Do you ignore col regs

DAKA

DAKA

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 Jan 2005
Messages
9,255
Location
Nomadic
Visit site
In error I posted this on the raggie forum .

Alright I stuffed up but seeing as I have stuffed up this is a marvellous opportunity to get an idea about the two differing attitudes to standing on to shipping.

Please add your vote and make Ken's day :)
 
Just put my two penneth worth into the poll. 'Tis mildly disturbing to see nearly 3/4 of all respondents (yes, me included), claim to take early action to avoid colision despite or without regard to the colregs. For the record the big majority of these were raggies.

We'll have to make up our own minds what these statistics tells us - do we all ignore the regs and it's just raggies who are more honest about it? Or do raggies think they can do what they like and get away with it more than mobo's can. It would have been interesting to see a question about raggie on raggie collision courses vs raggie on mobo collision courses and their respective skipper's consideration of the colregs.
 
gravygraham said:
'Tis mildly disturbing to see nearly 3/4 of all respondents (yes, me included), claim to take early action to avoid colision despite or without regard to the colregs.
Click to expand...
Pardon? Since when using common sense is mildly disturbing? :eek:
I wish more bankers and politicians would follow such example.
 
I work on it being better to avoid the clash rather than work out who was to blame afterwards. I do the same on the road. Core assumption is the other driver (car or boat) is a numptie, therefore I'll look after myself thanks.
 
gravygraham said:
Just put my two penneth worth into the poll. 'Tis mildly disturbing to see nearly 3/4 of all respondents (yes, me included), claim to take early action to avoid colision despite or without regard to the colregs. For the record the big majority of these were raggies.

We'll have to make up our own minds what these statistics tells us - do we all ignore the regs and it's just raggies who are more honest about it? Or do raggies think they can do what they like and get away with it more than mobo's can. It would have been interesting to see a question about raggie on raggie collision courses vs raggie on mobo collision courses and their respective skipper's consideration of the colregs.
Click to expand...
Surely the point is that you have to make an interpretation of the situation in order to apply the correct collreg. When is visibility reduced- that you can measure, for example.
If you take early avoiding action, I would suggest you are therefore taking action before you need to apply the collreg. Stand on vessel? You dont take make a decision on that for a 40ft boat 3 miles away, do you? So I would think a nimple powerful mobo is able to interpret the situation (NOT the collregs) at a different time to a sailboat. I guess the sailboat swiftly moving along at three knots might be viewing a fast moving powerboat as a dreadful abuser of collregs, becuase they see a collreg situation, and the mobo (as yet) doesnt.
 
rafiki_ said:
I work on it being better to avoid the clash rather than work out who was to blame afterwards. I do the same on the road. Core assumption is the other driver (car or boat) is a numptie, therefore I'll look after myself thanks.
Click to expand...

Well said, that's my view too. It's not much comfort being able to point out that you were the stand-on vessel when you've just been bashed into.
 
Philiz said:
Well said, that's my view too. It's not much comfort being able to point out that you were the stand-on vessel when you've just been bashed into.
Click to expand...
But there is more to the collreg than being pig minded to the point of being rammed.
The point of stand on etc is that at some point two vessels are so close you need to avoid unpredicatable behaviour; if you both know what the other will do, you will not collide. Thats why you shouldnt decide to go your own way- theres a chance it will make the situation much worse.
What the collregs cant identify, but only define, is when you need to make the decision, because there are a million variations.
 
Last edited:
gjgm said:
But there is more to the collreg than being pig minded to the point of being rammed.
The point of stand on etc is that at some point two vessels are so close you need to avoid unpredicatable behaviour; if you both know what the other will do, you will not collide. Thats why you shouldnt decide to go your own way- theres a chance it will make the situation much worse.
What the collregs cant identify, but only define, is when you need to make the decision, because there are a million variations.
Click to expand...


Exactly, which is exactly why I'll sort meself out, and indicate what I am going to do, before it all goes Pete Tong.
 
gjgm said:
But there is more to the collreg than being pig minded to the point of being rammed.
The point of stand on etc is that at some point two vessels are so close you need to avoid unpredicatable behaviour; if you both know what the other will do, you will not collide. Thats why you shouldnt decide to go your own way- theres a chance it will make the situation much worse.
What the collregs cant identify, but only define, is when you need to make the decision, because there are a million variations.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know what the Colregs are for, but what I'm saying is you're better being over cautious and hold back and not get into a situation where you're 'so close you need to avoid unpredictable behaviour'. The other skipper may not have a clue who is the stand-on/off vessel, so you might not both know what to do, even if you do.
 
What we now know as Rule 17 -- the stand on rule -- is one of the oldest rules in the book. It has been there with only minimal changes to the wording since Victoria was on the throne. Only para 17a(ii) is a relatively recent (1972) addition.

The stand on rule was put there for a reason. It has been retained through numerous updates and changes for a reason. And unlike many modern laws, the reason was not (and is not) to collect fines or piss people off.

The trouble with "common sense" is that it isn't: sense isn't common, and what is common isn't sense.
 
Last edited:
Philiz said:
Well said, that's my view too. It's not much comfort being able to point out that you were the stand-on vessel when you've just been bashed into.
Click to expand...
How comforting would it be to know that the reason you've been bashed into was because you decided that the colregs shouldn't apply to you, and you thought it would be a good idea to do something that is expressly prohibited?
 
Last edited:
When I head off to sea in my 22ft sail driven cockleshell I have every intention of obeying and applying col regs. When I meet a 100 + ft Gargantuship my confidence seems to flag for reasons I can't quite put my finger on..but through your mind go thoughts like..has he seen me, does he care, could he stop even though I am stand on vessel going at 3.5 knots as to his 17knots...if I get in his wind shadow I stop completely anyway..so I'm fooked....so...basically you chicken out half the time and play a waiting game for a gap where you hope you can play it safe.

I also have great difficulty with ships judging distances/speed so if there is ever a toy I will buy for my boat it will be an AIS. I have to say I tend not to have trouble with smaller boats, whether Motor or Sail, as I find the speed/spacial relationship a lot easier to handle, and whilst its nice when they are sailing right I don't assume they will.

Whilst it is no excuse. you have to remember that a lot of people who put to sea are occcasional weekend sailers/moboers...amateurs just like me. A goodly proportion will just get it wrong from time to time, and I include myself in there. Most of us try not to.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top