Jump to content

Lester Gilbert

MYA Council
  • Posts

    224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lester Gilbert

  1. From the photo, it looks like the fin is not a SAILSetc item. In that case, checking its position on the SAILSetc plan might not give a good outcome; and depending on the skill and experience of its previous owner, it might actually be in the "right" position. The issue is the balance of the boat, such that fin position needs to cooperate or coordinate with the sail plan. There is no "right" fin position otherwise. The only way to tell is to sail the boat and check the amount of helm, weather or lee, needed to keep her on track in a breeze which keeps her nicely heeled (30 degrees usually quoted). If the helm is neutral or slightly weather, the fin and the rig are in their "right" positions. If the mast needs to be forward of upright, or raked far back to obtain good balance, well, that's when its time to think about re-positioning the fin. I'd suggest, before surgery to "correct" the fin, sail the boat first; the fin would be too far back if you found you had to rake the mast back excessively. Good luck!
  2. Common to have the bulb canted around 2 degrees, gives optimum attitude when the boat is well heeled on the beat, or when being well driven on the run. http://www.onemetre.net/Design/Bulbcant/BulbCant.htm
  3. Currently, the Free Sailing Class Rules Supplement specifies, "1.2 The use of radio control, or any device not activated by the force of the wind, including timing devices for the operation of a tacking guy, is prohibited." Exactly what might be meant, or intended, by the phrase "activated by the force of the wind" is a very interesting question. A vane feather connected to an Arduino or similar is certainly "activated by the wind". But is the consequent control of the rudder via a servo also therefore activated by the wind? Do we need to understand "activated" as both "controlled" and "powered"?
  4. Hi Gareth Sadly, the free sailing rules require updating to reflect accepted practice. The FSCR supplement as published on the MYA Knowledge Base does not specify the necessary changes which you and others have mentioned. There is on-going discussion between the MYA and the Free Sailing Class Owners Group on this .... The M Class Rules require a mainsail to be set, C.7.4(f), and no sail to be reefed, C.7.4(g), as you say. Both rules need to be deleted for free sailing. It would be an interesting discussion at the pond side if anyone were to protest you for furling your jib (smile). A similar issue for the A Class, where the Class Rules specify that a mainsail shall be set and that the mainsail shall not be reefed, but also specify that the jib clew shall be attached to the jib boom. So, it seems that it is explicit that an A Class jib may not be furled, which would be quite a surprise for the Vane A sailors.
  5. Graham's original answer, posted on his behalf. ---------------- The formula is a straightforward use of Simpson's Rule. Imagine the leech roach represented by a graph with 5 ordinates at equal spacing. Let's call the ordinates z0, z1, z2, z3, and z4. The length of the leech is L. The area under this curve - the area of the leech roach - given by Simpson's Rule is: (L/4) * ( z0 + 4 z1 + 2 z2 + 4 z3 + z4 ) / 3 The first term, (L/4), is the spacing of the ordinates, the second term in brackets is the sum of the ordinates each multiplied by the Simpson multiplier (1, 4, 2, 4, 2, 4, 2....... 4, 1), the third term is the divisor 3. It will be obvious with a little though that Simpson's Rule works only for odd numbers of ordinates. For even numbers the trapezoidal rule is used. For special numbers of ordinates there are 'other' Simpson's multipliers but I'd have to check my uni notes (or Google) to discover those. For a Marblehead leech roach both z0 and z4 are zero, so this becomes: L * ( 4 z1 + 2 z2 + 4 z3 ) / 12 In the case of the Marblehead excess sail area calculation we do not have the leech length, L, but we do have the luff length, A. And we are interested in an excess area gained by excesses of the cross widths over the permitted cross widths. Those excesses are called X, Y and Z. So, if we replace L by A and z1, z2 and z3 by X, Y and Z we get the following: A * ( 2X + Y + 2Z ) / 6 Voila.
  6. Graham Bantock has explained the formula for the excess area of a Marblehead leech roach, as below.
  7. Hi Bill The best way to check your boat is to work through the 6M rules https://www.mya-uk.org.uk/kb/six-metre-class-6m/ and see how she conforms. A 6M is not the easiest of boats to check, though, and it may be that you need to have her measured. And the best way to check competitiveness is to enter an event and see how you do (smile). There is a 6M event coming up in Norwich at the end of October, drop an e-mail to the organiser, Vinnie.zammit@gmail.com, I'm sure you'd be welcomed. Good luck!
  8. As you well know, Brad, historically the MYA acts and has acted as the NCA for these classes. As you also well know, the MYA is currently trying to move class responsibilities to COGs. In due course I expect those COGs that wish to will accept the responsibility to act as the NCA for their class, and I expect that the MYA will delegate or transfer NCA responsibilities to those COGs. I also expect that not all COGs will want this responsibility, in which case the MYA will have to continue to act as the class NCA. As you well know, this is currently an on-going process that has only started recently, and much needs to be settled before a COG can act as an NCA, not only with the MYA but with the relevant international associations.
  9. Hi Brad A common misconception which I would like to correct. The MYA has introduced COGs recently, overturning nearly 100 years of history. It is a policy that has my enthusiastic support, and as far as I can see the support of the entire MYA Council, executive officers and district councillors alike. As the co-opted Racing Officer, I've engaged with the classes in supporting them to define their racing calendar for 2022 rather than telling them what dates they can have. I've engaged with the classes in asking them to take on the maintenance of their championship and ranking regs, their sailing instructions, and their notice of race templates. There is no reluctance here to ask classes to take control for themselves.
  10. Hi Michael Terminology might be in the way here. One of our "races" is usually made up from a number of heats if there are more than 20 boats or so; if fewer than 20 boats then every race consists of one heat. I'm thinking that your example comprised 6 races, each race comprising one heat. What we call an "event" is usually made up of a number of races. The racing rules of sailing generally talks about a "series" as being a number of races, and so this is what is taken to be an "event" in radio sailing. I'm thinking that your example is an event with 6 races, constituting a series in the terms of the RRS. RRS A7 applies to a particular radio sailing race, but not to the event. RRS A8 applies to the event, and is sometimes called the "countback" rule. There are no rules specifically which deal with what we might call a series, comprising a number of events. The best that can currently be done is to score a series of radio sailing events as a series of series (!), that is, to apply A8 to the events as though they were races.
  11. Hi Damian I guess if there were 3 skippers having trouble and 2 used Futaba, this might be right. But if there were 40 Futaba users in the event and 10 other brands, a different picture emerges.... Do you happen to know how many of the skippers were successfully using Futaba? My maths tutor always told us about the headline, "Dolphin saved my life". Yeah, he'd say, but how often do you hear of a swimmer returning saying, Damn dolphin killed me?
  12. Hi John Could you post a link to a page which explains how to do this, please? Many thanks!
  13. An early page of mine might be interesting. http://www.onemetre.net/Design/Bulbcant/BulbCant.htm
  14. The RG65 Class – from an IRSA perspective In Q&A form V1.1 To be posted on the IRSA Web site shortly Q Can the RG65 class have a world championship? Not as it exists at present. Some time back WS delegated responsibility for the international administration of radio sailing to IRSA and it is through this affiliation that IRSA is able to grant the right to run WORLD championships in the rc international classes. WS protects the right to call a sailing event a world championship – claiming an event is one when it is not sanctioned by WS or IRSA is a breach of the WS rules and can result in competitors being excluded from legitimate sailing events. IRSA is the international class association for the Marblehead, Ten Rater and A Classes. The International One Metre has its own independent international class association, IOMICA, that is responsible for the administration of the IOM class and which is affiliated to IRSA. All these international classes hold world championships from time to time and the events are run under the guidance of IRSA’s & IOMICA’s regulations using the well known Appendix E of the Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS). In order that the RG65 class may hold any event titled ‘world championship’ it has to have international class status given by IRSA. Q Why is IRSA interested in the RG65 class? IRSA’s constitutional object is to develop the sport of RC sailing throughout the world, and to support any class that is popular internationally. The class appeals to a large number of builders because they can exploit exotic construction methods without the problems associated with larger scale building projects. Construction can be as convenient as on a kitchen table. Sail making can be accomplished in a relatively small space. The class is a ‘development’ or ‘open’ class so builders have freedom to improve performance that is deliberately blocked in ‘one design’ or ‘closed’ classes. The boat with all its rigs will comfortably fit into a well designed pack not much bigger than a box used to transport an IOM hull. The prospect of travelling by public transport, as well as by plane without having to pay for excess baggage, is a realistic one. The restriction on the number of rigs serves to restrict cost and complexity, and the boats can be sailed in a space as small as an Olympic swimming pool. A well set up RG65 performs remarkably well, so it is easy to see why the class is popular. Given the opportunity to hold world championships the class would inevitably attract greater number of participants and the level of competition in the class would increase enormously. It is essential that robust class rules are in place before that happens so that continued participation in the class does not become prohibitively expensive. Q What is required for the RG65 class to become recognised by IRSA? To gain international class status some straightforward, but important, standards have to be achieved. • The class has to have a certain number of boats across a certain number of continents and countries. • The class rules have to be written to a common standard, the WS Standard Class Rules (SCR) format. Whereas the numerical requirements are met, it is clear the requirement for WS SCR format class rules is not. Q Why is SCR format required for the class rules? Class rules written using the WS SCR format ensure that as far as possible the language used in class rules and the measurement methods employed are harmonised across the classes. Designers, builders, sail makers and measurers can then be confident of having a common understanding of class rules. Commonly used words like ‘boat’, ‘hull’, ‘hull appendage’ and a vast number of other similar boat part names are all very precisely defined in the Equipment Rules of Sailing (ERS) which is a stand-alone document available as a download from the WS website. Q What else in the existing class rules might need to be changed? An issue that would prevent the RG65 achieving international status is the tradition that the boats are measured by the owners with no independent checking. A complicating factor here is a lack of a prescribed system for measuring sail area. Another tradition in the class, that of being able to replace the fin/ballast unit after each day’s racing, is not permitted either by the class rules or the Racing Rules of Sailing. The current lack of restriction on the material used for the ballast means that tungsten (also known as Wolfram) and other exotic high density materials are permitted. The unwelcome cost implications of this in the long term are clear. The concept of having only three rigs in the class is a sound principle that works well in the IOM class. Whereas the IOM class has several safeguards to keep cost down (no exotic materials in the hull, minimum hull weight, wood or aluminium spars only, one design sails) there are no such restrictions in the RG65 class and construction costs are higher than they would be otherwise. It is probably too late to introduce some of these concepts into the RG65 class – as “the horse has already bolted”. But there are some things that can easily be achieved that will help keep the class popular in the long term and restrict escalation of costs. Q What would IRSA RG65 class rules look like? Briefly: • The class rules would be written in the WS SCR format using terms defined in the ERS. • The sail measurement system would be specified. • Ballast materials denser than lead would be prohibited. • A draught limit would be introduced. • Sail marks rules would be rationalised with those in Appendix E of the RRS. • The rules for racing will be specified as the RRS. • Changing the fin/ballast unit after each day’s racing could either be facilitated by the class rules or, alternatively, prohibited. • Measurement and certification of boats would be by independent official measurers. • Each national association would keep a register of officially certified boats. Q Why does there have to be a draught limit? The draught limit is to ensure all boats at an event can be guaranteed to be able to sail. From an IRSA point of view it is imperative that the Race Committee of an IRSA event does not find itself embarrassed because some competitors with class rule compliant boats cannot compete. Q How will revised RG65 class rules be created? Under the guidance of Gerd Mentges, a sub-committee of the IRSA TC has already produced a first draft of an international standardised version of the RG65 class rules. It incorporates much of what has been learned over the last two decades from the Marblehead and Ten Rater Class rules. It deals with the above points and the TC will spend some time checking and refining its content. Q Could the RG65 owners create their own international class rules? Perhaps, but it may take longer to arrive at a result that is satisfactory to IRSA. Q How would revised RG65 class rules be adopted? When it is felt the revised class rules are of sufficient quality the intention is to post them on the IRSA website. While IRSA cannot impose such rules on anybody, it is hoped the RG65 community will find they like what they see and, if they want to progress to holding the first world championship for the class, there will be a clear pathway to do so. Q What is the pathway to a first world championship for the RG65 class? That pathway would be: • Use the revised class rules. • Achieve sufficient registered boats in sufficient countries and continents. • Apply to IRSA for International Status. • Apply to hold a world championship. Q Could the RG65 class run its own affairs? IRSA would like to see the RG65 class form a class committee within the IRSA structure. Although currently organised on a regional structure of representation, IRSA is in the process of re-structuring into a class based organisation. When the RG65 class committee becomes self-sufficient, IRSA policy is that it should split off to become an independent ICA in the same way as IOMICA.
  15. A couple of points might be worth making. RRS A5 tells us that only the protest committee may take (other) scoring actions that worsen a boat’s score. So no, the RO does not have the power to DSQ anyone. Following an incident on the water, a protest from a boat, the Race Committee, or the Protest Committee *may* be made; a protest is not mandatory (RRS 60.1, 60.2, and 60.3). Where the Race Committee is aware of an unresolved incident, it is considered good practice in radio sailing in the UK for the RC to protest the boats involved for a (gross) breach of the rules (MYA Race Management Guide). (When acting as an RO, I would consider boat on boat contact to be a gross breach of the rules, but not all ROs are of the same opinion.) It is then for the Protest Committee to hear the protest. Note that, although the time limit for protesting might have expired, the Protest Committee can extend the time limit for good reason (RRS 61.3). (Where the RO is aware of an unresolved incident, and then learns that one of the boats involved has retired, it is my opinion that the RO may conclude the incident is now resolved. Not all ROs are of the same opinion.)
  16. Alternatively, do not hail "I am out of control". Instead, use some other words, such as "I cannot steer" or "I have no way", or "I seem to be hooked up on some weed"... Hailing "I am out of control" invokes E2.3.
  17. Might be worth mentioning that ISAF Case 125 in the 2013-2016 Case Book Supplement refers.
×
×
  • Create New...