Friday, August 04, 2006

The Way I saw It



Tiller man asked for a diagram. So here it is. Now keep in mind this is my recollection of events and in every dispute there are 2 sides. All comments good or bad are welcomed.

For a detailed view look download the pdf here.

9 Comments:

Anonymous Paul Tracy said...

Who crashes a sailboat, I mean come on...,

Paul

10:03 AM  
Blogger Tillerman said...

Hmmm. There are still a couple of points that I find confusing...

a) Your diagram says the course was 3:1:3:1 but the diagram shows you rounding mark 2. What was the course? And in particular which was the next mark after this one? Not that it really affects how the rules apply but it helps to understand what was going on.

b) You say you were on starboard and leeward boat. But in position 1, if you were both on starboard tack then the white boat (us) is the windward boat.

Also, what rule do you think the red boat might have broken?

1:03 PM  
Blogger the skip said...

Sorry for the confusion Tillerman, ignore the 3:1:3:1 on the idagram...forgot to remove it from another race ;-).

The course for that day was 3:1:2:1:3 and we had just rounded 1 from 3 on a broad reach to 2, (2 is where the incident occured) the next mark was 1.

You are correct about the windward, sorry aboout that. The diagram is pretty acurate as to us and them. We were the windward boat in the lead and overlapped by the leeward boat. Rules I think were infringed by the protester are:

16.1 When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear.

18.4 When an inside overlapped right-of-way boat must gybe at a mark or obstruction to sail her proper course, until she gybes she shall sail no farther from the mark or obstruction than needed to sail that course.

I had given buoy room and gybed at what I thought to be a reasonable distance considering the angle of the wind. The "Other boat", I could argue held his line on the starboard tack unreasonably long and in doing so when he gybed broke rule 16.1 by not leaving me enough room to keep clear.

I have to admit at just as we gybed we had a jib line knot that prevented me from tightening up quickly at which point I would have been able to avoid the collision and bear off to avoid the mark. My only option at the time of the incident was to bear off. I considered heading up to wind quickly but with a knotted jib sheet and the mark that close, coupled with wind and waves i did not feel it was the safest move. There were other boats right behind us and the last thing I wanted was for us to backwind the jib by heading up to fast and to high with a knot.

I feel I did judge the bear off correctly but did not account for wave surge and think at the last minute a quick lunge forward made all the difference. Regardless it was up to me to keep clear according to the rules which is why I withdrew from protest.

Always welcome your learned opinion, whether I am in the right or wrong.

4:01 PM  
Blogger Tillerman said...

I wondered about 18.4 too. From your drawing it certainly seems that red boat may have sailed further from the mark than she needed to. But she'd probably argue that she was making a tactical rounding (swing wide cut close) which she is certainly entitled to do. So I doubt you'd win a protest on that issue.

And I don't think you can get her under Rule 16 because of Rule 18.2(d) which says that Rule 16 doesn't apply when the right-of-way boat is changing course to round the mark. As I see it the red boat as well as being inside boat is always right-of-way boat, initially as leeward boat, then as clear-ahead boat, and then after the gybe as leeward boat again. So she can change course to round the mark without having to give you room to keep clear.

10:56 PM  
Blogger the skip said...

Tillerman: 18.4 would have been my only real defence against the protest and you are correct I probably would not have won. I think he did sail farther out than needed.

Did not see rule 18.2(d). you are correct. Thanks for that.

7:51 AM  
Blogger the skip said...

Just a clarification Tillerman: The definition of "room" in the 2006-2008 rules, referring to room to round the mark, is:

"The space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvering promptly in a seamanlike way."

This definition by my accounts does not give him tactical rounding rights, just rounding rights.

How would you interpret that?

8:18 AM  
Blogger Tillerman said...

I think this is covered by rule 18.2 (a). If the inside boat is the give-way boat she is only entitle to room which as you say is the space to do a seamanlike rounding. But if, as in this case, the inside boat is also the right-of-way boat then the other boat has to keep clear. This means that the inside boat can sail her course subject only to any limits that may apply to her sailing above her proper course. 18.4 is of course one such limit. 17.1 might also apply but probably not because it looks in your diagram as if the red boat was clear ahead. But in any case the inside right-of-way boat is entitled to sail her proper course which I would interpret as doing a good tactical rounding.

9:17 AM  
Blogger the skip said...

You are correct about the red boat being clear ahead. Thanks for your input Tillerman. Much appreciated.

9:48 AM  
Blogger Pat said...

The Understanding the Rules book opines that the inside boat is entitled to room to make a "seamanlike" rounding, considering conditions, but isn't entitled to the luxury of making a tactical rounding. So, a protest could have kept the sea lawyers busy sorting out all the issues.

12:18 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home