Hi Dick:
We are discussing this in the ICA forum in “proposal”
In “proposal” only international class leaders can write , but anyone can read it , pre login.
cheers
Tallastro:
I’ve heard plenty of mark rounding situations where a skipper wanted to protest a boat but could not read the number (legal Victoria sails).
That’s very true but I have been called for fouling other boats at the markers when I couldn’t even see my boat through the starboard parade at the windward mark to be able to steer my boat, much less to make out sails or numbers of who was fouling whom. There are situations that no markings can help.
Dick Lemke:
I also would vote to eliminate clear sails which are too hard to read
Transparent sails do not obscure numbers. They do make it a bit more confusing because one sees one number correct and the other reversed, a mirror image.
However, I can offhand think of three reasons I oppose outlawing transparent sails. First is that this eliminates several sail materials and would force many people to make new sails in an accepted material. This may create less efficient sails. Next, what I said above – clear sails make it at least more possible to see a through the sails of one boat to see another that is behind it. Lastly, is telltales. I changed the jib on my '65 to a red opaque material because I messed up my original transparent jib while trying to flatten the material. As a result, I cannot easily see the telltales on the opposite side. Tells are a definite help for sailing and no rule should be imposed that makes them less visible or effective. The main can be opaque since the tells are normally located on the leech.
In the future I’ll likely make a new set, the main being red opaque and the jib transparent Trispi. Since most of the boats in my club use transparent sails, the opaque red does make mine more visible. However if everyone switched to opaque sails then mine would again be less visible at the marks.
Maximo, I’d ask that you consider my input if you are discussing changing the rules on the other forum Can we get a link here to it if we are allowed read access?
bob betts
Bob - I was referring to the “clear” floral wrap kind of film - TriSpi at least has scrim embedded in it and isn’t completely clear.
From an Argentine website regatta photos - posted strictly as another example. Look closely - left to right:
Sail #158 - jib sail numbers too low ?
Sail #158 (as I recall) a duplicate number plus completely clear, transparent sails. A bit hard to read ?
Sail #219 - no jib sail numbers
Sail # 18 - Jib sail numbers too low ?
Sail # 77 - no comment - can only see mainsail
Sail #230 - no jib numbers (if silver sail is jib)
Sail # 99 - no jib sail numbers
Sail # 24 - no jib sail numbers
Sail #222 - no jib sail numbers
So given this many boats out of compliance - or nearly so - can we really close the door on these competitors if they have been allowed to compete in large national regatta with sails that aren’t in compliance?
I just think we are looking to make an issue that hasn’t been an issue in the last 30 years - of course, only my opinion, and based on historical photos - in fact, our US Yahoo Group site has a front page photo of non-compliant sail numbering - and that has been there since early 2007 when the website was first developed and a photo added to introduce the class to the US sailors. (Not sure where Sven found that one).
My suggestion is to leave it alone if the main sail meets the mandatory placement and sizes - since there are a lot of sailors who will be S.O.L. if their sails aren’t grandfathered in.
ADDED: Here is the link to the ICA index page. Should also be on the Yahoo Group “links” section.
http://www.rg65.org/forum/index.php
It looks to me that the rules basically are ignored which I feel is dangerous. If rules can be ignored then where does one draw the line as to which particular ones are ignored. The only reasonable thing to do is to modify the rules so that they are reasonable and fit with accepted practice.
On the main page of the Argentina site there is #2 with no jib number at all. http://www.rg65-arg.com.ar/
On their “TORNEO ARGENTINO 2008” (2008 Argentina Competitions) page http://www.rg65-arg.com.ar/GALERIA.htm I could not find one boat that had the jib numbers in the 1/2 way position as the rules require. Many have no jib numbers at all.
I would be really ticked if I went 1000+ miles to a national or international competition and was told that I was disqualified because my sails had the numbers too small, too low on the jib, missing, etc. It doesn’t look like that would happen but I believe that we need to get the rules in line with the facts so that it CAN’T happen.
bob betts
Good points, Bob and I agree.
I even took a look at the premiere sail/boat maker from Brazil (Pro Sails) and found a variety of sail numbering configurations as well.
I would put forth a recommendation that the Mainsail “MUST” be in compliance with the rules, but based on such a discrepancy with the jibs, I would recommend leaving jib markings as optional at the discretion of the owner. That way no one has to do anything to their jibs to be “legal” and a lot of time and energy (and perhaps hard feelings) are avoided.
Well… you do have a distinctive paint job. That’s part of my point. A skipper has to recognize the boat to call a foul. A bland white Vic can only be recognized by its number. You are at a disadvantage just as someone with small numbers would be.
If someone is collecting opinions, put me down for marking both sails with the jib allowed to carry the largest size possible. Only 2 digits shall be permitted if using a number smaller than 10cm. I’m still trying to decide if mid height is the best place for the jib number. Lower and large seems better than high and smaller.
BTW, I can read all the numbers while sailing our lake provided I’m not blocked or have the sails edge on to me. I would like to do everything possible to have others see them as well.
Of course when you are 8 feet tall like John is, that helps as well 
I’m not an r65 guy, but I’m a sailor and that’s gotta count for something…
Clear sails…slippery slope to start mandating sail material after teh fact
I have noticed that on clear sails the black numbers are hard to read unless you have a light background behind them…even on trispi. if you are in a fleet of boats chances are you will have some good contrast behind the clear sails if you need to call any fouls… of course I put tr spi on my ec12 and I used navy blue numbers…
My vic uses orange and blue ripstop for the sail with the sail number in black on the orange background. Again, boat is easy to distinguish even if the sails are obscured. Which is a problem for the boats that are behind my sails. I have a hard time figuring out which boat it I need to call IE on a starboard tack toward the dock I am leeward boat and I’m pointing higher the windward boat…
Part of the owness is on t he RD if they make a course so long and far away from the dock that the numbers are hard to read, then a shorter course with more laps needs to be considered…
6.3.1 The boat number will be marked mid-height on each sail, starboard above port side, with clearly visible numbers. Mainsail numbers must be a minimum of 10cm tall 1cm wide. Jib numbers can be smaller to accommodate the smaller location. Acceptable placement for 10cm jib numbers would be the lower leading edge of the jib.
Rules are rules, and if people start bending one rule, then whats the next rule to be bent and so on…
Okay John, that does it! My next Vic is going to be painted in camouflage colors with invisible ink for numbers on transparent florist wrap sails.
(kidding)
I see nothing wrong with the Vic rules. They would be backwardly compatible. As John said, we have never had a problem reading numbers on Vics on our lake. Furthermore, every RG that I’ve seen so far is already using the lower 1/3 rule on the jib or no numbers at all. The Vic rule calls for 7.6 cm minimum height of the letters which means 10 cm is ok. To simplify, 7.6 could simply be rounded to 7.5cm or 75 mm.
(bold italics mine)
bob betts
Bob, that would just make you more recognizable. You should have a white boat with plain sails if you want to hide in the pack. 
“we have never had a problem reading numbers on Vics on our lake”, I don’t think I said that. I don’t have problems. Others do. I think large sail numbers would help many skippers in our club and beyond. I think 10 cm would work on a Vic main since they work fine on smaller RG65 mains.
Marc brings up a good point that the course should not be so far away that skippers can’t see their boats. That need just has to be balanced with need for workable course that is also a challenge. A short course bunches up boats much more and that’s not a fun time either.
Yeah but with a short course you don’t often have the runaway lead and it gives folks a chance to practice tactics and rules at multiple mark roundings.
Hi,
just to demonstrate what I meant above …
attached are two pictures - Sailnumber 30 according to the rules (100mm hight, 10mm thick)
Perfect with respect to visibility, but …
no chance to add an extra 1 or so if there multiple 30s
no chance to get the numer on the jib
now try the same on a B- or a C-rig. With the C even the IOMs run in trouble
I am in favour of changing the paragraph into a reference to the ISAF rules, were the use of 100mm is a recommendation, not a must ( if not possible)
It’s even more fun on a swing rig :
BR, Calou
I have submitted a proposed resolution to the U.S. RG-65 COA for their consideration. According to class rules as I read them, it should be circulated among US owner/members and then voted upon. Also any other proposals submitted. Once a vote is taken, the US COA President is the only person to cast a vote (or several based on class membership) at a World Council meeting. If you want a vote, get your boat registered with the class secretary.
After a lot of the “Whereas” mumbo-jumbo, my resolution reads as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, [FONT=Times New Roman][FONT=Arial]that the Mainsail “MUST” be in compliance with the rules as written, and based on the noted discrepancies with the jib sail numbers, placement and size of documented examples from RG-65 classes around the world, jib markings, numbers, sizes and locations are optional and their use is at the discretion of the owner.[/FONT][/FONT]
I felt this allowed the owners of jib sails that didn’t comply but that WERE marked in some manner, to continue to use them without fear of a disqualification, or the need to replace jib sails they already owned.
On a humorous note - even the International RG65 Class Association website includes photos of many RG-65’s that are not in compliance.
Calou - have been off sick since Thursday, and I owe you a response for your post on my build log for “Morning Wood”. Will get my thoughts there as soon as I can.
Cheers
Dick, I’m not sure that I agree with making jib numbers optional. It’s a fact that rules call for a size. That size is nearly always required as a minimum. However, the effect is that number becomes the ‘required’ size. In other words, everyone always uses that size and never makes larger numbers.
I believe a similar thing would happen if jib numbers were purely optional – In the future, it’s likely that no jibs would ever have numbers and I’m not so sure that is a good thing.
The RG rules require the entire boat number be on the sails. The rules for many other classes only require the last two numbers, a “1” to be added in case of duplicate boats. I don’t believe this has been stated yet but if one looks at the numbers closely I believe very few, if any, show 10 cm numbers when the boat number is greater than 100. They appear to me to be shrunk to fit the sail.
One of the pictures you uploaded for your previous post on page 3 shows two boats with the same numbers, “158”. With the 10cm required size of numbers on the main, there is no room at all to add a “1” which is required for just about every other class to avoid duplicate numbers. However, using the Victoria rule for number size, approx 75 mm, DOES allow a “1” to be used. Again, that is a minimum, so 10 cm sails would still be legal.
So again, if one quotes common practice and wants to change the rules based on this common practice, even then the numbers on the main are not always 10 cm. and are often less.
As I noted above, every jib I’ve seen that has numbers has them at the bottom part of the jib, not in the center which the rule presently requires. I believe that making the size optional would probably result in most owners using the 75mm size. which fits on most, if not all, jibs. If it doesn’t fit, then the owner could shrink the numbers as needed.
As for the problem of re-numbering, most owners use permanent ink which is removable from most sails. Most older sails could then be re-numbered.
Hey - I am open to other suggestions - but am also simply pointing out that after 30 years this is finally (??) being addressed?
In reality, perhaps the question to answer first is if jibs need/must have numbers - forget size, where located, etc. This is the point of my resolution … jib numbering on virtually all the National Class Associations for the RG-65 have been ignored.
While I will take the “heat” for suggesting no jib numbers - I can see no reason for why the issue has gone this long, with so many variations from “no numbers” to “extremely large numbers”.
It is a rule that appears to have been ignored in the past and my points are to either continue ignoring them - or the ICA takes on the issue and problems of invalidating all racing certificates for all boats without the “proper” jib number and locations.
The easiest way with less repercussions is to simply acknowledge someone (or someone"s") have been asleep and allowed this to become “habit”. My sticky Dacron numbers are smaller, and located at the foremost point of the jib. I placed them there after seeing photos as I’ve referenced. I can read the rules - and I understand - but the photos of boats at regional and national championships that seem NOT to follow the rules made me take the "middle line. Numbers are there, but are “smaller” than specified - BUT, they are there.
It “seems” (??) this issue only arises because of a pending world championship. After 30 years it’s time to get legal is what I am hearing. My suggesstion is a viable alternative. Anyone can make their own proposal fr consideration and vote. I am pointing out the obvious, and easiest way to resolve the problem - make the problem an “optional” rule. 
Oh - and the argument “FOR” numbers to allow race committees to see boats over early - if it really must be asked, I will ---- “So what happended all these past (30) years - blind race committees and measurers, or no one was called over early?” 
It is an issue that needs to be cleaned up - your suggestion and resolution is as valid as mine. Please send (as a member/owner) a resolution to the class president so he can get all of the suggestions circulated, and one of them supported by COA vote. Then he can cast his vote as member of the World Council. I beleive that’s the way it is “supposed” to work. 
Cheers
Hi guys.
ask to argentina, brazil and chile, during the sudamerican champioship we got a issue because of the jib numbers cause many boats did no have them, and the rules says “numbers in all the sails”…the final decision for sure will be applied in the worldchampioship, so make sure with these people if you are planning to attend, i heard that over 70 skeepers were asking to come.
Tato Lazo
CHI 273
Personally I suspect the p-roblem stems from the bekief that there woiuld never be more than 99 boat owners, hence there would never be three digit numbers. Two 10 cm numbers fit on an RG65 main and can be forced onto the jib if they are located in the lower part. Three digit, 10 cm numbers simply do not fit, unless they are squished horizontally. I think this is where and how the problem has originated, except that it doesn’t explain the fact that the jib numbers are supposed to be in the middle of the jib where 10 cm numbers will almost never fit.
So this is my rule proposal:
Replace section 6.3 of the rules with:
Sail numbers shall be at least the last two digits of a boat’s registration number (as assigned by the Class Secretary) and shall be at least 75 mm height on the main and 50 mm height on the jib, They shall be solid Arabic Numbers of an easily readable font.
Sail numbers shall be placed in the middle 1/3 of the mainsail and on the bottom 1/2 of the jib.
Sail numbers shall be placed at different non-overlapping heights on the two sides of the sail, those on the starboard side being uppermost. The only exception to this is if the numbers are such that they coincide when placed back to back on both sides of the sail, they may be so placed.
In the case of duplicate numbers, the Race Committee may require that one or more boats with the same number temporarily add a ‘1’ or other number to a boat’s sail number.
The measured surface of each sail will be marked in an indelible way close to its tack point.
The boats of the Class shall exhibit the Class insignia on their sails.
The Class Insignia measuring 4 cm by 4.5 cm. will be placed on at least one side of the sail. It will be placed in the superior third of the main sail. If the insignia is placed on both sides of the sail the upper placement will be on the starboard side and the lower will be on the port side.
The country of registry shall be placed on both sides of the main, in the lower third of the sail, in easily readable Arabic letters at least 50 mm in height. The markings on the starboard side shall be uppermost.
I believe this is a rule that would work well and not ever need to be modified. With 75 mm numbers it would be possible to fit in three numbers without a lot of trouble so if some feel that they’d like to keep the full boat registration numbers, then that would also work by slightly modifying the above rule.
bob betts
For US readers: I’ve requested clarification on the process for nominating and voting on proposals (individual vs. by country for both steps) on the ICA forum. As soon as I get it we’ll start the process for the US NCA/COA.
Cheers,
Earl
I think, Bob’s proposal wood be a good compromise, but is solves not the problem of smaller riggs. There should be a paragraph which allows for a lower position and/or smaller digits if the number does not fit into the sail otherwise.
Btw, yesterday we had a race in Lübeck. It was a typical grey, sunless, and misty November day in northern Germany …
There was no problem to recognize the numbers as long as they were at least 60mm of height. So 75mm for a A-rigg and even a little bit smaller on a C-rigg should work fine