Everything posted by bilge water
bilge water replied to JimC's topic in Sailing Anarchysorry about the confusion in an already confusing thread my post was of a different protest just to highlight where another starboard boat with little to no opportunity got scrubbed and had to pay the bill due to the others action is all.
bilge water replied to JimC's topic in Sailing AnarchyPROTEST HEARING Wednesday 7 November, 2018 2018-19/03 AUS144— v AUS184 —nd RF160 and 2018-19/04 RF160Äv AUS184— Facts Found Approximately three minutes after the start on the first upwind leg in 12kts of breeze on flat water an incident occurred. AUS144 on starboard two boat lengths to leeward and at least one boat length advanced on AUS184. RF160 on starboard three boat lengths astern and slightly to windward of AUS184. AUS144 tacks to port and bears away to sail a course to duck AUS184 and RF160. AUS184 tacks to port slightly after AUS144 and immediately becomes aware of a collision course with RF160 on starboard. AUS184 slowly tacks back to starboard having not built speed. RF160 is now on collision course with AUS184 in about one and a half boat lengths. RF160 bears away away abruptly dumping main and rudder hard over to avoid AUS184. RF160 now sailing downwind clears AUS184's stern by less than one meter. RF160 now on imminent collision course with AUS144. AUS144 has been keeping clear until RF160 changes course. RF160 immediately collides with the port bow of AUS144 and scrapes Dow the port side of AUS144 causing serious damage. AUS144 also attempts to bear away further but cannot avoid the collision. The jury chose not to put any weight on the written submissions of the helm of AUS184. Decision AUS184 breaks rule 10 in relation to RF160. AUS184 exonerates herself under RRS44.2 (as modified by SIS). RF160 breaks RRS 16.1 and 16.2, does not take an alternate penalty under RRS44.2, and is DSQ. RF160 also breaks rule 14 causing serious damage to AUS144. AUS144 also breaks rule 14 with regard to RF160 but is exonerated under RRS21. AUS184 is not entitled to exoneration under RRS44.1(b) due to serious damage resulting from the incident and is DSQ. split second decisions can really fuck your day