Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Matt
If you ensure your boat complies with the Rules & Measurements as published on the web site (and some are a bit esoteric in how they are applied or measured) you won’t be far wrong. Some things may have been changed but this should not affect you, as older boats are “grandfathered”; i.e., if they complied at original measurement and have not been altered, they do not have to comply with altered rules except for annually measured items such as sails and fins.
I am presently in the throes of incorporating recent rule changes into the building notes and hope to make them available to people in your situation at a fee that will cover our costs of production.
National measurer, Phil Johnson, has measurement records which may include your boat – give him a ring or an email.
It is unlikely that your competitors at your Club will take you to task for minor rule violations but, for your own peace of mind, it is best to make your boat comply and, if you aspire to state or national titles competition, things can get picky.
Fair winds
Mike SimpsonThanks Andrew – Worth consideration.
Measuring in accordance with the ERS would require a gauge to project the stay/shroud centreline onto the mast and the mast would need to be rigged on the boat to get the stay/shroud angles correct.
I’ll raise the matter of complying with the ERS when clearing the revised rules to accommodate the recent changes with the measurers.
Certainly our present system does NOT accord with the ERS!
Mike Simpson
Dean
I have just observed measurement of my mast and another by John Dixon (Vic Measurer).
He measured to the low point in the hole in the tang as shown on the “callout” in diagram #25A on page 51 of the current building notes.
This matches the “old” system where the thimble in the eye of the stay or shroud is directly attached to the tang and the measurement is to where the bearing point of the thimble bears on the tang.
This seems to indicate that the tang is considered part of the mast for measurement purposes but a pin or shackle used to connect the stay is not.
This cuts your margin for error down to the diameter of the pin.
Does that help?
Any comment from measurers??
Mike Simpson
The first hull out of the mould has been sold and is to be picked up by the new owner on 2 October.
Who’s putting their hand up for number 2?
The formal process for notification of the results of the ballot on the rules changes is that the National Secretary (me) advises the members of the National Associaton (the five State Associations) of the results via the State Secretaries.
The informal process of advising the general membership will be by posting on this web site.
The ramifications of the changes (if any) will be incorporated in the measurement rules and the building guide in consultation with the national and state measurers. At the same time I propose that the rules will be consolidated into a document that will reflect all the rules (including the so-called “hidden” ones), providing a reference for the measurers, the general membership and prospective Sabre purchasers and be posted on this website.
The rules will continue to be published in the Building Guide which is and will continue to be updated before each reprint. The full building guide will be made available to interested parties. Non-members will pay a premium which will provide one year’s state association membership. Current members will pay about $30 at current costs of publication and distribution. A new sail number and building licence for one boat will add another $30 at current rates.
Returns have been received from QLD, SA & VIC; reminder to others will be sent this week. Results will be posted when all responses are in.
It was interesting to note that the creme de la creme at the Vic committee meeting recently generally favoured the towel rail for effectiveness even if other, more sophisticated and expensive options are permitted. When outhaul tracks were permitted in years gone by, they were found to be sticky and difficult to adjust under load as well as being expensive!
MRS
On my boat, builder Phil Johnson used a nail punch about 3 to 4 mm dia (the type with a hollow point) to punch the number into the keel in indentations about 6 mm apart. Before varnishing by the look of it!
Mike Simpson
Reply to Sue:
All answers subject to review, but my thoughts are:
1. Yes – the idea is to incorporate them in the Building Notes but also make them available separately.
2. Will not be published unless they are approved by National Measurer
3. I am amenable to publishing them on the website.
4. Issue of sail numbers would continue as now but Building Notes would be available to non-builders – i.e. without issue of a sail number.
5. I thought this was essentially the situation now but if a glass hull does not measure it should be treated the same way a non-conforming timber hull would be. (I believe a glass hull can be distorted out of measurement, especially one with a timber deck.)
I believe the towel rail would remain a feature of the Sabre!
Mike Simpson
When the result of the vote on the current proposal to amend the rules of measurement is known I propose to consolidate the rules into a package that will become the reference for Measurers, builders and owners,
I will do this in consultation with the National Measurer and State Measurers.
There is presently a move in Victoria to establish assistant measurers to cover regional areas such as East Gippland (Paynesville) where there is a lot of activity. John Foley, a former Commodore of GLYC and new Sabre person along with partner Noelene, has volunteered to undertake this role in that location. State measurer John Dixon proposes a workshop for regional measurers and interested Sabre sailors to be held at his Bayswater premises before the end of the year, and I for one hope to be able to participate in this.
I also propose that the SSAA Building Notes will be made available to members for a small premium on costs (approx $30 total) and to non-members for a larger premium (approx $60 total of which $30 will be forwarded to their State Association for an initial year’s membership subscription just as the $90 building notes fee doea for new members now).
If anyone has a problem with this proposal speak now!
Mike Simpson
Motions re change of measurement rules from SSAV (Originally proposed by Vic Measurer John Dixon)
Part 1 That the implied restriction on use of fittings that are not included in the building notes be removed. A note should be added to the building notes stating that any fittings can be used. It might be necessary to note that the positioning measurements of fittings are unchanged.
Part 2 That the measurement of 75mm minimum 150mm maximum from base of mast for boom vang attachment point [Measurement No. 108, Rule No. 6.1(h)#] should be deleted, allowing positioning of this fitting at any point above the base of the mast.
#NOTE: This rule is incorrectly identified as being Rule No.6.1(g) in some versions of the Construction & Fitting Out Notes.
Part 3 That the measurement defining the position of the vang fitting on the boom [Measurement No. 119, Rule No. 7.2(b)] be deleted, allowing this point to be anywhere on the boom. The location of the forward mainsheet block hanger to be controlled by a new Rule No. 7.3 to a measurement of 975mm (+/- 5mm) from the after face of the mast section. The free location of the vang attachment will be restricted by not being able to be any further aft of the forward mainsheet block hanger and also by the vang being able to clear the centreboard when it is raised.
And that the Secretary be directed to amend the Rules of Measurement and Construction and the Construction & Fitting Out Notes as required to properly reflect the results of the National Committee’s deliberations.
BACKGROUND
The following are some notes I made up in response to a request from National President Rob Jackson for some background information.
I understand the proposers believe the changes will simplify rigging of new boats without affecting relative performance of newer and older boats and can also be readily applied to older boats as and if maintenance or personal preference requires it.
Proposal 1. The opening up of allowable fittings is considered to be a reflection of what is substantially current practice on the part of measurers in that many specified fitting are at least difficult to find and, in many instances, they are simply no longer available. The Sabre can be rigged with inexpensive generally available fittings at little or no loss of performance than if the “crème de la crème” fittings had been selected and, in discussions with Phil Johnson, John Dixon and others, this view seems to be generally held by Sabre sailors of considerable experience.
Proposal 2. The deletion of the control on location of the vang attachment point at the bottom of the mast is proposed because no one can say why it was applied in the first place and it is felt that the ability to lower the location will increase the effectiveness of the vang for a given force on the tackle. Those who want to place the attachment in a higher location to increase mast bend relative to vang performance, however minimally, will still have that option.
Proposal 3. Some have said they would like the ability to place the attachment a little further forward than the present limit allows and that the deletion of the control on location of the vang attachment point on the boom would leave the after limit still pretty well constrained by the forward mainsheet block hanger location and by the possibility of fouling on a partly raised centreboard, it is thought there would be relatively small take-up of this option.
None of these proposals were seen as affecting relative performance of boats with or without the changes and are thus seen as compatible with the class philosophy of maintaining older boats’ relative performance.
DISCUSSION
I am expanding a bit on the above in response to Sue’s queries.
Disclaimer: These are my own thoughts and are not intended to influence State members conferring with their Committees nor members of State Committees or Delegates when they vote on the proposals.
My understanding is that the proposals will not allow you to use fittings that are a substantial change of type from the current style specified in the Building Notes. I’ll bow to the National Measurer’s interpretation on this, but I think a towel rail will still be required and the rest of the rig would only be varied slightly.
A couple of “for instances”:
(a) Willy’s quest to use T-ball fittings for attaching the vang to the boom would not be enabled by the change.
(b) The limit on the size of mainsheet pulleys would not change.Re the “partly raised centreboard” this refers to the situation where, going downwind or coming into shore, you can lift your centreboard high enough to foul the vang tackle in a tack or gybe – this can be especially embarrassing when it happens without any input from you.
Now, let the flaming begin!
Regards
Mike SimpsonRonny
I assume the guy doing the roll swaging will want to be paid for that and the wire and the eye at the other end – say a round $100.
You’re just going to lose your carefully set tension the instant you pull the vang on – do you want a guage for that too?
I’ll stick with the $3 cord thank you!
Especially after the National Measurer said that was the only legal method of doing it!
Mike Simpson
Andrew
The Sabre rules are included in the building notes supplied when a new sail number is issued. Presently these are copyright and not available any other way, but I do lean toward making them more generally accessible – perhaps on the net and full copies of the notes for a fee (they cost the Association about $20 per set to issue). I will consult with the National Committee and see if there are any objections.
Many of the Sabre restrictions are based on the tenet that “no variations outside the Building Notes and Measurement Rules are permitted unless approved in writing by the Sabre Sailing Association of Australia Inc.”
and that “Only items specified in these Construction Notes shall be included either in construction or fitting out of a Sabre.”Other relevant rules are
1.4 Construction & Fitting Out Notes
The Construction and Fitting out Notes, as supplied by the Association for the construction of Sabre class dinghies, shall be read in conjunction with, and form part of these Rules of Measurement.1.10 Options & Alterations
Unless a system, method type or style of construction, or control is indicated as acceptable in these Rules and/or the Building Notes then that system method type or style of construction, fitting or control is prohibited.6.2 Mast Rigging
a. The material and gauge of all wire rigging is optional, but must be adequate.
b. The mast shall be supported by one forestay wire and two shroud wires (side stays).
c. Devices capable of adjusting shroud or forestay tension whilst sailing are not allowed.Regards
Mike SimpsonMatt
I wasn’t meaning to suggest you were fiddling but including measurement information which isn’t all that clear in the rules and notes.
When I said Phil may pick up on it I meant on the thread.
Regards
MRSMatt
Look at Rule 5.7 in the Red book P.91, Yellow & Green books P.68.
It gives the string position as 102mm above (keel at the) transom and resting on (tangential to) the highest point of the keel. Measure rocker at a point 3048 from the transom.
The table also requires rocker to be measured at 708 mm and 1416 mm from the transom.
It is my understanding that, inter alia, the keel must form a fair curve over its whole length and departures from this would be viewed as an attempted circumvention of the rules and the measurer may not pass the boat as meeting measurement standards.
Phil may pick up on this – keep your eye out!
Mike Simpson
Advice from QLD is that the title dates will be first race Fri 29 December 2006 and the last race Fri 5 January 2007; seven race series; one drop; lay day New Years Day; mornings available for resails.
Keep your eye on the QLD site for updates and start making your bookings!
Sorry ’bout the late notice – I’ve been away!
Mike S
