Rule 14(b) is entirely new.

It states; ' If reasonably possible, a boat shall not cause contact between boats'

I believe that new rule ,14(b), in conjunction with 16.1 means that a leeward boat can no longer luff and cause contact with a windward boat and claim , windward boat keeps clear.

The leeward boat that luffs would be breaking 14(b) and should make a penalty turn.

Is my interpretation correct?

Hi Roger,

R 14(b) is not really new - it is the words of the old R 14 but broken down into separate bullets (a) (b) (c) which makes it easier to make a reference to a section of a rule for example in a protest hearing.

I suggest to read the last paragraph of R 14 which says:

However, a right-of-way boat, or one sailing within the room or mark-room to which she is entitled, need not act to avoid contact until it is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear or giving room or mark-room.
 

L may luff and is restricted by 16.1, and W must stay clear under R 11. L only has to begin to avoid contact when it becomes clear that W is not responding, and continuing to luff causing contact could break R 14.

The problem for us in radio sailing is how fast is the action! The whole incident could be over in a second or two. Hardly time for anyone to think let alone to react.

The correct action of L would be to curtail the luff and protest under R 11 before the contact - but tough to do.

John

 

1 hour ago, John Ball said:

L only has to begin to avoid contact when it becomes clear that W is not responding, and continuing to luff causing contact could break R 14.

 

Hmmm, yes - is that at 4", or 2", and/or w.r.t. boat speeds and distance from shore....? At what point, whilst essentially RoW, do you have to back out (of your position of strength) so as to avoid R14 infringement yourself. And just hope to be able argue the t*ss later? 

I often hear debates along lines of: "but we didn't touch" , "yeah cos I took avoiding action" - and thats on 'simple' port/starboard or mark room. Given that luffing is a standard and permissible defence tactic, it does seem open to a lot of subjectivity for us.

(Fortunately I don't even manage to understand all the rules, let alone try to write them....)

 

Might be worth mentioning that RRS 43.1(c) also deals with this.

43.1 (c) A right-of-way boat, or one sailing within the room or markroom to which she is entitled, is exonerated for breaking rule 14 if the contact does not cause damage or injury.

In almost all situations, Rule 43 provides exoneration to a right-of-way boat if there was what we might call incidental contact. 

But there is the small point that the other boat must have been capable of giving room or markroom or tacking away or whatever.  If the other boat was not capable of any action, perhaps being disabled, then a protest committee may find that the right-of-way boat infringed Rule 22 as modified by E1.3(c), and there is no exoneration for that.

3 hours ago, Roger Crates said:

Rule 14(b) is entirely new.

It states; ' If reasonably possible, a boat shall not cause contact between boats'

I believe that new rule ,14(b), in conjunction with 16.1 means that a leeward boat can no longer luff and cause contact with a windward boat and claim , windward boat keeps clear.

The leeward boat that luffs would be breaking 14(b) and should make a penalty turn.

Is my interpretation correct?

The rules never allowed a boat to luff to contact.

Any contact between boats could be grounds for dsq, but as John says things happen so fast and at distance that contacts tend to happen when they would be avoided in a full size boat.

 

There is a penalty for Leeward boat and that is the jeopardy of a potential rafting with the windward boat.

The right of way doesn't give immunity, only priority. As soon as contact occurs and for as long as it continues you're just as screwed as they are.

14(b) and 14(c) are entirely new and change the game considerably.

14(a) means that you shall  avoid contact with another boat

14(b) means that you shall not cause another boat to make contact with another boat. For instance, when you luff a boat to windward, you shall not cause her to make contact with another boat.

14(c) means that you shall not cause contact between another boat and an object that should be avoided, for example the starting mark.

This means that if you have a group of boats to windward and you luff in such a way that the boat furthest to windward hits the starting mark then not only have you broken RRS 16.1 but also 14(c)

10 minutes ago, Gordon W Davies said:

14(c) means that you shall not cause contact between another boat and an object that should be avoided, for example the starting mark.

This means that if you have a group of boats to windward and you luff in such a way that the boat furthest to windward hits the starting mark then not only have you broken RRS 16.1 but also 14(c)

Half a dozen or so boats manoeuvring towards the line. The leeward one luffs to protect position. Knock-on effect causes the windward of the pack to be pushed into the mark. Who should call protest, and upon whom? Do they need to be so aware as to know who was the most leeward who started the chain reaction? Or is it a protest submission/hearing etc from each of them....?

 

This happens quite often in dinghy and keelboats There is usually a chain of protests, often initiated by the PC as they learn the facts.

It seems to me that now the windward boat who hit the mark could protest the furthest leeward mark.

2 minutes ago, Gordon W Davies said:

This happens quite often in dinghy and keelboats There is usually a chain of protests, often initiated by the PC as they learn the facts.

It seems to me that now the windward boat who hit the mark could protest the furthest leeward mark [boat, I assume you meant to put ].

Even in amongst-the-action forms of sailing, let alone 30yd-away-rc, that could be quite an ask for the windward to be able to be aware of who the leeward initiator/culprit was? 

Our sailing: distance and angles. Or dinghy/keelboat: windward boat is likely to be needing to see through a bunch of sails and even hulls? Judges etc probably even less likely to have eyes on the timeline of such a situation occurring, somewhere/anywhere on the line?

None seem practical or feasible to me....

 

Gordon, I think that in the previous version, if you were overlapping the windward start mark at the time of the start, the leeward boat had to give you room to pass the mark. Am I correct in this?

 

Hi Dave,

I cover this situation and variations in Chapter 2 The Start - and see pages 10 and 11. The rules have not changed for this situation.

https://sites.google.com/site/johnsrcsailingrulesandtactics/

John

2 hours ago, Darin Ballington said:

Gordon, I think that in the previous version, if you were overlapping the windward start mark at the time of the start, the leeward boat had to give you room to pass the mark. Am I correct in this?

 

 

Edited May 7, 2025May 7 by John Ball
should say Chapter 2

There is a team racing call C2 which illustrates the rules that apply;

 TR Call C2

 

Gordon

Call C2.pdf