Re: Continuing obstruction (RRS 18.5) question

Gene Fuller wrote:
> Walt wrote:

>>   My *opinion* is 
>> that M is not entitled to room under 18.5, but a contrary opinion is 
>> that M is entitled to room because there's enough space for her to fit 
>> between the hulls.  Is it the the distance between the hulls that 
>> count, or is it the hull and boom?  Looking for sup****ting arguments 
>> one way or the other...

> There are few rules or appeals that specifically mention the hull as 
> opposed to the complete equipment on a boat. For example, there is no 
> question that touching a sail constitutes contact, even if the sail is 
> an out of control spin****r. Touching a line dragging in the water is 
> also contact. The only two cases I can think of where an unusual 
> position of equipment would be questioned are the classic cartoon 
> showing extreme spin****r position at the finish line and a deliberate 
> sudden repositioning of the boom or a sail to block or hit an overtaking

> boat. 

I think the classic example would be towing a 100' floating line while 
on starboard, and pulling it in when on ****t.

> In the situation you described it would appear that the W boat had a 
> perfectly valid reason to have the boom extended over the side of the 
> boat. The boom is part of the overall envelope of the W boat. I agree 
> with your position.

While I agree that W had a valid reason to have her boom out, I don't 
think W is *required* to have a valid reason.  The fact is that the 
hulls were X cm wide and there was less than X cm between W's boom and 
L's hull when the overlap obtained.  To me that says "no room".

Unless someone can come up with a valid reason why W should be compelled 
to set her sail a certain way.

BTW, I've searched through the rules and the casebook for examples of 
the notion of "equipment in normal position" and I don't see anything 
that applies here.  Maybe I'm missing something...

//Walt