Crossing Separation Zones in Small Yacht

[GrahamM376]

Again you contradict yourself: do you agree with Graham 376? Or do you keep to the rules?

Where do I not keep to the rules?

Adjusting course at a distance, often before actually entering the TSS lane, is not against any "rules". What would be against them is altering course the wrong way when in close proximity to other vessels, which could force them to change course to avoid you.

 

[Simondjuk]

I have a sneaking suspicion that many of these crossing situation problems are in fact caused by too much changing of course and over thinking the problem.

For the average small sailboat, say travelling a 5 knots at right angles to a large tanker or whatever, the actual period of danger is only the few seconds that it takes to travel the distance of the beam of the ship, plus a safety margin, for the short period of time that the ship is passing you.

I am sure someone better at maths than me could calculate this.

In practice to me, that means I do not alter course or slow down ever until I am quite close. 9 times out of ten the ship passes way before I get there. The other time a quick tweak of the helm, or closing of the throttle means I pass behind.

I have AIS and radar both capable of CPA, but I tend to just let the situation develop and make a single action at the right time if need be.

So far, no commercial ship has misunderstood this and turned towards me.

I quite agree with all the above, and said the same myself in an earlier post.

I also did the maths you mention.

The container ship Emma Maersk has a beam of around 60 metres and a maximum speed of 25 knots. At 4 knots, a boat covers around 2 metres a second. Therefore, if Emma were steaming at maximum speed and you were making 4 knots, you could cross her at right angles, from clear on one of her bows to clear on the other, with her at 390 metres off as you begin.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that beginning to cross a huge ship's bows with her 400 metres away would be a good idea. Simply pointing out how little time/distance is actually needed to cross.

Or in other words, at 4 knots it takes you about 30 seconds to cross the beam of the Emma Maersk, one of the largest container ships in the world. Although, you'd want to allow a good bit extra on that to allow for any tide which may be on your stem but her beam, and just because I imagine that being less than a few hundred metres clear by the time she crossed your wake would feel pretty alarming.

 

[Simondjuk]

He can see you coming in from some distance, by eye and radar and see that your course will take you across his stern.

Quoting IRPCS in many instances is a red herring. I will have had the EBL on any conflicting traffic from most likely 8 miles. If my track is at right angles to the ships course and I'm 3-4 miles away from the point at which we will meet, it's going to be 20-30 minutes or so before we do so. To set my course at that distance to pass his stern is not a deviation from IRPCS and he's highly unlikely to have instituted a course change by then. If however he has done (which I've never seen at that distance) I would then stand on.

Blimey! To me, unless EBLing and MARPAing everything within 8 miles was a hobby, doing so would just be a perfectly good way to ruin a relaxing sail.

Also, how on earth do you ever cross a busy shipping lane if you start aiming at the sterns of approaching ships when they're 3 or 4 miles away? Do you often set off for Dieppe and end up in Cherbourg due to waiting for a suitable gap?

 

[stephenh]

Here we are :

Just follow the rules ! ( courtesy Cockroft and Lameijer)

The Four collision stages

1. More than 5m - both vessels - any action permitted

2. Less than 5m – give way – early and substantial action - rule 16
- stand on – hold course and speed - rule 17 (a) (i)

3. 1- 2m (?) If no action by give way then :
- stand on – whistle – rule 34 (a)
- may take action - rule 17 (a) (ii)
- mobos not to turn to port – rule 17 ( c)

4. (?) If still no action by give way then
- stand on – must take action – rule 17 (b)

The above is for tankers etc. probably shorter distances for us lot.......

 

[davidej]

My interpretation is that a TSS has two lanes - in the Channel there is west going lane and an east going lane. I am happy to be corrected!

Yes - thats fine but

the 'not to impede' rule applies to traffic in a lane -not a TSS. I interpret this to mean that you can be in a lane without actually being in a TSS.

I may be wrong about this and so hoped a professional would reply.

 

[sailorman]

Yes - thats fine but

the 'not to impede' rule applies to traffic in a lane -not a TSS. I interpret this to mean that you can be in a lane without actually being in a TSS.

I may be wrong about this and so hoped a professional would reply.

the only lanes are TSS
The approach channel to a Hbr ( Felixstowe / Dover for instance ) is similar but more restricted in the ships ability to alter course

 

[JayBee]

Blimey!....how on earth do you ever cross a busy shipping lane if you start aiming at the sterns of approaching ships when they're 3 or 4 miles away? Do you often set off for Dieppe and end up in Cherbourg due to waiting for a suitable gap?

I think this is a clue to the intended meaning of the language in Rule 8. The drafters of this rule probably did not want to impose an absolute duty on small/ sailing vessels crossing a TSS to give way to vessels proceeding along the lanes.

Just a thought.

 

[timbartlett]

Where do I not keep to the rules?

Adjusting course at a distance, often before actually entering the TSS lane, is not against any "rules". What would be against them is altering course the wrong way when in close proximity to other vessels, which could force them to change course to avoid you.

You wrote:

In the case of a large vessel I just adjust my course to pass his stern rather than the bow which may well cause him to alter course.... I don't have much time for the attitude shown by some yachtsmen that "I'm under sail and WILL NOT alter course for anyone"!!!...

And you talk about using the EBL to establish risk of collision at 8 miles.

Unless you have a good quality, narrow beamwidth radar interfaced with a good high-speed compass, then the EBL check at 8 miles would come under the heading of "scanty radar information" It's a great "quick check" but as a basis for decision making it infringes Rule 7c.

And you imply that you use the "adjust my course to pass his stern" regardless of whether you are the stand on vessel or not. Few yachts have the facilities required to establish risk of collision at 6 miles +. And if you are the stand on vessel, then altering course at less than 6 miles is in conflict with Rule17. In particular, altering course to port for a vessel on your port side is likely to conflict with 17c.

Many of the problems in discussing this stem from the fact that one person's "ample time" can easily be another's "last minute".

 

[GrahamM376]

You wrote:
And if you are the stand on vessel, then altering course at less than 6 miles is in conflict with Rule17. In particular, altering course to port for a vessel on your port side is likely to conflict with 17c.

Many of the problems in discussing this stem from the fact that one person's "ample time" can easily be another's "last minute".

It seems to have escaped notice that, in many cases, a course change has to be made when approaching the boundary of a TSS, in order to point at 90 degrees when crossing. As the crossing vessel often approaches at quite an angle the turn can be timed over some distance to suit passing traffic.

It appears from your comments that any vessel approaching a TSS should only approach at 90 degrees from many miles out and not deviate from that course which, in practice, is unrealsitic. A vessel outside the boundary can go round in circles, tack, gybe, heave to or, drop the anchor if it wishes, without infringing any rules.

My point is that it's up to the skipper at which point he enters the TSS (either in front of or, behind a vessel in the lane) but obviously from that point on the rules must be obeyed. When crossing a main road, do you wait for passing traffic or, pull out in front of an artic?

 

[onesea]

You wrote:
And you talk about using the EBL to establish risk of collision at 8 miles.

Unless you have a good quality, narrow beamwidth radar interfaced with a good high-speed compass, then the EBL check at 8 miles would come under the heading of "scanty radar information" It's a great "quick check" but as a basis for decision making it infringes Rule 7c.

And you imply that you use the "adjust my course to pass his stern" regardless of whether you are the stand on vessel or not. Few yachts have the facilities required to establish risk of collision at 6 miles +. And if you are the stand on vessel, then altering course at less than 6 miles is in conflict with Rule17. In particular, altering course to port for a vessel on your port side is likely to conflict with 17c.

If you cannot ascertain if risk of collision exists you can not do right for wrong..

With your average radar you can ascertain if risk of collision exists. It will just take longer (or more time to work out). You can be more confident the better stabilised and the better definition it has. Depends what distance you icked your target up..

Where does it say in rules that at 6 miles risk of collision is deemed to exist?

This is where your final statement is so true

Many of the problems in discussing this stem from the fact that one person's "ample time" can easily be another's "last minute".

It seems to have escaped notice that, in many cases, a course change has to be made when approaching the boundary of a TSS, in order to point at 90 degrees when crossing. As the crossing vessel often approaches at quite an angle the turn can be timed over some distance to suit passing traffic.

It appears from your comments that any vessel approaching a TSS should only approach at 90 degrees from many miles out and not deviate from that course which, in practice, is unrealsitic. A vessel outside the boundary can go round in circles, tack, gybe, heave to or, drop the anchor if it wishes, without infringing any rules.

My point is that it's up to the skipper at which point he enters the TSS (either in front of or, behind a vessel in the lane) but obviously from that point on the rules must be obeyed. When crossing a main road, do you wait for passing traffic or, pull out in front of an artic?

This to me is part of the shall not impede the passage of, concerning crossing TSS's. Traffic does tend to bunch in TSS so if you get it right the difficult situations should not exist.

 

[GrahamM376]

This to me is part of the shall not impede the passage of, concerning crossing TSS's. Traffic does tend to bunch in TSS so if you get it right the difficult situations should not exist.

+1

I suspect Tim has never crossed a TSS or shipping lane as skipper, if at all. His comments about the use of the EBL also indicate a lack of radar use and some "rule" quotations are farcical.

Crossing shipping lanes isn't brain surgery, it's common sense. Tactics will depend on the day in question - is it busy with ships maybe 3 abreast at different speeds or is it fairly clear? Can you sail at a reasonable speed or is it rough with wind on the nose and you're having problems maintaining speed?

DO NOT rely on large ships in the TSS giving way, some do but most don't, particularly when they have little room to change course due to traffic density.

 

[JayBee]

A reminder of this commentary, from Farwell's Rules of the Nautical Road:

"If the small craft or sailing vessel follows a course that requires another vessel following the lane to alter course or speed, the small craft or sailing vessel is guilty of impeding the safe navigation of the other vessel. Once again, however, if the situation develops so as to involve risk of collision, the applicable steering and sailing rules apply to the vessel following the TSS; however, Rule 8(f)(ii) makes it clear that the encroaching vessel is not in any way relieved of her obligation not to impede the other, and therefore she can not seek shelter as a potential priviledged vessel under the steering and sailing rules. If collision results, the vessel’s breach of her duty not to impede will be a basis for allocating fault for the collision."

Who is right here? Tim Bartlett or Mr Farwell?

 

[stephenh]

"Who is right here? Tim Bartlett or Mr Farwell?"

My vote goes to Tim B, backed up by Cockroft + L, your Mr Farwell doesn't quite cut the mustard.

 

[Tradewinds]

+1

I suspect Tim has never crossed a TSS or shipping lane as skipper, if at all. His comments about the use of the EBL also indicate a lack of radar use and some "rule" quotations are farcical.

Quite enjoying the discussion until now - someone always has to come along with the personal insults .

 

[westernman]

"Who is right here? Tim Bartlett or Mr Farwell?"

My vote goes to Tim B, backed up by Cockroft + L, your Mr Farwell doesn't quite cut the mustard.

+1

Otherwise it makes no sense to talk about impede. You might just as well say that the boat crossing must give way and the ships following the lane are all stand on.

 

[JayBee]

"Who is right here? Tim Bartlett or Mr Farwell?"

My vote goes to Tim B, backed up by Cockroft + L, your Mr Farwell doesn't quite cut the mustard.

Here's the Publisher's blurb:

Professional mariners, military and civilian, will find this book to be an invaluable reference in understanding the rules of the road and the role these rules play in managing the risk of collision. The author provides a thorough commentary on the rules and an analysis of collision cases involving abuse of the rules. Maritime attorneys and judges will find the book continues to be an indispensable reference on collision law as Craig Allen provides a mariner's insight into how the rules apply in context and their application by the courts and administrative tribunals. This new edition completely revises chapters on the rules pertaining to good seamanship and special circumstances and on restricted visibility, and it vastly expands coverage of the narrow channel rule, traffic separation schemes, and the application of the rules to high-speed craft. It also extensively revises materials on the look out and risk of collision responsibilities to update coverage on radar and ARPA and to address new technologies, such as integrated bridge systems, automatic identification systems, voyage data recorders and the increasingly active role of VTS. The first update in ten years, the eighth edition upholds and even surpasses the standards set over the past sixty years of the guide's publication.
Craig H. Allen, a retired Coast Guard officer, is a professor of law at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle, Washington, where he specializes in maritime law.

OK, they are hoping to sell a lot more copies of the book.

I don't have a copy of Cockcroft + L handy, so would you mind quoting the actual words used which support Tim's view?

Your logic would imply that it is preferable to use Cockcroft + L in the English Channel (with non-US flag ships in the TSS), and Farwell on the US Coast.

 

[JayBee]

+1

Otherwise it makes no sense to talk about impede. You might just as well say that the boat crossing must give way and the ships following the lane are all stand on.

See post 151.

 

[stephenh]

JB -

"Your logic would imply that it is preferable to use Cockcroft + L in the English Channel (with non-US flag ships in the TSS), and Farwell on the US Coast."
I think you are possibly right - different countries courts interpret law differently......and I appreciate that your comment was with your tongue in your cheek

Back to my post 131 for your answer ( ignoring my comments on US inland waterways which I would now withdraw on 2nd thoughts )

BTW I don't have a copy of Farwell to hand - it's a bit expensive !!!

Later

The Farwell / Cockroft debate has got me so intrigued that I have sent away for a copy.....expensive business sailing - even just talking about it .........

 

[JayBee]

JB -

Later

The Farwell / Cockroft debate has got me so intrigued that I have sent away for a copy.....expensive business sailing - even just talking about it .........

I hope it's Cockcroft you are investing in - you can read the relevant bits of Farwell on line.

This thread has had input from yotties and professional seamen*. Wouldn't it be useful to get the official opinion of the MCA? Probably not going to happen, because of the "getout clause" highlighted in post 151.

*Sometimes with both hats on!

 

[stephenh]

JB

I have Cockroft - I'm buying Farwell in hardback (£28 ! ) I can then scribble in the margins - something my PC will not allow....

OK - I'll have a go at playing the rules game -

You quote Farwell and 8 (f) (i)
but what about 8(f) (iii) ??
and surely 18 (a) (iv) overides ???

18 only allows 9, 10 and 13 to be excepted not 8

Oh dear - circular argument here - we now go back to the different interpretations of Cockroft and Farwell of Rule 10

I give up........

I think I'll just go sailing and deal with it as it happens .......