Topic : Class Rules

Call me an old vintage (git) but are the class rules available on our website?

Posted: 27/02/2006 16:20:37
By: splutter
All right. Old vintage git, that is what you said to call you wasn't it?

Bang up to datre lass rules are available from the RYA website under technical.


Posted: 27/02/2006 16:50:06
By: Chairman GGGGGG
Linked from our library.

Posted: 27/02/2006 17:21:46
By: Mags
Lass rules!!!!!!!!

Posted: 27/02/2006 17:37:21
By: Barry Dunning
says file not found on the RYA website

Posted: 27/02/2006 18:44:49
By: MR 1018
Secritive bunch these royals

Posted: 27/02/2006 19:23:26
By: Hamish
They are there, thanks.

Posted: 27/02/2006 20:53:24
By: splutter
Changing their URLs.....mutter mutter....

Posted: 28/02/2006 14:29:17
By: Mags
Am I alone, or does anyone else find the "rise of floor" rule about as plain as pig ----? I know what the intention is, but it reads really badly. Is it the intention to measure the boat whilst it's upside down?
Also, the rule says that hollows are not allowed in the topsides-but there's no definition of what topsides are. I'd guess the intention was to mean no hollows above the waterline, but is it, and is that the loaded waterline?

Posted: 01/03/2006 15:34:44
By: BmaxRog
I am quite sure the details are all in there somewhere. 
There is a bit of blurb about the rules in this link...

Posted: 01/03/2006 17:20:41
By: Mags
Hi B-max,

Yes rise of floor is measured with the boat upside down, and intends to control the extent to which hulls become vee shaped in the central section, ie to limit how narrow the waterline can become.

The 'hollow in the topsides' rule in effect only applies to the top four planks, because of the rise of floor requirement, ie, by the time you have planked out to the RoF measurement, it is time to start heading up to the max beam, making the hull convex as far as plank four, pretty much regardless of where the actual waterline is.


Posted: 01/03/2006 17:45:48
By: Chairman GGGGGG
The linked explanation is what I thought it was, but the rules wording could do with some attention. e.g. not actually stating that the boat is upside down for the measurement! A few more commas wouldn't go amiss either!
The topside rule-hmm, does the phrase "coach and horses" spring to mind? Is there an additional set of rules somewhere? Seriously, is there a set of rules that the measurers adhere to regarding the interpratation of the rules? 'Cos it seems that there's a lot of "well the rules don't actually say so-and-so, but we read it to mean such-and-such".

Posted: 02/03/2006 09:30:45
By: BmaxRog
Here you (possibly)go again, there was a scandal in 1962 regarding this very subject and a number of boats had certificates withdrawn (adur mk 6's) not everyone seems content to ahere to what they know the intention of the rules to be, which is why good rules and law for that matter starts with an statement of intent.

Posted: 02/03/2006 09:46:24
By: De Ja Vu all over again
Sorry to play devil's advocate, but I see no "statement of intent" at the start of the rules.
If everybody "knows what the intention of the rules to be", then it's not neccessary to have any rules at all! You merely send round a measurer who says "Oh, that's all right old chap, you obviously have honourable intentions, so we'll say it's a Merlin".
Why don't you make it a one design whilst you're about it? ('Scuse me, I'll just go and wash my mouth out with carbolic.........).
Q. If the Adur 6's had certificates withdrawn, how come the Mustard Seeds didn't-was one topsides and the other not topsides?

Posted: 02/03/2006 10:13:59
By: BmaxRog
Does the fact that you have only just seen the rules mean that you are STILL NOT A MEMBER!
They are, of course published every year in the yearbook - lovely new one out today!
If you were to join you could influence decisions in a democratic way.
Perhaps changes should be made?
Over the 60 years - there have of course been 'rule issues' - I thought Peter Flanagan's piece in the latest magazine was enlightening.
Of course the rules have evolved - much like the boats but I am sure that if you have proposals to to improve them our 'Rules Man' (Chairman Graham) would be interested to hear them.
To answer your question about the boat being measured upside down - there is on the measurement form some specific instructions about this. Perhaps this should be published in the yearbook as well?
We look forward to collecting your subscription at the Dinghy Exhibition.

Posted: 02/03/2006 10:51:21
By: Pat Blake
I seriously doubt we would have been allowed to have the rules in their current wording for so many years without the RYA noticing something. I think it is unlikely you will find any issues, BMaxRog!

Posted: 02/03/2006 11:40:48
By: Mags
You've just confirmed my original point! So there ARE some instructions that don't appear in the rules about measurement! I'm really NOT trying to be pedantic about this, just pointing out that what everybody THINKS is/are the rules may not actually be the case, and that the rules are open to measurers discretion. FINE-not a problem, so long as people know this is the case. But don't shoot the messenger!

Posted: 02/03/2006 11:59:27
By: BmaxRog
I'm staying out of this one.

Posted: 02/03/2006 12:59:56
By: Normally would stir things up
B-max, does that mean you are not paying up?


Posted: 02/03/2006 16:11:49
By: Chairman GGGGGG
Rule 564b - All messengers, who are not MROA members, will be shot.

Posted: 02/03/2006 17:19:59
By: Mags
Roger, you have a beautiful boat - you contribute to the forum, why on earth would you not want to support the class association ?

dig deep......

Posted: 02/03/2006 20:58:33
By: why ?
Chairman-no, it doesn't mean that!
Yes I will,(barring major snowfall)be at the Pallee this weak end. And joining the assoc!
Just cos you're paranoid guys, does NOT mean I'm out to get you!
I was (still am, slightly) genuinely puzzled about the topsides rule, as the word TOPSIDES is in capitals in the rules, which seems to suggest some special importance is attached to it, but, unless I'm missing something, there doesn't appear to be any other reference to it in the RYA link above. The loophole seems to be that IF (a big IF) only the top 4 planks are judged to be "the topsides", and that there appears to be no MAXIMUM number of planks used to build a Merlin (though of course there is a MINIMUM), what's to stop some clever sod putting 4 tiny thin planks under the gunwhale, with no hollow in them, meeting the rise of floor rule betwixt keel and RoF measurement point, and filling in the gap between the two with as hollow a section as they like, producing something that looks like a sort of 80's style Moth?(horror!)
IF though, the topsides are adjudged to be the bit between sheerline and RoF measurement point, the loophole doesn't exist (phew!).
I think the problem is, as Pat's said, that the Measurement form contains instructions that don't appear on the RYA site. That's why I said I was confused!
see y'all sunday!

Posted: 03/03/2006 09:47:33
By: BmaxRog
So you can build a merlin that looks like a sort of 80's style Moth? But will it go any faster?

Posted: 03/03/2006 10:14:17
By: stirer
Less planks - less turbulence mate.

Posted: 03/03/2006 10:19:35
By: Jon
It worked for the moths(but made 'em seriously hard to sail)!

Posted: 03/03/2006 11:59:00
By: BmaxRog
I believe the N12 rules as they were a couple of years ago would allow you to build a catamaran (well theory)! Fortuntely nobody did. They have since closed that loop-hole!

Posted: 03/03/2006 13:36:47
By: Dave Croft
Well you sort of could with a Merlin (kind of like a Laser Vortex), but you'd probably die of old age waiting for it to tack.

Posted: 03/03/2006 14:20:48
By: BmaxRog
I think a Merlin like an 80's moth would be pretty immense myself :D

Posted: 03/03/2006 18:16:52
By: Dave


To Reply, please join/renew membership.

Owners Association

Developed & Supported by YorkSoft Ltd


Merlin Rocket Owners Association