The following diagram is attached to the paper.
 |
| Diagram by Blue |
The jury secretary schedules both protest simultaneously and all three parties come to the hearing.
You find out that Blue did hail protest and fly a red flag immediately after position 4, but Yellow never did.
The challenge as per usual:
Find facts, draw a conclusion and decide the protest(s).
Limitations:
You are all allowed one question. And only one. But to make it interesting, you can decide when to ask it, up until next Wednesday 23:59. Better make it a good one!
All questions will be answered ASAP. So you might want to wait until last. Or not. Maybe your one question will trigger a question by one of the other challengers that will really solve the problem. Or not. You decide.
As compensation for this one question limitation, I will post the animation on Thursday.
Good luck,
J.
Yellow: please describe the relative position and course of the three boats at the moment that blue was on a close-hauled course after having tacked onto port, and your actions during the following five seconds.
ReplyDeleteYellow: "We (me and Green) stayed well above the lay line to give Blue plenty of room. They (Blue) were on starboard tack and had right of way. When Blue luffed and started tacking we were perhaps 2 BL to windward and a little in front, maybe half a boat.
ReplyDeleteGreen bore off and I had to bear away as well to avoid them. By the time Blue had finished tacking we were already on a reach and started to speed up. Green forced me down more and we crossed in front of Blue. Blue also went down around the mark.
I tried to keep clear of Blue as best I could but was hampered by Green who didn't keep clear of me."
Question to GREEN:
ReplyDeletePlease explain in detail your view of the situation, including distances between boats, and your response to yellow’s claim that you didn’t keep clear of her.
GREEN: "Everybody was rounding the mark. I didn't see any problem. Blue had plenty of room inside Yellow and Yellow had plenty or room to do that, inside me. I only went down after Blue had tacked."
DeleteHow was the overlap of yellow established. From astern or not mike b
ReplyDeleteYELLOW: "Green sailed behind me and went to windward"
DeleteGreen, please describe as fully as possible absolutely everything that you saw, heard and did from the moment Yellow entered the zone (position 1 in Blue’s diagram) until you left the zone (sometime after position 5 in Blue’s diagram), or later if you think relevant, including all details, no matter how trivial or irrelevant you think they might be, including the wind and wave conditions, speed and distance between each of the boats at each point in time, any shouts or hails made by any of the boats, and all changes in direction that you made or saw others make.
ReplyDeleteGREEN: "I think the diagram is more or less accurate. They both had plenty of space to round the mark inside me. We were never in any danger of hitting each other. There was no shouting until Blue protested Yellow"
DeleteQuestion to Blue: What was the speed of Yellow relative to yours?
ReplyDeleteBLUE: "She was slowing when approaching the zone. Then after I'd had tacked she bore off and gained speed. By the time I pointed down she was almost clear ahead"
DeleteTo Green: please descrieb the relatibve position and coure of yourself, blue and yellow immediately after passing the mark and your actions during the following five seconds.
ReplyDeleteGREEN: "I was to windward of Yellow and went down when Blue had tacked. We rounded the mark all more or less together. We gained a little on Blue because we had more speed. She had to tack and that slowed her down. There was plenty of room for Yellow and Blue to round the mark"
DeleteWhat is the deadline for providing the response to this chalenge?
ReplyDeleteFriday 30/03/12; 23:59 hours
DeleteGreen: Can you please descibe the relative position and course of the three boats, giving particaular attention to the reasons for your own course?
ReplyDeleteGREEN: "I think the diagram given is more or less accurate. I gave Yellow room to round the mark and Blue had plenty of room to round inside Yellow. The closest we go to Yellow was on meter."
DeleteQuestion to Blue:
ReplyDeleteWould you please describe the incident in detail from the time you were approaching the mark? Please try to give indications of distances between boats, boat speed and other details you feel are important.
Gordon
BLUE: "My diagram as depicted is accurate. I had to round the mark because Yellow was to windward of me. I couldn't sail straight because then I would have hit Yellow. At one time we were less than 2 meters apart with Yellow pointing lower when she was in front of my port bow"
DeleteQuestion to Green:
ReplyDeleteCould you please tell us if there was a reason for you to bear away after blue had tacked?
P.S.: You stated in your initial text "Yellow reads on the noticeboard she's being protested and asks for a protest form herself. She hands it in about fifteen minutes after protest time limit has passed." But you don't say against who?
P.S.2: I suppose that is stated in the SI to leave the mark to starboard?
Steviekouris
Yellow protested Green.
DeleteYes, the mark had to left to Starboard.
GREEN: "We just rounded the mark. For that we had to bear away. I still don't see the problem. Like I said, they had plenty of room to round the mark, both of them."
ReplyDeleteValidity:
ReplyDeleteBLUE’s protest of YELLOW is valid.
As soon as she became aware she was being protested, YELLOW promptly obtained a protest form, filled it out, and handed it in. There is good reason to extend the protest time limit.
YELLOW did not hail protest or fly a red flag. YELLOW’S protest of GREEN is not valid.
PC action under rule 61.1(c):
Based on information received in the valid BLUE vs. YELLOW protest, the PC protests GREEN.
Facts Found:
1. Blue’s diagram is accepted.
2. Three Tornados were approaching a Stb. hand windward mark.
3. BLUE tacked from Stb. onto Port about a half length from the mark, then rounded the mark.
4. YELLOW entered the zone close reaching on port, aiming 1 1/2 lengths above the mark. GREEN was overlapped to windward of YELLOW - there were 2 meters between YELLOW and GREEN.
5. Between positions 2 and 3, BLUE completed her tack. At that moment BLUE was overlapped inside YELLOW and GREEN, who were bearing away.
6. At position 3 GREEN was pointing slightly lower than YELLOW - there was one meter between them. There were 3 meters between YELLOW and BLUE.
7. Between positions 3 and 4, all three boats continued bearing away.
8. At position 4 YELLOW was pointing about 20 degrees lower than BLUE, with one meter between them. GREEN continued to point slightly lower than YELLOW - there was 1/3rd meter between them.
9. BLUE continued to bear away, and avoid contact with YELLOW.
10. YELLOW continued to bear away, and avoid contact with GREEN.
Conclusions:
1. After BLUE completed her tack she was ROW to both YELLOW and GREEN (rule 11).
2. YELLOW was ROW to GREEN (rule 11), throughout the incident. YELLOW was not subject to rule 17.
3. YELLOW and GREEN both owed mark room to BLUE (rule 18.2(a)).
4. GREEN also owed mark room to YELLOW (rule 18.2(b)).
5. At position 4 if BLUE had held her course, she would have made contact with YELLOW. If YELLOW had luffed, she would have made immediate contact with GREEN. If YELLOW had held her course, she would have made contact with GREEN.
6. YELLOW failed to keep clear of BLUE, a ROW boat, by forcing BLUE to alter course to avoid her. YELLOW broke rule 11.
7. GREEN failed to keep clear of YELLOW, both by sailing too close to YELLOW, a leeward boat, and by forcing YELLOW to bear away further to avoid contact. GREEN broke rule 11.
8. GREEN, by breaking a rule, compelled YELLOW to break a rule. YELLOW is exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
9. While sailing their proper courses while at the mark, BLUE and YELLOW were able to pass between GREEN and the mark. GREEN did provide mark room, and did not break rule 18.2(a) or 18.2(b).
10. YELLOW gave mark-room to BLUE. YELLOW did not break rule 18.2(a).
Decision:
Yellow exonerated (rule 64.1(c))
Green DSQ (rule 11)
Score 8 points, minus 1 for unnecessary use of 17 = 7 points
DeleteEven if a rule 17 limitation was in effect, it does not mitigate Green's obligation to keep clear and secondly, Yellow went down and never sailed higher than her proper course....
Green failed give Mark-room because mark-room includes room to keep clear of Blue. (Case 114)
Blue does not have Mark-room because she was subject to rule 13 in the zone while the others were fetching the mark, so rule 18.2 does not apply.
NB: I see no reason why the protest-time should be extended.
The PC does follow 61.1(c) but her protest is done based on rule 60.3(a)(2).
(I suspect you will say this is too long Jos, but I don’t have time to work out what to leave out! And given how long it is I’ve had to split it over two posts.)
ReplyDeleteFacts found relevant to validity of protests
Blue hailed ‘Protest’ and conspicuously displayed red flag immediately after incident; submitted protest within time limit.
Yellow did not hail ‘Protest’ or display red flag at any time, despite fact that Green was within hailing distance at time of incident. No damage or injury resulted from incident. Yellow did not submit protest until 15 mins after protest time limit.
Conclusions on validity of protests
Blue protest valid.
Yellow protest invalid (failed to notify Green as required by rule 61.1(a)).
However, clear from Blue’s valid protest (e.g. diagram) that Green was involved in incident and may have broken rules 11 and/or 18. Inform Green that PC is protesting her under rule 60.3(a)(2); close hearing (but ask those present to wait); complete protest form in respect of PC protest of Green (rule 61.2); give copy to Green and ask her if she needs further time to prepare (rule 63.2); if not, start new hearing of Blue’s protest of Yellow and PC’s protest of Green immediately.
As to writing a new protest; in order to save time, you could just tell the parties that a form will be filled out (based on information from Blue's protest)and proceed.
DeleteFacts found:
ReplyDeletePC endorses diagram from Blue.
Tornados, Blue, Yellow and Green, approaching windward mark to be left to starboard. Blue on stbd tack, Yellow and Green on port tack; Green overlapped to windward of Yellow (Green having established overlap to windward of Yellow); Blue in zone, Yellow entering zone.
Blue luffs head to wind 0.5BL from mark. Yellow and Green luff up to close-hauled; Yellow 1.5BL to port and 0.5BL ahead of Blue; Green approx 2m to windward and 2/3BL ahead of Yellow.
Blue tacks. Green bears away sharply. Yellow is forced to bear away to avoid Green.
Blue completes tack approx 0.5BL away from mark. Yellow and Green now reaching towards mark at speed; Yellow approx 3/4BL to port of Blue, on course to pass approx 1BL to windward of mark; Green approx 2m to windward of Yellow and 0.5BL ahead.
Blue continues to bear away round mark. Green continues to bear away. Yellow maintains course for about 0.5BL but is then forced to bear away further to avoid Green.
Blue is forced to continue bearing away round mark as Yellow and Green reach across in front of her; Yellow less than 2m away from Blue’s port bow, 0.5BL ahead; Green approx 1m to windward of Yellow, 0.5BL ahead.
No contact. No penalty taken.
Conclusions:
Green
Green, overlapped to windward and outside Yellow throughout, required to keep clear of Yellow by rule 11 (and NB Yellow not prohibited from sailing above her proper course by rule 17 since she did not become overlapped to leeward from clear astern), and required to give Yellow mark room by rule 18.2(b).
Green did so initially (up to position 2), but by bearing away in front of Yellow thereafter, failed to keep clear of Yellow as required by rule 11.
By continuing to bear away (from position 3 onwards) Green also failed to give Yellow mark room as required by rule 18.2(b) since Yellow’s proper course at the mark was to keep clear of Blue (ISAF Case 114).
Yellow
Prior to Blue’s change of tack, Yellow (port tack) kept clear of Blue (stbd tack) as required by rule 13 (rule 18 not applying because Blue and Yellow on opposite tacks on a beat to windward). Yellow also gave Green room to keep clear when Yellow (right of way over Green) changed course, as required be rule 16.1.
Yellow then compelled to bear away to avoid Blue despite being right of way boat (rule 11). Yellow’s change of course did not however break rule 16.1 as she gave Blue room to keep clear.
At the moment Blue completed her tack, Yellow was overlapped to windward and outside Blue. Yellow therefore required to keep clear of Blue by rule 11 (and NB Blue not prohibited from sailing above her proper course by rule 17 as she did not become overlapped to leeward from clear astern). Yellow not however required to give Blue mark room under rule 18.2 since Blue had been subject to rule 13 in the zone when Yellow was fetching the mark (rule 18.3).
Yellow kept clear of Blue initially (maintained her course), but then bore away in front of Blue, breaking rule 11. She was compelled to do so however by Green’s breach of rules 11 and 18.2(b), and is therefore exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
Blue
When Blue changed course (luffed) she gave Yellow and Green room to keep clear as required by rule 16.1. While Blue tacked she kept clear of Yellow and Green as required by rule 13.
Thereafter, as required by rule 18.3, Blue did not cause Yellow or Green to sail above close-hauled, or prevent them from passing the mark on the required side (rule 18.3 applying rather than 18.2 since Blue was subject to rule 13 in the zone when Yellow and Green were fetching the mark).
Blue, having completed her tack and acquired right of way as leeward boat (rule 11), initially gave Yellow and Green room to keep clear (by continuing to bear away) as required by rule 15.
Thereafter she was prevented from sailing her course by Yellow’s breach of rule 11.
Decision
DSQ Green from race.
Zaphod
I noticed you didn't have enough time. There were a couple of mistakes. Yellow had to keep clear under rule 10 (not 13), then Blue under rule 13 (while tacking).
DeleteYellow had to bear away to avoid Green (not Blue). Yellow cannot break 16.1 towards Blue because she was keep clear boat under rule 11.
I would not bring up rule 17 nor 16.1 for Blue and rule 17 for Yellow
Otherwise very good.
Score 8 points (10 minus 2)
Validity and rule 60.3(a)(2)
ReplyDeleteThe protest of Blue (B) against Yellow (Y) is valid.
The protest of Y against Green (G) is invalid (protest handed in after the time limit, and no good reason to extend it). That hearing is closed.
From B's valid protest, it is clear to the committee that G was involved in the incident between B and Y, and may have broken a rule. The chairman asks the sailors to step outside for some minutes, while the committee discusses whether or not the committee will act under rule 60.3(a)(2) and protest G.
During the discussion, a member points out case 39 in that the responsibility to enforce the rules lies with the competitor; it is Y that should have protested G (hail, flag, and protest form within the time limit). Furthermore, since Y did not inform G on the course, G never had the opportunity to take te appropriate penalty. Another member points out there is little guidance about when the PC should or should not act under rule 60.3(a)(2), but that G should not be exonerated from breaking a rule because of Y's mistake. After some deliberation, the committee decides not to protest G.
The sailors are informed of the committee's decision, and B and Y are called in to continue the hearing of the valid protest.
FACTS FOUND
B's drawing is endorsed by the committee.
When B acquired a close-hauled course on port tack at position X, Y was pointing lower than B, and G was pointing lower than Y. Y and B bore away. There was no contact.
CONCLUSIONS AND RULES THAT APPLY
- G must give mark-room to Y under 18.2(b) and keep clear under 11.
- G and Y must keep clear of B under rule 10 while B is on starboard tack. They did.
- After B passes head-to-wind and until she is on a close-hauled course, she must keep clear of Y and G. She did.
- From the moment B is on port tack and on a close-hauled course, Y and G must keep clear of B under rule 11.
- G broke both 18.2(b) and 11 against Y (Y's proper course at the mark includes keeping clear of B). G is not party to the protest hearing, so cannot be penalized under 64.1(a).
- Y broke 11 against B, but is exonerated under 64.1(c) because she was compelled to do so by G's actions.
DECISION
Protest is dismissed
I think it is wrong for the PC not to protest Green.
DeleteYour facts are very short. The diagram does compensate a little.
If you draw a conclusion about rule 10 the facts should start in that position.
No mention of 18.3 nor switching of 18.2 for Blue.
Score 7 points.
CASE 1 --> Yellow against Green
ReplyDeleteCASE 2 --> Blue against Yellow
CASE 3 --> Jury against Green
Case 1
About the validity
Facts Found:
-Yellow did not hail 'Protest'
-Yellow did not display a red flag
-Yellow lodged her protest 15 min after the protest time limit.
Conclusion:
Yellow did not comply with the requirements of RRS 61.1 when informing the protestee and with RRS 61.3, protest time limit
Decision:
Yellow's protest is Invalid
CASE 2
Facts Found
-Yellow, Green and Blue were approaching the windward mark on a close hauled course.
-Yellow and Green were on port tack, overlapped with Yellow on the inside and on leeward of Green, on the outside and windward, when they reached the zone.
-Blue was on starboard tack inside the zone.
-Yellow and Green luffed.
-Blue tacked in the zone 2 BL away from Yellow and rounded the mark.
-Green bore away towards Yellow and Yellow responded boring away too. The nearest the two boats got was 1 meter.
-The distance between Blue on leeward and Yellow on windward was 2 meters.
-No contact occurred between the boats.
Conclusion:
Blue when tacked in the zone did not cause Yellow to sail above close hauled complying with RRS 18.3(a)
Yellow as an overlapped to windward boat kept clear of Blue complying with RRS 11.
No rule was broken
Decision:
Protest is dismissed
CASE 3
Facts Found:
-The protest committee acting under RRS 60.3(a)(2) protested Green for an alleged infringement of RRS 11.
-Cases 1,2,3 were heard together because they concerned the same incident.
-Refer to CASE 2.
Conclusion:
Green failed to keep clear of Yellow as an overlapped to windward boat breaking RRS 11.
Decision:
Green is DSQ in the race
Steviekouris
Endorse the diagram!
DeleteI'm forced to award 6,5 points.
Yellow breaks rule 11 but should be exonerated.
Green failed to give mark as well as didn't keep clear.
Procedural matters (including validity)
ReplyDelete1. The two protests are to be heard together.
2. The protest incident was in the racing area, Yellow's hull length was greater than 6 metres, and Yellow did not display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity. Yellow's protest against Green is invalid (rule 61.1(a)).
3. Blue informed Yellow of her intention to protest at the first reasonable opportunity according to rule 61.1(a). The protest was in writing and meets the requirements of rule 61.2. Blue's protest against Yellow is valid.
4. During the hearing of Blue's protest against Yellow , the protest committee decided that Green was involved in the incident and may have broken a rule. The protest committee closed the hearing and, proceeding as required by rules 61.2 and 63, protested Green. Blue's protest against Yellow is heard with the protest committee's protest against Green.
Facts Found
1. Approaching the windward mark, to be left to starboard, Yellow and Green, sailing below close-hauled, both on port tack, were fetching the mark.
2. Yellow was on a course to collide with, or pass very close ahead of Blue, on starboard.
3. As Yellow entered the zone she luffed to a close-hauled course, as did Green, overlapped to windward.
4. Blue, luffed and passed beyond head to wind one boat length abeam of the mark and two boat lengths from Yellow.
5. From the moment Blue passed beyond head to wind, Blue was overlapped to leeward of Yellow and Green.
6. Blue bore away, initially to a close-hauled course (pos 3), then a beam reach (pos. 4).
7. When Blue passed beyond head to wind, Yellow started bearing away, as did Green, closing the gap with Yellow to leeward.
8. When Blue was on a beam reach (pos. 4) she was on a collision course with Yellow. Yellow was on a collision course with Green.
9. At this moment, Yellow was two metres to windward of Blue, with Green one metre to windward of Yellow.
10. From the moment Blue reached a close-hauled course onwards, Green took no action to increase the gap between herself and Yellow.
11. Blue bore away to a broad reach, followed by Yellow. Green bore away further to windward of Yellow.
12. There was no contact.
Conclusions
1. Yellow and Green, on port, kept clear of Blue, on starboard. Neither Yellow nor Green broke rule 10
2. Blue, while tacking, kept clear of both Yellow and Green. Blue did not break rule 13.
3. Blue changed tack and was subject to rule 13 in the zone. Rule 18.3 applies and rule 18.2 does not.
4. Blue did not cause either Yellow or Green to sail above close-hauled or prevent them from passing the mark on the required side. Neither Yellow nor Green became overlapped inside Blue. Blue did not break rule 18.3.
5. Blue was not entitled to mark room as rule 18.2 does not apply. The exonerations under rule 18.5 do not apply.
6. From the moment Blue passed head to wind she was on the same tack and overlapped with Yellow and Green. Blue was not restricted to sailing her proper course by rule 17.
7. When Blue reached a close hauled course she acquired right of way (rule 11) and was initially required to give Yellow and Green room to keep clear. Blue gave room by bearing away to a beam reach (pos. 4). Blue did not break rule 15.
(TR Call D3 provides guidance “A boat acquiring right of way may comply with rule 15 by altering course herself. This principle applies on any leg of the course”.)
8. When Blue gave room for Yellow to keep clear, Yellow was unable to do so by changing course to windward without immediately making contact with Green, overlapped to windward. Green, to windward, did not keep clear of Yellow to leeward. Green broke rule 11.
9. Blue needed to take action to avoid Yellow. Yellow, to windward, did not keep clear of Blue, to leeward. Yellow broke rule 11.
10. Yellow was compelled to break rule 11 as a consequence of Green breaking rule 11.
Decision
1. Green is disqualified (rule 64.1 (a))
2. Yellow is exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
If I knew who you are I would have awarded 9 points.
DeletePlease reply to this and I can do so.
You didn't mention rule 18.2 between Green and Yellow, otherwise very good.
If I am not mistaken, this must be Grey Bear?
DeleteI'm now assuming it is you....
DeleteProtest Yellow against Green is handed beyond the time limit. PC decides not to extend the time limit. Protest is invalid.
ReplyDeleteProtest Blue against Yellow
FF:
1. Green and Yellow, both close-hauled on port tack, approach the mark to be left to starboard.
2. Green enters the zone overlapped outside Yellow. Green had acquired this overlap from behind.
3. Blue approaches close-hauled on starboard tack, overlapped with both and on a collision course with Yellow and green
4. Yellow luffs up and leaves blue 2 bl of room before Blue starts tacking. Green luffs up in response
5. Blue tacks and establishes a close-hauled course. Meanwhile Both Yellow and Green bore off around the mark. There is a collision course with Yellow. Yellow is overlapped with Blue and Green is overlapped with Yellow.
6. Yellow luffs up, but not enough to avoid collision. Yellow cannot luff up more because Green is reacting to Yellows’s luff.
7. Blue avoids the collision by bearing off, hails “protest” and displays a red flag.
Conclusions and rules involved:
Protest is valid.
Nobody breaks RRS 18.2, RRS 10, RRS 13, RRS 14, RRS 15 or RRS 16.1 or 16.2. After Blue completes her tack, RRS 11 starts to apply between Blue and Yellow and between Green and both Yellow and Blue. Green breaks RRS 11 by not responding to Yellow’s luff, who luffed up to keep clear of Blue. Yellow breaks RRS 11 by not luffing up more, but she is compelled to do so by Green’s action. She is exonerated according to RRS 64.1(c).
Decision: Protest dismissed.
The PC learnt about Green’s breaking RRS 11 in this incident. This information did not come from an invalid protest or request for redress. PC finds this a good reason to extend the protest time limit and protests Yellow for breaking RRS 11.
Protest PC against Green.
Protest is valid. FF and conclusions as above. Decision: Protest is upheld, Green is DSQ.
Score 7 points.
DeleteGreen breaks rule 18.2(b) by not giving mark-room to Yellow which includes room to keep clear of Blue. Case 114
You forgot rule 18.3 and its implications.
And I'm deducting one point for use of 16...
Your extra point for Episode 03/16 has been added in this scoreboard.
DeleteValidity
ReplyDeleteB's protest against Y is valid.
Y's protest against G is invalid. Y did not hail protest, did not fly a red flag (rule 61.1).
G did not became a party, but was invited to be a witness.
During the valid hearing of B vs Y, the PC found that G may have broken a rule. PC closed the current hearing, protested G and opened a new hearing with parties B, Y and G present (rules 60.3(a)(2) and 61.1(c)).
Facts Found
B, Y and G were sailing on the same leg of the course toward the windward mark to be left to starboard.
B approached the mark on starboard tack. Y and G sailed on port tack well above the layline. G was outside and overlapped with Y during the whole incident.
B tacked at the mark. When she was head to wind, 1 boatwidth abreast of the mark, Y was 2 boatlengths and G was 3 boatlengths from the mark, just below close hauled courses.
When B reached a close hauled course, Y bore off to a reaching course and accelerated.
At position 4, G was less than 0.5 m to windward and half a boatlength ahead of Y, pointing slightly lower than Y.
At position 4, B's port bow was aiming at Y's starboard bow, with a distance between the bows 3m, angle between centerlines of the boats 25 degrees. At that moment Y's speed was two times higher than B's speed.
B intended to sail a straight course from position 4, but she needed to change course to leeward to avoid Y.
Conclusions
While B was on starboard tack, Y and G kept clear of B under rule 10.
B tacked in the zone while Y and G was fetching the mark. B did not cause Y or G to sail above close hauled, and did not prevent them from passing the mark on the required side. B complied with rule 18.3(a). Rule 18.2 did not apply between B and Y or G.
While B was tacking she kept clear of Y and G under rule 13.
When B reached a close hauled course, she acquired right of way under rule 11, and she initially gave Y room to keep clear as required by rule 15. While B was changing course, she gave Y room to keep clear under rule 16.1.
B became overlapped to leeward of Y within a distance of two of her length, but not from clear astern, so rule 17 did not limit her to not sail above her proper course - She was not required to bear away around the mark.
Given the speed differences and distances of B and Y, had B held a straight course from position 4, Y would have been able to cross ahead of B, but only with a very narrow margin (some centimeters). Therefore B's apprehension of a collision with Y was a reasonable one. Y broke rule 11.
At position 4 G did not keep clear of Y, since Y could not change course to windward without making immediate contact with G. G broke rule 11, and thus compelled Y to break rule 11. Y is exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
G did not give Y mark-room, since Y could not sail her proper course at the mark. G broke rule 18.2(b).
Decision
DSQ G
Pretty much perfect, save for the unnecessary use of 16 and 17.
DeleteScore 8 points
Protest Blue v Yellow and Protest Yellow v Green were scheduled together.
ReplyDeleteValidity of Yellow’s protest
Yellow did not hail protest or fly a protest flag, as she was obliged to under rule 61.1(a)(1).
Yellow lodged her protest 15 minutes after the expiry of the time limit, required by rule 61.3 and the SIs.
Yellow only lodged the protest as a result of reading Blue’s protest against her.
No good reasons have been given to extend the time for the protest to be lodged, pursuant to rule 61.3.
Yellows protest is invalid.
Protest Yellow v Green is closed.
Facts Found (for protest Blue v Yellow)
Yellow and Green were approaching the windward mark from above the port layline, on port tack. The mark was to be left to starboard.
Blue was approaching the windward mark, close hauled on starboard, one boat length below the starboard layline.
When Yellow and Green reached the zone, they were overlapped, with Yellow inside.
When Blue was abreast of the mark, she tacked onto port.
Blue reached a close hauled course on port, a boat length to leeward of Yellow and aiming 0.75 boat lengths in front of her.
Blue bore away to avoid Yellow.
Green who was windward of Yellow, bore away.
Yellow bore away to avoid Green, who had converged to a distance of 0.5 meters and who was still continuing to bear away.
While avoiding Green, Yellow sailed into the path of Blue, who was one meter to leeward of her. Yellow was within a boat length above the mark.
Blue bore away further to avoid Yellow.
There was no contact.
Conclusions
When Blue reached a close hauled course on port, she was initially obliged to give Yellow room to keep clear under rule 15. She did so by bearing away.
At that stage, Yellow complied with her obligations to Blue, as she would have been unable to avoid Blue had Blue remained close hauled.
After Blue gave Yellow room, Yellow nevertheless broke rule 11 by bearing away into Blue’s path when Blue was leeward.
At the same time, Green who was windward of Yellow, was breaking rule 11 by not keeping clear of Yellow.
Green also broke rule 19.2(b) by not giving Yellow room between Green and Blue, who was an obstruction.
Green was obliged to give Yellow mark room under rule 18.2(b). Green broke rule 18.2(b) because she did not allow Yellow to sail her proper course at the mark, when Yellow’s proper course was to avoid Blue.
Once Blue completed her tack, Yellow was obliged to give her mark room under rule 18.2(a). She broke rule 18.2(a) because she did not allow Blue to round the mark in the manner Blue would have done to maximise her speed, in the absence of Yellow.
Yellow had been compelled to break rules 11 and 18.2(b) by Green breaking rules 11, 18.2(b) and 19.2(b). Yellow is exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
Yellow is also exonerated from her breach of rule 11, under rule 18.5(a).
Green is not penalised because no valid protest has been lodged against her.
Rules applicable
11, 15, 18.2(a), 18.2(b), 19.2(b), 61.3, 64.1(c).
Decision
No boat is penalised.
A pity you didn't use rule 60.3(a)(2)
DeleteBlue is never entitled to mark-room because rule 18.3 switches of 18.2, something you missed. I would never use rule 19 in this situation, although technically you are correct.
At least you didn't go for 16 and 17
Score 8 points
We have missed several situations, but we're back to compete in the E03/23 Challenge.
ReplyDeleteBlue appears to have a valid protest, having properly hailed and flown a protest flag (Rule 61.1) and timely filed her protest (Rule 61.3).
Yellow's protest is not valid, because she did not hail "Protest" or conspicuously fly a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity (Rule 61.1) or timely file a protest (Rule 61.3), and it should not be heard by the protest committee.
Yellow is the protestee of Blue and should have a representative at the protest hearing (Rule 63.3 and definition of "party").
Green did not file a protest.
Green should not have a representative at the table during the protest meeting to hear Blue's protest (Rule 63.3), except that Blue or Yellow might call witnesses from Green if they choose to.
Facts found;
Blue, Yellow and Green were planning to round a windward mark on the racecourse.
Yellow and Green were approaching the mark on port tack; Blue was approaching on starboard tack.
Blue tacked within the Zone into an inside position.
Blue completed her tack without interfering with Yellow or Green.
Blue, after completing her tack, became the Right of Way leeward boat as she rounded the mark and remained so at position 4 in the diagram.
Blue had to alter course to leeward to avoid a collision with Yellow at position 4.
Conclusions:
After Blue tacked, Rule 18.2 did not apply (Rule 18.3), but Blue became the right-of-way leeward boat (Rule 11) and thereafter Yellow and Green were obligated to keep clear of Blue.
Yellow broke Rule 11 and is Disqualified.
"The Question" I would ask is directed to the representative of the Yellow boat: "Why did you fall down on the Blue boat at position 4 in the diagram when you were the 'Keep clear' windward boat at that time?"
Yellow most likely answered "the Question" by stating that she had to bear off at position 4 to avoid a collision with Green. If that is the case then the protest committee needs to call another hearing protesting Green under rule 60.3(a)(2) to determine whether Green broke Rule 11 and to see if Yellow should be exonerated under rule 64.1(c).
Eye Eye
Hmm, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'm assuming from your last statement you did all that.
DeleteScore 7 points.
You didn't mention anything about Green's obligations under rule 18.2(b) and fulfilling them...
If you decide Green may have broken a rule you must decide to protest them, before the hearing so that they become a party and protest can be heard simultaneously.
Validity
ReplyDeleteYellow files a protest against green at 18:15. Protest time limit was 18:00
Purples hailed “protest” and flew a red flag and complied with Rule 61.1(a). Purple’s protest is valid
Yellows protest was found invalid because the protest committee could find no good reason to extend the time limit.
The protest committee files a protest against green and yellow under Rule 60.3a(2) to be heard concurrent with purple’s protest
Facts Found
*Purple approached windward mark which was to be left to starboard on starboard tack. Purple has an inside overlap with yellow and green when she is first to enter the zone.
*Yellow and Green overlapped approached the mark on port tack. Yellow the leeward boats bow was 10 feet behind Greens bow. There was 2 meters between yellow and green.
*(Figure 2) Yellow luffed 5 degrees as purple approached on starboard on a collision course. Green luffed and kept 0.75 meters from yellow. Yellow was 10 meters from purple.
*(Figure 3) When purple completed its tack it was overlapped with yellow and green, 7 meters to leeward of yellow. Purple was on a collision course with yellow>
Purple said she wanted to continue straight ahead after tacking.
*(Figure 4) Purple immediately headed down an additional 25 degrees and was still on a collision course and now only 1.5 meters away from yellow. Green is 0.1 meter to windward of yellow
*Purple headed down another 10 degrees and yellow passed by 1 meter to windward.
*Purple hails “protest” at figure 4 and flies a red flay 4 seconds later.
Conclusion
*Rule 18 does not apply because purple and yellow were on opposite tack on a beat to windward. Rule 18 (a)
*Purple completes a tack in the zone Rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply.
*Purple kept clear of yellow when tacking from starboard to port.
*Purple on port to leeward of yellow could not sail her desired course after completing her tack. Yellow breaks Rule 11.
*Green 0.1 meters to windward of yellow at Figure 4 did not keep clear of yellow and prevented yellow from luffing to keep clear of purple. Green breaks Rule 11
Decision
*Green is DSQ for breaking Rule 11
*Yellow breaks Rule 11 but is exonerated under 64.1(c)
Basicly correct, although you forgot 18.2(b) between Yellow and Green.
DeleteIt would be a lot simpler if you just endorse the diagram. Then you have less facts found to write.
Please be very accurate in writing your conclusions. For instance there's no rule 18(a). Rule 18.3 states that rule 18.2 does not apply (not only 18.2(b). Use capital letters at all times when naming the boats > Yellow in stead of yellow.
Score 8 points
I posted all entries, so you can compare yours to the others. Scoring (hopefully) tomorrow-evening. During the day I'm umpiring in Lelystad.
ReplyDeleteHaving read all the entries I realised that they were all very long.
ReplyDeleteHaving a few spare minutes I attempted to shorten the text. My short version is presented here. There is of course less detail, but I hope the essential is there.
I would be grateful for any comments. Can anyone do a shorter version?
Procedural matters
1. Blue's protest is valid.
2. The protest incident was in the racing area. Yellow did not display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity. Yellow's protest is invalid. (rule 61.1(a)).
3. During the hearing of Blue's protest the protest committee learnt that Green may have broken a rule. The protest hearing was closed, Green was informed, and having proceeded as required by rules 61.2 and 63, a new protest against Green was heard together with Blue's original protest.
Facts found
1. When Blue passed head to wind inside the zone she became overlapped to leeward inside Yellow, with Green overlapped to windward outside Yellow. All boats on port tack.
2. When Blue reached a close hauled course she was on a collision course with Yellow.
3. Blue bore away. Green did not change course to windward, preventing Yellow, 1 metre to leeward, from changing course away from Blue.
4. Blue, still on a collision course, 2 metres from Yellow, bore away.
5. There was no contact.
Conclusions.
1. When Blue acquired right of way she initially gave room for Yellow and Blue to keep clear (rule 15).
2. Yellow, to windward, did not keep clear of Blue, to leeward. Yellow was compelled to break rule 11 because Green, to windward, did not give room to Yellow to leeward (rule 11, 64.1(c)). Green broke rule 11.
Decision
1. Green is disqualified
2. Yellow is exonerated under rule 64.1(c)
Grey Bear
This is how I would have done it when 'in the field'
DeleteDrop conclusion 1 and it would be perfect.
I'm allowing more conclusions and rules involved because of this challenge, but this gets you to the heart of the matter and gives the correct 'result'.
During the discussion in the room you can discuss all matters and dismiss the ones that have no impact on the outcome. During the discussion you can get to the one conclusion that sums it all up.
Jos
ReplyDeleteDid you receive my entry? It was sent in time, albeit one minute to go.
Dauphine
Yes I have. But somehow it ended up in the SPAM box. I've fished it out and it is now published.
DeleteSorry I can't finish scoring today. Been on the water the whole day and was late coming home. I'm beat and it's time for bed. (Despite what the time index on the comments are stating, it is actually Apr. 1, 2012 23:17 here)
Thanks Jos. Sounds like you need a good break over Easter.
ReplyDeleteAnother event, I'm afraid. It never ends :-)
Delete