From: J.R.Williams (jrw@cableinet.co.uk)
Date: Wed 23 Jun 1999 - 23:53:10 BST

• Next message: Howard Steavenson: "Reports and Results"
• Previous message: Earnest Bertram: "Huntington-Tents"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Rollo Pyper, who's not online, has asked me to put his comments forward on
the above subjects from last week:

"1. Spinnaker Sail Numbers

Pete Harper is quite correct. I14's do not follow ISAF sail measurement
instructions. We follow our own rules, which do not require boat numbers to
be put spinnakers. This does not prevent owners from having them put on if
they so wish.

2. Bowsprits (Called spi poles @ items 28.29.30 on the measurement forms!)

a) again Peter H is correct. The Bowsprit needs to be exempted at Rule
1(a) - "Bowsprit" should be added at the end of the 1st sentence after "stem
fittings".

b) Rule 1(b) 2nd sentence should be amended to read "The bowsprit support
shall not extend more than 900 mm forward of the hull".

c) Maybe the figure 457m in Rule 1(b) regarding support struts should be
revised to 400mm?

3. Ovi 3

Rule 1a - last sentence is quite explicit and should remove any ambiguity.

This all goes to show how difficult it is to formulate a consistent /
watertight rule. However this should not be too much of a problem if we -
as a class - have a mechanism to "tidy" up rule wording need in the light of
experience."

[after Rollo had written this Rand came in, so Rollo's additional comments
below]

"I had forgotten about the Racing Rules!!

It's good to have many minds on the problem.

It is confusing when the various rules seem to contradict, but I suppose it
allows loopholes and therefore lets classes do what they want.

Rand Arnolds assessment seems to sum it up."

Regards,

Rollo Pyper, UK Ch.Measurer

----------------------------end of Rollos bit ----------------------

<p>While I'm online how about just changing the length rule to be '4267mm max.
at and near the design waterline', no exceptions at all. This way the other
rules like the 900mm bowsprit could still apply but it would be a lot
simpler, remove ambiguity over the other appendages and hey, we could extend
the racks beyond the stern without being overcome with guilt.
Also chuck out rule 2.

Cheers,

John Williams

• Next message: Howard Steavenson: "Reports and Results"
• Previous message: Earnest Bertram: "Huntington-Tents"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4.