Near Collision

[tcm]

do you feel lucky? Well, do ya punk?

the guy is offering 1:10 that you smash up a bit during a weeks holiday. pay the 1500 and don't smack it, you save the 150. Else agree it's a loser, and give him his winnings up front.

For a gung-ho charter vet with good experinece and knowldge of his crew, this is a no-brainer! Yes! ....you write a cheque for £150!

 

[tome]

Re: Interpretations

Or light a flame in my rigging to show I'm heating water?

I think your ice is getting thinner by the post Simon.

 

[Guest]

Re: Interpretations

Non comprendo. Are you trying to argue that a ship's engine is not propelling machinery just because it also charges the battery? You're pulling my leg now!

So your argument around the colregs is based around the fact that the engine may have an alternator attached to it?

 

[tome]

Oh dear...

Absolutely. Non comprenda!

And you, m'learned colleague, are still arguing that an engine alone forms a method of propulsion?

 

[ean_p]

Re: Interpretations

mmmm think that you make some vague assumptions Simon....can an 'auxillary' yacht have a 'main' engine.....is not the propelling machinary the actual propeller...that is to say the thing that imparts thrust to the craft...how it is turned is really irrelivent.....the fact of its turning is what counts....a supertanker at sea may well be underway but may not be making way and in this situation becomes a vessel that may be propelled by machinary but is not at this time being propelled by machinary and hence in that state gives the appropriate signals and expects other craft to keep clear if appropriate

 

[halcyon]

Re: Interpretations

No more than an engine not connected to a propeller is a propulsion devise.

Also 25(e) a vessel proceeding under sail when also being propelled by machinery shall exihibit forward where it can best be seen a conical shape, apex down.

Therefore if the the transmission is in neutral, it can not be turning the propellor, and therefore is not propelled by machinery, thus it cannot come under motor sailing regs.

What does it therefore come under, and what shape do I fly.

Brian

 

[Guest]

Ean, Halcyon, Tome

In answer to your various questions, no a propellor is not machinery (it is neither a "machine" nor "constituent parts of a machine taken collectively"). It is just a propellor. No, Halcyon, an engine is not propelling machinery unless it has a propshaft and prop attached to it.

Can an auxiliary yacht have a 'main engine'? Yes, if it has more than one engine, which is uncommon I grant you. But that is not really relevant to our discussion.

In response to Tome's question, no I am not arguing that an engine alone is a method of propulsion. As I said to Halcyon, it has to be connected to a propellor shaft and propellor or equivalent. The engine remains machinery whether or not it is switched on (= being used). And it is "propelling machinery" whether or not it is being used because if it were not propelling machinery when it is not being used then the words in the definition "which is being used" would be completely redundant. The word "propelling" therefore has to mean that it's function is to propel, not that it is currently being used, otherwise the remaining words of the definition have no meaning.

Hope that answers all your worries

 

[Twister_Ken]

Hear hear

I think the lad simon has summed it up nicely. Or maybe not.

I maintain that the real problem is that the modern auxiiary yacht is neither a power driven nor a sailing vessel as defined by the colregs, which do not seem to envisage a sailing vessel which can become a power driven vessel at the drop of a very small breton cap.

 

[halcyon]

Re: Ean, Halcyon, Tome

May I refere you to thread " interpretation " to answer your question.

But for short, to be motor sailing the yacht must be " propelled " by machinary.
Not have machinary running.


Brian

 

[jimi]

Believe it or not, it was an absolutely factual situation. I was also under the impression the guy had been drinking.

Jim

 

[Twister_Ken]

Not quite

(b) The term "power-driven vessel" means any vessel propelled by machinery.
(c) The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.

 

[jimi]

Re: Not quite

I'd argue that if I am using my enging to charge the battery that I am running charging machinery not propelling machinery

Jim

 

[jimi]

Blackmailin\' bastid

They know you'll pay the £150 for fear of being unlucky & losing more. However if its not your fault does'nt the insurance cover it anyway? And the CDW is really just extra charter income?

Jim

 

[Guest]

Re: Not quite

A snowball's chance in hell of succeeding with that one, but it should at least brighten the court's day up a little!

But maybe the next draft of the colregs will have separate combinations of cones and black balls to hang up to show whether you're running your engine in gear, out of gear, in reverse, to charge the batteries, to get some hot water, because the wife finds the noise soothing, just for fun, to drown the noise of someone straining on the toilet, etc.

Think how much fun we could have: "a yacht charging its batteries meets a yacht coming in the opposite direction with a crew suffering from flatulence. Who has right of way?"

 

[tome]

Re: Not quite

Why the crew with flatulence. Naturally.

 

[Guest]

Re: Not quite

Oxford Engish Dictionary.
To propel = to push or drive!
So to that end I would expect "propelling machinery" to be pushing or driving?
It can be running but if its not "driving" then its not "propelling" Therefore I concider the following to be true,
If I have sails up only, I'm a sailing vessel, If I have sails up and using that to "propel the vessel" and engine running out of gear I'm still a "sailing vessel". If however I engage the engine+ propellor I'm now a power driven vessel and should display the ness' lights shapes etc.
For almost 15 years I sat on various British Standards / ISO committees writting various standards and the one thing that you all have to understand is what we called "The spirit" in which the standard was written i.e. If a yacht is proceeding under sail only, no probs its a sailing vessel as described, if it has no sails up and is proceeding under power, no probs, its a power driven vessel as described. The problem comes when its deemed to be in-between i.e. sails up and engine driving at the same time, In which case the regs allow for this by asking for an inverted cone to be displayed so that any other skipper can firstly see that you have sails up (so he thinks your a sailing vessel) then he sees that you are showing a cone so he knows that you have machinery engaged and will be able to react as a power driven vessel and as such should be treated as a power driven vessel. So I honestly can't see the problem. We did BTW have another saying which was "You must write a standard so tight that you can drive a bus through it" and I think this is the situation we find ourselves in. Yotties (and I include myself in this) believe that it is perfectly normal to run to windward with the main sheeted in tight and the engine running (propelling) just because we think it makes the boat more stable where in fact all we are doing is confusing the skipper of the distant boat as to what we actually are! sailing or power boat?
Come on guys get a life you know when you are a sailing vessel or power boat and can act as such?

 

[jimi]

Re: Not quite

Actually I think I'd have a rather good chance of succeeding .. just think about it logically rather than from your rather entrenched position. Under your argument if the engine was running its "using propelling machinery". What if your prop has fallen off (Yes, it has happened to me) or there's a rope wrapped round it? I need to use my engine an hour a day to get the fridge working .. I'm certainly not using my engine as propelling machinery then. And as fot the argument that the engine is available , it is anyway ... all iI need to do is switch it on ...

Jim

 

[nicho]

96 posts and still growing - will this be your first century?

 

[Guest]

Re: Not quite

So you would say that a digging implement is only a digging implement when it is actually digging?

Where I come from they call a spade a digging implement.

 

[Guest]

Re: Not quite

Yup, entrenched, that's me. But at the moment don't see any reason to modify my position.

I did say earlier that an engine without a propshaft and prop attached (or equivalent eg. paddlewheel...) is not propelling machinery. If yours has dropped off, that means it's no longer attached.