I believe you are over thinking a bit. Although we quote a rule when protesting, it's of very limited significance. The job of the PC is to look at the incident and decide whether or which rules were broken. So you can't protest quoting E2.1, but you can protest quoting 20.1. RC is not my area, but similarly it would seem you can't protest a competitor giving advice under E2. 2, but you can protest a competitor receiving such assistance quoting RRS41. 

Once a valid protest is in the room it's then down to the PC to decide which if any rules were actually broken. A protest is not rendered invalid because the protesting boat quoted the wrong rule. There's a case that says exactly that. 

Rule E2.1 creates three very specific requirements for hails, namely:

Rule E6.1 then says a boat or competitor may not protest for an alleged
breach of rules E2 ... .  That is to say any breach of rule E2 can only be protested by the race committee or the protest committee.

The interaction between rule E6.1 and Rule E2.1 only covers the specific requirements of rule E2.1.  Rule E6.1 does not restrict protests about hails in general other than the things covered in rule E2.1.

Case 54 tells us the basic requirements for a proper hail under rule 20.1

The requirements of rule E1.3(b) are special, additional requirements for Radio Sailing.

Nick poses three examples:

Let's assume in each case that the hail complies with the Case 54 requirements.

A RC boat hails for room to tack, supposedly under rule 20.1, when she is not approaching an obstruction, in breach of rule 20.1(a).

Firstly, rule 20.2(a) requires that the hailed boat must respond in accordance with rule 20.2(c).

If the hailed boat thinks that the hailing boat broke rule 20.1(a), then, after responding, her remedy is to protest.

If the hail complies with the Case 54 requirements, it will not break rule E2.1(a).

It's not a hail by a responding boat so rule E2.1(b) does not apply.

Let's assume that the hailing boat's sail number is hailed in digits and so rule E2.1(c) is not broken (otherwise see the example about sail number below.

Rule E2.1 does not prevent a boat from protesting.

A RC boat hails for room to tack, but the hail does not include  the words ‘room’ and ‘tack', in breach of rule E1.3(b).

We've assumed that the hail complies with the Case 54 requirements:  it just lacks the words mandated by rule E1.3(b).
 
Again, as the rules stand, rule 20.2(a) requires that the hailed boat must respond in accordance with rule 20.2(c).  Nothing can make the rule 20.2 requirements disappear.

If the hailed boat thinks that the hailing boat broke rule E1.3(b), then, after responding, her remedy is to protest.

Again, the hail  does not break rules E2.1(a) or (b), nor assuming that the hailing boat's sail number is hailed in digits, rule E2.1(c).

Rule E2.1 does not prevent a boat from protesting.

A RC boat hails for room to tack but the hail does not include the the sail number of the hailing boat in breach of rule E1.3(b).

Again, let's assume that the hail complies with the Case 54 requirements:  it just lacks the sail number as required by rule E1.3(c).
 
Again, as the rules stand, rule 20.2(a) requires that the hailed boat must respond in accordance with rule 20.2(c).  Nothing can make the rule 20.2 requirements disappear.

If the hailed boat thinks that the hailing boat broke rule E1.3(c), then, after responding, her remedy is to protest.

Again, the hail  does not break rules E2.1(a) or (b).

The defect is NOT that a hailed sail number is not hailed as digits (rule E2.1(c)), but that no sail number has been hailed at all, contrary to rule E1.3(b).

Rule E2.1 does not prevent a boat from protesting.

In RC sailing (Appendix E), a skipper calling "water" or anything else that does not constitute a hail (under E1.3b), has not hailed. So you can't protest the hail (because there was none), but you can protest what happens next; if he believes he has hailed and tacks out in front of you then you protest him under R13 or R15.

Johan, I'm not sure I agree.

I think an RC boat that hails for "water" or other words that don't include "room" and "tack" has broken 20.1 by not complying with E1.3. 20.2(b) requires the hailed boat to respond even if the hail breaks 20.1. So the hailed boat must respond either by tacking or allowing the hailing boat to tack & avoid, otherwise she breaks 20.2(b). The hailed boat can protest if she believes the hailing boat broke 20.1.

I don't see anything in E2 that prevents a boat from protesting an infringement of 20.1

Thanks all yes i do over think.

John thanks I have read the case 54 after you pointed it out. 
Yes I see your point 20.2 is always there. if its does not comply with E1.3B or 20.1 protest after response.

Johan it would be nice to ignore the incorrect hail. but i do think Tim and John's approach would cover the hailed boat rule requirements.

Thank Again
Nick






 

Tim,

I don't agree that a RC boat that hails for "water" or other words that don't include "room" and "tack" has broken 20.1 by not complying with E1.3.

Rule E1.3 is a requirement additional to rule 20.1, like rule 20.4 or rule C2.10.

There is no part of rule 20.1 that she has broken.   She has just broken rule E1.3.

Interesting thought:  presumably RC SI/NOR routinely switch off rule 20.4.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to do that in Appendix E?

John, I can see where it could be interpreted that way. Distinction without a difference, I’d say. Under either interpretation the hailing boat has broken a rule by hailing improperly but the hailed boat is required to respond.

Or are you saying that the hailed boat does not have to respond if the hail doesn’t meet E1.3, but only if the hail is improper under the requirements of 20.1? (From your examples above it doesn't sound like you make that argument)

I’m also wondering if there’s a reason that RC racing requires a specifically worded hail (or match racing requires specific arm signals) but the core racing rules do not.

Tim,

I agree that the outcome may be the same but you can hardly say that the correct citation of a rule is a distinction without a difference.  Its alway  useful to know exactly what rule you're looking at and pretty useful to understand how similar or related rules interact or don't interact. 

I'm certainly not saying that a hailed boat, were the hail complies with Case 54, can disregard the hail if it does not comply with additional rules like rules 20.4, C2.10 or E1.3.  A hailed boat must respond in accordance with rule 20.2.

Match Racing Rule  C2.10 arm signals has been around like forever.

Rule  20.4 was added to the fleet racing rules as a watered down version of the MR rule in 2021.

RC Racing rule E1.3 has been incrementally adding requirements about room to tack hails only since 2017.

I think the reason for the MR Arm Signals rule may have been so umpires were made aware of the hail and the precise instant of it, where they may not have been close enough to hear a quiet but effective hail between boats.  Its rather an Americas Cup 12 metre rule.  In smaller MR boats, like Elliotts and J70s it's difficult to do, and is sometimes written out by NOR/SI.  Anything much bigger than 12 metres, and you need something better like radio or light signals.

Gordon, in a recent post explained some of the control area, line of sight and point of view problems that the RC Racing rules attempt to overcome.

I would have preferred to see Arm Signals hard wired into the standard Fleet Rules with provisions to switch it off in the sub-discipline Appendices or NOR/SI, but so be it.

Tim wrote above
 I’m also wondering if there’s a reason that RC racing requires a specifically worded hail (or match racing requires specific arm signals) but the core racing rules do not.

In 'big' boats, you are along side another boat as you approach an obstruction, so there is no doubt about who is hailing whom!

In RC racing, we sail from a control area, and the boats could be on the other side of the pond - 40 meters or more away, and to to clarify which boat is hailing for room to tack, they are required to hail their sail number - it is up to the other boat(s) to decide if they are affected by that hail, and need to respond.

Another factor in RC sailing is the speed of the action - boats such as IOMs move at a boat length per second - so there are only a few moments for the hailing boat to let the other know, and for them to respond - so the hail needs to be concise and clear. 

John

Just to add to John B 

Maybe think of its this way, someone totally new to sailing picks up the rule book studies it feels ok about and goes racing. Sailing along the bank with a boat ahead and leeward (LB).

LB hails “water” to boat newbie. Newbie sails on thinking why the sailors are to leeward just so dehydrate, after the race I better buy them a beer.

Now apply E3.1 

LB hails “Room to tack 123” to boat newbie. Newbies know what to do and hail makes complete sense. The hail and rule name are about the same, even if newbie did not know the any rules it just makes sense what to do. And LB missed out on a beer.

Thanks all, what is now clear to me.

 Always respond to the 20.1 hail whatever that maybe to cover yourself. Protest on E3.1 if applicable.  

There are five reasons I believe an incorrectly worded hail can be ignored:

The first point is the most important. In RC sailing a hail is only a hail if it complies with E1.3b. Anything else is a skipper speaking words, that could have been aimed at anybody.

What really worries me is how different we interpret 20.1 and E1.3b. Feels like this deserves an entry in the Call Book for Radio Sailing.

This issue arise frequently, especially when sailing from right to left (as seen from the control area) as boats reach the bank soon after sailing.

Hails need to be short, unambiguous and comprehensible, especially at international events where many competitors are not native speakers of English and its many (not always mutually comprehensible) variants.

'(My sail number) room to tack' meets these requirements 'Fred, I'm getting close to the bank, are you going to do something about it' or any such 'more or less polite' phrase does not.

The boat that hails becomes entitled to room to tack and avoid other boats.

The other boats may respond by:
- tacking
- hailing 'you tack' and then giving room to tack and avoid.

Room to tack and avoid means the space needed in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way. Because she is entitled to room the boat will be exonerated under RRS 43.1(b) for a breach of rules 10 - 13 and 15, 16 and 17 and also, in some circumstances, under RRS 43.1(c) for breaking rule 10. However, entitlement to room ends once the boat has tacked and avoided the hailed boat(s). Immediately afterwards she becomes subject to all the rules, and, in the scenario above, just after the start, is now on port in a crowded fleet and may have to tack back.

When the hail does not conform to RRS 20.1 as modified by E1.3(b)

If the hail does not include the correct wording then the hailed boat must respond (see RRS 20.2(b)). I would add that this obligation only applies if the hail can be reasonably understood to be a hail for room applying to the hailed boat (which can be an issue at international events) (see Answer 4 WS Case 54).
If she responds by hailing 'You Tack' then she must give the hailing boat room to tack and avoid (RRS 20.2(c))
If, while the hailing boat is tacking and avoiding, while manoeuvring promptly and in a seamanlike way, there is contact then:
- penalise the hailed boat for not giving room under RRS 20.2(c)
- exonerate the hailing boat under RRS 43.1 (b) for a breach of RRS 13 or 10, and possibly under 43.1(c) for a breach of RRS 14 if there is no damage.
- penalise the hailing boat for breaking RRS 20.1 as modified by E1.3(b).

RRS E1.3(b) does not place an onerous burden on the hailing boat. In most cases an incorrect hail will not give rise to an incident. A boat can only be penalised for an incorrect hail if there is a protest or, in umpired racing, an umpires decision following a hail of contact, which will only happen if there is a incident.