New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Extreme 40 crash decision
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Extreme 40 crash decision
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
rb_stretch View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 23 Aug 10
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 742 		Post Options Post Options   Quote rb_stretch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Extreme 40 crash decision
    Posted: 26 Sep 11 at 2:18pm

My original concern in starting this thread was that boats are expensive items and serious damage through collisions and any injury risks should be discouraged at all times. My own experience of protests (particularly keelboats) was that this indeed was the primary concern - avoid collisions first, then debate the rules later.

On first viewing of the video, I didn't think R had made every effort to bear away, so I was concerned the wrong message was being sent out ie. it's OK to collide if you are in the right. If my observation was wrong and R had made every attempt, then I would be happy with the decision. However there don't seem to be many people on here who can argue then they couldn't have done more.

What if the collision had resulted in loss of life (quite possible in those boats at those speeds)? Would the decision be the same? Would the decision be right?
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: 1151 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Sep 11 at 12:19am

There's no doubt that R could have made 'more of an effort to bear away'.

The question is, why should anyone think she was obliged to make 'more of an effort'?
 
At the time R bore away, she bore away to a course which, had A accelerated out of her tack normally, would have passed astern of A. It was  reasonable for R to bear away enough to miss A but no more.
 
The next observable event was that A did not accelerate normally out of her tack.  It was at this point that it became clear to R, that on her new course, A was no longer keeping clear, but now there was insufficient time for R to bear away further, that is, at that time, it was not reasonably possible for R to avoid contact with A in the new circumstances.  Thus R did not break rule 14 as limited by rule 14(a).
 
This situation is not about 'room'.  It is a simple rule 13 and rule 14 case.


Edited by Brass - 26 Sep 11 at 2:24am
Back to Top
Skiffman View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work
Avatar

Joined: 27 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 291 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Skiffman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Sep 11 at 10:47pm
I think that your position is clear Gordon but my question is could R have made more of an effort to bear away? The mainsheet was not released fully, if it had they would have had no problem ducking. So why was the mainsheet not released fully? Was it because they wanted to keep it on so they could do a good tack or was it because of a malfunction? Which is probably only the guys on R will know.

It will be interesting if this makes it into the case book as there is a lot of room required. More so than I have ever thought or ever seen in 49er racing!
49er GBR5

teamfletcherandsign.co.uk
Team Fletcher and Sign campaign site
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: 25 Sep 11 at 4:47pm
R's option to tack was somewhat limited by the white boat that was following them.

The video evidence seems to make it clear that R took reasonable avoiding action when A passed through head to wind and broke rule 13. A then completed her tack and stalled. A had acquired ROW and did not give R room to keep clear. Having already broken rule 13 A then broke rule 15.

Although R MAY have avoided contact by tacking when A passed head to wind, she was under no obligation to do so. When R initially bore away this was a reasonable and seamanlike manoeuvre. It was only when A compounded her initial error by failing to tack smoothly that it became clear that R's initial bear away was not sufficient. At this moment R had already started to bear away and tacking was no longer an option. Attempting to bear away was by then the only seamanlike manoeuvre.

I agree that this incident does demonstrate that a boat required to keep clear or give room must allow  a considerable space.

Gordon
Gordon
Back to Top
Skiffman View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work
Avatar

Joined: 27 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 291 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Skiffman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Sep 11 at 10:38pm
Interesting read what everyone thinks, personally it is not clear cut and a different jury would probably find a different outcome. This is certainly in the grey area for more than one reason. 

Personally I think there are a few things that have probably gone unsaid that hugely effected the decisions of the crew on R.

First of all A has tacked tight on the lay. R does not want to tack below as they will get rolled and miss the mark. Tacking a 40 is much easier than a duck, a tack in this situation would most likely of not caused any problem.

So next thing is that if R starts to duck early and makes it look very hard, the jury could penelise A. Think of the Greece duck on Ben a few years ago, 

Now R has started to duck but A has not done a great tack, R still wants to make it look close but at the same time wants to be in a situation to be able to tack straight after the duck. As said the 40 has a dump valve on the mainsheet where all the pressure gets released instantly. If the button had been pressed and the main released there would not have been a collision. 

Why was the button not pressed? First off they could have tried and it failed or it could have not been on the mainsheet but on the cunningham etc. Then playing devils advocate, what if R did not want to press the dump valve because if they did they would not be able to tack straight after the duck. Therefore putting them further behind...

At the end of the day you do not know exactly what went on, but has opened up how much room you need to avoid in future decisions. 

Just for reference for me I think its 50/50 as I do not know the whole story and nor am I an international jury. 

Also I do not know what is a seamanlike way of avoiding contact is in a 40.

The whole thing is really interesting because often happens in 49ers but I do not think before seeing the jurys decision on this you could ever go to protest being R. Although the one thing that is very difficult is what seamanlike for the top guys is not going to seamanlike for the back markers...


Edited by Skiffman - 24 Sep 11 at 10:47pm
49er GBR5

teamfletcherandsign.co.uk
Team Fletcher and Sign campaign site
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: 6661 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 11 at 7:12pm
Originally posted by Scooby_simon

...then this makes the burdon on A massive as they HAVE to assume that the boat may attemp to bear off; dump the jib and thus carry on on a very similar heading

Yes, the burden on A is massive. They may not tack unless they can be sure that they can complete the tack before the boat behind has to *start* taking avoiding action.
Ahead but to leeward and needing to tack is not a good place to be on the approach to a windward mark. The video makes it clear that this is particularly the case with these ultra fast multihulls.


Edited by JimC - 22 Sep 11 at 7:35pm
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: 22 Sep 11 at 6:19pm
1 These races were umpired I believe. There may have been a rule 14 hearing;

2 If you study the video carefully the main sheet on R is trimmed out at least twice - you can see a clear flick as this happens. The jib is trimmed at same time. On one of these trims jib flogs and is instantly resheeted.

3 I hope we are all agreed that A broke rule 13. I am satisfied that R took action as soon as it was clear that A was not keeping clear, but were surprised when A's poor tack meant that A stalled.

You are not satisfied that this is the case. A good illustration of why there are  members of a protest committee, and  5 on an international jury. Decisions are not always unanimous.

Gordon
Gordon
Back to Top
Scooby_simon View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 02 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2415 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Scooby_simon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 11 at 5:06pm
Originally posted by gordon

If a Jury had decided that R did not act to avoid contact with A when it became clear that A was not keeping clear that would not change the fact that A broke rule 13. However, we have established that she did take avoiding action. It could be argued that she took avoiding action twice, once by bearing away to pass behind a boat (A) that should accelerate on the new tack and then a further bear away to pass behind A when it was clear that A had stalled. The second bear away was reasonable but unsuccesful.

Question, on these boats, with the wind as it was, how long does it take to dump the main?




 
BUT Gordon;  I would argue that neither part of the bear-away were "reasonable" BECAUSE they dumped the Jib and did not dump the mainsail. 
 
Were there any cat sailors on the jury?  
 
If I have been on A; I would have argued that it is common knowledge that you MUST NOT dump the jib when trying to bear off and so they DID NOT take reasonable action to avoid. 
 
IF sail handling and "reasonable" does not mean "common practice" then this makes the burdon on A massive as they HAVE to assume that the boat may attemp to bear off; dump the jib and thus carry on on a very similar heading....
 
OR the boat may attempt to head up (to slow and/or to tack).
 
and fail to do so as well........
 
 
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
Back to Top
tornado435 View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king
Avatar

Joined: 05 May 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 196 		Post Options Post Options   Quote tornado435 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Sep 11 at 4:57pm
Not that long, its on hydraulics with a special dump button.
 
Only issue could have been if the Hydraulic selector wasn't on main but on cunningham or traveller.
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: 22 Sep 11 at 4:21pm
If a Jury had decided that R did not act to avoid contact with A when it became clear that A was not keeping clear that would not change the fact that A broke rule 13. However, we have established that she did take avoiding action. It could be argued that she took avoiding action twice, once by bearing away to pass behind a boat (A) that should accelerate on the new tack and then a further bear away to pass behind A when it was clear that A had stalled. The second bear away was reasonable but unsuccesful.

Question, on these boats, with the wind as it was, how long does it take to dump the main?
Gordon
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>

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