Tacking at windward mark to starboard
Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: General
Forum Name: Racing Rules
Forum Discription: Discuss the rules and your interpretations here
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10924
Printed Date: 28 Jun 25 at 4:34am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Tacking at windward mark to starboard
Posted By: Hitcher
Subject: Tacking at windward mark to starboard
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 9:49pm
|
So this came up the other day when i was teamracing. Windward mark to be left to starboard. Boat A is on PORT on the layline, and slows as it reaches the 2boatlength zone clear ahead of Boat B who is directly behind, also on PORT on the layline. Boat B then bears away and sails below Boat A and becomes overlapped to leeward. Boat B then tacks on to starboard, and is now on a collision course with Boat A. Boat A then accelerates to keep clear and Boat B tacks back on to port and is now inside Boat A. Boat B asks for room. Boat A was probably slightly above the layline by this point, but definitely had to head up to avoid Boat B. It was not definite whether or not they Boat A went above close-hauled. Please could you help me understand which rules apply at which points and if any rules may have been broken? Thanks Edit: Sorry, you were both right. The boats were originally on port. I drew it all out and then just used the wrong words!
|
Replies:
Posted By: Ian29937
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 10:52pm
| Are you sure you've got your port and starboards correct? In the first line Boat B is on starboard on the layline and then on line three tacks onto starboard? |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 17 Jun 13 at 11:05pm
|
The only way I can work this out is if they were both originally on port? Andy ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 12:20am
And the boats fitted all this in within the two hull lengths zone? Wow. OK, here goes. @ Position 1 A is right of way boat (rule 12) entitled to mark-room (rule 18.2( b )). B is keeping clear and giving mark-room. @ Position 2 B is right of way boat (rule 11), limited by rule 15 (must initially give A room to keep clear). A is still entitled to mark-room (rule 18.2( b )), sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled and thus entitled to exoneration under rule 21 if she does not keep clear. @ Position 3 When B, in tacking, passed head to wind, rule 18 ceased to apply (rule 18.1( a ) or ( b )), and A's entitlement to mark-room ceased. B, having been the give way boat until she reached her close hauled course (rule 13) is now the right of way boat (rule 10), limited by rule 15. So the only rules applying are rules 10 and 15. @ Position 4 A keeps clear. When, in tacking B passed head to wind, · she became the give way boat (rule 13), and · rule 18 again began to apply, and · because B passes head to wind in the zone, its rule 18.3. When B reaches her close hauled course inside A: · she becomes the right of way boat (rule 11), · bound by rule 18.3( a ) to not cause A to sail above close hauled. @ Position 5 Whatever B 'asks' for, she has no entitlement to room of any kind. With rule 18.3 on, rule 18.2 does not apply (rule 18.3 stem) and B, becoming inside boat does not get an entitlement to mark-room under rule 18.2( a ). In a rule 18.3 situation, if the fetching boat is above the layline, by any significant amount, it's going to be unlikely (although not impossible) that she will be caused to sail above close hauled in breach of rule 18.3( a ), even though she may need to change course to windward. The test for rule 18.3( a ), first bit, is that she is caused to sail above close hauled, not just to 'head up'. If it wasn't definite whether or not A sailed above close hauled, at the last point of certainty, she was not sailing above close hauled, so she should be taken to be not sailing above close hauled. A is keeping clear, not sailing above close hauled. B is right of way boat, not entitled to mark-room, not breaking rule 18.3. No rules broken. |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 12:45am
|
assuming that b, when she becomes overlapped to leeward does not break rule 17, which becomes a mine field near the windward mark once lay lines have been crossed. Brass, what turns off 18.2b? 18.2.c (2) suggests that only the actions of the boat entitled to mark room by tacking turn it off again, not the actions of the boat required to give it, that bit reads thereafter. So not sure we go from 18.2b back to 18.1a? 18.3 would only seem to be intended when there was no prior obligation? I think there would be a struggle to pull that manoeuvre off with in 2 boat lengths. I think we need to see a diagram, and may actually be worth a question to the powers that be. Andy ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 1:40am
Agree: it's going to be an action packed little zone.
Maybe with a honking downwind tide, so everything happens in super slo mo?
As I referenced in my post above Rule 18.1 ( a ) or ( b ) switch off rule 18 in its entirity.
When either of two boats, initially on the same tack passes head to wind, so that boats are on opposite tacks, either on a beat to windward (rule 18.1( a ), or where the proper course of one but not both is to tack (rule 18.1( b )), rule 18 does not apply.
Hence the maxim: 'At a windward mark on opposite tacks, take the mark away'.
Neither I nor anybody else should be bothering about what we might think a rule was 'intended' to do.
The best we can do is just apply the rules as they are written.
I don't see what this demand for diagrams is.
The OP here gives ample detail to enable us to diagram the situation for ourselves.
If we are to be on protest committees we need to develop our skills of visualisation.
First thing I do when given a scenario like this is grab the pencil and paper and start diagramming. Otherwise you can use toys, or, if technologically inclined TSS or BoatScenario.
Can't see any issues that would warrant a Call or Case here.
|
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 8:52am
|
The reason we would need to is what turns off 18.2b/c
It suggests once the obligation to give mark room has occurred, on only the actions of the boat entitled to mark room turn it off. Rule 18.1 tells us when rule 18 becomes applicable, not when it turns off. I am surprised that you feel that when there is ambiguity, and disagreement that a question is not worth asking. This situation is not covered in the call book. We certainly need to know if we revert to 18.1 or if 18.2b/c is still in force. Certainly we were always encouraged to ask these questions, and there is now a call in the book from from a similar question which we raised back in the nineties which led to a disagreement between umpires. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 9:15am
But also achievable in most craft once you start slowing - high tariff stuff from B, but worth a go.
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 9:38am
|
I am surprised that B had room to duck below A and tack (and complete the tack and give A room to keep clear) all without leaving the zone, but if this was in Fireflies, then they do turn well! And the amount of room needed would be rather less than expected in a fleet race, I imagine.
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: Quagers
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 10:03am
|
Brass has the rules spot on, what I dont understand is why B tacked back onto port. I would have stayed on starboard and forced A to tack away before tacking to round the mark, gives yourself much more space on the reach. < id="adlesse_unifier_magic_element_id" style="display:none;"> |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 10:39am
I'm not much interested in what rules 'suggest'. I prefer to deal in what they say. Your assertion about rule 18.1 is wrong. Rule 18.1, second sentance, followed by the subparagraphs quite expressly says: 'However it [rule 18] does not apply ...' If anyone is still in any doubt, see Case 95
In this case there is no ambiguity. In the rare cases that a rule is ambiguous, trying to second guess what the rules drafters 'intended' is rarely a good way to resolve it. Careful analysis of what the rules actually say, and appropriate research in the Cases, Appeals, Calls and Q&A is usually much more reliable. I can't see why the situation needs to be covered in the TR Call Book: the rules application is, IMHO quite simple and straightforward, and the umpiring process should get to that result: how do you think I did the analysis in the first place? |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 10:43am
Possibly Andymck was driving B <g> and thought 18.3 would not go on, and he would get inside mark-room under 18.2( a ).
|
Posted By: Rupert
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 10:58am
|
Or more likely it was to do with the situations that team mates were in.
------------- Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686 |
Posted By: andymck
Date Posted: 18 Jun 13 at 1:37pm
|
Actually I was more concerned about the English definition of the word thereafter in 18.2b. With the provision of breaking that stated in 18.2c:
When a boat is required to give mark-room by rule 18.2(b), she shall continue to do so even if later an overlap is broken or a new overlap begins; if she becomes overlapped inside the boat entitled to mark-room, she shall also give that boat room to sail her proper course while they remain overlapped. However, if the boat entitled to mark-room passes head to wind or leaves the zone, rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply. This appears to contradict 95's wording, but as both boats tacked in that case,not the scenario. We still also have not discussed the role of rule 17 here, but both 17 and 18c give protection the windward boat. I am not trying to second guess the rule makers. All I am doing is asking why 18.1 overrules 18.2c which seems to have this situation covered? And only mentions the boat entitled to mark room tacking. ------------- Andy Mck |
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 19 Jun 13 at 12:39am
Andymck is asking why there are two 'switch-off' provisions operating when a boat tacks in rule 18:
Let us consider the case where a tack switches off rule 18.2( b ) but does not switch off the whole of rule 18. This might occur in team racing or match racing.  So the above demonstrates that, while they will often overlap one another, rule 18.1 and rule 18.2( c ) last sentance can have different work to do, at least sometimes.
|