| Hobie Forums http://www.hobie.com/au/en/forums/ |
|
| below the Black Band http://www.hobie.com/au/en/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3920 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | John Eaton [ Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | below the Black Band |
I did a quick (maybe too quick) search of the rules and did not find an explanation/illustration of the downhaul restrictions. What are we NOT supposed to have below the blackband? Is it the foot of the sail itself, gooseneck, boom, ??? |
|
| Author: | MBounds [ Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It has changed in the last year. For example, the 2005 Rule for Hobie 16's was: Quote: 4.4 Each mast shall have a black band around it, as supplied by the HOBIE CAT CO., to indicate maximum downhaul. a) The black band is located 24 ft. 8 in. (7.52) meters) from the top of the mast not including the mast cap. b) The uppermost portion of the gooseneck slide shall be the guide for measurement, and the top of the slide must not be downhauled beyond the top of the band. The new 2006 rule was changed to eliminate the downhaul restriction: Quote: 4.4 Each mast shall have a warning label around it,
as supplied by the HOBIE CAT CO. The warning label shall be located below the opening in the mast track. With the new 6:1 downhauls on the 16, you can easily get the slide past the black band now. |
|
| Author: | mmiller [ Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Surprised! |
I am surprised by that one. I would have thought the manufacturers would have voted to restrict it do to the possible damage issues from over downhauling. |
|
| Author: | MBounds [ Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's something the Europeans slid through the approval process. |
|
| Author: | bphendri12 [ Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Question, What is not supposed to go below the black band? The gooseneck or the foot of the main? |
|
| Author: | MBounds [ Thu Aug 17, 2006 3:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It used to be the top of the gooseneck slide, but now it doesn't matter. Since the rule changed, you can downhaul it as much as you want. |
|
| Author: | Erik Olsen [ Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
In response to the comments from Matt Miller and Matt Bounds please allow me the following clarifications: 1. The manufacturers have all agreed to this rule change including Hobie Cat USA. 2. The rule change was not slid through by a certain region. It went through due process all the way as spelled out in the class rules. It was posted for comments July 26, 2004 (see: http://www.hobieclass.com/default.asp?Page=1876&MenuID=Class_Rules/10773/0 ) and was accepted by the IHCA Council during the 2005 AGM in Santa Barbara. The function the label has now is being a warning label only (overhead wires etc.) Best regards Erik Olsen IHCA Rules Committee Chair |
|
| Author: | MBounds [ Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Erik - I meant no disrespect to you or the Europeans with my comment. It was my understanding that the change was initiated by the EHCA. It went through the approval process fairly rapidly in comparison to the 6:1 downhaul change. Therefore "It's something the Europeans slid through the approval process." The reason for the rule change stated in your submission for comments - "Simplification and clarification" is extraordinarily vague. This was not simply a wording change, but the removal of a critical measurement criteria that existed for nearly 30 years. My suspicion is that sailors in high wind areas discovered that the new 6:1 system allowed them to easily downhaul past the black band, whereas the 3:1 system did not. Therefore, they wanted that restriction removed. |
|
| Author: | Erik Olsen [ Sat Aug 19, 2006 9:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It is OK, Matt. For the records, the change was actually initiated by the Rules Committee. It happened for a number of reasons: 1. We found that the rule was almost impossible to enforce while on the water. 2. The ruling was bad from a measurement point of view. E.g. what if the band was not applied 100 pct. perpendicular to the mast? Where to measure then? 3. Spot-checks revealed inconsistencies in the positions of the bands put on by the manufacturers. This meant quite a few sailors around the world were sailing on non-legal boats without knowing it. Although not the determining factor, this fact ended up being part of the arguments for changing the purpose of the ruling from measurement and safety to safety only. We actually discussed requiring some sort of physical stop installed in the mast track in order to limit the amount of downhaul as it would be the only way to make the downhaul ruling “work†|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|