Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 16.1, Changing Course
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
When an inside overlapped windward boat that is entitled to mark-room sails below her proper course while at the mark, she must keep clear of the outside leeward boat, and the outside boat may luff provided that she gives the inside boat room to keep clear.
Summary of the Facts |
Decision
Rule 18.2(b) required OL to give IW room to sail to the mark and then room to
sail her proper course while at the mark. Clearly, between positions 1 and 2
OL gave IW room to sail to the mark. At position 2, IW was ‘at the mark’
and between positions 2 and 3 she was entitled to room to sail her proper course.
Her proper course during that time was to luff onto a close-hauled course, and
OL gave her room to do so. Therefore, OL did not break rule 18.2(b).
When OL luffed between positions 2 and 3, IW was required by rule 11 to keep
clear of OL, and OL was required by rule 16.1 to give her room to do so. OL
luffed approximately 30 degrees while moving forward two hull lengths. Even
with a boom-end mainsheet rig, a boat sailed in a seamanlike way can turn through
30 degrees and trim her mainsail appropriately
while moving forward two hull lengths. Therefore, OL gave IW room to keep clear
and OL did not break rule 16.1.
OL could easily have avoided contact with IW, and so OL broke rule 14. However,
she is not penalized for doing so because neither boat was damaged, nor was
there any injury.
IW sailed well below her proper course; in fact she sailed a hull length away
from the mark on a course over 45 degrees below close-hauled and, as a result,
took much more space than rule 18.2(b) entitled her to take. Throughout the
incident IW was required by rule 11 to keep clear of OL. Shortly before the
contact, IW broke rule 11 by failing to keep clear. It was possible for IW to
have avoided the contact, and therefore IW also broke rule 14. However, because
IW was entitled to mark-room and the contact resulted in neither damage nor
injury, she too can not be penalized for breaking rule 14.
IW’s appeal is dismissed. The protest committee’s decision to disqualify
IW under rule 11 is upheld.
CYA 1971/9