Translation missing: en.posts.shared.post_not_found

Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Frank .. just tagging the change-areas (if we decide it is worth proceeding).  I think as we step through these individual rules .. one might conclude .. yea .. this should be submitted .. as the language of 61 is also pretty restrictive in the context of actions against a competitor themselves.

    1. Def: Party (b) -> change "for a redress hearing: a boat [or competitor] requesting redress .. 
    2. Rule 61.1(a)  -> change "a boat [or competitor] may .. "
    3. Rule 61.4(b) -> change "A boat [or competitor] is entitled ... "
    4. Rule 61.4(c) -> change "If a boat [or competitor] is entitled to ... "

    That's what I found at first pass.
    Today 19:42
  • I have the attached two documents from 2017 when Virtual Marks were being introduced.

    The guidance document, 2.4 says:

    (a) A waypoint is not a physical object, and

    (d) RRS 18 and RRS 28.2 cannot apply unchanged because a mark is defined as an object.

    Does anyone have any insights about the apparent philosophical change?

    AppendixWPRulesforRacingAroundWaypoints-[19996].pdf 25.4 KB
    GuidanceonRacingAroundWaypoints-[19997].pdf 373 KB
    Yesterday 22:09
  • Thanks Guys
    Yesterday 19:38
  • RYA's Casebook is at https://www.rya.org.uk/racing/rules/rya-case-book/
    Fri 20:08
  • Thanks everyone for your contributions. There is a clarity in my mind now with all the inputs given here. Now I will close this thread here.

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 Satish Kumar Kanwar 4.2K
2 John Allan 3K
3 Richard Jones 2K
4 Joan Noguera 2K
5 Andrew Lesslie 1.6K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more