• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Jackdaw

Rules question.. Potential overlap at the start

Recommended Posts

Looks like the Shields tacks in front of the boat filming clear ahead but does not hold its lane... falling off it creates overlap.. Then it gets messy. Whatcha think?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been wondering about for some time. There is an unseen boat below, calling him up, right? And he replies "I'm going to hit that boat if I go up further". So essentially he is calling obstruction.

 

Is someone allowed to call obstruction at the starting line, and therefore not head up if called to do so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been wondering about for some time. There is an unseen boat below, calling him up, right? And he replies "I'm going to hit that boat if I go up further". So essentially he is calling obstruction.

 

Is someone allowed to call obstruction at the starting line, and therefore not head up if called to do so?

 

The filming boat is the jam in the middle of the sandwich here. The sensible thing to happen is for the leeward boat not to luff the jam - complying with 14 in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Shields calls out that "you're astern" to the faster overtaking boat doing the filming; if they could have gone over the top of the Shields but did not can the Shields be blamed for not keeping clear? But were it not for the faster boat diving down and trying to stay below the Shields there might not have been a collision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been wondering about for some time. There is an unseen boat below, calling him up, right? And he replies "I'm going to hit that boat if I go up further". So essentially he is calling obstruction.

 

Is someone allowed to call obstruction at the starting line, and therefore not head up if called to do so?

 

you would protest the windward boat for not heading up not call an obstruction unless the windward boat was already head to wind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been wondering about for some time. There is an unseen boat below, calling him up, right? And he replies "I'm going to hit that boat if I go up further". So essentially he is calling obstruction.

 

Is someone allowed to call obstruction at the starting line, and therefore not head up if called to do so?

 

You are allowed to call obstruction, but only relating to a right of way boat

a keep clear boat, even if you owe them room is not an obstruction (unless capzised, anchored or aground)

 

So if a boat is calling you up that boat is typically the 'obstruction' in the situation, and the other boat (who you fear you might hit if you go up) is the usually the one who must give room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I've been wondering about for some time. There is an unseen boat below, calling him up, right? And he replies "I'm going to hit that boat if I go up further". So essentially he is calling obstruction.

 

Is someone allowed to call obstruction at the starting line, and therefore not head up if called to do so?

 

you would protest the windward boat for not heading up not call an obstruction unless the windward boat was already head to wind.

 

doesn't matter if the windward boat is already head to wind

they are still not an obstruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are allowed to call obstruction, but only relating to a right of way boat

 

What happens if the top boat simply does not head up even if I protest him? Am I, the middle boat, subject to protest if the top boat does not head up?

Part 2, what if I am just a friendly guy and do not call for the top boat to head up? Am I still subject to protest by the bottom boat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle boat may be a candidate to be protested (if leeward wants to bother) and then exonerated/not penalized (assuming no damage to trigger RRS 14 for them if the collision was somehow avoidable for them). In the 2013-2016 rules the role of exoneration will be more clear with the rewrite of part 2 d. It looks like the Shields was initially okay after completing a tack in front, but then bore off down into the path of the other boats and then maybe panicked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the beginning, when the port boat tacked in front of the boat filming, it became a starboard boat CLEAR AHEAD, with all the rights and responsibility of a CLEAR AHEAD BOAT ON THE SAME TACK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the Shields completed their tack, the filming boat was clear astern, the Shields turned down a little but didn't seem to give away a leeward overlap to the filming boat. It's tough to tell, but to me. it looked like the filming boat started screaming UP UP before they had established a leeward overlap. I think they started screaming because they too were being luffed and didn't want to head up when in fact they had room to do so and miss the Shields. As a further indication that they hadn't established a leeward overlap, just before the collision, the Shileds appeared dead ahead of the screaming boat astern. The screaming boat was moving too fast into a tight spot and ran over the Shields. The shields had every right to be where it was before the start.

 

The video isn't conclusive in terms of overlaps but I think the filming boat should be tossed at least, or retire for damage to the Shields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops, hit the wrong button.

 

The filming boat(boat 1) had to make a choice of following, going above or going below boat 2.

He definitely did not have the option of ramming boat 2.

 

Why boat 2 fell off and stalled the boat is beyond me.

 

Boat 1 should have tacked over and protested boat 2.

Instead he just started screaming at a boat that was dead in the water in his path.

 

The entire crew of boat 1 is a bunch of idiots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On closer inspection of the video:

 

At 0:39 Shields has completed their tack clear ahead

At 0:43 The Shields turns down but it's debateable whether or not they gave a momentary overlap and ROW to Screamer.

At 0:53 There's a lot of UP UP from Screamer, but it didn't look like they had an overlap and they were clear astern with room to windward to take avoiding action.

At 0:56 Screamer clear astern No overlap

At 0:58 Screamer turns down and screams at leeward boat that's luffing them. What Screamer seems to be forgetting is that they have an obligation to avoid the Shields... and avoid the leeward boat that's taking them up. They needed to bite the bullet and head up themselves to avoid leeward's luff, even if it means they get taken above the committee boat. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time and definitely had room to avoid the Shields as opposed to sticking their nose in there.

 

At 1:00 Screamer was simply closing fast from clear astern and not taking any positive avoiding action - too many people talking to helmsman who in turn seems to be confused in terms of taking appropriate avoiding action

At 1:03 Screamer helmsman turns down and hooks the Shields

 

It might have helped having the bowman on the bow clearly calling the overlap.

 

Rules that screamer probably broke:

12: ON THE SAME TACK, NOT OVERLAPPED

When boats are on the same tack and not overlapped, a boat clear

astern shall keep clear of a boat clear ahead.

 

14 AVOIDING CONTACT

A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible.

(it was reasonably possible for Screamer to avoid by heading up)

 

15 ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY

When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other

boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of

the other boat’s actions.

(If the screamer thought they had acquired the right of way (leeward overlap), judging by the speed of the approach and collision, it didn't look like they gave the Shields any room to keep clear. The Shields probably couldn't have luffed up without their stern swinging to port and hitting the Screamer.)

 

Jackdaw... do you know what eventually happened in terms of protests?

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been said it is hard to call from the video but I would say middle boat starts calling up way before the established an overlap. It seems to me eye like they had the option to luff above the windward boat throughout the entire video, even up till seconds before the collision, so as well as anything else there is definitely a 14 case against them.

 

As an aside, if they are both clear astern and the leeward boat clearly intends to pass to leeward of the windward boat the middle boat is entitled to call room to duck, as you would when ducking a starboard boat. However I don't think the leeward boat is far enough forward for this to be the case here and they would be entitled to force the middle above windward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the beginning, when the port boat tacked in front of the boat filming, it became a starboard boat CLEAR AHEAD, with all the rights and responsibility of a CLEAR AHEAD BOAT ON THE SAME TACK.

Dont forget 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the beginning, when the port boat tacked in front of the boat filming, it became a starboard boat CLEAR AHEAD, with all the rights and responsibility of a CLEAR AHEAD BOAT ON THE SAME TACK.

 

Dont forget 15

 

It looks to me like they had plenty of room when their tack was completed... remember, a "tack" is defined as from head-to-wind until you are on a close-hauled course. The Shields happened to have their mainsail eased so it was not filling, but their tack was completed in plenty of time.

 

IMHO WHL nailed it. The filming boat had the obligation to avoid boats to leeward and a boat clear ahead, but instead of keeping clear steered into a risky course and a collision resulted. They earned a DSQ... the Shields -might- get a DSQ also for bearing away across the bow of a leeward boat, depending on exactly when the windward-leeward overlap was established but that is impossible to determine from this video IMHO.

 

This is one reason why it's so difficult to take beercan racing seriously... too many snackticians think they are geniuses for ignoring the rules.

 

BTW let's all remember that it doesn't matter if a windward boat is head-to-wind. A LEEWARD boat is allowed to go head-to-wind, the windward boat just has to keep clear... often that means tacking away which is just too bad for them.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a perfect example of why judges don't like video evidence in a protest hearing. Distance / overlaps are often impossible to determine due to the position / perspective distortion of the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the video boat doesn't actually have an overlap until about 1:00, maybe a few ticks after that. So regardless of all the yelling and who tacked where, they had no rights (or ability) to luff the Shields up to that point. However, when the video boat, overtaking to leeward, stuck his bow too close under the Shields for it to turn to weather, and then hit and spun it ... That's Rule 15 DSQ on the video boat ...

 

And he's lucky there weren't people hurt or rigs down ...

 

G4B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jackdaw... do you know what eventually happened in terms of protests?

 

 

WHL, nice. I can check. The race was one of the mid-distance fleet races that runs every day during BRW. Boats are mixed bag, cruisers having a go, boats that don't like buoy racing, and some short handed race boats that normally race buoys. The only player I know is the Shields driver, and he's got game.I don't remember a protest from the mid-distance races, so maybe someone retired. But I'll check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

life Jackets in 5-8knots of wind in the cruising Div.. Chuck them anyway:P

 

but seriously.. It looks like the filming boat did alter to go above the Clear ahead boat.. Then though "Fuck it im faster and heavier" and ducked below, only to ram them. Watch the helmsman..

 

the boat CLEAR AHEAD didnt do anything wrong except get moved down.. There is nothing in the rules about "holding a lane" only he completed, started sailing and got wacked hard..

 

The boat below should also get chucked for luffing a guy with life jackets on in 5 knots... at that speed would have been better to sail around them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

life Jackets in 5-8knots of wind in the cruising Div.. Chuck them anyway:P

 

SIs require them at start and finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

notice the :P otherwise know as a :P

 

Was tongue in cheek. I actually applaud people who take safety beyond the bare minimum. Shows seamanship..

 

If uncomfortable, be over cautious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, it would be extremely interesting to know exactly where on the Shields the boat with the video camera struck with their bow. It is not clear to me from the video that there ever was an overlap. Were the Shields going slowly with the tiller pulled up trying to dive down below a boat clear astern (which they have a right to do), then what I saw in the video would have happened even if the boat who made the video struck them in the transom from directly astern.

 

Jackdaw, can you get your friend with the shields to tell you where the damage is? I'm sure there is some and it wouldn't be hard to find. That kind of evidence is pretty critical to getting this right.

 

Second, if we assume that the point of contact was along the leeward side of the shields, proving there was some sort of overlap, it would be extremely interesting to know just how far forward that contact point was (again trying to get to physical evidence as opposed to video). If the point of impact was on the leeward quarter within a few feet of the transom, which is my guess from the film, then it appears that the boat who took the video stuck their bow in directly to leeward of the shield's transom and would be a real candidate to get tossed under rules 15 and 14.

 

The boat who made the video must allow the shields "room to keep clear" after she acquires the right of way. See rules quoted below. For a shields, with a long overhanging transom the boat making the video would need to provide at least 4 or 5 feet of room to leeward of the shields to allow the shields to actually keep clear. I've sailed shields and their transoms go to leeward at least that far when they head up. This isn't well understood by a lot of sailors of modern boats that don't have overhanging transoms.

 

 

Rule 15: Acquiring Right of Way

 

When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions.

 

 

Rule 14: Avoiding Contact

 

A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible. However, a right-of-way boat or one entitled to room or mark-room


  • (a) need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear or giving room or mark-room, and
     

  • ( B) shall not be penalized under this rule unless there is contact that causes damage or injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beau,

 

I looked at the results and saw the shields was DSQ'ed. Don't know any of the details, except that it was the only boat tossed, so I assume the contact didn't cause damage that would have triggered 14-B

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beau,

 

I looked at the results and saw the shields was DSQ'ed. Don't know any of the details, except that it was the only boat tossed, so I assume the contact didn't cause damage that would have triggered 14-B

 

wow - that doesn't sound right looking at the video - maybe there was other evidence more compelling being presented - or some "not so true" statements being made in the room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the video the filming boat is completely in the wrong. WHL gets it right. AT MOST there was a momentary overlap early in the process. but for the vast majority of the time, the Shields was Clear Ahead ... QED RRS 12 applies. And there Clearly was room for the filming boat to sail ABOVE the shields - of course TACTICALLY that's undesirable but that's not the Sheilds problem

 

At ANY POINT the filming boat could have ragged all sails and backed the main and stopped. And it would not have overtaken the Shields and no collision would have occurred

 

QED violation of RRS 14 by the filming boat.

 

 

Finally at 55 seconds, the Filming boat establishes an overlap to leeward of the Shields. But remember that under RRS 15 he must do so in a manner that gives the Shields "ROOM" to keep clear. "Keeping clear" includes the Shields' right to luff. that means basically you need to give about 1/2 a boatlength distance between your bow - and his stern LATERALLY - which the Filming boat clearly does not do

 

 

This is a DSQ of the filming boat ON THREE separate opportunities to avoid a problem....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the video the filming boat is completely in the wrong. WHL gets it right. AT MOST there was a momentary overlap early in the process. but for the vast majority of the time, the Shields was Clear Ahead ... QED RRS 12 applies. And there Clearly was room for the filming boat to sail ABOVE the shields - of course TACTICALLY that's undesirable but that's not the Sheilds problem

 

At ANY POINT the filming boat could have ragged all sails and backed the main and stopped. And it would not have overtaken the Shields and no collision would have occurred

 

QED violation of RRS 14 by the filming boat.

 

 

Finally at 55 seconds, the Filming boat establishes an overlap to leeward of the Shields. But remember that under RRS 15 he must do so in a manner that gives the Shields "ROOM" to keep clear. "Keeping clear" includes the Shields' right to luff. that means basically you need to give about 1/2 a boatlength distance between your bow - and his stern LATERALLY - which the Filming boat clearly does not do

 

 

This is a DSQ of the filming boat ON THREE separate opportunities to avoid a problem....

 

^ what he said ^

 

Did the Protest Committee watch the video? It's not clear to me exactly when the overlap was established but it was obvious that the filming boat did not make any attempt to keep clear of a boat clear ahead, nor to establish an overlap in a manner than gave them room to keep clear, nor attempt to avoid the collision.

 

This is why I am very doubtful of protest committees

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As an aside, if they are both clear astern and the leeward boat clearly intends to pass to leeward of the windward boat the middle boat is entitled to call room to duck, as you would when ducking a starboard boat. However I don't think the leeward boat is far enough forward for this to be the case here and they would be entitled to force the middle above windward.

 

Next time I'm in a start, I'm going to call room to duck and see how it works...

 

Cheers,

 

Chaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Shields got DSQ'd???/ Wow there must have been some extravagent testimony !!!

It would be really interesting to see what the Protest Committe concluded were the facts found and what rules they said were broken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to get my ass seriously reamed for this but I'd still ike to make the point.

 

First, in my opinion the Shields did nothing wrong and the filming boat should have abandoned his hope of hooking the Shields and gone over them.

 

Having said that, I'd like to make the observation that the Shields was DEAD RIGHT. Just like a corpse in a crosswalk, he had the right of way but still got hit and tossed ( though that's shocking). The big assumption I'm making my next statement is that the Shields in this video does some one design racing, even if not, I'd still like to express the thought.

 

Around here we have some extremely talented J24 sailors who spend most of their time racing one design but occasionally join the PHRF ranks and give us a few lessons. What I notice is that the one design racers have what I call very small personal space, they are more comfortable in close quarters than the varied PHRF boats. In their one design venue this is necessary and part of the fun, they are all evenly matched and the speed/manoverability similarities keeps the relative distances between them pretty stable. But when these practices are applied against less skilled racers on boats with different performance charateristics the results can be much different than in their usual one design arena. In the video the Shields pulled a perfectly fine tack but if you can imagine what the situation looked like from the Shields point of view, there were two boats coming at them, the video boat and the boat to leeward of them and yet the shields chose to show both of them his beam when he took his dive down. Yes he had every right to do this but the potential for the eventual result was actually somewhat predictable. Those two boats were coming at him fast, even if the filming boat squeaked above the Shields, the boat to leeward of him would probalby have had nowhere to go. The Shields had all the rights but I believe unnecessarily caused the doomed situation.

 

Flame on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jackdaw, I'm stunned. Any chance the PC posted the findings? It would make very interesting reading, given that video. BV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can easily see the Shields getting chucked under 11. Depends on the testimony, but if the PC finds that the overlap was established shortly after the tack was complete, that means that the time that the Shields was clear ahead right was short - a boat length or so and 15 applied the whole time. And I wonder whether the filming boat said that they couldn't luff above the shields, given times,distances and speed she was sailing. As I say, it all depends on the testimony of times and distances.

 

Promptly is different from instantaneously.

 

From a seamanship point of view, sticking yourself right in front of 2 larger and faster boats isn't necessarily big or clever.

Wonder why she's wearing an ensign?

 

517-8123_Collision_between_Mari_Cha_V_and_Venom_W60_.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On closer inspection of the video:

 

At 0:39 Shields has completed their tack clear ahead

At 0:43 The Shields turns down but it's debateable whether or not they gave a momentary overlap and ROW to Screamer.

At 0:53 There's a lot of UP UP from Screamer, but it didn't look like they had an overlap and they were clear astern with room to windward to take avoiding action.

At 0:56 Screamer clear astern No overlap

At 0:58 Screamer turns down and screams at leeward boat that's luffing them. What Screamer seems to be forgetting is that they have an obligation to avoid the Shields... and avoid the leeward boat that's taking them up. They needed to bite the bullet and head up themselves to avoid leeward's luff, even if it means they get taken above the committee boat. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time and definitely had room to avoid the Shields as opposed to sticking their nose in there.

 

At 1:00 Screamer was simply closing fast from clear astern and not taking any positive avoiding action - too many people talking to helmsman who in turn seems to be confused in terms of taking appropriate avoiding action

At 1:03 Screamer helmsman turns down and hooks the Shields

 

It might have helped having the bowman on the bow clearly calling the overlap.

 

Rules that screamer probably broke:

12: ON THE SAME TACK, NOT OVERLAPPED

When boats are on the same tack and not overlapped, a boat clear

astern shall keep clear of a boat clear ahead.

 

14 AVOIDING CONTACT

A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible.

(it was reasonably possible for Screamer to avoid by heading up)

 

15 ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY

When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other

boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of

the other boat’s actions.

(If the screamer thought they had acquired the right of way (leeward overlap), judging by the speed of the approach and collision, it didn't look like they gave the Shields any room to keep clear. The Shields probably couldn't have luffed up without their stern swinging to port and hitting the Screamer.)

 

Jackdaw... do you know what eventually happened in terms of protests?

.

 

+1 and I would add that from the way the Shields spun the impact was on the transom. If this was so there were no leeward rights as no overlap existed. For a boat to spin like that it is unlikely there was no damage - Rule 14.

 

As the video boat was clearly going faster perhaps the best action was to use that speed to luff above the shields and run the risk of the committee boat. They had already left themselves vulnerable by being close to the committee boat end with sails not driving and therefore reduced ability to manouver. Not tactically brilliant but as others have said before - tough! They put themselves there.

 

From the video the only boat that clearly broke a rule is screamer who, with more than adequate room to keep clear drove straight into the Shields - if screamer was right of way boat. Would need more than just the video to find one way or the other.

 

For the sheilds to exit the room as the loser is difficult to understand - from the video - they didn't break 10,11,12,13, certainly didn't break 14, or any of the others - hard to understand. Screamer but have been crewed by lawyers :)

 

See ya on the water (or in the room)

 

SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the beginning of the video, doesn't someone say "We are a minute and a half...." and considering that this is all happening at the prestart, there is no proper course, regardless of how the overlap occurred. You also dont hear any starting signals and the video was less than 1:30.

 

If that is really the case, ultimately, the shields was the windward boat once the overlap was established and needed to keep clear. Even if the overlap was broken and re-established, again, she needs to keep clear of the leeward overlapped boat. I didnt see the shields ever attempt to keep clear by heading up, if anything, she seemed to fall down further, as if she was afraid of being over the line.

 

I didnt see anyone mention that fact that this was in the pre-start, and if I got that part wrong - my mistake.

 

Bam Miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a perfect example of why judges don't like video evidence in a protest hearing. Distance / overlaps are often impossible to determine due to the position / perspective distortion of the camera.

 

IME, it's not about like/don't like. A well placed video can be very helpful. It's more a question of being aware of the shortcomings. The Judges' Manual gives some guidance. Given how hard it can be to determine whether two boats are overlapped or not when you're right behind them in a RIB, (why they use wing umpires in match racing), it's impossible to tell from this video the timings of the overlap, which is the important question.

 

 

9.14 Photographic Evidence

Photographic and video recordings may be accepted as evidence at a hearing and can sometimes be useful. However, there are limitations and problems, and these should be appreciated by the protest committee. The following points may be of assistance to juries when video or photographic evidence is used.

 

• When a video recording is to be shown to the protest committee, it is the party presenting the evidence that should arrange the necessary equipment and ensure an operator (preferably the person who made the recording) is available to operate it.

 

• The party bringing the video evidence should have seen it before the hearing and provide reasons why he believes it will assist the protest committee.

 

• It is usually preferable to view the video after the parties have presented their cases.

 

• Allow the recording to be viewed first without comment, then with the comments of the party bringing the evidence, then with those of the other party. Questions may be asked in the normal way by the parties and the protest committee members.

 

• The depth of field of any single-lens camera is poor and with a telephoto lens, it is non-existent. When, for example, the camera's view is at right angles to the courses of two overlapped boats, it is impossible to assess the distance between them. Conversely, when the camera is directly ahead or astern, it is impossible to see when an overlap begins or even if one exists, unless it is substantial. Keep these limitations firmly in mind.

 

• Use the first viewing of the tape to become oriented with the scene. Where was the camera in relation to the boat? What was the angle and distance between them? Was the camera's platform moving? If so, in what direction and how fast? Is the angle changing as the boats approach the critical point? (Beware of a radical change caused by fast panning of the camera.) Did the camera have an unrestricted view throughout? If not, how much does that diminish the value of the evidence? Full orientation may require several viewings; take the time necessary.

 

• Since it takes only about 30 seconds to run and re-wind a typical incident, view it as many times as needed to extract all the information it can give. Also, be sure that the other party has an equal opportunity to point out what he believes it shows and does not show.

 

• Hold the equipment in place until the end of the hearing. The tape should be made available during deliberation for review to settle questions as to just what fact or facts it establishes, if any. Also, one of the members may have noticed something that the others did not.

 

• Do not expect too much from the videotape. Only occasionally, from a fortuitous camera angle, will it clearly establish the central fact of an incident. But, even if it does no more than settle one disputed point, that alone will help in reaching a correct decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please address the issue of "once the overlap is established, the Shields must . . . . . ." Assuming this is prestart, if there is an overlap briefly soon after the Shields tacks, there clearly isn't one at several later points. Doesn't the overlap get re-established each time and thus require giving the Shields new room to keep clear each time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each time the Shields changes from clear ahead to windward, she changes from the right of way to give way boat. And vice versa with the filming boat.

 

On that change, 15 says that 15 ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions.

 

So on each change between RoW and GW, the new RoW boat has to give the new GW boat room to keep clear. Room and Keep Clear are defined terms.

 

Room The space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way.

Keep Clear One boat keeps clear of another if the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and, when the boats are overlapped on the same tack, if the leeward boat can change course in both directions without immediately making contact with the windward boat.

 

Also, the RoW boat is constrained by 16 CHANGING COURSE 16.1 When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like there were 10 seconds between the Shields completing her tack and the beginning of the UP UP hailing..10 seconds seems a reasonable time for Screamer to slow down, and/or avoid the Shields. There's some interesting action and conversation on Screamer. The person sitting to the right is doing the screamming UP UP. and the person on the backstay seems to be coaching the helmsman. It looks like he puts his hand on the wheel to take Screamer up and you can hear someone say "take us up". The Helmsman starts to go up then panics with "I'm going to hit that boat if I do", then immediately goes down while Mr Red Shirt on the right keeps hailing. At that point, the helmsman could have gone up as prompted by Mr. Backstay Coach. Mr Backstay tries to stop the helmsman turning down and sticking his bow in there. The sounds track sounds like someone says hold your course to the helmsman and it's coincident with Mr Backstay moving his hand onto the wheel.

 

The helmsman is evidently getting too much conflicting info from his own crew and he looks flustered. That may account for some extravagent testimony from Screamer to sway a PC that the Shields tacked too close for Screamer to avoid (R15). Again, 10 seconds at that relatively slow speed seems long enough for Screamer to slow down. I think that Mr Backstay's coaching to go up themselves then hold their course, might have avoided the contact. There was also room between the Shields and the Committee boat to go there.

 

Having bow person calling overlaps in the starting area may also have given the helmsman and the tactician(s) better information on their rights and options.

 

Irrespective of a possible infraction by the Shields under Presuming Ed's scenario, I think Screamer should have been DSQ'd too. They had 10 seconds to take action to avoid a collision and if they did have rights, they had the obligation to avoid under R14 and the right to protest too, and not stick their nose in there and run the Shields over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thoughts from WHL and Presumed ED, but I would REALLY LIKE to see where the scuff marks on the Shields are. I agree with SS, having sailed a very similarly designed boat (IOD) and been rammed from astern a couple of times, my bet is that the Screamer hit the Shields on the transom. If so, it's hard to see this as a Rule 11 violation by the Shields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like there were 10 seconds between the Shields completing her tack and the beginning of the UP UP hailing..10 seconds seems a reasonable time for Screamer to slow down, and/or avoid the Shields. There's some interesting action and conversation on Screamer. The person sitting to the right is doing the screamming UP UP. and the person on the backstay seems to be coaching the helmsman. It looks like he puts his hand on the wheel to take Screamer up and you can hear someone say "take us up". The Helmsman starts to go up then panics with "I'm going to hit that boat if I do", then immediately goes down while Mr Red Shirt on the right keeps hailing. At that point, the helmsman could have gone up as prompted by Mr. Backstay Coach. Mr Backstay tries to stop the helmsman turning down and sticking his bow in there. The sounds track sounds like someone says hold your course to the helmsman and it's coincident with Mr Backstay moving his hand onto the wheel.

 

The helmsman is evidently getting too much conflicting info from his own crew and he looks flustered. That may account for some extravagent testimony from Screamer to sway a PC that the Shields tacked too close for Screamer to avoid (R15). Again, 10 seconds at that relatively slow speed seems long enough for Screamer to slow down. I think that Mr Backstay's coaching to go up themselves then hold their course, might have avoided the contact. There was also room between the Shields and the Committee boat to go there.

 

Having bow person calling overlaps in the starting area may also have given the helmsman and the tactician(s) better information on their rights and options.

 

Irrespective of a possible infraction by the Shields under Presuming Ed's scenario, I think Screamer should have been DSQ'd too. They had 10 seconds to take action to avoid a collision and if they did have rights, they had the obligation to avoid under R14 and the right to protest too, and not stick their nose in there and run the Shields over.

Looks like 2 guys competing to be the tactician: the guy on the backstay does try to take the wheel and force the video boat to go over the Shields and well as quietly telling the helm to head up and the guy in the orange looks like he is initally telling the helm to go up but then starts calling the Shields up instead.

 

Given that at least a few people on the video boat think they could have gone over the Shieds it is really hard to see why the Shields got DSQ: tack completed clear ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

Given that at least a few people on the video boat think they could have gone over the Shieds it is really hard to see why the Shields got DSQ: tack completed clear ahead.

 

I can tell you exactly why. It is the inescapable nature of committees to arrive at a consensus that follows the cultural narrative. Engineering committees design bridges that fall down. Protest committees hand DSQs to boats whose faults are mainly social.

 

I doubt that anybody deliberately lied to the PC in this case. However it is certainly human nature to put the best face possible on one's case no matter how bogus, and we've all done it. The Shields tacked in front of the other boat(s), a transgression against good orderly starting in most fleets. That is what they were really guilty of. If the PC were inclined to actually read the black-and-white of the rules, as so few actually take the time to do, they would have found it hard to avoid DSQ'ing the filming boat also, but apparently they found a way.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it does not matter "where the scuff marks are"... the issue is that

 

1) the Shields tacks very clear ahead. And once she completes here tack, the Filmer MUST IMMEDIATELY BEGIN TAKING ACTION TO AVOID CONTACT as they are the burdened boat (Clear astern).

 

2) Bam you are wrong. The shields on TWO OCCAISIONS turns back upwind breaking overlap. Which IMMEDIATELY puts th burden back on FILM to avoid the "clear ahead" boat.

 

3) the overlap was clearly established LESS THAN 1/2 BL to leeward of the Shields. This is INSTANTLY a violation of RRS 15 "giving room to keep clear"... because it means that if the Shields puts her helm down, and pivots around her keel, she will "immediately" cause contact.

 

And the definition of "keeping clear" is that the other boat can alter course without 'immediately causing contact".

 

 

 

This is a travesty of a jury ruling... What probably happened was that neither side really understood the rules, and the Shields did not defend the fact that no overlap had existed except for about 2 seconds before contact.

 

But frankly a decent jury should have sussed this out from just the way the these clowns testified

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB,

 

The scuff marks could prove there was no overlap at the time of the collision, or not. On all the rest, I basically agree with you.

 

I don't believe anyone commenting here has any knowledge of what happened in the "Room", nor has anyone seen a copy of the "Decision" with the attendant finding of facts etc... It is, obviously, up to the Shields if they wish to appeal the decision. In that event, the "facts found" would stand but I have known a case to be sent back to the Protest Committee to "find more facts", something I was not aware that those hearing the appeal could do. It'd sure be nice to know more facts.

 

BV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Shields said "fuggit" and did not attend the hearing.

 

Maybe the film boat said the Shields altered course down onto him.

 

I've noticed that the rules are interpreted & applied or ignored according to area tradion as SF notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its interesting that knowing the results of the jury throws the thread off a bit. They were working off of the forms and the memory of involved parties. I thought the video was fascinating to watch; I think my option changed several times during multiple viewings. I'm pretty sure the PC did not see the vid. I know some of the guys on the committee, and they would have giving a fair hearing of all the presented evidence.

 

As Ed points out, video evidence can be both telling and misleading.

 

I HAVE heard through a 3rd party that the Shields was unhappy, and had contemplated an appeal with USsailing. Not sure that ever happened. I'll see if I can find anything else. Some of the players are SAers, maybe they will chime in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree video evidence can be misleading, but NOT in this case.

 

Jury clearly blew the call. Screamer should have been tossed, and had to pay for the almost certain

damage that happened to the Shields.

 

No question...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each time the Shields changes from clear ahead to windward, she changes from the right of way to give way boat. And vice versa with the filming boat.

 

On that change, 15 says that 15 ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions.

 

So on each change between RoW and GW, the new RoW boat has to give the new GW boat room to keep clear. Room and Keep Clear are defined terms.

 

Room The space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way.

Keep Clear One boat keeps clear of another if the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and, when the boats are overlapped on the same tack, if the leeward boat can change course in both directions without immediately making contact with the windward boat.

 

Also, the RoW boat is constrained by 16 CHANGING COURSE 16.1 When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear.

 

Haven't we all been a bit careless about the last part of rule 15 unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions?

 

When, having completed her tack clear ahead, Shields first bears away, so that Film becomes overlapped to leeward, Film acquired right of way because of Shields' actions and rule 15 did not apply.

 

Later when Shields changes course to windward, showing her transom to Film, and becoming clear ahead, she acquires right of way through her own actions and is subject to the rule 15 obligation to give Film room to keep clear; there is half an ocean to windward of Film at this time, so she has ample room to keep clear.

 

I have a little difficulty with the situation where a faster boat becomes overlapped close to leeward of a slower boat with neither boat changeing course: what 'action' by either boat has caused her to 'acquire' right of way? Given that it is clearly necessary to protect the newly give way boat, I am inclined to think that rule 15 should apply in this situation (but I wouldn't mind a case to tell me so). Of course, rule 15 will not apply if there some action, such as starting sheets and sailing slow or sailing backwards by the ahead boat that causes the astern boat to acquire right of way.

 

Absolutely agree that we also need to consider rule 16 here: once boats start jinking around, rule 16 is always on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each time the Shields changes from clear ahead to windward, she changes from the right of way to give way boat. And vice versa with the filming boat.

 

On that change, 15 says that 15 ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY When a boat acquires right of way, she shall initially give the other boat room to keep clear, unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions.

 

So on each change between RoW and GW, the new RoW boat has to give the new GW boat room to keep clear. Room and Keep Clear are defined terms.

 

Room The space a boat needs in the existing conditions while manoeuvring promptly in a seamanlike way.

Keep Clear One boat keeps clear of another if the other can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and, when the boats are overlapped on the same tack, if the leeward boat can change course in both directions without immediately making contact with the windward boat.

 

Also, the RoW boat is constrained by 16 CHANGING COURSE 16.1 When a right-of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear.

 

Haven't we all been a bit careless about the last part of rule 15 unless she acquires right of way because of the other boat’s actions?

 

When, having completed her tack clear ahead, Shields first bears away, so that Film becomes overlapped to leeward, Film acquired right of way because of Shields' actions and rule 15 did not apply.

 

Later when Shields changes course to windward, showing her transom to Film, and becoming clear ahead, she acquires right of way through her own actions and is subject to the rule 15 obligation to give Film room to keep clear; there is half an ocean to windward of Film at this time, so she has ample room to keep clear.

 

I have a little difficulty with the situation where a faster boat becomes overlapped close to leeward of a slower boat with neither boat changeing course: what 'action' by either boat has caused her to 'acquire' right of way? Given that it is clearly necessary to protect the newly give way boat, I am inclined to think that rule 15 should apply in this situation (but I wouldn't mind a case to tell me so). Of course, rule 15 will not apply if there some action, such as starting sheets and sailing slow or sailing backwards by the ahead boat that causes the astern boat to acquire right of way.

 

Absolutely agree that we also need to consider rule 16 here: once boats start jinking around, rule 16 is always on.

 

I'm pretty sure there is a case or call which states that even a change of speed by a boat is not considered an 'action' under R15.

an action can be changing tack, or changing course, but being overtaken would not count, even if the boat clear ahead sheeted out and slowed.

 

I'll see if I can find the reference.

 

ok found it

its a match race call... so not definitive in fleet racing, but it does carry some weight.

MR CALL B18

 

While the change in speed is a consequence of an action by Yellow, an increase

or decrease in speed is not in itself an 'action' within the meaning of the second

part of rule 15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was the jury here's what I would rule

 

Facts Found:

 

S (Shields) and F (Filmer) were near the starting line roughly 2 minutes from the start of their class

Winds were 5-7 knots no appreciable current

 

S was on Port

F was on Starboard and they were separated by at least 7 boatlengths

 

S began her tack to starboard well clear of F

S tcompleted her tack when she was at least 3 Boatlengths ahead of F

 

Under RRS 12 F was now required to Keep Clear of S and had ample "room" to do so.

 

F was now traveling about 2 knots faster than S

F began to shout "Stay up - Stay Up" - without any rights or basis to do so

 

Still clear ahead S bore off from her close hauled course to accellerate. F chose a course that would take him to leeward of S

 

With a separation of 2+ Boat lengths, a momentary overlap was established between the stern of S and the bow of F.. This transfered the Keep Dlear obligation onto S and under section 2 of RRS 15, there was no "initial" room period. F again hailed (correctly this time) "Stay Up Leeward Boat"

 

S immediately responded by turning to a closer hauld course thereby braking the overlap with 2 BL of separation between her stern and F's Bow

 

This re-established RRS 12, and thus F was required to Keep Clear. RRS 15 ddid require S to give F "room" to keep clear. As there were 2 BL separating S and F S complied with RRS 15

 

F continued to carry her speed and to sail a course to leeward of S continuing to hail "Stay Up" but with no force of the rules.

 

At approximately 30 seconds to the start, F overlapped S from clear astern. wiith approximately 2' laterally between S's stern and F's bow. F was moving at approximately 3 knots and S at approximately 2 knots. Contact occurred between F's Starboard Bow and S's port quarter approximately 3 seconds afterwards spinning S completely 180deg and to leeward of F.

 

F at no point made any attempt to sail further to leeward of S nor to sail to weather of S, nor to slow down.

 

 

Rules that apply at the time of Contact

RRS 11 requires S as windward to Keep Clear of F

RRS 15 requires that when F established overlap with S that F "initially give S Room to keep clear"

 

Room is defined as the distance and time required to maneuver in a seamanlike manner to keep clear.

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

3' and 3 seconds is not sufficient ROOM for windward boat to "keep clear" after a boat "clear astern" establishes overlap

 

DSQ F for violation of RRS 15 and RRS 14

 

 

As for whether F had "room" to sail further below S. The Appeals case (I think its 72 but I don't have time to look that up right now) states that if a boat does not have room to sail between another boat and an obstruction (a boat to leeward of both S and F would countt as an obstcution) before establishing overlap, then that boat is not entitled to Overlap. So if F claims they themselves lacked room to sail below S sufficiently, then they are in violation of RRS 12 since they had no right to establish overlap.

 

 

DSQ F.

 

Reinstate S and this committee is open to hearing a redress petition from S for having been spun 180 degress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So whomever sails with F (filmer) since they posted the video... you need to go to the skipper and tell them to

 

1) appologize to the Shields folks

 

2) withdraw from the race.

 

Do the honorable thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated earlier there is no proper course before the start! So clear ahead does not apply! If all this happen prior to starting gun the shields is in the wrong. The film boat may not have done enough to avoid a collision -hard to tell. But the shields tacked in a really dumb spot, early on time and and with boats to leeward on starting boat layline. The shields had the option to go above the starting boat but chose to run down the line interfering on boats approaching to leeward.

Before the gun Film can luff to head to wind after gaining an overlap to leeward. After starting gun once a proper course is estabilished, different story.

If gun had not gone, rule 11 still applies-windward boat keep clear.

rule 15 does not apply as film gained right of way through shields action

rule 17 does not apply as no proper course estabilished

rule 14 may apply to film boat but only if serious damage was involved.

 

Look up ISAF case 13 pretty easy, Before her starting signal, a leeward boat does not break a rule by sailing a course higher than the windward boat’s course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated earlier there is no proper course before the start! So clear ahead does not apply!

 

what the fuck are you talking aboit

sure there is no proper course before the start, but this has no effect whatever on the definition of clear ahead or the application of R12.

 

R12 applies and while the shield is clear ahead the clear astern boat has to keep clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OCS, Please look at the diagram and facts found in ISAF Case 13. It has nothing to do with this situation.

I hope I don't see you in a tight start line situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated earlier there is no proper course before the start! So clear ahead does not apply!

 

what the fuck are you talking aboit

sure there is no proper course before the start, but this has no effect whatever on the definition of clear ahead or the application of R12.

 

R12 applies and while the shield is clear ahead the clear astern boat has to keep clear.

sure but once overlapped S shall keep clear which she did not, she created the overlap by turning down the line in order to avoid breaking the start. S had options to break the start or go above the committee boat but chose to run down line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OCS, Please look at the diagram and facts found in ISAF Case 13. It has nothing to do with this situation.

I hope I don't see you in a tight start line situation.

Not the initial part but the second stage is very applicable, look at S change of course at 1.03 turning into a leeward boat and creating an overlap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated earlier there is no proper course before the start! So clear ahead does not apply!

 

what the fuck are you talking aboit

sure there is no proper course before the start, but this has no effect whatever on the definition of clear ahead or the application of R12.

 

R12 applies and while the shield is clear ahead the clear astern boat has to keep clear.

sure but once overlapped S shall keep clear which she did not, she created the overlap by turning down the line in order to avoid breaking the start. S had options to break the start or go above the committee boat but chose to run down line

 

I think everyone who has tried to answer the question has acknowledged that the issue here is about whether R11 applied and S was obliged to keep clear, or R12 applies and F was obliged to keep clear, and whether or not R16 or R15 applied

 

No-one has suggested that F was under any obligation to sail her proper course at any time

 

hence the very real question as to why you keep bring up proper course, or write utter nonsense like

as stated earlier there is no proper course before the start! So clear ahead does not apply!

why would proper course matter in this discussion at all, and who (other than you) has made any suggestion that proper course has any beading on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a little difficulty with In the situation where a faster boat becomes overlapped close to leeward of a slower boat with neither boat changeing course: what there is no specific 'action' by either boat that has caused her to 'acquire' right of way thus the newly right of way boat has not acquired right of way through the other boat's actions and rule 15 applies. Given that it is clearly necessary to protect the newly give way boat, I am inclined to think that rule 15 should apply in this situation (but I wouldn't mind a case to tell me so). This is the archtypical application of rule 15 to give the formerly right of way boat, where she loses right of way instantaneously, the chance to keep clear.Of course, rule 15 will not apply if there some action, such as starting sheets and sailing slow or sailing backwards by the ahead boat that causes the astern boat to acquire right of way.

 

I'm pretty sure there is a case or call which states that even a change of speed by a boat is not considered an 'action' under R15.

an action can be changing tack, or changing course, but being overtaken would not count, even if the boat clear ahead sheeted out and slowed.

 

I'll see if I can find the reference.

 

ok found it

its a match race call... so not definitive in fleet racing, but it does carry some weight.

MR CALL B18

 

While the change in speed is a consequence of an action by Yellow, an increase

or decrease in speed is not in itself an 'action' within the meaning of the second

part of rule 15.

Thanks for trying to help me out, but the issue I raised was just way off beam Dunno what I was thinking.

 

I've corrected the erroneous bit above in red.

 

I don't think the MR Call you cites stands up. It's fine for MR Calls to specify consistent interpretations of situations to make MR more 'umpireable', thus, the call enables umpires to avoid having to decide whether the right of way boat did deliberately slow down, the Call contains no rationale to explain why what is plainly an 'action' that clearly 'caused' the change in right of way should somehow be deemed to be not an 'action'. Nowhere else in the rules or Cases is there any discussion about what is or is not an 'action' (nor do I think that is necessary).

 

For me, I'll use the Call in MR, but for an ordinary protest hearing, if the boat clear ahead, by deliberately reducing speed 'causes' the boat clear astern to become overlapped to leeward, then I will be satisfied. But I might be very cautious about whether there was a [deliberate] action, and whether and to what extent it 'caused' the transition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proper course only from the point of view that F has limitations as to their course under rule 17 if a proper course applies, whereas her options are a lot broader pre-starting gun. I agree it is fairly basic in its interpretation one way or the other but my point of view is S tacked in a really silly spot and secondly caused the collision by turning down the line and infringing rule 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a little difficulty with In the situation where a faster boat becomes overlapped close to leeward of a slower boat with neither boat changeing course: what there is no specific 'action' by either boat that has caused her to 'acquire' right of way thus the newly right of way boat has not acquired right of way through the other boat's actions and rule 15 applies. Given that it is clearly necessary to protect the newly give way boat, I am inclined to think that rule 15 should apply in this situation (but I wouldn't mind a case to tell me so). This is the archtypical application of rule 15 to give the formerly right of way boat, where she loses right of way instantaneously, the chance to keep clear.Of course, rule 15 will not apply if there some action, such as starting sheets and sailing slow or sailing backwards by the ahead boat that causes the astern boat to acquire right of way.

 

I'm pretty sure there is a case or call which states that even a change of speed by a boat is not considered an 'action' under R15.

an action can be changing tack, or changing course, but being overtaken would not count, even if the boat clear ahead sheeted out and slowed.

 

I'll see if I can find the reference.

 

ok found it

its a match race call... so not definitive in fleet racing, but it does carry some weight.

MR CALL B18

 

While the change in speed is a consequence of an action by Yellow, an increase

or decrease in speed is not in itself an 'action' within the meaning of the second

part of rule 15.

Thanks for trying to help me out, but the issue I raised was just way off beam Dunno what I was thinking.

 

I've corrected the erroneous bit above in red.

 

I don't think the MR Call you cites stands up. It's fine for MR Calls to specify consistent interpretations of situations to make MR more 'umpireable', thus, the call enables umpires to avoid having to decide whether the right of way boat did deliberately slow down, the Call contains no rationale to explain why what is plainly an 'action' that clearly 'caused' the change in right of way should somehow be deemed to be not an 'action'. Nowhere else in the rules or Cases is there any discussion about what is or is not an 'action' (nor do I think that is necessary).

 

For me, I'll use the Call in MR, but for an ordinary protest hearing, if the boat clear ahead, by deliberately reducing speed 'causes' the boat clear astern to become overlapped to leeward, then I will be satisfied. But I might be very cautious about whether there was a [deliberate] action, and whether and to what extent it 'caused' the transition.

 

I think that's a good way to play it, and to me was the only reasonable basis of the call.

It would be often be challenging in fleet racing to be 'sure' that a boat slowing down 'caused' the overlap, but if sure then it would be very reasonable to say that R15 does not apply because of the action of the boat who slowed down.

 

for example if a boat was clear ahead, slowed down, and then accelerated again, but while accelerating was overtaken to leeward, would the original 'slowdown' be considered an action which caused the change of right of way.... I don't know, and I have no idea how far back you would have to consider.

 

if a boat is luffing near the start line does her earlier action of slowing down, count as an action which caused a subsequent overlap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I see:

 

at :38 S completes tack, clear ahead (and to windward).

post-8534-0-32413100-1355180368_thumb.jpg

 

at :41 S bears off

post-8534-0-64206600-1355180370_thumb.jpg

 

at :46 S is in maxminum 'bear away'.

post-8534-0-33073900-1355180384_thumb.jpg

 

From :46 to :50 S turns up, until at about :53 they are clear head, still sailing slightly deeper than F.

:50 post-8534-0-29902100-1355180385_thumb.jpg

:53post-8534-0-12862300-1355180390_thumb.jpg

 

The film boat is going faster and runs right up S's transom and hits them at about 1:01. My guess from the angles is that the initial soft impact was right on the (windward side of the) transom.

post-8534-0-34489700-1355180391_thumb.jpg

 

At 1:04 F is pushing S's transom around and S into a 180.

post-8534-0-87777900-1355180397_thumb.jpg

 

For me, everything up to :50 is 'history'. From :50 on, S is clear ahead and F just runs into them breaking rule 12. S did not break rule 15 or 16, as F had time and room to turn to windward or to slow down from :50 - 1:00.

 

By the way, you can hear a sound singnal at about :25, which is probably the 1 minute warning.

 

Also F is using plastic coated life lines - not legal under the OSR's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears from the sound that the collision occurs at 1.08 and as far as you can ascertain there appears to be no contact before then. the preamble (pardon the rules pun) up until 0.50 carries the usual verbage at any start, I would assume the protest findings were based on the 0.55 onwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears from the sound that the collision occurs at 1.08 and as far as you can ascertain there appears to be no contact before then. the preamble (pardon the rules pun) up until 0.50 carries the usual verbage at any start, I would assume the protest findings were based on the 0.55 onwards.

 

No the sound you hear at 1:08 is the second impact when the two topsides come together, with S already 180. S has been push around to that position.

 

The initial impact happens at about 1:01, just after the one guy stands up and when the shouting stops on F and they are just watching the accident happen. The initial impact is 'quiet' because the relative speed (overtaking speed) is low, and its not a big fat surface impact - as the second one at 1:08 is.

 

This kind of 'push around' with an initial stern impact and then a second impact when the front boat is 180 is pretty common. Take a look at the 'famous'

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears from the sound that the collision occurs at 1.08 and as far as you can ascertain there appears to be no contact before then. the preamble (pardon the rules pun) up until 0.50 carries the usual verbage at any start, I would assume the protest findings were based on the 0.55 onwards.

 

No the sound you hear at 1:08 is the second impact when the two topsides come together, with S already 180. S has been push around to that position.

 

The initial impact happens at about 1:01, just after the one guy stands up and when the shouting stops on F and they are just watching the accident happen. The initial impact is 'quiet' because the relative speed (overtaking speed) is low, and its not a big fat surface impact - as the second one at 1:08 is.

sorry can't see that, IMHO If F had hit on windward side the boat would have spun other way and secondly there is a significant time lapse between S turning and the loud impact which is far too loud and shakes S so I would conclude it was not an ongoing shove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If F had hit on windward side the boat would have spun other way and secondly there is a significant time lapse between S turning and the loud impact which is far too loud and shakes S so I would conclude it was not an ongoing shove.

 

No windward side of boat, windward side of the transom.

Also, remember that S was sailing slightly broader than F. Thus any hit/push anywhere on the transom would spin S's bow to leeward.

The boat would spin exactly as shown in the video. Transom would be driven to windward and bow spin to leeward.

This is a common and well understood dynamic.

 

I am not sure what 'far to loud' and 'shakes S' have to do with anything here. Usually in a transom run over the major damage is NOT in the initial impact, but the secondary effects as the lead boat is spun and hits the following boat side to side. Again, look at the video I linked in my prior message. The dismasting did NOT happen in the initial transom run over, but in the aftermath. The initial transom run over is usually 'quieter' that the secondary because the relative speeds are less and the bow can ride up and soften the blow. Again all this is common and well understood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow OCS, you sure can see things very differently. I think Estar's "shove on the windward quarter" scenario works as illustrated in that vid clip.

It could also happen on the leeward quarter if the Shields was turning down even faster to try and avoid Screamer's bow (since they clearly couldn't come up in the remaining seconds).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

listening more closely to the video, there is a noise at 1:05 that might be the initial impact. At 1:06 S is clearly being pushed around - her turning rate is obviously faster/sharper than the tiller would create.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the discussion interesting since it seems to be so easy to assign blame and pick the guilty party. The Shields had no obligations until an overlap was established. They probably did get hit less than a second after that overlap took place and had no opportunity to respond. Looks like the helmsman of the film boat had an easy decision to make. He could not come down because of a third boat and decided he did not want to get stuck to windward of the Shields. Wonder whether he would have rammed the Shields if she would have been a two or three times bigger boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well we will never know? All I can see is a very loud impact at 1.08 and everything else debatable, showed it to a few yachties coming through and they see it as I do. But we all see what we want to I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I see:

 

at :38 S completes tack, clear ahead (and to windward).

post-8534-0-32413100-1355180368_thumb.jpg

 

at :41 S bears off

post-8534-0-64206600-1355180370_thumb.jpg

 

at :46 S is in maxminum 'bear away'.

post-8534-0-33073900-1355180384_thumb.jpg

 

From :46 to :50 S turns up, until at about :53 they are clear head, still sailing slightly deeper than F.

:50 post-8534-0-29902100-1355180385_thumb.jpg

:53post-8534-0-12862300-1355180390_thumb.jpg

 

The film boat is going faster and runs right up S's transom and hits them at about 1:01. My guess from the angles is that the initial soft impact was right on the (windward side of the) transom.

post-8534-0-34489700-1355180391_thumb.jpg

 

At 1:04 F is pushing S's transom around and S into a 180.

post-8534-0-87777900-1355180397_thumb.jpg

 

For me, everything up to :50 is 'history'. From :50 on, S is clear ahead and F just runs into them breaking rule 12. S did not break rule 15 or 16, as F had time and room to turn to windward or to slow down from :50 - 1:00.

 

By the way, you can hear a sound signal at about :25, which is probably the 1 minute warning.

 

Also F is using plastic coated life lines - not legal under the OSR's

 

Nailed it I think.

Still not sure what F was doing as I believe they were going to be WAY early to the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jackdaw,

 

I'll ask one more time and then shut up. Could someone, anyone, go have a look at the transom and rails of the Shields. That should establish where she was hit.

 

As I said above, I'm with Estar, the Shields got hit in the transom and spun. The Shields broke the overlap when she turned back upwind, at about 0:45. It was more than 15 seconds before the contact was made and during that time not only did Film not have an overlap but they also did nothing to avoid hitting the Shields. Indeed, as shown in the film there were occasionally two people attempting to steer the boat and another yelling things. No one was even easing the sheet.

 

I completely disagree with OCS, tacking in front of other boats and leading them slowly back to the starting line is a perfectly legal and common strategy. The Shields has not done anything stupid other than perhaps misjudging the competency of his competitors. To be successful this strategy does require that others in the fleet not run over the boats leading back. Shields does not break a rule by tacking where she did (OCS, if you disagree please state the rule). One can see dozens of boats doing exactly this at any high-level keel boat regatta as they approach to start.

 

BV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites