Advertising via sail numbers? 55

In fairness, an earlier Facebook status comment clarified that they would not be using the tapes again and other sails would be tested at Hayling. This comment has subsequently been removed.

There is enough clarity in the statement sent via Mark, that they do not believe there be any fault and indeed believe this is a matter needing urgent clarification from the IFCA as, in their opinion, other sails using exactly the same technology were measured and racing in class.

I would strongly advise anyone in contention of winning such an event, or drawing publicity from it; makes damn sure their boat is fully class rules compliant. Folks clearly take these events far more seriously than I for one give them credit for. (That's not a criticism, it's a statement acknowledging and respecting the views of majority)

Happy Sailing

Edited by pondmonkey - 14 Feb 13 at 6:01pm

Yes, the sails on 13684 are taped sails, and were home-made by me.  I have been renovating an old Fireball since early 2011, as documented in my thread on Sailing Anarchy, here.

I used to be a sailmaker until about 6 years ago and now make sails purely on an amateur basis, for fun.

Originally posted by JimC One thing's for sure, any controversy can be immediately silenced by the boat in question getting their sails measured (if not already done) and demonstrating that they pass.

Our sails are made with exactly the same method as the winners' and as mentioned before, they were measured. So I’m pleased that the controversy is now silenced and I admire your optimism!

I don't know if Ian's sails were measured or not but frankly, I don't mind either way and I agree completely with Jim's earlier sentiment:

Originally posted by JimC I don't think there's anything very wrong with racing with a set of sails that were bought to measure, are intended to measure but haven't been measured yet.

In my case, around the time I started doing up the Fireball back in 2010, I wanted to know if various loadpath sails would be class legal, which is why I asked the question in good faith on the Fireball International Association website.

This may have got lost in the thread, so for anyone who missed it, here is the exchange again, in full:

However:

Originally posted by gordon 1. A  Jury would not base a decision on private correspondence between a class official and a sailor, even if the  correspondence was published. If the current official documents, including any officially posted interpretations did not provide a clear answer then the Jury would refer the problem to the authority responsible for interpreting the class rules (see rule 64.3 b) 2.As there is no protest the club or any RYA affiliated organisation can request an interpretation of the rules (rule 70.4). This would perhaps clarify the situation and establish a correct procedure for future events.

I realise that the dialogue did not constitute an official interpretation but as far as I am aware, individual sailors can’t request ISAF interpretations. I think it’s reasonable for an individual sailor who wants clarification of a rule to ask the question on the International Association website. I actually think that forums are better for this than email exchanges because the information stays publicly viewable for the benefit of others.

In my case, the question was asked at a time before any loadpath sails had appeared in the class and I wanted to ask if all the various construction methods would be acceptable. The reply came from the International Technical Committee Chairman; the highest measurement authority in the class, and I thought it was very carefully considered. It included an accurate description of the different construction methods I’d mentioned and confirmation that all would be considered to be laminated ply.

In hindsight, I wish I’d asked the question differently but I still think it’s reasonable to interpret the answer to mean that all the methods are (or were) class legal. Since he took the trouble to mention some doubt about 3Di, which I hadn’t asked about, I think he would have mentioned any doubt about taped sails, which I had asked about.

So no, it’s not an official interpretation but because individual sailors can’t request these, I think that a post such as this on the International class website is a close second and is actually the best option that was available.

Originally posted by Paul S I thought one of the few 'facts' was the fireball class association statement that Tape Drive Sails are not class legal. Now I'm confused.

The Fireball is an International Class and only an International Jury (via a protest) or the ISAF (via a rule interpretation request) have the authority to make a final ruling on this. A rule interpretation from the UK Fireball association is, as far as Im aware, not authoritative.

Again, prior to the Tiger Trophy there had been no communication made by the FB class that the sails would not comply. Certainly not any that I had seen, and presumably not any that Speed Sails had seen. (Oh, and for the record, I don't know and have never spoken to anyone currently involved with Speed Sails).

I'll say this bit again - the only prior published reference to taped sails that I was aware of was the exchange between me and the Fireball International Technical Committee Chairman, which did not suggest any problems.

So from my perspective,:

1). Having asked if the sails were legal and having been told (or so I thought) that they were.

and

2). Having got the sails measured.

I am struggling to see what I could have done differently. 

Earlier in this thread I was criticised for not explaining why I thought taped sails were class legal. Fair enough, so here you are:

As I said previously, there are two main interpretations:

1. The tapes should be considered to form part of the laminated ply (one or more of the layers)
2. The tapes should be considered as reinforcement (either primary or secondary).

My belief is that they would not be reinforcement because:

1. The intention of the reinforcement rule is to control patch sizes.
2. The tapes are not intended to be patches.
3. The ERS requires reinforcement to be "a sheet of sailcloth" and a long, narrow ribbon of unidirectional fibres is not a sheet of sailcloth.
4. It fails various logic tests:

• If you cover the tapes with a large layer of cling film, the sail becomes analogous to 3DL so presumably the whole package would revert back to being ok.
• If you make the tapes narrower, then at some point the tapes could no longer possibly be described as a “sheet” of material. What is the threshold for this?

My belief is that they would be part of the laminated ply because:

1. That's the intention of them.
2. There are no rules about when in the sailmaking process the layers are laminated together.
3. It means that these sails can be be made on a level playing field with 3DL and other comparable systems.
4. It wouldn't break any rules, cause any knock-on effects or fail any logic tests.

 

I appreciate that it's possible to make a case for either interpretation but I think it's fair to say that the rules do not provide a clear answer. That's why I would strongly suggest that an ISAF interpretation would be a very good idea at this point. Perhaps the Fireball International Technical Committee should request one, so we all know for the future.

Cheers,

Graham Nelson

Fireball 134684 "Crocodile JD"

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

Edited by Roy Race - 14 Feb 13 at 7:22pm

Hi 2547,

From what I understand, the winners sails were measured at Banks Sails, but I am seeking confirmation on this point. I'm pretty sure that I was told this on the phone, but I've had a lot of phone calls in the last couple of days and want to make absolutely sure.

Graham, many thanks for your comprehensive post - it explains a lot and also explains much better than I could about the confusion in the matter.

Best Regards, Mark

Graham, thanks for your clear and detailed statement. A shame you didn't mention that your sails measured in your first post on this thread, but understandable in light of the pretty unequivocal statement on the Fireball Ass website. Unfortunately that statement was one of the few "facts" that we had to go on.

Thanks Graham for the comprehensive clarification concerning your sails.