IOMICA Forum

Hi,
I am currently experimenting with the hounds height and to that end I have temporarily fittedI a strangulation loop round the mast, over the shrouds, tied to a bowie loped under the spreader roots. I don't know whether this could be kept as an adjustment method - all be it tidied up - in the long term or if it would be considered out of class.
In my opinion it all depends on whether the arrangement would be considered a fitting to make length and tension adjustments of the shrouds in accordance with "RULE F.5.3 FITTINGS - OPTIONAL (b) Length and tension adjustments".

I would be interested to hear your thoughts/advice/ruling on the subject.

James

Hi James

Interesting idea! Perhaps Robert Grubisa will be able to jump in here to offer a point of view.

My thought would be to expand on your idea to take it to an extreme in an attempt to clarify whether this is 'only' a length and tension adjustment.

I imagine (a) the shrouds attached at the head of the mast, (b) one or more strangulation loops which hold the shrouds tight to the mast, and (c) a final loop at the point where you want the hounds.

In this imaginary case, I see some opportunity to stiffen the upper mast in the athwartship plane between points (a) and (c), and I would wonder if rule F.2.3 LIMITATIONS: "The function of items shall be limited to what is normally provided by items of their type" might apply...

Hi Lester,

Interesting thought.
I'll set out the full details and reasons for what I am doing.
I briefly raced a Nordic Folkboat and during one windy race we broke the backstay control. Fortunately we had the jumpers on a cascade control with considerable range and found that we could effectively depower the rig by letting of the jumpers. The result proved very fast and we adopted the technique on a regular basis.
With the IOM it initially occured to me that as the hounds height is optional, it would be useful to experiment with the hounds height to establish a position that would enable the mast to fall off in the stronger winds and yet remain stiff enough for the light stuff. Consequently I have fitted this temporary arrangement so that I can play around a bit before drilling new holes in the mast for the stays.
The rig set up at present is:
The mast was prebent (even bend over whole length) when I bought it and the only alteration I have made to date is to fit a bar across in front of the spreaders to force them forwards , thereby stiffening the mast below the hounds and enabling me to adjust that stiffness with the shroud tension.
Measuring from the top of the mast:
Forestay 230 mm
Hounds 483 mm
Spreaders 1084 mm

My first trial was with the hounds "lowered" to 700 mm, but this was too much.
My second trial is with the hounds at 640mm - tested in light airs 5 to 10 knts - worked ok, but now want to test in stronger winds.

It has in the last few days occurred to me that it would be useful to be able to set the hounds at different heights for different conditions and to formalise my temporary arrangement would make this possible.

More thoughts from you all would be appreciated.

Thanks,

James

Interesting question. Just to know that I am aware of it and I will discuss it in IOM ICA TSC.

Regards

Thanks for acknowledging Robert. I shall look out for the outcome with interest. Are you able to givean indication when this might be please.

Thanks again.

James

Hi James

Your question regarding the IOM Class Rules may affect some other boats in your NCA and worldwide.

Please let me know if you ask the same question your NCA Technical person/team? If not, I strongly recommend to do so.

IOMICA encourages an NCA/NCS officer to request an official interpretation from the IOMICA Technical Sub-Committee via the VC Technical in all cases where an NCA/NCS officer feels this would be useful. In general, it is the NCA/NCS which is the source of official requests for interpretation.

More about procedures regarding interpretations and role of the IOM ICA TSC are published on
http://www.iomclass.org/administration/technical/ which has been updated recently.

Regards

Hi Robert,

No I haven't but will do so. I had thought that this open forum would be the place to "set the ball rolling" as they say.

Thanks and regards,

James

James,

IOM CR F.5.3 is explicit in allowing both length AND tension adjustments. Choke ring or similar method of adjusting tension is perfectly fine and doesn’t preclude you from having turnbuckles at deck level as an independent means of adjusting LENGTH as well.

Thank you very much Robert. I am delighted with this news.

James

I am unclear--is the above response a formal interpretation of the IOMICA Technical Committee?

Roy

Posted answer is IOM ICA TSC official view and I believe that formal interpretation is not necessary.

Take a look on Technical Subcommittee page http://www.iomclass.org/administration/technical/ for more info.

IOM is still RSD class and formal class rule interpretation must be made by RSD-IOM ICA Subcommittee.

In general, it is the NCA/NCS which is the source of official requests for interpretation. Official requests should be submitted to the IOMICA TSC with supporting documentation that provides diagrams, quotes relevant rules, and gives a summary of the issues.

Regards

I have looked at the documents suggested and only found information on rule interpretations and how to submit them. I couldn't find anything regarding an "IOM ICA TSC official view" and how it is binding on the class. Could you please reference the applicable rules?