By the sound of things I would shoot the race officer for setting a course with a potential danger built into it.

Why do you need to go through the gate downwind? Especially when it is also being used as a startline and an upwind gate. Bl**dy dangerous if you ask me.

Where was the sailing committee when this risk assessment was done?

Contender...kinda agree with you, and I don't think the PRO was aware of how quickly the 18s would do the beat and half the run.  However we are not going to moan as it was good of Rutland SC to host the event for us in the first place with such unusual classes.  As it happens I think I speak for all the 12 sailors when we say that we did not really want the downwind gate as it can be quite a challenge to go through as a 12 is a bit more "follow the kite" than an 18 and most other events I have sailed actually give you a DSQ if you go through the gate downhill

Sorry if I sounded a bit blunt about this, but I feel when a club is running a multi class event they should always consider what happens if one fleet completes a lap before the other fleet has started. Also having fleets or boats meeting at onepoint on the course from differnet directions is never a good idea.

This can be done by having a start line that is not part of the course after the start. I appreciate at some inland clubs space is limited and this is not always possible.

We've had this kinda problem for years at Grafham.  Lasers and FF's now go off FIRST otherwise the Fast cats would be back thru before the start.  We now have a different problem that some of the slower boats do not all know the rules and so at time do not understand that they have to give way to a Asym Mono, or Cat when we are on Stbd and they are on port - can be a bit scary....

We are working on correcting their lack of rules knowledge......

As for the OOD, sounds like a "quiet" word was required to get the OOD to set a sensible sized course!

If, as you say, "Skiffs aren't dangerous", then what is the issue? The bottom line is in any powered up asymmetric in a breeze you are not in control. You get a gust you go downwind. You have no choice. Now that just isn't safe in my opinion.

I sail an asymmetric vortex and I'm very conscious of how dangerous things can be on cramped water with mixed craft. I took the spinnaker down the other day as I just didn't feel it was safe to sail over the top of a Thames barge in a gusty force 5!

I've sailed at grafham in their asymmetric fleet and It just isn't safe, heading downwind in a blow against fleets of lasers and flying 15s coming back the other way. Just a matter of time before one of these situations goes horribly wrong.

Should the rules change? I don't know. Would it make a difference? Downwind gates are definitely a bad idea, perhaps their should be a rule stating you should NOT sail through the startline downwind and have it as an upwind gate only, at least that gives some seperation.

Me, I'm probably going back to an non asymmetric (anyone got a decent Contender for sale??), at least you've got some control and some visibility with only one sail.

Originally posted by rogerd Interesting debate. Anyone thought of something radical like a trapezoid course then you would all be going in roughly the same direction on the same bit of water...no conflict.

Dammit Rog, I think you might be onto something there

What I have found works, 'reasonably' well in situations near the bottom mark is if the boat heading upwind calls to the one heading downwind not only that they are there (this can be almost as unhelpfull as helpfull) and have rights, but whether they should hot up and cross or bear off and duck.  Now the success of this is mostly down to how good the guy going upwind is at judging the relative motions of the boats, and a general gentlemans agreement within the fleet that you suggest the option that will mess the downwind boat up the least.  But in general the better sailors are at the front and as such 'should' be better at making these calls (I know for one I am pretty bad at it so if I'm lucky enough to be leading I tend to just keep out of the way).  Its not great, but a bit of helpful consideration does seem to work for the most part.  After all, it is just for fun at the end of the day. 

On a different note, trapezoids may solve this problem (and I enjoy a decent 2-sail reach as much as the next man) but from a racing point of view they really are very boring, the main reason for running windward/leward is to remove the procession of round the cans.  Just my 2-pence on the subject. 
----watches for volley of abuse----

Rod I kinda see your point if you were going upwind, came across a 12 but had no idea it had a fixed prod until the last second thorugh poor viz etc, or if you saw sails underneath, and did not realise they belonged to a 12 and got tangled up in the bowsprit...fair enough.  But if you knew it was a 12 and had a bowsprit and still had issues on the startline then I'm struggling a bit, that would be the same as luffing a B14 and not giving it time and opportunity to respond as you could not work out where the wings ended!  Anyway, it's a valid enough comment although not really what the purpose of the thread was about.  The facts are that upwind a 12 will not point like a B14 in my experience, the guys probably wanted to come off the line on "safe starboard", and they'd also made some duff rig choices all weekend hence some seriously slow upwind performance at times (oh how easy it is when you're not actually sailing)

Anyway, to show we're all friends I think I got some pictures of your boat which I'll PM you at some stage...

The bow of keelboat is not about 2" DIA and black, and so is easier to see.  Also, keelboat bow does not move sideways as quickly as a bow sprit can.

at the end of the day it doesnt matter if you get hit by a fixed pole or a sliding one, both are held out rigid and will cause a lot of damage. i think this thread is trying to find the solution to this upwind/ downwind problem. im not going to be popular but get a smaller kite with a shorter/ higher foot.

unless rule changes occur theres nothing you can do further than a 'gentlemans agreement' or have something writted into the SI's for events.

Ah yes - Torbay courses.

Rememember in the 300 sharing a mark with 400s.  Our leeward mark there ODM!

Port biased line!

Made the big call to round when I heard them counting down!

Nearest boat was on 4 as I went round the mark!  Never hiked so hard in my life.  Thankfully 3 and 4 about the same speed in those conditions.  Rest of my fleet when behind the 4s and were nowhere!

Apalling raace officering!

1 I am totally opposed to having gates in the middle of the course either upwind or downwind - they effectively reduce the "playing field" to a tiny hourglass shape. In the same way leaving the start line in the middle of the course and not allowing boats to sail through it means that there is a huge hole in the "playing field" (draw a course and then put in the lay lines to see what I mean).

2. In big fleets the first beat has to be long enough to allow the fleet to sprerad out before the windward mark. At the Irish SB3 Nationals 1 mile was too short.

3. Leeward gates need to be well set and wide enough so that there is not a pile up at one mark.

4. Conclusion from the SB3 event last weekend (80 boats)... put a jury boat on the water with an umpire, whistle and yellow flag...hover at the marks...rule observance will improve hugely and many problems will disappear. I should know - I was the umpire!

Gordon

The bowsprit is not the issue, it's the kite and the limited viz...

As opposed to a keel boat bow that tapers to a point of about 2mm in diameter and is painted white?

12ft Skiff Rules:

(v) All skiffs using a "fixed pole" system must have an Association Approved "safety orange" stripe at least 100mm long affixed to the pole within 350mm of the outward end.

edit: The poles are not painted black... that's what clour carbon is. Paint is heavy!

Anyway, back on topic. It is the duty of every single sailor out there to avoid a collision. For safety's sake, do not put yourself or anyone else at risk to prove a point. Use common sense, and if you feel agrieved then take it to the protest room and apply for redress. Bear in mind a "gentlemans agreement" will not tand up in a hearing.

We can conclude that the problems Iain mentions were not competitors fault but due to the naiveity of the PRO about the velocities these craft travel at . An inappropriate course was set. It is - infact - a testament of the boat handling skills and common sense of all the skiffies on board, that there were no serious collisions.

My point was that keelboat bow is easier to spot than an extended 12' X 2"DIA carbon pole, and a keel boat doesn't move quite as quick, it's not difficult to understand, don't you agree?

Interesting thread this, and some interesting coments made. However if I could add my 4-penny worth...

I do agree that there are issues with starting 12s in a mixed fleet, this is why we specifically asked the PRO at Torbay to give us our own start (which he did for the first race, but then gave up on it). On the start that was mentioned above, we did indeed spot the shift, but we weren't racing the B14s, we were only racing the other 12s, and our main concern was to sit on and cover Design Source. The reason we were going the speed of a Topper, was that we were being squeezed up by boats that point higher than us (a 12 is setup to foot off and drive), hence we were pinching like mad.

On the subject of "are skiffs dangerous", the answer is that they are not dangerous in themselves. I've sailed in a fleet of 30-odd 12s and there were no problems. This is because everyone on the race course had the same machinery and hence understood what everyone else was dealing with.

It's a bit like the question of "are motorbikes dangrous". Most bikers will tell you that their biggest issue is the car driver who's never ridden a bike, and hence doesn't undestand. It's the same with a skiff. Our biggest problem are people in slower "displacement" boats, who've never sailed a skiff, and hence don't have an understanding of what we're working with, and the fact that when going downwind we simply can't just steer where we want to all the time.

As Stuberry says, there were a number of times at that event when we had to dump/bin/get-out-of situations where someone else had put themselves in a position where they were likely to get impailed if we'd kept it going.

The reality is that most problems arise due to a lack of understanding by others. Now I'm not saying that it's their fault or anything, you can't expect someone who's never sailed one of these boats to know any different. It's just the way it is.

Interesting analogy. When I rode a bike a lot I always adopted the 'defencive riding' strategy in which you ride on the same streets as the other vehicles but in a kind of paralell universe where you can see everything but assume that you are invisible. This frees you to stretch some of the rules on the condition that you take full resposibility for whatever happens.

Whenever sailing a quickish boat (RS400, Contender) around slower boats (oppis, toppers at my club) I have taken the same approach and I think assy boats should always take thia approach, especially on restricted waters.

BYW the course conflict situation isn't new or limited to performance boats either: at the Filey regatta a few years ago we lapped quicker than thr RO could get all the starts away so we wee planing upwind (F4-5) throuigh the start line during the final minute of an Ent start... that was entertaining.

Skiffybob the boats coming upwind on a port tack could have an argument that by you changing course so quickly that they had no opportunity to kep clear. How can they predict violent bear aways in sufficient time to keep clear.

Mind you if I was them I would tack onto starboard long before your approach and call windward boat.

I have to agree with the defensive sailing bit; I try it at Grafham with F16's and Tornado's hamming around the courses and the slow boats like FF's and Lasers and other slow boats.

The problem is that we still have boats that will NOT Give way to boats on stbd when we are going down wind at 20-25kts - makes it a bit exciting having to plan around boats that MIGHT not give way, even if they are burdend boat.

Exacly my point. It takes them by suprise BECAUSE they're not expecting it, having not experienced it for themselves.

Someone who had sailed skiifs, would think on the basis that "this skiff coming towards me might well bear off right onto me, so I'll tack away now just in case and keep well clear".

The other dilemma of course is one of when to call starbord when going downhill, as once we've done it we have to hold our course. So as a result, we tend not to call unless we abolutely have to, and then we'll leave it as late as we dare. Not really an ideal situation, but it's what the rule book forces us to do.

No, you mis-uderstand me; some do not GIVE WAY because they cannot be bothered to understand the rules (or they are too stoopid) and don not GIVE WAY.

I have a classic example at Grafham; Sailing along in about 12kts with the Spi up; I was on Starboard; and called so on a FF; they just looked at me as if I was an alien and so I had to go behind them (Luckily I could dump the traveller and flog the kite).

I asked them afterwards why they did not give way; the answer was "you were not on stbd" - totally outragous behaviour and I should have protested.  I did not and I regret it to this day.

As the rules don't make you call starboard, calling it doesn't affect what you can or can't do, surely? What you can't do is alter course in such a way as to get in the way of a boat that has altered course already to avoid you (which may be where your idea of the starboard call comes from) or to alter course in such a way that the other boat doesn't have time or oppotunity to keep clear. They do not have to predict what you are going to be forced to do by a gust of wind. Good sense and experience means it would be sensible for them to, but that could be in short supply. It could also be said that the inability to be able to steer your boat in a particular direction is pretty unseamanlike, and must explain the huge insurance costs. Excellent fun, though!

That's an appropiate response when on STARBOARD; I assume when you are on PORT you are constantly looking below for boats on Stbd and above for boats coming down on stbd?

What I find difficult to understand is your apparent perception that 12ft skiffs have 3m fixed spinnaker poles that they paint black just to be really annoying!

And that 12ft skiffs bear off in the gusts just so they can really get in everyone's way!

I think 'gentlemans agreements' start to get a bit dodgy and I'm pretty sure would invalidate your insurance claim should the worst happen.  I would vote for sticking with the rules as they are - this way everyone (ok nearly everyone ) will know them and adhere to them.

I think its more to do with the race officer taking into account conditions, the types of boat racing and setting a course that suits the needs and safety of everyone.  Maybe anyone with concerns should raise these issues at the breifings or before the race to allow the decision makers to take these concerns into account.

I never mentioned anything about painting poles black!  Or anything about skiffs bearing off in gusts, I just said a keel boat moves slower and is easier to see, can you not grasp that concept? Yes or no?

My opinion on 12ft skiffs is that they shouldn't be expected to share start lines with other classes, it will end in tears one day.  As JimC says, fixed bow sprits are a new concept, but in the UK on racing dinghies they are.  I don't think fixed bowsprits are very practicle for most UK sailing clubs both on & off the water.

Practicality isn't usually an issue as most clubs that we go to have ample space for rigging and launching (and we don't go the the clubs that don't).

I agree completely that boats with fixed bowsprits shouldn't be expected to start with other classes, and we always make a point of explaining to the PRO the issues and requesting our own start, however it can't always be catered for.

So when we have to line up with others (espacially on a busy line like you get at the Weston event), we sit back from the pack and follow them over. It really screws up our chances in the races because we're then sat in evryone's bad air, but t's better than having someone in hospital with an eye out.

Quite right, and if you're passing one when you're going upwind and they're coming downwind, make it obvious which side of them you're going to go as early as you can, and stick to it.

Which brings us nicely back to the origin of the thread. You see it's all just common sense really.

Consider Case 99 "the fact that a boat required to keep clear is out of controldoes not entitle her to exoneration for breaking a rule of Part 2"

And also case 60 "When a right of way boat changes course in such a way that a keep clear boat, despite having  taken avoiding action  promptly, cannot keep clear in a seamanlike way, the right of way boat breaks rule 16.1."

Many skiff classes seem to have very limited control (if any) of their course and speed when sailing downwind This canot be used as an excuse. Similarily, the fact that skiffs may have to make sudden and unpredictable course changes in order to avoid a capsize in no way exonerates them from givng other boats room to keep clear!

Maybe skiffs shouild sail around the course preceeded by someone waving a red flag!

Gordon

Yet again the forumites take things out of context.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that everyone else on the water should keep clear, and I don't agree with the view that skiffs spend a lot of their time "out of control".

I think where Iain started from is a concept that people use common sense. A boat going upwind is move able to change course than a boat going downwind. Now, when you have a twin-wire boat with a big kite, where you have to set the boat up and then lock yourself in, makes it much more difficult to make a sudden gybe than it does for a similar boat going upwind.

The reality of it is that if you call late and force one of these boats to make a sudden gybe, there's a good chance that not only will you ruin their race, but you'll probably ruin your own when they capsize right on top of you (best case), of stick a big hole in your boat (or your head, worst case).

So all we're saying here is that if you see someone powering downwind with both crew on the wire and locked-in, use a bit of common sense and let them go.

Surely, a boat that is "locked in" is by definition a boat that has limited control of both course and speed. However this does not exonerate her in any way from any obligation to keep clear, or when right of way boat not to change course without allowing a keep clear boat room to keep clear.

A right of way boat beating to windward might want to make a minor alteration of course to allow a keep clear boat through - however they have a right to expect that a boat sailing downwind can alter course to avoid them. IF (and I am not sure that they are ) skiff sailors are saying that they cannot alter course to keep clear then that is their problem, which they will have to solve by developing new techniques or equipment.

One other point - it is not the ROW that hails, she has no obligation to do so - the keep clear boat has an absolute obligation to keep a look out. Is it possible that some modern designs do not allow crews to maintain a look out to windward?

Gordon

I agree Gordon. It is the responsibility of the downwind boat to keep clear (unless of course the downwind boat is on Starboard and the upwind boat is on port, which is often the case, and if fact was the case that Iain was referring to, that of port tack boats going upwind and not keeping clear of starboard boarts going downwind). I don't think it implies that the boat is not in control, it just implies that they are less maouverable, and if the consequence is that they are highly likely to p*ss it in on top of you, then surely it's better to avoid the situation altogether.

All we're suggesting here is that people use a bit of common and try to avoid creating these situations if they can, as it's of no benefit to anyone. Even if you're all racing against each other, if one boat is that far behind that it's on a different leg of the course, then don't deliberately try to screw the other guy's race up. Just tack away early and let him go, or at least make it clear which way you intend to go.

You're also right that the ROW boat has no obligation to call, but am I righ in saying that if he does, then from that moment he has to hold his course?

Gordon,

I firmly believe there is a much more important issue underlying ALL this.

Some people do not undertand that a boat going down wind has Can be on Stbd and have the rights.

Second question.  How long do you feel a burdend boat has to take avoiding action.  Similar, how late can a starboard boat continue to change course? 

I'd suggest a laser can tack and gybe VERY quickly and so remains burdened later in this type of issue.  18foot skiffs take longer to tack and gybe and so when the burdened boat, they can expect longer to take action (and thus expect the R-O-W boat to hold course from an earlier point in the developing situation.

We've seen lasers at the ollies chasing each others tails, they are reacting on very short time scales(a second or so); I don;t suggest we would expect 49ers to react so quickly.

What's your view?  

1. Port tack boat must keep clear, but if the starboard tack boat makes a course change for any reason she must leave port tack boat room to keep clear. The rules do not differenciate between different types of boat, nor the fact that some boats can only sail downwind in a narrow band of angles, which change according to wind speed. If a boat has to bear away in a gust to avoid a capsize that makes no difference to the rule situation. It may be that in some situations certain boats are not manoeuvrable enough to meet their obligations under the rules. In such a case common sense, and the rules, would be for such boats to carry less sail. The rules do not give a boat any right to carry full sail at any time.

2. Deliberately "screwing someone elses race up" would be dealt with under rule 2, if you can prove it!

3. Hailing does not oblige ROW boat to hold her course. She has an obligation not to alter course without giving keep clear boat room to do so, as always. However, if a Jury finds that a ROW boat hails to allow a keep clear boat to cross then deliberately alters course so as to prevent her keeping clear this would probably be seen as a Rule 2 infringement

3. In the 1929 rules all boats not close hauled kept clear, whatever tack they were on, of close hauled boats! Memories of this may linger on.

4. Case 87 establishes that a ROW boat need not anticipate that the other boat will not keep clear, Case 92 establishes that the keep clear boat need only react to what the ROW boat is doing at the time, not what they might do subsequently.

In other words a ROW boat need only take avoiding action only when it become obvious that the other boat will not keep clear. They do not have to anticipate that the keep clear boat is "locked in" and sailng in a perilous balance on the verge of capsize. ROW boat can assume that other boat is being sailed in a seamanlike manner and will keep clear. A Jury will ask when did it become apparent that the keep clear was not going to keep clear, and did the ROW boat take prompt action to avoid or diminish the impact of the colision. Similarily, if a ROW boat changes course the jury will ask if when doing so the keep clear boat was given room to keep clear.

It is assumed that time is given for an averagely competent crew, sailing in a seamanlike manner, to manoeuvre. If a boat was to say that she was unable to manoeuvre because any change of course would result in a capsize, a Jury might well consider that she was not being sailed in a seamanlike manner.

Gordon

Gordon,

I totally agree with the rules and cases you quote above.

BUT, as you state in 3 above "She has an obligation not to alter course without giving keep clear boat room to do so"; thus a laser can keep clear more quickly (as it is more manoverable) than a 100 foot boat, or a 49er.  SO; I would argue that a laser needs LESS time to react to a change of course, and so the ROW boat can alter course LATER then approaching a LASER than when APPROACHING a 49 "fully locked in" that is the burdend boat. 

I believe that the "without giving keep clear boat room to do so" is CRITICAL - NOTE this is ROOM; so a small boat needs less ROOM to keep clear as they are smaller and can tack or gybe quicker, BUT as they (may) move slower, then they cannot move "away from the bit of water" as quickly.

I also do agree with you that you cannot HUNT someone without risking a Rule 2; and also a boat sailing down wind needs to be aware of the abilities of the keep clear boats. 

What is defined as "without giving keep clear boat room to do so" is down to a trip to a protest room.

God, it's stating to sound like one of Mrs Blair's cross-examinations!

and people wonder why are sport isn't more popular.

If we on this forum find this subjct confusing, what chance does the average club sailor or someone trying to enter the sport have.

I understand that when you're sailing a Laser or Finn at Olympic level, then a lot of winning is about knowing the rules inside-out and using them to your advantage, but in most environments, my belief is that the rules should be there mainly for collision avoidance and to ensure that everyone has an enjoyable and incident-free day on the water. In which case a bit of common sense and respect should prevale.

Surely, the whole thread has been about collision avoidance. All the Part 2 rules are about collision avoidance -  and not breaking boats or crew is the foremost mark of respect for other competitors.

In my experience there are major problems in some classes concerning rule observance, with boats getting broken and regular examples of unsportsmanlike behaviour and even bullying. Strangely enough these classes are often those presented as "fun" classes, in which "we don't bother with protests"

On several occasions I have acted as umpire/judge at events where it has been permitted for the judges to signal infringements on the water. On every occasion, competitors have thanked me, claiming that the event was more enjoyable, because rule obsrvance was better. Mark roundings are said to be a lot less stressful when anyone forcing a passage gets an instant penalty. Completing an SB3 event without breaking a boat ws considered to be worthy of note, for instance.

At another event I chaired the protest committee which disqualified a competitor. To my surprise several other competitors thanked me - the culprit had been getting away with multiple rule infringements for years, and every body was pleased that he had been penalised for once.

The Part 2 rules are extremely simple, certainly a lot less complex than the rules of rugby, cricket or golf. There is really little excuse for not knowing and applying them. Sailing is a self policing sport. I, for one, would not like all events to become fully umpired. Umpires are thirsty creatures with large appetites...entry fees would have to increase exponentially if each event had to cater for a whole troop of umpires.

One conclusion from this thread is that competitors should insisit on there being more separation between incompatible categories of boats.

Gordon

Jim C - all my sailing is on the sea at present.

My point is that some skiffs seem to have a fairly narrow range of angles on which they can go downwind without capsizing, and some seem to have difficulty when they are going downwind without a spinnaker. Big boats may take some time to change course, but they do not have this limit range of possible course. And the notion of not keeping clear in a 60ft yacht implies a lesser tolerance of proximity than when sailing 12 ft dinghies.

I was once sailing an International 12foot class, we were on starboard and the J Class Valsheda was on port! We decided to tack rather than insist on our rights!

Gordon

So common sense prevailed rather than tryng to psh a point BECAUSE you understood what the guys on the J were dealing with and know that letting them past was the lesser of two evils.

Gordon,

Was you polint re the J class the fact it cannot tack/gybe and change course the reason you did not push too hard?

I again ask for your comments on the above.  I feel you have essentially agreed that different boats take differing times to change direction and thus the time required to keep clear is different depending on the boat that is sailing. 

On the Velsheda - we could have stood on, borne away to pass astern or tacked. We tacked because we wanted to go to the right. A big boat can in fact alter course quite rapidly, they are not usually restricted to a narrow band of wind angles. Velsheda could have lufed 3 or 4 degrees and cleared us without problem. The speed difference was such that we were, for all purposes, an immobile object.

I would argue that the time required for most boats to alter course is not that different, although in that time some may travel a lot further. The reaction time of the helmsman remains the same. Big cats are an exception, because they often have difficulty bearing away without some serious trimming to prevent the leeward bow digging in. Some skiffs also have a problem when running as bearing away of luffing more than a few degrees may result in a capsize. The rules clearly state that this does not alter in any way their obligations.

It could be argued that sailing a boat in such a way that it has a limited capacity to alter course is not "seamanlike". It would make an interesting case.

Probably, the common sense decision is to ensure that there is sufficient separation between differing classes so that the problem doesn't arise.

Gordon

The J Class example bought to mind the Match Race between the IACC Ville de Paris and one of the Js (Endeavour?).  VDP stuffed the J downwind in the prevailing conditions but upwind they were well matched.

Going upwind there was a close crossing/collision situation with the J on port.  The J simply hardened up by a significant amount and "fore-reached" across in front of VDP who simply did not have the momentum to "hunt" even if she wanted to.

Not the same deal - but relevant as it illustrates how the characteristics of boats vary their rule interactions.