Jump to content

John Ball

Forum Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by John Ball

  1. There is a simple way to find out if swapping sides will work for you. Hold the radio with the antenna pointing towards you.

    However, before you do this, go into the programming and reverse direction for Channel 1 and channel 3.

    Now when you use the radio, the rudder will be your left, side to side, with spring centering, and the sail will be on the right, up is out, down is in, and no centering.


  2. Olivier has answered Q1.

    These are my thoughts.

    Q2. May you receive redress for incident A, even if you retire subsequently, having being at fault in incident B. I do not know of any case covering this, but I suspect the answer would be No - retiring after an 'at fault' situation, your finish position is affected by your own action and forfeits any redress.

    Q3. If you gained significant advantage over another boat, and took a series of penalty turns until the advantage has gone - then you overtake enough boats to avoid relegation, while the other boat fell back and became relegated, the issue ended when you took the penalty.

    Q4. The observer duties include calling contacts and recording the positions of the boats for the incident, and reporting the incident to the RC at the finish. It would be up to the skipper involved, or the RC to initiate additional action - ie file a protest if they felt that the penalty taken was insufficient. Yes, an Umpire may call additional turns, but not an observer.

    Q3 raises a different issue. Scenario - you are in B heat with 6 up/down and you foul the boat that is seventh last, such that you finish seventh last and the ROW boat finishes 6th last - so he gets relegated to C fleet for the next race. You did a one penalty turn, but you recovered faster and were still ahead of the other boat after the penalty turn. Did you gain significant advantage? The rule is not clear on what is 'significant'. It is very subjective. On the score sheet for that race, you finish one place higher than the boat you fouled. I would argue that one place in many circumstances, is not significant. If the rule wants you to take penalty turns until you are behind the boat that you fouled, why does the rule not simply say that. (like passing under a Yellow flag in motor racing - get back behind the other guy).

    However, if the incident happened at the front end of the heat, such that after the penalty, you finish 6th in the heat and get promoted, while the other boat finishes 7th and stays in B - Now you go into A fleet and may finish many places higher in the race that the boat you fouled - that sounds more significant.

    I really dislike the current wording for significant advantage because of the subjectivity of both the foul (how many boats to be significant) and the penalty (how many turns until the advantage has gone). I have suggested to the IRSA Rules committee to look at changing it in the next RRS so the penalty for significant advantage is to retire. eg. If you foul one boat, do one turn and carry on - if your foul affects more than one boat - retire.


  3. From another forum

    Janusz Walicki

    In my search for a TenRater sailboat I e-mailed Walicki Boats (Janusz Walicki). Unfortunately, a very sad response from the wife:

    "Hello Mr. Perena,

    Thank you for your interest.

    I'm sorry I can't help you anymore.

    My husband Janusz has died last sunday.

    I can't provide you any boats anymore.

    Best regards,

    Beata Walicki"

    e-mail received 5:47AM June 10, 2015.

  4. Hi Gordon,

    Can we send in an additional clarifying question to the Q&A asking two additional questions about this case.

    1. How does Answer 2 relate to RC sailing and E3.7.

    If the answer to 1 is NO. then Q2 follows

    2. When the keep clear boat broke a rule of Part 2 and forced the ROW to break R 30.3, may the Keep clear boat take an R44 (Turns) penalty, or is there significant advantage, such the the penalty is to retire


  5. On re-reading E3.7, it looks to me that its purpose is to relate to the second part of R30.3 and the actions of the Race Committee about displaying the sail number of an offending boat in a subsequent restart of that heat.

    So I take the view that the Q&A answer does apply to RC sailing.


  6. My point is that E3.7 is not needed - there are already rules that cover a boat not racing. E3.7 seems to be saying that RC sailors are dumber than full size sailors and have to be told to get out of the way. R 30.3 says you are DSQ without a hearing. If you are DSQ you act accordingly.

    The point of the Q&A answer that there should be recourse for a ROW boat that is pushed over by another boat that is breaking a rule of Part 2. If Appendix E is interfering with that recourse, then the Appendix E item needs to be fixed.


  7. HI Gordon,

    I missed it too when I was researching the situation - the title did not help as it did not refer to the black flag start, yet that is what it is all about.

    If this Q/A will make it into the ISAF Case Book, then there is no need to put it in the IRSA book - in my opinion, the IRSA book should only include items applicable to RC sailing eg based on Appendix E or depth perception or HMS, and not include situations where the application if a rule is identical to big boat s and already included in the ISAF Case Book.



  8. Even though A is given BFD, A can still protest B for the breach of the rule that forced A over the line - eg A is sitting just below the line, pointing on a close hauled course, but with sails luffing, and B breaks R 12 by sailing into the transom of A, pushing A over the line. If B took a one penalty turn, could not the PC could find that a one turn penalty was insufficient and 'significant advantage' existed after the penalty and so R 44 was not satisfied and further penalise B?

    I think this represents a ' hole' in the rules - For example, if keep clear-B crashed into ROW-A and A is knocked out of the heat as 'disabled, then B must retire. Here we have a situation where B breaks a rule and knocks A out of the race - but there is no similar defined consequence.


  9. Questions

    Q1. Is there any way a protest committee can offer any comfort to boat A ?

    Q2. If boat A protests boat B on the basis of gaining an unfair advantage, what would be the likely outcome ?


    For Q1,I think the answer is NO. These circumstances do not fit any of the list of items fro which redress may be granted.

    For Q2.It is possible, even likely that a Protest Committee may find 'significant advantage' and dsq the keep clear boat, but I think the offending keep clear boat should retire for causing the ROW boat to BDF, regardless of any rules.


  10. Hi Peter,

    That is a very good question and the answer is not as clear as I would like. But basically the idea is that using binoculars gives a visual advantage to you and that view is not freely available to other competitors.

    The only rules and interpretations I can find are below.


    From the RRS Appendix E.

    E4.2 Outside Help

    Rule 41 is changed to:

    A boat or the competitor controlling her shall not receive help from

    any outside source, except . . .

    © help in the form of information freely available to all


    E5.3 Rules for Observers and Umpires

    Observers and umpires shall be located in the control area. They

    shall not use any aid or device that gives them a visual advantage

    over competitors.

    IRSA Case Book Case R5 after the three specific questions, it ends with . .

    As regards competitors:

     a competitor who believes that the race committee's organisation of the control area gives

    such a visual advantage to another or other competitor(s), or to the race committee, that

    their boat's score has been made significantly worse, may request redress under rule 62.1(a);

     a competitor who knowingly introduces into the control area and uses an aid or device that

    gives him a visual advantage over other competitors may break rule 2.

  11. but the windward boat has pulled out half a boat length and is starting to bear away around the mark .


    This is the key to this situation - Windward breaks R 18.2.b. WIndward must wait until the inside mark room boats are clearing the mark. WIndward has to give room to both inside boats, including room for Middle to give room to Inside..

    The inside boat does nothing wrong - no hail is required - and as R 18 applies, the obligation is on the outside boats to give room, and the inside boat does not have to give 'room and opportunity' (an obsolete phrase) to the others when she luffs (R 21 exonerates for breach of R 16).


  12. Sorry everyone - please ignore the last three posts - I thought the situation was nearing the downwind mark - my mistake. I would delete them, but the forum does not offer that option.

    On re-reading the description, this is an R 16 situation and Ahead/leeward is ROW and has to allow behind/windward room to stay clear when Leeward suddenly alters course.


  13. I did some more reading - Case 75 is very interesting. While not an exact duplicate, there are some interesting implications.

    The other rule to consider is R 18.4. As Leeward must gybe to round the mark, R 18.4 may apply. When the leeward boat broaches, does she move further away from the mark? If Yes, then she breaks R 18.4.


  14. Hi again,

    Again Case 60 is not a good precedent for this. If the contact occurred in the zone, then normally, the inside boat is entitled to mark room and the windward/astern boat has to keep clear. However this is more complex as the definition of Room, includes the phrase - in the existing conditions - which suggests give lots of room in gusty planing conditions - but it also requires the ROW boat to be 'seamanlike' - and a bad broach may not fit that part of the definition. However R 21 again exonerates the mark room boat specifically for breaking R 16.


  15. Hi Malcolm,

    I would not apply Case 60 to this. the diagram is quite different from your description. Case 114 Q1 is much better. Basically, Inside is entitled to mark room, and middle and windward must give room. If there is contact, Inside breaks R 11 and or R 31, but is exonerated by R 21. Middle may be exonerated under R 21 if she was unable to give room because Windward did not give room, and WIndward would be penalised for breaking R 18.2.b.


  16. An older version of the rules used to say that you have to take the penalty after starting, but that was removed several versions ago. Now you may take the penalty before the start. The rule requires to to take your penalty as soon as possible, after getting clear of other boats - so waiting until after the start would not be 'as soon as possible'.

    I remember some discussion that a foul prior to the start may have little or no effect on the boat's race, and so taking the penalty before the start is a fitting penalty.


  17. Hi Vinnie,

    Yes, you did the right thing.

    R 29.2 General Recall is allowed if there are 'unidentified' boats, or if the RC made a procedural error. As neither of these conditions existed, it would have been wrong to make a General Recall.


  18. Hi Darin,

    No, there is nothing in the cases that removes the obligation to start correctly. For example, you cannot do an R 44 penalty - you must come back and restart.

    Some 'big boat' long distance race SIs may allow a time penalty instead - but that is not for us.

    The case that I mentioned was a an R 30.3 Black flag start. In that case a Protest Committee could exonerate the ROW boat from the black flag under R 64.1.a, but the boat must still start correctly.


  19. Yes. The PRO was correct.

    This is covered in ISAF Q&A Case C 001 Q&A 2014.015

    Published: 4 August 2014

    Just because a boat forced you over early, does not remove the requirement to for you to come back and start correctly.


  • Create New...