Reply To: 1.-2. Ballot wordings Hull Cross section and Tiller

Home Forums IDNIYRA Technical Committee Discussion 1.-2. Ballot wordings Hull Cross section and Tiller Reply To: 1.-2. Ballot wordings Hull Cross section and Tiller

Peter HamrakPeter Hamrak

Thanks for the replies.

Just to clear some confusion here, the ballot proposal was discussed and then voted for by the CGG and it goes to Ballot.

The task here in the TC by the EPIC agreement is:

“Wording of proposals to change the OFFICIAL SPECIFICATIONS or OFFICIAL PLANS will be reviewed by the TC. The TC may suggest revised wording, if appropriate, to make the proposal more clear or reasonable to interpret. The TC may work directly with the author of the proposal on suggested revisions. ”

I am open to any suggestions you make and I am listening to reasonable changes, but we are not supposed to make the ballot different, as it was voted for by the CGG.

In regard to this, I agree with Richard, that the rectangle cross-section shape is a wrong idea. This was one of the reasons I submitted the proposal for.

The +-2 degree deviation from perpendicular I think is reasonable, as I could easily measure this mistake on all the hulls I was in contact with. I wouldn’t like to change that.

Just for curiosity, anybody has made any measuring in this regard? I measured mainly Kardas hulls and heard of Vaiko, Tomek, and Madar’s hulls having the same issue. Based on my experience, it is really easy to spread a few degrees from a right angle during cutting, gluing, and sanding especially maintaining it on a 4m length…