RadioSailing and RG65 class - Page 5 - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Mar 03, 2017, 08:46 AM
Registered User
With all due respect, Andrew, your characterization of IRSA as a well-meaning organization that is gently nudging the class onto the path of enlightenment is, as Tarmstro says, unconvincing to those who were there at the time. If things were as you suggest, the message from IRSA would have been:

"This is IRSA. We would like to invite the RG65 ICA to join the family of international classes. We have reviewed your class rules and have some concerns[list]. Please address these and submit your revised rules for our consideration."

But, of course, it was nothing like that. The message was:

"This is IRSA. By the power vested in us by our asserted ownership of the words W*rld Ch*amp**nsh*p we are assuming control of your class name, class symbol, and the goodwill you have built over the decades. Here are your new class rules. Now shut up and eat your porridge."

I respect and appreciate the enthusiasm you have for the class. May I suggest you direct that to the open and democratic processes of the existing ICA rather than the closed and (as I believe my paper on sail area shows) marginally competent autocracy of IRSA?


Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 05, 2017, 03:31 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
Thanks for the feedback Earl, back from sailing Rgs, 4 sailing days this week!

I am still definatley saying that the irsa team are well meaning, however their communications and people skills have not always been the best, this happens.

I understand that a lot has happened in the past and appreciate the efforts and frustration that have transpired, however the past is the past and if we as Rg sailors can drag isaf into our world as the sailors they represent then its a good thing for the future.

Maybe a bit (lot) of give on both sides could be helpful, I'm happily in the middle just wanting to go sailing, don't we all!

I wont go into a full rules debate Thomas, I am merely hoping to demonstarate while the rule sort of work, how they need improving.

I started making Rgs in the early 2000's so if you have only been using the later 2010 rules I see your confusion, even so the rewrites need a look to improve them and add clarity.

Even so the standard convention of rules is that text takes precedence over appendix and drawings that are their to help clarify, however if they do not , text is number 1.

So in the text, "models whos length will be 650mm +/-5mm" is very clear.

Drawing does not come into it other than to confuse.

The rule also says that on the bow (after loa has been set) a bow bumper shall be 5mm+/-1mm , so there is indeed a minimum size set.

The first rule component of 650+/-5mm length does in fact set a minimum length overall of the boat.

I agree totally with you that the underwater measurement process, even floating in a box is way too complicated, what do you think of the picture below?

Could that be workable Thomas, for length and depth all in one guage?

So you see how a few little things can make the result a bit better by just and you and I, talking and we have already potentially a new solution to offer on length measurement? (but include rudders in the calipers!)

Add to the thought above thought the isaf piece that said, 'an overall boat length of 661mm' with the foremost section of 5mm'minimum being soft elastomeric material, then the rule becomes more plain English and less technical!!!

I'm not saying its perfect yet, however if we can find a way together it will get better!

Mar 05, 2017, 03:40 PM
Registered User
Dick L.'s Avatar
Sorry to disagree Andrew, but can anyone care to explain "WHY" there is a determined effort to "force" a draft limit into a set of rulles that clearly states anything not allowed...IS ALLOWED? This is easy to see that rules are being changed as they are being (suppsedly) clarified for understanding.

The change AS ONE EXAMPLE, has never been approved by the owners. (a fact, not an opinion)

Mar 05, 2017, 04:48 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
Hiya Dick, I viewed the draft limit that way intitally also.

I think Brad covered that one quite well, my take on the keel depth of the models is that similar to marbleheads a maximum depth means that organisers can plan an event and know that all coming to sail can do so and not hit the bottom!

Marbleheads had some events years ago that the bulbs on some boats stuck in the mud, imagine if you travelled from usa to Europe or the other way around with your one metre deep rg65 keel and could not race, what a mess!!!

on the other hand,

I'm not happy with a rule change that has soft sails and does not allow wing sails and a few other items, however lets see how we can go together sorting that one!

they are as ever draft rules, using the framework from existing classes where rules have evolved and been thought through, its a good knowledge base for us to work with for our rule!

Last edited by gospectredotcom; Mar 05, 2017 at 07:37 PM.
Mar 05, 2017, 05:57 PM
Thomas Armstrong
Andrew (gospectre):

I totally value the way you look into the process - be open and ask for opinions, propose different way and sort together what the best would be. Problem is you are not part of IRSA, or are you?

If you could get to put yourself, Earl, Freddo and others (and maybe even myself) to be part of this "RG65 technical committee", then maybe we could work and do it right.

Unfortunately, this is not the way IRSA is behaving - hence the plain and simple NO you hear from everybody... sad but true.
Mar 05, 2017, 06:29 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
Hi Thomas, great idea, will suggest, see how reasonable they are to working with us!

I will see what we can do!!!

(oh definatley not a part of isaf!!!)
Mar 05, 2017, 11:53 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
all this positive talk of RG-65s is manifesting spooky coincidences, look what arrived todays mail!
Mar 06, 2017, 10:32 PM
Registered User

Thanks for looking out for us Earl

Thanks for looking out for us Earl. I have been rc sailing RG65 for sometime. ISRA communication skill are really lacking. maybe if they read some of this
they will try to be more inclusive by adding technical personal from all the major fleets. a world championship should include the world when they set it up.
the wording of the communique has them acting like a bully. brad has sanely spoken about the thoughts on the rules which was helpful,
what they need to know they should include the community as a whole not just Europe.
Mike Campbell RG165 USA

Mar 14, 2017, 07:31 AM
Registered User
paulo.pparra's Avatar
Been involve for quite a while in rg's and rc sailing national duties is a lot of work. Would apreciate that comunication between parties be more fluent both sides have pros and cons but if we continue in such hard positions we'll be in a fight that will weak the rg community. As Earl showed in his document RG65 ICA. Has much to give all classes and IRSA also con give their experties and experience but both sides should talk to the other with respect and looking forward to develope our hobby.. The ways, how things are said are as important as what we are trying to do, good intents get lost in word. As english is not my first language I will say it in spanish "las formas son tan importantes como el fondo, muchas veces como planteamos las ideas hacen que las ideas se pierdan"
Last edited by paulo.pparra; Mar 14, 2017 at 07:41 AM.
Mar 16, 2017, 04:40 PM
Registered User
gospectredotcom's Avatar
well you know how they say be careful for what you wish for because you might get it?

So heres an update on the RG-65 class vs World Sailing!

Having been commenting and asking people to work together the resut so far is.........

Irsa have now invited 3 ICA delgates to the table and 3 of their own choice.

I have been nominated by Irsa as punishment, but I'm still neither ica or irsa guys!!!

Remember that.

The really good thing is that Irsa have also set up a forum and each of the delegates has been able to nominate observers to look listen, report and aid us all!

Here's who I have nominated, if you haven't been emailed about it yet , let me know as need to be sure you can be there to help!

I'm on the list as I had planned being an aid , until now selected to be a target!

And yes, Earls at the top, the sail measurement technique is going to be a big point to look at as is my favorite, overall boat length!

Both sides, please, please, please try not to kill me and please try to stay talking, lets see what we can all do for the class together!

My Nominated RG65 Representatives.
USA Earl Boebert
CHILE Paulo Parra , Thomas Armstrong
UK Mark Dicks
AUS Andrew Cook
GREECE Vangelis Simonidis
GERMANY Andreas Hoffman
FRANCE Antoine Frommet
BRASIL Michael Causer
ARGENTINA - Maximo Lange

Please stick your heads up and be bigger targets than me!

Oh and the picture below, well as Fredo our ICA President and I will both agree and do, we love sailing rgs, just watching them, even in the middle of a race and zoning out, they are graceful, fun and exciting beasts!

Do not let them become captive to restrictive rules and please help the class grow and develop!

Mar 16, 2017, 07:13 PM
Registered User
Dick L.'s Avatar
Do not let them become captive to restrictive rules and please help the class grow and develop!

Andrew, with all due respect, it is my personal view that the rules, as they currently read, certainly have not restricted growth of the RG65 Class since my initial involvement in 2007 here in the USA. The number of new designs has continued to grow, the class has fostered new interests in home building, design and INNOVATION. Add on the huge growth of the DF65 as the "darling" of the class because of design and low entry cost for many new as well as experienced skippers just points out the rules as written had helped in this growth. To that end, I support NO CHANGE in current rules and suggest those that cannot comprehend how well they were written should contact their class secretary for clarification........unless of course this is just a way to make IRSA seem relevant.

My personal view, I could be wrong.

Dick L.
Mar 17, 2017, 04:34 PM
Useful Idiot
This must have been on the cards for a long time. I remember crossing swords with Lester Gilbert on forum many moons ago on this subject. Even then, he was proposing rule changes while the class was almost restricted to S. America and Maximo Lange was attempting to internationalise it.
Mar 17, 2017, 07:41 PM
Registered User
Dick L.'s Avatar
Maximo was a great guy to work with as we developed the US Class. Always willing to answer questions that came up during development.
Mar 17, 2017, 08:08 PM
Thomas Armstrong
Originally Posted by gospectredotcom
My Nominated RG65 Representatives.
...CHILE ... Thomas Armstrong...
No invite received yet. I sent you a PM with my email, in case that is the stopper for getting an invite...
Thanks for the nomination!
Mar 17, 2017, 11:31 PM
Registered User
So let me get this straight--IRSA has "invited" the already existing RG65 class to have three reps sit down with three IRSA chosen reps to equally decide the future of the class? And rather than open their discussions to the public IRSA is going to allow a few selected observers to report back to the rest of the world on the otherwise secret process? How generous of IRSA. Wanna bet that IRSA (i) will set the rules on how discussions will be conducted; (ii) get to be the tie breaker if there is any dispute and (iii) in the end IRSA will still be writing the class rules? The RG65 class association should be setting the rules here and inviting IRSA to sit in on the process, not the other way around. Just my opinion (but based on years of dealing with the current IRSA management).
Last edited by Tom Corbett; Mar 18, 2017 at 12:39 AM.

Thread Tools