Bottleport reviewed by Tillerman

Discussion in 'Laser Talk' started by hdco1313, Oct 20, 2008.

  1. pez

    pez Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    While I certainly agree that the ruling has been made, I dont necessarily feel that a discussion forum is a place where the phrase "It's time for the rest of us to move on" really means much.

    I for one find it quite interesting to discuss the intricacies of said rules, particularly in this case where there is very clearly some gray area, in that the bottleport is technically a inspection port cover. Read one way it's clearly legal, read another way it's clearly not.

    Please understand that I'm not trying to 'have a go' at you or any other measurer, you said yourself that discussions with other measurers have made you rethink your opinion.

    The crux of the issue here seems that the bottleport is an enigma, it's somewhat of a storage bag, and somewhat of a port cover, but not exactly either. I just happen to find it Interesting that the legislative body of ISAF can be thrown such a curve ball by a very innovative and clever idea.

    Finally, I think the proper amount of restraint vis-a-vis the class rules by ruling it illegal, until such time that members can vote on it. When such time occurs, I'm certain that it will easily become legal, and hdco1313 can be most properly rewarded for his invention.

    My apologies for not bringing the wine.
     
  2. sailchris

    sailchris Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I have not posted here or even looked at this site for a very long time. However, I am in possession of a Bottleport, so when I saw this thread I had to respond.

    The rule says that "watertight threaded covers" are allowed. The Bottleport is a watertight threaded cover. It is (1) watertight with respect to the hull cavity, (2) threaded for attachment to the port, and (3) a cover in the sense that it prevents stuff from outside the hull from getting the hull cavity. I fail to see the problem. The rules specifically allow the use of items such as the Bottleport.

     
  3. sailchris

    sailchris Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Was Jean-Luc's response an Interpretation of the Chief Measurer per ILCA Bylaw 3(3)? Has he issued an Interpretation of the Chief Measurer?
     
  4. Eric_R

    Eric_R D10 Secretary

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I think the problem comes in when it is used for storage and according to the rules you can't use it unless it's under the cover.
     
  5. AlanD

    AlanD Former ISAF Laser Measurer

    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Correct.
     
  6. sailchris

    sailchris Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The permission to use storage under hatch covers has nothing to do with the fact that the Bottleport is a watertight, threaded cover.

    I would be interested to learn more about the reasoning by which the Bottleport is not a cover.
     
  7. AlanD

    AlanD Former ISAF Laser Measurer

    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It is a cover, it is also a receptacle and under rule 20, the receptacle can only be under the cover.
     
  8. Eric_R

    Eric_R D10 Secretary

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Now could the Bottleport be used as an inspection port but not store anything (and use the bag underneath?) I think technically that would be legal.
     
  9. Bungo Pete

    Bungo Pete Member

    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    On a far more serious note, after careful review and analysis of this thread, particularly LooserLu's post identifying Jean-Luc Michon as "Darth Vader" I feel compelled to inform all concerned that this is impossible because everyone knows that Darth Vader is really Jean-Luc's father. We learn that when they are fighting on the deck of the Milennium Enterprise. Oh, wait a minute, I stand corrected. That was Jean-Luc Picard. No, sorry, I think he was Luke Skywalker's long lost father, who dies during the last episode of Battlestar Galactica; or was that The Jetsons.......Never mind.
     
  10. AlanD

    AlanD Former ISAF Laser Measurer

    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Probably not. You can look at it from to different directions.

    Why is an inspection port usually fitted, it's normally to do a repair or to do preventative maintenance*and rule 26 (a) says that

    “26(a) Repairs and preventative maintenance to the sail,
    hull, deck, centreboard, rudder, mast, boom or any
    fittings and fixings maybe carried out without violation
    of these Rules provided such repairs are made in such
    a way that the essential shape, characteristics or
    function of the original are not affected.”

    The Bottleport does change the essential shape, characteristics and function of the deck. A cover has been added which modifies the function of the deck and it significantly alters deck shape with cavity the countersunk deeply into the hull. Before anyone says that a standard cover alters the deck shape, yes it does, but in the scheme of things, in the most minimal way possible.

    * I don’t know of many people in the 25+ years I’ve raced lasers that have deliberately put inspection ports into brand new boats to install a storage receptacle under the hatch cover. It usually occurs after a few seasons when the boat has been leaking and they use the inspection port to sponge the water out of the hull or the owner has done an internal hull repair because the deck fitting needs to be bolted in or the mast base has needed repair. You certainly will not be able to put a inspection port into a new charter boat at the worlds because you want somewhere to place your drink bottle.

    Secondly, even under the Fundamental Rule, whether the cavity / receptacle is used or not, the hull form is altered. A cover has been added that impinges deeply into the hull. The fundamental rule states in part:

    “No addition or alteration may be made to the hull form,
    construction, equipment, type of equipment, placing of
    equipment, fittings, type of fittings, placing of fittings,
    spars, sail and battens as supplied by the builder except
    when such an alteration or change is specifically
    authorised by Parts 2 or 3 of these Rules. “

    Quite a few of you guys are trying to bend the rules to suit your purposes. If there was a man hole in to footpath or road that had covers on that you could fall several metres into, you’d be complaining bitterly, irrespectively of whether the local town council said “but we’ve covered the holes”.
     
  11. Der_Dude

    Der_Dude Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Dear AlanD,

    according to Your interpretation, the water bottle tied to the mast, the sandwich in a bag tied to the hiking strap and the spray jacket tucked under the center board shock cord would all infringe the rules. Because, in a way, they all alter the " essential shape, characteristics or function of the original" (because the mast was not designed as a bottle holder etc) and they are all an “addition .. to the .. equipment", sort of, in a way.

    That was cleary not meant be the you cited rules. Because they are about

    “26(a) Repairs and preventative maintenance .."

    and alterations to the hull are prohibited to ensure equal performance and this item clearly does not alter
    performance. Plus it can be seen as

    "authorised by Parts 2 or 3 of these Rules",

    namely rule
    "20. INSPECTION PORTS".

    I am not claiming the only valid interpretation. It's just that, in Your words, this may a grey area and the rules may need to be interpreted in the way they were intended to be used and not in the way somebody abstractly reads them. I do not see anybody here trying to bend the rules to their purpose or advantage in order to carry a water bottle and I don't understand Your comparison with potentially lethal man holes in streets either.

    May the Force be with You.
     
  12. sailchris

    sailchris Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Thanks Alan. I understand your position much better now.

    However, Rule 20 specifically permits inspection ports, so they are not a repair or preventative maintenance to the deck. They are, instead, specifically permitted equipment, including their covers.

    Is the shape of the deck part of the "hull form"? If so, then your argument has some merit. Last time I checked though the deck was one part of the boat and the hull was another part of the boat, but perhaps I haven't read the definition of "hull" in the Class Rules. Regardless, inspection ports and threaded, watertight covers are specifically authorized under the Rules and thus excluded from the fundamental rule.

    I suppose so, but we'd also be annoyed if the council filled in the local swimming pool with concrete because the town safety code required all exposed holes deeper than 1 foot to be filled to grade.
     
  13. marginal

    marginal Member

    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Very well explained response, thank you Alan.
     
  14. mackconsult

    mackconsult Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I always own new boats ..... so would never drill that big a hole in my boat. What I have done in the past is just take a plastic milk jug and tape it to the mast to hold my drink. If you cut it the right way it will even hold your drink.
     
  15. Martin_Cph

    Martin_Cph DEN 182275

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If mounted around the daggerboard, port or starboard – or both if really thirsty, I don’t really see the problem.

    However if mounted in the cockpit-well on both sides I see it as a major alteration of design and functionality; i.e. you can now “potentially” stick your feet in the holes. And this may just be a major point to some sailors – on both sides of the fence.
     

Share This Page