Jump to content

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In loving memory of Clark and Daw We welcome this evening Mr Richard the skipper of the winning power boat. Hello Brian. Mr Richard, may we call you Dick? Sure Brian, most

If Matt Allen as President of AS has any balls he should put Harburg/Bradford and Oatley/Richards in a room and read them the riot act. Harburg for not protesting but having a cry on national TV and O

Ok I am now caught up on this thread. Yes I went live - first actually - with the news direct from Shipwright Arms where WOXI were having lunch in one room, and BJ in the other. Was the best place to

Posted Images

47 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

While we're chatting about it, what does your AIS transmit when you lose GPS synch? 

The most likely answer is that you cease transmitting. The problem is not so much your loss of position information - which is obviously rather important - but that you will lose the timing accuracy needed to maintain sync with the timing slots. The AIS protocol defines very stringent timing, and for class B this timing is even more crucial as the transmitter gets a very short window in which to detect a clear slot and then start transmitting. The timing accuracy afforded by GPS reception is a critical part of what makes the AIS protocol work. This is one reason why preference is given to providing an AIS unit with its own dedicated GPS receiver and antenna. 

With the huge number of sats, and three separate constellations, there should never be an occasion for a modern AIS unit to lose sight of enough sats. Perhaps older unis only tracked GPS, and didn't include Glonass. New ones will add Galileo as well, and you should never run out of sats. 

Losing sync for 45 minutes is  long time. I wonder whether you didn't have some other issue. The sats orbit in 12 hours, and each constellation should have a minimum of 6 sats in view at any time. Add Glonass and Galileo and you have 24 in view minimum. A high quality GPS receiver can track every one of them, and should be rock solid.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

The most likely answer is that you cease transmitting. The problem is not so much your loss of position information - which is obviously rather important - but that you will lose the timing accuracy needed to maintain sync with the timing slots. The AIS protocol defines very stringent timing, and for class B this timing is even more crucial as the transmitter gets a very short window in which to detect a clear slot and then start transmitting. The timing accuracy afforded by GPS reception is a critical part of what makes the AIS protocol work. This is one reason why preference is given to providing an AIS unit with its own dedicated GPS receiver and antenna. 

With the huge number of sats, and three separate constellations, here should never be an occasion for a modern AIS unit to lose sight of enough sats. Perhaps older unis only tracked GPS, and didn't include Glonass. New ones will add Galileo as well, and you should never run out of sats. 

Losing sync for 45 minutes is  long time. I wonder whether you didn't have some other issue. The sats orbit in 12 hours, and each constellation should have a minimum of 6 sats in view at any time. Add Glonass and Galileo and you have 24 in view minimum. A high quality GPS receiver can track every one of them, and should be rock solid.

 Bless you Francis, that's what I had just worked out, but didn't seem right. I'm feeling guilty I didn't know this already. 

Regards the outage, yes I am sure there were other circumstances, as it was blowing like stink and big seas. Hence the query. I could see 7-9 satellites, but the GUI display , and the ProAis tool showed them all very low on the horizon. 

Thanks!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Trickypig said:

I get where Hoppy is coming from. 

Anytime you discuss the negatives of a safety measure you are in a no win situation. Safety is safety. More safety is better.

Collision avoidance, other than at the start or with sunfish, has never been an issue in the Sydney Hobart. I don't recall of a collision in the last 70 odd years.

Warro hit a Camera boat a few years back. And Lydia got holed at the start a few years ago as well. Don’t think AIS would have changed either of those incidents. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

 

Word !

The many posters here who doubt the immense safety value of AIS have either never been out to sea, or are so ignorant that they should not be allowed to go to sea at all. The safety factor goes way beyond any other consideration.

I am truly amazed how many posters here are plain ignorant...

 

Did you run into other vessels a fair bit before AIS did you?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Why would a SOLAS vessel turn off their AIS? How many have you seen do that?

I have sailed past a fair few ships over 500 tons which I have seen and which have not shown up on my AIS, but I have no way of knowing for sure if they have AIS or if they have it and its not working for some reason.

AIS is not a system in which I can put my trust.

I have sailed past numerous big fast steel fishing boats in the 50 to 250 ton size range which I consider potentially far more dangerous to me especially at night. Their AIS target display which I observe is often completely sporadic and frequently non-existent. It is common gossip where I sail that fishermen do not like other fishermen to be able to track and record their activity at the degree of detail that AIS allows, but as I  say that is gossip and I have no way of knowing if it's true.  If I see a fishing fleet on AIS, that is one time I like to make sure my AIS TX is on I keep a particularly careful visual watch as I know that there are multiple ships around with no obvious destinations and they have a greater interest in hauling fish than in watching for a yacht nav light!.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VOA said:

I sailed into Singapore at dusk pre GPS with "no fix" on the Satnav and no radar reflector. Didn't hit a thing until I got to the bar

You had SatNav pre GPS?   Impressive.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more philosophical note, the addition of technology to the sport is never going away. The purist approach to defining how the sport is run is always going to be at the mercy of technology. It isn't impossible we will see government's mandate (with teeth) some form of tracker (not necessarily AIS - but with the advent of cheap LEO microsats perhaps a service akin to Yellowbrick - but free for the boat owner) for any boat above a given size sailing more than some distance from the coast. We are fast approaching a time when the cost to the government in avoiding just one messy rescue operation could pay for the entire thing. Eventually a deliberate disabling of AIS on a commercial vessel will result in a nasty accident and the regulators will decide to act in response. 

No matter. We are likely in a transition period. For a few years we can argue the matter of mandatory AIS, and soon mandatory tracking will almost certainly be simply part of life. It will affect tactics, but this is a sport. A sport isn't some fixed pure ideal. It is a game, and many of the rules of the game are arbitrary and only there for the sake of the sporting experience. Much of the RRS could be recast in a different manner, and it would not change the nature of the game, just the specifics. 

Heck, those of us who do round the cans couldn't care less about AIS arguments. We are never out of one another's sight. OTOH, I have learnt over the years not to blindly trust my visual estimate another boat's precise course and speed at a distance. I have called shifts and holes that weren't there. Having a readout from another boat would have saved a few blunders. But in the end it doesn't matter. We do it for the fun and sporting competition. The precise form of the competition changes, but we keep enjoying it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Did you run into other vessels a fair bit before AIS did you?

Jeez, a notification of an LB 15 post, quoting me, how exciting.

Quite honestly LB, you just don't get it, so you are now #2 on my ignorant list (and remain on ignore).

I will oblige you with a real answer though. 

Yes indeed, before AIS I did run into plenty other vessels, or at least very nearly so in most cases.

Since AIS I still do, but a lot less.

Get it ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And congratulations everyone on getting the thread to another page- even without my trolling for 48 hours. Mind you there is a lot of discarded bait and tangled line around. Looks like you chaps were doing a lot of casting but didn’t catch anything. In order to catch a fish you need to think like a fish...

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, staysail said:

I have sailed past a fair few ships over 500 tons which I have seen and which have not shown up on my AIS, but I have no way of knowing for sure if they have AIS or if they have it and its not working for some reason.

AIS is not a system in which I can put my trust.

I have sailed past numerous big fast steel fishing boats in the 50 to 250 ton size range which I consider potentially far more dangerous to me especially at night. Their AIS target display which I observe is often completely sporadic and frequently non-existent. It is common gossip where I sail that fishermen do not like other fishermen to be able to track and record their activity at the degree of detail that AIS allows, but as I  say that is gossip and I have no way of knowing if it's true.  If I see a fishing fleet on AIS, that is one time I like to make sure my AIS TX is on I keep a particularly careful visual watch as I know that there are multiple ships around with no obvious destinations and they have a greater interest in hauling fish than in watching for a yacht nav light!.

WTF is ‘a particularly good watch’? Do you keep a less that good watch at other times?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

Jeez, a notification of an LB 15 post, quoting me, how exciting.

Quite honestly LB, you just don't get it, so you are now #2 on my ignorant list (and remain on ignore).

I will oblige you with a real answer though. 

Yes indeed, before AIS I did run into plenty other vessels, or at least very nearly so in most cases.

Since AIS I still do, but a lot less.

Get it ?

 

 

What don’t i get cupcake? That you can only safely operate a vessel with lots of screens around you? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ease the sheet. said:

Really? You need some help?

 

Because I heard richo has a couple of good watches........

Not bad Ease, not bad. You are really coming on.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, frant said:

The only vessels that don’t Tx on AIS are US warship or Australian warship, they are also radar invisible. I imagine that they can see you however irrespective of your own AIS status.

You can be sure of that. There will usually be a guy sitting in front of a console whose entire job is to watch the various inputs and collate the picture of what is going on.  But no reason that AIS isn't one of the inputs. One thing useful AIS gets you is the MMIS - unique vessel identity.  Sadly in the modern world an AIS transmitter on a warship is an open invitation to a low tech attack. The USS Cole was holed by nothing more than a RIB full of explosives driven by a couple of suicide bombers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said:

, so you are now #2 on my ignorant list (and remain on ignore).

I will oblige you with a real answer though. 

You can’t make this shit up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, staysail said:

not "less than good", "less than particularly good".

And welcome back!

Cheers mate and my apologies for being away but I have spent the last 2 days  floating in the shallows of Horseshoe bay with a Aussie flag tied around my head and Gangagang on continued loop on the speakers hung in a tree. I have being getting in touch with my inner bogan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall any resistance to the mandatory inclusion of AIS a few years ago so the diversity of opinion on its compulsory activation is interesting.

I must be a slow learner but it seems to me this is what is driving the debate. 

1. AIS can provide at times extremely valuable tactical information. WOXI at Tasman Is has proved that.

2. That "tactical worth" now exponentially boosts the probability of non-compliance and therefore protest.

3. This increased "protest probability" aspect suddenly completely overshadows any safety benefit the gear may have in some peoples mind.

So the moment AIS is emersed in a race by its activation being made compulsory it's worth as a piece of safety equipment suddenly comes into question.

I think those pushing for AIS activation being made voluntary have a very solid argument. However the extension to that means they should also not object to its inclusion as a piece of equipment being removed? I doubt there would be many who would support that.

It is actually a pretty difficult decision for a RC to make. They are weighing up increased protest probability versus a piece of safety gear that if not on does nothing and if half on (RX only) is say contributing half of its safety capacity. However the moment it is turned on to full (TX & RX) to secure full safety capacity non compliance and protests are introduced. 

Maybe the best way of cracking the stalemate is ask the question are race boats and the marine environment in terms of risk greatly different today compared to pre AIS times? If the answer is no then making AIS activation non compulsory or compulsory for RX only shouldn't be a problem. However if the answer is yes then that makes decision making for a RC pretty hard.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread will still be going by the time the next S2H is run.

I haven't participated in a sailing race since the 70's. Even then, at a small local level, the egos, the cheating, the bitching, the feeling that it was becoming dominated by rich pricks with a win-at-all-costs attitude was hard to stomach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

What don’t i get cupcake? t you can only safely operate a vessel with lots of screens around you? 

What you don't get is that it enhances safety. Your reasoning is lacking sense, big time.

You should go and join the  next GGR !  You will be a perfect fit for that other idiot, Don McFuckface. Were you in the boyscouts together?

Anyway, don't forget your Walkman and your wheelchair, good luck !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, staysail said:

I have sailed past a fair few ships over 500 tons which I have seen and which have not shown up on my AIS, but I have no way of knowing for sure if they have AIS or if they have it and its not working for some reason.

Mate own gear RX and not a SOLAS vessel TX more probable as the cause.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

And congratulations everyone on getting the thread to another page- even without my trolling for 48 hours. Mind you there is a lot of discarded bait and tangled line around. Looks like you chaps were doing a lot of casting but didn’t catch anything. In order to catch a fish you need to think like a fish...

You're welcome mate, 

I've no boat still until hopefully this weekend, and I admit to going a bit stir crazy with such stunning weather.

Glad you could get away!

Actually, I'd prefer everyone else to be wallowing in misery and stuck at home mowing the lawn if I'm honest.... 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shaggybaxter said:

Actually, I'd prefer everyone else to be wallowing in misery and stuck at home mowing the lawn if I'm honest.... 

Diversion activities to try to avoid getting back to clearing out the cellar. Depressing what one finds down there. Brilliant day here weather wise, which makes all the more stupid. I suppose I should really get the slasher out and get to the block. 

Happy? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Francis Vaughan said:

Diversion activities to try to avoid getting back to clearing out the cellar. Depressing what one finds down there. Brilliant day here weather wise, which makes all the more stupid. I suppose I should really get the slasher out and get to the block. 

Happy? 

You sir are a gentlemen. Does this mean the temp in SA  has tried dropping below 40 degrees just to be different?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shaggybaxter said:

Drop it. And the RC should be kicked up the arse for adding it as a mandatory requirement without thinking through the consequences.

Shaggy the only question the RC should ask are race boats and the marine environment in terms of risk greatly different today compared to pre AIS times? If the answer is NO then making AIS activation non compulsory or compulsory for RX only shouldn't be a problem. Removal of AIS trancievers as mandatory equipment could even be justified.

However if the answer is YES then that makes decision making for a RC pretty hard. Compulsory AIS activation RX & TX then brings into play the "tactical worth" of AIS which exponentially boosts the probability of non-compliance and therefore protest.

As the RC has in effect answered YES to increased risk, a large reason for that it is probably not the majority of the fleet, but the thought of 100' and 30 tonne of carbon hurtling through the dark at over 20kts or 10 metres per second down the NSW south coast.

The irony is if it was the 100 footer club that possibly tipped the balance for the RC making AIS activation compulsory, it is the 100' that are the first to trigger this enevitable issue of non-compliance and protest.

Getting the genie back in the bottle now is no easy task.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, frant said:

In any event I believe that BJ are blameless in this regard

If they had no evidence they should not have gone bleating to the media. That is what they get censure for. They can report what they see, but moaning for all to hear and then hiding behind a "we don't do protests" excuse is dickish. They need to walk the walk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, frant said:

In any event I believe that BJ are blameless in this regard and critisicm by the IJ was unwarranted. 

Frant if they didn't want to protest then they should have shut up and not had a cry on national TV. IJ critical ???

13 minutes ago, frant said:

BJ was clearly not in a position to provide evidence that WOXI was not transmitting. All they could do is provide “evidence” that they could not receive WOXI. 

No evidence?? You forget the evidence from a lot of other people that could not receive WOXI. Anyway moot point as WOXI have stated they were not AIS TX.

1603764687_WOXITSHIRT.jpg.ad607d8cbda1a1dc7ae2cfc898490196.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Cheers mate and my apologies for being away but I have spent the last 2 days  floating in the shallows of Horseshoe bay with a Aussie flag tied around my head and Gangagang on continued loop on the speakers hung in a tree. I have being getting in touch with my inner bogan

Ew and with the previous days catch still onboard no doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, frant said:

They didn’t have the hard evidence for a protest. They had pretty comprehensive circumstantial evidence. 

 

25 minutes ago, frant said:

SS will tell you that there are guidelines on the acceptability of photographic evidence. A screen shot is evidence of what?

Frant are on the loony soup?

You don't need evidence to make a protest, not to be confused with needing something to win one for something like this. That AIS tracks and data of no WOXI AIS not evidence?

BJ didn't flag,/notify protest out on the race track so any protest would have been invalid. Putting that aside if they had Richards would have simply plonked his fried splitter on the table and said this is why we were not AIS TX. Protest would have been dismissed as it should be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry been away did Ricco end up providing the evidence he said he would? Was it a fried splitter? All this aside they have gotten to Hobart first in the last 2 races and I think they have proved they have the best all round boat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, frant said:

still incumbent on the measures to deal with not the competitor.IMHO.

But doesn't that ignore the fact that AIS is used for tactical purposes. No signal RX = tactical disadvantage. 

10 minutes ago, frant said:

If that is not the case then we should look at that section of the rules on protest for amendment.

The rules then state it is safety only provision and treated accordingly no different than other safety gear on board.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, frant said:

I suppose it is inevitable that we keep on going around in circles. 

Frant it seems to me that any resolution has to start with the RC reviewing if any changes to race boats and the environment on the race course has changed sufficiently to warrant AIS activation in full being made mandatory. Until they properly do that everything else is moot.

In that regard I think it would be pretty hard task to show any demonstrable changes have occured going back the few years to when the equipment itself first became mandatory. If it wasn't necessary then, why is it now?

The RC to save some face could wind it back to RX only being mandatory. That would at least deal with static AIS enabled fishing devices etc if they have become more prevalent. The issues attached to accelerated non-compliance and protests would then dissapear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, frant said:

After the dog come out refusing to yield the parcel of drugs they thanked us for cooperating in a training exercise. I reckon we had been flagged and watched on AIS and satellite from the time we had departed Eden.

Then again, the world is a wicked place.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-28/former-aussie-horse-trainer-and-wife-international-drugs-trade/10755836

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, terrafirma said:

Sorry been away did Ricco end up providing the evidence he said he would? Was it a fried splitter? All this aside they have gotten to Hobart first in the last 2 races and I think they have proved they have the best all round boat. 

It may well be a great boat but apparently the electrics need some work....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

What you don't get is that it enhances safety. Your reasoning is lacking sense, big time.

You should go and join the  next GGR !  You will be a perfect fit for that other idiot, Don McFuckface. Were you in the boyscouts together?

Anyway, don't forget your Walkman and your wheelchair, good luck !

 

Any chance you could ignore me a bit more quietly? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, hoppy said:

No, the correct "extension" to the voluntary AIS would be that AIS receivers be the mandatory minimum. Anyway, the fact that some or is it all MOB devices are AIS, then AIS should be fitted and receiving on all boats. I do think that AIS Transmitters being mandatory is a good thing, because there are times when it will be beneficial to your safety to turn it on TX.

So you now correct peoples analytical extensions and turn them into your own opinion.

By the way it is fiction, not "fact that some or is it all MOB devices are AIS." Only 406 EPIRB PLB's are mandated so the basis to your opinion falls away. You didn't read my words "I think those pushing for AIS activation being made voluntary have a very solid argument" when rushing in there with your fiction.

Anyway it is so good to have you back.

coming-out-of-grave-hocus-pocus-gif-www-thescottsmithblog.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frant said:

And even more importantly they won in the true Corinthian spirit to the rousing three cheers from their opposition. 

Do they have a Corinthian Division? I don’t think Oats would qualify.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Even with crew having a PLB that's activated, I'm pretty sure most boats send out an SOS to AMSA as part of their MOB procedures.

I'm pretty sure most boats MOB procedure is to poke around for an hour or so looking for them first, before letting the only people who can track that PLB know.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, frant said:

Everyone knows deep down however that in this case it was a question of the silent mode switch.

Do they? I Would argue that in fact nobody ‘knows’ that. Speculation and suspicion are not knowing Frant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:
  1 hour ago, hoppy said:

 jeezus christ there are some dumb fucks on this thread

 

43 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Mmmmmm

Please don't quote Jesus Christ, dumb fucks, and loopy hoppy.

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hoppy said:

I think a AIS MOB would be more invaluable in a yacht race than a PLB. It allows the boat to hopefully recover the crew member, or even a nearby boat. If I went overboard, if my crew wants me back, I'd rather give them a better chance to recovering me than being reliant on a chopper

What happens when everyone is floating in the piss. Hand Signals?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, hoppy said:

Ok, prove it......

Show me the section

https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WorldSailingOffshoreSpecialRegulations20182019180104-[23449].pdf

APPENDIX E World Sailing Code for the Organisation of Oceanic Races An Oceanic Race is defined as any Offshore race over 800 miles.

21. The Sailing Instructions may include instructions; • To continuously monitor VHF Channel 16 • To have the AIS active at all times or to activate the AIS in reduced visibility and passages with extensive commercial traffic • For any other safety matters as appropriate

Still optional unless SI dictates, but S2H is not 800 miles

 

.

 

Are you serious????

We are talking about the AIS being in silent mode v transmitting, not turned off.

 

 

Read OSR 1.01.1

The purpose of the OSR is to establish UNIFORM minimum equipment etcetc

Then read 3.29.13.

It is in  Section 3 of the OSR which starts with the phrase "A boat shall be/have" shall being definitive not advisory.

Oh, and by the way, you can find 1.01.1 and 3.29.13 if you click on the link 

https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WorldSailingOffshoreSpecialRegulations20182019180104-[23449].pdf

Oh - wait a minute? That's the link you posted already :-) Be a good idea NOT to post references that prove yourself wrong.

If up until now the CYCA has NOT had the requirement as mandatory they have been behind the 8 ball as far as World Sailing safety regs are concerned

And by the way Appendix E is advice to race organisers NOT what boats competing in a Cat 1 "shall" carry.

The title "World Sailing Code for the ORGANISATION of Oceanic Races" should be a bit of a clue there.

Anyway, fed up being a tutor

TTFN

SS

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Sounds pretty stupid. It the PLB is properly "registered" on the AMSA site, it should be saying which boat it is on AMSA would contact them and the RO once the PLB is triggered

Yes that word stupid does come to mind. You obviously aren't aware of the potential lag time for 406 EPIRB's to show up at the neighbourhood RCC or in this case AMSA. Also degradation to signal from the PLB variety when each wave breaks over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Huh? Are you trying to be sarcastic or just succeeding in being ignorant?

I thought you thunk fish??

 

1 hour ago, hoppy said:

jeezus christ there are some dumb fucks on this thread. I bet a few of the cross the street at a pedestrian crossing without looking for traffic.

They clearly forget that AIS is not mandatory and as a result there could be cruisers or amateur fisherman out on the water with no AIS at all. The forget that as the S2H racers approach storm bay, they will encounter the L2H cat 3 racers for whom AIS is not even a recommended item on the SR and then in storm bay the cat 2 M2H fleet. 

For the racers more than 30 miles off the coast, 97% of of the AIS targets they will see will be fellow S2H yachts all heading in the same direction. The maxis might see 2 commercial ships offshore and the rest, perhaps 5 or 6. 

 

I'm happy to be on Fiji's ignore list because he is clearly one dumb fuck, firstly his head in the arse faith in AIS (probably has collisions at sea in god vis) and the fact that he dumb enough to announce his ignores. 

 

Hoppy, you have already admitted you haven't done a race since hand held radar guns. You are seriously becoming a thread pollutant, chill Lying Bastard is back, the pressure is off.

 
Edit .
Some really weird cross platform posting happened just then which I removed. Maybe I am under cyber attack?
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Yes that word stupid does come to mind. You obviously aren't aware of the potential lag time for 406 EPIRB's to show up at the neighbourhood RCC or in this case AMSA. Also degradation to signal from the PLB variety when each wave breaks over it.

Don't worry Jack just "jump off" as Hoppy suggests and we will see what heppens.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Yes they SHALL HAVE an AIS transmitter onboard... how many times do I have to write that I 100% agree with that rule.

Nowhere does it say that the AIS MUST be transmitting....

FFS

That's one of the versions MR postulated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hoppy said:

You are right, I'm not aware of the PLB time lag. More reason for someone to get on the radio as soon as the MOB occurs. 7 crew looking for the MOB and one alerting others in case outside assistance is required.    

As opposed to a fucking red light flashing and telling you his immediate global position. Thats like having a heart attack and calling Crime Stoppers.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hoppy said:

What read light flashing and what's telling his global position????

Jack made me aware that the race regs only require a PLB which is zero help to the crew on the boat who is looking for their MOB. No need to have the AIS on at all it seems.

What good is ais to a wet crewman when oats is traveling down wind at 25kts?

By the time the kite is down and the boat turned around, its out of range.

 

Of course,  that's if they can work the boat and watch the wet crewman at the same time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

What good is ais to a wet crewman when oats is traveling down wind at 25kts?

By the time the kite is down and the boat turned around, its out of range.

Of course,  that's if they can work the boat and watch the wet crewman at the same time.

 

Yes not a good idea to fall off a quick boat even in daylight. AIS PLB range in shitty conditions is maybe a mile. Doing 25kts means your are out of range in less than 3 minutes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, hoppy said:

Jack made me aware that the race regs only require a PLB which is zero help to the crew on the boat who is looking for their MOB. 

Are you sure about that? Remember the RCC that you said that will call them if they don't, or are you now suggesting PLB's are of no use other than for plucking people out of the water by chopper?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Lying Bastard has gone back under his foreskin. He lurked for hours today before posting and then his chief leg humper shot them both in the foot.


Fuck I love this place, even when it smells all fishy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hoppy said:

Jack made me aware that the race regs only require a PLB which is zero help to the crew on the boat who is looking for their MOB. No need to have the AIS on at all it seems.

Hoppy I promise that I'm close to the end here. I have dilligently read your posts, which is like herding cats, to be sure on what I think your current position is.

1. AIS Trancievers should be mandatory as per the Special Regs.

2. You do not support the RC's decision to mandate activation of AIS both RX and TX for this race.

3. Your only concession to 2. is that if any crew members carry AIS PLB's, whilst not mandatory, that vessel must keep their AIS RX activated at all times.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on clarifying your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

What you don't get is that it enhances safety. Your reasoning is lacking sense, big time.

You should go and join the  next GGR !  You will be a perfect fit for that other idiot, Don McFuckface. Were you in the boyscouts together?

Anyway, don't forget your Walkman and your wheelchair, good luck !

 

I thought you had LB on ignore? 

Fuck I love this place. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

I thought you had LB on ignore? 

Fuck I love this place. 

Mad I have come to the conclusion that when anyone who declares someone has been put on ignore, the first posts they read are those supposedly on ignore. Human nature is a funny thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Mate own gear RX and not a SOLAS vessel TX more probable as the cause.

Unlikely when one can see other targets at the same time, but you make my own point for me. There is no way of anyone knowing for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hoppy said:

 This was tongue in cheek...

No drama. So Hoppy your your position about AIS in this race, with your confirmation and additions in bold is;

A. HOPPY's VIEW

1. AIS Trancievers should be mandatory as per the Special Regs. correct

2. You do not support the RC's decision to mandate activation of AIS both RX and TX for this race. correct

3. Your only concession to 2. is that if any crew members carry AIS PLB's, whilst not mandatory, that vessel must keep their AIS RX activated at all times. I think RX should be on regardless. 

Hoppy now this is not an opinion piece but one simply of me interrogating the reasoning behind your viewpoint.

1. For #1 and #2 your view accords with some here, so your are not alone.

2. For #3 you introduce a mandatory AIS RX and TX provision for any vessel carrying crew with non mandatory AIS PLB's. To add this provision you obviously put a lot of weight behind the benefits of AIS enabled PLB's.

I'm light of that #3 some quick background.

B. BACKGROUND

While AIS PLB's are on the market they are more bulky than their 406 EPIRB cousins and obviously impose the hassle of carrying two seperate transponders on the body. A combined single unit is still a long way off due to technical and national communication authority issues such as automatic switching etc. Until this is sorted their take up will not be large in the race boat market.

However quick boats can be out of range of a AIS PLB in one mile or less than 3 minutes. There is a strong argument in a fleet race, there is a higher probability in fast downhill conditions a following competitor(s) will see and nearly run over that AIS enabled MOB before their parent vessel can turn around and labour upwind to find them.

Therefore in light of the above a generalisation is those boats who might have AIS PLB's tend to be restricted to the 15/20 kts plus variety and or those with healthy budgets. I can name a few, where WOXI is one.

The only crewed offshore race in the world taking the above opportunities and constraints into mind that has made both AIS and 406 EPIRB PLB's mandatory is the VOR.

C. CONCLUSION

Finally as to the RC's decision making either good or bad was that AIS activation in full was mandatory this year. We don't know their "why' that but if one reason was the increasing use of AIS PLB's by some competitors and the above background in mind, I note the following.

1. With all competitors mandated to have their AIS on RX, this raises exponentially the already higher prospects of them seeing a AIS MOB and pulling them out of the drink before their parent vessel. This is above the RC's stated concerns about static AIS devices like fishing infrastructure and any vessel in the path of the fleet with a AIS TX on.

2. With all competitors mandated to have their AIS on TX, any competitor sporting AIS PLB's can quickly check their on board system is working. Short of throwing someone overboard with a activated AIS PLB mid race they have no ready means of being  assured all is working well. That is aside from mandatory AIS TX enabling a fleet better equipped to locate and look after their own in case of incident well before external SAR can be mobilised on this race course.

So the RC's decision to mandate AIS full activation would appear to be based on the concept of "mutual dependancy". A concept without that mandate unravels faster than a Hong Kong sweater.

If you go to the next step of WOXI's role either by design or technical badluck they were removed from that "mutual dependancy framework". They did however enjoy by the mandatory AIS TX transmissions of others unlike their own, that their own AIS RX was working sweet in case they had a MOB.

As @shanghaisailor says, 

Just Saying.

PS. Hoppy just in case you wonder why I went to the trouble of posting this? Your reply as follows in another thread with me trying to get rid of you polluting it was the tipping point. "..Jack in this thread regurgitating what he found on google."

As you love memes, enjoy the ride down Hoppy from jumping all by yourself.

 

tenor.gif

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hoppy said:

Shit I thought MOB rules included AIS MOB or some other kind of locator that the boats crew could use for recovery.

I think a AIS MOB would be more invaluable in a yacht race than a PLB. It allows the boat to hopefully recover the crew member, or even a nearby boat. If I went overboard, if my crew wants me back, I'd rather give them a better chance to recovering me than being reliant on a chopper. 

Even with crew having a PLB that's activated, I'm pretty sure most boats send out an SOS to AMSA as part of their MOB procedures.

Now if the CYCA want to make some sensible AIS related rules, they should consider AIS MOB's on all deck crew and AIS RX on at all times.

 

When I was solo I carried a PLB on my LJ. When my misses joined me, we had an AIS MOB each.  

PLEASE don't recommend any more mandatory safety gear!

You can bet that when, (not if), AIS beacons are mandated for each crew that the requirement for PLBs will remain,  just for that 1 in a 1 000 000 chance that none of the surrounding boats AIS is working & the rescue crew only have 406.  I can't remember a piece of safety equipment being removed from the requirements in the 30+ years I have been doing this race.

The exception proving this rule is that you no longer need a trisail if you have a deep enough reef in your main.  The fast boats didn't like carrying them, & to be honest they are a bugger & bloody dangerous to rig on a big boat with mast cars.  I also noticed a number of orange reaching staysails towards the front of the fleet,  I wonder how effective they will be as storm jibs in 80 or 90+.

As for AIS usage,  even on a mid fleet boat we use it over the tracker to monitor our competition & other boats in range to try to be ahead of the next change, it can be worth hours to pick the timing of a front down to a couple of minutes as you watch it come through the fleet.

Do we keep it, I think that it is far from the most useless bit of safety kit on board & if we must carry it it should be operating as designed.  How to police that,  the same way all other unpoliceable (is that a word?) rules are enforced - the honour system & a declaration at the finish.

The only issue here is we haven't seen the declaration WOXI lodged, but the statements coming from the camp would lead people to believe that the failure to comply with the SIs was not noted.  If it wasn't,  that is poor form & once notified they should have done "something" to correct the "oversight".

The fact that they have given the impression of attempting to bully their way through the issue is why it is still an issue.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TUBBY said:

PLEASE don't recommend any more mandatory safety gear!

You can bet that when, (not if), AIS beacons are mandated for each crew that the requirement for PLBs will remain,  just for that 1 in a 1 000 000 chance that none of the surrounding boats AIS is working & the rescue crew only have 406.  I can't remember a piece of safety equipment being removed from the requirements in the 30+ years I have been doing this race.

The exception proving this rule is that you no longer need a trisail if you have a deep enough reef in your main.  The fast boats didn't like carrying them, & to be honest they are a bugger & bloody dangerous to rig on a big boat with mast cars.  I also noticed a number of orange reaching staysails towards the front of the fleet,  I wonder how effective they will be as storm jibs in 80 or 90+.

As for AIS usage,  even on a mid fleet boat we use it over the tracker to monitor our competition & other boats in range to try to be ahead of the next change, it can be worth hours to pick the timing of a front down to a couple of minutes as you watch it come through the fleet.

Do we keep it, I think that it is far from the most useless bit of safety kit on board & if we must carry it it should be operating as designed.  How to police that,  the same way all other unpoliceable (is that a word?) rules are enforced - the honour system & a declaration at the finish.

The only issue here is we haven't seen the declaration WOXI lodged, but the statements coming from the camp would lead people to believe that the failure to comply with the SIs was not noted.  If it wasn't,  that is poor form & once notified they should have done "something" to correct the "oversight".

The fact that they have given the impression of attempting to bully their way through the issue is why it is still an issue.

Well said Tubby and not the first time they have appeared to attempt to bully.

I wonder if they had any input into the Jury Chairman (done 8 Hobarts) not being invited back after the penalty on WOXI in 2017.

Just hypothesising.

SS

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TUBBY said:

The fact that they have given the impression of attempting to bully their way through the issue is why it is still an issue.

Good piece Tubby.

Plus throw in a spoon of elitism into this cake mix. For instance when Richo throwing AIS under his PR fuckup bus as a bonafide safety device saying the Race Tracker works just as well and better with added range as a safety device. He sort of forgot not everyone like WOXI has Satellite Broadband capability and so don't have Tracker access outside 3/4G Land Stations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mad said:

I thought you had LB on ignore? 

Fuck I love this place. 

LB reacted to a post of mine, so then I get a notification. He asked me a question and I am then so kind to give him an answer. Got it?

Also, sometimes when ignored people get quoted, I get the urge to react. That's human nature too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you folks please get back to arguing about if and how bad WOXI cheated!?  Or if MR dyes his hair and if so has it fried his brain leading to multiple PR screw-ups almost every time he opens his mouth? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fiji Bitter said:

LB reacted to a post of mine, so then I get a notification. He asked me a question and I am then so kind to give him an answer. Got it?

Also, sometimes when ignored people get quoted, I get the urge to react. That's human nature too.

Yes but it’s not really ignoring someone is it sweet pea. You know you don’t get notifications from someone you have on ignore don’t you? It is sad enough when snowflakes like you puff out your sunken chests and scream ‘I have you on ignore’. It is even sadder when they then don’t do it and read every post. Only true pin dicks then tie themselves in knots trying to explain how the came to reply to an ignore poster. Want to put me on ignore cupcake? Knock yourself out, but actually do it this time you stupid cunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites