AIS thread drift.

[RichardS]

I am happy for you to prove me wrong but I do not believe "right of way " appears in the UK Highway Code. The "slight" difference is that "stand on" imposes obligations whereas "right of way" implies rights.

Right of way vehicle, priority vehicle, stand-on vehicle ..... it doesn't matter which term you prefer, the difference is minimal. In each case you must avoid a collision if you possibly can even if you start off as the priority/right of way/stand on vehicle.

I believe that the first appearance of the phrase "right of way" is in the introduction.

Richard

 

[capnsensible]

The difference between "right of way" and "stand on" is so slight that it's simply not worth getting your knicks in a twist over.

Imagine you are in a car, which does have right of way, and a car pulls out some distance in front of you and you don't make any attempt to avoid a collision but simply glide on into the side of the car. When the Police Officer arrives you explain to him that you had right of way. How do you think that is going to end?

Richard

Of course, rules are for the guidance of wise men and in the case of IRPCS, Mariners. The definitions and rules regarding 'stand on' and 'give way' vessels are easy to understand and apply.

Any analogy to something that happens on land is, frankly, a waste of pixels.

However, there is enough scope within the rules to allow people like lawyers, pedants, trade union negotiators etc to spend many hours pedanting their asses off whilst the rest of us get out there and use the common practices of seamen to conduct our vessels safely.

Great to escape the BS isnt it?

 

[RichardS]

Any analogy to something that happens on land is, frankly, a waste of pixels.

But I'm not drawing an analogy but responding to Awol's analogy.

Richard

 

[TSB240]

Even on a clear day it's nice to see that a ship will cross your path with a comfortable CPA rather than trying to get accurate bearings from a yacht that is bouncing around with its head changing on each bounce.

Ais will tell you if a big boy has seen you and altered course for you probably well before your elderly mark one eyeball is aware he is out there.

 

[Sandy]

No vessel ever has "right of way" no matter how big it is (unless you both are racing).

I love seeing how the really big ships just stop in nanoseconds just to let our dinky little vessels pass in front of them, as we are the stand on vessel. Then flick a switch and head off at 15 knots with a jolly wave from the bridge.

In the summer of 2019 I watched a yacht attempt to get into Roscoff Marina by passing in front of 30,000 Gross Tonnes of of the Brittany Ferries's Armorique! Quite why the skipper thought it was a good idea only they will know; there was no way the ferry could stop in time or turn. Five long blasts woke the skipper up and the turned the yacht round!

 

[LadyInBed]

In the summer of 2019 I watched a yacht attempt to get into Roscoff Marina by passing in front of 30,000 Gross Tonnes of of the Brittany Ferries's Armorique! Quite why the skipper thought it was a good idea only they will know; there was no way the ferry could stop in time or turn. Five long blasts woke the skipper up and the turned the yacht round!

No hope for people like that. He obviously also ignored the big Do not enter/leave sign they illuminate when ferries are maneuvering.

 

[Uricanejack]

Of course, rules are for the guidance of wise men and in the case of IRPCS, Mariners. The definitions and rules regarding 'stand on' and 'give way' vessels are easy to understand and apply.

Any analogy to something that happens on land is, frankly, a waste of pixels.

However, there is enough scope within the rules to allow people like lawyers, pedants, trade union negotiators etc to spend many hours pedanting their asses off whilst the rest of us get out there and use the common practices of seamen to conduct our vessels safely.

Great to escape the BS isnt it?

As a pedantic, trade union negotiator, I resemble the remark

 

[RupertW]

Over the years, I can think of only three gadgets that I had to have, as soon I clapped my eyes on them:

1) Roller reefing headsail gear.
2) Chart plotter.
3) AIS receiver.

Agree on the first, by never felt the need for the last two. The first GPS was a game changer just by giving lat and long.

But if I was still sailing in foggy waters I would think strongly about AIS.

 

[Daydream believer]

Very understandable. What do the team think could be the next on this list of essentials?

Foils

 

[Daydream believer]

deleted

 

[awol]

But I'm not drawing an analogy but responding to Awol's analogy.

Richard

I think you will find that you were the first to bring cars into the discussion, not I. I have to disabuse you - "right of way" does not appear in the Highway Code Introduction or any other part, neither does it appear in IRPCS.
The obligations of "stand on" vessels are quite clear and certainly do not encourage dick-head behaviour in front of ferries or any other craft.
I blame the OP for including "thread drift" in the title!

 

[LadyInBed]

Over the years, I can think of only three gadgets that I had to have, as soon I clapped my eyes on them:

1) Roller reefing headsail gear.
2) Chart plotter.
3) AIS receiver.

As a single hander, I would add an integrated Autopilot, and probably put it as #1 or 2

 

[RichardS]

I think you will find that you were the first to bring cars into the discussion, not I. I have to disabuse you - "right of way" does not appear in the Highway Code Introduction or any other part, neither does it appear in IRPCS.
The obligations of "stand on" vessels are quite clear and certainly do not encourage dick-head behaviour in front of ferries or any other craft.
I blame the OP for including "thread drift" in the title!

I thought that the introductory "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident" would meet your requirements, and also illustrate just how close to the maritime rules they are. Oh well, it was you who wanted an extract from The Highway Code, not me, so you'll have to keep looking for yourself.

As for the analogy to cars, either your phrase "right of way" was simply three random words thrown together through serendipity, or it was chosen by you as a shorthand way to refer to a well-understood situation. The most commonly understood application of "right of way" in the UK is its reference to vehicular priority on the roads and so, inevitably, it seems that you were drawing an analogy to road situations.

However, if you were referring to "right of way" as applied to the right to walk across private land, or some other application which escapes me, then it was, indeed, yours truly who brought road traffic into the discussion rather than ramblers.

Richard

 

[awol]

I thought that the introductory "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident" would meet your requirements, and also illustrate just how close to the maritime rules they are. Oh well, it was you who wanted an extract from The Highway Code, not me, so you'll have to keep looking for yourself.

As for the analogy to cars, either your phrase "right of way" was simply three random words thrown together through serendipity, or it was chosen by you as a shorthand way to refer to a well-understood situation. The most commonly understood application of "right of way" in the UK is its reference to vehicular priority on the roads and so, inevitably, it seems that you were drawing an analogy to road situations.

However, if you were referring to "right of way" as applied to the right to walk across private land, or some other application which escapes me, then it was, indeed, yours truly who brought road traffic into the discussion rather than ramblers.

Richard

I have no idea which antiquated version of the Highway Code you are using. The current Introduction is below

Introduction
This Highway Code applies to England, Scotland and Wales. The Highway Code is essential reading for everyone. The most vulnerable road users are pedestrians, particularly children, older or disabled people, cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders. It is important that all road users are aware of The Highway Code and are considerate towards each other. This applies to pedestrians as much as to drivers and riders. Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’ . In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. See an explanation of the abbreviations. Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’. Knowing and applying the rules contained in The Highway Code could significantly reduce road casualties. Cutting the number of deaths and injuries that occur on our roads every day is a responsibility we all share. The Highway Code can help us discharge that responsibility.

The term "right of way" was used by a previous poster and my 1st contributions referenced his/her/their post. While you, no doubt, understand what you mean by using the term, there are others, who on hearing/reading it in connection with the IRPCS may believe that they actually have rights rather than expectations and obligations.
Perhaps you should obtain current copies of the Highway Code (and IRPCS), study them and, if necessary, seek guidance on the interpretation

 

[RichardS]

I have no idea which antiquated version of the Highway Code you are using. The current Introduction is below


The term "right of way" was used by a previous poster and my 1st contributions referenced his/her/their post. While you, no doubt, understand what you mean by using the term, there are others, who on hearing/reading it in connection with the IRPCS may believe that they actually have rights rather than expectations and obligations.
Perhaps you should obtain current copies of the Highway Code (and IRPCS), study them and, if necessary, seek guidance on the interpretation

It's the introduction to the "General Rules, Techniques and Advice for all Drivers section of the bang-on-up-to-date Highway Code. Who is it needs to obtain current copies of the Highway Code (and IRPCS), study them and, if necessary, seek guidance on the interpretation does one think?

But please feel free to address my point above, viz ,when you use the term "right of way" which context do you have in mind?

Richard

 

[awol]

It's the introduction to the "General Rules, Techniques and Advice for all Drivers section of the bang-on-up-to-date Highway Code. Who is it needs to obtain current copies of the Highway Code (and IRPCS), study them and, if necessary, seek guidance on the interpretation does one think?

But please feel free to address my point above, viz ,when you use the term "right of way" which context do you have in mind?

Richard

Strange - my Highway Code dated 20/8/2019 only contains "right" in the context of dextral and the search function returns nothing for "right of way". It is the Scotland, Wales and England code you are using, isn't it? Ireland has its own.

I thought I had identified the context quite clearly but I'll try again - as used in post #5 - and my point in response was that, unless racing, "right of way" is a totally erroneous concept for vessels and, since you raised it in post #18, also for vehicles on the road.

You must excuse me for the next few hours, I have something interesting to do.

 

[RichardS]

Strange - my Highway Code dated 20/8/2019 only contains "right" in the context of dextral and the search function returns nothing for "right of way". It is the Scotland, Wales and England code you are using, isn't it? Ireland has its own.

I thought I had identified the context quite clearly but I'll try again - as used in post #5 - and my point in response was that, unless racing, "right of way" is a totally erroneous concept for vessels and, since you raised it in post #18, also for vehicles on the road.

You must excuse me for the next few hours, I have something interesting to do.

Download the latest version here: Download The UK Highway Code ebook PDF for free and look at page 58.

As long as that interesting thing is not pompously criticising fellow sailing forumites by saying "I just wish sailors would stop using "right of way" - it shows a failure to read and/or understand the IRPCS "

Richard

 

[BrianH]

I can't imaging the Ouzo tragedy happening if Ouzo had been using AIS.

I agree, however . . . .
For those whose memory of that incident may have dimmed in the intervening 14 years, the yacht Ouzo, a lifting keel Sailfish 25, was sunk with the loss of all three of the crew by a possible close encounter with what was judged to have been the ferry ship Pride of Bilboa, for which the second officer, on watch at the time, stood trial for manslaughter but was found not guilty due to lack of sufficient evidence that the yacht involved in a near-miss at the time of the Ouzo's loss, was indeed the Ouzo.

In my agreement with your statement we both would be taking issue with a very important conclusion in the MAIB report that AIS would not have influenced the outcome: "AIS is being carried by an increasing number of yachts, partly to assist in their being more visible. Had Ouzo carried AIS it would have made no difference to the outcome as AIS information was not displayed on the radar of Pride of Bilbao. This situation should improve as AIS is being integrated into more ship systems in the future"

For me, this statement raises more questions than it answers. Firstly, the report fails to inform just what the Pride of Bilbao had installed for AIS receiver processing but if it was the least sophisticated system merely to comply with the SOLAS regulations then she possibly had a MKD (Minimum Keyboard and Display) device, the display screen of which is so small that it is not much use as a CPA warning unit, having only a line of text data for each target received.

But the report fails to consider that the Ouzo could have taken some other action had their crew been better informed, which would have been the case with just an AIS receiver and no transponder. With the call sign, name, position and course of the Pride of Bilbao, including the final and lethal change of course that the CPA would have given, the crew may have had warning and data enough to have made a lifesaving change of course and/or VHF call on channel 16 to warn the Pride of Bilbao directly of their presence and position.

Included in the MAIB report was also some very revelatory information: "In the course of the investigation, the MAIB accident database was searched for relevant similar cases. In the last 10 years, there had been 87 hazardous incidents between yachts and merchant vessels in open sea conditions, and 14 collisions."

"On 28 August 2000, at about 2200, in moderate to good visibility, Pride of Bilbao was involved with a near collision with the yacht Aliniel (Moody 30) south of the Isle of Wight. Pride of Bilbao, when less than a mile from the yacht, changed her course and headed directly towards her. The crew only had enough time to put the engines full ahead and to shine a powerful light onto the sails; there was no time to use flares despite them being readily accessible by the chart table. On this occasion, Pride of Bilbao did take effective emergency action and eventually passed less than a cable away." The Pride of Bilbao again and south of the Isle of Wight!

​

 

[awol]

Download the latest version here: Download The UK Highway Code ebook PDF for free and look at page 58.

As long as that interesting thing is not pompously criticising fellow sailing forumites by saying "I just wish sailors would stop using "right of way" - it shows a failure to read and/or understand the IRPCS "

Richard

Ah, indeed the words do appear (I used Firefox's search function) - my bad.
You may think that it is pompous to try and disabuse anyone that thinks that "right of way" applies. You may be right.
On the other hand, not being able to differentiate between the concepts of "stand on" and "right of way" seems indicative of other failings.

 

[GHA]

Ais will tell you if a big boy has seen you and altered course for you probably well before your elderly mark one eyeball is aware he is out there.

Well offshore any course alterations often happen before the ship even appears over the horizon. Assuming you have a good radar return or, presumably, are transmitting ais. Worth remembering in busier waters the ships will be applying the irpcs to not just you but other vessels a mk 1 eyeball is unaware of.