The state of ocean racing

[grant 40]

I'm looking for a real, tangible, example of where 'reckless' ocean racing incidents have led to any negative impact on my cruising?

 

of course in relation to mindless pollies taking punitive action you are making a big assumption that they will actually require tangible evidence and facts to make those changes....

 

Not saying all rules are made like that, the voice of reason often manages to battle its way into the process

[Jon 360]

AC I totally agree with what your saying and think that Squid is being alarmist ( he still hasn't replied to my reply to his question earlier in this thread)

But to shoot myself in the foot I was told by the major marine insurer in NZ that my premium if i was doing the RNZ would be going up this year because of my and all the other claims they suffered in the last RNI.

I also know of one boat that they refused as they said they already had 7 out of the 10 boats entered and felt they had enough exposure.

[Fogg 427]

Problems getting insurance for racing are long-standing and not changed by the events of the last few months. And yes if one insurer finds itself covering 7/10 of the fleet they might regard that as too much of an aggregation risk eg if a storm came thru and dessimated the fleet.

[Fogg 427]

I'm looking for a real, tangible, example of where 'reckless' ocean racing incidents have led to any negative impact on my cruising?

 

of course in relation to mindless pollies taking punitive action you are making a big assumption that they will actually require tangible evidence and facts to make those changes....

 

Not saying all rules are made like that, the voice of reason often manages to battle its way into the process

 

No I'm just looking for tangible evidence from Ogre that this is a real threat rather than alarmist over-reaction. This issue is nowhere near the pollies - they are too busy screwing up central government rather than fringe activity like sailing.

[Guest]

he still hasn't replied to my reply to his question earlier in this thread)

.

 

Sorry, just reread the entire thread - not sure what I am supposed to have missed????

[grant 40]

 

This issue is nowhere near the pollies - they are too busy screwing up central government rather than fringe activity like sailing.

 

And that is a very good thing, apart from the screwing things up bit....

[DrWatson 375]

I think rig insurance is a strange thing.

 

look at the reasons for losing your rig, and please feel free to add to this list.

 

1. poor maintenance

 

2. pushing to hard/screwing up a gybe.

 

3. tangled with another boat during a race

 

4. caught in sudden squall (should have seen it coming)

 

5. caught in a sudden squall (couldn't have seen it coming)

 

6. adrift after coming off a mooring (for some reason other than maintenance) and bashed up under the bridge, or bashed up on your mooring by someone else.

 

The first four causes are purely operator error and it surprises me that insurance companies cover for this. I wouldn't expect insurance to pay if my expensive mountain tent got shredded in a storm. I wouldn't expect insurance to pay if I left my TV out in the rain. I wouldn't expect insurance to pay for repairs if I crashed my racing car, or my racing mountain bike.

 

The last two points are something else. I may consider it a claimable thing if I couldn't see the squall coming (but probably I was not being careful of the conditions and so it's operator error) and the last point , 6, is another thing entirely, and less a matter of operator error.

 

Sh¨t breaks when you use it. yes even expensive sh¨t. Why expect someone else to pay when you break expensive stuff.

 

I only bring this up because insurance is one of the major hurdles and the insurance companies can dictate govmnt policy (and enforce compliance). ie. Govt says "sure you can go off shore, as long as you have insurance" - insurance company say, we won't insure you unless your boat is a steel tub and has no rig and you wear clean undies every day and don't get your hair wet (or the boat wet).

[Jon 360]

he still hasn't replied to my reply to his question earlier in this thread)

.

 

Sorry, just reread the entire thread - not sure what I am supposed to have missed????

Sorry just a windup

 

Crew Ogre wrote:

Danaide wrote:

To me hoving to in a race boat with a crew of 18 is not even worth concidereing.

 

 

Curious as to why???

 

If the boats not setup to sail into 50 kts with a deep reefed main and or a storm jib then it shouldn't have left the harbour to start with.

Secondly you have the manpower to helm and keep the boat moving, with forward motion you have steerage and options.

Thirdly going backwards in a race boat at 2 to 3 kts has a very negative effect on morel

But don't get me wrong if you are short crewed or all buggered/injured then it is a good tool to have in the box.

[Guest]

You made me reread all that crap too

[Jon 360]

You made me reread all that crap too

Reading is good for someone of your age

[Guest]

I'll have you know my wife has just returned from 3 weeks in the US and much as I do enjoy reading, there are other things on my mind tonight (soon as she wakes up )

[Jon 360]

I'll have you know my wife has just returned from 3 weeks in the US and much as I do enjoy reading, there are other things on my mind tonight (soon as she wakes up )

Such thoughts at your age can be hazardous to your health I hope you realize

[Fogg 427]

Still no serious response to my question regarding the point of this whole thread.

 

Namely, tell us a real, tangible, serious example of cruising being negatively impacted by incidents in yacht racing,

 

Either historic examples.

 

Or evidence of future threats.

 

If not, just admit this whole thread is alarmist sensationalistic crap.

[Guest]

Still no serious response to my question regarding the point of this whole thread.

 

Only by your own definition

[Fogg 427]

Still no serious response to my question regarding the point of this whole thread.

 

Only by your own definition

 

Errrrr, yes. Exactly. Because that's what is required if you are wanting to pursuade me that there is an issue/risk here.

 

Maybe I've missed it (have trawled back through the whole thread a couple of times) in which case I apologise.....

 

But please tell me (or anyone else jump in here) the answer to this question:

 

If I want to go sailing his afternoon, as I get onto my boat and set sail, in what tangible way will my sailing be restricted or worse as a direct result of some sailing accident in the past?

 

Sure, if I want to go offshore I will need to meet Cat 1 but as far as I know that is just a list of reasonble-ish requirements which mostly help you prepare for a safer trip (other than the quirky NZ requirement to have a sextant which I think is a bit oudated if it's still in the rules)?

[Jon 360]

Sextant is no longer required iirc

It has been replaced with a extra gps that has its own independant power supply

( usually a hand held in your grab bag with spare batteries )

The pervious set of regs required the navigator to be competent in the use of a sextant but the tool itself was only recommended

[Fogg 427]

Ok so the sextant rule has been updated that makes sense.

[Guest]

i think the biggest problem is that people do not know when to stop pushing so hard in big breeze up hill its a fine line between breaking the newer boats and saving them

[Jon 360]

If you don't push things to the limit how are you to know where the limit is ?

[Fogg 427]

Tank testing?