Skip to main content

The Racing Rules of Sailing

RRS 42 and RRS 45

Subscribe
Stefan Ibold
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Race Officer
The situation:
45 FD's are on the starting line 3 minutes before start.
One boat is near by the pin-end ( arr. 3 boatlenght in direction to the starting vessel and a half boatlenght behind the line) and the crew (frontman) is in the water (standing on the ground) fixing boat position.
RRS 42.1 says: Except when permitted in rule 42.3 or 45, a boat shall compete by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed. Her crew may adjust the trim of sails and hull, and perform other acts of seamanship, but shall not otherwise move their bodies to propel the boat.
RRS 45 says: 45 HAULING OUT; MAKING FAST; ANCHORING
A boat shall be afloat and off moorings at her preparatory signal. Thereafter, she
shall not be hauled out or made fast except to bail out, reef sails or make repairs.
She may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom. She shall recover the anchor
before continuing in the race unless she is unable to do so.

In my opinion it is an inpropper action under rule 42 because there was no emergency or an other incident to do so. The only reason was to fix the boat in a good position. But by reading the rules I can´t give a reasonable explenation according to the rules.
Who can help?

Thanks
Stefan

Created: 26-Aug-02 10:44

Comments

Format:
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Stefan, boats can use RRS45 to maintain their position for strategic racing goals while racing.  No emergency required.  
Created: 26-Aug-02 10:55
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
  1. RRS 45 3rd sentence specifically permits the long established practice of a boat, once off her moorings, anchoring, for example to avoid the effects of a foul tide.  It is not a condition of the third sentence permission that she needs to bail out, reef sails or make repairs, which are conditions applicable to 'hauling out' or 'making fast' which are referred to in the second sentence and which are distinctly different from anchoring
  2. The 3rd sentence 2nd clause extends the permission of anchoring to he crew standing on the bottom, otherwise he crew standing on the bottom can be characterised as an alternative method of anchoring.
  3. RRS 42 does not 'switch off' his quite specific permission.
Created: 26-Aug-02 11:09
John Mooney
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • International Judge
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
Stefan, while I sympathize with your intuition that it's not very fair to hold position by standing on the bottom, Rule 45 really couldn't be clearer. If you want to eliminate that option for competitors, you'll have to change RRS 45 according to RRS 86.1 in the sailing instructions.
Created: 26-Aug-02 11:11
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Simple SI to remove this tactic.  

"SI #.# Except when complying with RRS 1.1, a boat shall not anchor nor may crew stand on the bottom, from her preparatory signal until her starting signal.   This changes RRS 45."

One could also make it shorter .. limit it to only the last min before the starting signal borrowing wording from 30.1,

 "... during the last minute before her starting signal..". 
Created: 26-Aug-02 15:47
Timo Engelberts
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
My question on this topic is how RRS 45 and RRS 48.2 interact in the situation described. 

According to RRS 48.2,
No person on board shall intentionally leave, except when ill or injured, or to help a person or vessel in danger, or to swim.
This means that intentionally leaving the boat is prohibited unless one of these specific exceptions applies.

RRS 45 states:
She may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom
This allows the crew to stand on the bottom once they are already in the water, but it does not itself permit leaving the boat.

In my view, these two rules must be read together:
Standing on the bottom is allowed under RRS 45, but only if the crew is already in the water for a permitted reason under RRS 48.2.

Therefore, intentionally leaving the boat with the purpose of standing on the bottom to hold or stabilize the boat is prohibited under RRS 48.2, even though RRS 45 allows standing on the bottom.

In my opinion, the only situation in which holding the boat while standing on the bottom is allowed is when the crew has left the boat unintentionally, for example due to an accident such as a capsize. In such a case, the crew did not violate RRS 48.2, and RRS 45 permits them to stand on the bottom while recovering the boat. 

For the situation described at the starting line, the crew member left the boat intentionally to fix the boat’s position. This is not an emergency, nor an accidental departure, nor swimming. Therefore, even though RRS 45 allows standing on the bottom, the action is not permitted because the way the crew entered the water violates RRS 48.2. 
Created: 26-Aug-02 12:32
P
Anthony Pelletier
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
  • Club Race Officer
Reply to: 22079 - Timo Engelberts
or to swim
The last phrase of 48.2 is "or to swim." So, the person could leave the boat to swim. Once s/he has done so, she is entitled to stand on the bottom. If you want to read the rules together, you have to read the whole rule. 
As others have pointed out, anchoring during a race is quite common in some distance races (Block Island Race comes to mind). I've anchored in that race and in the bay outside Ensenada to hold position against a tide once the wind died. 
I understand why holding your position at the start line by standing on the ground feels wrong to some. But I don't think it is precluded by the rules. 
I also think there are few cases where it is possible and makes sense to do this. 
Created: 26-Aug-02 15:24
Timo Engelberts
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
@Athony Pelletier 
I think RRS 48.2 covers the entire action of being outside the boat.
So I do not believe that a sailor can leave the boat “to swim” and then perform a completely different action afterwards.

If that were allowed, the question becomes: when does swimming end and how long must the crew actually swim to comply with the rule? 



Created: 26-Aug-02 16:47
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Timo, I'm with Anthony and the John's.  

"She may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom."

Anchoring and crew standing on the bottom are used in the sentence as equivalent actions. 

That said .. I can see your argument that the way 48.2 is worded isn't clear relative to the connotation of 45. 

Maybe someone on the forum can ask for clarification from the Q&A Service.  I'd guess that they would say that intentionally going into the water to stand is encompassed within "to swim". 
Created: 26-Aug-02 19:14
Timo Engelberts
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
I agree that the situation (holding the boat) is allowed under RRS 45.

However, the situation cannot be viewed in isolation; the steps leading up to it (the sailor entering the water) must also be considered. When the sailor enters the water intentionally, this action must comply with RRS 48.2. For me, swimming and holding the boat in position are two different actions.

Like Angelo, I would appreciate it if the question were forwarded to the Q&A service, and I am curious to see their answer. 
Created: 26-Aug-02 19:55
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Timo re:"For me, swimming and holding the boat in position are two different actions."

I think "to swim" here is a very broad sense of purposely going into the water and remaining in the water. .. and if the water depth allows .. such a crew could stand on the bottom and not break a rule. 
Created: 26-Aug-02 20:47
I think ‘leaving the boat’ also means going a distance away, like ashore or on another boat, not just being off the deck. Standing on the bottom and holding a shroud or what have you to hold the boat in position, I doubt is what is the intended meaning of ‘leaving the boat’. Seems like a stretch to try and make an action which is clearly allowed, disallowed. If simply being off the deck was intended, then it would directly conflict with rules allowing swimming and holding the boat in position, which are clearly stated as allowed. 
As a non defined term, refer to common / dictionary definitions, which all seem to state ‘to go away’. I don’t think most people would consider standing next to something and holding it as having ‘gone away’. 
Created: 26-Aug-02 22:39
Rene Nusse
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Club Race Officer
  • Club Judge
  • Umpire In Training
The facts as I understand them...

  •  Forty-five Flying Dutchman dinghies are approaching the start. 
  •  Three minutes before the starting signal, one boat is approximately three boat lengths from the pin end and half a boat length behind the starting line. 
  •  The front crew member is standing on the bottom. 
  •  The stated purpose is to "fix the boat's position." 

Rule 45
Rule 45 states:

"She may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom."

Therefore, the mere fact that the crew member is standing in the water is not, by itself, a breach of Rule 45.

The rule expressly permits a crew member to stand on the bottom, even after the preparatory signal.

Rule 42.1
Rule 42.1 states that the boat shall compete using only wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed.

The critical question is whether the crew member is:

  1. Simply stabilising the boat's position, or 
  2. Actively pushing, pulling or holding the boat to gain an advantage. 

Situation 1: Merely holding position
Suppose the crew member stands beside the boat and lightly holds it to prevent it drifting into another competitor while adjustments are made.
In that case, one could argue that the crew member is not increasing or decreasing the boat's speed, but merely exercising a right expressly permitted by Rule 45.
There would be no breach.

Situation 2: Using the bottom as propulsion
Suppose the crew member repeatedly pushes the boat forward, drags it backwards, or walks along the bottom to reposition the boat into a better starting position.
Now the crew member is no longer merely "standing on the bottom"; he is using an external force to alter the boat's motion.
That would almost certainly breach Rule 42.1 because the boat is no longer competing using only wind and water.

The key distinction
Rule 45 permits contact with the bottom.
Rule 42 prohibits using the bottom as an engine, brake or steering mechanism.

My interpretation...

The answer depends entirely on what "fixing the boat's position" actually means.
  • Standing on the bottom: permitted by Rule 45. 
  • Holding the boat stationary: permitted. 
  • Pushing, dragging or walking the boat into position: prohibited by Rule 42.1. 

The protest committee would need to determine the facts:
  •  Was the crew member merely preventing drift? 
  •  Was the boat's speed changed? 
  •  Did the crew member push or pull the boat? 
  •  Did the boat gain a tactical advantage that would not otherwise have existed? 

Those factual findings would determine whether Rule 42 was broken.

Created: 26-Aug-02 23:25
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
If anybody is in any doubt, Case 5 Answer 2 says

Actions that are permitted by rule 45 are exceptions to rule 42.1. 
Created: 26-Aug-03 05:29
Stefan Ibold
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Race Officer
@ rene,
your facts found is right.
The frontman fixed the position of the boat. There was no current or thometinhg else that makes it neccesary to do so. It was also not neccesary to do it to avoid contact with another boat. It was simply to fixed it in a good starting position.
It´s impossible to see wheater the crew is walking over the bottom in a slow way because the depht of the water is arr. 1.5 m. And it was in light to middle wind with max. 6 - 8 kts.
I see an advantage for: still holding the boat in a good starting position. It was an obstruktion for other boats under RRS 19. So it was not neccesary for it to have a look to other boats which are sailing.

@ John Allan,
Case 5 didn´t answer to this special case. And case 5 is the only one in ths area.

@ Angelo,
 Maybe someone on the forum can ask for clarification from the Q&A Service.  I'd guess that they would say that intentionally going into the water to stand is encompassed within "to swim".  
I will ask an IJ to do it.
Created: 26-Aug-03 07:28
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Stefan, I don't see any 'special case'.

RRS 42.1 provides

Except when permitted in rule 42.3 or 45, a boat shall compete by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed.

RRS 45 provides

[A boat] may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom.

and (emphasis added)

Her crew may adjust the trim of sails and hull, and perform other acts of seamanship, but
shall not otherwise move their bodies to propel the boat.

If the action of the crew standing on the bottom propels the boat, the boat breaks RRS 42.1, but not otherwise.

If Appendix P is in force, we should apply the usual requirements that there should be two judges observing and agreeing that RRS 42 is broken, then a penalty may be given.

If Appendix P is not in force, If the protest committee hears evidence that establishes on the balance of probabilities that the crew  standing on the bottom propelled the boat the protest committee should conclude that the boat broke RRS 42.1 and penalise the boat.
Created: 26-Aug-03 11:08
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
John A .. I think what Stefan is saying is that though the first sentence of 42.1 exempts 45 actions, that doesn't address the potential conflict with 48.2 (as he and others see it). 
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:15
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Angelo, I take your point.

I think it's a pretty fair implication that a crew standing on the bottom in accordance with RRS 45 is holding on to the boat.

Remember the long threads we had about 'finishing with crew overboard in contact/not in contact with the boat'.

I think a crew that is in contact with and holding on to a boat, as specifically provided in RRS 45 has not 'left' the boat and RRS 48 is not broken.
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:20
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
John A re: crew in contact hasn't left the boat. 

Yea .. that's another angle.  I had thought that there was a Case/Appeal on that .. but just looked under finish and didn't find it. 
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:36
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Ang This thread Post: Finishing While Capsized has references to old cases and Q&A
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:48
Stefan Ibold
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Race Officer
I have still a problem with it.
I try another view:
I agree if a boat was capzized that one or both of the crew are in the water to straight up the boat. And if - for example - the helm is again in the boat to clear it up  and the frontman is on the bow to fix it while clearing that must be possible and not prohibitet.
But to get an advantage at the startingline ... I´m not shure that this is the intention of the rule.
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:52
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
According to RRS 45 crew standing on the bottom [holding the boat] is exactly equivalent to anchoring and is permitted.

Anchoring to hold position against a foul tide is a seamanlike manoeuvre that has been a common part of racing for over 100 years (and anchoring, hoisting a black ball and requiring another boat to avoid you in accordance with RRS 22 was a common practice racing the Admirals 'Cup races on the Solent, and I presume still is.
Created: 26-Aug-03 12:58
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Stefan .. "not the intention of the rule". 

At the risk of sailing in circles here .. the clear intention of rule 45 (IMO) is to allow:
  1.  "position-keeping" while racing by fixing the boat relative to the bottom.
  2. That position-keeping can be accomplished by either 
    1. crew standing on the bottom or 
    2. by an anchor. 
  3. A boat is racing from her prep-signal until she finishes and clears the line and marks .. so the starting sequence is fair-game. 

So .. if you are racing in shallow enough waters that this is possible and you don't want to allow it, simply add the SI I wrote earlier

Problem solved. 
Created: 26-Aug-03 13:05
Stefan Ibold
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Race Officer
@ John,
in this point I agree with you because there is a current. In this case the current may made that the boat is drifting backwards. And the boat is doing it only for it´s own and ohter boats racing will do the same. On the startingline with no current and the intention is only to get an advantage in addtion to the problems with RRS 19 for the other boats which may get a disadvantage that is my problem.
If this is allowed in any option I say that in futur a lot of boats will be handle in that way with a art of the crew in the water.
Created: 26-Aug-03 13:14
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Lets break up the second and third sentences of  RRS 45.

Sentence 2.  [After her preparatory signal], she shall not be hauled out or made fast except to bail out, reef sails or make repairs.

Sentence 3.  She may anchor or the crew may stand on the bottom.

Sentence 2 forbids a boat from being hauled out or made fast, subject to certain exception conditions.

Sentence 3 permits a boat to anchor, or, equivalently, for crew holding the boat to stand on the bottom.  Sentence 3 is not subject to any conditions at all.

Whether or not there is adverse tide or current or some other apparent reason for doing so is not relevant to a boat being allowed to anchor.

Boats are always allowed to manoeuvre or take actions that do not break the rules, or, as in this case, are specifically allowed by the rules, in order to gain tactical or strategic advantage over their competitors  See Case 78.  That's a fundamental feature of the game of sailing.
Created: 26-Aug-03 22:48
David Taylor
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
So, what if I throw out a drogue?
Created: 26-Aug-04 00:53
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Reply to: 22101 - David Taylor
So, what if I throw out a drogue?
Do you mean in accordance with Australian Sailing Special Regulations Part 1 4.2 or WS Offshore Special Regulations 4.28?

Or do you mean like Manfred Curry?
Created: 26-Aug-04 01:01
David Taylor
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
The spec regs are not relevant and I am not aware of the Manfred Curry reference.

I am simply wondering whether the use of a sea anchor (or perhaps a drogue) qualifies as being anchored under rule 45. And then, what if the line attached to said 'anchor' extends say 10-50m out from the vessel. And if another vessel passes over this line and drags it with them then whose problem is this.  And if while retrieving this 'anchor' they accidentially propel themselves forward then is this a breach of rule 42?
Created: 26-Aug-04 07:23
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
David re: Sea Anchor - interesting question.

A drogue/sea-anchor doesn't seem to conflict with 42.1 ... deploying such a device might fall within "other acts of seamanship". 

Except when permitted in rule 42.3 or 45, a boat shall compete by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed. Her crew may adjust the trim of sails and hull, and perform other acts of seamanship, but shall not otherwise move their bodies to propel the boat.

A drogue uses the water to decrease a boat's speed relative to the water (increase the boat's water-drag).  Unless otherwise forbidden in the class rules or the race-docs for the event, using a drogue would seem fine. 

PS: that said .. I think 45 is about fixing a boat's position relative to the bottom ... not slowing a boat's movement relative to the water, as the water may be moving (current).   Though a sea-anchor uses the term "anchor" .. it's a water-drag increasing device .. not a position-fixing device. 
Created: 26-Aug-04 14:20
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Reply to: 22105 - David Taylor
A drogue/sea-anchor doesn't seem to conflict with 42.1 ... deploying such a device might fall within "other acts of seamanship". 
I think using a drogue only to slow a boat for a tactical purpose would break RRS 42.  We know that trailing hands or feet, or a paddle in the water to slow a boat breaks RRS 42.  I think that just slowing a boat down for a tactical purpose is not an act of seamanship.

Consider the discussion in the OSR.  I think that using a drogue when prudent seamanship demands it, is an act of seamanship and is allowed.

I agree that a drogue or 'sea anchor' isn't an anchor for purposes of RRS 45 (or RRS 22).
Created: 26-Aug-04 22:20
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Reply to: 22105 - David Taylor
I am not aware of the Manfred Curry reference.
Manfred Curry wrote one of the first books on racing tactics.

He, famously, fitted 'water brakes' to his small racing sailboat.  It was a great scandal.
Created: 26-Aug-04 22:21
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
John A re: "I think using a drogue only to slow a boat for a tactical purpose would break RRS 42. "

Let's nail this down while we're at it. In the OSR, one of the sea-anchor's purpose is to "reduce drift" .. this is what we are talking about here. 

Let's find a place that restricts its presence or use.  Like a mentioned before, the OD Class Rules are the place I'd look first, not as listing that it's specifically disallowed,  but rather by being a "closed rule set" and stating the equipment allowed (I haven't looked, but I'd imaging the FD class have such a rule-set).  The J/105 is a closed ruleset and it would not be allowed for OD racing (unless the event Cat-designation required having one onboard).  

When thinking about OSR categories and event Cat-designations, these set minimum requirements for build and equipment. If an event is designated a Cat4 event, I couldn't  find anything that prevents a boat from having/deploying equipment meant for Cat2. 

So let's nail down the rule that would disallow it in general (outside of CR's). 
Created: 26-Aug-05 11:49
P
John Quirk
Nationality: New Zealand
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Judge In Training
Thanks everyone - fully clear to me now too.
Created: 26-Aug-05 01:34
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Before we go on with discussing drogues, can weseeif we agree on a basic issue.

Slowing a boat by dragging a hand, foot or say a paddle or bailer breaks RRS 42.

Does anyone disagree with that?
Created: 26-Aug-05 21:32
P
Anthony Pelletier
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
  • Club Race Officer
Reply to: 22127 - John Allan
It seems like rule 42 is explicit in this "a boat shall compete by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed." Decreasing speed is included in the prohibition. 
42.3f says a "boat may reduce speed by repeatedly moving her helm." 
It's generally accepted that we can back a sail (though we lose some right of way rights when we do so).  
USA Appeal US25 addresses the use of two rudders steering opposite direction to slow a boat. The conclusion was that this does not violate rule 42. The wording of the answer provides a difference between these actions and the use of a paddle, hand or bailer.
It says
"Sails are intended to transmit power from the wind to give a vessel forward speed. From the earliest days of square riggers, they have also been backed to stop forward motion. 
Rudders are intended to transmit power from the flow of water to change the direction of the boat. In the process, drag is increased, and the boat is slowed."

A bailer, your hand or foot is not "intended to transmit power from the flow of water." A paddle is, but it includes power put out by the person powering it. 
Thus, I would agree with you that dragging something other than the rudder would break the rule. 
The drogue is a little grayer. An anchor is a regular part of a boat's equipment whose role is to slow or stop a boat. It is explicitly permitted. One could argue a drogue also fits this description. One could be used for safety, I believe.  Using one for a tactical advantage seems over the line. 



Created: 26-Aug-05 23:06
David Taylor
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
Reply to: 22127 - John Allan
Dragging a hand or a foot (or something bigger) in the water is simply using the water to decrease her speed releative to the water mass [ie. forget COG]. This is allowed by 42.1 although it does not define the type of 'speed' to which it applies. BTW, using a "manually-powered" paddle would be quite a different matter.

So, let's say I have an emergency rudder and that mine is a modified companionway hatch of say 0.8 square metres that can be hung over the stern. So, when I turn it to 90 degrees and deploy it to 'anchor' me to the water mass, am I breaking a rule?
Created: 26-Aug-05 23:56
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Reply to: 22127 - John Allan
John A .. ok .. let me try to understand the hand/foot argument. 

  • We agree a person can swim. 
  • We agree a person can stand on the bottom holding the boat fixed to the bottom. 
  • We may agree with the old Q&A that said a capsized boat that floats across the finish, pushed across solely by wind and current, gets her finish-score as long as all crew is in contact with the boat when it crosses, though they may still have their bodies in the water. 

Take that crew holding the boat and standing on the bottom. They bend their legs at the knees and are now hanging-still holding onto the toe-rail. Is that person now breaking 42?  (How is a swimmer to return to the boat?)

If not, why?  
If so, are we then saying you can put your entire body in the water .. but not your hand?  Can't crew sit on the rail and have their feet touch the water?
Created: 26-Aug-06 11:14
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Anthony, good get on USA Appeal US25.

Using an anchor for tactical advantage:  we've just been there:  it is expressly permitted by RRS 45, which is carved out of RRS 42.1 first sentence.
Created: 26-Aug-05 23:13
P
Anthony Pelletier
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
  • Club Race Officer
Reply to: 22129 - John Allan
Agreed regarding the anchor. And I stated that  "It is explicitly permitted."
My argument follows the case I cited. When rule 42 says "using only the wind and water" it doesn't really mean that--since some piece of equipment must interact with the wind or water. Case US25 explains that using rudder(s) or sails is OK because they are specifically "intended to transfer power" from water or wind, respectively. 
If I follow that line, a piece of equipment that is intended to interact with the water (i.e. drogue) might also be an acceptable way to engage with the water, while a hand, foot or bailer don't fit that description.
So, I'm comfortable with excluding dragging a body part or bailer. The drogue I think would be accepted, but would not be shocked to be proved wrong. 
I thought about an emergency rudder. I hadn't gone so far as to imagine one made from a hatch board, but thought a paddle could be considered an auxiliary rudder. 
What would case 25 say about that? I'm not sure. I could see a committee either deciding only a built-in rudder would be permitted or that a paddle or modified hatch board still qualifies as a rudder and would therefore be permitted explicitly to steer and slow the boat. 

 
Created: 26-Aug-06 03:01
P
John Allan
Nationality: Australia
Certifications:
  • National Race Officer
  • National Judge
Ang, I don't want to go on with debating the merits of the hand/foot proposition until I see the opinions of some more experienced RRS 42 judges.

I've always taken it as the canonical example of impermissible decrease the speed.
Created: 26-Aug-06 21:32
P
Angelo Guarino
Forum Moderator
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
Reply to: 22153 - John Allan
Me neither my friend .. (it was your point .. not mine .. I was just trying to understand it.)
Created: 26-Aug-06 22:20
Jerry Thompson
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Umpire In Training
  • Regional Race Officer
If a skipper or crew place their hands, arms, or feet, legs in the water and this action causes the boat to slow down, I believe it breaks 42.1, "a boat shall compete by using only the wind and water to increase, maintain or decrease her speed". Body parts in the water have no exception to decrease speed in 42.3.

I have never given or heard of a Rule 42 penalty given for body parts used to slow a boat. Repeatedly moving the helm is an effective brake.
Created: 26-Aug-06 22:32
António Negreiros Fernandes
Nationality: Portugal
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Club Judge
  • Club Race Officer
I have the same understanding.
Created: 26-Aug-09 15:28
Nigel Vick
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
Presumably, while anchored (with the crew standing on the bottom) the boat is stationary. The temptation must be for the crew to push the boat forward and to propel the boat by kicking as he gets back into the boat. This is where you get a breech of rule 42, it would be equivalent to kedging, which is also prohibited. Even if he gets in with the boat stationary, it is quite likely that there will be a single rock, or pump, just to get the boat moving, another breech of 42. Good tactic but having drawn attention to yourself in this maner you have to be very careful

Created: 26-Aug-08 17:24
Jerry Thompson
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • Umpire In Training
  • Regional Race Officer
Reply to: 22179 - Nigel Vick
A single rock or a single pump does not break Rule 42 unless those actions propel the boat, Basic 4. 
Created: 26-Aug-08 17:32
Nigel Vick
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Umpire
Agreed, but in this case it should be easy to see if the boat was propelled. The natural action would tale longer to get the boat up to speed.
Created: 26-Aug-08 17:58
António Negreiros Fernandes
Nationality: Portugal
Certifications:
  • Regional Judge
  • Regional Race Officer
  • Club Judge
  • Club Race Officer
I would like to bring this analysis to this discussion. Rule 45 is not really a list of unrelated prohibitions. Its provisions are connected by a common concept: a boat must remain a racing boat, using the racing environment only within the limits expressly permitted by the rule.

We should analyse the clauses separately for application, but interpret Rule 45 as one coherent rule for its purpose and structure.

If we step back from the individual clauses, I think the central idea of Rule 45 is control of the boat’s physical relationship with the outside environment while racing.

The rule establishes a basic racing condition:
The boat must remain a racing boat, rather than gaining an advantage by being hauled out, secured to something, or otherwise using external support—while expressly allowing certain necessary or practical interactions with the bottom and an anchor.

That explains why the paragraph contains several seemingly different ideas.

The structure makes more sense this way

1. Establish the normal condition
The boat starts racing afloat and off her moorings.

2. Prevent external support
After the preparatory signal, she cannot be hauled out or made fast, except for the specified necessities such as bailing, reefing or repairs. 

3. Allow two specific physical interactions
The rule then says:
  •  she may anchor, or 
  •  the crew may stand on the bottom
Those permissions are important. They show that Rule 45 is not simply a prohibition against stopping, touching the bottom, or interacting with something outside the boat.

4. Control the consequence of anchoring
If she anchors, she must recover the anchor before continuing, unless unable to do so. 

So the underlying concern is not “never stop the boat.” It is closer to:
Don't use being attached to, supported by, or in contact with the environment as an uncontrolled means of racing; where the rules expressly allow such contact, stay within the limits of that permission.

This also explains “standing on the bottom”

This is why I would resist interpreting “the crew may stand on the bottom” as merely an accidental-grounding provision.

The rule deliberately grants that permission.

So if a sailor is in shallow water and stands on the bottom while holding the boat, the starting point should be:

Rule 45 permits the physical situation.

Only after that do we ask:

What is the sailor actually doing while standing there?

That second question could engage Rule 42 or another rule like any of the Part 2.

This is similar to the logic in World Sailing Case 5: the fact that Rule 45 permits anchoring does not mean every movement associated with an anchor is automatically permitted. The Case distinguishes the permitted recovery of an anchor from using that recovery to propel the boat beyond the permitted effect. 

So I would formulate the “main idea” of Rule 45 as:
Rule 45 regulates the boat's use of external physical support while racing: it prohibits being hauled out or made fast, but deliberately permits anchoring and standing on the bottom within the limits established by the rule.

Created: 26-Aug-08 23:35
Justin Scott
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
Standing on the bottom is quite commonplace in dinghy racing in certain locations.  Don't overthink it. Rule 45 is clear. Drop by the Chiswick Eyot at flood tide and watch the London Corinthian dinghies racing. It is highly entertaining. 

What is not allowed is to "shove off" or give a good "pull" when you restart. Your competitors will protest you under rule 42. 

In the situation quoted in the OP, the Flying Dutchman was not breaking any rule when the crew member hopped out of the boat to hold it in position. He would break a rule if he gave any kind of shove as he got back on board or if he walked the boat forward. There is no testimony that this occurred.  

One assumes that if conditions were the 7-8 knots with no tide as described,  then the crew either got back on board 15 seconds before the start or had a really terrible start.  (speaking as a former crew of an Olympic Gold medalist in the FD class)
Created: 26-Aug-09 14:38
Stefan Ibold
Nationality: Germany
Certifications:
  • National Judge
  • National Race Officer
In my opinion the boat with the crew in the water may get an advantage in the way that it´s able to fix a good starting position while the ohter boats are turning arround it. The fixed boat is an obstraction for the others under RRS 19. So it must not observe the other boats but the other boats have to observe the fixed boat.
The fixed boat has not to avoid contact or to keep clear from an other boat in leeward.

I can/may belive that the meaning of the RRS 45 is for example while or after capzising to clear the boat up. Therefore it must be possible to swim because otherwise capzising is a prohibited action.
The most of the rules are rules for fairness and safety regulations. And the question is: is it a fair action to fix a boat on the or near the starting line for a better position? I´m a little bit in a doubt.
Created: 26-Aug-09 16:36
Justin Scott
Certifications:
  • Club Judge
So Stefan, two quick points. 

1. Standing in the water holding the boat or anchoring is always legal. If you can use it to your advantage , that is fair. Any other boat can do the same.  Provided you comply with 42 and dont push or pull off, this is legal and part of sailing.
2. In real life, in good breeze, in the absence of a foul current, it does not pay to be at a standstill at the start. So this is all a bit academic.
Nonetheless even if there was a tactical advantage that I do not fully understand, it is legal to anchor.

Created: 26-Aug-09 17:11
You must be signed in to add a comment.
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more