Colregs: Restricted in her Ability to Manœuvre is not intended to be used by leisure yachts.

[Mark-1]

I'm saying that RAM status can only result from the 'nature of the work she is engaged in', not random misfortunes such as a damaged rudder, nor anything else which unexpectedly occurs, including towing another yacht.
I totally agree that Tillergirl's surveys, for example, are work, albeit unpaid.

I'm pretty close to you on this with the quibble that I think unexpectedly towing probably qualifies as work, even if that wasn't the direct intent of the original legislator.

I've come to the conclusion that the intent behind this rule is to cover working boats doing pre-planned industrial style work (paid or unpaid). Other things may be caught up in the wording but they weren't especially intended.

My guess is the idea of this rule was never that a wide range of vessels should randomly and unexpectedly become RAM. (Unlike "Whoops we've suddenly become NUC", for instance.) In the same way if I find and recover a mine in my Corribee (happens all the time) I didn't become a mine sweeper for 35 minutes. It almost a class of vessel rather than a situation. (Almost, but not, before I get jumped on.)

All of the above my guess, I have no evidence.

I've learned a lot from this thread and I bet I'm not alone. Hitherto I had NUC and RAM as two points on the same graph. If your rudder was a bit stuck you might be RAM if your rudder fell off you'd be NUC. That was totally wrong.

 

[Black Sheep]

I've learned a lot from this thread and I bet I'm not alone.

Yes - one doesn't always check the definitions. Until I did, I assumed that NUC meant "I'm totally helpless" while RAM meant "I can't manoeuvre easily".
Like others, I'd have said that a yacht under dodgy jury rudder would be RAM. I now understand that if it affects the ability to manoevre according to colregs, it should be NUC. If it doesn't, then no signal is appropriate.

I also hadn't realised that a sailing vessel cannot be constrained by her draught.

 

[Yealm]

All these terms are well defined, without 'obfuscation', in the Rules, it's the 'intuitive perspectives' which cause the hang-ups..

Personally speaking, I would dearly love to be taught and study them in more detail and take some specific classroom course, followed by an exam or certificate; the RYA YM syllabus is rather light on this specific subject, but I don't know of any such courses. C and L only goes so far. (There is definitely a gap in the market as far as I'm concerned. )

Great idea..

 

[john_morris_uk]

Doesn't that simply mean that "by nature of work" is a necessary condition but not a sufficient one?

Exactly so. And it’s a question I often ask YM candidates. There’s a large tug towing a small pontoon or barge approaching on a steady bearing from your port side. It’s showing the day shape for a towing vessel but no other shapes. Who is stand on and who should give way?
The correct answer is you’re stand on and you stand on (and if you’re prudent you monitor closely...). A towing vessel gets no rights simply by towing. It needs to be severely restricted in its ability to manoeuvre and put RAM up to gain rights.

Of course in practice almost every tug towing anything puts RAM up and gains rights and no ones going to argue.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I've come to the conclusion that the intent behind this rule is to cover working boats doing pre-planned industrial style work (paid or unpaid). Other things may be caught up in the wording but they weren't especially intended.

I think the intent is that RAM = "I have to be in this bit of sea" and NUC = "I can't get out of this bit of sea". On of the many, many problems with the IRPCS is that they were originally written at a time when non-commercial traffic was negligible. I gather from previous discussions here that it's generally accepted that they are full of holes, but doing anything about it is almost impossible because so many countries would have to agree.

 

[scottie]

Earlier I quoted yacht race mark laying as an example of non commercial use of RAM shapes

I would suggest that this is a sensible use where you can predict the need and prepare accordingly whether anyone recognised them or took any notice is another matter

 

[RichardS]

I also hadn't realised that a sailing vessel cannot be constrained by her draught.

A sailing vessel under sail, presumably ......

Richard

 

[Aardee]

I think the intent is that RAM = "I have to be in this bit of sea" and NUC = "I can't get out of this bit of sea".

Nice definition.

 

[Black Sheep]

A sailing vessel under sail, presumably ......

Richard

If it's not under sail, it's not a sailing vessel.
Rule 3(c) applies.

 

[RichardS]

I'm saying that RAM status can only result from the 'nature of the work she is engaged in', not random misfortunes such as a damaged rudder, nor anything else which unexpectedly occurs, including towing another yacht.

So we are not in agreement as I would suggest that a leisure vessel which is engaged in towing another vessel in an unexpected recovery operation can have RAM status if the vessel being towed is sufficiently unwieldy such as to render the towing vessel restricted in its ability to manoeuvre in the practical sense of the phrase.

Richard

 

[awol]

Meanwhile the MV Sir John Murray operated by SEPA (Scottish Environmen Protection Agency) appears to have Ball/Diamond/Ball welded to her mast. It stays up when parked, in the Caley Canal or steaming in open water and her ability to swing in her own length when parking is impressive. She also sometimes claims "Law Enforcement" on AIS.

 

[RichardS]

If it's not under sail, it's not a sailing vessel.
Rule 3(c) applies.

"The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail; provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used."

Richard

 

[rgarside]

Should your ability to manoeuvre be restricted, and you have chosen not to display the appropriate signals, then in the event that a collision occurs I assume that the other vessel might reasonably take the view that your failure to display the appropriate signals was misleading.

 

[Caraway]

Approaching 24 hours and no distinct verdict.
This in the Col Regs which may you require you to make a snap decision at sea in order to comply.

These discussions always bang along like this. No clear answers. Diverse opinions. Hardly hard and fast or dependable when of two parties, neither can know how the other sees the "Rule of the Road".

 

[awol]

I see RAM a bit like "Room to Tack" in the RSS. There is no choice - RAM requires avoidance, "Room to Tack" requires a tack or "You tack". As to whether it is right or wrong to hoist the signal (or "Room to Tack") worry about it and deal with it after the fact.

 

[Sandy]

Approaching 24 hours and no distinct verdict.
This in the Col Regs which may you require you to make a snap decision at sea in order to comply.

These discussions always bang along like this. No clear answers. Diverse opinions. Hardly hard and fast or dependable when of two parties, neither can know how the other sees the "Rule of the Road".

For that we have

Admiralty Court

 

[Black Sheep]

Approaching 24 hours and no distinct verdict.
...
These discussions always bang along like this. No clear answers. ...

Nonsense!

We've had lots of distinct verdicts and many clear answers.

 

[DJE]

Very manouvreable survey vessels performing tight turns and following precise tracks rightly display RAM. ("I've got to be in this bit of sea" as noted above)

A yacht towing a grapnel and trying to recover an anchor that she had to cut away a day or two earlier could reasonably claim the same and show the same shapes.

I don't see why it doesn't apply to leisure vessels.

 

[Black Sheep]

I don't see why it doesn't apply to leisure vessels.

It does apply to leisure vessels.

The thread title is wrong - leisure yachts are capable of engaging in work, the nature of which could restrict the vessel's ability to manoeuvre as required by the regs. (my post #53 among others). They can legitimately claim RAM status under those circumstances.

 

[RichardS]

Very manouvreable survey vessels performing tight turns and following precise tracks rightly display RAM. ("I've got to be in this bit of sea" as noted above)

A yacht towing a grapnel and trying to recover an anchor that she had to cut away a day or two earlier could reasonably claim the same and show the same shapes.

I don't see why it doesn't apply to leisure vessels.

I also agree that it can apply to leisure vessels but whether being engaged in an operation that could easily be ceased would qualify might be arguable.

Richard