Jump to content


Crash at Big Boat Seires Saturday (SF)?


  • Please log in to reply
141 replies to this topic

#1 L124C

L124C

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 29 September 2013 - 07:58 PM

I was at the BBS Saturday and saw a older boat owner and (was told) 3 other sailors taken to the hospital with relatively minor injury's. Several fire trucks and a couple of paramedic trucks at the SFYC. Supposedly, a boat hooked a mark. Anyone know the details?

#2 Irish River

Irish River

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Interests:sailing, skiing

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:43 AM

Today a J120, Chance and M24, Rock n roll had a serious incident.



#3 TeamGladiator

TeamGladiator

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,013 posts
  • Location:Portland, OR
  • Interests:Traveling to far away sailing venues and terrorizing the locals!

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:53 AM

Today a J120, Chance and M24, Rock n roll had a serious incident.


A sportscar and a dump truck!! Wonder who won that one

#4 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:30 AM

.

 

...I hope everyone's allright :huh:

 

.



#5 NorCalLaser

NorCalLaser

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Location:Berkeley, California

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:34 AM

m24 rounded up into chance yesterday,  collision ensued, skipper knocked out cold and broke his back.

 

also saw a collision today in the harbor-- crew tried to stop it with their arm, and they were left with a broken arm.  Never a good idea.  Stay safe folks



#6 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:38 AM

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?



#7 Varan

Varan

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 547 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:41 AM

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

They appear big compared to J70s.

#8 NorCalLaser

NorCalLaser

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Location:Berkeley, California

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:44 AM

the sporties wanted to sail because of the stellar race mgmt, competition and good breeze.  the regatta wanted em because there aint many "big boats" left.  get it?



#9 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:46 AM

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.



#10 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,950 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:54 AM

.

 

...I hope everyone's allright :huh:

 

.

 

+1



#11 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:59 AM

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.

I guess that with the GFC and all noone can afford big boats. Soo how long before a Kiwi blames LE and expensive cats have also ruined the big boat series ?



#12 Somebody Else

Somebody Else

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,946 posts
  • Location:Southern California
  • Interests:Shootings, just like HotRod!

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:21 AM

Is Argyle Campbell OK?



#13 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:26 AM

m24 rounded up into chance yesterday,  collision ensued, skipper knocked out cold and broke his back.

 

also saw a collision today in the harbor-- crew tried to stop it with their arm, and they were left with a broken arm.  Never a good idea.  Stay safe folks

.

 

.....that sounds terrible :(

 

.

 

 

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.

I guess that with the GFC and all noone can afford big boats. Soo how long before a Kiwi blames LE and expensive cats have also ruined the big boat series ?

.

 

....ummmm,,,,,,,,'GFC' ??? :mellow:

 

.



#14 BronzeWing

BronzeWing

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts
  • Location:Tauranga, NZ
  • Interests:Sailing, photography, CNC stuff and planes

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:29 AM

 

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.

I guess that with the GFC and all noone can afford big boats. Soo how long before a Kiwi blames LE and expensive cats have also ruined the big boat series ?

All right. I will play your stupid game. LE fucked sailing all over the world!!!!!

 

BTW 2 Gold and 1 Silver to Kiwi crews at the 49 and 49FX Worlds :P  :P  :P  :P  :P



#15 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:30 AM

m24 rounded up into chance yesterday,  collision ensued, skipper knocked out cold and broke his back.

 

also saw a collision today in the harbor-- crew tried to stop it with their arm, and they were left with a broken arm.  Never a good idea.  Stay safe folks

.

 

.....that sounds terrible :(

 

.

 

 

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.

I guess that with the GFC and all noone can afford big boats. Soo how long before a Kiwi blames LE and expensive cats have also ruined the big boat series ?

.

 

....ummmm,,,,,,,,'GFC' ??? :mellow:

 

.

 

HaHa sorry i meant gods reaction to Obama being voted dang well in.



#16 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:31 AM

 

 

Why are 24footers sailing in a "Big Boat" series ?

.

 

.....'big' fleet!

 

.

I guess that with the GFC and all noone can afford big boats. Soo how long before a Kiwi blames LE and expensive cats have also ruined the big boat series ?

All right. I will play your stupid game. LE fucked sailing all over the world!!!!!

 

BTW 2 Gold and 1 Silver to Kiwi crews at the 49 and 49FX Worlds :P  :P  :P  :P  :P

Yep plus another solid victory by the All Blacks = all iz gud.



#17 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:56 AM


 

....ummmm,,,,,,,,'GFC' ??? :mellow:

 

.

 

HaHa sorry i meant gods reaction to Obama being voted dang well in.

.

 

...oh.

..........let me know how that works out for you <_<



#18 L124C

L124C

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 30 September 2013 - 06:42 AM

m24 rounded up into chance yesterday,  collision ensued, skipper knocked out cold and broke his back.
also saw a collision today in the harbor-- crew tried to stop it with their arm, and they were left with a broken arm.  Never a good idea.  Stay safe folks

The old guy I saw was sitting up (doesn't sound like a broken back) with some facial injury's. Maybe more than one incident Saturday.

OMG...sailing is dangerous! Better consult the CG, maybe airbags are in order. At least some wind limits! : )



#19 atefooterz

atefooterz

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,832 posts
  • Location:Aus 2154
  • Interests:many

Posted 30 September 2013 - 10:32 AM

 


 

....ummmm,,,,,,,,'GFC' ??? :mellow:

 

.

 

HaHa sorry i meant gods reaction to Obama being voted dang well in.

.

 

...oh.

..........let me know how that works out for you <_<

TBH i would love the O man as our Prime Minister and would gladly swap him for our Phoney Tony, only 4 years to go and the public will either reject him ..or the oposition may have got their act together & we can have an exciting election again as ours was less interesting than the LV series and a bigger walkover!!.



#20 Dixie

Dixie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,690 posts
  • Location:SF

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:07 PM

From the Hedgehog FB page, looks like Argyle is ok, but crew Charlie was injured and recovering, but won't be racing in the m24 worlds. :-(.

#21 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:19 PM

TBH i would love the O man as our Prime Minister and would gladly swap him for our Phoney Tony, only 4 years to go and the public will either reject him ..or the oposition may have got their act together & we can have an exciting election again as ours was less interesting than the LV series and a bigger walkover!!.

.

...your political commentary doesn't seem to fit with this thread. :mellow:

 

...it sounds like someone was -seriously- hurt at this event.

 

 

 

 

 

....maybe try political anarchy,,,,,,,or 'don't give an F' anarchy <_< ;)



#22 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:21 PM

From the Hedgehog FB page, looks like Argyle is ok, but crew Charlie was injured and recovering, but won't be racing in the m24 worlds. :-(.

.

 

....one of these is the fellow who hurt his back?



#23 LateNite

LateNite

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Location:Windy City

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:54 PM

The M24 doesn't look to badly damaged:

1383199_658198077532909_913695709_n.jpg



#24 L124C

L124C

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:San Francisco

Posted 30 September 2013 - 07:14 PM

The M24 doesn't look to badly damaged:

1383199_658198077532909_913695709_n.jpg

Thought the Megles rounded up INTO the other boat. Wonder how this happened. Maybe this was the harbor incident?



#25 40grit

40grit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts

Posted 01 October 2013 - 11:02 PM

Talked to Argile yesterday, he said his crew Charlie had been hit in the head during the accident and had compressed some vertabra, leaving him out of sailing for a little while. he Argile said he recieved a couple of stitches to the face for his trouble. aparently the 120 came out of no where just as they were rounding the leward mark. 

thats all i know?



#26 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 02 October 2013 - 12:42 AM

Talked to Argile yesterday, he said his crew Charlie had been hit in the head during the accident and had compressed some vertabra, leaving him out of sailing for a little while. he Argile said he recieved a couple of stitches to the face for his trouble. aparently the 120 came out of no where just as they were rounding the leward mark. 

thats all i know?

..

 

....alls fun until someone crunches their vertebrae! :mellow:

 

............may you heal well and fast,,Argie!



#27 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 04 October 2013 - 03:51 PM

more details coming in now.

 

Charlie Enright has a fucked up back but will be OK in 6 weeks or so.  He is back home resting.

 

Argyle got an uppercut to the jaw from who knows what.  11 stitches but he is driving the boat OK.

 

A few other cuts and scrapes.  

 

As for race management...the M24 course was set inside the big boat course, and starboard tack from the bottom mark of the big boats took you through the M24 fleet.  Rock N Roll was on starboard gybe, headed to bottom mark a few boatlengths away, about to drop the kite.  J/120 was coming upwind on starboard.  J/120 tactician told driver there were no other boats.  M24 didn't see J/120 around the kite.  J/120 crushes M24.  M24 wrong for w/l.  J/120 wrong for failure to avoid, more importantly or failure to keep a lookout.  

 

RnR DNF, J/120 given no penalty, though thankfully their request for redress was denied.  J/120 didn't stop to give assistance, they continued on their way once untangled.

 

Jeremy Wilmot flew in to take over Charlie's tactician duties.  Big Boat might want to let their Big Boat owners know that they are setting Little Boat courses inside the big ones.  



#28 AndreasE_NO

AndreasE_NO

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 04 October 2013 - 09:50 PM

The M24 doesn't look to badly damaged:

1383199_658198077532909_913695709_n.jpg

Thought the Megles rounded up INTO the other boat. Wonder how this happened. Maybe this was the harbor incident?

 

The harbor incident was between two big boats, a cruiser returning from a afternoon cruise and a racing boat docking, both under motor.



#29 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 04 October 2013 - 09:57 PM

Quote from the boat behind "It was the most violent boat crash I've ever seen."

 

J/120 was caught in a pile of M24s coming into a mark rounding.  Bad situation to be in, but exactly the kind of thing that happens when courses between very different kinds of boats overlap.



#30 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 04 October 2013 - 10:09 PM

Other quotes from M24 sailors:

 

"We had a nice close quarters with the MOD too, some of the most fun racing ever with all the different boats out there."

 

"Lighter than a midsummer event but planing in pretty much every race and great weather."



#31 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,006 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 05 October 2013 - 03:30 AM

Just because you've gotten away with it in the past doesn't mean that these overlapping courses are a great idea. In fact, I defy you to show me one boat owner that enjoys it. It's the only regatta on the bay that week, and YOU invited the Melgi. Don't you think that you owe them a course that they can compete on as an OD without having to play dodgeball with 3-5 other fleets? There is ALWAYS room for improvement.

#32 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,006 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 05 October 2013 - 04:59 AM

Calm down indeed...you're frothing again Joanie.

It isn't that difficult to look at the horses and the courses and know that it's in no ones best interest to have multiple fleets rounding the same mark from different directions. Nothing is perfect, and like I suggested before, there is always room for improvement. You just have to have an open mind.

#33 eastbay

eastbay

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Location:Oakland

Posted 05 October 2013 - 05:34 AM

God I hate it when both sides are right.



#34 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 06 October 2013 - 02:20 PM

One brilliant young pro sailor in hospital with cracked vertebra because the 'big boat' fleets are not used to figuring out how to avoid five 24-foot boats all within a boatlength of each other.  If this was in Lake Garda you'd be screaming for blood.

 

Indeedie do?

 

Get fucked.

 

you are down to 50 biggish boats.  You needed to add 50 little boats to prevent the event from all but disappearing.  operating under the same rules is fine, so long as you don't mind a young pro sailor nearly being paralyzed and a lifelong one-design sailor nearly having his jawbone ripped out.  Of course shit happens, and it's the PRO's job to try to prevent it where practicable and to address it when it happens.

 

You really intend to not address this at all?  Given the lack of video and photo and news of the crash, it certainly seemed that way, and knowing you and ND quite the surprise.  Goes on the front page tonight now that I've spoken to the injured and a few witnesses.  

 

My view is that the Melges was at fault under the rules, largely because it's impossible to see under the spinnaker a lot of the time, the J/120 was at fault for not anticipating what happens in a tight one-design fleet on his bow and possibly for not doing what he could to avoid contact, and I don't know whether the RO was at fault because I am still confused where the 120 was going; was it the same mark but after they went down to another one first?  Do the Melges sail a shorter course for BBS?



#35 another 505 sailor

another 505 sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,638 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 03:25 PM

Does it matter that the injured is a pro sailor in a sport boat fleet? And the other is a life long one design sailor?
To Clean, apparently, yes.

#36 zerothehero

zerothehero

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,362 posts
  • Interests:sailing. Duh.

Posted 06 October 2013 - 03:41 PM

The M24 doesn't look to badly damaged:

1383199_658198077532909_913695709_n.jpg

a light dish shaped hull and small rudder means the boat will go with the impact lessening the damage.  The crew however may be worse off for it.  Sorry to hear people were injured.



#37 Monkey

Monkey

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,322 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 05:38 PM

Does it matter that the injured is a pro sailor in a sport boat fleet? And the other is a life long one design sailor?
To Clean, apparently, yes.

I was a bit confused by that as well. It's such a shame an amateur sailor wasn't hurt instead.

#38 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 921 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 07:04 PM

Comments deleted.  It's useless arguing with armchair quarterbacks.



#39 krispy kreme

krispy kreme

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 06 October 2013 - 08:50 PM

Deleted comments as well - same reason as BobJ

 

My comments were not aimed at the incident itself.  It was an unfortunate accident and I wish everyone a speedy recovery.

 

No need for threats/blackmail (and Alan, you still owe me $250.00 over a previous threat/blackmail)

 

The constant bashing of people, regattas, and the sport gets old. 



#40 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:05 AM

the constant defensiveness gets old too.



#41 krispy kreme

krispy kreme

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,113 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:28 AM

And with that Alan, I hereby close my account on SA



#42 NYBOZO1

NYBOZO1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 01:50 AM

Krispy Kreme.... Member since Jan, 2004.

Too bad.

#43 DRIFTW00D

DRIFTW00D

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,247 posts
  • Location:Blue Water Area Great Lakes

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:12 AM

Seems a lot of sailiors are getting hurt / killed in and offshore of San Fran!!


What's up out there????

#44 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:13 AM

...............My view is that the Melges was at fault under the rules, largely because it's impossible to see under the spinnaker a lot of the time,,,,,, 

.

 

....if that were true,I'd be expecting -many- more incidents when melges are on the course. :mellow:

 

.....methinks it's a matter of due diligence....usually you can soak down occasionally,flatten out ,take a peek,,no?

 

.



#45 NoStrings

NoStrings

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,006 posts
  • Location:Richmond, CA

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:57 AM

So, aside from the obvious issues with both vessels failing to maintain a proper lookout, is it not worth a discussion about inter fleet/course/mark conflicts potentially impacting results? Or is that just something that we have to live with, because it's the way things have always been run? I understand that we have limited RC assets, I just wonder if there s something that we're overlooking.

For example, if there were once again a permanent (as can be anyway) Yellow Bluff mark, would it help to keep boats on the north courses away from the Presidio Shoals marks and running into, over, and through the J70 fleet?

I'm just asking questions here, because I like fair racing, not a big fan of collisions.

#46 White Cracker

White Cracker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,287 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 11:40 AM

One brilliant young pro sailor in hospital with cracked vertebra because the 'big boat' fleets are not used to figuring out how to avoid five 24-foot boats all within a boatlength of each other. 

Is a "brilliant young pro sailor" a better person than, say a "old, pretty decent, amateur" sailor?

Why the distinction?



#47 billy backstay

billy backstay

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,699 posts
  • Location:Etchells fleet 24..Long River meets the Sound....
  • Interests:boats, cars, girls....

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:21 PM

...............My view is that the Melges was at fault under the rules, largely because it's impossible to see under the spinnaker a lot of the time,,,,,, 

.

 

....if that were true,I'd be expecting -many- more incidents when melges are on the course. :mellow:

 

.....methinks it's a matter of due diligence....usually you can soak down occasionally,flatten out ,take a peek,,no?

 

.

 

When sailing the Etchells, we can often not see other boats on the course behind the sails.  That doesn't abslove us of the responsibility to make sure we know when someone is approaching from there, and we make sure that we do just that.



#48 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:26 PM

is it not worth a discussion about inter fleet/course/mark conflicts potentially impacting results

Apparently that is the kind of question that makes those in power run and hide.  much easier than answering questions!



#49 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:31 PM

 

Is a "brilliant young pro sailor" a better person than, say a "old, pretty decent, amateur" sailor?

Why the distinction?

Those are simply adjectives.  If you choose to see them as a delineation or a distinction, that might be your own brain talking.  The 'old, amateur' sailor was driving the boat, and he had 11 stitches across his chin/jaw.



#50 andyxs

andyxs

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:32 PM

Sorry clean but you seem to forgive any sexy fast boats because "that is the future" a course within a course is totally normal in the UK. And a sail being in the way isnt a good enough reason for hitting someone! What should actually be written is that they were so bothered about going fast that they didn't try and keep a proper look out! A "pro" should know better, If you are selling your services hopefully you do more than just boatspeed.



#51 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:35 PM

Krispy Kreme.... Member since Jan, 2004.

Too bad.

 

Another SA'er who won't comment for a few months but will lurk more than ever.  How unusual.



#52 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 12:42 PM

Sorry clean but you seem to forgive any sexy fast boats because "that is the future" a course within a course is totally normal in the UK. And a sail being in the way isnt a good enough reason for hitting someone! What should actually be written is that they were so bothered about going fast that they didn't try and keep a proper look out! A "pro" should know better, If you are selling your services hopefully you do more than just boatspeed.

Neither boat saw the other one.  The J/120 made NO COURSE ALTERATIONS according to two witnesses on two different boats, even though if they had seen the M24, they would only have had to pinch up a bit to let them around the bow.

 

In other words, neither boat had a proper lookout, and the right-of-way boat made no effort to avoid a collision, because they didn't know one was imminent.

 

After untangling itself from the M24, the J/120 sailed on, and then went and asked for redress.  It seems the BBS jury didn't ask about 'proper lookouts'.



#53 Bruce T. Shark

Bruce T. Shark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 358 posts
  • Location:Martha's Vineyard
  • Interests:After Race Parties<br />Frank Mundus<br />Peter Benchly

Posted 07 October 2013 - 02:39 PM

Mr Clean; would you please cite me the section of the RRS that describes a proper lookout? I do know that COLREGs discuss proper lookout but I am not a knowledgeable in the RRS as you are.



#54 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 03:10 PM

Mr Clean; would you please cite me the section of the RRS that describes a proper lookout? I do know that COLREGs discuss proper lookout but I am not a knowledgeable in the RRS as you are.

CASE 107
A boat that is not keeping a lookout may thereby fail to do everything reasonably possible to avoid contact. Hailing is one way that a boat may ‘act to avoid contact’. When a boat’s breach of a rule of Part 2 causes serious damage and she then retires, she has taken the applicable penalty and is not to be disqualified for that breach.



#55 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 03:12 PM

Decision
Rule 14 begins ‘A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible.’ This requirement means a boat must do everything that can reasonably be expected of her in the prevailing conditions to avoid contact.
This includes keeping a good lookout, particularly in a crowded starting line situation.
The protest committee concluded that if either boat had seen the other a collision could have been avoided, even at the last minute, particularly if Ephesian had hailed Jupa when it was clear that Jupa was not changing course to keep clear. Until that moment, rule 14(a) allows a right-of-way boat to delay acting to avoid contact. It follows that at that moment she must begin to act in an effort to avoid contact. The word ‘act’ is not restricted to changing course or speed. Hailing was an action that Ephesian could and should have taken. Ephesian broke rule 14. Because the collision resulted in damage, the protest committee’s decision to disqualify Ephesian was correct (see rules 14(B) and 64.1(a)). Her appeal is therefore dismissed.
Clearly, Jupa broke rule 10. As a result of the serious damage she suffered in the collision, she retired from the race and thus took the applicable penalty (see rule 44.1(B)). Rule 64.1(B) prohibits penalizing her further. The disqualification of Jupa is reversed and she is to be scored DNF.



#56 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 03:46 PM

http://sailinganarch...e-the-big-boat/



#57 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:03 PM

So, aside from the obvious issues with both vessels failing to maintain a proper lookout, is it not worth a discussion about inter fleet/course/mark conflicts potentially impacting results? Or is that just something that we have to live with, because it's the way things have always been run?

.

 

.....I've always considered navigating through multi-fleets to be 'part of the game' in the rat-race that is yacht-racing.

...only in a major championship of a major fleet would I expect/hope for -sterile- conditions

 

.

 

Neither boat saw the other one.  The J/120 made NO COURSE ALTERATIONS according to two witnesses on two different boats, even though if they had seen the M24, they would only have had to pinch up a bit to let them around the bow.

 

In other words, neither boat had a proper lookout, and the right-of-way boat made no effort to avoid a collision, because they didn't know one was imminent.

.

...'professional' sailors indeed...........another oxymoron?? <_<

 

.



#58 Gray Ghost

Gray Ghost

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts
  • Location:Northeast Wisconsin
  • Interests:etc.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:11 PM

Still trying to figure out how the boat going upwind on starboard didn't see the boat coming downwind on starboard.  It's not as if the boat coming downwind would have somehow been hidden under the jib of the boat headed upwind.  Seems more likely that the failure to avoid a collision by the boat headed upwind was an error of judgment.  

 

Also not sure how the M24 course being 'inside" the big boat course differs in the number of potential collisions, from any other course where there are a lot of boats going through the leeward gate in quick succession.  Say for example this was a one design regatta where one boat had just rounded the gate and was headed upwind on starboard...into a pack of boats coming downwind on starboard.  Happens all the time.  That windward boat needs to keep clear.  The leeward boat should be keeping an eye out too. 

 

If the point is just that boats of very different size don't belong on the same course, because one of them takes a beating when there is a collision, that's a story as old as the sea, nothing new here.  Lesson:  small light boats without right of way should keep a good lookout. 



#59 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:15 PM

Still trying to figure out how the boat going upwind on starboard didn't see the boat coming downwind on starboard.  It's not as if the boat coming downwind would have somehow been hidden under the jib of the boat headed upwind.  Seems more likely that the failure to avoid a collision by the boat headed upwind was an error of judgment.  

 

Also not sure how the M24 course being 'inside" the big boat course differs in the number of potential collisions, from any other course where there are a lot of boats going through the leeward gate in quick succession.  Say for example this was a one design regatta where one boat had just rounded the gate and was headed upwind on starboard...into a pack of boats coming downwind on starboard.  Happens all the time.  That windward boat needs to keep clear.  The leeward boat should be keeping an eye out too. 

 

If the point is just that boats of very different size don't belong on the same course, because one of them takes a beating when there is a collision, that's a story as old as the sea, nothing new here.  Lesson:  small light boats without right of way should keep a good lookout. 

I'm told that the tactician of the J/120 was asked 'are we clear' and he said 'yes' because he didn't realize there was a boat obstructed by the one that he did see but knew would cross ahead.  I imagine their version will filter down sooner or later.  There's also some GoPro footage floating around but I can't find the holder at the moment.



#60 Gray Ghost

Gray Ghost

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 229 posts
  • Location:Northeast Wisconsin
  • Interests:etc.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:16 PM

 

 

Is a "brilliant young pro sailor" a better person than, say a "old, pretty decent, amateur" sailor?

Why the distinction?

Those are simply adjectives.  If you choose to see them as a delineation or a distinction, that might be your own brain talking.  The 'old, amateur' sailor was driving the boat, and he had 11 stitches across his chin/jaw.

Now, now Mr. Clean:  caught out with your own language, you try to disown it as if it's without meaning.  What was the purpose of using those adjectives unless you meant to emphasize that the injured sailor was in fact young, a pro and brilliant?  Either be a more careful writer, or take responsibility for what you write.  Not surprising that this website is the defendant in a libel suit, when its writers take the attitude that they need not be responsible for the meaning of their words.



#61 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:21 PM

 

 

 

Is a "brilliant young pro sailor" a better person than, say a "old, pretty decent, amateur" sailor?

Why the distinction?

Those are simply adjectives.  If you choose to see them as a delineation or a distinction, that might be your own brain talking.  The 'old, amateur' sailor was driving the boat, and he had 11 stitches across his chin/jaw.

Now, now Mr. Clean:  caught out with your own language, you try to disown it as if it's without meaning.  What was the purpose of using those adjectives unless you meant to emphasize that the injured sailor was in fact young, a pro and brilliant?  Either be a more careful writer, or take responsibility for what you write.  Not surprising that this website is the defendant in a libel suit, when its writers take the attitude that they need not be responsible for the meaning of their words.

Precisely what responsibility does using those adjectives carry with it, pray tell?

 

Do you infer some meaning beyond the facts that Charlie is in fact young, brillant, and a pro?  What if I had said he was 'brown-haired, of medium build, and quite attractive?"  Would that somehow imply that I think ugly people are at fault?

 

-confused in st. clair



#62 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:22 PM

So how is having an obstructed view "Not Keeping a LookOut?"  seems to me that applies to the idjit who can't see under his kite



#63 J120fan

J120fan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 25 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:25 PM

 

So, aside from the obvious issues with both vessels failing to maintain a proper lookout, is it not worth a discussion about inter fleet/course/mark conflicts potentially impacting results? Or is that just something that we have to live with, because it's the way things have always been run?

.

 

.....I've always considered navigating through multi-fleets to be 'part of the game' in the rat-race that is yacht-racing.

...only in a major championship of a major fleet would I expect/hope for -sterile- conditions

 

.

an style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">

 

Neither boat saw the other one.  The J/120 made NO COURSE ALTERATIONS according to two witnesses on two different boats, even though if they had seen the M24, they would only have had to pinch up a bit to let them around the bow.

 

In other words, neither boat had a proper lookout, and the right-of-way boat made no effort to avoid a collision, because they didn't know one was imminent.

.

...'professional' sailors indeed...........another oxymoron?? <_<

 

.

 

 

+1



#64 USA190520

USA190520

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,851 posts
  • Location:mostly here but not all there

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:39 PM

Jesus H Christ on a corn chip-

2 people were seriously injured- both parties were at fault.

The race course didn't cause this, the RC didn't cause this, the two drivers lost the big picture and what resulted was an unfortunate, untimely meeting between 2 boats.

Why does everyone feel the need to attempt to lessen their culpability by shifting blame to another?

It's akin to blaming ones parents for their problems... HTFU-

There's a mixed fleet, big boats and small boats, you're flying into the leeward mark, boats are exiting the gate going upwind- pretty good time to assume there may be a couple boat on boat issues approaching- same goes for the boat exiting-

It's unfortunate but blaming a yc or event chair for a collision on the water is just weak.

Shit happens-

#65 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,013 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:43 PM

So how is having an obstructed view "Not Keeping a LookOut?"  seems to me that applies to the idjit who can't see under his kite

Yeah I don't get that: you're on stbd going hard upwind and about to round a mark (?) in a situation where you can plainly see other boats and are probably even figuring out your own rounding based on the other boat's location, speed & probable tactics when something pops up out of nowhere and suddenly it's your fault as the stbd & leeward boat? I suppose an argument could be made that the 120 could have contemplated that the m24 in front (obscuring the m24 behind) could not see them and should have anticipated manuevering on that basis but how could the 120 anticipate that an m24 that the 120 did not even know was there (obsured behind the m24 in front) was going to manuever in an unexpected fashion?



#66 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 921 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:48 PM

Just more garbage from the "National Inquirer" of the sailing world, as it continues its headlong rush to irrelevance.

 

 

Why does everyone feel the need to attempt to lessen their culpability by shifting blame to another?  It's akin to blaming one's parents for their problems...

It's unfortunate but blaming a yc or event chair for a collision on the water is just weak.



#67 andyxs

andyxs

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:15 PM

Jesus H Christ on a corn chip-

2 people were seriously injured- both parties were at fault.

The race course didn't cause this, the RC didn't cause this, the two drivers lost the big picture and what resulted was an unfortunate, untimely meeting between 2 boats.

Why does everyone feel the need to attempt to lessen their culpability by shifting blame to another?

It's akin to blaming ones parents for their problems... HTFU-

There's a mixed fleet, big boats and small boats, you're flying into the leeward mark, boats are exiting the gate going upwind- pretty good time to assume there may be a couple boat on boat issues approaching- same goes for the boat exiting-

It's unfortunate but blaming a yc or event chair for a collision on the water is just weak.

Shit happens-

+1



#68 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,082 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:36 PM

.

...sure 'shit happens',,,but it's not very comforting to see such a lack of vigialence....

 

...especially as the speedier high-perf sporties are gaining prevalence.

 

 

 

...once ws witness to a 49er crew being somewhat -skewered- by a spinn-pole-----NOT PRETTY :unsure:



#69 SA Lurker

SA Lurker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:42 PM

Just more garbage from the "National Inquirer" of the sailing world, as it continues its headlong rush to irrelevance.

 

+1

 

Nice move throwing the M32-Opti confrontation into this mix, Alan.

But, nowhere have you mentioned one of the worst offenders in that mess and lo and behold you are now responsible for their website.

Good for you!

Just don't try to pass yourself off as a fair and impartial observer.

Your agenda is clear.

 

BTW, perhaps the modifer BIG is now intended for the SERIES and not the BOAT.



#70 Beer Hound

Beer Hound

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 138 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:49 PM

Clean, are you attempting to help sailboat racing or kill it?  This site has lost its way.



#71 Big Show

Big Show

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,389 posts
  • Location:T'ic' o' Fog

Posted 07 October 2013 - 05:52 PM

Come on Clean. 
 
It was an accident. Accidents happen. Shitty for all involved. In terms of assumptions it was likely a relatively high closing speed with the J120 in the M24's blind spot. Sorry for all those injured. Get better soon.
 
Knowing nothing else for certain what we do know is coming into this accident it was the Melges obligation to keep clear. And, the J120 need not take any avoiding action until it is clear the Melges is not keeping clear.
 
What the J120 did or did not see is not a known fact. What the J120 could or could not have done is not a known fact. It's simply speculation. 
 
It's all too lawyer for me. No one wants to be in such a shitty collision but to imply it's as much the fault of the J120 without being there is a bridge too far. People make mistakes and sometimes there's no one else to blame. 
 
Not being there I'm going to blame the lack of window in the M24 kite - there, I said it. It's been bugging me. Let the shit fly. 

#72 BobJ

BobJ

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 921 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:11 PM

To be clear, CHANCE should have retired - see rule 44.1b - and stood by, due to the obvious damage and injuries.  To go on and finish (and even ask for redress) tells me the local J/120 fleet needs to talk about its reputed uber-competitiveness, vis-a-vis the RRS.

 

But that's not what the Bald Ego is on about.  He, like Scot, uses the incident to attack yet another premier regatta.  Maybe their goal is to make SA a cruisers' site?

 

 

(Edit - stupid emoticons)



#73 Grrr...

Grrr...

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,422 posts
  • Location:Detroit

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:12 PM

s for race management...the M24 course was set inside the big boat course, and starboard tack from the bottom mark of the big boats took you through the M24 fleet.  Rock N Roll was on starboard gybe, headed to bottom mark a few boatlengths away, about to drop the kite.  J/120 was coming upwind on starboard.  J/120 tactician told driver there were no other boats.  M24 didn't see J/120 around the kite.  J/120 crushes M24.  M24 wrong for w/l.  J/120 wrong for failure to avoid, more importantly or failure to keep a lookout.  

 

RnR DNF, J/120 given no penalty, though thankfully their request for redress was denied.  J/120 didn't stop to give assistance, they continued on their way once untangled.

 

Jeremy Wilmot flew in to take over Charlie's tactician duties.  Big Boat might want to let their Big Boat owners know that they are setting Little Boat courses inside the big ones.  

 

'Failure to keep a lookout'?

 

Fucking really, clean?  I mean fucking really?  Why wasn't the Melges keeping a lookout?  Why is that just the J's responsibility?  I'd venture a guess the Melges was going twice the speed of the J, too.

 

We've certainly never see a windward / leeward collision like this before between similarly sized boats.  No, it must just be due to their different sizes that this collision occured.

 

You tried to claim ignorance of scooters total shit reporting on the America's cup.  But you're no better.  Your shit stirring is riduculous, and while you don't have enough shame left in you to realize it, everyone who reads this type of bullshit certainly does.

 

Oh my, how revisionist history goes.

 

In other words, neither boat had a proper lookout, and the right-of-way boat made no effort to avoid a collision, because they didn't know one was imminent.

 

What, did you suddenly realize how BIG a cock you were being when you just accused the J?  Quick, tell us again how it was the different sizes that caused this mess.



#74 Jagtek Performance Products

Jagtek Performance Products

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Location:San Francisco Bay / Charleston, SC

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:12 PM

Precisely what responsibility does using those adjectives carry with it, pray tell?

 

Do you infer some meaning beyond the facts that Charlie is in fact young, brillant, and a pro?  What if I had said he was 'brown-haired, of medium build, and quite attractive?"  Would that somehow imply that I think ugly people are at fault?

 

-confused in st. clair

Your incessant jock sniffing of the "pro" fleets is just lame. Its amazing how just plain wrong you guys see the world. Its like you WANT everyone to hate you. Guess you just want to drive traffic through controversy. I guess that works, but it really isn't original, or value add in any way. 



#75 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:25 PM

To be clear, CHANCE should have retired - see rule 44.1b - and stood by, due to the obvious damage and injuries.  To go on and finish (and even ask for redress) tells me the local J/120 fleet needs to talk about its reputed uber-competitiveness, vis-a-vis the RRS.

 

But that's not what the Bald Ego is on about.  He, like Scot, uses the incident to attack yet another premier regatta.  Maybe their goal is to make SA a cruisers' site?

 

 

(Edit - stupid emoticons)

 

as far as retiring - only if they  broke a rule - presumably 14 in this case - .., and they obviously maintain they didn't

 

an accident with damage or injury doesn't, by itself mean a boat has to retire



#76 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:34 PM

s for race management...the M24 course was set inside the big boat course, and starboard tack from the bottom mark of the big boats took you through the M24 fleet.  Rock N Roll was on starboard gybe, headed to bottom mark a few boatlengths away, about to drop the kite.  J/120 was coming upwind on starboard.  J/120 tactician told driver there were no other boats.  M24 didn't see J/120 around the kite.  J/120 crushes M24.  M24 wrong for w/l.  J/120 wrong for failure to avoid, more importantly or failure to keep a lookout.  

 

RnR DNF, J/120 given no penalty, though thankfully their request for redress was denied.  J/120 didn't stop to give assistance, they continued on their way once untangled.

 

Jeremy Wilmot flew in to take over Charlie's tactician duties.  Big Boat might want to let their Big Boat owners know that they are setting Little Boat courses inside the big ones.  

 

'Failure to keep a lookout'?

 

Fucking really, clean?  I mean fucking really?  Why wasn't the Melges keeping a lookout?  Why is that just the J's responsibility?  I'd venture a guess the Melges was going twice the speed of the J, too.

 

We've certainly never see a windward / leeward collision like this before between similarly sized boats.  No, it must just be due to their different sizes that this collision occured.

 

You tried to claim ignorance of scooters total shit reporting on the America's cup.  But you're no better.  Your shit stirring is riduculous, and while you don't have enough shame left in you to realize it, everyone who reads this type of bullshit certainly does.

 

Oh my, how revisionist history goes.

 

In other words, neither boat had a proper lookout, and the right-of-way boat made no effort to avoid a collision, because they didn't know one was imminent.

 

What, did you suddenly realize how BIG a cock you were being when you just accused the J?  Quick, tell us again how it was the different sizes that caused this mess.

did you miss the part where i said the melges was at fault, and would have been DSQ had they finished the race?  convenient.



#77 RATM

RATM

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 576 posts
  • Interests:My Grandchildren

Posted 07 October 2013 - 06:58 PM

Pretty cheap shot throwing COLREGS into this. I would argue that the J/120  is the "more burdened" vessel.



#78 Bruce T. Shark

Bruce T. Shark

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 358 posts
  • Location:Martha's Vineyard
  • Interests:After Race Parties<br />Frank Mundus<br />Peter Benchly

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:26 PM

That is one of my points...COLREGS is NOT the RRS.  We NORMALLY dont race under COLREGS, unless meeting boats that are NOT RACING, there is nothing in the NOR or SIs that say COLREGs. 

 

That is like the state troopers monitoring speeds during the indy 500.  All boats have a duty to avoid colisions, but the happen even to the best sailors, more often to the worse ones - they all are often serious, i am sorry that people got hurt, but you do a huge disservice by throwing COLREG definitions, terms and rules into a RRS discussion.



#79 'moondance44

'moondance44

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,165 posts
  • Location:Dodgy Bit Of Stamford, CT and The Cows, Graveyard of LIS where bluefish get blown off wire leaders

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:52 PM

That is one of my points...COLREGS is NOT the RRS.  We NORMALLY dont race under COLREGS, unless meeting boats that are NOT RACING, there is nothing in the NOR or SIs that say COLREGs. 

 

That is like the state troopers monitoring speeds during the indy 500.  All boats have a duty to avoid colisions, but the happen even to the best sailors, more often to the worse ones - they all are often serious, i am sorry that people got hurt, but you do a huge disservice by throwing COLREG definitions, terms and rules into a RRS discussion.

 

 

Thank you . I knew your question was provocative and you had the answer. This was simple W/L or P/S where people got careless. All the speculation without any witnesses or facts found is the usual Mr.C circle jerk.  Saying a winward  boat with a spinnaker is less manouverable  and gains right of way because of it is RETARDED. Better to have separate courses? Yes. Is it going to happen enough to make everyone happy?  No.  Existing rules cover it. We had a guy TBone a mark boat at full speed while tuning this weekend as the MB was stationairy and  setting the pin rior a race.  Stuff is going to happen when people dont pay attention.

 

And saying the M32 / Opti  situation in Lake Garda was not 'dangerous' is just plain moronic. Even some of the paisanos on board admitted it was regretted it. 



#80 'moondance44

'moondance44

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,165 posts
  • Location:Dodgy Bit Of Stamford, CT and The Cows, Graveyard of LIS where bluefish get blown off wire leaders

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:57 PM

Who was wrong here? 

Attached Files



#81 Jeff Asher

Jeff Asher

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Location:Lake Norman, NC
  • Interests:Sailing, Skiing, Shooting

Posted 07 October 2013 - 08:09 PM

I was the doing  mid bow on Chance on this race and was fully part of this incident. Although I admit that we did not alter course enough, we felt we were well leward enough from the melgi's mark to allow them to round in front  of us. We were looking out for smaller boats however and the furthest forward bow man did call to head up in the incident however because of the large size of our vessel and the speed the the melges darted infrequent of us we were unable to avoid. Skippers on other J120s commented that "it was like dodging flies out there", referring to the melges erratic often unpredictable sailing. Similar to the incident between the melges 32 and the opti flee earlier this summer I feel like the fleet as so competitive that they are willing to risk danger to win.

 

Although I feel like this was a bad incidents,  I am surprised this is the first incident like this, and I feel like the melges community as a whole is partially to blame as they regard so safety seems to be lacking.  I understand the need for competitiveness, having done years of match racing I know about taking close calls for the win, but when its 20 knots and your planning down wind on the edge of control some caution does need to be taken. 

 

Thanks for the first hand account.  I'm glad you weren't injured and that as bad as the other guys were hurt, I'm glad it wasn't worse.

 

I'm not sure that I would paint Melges sailors as more unsafe than other competitive one-design classes. I would say that they develop a tunnel-vision that is much more pronounced than other classes.  That said, stereotypes often exist for a reason and the Lake Garda video didn't show a couple of J/70's plowing through a bunch of kids.



#82 Mike Hunt

Mike Hunt

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada

Posted 07 October 2013 - 08:30 PM

On the bright side, look how many boats didn't crash the weekend of the BBS.  



#83 Gypsyclubjuggler

Gypsyclubjuggler

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Location:South England
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 07 October 2013 - 09:09 PM

What I really admire about the editors of SA is their ability to effortlessly judge the mood of their target audience and say what everyone is thinking.



#84 TBone

TBone

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 373 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 10:00 PM

What I really admire about the editors of SA is their ability to effortlessly judge the mood of their target audience and say what everyone is thinking.


It would be so much easier to simply make up sh*t.
Oh, wait...

#85 NewDogBalls

NewDogBalls

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 171 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 10:44 PM

Must not be a lot of sailing news this Monday of Clean is stirring his one sided dingy boat agenda.......



#86 robmo01

robmo01

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Oregon, TX
  • Interests:Sailing, writing, dogs, Baseball, football, beer

Posted 07 October 2013 - 11:29 PM

Jesus H Christ on a corn chip-

2 people were seriously injured- both parties were at fault.

The race course didn't cause this, the RC didn't cause this, the two drivers lost the big picture and what resulted was an unfortunate, untimely meeting between 2 boats.

Why does everyone feel the need to attempt to lessen their culpability by shifting blame to another?

It's akin to blaming ones parents for their problems... HTFU-

There's a mixed fleet, big boats and small boats, you're flying into the leeward mark, boats are exiting the gate going upwind- pretty good time to assume there may be a couple boat on boat issues approaching- same goes for the boat exiting-

It's unfortunate but blaming a yc or event chair for a collision on the water is just weak.

Shit happens-

I'l second that opinion. 



#87 robmo01

robmo01

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Oregon, TX
  • Interests:Sailing, writing, dogs, Baseball, football, beer

Posted 07 October 2013 - 11:41 PM

What amazed me about this article is that the J120 collided with a smaller boat and after they disentangled themselves form the M24 sheets they went back on the race course and finished 5th.  What a bunch of unadulterated BS!  From the article it sounds as if it was carnage on the M24 and all that the capt and crew of the J120 could think about was getting back into THEIR race!  Under those circusmatnes, I would suggest that not only should have the J120 been DSQ'd they should have been banned from racing for significant period.  At a minimum, sportsmanship should have kicked in and the crew should have been asisting the crew of the smaller boat until assistance arrived.  Beyond that, proper seamanship would have dictated that they should have offered assistance without question.  If the M24 was taking on water and the crew was disabled, what would the J120 do if the boat had sunk?  I think the 'win at all cost' crap that exists in high stakes sailboat racing today is absurd, it cheapens the sport and lowers the participants as evidenced by this incident. 



#88 CrushDigital

CrushDigital

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,810 posts
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 08 October 2013 - 12:09 AM

What amazed me about this article is that the J120 collided with a smaller boat and after they disentangled themselves form the M24 sheets they went back on the race course and finished 5th.  What a bunch of unadulterated BS!  From the article it sounds as if it was carnage on the M24 and all that the capt and crew of the J120 could think about was getting back into THEIR race!  Under those circusmatnes, I would suggest that not only should have the J120 been DSQ'd they should have been banned from racing for significant period.  At a minimum, sportsmanship should have kicked in and the crew should have been asisting the crew of the smaller boat until assistance arrived.  Beyond that, proper seamanship would have dictated that they should have offered assistance without question.  If the M24 was taking on water and the crew was disabled, what would the J120 do if the boat had sunk?  I think the 'win at all cost' crap that exists in high stakes sailboat racing today is absurd, it cheapens the sport and lowers the participants as evidenced by this incident. 

 

I think you're jumping to an awful lot of confusion.  Nowhere in the write-up does it say what transpired as they were disentangling themselves, what was said between the two boats, when other help arrived, etc.  You just want to show how righteous you are.



#89 robmo01

robmo01

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Location:Oregon, TX
  • Interests:Sailing, writing, dogs, Baseball, football, beer

Posted 08 October 2013 - 12:41 AM

What amazed me about this article is that the J120 collided with a smaller boat and after they disentangled themselves form the M24 sheets they went back on the race course and finished 5th.  What a bunch of unadulterated BS!  From the article it sounds as if it was carnage on the M24 and all that the capt and crew of the J120 could think about was getting back into THEIR race!  Under those circusmatnes, I would suggest that not only should have the J120 been DSQ'd they should have been banned from racing for significant period.  At a minimum, sportsmanship should have kicked in and the crew should have been asisting the crew of the smaller boat until assistance arrived.  Beyond that, proper seamanship would have dictated that they should have offered assistance without question.  If the M24 was taking on water and the crew was disabled, what would the J120 do if the boat had sunk?  I think the 'win at all cost' crap that exists in high stakes sailboat racing today is absurd, it cheapens the sport and lowers the participants as evidenced by this incident. 

 

I think you're jumping to an awful lot of confusion.  Nowhere in the write-up does it say what transpired as they were disentangling themselves, what was said between the two boats, when other help arrived, etc.  You just want to show how righteous you are.

Hardly the case asshole, I'm responding to what I read, if you have additional information, please provide it.  here's a question for you, what would you have done in that situation if you were on the J120?  Incidentally, the term is 'self-righteous'



#90 CrushDigital

CrushDigital

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,810 posts
  • Location:New York, NY

Posted 08 October 2013 - 12:51 AM

 

What amazed me about this article is that the J120 collided with a smaller boat and after they disentangled themselves form the M24 sheets they went back on the race course and finished 5th.  What a bunch of unadulterated BS!  From the article it sounds as if it was carnage on the M24 and all that the capt and crew of the J120 could think about was getting back into THEIR race!  Under those circusmatnes, I would suggest that not only should have the J120 been DSQ'd they should have been banned from racing for significant period.  At a minimum, sportsmanship should have kicked in and the crew should have been asisting the crew of the smaller boat until assistance arrived.  Beyond that, proper seamanship would have dictated that they should have offered assistance without question.  If the M24 was taking on water and the crew was disabled, what would the J120 do if the boat had sunk?  I think the 'win at all cost' crap that exists in high stakes sailboat racing today is absurd, it cheapens the sport and lowers the participants as evidenced by this incident. 

 

I think you're jumping to an awful lot of confusion.  Nowhere in the write-up does it say what transpired as they were disentangling themselves, what was said between the two boats, when other help arrived, etc.  You just want to show how righteous you are.

Hardly the case asshole, I'm responding to what I read, if you have additional information, please provide it.  here's a question for you, what would you have done in that situation if you were on the J120?  Incidentally, the term is 'self-righteous'

 

I don't have additional information, which is why I'm choosing not to condemn the crew of the J/120.  I've made a choice not to jump to conclusions.  In that situation, were I on the J/120, after making sure everyone on my boat was safe and accounted for and that we were disentangled, I'd communicate with the Melges to determine their status.  Based on their answer and the immediate presence of other support, should it be needed, I would then make a determination of whether to continue on with my race. Yes I know, a complex answer to a complex situation.  

 

Incidentally, you pedantic prig, the term is righteous.  If I had intended to say something along the lines of, "You just want to show everyone how smug and holier than thou you are," I would have said self-righteous.  But just as you don't actually know what happened in the aftermath of the collision, you don't have a clue what my intentions were.  

 

Your lazy attempt at criticism, that on the other-hand was self-righteous.



#91 evenflow

evenflow

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Location:Toronto
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 08 October 2013 - 02:33 AM

Sad to hear of the injuries, but I will wait to see the video of this mess.



#92 Terrorvision

Terrorvision

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,832 posts
  • Interests:Taking 'the' out of Psychotherapist

Posted 08 October 2013 - 04:50 AM

It's very simple, after many years on this site the status quo is that whenever a Melges is involved, they have done no wrong.

 

I have sailed sporties long enough and in much bigger fleets on mixed courses in small areas (Hong Kong Harbour anyone?) to know that you constantly need to keep a look out due to your speed and manoeuvrability especially downwind.

It sucks that people were hurt but the leeward boat bears responsibility and the only thing worse than the indignance of teh front page piece is the people that say 'Shit happens'.



#93 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,223 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 08 October 2013 - 05:17 AM

What if I had said he was 'brown-haired, of medium build, and quite attractive?"  Would that somehow imply that I think ugly people are at fault?

No, but you would not have faired well in the gay test.

#94 Bmajor

Bmajor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Location:USA, Midwest

Posted 08 October 2013 - 06:26 AM

 

It's very simple, after many years on this site the status quo is that whenever a Melges is involved, they have done no wrong.
 
I have sailed sporties long enough and in much bigger fleets on mixed courses in small areas (Hong Kong Harbour anyone?) to know that you constantly need to keep a look out due to your speed and manoeuvrability especially downwind.
It sucks that people were hurt but the leeward boat bears responsibility and the only thing worse than the indignance of teh front page piece is the people that say 'Shit happens'.

 Both boats bear responsiblity to avoid collision. But leeward is ROW so how does this exonerate the windward boat?

#95 Terrorvision

Terrorvision

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,832 posts
  • Interests:Taking 'the' out of Psychotherapist

Posted 08 October 2013 - 08:56 AM

It's very simple, after many years on this site the status quo is that whenever a Melges is involved, they have done no wrong.
 
I have sailed sporties long enough and in much bigger fleets on mixed courses in small areas (Hong Kong Harbour anyone?) to know that you constantly need to keep a look out due to your speed and manoeuvrability especially downwind.
It sucks that people were hurt but the leeward boat bears responsibility and the only thing worse than the indignance of teh front page piece is the people that say 'Shit happens'.

 Both boats bear responsiblity to avoid collision. But leeward is ROW so how does this exonerate the windward boat?

I'm not exonerating the windward boat- on rereading it is not as clear as I had hoped in that my comment was more in light of previous comments which seemed to place all responsibility on the J.



#96 mad

mad

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,822 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 10:21 AM

Who was wrong here? 

Holy shit, never seen that picture before.

 

Anybody got any details??



#97 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,323 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 08 October 2013 - 11:42 AM

That is one of my points...COLREGS is NOT the RRS.  We NORMALLY dont race under COLREGS, unless meeting boats that are NOT RACING, there is nothing in the NOR or SIs that say COLREGs. 

 

That is like the state troopers monitoring speeds during the indy 500.  All boats have a duty to avoid colisions, but the happen even to the best sailors, more often to the worse ones - they all are often serious, i am sorry that people got hurt, but you do a huge disservice by throwing COLREG definitions, terms and rules into a RRS discussion.

Decision
Rule 14 begins ‘A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible.’ This requirement means a boat must do everything that can reasonably be expected of her in the prevailing conditions to avoid contact.
This includes keeping a good lookout, particularly in a crowded starting line situation.
The protest committee concluded that if either boat had seen the other a collision could have been avoided, even at the last minute, particularly if Ephesian had hailed Jupa when it was clear that Jupa was not changing course to keep clear. Until that moment, rule 14(a) allows a right-of-way boat to delay acting to avoid contact. It follows that at that moment she must begin to act in an effort to avoid contact. The word ‘act’ is not restricted to changing course or speed. Hailing was an action that Ephesian could and should have taken. Ephesian broke rule 14. Because the collision resulted in damage, the protest committee’s decision to disqualify Ephesian was correct (see rules 14( B) and 64.1(a)). Her appeal is therefore dismissed.
Clearly, Jupa broke rule 10. As a result of the serious damage she suffered in the collision, she retired from the race and thus took the applicable penalty (see rule 44.1( B)). Rule 64.1( B) prohibits penalizing her further. The disqualification of Jupa is reversed and she is to be scored DNF.



#98 DKinSF

DKinSF

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 08 October 2013 - 03:13 PM

It seems to me that the International Jury decided who was at fault based on the accounts from the representatives and witnesses from each boat.  Rather than guessing who was at fault, why not simply use the decision that was made by professionals in possession of all the facts?



#99 'moondance44

'moondance44

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,165 posts
  • Location:Dodgy Bit Of Stamford, CT and The Cows, Graveyard of LIS where bluefish get blown off wire leaders

Posted 08 October 2013 - 03:21 PM

It seems to me that the International Jury decided who was at fault based on the accounts from the representatives and witnesses from each boat.  Rather than guessing who was at fault, why not simply use the decision that was made by professionals in possession of all the facts?

 

Because  bullshit and speculation is better for website performance analytics especially when fighting a big lawsuit

and you are out begging for money to pay your legal bills.  Other than that, you're right! 



#100 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,681 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 04:07 PM

That is one of my points...COLREGS is NOT the RRS.  We NORMALLY dont race under COLREGS, unless meeting boats that are NOT RACING, there is nothing in the NOR or SIs that say COLREGs. 

 

That is like the state troopers monitoring speeds during the indy 500.  All boats have a duty to avoid colisions, but the happen even to the best sailors, more often to the worse ones - they all are often serious, i am sorry that people got hurt, but you do a huge disservice by throwing COLREG definitions, terms and rules into a RRS discussion.

Decision
Rule 14 begins ‘A boat shall avoid contact with another boat if reasonably possible.’ This requirement means a boat must do everything that can reasonably be expected of her in the prevailing conditions to avoid contact.
This includes keeping a good lookout, particularly in a crowded starting line situation.
The protest committee concluded that if either boat had seen the other a collision could have been avoided, even at the last minute, particularly if Ephesian had hailed Jupa when it was clear that Jupa was not changing course to keep clear. Until that moment, rule 14(a) allows a right-of-way boat to delay acting to avoid contact. It follows that at that moment she must begin to act in an effort to avoid contact. The word ‘act’ is not restricted to changing course or speed. Hailing was an action that Ephesian could and should have taken. Ephesian broke rule 14. Because the collision resulted in damage, the protest committee’s decision to disqualify Ephesian was correct (see rules 14( B) and 64.1(a)). Her appeal is therefore dismissed.
Clearly, Jupa broke rule 10. As a result of the serious damage she suffered in the collision, she retired from the race and thus took the applicable penalty (see rule 44.1( B)). Rule 64.1( B) prohibits penalizing her further. The disqualification of Jupa is reversed and she is to be scored DNF.

 

Clean - this isn't really relevant, as it's clear the 120 _did_ see the other boats.., so there is no issue of keeping a proper lookout.

 

the geometry of a boat on starboard going upwind (L) vs a boat on starboard going downwind (W) virtually assures this - the 120 probably had 8 people on the rail that saw the group of melges. if the boat they eventually hit was hidden behind other boats, that's a separate issue.

 

in any case the crew member says they saw them.

 

as someone who actually steers a boat - there are a few things i would want to know before passing judgement here (and if i were the 120 owner i would _not_ be answering questions here).

 

you need to remember that under rule 16, the ability of the ROW boat to maneuver (in this case L, the 120) is actually _more_ restricted in this situation, than that of the giveway boat (W, the melges) and it can be a bit scary.

 

not only does L not have to alter course until it is clear that W is not keeping clear..., but it's actually safer if they don't.

 

one big question, is whether the melges were altering course as they converged with the 120... planing boats alter course quite a bit on a run.

 

what was the exact geometry of the group of melges? did they all pass in front of the 120? did some pass behind? the 120 was an obstruction for the melges...  was there an issue of room to pass an obstruction?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users