A Class

Is the extension fitted to the sails in the photograph to be considered as part of the sail or as a halyard? If the extension is part of the sail then:

1. Do these sails comply with G.3.2 (b) (1994 CR 6.3.1)?


2. Where is the head point?


3. How are the “correct positions” of the battens to be found for clause G.3.3 (1994 CR 6.3.2)?


4. Do these sails satisfy the requirements of measurement form item 10 (1994 MF item13)?

a      Yes. The upper part of each sail is clearly not separable from the remainder of the sail and is therefore part of the sail. Taking the individual points raised above in turn:
The class rules are open class rules and therefore anything which is not specifically prohibited is permitted. CR G 3.2 (b) requires the mainsail to be trilaterial and bounded by the luff, foot and leech. There is no rule which prohibits a concave leech but hollows shall be bridged as described by ERS H.5.2. For the 1994 class rules the IYRU SMR describe how to handle measurement of a sail with a hollow leech. The sail is not a quadrilateral sail and has the three required edges. Restrictions are placed on the shape and size of the sail elsewhere in the CR and the sail shall comply with those restrictions.

b      The head point is defined in the ERS G.4.2 and is found as the intersection of the luff, extended as necessary, and the line through the highest point of the sail at 90 degrees to the luff. For the 1994 CR the IYRU SMR apply but the effect is the same. The design of the sails referred to does not affect this measurement.

c      The batten position is limited as in G.3.3 (1994 CR 6.3.2). The design of the sails referred to does not affect this measurement.

d      Yes. See (a) above.

Except when the original mast spar or main boom spar are damaged, no. CR C.7.2  permits that the mast spar and main boom spar, when lost or damaged beyond repair, may be replaced with the approval of the race committee.

C.4.2 requires the boat to sail with the mast spar and main boom spar used when the boat was measured for the certificate in use at the event.

The clear implication of C.4.2 is that if the mast spar or main boom spar are replaced then the boat shall be re-measured. If the boat complied with its certificate (and the dimensions on it) no further action is required. If it does not comply with its certificate then the necessary adjustments shall be made to the boat and/or the measurements forms and a new certificate shall be issued.

The 1994 class rule has the same effect.

No. C.6.3 prevents the movement, articulation, retraction or extension of hull appendages (including the ballast). Additionally RRS 51, which is not excluded by Appendix E of the RRS, states that movable ballast ‘for the purpose of changing trim or stability’ is not allowed.

1994 CR 4.1.1 prevents movement of the ballast fore and aft and canting keels per se are not prohibited. However, when a race is un using the RRS and RRS 51 is not cancelled the effect is the same.

The same logic applies to the other classes too.

Who issues a certificate for any of the IRSA classes?

The certification authority issues the certificate. As of 1st July 2016 all the IRSA classes have the same administrative section. It is A.9 that indicates it is the certification authority that issues a certificate.

The term ‘certification authority’ is defined in the ERS as:

For the hull: the ISAF, the MNA of the owner or their delegates.

For other items: the ISAF, the MNA of the country where the certification shall take place, or their delegates.

The members of IRSA are the bodies to which the administration of RC sailing has been delegated (if not the MNA of the country itself) and which are known as the DNMs. So, for the hull it is the IRSA DNM of the owner.

For other items it will usually be the same but it could be the MNA or delegate of MNA in another country where the emasurement took place. This would apply where, for example, sails were certified in house by a sailmaker who had been delegated the authority to do that.

See also the related Q&A concerning who is the certification authority, or DNM, for an owner.

Section C of the class rules requires the hull registration number to be displayed legibly on the external surface of the hull with a minimum height of 20 mm.

Section D of the class rules requires the hull registration number to be permanently marked on a non-removable part of the hull surface.

Can a single set of hull registration numbers satisfy both rules?

Yes. Providing the hull registration number digits are of minimum height 20 mm, are clearly legible, are easily visible, are painted, engraved, bonded in or moulded in, and are on a non-removable part of the hull then both rules are satisfied by a single set of numbers.

However, it is often more convenient and attractive to use vinyl numbers on the deck to satisfy the Section C rule and some more convenient method on an inside area to satisfy the Section D rule.

Bear in mind the purpose of the rules: the Section C rule is for the benefit of the race committee and other competiors at an event to help identify a boat when it does not have it’s rig in place; the Section D rule is to permanently and uniquely identify a boat so that it may be grandfathered, if needed, at a later date. In 50+ year’s time the number will also add value and interest to any boat that has survived that long.

What is the difference between a Q&A and a Class Rules Interpretation?

An interpretation is requested when it is not clear (to a designer, builder, measurer, class association or certification authority) how a class rule shall be interpreted. When an interpretation is issued it should be kept in mind that the interpretation is valid until the class rules are changed or for two years maximum only. The purpose of this last rule is that two years gives sufficient time to consider if the effect of the interpretation is a) desirable or b) undesirable. Depending on the decision or choice (a or b, by the IRSA TC or the class depending on whether there is an independent class organisation or not) the class rules can be revised accordingly.

Thus, when drafting any interpretation, it should be kept in mind how the class rules should/could be revised to make the original interpretation request redundant.

It follows that, if no revised class rule can be written, there is no need to issue an interpretation. Where no interpretation is required, but only an explanation of the effect of the class rules, it follows that it would be appropriate to deal with the original request by issuing a Q&A to be published on the IRSA website and elsewhere as appropriate.

This is the guiding principle used by the IRSA Technical Committee when considering any question about the class rules whether it is a formal request for an interpretation or not.

At what point, on change of ownership, does the certificate become invalid?

The certificate becomes invalid upon a change of ownership. The change of ownership is the important criterion – not the signing of the certificate by the new owner – not the issue of the new certificate in the new owner’s name.

However, while the concept of ownership is normally well understood between any two people it may be that the law of the land becomes relevant in particular cases and this may vary depending on the contract involved and where the ‘transaction’ takes place.

The view is that IRSA class rules are not intended to, nor do they, shed any light on ownership or when it changes hands.

Use of boats with certificates issued by sources other than IRSA affiliated bodies?

Is it possible to enter an event described in the NoR and SIs as for boats of an international class (IOM,. M, 10R or A Class) with a certificate other than an IRSA certificate issued by a body affiliated to IRSA?

No.

The IRSA international classes are distinct from classes using the same name but which are not administered (ultimately) by IRSA. For example the Naviga administered One Metre, Marblehead and Ten Rater classes are different classes and the certificates issued under those rules are not valid for IRSA events (world or continental championships) or events normally organised by IRSA affiliated bodies. The same is true for the Marblehead class administered by the American Model Yachting Association which uses class rules different to the international class rules.

The owner of a boat in one of those classes can obtain a certificate for the international class after having his boat measured to the IRSA class rule. To do this he should find an official measurer (please see the Equipment Rules of Sailing) and then contact his certification authority (normally the body in his country that administer rc sailing and is affiliated to IRSA). If he is a member of a body affiliated to his World Sailing Member National Authority (the body responsible for the administration of SAILING in his country) he will then be eligible to take part in events for the international class.

Starting in around February 2015, class rule changes were introduced and discussed within the IRSA Technical Committee. The proposed rule changes were circulated to IRSA Designated National Members (DNMs) around December 2015 and January 2016. A number of DNMs responded with comments, and these were addressed by the TC Chairman. The proposed revised class rules were then brought to the Executive Committee by the TC Chairman in March 2016, which the EC formally voted on and approved. The rules, and an explanation of the changes, were published in April 2016, and came into effect in July 2016 after minor errors were found and edits made. This is the process which has been used in the previous decades of rule changes by the IMYRU, ISAF-RSD, and now IRSA.  

Does the Certification Authority have to use an official stamp in the relevant place when issuing a certificate?

There is no prescribed requirement for the size or style of ‘official stamp’. At an event the person inspecting the official stamp on a certificate has no means of knowing if it is the correct one or not. The important thing is that the issuing Certification Authority will recognise it at some future stage should the certificate be referred back to it for any reason.

Any size or style of official stamp will suffice providing the CA is happy that it can recognise it as authentic at a later stage.

Should the 2016 software should be used when the owner of a boat first certified to the previous class rule elects to have his boat re-certified. 

A boat with a certificate first issued to previous versions of the class rules may have one or more alternative certificates issued using the process identified in CR A.12.1 (c).

A.12 HULL RE-CERTIFICATION

A.12.1 A hull may be issued with a new certificate, showing dates of re-certification and initial certification as applicable:

(c) when one or more alternative certificates are requested to be valid concurrently with an existing certificate

by application of the procedure in A.9.

A.9 is the standard procedure for certification and no variation is necessary for a boat with a previous certificate.

When an A Class boat is raced without optional equipment on board, does it comply with the class rules when its weight is below the lower limit for boat weight because optional equipment is omitted?

The full text of the discussion and conclusion, under the 2017 CR and previous CR, will be posted here as a download. For the sake of brevity the conclusion is posted here:

The CR permit several items of the rig that shall be on board for certification control to be omitted for racing. The CR do not require sails to be on board during certification control. Further the CR permit the headsail to be omitted when racing.

It follows that the weight of the boat when racing is permitted to be lighter than the certified weight less the tolerance.

It follows that the weight of the boat when racing is permitted to be heavier than the certified weight plus the tolerance if the sails used weigh 200 grams or more.

At an event for A Class after 30^th June 2016

At an event for A Class after 30^th June 2016 the 2016 CR apply. Section C of the 2016 CR applies to all boats so this (discussion and) conclusion applies equally to boats competing under certificates issued under previous class rules.

When an A boat which has been originally measured under the previous class rules is remeasured, would that be under the current or the original class rules?

If a boat is being re-measured it is almost certain that this is because its flotation or other dimensions have been changed – that is A.11.1 a), b) or c) apply. A.12. 1 (b) is another possible reason. A.11.2 tells us what can be done when a boat ceases to comply with the class rules (which include its certificate) and option a) is for an official measurer to carry out certification control (i.e. re-measurement) of affected equipment (in this case, the boat).

The boat shall be certificated to the current class rules. However,  Sections D, E, F, G each tell us about possible grandfathering in cases where previously permitted equipment has become non-compliant due to class rule changes.

D.1.1 RULES
The hull shall comply:
(a) with the class rules in force at the time of its initial certification control;
or
(b) with the class rules relating to its certificate; or
(c) with the current class rules.

E.2 RULES
The hull appendages shall comply:
(a) with the class rules in force at the time of its initial certification
control; or
(b) with the class rules relating to its certificate; or
(c) with the current class rules.

F.2.1 RULES
(a) The spars and their fittings shall comply either with the class rules in
force at the time of the initial certification control of the hull or with the
current class rules.
(b) The standing rigging and running rigging shall comply with the
current class rules.

G.2.1 RULES
The sails shall comply either with the class rules in force at the time of their
initial certification control or with the current class rules.

At certification, when the difference between the QBL dimensions is found to be outside the class rule limit, what is the correct action?

Large differences in the QBL lengths will occur due to one or a combination of the following:

• lack of symmetry of the hull


• placement of the hull off the centreline of the measurement equipment


• lack of alignment of the hull with the centreline of the measurement equipment

As the permitted sail area can be increased (where there will be a QBL penalty) by enhancing the difference in port and starboard QBL measurements, the class rules specify a limit to that difference.

There is no requirement in the class rules for the centreline of the hull to be on the centreline of the measurement equipment. Moving the hull laterally on the measurement equipment can restore equality in the measurements. A rule of thumb that can help here is to move the hull one fourteenth (1/14) of the difference between the QBL measurements towards the side of the shorter measurement.

Alternatively, if the owner is prepared to lose some permitted sail area, the lower QBL dimension can be raised artificially to within the specified difference from the larger QBL dimension before recording.