New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Starboard Rounding Windward Mark Incident
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Starboard Rounding Windward Mark Incident
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1459 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Starboard Rounding Windward Mark Incident
    Posted: 27 May 13 at 8:38pm
Originally posted by gordon

When P reaches a close hauled course she acquires ROW. She must initially give S room to keep clear. Room, under the nex definition includes space to comply with her obligations under rule 31 i.e. not touch the mark.

Which is interesting because it is in conflict with Rule 18.2(e).

As to the debate amongst umpires I believe that the "I gave room beacause the other boat didn't hit me" is somewhat of a cop-out, making life much easier for umpires. The most difficult moment to judge is when a boat establishes an overlap from clear astern inches/centimetres to leeward of the other boat. If the now keep clear boat cannot chnage course to keep clear without immediately making contact then I believe that she has not been given room.
Back to Top
gordon View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 07 Sep 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1037 		Post Options Post Options   Quote gordon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 9:33pm
I am not convinced that there is a contradiction.

If P finishes her tack clear ahead but close enough so that there is a rule 15 issue then P and S were almost certainly overlapped as, or soon after, P passed head to wind. If either P or S were in the zone at this time then 18.2a applies and in addition to meeting her rule 13 and then later rule 15 obligations P must give mark room.  18.2e does not apply because the overlap was not obtained  from clear astern or by S tacking to windward. S, overlapped on the inside to windward, is entitled to room to tack.

If P breaks the overlap, 18.2a ceases to apply only to reapply when S establishes a new overlap. If P is now unable to give mark room it seems improbable, to say the least, that P was giving mark room whilst tacking.
Gordon
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6649 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 10:38pm
Originally posted by sargesail

I am P approaching....I know that at a windward mark unless one of us is fetching the mark then I can consider Rules 10 and 13 as if the mark is not there.


Maybe what this thread is highlighting is that that rule of thumb we've always worked by isn't entirely enshrined in the rules and in fact there's an exception...

I sail boats that go very fast upwind, are wide, but come very slowly out of a tack, and I can easily envisage this situation happening.

But I think on the whole I'm with Gordon. Rule 15 is critical. With the revised definition of room that includes compliance with rule 31 then I really cannot imagine a situation in which P can be considered to have given room if S doesn't get round the mark without touching it.

Certainly in the boats I sail neither bearing away behind a slower boat or attempting an immediate slow down could remotely be considered manouvering in a seamanlike way.
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1459 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 10:55pm
Originally posted by gordon

I am not convinced that there is a contradiction.

If P finishes her tack clear ahead but close enough so that there is a rule 15 issue then P and S were almost certainly overlapped as, or soon after, P passed head to wind. If either P or S were in the zone at this time then 18.2a applies and in addition to meeting her rule 13 and then later rule 15 obligations P must give mark room.  18.2e does not apply because the overlap was not obtained  from clear astern or by S tacking to windward. S, overlapped on the inside to windward, is entitled to room to tack.

Gordon - yes I can see that...but my assumption is that P had reached her close hauled course....so 18.2 (e) would apply.  Could undoubtedly happen in some craft - see Jim's comments below about ICs.

If P breaks the overlap, 18.2a ceases to apply only to reapply when S establishes a new overlap. If P is now unable to give mark room it seems improbable, to say the least, that P was giving mark room whilst tacking.
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1459 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 10:57pm
Originally posted by JimC

Originally posted by sargesail

I am P approaching....I know that at a windward mark unless one of us is fetching the mark then I can consider Rules 10 and 13 as if the mark is not there.


Maybe what this thread is highlighting is that that rule of thumb we've always worked by isn't entirely enshrined in the rules and in fact there's an exception...

I sail boats that go very fast upwind, are wide, but come very slowly out of a tack, and I can easily envisage this situation happening.

But I think on the whole I'm with Gordon. Rule 15 is critical. With the revised definition of room that includes compliance with rule 31 then I really cannot imagine a situation in which P can be considered to have given room if S doesn't get round the mark without touching it.

Certainly in the boats I sail neither bearing away behind a slower boat or attempting an immediate slow down could remotely be considered manouvering in a seamanlike way.

Agreed ref an exception....but I can't quite see how the rule 31 aspect of room is not in conflict with 18.2 (e) - may be some unintended consequence of the change.
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1459 		Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 10:59pm
The irony in all of this is that I started with the assumption as S that I wouldn't be able to get mark room!  The thread has corrected that view....but many were in the same boat as me....which demonstrates the logic.....unless you go to the default "if you tack in the zone you're wrong".....
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1146 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 May 13 at 11:46pm
Originally posted by sargesail

Don't disagree with that either Gordon.  Although it is my assumption that by tacking clear ahead and to leeward P has fulfilled her obligation under 10, 13 and 15.
Originally posted by gordon

I do not think you can assume that just because a tack is completed clear ahead and to leeward that P has fulfilled her rule 15 obligation. How far ahead? How far to leeward? If S is obliged to make an unseamanlike manoeuvre in order to keep clear then P has not initially given room to keep clear. Room to keep clear includes room not to touch the mark.

If P reaches her close hauled course clear ahead, whether above or below S's course, I think this is looking like a 'pure' rule 15:  if there is time and space for S to keep clear to windward, there will proabably also be room for her to bear away and go to leeward (as you say, starting sails and slowing up as necessary):  special circumstances such as a third boat to leeward, of course, excepted.

 
Agree with Gordon, that if the boats are really close together, there's every good chance that P has not given S room to keep clear, but it might be that the boundary between rule 13 and 15 is indistinguishable, whether on protest hearing evidence or umpire observation.
 
I also teased out the other scenarios as below.
 
If P reaches close hauled overlapped outside S, rule 18.2( e ) will not apply because S does not become overlapped from clear astern, but supposing that at the instant she reaches close hauled she is unable to give mark-room, will she not also be unable to give S room to avoid the mark so as to comply with rule 31, and so will not initially be giving S room to keep clear in accordance with rule 15?
 
If P becomes overlapped inside S before reaching her close hauled course, P is entitled to mark-room, but is NOT entitled to room to bear away to her close hauled course:  S can give her room to sail a pinched, luffing course to the mark, but still need to take action to avoid her, before she has reached a close hauled course, thus P will almost inevitably break rule 13.
 
If P has room to reach her close hauled course overlapped inside S, then P, overlapped inside has mark-room and S gets nothing.
 
I'm just very mindful that this is all happening inside the zone, probably within two boatlengths of the mark, with boats close together:  If P intentionally played for one of the above situations, it's going to require very precise judgement and boat handling:  one slip-up and it all turns to custard.


Edited by Brass - 28 May 13 at 3:09am
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1146 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 May 13 at 12:01am
Originally posted by sargesail

But I want to draw out the distinction between an 18.3 situation where the tacking boat "shall give mark room if the other boat becomes overlapped inside her" and where therefore she has to anticipate the requirement, and this situation, where she does not have to anticipate that the other boat will choose to go inside.
 
This seems to me a logical application of the principle behind 19.2 (c).
 
I thought we'd all agreed that while it would seem logical to extend the 'if she is unable to give mark-room' get-out in rule 18.2( e ) to mark-room under rule 18.3( b ) the rules don't say that:  When rule 18.3 applies rule 18.2 does not apply, so there is no get out of gaol card under rule 18.3.
 
I quite liked what JimC said:
 
Originally posted by JimC

Its a hopelessly pointless - indeed dangerous - exercise to try and double think what one thinks the rules ought to be trying to say
 
Just another thing while thinking about rule 18.2( e ) and rule 19.2( c ).  The get out of gaol criteria are subtly but distinctly different:
 
Rule 18.3( e ) 'from the time the overlap began the outside boat has been unable to give mark-room'
 
Rule 19.2( c ) 'at the moment the overlap begins there is no room ... to pass between'
 
Under rule 19.2( c ) the outside boat can be well able to give room but may refuse to do so if there was no room at the beginning of the overlap.
 
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1146 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 May 13 at 12:24am
Originally posted by sargesail

Originally posted by gordon

When P reaches a close hauled course she acquires ROW. She must initially give S room to keep clear. Room, under the nex definition includes space to comply with her obligations under rule 31 i.e. not touch the mark.

Which is interesting because it is in conflict with Rule 18.2(e).
 
If, despite JimC's advice you want to metaphysically contemplate 'principles' or 'what the rules should say or mean', you could say that the rule 15 obligation to give room to not touch a mark under rule 31 is 'in tension' with the rule 18.2( e ).
 
However you can't say there's a contradiction.
 
Rule 18 deals with mark-room.
 
Rule 15 deals with room to keep clear.
 
Different animals.
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1146 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 May 13 at 12:31am
Originally posted by gordon

As to the debate amongst umpires I believe that the "I gave room beacause the other boat didn't hit me" is somewhat of a cop-out, making life much easier for umpires. The most difficult moment to judge is when a boat establishes an overlap from clear astern inches/centimetres to leeward of the other boat. If the now keep clear boat cannot chnage course to keep clear without immediately making contact then I believe that she has not been given room.
A bit simplistic there, and you're importing words from the definition of keep clear overlapped, applicable to the right of way boat, into the room to keep clear situation and applying them to the give way boat.
 
Consider the situation where a boat clear astern surfs into the close leeward overlapped position and then the same wave picks up the other boat and surfs her clear ahead again.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy