Scary moment, colregs, seamanship, opinions welcome

[Refueler]

Perhaps all you are saying is that you treat all ships as though they are proceeding along a TSS and take early action to avoid a the regulations having to come into play.
That's ok by me but easier in a fast vessel than a slow sailing boat.

There is a good deal of subjectivity in the IRPCS and for good reason. The people getting worked about rules never quite seem to have rumbled this.

.

The old rules todays and updates replaced were more specific and actually worded stricter to hold you to status ... in fact in some situations it was argued - to the point of not being able to avoid collision. Of course no-one in right mind would hold that long ??

But the new rules were supposed to solve those and introduce Radar etc. to the mix. Countless debates in Marine Establishments followed and today some areas are still not sorted.

In one section - it mentions that Radar equipped vessels may be proceeding at higher speed in reduced visibility .........

I don't think anyones getting worked up about the Rules. But I for one expect others to abide by them ... while I keep a careful eye on them just in case I have to take action due to their ******.

I posted long time ago about crossing W to E from Gotland to Latvia in Baltic. I noted a feeder container ship on port side about 3pts of the bow .... heading south.
I watched carefully ... started engine just in case and had it idling in neutral. I kept my course and speed .... he kept coming.

There was no detectable change of course on his part ..... so I took action ... a smart 180 then slow turn to go back on course as he cleared ..... my boat was tossed like a cork in his wake ... and once my boat had settled down ... I called him on the VHF .....

He told me that he had tracked me for at least 5 miles .... and was going to pass astern by 1 cable ....

I politely told him that being a yacht with only a hand compass - I could never determine 1 cable pass ... second that his wake at that distance and his speed was a serious matter for me ... did he not think a greater margin would have been better - with an obvious course change that I could have seen ... as he was the Give Way vessel.

He apologised and sailed on ... leaving me to clear up the mess in the cabin.

 

[zoidberg]

"so I took action ... a smart 180 then slow turn to go back on course as he cleared "

And before anyone mentions the antics of Looe and Newlyn beam trawlers in the Channel....

 

[Momac]

Perhaps all you are saying is that you treat all ships as though they are proceeding along a TSS and take early action to avoid a the regulations having to come into play.
That's ok by me but easier in a fast vessel than a slow sailing boat.

Yes. Avoidance of having to think about collision regulations is the best plan.
Similarly I assume all vehicles on the road are driven by twats and quite often it is proven correct. Now and again I drive like twat myself. We all make mistakes.
Easier to get into trouble with a fast boat . Using power to get out of trouble doesn't necessarily end well.
But overall yes a yacht is less able to react than a motorboat (I have sailed a little, under supervision).

.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Yes. Avoidance of having to think about collision regulations is the best plan.

But the rules apply as soon as you’re in sight of each other.

IMHO it’s much better not to prat about pretending you’re ‘keeping out of the way of big ships but to learn and obey the rules.

Then apply a dose of common sense and cynicism as to whether they’ve seen you and they’re complying. Ultimately it’s every seafarers responsibility to avoid collision so you don’t stand and make a close quarters situation dangerous, but if you’re the stand on vessel you comply by standing on and monitoring carefully.

 

[srm]

except - in my interpretation - you should not pursue a course that would require the give way vessel to leave the TSS, slow or stop (also bearing in mind the constraints on its ability to manoeuvre imposed by other traffic).

So - you are arguing that it is all a matter of degree as to how far a vessel under 20 metres or a sailing vessel can cause a vessel in a TSS to give way. (I am not using the term "crossing vessel" as they may be power over 20 metres and for them Rule 10(a) applies). You are saying its OK to cause a little bit of an alteration but not OK if its a bit more? That is your prerogative.

I will stick to my broader interpretation as it avoids any argument over was or was not the vessel actually impeded and if so to what degree. This has the advantage of being a practical working interpretation that avoids recourse to lawyers.

 

[Pye_End]

'shall not impede the safe passage '

2 things.
Impede - Oxford English Dictionary - 'to delay or stop the progress of something '

How does say a 5 degree course change one way then the other automatically cause a 'delay or stop the progress of a ship'? Would the delay be measurable?

You also note the word 'safe'. So in theory, you could even impede a ship's progress so long as it was safe to do so, according to the wording.

 

[Uricanejack]

I can’t post the reputed origin of the International Code of Signals YG for fear of being in breach of forum rules.
Certainly have memories of operating in the med the same applies to most of the locals as far as I recall.
While in the end self preservation trumps all.

Not sure I have your situation correct. It appears to me.

You were a sailing vessel heading WNW with a SW wind or roughy 6 point of the wind in F5 ish at about 6 knots.
1m S of TSS is a little vague assume crossing a TSS rather than South of the end of it.
You believe you will pass astern. Of a commercial vessel. Based on a relative bearing taken by? Which is changing to port.

My assumption the commercial vessel is somewhere on your starboard side. Distance relatively close and bearing changing.

Unfortunately we don’t know what the OOW was seeing, I expect he was looking as opposed to hoping the dog would bark.

Possibility. already suggested he wasn’t looking and just altered blind. I think unlikely.

More probably you were seen. Which leave two probabilities

He is a power driven vessel with a sailing vessel crossing on his port side.
He observes and concludes it will be a close quarters.
determines he is give way vessel.
chooses to give way by altering to port. Why? It’s the quickest and easiest way to avoid the sail boat by going around its stern.

He is not going to go for a R to R this is G to G perfectly sane normal responses for a vessel which is give way to a vessel on its port side.

The other probability.

same as above instead of determining a close quarters situation is developing.
The OOW dermines there will be no close quarters situation and he is free to alter course for some other navigational purpose and decides to alter boldly to port.

Again to pass astern.
Possibly less than entirely prudent. To make this alteration until you were past and clear but in confined waters perhaps not unreasonable.
Put it this way, I probably wouldn’t interfere, I’d let an OOW do it. I might ask what his plan was and if he had any concerns.
Then I’d watch for the maybe not inevitable outcome.
If as I suspected, the little boat got concerned and turned towards him.
Ok now what you going to do.
You were lucky.
OOW gets 3 out of 10 for planning.
but he gets 8 out of 10. For recovery.

When you made a possibly fatal error of altering towards or in the direction of a give way vessel. Instead of changing his mind and trying to stop his alteration and turn back to starboard which would have made it worse.
The OOW kept his head and kept his turn going and altered far enough to clear you.

like I said I’d have let him do it. He will learn far better by f ing up and getting out of it than by me telling him it was an obvious possibility.

The lesson for you.

Never turn to words a give way vessel.

The danger. He may have interpreted the risk of collision quite differently from you and may have left it a bit late.
on sighting you a considering risk of collision possible it is very probable the give way vessel will alter course towards you with the intent of passing astern.

By altering towards the give way vessel you make the situation worse.

If concerned either reduce speed and stop or turn away.

Note again You may have concluded the bearing was changing sufficiently, the other vessel might very well have concluded the bearing was not changing sufficiently.
In which case his error was leaving his alteration a bit late.

I posted this question to try and give some idea of the perspective from the other side of the equation.
Which is why I included some rough description of the typical maneuvering characteristics of a very average deep sea vessel.
Which could be encountered almost anywhere.

I specifically didn’t mention the TSS to avoid the rabbit holes.

I also put the distance as a bit close for detection, so the answer would require a proper alteration.

So far only one answer.
Alter course 20 deg to starboard after sounding 1 short blast.
It would work, collision would be avoided.

Some Questions.

Would this be readily apparent to someone sitting in the cockpit of an average sailing yacht heeled over bouncing along full and bye in a stiff breeze?
The short blast would help?
How often have you ever heard a short blast? or two short blasts?

Most of us have heard 5 Short, sounded at someone else of course.

What would you consider is a safe passing distance, if you were on the ship, if you were on the yacht?

I will give you my answer you can decide if it’s a pass or fail.

First thing to do is determine if risk of collision exists or not.
How?
MCA answer take a series of compass bearings,
Truth I’d probably just use the binos and eyeball it. MCA fail.
Actually I would acquire it as a target on ARPA as well.
My eyeball with the binos will actual tell me what is happening, faster than the ARPA will. In particular it will tell me the most important thing the ARPA won’t tell. Me.
Its a sailing vessel.
I’m power driven.

Rule 18. Nothing complex, I’m give way. It’s on my port side.
This vessel is close. It’s not a big deal to check bearing it’s, my ARPA is just coming up with its info I can see it’s still 3 points to port.

Note, as vessels get closer the visual bearing can change and still have a very close passing distance. If using visual bearings it needs to change significantly to be a safe passing distance by this point in time.

What acceptable up to you. Your the OOW,
Depends on circumstance, my question added none, open water.

My speed is 15 knots, the small boats 1/3 to 1/2 of mine. So closing at roughly 1 mile every 3 minutes,

By the time I alter the sailboat might be about 3 miles away.
Would you be happy with this distance?

I am required to
Keep well clear.
Take early action.
which is readily apparent to the other vessel.

I could choose to go ither way.

My choice.
Sound two short, ( actually, The whistle tends to scare little boats)
Alter course to Port until I show the other vessel my Starboard side.
So 40 or 5O degree alteration to port.

Why,

My reasons.
if I alter to starboard I would be altering to pass ahead of the stand on vessel.
In my opinion. I require a much greater passing distance or CPA if I am crossing ahead than I do if I’m crossing Astern.
I prefer to cross astern.

Also probably more to me.
My action is much more apparent to the observer in the cockpit of the other vessel.

Is there a risk he might turn towards me. Yes.
have I taken this possibility into account.
is it Ok feel free to comment.

my turning circle. About half a mile. I’m not turning that hard I’m only using about 10 deg rudder. My advance and transfer will be much greater.
Of the small vessel were to turn in my direction.
Mheee Arrd a Port and keep going till it’s astern.
Somebody mentioned the dance of death not going to dance.

Why would I prefer not to do the 20 degrees to starboard?
Actualy I often might choose to alter to starboard. Depends what’s around.
if I do Alter to starboard 20 deg not going to be enough more like 40 to 50.
Quite a few reasons, Main one avoiding crossing ahead at a close distance. Followed by concern about being readily apparent.
I am expecting a stand on vessel to well Stand On.
I would be much more likely to choose starboard if the other vessel is slow.

What’s my minimum CPA
Well it depends,
open water I’ve got no excuse for anything close.

My turning circle is half a mile my stopping distance is a mile.

Im not happy with a vessel crossing less than a mile ahead of me.
im not happy with a vessel less tha 5 cables or half a mile from my beam.
Astern Half a mile.

open water double those.

Looking at other vessel a rough rule of thumb I want to pass not less than 1 cable ahead for every knot the other vessel is making.

Hopefully you might get some insight into what a commercial vessel might do, needless to say we all have different opinions.
some will disagree with me entirely.

some vessels are much bigger and have bigger distances or are much faster
some are much more manoeuvrable.

And it’s been a lot of years since I drove one of those typical deep sea vessels long before low sulphur fuel.

 

[laika]

There are 3 possibilities. The crew of the other ship were psychopaths who wanted to run you down, they hadn’t seen you, or they were aware of you but knew that their completed turn would put them on a course to miss you.

You were the stand on vessel. When they were pointing straight at you there were 2 alternatives. Either they were going to continue straight towards you (psychopaths or hadn’t seen you) or they were going to continue to turn to port.

Unless you were so close you felt 17b was in play, waiting to see if the turn continued would have been the right thing to do. Obviously hindsight is a marvellous thing and when you've got several thousand tons of boat pointing at you it's doubtless tempting to take avoiding action.

If you had to make a turn I would say a big tack to port would be most appropriate : its an obvious manoeuvre and it gets you out of the way in all but the “psychopath” case: ie if they hadn't seen you they'd be pointing at where you used to be and if they were continuing to turn you'd be going in the opposite direction. If they're psychopaths trying to run you down obviously they'll turn back to starboard and chase you but I'm going with westernman's supposition from post #40 as the most likely.

The TSS thing is a red herring if you were outside it (or in an actual risk of collision situation). If things were happening too fast to wait to see if the turn carried on, I doubt a VHF call was on the OP's to do list regardless of the issue of vhf assisted collisions.

 

[LittleSister]

So - you are arguing that it is all a matter of degree as to how far a vessel under 20 metres or a sailing vessel can cause a vessel in a TSS to give way.

No, I am arguing that the ColRegs apply, whether you like them or not.

The ColRegs themselves say that the stand on/give way relationship doesn't change! A power-driven give way vessel proceeding along a TSS is still obliged to give way, but the crossing 'stand on' sub-20m or sailing vessel mustn't put the give way vessel in a position where to do so would impede its passage along the TSS.

That is the test - can it continue within the TSS and at the same speed? A small course alteration within the confines traffic lane does not stop it doing so. Many have reported here and elsewhere seeing, directly or via radar/AIS, TSS vessels making such alterations to pass clear of crossing vessels (which they are required to do), and I have seen the same. Yet, I cannot recall anyone reporting that the TSS vessel complaining to the crossing vessel or to the coastguard about having to do so.

My interpretation is, I believe, consistent with the ColRegs.

I will stick to my broader interpretation

What you are proposing is not an 'interpretation'. It is in direct conflict with the wording of the ColRegs.

 

[Uricanejack]

Hmmm.
Go down the rabbit hole or not. It’s the question.

What the heck does not impede mean?

It’s fine you all have your opinion. You do what you want, I will deal with it either way.
You could try reading Cockcroft or others. It’s in there.

Just a small point. SRM has self identified as a retired ship simulator instructor.
To be a ship simulator instructor a Master Certification is required, otherwise why would I give a rats about what he instructs.
The courses are required for MCA certification.
There are several courses, having developed from Radar observer through ARPA and on through to BRM. All of which are required.
While many exercises are in open water.
Most of the exercise involve buggering about for an hour or two in a variety of simulated vessels in simulated TSS including Dover ect. Or Narrow Channels or Fairways.
I seam to recall approaching South Hampton blind at 25 knots in a container ship because it was coming up to lunch time and I wanted to go for a pie and a pint at the Old Vic.
Instructor wasn’t very impressed with my seaman ship. But I had a nice pint and pie for lunch. Which I would have missed if I had been running Half ahead.

Any who.

Odds are if a chap was an instructor at a simulator audited by the MCA, where MCA examiners actually show up and check.
He might actually know what he is talking about.
Or
The MCA have got it completely wrong as well.

And of course all the professional mariners who attend any of those courses and passed.

 

[LittleSister]

Odds are if a chap was an instructor at a simulator audited by the MCA, where MCA examiners actually show up and check.

He might actually know what he is talking about.

I agree with you that the chances are in favour of someone with that experience and qualifications knowing what he is talking about.

On the other hand, in this particular case he clearly does not (in relation to this particular issue), since his 'broad interpretation' is in direct conflict with what the ColRegs explicitly say.

We have here, then, a clear example of the crucial difference between probability and certainty.

The chances are also that someone with such an esteemed background could perhaps be lulled into becoming complacent and arrogant, and hence be unwilling to review his or her beliefs in the light of authoritative information (i.e. the ColRegs themselves) to the contrary.

 

[sailoppopotamus]

Sorry to all who posted for being late to respond, I was AFK yesterday and the forum's response was more than I anticipated.

I read the first post a number of times and TBH - it is too vague on actual positions of the vessels at start and through the event. It is also vague as to the TSS and its proximity to event.

Maybe OP can draw a sketch of the event so we can see the real relative aspects ??

Not being difficult - but I do not automatically agree with many of the posts above ......... there's a good rule to observe - Not to base action on poor and scanty information - which I suggest many of the posts above are doing.

I was around a mile south of the TSS, which runs north-to-south. The ship was just out of the TSS as well. I believe this is no coincidence, he was travelling down the TSS and turned towards his destination as soon as he could.

 

[sailoppopotamus]

'Suddenly, the ship starts turning to port, and very quickly our bows are facing each other. I'm quite unnerved at this point as I've never been on a bow-on-bow situation with a ship before, and not sure of the captain's intentions. I figure that colregs are out at this point and common sense must prevail'.

I disagree with your final sentence. The Col Regs were not 'out' at any point, and it was unwise, in my view, to abandon them as you did. They accommodate and provide guidance for situations where the unexpected is happening, such as when one vessel is not taking the required avoiding action (or is suspected of failing to do so). There is nothing in the Col Regs preventing you at any point from taking effective action to avoid a collision.

I suspect your knowledge of the Col Regs is (as with many of us) shaky, as in your trying to apply the red-to-red rule when it was inapplicable.

At the moment it seemed to me like the ship was trying to run me down and it's up to me to save myself (hence the 'colregs are out' bit,). I knew that red-to-red was not actually applicable, as I'm the sailing vessel and therefore stand-on. Yet the ship has just turned directly towards me, so I fall back to red-on-red as perhaps the most predictable avoidance maneuver.

 

[finestgreen]

I don't think it relates to the question directly but this supreme court judgement is a good read, if you haven't seen it already:

Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd v Nautical Challenge Ltd [2021] UKSC 6 (19 February 2021)

Not least to dispel any certainty that either reading the text of the rules carefully or being qualified and experienced guarantees your interpretation is correct

 

[Bilgediver]

I would worry more about making efforts to avoid collision, and less about forcing a red-to-red pass. If green-to-green looks safer, just do it.

Quite normal and usually the vessel crews discuss over VHF so no confusion

 

[LittleSister]

At the moment it seemed to me like the ship was trying to run me down and it's up to me to save myself (hence the 'colregs are out' bit,).

No. The ColRegs are not 'out', or irrelevant, even if someone is trying to run you down!

Far from expecting you to continue to apply a rule that leaves you in, or leads you into, danger, the very first ColReg rule that applies to mariners (rather than governments, etc. which is what Rule 1 is about) specifically says:
- your first responsibility is to avoid danger and collision; and also that
- you should depart from any other rule if necessary to avoid immediate danger.

Rule 2
Responsibility

1. (a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.
2. (b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

[emphasis added]

 

[sailoppopotamus]

You were a sailing vessel heading WNW with a SW wind or roughy 6 point of the wind in F5 ish at about 6 knots.
1m S of TSS is a little vague assume crossing a TSS rather than South of the end of it.
You believe you will pass astern. Of a commercial vessel. Based on a relative bearing taken by? Which is changing to port.

....

He is a power driven vessel with a sailing vessel crossing on his port side.
He observes and concludes it will be a close quarters.
determines he is give way vessel.
chooses to give way by altering to port. Why? It’s the quickest and easiest way to avoid the sail boat by going around its stern.

He is not going to go for a R to R this is G to G perfectly sane normal responses for a vessel which is give way to a vessel on its port side.

The other probability.

same as above instead of determining a close quarters situation is developing.
The OOW dermines there will be no close quarters situation and he is free to alter course for some other navigational purpose and decides to alter boldly to port.

Again to pass astern.

Apologies if my original post was vague. We're 1nm south of the end of the TSS which runs north-to-south and moving perpendicularly to it, i.e. at no point is our projected trajectory going to lie within the TSS. The ship passed in front of my bow, not astern. Had they maintained course we would've passed well clear of their stern, but they decided to turn before we had passed. I assume they had a destination to get to and have set a waypoint at the end of the TSS to minimize their distance travelled.

It's a big ship, so it takes a while to turn. I don't know what their turn rate is, nor their intentions. I just see them steadily turning towards us, not sure if they plan on continuing their turn so that we pass green-on-green, or if the current bow-on-bow situation I'm finding myself in is their final course.

Technically, I'm the stand-on vessel and I'm violating colregs by not maintaining course. This may be true, but as others here have confirmed, in Greece it is suicidal for small boats to rely on big ships keeping clear of small sailing vessels. Give-way ships will routinely stand course, colregs be damned. So it's up to you to avoid them. I've seen this myself, with a ferry repeatedly sounding 5 blasts to a motoring sailing vessel on their starboard side.

In my case there are 3 scenarios:
(i) they didn't see me
(ii) they saw me but knew they could make their turn and pass green-on-green without risking a collision
(iii) they saw me and disregarded me, figuring I'll change course to avoid them.

My problem is that essentially I had no idea which of these scenarios I'm in. Maybe I should've tried to ring them up on 16. I didn't attempt this because I'd have to dive below to retrieve the handheld VHF and then try to address the "vessel close to Sounio who just turned to east on a collision course with a sailboat". This seemed like a long shot to a fruitful call, so I focused on sailing, not communicating.

 

[Refueler]

We're 1nm south of the end of the TSS which runs north-to-south and moving perpendicularly to it, i.e. at no point is our projected trajectory going to lie within the TSS.

??

Sorry if I appear daft .... but if you are travelling perpendicular to the TSS - surely you would then after your 1nm be crossing it at 90deg ? Or do you mean you were travelling PARELLEL to the TSS ?

1nm to a big ship is CLOSE !! Ships avoid such close approach unless in confined waters .... or as here TSS. To you 1nm is a lot.

 

[doug748]

Apologies if my original post was vague. We're 1nm south of the end of the TSS which runs north-to-south and moving perpendicularly to it, i.e. at no point is our projected trajectory going to lie within the TSS. The ship passed in front of my bow, not astern. Had they maintained course we would've passed well clear of their stern, but they decided to turn before we had passed. I assume they had a destination to get to and have set a waypoint at the end of the TSS to minimize their distance travelled.

It's a big ship, so it takes a while to turn. I don't know what their turn rate is, nor their intentions. I just see them steadily turning towards us, not sure if they plan on continuing their turn so that we pass green-on-green, or if the current bow-on-bow situation I'm finding myself in is their final course.

Technically, I'm the stand-on vessel and I'm violating colregs by not maintaining course. This may be true, but as others here have confirmed, in Greece it is suicidal for small boats to rely on big ships keeping clear of small sailing vessels. Give-way ships will routinely stand course, colregs be damned. So it's up to you to avoid them. I've seen this myself, with a ferry repeatedly sounding 5 blasts to a motoring sailing vessel on their starboard side.

In my case there are 3 scenarios:
(i) they didn't see me
(ii) they saw me but knew they could make their turn and pass green-on-green without risking a collision
(iii) they saw me and disregarded me, figuring I'll change course to avoid them.

My problem is that essentially I had no idea which of these scenarios I'm in. Maybe I should've tried to ring them up on 16. I didn't attempt this because I'd have to dive below to retrieve the handheld VHF and then try to address the "vessel close to Sounio who just turned to east on a collision course with a sailboat". This seemed like a long shot to a fruitful call, so I focused on sailing, not communicating.

Thanks for the update.

I think you had it pretty much covered in post 1. I must say I agree with you and am not in favour of VHF conversations, the use of flares or consulting multiple instruments, all of which can deflect from direct attention to developments. Focus on the helm and observation of what is occurring is vital - particularly when short or singlehanded.

I know what you mean when you say "colregs be damned." but, as pointed out above, the regulations in fact cover all properly motivated actions taken to avoid collision so you are in fact in good order.

.

 

[Uricanejack]

I don't think it relates to the question directly but this supreme court judgement is a good read, if you haven't seen it already:

Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd v Nautical Challenge Ltd [2021] UKSC 6 (19 February 2021)

Not least to dispel any certainty that either reading the text of the rules carefully or being qualified and experienced guarantees your interpretation is correct

Well that took me a while to read.
Thanks, I did find it quite interesting. There is possibly something wrong with me, I’m sure most normal people would have given up.
The picture ate the end of the actual positions put it all into perspective and it all made sense. Sort of well yea.

Two edgits no matter how the lawyers came up with who pays how much ect.

There was one tiny little bit on topic where it quote Page 75 Cockcroft.
Dint help much though.