Laurent Giles 'Jolly Boat' Exeter |
J24 (Sail No. 4239) Dartmouth |
29er GBR 074 Tynemouth |
List classes of boat for sale |
Sailing Instructions vs Racing Rules |
Post Reply | Page <1234 6> |
Author | ||
Noble Marine
Posting king Joined: 09 May 05 Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 126 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Sailing Instructions vs Racing Rules Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 6:17am |
|
The port tack boat would have been inside the starting time limit of 15 minutes.
I have tried to find some former case like this as I am sure it must have arisen previously. If anyone knows of a case, please let me know.
|
||
Stefan Lloyd
Really should get out more Joined: 03 Aug 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1599 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 6:57am | |
There have been several court cases in the UK and USA upholding the principal that RRS, not Colregs, apply between boats involved in racing, even if not in the same race. http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/news/04/0111pera/ is a good read on the subject. ISAF case 67 ruled that a boat racing that collided with a boat not racing could be penalised under RRS. However I don't think the case is relevant here because the other boat in case 67 was not involved in racing at all and hence 22.1 didn't apply. I can't locate any ISAF cases involving RRS 22.1. If you know of International Jury findings that found a boat in boat B's situation was not required to abide by RRS22.1, please let us know the details. Edited by Stefan Lloyd |
||
sargesail
Really should get out more Joined: 14 Jan 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1459 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 10:28am | |
Frankly if I was either of the parties to this claim and came across this while browsing this forum I would be more than a little shocked. While I appreciate that extremely obscure cases call for more unusual research methods I don't really see it as appropriate.
|
||
Noble Marine
Posting king Joined: 09 May 05 Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 126 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 11:18am | |
Which is why I have deliberately kept names and precise details out of the discussion. We have had long discussions in-house about the case and thought that it would be an interesting to debate. This wording is commonly found in the sailing instructions of many events and I believe that similar situations must have occured previously. Thankfully in the specific incident, no-one was injured, but it is easy to see how an injury could occur if one skipper felt he had right of way by virtue of the fact that he was sailing on starboard (rule 10) and another skipper felt he had right of way by virture of the fact that he was racing and the SIs stated that a boat not yet racing must keep clear of a boat who is racing. Obviously under rule 14, a boat shall avoid contact, however the rule also states that, a right-of-way boat need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear. If the SI and the racing rules are in conflict, confusion could arise whereby both boats believe themselves to be the right of way boat and therefore wait for the other boat to take action. My question was, if the rules and the sailing instructions are in conflict, which should take precedence. |
||
Stefan Lloyd
Really should get out more Joined: 03 Aug 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1599 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 11:27am | |
However I've argued that the rules and SIs are not in fact in conflict. See RRS 22.1.
|
||
Noble Marine
Posting king Joined: 09 May 05 Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire Online Status: Offline Posts: 126 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 12:06pm | |
But 22.1 states "If reasonably possible,a boat not racing shall not interfere with a boat that is racing.". The SIs state that "Boats whose warning signal has not been made shall keep clear of the starting area and of all boats whose warning signal has been made" There could be a big difference between "if reasonably possible" and "shall". Perhaps if the proposed case were more general. Would a boat, either racing, or about to race, have automatic right of way over a boat, awaiting her start, well away from the starting area and the course? |
||
sargesail
Really should get out more Joined: 14 Jan 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1459 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 12:27pm | |
Yes but surely the point here is that neither boat could actually know who was bound by what at the stage that the incident occurred, or more specifically if you take Stefan's line, or indeed apply the "shall" above, that Boat B the give-way boat had no reason to believe she was not the right of way (or to go IRPCAS - stand-on vessel). The hail from Boat A was her first indication - they may have been close or seperated but the question for me really comes down to "was there time and opportunity for Boat B to compute the relative merits of the SIs, RRS, IRPCAS and move her perception from right of way to give way and then make an alteration of course, in a sensible manner, without worsening the situation. That it was Boat A that made the attempt to alter and avoid might suggest not, or might suggest that Boat B was mereley being difficult. But the point is that any Protest decision or I believe insurance decision shoul take this into account. Frankly if Boat A, who had already duffed the start was entering the starting area and was not keeping up a constant stream of "advice" that she intended to take up her rights as a racing boat over boats that were not then she deserved everything she got - and the question of rights and which rules have priority is dancing on thr head of a pin. I assume if this has been debated at length that a decison has been made. These things do create odd circumstances and odd decisions - I was staggered that a pal of mine who was returning ashore foils up and hit another boat which launched into his path lost his excess - but I have/had faith in the protocols used for these decisions - until I saw this thread! |
||
craiggo
Really should get out more Joined: 01 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1810 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 12:37pm | |
On most counts I agree with Stefan, however ultimately colregs must be the final requirement to be met, and in this instance boat A is in the wrong, however having hailed Starboard, boat B should not have just assumed that boat A would avoid them and should have maintained watch. When it became obvious to boat B that boat A was not going to alter course boat B should have taken avoiding action, not doing so was in contrivention of colregs and so swithed blame onto them. Had B avoided A then they would have been entitled to protest although given that they still had 13mins before their preparotory signal they would be unlikely to claim any redress, boat A however may have been DSQ.
Paul |
||
Stefan Lloyd
Really should get out more Joined: 03 Aug 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1599 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 1:10pm | |
Questionable. They were different classes in the same event. It isn't too much to expect that you might know which classes started ahead of you. In a protest I'd chuck boat A under rule 10 and boat B under 14 and 22.1.
Edited by Stefan Lloyd |
||
Scooby_simon
Really should get out more Joined: 02 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 2415 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 1:31pm | |
That maybe so, but given who is asking the question, we need to go further than the results of a protest. The protest does not provide a definition of ultimate "fault", it provides a ruling based on the SAILING RULES that apply. Consider if the Starboard boat was not part of the race and so did not know what the SSI's said. Would it then be a simple port / stbd / colision regs situation ? I would say, on balance (and it's close IMO) that the boat on PORT was wrong to push to the point of collision as the stbd boat (may) have had the view that they had rights. Did the Port boat know the Stbd boat was part of the regatta ? Did the Stbd boat assume that the PORT boat was not part of the regatta as they were so late for the start ? Or did the Stbd boat assume that the boat was on a later start because hey were so late. Without all the facts it's difficult to be certain, but perhaps port boat was pushing TOO hard as they were late. I'd probably bin both as above and find fault with the port boat. would be good to have more facts |
||
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
|
||
Post Reply | Page <1234 6> |
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 |