Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013 - Page 40 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > General Interest Forums > General Discussion (sailing related)
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree1029Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #391  
Old 08-06-2013
hellosailor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,044
Thanks: 0
Thanked 50 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
hellosailor has a spectacular aura about hellosailor has a spectacular aura about
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Well, smack, since a dsq is a penalty, I suppose one can read it both ways. The event rules take priority, as they always do, and they can also penalize you by dsq'ing you, which would harmonize with the racing rules.

That would be the RC's choice, to apply a penalty of points, or a full dsq. But since they say "penalty" and do not expressly say "dsq", I don't think that would hold.

A navigator normally does not need to know the rules of the race, he just needs to say "go here" and the skipper can let him know if that's a problem. But I'd be really surprised in the skipper, navigator, tactician, and watch lead didn't all attend every meeting, simply because there's always something relevant and more heads on the boat that understand the bigger picture, usually means a better outcome.

Ain't rocket science, the event rules always have been the final word. Anyone who is not a USSA member can puzzle themselves about that, or join USSA and then they're obligated to tell you "Yeah, that's how it works" since they are the governing body of sail racing in the US.

Unless of course the racing rules say "this is not a USSA sanctioned event and no USSA policies etc shall apply of govern here." Never seen that, but it would be possible.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #392  
Old 08-06-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 314
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 6
Sanduskysailor is on a distinguished road
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

So what class rule excepts Rule 52? Certainly not any of the ORR rules. Unless it is spelled out explicitly that the rule or parts of rule 52 does not apply it applies. There aren't time penalties for breaking a fundamental rule. As stated before there is no penalty for motoring- you are out. Same for the autopilot. Use it and you are out.

Ignorance of the rules doesn't cut it. ORR class rules don't allow it either. http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets...ok+June+22.pdf
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #393  
Old 08-06-2013
poopdeckpappy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 5,471
Thanks: 22
Thanked 37 Times in 31 Posts
Rep Power: 9
poopdeckpappy has a spectacular aura about poopdeckpappy has a spectacular aura about
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Quote:
However, it was also clear from the race rules that uses of autohelm would be subject to a penalty, and would not lead to disqualification. This was laid out with great clarity in the race rules.
So and until someone can rebut this, ya gotta go with it, he was there
__________________
1978 Tayana 37

Freedom comes when you’re ready to sail away. True freedom comes when you don’t have to return


Cut off from the land that bore us, betrayed by the land we find, where the brightest have gone before us and the dullest remain behind, .......but stand to your glasses, steady,.......tis all we have left to prize, raise a cup to the dead already, hurrah for the next that dies
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #394  
Old 08-06-2013
Coquina's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 333
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 2
Coquina is on a distinguished road
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

From the 2013 NOR:

1.6 Auto pilot use is only permitted for double handed boats.

13.3 For infractions of the Notice of Race or Sailing Instructions, the Race Committee may protest and the Jury
may penalize the offending yacht by adding a time penalty


For a boat that was going to be DFL anyway, it seems like the RC might just demote them to even more DFL. But then again, 13.3 leaves a lot more weasel room than I am used to in a NOR.
__________________
Joe Della Barba
Coquina
C&C 35 MK I

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #395  
Old 08-06-2013
smackdaddy's Avatar
Last Man Standing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 12,717
Thanks: 71
Thanked 61 Times in 55 Posts
Rep Power: 8
smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coquina View Post
From the 2013 NOR:

1.6 Auto pilot use is only permitted for double handed boats.

13.3 For infractions of the Notice of Race or Sailing Instructions, the Race Committee may protest and the Jury
may penalize the offending yacht by adding a time penalty


For a boat that was going to be DFL anyway, it seems like the RC might just demote them to even more DFL. But then again, 13.3 leaves a lot more weasel room than I am used to in a NOR.
Well there you go. And as LetsGo called it in and got the verbal ruling which fits the above...what's the issue?

"Even More DFL". Best thing to come out of this thread yet.

PS - Coquina, this is an insane photo:



We had a similar thing on our old boat on Lake Travis:



Not quite as nasty looking as yours!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

S/V Dawn Treader - 1989 Hunter Legend 40

Last edited by smackdaddy; 08-06-2013 at 05:49 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #396  
Old 08-06-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 314
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 6
Sanduskysailor is on a distinguished road
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

This isn't about "For infractions of the Notice of Race or Sailing Instructions, the Race Committee may protest and the Jury" It is about breaking a rule of Sailing (Rule 52) The RC can except certain Rules of Sailing but must do so in the NOR or amendments.

Using an autoplilot in a crewed racing division would be highly unusual. Now if you are talking about classes that allow motoring, it is pretty common to also allow autopilots. That applies to specific "cruising classes" normally. To my knowledge, none of those classes existed in the Transpac outside of the double handed class.

The statement that got my antenna up is " I doubt they would disqualify a boat that was so far behind". Really! Obeying the rules is not relative to your position on the course.

Last edited by Sanduskysailor; 08-06-2013 at 05:39 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #397  
Old 08-06-2013
hellosailor's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,044
Thanks: 0
Thanked 50 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
hellosailor has a spectacular aura about hellosailor has a spectacular aura about
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Sandusky,--
Forget about Rule 52. Read the 2013 Introduction, which tells you that "Changes to the Rules The prescriptions of a national authority,
class rules or the sailing instructions may change a racing rule only
as permitted in rule 86."

And then go to Rule 86.

And then keep reading, it specifically lists Rule 52 as being one that can be changed by the event rules.

Forget the trees, look at the forest.

USSA policy has always been that the event rules govern the event. You got a problem with the event rules, you take it up with the sponsor before the race.

This is why it pays for everyone above "rail meat" to attend the meetings, read the papers, and generally be aware of the full circumstances of the race.

Before there was a handy dandy internet to download rules from (and before the ISF got generous about posting them) it was worth joining USYRU just to ge tthe pocket-sized copy of the rules. Which made for good reading while on the rail.

I've never heard a skipped complain when anyone on the boat expressed an interest in learning or applying the Rules, because there's always a way to misread them.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #398  
Old 08-06-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 314
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 6
Sanduskysailor is on a distinguished road
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

I know all about rule 86 having dealt with it in regards to exceptions to class rules. This isn't a rule 86 issue since the RC did not explicitly exempt anyone from the Rules of Racing in a general way other the the DH class. Most likely the intent was to penalize boats for missing call ins and other rules specific to this race not to violations to the Rules of Racing. .
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #399  
Old 08-06-2013
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 15
Thanks: 1
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Rep Power: 0
LetsGo is on a distinguished road
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanduskysailor View Post
"Now, using autohelm was technically against the race rules, except for double-handed boats. However, it was also clear from the race rules that uses of autohelm would be subject to a penalty, and would not lead to disqualification. This was laid out with great clarity in the race rules. And it was quite obvious that the Transpac would have no interest in disqualifying a boat that was already in last place."

Jake I am sorry to hear that you had to endure the race on the ship of fools but your statement quoted above is a bit bothersome. As soon as you turned on the autopilot you were in violation of rule 52 of the 2013-16 rules of racing. There is no penalty or exoneration for breaking that rule, only disqualification. What clarity was there in the Transpac NOR regarding this? Exception 1.6 pertains only to the double handed class regarding autopilots. It is no different than turning on your motor, putting it in gear and motoring. Not cool and definitely not kosher no matter how far behind you were. It is not the responsibility of the Transpac Committee to enforce this. It is incumbent on yourself to call it on yourself. Hopefully you don't teach sailboat racing along with the sailing classes you give.
Perhaps to accommodate our class of "racer," the Transpac NOR defined penalties as below. (Only the bolded part is completely relevant here.) It is effectively saying that violation of most of the rules will likely involve either a penalty, or no penalty, but probably not disqualification—except in the specific examples cited.

Again, confirming that I read this correctly, when I asked the commodore on the phone whether using autohelm would lead to disqualification, he said that was very unlikely.

Surely if we had been in anything other than class 8—the Aloha class, basically boats not really meant for racing—the interpretation might be quite different. At least I imagine there would be little excuse for a well-crewed boat in serious contention for trophies to be using autohelm much if at all. But for ours....

I do, incidentally, know that it is generally a disqualification to use autohelm. In fact, some races enforce this by various means.



13 PENALTIES
When the protest committee decides that a boat that is a party to a protest hearing has broken a rule and is not exonerated, it may impose an elapsed time penalty or impose no penalty at all. If an elapsed time penalty is imposed, its magnitude will be at the protest committee’s discretion. This penalty also is applied to elapsed time, Class and Fleet standing trophies. However,
(a) if the boat caused injury or damage to another boat that affected the other’s racing
ability or gained a significant advantage in the race by her breach, she will be disqualified.
(b) if the boat is found to have broken rule 69.1(a), the protest committee shall follow
rule 69.2(c). Willfully reporting a false position or false weather will be considered
gross misconduct and dealt with under rule 69.2.
(c) if the protest committee decides that a breach of rule 41 was committed to insure
the safety of a boat or her crew, the protest committee will impose no penalty.
(d) a boat will receive an elapsed time penalty of two hours if the protest committee
determines that she
(1) is on the course side of the starting line at her starting signal and does not
return to the pre-start side of the line and start, or
(2) touches a starting or finishing line mark and does not take a One-Turn
Penalty as described in rule 44.2.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #400  
Old 08-06-2013
chef2sail's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,706
Thanks: 23
Thanked 47 Times in 43 Posts
Rep Power: 7
chef2sail will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to chef2sail
Re: Mutiny at Dawn - Transpac Race 2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGo View Post
Hi Coquina,



Yes, we did talk to plenty of experienced people before leaving—no one who knew these owners well, but plenty who knew the conditions of the race, and one (the sailmaker) who knew the boat and the specific sails we had (he had sold the owners their spinnakers and spinnaker net). I also received a full briefing from that sailmaker about those sails.

But the point here is: There was nothing difficult about this crossing, nothing tricky at all. In retrospect, it is completely clear to me that technically, rockDAWG and I could have done it quite easily, just the two of us. The weather was fine, the wind was good when we had it (and almost never too strong for comfort), the boat was solid (except for a couple of things the owner had neglected to fix, or maybe he didn't notice them), and the sails were fine.

What made the crossing nightmarishly difficult was the incompetence, arrogance, bullheadedness, and misguided ambition of the owners.

For one thing, weather routing: rockDAWG had studied previous race routes, we both attended and understood the weather briefing ("Harry" basically slept through it), we both knew how to get and work with GRIB files. But no matter how many times we explained to "Harry" where we needed to go, he insisted, with absolute confidence (i.e. stupidity), that we needed to simply stick to the rhumb line. That's why we got becalmed.

Funny (in retrospect only) detail: At one point, AFTER we'd been predictably becalmed, I explained for the umpteenth time to "Harry" that we needed to head south for a day or so to be sure of decent wind, and showed him the charts with the GRIB files and their predictions for the next several days. About an hour later he told me that he had just tried going south, and that the wind was the same: he had simply turned the boat to 180° and found that it didn't sail any faster than at 240° or whatever our rhumb line course was. The guy simply didn't get it.



I have lots of spinnaker experience, and was the one who showed "Harry" how to set up the chute. He never actually got it, though, and rockDAWG and I were the ones who had to set it up each time "Harry" fouled it.

There was actually nothing difficult about flying the chute at night, even when the wind picked up, and even during the little squalls we encountered.

The only thing is, we needed to use autohelm liberally. In fact, during the periods we used autohelm as needed, there was not one single incident involving the chute. It was only when "Harry" came on and attempted to sail without autohelm that he lost control. (And that happened like clockwork, pretty much every time he turned off the autohelm and insisted on sailing it manually. He was simply unable to maintain concentration well enough, and would spin out after as little as 30 minutes. I believe that rockDAWG or I could have held stable for a whole lot longer, but there was no reason on earth to do so, at night, undercrewed as we were.)



Good question. Long answer:

At a certain point, rockDAWG and I both realized that, given the cumulative skill level of the three of us who could helm (myself, rockDAWG, and "Harry"), plus our small number, the ONLY way we could get through each night with the spinnaker up (which we needed to do in order to get to Hawaii in a timely fashion, and not run out of water) was to use autohelm liberally.

Again, when we used autohelm, at night or not, there was not one single incident. And each time the owner took over and sailed manually during the night, we had trouble almost immediately—trouble that rockDAWG and I had to fix by going out on the foredeck at night, at our own personal risk.

Now, using autohelm was technically against the race rules, except for double-handed boats. However, it was also clear from the race rules that uses of autohelm would be subject to a penalty, and would not lead to disqualification. This was laid out with great clarity in the race rules. And it was quite obvious that the Transpac would have no interest in disqualifying a boat that was already in last place.

The problem is, "Jane" had a truly crazy attitude about this. For some reason, she believed that we were in the running for some kind of trophy, even long after it was obvious we were in last place by far. She thought were serious racers, headed for glory, and that we should act like serious sailors (like the boats that had ten ultra-experienced crew, I suppose) and not violate any of the rules no matter what.

(Side note: "Jane's" mother "Sheryl" is 86 years old and apparently the oldest person ever to do the Transpac (though all she did was provide ever-cheerful company). "Jane" had arranged with the Transpac to give Aquarius a trophy for this. "Sheryl," however, had no idea of this arrangement, or of the role that she was playing in her daughter's racing ambitions. I found this unspeakably pathetic. More on this later….)

Anyhow, "Jane's" insisted that we, the crew, not use autohelm, even though it should have been clear (even to a non-sailor such as herself) that safety demanded it. She was not open to reason in this regard, and insisted that we would be disqualified, even after I pointed out the specific section of the race rules that prescribed "penalties." (Disqualification was prescribed only for "gross misconduct"—which Jane bizarrely insisted the use of autohelm would be.)

"Jane's" attitude rubbed off on "Harry"; even though he was officially the skipper, he deferred to "Jane" in many regards.

Finally I wrote the Transpac commodore, gave full details of our situation, and begged him to let "Jane" know that using autohelm would almost certainly entail only a penalty. The commodore did not write back at all; when I wrote again with more urgency, he wrote back very curtly that the Transpac could not get involved (for legal reasons, I assume). At one point I called the commodore directly and asked him whether the use of autohelm would indeed be a penalty. He was sympathetic, confirmed that it would surely NOT mean disqualification, and even said "There are no hard and fast rules," but he still refused to address this to "Jane" directly, even when I wrote yet another begging email, indicating the full danger of the situation.

I assume the Transpac had legal reasons to avoid getting involved more. But the fact is, a simple communication to the owners about this would have saved us several life-threatening incidents, our days of struggle, and the physical altercation that rockDAWG describes. We would also not have had to get the Coast Guard involved.

Hope that clarifies it.
Jake


Simple question....did the Captain not want to fly the spinnaker? Did he not want to fly it on his shift? Did he not feel comfortable flying it at night? Did he express either of these feelings?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
___________________________
S/V Haleakala (Hawaiian for" House of the Sun")
C&C 35 MKIII Hull # 76
Parkville, Maryland
(photos by Joe McCary)
Charter member of the Chesapeake Lion posse

Our blog-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


“Sailing is just the bottom line, like adding up the score in bridge. My real interest is in the tremendous game of life.”- Dennis Conner
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cheap Classic Plastic smokes the fleet in 2013 Down the Bay Race jameswilson29 General Discussion (sailing related) 65 06-04-2013 02:52 PM
SouthEast Alaska Sailing announces 2013 SEAS Cup Race schedule NewsReader News Feeds 0 05-08-2013 08:50 PM
OKI 24-hr Sailing Race 2013 NewsReader News Feeds 0 02-25-2013 05:40 AM
Melbourne-Geelong Race 2013 Classic30 General Discussion (sailing related) 0 01-29-2013 12:56 AM
TransPac July 2013 MCM aguyleroux Racing 2 11-04-2012 08:48 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:25 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012