Internet Course

Footy Class Internet Course Postings
1

The way that things seem to be going, can anyone who actually has an Internet course work out some way of adding starting line at 45 degrees to the long axis of the course. To achieve stability and for variety it mght be best to produce two lines so that the course looks like a Y with the lines as its arms.

There are formulae for line length v. number/size of boat. Anyne know what they are off hand? Given the very short course (and radio restrictions), what is a sensible upper limit for a fleet?

Anyone thought of the finishng line problems.

I can’t think of any right-of-way rule problems arising from use of Internet course for fleet racing. Can anyone else?

A.

2

When I first learned of the Internet Footy course, I had assumed it would be like the usual sailing course (but windward-leeward.) Timing would start and end at a point near the midpoint of the line connecting the two marks, both on the upwind, like a starting/finish gate.

Instead it was said to start & end timing at the leeward mark, perpendicular to the course.

3

Angus, I am at a little bit of a loss to understand why you want to attach a start or finish line at 45 degrees from the long axis of the course.
Surely you mean 90 degrees?:lol:

In practice we have simply chosen a point on the side of the pond to act as one end of the start line with the leeward course marker as the other end.
The finish has not yet been critical, but as most boats finish close in to the course string, it is easily judged.
The formula for start line length is "the overall length of one yacht x the number of starters in the largest heat plus one.:witch:

Your question on right-of-way rule problems if one should use the internet course for fleet racing, may open a rather large can of worms, as they say.
The most common conflict will happen when a leeward yacht calls for room to tack for an obstruction. Rule 19.
The fact that the course is around a continuous obstruction is of some concern.
Not in the short term, but if your idea grows to heat sizes of more than six Footies we may be in trouble.:cool:

My question is… Why do you want to use the Internet Course for fleet racing in various parts of the globe?
It was developed to allow sole sailors to have a measuring stick as to how well their Footy`s were performing.
If you have two or more chums to sail with, why not just set a course that suits your venue? The first past the post is the winner.
If you wish to do solo runs and post the time as originally conceived, then do it.
I await your elucidation.:scared:

4

‘Angus, I am at a little bit of a loss to understand why you want to attach a start or finish line at 45 degrees from the long axis of the course.
Surely you mean 90 degrees? ’

Woops – obviously that should be 90. I think some other bizarre thoughts I was having carried over into the typing!

‘’In practice we have simply chosen a point on the side of the pond to act as one end of the start line with the leeward course marker as the other end.’

That’s fine up to a point. However, I was thinking that these courses might be permanently laid, in which case a point on the bank may be inconvenient in some wind directions. It shouldn’t be beyond the bounds of possibility to persuade the local council to provide a permanent course on the municipal boating lake.

‘The finish has not yet been critical, but as most boats finish close in to the course string, it is easily judged’

For fleet racing the course really has to be 5.5 times round – finish at the windward mark. Can you image a gaggle of 16 year olds rounding a leeward mark for a windward finish on a bearing from the mark? Should the length of the solo course be changed to match? See below.

‘The formula for start line length is "the overall length of one yacht x the number of starters in the largest heat plus one. ’

Thanks

‘Your question on right-of-way rule problems if one should use the internet course for fleet racing, may open a rather large can of worms, as they say.
The most common conflict will happen when a leeward yacht calls for room to tack for an obstruction. Rule 19.
The fact that the course is around a continuous obstruction is of some concern.
Not in the short term, but if your idea grows to heat sizes of more than six Footies we may be in trouble. ’

Basically agree. There are precedents in the protest appeals for obstructions that are marks of the course: ‘Leave Anglesey and all outlying islands to starboard’ does occasionally end up with a confrontation between 2+ boats and a big lump of rock!

Is the 6 boats per heat based on practical experience, a considered guess or just (no, never) a number? Does everyone else with practical experience agree?

‘My question is… Why do you want to use the Internet Course for fleet racing in various parts of the globe?
It was developed to allow sole sailors to have a measuring stick as to how well their Footy`s were performing.
If you have two or more chums to sail with, why not just set a course that suits your venue? The first past the post is the winner.
If you wish to do solo runs and post the time as originally conceived, then do it.
I await your elucidation. ’

Because I think we can use the Internet to have needle matches between clubs/fleets/chapters/call them what you will across the world. If we can get the (as yet highly embryonic) format right, this can be a mechanism to get clubs to improve overall standards, encourage high turnouts, etc. Isn’t that what it’s all about?

A.

5

Because I think we can use the Internet to have needle matches between clubs/fleets/chapters/call them what you will across the world. If we can get the (as yet highly embryonic) format right, this can be a mechanism to get clubs to improve overall standards, encourage high turnouts, etc. Isn’t that what it’s all about?
Well sort of…:sly:[COLOR=Black]
[SIZE=2]Personally I do not believe that the use of any sort of “standard” course for comparison [SIZE=4]“FLEET” racing is practicable.:graduate: IMHO!
Individual timed runs…no problem…fleet race regattas…forget it.:devil3:

We could spend so much time working out the logistics and rules and still end up with a dog`s breakfast that could cause so much dissapointment that I would encourage groups to “just do it” as my byline suggests.

[/SIZE][/COLOR][/SIZE]

Is the 6 boats per heat based on practical experience, a considered guess or just (no, never) a number? Does everyone else with practical experience agree?
The number is based on both practical experience and a considered guess.:cool: Six skippers would generally mean more than two of similar skill and compeditivness which makes for great racing but also more conflict resolution challenges. ( ahem…ahem )

6

I suspect I didn’t make myself very clear. When I was talking about fleet results, I did mean fleet results - something along thel lines of an average time to complete the course. Obviousy these are only comparable on a series basis.

It is a very important part of the cocept that their be ;leagues’: sl-associated groups of clubs that find their results mutally comfortable.

A

7

“OK” … one last time, I do not wish to be a bore, so, IMHO the “internet course” is NOT suitable for fleet racing.:turtle:
I will pull my head in now and just observe developments.:tapedshut

Don`t be concerned, I have not spat the dummy, nor taken offence, just expressed my opinion and do not need to enter into any futher debate unless things evolve to the point where my opinion is changed.
I shall observe with interest.:magnify:
Right their Pet?:zbeer:

8

OK Ian,

I hear what you say and bow to your greater experience.

Apart from the possibility of ‘cross-fleet’ racing over standardised courses (ignore this for the present and sick to the purely technical issues), what I find particularly attractive about the internet course is the abikity, conditions permitting) to leave it permanently laid and the faxt that it always presents a true beat and (potentially) a true line - or one with a predetermined amount of bias without any skill on the part of the person running the race. You know as well as I do the amount of horsepower, skill, frustration and ill-feeling involved in laying an accurate Olympic course.

So, if the Internet course is not the answer for fleet racing, what is - that can preserve the above virtues of the Internet course. The temptation is to say that you can increse fleet sizes by increasing the length of the course so that the little buggers are more spread out when they get to the first windward mark. This has the disadvantage of increasing the swinging room needed for a permanently laid course. Any more imaginative ideas?

I think that the other rule and practical problems are probably surmountable. It should be possible to designate only the windward and leeward floats as marks of the course. The adjoining structure then becomes a simple obstruction. The position is pretty similar to Cowes, for example, where there is often great inducement to get in over a tidal beach to get out of the tide.

Of course the first design question is what is the upper limit of a fleet? Or perhaps what is the lower permissible upper limit!

A.

9

I may not have got across what I mean by cross-fleet racing.

I do NOT mean tthat we treat a numer of physical races taking place at different locations as a sinle race with a winning boat. I agree that is totally laughable.

What I DO mean is that fleets/clubs/call them what you will compete between each other AS SUCH, NOT AS INDIVIDUAL BOATS. Furthermore they do it in SERIES OF RACES. Basically a win in a race in the series is the lowest AVERAGE time of the ENRIRE FLEET. Fleet places are scored on the usual Olympic low points system for want of anything better. The real WINNER is the WINNING FLEET.

This does not quite work. One problem is that a fleet somewhere in the American Mkid-west where a farting buffalo is reported as a hurricane has no chance against one on the coast of Britain or New Zealand. We therefore have LEAGUES - self-selecting groups of clubs/fleets that feel reasonably happy that under average conditions they are fairly matched. It is important that hey be self-selecting: if you try to impose formal and/or mathematical rules, you can, I agree, be totally certain of the whole thing going pear-shaped.

The biggest bugbear is fleet size. One of the ideas of the system is to help clubs get boats out on the water ‘for the honour of the club’. But if the fleet consists in practice of two hotshots and the rest stay at home, it has a much better chace of winning. How do we deal with this without being too ‘nannyish’?

A.

10

If the Internet Footy course is permnently laid, then it defeats the purpose of it being a truly windward-leeward course, and you’ll not always get a true beat.

One will have to weigh that ( being permanently laid) with the option of acorrect beat, and choose.

Angus-
You gotta lay off the pints :zbeer: when you’re typing, mate. :smiley:

11

No, Tomohawk. The whole point of the Internet course is that it is self-aligining to the wind. All you needfor a permanently laid course is sugffient room for it to swing!.

A.

12

That’s what I mean, but this is the first time it was mentioned to be permanently laid, so when you say “permanently laid,” you really mean that only the windward mark is permanently anchored. Usually, a pernanent course has both marks anchored.

Having it move DURING a heat also gives a new meaning to the idea of an obstacle, as the course line and marks may be moving.

13

Sure. The whole point of the course is that it is ALWAYS lined up with the wind - including windshifts. It ALWAYS gives a true beat and (if we can arrange the hardware) an unbiased line or one with a preset bias to the leeward end.

And, yes, it opens up a whole pile of non-traditional tactics. You have to rethink completely how you deal with windshifts and which is the ‘right’ ‘side’ of the course.

A.

14

Tomo,
Angus is correct here.
The Internet course is only anchored at the windward mark,Its always been like that.
The course has always been free to move with the wind,that was the whole idea.
Right that said…back to your normal program.

15

Remember, Tomo that in big boats the next mark is laid about when the leading boat reaches the mark - at least that’s the way I’ve always seen major regattas for offshore boats in Europe done. A mark boat give the compass bearing to the next mark.

Needs lots of horsepower. In La Rochelle they had 4 French navy gas turbine gunboats to lay the marks. The Internet course is so much simpler.

A.

16

In radio yachting, the course is laid out prior to the regatta, and anchored, just like the Footy course. Some clubs (at least in the U.S.) anchor the marks in the Spring, and leave it like that until the marks come out in the Fall. The only times I’ve seen any marks moved was for a major wind shift, and that was only the start marks. That is why I got the ideas mixed up. I’m totally aware only the windward mark is anchored “permanently” (i.e. for the day or regatta.)

17

As it is in most racing in full size boats. The resources required to but on true courses are too huge for it to be any other way. However, since a Footy is so small and manouverable, courses can be short and it should be possible to do something better.

Keep the ideas coming folks.

A.

18

Angus hits pretty well on our solution - in a different thread. ( ? )

We have a large concrete “chunk” with embeded eyebolt. Through it is a very fine “green” colored Spectra-type fish line that goes from shore - out to eyebolt and then back to shore. The ends are, as noted by Angus “hidden” in the weeds, or tied to a brick and dropped to bottom of pond in about 1-2 feet of water. When ready to race, you retrieve the brick/end of line and attach both ends of the line to the bottom of the buoy. This gives you the ability to pull one line and move buoy out to the point above concrete anchor. The other line serves as a retrieving line for the buoy. Once the buoy is in position the retrieving line is allowed to have enough slack to sink to bottom, yet it remains attached to shore. I suppose in real deep ponds/lakes, as long as it is below keel depth, it’s fine.

End of regatta = just pull on the retrieving line and the buoy comes to shore. Untie buoy, tie line ends together and sink/hide til next time.

Obviously we found it easier to sink in 2 feet of water and use waders to retrieve, since then it is out of the hands of any little “urchins” who may wander along the side of the pond/lake and see the line coiled up under a rock. The green (or black) fishing line makes it hard to see unless you know where to look. If you have trouble getting the retrieve line to sink, small lead “crimp” sinkers will help with that job.

The eyebolt acts as a turning block for the line. A plastic milk jug filled with sand, and capped will also work - run the line through the handle.

And as noted - with the FOOTY course, the entire course is designed to “windvane” from the one anchored windward mark.

As a side note - at least once you will need a rowboat or similar to get the concrete/milk jug anchor out away from shore and into it’s required position. Also, a FOOTY course needs to be short enough in length to be able to circle the sunken anchor. If 50 feet is FOOTY course, then the anchor must be at least 55 feet from shore or any dock, etc. At season end, you “could” use the lines as a pull string for a heavier line allowing you to recover the anchor.

19

I like your refinements. I will admit that my mind is more inclined to run to 3/4" chain - but I think you probably have it sized about right!

20

Keep in mind you’ll probably want to remove your anchor block sometime, and unless your course tether line is strong enough to lift the block, you’ll need yet another line.