Colregs

wadget said:
Just read through some colregs threads. Some people have some worrying interpretations of the rules. There is a way to stop these arguments.

Everyone get hold of a copy of this:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Guide-Colli...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1338391368&sr=1-1

Read it fully remember it and apply it.
Click to expand...

There are of course lots of people out on the water who have minimal knowledge of the rules. For example a raggie who ran down an anchored fishing boat while yelling 'power gives way to sail'. On the other hand there are enough grey areas and omissions to provide endless room for debate.

Examples:

What is the status of a boat under oars?

How far must a sailing boat travel after forcing a motor vessel to give way before a tack is no longer considered to be failing to hold course and becomes a new crossing situation?

Only a vessel under 20m LOA is required not to impede a vessel constrained to a narrow channel but what is the minimum size of vessel that must not be impeded?
 
pteron said:
No, it includes *an* interpretation of the rules. Only the Admiralty court can give you *the* correct interpretation of the rules!
Click to expand...

Ok it contains an interpretation of the rules based on cases from admiralty courts. So as good as you'll get without going to court.
 
But it's the same as racing.
Sometimes you not only need to know the rules, you need to know what other people think the rules are!
 
wadget said:
Ok it contains an interpretation of the rules based on cases from admiralty courts. So as good as you'll get without going to court.
Click to expand...

Well not really. There is a book which goes into chapter and verse about court decisions related to collisions at sea. Try this one. Mind you, it costs over £600 and is heavy enough to sink the average small cruiser, so perhaps it's not surprising that it's not well known!

Incidentally, it's many years since I read it, but I seem to remember that one of the decisions related to sailing boats (or ships) beating. I believe that 'standing on' was interpreted as continuing with one's intentions; if the stand on vessel was beating up a channel then it should continue to beat.
 
Last edited:
Lakesailor said:
Ah! Simple mistake. Easy to make.

The problem is that the forum lawyers have read about the ColRegs and have a full and complete misunderstanding of them.
Click to expand...

What's really worrying is that they seem to think that the colregs need interpretation!

Do speed limit signs need interpretation? Do double continuos white lines in the middle of the road need interpretation??

Regulations are regulations, you have either contravened them or you haven't. By all means have a discussion about whether or not somebody has contravened the regulations, but for goodness sakes, the regulations are what they are, and interpreting them doesn't come into it.:rolleyes:
 
This is the book often quoted by the MAIB in accident investigations. As you say, it provides the all important authoritative statement on matters of interpretation. e.g exactly what does "Must not impede" mean? It is a "must have" for those sitting MCA oral exams for their professional Cs of C. Older editions e.g. edition 5 can be found at a much more reasonable price and not that much has changed over 10 years or so.
 
Malabar said:
This is the book often quoted by the MAIB in accident investigations. As you say, it provides the all important authoritative statement on matters of interpretation. e.g exactly what does "Must not impede" mean? It is a "must have" for those sitting MCA oral exams for their professional Cs of C. Older editions e.g. edition 5 can be found at a much more reasonable price and not that much has changed over 10 years or so.
Click to expand...
You mean Cockroft and Lameijer, don't you? Not Marsden
(C&L is for seamen, Marsden is for lawyers!)
A seventh edition of C&L was published earlier this year, so the price of the 6th edition should start plummetting any time now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top