No - You missed part of the explanation… :rolleyes:
the tether line is still small, lightweight and sinkable. You use it as a “Pull Line” for heavier stuff to remove anchor at seasons end. There is need for only one, lightweight, continuous line.
“Pull Line” - like an electrical “pull wire” for running electrical/data cable thru conduit. Doesn’t have to be large, just strong enough to handle the “anchor” retreiving line. I would think 80 lb. test fishing line could pull a 3/8 inch polypropelene line out and through the eyebolt and back to shore. If you are using a boat to retrieve, then it only has to be 2 times the water depth. That is the line that must overcome weight of whatever size anchor you are using.
I presume that the reason you bother to retrieve it is the effect of ice on the shore end. I would think that a decent galvanised eyebolt would last pretty much indefinitely.
up our way, water gets pretty hard, and makes it nicer in spring to just drop it again. Not to keep this “FOOTY ONLY”, the idea can work times three (or more) if you want to use it for all buoys in your race pond.
I suppose an inflatible buoy could be pulled down near the bottom when not in use and then tied off - just release and let it “bob” to the surface when you want to use it, but seems it would get pretty “foul looking” based on some pond and lake water quality I have seen.
All this is great stuff…very practical ideas coming out. Dick, I think I will modify my article (based on Ian’s original version) to include your retrieval idea.
I think it’s a bit unfortunate that the “obstruction” of the line between the windward and leeward bouys takes away half the course. It reduces the options and makes it more likely that all boats in the fleet will sail pretty much the same tacks. I can live with it, though, since in so many other ways this is a good course solution.
One concern for my pond…the prevailing wind means we’ll be starting on a line parallel to shore, that is, the boats will be sailing directly away from us when we cross the start line. It will be difficult to judge someone over early. Similarly hard to judge a close finish. Any thoughts?
No Brett, unfortunately we don’t. The start is usually a reach, then after rounding the first mark, we sail to the windward (second) mark. It’s not ideal, but then again, it’s the same for all boats.
I agree, Angus…aaggh…I think the Internet course is great for individual time trials and for team relay races (Brett’s latest idea,) but fleet racing may be problematic in some club locations. That being said, please understand that I am not opposed to it by any means…just pointing out that it may not fit all applications. Where it fits, I think the concepts coming out in these discussions will be fun for clubs to see how they stack up against world-wide competitors. Where it’s not a good fit, the relay may be a good substitute.
p.s. I’ll be back home Saturday and will try to catch up on all the the email.
Well, when I first read about fleet racing and worldwide scoring I didn’t think the course was going to be a sticking point. We’ve have several ideas kicking around and a few concerns. Let’s see if I understand this all (Still the novice sailor).
Solo racing on the internet course (IC) is no problem. We’ve already started. Building courses, automating the scoring, promoting, and running the races is all we need. I’m planning to build a course myself.
Fleet racing. Some concerns over crowding on the IC and dealing with the obstruction in general. Even with all its warts, I think we should go with it anyway. Several things can be done to deal with the concerns.
* The start line can be lengthened. This will give more room at starts and open up the field a bit. I also don’t think overcrowding will happen often. We just don’t have the boats for it.
Maybe we can sink the center line of the IC. It only has to be a foot underwater for a footy to clear. This would be ideal if practical. It will respond to wind shifts slower but eliminates the added obstruction. This idea may be more or less of a problem for permanently layed courses. It will look better, just being a few buoys. It's going to be a fouling hazard for boats with deeper drafts.
Perhaps lay out a static IC for fleet races. The marks won't move and placement will have to be best guess but the course length will be the same and allow for fleet scoring schemes.
The best reason for using the IC...it's already built. If we're using it for solo timed runs, why go to all the trouble of setting another course. We'll just learn to deal with its eccentricities.
What do we have to lose by trying fleet races on the IC? If it doesn’t work, we’ll worry about it then. It’s not like any of this is written in stone. There’s my $0.02, see ya on the water sometime.
If you don’t mind wet FOOTIES (the real ones) you can do a start similar to ice boats. Wade out to line, 1/2 start to port, the other half start to starboard. Starting positions are drawn from hat. Works from shore with such shallow draft. Needs a nice long windward leg to let the boats string out and find favored side of course.
You can also use a “rabbit” - where one boat (usually fastest) sails on a reach in front of all others. Others can’t start until the “rabbit” pases them - they must start on opposite tack. This gives an edge to “rabbit” as even though he starts later, he has desired tack. You can decide how to draw for “rabbit” for following races.
A few things to think about re fleet racing on the internet course.
1st the course only lies straight and true in steady winds with no current,at other times the course can be anywhere!! same as for the time trial situation though,but what I am saying is that in fleet racing the object is to beat the fleet not the clock. I am still not clear on how the fleet racing resullts will be scored.Angus can you make this clear to me (dumb kiwi)
2nd, only half the course is avalible for the beat to windward.That being said careful thought will have to be given to the location of the start line.Depending on what side of the course the line is has drastic effects on the tactical implications and number of tacks needed to make the windward mark.
Perhaps have the start line below the actual course?This would give a sort out area before the obstruction of the bottom mark is reached.
3, course length,Angus has made his case based on IOM course lengths.Well that sounds fine but as said above all the boats will be on one side of the course.Footies are faster for there length than IOMs,remember we have boats going around 5 laps of this course in a little over 6 minutes,this will impove as the boats evolve further.Work out how long each beat will take and you will see my concerns.
Edit…I estimate that an average beat will be about 54seconds based on 7minutes to complete 5 laps.
4,A lot of talk here which is great,but what is needed is PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE,not many have even actually set up and sailed the internet course,No one has done any fleet racing with one as far as I am aware,
We need experienced people,both in yachting in general and Actual footy sailing,those are the opinions that matter IMHO.We seem a bit lacking in this area for now.
My 2 cents worth is that the Internet course is much more suited for what it was designed for than fleet racing.I guess the crux of the matter is the scoring system and how fleets will be compared and what value there is in this.
I have broached the idea of Relay racing,3 boats per team,2 laps each boat.The Internet course is sutible for this format.
Scoring is simple and meaningful just as with individual trials.
Yep, lots of talk. And I think we all may agree more than disagree. Remember email and forum exchanges tend to magnify differences of opinion. I call it the internet mountain/molehile effect. :graduate:
I’ll start with your 4th point since this is where we agree most. Yes, we absolutely need experience sailing the IC (Internet course) both solo and fleet. But we certainly won’t get fleet experience if we don’t encourage fleet racing.
Back to the 1st. A moving course sounds exciting while possibly being very frustrating. My ideas for fleet scoring involve average times or times from the first 3-5 finishers. I’d like the race to be about beating your fleet mates as well as getting good fleet times. Track & field races are similar. You want to beat the immediate competitors and if possible set record times.
2&3. You point out some very important factors. These can be thought of as impediments to good racings or as enhancing the racing. I can imagine some cut-throat tactics if the first boat across the line determines the direction the course runs. :devil3:
I’m not sure about relays. I never liked running them. If others like the idea then I’m all for it though. I’m here to support this venture any way I can.
Well, enough talk. I need to get that 2nd boat working so I’ll have a fleet of 2 for race testing. That and Bill would like to know how FatBob performs.
Apllies to any course but self-adjusts within race. Greater chance than anything I know of reasoably consustent true beats
2nd, only half the course is avalible for the beat to windward.That being said careful thought will have to be given to the location of the start line.Depending on what side of the course the line is has drastic effects on the tactical implications and number of tacks needed to make the windward mark.
Perhaps have the start line below the actual course?This would give a sort out area before the obstruction of the bottom mark is reached.
3, course length,Angus has made his case based on IOM course lengths.Well that sounds fine but as said above all the boats will be on one side of the course.Footies are faster for there length than IOMs,remember we have boats going around 5 laps of this course in a little over 6 minutes,this will impove as the boats evolve further.Work out how long each beat will take and you will see my concerns.
Edit…I estimate that an average beat will be about 54seconds based on 7minutes to complete 5 laps.
4,A lot of talk here which is great,but what is needed is PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE,not many have even actually set up and sailed the internet course,No one has done any fleet racing with one as far as I am aware,
We need experienced people,both in yachting in general and Actual footy sailing,those are the opinions that matter IMHO.We seem a bit lacking in this area for now.
My 2 cents worth is that the Internet course is much more suited for what it was designed for than fleet racing.I guess the crux of the matter is the scoring system and how fleets will be compared and what value there is in this.
I have broached the idea of Relay racing,3 boats per team,2 laps each boat.The Internet course is sutible for this format.
Scoring is simple and meaningful just as with individual trials.[/QUOTE]
Just a reminder here as well - Intenet Racing was designed to give a comparison of boats on a similar course without wind considerations. I don’t believe it was going to be a National Championship Regatta type course?
Just a thought! One of the advantages of the original Internet course is that upwaind and downwind ‘traffic’ are physically separated. Which gives rise to more protests?
And another thought, that perhaps explains some of my biases.
As far as dinghy sailing is concerned, I was brought up sailing a Firefly (12" dinghy used as the single-hander in the 1948 Olympics in the bottom division of a very hot fleet (national champions about 1 year in 3 over a very long period).
We sailed on a long, very narrow artificial lake. Sailing was cramped and tactics and knowledge of the rules everything. Yes there were protests, but not that many - if you stay out of trouble you’re more likely to collect series points.
It was temendous fun.
The same club is still running the Wilson Trophy and (sometimes) the Intervarsity Team series, still in Fireflies, 40 years later. These are the two premier team-racing events in UK.
Fireflies are not fast: neither is a Footy. Surely the Footy’s place in life is to be a tactical boat.
