Questions on requirements.

[JakeJ]

Still outfitting my boat but have a few questions regarding the specifics of the requirements.

1. Fuel shutoff valves. Are these required to be mounted on the tank, or is inline along the fuel line acceptable?
2. Water containers. I have two tanks mounted, each isolated from the other with valves - is this acceptable or are we required to have "bottled" type containers.

Thanks!

[BobJ]

Since neither George (Chief Inspector) nor Brian (SHTP Race Chair) tend to post here, I'd send questions to them directly:

George: glythco@yahoo
Brian: brianb@brianboschma

(Both have a .com on the end)

1. The rule says "Shut off valves shall be fitted on all fuel tanks." This makes sense since you want the valve as close as possible to the source of fuel.

2. That water storage plan sounds okay and is probably the norm for larger boats.

[AZ Sailor]

I seem to have gotten myself wrapped around the axle trying to reconcile SER 3.33.3 and 3.33.4.

The former requires a storm jib “not greater than 13.5% of the height of the fore-triangle squared”, while the latter calls for one “not exceeding 5% of the yacht’s I dimension squared.” I thought “the yacht’s I dimension” is defined as the “height of the fore-triangle”. So two storm jibs are required?

[Daydreamer]

I seem to have gotten myself wrapped around the axle trying to reconcile SER 3.33.3 and 3.33.4.

The former requires a storm jib “not greater than 13.5% of the height of the fore-triangle squared”, while the latter calls for one “not exceeding 5% of the yacht’s I dimension squared.” I thought “the yacht’s I dimension” is defined as the “height of the fore-triangle”. So two storm jibs are required?

As I understand it, the 13.5% is a "heavy weather" jib, and the 5% is a "storm" jib.
Both are required.
I'm not an inspector, this is what I learned from my Long-Pac prep.

[BobJ]

This could be an error. Past SHTP rules said "or" which makes sense for a downwind race (not requiring both). My understanding is the guys moved the text from the 2016 SHTP rules into a spreadsheet format and renumbered them. They might have missed the differences on this one.

Can we get a clarification?

[AZ Sailor]

Can we get a clarification?

That would be great.

On another issue, I have two fresh water tanks, lying either side of the centerline of the boat, under the V-berth. 31 gallons each, separate valves to keep isolated from each other. So we've got SER 2.3.4 covered.

However, SER 2.2.4 says this constitutes moveable ballast and must be full or empty in performing incline tests under Appendix B. Part (a)(ii) of Appendix B says: "Competitors shall be able to demonstrate an efficient and safe manual method of discharging, transferring, or taking on liquid ballast with the vessel at up to 50 degrees angle of heel port or starboard of the normal laden trim." I can't do any of those. I could discharge a tank by pumping it dry with the foot pump, but that would be far from "efficient". Using the electric fresh water pump would be more efficient, but would not be "manual". And the other two tasks (transferring or taking on) are impossible.

Do I need to leave both tanks empty and carry water in jugs?

[BobJ]

No (IMO). Valiant 32's are not water-ballasted boats so Appendix B would not apply. Non water-ballasted boats would just need to comply with 2.2.5 (floating on their lines).

Again to clarify, I'm just some guy. You need to contact Brian or George to get definitive answers to these questions.

[AZ Sailor]

Thanks, Bob. Maybe the answer is that tanks immediately on either side of the centerline are not considered mounted to port and starboard. But I will email Brian and George on this and the storm jib issue.

[JakeJ]

Thanks, Bob. Maybe the answer is that tanks immediately on either side of the centerline are not considered mounted to port and starboard. But I will email Brian and George on this and the storm jib issue.

Please post it here too if you would - I need the same question answered.

Thanks!

[AZ Sailor]

Please post it here too if you would -

This just in from George Lythcott:


Water Tanks:

A minimum of 21 gallons of water must be carried in at least 2 separate tanks/containers. Depending on how close the tanks are to the center line and being that they are located forward under the v-berth where the boat is narrow, I don't think storing water in either/both tanks would be a problem and I would pass it (after inspection). I also note that depending on the boat's overall configuration/balance, carrying water forward of the mast may not be the best location for that weight.

Heavy Weather Jib/Storm Sail:

I don't have a definitive comment on this issue. As written, paragraphs 3.33.3 and 3.33.4 appear to require two jibs; one being a Heavy Weather Jib and the other a Storm Jib. I defer to others on this requirement.

So, that's what we know so far. I'll post any additional answers I receive.

[jamottep]

Heavy Weather Jib/Storm Sail:

I don't have a definitive comment on this issue. As written, paragraphs 3.33.3 and 3.33.4 appear to require two jibs; one being a Heavy Weather Jib and the other a Storm Jib. I defer to others on this requirement.

Looking forward to an update on this one too ...

[AZ Sailor]

Looking forward to an update on this one too ...

While not definitive, further consideration of this has me convinced we're talking about two sails. These paragraphs are taken straight from USSA's SER for ocean races. And, doing the math for my boat, the maximum size for the heavy weather jib required by 3.33.3 comes in just over the stoutly-built 80% jib that came to me with Morning Star. And the much smaller actual storm jib required by 3.33.4 comes in at the size of an ATN Gale Sail for my boat -- and the Gail Sale meets 3.33.4's requirement for attachment without use of the foil.

Perhaps someone in the SSS officialdom has a USSA contact who can give us the definitive word.

In the mean time, it looks like there is a duplication between 3.6.1 and 3.6.2. The latter lists the set of flares that must be carried (in addition to those packed with the life raft), including "Two SOLAS orange smoke flares." 3.6.1 also requires two SOLAS orange smoke flares. Are we really expected to carry four of those (plus 2 for the raft), or was this a typo in the translation from the USSA rules?

[BobJ]

The text of the 2018 SHTP SER is taken from the 2016 SHTP RR&Cs, not the similar-looking (in format only) USSA SER. I think they just forgot to change the text back for this requirement, including adding the "or."

I've spent several years trying to wind myself down from agitating about this stuff. So I'm going to try to stay out of it and hope the powers-that-be do what they said they would.
.

[brianb]

The text of the 2018 SHTP SER is taken from the 2016 SHTP RR&Cs, not the similar-looking (in format only) USSA SER. I think they just forgot to change the text back for this requirement, including adding the "or."

I've spent several years trying to wind myself down from agitating about this stuff. So I'm going to try to stay out of it and hope the powers-that-be do what they said they would.
.

The 2018 SER's are largely copied from the Long Pac 2017 SER's, Which is derived from the USSA rules and the efforts of the Bay area Offshore Racing Council. There was also reference back to 2016 SHTP in some cases. The reason for moving towards consistency with USSA, to the degree we agree with their rules,(and we don't follow them to the letter where it doesn't make sense for single handing) is due to the fact that there are many racers in Northern California who engage in offshore crewed racing as well as the SSS events. Also there was a desire to have boats that had completed the Long Pac be essentially ready to go for the SHTP. The Offshore events are governed by USSA rules with modifications specific to Nor Cal waters. Hence the consistency makes it easier to equip a boat. Additionally, after the Low Speed Chase disaster in 2012, the Bay Area YRA worked with all the clubs associated in offshore racing to arrive at a reasonably consistent set of rules that would reduce the risk of future disasters. The consistency helps both the racers, and the management of the rules with the offshore racing council's that facilitate the content.

All that said, I believe there is an error in 3.33.3 and 3.33.4. We will resolve this. It is my belief that the intent was one or the other.

[BobJ]

Then the work we've done to develop our SHTP rules over almost 40 years is lost. You didn't do what you told me you were going to do.
.

[brianb]

Bob J: "You didn't do what you told me you were going to do. I'm very disappointed. "

The You in your quote needs to changed to a you folks, as the changes were made by several.

Is the work ost ? Not at all, in fact SSS input into the offshore rule set has had impact nation wide as have the overall input that was provided to USSA before and after the Low Speed Chase disaster. Also, if you review the 2012, 2014, and 2016 rules you will find that the concepts align in most respects to what is captured in 2018. To a large extent there has simply been a format change to align the rule numbers for consistency.

I suggest we move on to making 2018 happen, for example, we are in need of volunteers for the season races. Anyone want to help run races in 2018 ?

Brian

[brianb]

The 2014 and 2016 SER's, which were taken from the 2012 race as the root, were worded as follows with regards to Head Sails:

[b] Headsails
[1] If the rig is of a type on which a headsail is commonly used, then a storm jib shall be provided which attaches to a stay by a strong and secure method, is of an area not greater than 5% of the height of the foretriangle squared, and has a luff no longer than 65% of the height of the foretriangle, OR
[2] A heavy weather jib of 85% LP or less, of non-aramid fiber construction, that does not contain battens.

In the 2018 version and the 2017 version for the Long Pac the OR is missing. We will put this back in a revised version.

[BobJ]

The 2018 SER's are largely copied from the Long Pac 2017 SER's, Which is derived from the USSA rules and the efforts of the Bay area Offshore Racing Council. There was also reference back to 2016 SHTP in some cases. The reason for moving towards consistency with USSA, to the degree we agree with their rules,(and we don't follow them to the letter where it doesn't make sense for single handing) is due to the fact that there are many racers in Northern California who engage in offshore crewed racing as well as the SSS events. Also there was a desire to have boats that had completed the Long Pac be essentially ready to go for the SHTP. The Offshore events are governed by USSA rules with modifications specific to Nor Cal waters. Hence the consistency makes it easier to equip a boat. Additionally, after the Low Speed Chase disaster in 2012, the Bay Area YRA worked with all the clubs associated in offshore racing to arrive at a reasonably consistent set of rules that would reduce the risk of future disasters. The consistency helps both the racers, and the management of the rules with the offshore racing council's that facilitate the content.

Here is part of my email response to Brian. I'm posting it here because it is important for newer participants to understand what has been happening:

Starting with Jim Quanci, there has been a steady push to conform the SHTP rules to US Sailing's SER. The devil is in the details. For example, The Ocean SER requires a stability index of 115, a standard few (if any) boats in our fleet can meet. An Olson 30, the go-to boat for many past SHTP'ers, is about 102. This is just one of many examples.

As the SHTP rules look more and more like the USSA SER, the differences will continue to go away (since most people are conformists) and we will end up with a set of rules that 1) Are not our rules and 2) Add more cost while eliminating boats that used to be able to participate. ...

... you are using the argument that the SHTP rules should look like the LongPac rules. I agree, but it is the LongPac rules that should be changed back.

The SSS had perfectly good sets of rules for our races. We don't need to give over our expertise and autonomy to some guys back in RI and NY who don't understand us and will never do a singlehanded race.

[Ragnar]

This is a tough, complex topic with outside forces, namely the USCG and our legal system. What it appeared from a distance after the LSC event was the USCG trying to shift responsibility for safety away from the Person In Charge to the Organizing Authority. The USSA quickly joined in with the USCG, and perhaps there was no choice, I don't know. There are rules they came up with that I don't think are necessary - BobJ's stability index example, an Ovni doesn't meet this criterion - and in one case I can think of even detrimental to safety (running jacklines down side decks). But insurance and legal concerns also loom large for the Organizing Authority, and any deviation from "standard of care" - or in this case equipment standards can be used against the Organizing Authority.

Just a few years ago the Organizing Authority could think through how would a prudent mariner prepare his vessel, and what equipment he should carry. The rules were there NOT to ensure safety, but to ensure a level race and not penalize the prudent mariner for carrying equipment, spares & tools. This kept responsibility for safety where it inescapably belongs in reality - with the Person In Charge. In today's legal environment, it feels like this is no longer possible. So here we are.

[BobJ]

I think SSS is in a stronger position when it can say "We've run this race continuously for 40 years without a fatality. The rules have evolved over those 40 years and are reviewed for each race."

vs.

"These are the rules we got from US Sailing for all kinds of ocean races. We took this item out and that rule out because we felt they didn't apply."

[AZ Sailor]

I think SSS is in a stronger position when it can say "We've run this race continuously for 40 years without a fatality. The rules have evolved over those 40 years and are reviewed for each race."

vs.

"These are the rules we got from US Sailing for all kinds of ocean races. We took this item out and that rule out because we felt they didn't apply."

While not a maritime attorney, I have been a trial lawyer in commercial litigation matters for more decades than I care to count. My gut says Bob J is exactly right on this.

[AZ Sailor]

Just a few years ago the Organizing Authority could think through how would a prudent mariner prepare his vessel, and what equipment he should carry. The rules were there NOT to ensure safety, but to ensure a level race and not penalize the prudent mariner for carrying equipment, spares & tools. This kept responsibility for safety where it inescapably belongs in reality - with the Person In Charge. In today's legal environment, it feels like this is no longer possible. So here we are.

This is a concept that should be explicitly reflected in the race documents -- that the SER exist to level the playing field, not shift responsibility. And, a helpful change in the 2017 RRS is the concept of contract: by entering the race, you agree you are bound to comply with the race documents. Even in today's legal environment, such things will matter.