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  <12345>
Author
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: 1456
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 22 at 2:35pm
Originally posted by Brass

Originally posted by sargesail

Are understood - so you are suggesting that leeward could be in breach of 14 if it doesn’t take the available option of not stretching out?


SEE GMLs post second in the thread.

L breaks rule 14. No beg-you-pardons.

Originally posted by sargesail



Which might be the case….but it would be my contention that in most cases 14. a would apply….a crew going out needn’t check that space to windward, and their first apprehension of contact would probably be head on jib r whatever.


Nah, don't buy that. L, like everybody else is required to keep a good lookout.
Originally posted by sargesail



And that there would be few cases where exoneration under 14 b wouldn’t apply


That I do buy<g>.

Originally posted by sargesail



…..in fact notwithstanding US case 65,

Don't get your reference.


USA Appeal 65 is about one incident or two, which I don't think applies here, and the more relevant Appeal for you is RYA 2003/3.

Did you mean US Appeal 45? That's about anticipation, and I don't think that's relevant here either.

Originally posted by sargesail

would say that damage or injury would not have been caused by soft flesh on windward boat.


Yes, but there might be some injury caused by the windward boat on some soft flesh.



You’re not a trapeze crew are you? It’s actually really hard to look into that space behind you!

So I was talking about 16.1 in the post above at 1842. Does L break rule 14 if she brings the boat upright into ty mast of a windward boat above her hull?

If there isn’t some leeway for L why does the word ‘reasonable’ feature in the rule?

I was referring to US65 because of the double incident concept…..my point being that it would be hard for 14b not to apply unless there were something which made it 2 incidents. Sorry for the confusion

Edited by sargesail - 31 Mar 22 at 2:41pm
Back to Top
davidyacht View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 29 Mar 05
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1330
Post Options Post Options   Quote davidyacht Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 22 at 4:12pm
I don't think you need to be trapezing, historically I can recall several occasions where hard hiking after the start would have my head in the boat to windward's jib.  I don't think I am allowed to do that now, but it did make the point without causing damage.
Happily living in the past
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 22 at 7:20pm
A leeward boat sailing upwind on stbd tack with no obstructions near by has every right of way going. Why (and how) would they expect to look over their shoulder to see if they were in close contact with another boat, knowing that they must be right of way boat over any other?  Surely if L can’t sail her normal course in her normal manner (i.e. with possibility of needing to trapeze) then W isn’t keeping clear?
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: Online
Posts: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 22 at 10:11pm
Originally posted by sargesail



You’re not a trapeze crew are you? It’s actually really hard to look into that space behind you!


No I'm not.

That's no doubt what the guys behind the big assy in Case 107 said. It didn't wash.

Originally posted by sargesail


So I was talking about 16.1 in the post above at 1842.


I don't know why: nobody has ever said that L changed course.

You said

Originally posted by sargesail


Surely no one would argue that in this situation 16.1 applies…


I agree with that.

Originally posted by sargesail


Does L break rule 14 if she brings the boat upright into the mast of a windward boat above her hull?

If there isn’t some leeway for L why does the word ‘reasonable’ feature in the rule?


Yes.

It was reasonably possible for L to not bring her boat upright, therefore it was reasonably possible for her to avoid contact.

The test is not was the action [of bring the boat upright] reasonable.

The test is was it reasonably possible not to bring the boat upright.



Coming back to rule 16.

Educate me about pulling the trigger.

Does pulling the trigger necessarily involve changing course?

Is that what's bubbling along about this rule 16 stuff?

Can it reasonably be argued that pulling the trigger:

* usually involves changing heading from slightly below CH to CH? OR
* by accelerating and the action of the centreboard as the boat comes upright, involves the boat's track moving ahead and to windward (thus changing course)?
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: Online
Posts: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Mar 22 at 10:15pm
Originally posted by sargesail


I was referring to US65 because of the double incident concept…..my point being that it would be hard for 14b not to apply unless there were something which made it 2 incidents. Sorry for the confusion


We usually treat the coming together, with all the rules 11 14, 16 implications as one incident. It's something, all connected, happening within a few seconds.

What sort of 'something which made it two incidents' did you have in mind?

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: 01 Apr 22 at 12:53pm
This is something that pops up a lot sailing the 800. Boats sailing in from behind tight to you, but not enough space for them to step out on the trapeze or for the windward boats leeward tiller to drop to leeward at they try to head up.

Also remind me of a story from the 29er fleet.  Not long after the start the leeward boat dropped their main sheet and capsized to windward. The tip of their mast tore through the windward boats sail. They finished the race, but had to go in for the next one to switch sails. The windward boat then applied for redress.. and not only was not reinstated to the second race, but was disqualified from the first race for not keeping clear (leeward boat didn't change course). 
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: 1456
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 22 at 2:54pm
Originally posted by Brass

Originally posted by sargesail


I was referring to US65 because of the double incident concept…..my point being that it would be hard for 14b not to apply unless there were something which made it 2 incidents. Sorry for the confusion


We usually treat the coming together, with all the rules 11 14, 16 implications as one incident. It's something, all connected, happening within a few seconds.

What sort of 'something which made it two incidents' did you have in mind?



Yes it would be my expectation that it would be treated as a single incident. I guess two incidents might be if L altered course as a result of the initial contact and that W made it clear that it had two protests?
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: 1456
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 22 at 3:05pm
Originally posted by Brass

Originally posted by sargesail



You’re not a trapeze crew are you? It’s actually really hard to look into that space behind you!


No I'm not.

That's no doubt what the guys behind the big assy in Case 107 said. It didn't wash.

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.

Originally posted by sargesail


So I was talking about 16.1 in the post above at 1842.


I don't know why: nobody has ever said that L changed course.

You said

Originally posted by sargesail


Surely no one would argue that in this situation 16.1 applies…


I agree with that.

Originally posted by sargesail


Does L break rule 14 if she brings the boat upright into the mast of a windward boat above her hull?

If there isn’t some leeway for L why does the word ‘reasonable’ feature in the rule?


Yes.

It was reasonably possible for L to not bring her boat upright, therefore it was reasonably possible for her to avoid contact.

The test is not was the action [of bring the boat upright] reasonable.

The test is was it reasonably possible not to bring the boat upright.



Coming back to rule 16.

Educate me about pulling the trigger.

Does pulling the trigger necessarily involve changing course?

Is that what's bubbling along about this rule 16 stuff?

Can it reasonably be argued that pulling the trigger:

* usually involves changing heading from slightly below CH to CH? OR
* by accelerating and the action of the centreboard as the boat comes upright, involves the boat's track moving ahead and to windward (thus changing course)?


No I don’t think that can be reasonably argued as a general rule. Albeit it seems to underpin some posters’ views in this thread it is not the case that a trigger pull necessarily involves a change of course. It would be wrong for a PC to assume that it did.

On the last question of the CB levering the boat’s track to windward, I would say that on very many occasions that I have watched Opis trigger pulling, where W asserted that L had changed course, in 90% of cases it was not magic movement to windward by L but a less good trigger pull by W resulting in W continuing to slide to leeward.

Which to W felt like magic by L!

Crabbing….now that is another matter…..
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: 1456
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 22 at 3:09pm
Originally posted by Mozzy

This is something that pops up a lot sailing the 800. Boats sailing in from behind tight to you, but not enough space for them to step out on the trapeze or for the windward boats leeward tiller to drop to leeward at they try to head up.Also remind me of a story from the 29er fleet.  Not long after the start the leeward boat dropped their main sheet and capsized to windward. The tip of their mast tore through the windward boats sail. They finished the race, but had to go in for the next one to switch sails. The windward boat then applied for redress.. and not only was not reinstated to the second race, but was disqualified from the first race for not keeping clear (leeward boat didn't change course). 


I imagine that felt fairly harsh to W! But I think that degree of ‘protection’ to L is appropriate, especially in our start line trapezing contact example.
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: 3384
Post Options Post Options   Quote 423zero Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 22 at 7:46pm
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 ?
Robert
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>

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