Am I a power vessel....?

[Twister_Ken]

But what is propelling machinery

Perfectly logical argument is that propelling machinery is the drive mechanism and the propellor. The engine is not part of the propelling machinery unless it is engaged with the sterngear. Until then it is a non-specific engine which at the time may be driving a generator, but not the propelling machinery.

After all, it is not the engine that propels the boat, but the rotating propellor.

 

[Guest]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

A number of reasons:

1. see the point I made in answer to yours that (the way the phrase is used in the regs) propelling machinery doesn't cease to be propelling machinery just because its not in use since the regs refer to "propelling machinery... not being used".

2. In construing the regs a judge would take into account the fact that the regs cease to work sensibly if a vessel were to cease to be power driven if it slips into neutral for a moment. A judge won't (if he can help it) get quite so metaphysical as you're trying to.

3. If you do want to get metaphysical anyway, see my point about not having to use every bit of the machinery concerned. It's still all connected together as one lot of machinery even if the gearbox has disengaged one function.

If a judge has a choice between two interpretations: one that works and one that makes a nonsense of the regs, he'll go for the one that makes sense of the regs since he'll presume that's what whoever drafted the regs intended.

 

[Bergman]

Re: Clear as a bell

I'd never have guessed

But I still think you are wrong.

Your argument as I understand rests upon the engine alone being "propelling machinery"

My case rests upon the engine, transmission and screw being "propelling machinery"

I do not believe that there is any definition in the Col Regs that gives a definitive answer to this difference of opinion.

Perhaps a lead comes from your argument that no Cone is necesary if running the engine but not driving the boat.

A cone is necessary if powering the boat by engine and sail.

If no cone is necessary then it can only be one or the other.

If the sails are set and drawing then it must be a sailing vessel

QED
?

 

[davel]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

Simon,
surely the interpretation that makes most sense is that a vessel that is being propelled by its sail and NOT being propelled by machinery is in fact a sailing vessel and not a power vessel.

 

[Guest]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

I don't think so because:

1. if you're give way vessel because you're power driven you could change your status simply by slipping your engine out of gear.

2. How does the other guy know whether you're in gear or not? If you really have to rush forward and remove your motoring cone every time you slip into neutral, things become practically unworkable.

3. Most importantly, the colregs don't revolve only around sailing vessels. The same definition of power driven vessel applies to ships as does to sailing vessels. That means if we cease to fall within the definition if we slip out of gear, ships (to which the same definition of power driven applies) also cease to be power driven if they disengage their propellor and coast. Things start to get silly.

Alternatively, the judge can just decide that sailing vessels running their engines out of gear are power driven vessels. This doesn't disadvantage those sailing vessels because they can slip into gear quickly and are therefore as easily manoeuvred as if they were in gear.

And taking that interpretation falls within the normal meaning of the words, is what the regs say if you construe them really closely.

 

[Guest]

Re: Clear as a bell

See my response above.

On the questions of using cones, the regs use a different expression: "when also being propelled by machinery". This is of course different from the definition of power driven vessel. But then not all power driven vessels have to carry a cone anyway: only sailing vessels when being propelled by machinery.

Strictly speaking being propelled by machinery in the context of cones means in gear. I doubt that the drafters were thinking about the inconsistency with the definition of power driven vessel when they wrote it.

 

[davel]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

Hum.

Let me put my wig on and propose some counter arguments.
1. A power vessel that slips into neutral does not change its status simply because of that action. It remains a power vessel in neutral. What other status could it have? It's not a sailing vessel, It's not a vessel not under command, It's not a fishing vessel. Could it be a vessel restricted in it's ability to maneouvre? I doubt that a judge would accept that interpretation.
2. A vessel driven by sail with motor running and engaged is a motor vessel since it's propelled by machinery. When it disengages it's engine it does have an alternate status - that of a sailing vessel, which is exactly what it is!
3. One could argue that the point is clarified by Rule 18 which clearly states that the cone need only be displayed when the machinery is actually propelling the vessel. Since the purpose of the cone would be interpreted as being meant to signify that a vessel that might otherwise be observed to be a sailing vessel was actually under power, it is logical that if the cone is not required to be displayed (ie when the machinery may be running but not propelling the vessel) then the vessel should correctly be seen to be a sailing vessel.
4. To sugest that a sailing vessel with it's engine running has the potential to become a power vessel by putting it's engine into gear has a natural extension to sugest that a vessel that is fitted with an engine is automatically a power vessel since it has the potential to start its engine and engage gear. This would not be accepted by the courts.

Your witness (and round)

 

[Bergman]

Re: Clear as a bell

Perhaps the key words are "also being propelled"

A yacht under sail with the engine running is not "being propelled" and therefore does not need to show a cone.

If the engine is running and not propelling the yacht it cannot be "propelling machinery" It only becomes propelling machinery when it starts to turn the propellor.

I mentioned generators earlier, many ships have engines which are normally used to generate electricity but can be used to add to the ship power driving the prop. What is their status?

The case of a power vessel kicking out of gear is different. So long has he has steerage way he is a power driven vessel since engine power gave him the way with which to steer. At the point he can no longer steer (or arguably at some earlier point) he becomes a vessel not under command since the crew have no control over it's speed and direction.

 

[Guest]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

The question is does a vessel fall within the definition of "power driven vessel". Sorry, the definition is the same for everyone. As a matter of construction, you can't change the meaning of the definition for different types of vessels.

The cone is a different issue: it mustn't be hoisted by ALL power driven vessels, only by sailing vessels being propelled by machinery. This cannot be a clarification of what a "power driven vessel" is. They are two different things- the former is a sub-set of the latter. Power driven vessels include all sorts of things that don't have to hoist cones, like ships, for example.

I agree that the wording of the circumstances in which you have to hoist a cone isn't entirely logical. In practice, this doesn't matter since the regs would only be cited to determine who had been negligent.

Qu.: a sailing vessel with its engine in gear takes its engine out of gear - is it negligent if it doesn't immediately take down its cone? Answer: No. End of problem.

Qu.2: a sailing vessel has its engine running but out of gear, but fails to hoist a cone. Is it negligent in not hoisting a cone? Answer: No, it is within its rights within the regulations. Is it a power driven vessel? Yes.

So the discrepancy doesn't matter.

To answer your point 4. The question is: is it using its machinery? If its switched off, the answer is no. If it's switched on, the answer is yes.

 

[Guest]

Re: Clear as a bell

"Power driven vessels" and the circumstances under which sailing vessels also being propelled with machinery are two different things.

Your second paragraph is correct.

On generators, if the generator is capable of manouevering the ship properly and is being run, then it may well make a vessel power driven even if the main engines aren't running. If they aren't so capable, then they wouldn't.

You last para is wrong, unless the engine has broken or there are other difficult circumstances. A vessel is not "not under command" even if it stops - its speed and direction can still be controlled by the crew. They have it in their control for example to engage the propellor.

 

[davel]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

Let's try a different tack.

The Regs say
b) The term "power-driven vessel" means any vessel propelled by machinery.

by this definition a sailing vessel when fitted with a propelling machinery is a "power driven vessel". However there is a further definition that refines this ie
c) The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.

This means that a sailing yacht fitted with propelling machinery is a "power driven vessel" unless and until it is under sail and the propelling machinery is not being used.

The definitions apply to all vessels and the propelling machinery is the same for all vessels. In most modern cases this machinery comprises an engine, a gearbox, a drive shaft and a propeller. The engine alone is not propelling machinery it is simply a component part. The same situation applies to all vessels be they sail or power.

So the anti collision regs apply to all vessels equally. Any vessel becomes a "sailing vessel" provide it fulfills to two qualifying contitions i) it must be under sail and ii) it must not be using it's propelling machinery. It can, however use it's engine (for purposes other than for propulsion) and be considered a sailing vessel if it's also under sail.

 

[oldharry]

Nice debate to return from a short cruise to: made more real by an Wightlink Car Ferry who evidently decided I was using the outboard on my little yacht, and held his course, crossing my bows about 20 feet ahead of me, and forcing me to gybe all standing to avoid hitting him amidships (Ferry 1, me 0 in that situation).

Interesting question as he approached, as the stand on vessel, a) being under sail and not propelled, and b) as he was approaching from my starboard quarter, passing ahead of me, he was an 'overtaking vessel' therefore required under the regs to steer clear of me. I can only assume he thought he was 'stand - on vessel' as he was approaching my starboard side.

Or maybe, being the day after IFOS, he wa so p****d off with yachts getting in his way all weekend that he wasnt going to stop anyway....


By the way becoming a 'vessel not under command' does not involve simply stopping engines - nor for that matter does it apply to a yacht lying to a sea anchor during a storm.

To be 'not under command' must be exactly that - unable to control the course or speed of the vessel - in other words drifting out of control.

Otherwise, any vessel, if not at anchor, is technically 'under way', even if it is not moving. Thus a becalmed yacht is still technically 'under way' while a dismasted yacht with a rope on the prop is becomes 'not under command'

That is why the regulations require power to give way to sail - a sailing vessel 'under way' may be becalmed and unable to take effective avoiding action.

 

[johndf]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

An interesting debate, but I'm afraid that I cannot accept that a vessel under sail with its engine in neutral is a power driven vessel, because if that were the case it would lead to a dangerous situation, as described below, in which it is not clear which is the stand on vessel.

The aforementioned vessel would not according to rule 25e be displaying a cone and would therefore appear to other vessels to be sailing vessel. Thus a power driven vessel on collision course with it would give way, but since it was itself a 'power driven vessel', it would also be required to give way if the other power driven vessel was on its starboard side. Thus both skippers would be giving way - exactly what we don't want.

So there it is, a vessel under sail with its engine in neutral cannot be a power driven vessel and must therefore be a sailing vesselfor the purposes of the IRPCS.

On the other hand i have to agree with SimonC that a boat without sails with its engine running in neutral is a power driven vessel.

 

[johndf]

A clearer version of theabove

An interesting debate, but I'm afraid that I cannot accept that a vessel under sail with its engine in neutral is a power driven vessel, because if that were the case it would lead to a dangerous situation, as described below, in which it is not clear which is the stand on vessel.

Let us suppose that we have a vessel (vessel Y) under sail with its engine in neutral and therefore not displaying a cone. Suppose that we also have on vessel Y’s starboard side a power driven vessel (vessel M) on collision course. As viewed from vessel M, vessel Y would appear to be a sailing vessel and so vessel Y would give way. However, if vessel Y is in fact a 'power driven vessel', it would be required to give way to vessel M on its starboard side. Thus both vessels would be giving way - exactly what we don't want. So it follows that vessel Y cannot be a power driven vessel and can only therefore be a sailing vessel.

So there it is, a vessel under sail with its engine in neutral cannot be a power driven vessel and must therefore be a sailing vessel for the purposes of the IRPCS.

On the other hand I have to agree with SimonC that a boat without sails with its engine running in neutral is a power driven vessel. Assuming the skipper or crew are or should be on watch, then surely it is under way, even if it is not making way. Of course a vessel at anchor or moored with its engine running in neutral is a different matter entirely (is it?).

 

[Guest]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

I agree with most of that, except that the sailing boat IS using its propelling machinery.

You have to ask yourself:

Question 1: is its main engine "propelling machinery"? Answer: yes, because its main purpose is to propel the boat.

Question 2: Is it using it? Answer: yes, the machinery is running.

And it can't be said that "propelling machinery" isn't "propelling machinery" when its not actually propelling, because the regs talk about "propelling machinery... not being used".

 

[Guest]

Re: A clearer version of theabove

It's quite common for situations to arise under the colregs where both boats are give way vessels, so there's no real problem with that situation in my view.

One example: a sailing vessel on port tack sees a sailing vessel to windward but can't see which tack she's on. Sailing vessel to windward is in fact on port tack. Both vessels are obliged to keep out of the way of each other - there isn't a stand on vessel.

The wording of the motorsailing cone provision could be better phrased, but in practice is unlikely to give rise to problems and, as I mentioned elsewhere, you shouldn't be negligent if you use it with the engine in neutral. In view of general practice, it may even be arguable whether you're negligent if you never hoist one at all!!!

 

[davel]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

This is the crux of the matter.
Your Question 1: is its main engine "propelling machinery"? You answer: yes, because its main purpose is to propel the boat.
I answer that it's main purpose is irelevant (and open to question - a long distance cruiser could well answer that the main purpose of the engine is to charge batteries, power a fridge, drive a water maker. A secondary purpose could be to provide a component of propulsion on occasions). I also answer that it is not, of itself, propelling machinery. Without an engaged gearbox etc it is not capable of providing propulsion.

 

[Guest]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

OK, make that one of its main purposes if you want to. To borrow your phrase: is it capable of providing propulsion?

You say: "Without an engaged gearbox etc it is not capable of providing propulsion". But it IS capable of providing propulsion even if the gearbox isn't engaged. All you have to do is engage the gearbox...

The engine in my boat is capable of providing propulsion even though it is at the moment completely turned off. At the moment it is "propelling machinery... not being used".

By Monday it will already be in use!

 

[davel]

Re: But what is propelling machinery

And that (finally cos it's getting late and I'm sailing tomorrow!) is exactly my point.
When the propulsion machinery (gearbox and propeller) is not in use my vessel under sail is a "sailing vessel". Even if the engine is being used, my propulsion machinery is not. Under all other circumstances my vessel is a "power driven" vessel.

I'm out on the Solent tomorrow. Perhaps we'll bump into each other??

 

[Guest]

I\'m afraid your boat\'s engine IS its propulsion machinery!

Probably best to avoid the bumping bit.

After all they are the IRPCS, not the IRABS (International Regulations for the Apportionment of Blame at Sea)!

Happy sailing!