MapisM
Well-Known Member
Ok, but if that's what RR+W necessarily implies, what should a NUC vessel exhibit when anchored, just RR?
And if so, why shouldn't a RAM vessel anchored exhibit just RWR, rather than RWR+W as you previously pointed out?
One for colreg experts - NUC & RAM lights
- Thread starter MapisM
- Start date
And if so, why shouldn't a RAM vessel anchored exhibit just RWR, rather than RWR+W as you previously pointed out?
Capt Cautious
Well-Known Member
You need to look at the definition of NUC here. "Due to some exceptional circumstance is unable to manouvre as required by the rules and is therefore unable to get out of the way of another vessel". A vessel at anchor - is by definition (although recent hebei spirit case is starting to question this) unable to keep out of the way. NUC at anchor really doesnt make sense. Maybe someone could think of an example of the "exceptional circumstances" under which you would be NUC at anchor ?
You need to know the history of RAM too - it used to be called "engaged in special operations" - which to my mind was far more explanatory than RAM, and allowed us to immediately consider that the vessel may be underway, or at anchor, which indeed it still may.
The reason a RAM at anchor shows an anchor light is because it switches out its mastlights and sidelights when not making way through the water. There would be no way to tell the difference otherwise between a drifting vessel and an anchored vessel.
CC
You need to know the history of RAM too - it used to be called "engaged in special operations" - which to my mind was far more explanatory than RAM, and allowed us to immediately consider that the vessel may be underway, or at anchor, which indeed it still may.
The reason a RAM at anchor shows an anchor light is because it switches out its mastlights and sidelights when not making way through the water. There would be no way to tell the difference otherwise between a drifting vessel and an anchored vessel.
CC
Last edited:
mjf
Well-Known Member
Yes thats correct IMHO.
There are loads of times when at anchor you can be NUC - take for example you have disabled the ME when waiting for a berth in a good calm anchorage, this is normal after first getting the permission/advising the local HM etc. Anchor lights only shown however.
What about being at anchor and then putting a chain stopper on and then doing some work to the windlass as you saw a leak or an issue when walking the anchor down to the water before 'letting go' . No NUC lights shapes either 'cos you are not underway nor making way.
Capt Cautious
Well-Known Member
Quite simply - you cannot be NUC at anchor. Nor are there any signals to indicate this. Two red all round plus anchor lights is the signal for aground. You may well be disabled at anchor. That is quite a different matter. But you are not NUC.
CC
CC
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Fine, but there's an obvious difference between a "normally" anchored vessel and one which is anchored & disabled, since the latter can't react (if frinstance another NUC boat is drifting in its direction), whilst the first can maneuver.
If you're saying that both are supposed to exhibit only the allround W, I take your word for it, but imho it would make sense to differentiate somehow...
If you're saying that both are supposed to exhibit only the allround W, I take your word for it, but imho it would make sense to differentiate somehow...
Capt Cautious
Well-Known Member
There really is no difference at all. Most vessels take a considerable time to get underway from being at anchor. Mine takes in excess of an hour. Many vessels at anchor (pontoons, barges etc) have no engine at all. If you feel that your vessel represents a hazard to shipping in the vicinity (which is what you are saying in effect) then by all means indicate this by flying and flashing "U", a common enough sight in the North Sea. The colregs and ICS already deal adequately with your desire to differentiate.
CC
CC