Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Spoonie

  1. No, you have to leave the mark on the required side. There is no immediacy to the requirement of the string touching the mark, only that it must do so at the finish. There fore, having the string touch the mark, as you sail past it, is not necessary to sail the course. Being provided room to leave the mark on the required side, is however a requirement of mark-room. To full fill that requirement, a boat obliged to provide mark-room need only provide enough room for the boat so entitled. to pass and leave the mark in the direction of the course. The clear example is boats on a
  2. No, I'm very aware of it. The explicit definition of sailing the course is to leave a string on the required side so that between the start and the finish, when pulled tight, it touches the mark. The definitions TJ refers to are moved from 28 into the definition. I'm wrong for other reasons... The very literal interpretation of those two definitions is that provided that string touches the mark when drawn tight at the finish, then there is no obligation for the string to touch the mark at the moment the mark is passed. In preventing a boat with mark-room from rounding it,
  3. To clarify my argument The new definition for mark-room is to round or pass the mark. This can be interpreted in two ways: 1) as a boat entitled to mark-room, I should be given room to pass the mark, or manoeuvre to round it as is deemed necessary 2) a boat obligated to give mark-room has complied provided the inside boat has been given sufficient room to do one of either passing it, or rounding it, but not necessarily both. The key here is mark-room only applies to sailing the course. to sail the course, I must only leave a track on the required side of the mark. Ther
  4. I think the changes to 18 and mark-room are subtle but profound, certainly from a lay interpretation point of view. Perhaps this will kill off a tactical rounding under the premise of mark room. Or indeed a boat that is just overlapped to leward may choose to force a non tactical rounding so as to nip up the inside. Because once room is given, room no longer applies. And room only extends to enough space not to hit the mark while they "round or pass it" (emphasis mine). a right of way boat can force a mark-room boat as close the mark as possible without actually hitting it and need onl
  5. Mmmm... is that cardboard? the front is definitely going to fall off that one
  6. My wife thinks this is a forum about Sailing
  7. I don't know where you go it, but I posted it in reply to you up above. It's not a proper keel test. They're attempting to validate design assumptions on acceleration and forces, as opposed to confirming the failure mode of the as built design meets expectations. One of those boats in that paper would go on to have a catastrophic ram failure though. A good example of a proper test would be the work that went into the de Havilland Comet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Comet I would suggest such a test is cost prohibitive in most yacht design scenarios.
  8. In the old days, the North MK I was a softer cloth and routinely a flatter head than the hyde MK I. From my experience, there was also about a .4kg difference between light and heavy top sections at the dealer (2.2kg to 2.6kg from memory). I think the Aussie top sections seemed like a harder temper though. I also felt the aussie bottom sections were stiffer as well. Maybe psycho sematic. We did weigh a lot of top sections though. I haven't sailed with a MKII sail or carbon section. If the carbon sections are at least consistent from batch to batch, that has to be a good thing!
  9. Nah... as an applied mathematician, it's a guesstimation. you build a model, plop in some boundary assumptions & conditions, and spit out some numbers. Your model could be wrong, your assumptions could be wrong, or both. Chances are you're wrong somewhere. They're certainly called assumptions for a good reason. Newtonian physics being what it is, they could be highly educated guesses, but they're still just an approximation of the real thing. Especially when you add hydrodynamic loading into that picture. You can see from the paper I posted above, the numbers used were rel
  10. No such structure exists. Everything has a failure mode. One of the practices in building resilient systems is to assume the element has failed and then assess the impacts across the rest of the system. All too often people try to guess why it might fail. If they can't, they assume the risk to be minimal. this can lead to solution designs that are inherently less resilient to failure than other options. Even experienced engineers are not immune to this and there are many famous examples (like the challenger disaster) where an assumed low risk proved to be vastly inaccurate. I
  11. QYA has had interesting things going on as far back as the late 90's.
  12. I had a custom rope bag made up for the front of the cockpit with bottle holders. Otherwise get yourself some of these: https://decathlon.com.au/products/168751# Beer goes in bag, tack/gybe, beer comes out. I'm considering gymbles
  13. Time to spend some more time in dinghy's shaggy
  14. In short, a lot. There a lot of standing jokes about it. How do you pick a dentist in the bunch, how do you pick the masters riders on the track etc... etc... a bike shop that supported me for a long time would always keep one $20k bike in the floor. They helped inflate overall sales and they would always sell a couple a year.
  15. Etchells, Soling, Diamond. Elliot 7 and 7x0's (the origionals). Depending on deck layouts and design style, many of the old quarter tonners. The test is, can you stand with the tiller between your legs and get the jib on or trim the kite. The next is are all the rig controls within reach. IMHO find a boat that is fun to sail without being too twitchy, and has room to relocate controls or designed like a big dinghy to start with. Too me, that's a relatively lightweight frac rig boat that's easily driven.
  16. appears my french is not that good after all...
  17. Maybe the answer is not getting more 30’s into Hobart but more 30’er friendly events. I’ve toyed with the idea of a cat 3 coastal hop. Jarvis bay to Port Stephens via Botany and Broken Bay. Getting to Cat 3 is significantly less prohibitive.
  18. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contessa_32 tcc is 0.86, AVS 155, if it doesn’t pass scantlings I’ll eat my hat. May be an issue with the entry req’s and LWL just say’n...
  19. Oh last time I checked, a syd 32 passes. 123 or something
  20. I bought the sister ship to Atria with the grand idea of doing her up and racing her south. I got to $50k on the laundry list and decided it wasn’t going to happen. Scantlings check / cert was going to be $5k before any remediation. SSB and electronics upgrade $10k, stability check $1k before any remediation. Budget for remediagion scantlings & stab (provided with reason) $10k. rig refurb, $10k, misc safety $5k... I still have a dream of racing a 30 south, but probably not out of my pocket. I note even a Figaro 2 won’t meet AVS
  21. In any OD fleet it’s always hard for rookies to be fast. Initially you have a big gap between the early guys in the know and the back markers. Over time the tips and tricks filter down the fleet and the gap gets narrower, but it’s the old guard who find the niche tricks by virtue of time in the boat. Looks like they already realised you extend the wings and leave ‘em there. I always find the idea of “symmetrical kites are harder” funny. With a sym, you can pull in the tweakers, gybe the main, and gybe the pole in a relatively relaxed fashion. With a asym, you have to jam the
  22. Yeah so you press it hard, ease the main, get maximum speed and then pinch. Probably picking a flat spot to pinch in. Regardless of foils, pinching before a gust in a modern boat is slow
  23. What's the thickness of the top? Bore a 35mm hole through, glue in a composite 32mm socket. Stanchion fits socket. Plug fits socket when stanchions are not in
  • Create New...