New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Trapezing and Windward Boat
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Trapezing and Windward Boat

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6644
Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Trapezing and Windward Boat
    Posted: 06 Apr 22 at 9:49am
Originally posted by Rupert

4 pages on someone essentially standing up and brushing against another boat. Makes me want to go cruising, almost.


Recent events in the Formula One world suggest that our rules are a model of clarity and simplicity by comparison!
Back to Top
ohFFsake View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 04 Sep 08
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 219
Post Options Post Options   Quote ohFFsake Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 22 at 7:45am
Originally posted by Brass

 
I'ts an artifact of the RRS that they only contemplate boats rotating around the yaw axis (changing course). A boat that rotates radically around the roll axis, doesn't get an obligation to give room to keep clear. That's just the way it is.

And there is no 'if reasonably possible' in the right of way rules.

In the case of a boat capsizing 'under your nose', and you hit it:

* it might not be reasonably possible for your to avoid contact, so you do not break rule 14, but
* If you hit her before the masthead is in the water, you break rule 12, boat clear astern keep clear,
* if you hit here after her masthead is in the water, then 'reasonably possible' kicks in via rule 22.

The rules don't look at 'the point where she losses control', which would be endlessly disputable, but at the much clearer point where 'her masthead is in the water'.

In either case where boats are on the same tack and overlapped or not, the boat clear ahead, or overlapped to leeward is the right of way boat and is an obstruction, all the time.
Thanks for the excellent clarification. Having pored over the rules a little after writing my post I was gravitating towards the same conclusion regarding the capsizing boat. Of course in this instance it hits the windward boat long before the mast ever hits the water so the course change is perhaps the only possible defence for W to avoid penalty.

I guess I was just trying to find something in the rules to deny the inevitable conclusion that in order to avoid this situation on a start line you would need to maintain a mast height's separation from the boat to leeward, in the case of a 29er this being around 6m
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 11:28pm
Originally posted by ohFFsake

I guess this swings on whether a capsizing boat is "sailing her course"?Taking it to the next logical step, if a boat unexpectedly capsizes in front of you then you would surely not expect to be penalised for failing to avoid her if you were unable to do so.So in this case could it perhaps be argued that at the point the leeward boat loses control she switches from being ROW boat (rule 11) to becoming an obstruction, which establishes a new obligation on W and with it the defence that she did not have room to avoid?Also seems unlikely that L would drop a mainsheet and capsize without changing course, which again gives W a valid defence?


I'ts an artifact of the RRS that they only contemplate boats rotating around the yaw axis (changing course). A boat that rotates radically around the roll axis, doesn't get an obligation to give room to keep clear. That's just the way it is.

And there is no 'if reasonably possible' in the right of way rules.

In the case of a boat capsizing 'under your nose', and you hit it:

* it might not be reasonably possible for your to avoid contact, so you do not break rule 14, but
* If you hit her before the masthead is in the water, you break rule 12, boat clear astern keep clear,
* if you hit here after her masthead is in the water, then 'reasonably possible' kicks in via rule 22.

The rules don't look at 'the point where she losses control', which would be endlessly disputable, but at the much clearer point where 'her masthead is in the water'.

In either case where boats are on the same tack and overlapped or not, the boat clear ahead, or overlapped to leeward is the right of way boat and is an obstruction, all the time.

Edited by Brass - 06 Apr 22 at 2:00am
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 11:02pm
Originally posted by sargesail

I disagree that Case 107 is relevant. In that case the boats were always there and closing. On the start line L checks and sees Clear Astern. When they commit to go on the wire CA has become windward.

How would you find if L projected on the wire, made contact with the jib of W and was then injured by Ws shroud?

I disagree with your disagreement <g>.

Case 107 says very clearly that everybody, including right of way boats must keep a good lookout.

I think that What your are arguing about is what constitutes a 'good lookout'.

I've previously said that this means 'seeing what's there to be seen'.

As you now pose the problem, L has seen W, before the contact, judged that it is possible to hike out without contact, and committed to do so, and then finds that it's not reasonably possible to 'unhike' or bear away in time.

You've almost got me convinced.

I'm mindful of JimC's wise advice

There's danger of too much logic chopping here

However,

While rule 14, very pointedly, avoids avoids addressing who hit whom, it is sometimes useeful to identify a 'hitter' and a 'hitee'.

The picture I've had in mind up to now, is that L's crew extends on trap and in the act of extending, touches W. That is, L moves towards W and contact occurs. In that case, arguably, it is reasonably possible for L to have avoided contact simply by not extending [any further].

An alternative picture is that L's crew is fully or partially extended, and W accelerates or decelerates and by that change in motion, touches L's crew. In that case, I would agree that it was not reasonably possible for L, once her crew had reached that position, to avoid contact.

Lastly, if there's any injury or damage, exoneration goes out the window.
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 8:55pm
Club handicap racing actually makes the rules more complex and harder to deal with, in a way. Suddenly proper course can vary wildly between boats, where in a one design fleet it is likely that two boats going down wind will be sailing roughly the same angles. Same goes for upwind windward/leeward situations, too.

Simplified rules simply make bigger grey areas and bring up more situations that aren't covered.
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
423zero View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 08 Jan 15
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3399
Post Options Post Options   Quote 423zero Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 6:54pm
I always enjoy the rules threads, I even read the book, I know a bit weird  Smile (I have a collection of Cricket rules books, from the 1800's to today), think a lot of it can be dropped for club handicap racing.
Robert
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 6:17pm
Reading this thread, is it any wonder that the sailing rules are regarded as opaque by so many people? 4 pages on someone essentially standing up and brushing against another boat. Makes me want to go cruising, almost.
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
Mozzy View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 21 Apr 20
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 209
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mozzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 3:26pm
Originally posted by ohFFsake


I guess this swings on whether a capsizing boat is "sailing her course"?
Taking it to the next logical step, if a boat unexpectedly capsizes in front of you then you would surely not expect to be penalised for failing to avoid her if you were unable to do so.

So in this case could it perhaps be argued that at the point the leeward boat loses control she switches from being ROW boat (rule 11) to becoming an obstruction, which establishes a new obligation on W and with it the defence that she did not have room to avoid?

Also seems unlikely that L would drop a mainsheet and capsize without changing course, which again gives W a valid defence?

I believe if the windward boat had thought on their redress request they would have put in there that leeward changed course, as it's hard to imagine they didn't during the capsize. 

It's a story told by some friends who were young at the time. I think both they (windward boat) and leeward boat agreed in the boat park that it wasn't the fault of the windward boat and the leeward boat did spins or retired (admitting fault). I think both boats were good friend and they went along to either a protest hearing or request for redress solely for formalise what they all believed was the correct outcome: that the windward boat would get redress for that race, and the subsequent race they missed. 

They probably weren't aware of a need for leeward to change course and maybe when asked the question by the PC they just stated that leeward dropped the sheet. 
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1458
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 9:39am
Originally posted by Brass

    
Originally posted by Brass

Originally posted by sargesail

...trapeze ... Its actually really hard to look into that space behind you!
That's no doubt what the guys behind the big assy in Case 107 said. It didn't wash.
Originally posted by sargesail

Head to head on keelboats who are not looking behind their genoas is very different from trapeze skiffs where the speed differential between the boat close to the line, compared with the one approaching late might be 1:3.and that is 3 knots to 9 knots in planing conditions.

Closing speed in Case 107 might have been 3kts + 6kts = 9kts. Not really relevant. Case 107 says that if it's there to be seen and you didn't see it, or see it in time, you are not keeping a good lookout and not doing what is required of you to avoid contact under rule 14, no matter what obstructions, like a assy or being behind your back there are.

In practice, as you observed, in the hiking out scenario, it is very unlikely that there will be damage or injury, so L will nearly always be exonerated.

I get the sense that in your above post you are maybe feeling around for a rule 14 second sentence get out of gaol.

I knew W was there, but because of the angles etc etc, it was never clear to me that W wasn't luffing up to keep clear, so the time for me to act never arose.

It doesn't appeal to me.







I disagree that Case 107 is relevant. In that case the boats were always there and closing. On the start line L checks and sees Clear Astern. When they commit to go on the wire CA has become windward.

How would you find if L projected on the wire, made contact with the jib of W and was then injured by Ws shroud?
Back to Top
ohFFsake View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 04 Sep 08
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 219
Post Options Post Options   Quote ohFFsake Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 22 at 9:15am
Originally posted by Mozzy

Originally posted by 423zero

You are talking a sizeable space to allow for L boat to be able to capsize without touching W, seems to be a gamble by W on a crowded start line, perhaps RO should call any  boats that are to close ?

It's an interesting one, not sure who sailed in to the start line gap. But more often than not it is the leeward boat that sails in from astern and close to the windward boat, to then give them maximum space to bear off and accelerate.

I wasn't involved in the incident, only had it told to me second hand. The contact happened shortly after the start. I wonder if the windward boat ever had opportunity to get more than a mast length to windward before the leeward boat capsized. 

I also forgot, I think the windward boat, whose sail was torn, also got DND as damage was caused in the collision. So instead of getting redress they expected, they ended up with a DND and  RTD. 

I guess this swings on whether a capsizing boat is "sailing her course"?
Taking it to the next logical step, if a boat unexpectedly capsizes in front of you then you would surely not expect to be penalised for failing to avoid her if you were unable to do so.

So in this case could it perhaps be argued that at the point the leeward boat loses control she switches from being ROW boat (rule 11) to becoming an obstruction, which establishes a new obligation on W and with it the defence that she did not have room to avoid?

Also seems unlikely that L would drop a mainsheet and capsize without changing course, which again gives W a valid defence?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy