Forum: Rule 18 and Room at the Mark
Rule 18 at the offset
Martin Manrique
0
I'm now in Palma, before Princesa Sofia Trophy and have been discussing a situation in which we need some clearance.
Its about Rule 18 in an upwind Mark to be left on port, but with a situation in which the off set mark is very high up (the boats finally need to tack to make it to this mark). In this case, is the upwind mark a "Mark" in which one may be entitled for room? And when did we actually passed the mark, if the offset is higher -more upwind- than the upwind mark?
The situation was between 3 boats, boat A was approaching the mark on starboard, boat B and C where coming on port -major shift, very much over the layline- and both tack inside the zone. Boat B tacks clear ahead of A and boat B finish the tack overlapped on windward of A. A cannot go anywhere and crashed the stern of boat B not being able to head up because of boat C. On a normal situation my understanding is that both B and C broke rule 18.
Now, what happens next is that the offset mark is very high because of the same shift. In this case, is it correct to consider that the boats already passed the mark, and exonerate boat B?
Its an interesting situation that may occur quite often with big shifts and off set buoys.
Its about Rule 18 in an upwind Mark to be left on port, but with a situation in which the off set mark is very high up (the boats finally need to tack to make it to this mark). In this case, is the upwind mark a "Mark" in which one may be entitled for room? And when did we actually passed the mark, if the offset is higher -more upwind- than the upwind mark?
The situation was between 3 boats, boat A was approaching the mark on starboard, boat B and C where coming on port -major shift, very much over the layline- and both tack inside the zone. Boat B tacks clear ahead of A and boat B finish the tack overlapped on windward of A. A cannot go anywhere and crashed the stern of boat B not being able to head up because of boat C. On a normal situation my understanding is that both B and C broke rule 18.
Now, what happens next is that the offset mark is very high because of the same shift. In this case, is it correct to consider that the boats already passed the mark, and exonerate boat B?
Its an interesting situation that may occur quite often with big shifts and off set buoys.
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
An offset is a mark, and has the same standing as a "mark" and boats are entitled to room.
This sounds like a mark so poorly set that even if someone ends up fouling another boat, they will be seeking redress.
But it needs to be graphed and analyzed fully, hypothetically.
But hypothetically speaking, I would be looking at the RC to consider abandoning the race.
That said, it appears that the relevant SI are here http://www.trofeoprincesasofia.org/uploaded_files/Document_8772_20180329124949_en.pdf, and there is nothing to suggest that the offset mark (mark 1A) is anything but a mark, according to the definition in the RRS.
Rule 18 deals with room at marks. There seems no reason why it should not apply at the offset mark in this event.
If there was an incident in this event, it should be decided by the Intternational Jury and not discussed on this forum.
2) The incident is public. There is absolutely no reason why anybody cannot discuss it! We don´t know if there is a protest already decided but we are not members of the Jury at Palma. There is still something called freedom of speech! We can discuss anything that is public and is not offensive. Of course we are not deciding anything, we are just having fun!
3) After boat C completes her tack to windward of A, it seems that she is keeping clear of A, I don´t see any reason why C should be penalized. The text doesn't say that A tried to luff, so lets not speculate!
4) After B completes her tack, she becomes clear ahead right of way boat subject to rules 18 and initially 15. If A, unable to take timely evasive action, crashes into B shortly after the tack, then B is violating 18 and 15 and should be penalized. A violates 14 but is exonerated if there is no damages, etc.
5) The offset mark is a course mark and has its zone where ever it might be set. You may, in a friendly way, tell the Race Officer that he made a mistake.
Certainly a candidate for PRO to consider abandoning the race.
Here indeed is the situation where an over-stood port tacker coming into zone need not tack at the mark (because the next mark is higher) and therefor can claim mark room from starboard tacker.
Just to make it clear, this was during trainings and not during the event (which starts on Monday) so there is no need to contact any Jury Comitte. It's only a situation which may ocurr (it certainly does, with shifty conditions).
What I cannot understand is the relevance of the offset. Presumably, the port boats are constrained by the original windward mark so are approaching this. In any event if there are separate zones so marks say at least 4 lengths apart they should be treated separately in any event. This is not a gate where you need 7 lengths as you will be leaving one mark before you get to the zone of the other. I would guess they are on the layline for the higher mark having passed the normal windward mark. It depends if they are in the zone of the offset yet or not. If yes it is just as if the other mark were not there. Was a given mark room? Why could a not bear off? There is not enough detail in the question without perhaps a diagram to give any answer.
First, I think that Green, @3, should be a little less advanced on Yellow: the OP scenario was that G finished her tack overlapped on Y, so that Y could not luff to windward of Blue.
As previously suggested, B is exposed under rule 15.
There is, however ample space for Y to bear off and keep clear to leeward of B. B does not break rule 15.
Rule 18 considerations are with respect to the first mark. The Offset mark is irrelevant.
The exceptions in rule 18.1( a )and ( b ), and the issue of whether boats are on a beat to windward or the proper course at the mark being to tack, are only relevant while B and G are on opposite tacks to Y. The instant they pass head to wind, they are on the same tack as Y, rule 18 in general applies,and specifically, rule 18.3 applies to both B and G.
Y never sails above close hauled, so there can be no breach of the first limb of rule 18.3.
Y, as diagrammed, is never overlapped to inside B, so B does not break the second limb of rule 18.3.
Y, however, is overlapped inside G, from about the time that G reaches her close hauled course, say @3-delta. From this point, G is required to give Y mark-room (rule 18.3, second limb).
The mark-room G is required to give Y is room to leave the mark on the required side (Definitions: mark-room), including space to comply with her obligations under the rules of Part 2 and rule 31 (Definitions: room), in this case, to keep clear of B.
As diagrammed, there is insufficient space for Y to dive to leeward of B, then luff B so that Y can pass to windward of the mark without touching it.
G breaks rule 18.3.
@4, Y, clear astern contacts B. Y breaks rule 12.
Y could have avoided contact with B by bearing away. Y also breaks rule 14.
B could not reasonably have avoided Y mounting her stern. B did not break rule 14.
While Y was sailing within the mark-room to which she was entitled, her contact with B was not an incident with the boat required to give her mark-room, and Y is not entitled to exoneration under rule 21.
G's breach of rule 18.3 did not compel Y to hit B. Y is not entitled to exoneration under rule 64.1( a )
Decision:
Penalise G and Y. B has broken no rule.
In Angelo's diagram -very clear, thanks- I agree with Paul explanation.
In the real situation, the mark was closer and the contact between Y and B is before passing the mark @3. In that case, I believe B broke also rule 18.3 by not giving mark room, and so Y has broken no rule. Is this correct?
The question about the off set:
If the off set is like in the diagram, and B forces Y to sail above close hauled @3. Is it correct to say that they already passed the mark, being the off set to high ? I only found on the Q&A booklet a mention to "When boats pass the mark" and it says that this happens when the mark does no longer influences her course to sail the next leg of the course. Can I assume then that @3 they already passed the mark? and so 18.3 does not apply?
Or I shouldn't assume the offset is not a "leg"?
I guess my question is again, when do we consider that they passed the mark? or better they already "left the mark to port"?
http://boats.sourceforge.net/
Depending on the geometry, boat positions and the points-of-sail of the boats makes a very big difference here.
Let's get the drawing very clear and go from there ..
Maybe this drawing is clearer.
Y @3 makes contact with Green. He should have sail higher than close hauled to avoid contact.
18.3 says:
"If a boat in the zone of a mark to be left to port passes head to wind from port to starboard and then is fetching the mark, she shall not cause a boat that has been on starboard tack since entering the zone to sail above close hauled to avoid contact and she shall give mark room if that boat becomes overlapped inside her. When this rule applies between boats, rule 18.2 does not apply between them."
Our doubt is that being the offset so high up, if the boats @3 passed the mark or not. This would activate rule 18.3 or not.Is there a definition of what it means that you pass the mark? If it means that the mark does not influence your course to your next leg any more, then may I consider that they already left the mark on port, and then 18.3 does not apply?
I think that for my question we can take B out of the diagram.
Maybe this represents better what I am asking. With the offset so high up, can we consider they already passed the mark before position 3?
said If you agree with Angelo's diagram, then:
- Y never sails above close hauled (rule 18.3 first limb); and
- Y never becomes overlapped inside B (B is the inside one of the tacking boats), so B has no obligation to give Y mark-room (rule 18.3 second limb).
- Y is overlapped inside G (the outside one of the tacking boats), G is required to give Y mark-room, fails to do so and breaks rule 18.3.
On that scenario and analysis, B broke no rule, and Y broke rule 12 and 14.Martin Manrique
said Your first new diagram is significantly different from your original scenario and Angelo's diagram.
In your OP scenario you said ' In your first new diagram (apart from switching colours between Boats B and C), you now show:
- A making contact with the windward quarter of B, which is not 'crash[ing] the stern' although A remains the give-way boat, now under rule 11;
- Significant space between A and the outsidemost tacking boat (C), so that A had at least some space to luff into to keep clear of B (whether that space would have been enough, would be a matter for the protest committee);
- A is still not shown as sailing above close hauled.
You said Rule 18.3 first limb depends on whether or not Y actually did sail above close hauled, not on whether she could have or should have done so.Martin Manrique
said It is wrong to say that whether boats have passed the mark or not 'activates' rule 18.3.
What 'activates' rule 18.3 is a boat passing head to wind in the zone and fetching the mark.
Whether a boat has passed a mark or not may affect whether she has been given the mark-room to which she is entitled. These issues are discussed in Q&A B005 and B007.
Rule 18.3 applies to Boat C (the outside tacking boat), and Boat A, being overlapped insider her, is entitled to mark-room. While there may be sufficient space between C and the mark, the mark-room A is entitled to includes room for her to comply with her obligations under Part 2 and rule 31 (Definitions: room).
At position 3, I don't think there is any doubt that A's course is influenced by the nearby mark and by the requirement to keep clear of B.
In Angelo's diagram and on the OP statement that 'A cannot go anywhere', C is not giving A mark-room.
In Martin's first new diagram, there is more space shown between A and C: possibly C is giving enough room: that would require more facts found by a protest committee.
Martin Manrique
then said Martin has now changed the scenario a third time:
- C, the outside tacking boat has been omitted,
- B, the tacking boat and A the other boat are shown further away from the mark,
- B and A are shown below the lay-line to the offset mark; and
- A is shown clearly sailing above close hauled.
In this scenario B has arguably caused A to sail above close hauled to avoid her, although given the increased space between B and the mark, it may have been possible for A to bear away inside B, and obtaining necessary mark-room.Once again, a protest committee would nee to find more facts to decide whether B caused A to sail above close hauled, or whether A could have gone below and inside.
Yea .. shaking this scenario out has been a little challenging given the different descriptions. That said, what intrigued me about Martin's first description of the scenario were these 2 facts which he included ..
- The offset was significantly to windward of what was intended to be the windward mark
- That the port boats were off the wind ("very much over the layline") as they approached the windward mark
With (a) in place, the port boats' proper course wouldn't be to tack at that mark, but to carry further to windward (18.1(b) not satisfied)With (b) in place, the port boats aren't on "a beat to windward" (as established in a previous thread's analysis 18.1(a) not satisfied)
Seems to me we could have had a stickier wicket if the port/stb boats met at the mark.
Based on the last diagram in this thread, the boats are on a beat to windward. The mark exists and has a required side so it is a mark and R 18 may be applied.
At P2, Yellow and Green are on opposite tacks, so initially, R10 apples. Yellow enters the zone fetching the mark, and Green tacks in the zone. So R 18.3 applies, but R 13 also applies until Green has completed her tack to stbd. Once Green completes her tack, and if Yellow is unable to avoid Green and runs into her transom, then Green breaks R 13. If Yellow in avoiding Green luffs above close hauled, Green breaks R 18.3. After Green completes her tack, she becomes clear ahead and R 12 starts to apply, and as there is a change in ROW, briefly R 15 applies, and Yellow must be given room to keep clear. If there is enough room for Yellow to avoid Green but she takes no action, then Yellow breaks R 12.
The presence of the offset mark further to windward is irrelevant as the incident occurs before they reach the zone of the offset mark.
said
This is how I interpret this scenario.
Based on the last diagram in this thread, the boats are on a beat to windward. The mark exists and has a required side so it is a mark and R 18 may be applied.
At P2, Yellow and Green are on opposite tacks, so initially, R10 apples. Yellow enters the zone fetching the mark, and Green tacks in the zone. So R 18.3 applies, but R 13 also applies until Green has completed her tack to stbd.
Agreed so far.
Once Green completes her tack, and if Yellow is unable to avoid Green and runs into her transom, then Green breaks R 13.
Is this a typo? Rule 13 applies until G completes her tack (reaches her close hauled course). Once G reaches her close hauled course, rule 13 no longer applies. I think you more accurately discuss what may happen after G reaches her close hauled course below.
If Yellow in avoiding Green luffs above close hauled, Green breaks R 18.3.
OK.
After Green completes her tack, she becomes clear ahead and R 12 starts to apply, and as there is a change in ROW, briefly R 15 applies, and Yellow must be given room to keep clear. If there is enough room for Yellow to avoid Green but she takes no action, then Yellow breaks R 12.
Agree
The presence of the offset mark further to windward is irrelevant as the incident occurs before they reach the zone of the offset mark.
Agreed for last diagram, with wind coming from top of page.
Let's say that G tacks in front of Y inside the zone, and is still accelerating out of her tack while Y is at full speed, and Y has to alter course to avoid rear-ending G. Has G violated rule 15? It seems to me that this applies equally at a mark or not.
Also, 18.3 in part reads "...she shall not cause a boat that has been on starboard tack since entering the zone to sail above close-hauled to avoid contact..." (emphasis added). If Y is able to duck below G to avoid contact, has G violated rule 18.3? Strictly speaking, Y didn't have to sail above close hauled, although she may have chosen to.
Because 18.3 applies, 18.2 does not and therefore G has no entitlement to mark room from Y, correct?
Yes, RRS 15 does apply and applies in the same way as anywhere else on the course. What RRS 15 does not do is provide Y the right to maintain her course, but rather Y has the right to the opportunity to keep clear. If Y does not have to start her "keep-clear move" prior to G completing her tack and Y is able to avoid G, then normally it would be concluded she had been given the opportunity to keep clear.
In effect RRS 18.3 "assumes" that the tack in the zone has been made in such a way that RRS 15 was not violated. You can think of RRS 18.3 as sort of a "special case extension" of RRS 15, putting further burdens on the tacker beyond just providing the other boat an "opportunity to keep clear".
Ang
Mama always taught me that it was polite to leaving something on the plate for others :-)
Ang