Seamanship-lacking in yachting circles???

Oh well, I shall just have to be an ignorant idiot then! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Only prudent ignorant idiots will tack off in plenty of time if they see a ship coming, never mind that they might have right of way over the ship, and should keep their course, confident in the knowledge that the ship will take appropriate avoiding action all in accordance with the IRPCS.

Re my last post here, where the ship nearly ran us down - why didnt we get to hell out of its way? We were keeping a good look out, and could see it coming from a fair distance. Initially we tried to communicate with the vessel, as we did have right of way after all, and we stood our ground - after all, we didnt want to suddenly alter course and confuse the poor chaps on board, did we? That would be ignorant idiot behavior.

But nowt doing, they didnt see us, and carried on. And because we were hove to in a gale with very little sail up, we couldnt get out of their way. I assure you we tried hard to, but couldnt. The skipper had sailed 300,000 miles in Stormy (incl more than 20 transatlantics), so he knew her pretty well, but there is not much you can do in a big sea hove to with very little sail up.

Old Hand, have you ever looked UP at a bulk carrier's bow? Its an impressive sight, especially when steaming along in ballast and about to run you down. Hence my No 1 rule of the road - if you can stay clear, do so, wherever possible, and to hell with arguing about who has right of way.

PS - The above is with reference to being out in the open ocean - I agree entirely that when any little yacht is (say) crossing shipping lanes, or navigating in congested waters, then it is best to obey the Coll Regs implicitly, and do as the merchant ships expect a little yacht to behave - as in these instances one can fairly safely assume that these ships will have (or should have!) eagle eyed watch keepers on the bridge.
 
[ QUOTE ]
PS - The above is with reference to being out in the open ocean - I agree entirely that when any little yacht is (say) crossing shipping lanes, or navigating in congested waters, then it is best to obey the Coll Regs implicitly, and do as the merchant ships expect a little yacht to behave - as in these instances one can fairly safely assume that these ships will have (or should have!) eagle eyed watch keepers on the bridge.

[/ QUOTE ] Completely agreed. With good knowledge of col regs you can go a step further too.

Since it's going off topic, I've started another thread . . . 'why do threats come from starboard?'
 
Brilliant post Cornishman. Humility is the best place to start for everyone. I've made loads of mistakes like every other yachtsmen, but I have seen lots of them made by so called professionals too. Professionalism is a state of mind, not a piece of paper or a wage packet.
 
Jack,

Quote
"There are many professional FI's out there, I am aware of that, and my point circles around that. Training, training and training, it all comes down to training."

I disagree.

Training doesn't benefit everyone, only people with the right attitude.
Morons and general F I's just become "qualified" morons and F I's.
I have come across "mechanics" with all sorts of training and re-training who could not be trusted to put the proverbial nut in a monkey's mouth.

Attitude, Attitude, Attitude, is what it comes down to.

Mebbe that would be better by changing the first "t" to a "p".

On the point of Colregs, it's exactly the same as motorcycling.
It does not matter who's fault it is/was, the little guy gets hurt or killed. Moral?? Avoid collisions. They're bad for you.
 
I think that most naughty incidents Colregs boils down to one or two common misconceptions.

Everyone first learns when they get on a sailing boat that "steam gives way to sail". This sounds so nice and poetic, and convenient, that some think they can apply it all over the place and get the idea that, because their boat has a stick in the middle, everyone else has to keep out of their way no matter what they do.

This single misconception, it seems to me, is responsible for a great number of WAFI incidents. Most of the rest are probably accounted for by not looking under the genoa, or astern.
 
I've studied quite a bit but the first time I could actually say I learned anything was on a fellow contributors boat , without that and more practical lessons to come I don't think I'd ever get on a boat and take her out
 
[ QUOTE ]


Attitude, Attitude, Attitude, is what it comes down to.

<snip>

On the point of Colregs, it's exactly the same as motorcycling.
It does not matter who's fault it is/was, the little guy gets hurt or killed. Moral?? Avoid collisions. They're bad for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very, very, very true!
Attitude is almost everything, but not all. Need common sense too!

There's a rule in Colregs (forget the number) wot says that you have to take all possible actions to avoid a collision. It's the only rule that matters.

I may very well believe that I'm stand on; but as 20K tons is coming my way and I judge it too close to call I give way. Always!
You know it makes sense.
 
Of all the caes that come accross my desk I would say that the vast majority come not from a failure to recognise which vessell should take what action, but from vessells not keeping a proper watch, whether that is under the genoa of a yacht or on the bridge of a commerical vessell.
 
I wasn't suggesting that you specifically were an ignorant idiot!

It's just there has been quite a few posts on here from which I have got the feeling that there is a certain smugness in saying something like "my no.1 rule is to keep out of the way". I'm not suggesting it is a bad policy but I do wonder how many people who state it consider all the implications of the actions they may take operating their rule. I fear some if not many may do things which are contrary to COLREGS and leave the big boys worrying about what might happen next. It could be a reason for ships often disregarding COLREGS with pleasure craft when no reason can be seen for them to do so.

In confined waters I have been lucky enough to identify potential problems and plan ahead not to get too close to large vessels. However, on one or two occasions I have come across 1 or 2 small ships in open water that have come uncomfortably close because they have taken no action when I have been stand on vessel and there was nothing impeding them to alter course or speed. I have also come across 1 or 2 ships which made embarrassing large deviations of course to keep a mile away from me and made me feel guilty for being in the way!
 
Crumbs,

feel like I've opened a small can of worms with my first ever post on this here forum.
I not entirely sure what the answer is to everything thats been written on this thread...Stay alive as long as possible?!
The thing with the IRPCS is that technically you can take whatever action you deem to be necessary to avoid a close quarters situation/risk of collision. They come accross as ambiguous but they do try and cater for every situation that might be encountered.
I think this will lead me onto my next thread..."certification for everyone?"
Good to see people interested!
 
Jack, as a merchant seaman new to yachting, do you have a view on stand-on vessels taking early action to keep clear, as discussed above?

Imagine you see a sailing yacht crossing, from Starboard. In open waters. Before you need to think about taking action, you see the yacht has made a significant course change ... maybe turning Stb to parallel, or to P to pass astern.
 
I was just wondering what the guy on the bridge thinks. Is it "Good, I don't have to worry about that one, he's clear" or is it "Christ, now what's he doing, I wish he'd stick to his course and let me manage avoiding action".

Its a situation I was often in when dinghy sailing, and I have always felt that keeping clear wasn't contrary to the rules - what I was doing was preventing the close-quarters situation from arising in the first place - ie my action was prior to anyone having to think about the collision rules.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"Christ, now what's he doing, I wish he'd stick to his course and let me manage avoiding action".


[/ QUOTE ]

Don't want to steal Jack's thunder, but I'll give you my two pennies for comparison. 95% of the time, it's the answer above. You should consider that the big ship drivers generally consider the application of the rules at greater ranges than the small boaty set. Too many times I've seen a yacht tack out of my way, only to tack back onto a collision course, when we're that much closer, thus forcing us to alter course later than desired - big ships are not all that manoeuvrable. Certainly if you're within about 5 miles you should maintain your stand-on status, and if you haven't seen obvious action by the other vessel at about 3 miles, then sound five short and hail him on vhf. These are not hard and fast figures - they could be moved in or out depending on geography, traffic, visibility, speed and manoeuvrability of both vessels, etc. That said, there's the 5% where clearly abdicating your stand-on status would be most appreciated - where other vessels or navigation hazards are present that would seriously impede the progress of the big ship's passage or things like ferries on their scheduled routes. Again, I say make it absolutely clear what your intentions are - call on vhf if necessary. This advice does not apply where you have an obligation to not impede a ship, such as traffic lanes, narrow channels or if they're constrained by draught. You're not relieved of the obligation to not impede even where the big guy is required to take avoiding action. In these cases it's better to try to anticipate the other guy's move - if his best option to avoid you is to turn to port, then don't turn to starboard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top