Announcements
New Discussions
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235904
08/08/11 06:11 PM
08/08/11 06:11 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Jake Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Jake  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 12,310
South Carolina
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
It is much better to think about these situations at home... rather then REACT to what you think or remember with a boat under your control at 12 knots.

Excellent point. That's exactly why we need to have these discussions here. Then we'll know what to do when we get into similar incidents out on the racecourse. I'm kind of surprised that noone has yet asked how Artemis could have avoided this situation.

What Team Artemis should have done, was pinch up before she got near the mark, and scrape Groupe Edmond off at the bouy.

Know the rules, forsee a problem coming, and plan to aovid the situation before it forms.

Regards,
Eric



that's good to know. I was wondering what Artemis could have done short of sail way past the mark and hand the lead to GE.


Jake Kohl
-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: Cowes [Re: Lost in Translation] #235907
08/08/11 06:20 PM
08/08/11 06:20 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by Lost in Translation
I don't see the version of 18 (c) that you cite in the 2009-2012 rule book with 2010 changes.
You're right. Rule 18.2(c) did change in 2010, and I quoted the old version. The updates had slipped out of my rulebook (I guess I should have pasted them in). Instead of reading "if either boat passes head to wind", it now reads "if the boat entitled to mark room passes head to wind". The change was made because some team racers had found a way to exploit that loophole to turn off rule 18. The change doesn't affect this scenerio though, because it was Artemis who tacked.

Quote
I believe Boat A that tacks with the zone onto starboard has right of way over boat B that enters the zone on port after Boat A completes its tack, correct?
In that scenerio, rule 18 doesn't apply because boats A and B are on opposite tacks on a beat to windward (see rule 18.1(a)). It's a simple rule 10 situation.

I hope that helps,
Eric

Re: Cowes [Re: pgp] #235909
08/08/11 06:38 PM
08/08/11 06:38 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Originally Posted by pgp
Had I been sailing GE, I would have simply eased the main, that, imo, would have slowed me down enough to avoid the collision.
At time 0:14, Artemis passes head-to-wind. I see Groupe Edmond bearing away at 0:15, and I see the mainsail eased at 0:16. Both actions were taken while Team Artemis was the keep-clear boat.

Quote
Am I right in assuming that you don't have to slow down even if it is the only way to avoid a collision?
No. Rule 14 requires all boats to avoid contact if reasonably possible. Slowing down constitutes "avoiding action", and is a reasonable one to take. If a right-of-way boat maintains course but slows down to avoid a give-way boat, then the give way boat does not keep clear.

Regards,
Eric

Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235911
08/08/11 06:44 PM
08/08/11 06:44 PM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
Thanks Eric, I could never keep all this stuff straight.


Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235912
08/08/11 06:52 PM
08/08/11 06:52 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 606
Maryland
Kris Hathaway Offline OP
addict
Kris Hathaway  Offline OP
addict

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 606
Maryland
Had this occurred away from any marks or laylines, GE would likely have tacked and had ample time to do so. It was only after they committed to ducking that the wind shifted and the boat powered-up and get out of control. They had plenty of time to tack but it was not preferred to them so they unsuccessfully tried to shoot behind. It took Artemis only 3 secs to tack!!!


Kris Hathaway
Re: Cowes [Re: Kris Hathaway] #235913
08/08/11 07:12 PM
08/08/11 07:12 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
This situation (tacking too close) does happen away from marks or laylines. It happened twice at the Tanzer 16 Nationals (one of which was in front of me causing me to crash-tack) and I saw it happen on Hobie 16's at the Special Olympics last week.

As I count it, Artemis took 8 seconds to tack (2 to go head-to-wind, and 6 more to reach a close-hauled course). I saw GE taking avoiding action 6 seconds before contact, so I'm not sure that a crash tack would have been different except for where the boats hit.

Bear in mind that when GE bore away, she was the right-of-way boat. Even without contact, Artemis still broke rule 13. There was only one second at the most between Artemis gaining right-of-way and the collision. That is not "ample time" to tack.

Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235916
08/08/11 08:09 PM
08/08/11 08:09 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,844
42.904444 N; 88.008586 W
Todd_Sails Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Todd_Sails  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,844
42.904444 N; 88.008586 W
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Originally Posted by pgp
You shouldn't come flying in on port unless you are absolutely certain of yourself.
You have that backwards. You shouldn't tack in front of an oncoming boat unless you can complete your tack and then give him room to keep clear.


Thank you Eric, It seems A was much more at fault here, IMHO


F-18 Infusion
#626- SOLD it!

'Long Live the Legend of Chris Kyle'
Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235924
08/08/11 09:24 PM
08/08/11 09:24 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 606
Maryland
Kris Hathaway Offline OP
addict
Kris Hathaway  Offline OP
addict

Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 606
Maryland
Hmmm....I count Artemis on starboard and close haul at 16 sec, started tack at 13. It was at 21 sec contact with GE. Had GE started to tack at 17 sec, she would have slowed up considerably and easily avoided contact. Extreme 40s seem to tack quickly but have real issues bearing off.

GE misjudged the duck not expecting Artemis to come out of the tack as slowly as it did.


Kris Hathaway
Re: Cowes [Re: Kris Hathaway] #235929
08/08/11 10:02 PM
08/08/11 10:02 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
I
Isotope235 Offline
old hand
Isotope235  Offline
old hand
I

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 807
Hillsborough, NC USA
Well, we watched the same video and came up with very different sets of facts. That is one reason photo evidence is treated with skepticism. I doubt, however, one will convince a jury that a 40' catamaran can tack in 3 seconds. I see Artemis turning all the way to 0:20.

Regards,
Eric

Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235940
08/09/11 07:27 AM
08/09/11 07:27 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,152
tampa, fl
K
ksurfer2 Offline
old hand
ksurfer2  Offline
old hand
K

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,152
tampa, fl
I think you see Artemis turning all the way to 20 seconds because they are not coming out of the tack on a close hauled course, they overstood the mark and are bearing away to go to the mark. I think if Artemis had accelerated out of the tack close hauled, GE would have cleared their stern. It looks like Artemis spends at least 1-2 seconds spinning their boat to the mark instead of accelating close hauled.


If your havin girl problems i feel bad for you son
I got 99 problems but my beautiful wife ain't one
Re: Cowes [Re: Jake] #235946
08/09/11 07:59 AM
08/09/11 07:59 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
Originally Posted by Jake
No rule requires you to anticipate what the other boat may or may not do....but yeah, probably.


I understand but disagree with the rationle.

Firstly, we are sailing catamarans not 4ksb and I posit the damage to both boats in the case at hand. NOT anticipating is inherently unsafe.

Secondly, we are discussing an approach to A mark. Where else was Artemis going to go?

I feel the starboard right of way rule should be strengthened.

Again, thanks to Eric for all his work. Somebody has to try and keep us straight and I appreciate it.

Last edited by pgp; 08/09/11 08:03 AM.

Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Re: Cowes [Re: pgp] #235949
08/09/11 09:17 AM
08/09/11 09:17 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
T
ThunderMuffin Offline
Carpal Tunnel
ThunderMuffin  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
T

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
Originally Posted by pgp
I understand. My contention is that A had completed the tack and was in the process of making the mark rounding and GE had to give way.

At least that's how I see it.


Me too.

A was starboard, GE was port. Simple enough to me.

Re: Cowes [Re: ThunderMuffin] #235950
08/09/11 09:20 AM
08/09/11 09:20 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
T
ThunderMuffin Offline
Carpal Tunnel
ThunderMuffin  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
T

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,655
Portland, Maine
Quote
Somebody has to try and keep us straight and I appreciate it.


I disagree. It only seeks to confuse us. Who the hell can run through that whole rule analysis on the water in order to determine who needs to do what? Throw it in 4 boatlengths from the mark while blowing 20knots. I know that my mind is devoted to keeping the pointy end up.

Furthermore the more complicated the rules are, the easier it is for situations like this to pop up where both boats think that they are doing the right thing and therefore crash thinking "well its the other douchebag's fault!"

Seriously the rules we have are not practical and the fact that we need certified judges to figure out who was at fault for, what appears to be a simple port/starboard incident really chaps me the wrong way.

Re: Cowes [Re: ThunderMuffin] #235953
08/09/11 09:34 AM
08/09/11 09:34 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
G'mornin' sunshine! laugh

I had some vague notion of a rule set based on the traffic light. If port is red and starboard is green, you just look at the boat you're approaching and stop or go. Mentally extending the bows to a potential point of impact would quickly determine who has right of way.

Obviously I've not put a great deal of thought into it. Jus' sayin'...


Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Re: Cowes [Re: pgp] #235957
08/09/11 09:59 AM
08/09/11 09:59 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Matt M Offline
addict
Matt M  Offline
addict

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
I really dislike the current rule as it leaves too much room for interpretation.
Who is to say how much room is enough?

These guys bore off on a boat known for stalling. The lead boat appeared to over stand the mark so it appeared there would have been room for a tack and then GE would have had rights for buoy room and could have easily avoided a collision as the boat can tack that fast, where they just stalled the rudders in the bear off. At the least they should bear responsibility for not avoiding the collision – it was not very avoidable they way they went about it, but that was not the fault of the other boat.

Re: Cowes [Re: Matt M] #235958
08/09/11 10:05 AM
08/09/11 10:05 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
As the rule is better understood it will invite more agressive port tactics with similar results, imo.


Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Re: Cowes [Re: Isotope235] #235962
08/09/11 10:38 AM
08/09/11 10:38 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 297
R
rexdenton Offline
enthusiast
rexdenton  Offline
enthusiast
R

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 297
Originally Posted by Isotope42
Well, photographic evidence is suspect, because it is often difficult to judge actual boat placement due to camera angle and foreshortening. Even video can can be misleading.

That said, it looks to me like:
  1. Both boats were sailing on a beat to windward, on port tack. Team Artemis (A) was about 4 boatlengths ahead of and about 2 boatlengths to leeward of Team Groupe Edmond de Rothschild (GE).
  2. Boat A proceeded to tack to starboard.
  3. After A passed head-to-wind, and before she reached a close-hauled course, GE began to bear away.
  4. GE bore away hard, slacking sail and turning, but her rudders stalled and her port bow hit A's port side just ahead of the transom, significantly damaging both boats.
If that is indeed the case, then the rules that apply are:
  • As A started to tack, rules 12 "On the Same Tack, Not Overlapped" and 16.1 "Changing Course" apply. Rule 16.1 requires A to give GE room to keep clear. Rule 12 requires GE to keep clear. Both boats do.
  • When A passes head-to-wind, Rule 12 ceases to apply and rule 13 "While Tacking" does instead. Now A is required to keep clear and GE has right-of-way. Rule 15 "Acquiring Right of Way" does not apply since GE acquired right-of-way because of A's actions. A is required to keep clear of GE. Given that GE took avoiding action at this point, A did not keep clear.
  • I can't tell if A reached a close-hauled course before contact. If not, rules 13 and 14 "Avoiding Contact" apply. If so, then Rules 10 "On Opposite Tacks", 15, and 14 apply. Rule 14(a) states "...a right-of-way boat or one entitled to room...need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear...". It appears to me that GE acted as soon as it was apparent that A was not keeping clear. If A completed her tack before contact, then GE was required keep clear and A was required to give GE room to keep clear. A was also required to avoid contact if reasonably possible.

Based on that, it looks like A broke rules 13 and 14. GE did not break rule 14. If A reached a close-hauled-course, then A also broke rule 15 and GE broke rule 10, but GE is exonerated under rule 64.1(c) "Penalties and Exoneration".

Therefore, it looks entirely reasonable and appropriate that Team Groupe Edmond protested.

Regards,
Eric


GEDR is sailing from clear astern of A entering circle so owes room per rule 18. GEDR sails straight on proper course to mark , but open commiting to the mark rounding (early), A shuts the door, and puts GEDR in the squeeze. A heads down to mark, pinching, sailing slow. Easing his sails to accel, trims and begins maneuvers to head back up, when GEDR, attempting to avoid hits A. In question is whether rules engine penalizes GE for 18, or A is DSQ'd for unseamanlike rounding.

Given the proximity to the circle, A did not make a seamanlike rounding (rule 18), and was intentionally short on the rounding. (A tactical squeeze to slow down/stall GE.) Because of position of both boats in the circle at the time of contact the decision by A to not afford GEDR sufficient room inside the circle, and at the mark, A has fouled GEDR, as A's aggressive sailing did not leave GE room to keep clear as per rule 11 (GEDR was leward boat entering the circle). 16.1 also applies as maneuvering boat (A) did nothing to keep clear of GEDR who was on proper course. Rule 18 takes precedence because it is in Section C of the rulebook. Therefore A must give GEDR room to round the mark, but instead, maneuvers to round mark.

My opinion is that A should be DSQ'd. I don't have any favorites here; its' just what I saw. and I'm offering my 2 cents.


Nacra F18 #856
Re: Cowes [Re: pgp] #235963
08/09/11 10:40 AM
08/09/11 10:40 AM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 62
K
KMarshack Offline
journeyman
KMarshack  Offline
journeyman
K

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 62
Pete,

Both boats came in on port. Both were taking a chance there was not a starboard boat approaching This has nothing to do with the mark or laylines. This is simply...don't tack in front of me. Not arguing if there was enough time or if he could have tacked, but the rule has nothing to do with the mark.

Re: Cowes [Re: pgp] #235964
08/09/11 10:48 AM
08/09/11 10:48 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Matt M Offline
addict
Matt M  Offline
addict

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Originally Posted by pgp
As the rule is better understood it will invite more agressive port tactics with similar results, imo.


No way - or at least not often in the instances I have seen collisions and protest in these situations. The aggressive tactics come from the port tackers who use ambiguity in the rule to push situations. Your behind but you might win in the protest room.

A boat has to provide opportunity to avoid, they do not have to provide opportunity for the other boat to do whatever they want. In my view the lead boat accomplished their tack and was sailing. I do not agree there was a broken rule then because GE appeared to have both time and room to accomplish their own tack, but they did not, they forced a protest and lost their boat for a few days. The still could have tacked and protested, but it is a lot more visual to the judge boats to try a spectacular bear away.

The judgment call comes from how much room is required to be clear ahead for a maneuver. In the crappy video shot, it appeared to me to be enough. Eric and the judges saw it as not enough. As the lead boat was on or even past the lay line there was also then plenty of opportunity for GE to realize a tack was coming – not part of the rule, but something that should be considered in the decision of determining that all was done to avoid a collision.

Re: Cowes [Re: KMarshack] #235965
08/09/11 11:02 AM
08/09/11 11:02 AM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
Originally Posted by KMarshack
Pete,

Both boats came in on port. Both were taking a chance there was not a starboard boat approaching This has nothing to do with the mark or laylines. This is simply...don't tack in front of me. Not arguing if there was enough time or if he could have tacked, but the rule has nothing to do with the mark.


Again, Eric has the credentials so his opinion will carry the day.

Cheers!



Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Page 3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Moderated by  Damon Linkous 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 442 guests, and 104 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Darryl, zorro, CraigJ, PaulEddo2, AUS180
8150 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,404
Posts267,055
Members8,150
Most Online2,167
Dec 19th, 2022
--Advertisement--
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1