Shocking piece of video...dare I say "col regs"?

Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

Nas
I wouldn't suggest for one moment that the boat in the video was in the right. However, I strongly disagree that a private set of colregs should be maintained which is what was suggested. The colregs already account for situations were the other vessel doesn't behave as expected - I just don't think you should pre-empt other peoples mistakes.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

Here lies the body of Aeolus
Who failed to stand on when the rules said thus.
His confidence lacking,
His vessel went smacking
Into a rock and was lost.

The above is not intended to wish malice upon any forumite nor castigate their sailing skills.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

OK, see where you are coming from, but I think you are reading a lot into Aelous's comment..... he wasn't IMHO suggesting that Colregs are ignored, but that very early action would have given the yacht skipper plenty of time to make a move to either side of the channel, without being at risk of collision, and hence the colregs would have been less applicable.... moving very early over to one side and just out of the channel would not be at odds with the colregs.......
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Never mind col regs, if you see something that much bigger than yourself straight ahead, you take early avoiding action.
Jonathan

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose you're the sort of driver that igores the highway code and stops unexpectedly on roundabouts to let people out . "Never had an accident but seen plenty in my mirror." The Colregs are there to be applied after much consideration being given to their content. It helps nobody to modify them on a whim. Whatever the colreg faults at least they are universal unlike your own pecular code of practice.

[/ QUOTE ]

For what it is worth the col regs actually specifically state that "in construing and complying with Rules due regard should be had for all dangers....." "Rules do not prevent collisions"......"No regulations gives right of way from one vessel to another" ....."Right of way is only given by one ship to another" "everyone has an equal responsibility to avoid collisions".......ie if you are in danger of collision it is pointless to just shout and continue on course with the knowledge that the col regs in "theory" give you the right of way and then find that you have collided.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

You have provided a facinating insight into the Col Regs, perhaps never before considered, but it hardly explains why a stand on vessel should anticipate a give way vessel not abiding by the regulations, and alter course unneccesarily.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

Now now chaps....

Lets face it, we all know the yacht owner screwed up big time regardless of colregs....

But HiandDri... you seem to be in a perfect world..... sadly, in my experience, strict adherence to colregs will end up with you dead.....

So you are both right!

Happy? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
WARNING - DON\'T VISIT THIS WEB SITE

I opened this web site and got 'infected' with the WINFIXER adware. Do a Google search on this. Nasty thing to get and difficult to remove. It's taken me 3 hours to remove even though I have an up-to-date virus checker etc.

Apparently one thing it does is to tell you your computer has problems when it doesn't (except for Winfixer itself) then it persists through pop-ups in trying to make you buy the repair programme which may even remove files and programmes which are not a problem. It adds loads of files to your system registry so just removing the main file doesn't solve the problem.

Davel, your computer is very likely affected. Run your virus checker or spyware/adware checker. Mine picked it up as a "potentially unwanted programme" (PUP).
 
Re: WARNING - DON\'T VISIT THIS WEB SITE

I didn't! The information I have seen here says that even closing the initial popup (which is what I tried to do) causes the file to load.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

Not really, but I do appreciate your efforts at mediation so I'll leave it there.
Andy
 
Re: WARNING - DON\'T VISIT THIS WEB SITE

I looked at the video once with no problem went baxck last night for a second look the pop up appeared ,I clicked on the cross to close it then the bloody thing started doing unasked for "checks" etc only way I could stop it was by pulling the plug thern rebooting.

My Zone alarm anti virus did come up warning me of the attack but only after it had started.

My advice is if you get the "WINFIXER" pop up dont try to cancel it or close it just shut down your computer without touching it.

Why didnt it get me the first time ??
 
Re: thats nice of you.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the discussion as soon as you launched a personal attack on another forum user you were definitely in the wrong.

All that nonsense about "I bet your the sort who does this that and the other" completely uncalled for IMHO.
 
Re: thats nice of you.

Well Graham, I don't agree. Havn't you personally attacked me, or doesn't that count? Perhaps not everyone is as sensitive as you.
To put things in perspective, I admit I do rile to suggestions that individuals think they have a better system than the Col Regs. I sea kayak and the attitude of many kayakers is just the opposite of Aeolus', see Here I cannot see any advantage in tampering with a set of rules that everbody should know. I use the highway code analogy as an example of how these things can cause problems. The original poster stated "Forget the Col regs..." I find this an unacceptable statement and replied to it. Given this advice, I think my conjecture on driving was used to highlight the untenability of of his position.
BTW, I also replied to the kayak site but they did not publish my comments so perhaps you are not alone in your aversity to lively debate.
 
Re: Shocking piece of video...dare I say \"col regs\"?

Breaking my own rule not to enter into colreg debates, I do feel it is important to point out that Newtosailing's quote from colregs, far from being a novel concept, is the cornerstone of the regs applied in practice by professional seafarers.
It enshrines the principle (and if we are into motoring analogies the same applies) that you should always expect the unexpected and if in doubt then get the hell out.
 
Re: thats nice of you.

I've no problem with adherence to the colregs but if you remove the likelihood of a collision then it doesn't matter whether the action you took to do that fits the regs or not.

For example there are plenty of times when I have given way although I've been the stand-on vessel - when the other boat is racing, or just obviously trying a bit harder, for example. When somebody is motoring along and busy with fenders or ropes or when I think the other boat simply looks distracted. Most important of all, when the other vessel is much much bigger than me and involved in professional work when I'm just sailing about the place.

The important thing is that the action I take is very obvious and very early and I settle down to a new (if possibly temporary course) that shows that the collision situation no longer exists. On the very rare occasions that the give way vessel starts to give way at exactly the same time then I revert back to my original course but as this is all happening early then there's no danger of a "will he won't he" collision.

IMHO that's a good way of using the rules for their original intention of avoiding collision due to confusion about the other vessel's intention.
 
Just a thought.....

The yacht was in the wrong....but here's a thought, why didn't the ferry captain give 5 blast at the earliest opportunity?

They weren't expecting the yacht to run in front of them, but the CPA would have been too close, and when there is doubt a risk exists, it does.

It's the responsibility of every vessel to avoid a collision.

My guess about why the yacht turned the way it did was this:
Skipper down below, crew (possibly inexperienced) "er there's a big ship ahead" Skipper looks out of window, eyebrows raise through the headlining, turns round and franticly points/waves/wills the boat to starboard shouting "GO THAT WAY!". The crew sees the paniced expression, and throws the tiller over to starbord, just as the skipper has told them!...wham bam
 
Re: Just a thought.....

[ QUOTE ]
The yacht was in the wrong....but here's a thought, why didn't the ferry captain give 5 blast at the earliest opportunity?


[/ QUOTE ]
very good point.In a collision there is allways a percentage of blame to both parties as ultimately they both contributed to the accident either by their actions or lack of actions.

As you say,the ship should have at least been giving sound signals .good job he didnt try to take way off by dropping the port anchor though /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
Re: Just a thought.....

What's to say that the larger vessel wasn't giving sound signals earlier? On a large container ship you may not be able to see anything for up to half a mile away from your bridge, depending on the size and whether it is fully loaded.

With the yacht that close, it may have been invisible from the bridge for several minutes, which would have been very problematic for the captain of the larger vessel. Because even if he gave five blasts, he wouldn't be able to see what the yacht is doing...
 
Re: Just a thought.....

armchair to the ready .......

in my opinion the yacht was going to pass safely down the ferrys port side - albeit close. so classic port to port encouner in confined waters.
the helmsman/skipper was occupied below and was called up by the in-experienced chap on the helm very late in the developing situation.
he took one glance and reacted incorrectly turning across the bows of the ferry.
the rest is history .........

so, assuming they were in a channel and looking at the buoy ahead of the ferry and to port - there seemed sea room for the yacht to go to stbd (coupled with the fact that as is was a largish ferry it was unlikely there was absolutely no water to port of it - cos then it would have been travelling too fast )

so - rules ugh .... blahblah ..... scanty information .... blahblah ... poor lookout ...... etc zzzzzz

the 5 short blasts you raise as per colregs mean ' wtf are you doing about the developing situation - your intentions are not clear to me' so sounding them as you crunch the yacht will not have made any difference to the event, or act in your favour during the forthcoming enquiry.

and being a ferry the bridge would have been frd so the yacht would have been in sight until the final few seconds.
a lot of ifs and buts - thats how I read it. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top