Powered by
WIND


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • I was being a bit lazy about RRS 14.

    Here are some more facts and conclusions

    Assuming there was no injury or damage.

    Facts

    3A.  There was ample space to windward of Y.


    Conclusions

    C1.  Y did not avoid contact with B when it was reasonably possible for her, acting no sooner than it was clear that B was not giving mark-room, to do so. Y broke RRS 14.
    C2.  Y, sailing within the mark-room to which she was entitled, and contact not causing any damage or injury, is exonerated for breaking RRS 14 by RRS 43.1(c).
    C3.  B did not avoid contact with Y when it was reasonably possible for her, acting no sooner than it was clear that Y was not keeping clear, to do so. Y broke RRS 14.
    C4.  B, a right of way boat, and contact not causing any damage or injury, is exonerated for breaking RRS 14 by RRS 43.1(c).

    F1.  It was not reasonably possible for B acting no sooner than it was clear that G was not giving mark-room, to avoid contact with G.  B did not break RRS 14 with respect to G.
    F2.  G did not avoid contact with B when it was reasonably possible for her, acting no sooner than it was clear that B was not keeping clear, to do so. Y broke RRS 14.
    F3.  G, a right of way boat, and contact not causing any damage or injury, is exonerated for breaking RRS 14 with respect to G by RRS 43.1(c).

    J1.   It was not reasonably possible for G acting no sooner than it was clear that R was not giving mark-room, to avoid contact with R.  G did not break RRS 14 with respect to R.
    F2.  R did not avoid contact with G when it was reasonably possible for her, acting no sooner than it was clear that G was not keeping clear, to do so. R broke RRS 14.
    C4.  R, a right of way boat, and contact not causing any damage or injury, is exonerated for breaking RRS 14 with respect to G by RRS 43.1(c).

    Summary

    Boats Y and B.

    Both boats broke RRS 14 but both boats are exonerated because there was no injury or damage and each one was either a right of way boat or sailing within the mark-room to which she was entitled.

    Boats B and G

    B did not break RRS 14 with respect to G.

    G broke RRS 14 but is exonerated because there was no injury or damage and she was a right of way boat.

    Boats G and R

    G did not break RRS with respect to R.

    R broke RRS 14  but is exonerated because there was no injury or damage and she was a right of way boat. 
    Today 01:27
  • John, as well as the comments above about the cons of  a standard PY race rather than average lap, we have up to 3 races a day on Sundays. The boats are mostly taken out of the water between races so the sailors can have a cup of tea or something to eat and a chat as well as seeing if the OOD wants to alter the course. With 3 races and 2 to count, if someone has won races 1 & 2 they might not sail race 3.  Only by coming ashore can they know if they need to sail Race 3.

    Some do all 3 but some come for a specific race so starting times of races are important. 

    Average lap times allows the timetable to be adhered to.

    Note that until the finishing times and laps are entered into the computer do we get the results. With fixed laps, you know if you have won, but with PY the sums have to be done first.

    Also, we get a huge difference in the standard of crew skill. Some are very good, but some struggle to even go upwind and keep getting stuck in irons. They sit there with the rudder hard over wondering why it doesn't turn onto the wind. The club does a lot of training and we encourage them to race to improve their skills but at first they may only do one lap when the leaders have done 8 or 9.

    Coming ashore between races gives us a chance to help them. 


    Yesterday 21:01
  • Is there somewhere in RRS that you can specify the fields to be output in the Competitors List? My first attempt included both Competitors and Crew. My intention was to import into Sailwave and like you, there' a lot of editing and mapping to get rid of some fields and combine others.
    Mon 16:17
  • Up to 1969 the penalty for touching a mark was to retire.  No options.

    In the 1969 RRS (Rule 52) the option of (if the mark was in navigable water) of re-rounding the mark was introduced.

    The 1977 RRS introduced a 360 degree penalty if the mark was not surrounded by navigable water, but retained the re-rounding requirement if it was.

    The One Turn Penalty for all mark touches was introduced in the 1989 RRS.
    Sun 22:28
  • Roger, et al,  Could you provide some more detail about how Seagulls work please.

    Is a Seagull different from a Beach Maeshall/Master?

    What exactly are the duties and tasks of the Seagulls?

    What documents/lists do they use?

    How do they interact with the CRO?
    26-Mar-01 23:01

Forums Leader Board

This Month

1 Satish Kumar Kanwar 3K
2 John Allan 2.4K
3 Richard Jones 2K
4 Andrew Lesslie 1.6K
5 Calum Polwart 1.4K
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more