Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TJSoCal

  1. I think the PC got the right result but got there the wrong way by recognizing everyone's individual "truth" about how to finish and saying we'll ignore the language in the rules just this once to keep it friendly. The RC gave a finishing horn both to boats that finished correctly and those that did not. This was an error by the RC that kept boats that didn't finish from recognizing that and finishing correctly (it seems likely that the RC, when they saw boats finishing different ways, were not themselves sure which was correct and which was not so they just decided to give everyone a ho
  2. I agree with SF that although rule 32 doesn't specify where you must put the "S" boat in relation to the shortened finishing mark it's least confusing if it's positioned such that boats still pass the mark on the original side and if the new finish line is roughly oriented perpendicular to the direction from the previous mark. This is also recommended in the US Sailing Race Management Handbook. To the original question, you'd need to include in the course description "a line the course requires boats to cross" if you want to be able to shorten anywhere other than a rounding mark or gate.
  3. Maybe think about a comfortable cruiser/liveaboard and plan to race on somebody else's boat?
  4. I could probably convince myself that a boat that recorded and reported a time which was not her actual finish time (whether deliberately or accidentally) did not comply with the SI. Otherwise the SI is more or less meaningless, if any boat can report any time they like without breaking the SI. Also note - a boat cannot protest on rule 69 (see 69.1(c)). They can make an allegation to the protest committee and the committee will decide whether to hold a hearing. I don't believe there's any time limit on reporting an alleged breach of rule 69.
  5. Check the allowed causes for redress (rule 62.1) - I don't think any apply here. I agree that the first action should be to talk to the other boat, maybe it was just a goof that they're willing to correct.
  6. I'd tend to agree that simpler is better, if space allows for installation of one bigger tank. If you go with two tanks and use a Y valve so only one tank is aligned to pump out at a time I think you could get by with a single deck fitting.
  7. The mechanic who pulled my engine had a kind of a crane device with two legs and a horizontal crossbar. The two legs sat on the cabin floor and the other end on the companionway step (or could probably sit on the hatch coaming). It had a piece of pipe with a padeye that slides on the crossbar. So you hoist the engine up with a come-along on the sliding pipe and then you can slide it forward into the cabin.
  8. If the PHRF board re-rated the boat after the event I don't think there was any reason for them to contact the event organizers/RC since the boat sailed under a certificate that was apparently valid at the time of the event. The PHRF board probably should have just contacted the boat owner and updated their fleet list. So I'm leaning toward four thoughts: 1. Zingara probably did have cause for redress when they were made aware of the scoring change 2. The period for them to request redress is almost certainly expired 3. It really was the better part of valor to just accept
  9. The nub of the question, I think, is did the rating authority rate the boat at 127 and then change it to 118 or did the rating authority, or did the rating authority rate the boat at 118 but issue an erroneous certificate stating 127? Correcting an erroneous certificate is not, I think, the same thing as acting on its own volition to change the rating.
  10. If the position of the PHRF board is that your valid rating at the time the race was run was 118 (which is to say that the erroneous 127 rating was never in effect) then I think the RC did not make an error in correcting the score. There's nothing to protest and no cause for redress. If the PHRF board feels that your rating of 127 was in effect from the time of issuance until the correction was made (if the revision to your rating was made after the race), then you've got a case that you should be scored with the 127 rating that was in effect at the time of the race. Would you have
  11. The released draft version of the 2021 rules reflected the changed definition of start, but retained the "hull, crew or equipment" language in rules 29 & 30 (individual recalls, I flag, black flag, etc.) so there was a mismatch. The final version says only "hull" in those rules, consistent with the changed definition of start.
  12. That was fixed between the draft release that was the topic of this thread and the final version.
  13. Yeah, I'd never replace a boat fresh water system with PVC hose - seems like PEX would be much better and the tubing and fittings are obviously rated for hot or cold. I'm wondering, though, do the crimp rings contain ferrous metal? That would definitely be an argument for Shark-Bite type fittings to me.
  14. I remember reading something somewhere about a yacht club in Hawaii that built up a nice little Hobie 33 fleet by buying up Transpac boats that the owners didn't want to hassle with getting back to the mainland.
  15. Wonder if Sea Scouts might also be a possibility. Or if a local YC is putting on a Safety at Sea seminar might take some.
  16. No experience but I think he was talking about rounded keels, I expect a fin keel with a flat bottom would tend to stand on her keel. But if it were me I think I'd make sure to keep weight out of the ends and not do a lot of jumping around topsides.
  17. "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practice there is." No advice to offer, but how do others in the area do it?
  18. Good article on the safe and proper way to practice with expired flares, including suggested radio calls.
  19. Not necessarily in that order...
  20. Send 'em to Portland, they'll get used... More seriously, one suggestion from the California Coastal Commission is "Donate expired flares to your local Coast Guard Auxiliary for use in their training classes." Might be worth a try.
  21. The Study Version of the new rules is out. Includes the submissions that led to the changes. Have fun!
  22. I'm not sure the round-pass issue is as big as you're making it. To me it looks like a minor language clean-up. A mark may either be a rounding mark (string required to touch on correct side - 28.2(b)) or a passing mark (must be left on correct side but string need not touch - 28.2(a)). Unless it's clear from the course diagram the SIs should identify which marks are rounding marks (J2.1(5) and L9.2). So I think they just decided to include "or pass" in the definition of mark room to make it clear that mark room applies at both rounding marks and passing marks. I don't think amount o
  • Create New...