Solent

There seems to be a surprisingly high number of events cancelled or postponed this year already. The question is Why? Too many seem to cite lack of entries. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS? Is the London emissions zone causing reluctance for some to come to events inside the M25 or is it just the cost of London based accommodation. Are we just reluctant to commit and enter in good time? (is this just a cumulative effect i.e. if there are only a couple of entries on the MYA entries list we are not prepared to travel to an event with only a few other competitors?) Is it poor timetabling i.e. too many events for a class close together so we pick one ands save the 'brownie points' for other weekends to keep family etc. happy? Are these the issues or something else? Your thoughts

The 10R Registrar will be unable to issue certificates in May. Those requiring change of ownership or fundamental measurement certificates for the Nationals should ensure that correctly completed valid documentation is delivered to the Registrars home address by June 1st. Certificates for valid documents received by then will be processed and issued before the Nationals. Electronic copies to confirm this will be sent to the new owners and the master originals delivered to the Nationals for registration. Those requiring a new number to be issued in May should e-mail the request to the Registrar who will be able to issue numbers. Registrars e-mail and contact details can be found in the members area of the website.

sail measurement. - most sails requiring measurement are International Classes. - most are made by reputable sailmakers who are in effect one man bands hand making sails to order. However competent this is not infallible and mistakes can be made. Hence the need for a second pair of eyes - the official measurer. For replacement sails (i.e. ones where the boat has already passed fundamental measurement and there is an existing valid certificate). It is quite legal and possible for a sailmaker to have an arrangement with a local official measurer ( with no conflict of interest) to, for an appropriate fee, come and measure and check agreement with existing certificate and sign off sails, before dispatch to customer. This could solve a lot of the problems. However for Fundamental Measurement. (First time new boat) this does not work as for many classes (i.e 10R & A) the dimensions of the sails are dependant on many factors relating to the hull and rig design and construction and can even vary between boats of the same design if fitted with different weight fittings and accessories. The whole package needs checking by an official measurer at this fundamental stage. In relation to measurer qualifications. MYA Classes now have online courses available for "Class" measurers. Although it is usually advisable to have someone new who has passed the on line course to carry out their first measurement with an experienced qualified measurer to ensure they have the practical skills covered as well. However before you can become a 'class' measurer you need a sail measurer qualification and the only one available at present is the RYA one. Here we have 'catch 22'. Yes in principal the MYA can run a sailmaker "radio sailing only" course. However the syllabus needs to be 'approved' by the RYA and they can only approve a course if it meets World Sailings requirements. This can happen but not overnight. It has lots of hurdles to jump over all of which also take time and individuals with the time to chase its progress. I am sure it will happen but not this year...

Some thoughts, Not sure if Brad has ever attended a Euro Nations Event. Having been at several (albeit as a spectator accompanying my husband), I can say that these events are usually over 3 days with sailing starting late morning on the first day and finishing early afternoon on the 3rd day to accommodate scrutineers and those who travel very long distances to attend. (Some are Fri. - Sun) A lot of continental open events are organised in this way. A UK style 2 day event starting relatively early on first day and finishing relatively late on second day should provide enough races for a Euro Nations event but could provide difficulties for scrutineers on the first day and would still require at least 3 nights accommodation for those travelling a long way (Even UK Skippers). Euro Nations are usually also very social events with evening gatherings on the 2 nights. Many of these events are also the Nationals for that Class in the country concerned over all or some of those days. So either option could work. If it is over 3 days there is no obligation for UK skippers to compete in the Euro Nations and stay the extra day. Though it would be nice if some of them did. Probably only those who would consider travelling to other events in the Euro Nations Calendar. It in no way dilutes the standing of the UK event. It might even make some UK skippers consider travelling or incorporating a European event in a holiday to that country. see https://enc.marbleheadclass.org/2022.

GBR3435 is a Doubloon registered in UK in 2015 by Peter Mitchell, the designer. Registered to a new owner in Uk in 2018.

I think the phrase is sometimes you cannot see the wood for the trees. First with regards to weight ( yes mass is component of weight but whereas mass remains the same weight can vary due to geographical conditions so weight si relevant at an event location. Remember matter in section C are not part of certification measurement but are the owners responsibility to ensure compliance and are subject to checking at event measurement. Not significant variation within UK). C.4.3 is relevant here. C.4.3 WEIGHT When carrying out equipment inspection or measurement at an event the weight of the boat in sailing condition, dry and with its heaviest rig shall be found using calibrated equipment and rounded to the nearest 0.01 kg. The weight shall be not more than the weight recorded on the certificate plus a tolerance of 0.05 kg. So essentially the boat cannot get more than 50g heavier than the weight recorded on the certificate but it can get lighter. The reason for this limitation. Essentially when setting the rule it was decided (by people who understand the science better than me)that an increase of 50g or more will have a significant effect on displacement and therefore waterline length but a tolerance of 50 gave leeway for small permissible changes such as using different batteries whic might be heavier or minor repairs which might increase the weight. From experience I would add that most owners declare a waterline length a few mm. longer than the length determined at tank flotation to allow for inevitable minor modifications. Calculating that the potential small loss in biggest sail area is less significant than their overall sailing ability and construction and maintenance skills. (A pragmatic approach). With regards to C.4.4 and C.6.1 These are both limitations at an event. C.4.4(b) The boat may use any hull appendages and ballast provided that the limitations relating to the certificate used for the event are complied with. i.e the appendages used must comply with the Certificate. ( you could have a choice of appendages) The plural includes rudders. C.6.1 Except when a hull appendage has been lost or damaged beyond repair the same hull appendages shall be used during an event. Such replacement may be made only with the approval of the race committee who shall then remove or cancel any event limitation mark attached to the replaced hull appendage. i.e choose which of your appendages you are going to use for an event and stick with them for the whole event. (Even if it is a multiple day event.) As a practical issue at event measurement for International, National and some ranking meetings the appendages declared at event measurement and are marked with an event mark and spot checks take place during the event to ensure the declared appendages are the ones being used. (This course of action is supporteed by RRS and ERS and Sailing Instructions. Re Sails. In relation to C.4.4(c) a smaller sail can comply with the dimensions recorded on the certificate. Also see section K and C.8 in particular (a) & (c) and G.1.2 All provide for alternative smaller sails provided they fall within the dimensions of the parent sail (i.e the jib or main dimensions recorded on the certificate.) As to Event - the dictionary definition "a planned public or social occasion" would seem to suffice. In Radio Sailing Terms that is an occasion when Planned organised Racing takes place according to RRS, ERS & Class Rules. Oh in relation to G.1.4 (i) & (j) I do not see a problem. I Have seen them applied and they work. Note the 900mm radius template is also used for a similar purpose in the M class rules.

Essentially only one fin can be used for an event no changes permitted during an event. Before deciding on the rest of this. Some questions come to mind. 1. Are you intending to change just fin or fin and lead? 2. Does change make boat more than 50g heavier? (If yes outside certificated event measurement tolerances) 2 Does change affect trim? (Even if displacement waterline length the same marks could be in the wrong place) 3. Does change affect waterline length? In particular make it longer? (If longer outside certificated measurements and sails could be too big) Simplest solution long term if differences affect certificated measurements is to have a multiple certificated boat. One for each configuration and use whichever suits the conditions at the event.

In response to Brad All I would say is that It was not just me but many others that were caused unnecessary grief by the matter concerned but hopefully that is all now in the past. On the matter in hand I agree that the RYA should only be involved to the extent of delegating all responsibility for Radio Sailing OM accreditation to the MYA (which World Sailing rules allow it to do). The MYA should run the necesscary training and refresher training using the COGS for Class expertise and maintain the database of current accredited Radio Sailing OM. There will be some OM who wish to be accredited for more than one class. There also may be a place for a general OM sail measurer for classes who do not have class specific sail measuring requirements, if only to have more OM who can measure sails for multiple classes around the country. So we come back to where are the people to run this, set up a minimum standard syllabus, validate the the training/trained person meets a suitable competency standard, ensure refresher training takes place and keep the records? Is this a role for the MYA TO? or should we have a delegated MYA Training Officer? After all Technical Officers and OM are not necessarily the same thing. Damian the A claa is not the only one with this conundrum before fundamental measurement it applies to the 10R as well.

Yes, I agree, the focus should be on getting people sailing. Yes OM are human and mistakes occur. I sincerely hope that a better arrangement with the RYA can be established so that we can go ahead without rancour. However currently we are stuck with what we have. World Sailing delegate authority to NMA (i.e RYA in UK) to appoint National Measurers. International Measurers are directly appointed by World Sailing and must have ben National Measurers first and pass the World Sailing Training Courses. In terms of what is an OM look at the ERS definitions not IRSA or Class requirements. District TO role disappeared a number of years ago. If my choice of words has caused any particular OM offence I apologise perhaps become less careful and not keeping up to date would be a fairer reflection of how the situation for most was standing in 2017. There are many very good competent OM out there, unfortunately there have been in recent years some who have caused considerable grief. We just need to get their appointment to be one recognised as valid by the international hierarchy of powers that be and ensure that the refresher training lapses of the past are not repeated. For a new OM applicant 30 minutes general discussion is not going to suffice. Most events are one day and people want to get home. Not all OM attend such events anyway and all need to be equally kept up to date. At multiple day events people want to relax, recover and rest not have to concentrate on giving or receiving training. Yes, one day seminars will not always be needed but something more than a chat at the pond side or in the bar is required. That is why there are efforts going on to work up online training for the non-practical bits of Class OM Training with a subsequent session in a group or 1 to 1 to do the practical bits. With Covid restrictions over more are attending meetings and sailing at their clubs on a regular basis. Getting volunteers for any aspect of setting this up and administering this is problematic. As you said most just want to sail and have someone else do the the administration and organisation bit, no one wants paid MYA staff and the complications of employment law that would entail. So we need to agree that this is not something we can influence further through a forum discussion such as this.

A few of snags with this 1. To be a recognised OM under the system of delegation from World Sailing the has to be chain of authorisation from world sailing to the MNA (the RYA) and then via whoever they then delegate authority to to authorise the OM. Unfortunately this delegation was found not to exist for our current measurers except that after this agreement they conceded temporary recognition of MYA OM until end 2022. Due to Covid this period is likely to be extended. 2. There is no such role as a regional/Area TO. There is the MYA TO and there can be COG Class TO but if no such person is appointed by the COG then this role is covered by the MYA TO. 3. Holding Training sessions at International, National or Ranking events will not work. OM who are involved in the event as participants or organisers just will not have the time or the mindset to do both. Anyway where is the volunteer to organise such training at events? It's difficult enough to get participants to turn up in time for event measurement scrutinising let alone OM who are not participants or organisers. 4. Many events have no effective event scrutinising and yes problems do occur when it does take place. and yes even at International events with strict event measurement, issues do occur due to measurer incompetence. I know of one sailor who was told his sails did not meet the measurements on his certificate. It turned out after complete re-measurement by an event OM that they did it was forms incorrectly completed by the OM that caused the problem! Fortunately event scrutinising was over 3 days so there was time to resolve this issue in the country concerned. Checking there is a current certificate for a boat is basic event management. Not scrutinising. It does not mean that the boat complies with the section C class rules matters which are not part of the certification process. There are additional spot checks . At one Nationals event a boat was disqualified because the sails used in the event had never been checked by an OM and signed off and the certificate produced should not have been issued as all the measurement pages were not signed off by an OM. 5. YES there have been lots of problems with OM who had got into lazy or bad habits, missed/ignored changes to class rules and/or interpretations, failed to complete forms/spreadsheets correctly, or even remembered to sign them. Some have been quite rude/obsructive to Registrars who have tried to get these issues resolved. Some have been suspended pending re-training, to be organised on a one to one basis, which they have declined to take up. A lot of decline in numbers of OM pre Covid has also been due to ageing with older OM deciding their eyesight and measurement abilities were no longer up to it or that they were too old to keep up to date with changes in class rules and the application of new technology. So new volunteer measurers need to be found and trained. The new system is intendeds to make the training of CLASS measurers the responsibility of the COGS with the MYA ratifying their appointment and some requirement every 4 years for refresher training. The snags that needs resolving are how to bring all OM back up to a uniform standard of refreshed competence across the country and to ensure that their appointment is recognised by the RYA as the delegated NMA. Currently the only way of doing this is to have all OM pass the RYA sail measurers course and be members of the RYA.... All I am saying is that there has to be another way to get the RYA recognition.

Somewhat surprisingly I find myself largely in agreement with BRAD's comments. The RYA system requires retraining of an OM every 4 years. See section 8 of this RYA document for details of their system. Th bit I find difficult to live with with regards to the MYA is that they have totally delegated the situation regarding class measurers to the MYA but require all such measurers to satisfy their basic sail measurer system first and on an ongoing basis. It should be possible to delegate sail measurer training for Radio sailors only and have a MYA sail measurer course for radio sailors only which (if appropriate) the content and syllabus is approved by the RYA. Of course it will require someone to administer and run such courses to be found from a volunteer organisation whereas using the RYA system takes out the need to find yet another committed volunteer. The snag is the ongoing need to also be individual members of the RYA and who picks up this bill.

There is an item in the MYA Q & A which may shed some light on these issues as follows: The system adopted by the Royal Yachting Association (RYA, UK Member National Authority of World Sailing) is that in order to become appointed as an official measurer as defined in the Equipment Rules of Sailing (ERS), a candidate attends and passes the RYA’s course on sail measurement. At this point he/she is an official measurer known as a Sail Measurer and may certify the sails of any class that uses the Standard Class Rules format and terminology. There is no obligation to do so; it is a permission. The RYA’s policy is that classes are responsible for training and appointing their own class measurers and this naturally applies to the MYA and its classes. As the class rules of the 36*, IOM, M, 10R, 6M and A Class all require boats and equipment to be certified by an official measurer, it follows that our class measurers shall be appointed as Sail Measurers. This requirement will not apply until end of 2022 at the earliest and quite likely not until the end of 2024. Relevant costs for initial training and qualification may be claimed from the MYA. Ongoing costs may be covered by the MYA, clubs, COGs, measurer fees – TBA. * The current (March 2022) 36 Class rules require an official measurer to be used. The proposed draft class rule with the Class Captain has removed this requirement as sails are not part of certification. Also the page on How to become a measurer says: Applicants to become a Sail Measurer will need to take and pass the RYA Sail Measurer course. These are one day sessions run at regular intervals at various locations around the UK. Costs for the course fees, travelling, and RYA membership for the first year will may be claimed from the MYA funds. Interested parties should contact the MYA Technical Officer for further information. Once appointed as a Sail Measurer they may apply to become a MYA Class Measurer. This will entail passing general and class specific training demonstrating satisfactory ability to the Class & MYA. Current MYA measurers retain their appointment until the end of 2022 but will need to re-train, as above, if they wish to become an Official Measurer.

Correction the latest 2022 IOM class rules are 33 pages.

Yes John the document has more pages but the number of pages is not an effective measure of complexity. The longer document (2002 and later) is formatted in the World Sailing prescribed format. The content is not more complicated just more comprehensive and spaced out on the pages for clarity. The content is no more complicated. Also this is the same format as for all other International classes note: The Marblehead class rules are 25 pages, the IOM class rules are 27 pages and the A class class rules are 30 pages. Are these more or less complicated?

Oh dear, here we go into the realms of misunderstanding - again. Firstly if a boat does not measure in accordance with the class rules it is not a 10R. That does not mean it cannot be a nice boat to own or sail but it is not a 10R. Secondly the class rules have not become progressively over complicated. They have always been complicated. If you do not believe this then look back at the historic previous versions of the class rules on the ITCA website. Which version of the rules is less complicated? Yes there have been changes over the years not least the change from measurement in feet and inches to metric. Nor the change to certification being for life, if the boat remains with the same owner and with the owner signing an undertaking to maintain the boat within the class rules. (Obviously if the boat is changes so it no longer complies with its original measurement certificate it will need remeasuring). Previously re-measurement was required every 2 years. The vast majority of changes have been to reflect 'interpretations' where the rule was not clear and open to different interpretations. Also the measurement forms have moved from being printed and manually completed to a spreadsheet. (Largely to eliminate mathematical errors) However the layout and completion requirements have remained the same. Electronic measurement forms have greatly simplified the processing of certification and registration and reduced the amount of paper used and produced which needs to be kept and stored. Which previous version of the class rules would make it less complicated?

John, I apologise I was not aware from any posting or communication I have seen that you had offered your services to help ITCA resolve these issues. Maybe my use of the term 'hacking' is misplaced or a lack of understanding of the term but to me any unauthorised digging into protected electronic spreadsheets/documents the copyright of which is 'owned' by someone else, without their permission is infringement of intellectual property and 'therefore 'hacking'. (gain unauthorised access to data in a system or computer.) I can see the differences in the two graphs but I cannot see that the differences will make a significant difference to a competent official measurer carrying out his duties. I am not an IT expert and have no wish to learn that skill now. However, I can say I have no idea what you mean by 'publishing a bug work around list' means or if one was published how to use it. (I feel most readers of this conversation and Official Measurers feel the same as no one else has commented). It also seems to run dangers of multiple copies/variations of the official spreadsheet creeping in which is what a protected spreadsheet was intended to minimise/prevent. I am still not convinced that to anyone other than an IT "expert" that in the short to medium term it makes any difference to the official measurement, certification, and registration process. If you want to give your time and effort to help the 10R class then please use official channels first. (The COG, MYA ITCA systems). Stand for office and help run the class (the UK 10R COG have been looking for an IT expert to set up a new website and help run it, you appear to have relevant IT skills..... ). A Forum It not always the best medium.

John, The origins of the spreadsheet stem from attempts (worldwide) to reduce /remove the number of mathematical and measurement errors which were arriving on measurement forms checked by registrars. The whole point of the graphical and check tables is Guidance and was never intended to be a definitive answer. Competent (trained) Official Measurers know this is guidance. They do not need to be IT specialists and understand the design of the macros behind the spreadsheet and most would not wish to try to have such expertise. Their expertise lies in other areas. The whole point of guidance is to indicate possible problem areas which may need checking after all we are all human and can make mistakes. Any official measurer who has checked and is satisfied there is no error in his measurements, has space on the measurement documents to indicate this or any issues he is concerned about. (and should do so). Similarly if an error message persists such as could be caused by a correct zero measurement at ho. The official measurer will use the notes space to indicate the reason for this message and that he has checked the zero measurement and it is correct. Such notes and messages on measurement forms are helpful and necessary and not fatal to satisfying measurement requirements and do not hinder certification and registration. (As the class administrator I have filed multiple Official Measurement documents over the years and I know of only one instance of a persistent error message on measurement forms. Which was appropriately dealt with and the early spreadsheet version concerned corrected to deal with this. I have not come across any challenges or official queries of the guidance by any measurers.) In all this it must be noted that the fact that the spreadsheet correctly calculates the rating based upon the data entered even with these guidance check anomalies and this has never been challenged anywhere in the world. So where does that leave us. Yes it would be a good idea to have these guidance anomalies reviewed by ITCA and appropriate corrections made to reduce the number of dubious checks indicated. Are any of them fatal to the used of the spreadsheet in its current format? No. How quickly should this happen? Well that is a matter of ITCA priorities and resources. Certainly there are no current financial resources to pay someone for this task. 10R is a volunteer based organisation. Even after adaptation substantial testing time would be required to ensure no inadvertent alteration to substantive parts of the spreadsheet had occurred. John, you seem to have expertise in hacking into "protected documents" i.e. this spreadsheet and skills in writing revised macros. Perhaps it is time to volunteer your 'private spreadsheet' to ITCA, via the Technical Officer, with necesscary supporting information on what you have done and the how's and why's. Then this could be vetted/tested by the ITCA IT expert. This could substantially reduce the time and effort of the 10R organisation in making any necesscary progress on these issues. p.s The production of the "private spreadsheet" raises several questions. 1. Copyright. 2. The level of 'protection' against unauthorised alteration in the current spreadsheet which may need upgrading. It might have been 'better' to offer to help solve the problems and or ask 'permission' to hack the spreadsheet first.

For information The IRSA website has been updated to remove M class rules and measurement documents from their website. These have now been moved to the IMCA ( marblehead class.org ) website. Q & A remain for the time being on the IRSA website.

For information: With the formation of ITCA these documents have now all moved from the IRSA website to the ITCA website (tenrater.org)

Richard, I am unclear where you downloaded the version 5 form from but obviously not the IRSA website as the Version 6 form replaced the version 5 on their website in January 2020. Note: with the formation of ITCA all 10R documents have now moved to the ITCA website ( tenrater.org ) from the IRSA website. I am not sure what you data entry problem is but a common error is to double enter the last (top of the sail) measurement. The uppermost cross width is always entered into the box marked cn The aftermost height is always entered into the box marked hn

In relation to measurement Forms Try reading this document from the 10R section of the IRSA website. When using the spreadsheet form the only areas which need completion by the measurer are those highlighted in blue. It is important to pay attention to placing the sail/mast spar on the measurement grid correctly.

I am not sure how the 'licensing' system works for sailmakers to self certify in other countries. However having trained as a quality systems auditor I can say that this usually requires the company concerned to meet quality systems such as those in ISO 9000. These involve a chain of checks and records of such and demonstration of consistent repeatable accuracy. This can work for production system manufacture but is extremely difficult for made to order hand made sails. I believe in the UK for those accredited 'big sail' measurers the RYA as the licensing authority, requires an appointed accredited OM to be part of the companies validation of measurement team. The system costs money both to set up and maintain and to pay the licensing authority for assessment at the beginning and regular audits to check continued compliance. Generally UK sailmakers of radio sails just are not big enough or organised in a way that makes it economic to be licensed. These costs are reflected in the price of the sails. In relation to Brad's suggestion of rejoining the AYRU I believe he will find that a 'foreign' OM needs to be authorised by the National Member Authority to operate and 'legally' measure in another country or another countries boats in his own country. This applies to big boats as well. It causes angst in Europe where I know an Italian owner has a 200K round trip to his OM whereas his nearest accredited OM is only 20K away but in Switzerland!

Richard I am confused. There is no overall length restriction in the 10R Class. The MYA website https://www.mya-uk.org.uk/kbtopic/classes/ten rater class states this as follows:- A Ten Rater is not limited in length and has overhangs beyond its waterline endings making them light, sleek, and fast. This IRSA rule is based on the 1887 ‘length and sail area rule’ which allows short waterline length boats to have a big sail area and longer LWL boats have smaller sails. It is an ‘open’ rule with great freedom to develop design and construction, particularly in rigs and sail plans. There is and can only be one 10R Class. There is not a 'GBR Class rule' only the class rules as currently published on the IRSA website. The dimensions you see in the table on the website are not definitive but example dimensions found on current modern boats.

Richard, The best place to start is with the Class Rules. (IRSA website/classes/10R/ Technical & Measurement) The key thing to note is that the permitted sail area relates to the waterline length. Both as established and measured in accordance with the class rules. note: trim can affect waterline length and consequent permitted sail area. Overall length is not a controlling measurement, except for the ability to get it in your car and transport it! The figures you quote are typical examples of ranges for modern boats. There are also some specific rules and limitations in the Class Rules i.e maximum mast height, number of spars. (Dimensions of additional spars have to be measured and included in the sail area.) To race a 10R it needs to be measured by an official measurer, certified and Registered. To do this in the UK you need to be a MYA member.

I have no idea how the formula was derived in the first place. However in terms of a simple way to work out the effect on sail area calculations. Try using the measurement and certification spreadsheet which you can download from the IRSA website. You can enter the measurement figures and then play with the data and the calculation shows you if there is any excess area and what the effect of adjusting a X,Y or Z dimension is instantly.