Forums
The Racing Rules of Sailing |
1833 Posts
|
|
Rule 18 and Room at the Mark |
176 Posts
|
|
Protest Committee & Hearing Procedures |
110 Posts
|
|
Race Committee & Race Management |
79 Posts
|
|
Rules 2 and 69 |
49 Posts
|
|
Match and Team Racing Rules |
46 Posts
|
|
Training Materials, Presentations and Classes |
59 Posts
|
|
Share Your SI/NOR Language |
49 Posts
|
|
Event Management & Forum System (Q's, Comments & Suggestions) |
173 Posts
|
|
Regole e dintorni - Italian Channel |
50 Posts
|
Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.
Recent Posts
-
14 CommentsPJohn Quirk, Mon 08:25
-
32 CommentsÓlafur Bjarnason, Sun 17:08
-
28 CommentsPJohn Allan, 26-Jul-09 10:54
-
2 CommentsPJohn Quirk, 26-Jul-07 09:12
-
20 CommentsPBenjamin Harding, 26-Jul-07 09:12
Recent Comments
-
Dustin, I think a lot of your points are well made, but it's perhaps useful to relate them to some of the more or less unspoken conventions about rules problems and forum rules discussions.
Posts in a forum rules discussion are not necessarily of the completeness and precision of a well written jury decision.
When judges are discussing a written 'rules problem', by convention, they do not rely on any fact not stated in the problem, for example if there is no mention of contact, then it is taken that contact did not occur. It is, however useful to make some assumptions for the sake of discussion, for example, in a diagram, that the wind is coming from the top of the page, or, as in this case, that the next mark is to windward. Some of these assumptions will be stated, some just made and then left open to challenge by others participating in the discussion
Just as in a live protest hearing, judges will consider all the evidence available including diagrams, textual descriptions, images, and some 'notorious facts' ('notorious' being used in its proper meaning of well-known, not 'infamous'), like boats will normally sail close hauled at about 45 to 40 degrees to the wind.
I think it's a pretty fair assumption in this case that this is a normal W/L course and the next mark is to windward.
Anyone that wants to challenge these sorts of assumptions is welcome to do so in the course of discussion.
There's not enough information in the diagram to infer that Yellow tacked too close (or more specifically, Green had to alter course to avoid Yellow while tacking).
I absolutely agree, but bear in mind that Angelo was pitching up the first ball over the net in the first post in reply to the OP.What kind of boats are we talking about? If you're talking about a 80 foot cruising monohull, or a slow tacking catamaran, perhaps it's too close. Are we talking about a Laser or 470, both of which complete a tack in well less than a boat length? Then very likely it’s not too close.
OK, we can glean something from the diagram.- Boats are shown as same size, so we can expect similar performance.
- Boats are symmetrical spinnaker boats (FWIW), not cats or rack dinghies, but not Lasers or Optis either.
- Boats have tacking angles and close hauled wind angles shown by the grid lines.
When we deal in boat lengths, size doesn't make all that much difference, except perhaps when thinking about carrying way. It's not like the Yellow boat is a Farr 40 and the Green boat is a Dutch Barge.How fast were they going? Also greatly impacts the answer. If these are for example, Tech Dinghies, which both tack quickly and go very very slowly, it’s not anywhere near too close. If we're talking 505s, 49ers, or A Cats, then Yellow was not only too close,
Once again when we deal in boat lengths, until we get to very fast boats where psychomotor reaction time of fractions of a second may become relevant, speed is less important than existing conditions (which will affect speed). If, instead of light conditions as stated, this scenario was in 25 kts, and offshore waves, that would make a difference.but likely needs a trip behind the wood shed.
I don't get this proposition. If a boat in a highly competitive performance class nails a competitor port and starboard without breaking a rule, that's exactly how the game is meant to be played.If we're talking small modern keelboats, say a J80, it's likely still not too close. They do specify light air, so I suppose much is happening "slowly", but that makes which boats you're talking about even more important. You can tack a Laser in no wind in a boat length. Try that in a Lightning. Whereas an A Cat can be going 11-12 knots in "light air" of 6-8 knots, so nothing in particularly "slowly".
The PC has to ask sufficient questions to determine the facts. We don't have them here.See above: I think assumptions about 'normal' conditions and performance are quite all right, and are necessary.
If forum contributors think there are unclear variables, they can always ask the OP, or state some explicit assumptions.My inclination, absent any other information, would be to say it's on Green to show that Yellow tacked too close.
Shock, Horror, you're bringing back 'onus'.I personally don't see that in the diagram. Absent a good explanation, I wouldn't be able to find sufficient information to indicate Yellow tacked too close.
Well, what would need to be proved is that G, having a reasonable apprehension of collision (Case 50) changed course to avoid Y, before Y had reached a close hauled course.
I certainly agree that the diagram and the OP scenario doesn't show that.Why don't I see it? At point 2, Yellow appears to already be nearly head to wind, and Green is over 3 boat lengths away. Most boats I can think of would be able to complete the last half of a tack in less than 2 boat lengths. Unless they're very slow, or very slow to turn.
YupWe can't really infer point "2.5" because they didn't draw it. We don't have that information.
I think we're at perfect liberty to do some geometrical interpolation. That's not inference.
Anybody who thinks it's wrong can bring up the discusison.
So if I were on the PC, my questions would be around when Yellow crossed head to wind, and where Green was at that time.Yup again.A couple of boat lengths is plenty of time to avoid a collision on virtually any boat.
OKThus, I'd say the burden is on Green.
Then you would be advised not to use language of burden or onus. Onus was removed from the RRS in the 1995 rewrite. Not relying on 'onus' is sort of a big deal.Whether Green saw them or not, also irrelevant. That's a safety/seamanship question, not a rules question.
Hmmm, it might be better to say that it does not excuse or exonerate G if she does not keep clear.If Green has a large Asym, and isn't keeping track of their fleet, leading to crash maneuvers, that's not a rules issue. It's a seamanship issue.
Generally, we're all bringing a lot of preconceived assumptions here based on the boats we have most experience with.
As judges tend to do in real live protest hearings. Good judges are alert to this and pay attention to boat characteristics that are different from their personal experience.John Allan Today 12:54 -
John A, I completely agree that if a sailor breaks a rule and they know that they broke a rule that they should take a penalty regardless of any hails of protest displays of red flags. The Basic Principle charges us to follow and enforce the rules including upon ourselves. Is the breach of a rule always clear to the sailor who may have broken a rule? Let's suppose that I tack in front of you from port to starboard. I believe that I completed my tack before you needed to change course to avoid. You disagree and hail "protest" (I am a dinghy sailor so I will leave the red flag out). I now have a decision to make. If I am sure that I completed my tack before you changed course, I may sail on. If it was close, I may take a penalty to avoid the "room". If your hail convinces me I broke rule 13, I take a penalty.Jerry Thompson Yesterday 12:11
-
Bullseye. H12 hull with an aluminum marconi rig, cuddy cabin deck layout, half wishboom.Niko Kotsatos Tue 18:13
-
Ang, I think asking someone to do something, is probably ok, but the line is crossed when the protest chair starts 'statement taking' writing down what a witness says, taking possession of videos, and seeking out witnesses.John Allan Tue 14:29
-
Nice work on the AI summary ;-)David Taylor Tue 00:00