It goes even further than saying the races are under RRS; it actually includes a poster showing the rules.
Australian Sailing
- Thread starter Commodore Captain
- Start date
It goes even further than saying the races are under RRS; it actually includes a poster showing the rules.
duncan (the other one)
Super Anarchist
yeh - the stupid part of that change is that I'm sure the cast/forged parts would snap with the same side loading which bends the plate style.
LB 15
Cunt
The sailing schools association we set up to fight them was called the Coalition of Unaccredited Nautical Training Schools. We took great childish delight in writing to them on the C.U.N.T.S letterhead.
LB 15
Cunt
AS take the safety of its subjects very seriously.
After all, dead men pay no capitation fees.
Rambler
Super Anarchist
Do you mean capitulation?
Or decapitation?
duncan (the other one)
Super Anarchist
Just dredging this up because I need to replace my old plate-hook tether..
(It's a PITA that AS aren't aligned with WS.. )
WS:
Each crew member shall have:
...
5.02.2 A tether that shall:
MoMu0,1,2,3 a) comply with ISO 12401 or equivalent
MoMu0,1,2,3 b) not exceed 2 m (6’-6”) including the length of the hooks
...
5.02.3 All of the crew shall have either:
MoMu0,1,2,3 a) a tether not exceeding 1m (3'3") including the length of the hooks, or
MoMu0,1,2,3 b) an intermediate self-closing hook on a 2 m (6’-6”) tether
So it seems you can get away with a 2-hook tether that's < 1m long. Not very useful unless you're a midget.
AS differences are:
- no plate hooks
- snap hook at each end - which I think excludes the use of a quick-release snap shackle.
- only 30% of crew need 3-hook tethers.
Capt Araldite
Anarchist
As a matter of interest I called into a Whitworths store today to buy something unrelated, and thought I would ask the question about tethers, the very helpful guy showed me their range of tethers, about 12 different versions available. He wasn’t aware that the plate hook style were illegal for cat1-4 from July. They did have 2 with 2 hooks made from die cast aluminium, but he even agreed that he would rather trust a stainless plate than an aluminium hook. By the way these were $189 each but were not elasticated and were only 2 hook not 3.
Downunder Legend
New member
Are there any unaffiliated clubs in capital cities? Do they run races and if so under what rules?
Fleetwood
Member
Yes, our club uses RRS.
(This copyright thing is a furphy; one can use the RRS, just as you can use a recipe in a cookbook. You can't copy them for commercial gain tho'.)
(This copyright thing is a furphy; one can use the RRS, just as you can use a recipe in a cookbook. You can't copy them for commercial gain tho'.)
dogwatch
Super Anarchist
It is isn’t so simple. You can license copyright material I.e. put conditions on its use. That is common for open source software. You might, for instance, be required to put enhancements you make into the public domain and a popular licence specifies just that. Not that this is commonly enforced. In other fields, the popular Creative Commons licence requires the creator to be acknowledged.
However afaik neither WS nor MNAs specifies a licence against use of the RRS. I went looking at one point.
Last edited:
Rotnest Express
Member
I’m not really sure but it has been previously well reported here that there is an affiliated club in a capital city in a northern eastern seaboard state that has its own variation of the RRS.Apparently the Starboard Tack boat has to give away to the Port Tack Boat as well as Multi Hulls having to yield to Mono Hulls according to a Chairman.They also apparently adopted a variation of the Col Regs- “International Rules for the Promotion of Collisions on the Bay”.Hope this helps.
Last edited:
Yep, it seems that you're probably right that one can use the RRS generally without breaching copyright.
The fact that there's no commercial gain doesn't create any exception to the usual restrictions on copyright in Australia. It may have some relevance about whether the use of the copyright material falls into the "fair use" exception. The fact that the RRS aren't really original makes it more likely that any use of them will fall into the "fair use" exception; most of them are just adaptations or adoptions of earlier rules and it's likely that only the very precise wording of the RRS is protected by copyright, rather than the general concepts.
From what was said here, that case was simple - the cat (on starboard) was not allowed to bear away to make the boat that was ducking change course immediately, but it did. That's a basic rule - 16.2. The starboard tacker isn't allowed to stop the port tacker from avoiding a collision. Even under the Col Regs, a "right of way" boat is under the same duty to maintain its course as a "give way" boat is to keep clear.
If the club's PC was so bad, why didn't the cat owner appeal?
Livia
Super Anarchist
Which version of the Reasons did you read!!!!!
Livia
Super Anarchist
The ones which do not support the findings or the ones that can’t explain that the damage is on the wrong side of the mono
LB 15
Cunt
Or have recourse as an appellant.
LB 15
Cunt
And that little known rule that states when a flag officer is involved in a collision, his boat shall be moved to another city at first light of the day following the collision.
Also the hearing will have both a chair-person and a chair-thrower in attendance.
The collision that just keeps on giving.
