Jump to content

Michael Thomas

MYA Member
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Michael Thomas

  1. I have recently acquired a Paradox Marblehead to complement my Stark. It needs a fair bit of refurbishment and some repairs however I cannot find a hull identification number on the boat. It may be it was never measured or having been repainted the original number may have been erased. Previous owner has no information to assist me. It is an early boat, build No 2. I have contact both the class registrar Roy Stevens and Brad Gibson the builder without success. The sails display No 29 and there is an international K which suggests it was competition sailed some time ago. The boat would date back to the early '90's When I removed the paint I found the name " Avantgarde II" underneath. If you recognise this boat or know of a previous owner or a registered number can you let me know please. Thanks Michael.
  2. Hi Bill. I use Sailwave. I use two programs one for the daily racing event and one for the series. It is really quick to update results which I e-mail out or you can put the results on the Sailwave web site where everyone can view them. It has numerous options based around Appendix A of the RRS so you can customise it as you wish regarding discards, ties, etc. If you have any trouble setting it up the contact guy is really helpful. Good luck, Michael
  3. Hi Darren. Good to hear from you. Yes SI's is something we are working on at the moment. I'm still relatively new to RS having come from yacht racing where SI's and NOR were normal practice. Should solve a lot of problems and to include the terminology used in Radio sailing. In response to earlier quotes about discards. I'm not a great lover of too many discards in a series especially at club level. It does not promote good support for the club by regular attendance and tends to benefit the best skippers who can win a series without the commitment of taking part in most of the races. In fact Appendix A default is only one worst score to be discounted. I would like to end this discussion here as I have the information I need. Thanks to you all. Michael
  4. Thanks for you input guys. I have adopted Lester's explanation for the event that took place last Friday and adjusted the scores accordingly. There is a lot of discussion online, both at home and abroad regarding the fairness of the "best in the last race" application of scoring ties and generally it is regarded as unfair except at the highest level of competition. As the Club IOM Class Captain and IOM scorer I am drawing up a Notice of Race that amends slightly the RRS Appendix A low score system to suit our events and skill level of our members more fairly by changing the "best in the last race application" in the event that the countback rule does not resolve the issue to "take account of all scores including excluded scores" If scores are still tied then to award equal points to each. Seems fair in a small club with vastly differing skill levels. Regards Michael.
  5. I am the Club scorer for the IOM races we run under the RRS. I use the Sailwave Race Management System to calculate race results using the Appendix A low points scoring system. There are no Sailing Instructions or Notice of Race currently in place that changes the rules A bit of an anomaly was thrown up after last Friday's racing, in fact this is the second time this year the same question has arisen. The query is about tied scores after a discard has been applied when all scores are equal e.g. each of two competitors has scored 1 x 1st. 1 X 2nd. 1 x 3rd. 1 x 4th and 1 x 5th in a race consisting of 6 heats. One competitor had a high score of 6th discarded and the other a high score of 8th discarded. This gives equal points of 15 after the one discard. One of the two competitors whose discarded score of 6th was calculated by Sailwave to be placed second overall. The other was placed 3rd. I'm not sure how this calculation came about as it is obviously incorrect but I didn't notice it at the time. The third place competitor complained, quoting RRS A8.2 stating his final heat score was better than the other competitor and he should be awarded 2nd place. On looking at the rules it appeared to me that A8.2 is how to calculate tied scores at the end of a Series not the end of a Race and perhaps A7 giving each 2.5 points and joint second place is the correct answer. Not knowing which to apply I have sought some advice but been given conflicting answers. One indicated that RRS A7 should be applied to the RACE result which would give both competitors 2nd place with 2.5 points each. The other indicated that RRS Rule 8.2 should be applied as in his opinion a number of races in a day is a series irrespective that the scores will be added to a longer series, therefore the competitor with the best score in the last heat should be awarded the 2nd place. In the interest of fairness I wish to apply the correct scores as it may affect the overall series results. I think the answer may lay in the definitions of Race and Series but I'm not sure which to apply. Many thanks Michael.
  6. Thanks Brad & John. Got it now. Michael
  7. Please bear with me while I continue this thread. I have been given some Marblehead sails which I wish to check measure the sq. area before I visit a measurer for certification. I have now digested the information on the Marblehead sail measurement form and am happy that I can enter the relevant information to check the sails are compliant. However there is no information on how to find the 1/4 measurement points. I did briefly speak with a measurer and the below is I think what he told me but I need confirmation. The sails are standard luff with luff rings. Measure the Luff perpendicular by taking a measurement from the luff at 90 deg. to intersect the point of the clew. To find the 1/4 points. Take a datum line from the hoist side of the head of the sail to the clew. Divide this measurement into 4 equal parts and mark this point on the datum line. To identify the measurement point, take a line at 90 deg. from the luff to intersect the datum points to the leech. This will give the 1/4 1/2 3/4 measurements. Is this correct? Thanks Michael.
  8. Thanks for your advice guys. Raced today wit the recommended elastic to keep the topping lift taught and it worked a treat. Only problem was I found when I arrived home that the vertical axis pin on my Gooseneck had come out. No wonder the boat wasn't sailing fast.
  9. Thanks John, John & Eric. I don't think the mast prebend is a problem, in fact there is quite a lot of backstay tension to get the mast straight or should I say to match the luff in the main sail. This in turn actually pushes the centre of the mast forward and in doing so brings the spreaders closer to the topping lift I shall have a look at John Bennett's boat on Friday and try some elastic. I have some 1.5 mm elastic which may do. Thanks for all your advice. Michael.
  10. I have a problem with the jib boom topping lift getting caught on the spreaders. I have fitted a light keeper line but it still occasionally catches. Is there a solution, I think I may have heard about an elastic line as the jib boom topping lift but have no idea how this would work. Any solution greatly appreciated? Thank you, Michael
  11. Thanks Brad & Richard. I'm actually using one of Dave Potters goosenecks which have an adjustable axis. I'll adjust it a little to change the axis. Busy at the moment but will try again later today or tomorrow. Thanks again.
  12. Thanks Brad. I'll have another go tomorrow, mast pre-bend starts at about 600 mm from the top, spreaders are square and in tension so everything is about as you suggest apart from the ram which I set up after setting the downwind sheet positions and vang to give an even twist to the leech of the main in the close hauled setting. I'll reset this tomorrow with more ram and send a photo if I still can't get it to work. Thanks for your advice. I'm sure many will read it with interest. Michael
  13. Having started this thread I have now finished building the rig and fitted it to the boat today. I used Frank Russel's pre-bend suggestion of 12 mm for the A rig and Brad's mast building guide measurements. However when I rigged the boat and set everything up I noticed that looking down the rig from the top, the pre-bend has not straightened out or formed a nice curve to match the luff of the main sail in the top section. I have a put on a lot of backstay tension but can't get the mast to form a nice even curve. Now I bought two masts at the outset and although I used the recommended pre-bend I'm using a PG mast which I understand is considerably stiffer than most available. Although the sails appear to set nicely I'm tempted to build a new mast without pre-bend just to see how it sets. Should I do this or just wait and see how the boat sails?
  14. Thanks Gavin. I m using the Brad Gibson mast dimensions but thought it worth an ask about shroud attachment point. Michael
  15. I am building a new mast for my MX14 IOM and the old one had become damaged. I am using a PG tube from potter solutions. I have managed to gain a nice pre-bend and am marking out the positions for fittings. There appears to be two schools of thought about the best position for the shroud attachment. Brad Gibson's rig build document recommends a single forward attachment point, where Sailsetc rig guide suggests the sides of the mast. Others rig builders also have differing views. So before I set drill to mast what are the benefits or negative points of each? On my full size yacht the shrouds were always on the side of the mast. Thanks Michael
  16. Thanks Richard for your comments especially on carbon rigs. I also sail a Marblehead with both carbon swing rigs and an A2 conventional carbon rig with shrouds and spreader. It would appear to me a simple rule change to allow carbon rigs to be used on the IOM either unstayed or with shrouds. I wonder what the purists would make of a suggestion to a rule change to permit? Seems an obvious update in line with current thinking. I recall some time ago that a rule change permitted pigmented grp hulls.
  17. So, going back to the pre-bend issue, the designer of my boat an MX14 by Frank Russell only recommends a 10-14mm pre-bend on the A rig. As I mentioned earlier I bought two new P G masts one of which I tried the Bantock method of bending and only succeeded in a kink. As only a relatively small amount of pre-band is recommended how detrimental I wonder it would be not to put any pre-band in the mast at all? Maybe I'll try it. Views and comments please. Michael
  18. That's a very nice pre-bend in your mast. I've just bought two new masts and tried the Batock method and only succeeded in a kink. Not worried about that as I can cut it down for the B rig but how did you do yours?
  19. Hi all. I'm considering upgrading my 1996 Stark Marblehead to something a bit newer with more freeboard and buoyancy at the bow. I've been sailing my current boat for just over a year now on a lake, that like many inland waters has trees on two sides W & N which cause generally light and fickle winds with flat water most of the time in A rig conditions. So I know the Starkers Cubed is a tried and trusted design but I'm also considering an Astrix by David Taylor or has anyone experience of the Emme, designed by Ceccarelli and built by MX components? Would like to hear of any thoughts on that one. I have a MX 14 IOM which although the build quality is not quite up to that of Robot Yachts is nevertheless very acceptable. I would have considered a Grunge but can't afford the 4K plus as I understand I can't just buy a boat but would have to buy at least 3 rigs to go with it! Thanks.
  20. Thanks Mike. Stuck in tier 4 lockdown at the moment so can't go anywhere for a while. Thinking of updating to a new design as I have some spare cash. Open to suggestions in a new message.
  21. Thankyou for your answers. I actually live in Southampton but thanks for the offer Damian.
  22. I own an older Starker's Marblehead and unfortunately the previous owner to me did not update the class registration measurement certificate when he acquired the boat. Therefore in compliance with the class rules I technically need the boat to be re-measured before I can sail her in competition, even at club level. I have only made some small improvements including a new bulb to the fin and a new A Swing rig which is the same size as the original, everything else including the rig and sails is as was when the boat was originally measured. I found a measurer, the closest to where I live albeit 30 miles away and arranged to have him re-measure the boat. It was obvious that he hadn’t measured a Marblehead for some time, hardly surprising as many of the club’s that previously sailed them including his own no longer did. What was painfully obvious was that the measurement forms for the class has been updated over the years to a point where unless you hold a B-tec in computer science, to the ordinary layman they are totally incomprehensible. The chap did his best and I phoned Martin Roberts for some guidance while I was there. Unfortunately although Martin gave some advice it was not until I got home and phoned David Creed that I realised what had been done was not what was required as the on line forms had not been completed and I and the measurer had wasted about 3 hours of our time each and a 60 mile round trip. There is no guidance on the web site about how to edit and complete the forms and the demo form makes it all the more confusing. The class registrar is not available to answer any queries on the phone while the procedure is being completed. Most radio sailors are getting on in years and are not fully computer literate. It is not acceptable to have a system where the measurer has to complete an online form without some guidance of what is required and how to do it. The Marblehead class has shrunk in recent years and this does nothing to encourage sailors to join the class and have their boats measured and take part in competition. A good example of a simple measurement form can be found on the American One Meter class website. The old adage of Keep it Simple needs to be adopted here! Apparently I am not the only Marblehead owner who has struggled with this.
  23. Thanks Guys I was aware of using soapy water to fix vinyl but didn't consider it for deck patch material. 'll give it a try. Michael
  24. Is there a special way of applying deck patches to keep it taught and avoid wrinkles?
  25. Well I agree with Richard and I think I may have bought his boat if it's No 22 a couple of years ago when I was new to Radio sailing. I have since moved on to IOM and Marblehead's which are much more satisfying. A taller rig similar to that introduced to the DF 65 may help. I wonder if the low aspect rig was a deliberate decision based on the stronger winds at open venues like Fleetwood, etc. We sail in fickle and generally light winds at Eastleigh and I find this particular boat very frustrating. I know I am in the minority at my club but I am leaning towards a feeling that the whole DF breed is stifling development of RG65's and IOM's. After all, a good second hand competitive but older model IOM with a couple of suits of sails can be had for not much more than a DF95 and likewise a used RG65 with a swing rig is much more fun than a DF65. I have decided to mothball both my 65 and 95 or sell them if anyone is interested.
×
×
  • Create New...