Jump to content


(Attempted) Headshot - Another P/S collision


  • Please log in to reply
154 replies to this topic

#1 Merde2

Merde2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 08:50 AM

If at first you don't succeed in impaling the trimmer, try the skipper.

Action happens at the :10 mark and replay at the 1 minute mark.

 


 



#2 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 09:06 AM

Ouf. 

 

Good reason not to have a split tail backstay..



#3 floating dutchman

floating dutchman

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,815 posts
  • Location:nelson: new zealand

Posted 12 November 2013 - 09:06 AM

Hard to see  the full story from that short clip.

 

But I see a significant change of course at 6 seconds then calls "Starboard" at seven seconds. contact at 11 seconds , Trying to make the other boat tack in trying conditions?



#4 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 09:54 AM

Wide angle lenses make judging anything about changes in angle very difficult. 



#5 DRIFTW00D

DRIFTW00D

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,167 posts
  • Location:Blue Water Area Great Lakes

Posted 12 November 2013 - 01:34 PM

Those new-fangled pointy things gona kill some body.

#6 SaylurMaine

SaylurMaine

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 169 posts
  • Location:Duh....Maine

Posted 12 November 2013 - 01:54 PM

1:24: Good thing you opted for the rubber wheel.



#7 SHNOOL

SHNOOL

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts
  • Location:NE PA
  • Interests:sailing.

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:04 PM

Might I suggest a change in your port side paint scheme (since it looks as if you'll be needing to do that anyway)?

dip-tack.jpg



#8 ALittleLoose

ALittleLoose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Interests:Blah blah blah

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:13 PM

Helm was brilliant to get flat after being knocked to port side!  Gets his head up enough to see the pole coming at his head.  Then scrambles to the companionway.

 

Wind and waves = not a steady helm, that's normal.

 

My bet is the main on other boat not eased enough for a too close duck and bad things happened.  Barely a scratch on the 410, those things are solid.



#9 Innocent Bystander

Innocent Bystander

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,043 posts
  • Location:Lower Southern MD

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:16 PM

Hard to see  the full story from that short clip.

 

But I see a significant change of course at 6 seconds then calls "Starboard" at seven seconds. contact at 11 seconds , Trying to make the other boat tack in trying conditions?

 

Called hunting and based on the driver's actions and the horizon, he turns down sharply.   Question for the PC is when a stand on vessel has to hold course rather than sail up and down in response to conditions in a "normal" fashion.  Putting the bow down and immediately calling "Stbd" is suspect.  Port's defense is obviously "we were on course to clear astern and he turned down on us a few seconds before contact and we had neither room or opportunity to turn down further in those conditions.  Odds are Port would still get tossed as Stbd can say "we were sailing upwind and responding to wind and wave conditions". 

 

Putting 350K worth of boats together for a pickle dish is a bit silly.  



#10 ssi

ssi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 407 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:17 PM

Not one bitch did a single thing with the sails.  Perhaps if the driver actually drove instead of sitting on his ass in the center and the trimmers trimmed, they would not be going sideways like lemmings waiting for the impaler.



#11 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:28 PM

I'm stunned that there is no call of Protest or a flag pulled.  that's gonna be problematic with insurance and the Protest Room



#12 Vogel515

Vogel515

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, snowboarding, skiing

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:36 PM

What video are you guys watching???

 

hunting?? trying to make the other boat tack??

 

Looks like the jib is over trimmed, the boat is going sideways as fast as its going forward, and the bow is being dragged down. You can see the port tacker at 3 seconds. He is still obligated to duck a starboard boat sliding sideways. 



#13 ALittleLoose

ALittleLoose

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Interests:Blah blah blah

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:41 PM

Guys, watch the vid again.  Not once does the helm of the 350 turn down.  The boat clearly spins in reaction to the wind and waves but this was not caused by the helm.  More likely he was feathering and the wind caught him...big change in heel and heading.

 

His first reaction to the change in heading is to call starboard and start turning up.  Reaction time almost immediate. 

 

Boat spins at :07, call for starboard at :08, collision at :12



#14 cogito

cogito

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 02:59 PM

I have looked closely at this clip a few times and respectfully suggest that some of the initial responses are inaccurate. I agree, that it looks like there's a change of course to port prior to the contact but closer inspection of the wheel and wave heights tell me that the helm didn't turn down in any significant way and that the horizon swing we see was the boat being knocked off a wave, increased heel and wide angle lens exaggerating the effect. I see the helmsman turning the wheel to starboard most of the time.

Cut the guys some slack about throwing the flag. They must have been pretty shaken up and shocked. I expect the port tacker to immediately drop sails and retire. I would be outraged if this crew saw the inside of a protest room and I doubt that would be problematic with insurance.

Plus 1 on the rubber wheel!



#15 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:04 PM

RRS 14 and 16.2 (with a touch of Case 107).

 

DSQ starboard!



#16 surf nazi

surf nazi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,256 posts
  • Location:LA ( the other one )

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:05 PM

I'm stunned that there is no call of Protest or a flag pulled.  that's gonna be problematic with insurance and the Protest Room

 

No it won't. When there is obvious damage you are relieved of hailing and flying flag. Of course you should do it but it is understandable that you may be busy sorting things out and the rule ( maybe it's an appeal )  



#17 Flaming

Flaming

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:05 PM

Were they even racing?  That's an ensign on the backstay, not a class flag.



#18 surf nazi

surf nazi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,256 posts
  • Location:LA ( the other one )

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:06 PM

I'm stunned that there is no call of Protest or a flag pulled.  that's gonna be problematic with insurance and the Protest Room

 

No it won't. When there is obvious damage you are relieved of hailing and flying flag. Of course you should do it but it is understandable that you may be busy sorting things out and the rule ( maybe it's an appeal )  

...reflects that. 



#19 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:19 PM

Were they even racing? 

 

Yes. From the YouTube page.

 

On a race 3 of Impression Sailing week 2013, Elan 350 of Koroško Navtično Društvo got a surprise attack by Elan 410.
 
Wind, SE, "jugo", about 25 kn, location about 200 meters before upwind marker.


#20 Flaming

Flaming

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:38 PM

Were they even racing? 

 

Yes. From the YouTube page.

 

On a race 3 of Impression Sailing week 2013, Elan 350 of Koroško Navtično Društvo got a surprise attack by Elan 410.
 
Wind, SE, "jugo", about 25 kn, location about 200 meters before upwind marker.

 

 

Obviously have different ensign / class flag regs then!  Mind you the impression cup sounds rather like an in house Elan thing.



#21 ssi

ssi

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 407 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:40 PM

Guys, watch the vid again.  Not once does the helm of the 350 turn down.  The boat clearly spins in reaction to the wind and waves but this was not caused by the helm.  More likely he was feathering and the wind caught him...big change in heel and heading.

 

His first reaction to the change in heading is to call starboard and start turning up.  Reaction time almost immediate. 

 

Boat spins at :07, call for starboard at :08, collision at :12

 

Feathering?  I think he was just ogling at his purdy orange wheels and thinking how fast they are.



#22 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:45 PM

 

Were they even racing? 

 

Yes. From the YouTube page.

 

On a race 3 of Impression Sailing week 2013, Elan 350 of Koroško Navtično Društvo got a surprise attack by Elan 410.
 
Wind, SE, "jugo", about 25 kn, location about 200 meters before upwind marker.

 

Obviously have different ensign / class flag regs then!  Mind you the impression cup sounds rather like an in house Elan thing.

 

obviously you should shut up by now.



#23 Flaming

Flaming

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 12 November 2013 - 03:59 PM

 

 

Were they even racing? 

 

Yes. From the YouTube page.

 

 

On a race 3 of Impression Sailing week 2013, Elan 350 of Koroško Navtično Društvo got a surprise attack by Elan 410.
 
Wind, SE, "jugo", about 25 kn, location about 200 meters before upwind marker.

 

Obviously have different ensign / class flag regs then!  Mind you the impression cup sounds rather like an in house Elan thing.

 

obviously you should shut up by now.

Wow, my very own bitch slap from Clean.  I feel honoured.  



#24 dash34

dash34

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,536 posts
  • Location:Nanaimo, B.C.
  • Interests:Sailing my boat, playing bass and classical guitar, flying sailplanes, skiing, cycling and hiking.

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:34 PM

That pushpit gave up without much of a fight.  Maybe mount with bigger hardware next time.



#25 bruno

bruno

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,816 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:36 PM

Then when the swan comes theough it will be strong enuff

#26 couchsurfer

couchsurfer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,172 posts
  • Location:NA westcoast
  • Interests:...pimping HOOTs
    ...i550 NW circuit

Posted 12 November 2013 - 04:51 PM

.

 

...classic!....4 bites! :)

 

...that boat really had it in for them!!!



#27 Big Show

Big Show

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Location:T'ic' o' Fog

Posted 12 November 2013 - 05:01 PM

Ouch. Brutal to see. Possibly port didn't even know stbd was there.That or the vang and main weren't eased. 

 

As for 'hunting,' likely what you mean to say is 'altering'. Starboard is a ROW boat and is clearly altering up (and only up that we can see). Perhaps she was doing so to provide port room to keep clear (duck or tack)?

 

We certainly don't have conclusive evidence from this video but the important question is - was port otherwise keeping clear had starboard not altered up? 



#28 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 05:28 PM

Remember, STB can alter course -- as long as iin doing so she does not prevent Port from Keeping Clear.   All Port has to do is release its main and bear off...   Remember RRS 16.1 does not mean on stb I cannot alter course to leewward

 

RRS 16.1When a right -of-way boat changes course, she shall give the other boat room to keep clear

 
Even in that sea and wind state - 1 BL is more than enough for Port to Keep Clear by altering course.    On STB I can hunt port all I want as long as  give an escape route.  In can come down enough that your only escape route is to bear off to leeward and I am still within RRS 16.1 as long as I give you room to turn down that way.
 
Port really has a lot of burden on them
.


 



#29 Bulbhunter

Bulbhunter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,695 posts
  • Interests:SA is DEAD

Posted 12 November 2013 - 05:32 PM

Looks to me like SB helms man spotted the impending impact about 5 seconds before impact and was trying to turn the only way possible to do something to avoid or reduce the impact. No freaking way there is enough video leading up to the impact to know how the boat was being handled or if they were hunting etc. BTW the 350 is duel rudder and has pretty good grip in those conditions the 410 is single rudder and could have easily been stuffed by sails not being released and the single rudder loosing grip the impact actually did not look hard and the 410 didn't look to be carrying much speed or it would have spun the 350's stern.



#30 DRIFTW00D

DRIFTW00D

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,167 posts
  • Location:Blue Water Area Great Lakes

Posted 12 November 2013 - 09:04 PM

I'm guessig stb main was not let out enough. His jib is WAY out leaving the main to force the boat up.

#31 Rum Runner

Rum Runner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,008 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 10:57 PM

I don't think that will buff out.



#32 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,537 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:06 PM

I'm stunned that there is no call of Protest or a flag pulled.  that's gonna be problematic with insurance and the Protest Room

 

if there is damage or injury, no hail or flag is required.



#33 SCANAS

SCANAS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Water and Mud

Posted 12 November 2013 - 11:19 PM

Heat of the moment and you had to be there, but from the armchair wouldn't you crash tack over incase there is a hole in the boat?



#34 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:14 AM

Remember RRS 16.1 does not mean on stb I cannot alter course to leewward

In can come down enough that your only escape route is to bear off to leeward and I am still within RRS 16.1 as long as I give you room to turn down that way.


 

You'd better read 16.2 then.  If she was already passing behind, stbd cannot bear away further.  AT-ALL.

 

Look.. When we see port in the distance, she is definitely going to pass behind stbd.

 

Stbd definitely changes course to port (whether deliberately or accidentally). You can see this relative to the headland.  This course change would have broken rule 16.2.

 

16.2 In addition, when after the starting signal a port-tack boat is keeping
clear by sailing to pass astern of a starboard-tack boat, the starboard-
tack boat shall not change course if as a result the port-tack
boat would immediately need to change course to continue keeping
clear.
 
I'm sure it was noisy, but it doesn't see like there's much action to avoid contact until 3 seconds before the collision.  No arm waving, no loud hailing, no nothing.
 
 

and the 410 didn't look to be carrying much speed or it would have spun the 350's stern.

 

Huh! Look at the land and the boat which comes to view in the distance....given that stbd was trying to round up, and we see all that new landscape, I'd say she was pretty violently swung by the collision.  The two boats are almost 140 degrees opposite direction by the end of it!

 

And true, no flag was required.  Damage was obvious to both boats.

 

 

To me this looks like a very tight cross behind, made impossible by a late change to of course to port, by the starboard boat.



#35 Big Show

Big Show

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Location:T'ic' o' Fog

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:59 AM


 

Look.. When we see port in the distance, she is definitely going to pass behind stbd.
 
Stbd definitely changes course to port (whether deliberately or accidentally). You can see this relative to the headland.  This course change would have broken rule 16.2.


 
What video are you watching? The fact you use the word 'definitely' like you can be 100% sure port was going to duck is laughable. A fucking joke. You speak in absolutes when you clearly, like the rest of us, can have no fucking clue about port's actual position, speed or ability to tack or duck. 
 
Also, do what any trained ump would do - watch the wheel. Watch the spokes of the wheel on the stbd boat. 
 
Nothing stbd does should excuse port from ramming stbd midships. It wasn't even close. 

#36 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:13 AM

Look.. When we see port in the distance, she is definitely going to pass behind stbd.
 
Stbd definitely changes course to port (whether deliberately or accidentally). You can see this relative to the headland.  This course change would have broken rule 16.2.


 
What video are you watching? The fact you use the word 'definitely' like you can be 100% sure port was going to duck is laughable. A fucking joke. You speak in absolutes when you clearly, like the rest of us, can have no fucking clue about port's actual position, speed or ability to tack or duck. 
 
Also, do what any trained ump would do - watch the wheel. Watch the spokes of the wheel on the stbd boat. 
 
Nothing stbd does should excuse port from ramming stbd midships. It wasn't even close. 

Nah...I have just as much info as you do, so there is of course some poetic licence in my 'absolutes'...mainly though, I just like riling you up..that's all.

 

You do see the port boat 3 seconds into the video, right? Just checking.

 

Yes, I see the spokes of the wheel.  I also see starboard come upright in a lull.  Helm from the last gust is clearly to port.  So in the lull, she is borne away about 30 degrees.  No?

 

30 degrees of course change 4-7 seconds before a collision could well be the difference between a successful duck by port and carnage.

 

Then there is a collision.  Mainsheet is not moved during the entire event.


Anyway, what I can say for absolute, presuming the camera is fixed, is that STBD bears away about 4-7 seconds before the collision by about 30 degees, and then there's a collision!  Go figure.



#37 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:45 AM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

Attached Files

  • Attached File  A.jpg   63.42K   18 downloads


#38 Ishmael

Ishmael

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,686 posts
  • Location:Fuctifino

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:44 AM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 

So you get hit a second later?



#39 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:54 AM

... ...

 

 

To me this looks like a very tight cross behind, made impossible by a late change to of course to port, by the starboard boat.

 

You should make an app't with your optometrist.

 

Port has to give way. If she rams stb amidships, especially in gusty choppy conditions when boats are difficult to control even when reefed, then Port was cutting it far too close even if she was aimed to pass astern of Stb before a change of course for 4 seconds (four seconds!?!?)

 

FB- Doug



#40 Bus Driver

Bus Driver

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,465 posts
  • Location:Just this side of insanity.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:58 AM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 

So you get hit a second later?

 

Pretty sure the diagram is meant to show the 3rd position of the boats indicates a collision if STB bears away.  Of course, the diagram indicates that, in bearing away, STB slows down.  That does not happen in many situations.  Especially not those we see in the video.



#41 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:05 AM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 

The difference is-

Stb holds course = collision

Stb bears away slightly for 4 seconds = collision

 

FB- Doug



#42 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:14 AM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 

The difference is-

Stb holds course = collision

Stb bears away slightly for 4 seconds = collision

 

FB- Doug

Huh? At position 3 green collides with blue,  but not with yellow!  The difference is the course change. 



#43 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:32 AM

... ...

 

 

To me this looks like a very tight cross behind, made impossible by a late change to of course to port, by the starboard boat.

 

You should make an app't with your optometrist.

 

Port has to give way. If she rams stb amidships, especially in gusty choppy conditions when boats are difficult to control even when reefed, then Port was cutting it far too close even if she was aimed to pass astern of Stb before a change of course for 4 seconds (four seconds!?!?)

 

FB- Doug

 

Doug, 

 

Really, I'm deliberately playing the devil. 

 

So many people will jump in port,  and ignore the obligations of RoW.  

 

Here,  no matter how much we don't want to accept it,   there was a course change some seconds before. High school physics and geometry tells me such a change  would turn a duck into not a duck. 

 

Question is,  whether port took this too close. 

 

What are port's obligations? To keep clear.  By how much is not defined. 

 

If port was keeping clear,  she was keeping clear. 

 

Now Stbd ' obligations  were not to bear away. 

 

Should port anticipate such a bear away? 



#44 DISHONEST ASSHOLE

DISHONEST ASSHOLE

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Location:Quohog, RI
  • Interests:Rum and Cougars

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:33 AM

It's amazing how people can watch the same video and not agree. I didn't see the helm turn the wheel anyway but right and not change their bearing with shore until after the crash.

#45 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:36 AM

 

... ...

 

 

To me this looks like a very tight cross behind, made impossible by a late change to of course to port, by the starboard boat.

 

You should make an app't with your optometrist.

 

Port has to give way. If she rams stb amidships, especially in gusty choppy conditions when boats are difficult to control even when reefed, then Port was cutting it far too close even if she was aimed to pass astern of Stb before a change of course for 4 seconds (four seconds!?!?)

 

FB- Doug

 

Doug, 

 

Really, I'm deliberately playing the devil. 

 

So many people will jump in port,  and ignore the obligations of RoW.  

 

Here,  no matter how much we don't want to accept it,   there was a course change some seconds before. High school physics and geometry tells me such a change  would turn a duck into not a duck. 

 

Question is,  whether port took this too close. 

 

What are port's obligations? To keep clear.  By how much is not defined. 

 

If port was keeping clear,  she was keeping clear. 

 

Now Stbd ' obligations  were not to bear away. 

 

Should port anticipate such a bear away? 

 

Port does not need to anticipate Stb bearing away, you are correct about that.

However reefing conditions are not the time to cut it so close; and even if Stb did bear away for 4 seconds (four fuckin seconds, really!?!?) that difference is too small to place blame wholly on Stb. And it's not certain that Stb -did- bear away.

 

Not a good idea IMHO to dream up excuses for a give-way boat to slam into another racer

 

And "keep clear" is indeed defined, check your rule book. It's defined as the R-O-W boat being able to change course without risk of collision.

 

FB- Doug



#46 The Salmon of Doubt

The Salmon of Doubt

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 10 posts
  • Location:Southeast PA
  • Interests:Money. Power. Everything else follows.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:37 AM

There may not have been an intentional "bear away". In these conditions, stbd may indeed by reacting to a gust which was a header by laying over and assuming a new course to further to the left. In this case, if a collision occurred, then port was by definition NOT keeping clear enough. How can I tell? They collided. The fact that they did not telegraph their intentions, or that port hasn't yet felt the new wind, is immaterial. Keeping clear is, well, clearly defined by the absence of contact.

 

Glad everyone is ok.



#47 Grinder

Grinder

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,569 posts
  • Location:Chicago, IL

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:40 AM

Just like the video of Blue in Mexico.

#48 furr_ball

furr_ball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 211 posts
  • Location:Brisvegas, Australia

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:51 AM

Dog....

'Here,  no matter how much we don't want to accept it,   there was a course change some seconds before. '

 

 

Went back and watched it again, well a few times actually to be sure.

 

Specifically watched the wheel and when STB headed down.

 

STB headed down with no turn of the wheel, they crested over a wave.

 

Skipper actually corrected to STB with the wheel and then got hit.

 

The 'bear away' was from wave / wind only.

 

Port had to keep clear.

 

 

Salmon got it here....

if a collision occurred, then port was by definition NOT keeping clear enough. How can I tell? They collided



#49 JohnMB

JohnMB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,140 posts
  • Location:Evanston
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:12 AM

And "keep clear" is indeed defined, check your rule book. It's defined as the R-O-W boat being able to change course without risk of collision.

 

 

sorry

[Pedantic] the change course bit only applies when the boats are overlapped, in this situation P and S where not overlapped (by definition) and therefore only part a of the definition of keep clear aplieas [/pedantic]

 

 

Keep Clear
A boat keeps clear of a right-of-way boat
(a) if the right-of-way boat can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and,
(B) when the boats are overlapped, if the right-of-way boat can also change course in both directions without immediately making contact.
 

In this case I don't believe it matters, but its worth remembering particularly with respect to R16.1.

(and the main reason I know this is because I have got it wrong the the past :) )



#50 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,110 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:52 AM

What amazes me is why a 35 footer needs twin wheels. Particularly since after the helmsman heads below to hide under his bed the boat sails fine by itself.

#51 view at the front

view at the front

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts
  • Location:Anacortes, WA USA

Posted 13 November 2013 - 05:13 AM

Align the bow with the horizon… STB didn't come down… maybe he should have to help avoid contact… but certainly not required.

 

Just like the video of Blue in Mexico.

 

Yikes… I thought that we put that one to bed?

 

I've raced against Blue's pro and unfortunately he was less that a pro then.  I hope that he is well and healing from that.



#52 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 05:58 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 'bear away' was from wave / wind only.

 

 

 

 

Salmon got it here....

if a collision occurred, then port was by definition NOT keeping clear enough. How can I tell? They collided

Furball 

 

I'm not sure the rule 16.2 really cares why they're was a course change,  does it?

 

As for salmon,  how incredibly simple. 



#53 Rushman

Rushman

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 176 posts
  • Location:Was Auckland, now in Canberra

Posted 13 November 2013 - 06:48 AM

What amazes me is why a 35 footer needs twin wheels. Particularly since after the helmsman heads below to hide under his bed the boat sails fine by itself.

The helm may have been emptying out his pants! (Or checking for through hull damage)

Imagine is the port boat had a bowsprit with a bob stay, it could have ended up on top of the starboard boat.

#54 furr_ball

furr_ball

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 211 posts
  • Location:Brisvegas, Australia

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:15 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 'bear away' was from wave / wind only.

 

 

 

 

Salmon got it here....

if a collision occurred, then port was by definition NOT keeping clear enough. How can I tell? They collided

Furball 

 

I'm not sure the rule 16.2 really cares why they're was a course change,  does it?

 

As for salmon,  how incredibly simple. 

 

You go sail it, be on stb and get hit, then see which way you view it.

 

STB had the rights, port keeps clear.

 

Port had the obligation.

 

Would love to stand in a protest room and have you defend ports position based on stb breaching a rule due to the wave moving them....



#55 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:34 AM

What amazes me is why a 35 footer needs twin wheels.

 

Because without twin wheels, you're not really going to see much of the jib luff without an 8' wheel. And there isn't space for an 8' wheel. 

 

boatplan-01-large.jpg



#56 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,110 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:41 AM

I was thinking more about a tiller actually. Have you heard of them? Or are you one of these new gen hero's that have never sailed a boat with one.....

#57 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:59 AM

Remember RRS 16.1 does not mean on stb I cannot alter course to leewward

In can come down enough that your only escape route is to bear off to leeward and I am still within RRS 16.1 as long as I give you room to turn down that way.


 

You'd better read 16.2 then.  If she was already passing behind, stbd cannot bear away further.  AT-ALL.

 

Look.. When we see port in the distance, she is definitely going to pass behind stbd.

 

Stbd definitely changes course to port (whether deliberately or accidentally). You can see this relative to the headland.  This course change would have broken rule 16.2.

 

16.2 In addition, when after the starting signal a port-tack boat is keeping
clear by sailing to pass astern of a starboard-tack boat, the starboard-
tack boat shall not change course if as a result the port-tack
boat would immediately need to change course to continue keeping
clear.
 
I'm sure it was noisy, but it doesn't see like there's much action to avoid contact until 3 seconds before the collision.  No arm waving, no loud hailing, no nothing.
 
 

>and the 410 didn't look to be carrying much speed or it would have spun the 350's stern.

 

Huh! Look at the land and the boat which comes to view in the distance....given that stbd was trying to round up, and we see all that new landscape, I'd say she was pretty violently swung by the collision.  The two boats are almost 140 degrees opposite direction by the end of it!

 

And true, no flag was required.  Damage was obvious to both boats.

 

 

To me this looks like a very tight cross behind, made impossible by a late change to of course to port, by the starboard boat.

 

You are missing a couple of points Dog

 

  1. 16.2 only penalizes STB if Port has to make the course change IMMEDIATELY  -   this is underscored by Case 6 http://www.sailing.o...ook-[14819].pdf though not as clearly as it ought to have been.   Essentially Case 6 says that as long as Port didn't HAVE to make the course change IMMEDIATELY to avoid contact or foul,  STB can still make any course change she wants

    At the distance we see port,  STB could therefore have altered course quite significantly and Port still had "room" to hold her course and THEN alter it
  2. you claim Port was "passiing astern"  - look at where contact occurs.   It is at the chainplates of  STB.  Essentially at the piivot point of the hull.

    for STB to have altered course to leeward to have  contact at that point with a Port tack boat that was "sailing astern of her"  would have required that STB turn down far enough that she actually was sailing below the course of port, and then turned back up to cross Port's bow so that the keel would be crossing the bow of Port at the time of contact.  Its just the mechanics of how boats move, because if Port was ALREADY sailing astern of STB, then STB's keel was across Port's bow, and any turn to leeward that did not "retrace" STBs course backwards would not be able to put the keel on the bow of Port

 

All 16.2 says, is that if P&S are so close, that a course alteration to leeward by STB  requires port to IMMEDIATELY alter course then and only then has STB violated 16.2   Note that "Keep Clear" also means that the distance being maintained by Port is the amount of space an AVERAGE crew would need to insure no contact IN THE PREVAILING WIND AND SEA STATE.  given those waves,  an arguement can be made that this requires AT LEAST a 3 meter duck distance since the waves are moving the boats 1-2 meters per wave.  

 

IOW Port was NEVER "keeping clear"



I was thinking more about a tiller actually. Have you heard of them? Or are you one of these new gen hero's that have never sailed a boat with one.....

Well gven the way he is driving, I think that may well be the case....



#58 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 13 November 2013 - 10:51 AM

At this size range - anything 32'ish and above - wheels now massively outsell tillers. YM had some statistic, which I can't remember,  but basically, tillers are dying out on c/rs below 30'. To the extent that it's worth spending a grand or so doing a wheel conversion on second hand boats, because it'll sell much faster than a tiller boat. 

 

I see it wasn't even an option on the 350, and in the current range, wheels are standard on both the 320 and the 360. 

 

http://www.royaleagl...ist-Elan350.pdf



#59 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:25 PM

Baltic, Baltic, Baltic....


 

 
I appreciate the attempt to raise the level of this discussion to nitty gritty details, but in fact I don't agree with much of your post!
 
Strangely, I'm going to address your post in reverse order.
 

IOW Port was NEVER "keeping clear"

 

 
If AT ANY TIME Port's course would take her behind Starboard (without the need for Starboard to avoid contact), Port was keeping clear.  There is no judgement as you try to apply here.  She either was sailing to pass behind, or she was not.  If she was, she was keeping clear.
 

Note that "Keep Clear" also means that the distance being maintained by Port is the amount of space an AVERAGE crew would need to insure no contact IN THE PREVAILING WIND AND SEA STATE. 

 

 
The only mention of 'existing conditions' I can find is in the definition of 'Room'.  This is described in Case 21.
 
I don't find any mention of 'existing conditions' when describing a boat's obligation to keep clear.
 
There is no rule that says I must keep clear of starboard boat by .50m when the conditions are calm, but an extra 2.50m (3m totally) when the conditions are wavey.
 
Your Paragraph 2 - Really....your geomartry teacher ought to be sacked!  Have a look at my diagram a few posts back.
 
In position 1, Port is sailing to pass astern of both Starboards.
In position 2, Blue has 'borne away'about 30 degrees.  Yellow did not.
In position 3, Port T-Bones blue, where as Yellow passes clearly ahead by about half a boat-length.
 
So Blue's bear away resulted in a T-bone amidships.
 
Your Paragraph 1 - Yes, 16.2 requires that 'immediate' factor.  Consider this...
 
T5' = Port boat is in view about 35 degrees forward of Stbd's port beam.
T6' = Port dissappears behind the mainsail of Stbd.  As she does so, she is going forward in angle to Stbd, suggesting some bear away.  This is backed up by the headstay moving left along the land.
T9' = Stbd is maximum left of her original track.  Her bow is pointing some 20 degrees left of her original track.  One can only extrapolate that Port is some 20 degrees forward in angle.  That would make her angle 55 ahead of her beam.
T12' = Collision!  Port's bowsprit comes over the Stbd's port rail.  Not at 90 degrees but forward of 90 degrees, suggesting that one or both boats were borne off.
 
So from T9 to T12.  I would say that any action from Port during this time would have to be immediate.  No?
 
Nothing you've said has ruled out 16.2.
 
DW


#60 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,641 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:41 PM

Given that, apart from one glimpse at 5 seconds, we don't see port until the impact, AND THAT THE VIDEO IS ON A WIDE ANGLE LENS, how is everybody so sure about tracks, distances and courses? 

 

From the judge's manual: 

 

"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."

 

Is there more video somewhere that shows the 2 essential facts - how far apart the boats where when S altered course, and how much of a course alteration S made? 



#61 Tom Ray

Tom Ray

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,290 posts
  • Location:Punta Gorda FL
  • Interests:~~/)/)~~

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:50 PM

There is no rule that says I must keep clear of starboard boat by .50m when the conditions are calm, but an extra 2.50m (3m totally) when the conditions are wavey.

 

So "clear" means "clear enough for the conditions."

 

The conditions may have turned S into P's path. Meaning, P was not clear enough for the conditions.



#62 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 12:52 PM

Ed,

 

Absolutely true!

 

As always is the case, people jump to the side of RoW.  Port is the default bad guy.  Or is it that people don't fully understand the obligations of the RoW boat.

 

People are happy to tell me that I can't judge distances and angles from the video to the extent that I can incriminate Starboard.  In many ways, I'm simply turning this around, by saying....

 

...How can people be so sure that Port was in the wrong?

 

Some call this 'Devil's Advocate'.  I think its just 'open minded'.

 

So people...tell me how you can be so sure that Stbd didn't turn down, causing Port to immediately attempt to bear off more, and be compelled to break rule 10, by Starboard's change of course.

 

DW



#63 Footlong

Footlong

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,206 posts
  • Location:Lawnguyland
  • Interests:Member # 175

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:00 PM

Lots of guess-work here. Nobody knows the facts.
Does anyone know how the real-life protest was settled?

#64 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:39 PM

Baltic, Baltic, Baltic....


 

 
I appreciate the attempt to raise the level of this discussion to nitty gritty details, but in fact I don't agree with much of your post!
 
Strangely, I'm going to address your post in reverse order.
 

IOW Port was NEVER "keeping clear"

 

 
If AT ANY TIME Port's course would take her behind Starboard (without the need for Starboard to avoid contact), Port was keeping clear.  There is no judgement as you try to apply here.  She either was sailing to pass behind, or she was not.  If she was, she was keeping clear.
 
... ...

 

 

Dog, dog, dog... if the two boats collided, then the give-way boat was not keeping clear.

 

Period

 

It -might- be that actions by the R-O-W boat prevented her from keeping clear, but the basic fact is that she has not kept clear.

 

And btw for all your diagramming and fancy geometry, in the video the Port boat hit starboard amidships. AMIDSHIPS! How the heck do you figure she was steering a course to pass astern... and missing it by 20 feet??

 

 

 

There is no rule that says I must keep clear of starboard boat by .50m when the conditions are calm, but an extra 2.50m (3m totally) when the conditions are wavey.

 

So "clear" means "clear enough for the conditions."

 

The conditions may have turned S into P's path. Meaning, P was not clear enough for the conditions.

 

Bingo

 

And Dog, playing Devil's Advocate is good, looking at alternatives is good, but you don't want to keep such an open mind that your brains fall out.

 

FB- Doug



#65 phillysailor

phillysailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:51 PM

Ed,

 

Absolutely true!

 

As always is the case, people jump to the side of RoW.  Port is the default bad guy.  Or is it that people don't fully understand the obligations of the RoW boat.

 

People are happy to tell me that I can't judge distances and angles from the video to the extent that I can incriminate Starboard.  In many ways, I'm simply turning this around, by saying....

 

...How can people be so sure that Port was in the wrong?

 

Some call this 'Devil's Advocate'.  I think its just 'open minded'.

 

So people...tell me how you can be so sure that Stbd didn't turn down, causing Port to immediately attempt to bear off more, and be compelled to break rule 10, by Starboard's change of course.

 

DW

Every dog has its day, but this ain't it.

 

We don't have to be "so sure that Stbd didn't turn down". You would have to prove, with irrefutable evidence, that Starboard DID turn down, to even make an argument that port was fouled. 

 

You are making this argument without the evidence, and thereby show lack of understanding of "Right of Way." Starboard DOESNT have to prove they fulfilled the burden of the Stand-on vessel, Port HAS TO show starboard was clearly turning down. The onus being on port means that to make the argument demands having the evidence. It ain't in the video, so it ain't in the thread! All that remains is the devil's advocate, and this ain't his day.



#66 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 02:50 PM


And "keep clear" is indeed defined, check your rule book. It's defined as the R-O-W boat being able to change course without risk of collision.

 

 

sorry

[Pedantic] the change course bit only applies when the boats are overlapped, in this situation P and S where not overlapped (by definition) and therefore only part a of the definition of keep clear aplieas [/pedantic]

 

 

Keep Clear
A boat keeps clear of a right-of-way boat
(a) if the right-of-way boat can sail her course with no need to take avoiding action and,
( B) when the boats are overlapped, if the right-of-way boat can also change course in both directions without immediately making contact.
 

In this case I don't believe it matters, but its worth remembering particularly with respect to R16.1.

(and the main reason I know this is because I have got it wrong the the past :) )

 

 

Thanks... I know I've fussed in the past about quoting rules exaclty so this is good... this is good... :(

 

The problem is that if you quote the definition exactly, there's nothing in there about smashing into the R-O-W boat with such force as to knock the helmsman off his feet; so maybe Port kept clear after all !!!

 

FB- Doug



#67 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:01 PM

Thanks Philly.

 

I'm interested in how you can be so determined about the burden of proof in sailing disputes.

 

Port HAS TO show starboard was clearly turning down. The onus being on port means...

 

I never thought this burden existed.  (See below..)

 

ISAF Judges Handbook
 
9.18 Hearing Procedure: Finding the Facts
In almost all cases the differences of opinion are settled by the quality of the
evidence. The racing rules do not give the onus of proof to one boat or the other. Port
is not required to prove she kept clear of starboard. A protest committee is required
to consider all the evidence, consider who was in the best position to determine what
happened, determine which evidence is more credible, then decide the facts of the
incident.
 
 
 
There is no onus on any boat to prove facts in a protest....

 

JohnMB http://forums.sailin...50#entry3399610

 

"as it stands there is no side with the burden of proof, the PC has to ask questions, until it feels it can make up its mind."

 

SteamFlyer

 

"Yep, pretty much correct.


There is no onus any more, no burden of proof in a situation like this. The Protest Committee would do their best to find the actual facts of the incident. "

 

etc...etc...

 

Thanks anyway.

 

(Yeah, I'm being patronisingly polite.  There is no burden of proof in sailing, other than rule 69.)  Humble pie, maybe!

 

As for evidence, I can only go by what I see in the video.

 

 

 

 

------------------------

 

And btw for all your diagramming and fancy geometry, in the video the Port boat hit starboard amidships. AMIDSHIPS! How the heck do you figure she was steering a course to pass astern... and missing it by 20 feet??

See the diagram!



#68 radicalmove

radicalmove

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:13 PM

Maybe they're using a different rule book in Croatia.
(I know Elan's are built in Slovenia, but the flag
on the stern of boat is Croatian)

#69 Remodel

Remodel

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,144 posts
  • Location:None
  • Interests:Sailboat racing and long distance cruising

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:32 PM

1:24: Good thing you opted for the rubber wheel.

OOF!

 

Nice catch. I amazed it didn't snap off.



#70 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:37 PM

For those unsure of how port could have hit amidships....or for those unsure how 30 degrees bear away is the difference between collision or not....

Attached Files

  • Attached File  B.gif   823.78K   73 downloads


#71 JohnMB

JohnMB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,140 posts
  • Location:Evanston
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:43 PM

The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 

 

Your diagrams both rely on port doing much less steering than S.

 

They also rely on pretty high speeds to suggest that there was no time to react. (around 15 kts upwind)

 

For the PC to conclude that S broke R16.1 its not enough to find that S changed course and that P hit her. They also need  to find that P could not have avoided her.

I don't see anything in any argument you have presented so far which would allow a PC to conclude that P was not able to keep clear.

 

The facts will clearly show that P did not keep clear.



#72 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 03:51 PM



The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 
 
Your diagrams both rely on port doing much less steering than S.
 
They also rely on pretty high speeds to suggest that there was no time to react. (around 15 kts upwind)
 
For the PC to conclude that S broke R16.1 its not enough to find that S changed course and that P hit her. They also need  to find that P could not have avoided her.
I don't see anything in any argument you have presented so far which would allow a PC to conclude that P was not able to keep clear.
 
The facts will clearly show that P did not keep clear.
Unfortunately,  what I can't show in the animation  (due to upload limit) is a frame just before  what you see.  Also, I can't control the speed.
 
That would be the moment when Port bears away to sail astern. 
 
If Port does so before Stbd,  then I suggest that Stbd broke 16.2.  No different from the AC dial down scenario. 
 
Again,  I haven't  mentioned 16.1. Read my posts.  16.2.

16.2 relies on scrutinising the actions of Stbd.

#73 JohnMB

JohnMB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,140 posts
  • Location:Evanston
  • Interests:Sailing

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:13 PM

 



The difference between holding your course and bearing away.

 
 
Your diagrams both rely on port doing much less steering than S.
 
They also rely on pretty high speeds to suggest that there was no time to react. (around 15 kts upwind)
 
For the PC to conclude that S broke R16.1 its not enough to find that S changed course and that P hit her. They also need  to find that P could not have avoided her.
I don't see anything in any argument you have presented so far which would allow a PC to conclude that P was not able to keep clear.
 
The facts will clearly show that P did not keep clear.
Unfortunately,  what I can't show in the animation  (due to upload limit) is a frame just before  what you see.  Also, I can't control the speed.
 
That would be the moment when Port bears away to sail astern. 
 
If Port does so before Stbd,  then I suggest that Stbd broke 16.2.  No different from the AC dial down scenario. 
 
Again,  I haven't  mentioned 16.1. Read my posts.  16.2.

16.2 relies on scrutinising the actions of Stbd.

 

No 16.2 still requires that P must act IMMEDIATELY. if P does not act at all, S does not break R16.2 (unless P has absolutely NO time to act which is not the case here)

 

 

what are you suggesting P claims? "well there was no way to avoid except by bearing away as soon as S changed course ... so we decided not to bother and speared the fucker..."

 

as for speed... control of speed is simple.... don't make you boats move so far between frames......(i know is a psychological trick, but having the boats spaced further makes it seem more reasonable to say there was not enough time.... your brain translates the distance between each successive number as a speed.)



#74 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,705 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:21 PM

I'm just amazed how you guys can judge anything at all from that video... About the only things I'd trust to learn from it were that S was on starboard and P was on port, and that the initial collision was well forward of the cockpit. Maybe you guys are all much cleverer than me, or else...



#75 Bulbhunter

Bulbhunter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,695 posts
  • Interests:SA is DEAD

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:39 PM

Given that, apart from one glimpse at 5 seconds, we don't see port until the impact, AND THAT THE VIDEO IS ON A WIDE ANGLE LENS, how is everybody so sure about tracks, distances and courses? 

 

From the judge's manual: 

 

"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."

 

Is there more video somewhere that shows the 2 essential facts - how far apart the boats where when S altered course, and how much of a course alteration S made? 

They are not sure, no possible way to suggest it was anything other than a P Vs S crash and burn. Maybe the 350 just rounded up prior to the video clip and the helm and the crew were mid recovery when they realized that the 410 did not see them, or had figured they were clear because 30 seconds earlier they were clearing prior to the round up etc. Way to many ARM CHAIR sailors missing FAR FAR FAR TOO much video to suggest anything other than yep two boats P Vs S collision. BTW neither boat appeared to be moving very fast I've seen J/24's hit FAR FAR harder than that.



#76 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:40 PM

I'm just amazed how you guys can judge anything at all from that video... About the only things I'd trust to learn from it were that S was on starboard and P was on port, and that the initial collision was well forward of the cockpit. Maybe you guys are all much cleverer than me, or else...

 

 

Because a day without arguing on the internet is like a day without sunsh... oh wait...

 

FB- Doug



#77 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:45 PM

Baltic, Baltic, Baltic....


 

 
I appreciate the attempt to raise the level of this discussion to nitty gritty details, but in fact I don't agree with much of your post!
 
Strangely, I'm going to address your post in reverse order.
 

IOW Port was NEVER "keeping clear"

 

 
If AT ANY TIME Port's course would take her behind Starboard (without the need for Starboard to avoid contact), Port was keeping clear.  There is no judgement as you try to apply here.  She either was sailing to pass behind, or she was not.  If she was, she was keeping clear.
 

>Note that "Keep Clear" also means that the distance being maintained by Port is the amount of space an AVERAGE crew would need to insure no contact IN THE PREVAILING WIND AND SEA STATE. 

 

 
The only mention of 'existing conditions' I can find is in the definition of 'Room'.  This is described in Case 21.
 
I don't find any mention of 'existing conditions' when describing a boat's obligation to keep clear.
 
There is no rule that says I must keep clear of starboard boat by .50m when the conditions are calm, but an extra 2.50m (3m totally) when the conditions are wavey.
 
Your Paragraph 2 - Really....your geomartry teacher ought to be sacked!  Have a look at my diagram a few posts back.
 
In position 1, Port is sailing to pass astern of both Starboards.
In position 2, Blue has 'borne away'about 30 degrees.  Yellow did not.
In position 3, Port T-Bones blue, where as Yellow passes clearly ahead by about half a boat-length.
 
So Blue's bear away resulted in a T-bone amidships.
 
Your Paragraph 1 - Yes, 16.2 requires that 'immediate' factor.  Consider this...
 
T5' = Port boat is in view about 35 degrees forward of Stbd's port beam.
T6' = Port dissappears behind the mainsail of Stbd.  As she does so, she is going forward in angle to Stbd, suggesting some bear away.  This is backed up by the headstay moving left along the land.
T9' = Stbd is maximum left of her original track.  Her bow is pointing some 20 degrees left of her original track.  One can only extrapolate that Port is some 20 degrees forward in angle.  That would make her angle 55 ahead of her beam.
T12' = Collision!  Port's bowsprit comes over the Stbd's port rail.  Not at 90 degrees but forward of 90 degrees, suggesting that one or both boats were borne off.
 
So from T9 to T12.  I would say that any action from Port during this time would have to be immediate.  No?
 
Nothing you've said has ruled out 16.2.
 
DW

 

Dog Dog dog

 

I'll takke them iin the order you addressed

 

Port Was keeping Clear of STB

 

Well only kinda.  Its true that until she came within 10 meters of STB she could have been sailing pretty any course she wanted to and be seen to be "keeping clear".   But at those wind, sea and boatspeed conditons, if she was "bow to bow with STB at 10m and STB "turned her helm to port"  there would have been "immmediate" contact" and thus from the time Port is within 10m of Stb - what constitutes "keeping clear"  necessarily INCLUDES the room STB needs to "turn in either direction without immediately making contact" 

 

So now consider the case of Port having her bow 0.5 M off the stern quarter of S.   Just as a puff hits, and a wave lifts S stern and S luffs up (say to avoid a log).  in less than a second (and "immediiately" in the rules is basically anything under 3 seconds)  S's stern gets thrown onto P, even if P does not get rounded up by the puff  which she likely would be. 

Now what if P sails this close and passes astern of S with no Contact? Isn't that evidence that P was "keepng clear"  No it is not.  it is only evidence that S gave P "room to keep clear"  but S could well protest P even if no such contact took place and no course alteration took place.  I learned this one the hard way with Dick Rose as one of the Protest Committee judges.  circumstances were slightly diff.  But even though I was crosssing by a good 10' across the bow of the other boat - the relatively green driver of the other boat thought there was a chance of contact and bore off and protested.  I lost.  Dick's point was that if the skipper had altered course to weather, there would have been immediate contact and thus I was not "keeping clear" even though S was constrained not to alter course.

 

The Great Sack of R.E. Bell Math Teachers

(R.E. Bell was my middle school where we started geometry) - in your diagram - blue sails a slightly shorter course than the other two tracks,  by about 1/4 of a BL - which would mean contact would not occur midships but slightly aft

 

Secondly, it doesn't matter if S bears off.  S has a right to bear off.  Case 6 says that S ONLY infringes P if P's reaction must occur IMMEDIATELY.   And that would mean a situation where P is within 10m of S.  And there are 6 seconds between the time the bow of S falls off (note that S's helm NEVER alters to leeward in those 6 seconds in fact it alters fairly strongly to weather  and then again even more to weather when collission appear immiinent).  So that means that P did not have to make any course change IMMEDIATELY.

 

also the time from the moment the bow moves to leeward to contact is 6 seconds.   This is an Elan 35.  Waterline of roughly 30' I'm going to guess they are doing about 5-6 knots of boat speed.  or roughly 7'/sec.  so in 6 seconds they will have travelled 35'-40'  And we see the other boat about 60' away (2 BL)

Now assuming both boats are making 45 degree CMG (about right for those conditions)  S would have to lose a minimum of 20' of distance (assuming P was keeping clear and held her course)    to have P go from "keeping clear astern" to contact at the shrouds. 
.
now because they are sailing at roughly 90 degrees to each other that's the same as S altering course 20' closer to P.    So if we draw the resulting right triangle, then one leg is 20'  the other is 40'    Thats a 1:2:SQRT(3) triangle  So that means that S would have had to alter course 30 degrees to port to cause P to go from "Keeping Clear" to hitting where she hit. 

 

Now in the video we see AT MOST a 10 degree fall off.  if you do those numbers, a 10 degree fall off (and thats generous)  means AT MOST a lost of 14'.    and in fact if these boats were sailing higher than 45 deg CMG then the loss of distance from that turn down is even less - as little as 10'

 

So there was no way P was on a geometric course to sail astern of S.

 

Dog bone Geometry

First off setting aside that there is no 20 degree fall off it is at most 10 - lets look at the nunbers if it was a 20 deg fall off.  OK  so

Tan(20) = 0.36

Denom = 40' traveled

Height lost = 40 x 0.36 == 14.4'    

 

BUT P hits S  MORE THAN 14' from the stern. 

 

even if you say the initial contact is at 14 ' from the stern

  1. Since the turn down is not instantaneous you lose less than 14'
  2. Since the turn down occurs at 2BL separation there is no need for P to make an IMMEDIATE course change to drop an addiitonal 14'

 

 

so Dog, the Geometry just doesn't work



#78 Big Show

Big Show

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Location:T'ic' o' Fog

Posted 13 November 2013 - 05:35 PM

Ed,

 

Absolutely true!

 

As always is the case, people jump to the side of RoW.  Port is the default bad guy.  Or is it that people don't fully understand the obligations of the RoW boat.

 

People are happy to tell me that I can't judge distances and angles from the video to the extent that I can incriminate Starboard.  In many ways, I'm simply turning this around, by saying....

 

...How can people be so sure that Port was in the wrong?

 

Some call this 'Devil's Advocate'.  I think its just 'open minded'.

 

So people...tell me how you can be so sure that Stbd didn't turn down, causing Port to immediately attempt to bear off more, and be compelled to break rule 10, by Starboard's change of course.

 

DW

Apologies Dogwatch but you seem to fundamentally misunderstand some key nuances of the RRS and certainly how boats actually interact on the water. While all of us can appreciate you playing devil's advocate you seem to struggle with the application of section A 'right of way' and section B 'general limitations' RRS. 

 

Take 'obligation' right out of your vernacular when describing the RoW boat. It is the RoW boat that has the rights outlined in RRS 10-13 with limitations as set by RRS 14-17. 

 

Carry on but please do not ever refer to the 'obligation' of a right of way boat. I would suggest you should be speaking of their rights and the limitations to those rights. 

 

As for this situation, starboard does nothing with the helm the would prevent a port boat paying attention from keeping clear in a seamanlike manner. If a wave or gust alone prevents port from keeping clear guess what? 

 

Port fucked up, didn't keep clear and should pay for everything and buy a round of drinks and I can guarantee you all will be forgiven. It's that simple. Accidents happen. In fact the only thing I can be sure of in this video is that starboard didn't turn down. 

 

Rights, limitations and obligations. To whom when - it matters. 



#79 phillysailor

phillysailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 06:23 PM

Dog Watch : Thanks for showing me the error of my ways. I thought that a Protest Committee would need compelling evidence to grant a Port tacker the right to T-bone a Starboard tacker and not be DSQ'd. Turns out port should claim they've been fouled and fly a protest flag! Get out the rule book, examine it for loophole nuances that don't (or shouldn't) exist, and let the PC figure it out, after reviewing all available evidence.

 

What shiite. This incident should be "sorted out" on the water, with port going home and buying beers for starboard with checkbook in hand. If a hearing is commenced, port should state, "I hit 'em while on port. I then stopped racing and withdrew." 



#80 MT14er

MT14er

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:MT
  • Interests:14s Forever!

Posted 13 November 2013 - 08:39 PM

Here's my take, starboard is going really freaking slow (possibly just tacked?) with sails not trimmed well for acceleration.  Port see starboard but doesn't register that starboard is going sideways just as fast as she's going forward.  Based on the direction that starboard is pointing, port assumes they will pass well astern.  Port looks down and checks his trim or watch or beer, then looks up and has just enough time to think WTF before hitting starboard.  Port is at fault for hitting starboard who was technically not doing anything wrong, just sailing shitty.    



#81 Bus Driver

Bus Driver

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,465 posts
  • Location:Just this side of insanity.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:54 PM

Here's my take, starboard is going really freaking slow (possibly just tacked?) with sails not trimmed well for acceleration.  Port see starboard but doesn't register that starboard is going sideways just as fast as she's going forward.  Based on the direction that starboard is pointing, port assumes they will pass well astern.  Port looks down and checks his trim or watch or beer, then looks up and has just enough time to think WTF before hitting starboard.  Port is at fault for hitting starboard who was technically not doing anything wrong, just sailing shitty.    

 

The red words are a rules violation.  The green words aren't.



#82 MT14er

MT14er

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:MT
  • Interests:14s Forever!

Posted 13 November 2013 - 10:05 PM

Here's my take, starboard is going really freaking slow (possibly just tacked?) with sails not trimmed well for acceleration.  Port see starboard but doesn't register that starboard is going sideways just as fast as she's going forward.  Based on the direction that starboard is pointing, port assumes they will pass well astern.  Port looks down and checks his trim or watch or beer, then looks up and has just enough time to think WTF before hitting starboard.  Port is at fault for hitting starboard who was technically not doing anything wrong, just sailing shitty.    

 

The red words are a rules violation.  The green words aren't.

 

Exactly.



#83 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 13 November 2013 - 11:59 PM

Ok, I have 2 busy days ahead, and clearly am not getting through so in closing from me...

JohnMb, don't put words into my mouth. Port was sailing to pass astern. Starboard unexpectedly bore away, requiring Port to immediately bear away further. Port attempted said continued move and could not successfully keep clear. That's what I'm saying.


Baltic, way too much.

Big Show, I don't think a limitation is too different to an obligation, deepening in the reference frame... But let's not go there. Anyway, things are pretty storage when you have to resort to arguing semantics.

Philly, sorry, but given a direct extract from isaf, to continue along your lines is pretty weak!

Last word

Clearly, people seem convinced is Port, but unwilling to accept the us not enough evidence to say either way.

That to me is a laughable to me as some have laughed at me! Red and green texts above? Whatever!

My last word ;

NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO MAKE A DECISION!

Thanks.

#84 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 14 November 2013 - 01:24 AM

Ok, I have 2 busy days ahead, and clearly am not getting through so in closing from me...

JohnMb, don't put words into my mouth. Port was sailing to pass astern. Starboard unexpectedly bore away, requiring Port to immediately bear away further. Port attempted said continued move and could not successfully keep clear. That's what I'm saying.

... ...

 

???

 

There is NO reason to state "Port was sailing to pass astern." The video barely gives a glimpse of Port before the collision

 

There is little reason to state "Starboard unexpectedly bore away" when there is little evidence in the video other than that Stb was heeling a lot and bouncing on the waves.

 

There is NO reason to state "Port attempted said continued move" (bearing away)

 

In short DW your entire case against Stb is based on a very very dubious supposition and total fantasy.

 

 

... ... ...

My last word ;

NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO MAKE A DECISION!

Thanks.

 

Well, that's kinda funny, there is PLENTY of evidence that Port fouled Stb; in the absence of evidence to support your claim about Stb breaking R16.2 (changing course and not allowing room to keep clear), the only decision that makes even a tiny bit of sense is to DSQ Port.

 

I agree with your contention that a Protest Committee must look at any evidence that a R-O-W boat broke a rule, but in this case there isn't any. All we got is the video.

 

FB- Doug



#85 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,110 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:46 AM

Here is my take on the whole thing. The Starboard tacker being an Élan 350 shitbox was factoring his shitbox's massive leeway and pinching like shit to compensate, (because he bought an Élan, we can assume he is clueless. Nothing in the video would suggest otherwise.) The Port tacker also was factoring in the Élan 350 shitbox's massive leeway and had determined that he would cross ahead. However he had forgotten that his Élan 410 was an even bigger shitbox with even greater leeway. (Again due to his choice of boat we can assume he was equally as clueless as the 350 owner but slightly wealthier.) He then hit him amidships. The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.



#86 The Main Man

The Main Man

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 525 posts
  • Location:Blighty

Posted 14 November 2013 - 12:45 PM

Here is my take on the whole thing. The Starboard tacker being an Élan 350 shitbox was factoring his shitbox's massive leeway and pinching like shit to compensate, (because he bought an Élan, we can assume he is clueless. Nothing in the video would suggest otherwise.) The Port tacker also was factoring in the Élan 350 shitbox's massive leeway and had determined that he would cross ahead. However he had forgotten that his Élan 410 was an even bigger shitbox with even greater leeway. (Again due to his choice of boat we can assume he was equally as clueless as the 350 owner but slightly wealthier.) He then hit him amidships. The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

 

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.

 

 

Best post of the entire thread otherwise I'd have just wasted 15 mins of my life. Thankyou! :D



#87 Clove Hitch

Clove Hitch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,846 posts
  • Location:around and about
  • Interests:Garnacha. Gunk-holing.

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:26 PM

The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

 

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.

 

Ever since the Archduke got killed, there's always been a danger of ethnic cleansing around the buoys.



#88 fastyacht

fastyacht

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:32 PM

Are you implying the 350 was Ustachi then?   Does this technically end the validity of this thread on the basis of Godwin's law?



#89 Parma

Parma

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 02:46 PM

anybody who thinks that port was not 100% at fault should not be allowed to sail



#90 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,631 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 14 November 2013 - 03:34 PM

Here is my take on the whole thing. The Starboard tacker being an Élan 350 shitbox was factoring his shitbox's massive leeway and pinching like shit to compensate, (because he bought an Élan, we can assume he is clueless. Nothing in the video would suggest otherwise.) The Port tacker also was factoring in the Élan 350 shitbox's massive leeway and had determined that he would cross ahead. However he had forgotten that his Élan 410 was an even bigger shitbox with even greater leeway. (Again due to his choice of boat we can assume he was equally as clueless as the 350 owner but slightly wealthier.) He then hit him amidships. The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

 

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.

 

 

Couple years back, there were a few Southern Baptist congregations that tried settling a disagreement by racing boats... ended up pretty much the same way...

 

FB- Doug



#91 gregj1

gregj1

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 03:42 PM

Dog Watch : Thanks for showing me the error of my ways. I thought that a Protest Committee would need compelling evidence to grant a Port tacker the right to T-bone a Starboard tacker and not be DSQ'd. Turns out port should claim they've been fouled and fly a protest flag! Get out the rule book, examine it for loophole nuances that don't (or shouldn't) exist, and let the PC figure it out, after reviewing all available evidence.

 

What shiite. This incident should be "sorted out" on the water, with port going home and buying beers for starboard with checkbook in hand. If a hearing is commenced, port should state, "I hit 'em while on port. I then stopped racing and withdrew." 

+1



#92 Joli

Joli

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,714 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:04 PM

I agree stb hunted.  It may be legal but it's a bone head move that probably caused the collision.



#93 fastyacht

fastyacht

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:23 PM

STBD is going sideways at the beginning of the footage.  It isn't hunting, it was stalling out.  Port TAck in the wrong.  Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick, this is so fucking ridiculous!



#94 fila

fila

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:42 PM

just for info, E410 from video allmost sank, as that one was hit by another 410 astern... that is why they hit a 350 few more times...and ther was a third port tacker that actually clean 350 astern... but it was fun reading what was 'dinosaurus on Venera' theory...



#95 Big Show

Big Show

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,386 posts
  • Location:T'ic' o' Fog

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:18 PM

Here is my take on the whole thing. The Starboard tacker being an Élan 350 shitbox was factoring his shitbox's massive leeway and pinching like shit to compensate, (because he bought an Élan, we can assume he is clueless. Nothing in the video would suggest otherwise.) The Port tacker also was factoring in the Élan 350 shitbox's massive leeway and had determined that he would cross ahead. However he had forgotten that his Élan 410 was an even bigger shitbox with even greater leeway. (Again due to his choice of boat we can assume he was equally as clueless as the 350 owner but slightly wealthier.) He then hit him amidships. The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

 

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.

Bestest!



#96 Bulbhunter

Bulbhunter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,695 posts
  • Interests:SA is DEAD

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:32 PM

Here is my take on the whole thing. The Starboard tacker being an Élan 350 shitbox was factoring his shitbox's massive leeway and pinching like shit to compensate, (because he bought an Élan, we can assume he is clueless. Nothing in the video would suggest otherwise.) The Port tacker also was factoring in the Élan 350 shitbox's massive leeway and had determined that he would cross ahead. However he had forgotten that his Élan 410 was an even bigger shitbox with even greater leeway. (Again due to his choice of boat we can assume he was equally as clueless as the 350 owner but slightly wealthier.) He then hit him amidships. The Serbian owner of the 410 then recognised the Croatian owner of the 350 and tries to repeatedly drive the bowsprit through his head, and then the Croatian owner of the 350 ran below to get his gun.

 

The protest was held in the streets outside of the yacht club but was broken up with tear gas and water cannons.

Bestest!

He clearly has never been to Croatia of all the places I've been Croatia probably had some of the best sailors and nicest people I've had the pleasure to sail, drink and socialize with.

 

If this was the big Elan once a year regatta all of the boats or at least 99% of them are charter boats and they Sail a hell of alot better than the Beneteau boats.



#97 Life Buoy 15

Life Buoy 15

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,110 posts
  • Location:The great southern land

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:59 PM

Done a bareboat charter in Croatia have we Princess, you little world traveler you! Lighten up Francis, it a was a joke. Like you saying how good Elan's are. You are a funny guy Bulbhead!



#98 Bulbhunter

Bulbhunter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,695 posts
  • Interests:SA is DEAD

Posted 14 November 2013 - 06:12 PM

Done a bareboat charter in Croatia have we Princess, you little world traveler you! Lighten up Francis, it a was a joke. Like you saying how good Elan's are. You are a funny guy Bulbhead!

I haven't seen much joking period on this thread just a bunch of critics with no idea what took place.



#99 MR.CLEAN

MR.CLEAN

    Anarchist

  • Reporters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,001 posts
  • Location:Everywhere you want to be
  • Interests:.

Posted 14 November 2013 - 06:13 PM

That's because you are an idiot.

 

Done a bareboat charter in Croatia have we Princess, you little world traveler you! Lighten up Francis, it a was a joke. Like you saying how good Elan's are. You are a funny guy Bulbhead!

I haven't seen much joking period on this thread just a bunch of critics with no idea what took place.



#100 Bulbhunter

Bulbhunter

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,695 posts
  • Interests:SA is DEAD

Posted 14 November 2013 - 06:17 PM

just for info, E410 from video allmost sank, as that one was hit by another 410 astern... that is why they hit a 350 few more times...and ther was a third port tacker that actually clean 350 astern... but it was fun reading what was 'dinosaurus on Venera' theory...

OMG!!! Say it isn't so? You mean there was way more taking place than the video shows? Wow Who would have figured that?

 

Some Times SA fails the stink test.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users