- This topic has 24 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
What is the two shackle outhaul system?
I was building a boom last year and was told by the local shop that the towel rail was a Fico fitting no longer in production, so I just made up my own equivalent- a wire stretched between two L pieces being left over diamond adjusters. I saw the same on several old Sabres but have no idea if it is legal because there are no published Sabre rules. Just a set of measurements which in this case are irrelevant.
My Sabre came complete with a 30 year old copy of the Fico rigging guide, but as Fico went out of business no one seems to know what are legal commercial replacements.
Most of the sabre towel rail fitting now come as a complete unit with the towel rail and slider fitted.
Have a look at the below link for an example.
http://www.binksonline.com.au/store/prod2853.htm
Mine has the same towel rail but uses two shackles instead of the black slider. Seems to be the old way of setting up your outhaul system.
Ashley
Tepara 1061QUOTE “No variations outside the Building Notes and Measurement Rules are permitted unless approved in writing by the Sabre Sailing Association of Australia Inc “
The problem is the Building Notes are only available if you are building a new boat. The present system is not satisfactory when only part of the measurement rules are openly available. The Building Notes should be precisely that, with a set of measurement rules which are published and stand alone. I know of no other class which does not make a full set of rules freely available to its members. The only rigging guide I have is of the Fico parts published in the early years of the class. the company is long out of business so why is it illegal to use modern fittings which serve the same purpose and give no performance advantage.
A typical problem I faced was I bought a new mast and was advised the construction notes required a bolt rope cut out. Now I am advised ‘rules’ have been changed to allow the track to be opened out to avoid weakness. I have just ruined a $300 mast because of measurement secrecy when all I was trying to do was have a legal boat. The mast is now weakened and the tack catches in the cut out.
What is the reason for requiring sails/foils to be remeasured every year? It is normal practice for other classes to measure only once. Does the Sabre Association expect its members to illegally alter them after they have been measured? Annual measurement might be a social occasion for metropolitan members but for country members it is expensive and time consuming. This is why very few bother to have an up to date measurement certificate. It is not true you can not enter a YA event without one, its just a requirement impossed by some state associations for competing in state championships.
There seems to be an underlying tone that would suggest there needs to be some action on the part of the Sabre executive to revamp the class rules to make them more easily accessible, understandable and to bring them into line with other classes.
One of the key issues that I see, is that in one discussion within this forum there is an outcry because someone wants to remove the batterns in the floor of the Sabre (no speed, manouverabilty etc advantage, will not outdate boats) and in another discussion Tim Heaney has identified that he believes he is able to move a chine (subsequently flattening the rocker aft of the centre board case) by 30-40mm (massive potential speed, manouverabilty etc advantage, will definantly outdate boats). I cannot believe that flattening the rocker by 30-40mm is in the intent of the rules but has not received the same responce.
If the Sabre Assoc’ is looking into an update of the class rule, I am happy to volunteer time to the exercise. If someone wants to post an email address I would be happy to send you my contact details.
I note with interest that the Minnow Association and Ronstan have just launched a fitting out guide fir the Minnow.
http://wwwshop.com.au/minnows/minnow_gear.pdf
Why not see if Ronstan would like to do the same for teh Sabre – and we could then replace the 1970’s Fico version….
With further response to the chine and the rules and mesurements i originaly started with the mesurements printed off the net but have last night re printed the hull mesurements and found the chine to sheer at the transom had two diferent mesurements. The print layout had also changed. I then looked at my building notes to find the later to be right. My mistake to not check with the building notes but i gues coming from the association site i presumed my orignal mesurements would be right. my mistake
tim
Further to Andrew’s post:
Ronstan developed a fit out guide for the Sabre in the early 1990’s. This is included within the building notes and I will work with Barry to put this on the web.This is an indictative list only and a number of the products listed on this fit out guide are no longer manufactured by Ronstan.
Maree Early
1613 hello buoysHi All,
Thought It was about time I waded into the debate as well.
Introductions first.
Sabre 1665 – ‘Risk of Decision’ is the WA based boat that Phil mentioned as being under construction. Hull construction complete, currently waiting final coat of paint on hull and Varnishing of upper deck. 1666 – (Yet to be named) will follow shortly, but as I am Navy and currently posted to an operational Submarine, it will be mid next year before 1666 gets started.
As part of my first ever boat construction, I am verifying the existing construction notes, and am already in the process of unofficially rewriting and updating the ‘Sabre Construction and Fitting Out Notes’ to reflect current products and fitting out guides.
I appologise to all for the slowness of this self imposed project, but as I have said, I am posted to an operational Submarine, and it cuts into my free time at the moment.
That said, It must be noted that
* My document is not officially sanctioned by the association. I am doing it by my own choice, with the intention of handing it, on completion, to the Association Free of charge and with all ownership rights, for Review and if approved, adoption as the 2005(6) update to the Construction Manual.
* I am not changing any rules. All I am doing is updating the existing manual to reflect the modern and currently available materials (eg, West System / BoteCote epoxy Resins and other materials); Re-arranging some steps in the construction sequence to allow a correct flow sequence (which has been nutted out with a lot of help from Phil Johnson in Melbourne, Trevor Baker in Adelaide, and a couple of others); and I will be updating the Fitting Out Guide as well, and Yes, I’m an Aussie, so I will not appologise for only putting Ronstan and alternative Riley Fittings in the guide where possible. Additionally, The way the document is formatted will change, but you will see it when it is done.
OK That finally gets me to why I’m here in the first place.
Having just built a timber boat (with floor battens) I cannot see what the problem is in doing it. It was not hard at all thanks to some simple advice from Phill. And the rules are the rules, and the timber boat must have floor battens. Get over it.
As to the towel Rail fitting – Yep, Go to Binks they do good work, and as they do make them, no one can say a commercially available Towel Rail is not available. So what – it is not a Ronstan Part. Whats the problem.
Or, you can make your own. The rod is 316 stainless 1/4 inch solid rod, the end pieces are 3 hole Ronstan toe strap plates bent at Right Angles in the centre – all you need is access to a Tig Welder or a mate with one. Heck, Dinghy builders have been inovating their own modified fittings for years. Trevor Baker is responsible for the idea behind the black nylon slide part seen on the Binks fitting. You can also just get a 40mm bit of Stainless tube slightly larger internal diameter than the 1/4 inch rod – weld a larger/longer shackle to it at right angles (tube inside the U), and put it on the rod before you weld the second end piece on.
As to all the arguments about fittings – REMEMBER – ‘The fitting out Guide’ is exactly that, A GUIDE. The only thing that the rules specify is the position of some fittings – not exactly which fitting (except the towel Rail) must be used. If you want Series 30 main sheet blocks, you can use series 30, If you don’t mind the extra weight of a 50mm block use them, as long as you place them in the correct position IAW the rules.
When I finish my Update and submit it to the Association for review and discussion, the ‘fitting out guide’ will still only be that, a guide.
Next one: Access to the Construction and Fitting Out Notes.
I am not sure what the Association’s Official Stand is on copies of the book. My own personal view on that topic is that if you own a boat, Timber/GRP or Composite, you should be entitle to have a copy of the handbook.
If you built your own, you should have bought a copy from the Association. You cannot get a Sail Number any other way. The Sail Number is what you are actually paying for here, not the cost of the Book.
If you purchased a boat new from a builder, or second hand, you should have received the original copy of the book issued for your boats Sail Number and construction from the person you bought it from.
If you have lost/damaged your book or bought second hand and did not receive your book, there should be no reason why you cannot go to the Association and request a replacement copy, which should be heaps cheaper (Printing and Postage costs only possibly) than a new issue, as you are not asking for a new sail number, just a replacement book. This would be safer than borrowing a mates and copying it yourself, as a new Association produced copy will have all the latest ammendments.
Well, Thats my say . . .
Before anyone asks, No – My project re-write of the manual is not for public or advanced viewing. The Association will choose how they wish to put it out for review and discussion when it is complete and I have handed it to them, be it mid next year or later.
Maree,
I would happily nominate to take one of the positions, Preferably Secretary, but until I get a shore based posting, I cannot do so, as it would be a disadvantage to the Association when I am not contactable and have no access to the net. Maybe after June 06.
Regards . . .
Willy . . .
Was this issue and the issue of ther rules and building notes in general discussed at the nationals/AGM?
If so could the discussions/outcomes be posted in this forum.
These matters were referred to by Phil Johnson (Nat Measurer) and John Dixon (Vic Measurer) and there are some proposals mooted to amend (in a minor way only) some of the rules and measurement limitations.
Issues like these can only be brought to a vote at an AGM through a formal resolution listed on the meeting agenda.
John D has indicated he is considering putting one forward for a Special General Meeting during the year.
This would result in Association members being consulted by their State Associations and the Delegates to the National Committee voting on the Motion/s to the Special GM with guidance from their states.
I do hope to post the Minutes of the AGM on the web site when I get my feet under the table!
Regards
Mike Simpson, Nat Sec.
- The forum ‘Boat Construction’ is closed to new topics and replies.