- Joined
- Nov 25, 2003
- Messages
- 16,194
Well I just got done reading Mr. John Equi's "technically speaking" in the December Roostertail. All I can say is that I'm stunned at the "instructions" given on how to take noise readings & it was written as follows-
"Our existing wording, as well as the revised rule Russ proposes takes the readings at 90 degrees to the travel lane with the boat in front of the sound meter. I did have to practice a bit to catch the boat in front of me. If readings are taken between buoy #6 and the starting line, they should be easier to obtain, since the boat stinger will never point directly at the meter. Using the existing rule could produce an errant peak reading that is outside the described detection area if the operator waits till the boat enters turn 1 and observes the meter."
John, I'm sorry but what the #*@$??? Taking readings BEFORE the boat gets to the meter? I have been studying dB readings on these boats regularly now for a number of years & these "instructions" given will only serve to help cushion the reading of an illegally loud boat. The point of a noise rule is to REDUCE the noise output in general, not just on certain parts of the course. It doesn't take a genius to know that the loudest readings will occur when the boat is at & going away from you. There are no "errant peaks" as a dB reading is SOUND PRESSURE & the highest reading will be when that SOUND PRESSURE is coming at you, in this case when the boats are at & going away from you. It also is not cumulative, it will read the loudest noise source no matter if it's one or three boats go by at the same time. The current method of the meter pointing straight out at the course & observing the highest reading as the boats pass along the front of the course is the correct method.
And BTW- this is the second consecutive issue of the Roostertail where you are using your column of "technically speaking" to attempt to influence the way a member votes or may vote on an upcoming issue. Technical articles are great but please keep it to "the facts" & not personal opinion or points of influence. Using the Roostertail as a medium to campaign your own opinion or feeling is not fair to anyone who might have an opposing view as they do not have the same advantage & leverage your column affords you.
This might ruffle feathers & I mean you no disrespect John but this is just not right.
"Our existing wording, as well as the revised rule Russ proposes takes the readings at 90 degrees to the travel lane with the boat in front of the sound meter. I did have to practice a bit to catch the boat in front of me. If readings are taken between buoy #6 and the starting line, they should be easier to obtain, since the boat stinger will never point directly at the meter. Using the existing rule could produce an errant peak reading that is outside the described detection area if the operator waits till the boat enters turn 1 and observes the meter."
John, I'm sorry but what the #*@$??? Taking readings BEFORE the boat gets to the meter? I have been studying dB readings on these boats regularly now for a number of years & these "instructions" given will only serve to help cushion the reading of an illegally loud boat. The point of a noise rule is to REDUCE the noise output in general, not just on certain parts of the course. It doesn't take a genius to know that the loudest readings will occur when the boat is at & going away from you. There are no "errant peaks" as a dB reading is SOUND PRESSURE & the highest reading will be when that SOUND PRESSURE is coming at you, in this case when the boats are at & going away from you. It also is not cumulative, it will read the loudest noise source no matter if it's one or three boats go by at the same time. The current method of the meter pointing straight out at the course & observing the highest reading as the boats pass along the front of the course is the correct method.
And BTW- this is the second consecutive issue of the Roostertail where you are using your column of "technically speaking" to attempt to influence the way a member votes or may vote on an upcoming issue. Technical articles are great but please keep it to "the facts" & not personal opinion or points of influence. Using the Roostertail as a medium to campaign your own opinion or feeling is not fair to anyone who might have an opposing view as they do not have the same advantage & leverage your column affords you.
This might ruffle feathers & I mean you no disrespect John but this is just not right.
Last edited by a moderator: