s: humorous formation, suggested by pulpit
Guess a bunch of sailors are easy to fool. Is the usage more common on the eastern side of the pond?

[casc27]

I, like, SO epic failed THAT! Instead of "Now about those lifelines" I should have written "Now about those stern pulpits."


Bob P wrote, "I think it is important for a few of us old farts to preserve the integrity of the terminology."

casc, you have a new mission in your nautical life.

Ok, but tell me, how would you prefer the preservation: freeze dried or canned?

Now, about those breasts on the rail...

[tolachi]

" . . . abreast the mast is a location where someone needs to sit and it would be painful to sit on them."

With big enough breasts that might be considered close enough - I'd ask for a waiver for starters. (Now about those lifelines.) The reality is that a smaller boat highly optimized for OD racing may not be a good candidate for conversion to an ocean racer.

I'll save up for implants.

Moore 24s have a long ocean racing history and getting to do that sort of racing is one of the reasons to sail this boat. It isn't that much work to add or subtract certain pieces of equipment based on the type of racing you will be doing.

Care to weigh in Senor Ahi Tuna?

[Presuming Ed]

Is the usage more common on the eastern side of the pond?

More common to the extent that I would guess that if you started to talk about a "stern pulpit", you would get a quizzical look and a standard answer of "What, you mean the pushpit?"

[Corvo]

4. Toe rail of minimum height 3/4 inches around the foredeck from abreast the mast to the bow pulpit

I strongly feel that molded glass toe rails that many of the moore 24s have gone to should meet the toe rail requirement. From a safety perspective they seem completely superior to the 3/4" aluminum toe rails the boats originally came with. However, in no case that I have seen do they extend all the way to "abreast the mast." They stop 1-2' short as abreast the mast is a location where someone needs to sit and it would be painful to sit on them.

Am I misunderstanding the intended meaning of this rule or is there some reason that the molded toe rails should not be considered adequate?

I think you understand the intent of the rule perfectly. The mast is simply an obvious landmark to write into the requirement. It would be tempting to define the toerail endpoint as "10% of LOA forward of the mast" or some such wording, but we are trying to keep the document simple and concise. As BobJ suggests, an exemption may be the way to go. Nobody wants to exclude Moore 24s from ocean races.

[NoStrings]

I have no problem with you guys dumping the fuel because it just doesn't make sense in your opinion...as long as you carry the equivalent amount of weight.

[Ahi Tuna]

I think Corvo answered the Moore 24 toe rail question. If we were to define every possible scenario our simple concise document would look a lot like that other long, hard to read document and that is not at all what we are trying to do. A waiver process is part of the plan.

The international version of this, the ISAF OSR's, requires an inboard engine. Long ago it was changed in the local OYRA (and SSS rules?) that an outboard was an acceptable alternative for smaller boats (sub 30'). Newer boats are getting lighter and bigger and boats like a Flying Tiger and others 30'+ use outboards so we dropped the length requirement all in an attempt to be inclusive.

Now the argument is that you don't want to carry fuel because your outboard does not actually work well in ocean conditions? My inboard is not great in 12' seas and 25kt winds, does that mean I don't need fuel either?

What is your alternative? The idea is that you need to be self sufficient. If for whatever reason you can't sail home, rig down, no wind, something else broken, you need to get back from potentially the farthest point on the race course. Coming back hours or days later after you jury rig or wait for the wind to come up is not an option. We waived the emergency water becasue you are not going to be out there long enough to need it.

Times have changed from when the race committee waited around for part of the evening and after a certain time they went home and you took your own time and reported it. Now, even before LSC, the race committee has to stay on duty until all boats are accounted for (possibly even inside the gate). They have to report to VTS before the race, and every 4 hours until the deadline. If any boats are unaccounted for at the deadline they are required to call the USCG and the search and rescue process starts. The first thing the USCG will do is to try and call you on VHF 16. Did I mention that is why you need a VHF with a masthead antenna and that you monitor 16? One of the first things they will do if they can't reach you is call all your emergency contacts to see if you are home, but at the same time your contacts find out you are 'missing'.

The preceeding paragraph describes the USCG comms plan that is part of the permit, at least for OYRA races. I assume the other OA's have similar responsibilities in their permits, and one of the goals of NCORC is to standardize these as well.

Because this is an organized event somebody is keeping track of you. They don't get to go home until you do.

[Estar]

^^ interesting post. I had not previously seen the 'new world' so clearly articulated.

>> Coming back hours or days later after you jury rig or wait for the wind to come up is not an option.

I hope/presume it IS still an option if the competitor successfully makes contact with the RC and says they wants to be self-reliant and sail home no matter how long it takes? It would be a shame for the sport if that self-reliant skill and attitude was now off the table.

>> Because this is an organized event somebody is keeping track of you. They don't get to go home until you do.

Just a suggestion . . . if 'tracking' has become an integral part of the 'new game', you might consider actually using proper tracking technology. Gear like AIS and/or SPOT are decently inexpensive and could give the RC a complete picture of the fleet at all times (not sure about AIS coverage out the F islands?). I know you are trying to avoid adding cost and complication, but again, if 'tracking' is now a required part of the game, it might make every-one's job easier and minimize future stress and problem if you just accept it and did it 'properly'. (that may be more properly a decision/question for the race organizers and not for the minimum equipment list)

On the AIS/passive radar reflector topic somewhere up the thread, just a comment/reminder that ALL the stuff on this minimum equipment list is a 'backup' to good seamanship. A proper watch is the first and line of defense against hitting other vessels. In fog (around SF), if you don't have radar (or AIS receiver), the second line of defense is staying out of the traffic lanes as much as possible and in the lanes telling traffic control where you are (and potentially making security calls). The reflectors and AIS transmission are only the third line of defense.

As to whether passive reflectors are 'better than nothing' . . . perhaps, but I personally am not so confident . . . in calm water the ship radar will see you with or without a reflector - they can see seagulls and mooring balls, and in decent size waves, which creates sea clutter and rolls the reflectors thru the reflection nulls they might well think you are just another wave with or without a reflector. I think we can all agree that in waves (or even in flat water) you should not depend on the ships seeing you just because you have a passive reflector.

[BobJ]

"The idea is that you need to be self sufficient . . ."

. . . as long as you can be home by dark, dear.


"Now the argument is that you don't want to carry fuel because your outboard does not actually work well in ocean conditions?"

No, the argument is that if the outboard even can, it takes a lot more fuel to drive the boat at the required speed for eight hours in the ocean than it takes for a diesel inboard. And it's gasoline, so storage of additional fuel is a bigger risk.


These are ocean races. If what you say is true, it sounds like we're reaching the point where we can't run ocean races any more.

[Ahi Tuna]

I hope/presume it IS still an option if the competitor successfully makes contact with the RC and says they wants to be self-reliant and sail home no matter how long it takes? It would be a shame for the sport if that self-reliant skill and attitude was now off the table.

This issue is on the table to be discussed with the USCG. When does a boat leave the organized event and become an individual mariner, responsible for themselves? For example if a boat finishes Drakes Bay (a both ways, two race event) and decides to go home rather than stay the night and do Sunday is the RC off the hook as of when that boat finishes on Saturday? On any race that does not finish back at the start line, where presumably the responsibility for the fleet is transferred from the start to the finish, if a boat drops out and goes home are they on their own? Most of us agree with you but we are working on it.

>> Because this is an organized event somebody is keeping track of you. They don't get to go home until you do.

Just a suggestion . . . if 'tracking' has become an integral part of the 'new game', you might consider actually using proper tracking technology. Gear like AIS and/or SPOT are decently inexpensive and could give the RC a complete picture of the fleet at all times (not sure about AIS coverage out the F islands?). I know you are trying to avoid adding cost and complication, but again, if 'tracking' is now a required part of the game, it might make every-one's job easier and minimize future stress and problem if you just accept it and did it 'properly'. (that may be more properly a decision/question for the race organizers and not for the minimum equipment list)

Electronic tracking is not yet part of the game for these coastal races. For the longer ones it is. We have to balance the wide variety in the races and racers that are included here. We have boats that might do only a single race in the venue a year, maybe ever, and we have boats that do a full season or more by combining races. What is inexpensive for a guy doing 9 races a year over several years could be prohibitive for one doing a single race.

Another issue with tracking is what do you do if a boats signal goes dark? Do you immediately call the USCG or do you call them on the radio? I say you call them on the radio. If our backup to tracking is the radio, why not just start there? VHF is already required and we are working on improving RC coverage of the venue. Scheduled roll calls are already part of at least one race and may be added to others that go long.

While tracking is not required, keeping track of the fleet is. And whether this is done with electronics, radio, or simply counting boats that finish somebody is still involved beyond the self reliant competitor.

[Ahi Tuna]

"Now the argument is that you don't want to carry fuel because your outboard does not actually work well in ocean conditions?"

No, the argument is that if the outboard even can, it takes a lot more fuel to drive the boat at the required speed for eight hours in the ocean than it takes for a diesel inboard. And it's gasoline, so storage of additional fuel is a bigger risk.


These are ocean races. If what you say is true, it sounds like we're reaching the point where we can't run ocean races any more.

How much fuel does it take you to go 30 miles?

[BobJ]

How much fuel does it take you to go 30 miles?

About two gallons if I'm running flat out. But I have a diesel inboard (1GM10), down under the hull where the prop stays in the water.


"When does a boat leave the organized event and become an individual mariner, responsible for themselves?"

According to both the old and new rules, he's responsible for himself throughout.


I think you (and the CG) need to define "accounted for." If a skipper is still on the course at the deadline he's not going to finish the race. The race is over. He has called in (or relayed) his position - he is accounted for at the end of the event and the R/C can go home. If the CG wants the R/C to stick around until he crosses the former finish line, that's unreasonable. The skipper may decide to head for the closest port, or as is common in the LongPac, to Drake's Bay for a night or two.

[Beau.Vrolyk]

I've had a few conversations with folks in the Moore and Express-27 fleets and the requirement for a fixed VHF and Masthead antenna is becoming an "issue". As a Moore owner, I can see why. The weight and windage of the VHF masthead antenna, COAX and fixed VHF below would be a big deal in one-design racing; so anyone who did comply would probably be removing all that for one-design and installing it for Ocean Racing (if this regulation isn't waived). While some of us have equipped our boats to allow the quick removal/install of things like life-lines and pulpits, dropping the rig and extracting COAX is more than a little much. Further, as is probably obvious, holding a VHF antenna up over your head on a Moore gets it 1/3 of the way to the masthead height anyway. It's not like a 50' sloop where the masthead antenna is going to be 60' or more above sea level. My personal opinion is requiring two handheld VHFs with DSC is a heck of a lot better idea than fixing one to the boat; particularly for DHF where each crew should have a VHF on their person.

Regarding lifelines and being "surrounded" by pushpits, pulpits, dogpits or whatever, there is a fundamentally different view amongst those of us who have small keelboats that we sail like dinghies vs those who sail them like small ocean going keel boats. The dinghy group either has no lifelines, extremely small ones, or lifelines whose real purpose is as a hiking aid (regardless of what the rules say). I would propose that for those without lifelines, or with hiking-aid lifelines (which is most of the Express-27 fleet and a lot of the Moore fleet), a waiver is going to be needed here or many of these fleets won't ocean race. I would suppose this will be in exchange for jack-lines, hard points and mandatory tethers (which are actually used as opposed to left un-used as on LSC). Given the small size of these boats, hard points along the center-line of the boat turn out to be as effective (and probably safer) than jack lines. Note, the NC-ORC proposal has set the tether at one per crew. A reasonable compromise might be to toss the lifelines in exchange for dual tethers and a requirement that at least one of them be hooked up while on deck.

Regarding toerails, the issue is probably how high they are and how slippery they are. A smooth fiberglass toe-rail is a lot harder to get a foot hold on than a alloy slotted rail with holes, especially the ones that don't have a vertical edge on the inboard side. Non-skid along the toe rail for the fiberglass ones would certainly help, although I haven't seen any done that way. A 3/4" toe rail isn't much to keep the bowman aboard with out off the rock pile while doing a headsail change, especially on a non lifeline boat. I doubt that anyone would have trouble getting a waiver for the foot wide gap forward of the shrouds, but I'm not the inspector.

I am actually surprised there hasn't been more carping about the requirement for an "electronic depth sounder". While it is obvious, based on what happened to LSC who was in 28' of water when they got smacked, why safety folks feel that the sailors need to know the depth, many folks who are in the dinghy sailing category for smaller keel boats don't seem to have depth finders. Some folks, mistakenly, believe this will require another thru-hull, but I have one that works just fine through the hull - no hole required. It also has turned out to be pretty damn helpful in the 3-bridge and ditch runs for finding or avoiding current.

I know that the NC ORC guys who drafted this are really trying to get it nailed down by mid-November. So, concrete suggestions are a great idea right now!

BV

[Estar]

Another issue with tracking is what do you do if a boats signal goes dark? Do you immediately call the USCG or do you call them on the radio?

Yes, that will certainly happen. But it could equally happen with a periodic vhf check-in procedure (lost electrical power, lost masthead antenna, etc).

With a dark tracker I would think pretty much everyone (including the USCG) would agree with calling them (radio and cell phone) first AND calling the fleet to see if anyone has a visual.

With a dark tracker OR with a missed vhf check in, my initial thought would be a principle of not sending out the SAR assets until either they have (a) made an active mayday (Epirb or DSC or voice vhf or flares, etc) or ( have been reported in (possible) distress by another vessel (or I guess finally are lets say 20% overdue with no visual or communication contact after several attempts). Have you had a serious incident where neither of those 'indicators' was present? It would be interesting to know what the USCG';s take on this question would be. I know they are very practical and fully aware that comms equipment fails and that does not necessarily mean a vessel is in distress.

If our backup to tracking is the radio, why not just start there?

Simply because for the 95% of the time that the trackers are working it will be easier and more complete and organized and less stressful for everyone, and give the USCG greater comfort, so they will back off and let you manage the races.

Just as an FYI . . . I seem to remember that you will be requiring DSC radios be phased in . . . I presume you do know that with a DSC radio the RC can send a DSC 'position request' message to the fleet and automatically get position messages back from each vessel and then via nmea that can all be (pretty easily) displayed on a plotter (or PC). So with the DSC radios the RC could do position tracking without adding any additional 'tracking' equipment.

Let me be clear . . . I am certainly not pushing for trackers . . .And yes, I understand and agree trackers are a philosophical change, and it's certainly not going to happen this year. It just struck me that tracking is the logical conclusion of your very crisp and clear post above. So I am just suggesting that if you and the USCG really and truly expect and require the RC to keep track of everyone from start to finish, then it might make sense to at least consider phasing in the best tools available (which happen to not be very expensive (and at least in the case of AIS have other benefits) .

holding a VHF antenna up over your head on a Moore gets it 1/3 of the way to the masthead height anyway. It's not like a 50' sloop where the masthead antenna is going to be 60' or more above sea level. My personal opinion is requiring two handheld VHFs with DSC is a heck of a lot better idea than fixing one to the boat; particularly for DHF where each crew should have a VHF on their person.

I think the primary concerns with handhelds are threefold: (1) They are NOT going to be held over the head for the entire race, so is the RC going to be able to get in contact with the vessel when the handhelds are in a coaming or where-ever they are stowed when not being used? (2) are the batteries going to be charged up? and (3) handhelds are both lower wattage and as I am sure you know the range is primarily a function of sqrt of height so the range will definitely be less for a handheld (even held over your head where it is sort of difficult to use!)

I am actually surprised there hasn't been more carping about the requirement for an "electronic depth sounder". . . . I have one that works just fine through the hull - no hole required.

Just as a comment on this . . . you can 'know the depth' pretty damn accurately (around SF at least) with a plotter.

[BobJ]

The EPIRB was supposed to be the answer for this. No distress beacon = leave 'em alone to race their race.

What's the problem with this?


Beau, I think much of what you suggest is in the current draft. What about running the VHF antenna down the backstay instead of inside the mast?

[Beau.Vrolyk]

Estar,

I believe that you'll find that the vast majority of MOB are recovered by their own boat or the fleet around them. While MOB is not the only thing that can go wrong, it's the most common based on a number of years of data from racing in the Gulf of the Farallon. Thus, the key thing is to get in touch with the other competitors surrounding whomever is having the problem quickly. In the races we're discussing - Ocean Races in the Gulf of the Farllon - the only boats anywhere out there are the competitors, a few fishing boats and an occasional pilot boat or large commercial ship. Many of these boats would be alerted immediately by a handheld VHF with DSC, despite lower in power and shorter in range.

Regarding the battery being charged, that applies to the battery running the fixed VHF as well. Keep in mind that quite a number of the boats in the Gulf are powered by outboards and have small fixed batteries that are solar or take-it-home-n-charge-it set ups. I think uncharged batteries applies to both types of radios. I think it would be much more important that it be a requirement that the VHF be on the person of each of the crew, especially in SH and DH races. The MOB, if they can, should be pushing the emergency button and alerting every boat within a few miles of them to their position and problem.

I agree that USING a chart plotter will tell you how deep it is around SF Bay, something that was available to LSC but was not used. But a depth finder displays the depth without anyone navigating or consulting a plotter. As many of the races in the area are SH and DH, it's a lot easier to consult a display on the bulkhead than a chart plotter. Personally, I'm ok with not having a depth finder, but I also know the drive for its requirement came directly out of the the fact that LSC was in 28' of water when she got hit - atop a shoal that is clearly marked on the chart.

Finally, I don't think any RC will have a chance in hell of talking to competitors who are near the Farallon Islands no matter what sort of antenna the boat has on it. I know from personal experience that the StFYC VHF - shore mounted, AC Powered, Antenna on the roof of the club house about 35' above the water - can't raise boats at Pt. Bonita because there is simply too much land and stuff in the way. If the RC of a race wants VHF contact with all the racers all the time in the Gulf, they'll need to set up a radio station/repeater on the Marin headlands to do it. If the RC sets up above Pt. Bonita in the parking lot (apx 500' above sea level) it is nearly line-of-site to the beach on the Farallon Islands and it won't matter at all what the boat is using - so a hand held would work fine.

BobJ,

EPIRB doesn't address a MOB in the Gulf of the Farallon very well because unless someone gets the MOB out of the water pretty quick it won't matter. The water is too cold to allow someone to just hang out while the EPIRB gets recognized, a phone call to the contact number gets made, some asset gets launched, the MOB gets found and a rescue diver (typically) jumps in to load them into a basket. While an EPRIB is fine if the boat is sinking, that's not what has gone on out there very often. LSC had a EPRIB and look how long it took for USCG to actually get there - and they weren't dawdling. At the same time, there were half a dozen boats within VHF (even hand held) range. In the case of LSC, as we know, there wasn't anything a boat on-site could do. But for almost every other circumstance that we've had in the Gulf a fellow competitor is the closest and best responder. The key, IMHO, is to reach the other competitors (and the Pilot boat) as quickly as possible. VHF with DSC does this, EPIRB doesn't do it as well.

As to running the COAX up the backstay, that is a lot more windage and probably wouldn't fly with these guys. It might be possible to get folks to mount the VHF antenna on a pole mounted on the aft deck or transom, but do keep in mind we're talking about boats that have masts that are only about 28' above the water. You're not going to reach out a lot further from 28' than you do from 15'. I'm repeating myself, but the folks you need to reach are within four or five miles of you - not the coast guard. IMHO.

BV

[K38BOB]

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

General comment is that an equipment list wo context of race management, sailing instructions, education, skippers' meetings etc is very confusing. The above clearly is overlapping on those topics and other committees.

Just for reference, BAMA DHF 2012 info http://www.sfbama.or.../dhf/index.html
which included a skippers meeting that some have described as a mini safety at sea seminar. This year we had the "basket ride winner" in the video talk of their experience with CG SAR in attendance while the video played and discussed.


>> Some excerpts from DHF instructions


EQUIPMENT
The following equipment is required:
1. Lifelines or safety lines leading from both sides of the
cockpit forward and well secured at each end.
2. Fire extinguisher(s) to meet Coast Guard
requirements.
3. Manual bilge pump of at least 10 gallons per minute
capacity.
4. Anchor with suitable chain and line.
5. Sea cocks or soft wooden plugs to close all throughhull openings below the water line.
6. Working Navigation lights.
7. Compass.
8. Charts and piloting tools.
9. Lead line or echo sounder.
10. Fog horn.
11. Radar reflector.
12. Waterproof flashlight.
13. First aid kit.
14. At least two gallons fresh water.
15. Life jacket with whistle attached.
16. Safety harness.
17. VHF radio with channels 16, 69, and 71.
18. Day and night distress signaling devices as required
by the U.S.C.G. (Orange smoke flares are strongly
recommended.)
19. 406 MHz EPIRB or PLB registered with NOAA to the
yacht or individual in the race as required by the
Coast Guard for offshore races past Point Bonita.

This list does not attempt to encompass all the equipment that
is necessary for offshore sailing, and compliance with this list
does not relieve the skipper and crew in any way of their sole
responsibility for the safety of themselves and their vessel. The
OYRA has an excellent equipment list on their web site. All
participants are highly recommended to visit their equipment
list and benefit from their experience and focus on safety
offshore.

INSPECTION
The Race Committee has the right to inspect any vessel
and to reject its entry if they find it does not meet the standards
of the race rules. The winning yachts may be subject to
inspection.

<snip>

REQUIRED RADIO CHECK-INs
All yachts must check in with the Race Committee on VHF
Channel 69. At all times, channel 71 will be used for all other
race communications. The official channel for race
communications, except for check-ins, will be 71. Yachts that
attempt to check in on channel 71 will be directed to channel
69.
The request for check-in shall include division number,
yacht name, sail number. The check-in shall not be complete
until the race committee acknowledges the entry by repeating
the identity of the racing yacht.
Example:
Yacht, Seahorse: “This is the yacht Seahorse, sail number
54321, checking in for division 4. Over."
RC: "Seahorse, this is Race Committee. Sail number
54321 is checked in for Division 4. Out."
If you do not hear a confirmation from the Race Committee,
assume you have not been checked in.
Yachts sailing the course without a check-in will be scored
as "Did Not Start" even if observed crossing the starting line.
For safety purposes, yachts observed to have crossed the start
line shall be included in roll calls, to ensure that they are
accounted for at the finish. However, inclusion in a roll call
shall not be construed as acceptance of any yacht as a
properly started racer.
Withdrawals
Any yacht withdrawing from the race for any reason must
contact the Race Committee via VHF Channel 71, or via
telephone 650-394-6343 as soon as possible. All yachts are
required to monitor VHF Channel 71 during the race. (Bring
extra batteries, if necessary.) Withdrawing yachts which fail to
comply with this provision shall be denied entry in next year’s
race.

ROLL CALLS
A roll call will be held at 9:00 p.m. and half-hourly thereafter <<

I'll comment that information on other boats are solicited/offered in the roll call process. Boats on the course also are used as relay stations/repeaters when line of sight/range is an issue. The race committee also goes to lands end for supplemental roll calls as a pseudo/virtual relay station ( I think that may be confused on the definition of remote relay in USS report for LSC incident) to address line of sight issues. I believe SSS does the same. This is easy nowadays with handheld VHF (and a separate cell call to the race deck) but wasn't too bad with a fixed mount made transportable with a cabinet in the olden days.

[Estar]

I believe that you'll find that the vast majority of MOB are recovered by their own boat or the fleet around them. . . .

Of course I agree that vessel recovery of MOB is primary, fleet recovery of MOB is secondary, and USCG recovery a long way third, and that VHF is currently the best tool for that (And EPIRB/PLB not so much use) - although mini-ais might become a better tool. But we (or at least I) was responding to the comments about USCG mandating the RC track the fleet and not go home until everyone was accounted for. Handhelds 'may' be sufficient for MOB fleet coordination issues, but have clear drawbacks for communicating with the RC (either for position reporting, MOB or any other situation).

I think uncharged batteries applies to both types of radios.

hmmmm..... I suppose so, but practically speaking a group 24 battery has rather more reserve power than 6 double A's in a handheld.

I know from our prior discussions that you are a big fan of handhelds and have had good success with them. I will just tell you (again) that my personal experience has been the opposite. I have never had much luck with them, and I suggest that you might want to factor into your suggestions that others might have my poor experience rather than your excellent experience. You are obviously very diligent about charging and battery checking. I am not, and I am sure others share my failings, and OSR's should recognize and take into account common failings. And further even when I have just put in new batteries, I have always had MUCH better experiences talking to bridges and marinas using the big set rather than the handheld. Its possible that you simply buy better handhelds than I do, but again, you might want to realize that other sailors might get the radios that I have rather than those you have and that should to be taken into account.

I think it would be much more important that it be a requirement that the VHF be on the person of each of the crew, especially in SH and DH races.

Well, again, first you are going into MOB details, while I was responding to a different issue - A's comments on fleet monitoring and tracking. And second, carrying a handheld on every crew member would be a significant new requirement. Have there been MOB incidents in this fleet to justify it? And third, as discussed above, if it were me, the damn handheld would not work very well. And fourth, mini-AIS 'may' (not proven yet) be a much better solution.

I agree that USING a chart plotter will tell you how deep it is around SF Bay, something that was available to LSC but was not used. ...... out of the the fact that LSC was in 28' of water when she got hit - atop a shoal that is clearly marked on the chart.

Well, one can equally have an electronic depth sounder and not be 'using' it - either because its off (to save power) or because the display is mounted down below. Around SF, I don't see much practical difference between a plotter and a depth sounder - they can both tell you in the cockpit what depth you are in, and they can both either be off or out of sight.

Personally I believe that the LSC skipper knew full well they were over that bar. He may not have know exactly what the depth was but he surely knew it was 'shallow'. And because of the earlier 'big' wave (while they were sailing between the two bar) they even surely knew (or should have known) they were in a depth where the waves were 'feeling the bottom'.

Finally, I don't think any RC will have a chance in hell of talking to competitors who are near the Farallon Islands no matter what sort of antenna the boat has on it..... it won't matter at all what the boat is using - so a hand held would work fine.

First, I believe there is a plan to set up a VHF repeater to fill that hole, Second you may remember that one of the LSC crew members tried a handhelf radio from the island and did not get anyone, and third you can get USCG on VHF from a long long way off


I'm repeating myself, but the folks you need to reach are within four or five miles of you - not the coast guard. IMHO.

And I am repeating myself . . . but true for the immediate MOB coordination (Where we agree an epirb/plb is not much use), but not for communicating with the RC and USCG (about a MOB or tracking or any other issues) - and even at that distance a masthead 25watt set will almost always work better than a handheld (At least in my experience)

[K38BOB]

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

General comment is that an equipment list wo context of race management, sailing instructions, education, skippers' meetings etc is very confusing. The above clearly is overlapping on those topics and other committees.

Just for reference, BAMA DHF 2012 info http://www.sfbama.or.../dhf/index.html
which included a skippers meeting that some have described as a mini safety at sea seminar. This year we had the "basket ride winner" in the video talk of their experience with CG SAR in attendance while the video played and discussed.


>> Some excerpts from DHF instructions


EQUIPMENT
The following equipment is required:
1. Lifelines or safety lines leading from both sides of the
cockpit forward and well secured at each end.
2. Fire extinguisher(s) to meet Coast Guard
requirements.
3. Manual bilge pump of at least 10 gallons per minute
capacity.
4. Anchor with suitable chain and line.
5. Sea cocks or soft wooden plugs to close all throughhull openings below the water line.
6. Working Navigation lights.
7. Compass.
8. Charts and piloting tools.
9. Lead line or echo sounder.
10. Fog horn.
11. Radar reflector.
12. Waterproof flashlight.
13. First aid kit.
14. At least two gallons fresh water.
15. Life jacket with whistle attached.
16. Safety harness.
17. VHF radio with channels 16, 69, and 71.
18. Day and night distress signaling devices as required
by the U.S.C.G. (Orange smoke flares are strongly
recommended.)
19. 406 MHz EPIRB or PLB registered with NOAA to the
yacht or individual in the race as required by the
Coast Guard for offshore races past Point Bonita.

This list does not attempt to encompass all the equipment that
is necessary for offshore sailing, and compliance with this list
does not relieve the skipper and crew in any way of their sole
responsibility for the safety of themselves and their vessel. The
OYRA has an excellent equipment list on their web site. All
participants are highly recommended to visit their equipment
list and benefit from their experience and focus on safety
offshore.

INSPECTION
The Race Committee has the right to inspect any vessel
and to reject its entry if they find it does not meet the standards
of the race rules. The winning yachts may be subject to
inspection.

<snip>

REQUIRED RADIO CHECK-INs
All yachts must check in with the Race Committee on VHF
Channel 69. At all times, channel 71 will be used for all other
race communications. The official channel for race
communications, except for check-ins, will be 71. Yachts that
attempt to check in on channel 71 will be directed to channel
69.
The request for check-in shall include division number,
yacht name, sail number. The check-in shall not be complete
until the race committee acknowledges the entry by repeating
the identity of the racing yacht.
Example:
Yacht, Seahorse: “This is the yacht Seahorse, sail number
54321, checking in for division 4. Over."
RC: "Seahorse, this is Race Committee. Sail number
54321 is checked in for Division 4. Out."
If you do not hear a confirmation from the Race Committee,
assume you have not been checked in.
Yachts sailing the course without a check-in will be scored
as "Did Not Start" even if observed crossing the starting line.
For safety purposes, yachts observed to have crossed the start
line shall be included in roll calls, to ensure that they are
accounted for at the finish. However, inclusion in a roll call
shall not be construed as acceptance of any yacht as a
properly started racer.
Withdrawals
Any yacht withdrawing from the race for any reason must
contact the Race Committee via VHF Channel 71, or via
telephone 650-394-6343 as soon as possible. All yachts are
required to monitor VHF Channel 71 during the race. (Bring
extra batteries, if necessary.) Withdrawing yachts which fail to
comply with this provision shall be denied entry in next year’s
race.

ROLL CALLS
A roll call will be held at 9:00 p.m. and half-hourly thereafter

for all yachts still racing. The race committee will call each
yacht, which shall respond with the yacht's name, position with
respect to the Golden Gate Bridge, and speed over ground.
Example:
"Seahorse, this is BAMA Race Committee for a roll call."
"Race Committee, this is Seahorse. My position is 1.4 nm
west of the Bridge. Speed over ground 4 knots."
Seahorse, this is Race Committee. 1.4 west, 4 knots. Out"
The check in shall not be considered as having been
completed until the race committee acknowledges receipt of
the call by repeating the information received from the racing
yacht.

<<

I'll comment that information on other boats are solicited/offered in the roll call process. Boats on the course also are used as relay stations/repeaters when line of sight/range is an issue. The race committee also goes to lands end for supplemental roll calls as a pseudo/virtual relay station ( I think that may be confused on the definition of remote relay in USS report for LSC incident) to address line of sight issues. I believe SSS does the same. This is easy nowadays with handheld VHF (and a separate cell call to the race deck) but wasn't too bad with a fixed mount made transportable with a cabinet in the olden days.

added the rest of "Roll Call" instructions

[K38BOB]

I believe that you'll find that the vast majority of MOB are recovered by their own boat or the fleet around them. . . .

Of course I agree that vessel recovery of MOB is primary, fleet recovery of MOB is secondary, and USCG recovery a long way third, and that VHF is currently the best tool for that (And EPIRB/PLB not so much use) - although mini-ais might become a better tool. But we (or at least I) was responding to the comments about USCG mandating the RC track the fleet and not go home until everyone was accounted for. Handhelds 'may' be sufficient for MOB fleet coordination issues, but have clear drawbacks for communicating with the RC (either for position reporting, MOB or any other situation).

I think uncharged batteries applies to both types of radios.

hmmmm..... I suppose so, but practically speaking a group 24 battery has rather more reserve power than 6 double A's in a handheld.

I know from our prior discussions that you are a big fan of handhelds and have had good success with them. I will just tell you (again) that my personal experience has been the opposite. I have never had much luck with them, and I suggest that you might want to factor into your suggestions that others might have my poor experience rather than your excellent experience. You are obviously very diligent about charging and battery checking. I am not, and I am sure others share my failings, and OSR's should recognize and take into account common failings. And further even when I have just put in new batteries, I have always had MUCH better experiences talking to bridges and marinas using the big set rather than the handheld. Its possible that you simply buy better handhelds than I do, but again, you might want to realize that other sailors might get the radios that I have rather than those you have and that should to be taken into account.

I think it would be much more important that it be a requirement that the VHF be on the person of each of the crew, especially in SH and DH races.

Well, again, first you are going into MOB details, while I was responding to a different issue - A's comments on fleet monitoring and tracking. And second, carrying a handheld on every crew member would be a significant new requirement. Have there been MOB incidents in this fleet to justify it? And third, as discussed above, if it were me, the damn handheld would not work very well. And fourth, mini-AIS 'may' (not proven yet) be a much better solution.

I agree that USING a chart plotter will tell you how deep it is around SF Bay, something that was available to LSC but was not used. ...... out of the the fact that LSC was in 28' of water when she got hit - atop a shoal that is clearly marked on the chart.

Well, one can equally have an electronic depth sounder and not be 'using' it - either because its off (to save power) or because the display is mounted down below. Around SF, I don't see much practical difference between a plotter and a depth sounder - they can both tell you in the cockpit what depth you are in, and they can both either be off or out of sight.

Personally I believe that the LSC skipper knew full well they were over that bar. He may not have know exactly what the depth was but he surely knew it was 'shallow'. And because of the earlier 'big' wave (while they were sailing between the two bar) they even surely knew (or should have known) they were in a depth where the waves were 'feeling the bottom'.

Finally, I don't think any RC will have a chance in hell of talking to competitors who are near the Farallon Islands no matter what sort of antenna the boat has on it..... it won't matter at all what the boat is using - so a hand held would work fine.

First, I believe there is a plan to set up a VHF repeater to fill that hole, Second you may remember that one of the LSC crew members tried a handhelf radio from the island and did not get anyone, and third you can get USCG on VHF from a long long way off


I'm repeating myself, but the folks you need to reach are within four or five miles of you - not the coast guard. IMHO.

And I am repeating myself . . . but true for the immediate MOB coordination (Where we agree an epirb/plb is not much use), but not for communicating with the RC and USCG (about a MOB or tracking or any other issues) - and even at that distance a masthead 25watt set will almost always work better than a handheld (At least in my experience)

"Heatwave" snapped a keel off and inverted over the south shoal (fun sailing right before that point). Fixed masthead VHF not so useful. See my above discussion on DSC

https://www.latitude...date=2009-03-30


The safety hierarchy
Education for prevention
Contingency planning for self preservation (aka "seamanship")
Self rescue
Fleet rescue
CG safety net for rescue and recovery

VHF/DSC aids in race management and fleet rescue
epirb in CG rescue and recovery

[JustDroppingBy]

Couple of points specific to the LSC situation -

1. Owner of boat had SAS seminar still current, and even though the curriculum at SAS doesn't deal with inshore obstacles in the highway type situations (rocks like Farallon or Coronados), he was still educated by certain standards.

2. Professional skipper hired by owner, one would believe that if you hire a professional, they are going to be more qualified by the nature of their being a professional and should be more aware of the risks they can take with the crew they have onboard (obviously a VOR crew is going to feel more qualified to do things that the average weekend crew should not consider), so the owner probably believed he was covered on that count.

3. If you've ever been on a boat that's bottomed out near shore (reef, rock, sunken Volkswagon), then you know that when you first hit something unexpected, the car crash effect (and it does feel like a car crash) means the first response is complete stupefaction (what in the HELL did we just hit), even if you know that shore is close by and those seconds can be the difference between really bad and not so bad.

4. The CG is a fantastic organization, and they do so much good for those in need that it's impossible to think of their not being around. Their level of off the water response management during a situation is nowhere near the level on water (in my direct experience), and they will confuse your EC because of their comm setup and reluctance to leave messages or voicemails when they don't get an answer on the first time or two that they try to contact the EC.

In regards to the running the wiring up the backstay for a mast mounted VHF -- the SSB antenna doesn't run all the way up the backstay, and the ones I've seen are terminated low enough that the end of the boom won't rip them loose if it catches in the backstay. The sheer amount of tape or whatever you'd have to use to secure the power cable to the backstay well enough to make sure it couldn't be ripped off during a gybe or wipeout means that you'd have to wrap it from top to bottom and not only would that take forever, unwinding it every time you wanted to pull the antenna off and race OD or in the Bay would be a real PIA. LSC would have had no problem communicating with the boats around her, had they used the VHF. There were so many boats on the VHF trying to call in to the CG during the incident that it was difficult to get a word in edgewise.

And the CG did not attempt to hail boats to ascertain their whereabouts or status, which still leaves me baffled.

[casc27]

In regards to the running the wiring up the backstay for a mast mounted VHF -- the SSB antenna doesn't run all the way up the backstay, and the ones I've seen are terminated low enough that the end of the boom won't rip them loose if it catches in the backstay. The sheer amount of tape or whatever you'd have to use to secure the power cable to the backstay well enough to make sure it couldn't be ripped off during a gybe or wipeout means that you'd have to wrap it from top to bottom and not only would that take forever, unwinding it every time you wanted to pull the antenna off and race OD or in the Bay would be a real PIA.

What are you talking about? A VHF coax run could easily be zip-tied to the backstay and connected to a masthead mounted antenna. I bet it would take fewer than a dozen small ties to secure the cable on a Moore. If you want to make it more secure, wrap it around the backstay a few times on the way up. Seems like a fairly painless way for some fleets to meet the impending offshore requirements for a masthead antenna.

I have no idea what "power" cable you are talking about. The power cable goes to the radio, not the antenna.

[casc27]

"The idea is that you need to be self sufficient . . ."

. . . as long as you can be home by dark, dear.


"Now the argument is that you don't want to carry fuel because your outboard does not actually work well in ocean conditions?"

No, the argument is that if the outboard even can, it takes a lot more fuel to drive the boat at the required speed for eight hours in the ocean than it takes for a diesel inboard. And it's gasoline, so storage of additional fuel is a bigger risk.


These are ocean races. If what you say is true, it sounds like we're reaching the point where we can't run ocean races any more.

+1 on the "home by dark" sentiment. It is starting to sound like we need to be motor vessels that keep a schedul but we can play with our sails along the way if we like. Just so long as we are not late.

On the fuel, carrying more gasoline in loose containers (it doesn't matter how securely you tie them down, they are not the same as a perment tank) is a hazard. And one that I think come with very, very little potential reward for the risk. It does not take 25 knots and 12 foot seas to render a transom mounted outbord ineffective. A 2 or 3 foot chop is just about enough. After that the cavitation from pitching moment would likely cause the motor to self destruct in short order.

I also have to agree with some of the voices on here who mentioned a verification communication at the cut-off time. After that, you are just another private vessel at sea.

[NoStrings]

I was in Richmond and heard damn near every VHF call from Temerity and Green Buffalo. Both boats have masthead antennae. In the meantime, some of what I'm reading is making me shake my head...I'll summarize "some of this safety stuff is inconvenient so we shouldn't have to do it". Moving the antenna to the masthead of a Moore24 more than DOUBLES the Radio Line of Sight (RLOS). Trying to make the case (to me at least) that the extra weight aloft makes the boat less competitive is totally irrelevant if everyone is paying the same penalty. Finally, one of the major arguments against the ORC MEL was the price to play. Now some of you are proposing to equip each of your crew with a waterproof VHF handheld (to the tune of $300. ea. That doesn't pass my sniff test. Regarding flares...My friend Ashley recommends that when you fire your flares, that you do it in pairs. The first flare might only be caught out of the corner of someone's eye...perceived but not located...the second, fired shortly after is what gets people's attention. Personally, I'll stick with the Cat II recommendations, and have a couple of extras.

[NoStrings]

Like I said earlier...fine if dump the fuel. You need to carry an equivalent amount of weight in non volatile (lead) ballast.

[JustDroppingBy]

In regards to the running the wiring up the backstay for a mast mounted VHF -- the SSB antenna doesn't run all the way up the backstay, and the ones I've seen are terminated low enough that the end of the boom won't rip them loose if it catches in the backstay. The sheer amount of tape or whatever you'd have to use to secure the power cable to the backstay well enough to make sure it couldn't be ripped off during a gybe or wipeout means that you'd have to wrap it from top to bottom and not only would that take forever, unwinding it every time you wanted to pull the antenna off and race OD or in the Bay would be a real PIA.

What are you talking about? A VHF coax run could easily be zip-tied to the backstay and connected to a masthead mounted antenna. I bet it would take fewer than a dozen small ties to secure the cable on a Moore. If you want to make it more secure, wrap it around the backstay a few times on the way up. Seems like a fairly painless way for some fleets to meet the impending offshore requirements for a masthead antenna.

I have no idea what "power" cable you are talking about. The power cable goes to the radio, not the antenna.

Coax, not power, whatever. I'm sure it's not that hard to rip one off of a PBO or similar type backstay when i the boom catches it or someone dislodges it when they're trying to clear the top batten.

What we really need is a wireless antenna unit for the masthead, that would be slick. No idea if one exists or if costs as much as a new boat if it does.

[NoStrings]

There are thousands of back stay mounted SSB antennas that survive just fine.

[Estar]

There are thousands of back stay mounted SSB antennas that survive just fine.

If the backstay does somehow cause some problem, the coax could be run up a shroud (side stay). That might also provide a shorter path to a nav station mounted vhf.