Jump to content

TJSoCal

Members
  • Content Count

    956
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TJSoCal

  1. For option 2 if you want to use two separate tank outlets I think you'd want to use two straight ball valves, not y valves. Everything from the head would go to the tank. Outlet number 1 would go to the thru-hull, either through a securable ball valve or figure out how to secure the thru-hull in the closed position. Outlet 2 would go to the deck fitting. It would probably be good to have a ball valve at the tank exit so you don't have waste sitting in the hose. Open the valve to pump out, close it when you're done. That valve wouldn't need to be securable since it doesn't connect to
  2. Yes, I definitely agree simpler is better. But I believe in California you must have a way to "secure" either the Y valve or the overboard thru-hull in the closed position to positively prevent accidental or unintentional aligning for overboard discharge. I don't think simply closing the thru hull meets the requirement, and zip-tying a Y valve in the correct position seems like a simpler solution than trying to secure the thru-hull in the closed position. Particularly since I plan to put the Y valve in a more accessible spot
  3. Looks like the current setup might be simplified as well, if the tank is high enough that it will gravity drain to the thru hull. You could use one Y valve from the head to either tank inlet or overboard, and another Y valve from the tank outlet to either overboard or deck. What I'm planning on my boat is for everything from the head to go to the tank, with one Y valve on the tank outlet to overboard or deck. At sea with the valve aligned to overboard everything will pass through the tank but go overboard immediately, and the Y valve, zip-tied to the deck position, will give me a way to p
  4. On further thought I think I got that wrong. I believe FLOW is the common side and the OPEN that is not obscured by the handle is the open side of the valve. Might be a common inlet with two outlets or a common outlet with two inlets.
  5. On the Y valve position, I think OPEN is the inlet and the side where you can read FLOW (where it's not obscured by the handle) is the outlet. Rotating the handle should show FLOW on the other side. And then you have to trace out which side of the FLOW goes to the holding tank and which to overboard. I have a similar snake's nest and a bladder tank in the bilge. I'm trying to figure out how I can mount a poly tank high that will gravity-flow to the thru-hull, probably with a y-valve to the deck pump out.
  6. If you start off by beating upwind RaceQs should calculate the wind direction and display it (somewhat) correctly. It is possible to enter it directly but I think you need to set up a racecourse (put in some marks) first. I like RaceQs a lot and use it frequently, but it is pretty much purpose-built for sailboat racing, not general tracking. In the replay mode in a browser, click on the > symbol on the left and the menus for regatta setup will slide out. It will probably offer you some tutorials first, which are worth watching and explain how to use the panes on that menu. In
  7. In some states with fault-based divorce that's literally true - you can't make infidelity grounds if you screw your spouse after you know they cheated...
  8. That's definitely true, the NOR should spell out any rule changes or other factors that might impact a boat's decision to enter. But on the other hand, if competitors are reluctant to and frequently fail to protest when it's clearly called for (see the first couple of posts in this thread, and there have been others similar) then I'm not sure you can accuse the RC of "perfidy" if they choose to discourage protests even if they do it in a somewhat flip manner. For Ajax, I'm curious, in the event where you saw those ridiculous SIs - if there had been a protest filed for a major inciden
  9. Well, it's the club's race so they can run it how they want. If the PRO wants to discourage protests that's their business (as long as they do it within the rules). They can run short filing periods, hide the protest desk, hold hearings at inconvenient times & places, etc. if that's what they feel is best for the event and the club. And it's everyone else's decision whether to race or not, given that they know their ability to protest rules violations may be curtailed. For the record, I don't think I've ever seen ridiculous requirements for protesting in SIs. I think about the most I'
  10. Hauling a sandbag to the masthead seems like a good activity. Good exercise and great training for future mast & pit people. Rainy day, maybe teach them semaphore.
  11. Well, seems like there are others who will say that excessive emphasis on a "complicated" set of rules is hurting participation. I think there are a lot of social and economic factors that are unfortunately combining to drive falling participation in sailing generally and sailboat racing specifically. I suspect that RRS impacts are well below the level of rounding error.
  12. Hmm, I could have sworn I read it as "if I was on the committee boat" but you're right, he was talking about being on the PC. Interesting piece from Stuart Rose here about how Rule 14 came to be in its present form.
  13. I think that's exactly what the Dave Perry quiz question is saying. L can luff up and leave no room for W to pass between her and the committee boat as long as W still has an option to bail out. In that instance if W chooses not to bail out and winds up hitting the committee boat that's on her, not L. I don't think Mr. Perry is interpreting rule 14 that way at all. I think you may be looking at the diagram I posted, which is not exactly the scenario in the Perry quiz. In the quiz scenario, "L luffs and W makes contact nearly simultaneously with both L and the committee boat." Since L a
  14. Curious, what was the rationale for rule 2, and did the PC conclude that it was broken? Seems like rule 11 would have been enough...
  15. Paper clip to unroll inversions in 12-strand when doing a one-end-accessible eye splice. Bend it into an S shape and it makes a good hook for grabbing the part you want to unroll and pulling it back through. Set of aluminum crochet hooks for various uses. Recently picked up a set of dreadlock crochet hooks that look like they'll be good for pulling cover strands aside to get at the core.
  16. True. Put Blue about it boat length belwo the line at 1, she can come up and close the door until 3. If she alters course at 4 when Yellow can no longer bail out she breaks 16.1
  17. "Damage" is not defined but guidance is given in Case 19: So I think it's safe to say that a scuff or scratch would not be ruled "damage" under RRS. Any common applicable definition of "contact" would, I think, require physical touching. A boat that doesn't touch another boat has avoided contact and is safe from rule 14. Given the scenario below, you say you would penalize Blue for "forcing" a collision between Green and the committee boat. With respect, here's how I expect the appeals committee would react to your decision: Blue to leeward had right of way. Blue did
  18. Yes it is right there. If L with rights changes course when it's too late for W to bail out (as in, when they're already overlapped with the committee boat) L breaks rule 16.1 and can be protested by another boat or by the race committee (but not automatically DSQ'd without a hearing). But if L does not change course she doesn't break any rule if the barger insists on sticking her nose in when there's no room and hits the committee boat. It's W's decision not to tack away that causes the contact, not L's maintaining course and not giving room. Neither mark room (18) or room to p
  19. Granted, the appropriate thing to do with a barger is to give room and protest. However - if you're on the committee boat you have no authority to DSQ a boat without a hearing. And if a boat with rights maintains her course and "forces" a barger into contact with the committee boat I don't think there's a rule that would allow a PC to penalize her.
  20. You can't force him to hit the committee boat, but you can force him to choose to tack away rather than hit it. If he then chooses to break a rule instead you're correct, the proper action is to avoid contact if possible and protest. If you want to avoid protest hearings for beer can races, ask your PRO to put Appendix T arbitration or (in the US) appendix V alternative penalties into the SI.
  21. Probably wouldn't go on their own bottoms, they'd be loaded on a heavy-lift vessel. As I recall the USN tried sending several MSOs to the Persian Gulf back in the 80s using an "enhanced tow" method, with not very good results.
  22. Patrick Childress & his wife Rebecca have a really interesting and informative YouTube channel following their worldwide cruise on their Valiant 40 Brick House. Apparently they've both contracted COVID-19 and Patrick is down hard, in ICU on a ventilator. From what's posted, Patrick's insurance is declining to cover "global pandemic" so a friend of theirs is running a GoFundMe page to help with expenses. If you're interested in following the story or contributing, link is here.
  23. Yeah, it looks more to me like they intentionally included those boats
  24. That's exactly what CRA is advocating according to their letter. And I get that they're pandering to the authorities hoping for permission to go sailing. Good intentions by CRA but maybe not worth the effort if you wind up with those kinds of restrictions. And I'm not sure the authorities will buy into it anyway, the path of least resistance for them is to just say no.
×
×
  • Create New...