CarpeDiem

Of course. The point is, it isn't a new law - it has been around for a very long time, at least 100 years based on a simple iLaw search - so wtf are YNZ trying to prove?

Dragging is very different - you are underway if you are dragging. There's (hopefully) no debate if you need a lookout while underway

Which is why we have a judicial system that determines legal meaning. Do you think that any rights should apply to your vessel while it is anchored? If your boat, while anchored, collides with another anchored boat, how should liability be apportioned? Should the portion you pay change because say the occupants of the other boat are ashore walking on the beach? Should the portion you pay change if the other occupants are asleep downstairs and you couldn't wake them as you tried to stop the collision? "BILBAINO" v. "DEFENDER." (1921) COLLISION OF ANCHORED SHIPS IN

YNZ exists for some good reasons and they certainly make a difference in the community in specific cases. But this is certainly not one of those times. This is a complete woftam.

All yacht racing, at speeds over 5 kts, would be illegal until the government changed the law.

I don't think that's not how it works, if a country is a signatory to the treaty then that country is required to have local legislation that gives effect to this treaty clause: Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision. If a country wants to have something different, then they either have to opt out of the treaty, or alternatively opt out of the specific clauses in the treaty.

We covered this in another thread somewhere... I am not sure what YNZ are trying to achieve - they aren't going to get the IMO to change COLREGS.

I believe it is a https://devilliersmarinedesign.co.nz/designs/monohull-sailing-yachts/12m-aluminium-cruising-cutter-design-043/ It was built here in NZ, the owner had the hull commissioned and is DIYing the inside. Have not seen inside but he has been slowly fitting it out, it appeared about the same time COVID finished.

No it wouldn't. Ignoring the fact you have a BMS. LFP can be safely charged to 4.2v / cell. While personally I have never done this, there's plenty of people online who have experimented with this. And that includes Rod @ Marine How To. This is what he charged his first pack too, many times in the beginning when he was experimenting with this tech and that pack is still going strong after many cycles. Because there's less than 1% capacity between 3.6v and 4.2v there's just no point charging to this voltage. At 15.6v AGM is equalizing, beginning to gas and will eventuall

1. if the vsense dies it should use the voltage coming out of the alternator as backup and alarm 2. if it sees no voltage at the alternator or does not have this feature, then it should ideally shutdown the field and alarm; 3. or it should just alarm, warning you it has lost the v.sense - you could then still leave it charging and just monitor the voltage. Sending 15.6v into a LA battery long term is a recipe for a thermal runaway - if you are lucky you will destroy the battery, if you are unlucky you will destroy the boat. At the very least an alarm is the minimum you shou

Going to 15.6v if the v.sense is disconnected would give me cause to throw it out.

Does to me. From just after the moment he starts calling starboard he is turning up. You can see the boat on the horizon moves from just in front to the left and out of the cameras view, that would put them pretty much dead upwind. You can see just before the crash the Jib is backed and the boom is starting to cone across. Immediately after impact the boat is spun back towards port. Edit: there's another camera angle online and you can see 11th hour is pretty much pointing into the wind when the collision occurs.

This was the guy that did a dance and left dead fish at The Goonies house. The capsize was at the mouth of the Columbia River Yep, boat was stolen. And he was wanted for other things as well. One very unhinged individual.

57259-Te-Rawhiti-CAN-12-June-2023.pdf An article I read said indefinitely and until it was eliminated. The CAN states 30/jun/24 - but as we have seen with Barrier they just keep renewing it.

CAN's aren't navigational information and they aren't restricted to the marine environment. CAN's can apply to literally anywhere. They can apply to a specific building, they can apply to the backyard of a beekeeper. They can be notified by any means deemed necessary. In newspapers on radios, in magazine's on websites etc etc... It's the agencies responsibility to get the info out there by whatever means necessary. The fact it is here on crew posted by a member means they have succeeded. I can't imagine anyone would go looking for any CAN applicable to them before they

As of yesterday it was the very first item on there news page, which you can get from the News link at top right of the home page. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/biosecurity/exotic-pests-and-diseases-in-new-zealand/pests-and-diseases-under-response/exotic-caulerpa-seaweeds-at-great-barrier-great-mercury-islands-and-bay-of-islands-te-rawhiti-inlet/ https://www.mpi.govt.nz/news/media-releases/biosecurity-rules-in-place-to-stop-northland-spread-of-invasive-seaweed/

You're looking for a charger that can do an IUI charging profile. I have not been able to find one at a reasonable price. The issue with IUI is that the final phase can really send the voltage high. I have a Optima yellow top that calls for this kind of charge profile. I once did it manually with a programable power supply. The final phase, which called for 3amps for 2hours pushed the voltage to just over 18v. It's unsafe to do equalization unless you have a way to protect the rest of your electronics which generally means guaranteed disconnection. I have seen electri

Thanks IT, I was curious if you had an opinion? If we take MHT as the single source of truth, ArgoFET isolator splitters aren't the be all and end all for load dump protection. Quote "and yes we have seen FET isolators fail". Blowing up an ArgoFET isolator vs blowing up alternator diodes appears to be a similar proposition If you wanted to be more risk adverse then going for a diode to your start battery could provide that, at the expense of voltage drop. Personally I think I would risk it.

You set up your alternator/regulator pair for the Li and use the dc/dc to top up your start. So you can take your start battery to 14.7 while your Li is charging at 13.2... Or if your Li has topped out at 13.8 then your dc/dc will continue at 14.7. All numbers are made up and will depend on your setup but are realistic. Now you have 2 chargers. Your alternator, that is smart because of your mc612, and the dc/dc charger. The voltage from the alternator while charging your Li should be too low to charge a agm start fully.

Also, Victron ArgoFET is the best splitter I have come across: https://www.victronenergy.com/battery-isolators-and-combiners/argo-fet-battery-isolators But in hindsight and thinking about it right now, I am not actually sure how these would cope with an alternator load dump/voltage spike which is your use case - maybe that is something @Island Time could comment on?!? Maybe a traditional diode splitter would be better just cranking up the voltage at the alternator to compensate for the voltage drop.

I got mine a year ago +/- from here: https://www.ivent.co.nz/product/category/951/12v 100ah deep cycle lead carbon battery/38317 I am pretty sure I paid $275 incl.. I note that site now says $275 and I suspect that that is excl GST, so maybe I got that wrong... although prices may have also gone up....

You definitely cannot charge any LA as fast as Li. You may be thinking that you can only charge so fast because of your alternator capacity, therefore it makes no difference - that's not correct either, because LA will push back on the current far far sooner than the Li will. Eg, the Li will continue to accept 100amps up to 95% capacity. While the LA will probably be down to 15amps at 95% capacity so your charge time is considerably longer to reach the same capacity. If you have a 100ah alternator and a 100ah LFP battery, you can pretty much gaurantee that after 1hour the battery w

Yes. Exactly that battery. Cost $275. The best value deep cycle around IMO. There's so many different ways to build a solution. You need to build based on the outcome you want to achieve. You'll only get as much current as the battery will accept. If it's fully charged it will be f.all and certainly not 12amps.

Use a splitter to charge the lithium and have it connected to the start as well. And use a cheap dc/dc from the Li to top off your start battery. You've already got the mc612, it's not what I would recommend for a greenfields installation but it's an investment you can leverage. Obs you need to set the right specs. Connect your current solar controller to your new Li and set it up for whatever Li charge specs you are happy with.

Lithiums don't need dc/dc. But that is one of many options. I would recommend against dc/dc for lithium. One of the main benefits of lithium is the fast charge rate and you lose that with dc/dc. You raise valid issues but there's other ways to skin the cat... The MC612 can't measure current. It limits the output and that's it. I run my stock alternator at max output for a couple of hours and have never had any problems. The reality is you cannot charge two different chemistries (incl lead carbon) with one charging source. Their will always be a compromise.