"No Water!"

[BelleSerene]

\"No Water!\"

Situation in the RTI race. Boats were competing for the shallow water by Ryde Sands on the windward side of the fleet, so with clear air too. Port tack took you along the first part of the sands, getting gradually into deeper water, then you had to stbd tack back.

Many of us are doing this, and we for one had a very good idea of the depth under us and (by chartplotter on deck and knowing the height of water on chart datum) how far further we could afford to go on stbd before tacking back to port.

Smart yacht comes screaming in on port tack parallel to the depth contours screaming 'no water!' all the way. We shouted 'starboard - you have plenty of water' and he shouted back 'no we haven't - look, there's a boat on the sands over there'. And of course, well off his port side, so there was, because - duh - that was beyond where the sands banked steeply. But our claim that he had plenty of water was still correct.

We gave way and tacked under him. But who's right? Is the onus on the boat claiming 'no water' to be right that he has no water? Or does he just have to have reasonable cause to believe there's no water? It's clear to me that he knew he had plenty and he was just trying it on - with great success - but that's not the point.

 

[fireball]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
We gave way and tacked under him. But who's right?

[/ QUOTE ]Hmm - I didn't think you could call for water (for an obstruction) unless you were on the same tack ...

 

[Judders]

Re: \"No Water!\"

Did he have his draft displayed on his topdsides?

 

[flaming]

Re: \"No Water!\"

Questions.

Did he have room to duck you?

At what range did he shout "no water"? (Which is an odd thing to shout btw)

Basically, if a boat hails you for room at an obstruction (a sandbank would definitely be an obstruction) then you have to give it. Shouting back "you wouldn't hit it" or whatever is not an option.
If you however believe that they didn't need to hail you must still give room, then protest. The same applies at marks. (though you wouldn't know it to witness most racing) If you think about it this is quite sensible!

But in the case described, unless the other boat was unable to duck you she has no case whatsoever.

 

[flaming]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We gave way and tacked under him. But who's right?

[/ QUOTE ]Hmm - I didn't think you could call for water (for an obstruction) unless you were on the same tack ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Rule 19.2b states "When boats are overlapped, the outside boat shall give the inside boat room between her and the obstruction, unless she has been unable to do so from the time the overlap began."

And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply.
However, this situation would most often apply running downwind when the boats get too close for the port tack boat to head up and take the starboard boat's stern.
Going upwind the port boat would have to have to prove that it couldn't duck the starboard boat into deeper water. And I can't see how you would do that.....

 

[fireball]

Re: \"No Water!\"

ta! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

may sound odd - but we don't have protests at our club - yup there is the odd "starboard" shouted ... but everything else is generally done quietly and within the rules ...

 

[pteron]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]

The same applies at marks. (though you wouldn't know it to witness most racing)

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are saying what I think you are saying "a boat must give water when called for" - what do you base this on? At my club, the hails of "no water" are common at most marks!

 

[fireball]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
At my club, the hails of "no water"

[/ QUOTE ]
There is (I believe) nothing in the RRS to give official meaning to this, however, I understand it is used where overlaps are likely and marginal - and is the call of the potential Give way vessel to pre-empt any call for water ...

 

[flaming]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The same applies at marks. (though you wouldn't know it to witness most racing)

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are saying what I think you are saying "a boat must give water when called for" - what do you base this on? At my club, the hails of "no water" are common at most marks!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they are common everywhere, and wrong.

I'm basing this on sailing with an RYA olympic coach and rules guru. It's based on the interpretation of rule 14, the no contact rule, that basically means that if someone calls for room and you don't give it, and could, you would be DSQ for that contact.

The correct hail is "No overlap" as this doesn't deny a boat the room that is requested, but states your opinion that they aren't entitled to it.
The way I sail is to call the overlaps at about 10 boatlengths (and I call overlaps as well as no overlaps) then hail if they change. Then I call the 3 boatlength zone.
If a boat is still aiming up my inside after I have called no overlap and the zone I hail "You have no overlap, if you go inside I will protest".
90% of people realise I know the rules and go outside, and the people I sail against regularly know that I'm fair.

If they go inside I give room, if possible, and protest. We decide later if we want to go through with it, normally based on if the guy was a shouty idiot, and if it affects the results.

 

[dt4134]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]


Rule 19.2b states "When boats are overlapped, the outside boat shall give the inside boat room between her and the obstruction, unless she has been unable to do so from the time the overlap began."

And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply.


[/ QUOTE ]

I thought the port tacker had no rights over the starboard tacker at an obstruction but wasn't sure so looked it up.

It is covered by P41 of the 2009-2012 Bryan Willis book.

Of course the starboard tacker has to avoid contact, but that done it's a pretty solid case for a no-risk protest.

 

[lw395]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We gave way and tacked under him. But who's right?

[/ QUOTE ]Hmm - I didn't think you could call for water (for an obstruction) unless you were on the same tack ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Rule 19.2b states "When boats are overlapped, the outside boat shall give the inside boat room between her and the obstruction, unless she has been unable to do so from the time the overlap began."

And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply.
However, this situation would most often apply running downwind when the boats get too close for the port tack boat to head up and take the starboard boat's stern.
Going upwind the port boat would have to have to prove that it couldn't duck the starboard boat into deeper water. And I can't see how you would do that.....

[/ QUOTE ]
definiton of overlap only applies to boats on opposite tacks when rules 18 (mark room) applies or boats are sailing below 90deg from the wind.
Damn complex these rules!

 

[flaming]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We gave way and tacked under him. But who's right?

[/ QUOTE ]Hmm - I didn't think you could call for water (for an obstruction) unless you were on the same tack ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Rule 19.2b states "When boats are overlapped, the outside boat shall give the inside boat room between her and the obstruction, unless she has been unable to do so from the time the overlap began."

And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply.
However, this situation would most often apply running downwind when the boats get too close for the port tack boat to head up and take the starboard boat's stern.
Going upwind the port boat would have to have to prove that it couldn't duck the starboard boat into deeper water. And I can't see how you would do that.....

[/ QUOTE ]
definiton of overlap only applies to boats on opposite tacks when rules 18 (mark room) applies or boats are sailing below 90deg from the wind.
Damn complex these rules!

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a very good point.

So in the original case, port tack has zero rights.

 

[ckris]

Re: \"No Water!\"

"And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply."

This assumption is wrong, in definitions an overlap on opposite tacks only exists when going downwind or approaching a mark.

Port tacker in this scenario is clearly give way boat and should have ducked (or stopped) if they did not want to tack back into the sands.

Chris

 

[flaming]

Re: \"No Water!\"

[ QUOTE ]
"And we know that boats can be overlapped when opposite tacks, so it would apply."

This assumption is wrong, in definitions an overlap on opposite tacks only exists when going downwind or approaching a mark.

Port tacker in this scenario is clearly give way boat and should have ducked (or stopped) if they did not want to tack back into the sands.

Chris

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, my bad.

Amazing what you can learn, even about a subject you thought you knew well!

 

[tross]

Re: \"No Water!\"

No - he's bullsh1tting you. If he was on port tack, he could bear away and go behind you into deeper water. He had no right to call for water as you were on opposite tacks.
Next time give him the option - "bear away behind or get protested - your call"