jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 18 minutes ago, corkob said: If the competitors knew it was against the rules to have the AIS turned off they may have decided to keep their powder dry.... as Blackjack did. ^^^This when they do not want to lodge a protest themselves but simply make the RC aware at the other end and leave it to the RC to do the heavy lifting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 The protest is due to start at 1.00pm local time?? That’s in half a hour. Can’t imagine it will take long. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maw 18 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 I find it difficult to believe a failure is not evident. Doesn't everyone have a copy of ProAis2 on the PC as a minimum? Its part of our checks before a race, and it would be very wrong to say we're a pro boat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
evenflow 8 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 It seems too bad to me. If they turned it off intentionally they are idiots, if it failed, then you’d wonder why A $250 handheld VHF with AIS wasn’t used as a substitute? I am surprised a land / support crew didn’t say a word either - it speaks volumes about preparation? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, random said: Outside Assistance it's a bit uncertain... _unsolicited_ outside assistance does not necessarily violate a rule - if someone on a nearby boat yells "hey, your spinsheet is dragging" you don't have to retire one issue would be whether "significant" advantage was gained by the unsolicited assistance - if it was then dsq or retirement might be required. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just looked at the recent AIS position for Wild Oats XI. It shows it working in Hobart an hour ago. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
savoir 182 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 It might be a good idea to clarify exactly what we know about the WO AIS usage. I am relying on Marinetraffic so hopefully they got it right. The unit was first turned on at 11.08 am on Boxing Day which was probably when the boat was started up to leave the dock. It was on briefly again at 12.23 pm when WO was directly west of Bradleys Head. That is a popular place for competitors to raise their mainsails when the breeze is in the east. You get both flat water and a lee shore providing light air. Vila would have been far too important for a menial task such as pulling ropes so he probably made himself scarce and went below for final checks. He turned the AIS on at 12.23, confirmed it was working in both receive and transmit and turned it off for the rest of the race. WO left no track on Marinetraffic. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
savoir 182 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, random said: Outside Assistance Correct Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richiec 47 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 hours ago, Mahina said: When will the RC file a protest against Infotrack for the same breach? Blackjack only reported WOIX but not Infotrack who was also racing beside them and not transmitting but finished 2 places behind so I suppose nothing to be gained there. And how many others through the fleet went stealth? They should all get the same treatment as wild oats XI. Should fifth place protest Infotrack? Why not? This is why the whole thing is a debacle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gweudo in oz 10 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Disappointed not to have heard a comment from the "boats owner" other maxi owners seem to be able to provide comments to the media on various topics when requested or required Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, richiec said: This is why the whole thing is a debacle. No it's not. It's how the sport works. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richiec 47 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 So if 30 boats did the same thing. They all get flicked? A third of the fleet? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
axolotl 156 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, TPG said: Regardless of "safety situations" please point out the rules violation. Given Richos track record lately it's a small wonder he hasnt mouthed off at the owner. He wouldn't be the first. Duh. Regardless of safety the SIs clearly stated AIS Class-B transmissions were to be on during the entire race. I'm not saying that was a good or bad idea, just that clearly WO violated the SIs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 7 minutes ago, us7070 said: it's a bit uncertain... _unsolicited_ outside assistance does not necessarily violate a rule - if someone on a nearby boat yells "hey, your spinsheet is dragging" you don't have to retire one issue would be whether "significant" advantage was gained by the unsolicited assistance - if it was then dsq or retirement might be required. Your post has two 'if's in it. I rest my case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 hours ago, Mahina said: When will the RC file a protest against Infotrack for the same breach? Blackjack only reported WOIX but not Infotrack who was also racing beside them and not transmitting but finished 2 places behind so I suppose nothing to be gained there. 48 minutes ago, Duck said: Will the RC go through all the starters and check that AIS was on and hand them all the same penalty? 46 minutes ago, us7070 said: i don't think they are obligated to go out and look for evidence of wrong doing - but when presented with it they have to act US is correct. The RC is the prosecutor (IJ the Judge) not the policeman. This is a self policed sport where outside mandatory inspections etc competitors are the the police. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, richiec said: And how many others through the fleet went stealth? They should all get the same treatment as wild oats XI. Should fifth place protest Infotrack? Why not? This is why the whole thing is a debacle. If the Jury decides against WOXI then infotrack will have to fall on their sword. Simple. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, random said: Your post has two 'if's in it. I rest my case. how about you just read the rule..? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, richiec said: So if 30 boats did the same thing. They all get flicked? A third of the fleet? So you are putting a case forward that if enough of the fleet broke the same rule then it's officially a 'debacle' and all is forgiven? That what you are saying? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Left Shift 2,875 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, us7070 said: it's a bit uncertain... _unsolicited_ outside assistance does not necessarily violate a rule - if someone on a nearby boat yells "hey, your spinsheet is dragging" you don't have to retire one issue would be whether "significant" advantage was gained by the unsolicited assistance - if it was then dsq or retirement might be required. This was asked and answered during the VOR. RC asked, pointedly, if a boat was "aware" of a certain reef. The boat took a hard left turn and stumbled into a sweet shift - outhouse to penthouse. The IJ said no foul, as the advice was given by a disinterested party and the advantage ultimately gained was not apparent at the time of their course change. Could the same call have been made by a competitor? I've done it, unsolicited, on an open channel ,probably saved a competitor a large yard bill, and no one gave me any grief. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, Gweudo in oz said: Disappointed not to have heard a comment from the "boats owner" Too busy working out whether he should use a belt or tie, or just jump off the Tasman Bridge. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 I disagree that this is a debacle. The rules are clear, and they have clearly been broken. Only the penalty is in question. If they are not flicked a position I would be surprised. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, us7070 said: how about you just read the rule..? Your post started with 11 minutes ago, us7070 said: it's a bit uncertain... I agree. Why would you risk a foul in that case? Case closed Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cap't Billy 2 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said: US is correct. The RC is the prosecutor (IJ the Judge) not the policeman. This is a self policed sport where outside mandatory inspections etc competitors are the the police. I'm trying to figure out how the Race Committee is an interested party? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, richiec said: And how many others through the fleet went stealth? They should all get the same treatment as wild oats XI. Should fifth place protest Infotrack? Why not? This is why the whole thing is a debacle Debacle. You clearly haven't got a clue about RRS and how they are policed. enforced and determined. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, Cap't Billy said: I'm trying to figure out how the Race Committee is an interested party? why? the RRS explicitly give the RC the right to file a protest... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 11 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said: US is correct. The RC is the prosecutor (IJ the Judge) not the policeman. This is a self policed sport where outside mandatory inspections etc competitors are the the police. 5 minutes ago, Cap't Billy said: I'm trying to figure out how the Race Committee is an interested party? They are not an "interested party" or in other words have no interest in any outcome. "Interested parties" are competitors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
leaky 1 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 I just want to thank this guy for consistently providing us with such superb entertainment. 2017 port starboard - why bother doing a 720 when Im so always right 2018 -Pleading ignorance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 it's time to get your predictions in... here's mine: 30min on elapsed time Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 It never ceases to amaze me how these protests, in a competition where sportsmanship is so important, result in lies being spouted like there is no tomorrow. I have witnessed protests where it is difficult to tell if the opposing parties were even in the same race not to mind involved in the same incident such is the propensity to generate porkies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
leaky 1 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, us7070 said: it's time to get your predictions in... 60 minutes would be consistent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, corkob said: It never ceases to amaze me how these protests, in a competition where sportsmanship is so important, result in lies being spouted like there is no tomorrow. I have witnessed protests where it is difficult to tell if the opposing parties were even in the same race not to mind involved in the same incident such is the propensity to generate porkies. Completely agree. Earthlings lie. In a race where a leader rolled the top mark. It rotated 360 degrees with big black vertical stripes on it to make sure you could see it. Nice guy, he just completely denied he was even close to it. Sport brings that out in some people. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HILLY 31 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 16 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said: ^^^This when they do not want to lodge a protest themselves but simply make the RC aware at the other end and leave it to the RC to do the heavy lifting. And this is where the can of worms just got bigger... As Random is so fond of pointing out :" If I saw two boats involved in an infringement, aand there was no protest, I would protest both of them". So Blackjack has known of this infrinement since the start, they believe it has impeded them, yet they failed to inform the boat of its transgression, (vhf 16 mandatory ON for race). See RRS BASIC PRINCIPLES, also RRS Part 1; para 2. Ok Random, now are you going to unwad your panties and initiate a 3rd party rule 69 infringement? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, corkob said: It never ceases to amaze me how these protests, in a competition where sportsmanship is so important, result in lies being spouted like there is no tomorrow. I have witnessed protests where it is difficult to tell if the opposing parties were even in the same race not to mind involved in the same incident such is the propensity to generate porkies. i do PC i have seen the same thing with the witness testimony i have come to believe that mostly people want to be honest - but they just see and experience things radically differently i think the lesson from the actual legal system, as well as experiments, is that eye witness testimony is very unreliable 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, us7070 said: it's time to get your predictions in... here's mine: 30min on elapsed time Probably choice of 3. 1. Where a penalty time has to equal one or more loss in placings. The 100' delta is 43 minutes including InfoTrack and 29 minutes to Comanche excluding InfoTrack.Take your pick. 2. DSQ. 3. Exoneration. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 5 minutes ago, us7070 said: it's time to get your predictions in... here's mine: 30min on elapsed time Either a DSQ or 60 mins. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Profit 31 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Hearing is starting now (1300 hrs on Dec 29) according to the Protest Notice Board. Should not take too long. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 no way DSQ will happen - i would be shocked Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cap't Billy 2 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, us7070 said: why? the RRS explicitly give the RC the right to file a protest... I guess that is why I think that RC's should protest sparingly. The RC can not be disadvantaged. But a competitor can. I think it should fall to the aggrieved party to seek justice. Otherwise it appears that the RC is making the claim, taking sides and being a witness all at once. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Forourselves 1,336 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Last year Comanche wins after coming in 2nd. This year Comanche wins after coming in 3rd, next year Comanche wins after coming in 4th. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moonduster 313 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Couple of things to consider: There is no such thing as Outside Assistance, Rule 41 covers Outside Help. A VHF call telling a competitor that their AIS is not working is not Outside Help as it is simply information that is freely available to all competitors - anyone with an AIS receiver can tell. Most Maxis position the physical VHF near to the base of the mast to limit the length of the VHF antenna cable, which is already large enough. This means the idiot lights for Rx and Tx are usually not directly visible in the nav station. Often there's a remote switch for Tx Disable and an indicator for that in the nav station. Often, there's also ProAISII installed and running, but no USB cable attached to the AIS transceiver. It's fairly simple for the AIS to be off and for that to not be obvious. Even a blown fuse could cause that or someone turning off the VHF antenna splitter. But, my bet is that AIS targets were being monitored onboard all the super maxis for competitive purposes, which means they all had AIS reception and would notice if their AIS was off. If a boat wasn't transmitting AIS data, I'm willing to bet it was via the Tx Disable function whether intentionally or unintentionally. The SIs and OSR are quite clear regarding AIS Rx and Tx using the mast head antenna and that the antenna cable loss must be less than 50% of the required 25W. And that having a piece of equipment means that equipment must be on board and functioning. Given that the AIS was working just before and just after the event, it's difficult to explain how the AIS failed during all of the race. Whether intended or not, there was a clear violation of the rules; the finding makes itself. It's hard to imagine a penalty of less than 1 hour. I believe DSQ makes the most sense. The comments from various crew members defy belief. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Profit 31 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 We had the same protest on the Islands Race in So Cal a few years ago. Boat with no AIS was DSQ. No time penalty. If this jury finds that WOXI breached the SI and does not DSQ them, I would be very surprised. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 who will represent woxi at the hearing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hitchhiker 919 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 7 hours ago, TPG said: what porn the naviguesser downloaded to watch later. Cat's out of the bag now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, us7070 said: no way DSQ will happen - i would be shocked You have obviously experienced a very privileged and sheltered life. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hobie Anarchy 2 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 8 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said: They are not an interested party or in other words have no interest in any outcome. Interested parties are other competitors. No such thing as an interested party in the 2017-2020 RRS. The term has been replaced by "Conflict of Interest." It's irrelevant anyway. RRS 60.2(a) gives the RC an explicit right to protest except for certain conditions, none of which apply here. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kermit 9 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 How about guilty, no penalty. A shot across the bow for all competitors without ruining the outcome of a great race. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, Forourselves said: Last year Comanche wins after coming in 2nd. This year Comanche wins after coming in 3rd, next year Comanche wins after coming in 4th. Has BJ been captured by aliens? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richiec 47 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 13 minutes ago, random said: So you are putting a case forward that if enough of the fleet broke the same rule then it's officially a 'debacle' and all is forgiven? That what you are saying? OK I will ask another way... Should all boats who had AIS issues similar to Wild Oats be dealt the same punishment? It appears there were multiple cases/offences. If a reasonable percentage of the fleet conducted the same behavior, it is the race, the event that becomes the debacle. Why only Wild Oats going to the room when it seems Infotrack also have a case to answer. And likely others throughout the fleet. I am not defending any these blokes. And don't particularly give a fuck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said: You have obviously experienced a very privileged and sheltered life. it's just t hat in my experience.., in distance races DSQ is uncommon unless it's required, or there is clear evidence of a dleiberate attempt to cheat. there is usually wide latitude in selecting a penalty.., and some consideration is given to what's involved in doing the race. it's not like a 1hr round the cans race that's one of 10 in a regatta.., where the PC doesn't have options 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, Hobie Anarchy said: No such thing as an interested party in the 2017-2020 RRS. The term has been replaced by "Conflict of Interest." OK Mr Pickity Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wess 2,494 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 DSQ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moonduster 313 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Kermit, You can't have a race without rules. You can't have a great race if people don't follow the rules. You can't pick and chose which rules to enforce for which competitors So, by linear logic: You can't have a great race if you know rules weren't followed and don't take action Therefore, if it's a great race, the yacht in question gets a penalty and if the yacht in question does not get a penalty, it wasn't a great race, it was a sham. You choose ... 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bowman81 95 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 They have a history of this kind of shit. The HF radio sched. The time they retired but didn't really retire. The port starboard incidence last year and now this. It's a very bad look. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 so.., we have 30min 60min DSQ no penalty any others? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, richiec said: OK I will ask another way... Should all boats who had AIS issues similar to Wild Oats be dealt the same punishment? It appears there were multiple cases/offences. If a reasonable percentage of the fleet conducted the same behavior, it is the race, the event that becomes the debacle. Why only Wild Oats going to the room when it seems Infotrack also have a case to answer. And likely others throughout the fleet. I am not defending any these blokes. And don't particularly give a fuck. The event only becomes a debacle if those who do not comply with the rules are no dealt with. You have it in reverse. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bowman81 95 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, us7070 said: so.., we have 30min 60min DSQ no penalty any others? No penalty is my prediction unfortunately. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kermit 9 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 6 minutes ago, RealEstateBroker said: We had the same protest on the Islands Race in So Cal a few years ago. Boat with no AIS was DSQ. No time penalty. If this jury finds that WOXI breached the SI and does not DSQ them, I would be very surprised. It won’t be DSQ IMHO. The sailing instructions allow for alternate penalties that differ from RRS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
P_Wop 2,029 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 There's standard VHF and HF protocol for alerting other vessels that they're standing into danger, or are poorly lit, or have their AIS TX off. In a race this does not in any way infringe any of the rules of the RRS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richiec 47 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Answer the question. Should everyone that had AIS 'issues' cop the same penalty, right through the fleet? Yes? No? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wess 2,494 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, Kermit said: It won’t be DSQ IMHO. The sailing instructions allow for alternate penalties that differ from RRS. Ah, thanks; was not aware of that. Like MR I didn't read the SIs. But then I wasn't racing in the S2H so its all OK. :-) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cirdan 3 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 44 minutes ago, savoir said: Aaaahhh, aint arrogance grand. The trouble is that YOU are the one who hasn't got a clue. EVERY class B AIS includes a satellite function because they don't come any other way. Anyone with access to an AIS based website such as Marinetraffic can check the position of any class B AIS fitted vessel in the world. Class B is not boat to boat at all. Off to bed with you and leave this thread to the grown ups. Sorry, this post is plainly wrong. Too wrong to let pass merely because a “grownup” said it. The satellite function that is common to all functioning AIS units is a dedicated GPS receiver. This is not to be confused with terrestrial or satellite monitoring of AIS transmissions, which detects some but not all AIS transmissions. Class B units that are in receive-only mode are not detected by AIS capable satellites, or by any other AIS receiver for that matter. If you don’t transmit, they don’t receive the signal that you didn’t transmit. Class B, with lower power, less frequent transmissions, and lower system priority, is principally a boat to boat system, especially in offshore/oceanic and low traffic density waters. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, richiec said: Answer the question. Should everyone that had AIS 'issues' cop the same penalty, right through the fleet? Yes? No? if the evidence is presented to the jury, and they accept that it is true.., then yes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Fiji Bitter 1,525 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 16 minutes ago, us7070 said: it's time to get your predictions in... here's mine: 30min on elapsed time Oats humbly admits they didn't know the rules, and gets penalized 20%, if they are lucky. What do I win? . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moonduster 313 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Wop, you wrote: There's standard VHF and HF protocol for alerting other vessels that they're standing into danger Cite a reference. Such a hail violates RRS 41 as it materially improves a yacht's position and is not information freely available to all competitors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rain Man 980 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 My guess: Deliberately turning if off whether out of ignorance or arrogance - DSQ Equipment failure - penalty. It will be hard to tell whether it was one or the other. I still question why no other boats let them know about the problem. There is nothing wrong with calling other boats during a race provided everyone has access to the communications, unless such communications are specifically prohibited by the SI's. If WOXI was drifting or disabled at night without AIS they could be run over by commercial traffic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, Wess said: Ah, thanks; was not aware of that. Like MR I didn't read the SIs. But then I wasn't racing in the S2H so its all OK. :-) distance races almost always permit alternate penalties - DSQ is just too big a penalty for most infractions that's why there will not be a DSQ here note that for a tracker violation - the SI's require DSQ.., but this was not the tracker Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Someone is going to make a killing printing these TShirts 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 the shortest distance is a straight line... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 1 minute ago, dash34 said: My guess: Deliberately turning if off whether out of ignorance or arrogance - DSQ Equipment failure - penalty. It will be hard to tell whether it was one or the other. I still question why no other boats let them know about the problem. There is nothing wrong with calling other boats during a race provided everyone has access to the communications, unless such communications are specifically prohibited by the SI's. If WOXI was drifting or disabled at night without AIS they could be run over by commercial traffic. Not hard to tell, but in the end it does not matter what the reason was. It was not working and the RC was not advised. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moonduster 313 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 the shortest distance is a straight line Great Circle 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 I'm still wondering who they select to go in and argue the case... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, us7070 said: I'm still wondering who they select to go in and argue the case... I'm hoping that MR does! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
us7070 289 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, random said: I'm hoping that MR does! can i change my 30min prediction? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
weightless 503 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, Moonduster said: the shortest distance is a straight line Great Circle Maybe they dug a tunnel? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
corkob 60 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 I would be surprised at disqualification. I would expect a time penalty sufficient to cost them line honors. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jack_sparrow 7,640 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Just now, us7070 said: I'm still wondering who they select to go in and argue the case... Vila technical. Richards rules, (that will be funny). I don't think Oatleys have time to buy B&G and then fly in their top tech man who just got a huge pay rise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rain Man 980 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, random said: Not hard to tell, but in the end it does not matter what the reason was. It was not working and the RC was not advised. That statement makes the assumption that they knew about it not working during the race. I haven't seen anything posted on here that establishes that as fact. PC's work with facts, not speculation. That's why we have SA. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shanghaisailor 1,420 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 4 hours ago, random said: Doesn't matter what you or I think. That's the point you are missing. No one has to agree with the rules, but everyone has to comply. Agree with you Random. If they don't like the rules, go play tiddlywinks Quote Link to post Share on other sites
A CheeseHead 25 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 8 hours ago, Glenn McCarthy said: I'm totally against RC protests, unless they observed an alleged infraction. They got a report from some competitor who didn't have the cajones to file the protest themselves. Why didn't the competitor file the protest? It was their job to. hmmm ... "60.2 A race committee may (a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from a person with a conflict of interest other than the representative of the boat herself; " and "61.1(b) If the race committee, technical committee or protest committee intends to protest a boat concerning an incident the committee observed in the racing area, it shall inform her after the race within the time limit of rule 61.3." And then there's: "BASIC PRINCIPLES SPORTSMANSHIP AND THE RULES Competitors in the sport of sailing are governed by a body of rules that they are expected to follow and enforce. A fundamental principle of sportsmanship is that when competitors break a rule they will promptly take a penalty, which may be to retire." Which sorta trumps it all. Still think the RC has no business doing their job? Or is your principle one of those that sets personal preference above the rules themselves? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
P_Wop 2,029 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, Moonduster said: Wop, you wrote: There's standard VHF and HF protocol for alerting other vessels that they're standing into danger Cite a reference. Such a hail violates RRS 41 as it materially improves a yacht's position and is not information freely available to all competitors. SOLAS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HILLY 31 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, Moonduster said: Wop, you wrote: There's standard VHF and HF protocol for alerting other vessels that they're standing into danger Cite a reference. Such a hail violates RRS 41 as it materially improves a yacht's position and is not information freely available to all competitors. RRS, Part 1. Fundamental rules, Sect. 1. SAFETY. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shanghaisailor 1,420 Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, Fiji Bitter said: Oats humbly admits they didn't know the rules, and gets penalized 20%, if they are lucky. What do I win? . Last time I checked ignorance is no defence. And a full time professional skipper of a multi million dollar campaign didn't know the rules? Think I will go out and watch the pigs flying by while we are at it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts