crazy sailors |
Post Reply
|
Page 123 4> |
| Author | ||
desteve1
Groupie
Joined: 23 Feb 09 Location: cambridge Online Status: Offline Posts: 81 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: crazy sailorsPosted: 10 Apr 10 at 6:52pm |
|
|
is there a rule stating that colision must be avoided ? it seemed completely unfair because she crashed into my boat and ruined my fibreglass hull, she knocked my brothers brand new burgee and sunk it and grazed a few other toppers and oppies. all of us did our turns and everything but it seems unfair to not punish her for careless sailing...
|
||
|
laser 81188 (looking for a name)
|
||
![]() |
||
JimC
Really should get out more
Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6662 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Apr 10 at 7:23pm |
|
|
There is, but the most significant ryle is probably this one:
which states that in the event of serious damage just doing turns is not adequate. Of course that does depend who was at fault... |
||
![]() |
||
desteve1
Groupie
Joined: 23 Feb 09 Location: cambridge Online Status: Offline Posts: 81 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Apr 10 at 7:49pm |
|
|
if she deliberaty runs into you to make you do turns ?
|
||
|
laser 81188 (looking for a name)
|
||
![]() |
||
Garry
Really should get out more
Joined: 18 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 536 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Apr 10 at 5:24pm |
|
|
If its deliberate then its a breech of rule 2 a
disqualification under this is non discardable. However, if a collision took place and you had to do turns then that also suggests you broke a rule? If so you would solve this by everyone just following the rules... Also if the collision was deliberate and you have evidence you should let your insurance company know as part of the claim. What you probably need is someone to take this to the RYA arbitration scheme if your club is signed up to it. |
||
|
Garry
Lark 2252, Contender 298 www.cuckoos.eclipse.co.uk |
||
![]() |
||
Andymac
Really should get out more
Joined: 04 Apr 07 Location: Derbyshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 852 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 6:15pm |
|
|
Ditto Garry; IF she had opportunity to avoid collision (or lessen impact/damage), then she should have taken avoiding action. To deliberately not do so (even though she had right of way) I also believe would fall within the scope of rule 2. It would certainly be interesting to present this case (backed up by a successful protest) through insurance for the avoidable damage caused... |
||
![]() |
||
JimC
Really should get out more
Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6662 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 6:38pm |
|
|
The main point that needs to be made from this is that there should always be a protest hearing if there's insurance level damage...
|
||
![]() |
||
Garry
Really should get out more
Joined: 18 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 536 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 8:51pm |
|
|
||
|
Garry
Lark 2252, Contender 298 www.cuckoos.eclipse.co.uk |
||
![]() |
||
Garry
Really should get out more
Joined: 18 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 536 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 9:12pm |
|
|
Its probably worth making a further point here and I am
sure those that regularly race small dinghies will sometimes get themselves into sticky situations. We sometimes push the rules, so most common is probably squeezing ahead of a starboard boat when you're on port, tacking at the windward mark and trying to squeeze through or going inside when there isn't enough room or you're not entitled. Sometimes even the best of us misjudge that and the right of way boat has to avoid a collision. Conversely if I think someone is going to tack inside because I've over-stood or squeeze inside when they don't have mark room, I'll try and get down to the lay-line to force them to tack early, go outside... In these situations its easy to get it slightly wrong (on both sides). We have to accept that and try our hardest to avoid contact, that way if one or both of us make a mistake and there is contact its rarely significant. If we start to try and deliberately have contact it will only be a matter of time before you cause £100s of damage - we all pay for that in higher insurance premiums. There's also a bit of common sense needed, a foiling moth or twin wire skiff in any breeze has a lot less manoeuvrability than a Lark so its best to give them room rather than get involved in close quarters last minute avoidance. Furthermore if I was sailing a 40 foot yacht I would leave a much bigger gap, because the consequences of a small error are so much greater. |
||
|
Garry
Lark 2252, Contender 298 www.cuckoos.eclipse.co.uk |
||
![]() |
||
Andymac
Really should get out more
Joined: 04 Apr 07 Location: Derbyshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 852 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 9:49pm |
|
|
||
![]() |
||
Brass
Really should get out more
Joined: 24 Mar 08 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1151 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 Apr 10 at 11:47pm |
|
|
In principle I disagree. If two parties in a damage collision are honest and agree on the circumstances and who was at fault there should be no necessity for the matter to be 'formalised' by a protest hearing. Remember, protests are about places in races, not about fault in a legal sense. Look at rule 68 and the relevant RYA prescription. Note also that RYA Arbitration is just another means of resolving a protest: it is not like an insurance or damages arbitration. |
||
![]() |
||
Post Reply
|
Page 123 4> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |