Why has nobody questioned why ISAF has the right to legislate a thing like this in the first place? 
Why wouldn't they have the right? Other sports' governing bodies have required minimum standards of equipment for safety grounds for years so I can't see a logical reason for saying that ISAF can't. Might save them from being sued by some over litigious American! 
Well, I would think it is the other way around -- that the more rules they have involving safety, the more they open themselves up to lawsuits.
Maybe it is better if they leave it up to the individual sailor to figure out what he thinks is safe on his boat.
I think the job of ISAF and of the various MNA's is to make recommendations and educate people regarding safety, not to legislate.
I agree that there is way too much legislating going on! That goes for all governing bodies.
Rick
Hi Mary
Do you feel the same way about Race Committe's who insist on the rule All must wear Life Jackets while racing"?
How about the Fed's mandating front air bags in cars?
How about the fed's dictating the bumper height of cars?
An experienced sailor died and those attempting to help were powerless to save him because of a limitation in his equipment. It would seem that while this is not common, more people have reported near misses and so the problem is quite real and not insignificant.
The obvious solution is to require the use of better equipment. The fact that few options (perhaps just one) exist on the market right now points to a real problem.
I certainly was aware of the sailor's death and its cause but I was not out there looking for a saftey solution. The new rule will change my behavior and I will upgrade when the equipment is approved and available.
ISAF and the National Sailing authorities have done what they are supposed to do... Take a leadership position and require sailors to upgrade their equipment. Mind you, the legislation pertains ONLY to sailors racing under the rules as specified by ISAF and spelled out in the general sailing instructions.
You are free to ammend the rules and waive this particular rule for any races that you PRO. Will you choose to waive this rule?
Take Care
Mark
Mark,
In my uninformed opinion, I think the new trapeze rule 40.2, "A trapeze or hiking harness shall have a device capable of quickly releasing the competitor from the boat at all times while in use," allows the trapeze harnesses we already are using. It sounds like the purpose is to eliminate "continuous" trapeze systems that attach you to the boat, or maybe people actually tying themselves to the boat for purposes of hiking or trapezing.
Nobody has asked whether this is going to extend to disallowing tethers, as well, since they attach you to the boat. In some cases you WANT to be attached to the boat, and in some cases you don't. How can you legislate this stuff?
The mere fact that there is so much confusion and discussion about the meaning of the rule makes it obvious that lawyers would have a field day with it.
As far as a race committee waiving the rule, that depends upon the interpretation of the rule, which we still do not have. If it includes tethering, and if tethers are attached to trapeze harnesses, I would assume the rule would have to be waived for long-distance catamaran races.
EVERYTHING in life and in the world is potentially dangerous. Even life jackets have resulted in drownings because of people being trapped beneath boats and not being able to swim out.
Race committees can mandate whatever they want. If you don't like it, you can pack up and go home. ISAF and US Sailing have not made a rule requiring all racing sailors to wear life jackets at all times. And neither has the Coast Guard. I would be totally opposed to a rule like that, and apparently I am not alone.
ISAF and US Sailing should educate rather than legislate. Sailors are not stupid. Give us the facts and statistics and anecdotal evidence and let us make up our own minds about what equipment we think is safe or unsafe.
As far as cars, I really don't think anybody is interested in my opinions, considering that I think electrically-controlled windows in cars are responsible for a lot of drownings. Give me a crank any day. Should the government require car manufacturers to go back to manual-crank windows just because people keep driving into canals in Florida?
Seat belts? No problem, because I can't be forced to wear them.
Air bags? Problem, because I don't have a choice. The government can force the manufacturers to put air bags into their vehicles, but I, as the consumer, should not be forced to have an air bag if I don't want it. Air bags save lives, but they also cause deaths. In fact, a member of Rick's family is partially paralyzed for life because of an air bag (seems he was too tall, and the air bag deployed in a minor, 15-mph incident in a parking lot. Hit him under the chin and broke a vertebra.) The manufacturers should give you the option of air bags at no extra cost. If you want a car without them, it should be available. Just like you should be able to get a car with crank windows. 
Actually I think most of us only attach a tether (a.k.a. chicken line) to the dogbone - not to the harness itself. David and I did this because we didn't want another attachment from us to the boat. It worked just fine that way.
Jake,
In my understanding, a tether and a chicken line are two different things. A chicken line is something to hold onto to keep you from falling off the boat. A tether keeps you attached to the boat if you do fall off.
aaaaa...I should have seen that...sorry. The way I look at it with regards to either falling off and loosing the boat or tyeing on with a tether, at least you get a second chance if you loose the boat with the EPIRB, smoke, and/or strobe.
This has always been a big dilemma -- to tether or not to tether. The most important thing on a long-distance race is to not become separated from the boat, because usually there is nobody around to help. In bad conditions if you fall off and are separated from the boat, is the remaining person going to be able to come back alone to get you? If the boat capsizes as a result of your falling off, will the other person be able to right the boat alone? What if you both fall off and become separated from the boat? I would rather be keelhauled a few times with the boat cartwheeling, and break a few bones, than be alone in the ocean watching my boat drift off over the horizon. And if you become separated from the boat at night, forget it.
Big-boat sailors have a relatively short tether line on their safety harness, and they can snap their tether onto attachment points on the boat or onto a "jackline" that runs fore and aft so they have mobility but cannot fall off the boat. I haven't heard any rule saying they are not allowed to use tethers because they are "attached" to the boat. I have not heard a rule saying they have to be able to have a quick-release from their tether in case the boat rolls over.
This particular rule is about hiking and trapeze harnesses specifically. They did not say you cannot be attached to the boat -- just that you have to be able to detach your trapeze harness from the boat. So are they saying that you can continue to be attached to the boat as long as it does not involve your trapeze harness? So are we now going to have to wear, in addition to life jacket and trapeze harness, a safety harness (like on the big boats) to which to fasten our tether, so we can "technically" comply to the rule?
I asked the Multihull Council if they discussed this new rule at their meeting in October, but I haven't gotten an answer yet.
Right now I do not think this rule was very well thought out, at least as to how it affects multihulls.
ISAF might as well add another RULE, that each sailor shall be required to carry on her person an effortlessly accessible tool with a serrated blade to cut your mate (or yourself) FREE of every possible line or sheet on the boat (or out from the tramp).
To think some here have actually implied that the fed gov can and should mandate safety standards. I am always amazed that people think the fed gov has the answers to all the problems.
Lets see....they tried to regulate the costs of the flu shots....we all see the results.....they run the railroad (all at a loss...save the ne corridor) When they "had" the airlines...one could never travel coast to coast for the equvilent of $200.00
So now we want the a "gov body" to regulate our safety and practices....again....the regulating body at UAL tried to mandate pilot wages...end result? Go against the market..and suffer the consequences.
Did not Adam Smith make a remark about the "invisable hand" of decisions? Sailors!! Let's handle this ourselves....we are sailors, and therefore, quite capable of making rational thoughts...
just my 2 cents..
I'm usually a reader-only at this forum but I remembered seeing some information on this issue so I thought it could be worth posting.
[color]5. QUICK RELEASE TRAPEZE HARNESSES
(a) November 2003 Council Minute
The Committee noted the Council minute which read:
"Council approved the proposal that competitors must make sure that trapeze or hiking vest hooks must have a quick release of the hook that quickly and mechanically allows the sailor to detach the hook completely from the plate to which it is attached."
[color](b) Currently available equipment
The Committee received a summary of known currently available equipment and presentations from representatives of Sea Sure(800 units sold), Wichard (prototype-available December 2004) and Milan University (prototype). Examples of RWO (300 units produced) and Bethwaite (2,500 units produced) products were also viewed.
[color]Recommendation to Council
The Sailing Committee endorses the general intent of the Council minute. Several workable designs are available or coming to the market but the technology is still developing. One of the devices demonstrated did not involve the complete detachment of the hook whilst another did not involve a hook at all. The Sailing Committee was also informed that there could be some patent issues regarding quick release hook mechanisms. Council are asked to consider whether at this stage use of this equipment is best promoted by education or through legislation. With legislation comes the probable need for setting standards and for equipment approval, which would inevitably involve some administrative responsibilities and potential legal liabilities. These implications should be thoroughly understood before a legislative route is taken.
Further experience with the systems is required before the Sailing Committee could say that this is a major improvement in personal safety.
Evidently they decided on legislation rather than education.
[color]QUICK RELEASE TRAPEZE HARNESSES
Council Mid-Year 2004 Minute 6 (ll)
[color](a) Hook Quick Release System – Submission 186-03
Consistent with minute 3(n)(i) of the Council minutes, 14-15 November 2003, Council received a recommendation from the Constitution Committee to delay implementation of the policy on the ‘hook quick release system’. In addition, Council noted that the Sailing Committee had reviewed a summary of known currently available equipment and received presentations from manufacturer representatives. Several workable designs are available or coming to the market but the technology is still developing. Council therefore noted the recommendation from the Sailing Committee that ISAF should do further research into the available systems.
[color]Decision
(i) On a proposal by Charles Cook (Group P – North America), seconded by David Tillett (Group L – South West Pacific), Council unanimously approved the following:
[color]a. that ISAF adopt a new racing rule 40.2 which will require that any harness or trapeze must have on it a device capable of quickly releasing the competitor at all times that means while the boat is capsized or turned turtle or if there is an emergency and the competitor needs to release himself.
[color]b. That the original implementation date approved by Council (immediate) be changed to 1st January 2006 to allow the market more time to develop the products.
It is worthy of note that the November 2003 wording may have outlawed key and ball systems. In my opinion, this and possible legal issues, are the reason that the final wording of the rule is far less prescriptive on the nature of the "quick release mechanism".
There would have been far less confusion if the final rule had used wording similar to paragraph a of the decision.
Clearly, the intent of the rule, when read with the minutes in mind, is to outlaw current hook and ring systems.
--Quick Release Products--
Sea-Sure Quick Release Trapeze Hook
RWO Quick Release Trapeze Hook
Bethwaite Keyball Trapeze System
I say that they pay for these "upgrades". Every trapeze sailor get's a new harness of their choice from ISAF!
Seriously, how are 'they' going to enforce this issue to the lowest level? Knee-jerk reaction. A better time frame would be Jan 2008. This would allow more companies to re-design their harnesses/buckle systems.
BC
We did discuss this in Portland at the US SAILING meeting, but not with any real seriousness, mostly because Judges agree that the wording is wide open. That combined with an effective date that may become permanently "the day after tomorrow" make it doubtful that it's something we have to worry about soon. I can't imagine someone filing a protest over my harness. And then what does the Judge or protest committee ask you? Quick release - yes sir! Sometimes involuntarily!
Most folks I talked to indicated they see this as a problem for classes that use continuous systems, not for beach cats and board sailors.
Sorry for bringing this one up again :
A chat with a Hobie 16 sailor this weekend tells me that this new rule, in one form or another, is a long way overdue.
Sailing in the Cape Point Challenge, (85km distance race in Cape Town, to the end of Cape Point & back. Can get nasty),his crewmember accidentally hooked his harness hook over the plastic handle that is in the wire trap-hook that the French Hobies are fitted with. Could he get it out ? Nope. Two of them couldn`t get it out, it had taken the full weight of the sailor to "pop" it into place, and was coming out for no-one. The skipper tried to assist in releasing the crew, while both still wiring & sailing in fresh breeze & quite big seas. That`s when he realized that if they capsize things could become a problem. The crew released all the buckles & climbed out of the harness, something he`d have found much more difficult underwater.
Since then they both carry a knife that can be opened with one hand in their harness. Maybe we should also carry a pair of wire-cutters ? Overkill ? Maybe, but you never know.
I`m not sure if this windsurfing harness system would comply. I have one, and it releases one side of the spreader bar, and loosens the leg straps, enabling you to get out of the harness quickly (mainly for a pee ! 
)
http:/
Cheers
Steve
I generally try to cary a stainless knife that clips to my life vest(although its missing right now, grrrrrrr) anyhow, when i was first learning to sail, someone told me that you never know when you will need to cut something fast, made sense to me, so I try to always have it, especially if there aren't gonna be lotsa folks around.
A chat with a Hobie 16 sailor this weekend tells me that this new rule, in one form or another, is a long way overdue.
Sailing in the Cape Point Challenge, (85km distance race in Cape Town, to the end of Cape Point & back. Can get nasty),his crewmember accidentally hooked his harness hook over the plastic handle that is in the wire trap-hook that the French Hobies are fitted with. Could he get it out ? Nope. Two of them couldn`t get it out, it had taken the full weight of the sailor to "pop" it into place, and was coming out for no-one. The skipper tried to assist in releasing the crew, while both still wiring & sailing in fresh breeze & quite big seas. That`s when he realized that if they capsize things could become a problem. The crew released all the buckles & climbed out of the harness, something he`d have found much more difficult underwater.
Since then they both carry a knife that can be opened with one hand in their harness. Maybe we should also carry a pair of wire-cutters ? Overkill ? Maybe, but you never know.
I`m not sure if this windsurfing harness system would comply. I have one, and it releases one side of the spreader bar, and loosens the leg straps, enabling you to get out of the harness quickly (mainly for a pee ! )
http:/
Cheers
Steve
If he'd been using the bethwait system he couldn't have got caught that way. Shame that ISAF seem to be outlawing that too!
Hi John,
where were you at the GYA meet on Sat, hmmm?
Dick Rose was lecturing at the GYA winter meet, and when he fielded questions, I asked him exactly what was the definition of a quick release harness.
Rose replied that there were to be parameters defined by several different entities, and their findings would likely be published by January 2006, and not to worry about it until then...
sea ya
tami
That is...unless you're trapped under water!
Or if you need a new harness in 2005..
Don't you think they will toss this whole rule out for liability reasons? How can ISAF take it upon themselves to legislate that you have to use a certain kind of gear? I think their job is to educate and maybe even recommend, but not to legislate.
Even on the big boats, regarding use of life jackets, ISAF only went as far as requiring life jackets to be worn during the start and the finish of the race. In between, it is up to the captain of the vessel (unless they have changed that rule).
Maybe they just proposed this rule to get classes, and sailors and trapeze harness manufacturers to start thinking about coming up with safer harnesses.
Toss the rule out? I dont think so, if they dumped a safety rule, they would loose a lot of credibility.
Liability? Wouldn't that cut both ways, if more people died while trapped (pun unintended) in their harnesses? I dont know, but wouldn't suing ISAF over this be a quick way to kill off their own business, instead of changing their product?
As long as they dont go so far as to only allow certain brands, I dont see how they could be sued over this? The ITA only allows certain sailcloths, spesific weights and brands, as far as I know nobody has sued them over this yet.
Those among us who race, needs rules to do so in an orderly way, isn't that legislation?
I am neither a lawyer or businessman, so I dont know..
No, it does not "cut both ways." If sailors are responsible for their own safety, as it has always been, why would the International Sailing Federation (ISAF) have any liability? It is only when they actually HAVE a rule that ISAF invites some liability.
Some of us on www.yachtsandyachting.com have asked the ISAF for a clarification of this on their forum (you will need to register to view it) and I would urge you all to add some comments here so we can FORCE the ISAF to make a comment about it
HAH! (but I'm still wearing mine)
148-05 "Delete RRS 40.2 [which is the (in)famous one about quick release trapeze harnesses] from the 2005-2008 Edition of the Racing Rules of Sailing."
or as an alternative:
147-05: "Delay the implementation date of RRS 40.2 from 1st January 2006. Rule 40.2 to be introduced with either the current or with amended wording on a date decided by a vote of the ISAF Council."
Reason given for both proposals: "As noted in Council Mid-Year minutes:
“In discussion it was felt that as currently worded, RRS 40.2 was inadequate and that ISAF should only introduce such a rule when standards have been established by an independent body. Concerns over ISAF liability were also raised.”"