Auckland to Bluff

[Guest]

 

Question. Would you sail to bluff with you wife and kids non stop no SSB ,Sat Nav, or SAT phone and how many times have you actually sailed to bluff non stop in a non Cat 1 sailing vessel.

 

OC

 

Never been to Bluff, but did all that from here to Alaska and back.

Wilow wrote from memory you can't actually get Cat one unless you are leaving the country.

 

 

Must have been before Cat 1 was compulsory when sailing from N.Z. You wouldn't be able to do that now sailing forward.

 

We had Cat 1, those things hadn't been invented or were too new to have made it on to the compulsory list. We did have a lot of other expensive stuff that Cat 1 required, we bought top of the line and most of it was stuffed before we got to Alaska.

 

Plus you can,t compare sailing to bluff as apposed to Alaska. That trip [ Alaska ] is about 90% tropical waters conditions in the non cyclone season. That route even misses the monsoon and typhoon areas / Zones.

 

Oh yeah a real piece of cake. We departed Sydney and went via the southern route non stop to Tahiti, got clobbered with 60kn + in the southern ocean and one complete knockdown. In Tahiti where we were supposed to be away from tropical storms it was the first big El Nino year I remember, and we took two at anchor (108kn on one occasion) and a third on the way to Hawaii - two days under bare poles with a drogue. From Hawaii to Alaska we got one serious depression and had the drogue deployed again, but hey Alaska was lovely and tropical if you avoided the icebergs. And it was only about 10 times the distance, the last 2000 miles in cold sh*t so not worth mentioning

[Guest]

 

Question. Would you sail to bluff with you wife and kids non stop no SSB ,Sat Nav, or SAT phone and how many times have you actually sailed to bluff non stop in a non Cat 1 sailing vessel.

 

OC

 

Never been to Bluff.

 

 

 

Exactly.

[Guest]

 

Question. Would you sail to bluff with you wife and kids non stop no SSB ,Sat Nav, or SAT phone and how many times have you actually sailed to bluff non stop in a non Cat 1 sailing vessel.

 

OC

 

Never been to Bluff.

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

 

So you did have Cat 1 when you where giving the impression you did not. Sat nav and Sat phone are not compulsory. SSb is.

 

Did you have a SSB or was that purchased at non NZ. rates and entered N.Z. on return and not declared. No duty. Good Skills.

[Guest]

Someone needs to drug test this thread.

I reckon it's dropped a tab, maybe 2.

[Guest]

So you did have Cat 1 when you where giving the impression you did not. Sat nav and Sat phone are not compulsory. SSb is.

 

Sorry I mislead you OC. I should have been more specific. I had Cat 1 for that trip on that boat. I didn't have Cat 1 when I crossed the Atlantic twice (E to W and W to E), nor for the trip across the Indian Ocean, crossing the Pacific again the "normal" way, 13 trans tasmans, 6-7 trips up and down to the islands., the Mediterranean,, the Caribbean. Nor will I have it when I leave next week to cross the Arafura and Timor Seas. I may have missed a few but don't have time to look at my notes.

Did you have a SSB or was that purchased at non NZ. rates and entered N.Z. on return and not declared. No duty. Good Skills.

NO , On that trip (Alaska and return)on that boat I did not have any of those three items. Satnav hadn't been invented, Satphone hadn't been invented. SSB was not compulsory (sorry can't tell you at what date that changed - I was out sailing)

[smithy09 50]

Someone needs to drug test this thread.

I reckon it's dropped a tab, maybe 2.

Right on the money. And this has what? to do with the A to B?? Ogre you should know better than to bite. The guy's smoked too much weed (or something...)

[Clipper 343]

Or he is an idiot.

[Guest]

You're right - silly me, I should know that he has better recollection of things that happened in my life than I do. Just so lucky to have him there to correct me.

[smithy09 50]

You're right - silly me, I should know that he has better recollection of things that happened in my life than I do. Just so lucky to have him there to correct me.

Not like you. You're biting worse than a robber's dog!!

[Guest]

Ah well, we all have our off days.

[Guest]

A few things I have learnt from this thread...

 

Marsh is a bloody legend.

 

OC may have some good points but I will never know as I don't understand what the furk he is saying.

 

YNZ never fails to amaze me at how disfunctional they are.

 

crew.org should have a "recommendations to YNZ" thread.

 

The government is easily swayed by idiots yet misses the real issues.

 

Who said there are no drugs in yachting!?

[Adrianp 119]

A few things I have learnt from this thread...

 

Marsh is a bloody legend.

 

OC may have some good points but I will never know as I don't understand what the furk he is saying.

 

YNZ never fails to amaze me at how disfunctional they are.

 

crew.org should have a "recommendations to YNZ" thread.

 

The government is easily swayed by idiots yet misses the real issues.

 

Who said there are no drugs in yachting!?

 

Spot on!

[Guest]

Someone needs to drug test this thread.

I reckon it's dropped a tab, maybe 2.

Right on the money. And this has what? to do with the A to B?? Ogre you should know better than to bite. The guy's smoked too much weed (or something...)

Safety.

 

Its not the cyclone season and a storm has just hit Auckland and further south. The Volcalno that was erupting in alaska when David was there is erupting again.

 

 

and somebody is suggesting the race should be Cat 3. When it should be Cat 1.

 

 

 

Here are the ISAF Definitions.

 

Category 0

Trans-oceanic races, including races which pass through areas in which air or sea temperatures are

likely to be less than 5 degrees Celsius other than temporarily, where yachts must be completely selfsufficient

for very extended periods of time, capable of withstanding heavy storms and prepared to meet

serious emergencies without the expectation of outsideassistance.

Mo Mu, 0

 

 

Category 1

Races of long distance and well offshore, where yachts must be completely self-sufficient for extended periods

of time, capable of withstanding heavy storms and prepared to meet serious emergencies without the

expectation of outside assistance.

Mo Mu, 1

 

 

Category 2

Races of extended duration along or not far removed from shorelines or in large unprotected bays or lakes,

where a high degree of self-sufficiency is required of the yachts.

 

Mo Mu 2

[Guest]

Thanks Marsh,

 

Yes RAYC really does try to make extended coastal sailing accessible.

 

Chris Skinner did a stellar job getting everything sorted so the the 3 Kings race could have cat 3 boats race in it, and the club managed to get White Island to become cat 3 a few years ago.

 

We will keep trying our best with the A2B.

 

 

OceanCruiser, let me clarify, the A2B is cat 2, as decided by YNZ and as many posters on this thread identify as the minimum requirement for this race.

 

The above post is just identifying that RAYC has tried to make extended coastal sailing accessible to as many kiwi boats as possbile with these races (white Island and 3 Kings).

 

This same focus on making sailing accessible was in mind when the A2B requirements were developed, our sailing committee is made up of sailors who own their own boats and are accutely aware of costs, each requirement was carefully thought about.

[Guest]

Thanks Marsh,

 

Yes RAYC really does try to make extended coastal sailing accessible.

 

Chris Skinner did a stellar job getting everything sorted so the the 3 Kings race could have cat 3 boats race in it, and the club managed to get White Island to become cat 3 a few years ago.

 

We will keep trying our best with the A2B.

 

 

OceanCruiser, let me clarify, the A2B is cat 2, as decided by YNZ and as many posters on this thread identify as the minimum requirement for this race.

 

The above post is just identifying that RAYC has tried to make extended coastal sailing accessible to as many kiwi boats as possbile with these races (white Island and 3 Kings).

 

This same focus on making sailing accessible was in mind when the A2B requirements were developed, our sailing committee is made up of sailors who own their own boats and are accutely aware of costs, each requirement was carefully thought about.

YNZ is operates within the ISAF regulations. Same rules and pays a fee to the ISAF for copyright to print the race rules. ISAF have a additional requirement if they print those rules with commercial advertising through out additional fees are required, whether they pass that on who knows. One can get the race rules from the ISAF site free.

 

HERE IS CAT 3 Definition ISAF.

 

FUNDAMENTAL AND DEFINITIONS

Category 3

 

Races across open water, most of which is relatively protected or close to shorelines. How close is shore lines. ISAF suggest 3 nms. To old three mile limit.

 

I,m saying its not about costs its about safety - first and foremost.

Your statement has now just nulified all indemnity liability for the RAYC.

 

You have just said its mainly about costs and not safety to get as many as possible to enter, which is wrong.

 

Go to the ISAF site. Just because you have TP. and indemnity statesments signed by the participants does not except the club from litigation if they are found to be negilgent as the Sydney cruising club found.

 

I listed the definitions. It would not take much to prove the wrong classification has been assigned to those races in the event of major loss of life.

 

The Cat definitions have been posted prior.

 

 

OC

[Guest]

Now I/m in a better mood I'm going to try and translate this while deleting all the extraneous stuff.

 

 

 

 

 

 

HERE IS CAT 3 Definition ISAF.

 

FUNDAMENTAL AND DEFINITIONS

Category 3

 

Races across open water, most of which is relatively protected or close to shorelines. How close is shore lines. ISAF suggest 3 nms. To old three mile limit.

 

I,m saying its not about costs its about safety - first and foremost.

Your statement has now just nullified all indemnity liability for the RAYC.

 

Only your opinion and probably not correct. I'm thinking more than one lawyer was involved in the decision and that concern was addressed.

 

You have just said it's mainly about costs and not safety to get as many as possible to enter, which is wrong.

No she did not, she said they were acutely aware of costs - different thing altogether. It is possible to make safety the primary concern whilst remaining aware of costs - they are to be applauded and I wish other "yachting bureaucrats" would take a leaf from their book

 

Go to the ISAF site. Just because you have TP (toilet paper?). and indemnity statements signed by the participants does not exempt the club from litigation if they are found to be negilgent as the Sydney cruising club found.

 

I listed the definitions. It would not take much to prove the wrong classification has been assigned to those races in the event of major loss of life.

 

OC

 

So OC, it appears RAYC (and I assume YNZ) have accepted a more liberal attitude to which category for which race, presumably to keep costs down and attract more interest. I think you are mistaken if you think this was done lightly and without legal counsel (maybe MissG can confirm?).

Is it correct then that you disagree and believe the limits for the various categories should be tighter than they are?

 

 

 

As an aside - I think the safety regs went kinda silly after the 79 SH, but that was about the time I also decided the boats were wet cold and uncomfortable and I'd rather go cruising, and as all my boats since have been registered outside NZ I haven't had to give it a lot of thought. My main beef to the changes that were made then was that there was very little emphasis on making the boats more seaworthy, and practically none on teaching those on board the skills that would be useful in extreme weather. Instead they added equipment to make rescue easier and taught people how to get rescued. E.g. at what point in getting Cat 1 is there a lengthy discussion of the various techniques for handling extreme, life threatening weather? (I can think of 5 off the top of my head) and in what situations might one technique be chosen over another? A 2 hour discussion of that could save more lives that knowing how to operate a VHF.

[Jon 360]

You are right on the money David.

I can't talk for rayc but am on the race committee and a competitor in the SSANZ RNZ

I phone the head of the safety committee YNZ prior to the NOR being set for RNZ, they had already discussed our upcoming event and had decided that it was Cat 2, so I asked for this in writing to cover SSANZ which they forwarded to us.

I also suggested that the wording for the criteria was somewhat ambiguous, they said it was designed to be.

 

So OC don't go thinking that your the only one that reads and thinks about these things as a lot of voluntary work goes into these event and if everyone followed your logic every event would be Cat 0

[B00B00 310]

OC no one has ever suggested the A2B race should be cat 3.

You are ranting, read the posts properly....

[Guest]

OC no one has ever suggested the A2B race should be cat 3.

You are ranting, read the posts properly....

 

 

Here the quote = "We will keep trying our best with the A2B."

 

 

they have given it CAT 2

 

So I assume she is trying her best to get it CAT 1. if as you suggest she is not suggesting CAT 3.

 

 

BOO BOO

[Guest]

Now I/m in a better mood I'm going to try and translate this while deleting all the extraneous stuff.

 

 

 

 

 

 

HERE IS CAT 3 Definition ISAF.

 

FUNDAMENTAL AND DEFINITIONS

Category 3

 

Races across open water, most of which is relatively protected or close to shorelines. How close is shore lines. ISAF suggest 3 nms. To old three mile limit.

 

I,m saying its not about costs its about safety - first and foremost.

Your statement has now just nullified all indemnity liability for the RAYC.

 

Only your opinion and probably not correct. I'm thinking more than one lawyer was involved in the decision and that concern was addressed.

 

You have just said it's mainly about costs and not safety to get as many as possible to enter, which is wrong.

No she did not, she said they were acutely aware of costs - different thing altogether. It is possible to make safety the primary concern whilst remaining aware of costs - they are to be applauded and I wish other "yachting bureaucrats" would take a leaf from their book

 

Go to the ISAF site. Just because you have TP (toilet paper?). and indemnity statements signed by the participants does not exempt the club from litigation if they are found to be negilgent as the Sydney cruising club found.

 

I listed the definitions. It would not take much to prove the wrong classification has been assigned to those races in the event of major loss of life.

 

OC

 

So OC, it appears RAYC (and I assume YNZ) have accepted a more liberal attitude to which category for which race, presumably to keep costs down and attract more interest. I think you are mistaken if you think this was done lightly and without legal counsel (maybe MissG can confirm?).

Is it correct then that you disagree and believe the limits for the various categories should be tighter than they are?

 

 

 

As an aside - I think the safety regs went kinda silly after the 79 SH, but that was about the time I also decided the boats were wet cold and uncomfortable and I'd rather go cruising, and as all my boats since have been registered outside NZ I haven't had to give it a lot of thought. My main beef to the changes that were made then was that there was very little emphasis on making the boats more seaworthy, and practically none on teaching those on board the skills that would be useful in extreme weather. Instead they added equipment to make rescue easier and taught people how to get rescued. E.g. at what point in getting Cat 1 is there a lengthy discussion of the various techniques for handling extreme, life threatening weather? (I can think of 5 off the top of my head) and in what situations might one technique be chosen over another? A 2 hour discussion of that could save more lives that knowing how to operate a VHF.

 

 

They have gone a long way to make them more sea worthy and escape proof- Especially Multihulls. although all the books I have read re the multis - they all manage to escape and re enter at will to get daily supplies in the past without having escape hatches as they float close to the surface.

 

By making them cat 1 and receiving emergency weather e-mails and weather e=mails every forecast period you don't need to handle extreme weather as you would alter course to avoid it.

 

A Vhf usually only has a range 12 - 16 nms. How far is three kings from the nearest VHF receiving station

 

6 nms north from north cape is certainly not in protected waters or sheltered waters. It is in open waters. Cat 1 SSB area.

 

Quote "and practically none on teaching those on board the skills that would be useful in extreme weather."

 

Covered by New Rule 1.02.1

 

The safety of a yacht and her crew is the sole and inescapable responsibility of the person in charge who must do his best to ensure that the yacht is fully found, thoroughly seaworthy and manned by an experienced crew who have undergone appropriate training and are physically fit to face bad weather. He must be satisfied as to the

soundness of hull, spars, rigging, sails and all gear. He must ensure that all safety equipment is properly maintained and stowed and that the crew know where it is kept and how it is to be used. He shall also nominate a person to take over the responsibilities of the Person in Charge in the event of his incapacitation.

 

OC