Racing Rules of Sailing 2005 - 2008

[Chairman]

ISAF have pre-released the 2005 RRS.

http://www.sailing.org/Article_content. ... cleID=7490

As far as I can see, no really major changes, just tidying up and clarifying a bunch of details. But there are *some* changes to the game.

• When two boats pass head to wind simultaneously (RRS 13), the boat astern is now burdened to keep clear. This is interesting, since previously it might have been thought that the windward boat was burdened (even though RRS 11 did not apply, it would have applied immediately prior, and immediately after).
• The obligations of a starboard boat while a port tack boat is crossing have changed (RRS 16.2). Starboard no longer must hold her course at all times; instead, she must only hold her course if a change of course would require port to immediately change course as well, and this restraint only applies if port is crossing astern.
• Your rights while rounding a mark (RRS 18) have changed subtly. RRS 18 now kicks in if, while on opposite tacks, you both must tack to round the mark. Previously it didn't kick in at all if one or both of you needed to tack.
• If you need to hail to safely tack in order to pass an obstruction (RRS 19), you are now permitted to do so, rather than obliged to do.
• There is a new rule which prevents you interfering with a boat on a different leg of the course (RRS 22.2).
• The 360 is now called a turn, so it is clearer that you do not have to turn through exactly 360 degrees -- 350 or 370 will do so long as you end up more or less on the course you were on prior to the turn.

The changes to Appendix E have not been highlighted. I understand they too are tidying up of detail, especially sail numbering, but again *some* of the game has changed.

• Unless your Sailing Instructions say otherwise, you cannot release your boat between the prep and starting signals (E4.5).
• The restrictions on propulsion and prohibited actions now follow those of full size more closely, the only matters which do not apply are those relating to body movement (E4.3).
• We seem to have lost all of the old E4.7 about moving ballast and replacing radio gear with similar items... I think this is an error... Argh!

[Chairman]

We seem to have lost all of the old E4.7 about moving ballast and replacing radio gear with similar items... I think this is an error... Argh!

My mistake. No error at all. Old E4.7 has been deleted from the 2005-2008 RRS. RRS 51 is reinstated. The intention is that the class rules shall specify what happens with ballast.

[Chairman]

RRS 18 now kicks in if, while on opposite tacks, you both must tack to round the mark.

Hang on! This seems to say that, if we have a "simple" port-starboard situation *within* the zone, where starboard has under-stood the layline, and port is sailing to reach the (starboard) layline, port can hail starboard and say, "Hey, starboard, we are both going to have to tack to round the mark. Seeing as how I am closer to the mark than you, seeing as how we are defined to be overlapped now, seeing as how RRS 18 now applies, I am the inside boat and so you must give me room to round the mark. You must tack away NOW and let me do that!"

Sounds like a pretty substantial change to the game to me. Have I got this right?

[Nigel28]

Lester
Seems to me that your interpretation is correct and wouldn't it also apply if 2 boats where heading towards the mark, both below the layline and both on stbd with the leward boat slightly ahead. Once they reach the 4 bl then the leeward boat becomes the inside boat and can make his tack to get up to the layline, furthermore as rule 16 does not apply while rule 18 is in force this becomes even more of an issue. I can't see it but I think we must be missing something!

[Secretary]

Lester:

I presume you're talking about:

(b) while the boats are on opposite tacks, either on a beat to windward
or when the proper course for one of them, but not both, to
round or pass the mark or obstruction is to tack.

My interpretation of the above passage is completely different.

The "either on a beat to windward" part makes it clear that in never applies at the windward mark (as you're approaching it on the beat) when on opposite tacks! So - no change there.

I think that the change in meaning is that in now applies to the tacking portion of the manoevre around the leeward mark - if you can show that that (opposite tack) is your proper course to the next mark (and presumably a boat following close astern would then want to do the same).

So now the follower cannot prevent you from making that tack (as she was able to do under old rules where the tack would not have "counted" as a part of a mark rounding and could mean risk of breaking RRS 16).

This will likely only come to play if the course (run) is heavily skewed - to the point where you have to tack at the leeward mark - e.g. if you can lay the windward mark or (more likely) the finish line straight from the leeward pin (from the opposite tack)...

Cheers,

Marko

[Chairman]

My interpretation of the above passage is completely different. The "either on a beat to windward" part makes it clear that it never applies at the windward mark

Hi Marko

OK, got it! I'm glad someone is doing a better job of reading the rule than I am!

(Muttering that I didn't think they'd make such a change to the game without lots more hoopla...)

[Nigel28]

Well spotted Marko, Its all the double meaning that is so confusing , so what do you or anyone else out there make of my other scenario?
Two boats on stbd both below the layline with the leeward boat half a length ahead. Once the second boat enters the 4 boat length zone rules of part C take precedence over rules of A&B and therefore rule 18 takes over as they both need to tack and therefore are not excluded from the rule. As rule 16 does not apply the first boat can now tack for the layline at will.

[Secretary]

Hi Nigel,

Hmmm... My interpretation of the meaning of rule 18 is (again) somewhat different.

In my mind "the zone" has little to do with when the boats are "about to round" (unless specifically invoked by the rule itself).

That is to say - if two boats are approaching the windward mark on stb but below the stb layline, even after entering the circle they are not "about to round or pass the mark". Therefore, 18 doesn't apply to them (yet)...

Presumably windward boat will tack at some point, followed by the leeward boat... Then ex-windward (now leeward) boat will tack again (assuming enough room is there to complete the tack) presumably this time on the stb layline... Now she's "about to round" but 18 still doesn't apply since they are on opposite tacks.

Then ex-leeward now-port-tack boat will tack and at this point rule 18 kicks in - 18.3 to be precise because the tack took place in the zone while the other boat was (now) "fetching the mark" - and consequently the tacker takes on obligations as per 18.3(a)&(b)...

Again, AFAICS, nothing changes...

Marko

[Steve Landeau]

Jumping in a bit late here, and I've not read all the new changes.. BUT..
18.2 B is a limitation telling you when rule 18 DOES NOT apply. The key here is how the comma is used.
Rule 18: (da, da, da, da,)
However, it DOES NOT apply: (and here is the key)
18.2(b) between boats on opposite tacks
now, change the comma to an AND, and continue

between boats on opposite tacks, (and) either on a boat to ww, (da, da, da, da)

If you are NOT on opposite tacks, rule 18.2(b) will not apply. Remember, 18.2(b) is a rule that TURNS OFF rule 18.

[Steve Landeau]

Sorry, fingers got away from me. Meant to hit 18.1(b) not 18.2(b).
Where did the "edit" feature go?

[Nigel28]

Once again very good point! I suppose it boils down to when you consider the boats are about to round the mark.
IMHO it is allways a boats intention to pass the mark as required by the race course. So when a boat enters the 4 boat length zone with an inside overlap he is entitled to "18:- room for an inside boat to round or pass between an outside boat and a mark or obstruction, including room to tack or gybe when either is a normal part of the manoeuvre."
In the present rules 18.1b states that this rule does not apply "when the proper course is for one or both of them to round or pass the mark or obstrucion is to tack."
In the new draft the same rule says "when the proper course is for one of them, but not both, to round or pass the mark or obstrucion is to tack."
Therefore if they are both required to tack to round the mark then, as Steve calls it, the turn off clause does not apply so rule 18 and room to pass must apply?
[/b]

[Secretary]

Hi Nigel,

I suppose it boils down to when you consider the boats are about to round the mark.
IMHO it is allways a boats intention to pass the mark as required by the race course.

Sure... On a free leg of the course entering the zone is a good "rule of thumb" that you're about to round.

I say a rule of thumb because in lighter winds and with our boats (which don't exactly require a lot of "prep-work" to execute a tack or a gybe) this can be a little less (than 4 lenghts). The rounding rights (whether you have to give room or are entitled to it) are "frozen" at 4 lengths but the outside boat (if holding ROW) may have another few seconds to jockey the inside boat closer to the mark before conceding the room that he owes. Anyway I seem to digress.

On the beat, however, (regardless of how "close" to the mark you are) if you're on starboard tack and below the starboard layline (to the point where you're not fetching the mark without an extra hitch) I would not consider you "about to round".

A "rounding manoevre" can include a tack but (unless you're required to do a 360 around the mark ) I can't see that it can include two tacks.

(the above is assuming rounding to port)

The key difference (now that I think about the cases where the old and new 18.1b are different) is that before (I guess) if you were both approaching the windward mark on port tack (with port rounding) the outside (leeward) boat was entitled to luff (based on how the overlap established) and take the inside boat past the mark and then come back to round first - because the proper course for both of them to round was to tack and hence the rule 18 was switched off. Now rule 18 applies to them so the outside boat has to give room.

Same story for starboard approach with marks-to-starboard rounding.

Funny, but I never realized that I can take a boat to the wrong side of the mark in that situation (port-to-port or stb-to-stb) and always went under the assumption that I should give room to the inside boat. Just as well, because I don't think that a stunt like that would endear you to many.



Cheers,

Marko

[Dan Crowley]

Am I gonna have to know all this for the Toronto regatta?

[Chairman]

ISAF have pre-released the 2005 RRS. The changes to Appendix E have not been highlighted. I understand they too are tidying up of detail, especially sail numbering [...]

Steve Landeau has pointed out that, in fact, the sail numbering rules have changed the minimum spacing very significantly.

In October 2003, Submission 144-03 to the ISAF annual conference identified changes to appendix E.6, and asked that the min and max distance between sail numbers was set as 13 mm and 25 mm for RRS 2005-2008. Not that different from the current 13 mm and 23 mm.

Somewhere along the line, this was changed, and the RRS is set to be published with 20 mm and 30 mm now as the min and max.

The rules about what you can make smaller in order to fit a sail number onto the (smallest) rig have also changed. In particular, you are not permitted to reduce the gap between digits. Steve thinks that you'll not be able to fit your number with the space for a "1" prefix onto your No.3 rig. Instead, you are permitted to reduce the height of the number, but that isn't very helpful if you are using "standard" pre-cut numbers.

Existing sails seem to be affected. The new appendix G says

Sails measured before 31 March 1999 shall comply with rule G1.1 or with the rules applicable at the time of measurement.

So sails measured after 1999 have no dispensation apparently. The IOM class rules tells us

C.8 SAILS
C.8.3 IDENTIFICATION Identification shall comply with the RRS.

F.2.1 RULES
Rigs shall comply with the current class rules.

[Dick Carver]

Why does the RSD feel it is necessary to, once again, make a lot of peoples sails illegal, when they have been in legal use for , in some cases several years?

IOM CR Section G - Sails

Rule G.2.1 - Sails shall comply with the class rules in force at the time of their initial fundamental measurement.

The change to the RRS 2005 - 2008 regarding sail numbers seems to be in conflict with IOM CR G.2.1

Which rule takes precedence?

[Chairman]

Why does the RSD feel it is necessary to, once again, make a lot of peoples sails illegal, when they have been in legal use for, in some cases several years?

Hi Dick

I am not sure that this was the doing of RSD. I was trying to be careful when I said "somewhere along the line" the rule has changed, and it could well have been changed by the ISAF Racing Rules Committee...

IOM CR Section G - Sails
Rule G.2.1 - Sails shall comply with the class rules in force at the time of their initial fundamental measurement.

Thanks for quoting the right rule!

The change to the RRS 2005 - 2008 regarding sail numbers seems to be in conflict with IOM CR G.2.1

The rules about sails in the IOM Class Rules, section G, do not include any rules about sail identification. So there is no conflict that I see there. The Class Rules about identification are in C.8, where it says that identification shall conform to the RRS, and that's where the problem lies.

The IOMICA Exec is working on two or three avenues. One is to consider whether we need a change to the class rules, so that identification is allowed to conform either to the current RRS, or to the RRS in force at the time the sails were measured. Two is to find out if the changes in E6 were, ah, editorial errors somewhere within ISAF, and can be reversed or amendments issued. Three is, if neither of the first two approaches work, to consider suggesting a change to the Sailing Instructions for IOM events similar to the first avenue.

[Dick Carver]

Thanks for the info Lester.
I apologize if I sounded a bit accusatory in my questioning of the RSD.

It gets a bit frustrating dealing with minute rule changes that render previously legal boats out of spec.

For those of us who have inked their sail #s on, it is simply a matter of making a large mess with paper towels and acetone, and a few hours work re numbering.
For the unfortunate people who are still using the stick on #s, they risk losing a suit of sails. I've ruined a set of sails trying to get the stick on #s off. It's simply not worth the risk.

So now we have another situation where many people who don't persue IOM racing at the highest levels will likely take a "who cares if my #s are 2 or 3 mm too close together" attitude. This isn't good for the class.

I sincerely hope that something can be worked out, either by amending App. E, or through the SI approach.

Thanks for your effort and
best of luck.

[ralph kelley]

Why not simply have one of the "emergency" IOM rule changes that grandfather existing sails?

Seems to be a simple way to address the problem.

And there need not be any time limit either. For those in the higher levels, they will be using new sails/new numbers in a short time anyway and for those who sail at the lower levels, with older sails, they won't have a need to do anything until they eventually change sails.

And we need to remember that there are likely to be some sails of dacron still in use. I have a #3 set in dacron with inked on numbers that, while several years old, are quite servicable in our heavy air Dallas Blowouts. I would not try to change these numbers.


Ralph