Ok all you rules junkies....here's one for you...

First the setting:
Winds 15-20
boats Nacra 20s (could really be any high performance spin boat)

OK....

S has rounded the windward mark, hoisted their spinaker and is headed downwind on starboard.

P is coming into the windward mark on Port and is close hauled.

S & P are on a direct collision course with about 100 to 150 yards between them. P knows he has to avoid S, and cannot go above S because he is already close hauled, so he starts to sheet out and bear off to go below. Just as P begins to bear off, S is hit with a puff and also bears off. (assume S is NOT hunting...at least not intentionally) P now sees S bearing off, and so quickly changes to go above, sheets in and pushes the stick. Puff is gone and S now comes back up forcing P to once again change and bear off quickly to avoid collision and go below at the last second. S also had to blow their spin to go higher to avoid the collision and protests P for causing him to alter course.

Now....It is my opinion that although ROW boat has an obligation to hold their course once the give way boat has altered to avoid, given the performance characteristics and conditions here, S was probably in his rights to bear away to avoid capsizing and therefor P had to alter course from their original intent. HOWEVER....am I wrong to assume that once S bore away, they should no longer be within their rights to come back up, thereby forcing P to alter for avaoidance yet again???? Or....(as S insists) is he perfectly within his rights to alter course up and down as part of his "normal course"???

P changed course twice to avoid S.
16.1 "when a right-of-way boat changes course she shall give the other boat room to keep clear."
Sounds like S didn't give P room to keep clear.
Happens alot on the race course, if P pinched, even to the point of almost stopping, she may have cleared S and not lost much ground. They were on the same boats so P must have been aware that S may steer the course that they did. Risky move to bareaway across the bows of a spinnaker boat.
Darryn

Personally, I wouldn't bear away to cross the bows of a fast cat with spin!!!

I believe that once S bore away she should have maintained that new course and given P TIME and OPPORTUNITY to keep clear. It sounds to me like S is at fault as P did try to keep clear but due to the actions of S was prevented from doing so.

You English language guys always get me confused with the port and starboard designations that are different then ours but if :




Wouldn't P ALWAYS have right of way over the spi boat ?

If P has the boom hanging over the port side of his boat and is closed hauled then P has all the right of way rules in his favour and doesn't have to give way to anyone.

And when P has its boom hanging over he starboard side of his boat then both P and S have their booms handing over the same side of their boats and the rule Luff gives way to lee applies; again favouring the boat that is close hauled.

So either way the spinnaker boat needs to keep clear.

Am I missing something here ?

Ehhh, unless the P boat is right on the port layline to the weather mark and S is running down this line from the weather mark. Then the spi boat has right of way. But no sailor in their right mind should approach the weather mark on the port layline ever, that is just stupid.

Wouter

I SINCERELY hope that I never meet you in a port/starboard situation Wouter!!!

Ohhh, don't worry. I'll be so far ahead of you that we'll never meet on the course !

Wouter

Wouter, you scare me sometimes.



OK, this exact situation has beed done to death a few times before and I've even asked the opinion of an international judge.

In this sitiuation. The PORT boat sailing up wind has to keep clear. But they only HAVE TO REACT to the Stb boat with the kite up.

As these are fast boats, then the closing speeds are high and the angles change are fairly great in gusts.

The safest option is to avoid the port layline. HOWEVER, the boat sailing upwing only has to react to the other boat, and the port boat has to be given sufficient room to react, thus if the port boat chose to bear off and sail under, then the stbd boat does have a problem if a gust arrives as the port boat is taking actions to avoid and so the stbd boat cannot alter course even if the kite is driving them over.

This exact thing happened at a 49er event and it was blowing 20kts. The judge indicated that if the port boat was around 3-400 meters away and made a decision to go below, the stbd boat was then committed holding course and to going above the port boat. Thus the stb boat cannot bear off. BUT he said that speeds were important in dictating the distance apart the boats were "committed to actions".

The port boat might win a protest in this situation, but the best thing to do is avoid the port layline; If the wind was gusty in this case, If I was the stbd boat, I would sail slightly lower than I needed to and encourage the port boat to go above me; thus, they are clear quickly and I don't get messed up by a incident. If I was the port boat I would wave the stbd boat over in front of me and pinch for a few seconds to encourage them to do this. Both in this need to understand the rules fully and also need to know that a course is commited to at some point and cannot be changed by the stbd boat.

Everybody,

I told you all in my first post :

"You English language guys always get me confused with the port and starboard designations that are different then ours"

So what are you guys calling a "port boat"

Overhere in Europe a boat sailing "over port" means that his boom and sails are hanging over the port side. It is my understanding that English speaking sailors use a different definition, like "this boat is on a starboard tack". Sadly this gets abbreviated to the boat being on starboard which can actually mean two different things or something like that. As I said earlier this always gets us confused.

This all has a direct effect on the wording of right of way rules even when they do regulate the exact same right of way situation. The same for the problem definition as given in the initial posting.

The issue is similar to the fact that we call "Bakboard !" (=starboard) when racing and claim our rights while you guys call "Port". And the fact that the US has reversed the red and green light designations with respect to European regulations.

It will be wise to recognize that these differences exit and not just assume that all non English speaking sailors know [censored] about the rules.

Hence my other statement ;"Am I missing something here ?"

Wouter

Wouter,

I don't think its a question of english language, it's a question of age. When I learned sailing we would say "port has right of way" meaning sailing over port (with the boom at port side) as you say. But nowadays you say "wind from starboard" has right of way, and starboard tack means exactly that. Of course "wind from starboard" is defined by "boom on port". Thus, language has changed over the years.

Backbord is port by the way.

I had no idea port and starboard had different definitions around the world!?

I assume physically it all works out on the race course, port boats giving way to starboard boats, windward giing way to leeward...?

Yep you are right, typo by me.




back when I learned sailing (80's) we never said "port has right of way". We always said "stuurboord wijkt voor bakboord" (starboard gives way to port). Hence the call "bakboord" that can still be heard often at the Aruba and Curacau regatta's I'm told. I'm told it is even explained to English speaking sailors at the briefing that when you hear a continental crew call "Bakboord" (BuckBoard) that they are refering to the English "port rights rule". I think we'll have the same explanation at the F16 global Challenge this year.

I have up till now never encountered a crew in the Netherlands that refer to the right of way rules and sail trim with respect to from which side the wind is blowing. Honestly, but then again I'm old school so ....

Wouter

When I learned to sail in the 80's we were given may ways to remember the tacks.

1, A boat on Port tack gives way to a boat on starboard tack.

2, Left hand back, I'm on the right (starbord) tack

3, Left had forward, care needed toward.


I've always remembered the left hand back, I'm on the right tack. Also, just put Green and red tape on the appropiate sides of the boat so you know which his which.

The definitions are the same for port and starboard but the nomenclature of what constitutes a "boat on port" and such can vary.

With Scoobies clarification I now understand that when a continential crew calls a boat to be "over starboard" that English speaking sailors call the same boat as being "on a port tack". This can get confusing when abbreviations are used.

Stuff like that.

However right of way rules typically are the same in net effect even when their definitions can read significantly differently because of these variations.

The situation is indeed differently with respect to red and green shipping lane markers.

The US switched the definition of these to confuse English vessels in the 18th and 19th century and have them run aground. They never switched back.

Wouter

Two clarifications.

1) by Port boat, I mean P was on "Port Tack" ie....with the boom and sails out to the starboard side of the boat and the wind coming from the port side of the boat.

2) P was not quite on the layline, and could have tacked, but initially did not feel that to be neccessary as P felt he could bear away fast enough. Also important to point out that even after S bore away, causing P to steer back up to go above, had S maintained that new course, all would have been clear and P would have avoided by going above (the safer position all the way around).

John, You don't know a case number for this incident do you??

W,
Time to get updated:

http://www.sailing.org/RRS2005/Intro1-7.pdf
http://www.sailing.org/RRS2005/Definitions.pdf

Incidentally, we had a problem with people still using mast-abeam a few years ago. After much harassment at the bar those skippers have updated themselves.

Or, is it lost in the translation,

My name is Simon, and no I don't have a case no; It was a protest that was heard (I believe) and all parties agreed after the fact as to what was going on.

Oops..Sorry Simon!! I may have found one good case that is relevant (I'm still looking for more..) Rule 14 case 92...
"When a right-of-way boat changes course, the keep-clear boat is required
to act only in response to what the right-of-way boat is doing at the time,
not what the right-of-way boat might do subsequently."

btw...all current Cases can be found at http://www.sailing.org/rrs2005/casebook2005.pdf
very interesting read....

Ah, yes case 92 does cover it.

Not only case 92, but I believe cases 60 & 76 are also in support.