Colregs don't apply to the elite?

dom said:
The Falmouth bye-law is (I think) a bit like a beefed up version of RRS Rule 24.1 which states, "If reasonably possible, a boat not racing shall not interfere with aboat that is racing.". A boat infringing the Falmouth bye-law would find itself liable to a fine or other penalty, but it does not as I understand it confer any Right of Way on the racing boat over the non-racing boat which has broken the bye-law. In other words the racing boat should apply the IRPCS to a vessel which is breaking the bye-law and then report him to the Harbour Master.
Click to expand...

I think you have it in one :encouragement:
 
pmagowan said:
It is obvious that there are simply a bunch of people that will not obey colregs no matter how clearly their obligations are explained to them. As this thread clearly demonstrates many people are simply happy to make up their own rules and to hell with anyone else that has to make heads or tails of it. Colregs are clear and straight forward in what your responsibilities are and have built in a rule that allows you to take any action that is neccessary to avoid a collision given the situation. I wonder what number of WAFI's it takes before they bring in regulations such as licensing.
Click to expand...

What is the clear and straightforward rule when I am simultaneously give-way and stand-on to two different vessels?
 
dom said:
There is no contradiction; the IRPCS are simply ill-designed and ill-suited to dynamic multi boat situations where any avoiding action by one immediately creates multiple new situations for others. Chaos would quickly ensue where a fleet of little boats under the Captaincy of Mainwaring all enforced their rights over a thumpting big ship! That is why the little boats mostly do the sensible thing and collectively indicate to the bigger vessel that they will get out of his way and allow him to gently steam to his destination. Where the little boats don't accept this principle, exclusion zones are implemented, such as we have off Cowes.
Click to expand...
Excellent point
 
laika said:
The obvious comparison is presumably that the requirement for a sailing vessel not to impede a power driven vessel following a TSS doesn't relieve the power driven vessel of its obligations under the COLREGS should it find itself impeded by an errant WAFI.
Click to expand...
That's sensible ships can't just rundown yachts
10. Traffic separation schemes
Ships must cross traffic lanes steering a course "as nearly as practicable" at right angles to the direction of traffic.
Vessel entering a traffic separation scheme should do it at an angle as small as practicable.
A traffic separation scheme does not relieve any vessel from complying with other rules.
and also
Rule 10 j. A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the safe passage of a power-driven vessel following a traffic lane.
 
Also, the other boats have responsibilities so, for instance, the boat that is stand on to you can see that you are restricted in your ability to manouvre by the other boat and should take action to give you sea room. Of course if nobody obeys the rules then in your situation it is likely there will be a bunch of headless chickens crashing into each other.
 
chrishelen said:
And so it goes on... Brings to mind the old saying...rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.
Click to expand...

Is that to be your defense in court? It is complete nonsense. The colregs provide for all the lateral thinking you can throw at them. If you choose to ignore tham and are involved in a collision then you are up the creek. By ignoring them you place yourself, your crew and others on the sea in danger.
 
AuntyRinum said:
The correct way to proceed at sea is to keep away from other vessels. Standing on because you think you are right is one way to travel, the other is to take your time, alter course, and avoid conflict.
The Colregs are useful for insurance claims and racing protests but, if you reach the point where you have to quote them then someone has made a mistake.
Most of us are not navigating great ships but small boats.
Click to expand...
Keeping out of the way is not the solution! And you are not standing on your rights you are fulfilling your obligation.

This was nicely illustrated by two events, one heading for Cherbourg and one returning just over a week ago.

Heading for Cherbourg I sighted a small freighter on my port bow on a steady bearing - I was sailing. I was clearly the stand on vessel - so did so - and continued to monitor him. He showed no signs of adjusting course or speed. As we closed it became clear we would collide unless one of us took action. I attempted to contact him by radio but got no response.
I therefore continued until we were sufficiently close that I knew I would be able to turn well inside his turning circle thereby ensuring our safety. As we passed astern of him the watch officer came out onto the bridge wing and and gave us a cheery wave.

On the way back as I was approaching the Needles another small freighter appeared also on a steady bearing on our Port bow. In this case he chose to alter course as per the Col Regs. His alteration was small - originally I suspected that he would pass in front of us so his alteration to pass astern was not immediately apparent.

Had I, however, altered course or slowed down this would have negated his alteration and put us back on a collision course. He passed happily astern and he also came onto the bridge wing and we exchanged waves.

Two points to bear in mind:
  • You do not have right of way - you have an obligation to maintain course and speed. Not doing so is dangerous and causes confusion.
  • If you are a sailing vessel of the size of the boats owned by most of us, you can turn or stop in little more than your own length and if you do that in the vicinity of a typical commercial vessel there is no danger of him making an alteration that could negate yours.
 
One of the most common reasons for failing the Yachtmaster Off-shore exam is lack of knowledge of the ColRegs. AND failure to demonstrate an adequate practical interpretation of the ColRegs.
I've never heard of any candidate being failed for taking early and obvious action to get out of the way of a ferry or ship, even if the yacht was the "stand on"vessel.

Rule 2. Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

ordinary practice of seamen ......read those with common sense without a touch of arrogance.
 
pmagowan said:
Is that to be your defense in court? It is complete nonsense. The colregs provide for all the lateral thinking you can throw at them. If you choose to ignore tham and are involved in a collision then you are up the creek. By ignoring them you place yourself, your crew and others on the sea in danger.
Click to expand...

It won't get to court because I use common sense, if you bothered to read my posts.
 
chrishelen said:
It won't get to court because I use common sense, if you bothered to read my posts.
Click to expand...

Yes, the same common sense that required the rules to be devised in the first place. Common sense has existed long before the rules and has been responsible for many collisions. The rules are there to make sure that everyone knows what they should do, and equally importantly, what they should expect others to do. The colregs do not undermine common sense as it is common sense to stick to a set of rules designed specifically to prevent collision. It is certainly not common sense to go around with your own set of personal rules that nobody else on the water could possible know unless they are mind readers.
 
pmagowan said:
Also, the other boats have responsibilities so, for instance, the boat that is stand on to you can see that you are restricted in your ability to manouvre by the other boat and should take action to give you sea room. Of course if nobody obeys the rules then in your situation it is likely there will be a bunch of headless chickens crashing into each other.
Click to expand...

Even so better to run into another headless chicken than the Emma Maersk!
 
southseaian said:
One of the most common reasons for failing the Yachtmaster Off-shore exam is lack of knowledge of the ColRegs. AND failure to demonstrate an adequate practical interpretation of the ColRegs.
I've never heard of any candidate being failed for taking early and obvious action to get out of the way of a ferry or ship, even if the yacht was the "stand on"vessel.

Rule 2. Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

ordinary practice of seamen ......read those with common sense without a touch of arrogance.
Click to expand...

I have never heard of any candidate failed for plucking an emu but hey ho.
 
pmagowan said:
Yes, the same common sense that required the rules to be devised in the first place. Common sense has existed long before the rules and has been responsible for many collisions. The rules are there to make sure that everyone knows what they should do, and equally importantly, what they should expect others to do. The colregs do not undermine common sense as it is common sense to stick to a set of rules designed specifically to prevent collision. It is certainly not common sense to go around with your own set of personal rules that nobody else on the water could possible know unless they are mind readers.
Click to expand...

I'm done..good bye.
 
pmagowan said:
It is certainly not common sense to go around with your own set of personal rules that nobody else on the water could possible know unless they are mind readers.
Click to expand...

If (as I think you mean) these personal rules are those involved in dealing with Greek Ferries they are based on sound common sense and a will to live.

We are extremely lucky here in the Solent that our ferries are manned by level headed professionals with an understanding of the short comings of some boaters.
 
southseaian said:
If (as I think you mean) these personal rules are those involved in dealing with Greek Ferries they are based on sound common sense and a will to live.

We are extremely lucky here in the Solent that our ferries are manned by level headed professionals with an understanding of the short comings of some boaters.
Click to expand...

This is the thing. Everyone seems to be trying to think of an example wher colregs requires you to enter a risky situation. Colregs does nothing but increase your chance of living whether you will it or not. Common sense dictates that everyone should obey the rules and thus avoid collisions at sea. If a ferry or any other vessel refuses to to so that is fine. Colregs do not require you to stand on into danger, in fact they prohibit you from doing so. I can not understand the scenario where you obeying the rules with a greek or russian or martian ferry would put you at risk. They will know what you are doing and can take avoiding action, if they refuse then you can take avoiding action.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top