Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • In all my years, I have never seen any written requirements for a hearing request to be in specific language. Events that I have done in Europe, the hearing requests have been in various languages. To me, it is just the start of the process the submission of the hearing request. It is there where translators earn their keep to move the hearing forward. 
    Today 19:37
  • David ... a couple comments regarding your last post. 

    Here is the def: Mark-room in its entirety. 

    Mark-Room
    Room for a boat
    (a) to sail to the mark when her proper course is to sail close to it,
    (b) to round or pass the mark on the required side, and (c) to leave it astern.

    Please note the "and".  (a), (b) and (c) are all elements of def: MR.  The "when .. proper course" condition only applies to and limits the application of (a).  It has no effect on (b) and (c).

    It's my opinion that Case 75's "corridor" is often too broadly applied.  The corridor comment is made in Case 75 about a specific boat given the specific geometry of the scenario.

    That said, it just so happens that the OP has a close enough geometry to Case 75 that the corridor concept is very applicable (IMO).

    I think it's a mistake to apply RRS 15 concepts to mark-room obligations. RRS 15 is only about a boat becoming ROW except then it is acquired by the other boat's action.  It has nothing to do with a boat becoming obligated to give mark-room.

    The physical geometry of the boats ... Yellow bow-out on Blue in such close proximity of each other ... prevents Blue from turning toward the mark to "take" her MR.  The rotation of Blue's bow toward Yellow's stern and the resulting converging course would quickly lock Yellow out of any room to turn.  Blue must wait for Yellow. 
    Today 02:06
  • Qu Chun, I beg to disagree with your disagreement.

    The race committee is the only entity authorised by the RRS to publish SI.

    The RRS do not recognise individuals such as Race Officers, or Technical Delegates.  The only entities recognised are the Organising Authority, the Race Committee, the Technical Committee, and the Protest Committee/Jury.

    I would suggest that the TD should be seen as the delegate of the OA, sometimes exercising the power of the OA to direct the Race Committee in accordance with RRS 90.1.

    Whoever may sign a Notice to Competitors announcing a change to the SI, it is the Race Committee that is responsible.
    Today 01:54
  • Yes - "virtual" is a pretty lame word.

    I was struggling with the word 'signal' used in the definition. In general / nautical English a signal is a man-made visual or aural communication to mark a time, event or state. 

    How then can 'nothing' be a signal?  Even 'deeming' or' taking it to be' are a little loose. I thought about 'pseudo'. But yes, I agree.  'Virtual' doesn't really work.

    For fixed timings, I've seen it all. Exact start times listed, times offset from the first start and even just watch for your flags on the day. Agree with postponement issues, but with 21st technology it gets easier to recalculate and disseminate new times on the fly. 

    I guess the main point I have is that persuit style of starts changes a great deal of RRS26.  That can't be avoided. 

    Cheers. 



  • And the starboard rounding comparison (the lazy author version)

    image.jpeg 122 KB
    Tue 13:54

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 John Allan 4K
2 Michael Butterfield 2.2K
3 Jim Champ 1.6K
4 Benjamin Harding 1.5K
5 Gijs Vlas 1.4K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more