New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Sailing Instructions vs Racing Rules
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Sailing Instructions vs Racing Rules

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>
Author
Noble Marine View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king
Avatar

Joined: 09 May 05
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 126
Post Options Post Options   Quote Noble Marine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 6:17am

Originally posted by Stuart O

Also please clarify the SIs do they state a time limit for a boat to cross the line after the start signal...some acutually say must cross the line within 2 minutes of the start signal.

The port tack boat would have been inside the starting time limit of 15 minutes.

Originally posted by Stuart O

Also look back in some of the IYRU/RYA appeals think you will find that this has been clarified and Im sure colregs led to the dsq of the boat on port.

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.

 

Back to Top
Stefan Lloyd View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 03 Aug 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1599
Post Options Post Options   Quote Stefan Lloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 6:57am

Originally posted by hurricane

how come I have seen a jury use the colregs to disqualify a boat for a similar situation?

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
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1348
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Noble Marine View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king
Avatar

Joined: 09 May 05
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 126
Post Options Post Options   Quote Noble Marine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 11:18am
Originally posted by sargesail

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.


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.


Back to Top
Stefan Lloyd View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 03 Aug 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1599
Post Options Post Options   Quote Stefan Lloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Noble Marine View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king
Avatar

Joined: 09 May 05
Location: Newark, Nottinghamshire
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 126
Post Options Post Options   Quote Noble Marine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 12:06pm
Originally posted by Stefan Lloyd

However I've argued that the rules and SIs are not in fact in conflict. See RRS 22.1.


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?
Back to Top
sargesail View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1348
Post Options Post Options   Quote sargesail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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!

Back to Top
craiggo View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1804
Post Options Post Options   Quote craiggo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Stefan Lloyd View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 03 Aug 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1599
Post Options Post Options   Quote Stefan Lloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 1:10pm

Originally posted by sargesail

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). 

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

Joined: 02 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2413
Post Options Post Options   Quote Scooby_simon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 07 at 1:31pm
Originally posted by Stefan Lloyd

Originally posted by sargesail

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). 

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.

 

 

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

F16 GBR 553 - Hungry Monster - For sale
Wanna learn to Ski - PM me..
I also talk sport here
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>

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