Lester Gilbert

With a length of wire held on the mast, tie the loop around both. Experiment with various wire diameters until you hit upon the tightness you think suitable. A 3 mm knitting needle works well for eyelets in an IOM sail, for example, or 1.2 mm piano wire for an IOM jackstay.

"It's one of those rules that doesn't make much sense if you are the customer." "Seems odd (and/or illogical) for an "International" class. How tortured and officious does this really need to be?" As I understand it, the point of requiring the Certification Measurer to be appointed or recognised by the MNA of the country where the control takes place is to establish jurisdiction. In the case of GBR, this means that the MYA can take any steps necessary to ensure trustworthy certificates and, if needed, to pursue dodgy practices. Otherwise, a measurer not appointed or recognised by the MYA (or RYA) is "out of reach".

The formula for rating a 6M doesn't care about length overall, so adding anything at the bows to make a bumper is fine, it is ignored when calculating LWL. The Class Rules require the squishy addition to be at least 13 mm thick, so that shouldn't be a problem either. The extra 20g of foam should not be a problem for displacement, but might be an issue when formed in 50g of bath silicone if the forward waterline ending is right on the edge of where it needs to be. The tricky bit is whether the boat was ever originally measured, or is eligible to be re-measured, under the Pre-1985 rules, when a bow bumper was not a required component of the boat. I think from 1985 onwards the Class Rules require a bow bumper, and this bumper needs to be in place at measurement (CR 2.2.9 in the 2025 rules, or similar in previous rules). If the certificate relates to measurement under Pre-1985 rules then a bow bumper does not need to be present at measurement. However, I think a bow bumper does need to be in place when racing, removeable or otherwise, both under CR 1.5.3(e) in the 2025 rules and as a courtesy to the other boats in the event.

"Select "Yes" if you want official IOM measurer to measure and officially mark your sails (signature) so they are ready to be used on next IOM class regatta." While Sailboat RC will have the sails measured exactly as stated (by an independent measurer, not a specially licensed "in-house" measurer), they do not make it clear that the sails are only "ready to be used" in CRO.

Around 30 years ago or so, if my information is correct (smile), a Renaissance measured as an A won the A Class National Championship. If my calculations are correct (smile), with wind speed always below around 5 mph, a Romanza certificated as an A consistently wins against a fleet of "proper" A's. In lighter conditions, say below 3 mph, you would time-out half the fleet having won by 2 or 3 minutes. At an average 6 mph or higher, though, you'd berth your boat and get more enjoyment sipping a Pimms than being thoroughly thrashed by every back-marker.... Might be worth mentioning that my calcs assume the Romanza is appropriately modified to rate '100' as an A -- more sail area and deeper fin at least. Unmodified, as John says, it would be a little pointless.

Brad makes a terrific point. Three ideas. One. We already have a Ranking weekend which usually comprises two days, one event on each day, and each event counts separately. Now the Nationals weekend usually comprises three days, so let's make each day a separate event, exactly as per a Ranking Event. The trick is to have the weekend declare a National Champion, so here are the additional regulations we need. (A) The National Championship shall comprise a Championship Series, being the three Ranking Events of the weekend. (B) All the Events of the Championship Series shall count. Well, of course, if you prefer, you could have 2 of the 3 Events to count. (C) The seeding of boats for Race 1 of Event 2, and for Race 1 of Event 3, shall be according to their current position in the Championship Series, with other boats according to their current Ranking positions. (D) Each Event of the Championship Series shall count 100 points, or if you prefer, 120 points. Or 125. Or any number you like. Two. We'd like the National Championship Event to somehow count more than an "ordinary" Ranking Event. Instead of giving it 200 points, or 150 points, or whatever, let's give a Bonus Ranking Point for each position above mid-fleet that a boat finishes in the Event. So the Nat Champs counts 100 points just like any other Ranking event, but now (74 boat entry) the 38th boat gets 49 points or so and no bonus, the 37th gets 51 points plus 1 bonus, while the first place boat gets 137 points (100 plus 37) and it is the 16th place boat which gets 101 (79 plus 22). Well, of course, if you prefer, you could have a bonus of 2 points for each place above mid-fleet. Or 3 points for each place above three-quarter fleet position. Or any bonus you like for each place above any other position you like. Three. Combine One and Two, and replace (D) in Idea One with Idea Two.

Hi Richard It would be good to know the reply to Darin's question. I believe JohnO's quote from IOMICA refers to the CRO proposal to amend the class rule. As far as I know it does not refer to a physical "CRO kicking strap", whatever that might be. The IOMICA report is simply poorly worded. Perhaps a photo of your VISS kicking strap would help us compare it to the current IOM class rules.

Hi Stuart In case it is helpful, a quick distance estimator using your extended thumb... (smile) "Thumb Tip" distance estimator Arm length (A) 550 mm eye to upright thumb Boat size (B) 650 mm Width of thumb tip (W) 20 mm eg, at nail base Size in the distance (Z) 0.1 thumb tips that is, approx 2 mm Distance to boat (DtoB) 179 m = (A*B) / (1000*W*Z) = ROUND((B4*B3)/(B5*B6*1000),1) if the data is in Excel Relationship DtoB : A ≈ B : W*Z

I've run a simple 3D printed plate in my Marblehead, and currently a SAILSetc fitting in my Six Metre, both carbon hulls, without problems. They fit inside the pot.

Hi Simon I think the 12 and 14 overlap is at a dia of 12 (outer for the 12, inner for the 14), so I guess an overlap length of 48 would be considered "sufficient". (Never did establish exactly what was meant by "sufficient"....)

Diameter at the overlap, I believe.

Hi Simon My recollection of Engineering 101 was that, other things being equal, a "sufficient" overlap should be at least 4 times the diameter. No limit on mast height. Unwanted drag a good reason to keep it as low as possible.

Hi Paul Terrific summary, thanks! There are two columns that would really be very useful to add if you had the enthusiasm. One is the degree to which: (a) the winch has an actual IP rating; (b) the winch is convincingly claimed to be waterproof; (c) is said to be waterproof in a hand-waving kind of way; (d) is said to be "water resistant"; (e) no claim or statement is made about this; or (e) is explicitly said to have no water "protection". Two is if: (a) the battery connects to the winch and also to the receiver; (b) the battery connects only to the receiver and it is the receiver which powers the winch; (c) the battery connects only to the winch which then supplies the receiver with the battery voltage unchanged; (d) the battery connects only to the winch which then supplies a different voltage to the receiver (ie 6V); or (e) two batteries are required, one for the winch and one for the receiver.

Hi John > unless you are familiar with Bernoulli's equation and know what the Navier-Stokes equations are about Yup, check, and, ah, check. > all the simple "molecules speeding up" or ^bouncing off the surface" explanations are nonsense These are perfectly good explanations, though some are considered better. The lift produced by a wing is described, but not explained, by some maths which is just a computable model of the situation in the realm of engineering that gives rather useful results. An explanation is a different matter from the realm of the philosophy of science, and a useful explanation is when a human says, "Ah, got it, I think I understand." And I think it is considered offensive in polite discussion to tell anyone they are talking nonsense.

Good stuff. But the business of the wind speeding up to follow the upper wing camber so that it meets up with the wind below is no longer thought a useful explanation. Instead, "[...] we imagine we are sitting with a bundle of fluid particles as we flow over the upper surface of a cambered wing. Starting from the nose, we are forced up by the curve of the wing. As the curve of the wing eases off, we stop being pushed up, and we travel straight and level for a moment or two. And now as the wing surface begins to drop away from us, where do we go? Well, we just want to keep going straight because of momentum and inertia. On the other hand, if we all just stop following the surface, we are going to create a perfect vacuum. So some of our bundle starts to follow the surface down, some of our bundle continues more or less straight on, and the remainder of the bundle spreads itself between those two. Technically, this results in decreased fluid pressure on the upper surface. A pressure decrease is the same thing as a partial vacuum, meaning that there is a suction on the upper surface of the wing, lifting it up. The amount of sucking – lifting – force depends on the amount of camber; more camber, more suction." https://www.onemetre.net/Design/Lift/Lift.htm