International Committee



Annual General Meeting held on 13th November 1999







Minute No. Page No.


Attendance 1

1. Opening 3

2. Approval of Minutes 3

3. Chairman’s Report 3

4. Treasurer’s Report 3

5. Appointment of Auditors 4

6. Appointment of Honorary Treasurer 4

7. Council Representation 4

8. Membership of Committees 5

9. Management Committee 6

10. International Technical Committee 8

11. ORC Club Working Group 16

12. Measurement Committee 17

13. Special Regulations Committee 19

14. Offshore Classes & Events Committee 26

15. Race Management Committee 30

16. Promotional Working Group 31

17. Meeting Dates 33

18. Appendix A – ORC/ISAF Position Paper 34

19. Appendix B – Draft of Green Book Revisions 36





Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of the Offshore Racing Council Limited held at 0900 on 13th November 1999 in the Hilton Hotel, Sydney, Australia.


Council Members Present:

Chairman Hans Zuiderbaan Benelux Countries

Deputy Chairman David Irish USA

Deputy Chairman Bruno Finzi Italy

George Andreadis ISAF, Greece

Kjell Borking Scandinavia

David Cox South Africa

Estanislao Duran Iberian Peninsula

José Frers South America

Don Genitempo USA

Giovanni Iannucci Italy

David Kellett ISAF

Pasquale Landolfi Italy

Bjorn Loken Scandinavia

David Lyons Australia

Paolo Massarini Affiliated Classes

Adrian Moggre Benelux Countries

Tony Mooney Australia – alternate for Roger Hickman

John Osmond USA

Juan Carlos Rodriguez Toubes Iberian Peninsula

Abraham Rosemberg Brazil

Peter Rutter UK, RYA

Wolfgang Schäfer Germany

Peter Scholfield UK, RORC

Friedrich Judel Germany

Olin Stephens Hon. Councillor

Minoru Tomita Japan – alternate for Kuniji Toda

Don Martin Canada – alternate for Wink Vogel

Jim McElrea New Zealand



Apologies for absence: H.M. King Harald V of Norway Honorary President

Marcel Leeman Countries not otherwise


Niel Siegel USA

Jacinto de Sousa Iberian Peninsula

Andre Tournis France

Wink Vogel Canada

Hans-Otto Shümann Germany

Kuniji Toda Japan


Officers Present: Ken Weller Consultant

Nicola Sironi Chief Measurer

Judy Garrett Jenkins Secretary


Committee Chairmen: David Pedrick ITC Chairman

Alan Green Special Regulations Chairman

Ecky von der Mosel Race Management Chairman


Committee Members: Bill Cook ITC

Emilio Feliu Serra Offshore Classes

John Green Measurement

Bengt-Olof Holmberg Offshore Classes

Patrick Lindqvist Special Regulations

Ken Morrison Race Management

Flemming Nielsen Measurement

Dan Nowlan Measurement

Timo Sarainmaa Race Management

Jim Schmicker ITC

Miguel Rosa Servan Race management

Jim Teeters ITC

Lazaros Tsalikis Race Management

Theodossis Tsaltas Measurement

Observers: Paul Bennett ORC Councillor of Honour

Jim Boucaut Australia

Marianne Davis Norway

Simon Forbes ISAF

Roula Galani Greece

Janet Grosvenor RORC

Carin Hildebrand SSF, Sweden

Hakan Lindqvist Sweden

Kendy Kellett Australia

Juan Kouyoumdjian Designer, France

Wally Rantanen Australia

Peter Reichelsdorfer Chairman-US Sailing

Arve Sundheim ISAF

Robert Teeters USA

Eric Wells South Africa

Shigeru Yajima Japan

Hanna Zuiderbaan-Schoen Netherlands





The Chairman welcomed the attendees to the meeting.





The following minutes were approved:


Annual General Meeting of 7th November 1998.

Extraordinary General Meeting of 8th November 1999.





The Chairman wished to congratulate the Cruising Yacht Club of Australia on their remarkable job following the Sydney/Hobart tragedy.


He continued to report on the highlights of the past year.


There had been good sailing from a large competitive IMS fleet in the Admiral’s Cup and the decision to include the newly formed IMS 50 Class in the next event had recently been made. The Chief Measurer, Nicola Sironi, was to be congratulated for his action prior to this Championship with regard to the “wing” mast incident.


The first Rolex IMS Offshore World Championship had successfully taken place in Sardinia with eleven countries competing and a large number of yachts are expected in the year 2000 event in Newport, Rhode Island, between the dates of 14-20 July and hosted by the New York Yacht Club. The event will then return to Sardinia in the year 2001.


Negotiations between ORC and ISAF had proceeded well over the week. The groups involved had been actively working to achieve a position paper for submission to both the ISAF and ORC Council. The ISAF Council had the day before approved the paper unanimously.


It was agreed that Pasquale Landolfi would undertake a special assignment in the role of Development Director, with responsibility to develop funding for the IMS Research & Development fund.





David Irish reported on the year end accounts. In terms of performance to Budget, the 1999 Financial Year had ended with a modest surplus of revenue over expense. The Treasurer circulated an Annual Net Worth History of the year-end “Net Worth” of the ORC taken from each of the past five years of audited financial reports. From 1995 onward, the Net Worth had steadily increased from £128000 to £140500. He felt the reports demonstrated sound financial management.

He wished to thank Ken Weller for his assistance during the week in producing a revised paper on the year's financials, also circulated to Council, which more accurately reflected the financial position of the ORC.


He felt that a change to a fully automated accounting system was of high priority.


4.1 Receipt and Approval of Accounts:


Following the Treasurer’s report a motion to adopt the audited accounts was seconded and passed unanimously.


4.2 Levy:


In view of the recommendation of the Treasurer and Management Committee, it was agreed that levies for the year commencing 1 October 1999 would remain at the same level as the previous year: £26 Full IMS and £11.50 Club. It was noted that this was the second time in three years that the levies had not been increased.


The Management Committee’s recommendation to introduce a new levy invoicing system for the coming year was agreed. The new system would be based on a quarter of each respective National Authority’s certificates issued for the previous year, minus ten per cent. Any difference between quarterly payments and actual activity would be settled at the end of the ORC financial year. A provision to link Rating Office software licensing to accounts in good standing was planned. Councillors were requested to convey this information to their Rating Officers.




David Irish proposed to Council to authorize a search and selection of new auditors during the coming year, most likely in the South of England. This was passed.





The appointment of Oscar Strugstad was proposed and passed.





For this meeting Minoru Tomita represented Kuniji Toda for Japan, Friedrich Judel represented Hans-Otto Schümann for Germany and Tony Mooney represented Roger Hickman for Australia.


It was agreed that Roger Hickman would represent Australia, Terry Robinson would replace Richard Matthews as the Councillor for RORC and Peter Rutter would represent the RYA. Juan Carlos Rodriguez Toubes would be an additional Councillor for Spain.


Commencing immediately after the Conference, James Muldoon would replace David Irish as Councillor for the USA.


The Chairman, Hans Zuiderbaan, wished to thank David Irish for his long and dedicated contribution to the work of the ORC, as both Deputy Chairman and Honorary Treasurer.


The nomination of John Osmond as Deputy Chairman was proposed and passed.





The membership of the following Committees was agreed, as listed:


Management Committee


Hans Zuiderbaan - Chairman Don Genitempo

John Osmond - Deputy Chairman Wolfgang Schäfer

Bruno Finzi - Deputy Chairman Oscar Strugstad - Honorary Treasurer

Offshore Classes & Events Committee

Don Genitempo - Chairman Klaus Jurgen Heer

Pasquale Landolfi Bruno Finzi

Emilio Feliu Serra Paolo Massarini

José Frers Harald Brüning

Gianfranco Alberini Bjorn Loken

Bengt-Olof Holmberg Estanislao Duran

Race Management Committee


Ecky von der Mosel - Chairman Ken Morrison

Adrian Moggre Akis Tsalikis

Nicola Sironi Miguel Rosa

John Mendez Timo Sarainmaa

Promotional Working Group


Giovanni Iannucci – Chairman John Osmond

Ken Morrison Kjell Borking

José Frers Theo Tsaltas

Adrian Moggré




David Pedrick - Chairman Jim Teeters

Friedrich Judel Lex Keuning

Andrew Claughton Jussi Mannerberg

Jim Schmicker Alessandro Nazareth

Nicola Sironi Ken Weller

David Lyons Axel Mohnhaupt

Measurement Committee


Nicola Sironi - Chairman Ken Weller

John Green Dan Nowlan

Theo Tsaltas Gerd Kall

Marcel Wagenaar Flemming Nielsen

Jean-Louis Conti Taro Takahashi

Joaquin Gonzalez Devesa John Warren

Edward Walter Timo Sarainmaa

Special Regulations Committee


Alan Green – Chairman Alfredo Messeder

Giovanni Iannucci Patrick Lindqvist

Tony Mooney Loic Peyron

Bruce Eissner Wink Vogel

Jean Sans (co-opted)


ORC Club Working Group


Ken Weller - Chairman Jean-Louis Conti

Jan van Berkel Friedrich Judel

Nicola Sironi Axel Mohnhaupt







9.1 ORC/ISAF Proposal


A group had met throughout the week to produce a Position Paper regarding the amalgamation of the ORC and the ISAF. The resulting paper had been presented to ISAF Council and approved. The paper had been presented to ORC Council Members for questions and discussion at a meeting called for the purpose 1700 12th November. Göran Petersson, Vice President of ISAF, and a member of the group working on the paper, attended on behalf of ISAF. The paper was then presented for vote at the AGM, where further discussion took place.


In answer to questions on points not covered in the paper, the ORC Chairman clarified for Councillors that the ORC's submission process would continue and that the existing levy system and other income devices would continue in place to help support the activities of the ORC. These and other points had been part of understandings within the working group and would have to be spelled out in future papers. Considerable discussion followed.


Councillor of Honour Olin Stephens expressed his reservations about attempting to combine the administrations of offshore and inshore racing interests and the likely further layering of legislative bureaucracy.

Minoru Tomita observed that National Authorities looked to the ORC for a broad spectrum of administrative activities and services to the sport, not just the VPP and ratings. He felt that the role of the ORC was very significant and must not be buried within the interests of another organisation. If the ORC and the ISAF were to amalgamate, then it would be essential that NAs put forward people of offshore background and interest for ISAF committees, offices and ISAF Council. Giovanni Iannucci urged great caution and care in developing and preceding with the plans.


The Chairman assured Council that progress would be made one step at a time, that no change would occur prior to end of November 2000 after Council had an opportunity to review and vote on plan details and that for at least a few years the ORC would remain, in the background, a Company under UK law. The next November ORC meetings would take place exactly as always. The next step would be to prepare a more detailed paper. Further discussions are due to take place in order to produce a paper for discussion with the ISAF Executive Committee in Genoa in February. The intention is that the draft would then be circulated to all Councillors for their input before its final submission and in any case input from ORC members was welcome at any time.


Following the discussion and clarifications, the Position Paper (see Appendix A to the Minutes) was put to a vote and approved by a large majority.



9.2 Submissions


Some recommendations were dealt with under other Agenda items, but the Committee had covered a number of submissions as well.


DSV1 - IMS Continental Championships


This submission was covered by the Offshore Classes & Events Committee.


The Management Committee recommended that the volume of events be carefully monitored to ensure that IMS racing is not diluted nor the overall quality of the events diminished.

FIV3 - No spinnaker pole when gybing (IMS 307.1.a)


The deletion of IMS Rule No. 307.1.a was agreed.


FIV5 - ORC Publications


It was agreed to allow National Authorities to translate ORC publications into their own languages at their expense without payment of royalty provided all sponsor recognition is maintained on each publication as in the original edition.







KNWV3 - VPP Code Developments


The Management Committee and ITC had addressed the idea before of using the 1999 VPP for rating calculations in 2000, 2001 and 2002 in order to give the ITC sufficient time to do the necessary maintenance on the IMS VPP code. It was noted that it was the policy of the ORC to continually improve the IMS.


KNWV7 - IMS Championships


The establishment of Continental and Regional IMS Championships was covered under DSV1.


RFEV10 - IMS Version for Designers


The proposal to give the IMS version for designers the capability of reading and working with BOF type files was not agreed. It was noted that Design offsets are confidential and must not be distributed to other designers.



USSA2 - Paragraph 305 Headroom and Interior Volume


It was noted that the proposal to change the formulation for headroom and interior volume for boats less than 12 metres in order to be more inclusive of smaller yachts would be on the ITC agenda for the year 2000.





ITC Chairman, David Pedrick began by introducing the new Programmer, Bill Cook, to the Council. He continued to report on the matters covered during the Conference.


10.1 Review of the August 1999 ITC Meeting Minutes

The minutes of the previous committee meeting in Delft, Holland on 27th-29th August 1999 had been approved.


10.2 Revision of Righting Moment Terms (DSV 3a, RFEV 1)

The apparent righting moment bias in 1998 was addressed at last year’s AGM by introducing a reduction of heeling moment resulting from the effect of sail twist. This more accurately represents actual sail trim practice and the results of wind tunnel tests sponsored by North Sails and US Sailing at the Wolfson Unit in Southampton, England. At the same time, it was found that a term in the VPP’s correction for the effect of wavemaking on reducing righting moment overstated the effect. This was the subject of research in the past year, including a re-analysis of Delft model data.


Using only “twist” in the 1999 IMS, the previous trend toward reduced righting moment was substantially corrected, but not entirely eliminated. Twist has no effect on sail force coefficients in light winds. However, removal of the excess RMV magnitude affects all conditions, and is expected to discourage the reduction of righting moment.


10.2.1 Dynamic Righting Moment (RMV)

Reanalysis of model test data indicated that the dynamic righting moment term, RMV, overstated the reduction of the static righting moment value due to hydrodynamic effects, primarily wavemaking. The term has been reduced to one-third of its original value. The reanalysis of the Delft model data was funded by the ORC R&D program.


10.2.2 Adjustment of 1999 Twist Function

With the correction of RMV, the twist function can be reduced to be more in the mid-range of wind tunnel data. A factor of 0.65 * twist produces the desired magnitude when combined with RMV/3.


10.3 Hydrodynamic Recommendations

Improvement in the prediction of residuary resistance is an ongoing area of study by the committee. Two alternatives were developed by the Committee during the week, and one is recommended for Council’s adoption for IMS 2000.

10.3.1 Residuary Drag: Existing Formulations with Updated Model Set (RFEV 4)

The committee has been endeavouring for several years to improve the regression for residuary resistance by adding models having more current design characteristics; selectively eliminating some previous models of the Delft Series whose hullforms were judged to be unrealistically forced and likely to have excessive drag; and adding some other earlier models believed to have reliable hullforms but which had been excluded from the current regression.


Included in the additions are the first three models of the new Canadian IMD/US Sailing model series. Because of the importance of their more current shapes, the Delft IV models are given double weighting, as was done for IMS 99. The new IMD models are also double-weighted.


The model set has been regressed using the existing parametric formulation containing the following terms which have been in use for several years.


Term: Description:

Cp Prismatic coefficient

BTR Beam-draft ratio

LDR Length-displacement ratio

WPA/Vol2/3 Waterplane area-to-hull volume ratio

LCB/LDR Longitudinal center of buoyancy to LDR

LCB2/LDR (Longitudinal center of buoyancy)2 to LDR

LDR2 (Length-to-displacement ratio)2

The result appears to be a rational and orderly sorting of the overall fleet, providing global improvement in the assessment of residuary drag. Yachts that need substantial help in their handicaps relative to newer, more optimized yachts are tending to receive it. Some older yachts are also sped up, although many of them have demonstrated reasonable competitiveness under IMS 99. When examining some yachts that race against each other, such as the IMS 50’s and ILC maxi’s, there may be inconsistencies in the last 2-3 seconds per mile of predicted performance relative to race course observations. However, margins of that magnitude tax the limits of the VPP’s hydrodynamic modeling when making as significant a change as this.


The ITC recommendation was made while cautioning that there may be some shifts in optimum hull characteristics among the Grand Prix level of aggressively tuned designs. The recommendation was agreed by Council.


10.3.2 Residuary Drag: Existing Regression with Cp and LCB Limits Added (DSV 3d)

The alternative to address an apparent bias by applying limits to the values of Cp and LCB taken for any yacht was not recommended in view of the success with the revised model base (see above).


10.3.3 Added Resistance in Waves (DSV3b, DSV 3c, FIV 2, RFEV 3)

Several submissions cited an apparent overstatement of the gyradius effect of increased mast weight. Because the mast gyradius adjustment follows from pure physics and mathematics, this suggests that the calculation of added resistance for a change in gyradius may be the source of overstatement. Furthermore, the IMS uses a “one size fits all” sea state, indexed to true wind speed, that may be too great for calm water venues while being too little for rougher than average venues. There has been conjectural evidence that handicapping might be better served by somewhat reducing the added resistance in waves overall. Council approved the Committee’s recommendation of a 20% reduction in the calculation of added resistance in waves. This will have the effect of reducing the handicapping credit for changes such as mast gyradius by a corresponding amount.


10.4 Aerodynamic Recommendations


10.4.1 Mast Diameter and Chord Length (RFEV 3)

Council agreed the recommendation that masts having chord lengths and widths exceeding normal practice for stayed masts receive no further windage credit for excess size. The maximum values of MDL1 and MDT1 are defined as:


MDL1max = 0.036 * (RM25*IG)^0.25

MDT1max = MDL1max *(MDT1meas/MDL1meas)


Any excess MDL1 shall be added to the values of E, MGL, MGM, MGU, MGT. Any excess of either MDL or MDT shall not be credited in the calculation of EDM.


10.4.2 Unstayed Masts

Consistent with action taken by the Chief Measurer during 1999, it was agreed that masts without spreaders or shrouds shall receive no windage allowance for those elements in the VPP.


10.4.3 Wide Spinnakers (DSV 4, RFEV 5, also referred to the Measurement Committee)

It is recommended that Rule 844 be modified as follows to calculate the area of spinnakers whose SMW exceeds the greater of SF or 1.8 * (the greater of SPL or J), notably of the Scandinavian type.


844.3 Spinnaker: For the purpose of the aerodynamic model, the area of a spinnaker is determined as 0.6*(SL*SMW-.25*SL*(SMW-SF)). For the purpose of displaying spinnaker area on the Certificate, the convention 0.94*(SL*SMW -.25*SL*(SMW-SF)) is used.


New limits are added to Rule 847 for spinnaker foot length.


SF: SF shall not be taken as less than the greater of 1.8*J or 1.8*SPL and SF shall not be taken as greater than SMW.


This formula credits smaller area in the lower part of the spinnaker to the extent that SF is less than SMW. To receive the credit, SF must be measured. In the Rating Office data file, SF will be recorded in the field formerly designated HBS.


Submission RFEV 5 asked to permit decoupling SMW from J, which would permit SPL to be less than J. The committee recommends not changing the present type-forming of rated SPL no shorter than J.


10.4.3 Asymmetric Spinnaker Coefficients

In recognition of continuing disadvantageous treatment of asymmetric spinnakers tacked on centerline, it was agreed that the sail force coefficients for these spinnakers be reduced to half the current value at running angles, merging to the existing values at close angles.


It was noted that if measurement procedures for asymmetric spinnakers were to be changed to use SMG instead of SMW, then the area calculation for use with sail force coefficients would have to be revised to yield an area approximately equivalent to the current area (see Measurement Committee, Section 11). If a revised area calculation was necessary, it would be formulated after the November meetings.


10.4.4 Spinnaker/Headsail Crossover (RFEV 6, RFEV 7)

Fine-tuning of the spinnaker and headsail sail force coefficients was investigated for the purpose of improving the predicted wind angles at which the transition between headsail and spinnaker occurs. This will require further study and is referred to next year’s agenda.

10.4.5 Adjustable Headstay

It was agreed that an adjustable headstay would be permitted on fractional rigged yachts, as well as on masthead rigs as presently permitted, provided that there is no adjustable backstay. Rule 305.2.b is to be reworded, “Where all spreaders of a mast are clearly swept aft, the forestay of that mast may be adjusted, but if it is, no stays abaft that mast may be adjustable.” If the forestay is adjustable, the jib lift coefficients in the aerodynamic model are to be increased per Rule 848.


10.4.6 Simple Mainsail Credits (DSV 3e, FIV 1)

Pursuant to rule discussions during 1999, the committee considered whether the relationship between the VPP’s aerodynamic credits and the number of adjustable backstays should be revised. No change in current practice was recommended.


10.5 Measurement Matters (also referred to the Measurement Committee)


10.5.1 Transom Tail Measurement (FIV 6)

The possibility of sensitivity of LSM4 to hull measurement practice was discussed. It was recommended to require a minimum of two measurement stations between the aft freeboard station and the aftermost station just forward of the lower tip of the transom.

In the case of unusually configured transoms, the measurer would use judgement in providing adequately close station to define the geometry. Only new measurements would be affected.


10.5.2 Fuel Tanks (USSA 1)

To enable more user-friendly measurement practices for cruiser/racers only, it was proposed to permit fuel to be in tanks at the time of measurement. The ITC considered the technical validity as well as measurement practicalities of this submission and supported the idea of the proposal in a simpler form that would also protect against exploitation. In concept, to avoid free-surface effects in the righting moment, if any individual tank were not presented for measurement empty, then it must be pressed up full. Only tanks aft of the mast and no higher than normal settee level would be allowed to be filled.


The righting moment used by the LPP would be the measured RM in the heavier and probably stern-down condition of the yacht at the time of measurement. However, freeboards used for calculations would be adjusted in parallel sink of flotation according to the estimated weight of fuel and the yacht’s waterplane area. This would provide sufficient bias in greater RM and usually greater LSM to discourage exploitation. The quantity of fuel would not need to be known with great precision, although a conscientious effort for accuracy should be made. Large quantities of fuel would be discouraged, and unusual placement of tanks is disallowed.


This approach would be allowed only where the yacht met IMS Part 4 Cruiser/Racer Division requirements.


10.6 Construction Matters

10.6.1 Scantling Rules (AYF 5)

In the absence of an operating scantling rule for ocean racing yachts at the international level, the ITC recommended continued self-declaration of compliance with the ABS Scantling Guide for Offshore Yachts. The scantling standards being developed by ISO for the European Recreational Craft Directive was believed to be about one year from release. These standards had been influenced significantly by the existing ABS Offshore Yacht guide and the continued work of Bob Curry of ABS.


It was noted that the AYF submission draws particular attention to the adequacy of deck scantlings. While a member of the ITC has been staying advised of the progress of the ISO committee’s work, it has been suggested by Council that the ITC take a pro-active role in the development and assessment of the pending ISO standards. This might be done with some support from the R&D Fund for technical programming and analysis.


10.7 Carbon Frame Cappings

In recognition of the use of limited quantities of carbon fibre in such structural members as keel floors and girders to achieve a greater section modulus, without either incurring excessive cost or a significant physical reduction in gyradius, the following was decided.


With effect from 1st January 2000, it was agreed that limited amounts of high strength (HS) carbon fibre would be permitted in IMS without the assignment of a gyradius reduction provided the following criteria were met:


  • HS Carbon is only permitted to be used in the capping of bona fide structural members such as frames, girders, bulkhead cut-outs and stringers, and as localised reinforcement on bulkhead faces in way of chainplate attachments etc.
  • Its use is restricted within the region of 0.3LOA to 0.7LOA aft of the stem.
  • Owners are reminded of their obligations under IMS Rule 302.4.


10.8 Other Matters

10.8.1 Stability Requirements

Discussion about the limit of positive stability arose in conjunction with the Sydney-Hobart Report. The Australian Coroner’s investigation, which was said to be very thorough, is reported to be looking closely at the question of stability, and the ORC may be able to assist and should be advised of the Coroner’s views in this matter. Meanwhile, concern was expressed that the ISO standards for limit of positive stability may be more lenient than the ORC recommends, possibly resulting from pressure from production yacht manufacturers. The ITC will follow up on the ISO standards, and monitor the Australian Coroner’s investigation to the extent that it is able.


10.8.2 Small Boat Accommodations and Cockpits (USSA 2)

The widespread popularity of smaller yachts that do not meet the IMS Accommodations Regulations leaves out a significant potential constituency for IMS. US Sailing is currently working on dimensional regulations for interior headroom and volume and for cockpits that will be consistent with such yachts. A new “sportboat” or similar division is proposed that would be eligible for IMS certificates designated as such. US Sailing intends to experiment with the concept as a prescription for racing in 2000. The ITC thanked Greg Stewart of the US IMS Committee for his work in this project and looks forward to the final specification and results with interest.


10.8.3 Cruiser/Racer Cockpit Regulations

Two corrections to cockpit provisions were agreed: The last sentence of IMS Regulation 416A.1 is to read: “Where the transom is open aft to the sea, the aftermost end shall not be taken forward of a transverse vertical plane projected through the aftermost location of the upper lifeline.”


The last subparagraph of Regulation 416A.3 is to read: “80% of the required seating shall be found within a forward percentage of the measured cockpit length. This percentage shall be equal to . . ..”


10.8.4 Sail Inventory

It was agreed that the second sentence of the “small jibs” paragraph of IMS Regulation 205 would be replaced with the following: “Inner forestaysails are included in this category, must be tacked on centerline, but need not be set on a stay.”


10.8.5 Carbon for Sails

Although not a submission, correspondence requesting permitting carbon in sails was discussed. The committee had no technical data on such sails. The committee’s preliminary comment was that the performance of such sails might be consistent with some permitted sail materials, but probably inconsistent with goals of economy in the Cruiser/Racer Division.

10.9 Program Conversion

One of the tasks achieved this year by the new ORC programmer was the conversion of the VPP and its related codes to a new compiler that is compatible with Windows 95, 98 and NT operating systems. It eliminates the cumbersome DBOS run-time module that has been required to date. This is expected to make the development and distribution of the IMS VPP easier and more reliable, and facilitates programming revisions and improvements in the future. This work has been a part of the ORC R&D program.


10.10 Work in Progress

10.10.1 Bow Models

Two new Delft IV models had been designed as a series to explore effects of bow geometry. The parent model had a raked stem. Model 411 had a characteristic current IMS bow, and model 410 is an intermediate form. The committee reviewed the lines plans and suggested some revisions. The models and testing are being generously donated by Delft University. Testing is planned in March or April 2000.


10.10.2 Rudder Tests

A systematic series of rudders at three spans is planned on a large (approximately 8 meter LOA) model of the Canadian IMD/US Sailing program. The purpose is to establish data that will permit better assessment of the induced drag of the combined keel and rudder. The rudder models are being funded through the ORC R&D program, while testing is being generously donated by IMD (Institute of Marine Dynamics, Newfoundland, Canada). Testing is anticipated in January or February 2000.


10.10.3 Heeled Drag

Treatment of the heeled drag increment in the VPP warrants study and refinement. The Delft model data is being re-analyzed by a graduate student for the ITC’s review early next year. The graduate student’s costs are being paid through the ORC R&D Programme.


10.11 Submissions


AYF 5: See Minute 6.1.

DSV 2 and FIV 7: Referred to Offshore Classes & Events and Race Management

DSV 3: See Minutes 2, 3.2, 3.2 and 4.7.

DSV 4 and RFEV 5: See Minute 4.3.

FIV 1: See Minute 4.7.

FIV 2 and RFEV 2: See Minute 3.3.

FIV 6: See Minute 5.1.

KNWV 1, 4 and 5: Referred to Club Working Group.

KNWV 3: The proposal to freeze the 1999 VPP through 2002 is considered impractical to keep up with competitive fleet evolution.

RFEV 1: See Minute 2.

RFEV 3: See Minute 4.1.

RFEV 4: See Minute 3.1.

RFEV 6 and 7: See Minute 4.5.

RFEV 10: The request for reading BOF files in the designers’ version of the VPP has been refused in the past due to proprietary restrictions. It is still to be refused.

RFEV 11: Referred to Club Working Group.

RFEV 12: The ITC has previously advised against this proposal’s simplification of the inclining experiment due to anticipated loss of fidelity in the readings, as would be especially the case with manual reading of deflections.

RFEV 14: The ITC encouraged the availability of course choices presently printed on the certificate and recommended to Race Management that they be retained.

USSA 1: See Minute 5.2.

USSA 2: See Minute 7.2.


10.12 Summary of VPP Recommendations for IMS 2000

  • New model set in residuary drag (model set I.D. JT1)
  • RMV/3 with 0.65*Twist
  • 20% reduction in added resistance in waves
  • Limits on mast diameter
  • New area calculation for Scandicap-style spinnaker
  • Reduction of coefficients for asymmetric spinnakers tacked on centerline


10.13 ORC R&D Fund


The following projects were funded through the ORC R&D Programme in 1999:

  • ORC Club hull finder program development
  • VPP/LPP documentation and recompiling
  • Reanalysis of Delft model data for RMV and heeled drag
  • Construction of model rudders for IMS tests


The following additional projects were proposed for 1999:

  • Comparative analysis of ISO/Recreational Craft Directive scantling regulations
  • Start of CFD validation review


10.14 Year 2000 ITC Agenda

  • Residuary drag regression format
  • Bow series models
  • Rudder tests and induced drag determination
  • Heeled drag increment review
  • Headsail/spinnaker crossover review
  • ISO scantling committee liaison





Chairman Ken Weller reported.


11.1 Friedrich Judel had demonstrated the “hull-finder” software tools which had been developed by Andreas Franzen under Friedrich's and the Group's direction, funded through the 1999 R&D programme. The hull-finder replaces the original concept of a manual generic offsets library for supplying offset files for Club Applications where the hull has not been machine measured. The hull finder searches a database of offset files to find the closest match to simple parameters entered by the operator. The parameters entered are measured off photographs, promotional brochure lines plans and the like. A “matching” canoe body is found, automatically rescaled to the size of the hull to be rated and the operator then adds a generic keel of the same chord and span as that of the hull to be rated.


The software had been tested and upgraded throughout the summer and was now ready for broad beta distribution. With one or two minor exceptions, all the planned features were now operational in the program.


11.2 The Group reviewed various options for the administrative portions of the new Club booklet to be completed end of the month. Principles for the wording of the certificate validity, owner’s responsibility for input and measurement protest sections were agreed for inclusion in the booklet.


11.3 A survey of rating administrators of countries issuing Club certificates was underway with eleven countries so far reporting in detail. The Chairman was conducting and assembling the reports for distribution and also would do a version for promotional purposes to update the Web site.


11.4 The fleet statistics, with latest information obtained during the meeting week, now showed over 2700 ORC Club certificates issued in 1999, four and a half times last year’s total of 576. Reports indicated that the fleet should be expected to grow to well over 3000 in the coming year. Successful programmes were operating in 15 countries with still others to launch ORC Club soon.


11.5 The Working Group discussed recommendations of the Race Management Committee with regard to the ORC Club certificate scoring features. The Group did not feel it would be wise to introduce a rather arbitrary new constructed course to replace an existing course type. It seemed the existing course types were now established and familiar and were sufficient to apply for a wide range of conditions. If there was a pressing need to add course types to the Club display at this time, the Group would prefer three options in two fundamental categories: Offshore and Inshore. Within each, the options would be PLS, ToD & ToT. Offshore would be the current robust Ocean configuration and Inshore would be Olympic. This should be sufficient for now, but the Chairman felt it would be preferable to review such recommendations thoroughly and systematically with race organizers over the coming year before implementing changes. It was also felt that ITC should be given a chance to consider proposals put forward as there was of course a direct link between the study of VPP effects and the way scoring options are promoted. It was noted that the scoring options which appear on the Club certificate can also, within limits, be tailored by the Rating Office.


If complete certificate format conformity was an issue for yachts racing Club internationally, it was suggested a policy could be adopted that a valid certificate from one country would be reprocessed (with no changes) by a second country at no additional charge.





Nicola Sironi reported.


12.1 Spinnaker measurement (also submission DSV4 - RFEV 5)


The Committee agreed with the proposal, referred from the ITC, to take into account the spinnaker foot length (SF, see IMS rule 821) for the calculation of the spinnaker area.


For asymmetrical spinnakers, in order to harmonize with other measurement rules, it was also agreed to replace the current measurement of SMW (maximum width, to be found at any height) with SMG (distance between mid points of luff and leech). The wording of Rule 819.2 would then change as follows: "…shall be the distance between the mid points of the luff and the leech measured across the body of the sail".


John Warren had proposed for consideration the procedure adopted by the IACC Rule of entering in the data file the measurer’s calculated area of the largest spinnaker instead of the largest dimensions found among the spinnaker inventory. There was some interest for future consideration but the Committee did not recommend implementation.


12.2 Inclining test procedures / instruments (also Submission RFEV 12)


After considerable discussion the Committee voted with a large majority to take the RFEV submission, and allow also in an inclining experiment performed with the water manometer a single transfer of all weights, recording the resulting deflection four times.


In the context of the electronic measurement instruments, it was reported that some of the existing units needed maintenance and components replacement, and that the new generation ones (used only in Spain and in Germany) were not satisfactory.


Some problems were also reported about the software, that it is not compatible with modern laptop computers.


The manufacturer has proposed the implementation of a new device that would be compatible with current computers, and had offered to check the dubious instruments of Spain and replace them if found significantly faulty. The Committee expressed the need to continue the service on older units, and agreed to accept this arrangement.


12.3 Tankage (also submission USSA 1)


The Committee did not disagree with ITC’s action to allow a fuel tank to be full for the IMS measurement afloat within certain restrictions (see ITC 10.5.2).


Another aspect of tankage was considered in the context of the errata issued in July by the Chief Measurer and of the Australian tankage prescriptions. It was agreed to amend as follows the last paragraph of Rule 313:


"Note that unwarranted quantities of stores shall be considered as ballast under this rule. Any liquid carried on board in excess of 2.5 litres of drinkable fluid per person per day of racing, in the tanks or in other containers, and any fuel in excess of the quantity needed to motor for 12 hours is not permitted. This requirement may be waived by Race Organizers specifying it in their Notice of Race."


12.4 Hull measurement machines


Service problems were experienced by some Rating Offices using the American machines. Dan Nowlan from US Sailing reported that two new machines had been manufactured and have recently been delivered to Spain and that parts would be available. He would verify costs and advise the Committee.


It was reported that some investigations are being performed with a view to using improved technologies with laser and photogrammetry tools.


12.5 Aft end of the boat offsets measurement


See ITC 10.5.1.


12.6 Submissions


12.6.1 International library for Regulations compliance (Hellenic O.C.)


The proposal presented last year from the Hellenic Offshore Committee was presented again this year. It was agreed that the Greek Rating Office would send to the ORC the data collected during the season and other Rating Offices are asked to do the same, so that the fullest possible list of boats and their compliance with the IMS Regulations could be made generally available.


12.6.2 Spinnaker reference area (RFEV 5)


The Committee did not agree to decouple the spinnaker width and the J measurement.


12.6.3 Freeboard points identification in curved sheerlines (RFEV 13)


It was noted that in the IMS there was already a provision for having the freeboard measurement points displaced from the actual sheerline (FFPV and AFPV).


12.7 IMS Regulations


Concern had been expressed about compliance with IMS Regulation 307(e) for small boats. It was agreed to decrease from 0.3m to 0.2m the minimum height of the hard berth bottom for boats with AL<8.5m.


It was also agreed to add a paragraph 410.1(e) with the same wording of 307(e).


It had been brought to the Chairman’s attention that in some recent cases overhead hatches were recessed in such a way as to intrude on the qualifying Interior Volume. He would consider a possible clarification to address the matter when the IMS Regs are reprinted.





Chairman Alan Green reported.


13.1 Minutes


The minutes of a meeting held on 5th November 1998 were approved.


13.2 Video


The Committee had watched footage of the Hobart 1998 rescues. The video showed the vulnerability to capsize of yachts which were pushed broadside by very large seas: once in this attitude, if the wave was breaking or began to break as the yacht was riding the crest, the yacht was most likely to be rolled. Helicopter winch recoveries were shown as well as several fixed-wing operations. An extract from this video would be considered as one element in the training syllabus to be developed (see below).


13.3 Harnesses


A submission for a 7-year harness replacement date was not accepted. The condition of a harness (in common with other equipment) relates more directly to its conditions of use or abuse than to age, although that is also a factor. Agreed to expand Fundamental Regulation 1.02 (a) to highlight the importance of checking the condition of equipment: eg harness stitching, in which contrasting thread colour made checking easier.


The US Safety at Sea Foundation report had been gratefully received by the committee. The report referred to a coloured flag embedded in the stitching of a safety line (or tether) in industrial applications. The flag indicates when the line has been overloaded and must be replaced. It was agreed to adopt this device for harness safety lines purchased in 1/2001 or later.


A submission for storage of harnesses in a watertight container was not accepted. The committee believed that deterioration would accelerate unless the harness was put away after being first washed in fresh water and then thoroughly dried. Good storage would comprise hanging in a dry locker with plenty of free air circulation. It was agreed to draw attention to this as advice.


Operation of harness clips: It was agreed that the ideal is a non-capsizing hook at the deck end and a hook which can be released under load at the harness end. The committee was not aware of a hook which could meet both criteria. If this were so, then one would be proposing a line which must not be used “the wrong way round”.

One solution would be for the harness end clip to be of a material of a smaller diameter than the deck end clip. Only the harness end clip would be able to fit through a hole in a plate on the harness buckle. Every hook should be operable with one hand. It was agreed that there would be no regulation changes at this stage but see note on coroner’s enquiry, below.


Submissions for extra safety lines: It was agreed to add to 5.02 a requirement for at least 30% of the members of a crew which are required to have safety harnesses, to each have (instead of or in addition to the already specified safety line), a single safety line with a snaphook at each end and another midway, or alternatively two safety lines of which one is to be a full length line (not more than 2m long) with a hook at each end, and the other is to be not more than 1m long and also with a hook at each end. Some crews will use short extra safety lines by clipping them for the duration of a race to a strongpoint in the vicinity of a workstation.


Attention would be drawn in 5.02 (harnesses) to 4.03 (c) (jackstays) which requires that a crew member shall be able to “…remain clipped on while moving laterally across the yacht…”. This rule appears not to have been noticed by some skippers and crews.


It was agreed that when harnesses are required (categories 0 1 2 3) so also will jackstays be required (in effect adds cat 3 to the jackstay categories).


It was agreed to RORC submission 3 to add an introduction to 5.01 and 5.02: “Before starting every individual shall, in a race in which the equipment is required, have personally fitted and adjusted the safety harness and lifejacket which he or she will wear during that race.” It was agreed that this would be included in the training syllabus (see below).


It was agreed that a thorough revision of harness requirements would be made when the Australian Hobart 98 Coroner’s enquiry is completed and the findings published – this is expected sometime between April and June in 2000.


13.4 Liferafts


Secure stowage adjacent to the companionway below deck is currently allowed for a raft packed in a valise weighing not more than 40kg provided it can be got to the lifelines within 15 seconds. This rule dates back some 20 years to a time when rafts stowed on deck even in purpose-built containers, would get damp or wet inside no matter how carefully packed: the dampness would react chemically with copper traces in the raft material which under the influence of diurnal changes in temperature and pressure would be partly destroyed sometimes in only a few weeks.


However modern materials are much more robust and packing methods better. The Hobart report underlined how difficult it was to get below-deck rafts into service quickly and without damage. The committee agreed to RORC submission 7 to call for purpose-built stowage opening into or adjacent to the cockpit or main deck to apply to yachts first launched on or after 6/2001. Yachts already built would be encouraged to stow rafts similarly if it is practical to do so.


Several particular lessons on liferaft construction came from the Hobart enquiry, including:-


  • total exterior of raft should be high-visibility orange
  • resistance to shock-load of drogue lines and painters to be improved
  • diameter of drogue lines and painters to be increased (to facilitate handling)
  • diameter of drogues to be increased
  • efficiency of ballast pockets to be improved (regard to be paid to volume, aperture size and size of lead weights which open the ballast pockets on deployment)
  • repair kits must operate effectively in wet conditions
  • emergency supplies bag to be better arranged against loss
  • canopy flap fastenings to be improved
  • rain-collecting device should not flood raft in heavy weather
  • better grab lines inside the raft
  • plastic windows in canopy (item added by chairman on 18-11-99)


It was noted that the ISO 9650 (liferafts) working party was now in its 11th year of deliberation and had not published a standard. The committee agreed that a working party would be set up to review and enhance the ORC standard for yachtsmen’s liferafts published as Appendix A to Special Regulations. The working party would initially comprise the Chairman (GBR), Mr Greg Halls (AUS) and a representative from the US Sailing Foundation which is currently also working on liferafts (Bruce Eissner would advise the contact and in addition, advise on the acquisition of a copy of a 1,000-page report produced by the US coastguard). The working party would assimilate the findings of the Coroner’s enquiry when these were available in mid-2000 and also recommendations included in earlier Hobart reports (eg 1976). The working party would consult SOLAS specifications as well as the draft ISO 9650 standard in order to arrive at the best possible conclusion. The revised ORC standard would be published as soon as possible after receipt of the Coroner’s enquiry findings.


A proposal to include liferafts in category 3 was not supported . MNAs or organisers who so wish can prescribe them as an addition (see footnotes to item 14 in the minutes of 5th November 1998).

13.5 Jon Buoy brand dan buoys and man overboard equipment


AYF had proposed that these be excluded until modifications had been completed to the mounting brackets. Modifications had now been made to the satisfaction of AYF who therefore withdrew their submission: It was agreed that there would be no action.


Discussion had followed about the best place to locate MoB equipment. If it was aft of the helmsman (in a conventional modern layout) it could be difficult and dangerous for a crewman to get past the helmsman in order to release MoB gear. The helmsman himself (within whose easy reach the equipment is required by Special Regulations to be) may be totally committed to the helm and unable to launch the gear. However SRs cover a very wide range of boat type and a rule against equipment aft of the helm would not work well for example in a centre-cockpit cruiser-racer: It was agreed that there would be no action.


13.6 Storm sail size


A submission had been received proposing the study of storm sail sizes. Prior to the meeting a review had been carried out by a sub-committee of the RORC technical committee.


The review group was chaired by Simon Rogers, a designer, had members who were sailmakers and also had Andy Claughton, an independent consultant, of the Wolfson Unit Southampton. The group had concluded that due to the wide variety of characteristics of boats it would not be practical to produce a single formula answer. Olin Stephens had proposed that the best guide would be found by relating sail size to stability. However the group’s conclusion was to leave the present regulation as it was.


It was noted that there is already a caveat in SR 4.24 and this will be strengthened to urge owners to consult their designers and sailmakers. The committee chairman had pointed out that storm canvas was expected to cope with a range of heavy winds and apparent precision in deciding a single set of dimensions would be misplaced.


13.7 Construction standards of decks, coachroofs, hatches and windows.


In the 98 Hobart race five yachts rolled by extreme waves sustained considerable damage to their decks. The same had happened in the 79 Fastnet. As a result of a report tabled earlier in the week Council had accepted an offer from David Lyons to carry out an investigation. The committee would like to receive an interim report by mid-2000 even if the main findings would not be ready until after that time.


13.8 Training


The committee agreed to RORC submission 1 to include a new section 6 “training guidance” with a minimum list of topics. At least 30% crew including the skipper in a category 0 or 1 race shall have undertaken training including both theory and practical sessions. All crew would be strongly recommended to do likewise. A new Appendix containing a detailed syllabus would be developed by a working party of which the initial members would be Bruce Eissner, Giovanni Iannucci, an AYF representative and an RORC or UK representative. It was agreed that the new Appendix was to be completed by mid-2000. Items to be covered were expected to include:-


  • care and maintenance of safety equipment
  • cpr and first aid
  • liferafts
  • storm sails
  • fire precautions and fire fighting
  • damage control and repair
  • heavy weather - crew routines, boat handling, drogues
  • man overboard prevention and recovery
  • giving assistance to other craft
  • SAR systems
  • using communications equipment (VHF, satcomms, etc.)
  • weather forecasting

13.9 Stowage Chart


It was agreed that a Stowage Chart would be required in categories 0-1-2-3-4. See RORC submission 2.


13.10 Weather forecast list


It was not agreed to add a requirement for a weather forecast list (RORC submission 4). However weather would be included in the topics and syllabus for compulsory training (see 9 above). Particular attention would be drawn to meteorological standard practice in which peaks (strong gusts of wind, and significantly larger waves amongst an average of smaller waves) are not given specific mention.


13.11 Stability Index


(RORC submission 6). The Chairman said draft ISO 12217-2 had many good features but unfortunately allowed a boat with as little as 105 degrees AVS to obtain a category “A” status (roughly equivalent to ORC category 1). Draft ISO 12217-2 was already being used to achieve compliance with the European Community Recreational Craft Directive (RCD) with which new craft must comply before being offered for sale within the EC. It was agreed to strongly recommend Council to resolve that every national authority represented would write to ISO to protest. (It was agreed that the SR committee would provide a standard template letter).


13.12 406 EPIRB


The RORC submission 9 was agreed. 121.5 and 243 MHz EPIRBs would be removed from SR 4.18 (except that the 406 and type “E” EPIRBs shall be required to also contain a 121.5 MHz unit for local homing). It was agreed that SR 4.18 as amended would apply also to category 2 events from 1/2001.


Note –during the chairman’s visit to the SAR authorities in Canberra this week he learned that some Australian aircraft used in SAR (eg the C-130 Hercules) do not carry maritime VHF and have no prospect of doing so. However on-scene voice communications are vital and AusSAR strongly recommends marine craft operating in its area to carry a dedicated, single-channel, waterproof self-contained hand-held aviation VHF which operates on 123.1 MHz AM. Such a set is made by a firm called “SALCOM” and sells for around $200 Australian. An advisory note explaining this will be added to SR 4.18 after a check on comms equipment used by other SAR authorities.


13.13 Foghorns


The RORC submission 10 was withdrawn. A Japanese submission to IMO prescribes sound signals reasonably achievable by small craft which could not except with great difficulty have produced the signals designed for ships and required by COLREGS.


13.14 Sextant, Radio Direction-Finder


SRs 4.11 and 3.24 (f). It was agreed that these items will be withdrawn from SRs. (The sextant served about 250 years –10 times longer than IOR….).




13.15 Proposed new category 5 – sportsboats


It was agreed that a working party would report on whether (and if so, how) sportsboats might be catered for by SRs. It was noted that Australia already used a similar category on a national basis. Bruce Eissner (USA) had wished for the draft list of equipment (circulated with RORC submission 14) to be reviewed. Eric Wells (RSA) had said an ORC-backed category 5 would be useful in South Africa. (It was agreed that working party members would be identified).


13.16 Lifeline tension


It was noted that some installations quickly exceed guideline maximum deflection of 50mm. However the committee did not agree to increase guideline deflection as they considered this would encourage owners to have even more bendy stanchions etc than at present. The committee did not wish to introduce a stiffness criterion for stanchions. It was agreed that there would be no change but the situation would be monitored.


13.17 Outboard engines


It was agreed that SR 3.23 (a) to (e) would be re-written to make it more clear. The committee decided on the principles that:


  • an inboard engine is mandatory in cats 0 1 and 2
  • an engine (either inboard or outboard) is mandatory in cat 3
  • an engine is not required in cat 4.


13.18 Sail numbers


It was agreed that SR 4.01 would be re-written in order to properly call up the provisions of RRS Appendix H. The committee chairman would consult with Tony Mooney on the details.


13.19 Anchors and cable


A proposed addition “anchors shall be provided with a suitable combination of chain and rope ready for immediate use” was agreed. The possible inclusion of a classification-society table of displacement/anchor weight/chain cable specification was considered but not agreed. Owners must continue to exercise their judgement and comply with SR 2.03 (a).


13.20 Rotating Wing Mast as substitute for Trysail


It was agreed, subject to the committee chairman circulating in the draft revised regulations an acceptable definition. Use of a twisting wing mast as substitute for trysail was not discussed.





13.21 Drogues


It was noted that Drogues (SR 4.25) offer significant aid in the reduction of the risk of capsize in heavy breaking seas. It was agreed to include a descriptive appendix, offered by the RORC.


13.22 Lifejacket equipment


The committee had reviewed the recommended equipment:

  • crotch straps (thigh straps to be specified as an alternative)
  • splashguard
  • light

It was agreed that these items would continue to appear as recommendations.


13.23 Category Margin Indicators


It was agreed that Category Margin Indicators would be shown as “Mo 0 1 2, Mu 0 1 2 3, etc. The word “all” would not be used.


13.24 Web site


It was agreed, subject to Council approval that SRs would be posted on the ORC web site both in complete form (virtual copy of the booklet) and also in modular form so that a user could select eg category 3 monohulls and have a text dump or html file with just the relevant parts extracted and provided in a single package. Separate checklists would also be supplied within each module. The committee was aware that internet access did not on the face of it promise to enhance booklet sales. Nonetheless, the committee proposes:

(a) we should prioritise giving the best possible service to sailors,

(b) that web site advertising should be sought, and

(c) that a “form-fill” area be displayed prominently on the site through which the booklet could be ordered with a credit card.


It was agreed that the Management Committee would consider these recommendations in their next meeting. However, it was noted that there was already a secure, credit-card order form on the site provided to purchase all ORC publications.


13.25 Development of international standard procedures and disaster contingency plans for shoreside organisations – brief from Council


It was agreed that a working party would be established to comprise members from AUS, USA, GBR and ITA. Members would be either members of the SR committee (Alan Green, Giovanni Ianucci) or nominees of members. The WP may co-opt and consult as they see fit. There would be an interim report in mid-2000 and a final report in November 2000.


13.26 Examination of legal liability and duties of organisers – brief from Council


It was agreed that a working party should be established on the same lines as in 26 above. Members would be predominantly lawyers who were also offshore sailors. Members of the SR committee from GBR, USA and AUS offered to nominate as also did observers from GER, RSA and BRA. Proposed that nominees should be tasked after discussion between the SR chairman and the Management Committee.


13.27 Publications


The chairman said that the target booklet publication date was 1/2000. A disk would be available with the main text in Word 97 by mid-December. A disk with the main text in Quark Express would be available in 1/2000.





Committee Chairman, Don Genitempo reported.


1999 had been a good year and had included the inaugural of IMS Worlds in Sardinia. The new Fifty Class Association was being organized. Their rules, constitution and officers were in place and they were being recognized as an affiliated class. There were to be two honorary Chairmen: King Harald V of Norway and King Juan Carlos of Spain.


14.1 Minutes


The minutes from 3 November 1998 were approved.


14.2 Report from Affiliated Class Association


Paolo Massarini was elected as the Affilliated Class Association Councillor.


ILC 25 Class Association: The Committee Chairman had reported that the World Championship was cancelled in Greece due to the lack of entries. It was noted that Greece wished to try again to hold the event in 2000 and it was agreed to endeavour to find a representative who could help reform the class.


ILC 30 Class Association: It was noted that the World Championship would be held in Brazil following the Novmeber meetings. Harald Brüning had been responsible for organizing the European participation. It was noted that Emilio Feliu would be the ORC Representative at the event.


ILC 40 Class Association: There had been no event scheduled for 1999.





IMS 50 Class Association: Paolo Massarini reported that the decision had been made to introduce a new class with a rating band for existing 50 footers. There were many boats of this size around the world and many had attended the Champagne Mumm Admiral’s Cup and Rolex IMS Offshore Worlds in Sardinia. The fleet was widespread with most in Italy and Spain. There were a number of American boats and some new projects in Japan and Australia. The first meeting to organize the class was held in Key West in January to decide the direction of the class during the year. Owners had agreed in general on certain parameters and matters were solidified in Sardinia, where Hans Eekhof, the owner of Innovision 7, was selected as President of the Class and Pasquale Landolfi, owner of Brava Q8, was selected as Vice President. King Harald V of Norway and King Juan Carlos of Spain were nominated as Honorary Presidents and Paolo Massarini was nominated as Secretary. The Class will shortly finalize the class parameters.


It was noted that the Rating Band for 2000 is based on the 1999 VPP and will change. A band no greater than 13 sec/mile was agreed.


With regard to the Racing schedule, a World Championship in the year 2000 was proposed to be held in Valencia as the majority of the fleet is due to be located in the Mediterranean at this time. The 2000 schedule, which would primarily be in the Mediterranean, would be circulated among the owners.


It was agreed that the Royal Cup and Landolfi Trophy, originally donated to the ILC 40 Class, were to be re-dedicated to the IMS 50 Class.


ILC Maxi Class: It was noted that Gianfranco Alberini represented the Class. There were no new boats. (and the situation was not very promising.?) The existing fleet had only four boats racing in 1999, Boomerang, Sayonara, Alexia and Sagamore. The Class could not meet the minimum criteria of the Green book, so there had been no 1999 World Championship. In 2000 they intend to have a series in Newport in June using the Newport to Bermuda Race as the long offshore for the World Championship. If the Championship was not possible, they would continue to race by themselves for an ICAYA Championship. ICAYA consists of more than ILC boats, some of which are cruising boats, a fleet which is growing. There had been nine boats in Sardinia and eleven to twelve cruising Maxis were planned to be racing in Sardinia in September 2000. There was currently a submission from Italy to change the World Championship from the ILC Maxi Class to the IMS Maxi Class.


Other Business:


The Committee Chairman had informed the committee that he wished to approach the ORC Management Committee with a request to allow him to contact Nautor Swan, Baltic Yachts, Beneteau Yachts and X Yachts and invite them to participate on the Offshore Classes and Events Committee. This would allow the ORC to provide a forum for the builders of some of the major offshore classes. But could be dependent upon the final outcome of the ORC/ISAF organizational format.


Paolo Massarini suggested that the Committee assist the boats in the 25-foot band in forming an IMS 25 association to replace the ILC 25. Rating Bands appeared to be in the direction that owners are going rather than supporting the ILC level class concept. The Committee agreed to offer assistance.


With regard to the IMS 40 Class, a letter had been received from the IMS 40 Class Association in the USA. They had proposed a rating band class similar to what was happening with the 50 foot Class and Maxi Class. It was agreed that the Chairman would contact their representative to see if their group could be the nucleus to reform the ILC 40 Class into an IMS 40 Rating Band Class, racing on handicap.


The Committee Chairman reported that the 1999 Rolex IMS Offshore World Championship had been held in Sardinia, in September. There had been thirty-one yachts entered with twenty-five participating in the event, representing ten countries. The fleet was divided into three classes by size and the organization had been excellent. The winds had been varied enough that all levels of wind resulted and the Class winners were Innovision 7, Winterthur Yah-Man and Drake.


14.3 Submissions


DSV1 - Establish Continental Championships


The Chairman recommended forming a subcommittee within the Offshore Classes & Events Committee to develop a calendar of events including the development of a series of regional or continental championships. This should include reviewing the schedule for the Offshore One-design classes of ISAF in order to assist organizers of events. Emilio Feliu-Serra suggested that the Euro/ISAF Championships schedule must also be addressed. Bruno Finzi suggested that the Committee go deeper into this issue to dertermine when or what are regional/continental championships and what their requirements are.


DSV2 - IMS Classes


The Chairman reported that the Committee’s actions were along the lines of the submission. The general philosophy was supported and they would be working toward this in the future. A 50 Foot class had been established and it was the intent of the Committee to assist boats with other narrow rating bands (40, 30 and 25 foot rating bands) if they so desired. A working group consisting of Paolo Massarini, José Frers and Wolfgang Schäfer was appointed to co-ordinate with the ITC. After analysing the majority of the European fleet and the relevant 1999 test fleet, it was recommended that on the base of the new IMS 50 Class Association spirit, the parameters to be considered are GPH and LOA.


For a 40 Foot Class, the following limits were identified:


GPH between 555 and 571

LOA between 11,50 and 14,00








In the meantime, the Working Party recommended considering a similar approach for the 25 and 30 Foot size yachts in the future. The suggested guidelines were:


IMS 25


GPH between 670 and 685

LOA between 7.20 and 8.50


IMS 30


GPH between 630 and 645

LOA between 9.00 and 10.30


It was noted that the GPH numbers would have to be adapted to the 2000 VPP.


The parameters for the IMS 50 Class Association had previously been established by the ITC at the request of the class organisation:


ILC 586: to 602

GPH 525: to 536

LOA 14.7:m to 15.5m


FIV4 - This submission was dealt with under DSV1.


FIV7 - This submission was dealt with under DSV2.


KNWV7 - This submission was dealt with under DSV1.


14.4 Revisions to Championship Rules (Green Book)


The provisions of the Green Book were reviewed. The drafted revisions are given in Appendix B to these Minutes.


14.5 World Championship Calendar for Future Events:


The following calendar was approved for the year 2000:


ILC 25 Greece Late September or October

ILC 30 Mediterranean Late September or October

IMS 50 Valencia, Spain Late summer or early fall

IMS Maxi Newport, Rhode Island June

IMS Worlds Newport, Rhode Island July 12-19


The following calendar was proposed for the year 2001:


ILC 25 To be determined




IMS Maxi Sardinia September

IMS Worlds Sardinia September


14.6 Regional Championship Calendar for Future Events:


The Committee is undertaking consideration for regional championships. The Yacht Club Punta Ala had requested to host the European IMS Championship in the year 2000. The Committee accepted their gracious invitation with pleasure. For the following years it was the hope of the Committee that the event would be rotated throughout the European continent. A request to host the European Championship in the year 2001 had been received from the Royal Gothenburg Yacht Club to host the event in Marstrand.


14.7 Other Business


It was noted that a Scheduling Working Group had been formed with Bengt-Olof Holmberg, Bjorn Loken and Gianfranco Alberini. The Group would review the scheduling of events and consider all major ISAF and ORC events to determine where scheduling conflicts occur.





The following submissions were reviewed:


15.1 DSV 2 IMS Classes and FIV 7 Level Classes


The Offshore Classes & Events Committee supported the philosophy of these submissions and has appointed a Working Group to review and make recommendations to the ITC for small rating band classes. As a result, the Working Group is preparing recommendations of sizes and rating bands for the 50, 40 and 30-foot groups. The Race Management Committee endorses the principle contained in the two submissions and supports the actions of the Offshore Classes & Events Committee in regard to the rating bands.


15.2 KNWV 2 ILC instead of GPH as class base


15.3 RFEV 14 To simplify Scoring Systems:


The Committee had studied various submissions on scoring options, scratch boats, class breaks, course types and simplification of scoring. Some of these submissions had also been taken up by ITC and/or the Club Working Group. Although the Committee had reached their own agreements, when these were compared with views of other committees it was apparent that compromise would be appropriate and, following Council discussion of alternatives and considerations, it was agreed to replace several fixed courses on the IMS certificate with two general race types, Inshore Race and Offshore Race. Within each race type there would be three options: Time-on-Time, Time-on-Distance and Performance Line. For the Inshore type, T-o-T and T-o-D would be based on ILC number and PLS would be based on the Olympic course configuration.

For the Offshore type, T-o-T and T-o-D would be based on GPH and PLS would be based on the Ocean course type. The principle identifier on the certificate would be the traditional GPH. The two race types and three options in each would be available also on the ORC Club Certificate.


15.4 KNWV 4 Scratch Boat ORC Club. The Race Management Committee supported this submission.


15.5 KNWV 5 New Performance Line course in ORC Club. The proposed new course type was not agreed.




Approval of Scoring Programs


It was agreed that the Windows based Race Management System (RMS) and the DOS based scoring system MK ALTURA be recognized as the official scoring systems for IMS. Approval by the ORC would be required with each version produced.




Chairman Giovanni Iannucci reported.


The Working Group had reviewed the promotional activity since the meeting in Palma. Despite the many initiatives highlighted by the Working Group (WG) and recommended to the Council, very little was achieved, mainly because of a shortage of funding. Only two modest initiatives had been implemented. It was concluded that the Group would establish specific and realistic marketing goals and determine their cost in order to submit a request to the Management Committee for inclusion in the year 2000 budget.


The Working Group then discussed a wide range of possible initiatives and priorities. In conclusion, the following proposals had been submitted and discussed with the Management Committee and Management had included appropriate funding in the 2000 Budget.


Marketing Committee Budget Activities:


  1. Web site enhancements and expansions

  • Promotion pamphlet and video

  • PowerPoint presentations to be put on to the web site to download for MNA seminars and Club seminars covering the following subjects (as a start)
  • -Explaining the rule changes for 2000

    -The ORC Club


    -ORC organization

    -PRC White book (Safety at sea)


  • ORC reception at the ISAF / ORC year meeting year 2000
  • Welcome – ORC chairman

    Cocktails and hors d’oevres

    PowerPoint presentation including video clip

    Pamphlet / literature for event participants


  • The format under point 4 would also be used for presentations during boat shows, some major regattas, such as Commodore Cup etc.

    Assignment of tasks:


    -1- Expansion and Enhancement of the Web


    The overall responsibility should lie with John Osmond, Theo Tsaltas and Kjell Borking.

    In order to have a living Web the Committee felt the need to assign responsibilities to each subject in order to keep the pages updated.


    A general news page which should be updated every week, links to interesting races, results etc. Under this, the following structure was suggested.:


    News page and general info Management Comm.

    -a- General promotion pages Promotional Comm.

    -b- Safety at sea including the Special Regs book Special Reg. Comm.

    -c- Technical matters ITC

    -d- Schedule of Regattas and results Offshore Classes &Events

    -e- Race management & scoring Race Management Com.

    -f- Format of Certificates & other measurement information Measurement Comm.


    It was decided that the web site could be improved with the input of a content supervisor and technical web master. A paper would be produced by Kjell Borking in order to use the extensive knowledge of the ORC Councillors and Committee Members in the upkeep of the site.


    -2- Promotional pamphlet and Power Point presentations.

    J Osmond,

    K Borking


    -3- Power Point presentations of the following subjects.


    - Rule and Special Reg. Changes 2000 T Tsaltas, K Borking, J Frers

    - The ORC Club J Osmond, K Borking

    - IMS K Borking

    - ORC Organization J Frers

    - Special Regs T Tsaltas


    -4- The ORC receptions. G Iannucci



    At the conclusion of the Working Group’s report ITC Chairman David Pedrick gave a transparency presentation to Council covering all aspects of the VPP. This was recorded by Kjell Borking to show how information could be conveyed in a simple but effective manner for inclusion on various media.





    5th - 7th February ITC RORC, London

    6th - 7th February Management RORC, London

    4th - 11th November Annual Meetings Edinburgh, Scotland

    The Annual General Meeting concluded with the Chairman, Hans Zuiderbaan, thanking the members for their input during the year, this included the welcome contribution of magazine articles from ITC member, David Lyons.





    ISAF / ORC


    POSITION PAPER – 12/11/99



    The objectives of the amalgamation are:-


    • To serve offshore sailors.
    • To have one governing body for world sailing.
    • To preserve and to protect the technical skills of the ORC.
    • To utilise the combined resources of both organisations in the most efficient manner.
    • To combine all activities in offshore sailing within the ISAF structure.
    • To improve the promotion of offshore sailing.
    • To encourage MNAs to maintain their existing offshore committee/group structure, to provide technically qualified people to the Offshore Racing Committee and Subcommittees.



    The following is proposed:-


    The ORC is to be a committee of ISAF reporting directly to Council.


    The committee will be known as the Offshore Racing Committee.


    The Offshore Racing Committee structure will be as currently used by ORC.


    The Offshore Racing Committee will have 7 subcommittees (present number of members to remain) which operate within its structure:-


    Chairman’s Group (Management Committee)

    International Technical Committee

    Measurement Subcommittee

    Race Management Subcommittee

    Offshore Classes and Events Subcommittee

    Special Regulations Subcommittee

    Promotion & Development Subcommittee


    MNAs will nominate technically qualified members to the Offshore Racing Committee and subcommittees in accordance with ISAF Regulation 3, in the same manner as is currently used at ORC. The Chairman's Group shall review the nominations and recommend to the Executive.


    The International Technical Committee will continue to be appointed and directed by the Offshore Racing Committee.


    The Offshore Racing Committee will report to the ISAF Council in the same manner as all ISAF Committees however for a decision on Technical matters, a 2/3rds majority of Council will be required to overturn a recommendation from the Offshore Racing Committee.


    The Offshore Racing Committee will present an annual budget to the Executive.


    ISAF will offer the ORC secretariat employment under the same current terms and conditions and utilise the Technical Consultants (Chief Measurer, Programming and Club).


    The Offshore Racing Committee will establish, conduct research, manage and administer:-


    1. The International Measurement System (IMS) and the IMS Regulations with the consent given to the ORC by the United States Sailing Association
    2. The ORC Club Rule
    3. The International Level Class Rule (ILC)
    4. ILC classes under IMS and any additional classes developed under current ORC rating rules
    5. Existing and additional Rating Rules the Offshore Racing Committee may develop or administer in agreement with the ISAF Council or Executive
    6. The Special Regulations (Safety Regulations)
    7. Measurement practice for the above rules
    8. Championship rules for offshore classes and IMS, ORC Club and additional rules the Offshore Racing Committee may develop or administer
    9. The International Offshore Rule (IOR)


    The Offshore Racing Committee will monitor all International offshore activities under International handicapping or measurement rules, even if they differ from those currently administered through the Offshore Racing Committee.


    Any handicap or measurement rule, supported by an MNA and desiring international status will be brought forward for representation through the Offshore Racing Committee under the direction of the Council.


    In due course, if appropriate, a number of the Offshore Racing Committee’s Subcommittees may be combined with other ISAF Committees.


    Example:- Offshore One Design Classes will combine with Offshore

    Classes and Events and Affiliated Classes and report to the

    Offshore Committee.










    The policy of the ORC is that the level rating classes and handicap racing within narrow rating bands shall be part of the overall structure of modern yacht racing as epitomised in the International Measurement System. This rule is primarily used to produce time allowances to enable offshore yachts of different sizes and ratings to race together. The Council therefore sees the level rating classes and yachts racing in narrow rating bands as yachts designed to the IMS but racing without time allowances, rather than restricted one design or formula classes such as were previously recognised in yacht racing. For instance, should there be changes in the Rules which alter the value of ratings for the yachts of a certain size, the Council may well change the rating value in order to preserve the yachts at the desired size and speed potential. It may also change other rules which established these classes.

    The Council issues instructions for these classes based on advice received from its committees, including the International Technical Committee, the Offshore Classes Committee and the Special Regulations Committee. The racing rules are the Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS) promulgated by the International Sailing Federation. The Council expects level racing and racing in narrow rating bands to take place at international, national, regional and local levels. It establishes policy for the conduct of the world championships which also may be used for other principal events.


    2.1 Authorised World Championships


    The current ORC Classes authorised World Championships by ISAF are:


    IMS World Championship

    Maxi World Championship

    IMS 50 Class World Championship

    ILC Maxi

    ILC 46

    ILC 40

    ILC 30

    ILC 25

    2.4 Qualifications for a World Championship


    For an event to qualify as a World Championship, there shall be a minimum number of eligible yachts. To be eligible, a yacht must be present at the event, checked by the Measurement Committee and be accepted by the International Jury as meeting all entry requirements for the event. For World Championships, the yacht’s owner shall be a member of the relevant Class Association, where appropriate. Except for the ILC Maxi Class, the minimum number of countries shall be four and the minimum number of entries plus countries shall be fourteen. For the ILC Maxi Class, the minimum number of entries shall be six and shall include at least one yacht from each of three different countries or two continents.








    3.1 World Championships shall be conducted under the current edition of the following. Rules apply in the order published in this document except as any of these are changed by the sailing instructions.


    a) ISAF Racing Rules of Sailing (RRS);


    d) b) Offshore Racing Council Championship Rules for the Offshore Classes, which shall have the status of Sailing Instructions. A copy of these rules shall be sent to each entrant by the host organising club;


    b) c) The relevant International Level Class Rule and as referenced, the IMS Rule, IMS Regulations and the Class Association Rules as published or approved by the ORC.


    c) d) Offshore Racing Council Special Regulations Governing Offshore Racing (See Rule 9.).


    e) Notice of Race (See Appendix 4) and Sailing Instructions (See Appendix 5) of the host organising club.


    f) Prescriptions of the national authority of the organising club shall not be applied to world championship series, but may apply in any other races and these shall be printed in the sailing instructions. unless authorized by the ORC.


    3.5 Any electronic aid may be used. A radio transmitter may be used only for private business or for emergency purposes or for Race Reporting if specified in the Sailing Instructions. Prearranged radio transmissions for the use of individual competitors are prohibited and cellular telephones are not allowed to be carried on board while racing.




    All challenges shall be lodged by the national authority of the country at least 60 days prior to the start of the first race. Late challenges may be accepted by organising clubs with the permission of the ORC. Challenges from individual yachts will not be accepted. Challenges shall be written in the following manner:


    4.3 Each yacht's rating certificate shall be presented in duplicate before 0900 hours on the day before the first day of inspection, unless otherwise specified in the notice of race. All rating certificates shall be rechecked and endorsed by the National Authority issuing the certificate. All rating certificates for yachts competing in a world championship shall indicate compliance with IMS Appendix 5.4 Double Measurement. All rating certificates shall be available for inspection by all competitors.


    5.3 Measurement

    Measurers shall be appointed in conjunction with the ORC Chief Measurer after consulting with the class and the National Authority of the host country. At least one should be from another country. At least one qualified ORC measurer shall be present throughout the event. At any time throughout the series even whilst yachts are racing, sails and yachts shall be subject to scrutiny and to checks for compliance with the rules at the discretion of the ORC Measurement Committee.








    Level rating class boats will no doubt race under national and local arrangements in short courses, single offshore races and as individual classes within regattas for prizes, within wider handicap events and in many other varieties of races. Wherever possible, and particularly in national and regional championships, the ORC recommends that a schedule of events be followed similar to that programme which is used in the world championships for the offshore class. In this way the boats will continue to be developed, designed and constructed to ensure that they remain fit for offshore racing.

    World Championship events shall not be scheduled as part of other events without express consent of the ORC. Even with consent, separate classes, starts and scoring will be provided for the Championship series.


    The IMS World Championship shall be open to any yacht with a valid IMS Certificate. Racing will be on handicap basis using Performance Curve Scoring. It shall be held annually. For this event the ORC, with assistance from the event organizer, may elect (1) to divide the fleet into a racing division and a cruiser/racer division, (2) apply the Dynamic Allowance and Age Allowance and (3) further divide the divisions into size classes.


    The Maxi World Championship is open to all yachts of 20 metres LOA or more that are members of the Affiliated Class Association (ICAYA). The ORC may divide the fleet into classes depending upon the number of entries or types (ILC, Racer or Cruiser/Racer). Prizes may be awarded to the various classes.


    6.1 In ORC world championships, conditions permitting, each event should adhere to the following schedule:


    For the ILC Classes:

    Day Race Scoring Programme


    1 Inspection

    2 Inspection

    3 1 0.75 Windward/Leeward

    2 0.75 Windward/Leeward

    4) 3 2.0 Long Offshore



    6 Rest or Reserve Day

    7 4 0.75 Windward/Leeward

    5 0.75 Windward/Leeward

    8 6 1.5 Short Offshore

    9 7 1.0 Windward/Leeward, Prizegiving



    Scoring Coefficients:

    Coefficient X Number of Races = Total

    Windward/Leeward 1 X 5 = 5

    Long Offshore 2.5 X 1 = 2.5

    Short Offshore 1.5 X 1 = 1.5

    TOTAL 9


    Before a World Championship may be awarded, races with a combined coefficient total of 7.0 must have been completed.


    Where unusual or extreme local conditions make it impossible to sail a Windward/leeward or Olympic Type course, the race committee shall refer to the International Jury who may give permission to sail an Inshore course, provided they are agreed that it is impractical to set a Windward/leeward or Olympic Type course on the day concerned. The coefficient of this race will remain the same as the race substituted. In the event of abandonment of the scheduled first windward/leeward races, they shall be re-scheduled to be held as the first races of the series.

    6.2 Races shall be designed to provide durations as follows:


    Windward/Leeward 1.5-2 hours

    Long Offshore 24-30 hours

    Short Offshore 12-15 hours


    Distances and times of races should be planned to be as follows (distances in nautical miles):


    ILC Maxi Class:

    Windward/leeward races (except final) - 14-18 miles

    Long Offshore Race - 250 miles or 24 hours (one overnight)

    Short Offshore Race - 120 miles or 12 hours

    Final windward/leeward race - 26 miles

    Olympic Type Race -27 miles


    ILC 46 Class:

    Windward/leeward races (except final) - 14-18 miles

    Long Offshore Race - 200 miles or 24 hours (one overnight)

    Short Offshore Race - 100 miles or 12 hours

    Final windward/leeward race - 24 miles

    Olympic Type Race -25 miles


    ILC 40 Class:

    Windward/leeward races (except final) - 14-16 miles

    Long Offshore Race - 170 miles or 24 hours (one overnight)

    Short Offshore Race - 80 miles or 12 hours

    Final windward/leeward race - 22 miles

    Olympic Type Race - 25 miles


    ILC 30 Class:

    Windward/leeward races (except final) - 12-14 miles

    Long Offshore Race - 120 miles or 24 hours (one overnight)

    Short Offshore Race - 60 miles or 12 hours

    Final windward/leeward race - 15 miles

    Olympic Type Race - 22 miles


    ILC 25 Class:

    Windward/leeward races (except final) - 10 miles

    Long Offshore Race - 80 miles or 24 hours (one overnight)

    Short Offshore Race - 40 miles or 12 hours

    Final windward/leeward race - 12 miles

    Olympic Type Race - 20 miles


    Time limits may be applied to inshore races. A race is completed when at least one yacht has finished.


    Before a World Championship may be awarded, the Short Offshore race, the Long Offshore race and a minimum of two Windward/leeward races or one Olympic Type or one Inshore race shall have been completed.


    Offshore races shall normally be started to windward. However when unusual and extreme local conditions make that impractical the race committee may refer to the International Jury, who may give permission for a downwind start.




    7.1 Scoring shall be the low point system as described in RRS Appendix A, except the value of a first place finish shall be 0.75 instead of 1.0. Points will be multiplied by the appropriate scoring coefficient. There will be no discards.



    7.1 Definitions


    a) The place of the yacht in each race shall be her place in the order of finishing, corrected for penalties.

    b) The number of entries shall be the number of yachts entered which are accepted after inspection.


    7.2 Scoring in each race


    a) The yacht which finishes in first place shall receive points equal to the number of entries. The yacht which finishes in second place shall receive points equal to the number of entries minus one. The yacht which finishes in third place shall receive points equal to the number of entries minus two, and so on.


    b) The yacht which has the best place in the race shall receive a bonus of a quarter of a point.

    c) A yacht which:

    i) ranks as a starter but does not start (DNS),or

    ii) starts and does not finish (DNF),or

    iii) retires (RET)

    shall score points equal to the points which would have been gained by the last yacht to finish, had all yachts which ranked as starters finished.


    d) A yacht which does not rank as a starter (DNC) shall receive one point.


    e) A yacht which is disqualified (DSQ) shall receive no points.


    7.3 Scoring - general


    a) Points will be multiplied by the appropriate scoring coefficient in 6.1. The points to be multiplied include the bonus of a quarter of a point for the winning yacht.

    b) A tie in the total score of two or more yachts shall be broken by their relative places in the longest race.

    c) There shall be no discard.

    d) The yacht receiving most points shall be the winner.


    7.4 Penalties


    RRS 44.1, 44.2 or 44.3 may apply, or as per sailing instructions.

    For inshore races, it is recommended that yachts be given the option of using either RRS 44.2 or 44.3. For offshore races, it is mandatory that RRS 44.3 be used.


    Event organisers, with the consent of the ORC Offshore Classes & Events Committee, may elect to modify penalties assessed under RRS 44.3 and for infringement of RRS 29.1 (OCS).


    RRS 44.3 shall be applied with the following additions:


    a) A yacht that fails to take a scoring penalty under Rule 44.3 will be liable to a 50% penalty of the number of yachts entered.


    A yacht that does not comply with the requirements of Rule 44.3 (a), but acknowledges an infringement prior to the hearing, shall be penalised 30% of the number of yachts entered.


    b) For infringements of rules other than those of Part 2, whether acknowledged or not, a scoring penalty based on the system in Rule 44.3 of not less than 10% of the number of yachts entered shall be applied, except as follows:


    A yacht which is scored as on the course side at the start (OCS) shall receive a penalty of 50%.


    For minor infringements of the Special Regulations and Rule 10 of the Championship Rules for Offshore Classes, the Jury may impose no penalty.


    8.2 Crew Lists


    For world championships A crew list shall be submitted before the first race and shall be made available to all contestants. Throughout the event the number of crew shall remain the same as the number participating in the first race. IMS Regulation 104 shall not apply for world championship events.


    The total weight of the crew shall be established before the start of the first race by weighing the individual members of the crew in bare feet and shorts. This weight shall not exceed the crew weight limit for the class yacht. Should a member of the crew be replaced during the series, the Jury shall establish that this limit has not been exceeded.


    8.3 Crew Substitution


    Substitution of crew will be permitted by prior consent of the International Jury. The owner has the responsibility to ensure that crew weight limits have not been exceeded. The International Jury may require that the weight of the original crewmember and his replacement be documented.


    The substitution of one crew member shall be permitted once, but the new crew member may not be a registered crew member from another competing yacht. It is not compulsory to nominate the substitute crew member in the crew list submitted prior to the first race. The substitution shall be notified in writing to the Jury. Thereafter no substitution shall be made without the prior written permission of the Jury, except for the declared single owner on the crew list. Only in exceptional or unexpected circumstances of illness, injury or of a personal nature will the International Jury allow the substitution of another crew member or allow any crew member to be left ashore.


    When a crew member has been replaced in terms of the above paragraph, the replacement becomes an ordinary member of the crew for the remainder of the regatta and subject to the provisions of this rule.




    All races will be category 2, with the exception of the ILC 30 and ILC 25 Classes which will be category 3 including the requirement that VHF radios are mandatory for all races and liferafts are madatory for offshore races.


    The categories to be used shall be as follows:


    ILC Maxi Category 2

    ILC 46 Category 2

    ILC 40 Category 2

    ILC 30 Category 3 *

    ILC 25 Category 3 *

    * Liferaft and VHF radio are mandatory. For the ILC 25 Class, this only applies to offshore races.


    For races other than world championships, the category shall be decided by the organising club but it is recommended that the above categories are used.


    The minimum fresh water capacity shall be 35 litres. Race Committees at an event may limit the quantities of liquids permitted on board whilst racing.


    10.1 Sails


    One suit of sails plus one mainsail may be used in a series and shall have been measured and stamped by an ORC measurer. This number may not exceed the maximum permitted in the IMS Regulations for the maximum L of the yachts in the class. With the exception of the spare mainsail all sails must be carried aboard.


    Sails damaged during the series may be repaired. Sails beyond repair may be replaced with permission of the International Jury.


    All sails to be used in the series shall:


    - have been measured and stamped by an ORC measurer, fully certified for all IMS and/or IOR measurements, as appropriate, and

    - be inspected at a pre-race inspection.


    At the pre-race inspection all the sails to be used in the series shall be checked against each yacht's certificate, measured and stamped with a stamp specially made for the event, and listed in an inventory.


    Two mainsails are allowed with the option to race with either throughout the series, but one mainsail only shall be carried aboard while racing. Each mainsail shall comply with the yacht's measurement certificate. Both mainsails shall be capable of being reefed at least 15% of P. All other sails shall be carried on board (while racing).


    The sail inventory shall be signed by the owner, charterer or borrower of the yacht and shall comply with the relevant class rules.

    Sails damaged during the series may be repaired, but may not be replaced.


    Sails which are to be repaired off the yacht shall be checked before and after by an official of the event.


    11. PRIZES


    11.4 For the IMS World Championship, if the fleet is divided into racer and cruiser/racer divisions, each division will have a designated “World Champion”. The ORC may further elect to award an additional prize to the “Outstanding World IMS Yacht” derived from a formula of its own design.