Waiting for ruling on 'Billboard'

[Art Prufer]

A request was submitted on November 232rd last year by the CAN IOM Class Secretary requesting a ruling on the legality of a "vane like billboard" installed on an IOM. AFAIK there has been no response to this request.
Here are some photos of the "billboard" in question.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/utCsFpjHK22Dga528

[Art Prufer]

Wow, 1492 views and not one comment.
It seems the 'system' is broken.

[Art Prufer]

Thank you for posting the answer in the Q&A section.

[Bruce Andersen]

Looks like it should be measured as additional sail area!

Some time ago, some boom vangs were quite large CF plates and they were outlawed along the same line of though

[Art Prufer]

Looks like it should be measured as additional sail area!

Some time ago, some boom vangs were quite large CF plates and they were outlawed along the same line of though

Hi Bruce, It has been approved as class legal. I guess the difference is the boom vang is in the same plane as the mainsail and rotates with it.
It is also considered as rigging, whereas the billboard is static and considered part of the hull deck structure.

The ruling is here:
https://www.iomclass.org/iom-questions-and-answers/
"Question:Having in mind closed rules nature of the IOM Class Rules and that deck is not an ERS defined term is there any restriction on placing vertical part on the IOM deck (like one on the photo? "

[Bruce Andersen]

opens up a whole new area of creative "deck" components I guess

also opens up a whole new area of creative plate vangs that pass through the appropriate size ring

[Bruce Andersen]

I guess if a "deck" is undefined in the rules then any sort of unusual and unexplained protuberance could be considered legal eg. the bumps on the deck of a VISS

Section F rules concern rigs:

F.2.4 CONSTRUCTION
(a) Fittings and/or control lines may be combined provided their function is not extended beyond what is permitted.

I wonder if a similar statement belongs in the Section D (hull) and Section E (hull appendages) rules to staunch the proliferation of "rule beater" designs eg plate vangs, deck protuberances, deck billboards, etc.

I think most would agree that these are designed to increase surface area and limit the flow of air between the main boom and the "deck", but where does it stop?

If a manufacturer wanted to push the limits of design, get into an open design like Marblehead, RG65, or 10 Rater rather than muck up the IOM notion of a class with a closed rule.