ski v sail !!!!

S

sundancer9000

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 Nov 2007
Messages
167
Location
Northern Ireland lough neagh
Visit site
Had the pleasure to witness a great argument. A group of sail boats were preparing to race(an organised event) the marina was owned by the local council who facilate the local yacht club. While waiting for their 'call' to race lots of sailing boats circled in the designated TOWING ZONE ie for power boats to tow skiers, toys etc. A sail boat almost ran over a skier in the water and another obstructed the power boat from picking up the distressed skier! I know the regs for power giving way to sail, however this was a designated towing zone by the local harbour master and council! As it turns out the authorities favour the sail boat!!! Whats your opinion on this ????
 
Theres plenty of room for every one, if the skiers had strayed from their zone i bet something would have been said, thats why you get the designated zones.
 
Bit silly of the yachts to hold in the towing zone unless there was no other choice. If they could have waited outside the zone easily then they should have.

That said, once in the zone normal rules and common sense applies. It is a "designated" tow zone but that doesn't mean powerboats have priority. Normal colregs apply so once a yacht is in the ski zone then the powered boats must give way and get out of the way of the yachts.

Similarly, if a ski boat has a skier in the water and in the process of recovery then the yacht should then stay clear of the area to allow the ski boat space to recover. I don't suppose the yacht would get in the way if the powerboat was recovering a man overboard? Well, for the same reasons, they shouldn't get in the way of a powerboat recovering a skier. The skier could be injured or in distress. Also, the skier is in danger and at risk until either recovered or ready to go again. Either way, the yachts should stay clear. Once the skier is recovered or is up and going again then normal colregs would then apply again.

This is all common sense isn't it? I am afraid to say that when it comes to boating, egos seem to take over and common sense get thrown overboard.

I wasn't there so I can't say too much on that actual situation. There may have been mitigating circumstances. However, it sounds like there may have been a certain lack of consideration on both sides that lead to the dangerous situation you describe. Perhaps the powerboats resented the encroachement of the yachts and so were reluctant to apply the colregs and give way? Perhaps as a result the yachts then decided to make sure they enforce the colregs to the letter? Who knows? What is clear though is people could have got hurt.

Lesson to us all here. Don't let our egos stop us from taking the right course of action. Moan about it afterwards... not at the time when the dangers still exist. We must keep our eye on what is important and that is safety... not just ours but also others EVEN if it is them in the wrong. Make the situation safe... then SWEAR AND SHAKE YOUR FISTS AT THEM!
 
SnaxMuppet said:
the powered boats must give way
Click to expand...
Not when towing a skier! Or am I forgetting more colregs than I was already aware of?
That said, by direct experience it's a good idea to stay very clear of sails also while towing, for a very simple reason: most of them do not know what it means towing a skier at 30kts, and can maneuver dangerously without even realizing that.
No bash intended, just commenting based on facts.
 
MapisM said:
Not when towing a skier! Or am I forgetting more colregs than I was already aware of?
Click to expand...
Well, I didn't look it up so you could be right but I have done a search of the online colregs and I can find no mention of towing skiers.

AFAIK a boat towing a skier is just a normal power-driven vessel under the colregs. It certainly isn't restricted in manouvrability If I am wrong then I am wrong but perhaps you could quote the colreg so I can see where I went wrong in my search!!!!

Again, like you, I don't want to argue and if you are certain then fair enough... but I would like to know the regulation that applies.

Ta
 
Nope, I just told it by heart but I'm not certain that it's a general colreg principle.
And forgive me if I'm not going to google around for that... :o
Actually, I know for sure of some designated towing areas where transit is allowed to any boat, but only as long as they give way to towing boats. But it might well be a local/specific regulation.

Otoh, somewhat restricted in maneuverability a towing boat definitely is!
Just think of what happen in a slalom course, with the towboat at a steady and straight 36mph: after turning a buoy, the skier accelerates in a blink of an eye from 30mph or so to 60, or even 65+ (depending on the rope length).
Now, trust me if I tell you that the skier wouldn't be a happy bunny if his driver should suddenly slow down or change his course!
 
I agree... on a slalom course it would be stupid for a yacht to sail through it... but that doesn't mean that the powerboat is the stand-on boat according to the colregs. As I understand it the powerboat is still subject to the colregs and that means it must still give way to sail... even though it doesn't make sense.

OK... you don't want to do the searches so you leave it to me... I can tell you now then that my searches reveal that a boat towng a skier has no special considerations as far as I can see. It must comply with the colregs and give way to sail. Obviously, there may be local regs that say otherwise in specific areas but generally this is the case AFAIK.

As for a powerboat towing a skier being restricted in manoeuvability... not sure I agree with that one...

If anyone thinks otherwise say so an quote the reg so we can all see.

Ta.
 
Last edited:
Oh goody - Colregs again !!!!!

The regs were never particularly aimed at any specific group or type of vessel other than those mentioned therein. As to whether a ski boat towing could be considered a vessel constrained in its ability to manoeuvre, this would have to be decided in court, where most of the Colreg infringements end up.

Of course all this happens long after the event.

It does not matter how much pontification goes on here, it is all purely personal opinion, while interesting to read, it is of little value until tested in court. We all have no alternative but to observe the Colregs as we understand them - whether that understanding is correct is something that you will never be sure of until it all hits the fan.

As always the devil is in the detail and the one thing you can be sure of in any court concerning the Colregs and that is that there is NEVER a 100% allocation of blame on one side, there is always a percentage split.

I think that I have a reasonable knowledge of them as I have been bound by them for every day of my working life and based on this I believe that the best rule of all is - keep out of everyone's way.

Tom
 
Last edited:
Hi Nonitoo,

I don't anyone was looking for a definitive answer as to how it might end up if a collision actually occured. I wasn't. I think we all agree that this is very much a theoretical question because at the end of the day, if a collision ever does occur then the chances are that it will be deemed the fault of both parties because ultimately, even if you are stand-on vessel, you MUST still take timely action to avoid a collision.

None the less, it is a fun and interesting question to pose IMO.

The question for me was.. who is stand-on vessel? Rather than who fault would it be in the event of an incident. The first we can probably answer with a bit of digging around and careful interpretation... the second is an impossible question to answer as it will depend on the actual circumstancs and so we will have to leave that to the courts as you say.
 
SnaxMuppet said:
The question for me was.. who is stand-on vessel? Rather than who fault would it be in the event of an incident. The first we can probably answer with a bit of digging around and careful interpretation... the second is an impossible question to answer as it will depend on the actual circumstancs and so we will have to leave that to the courts as you say.
Click to expand...

Morning Paul,

As you say there could be a number of interpretations starting with the ski boat being within a designated area and the yacht entering this area. It could be that the ski boat might have priority (rule 1b - local regs supplanting the Colregs - all depends how the by-law is worded).

Outside the designated area I guess the normal power/sail rules apply with the proviso that the stand-on yacht should not exacerbate any situation and hamper the give way vessel (rule 2b, rule 8c and rule 8f(iii) - tacking into the path of the vessel that has given way is one example).

The vastly disparate speeds of the two craft would have quite an effect in reality and any investigation would be concerned at this.

Each case would hang in its own merits. I emphasize that these are merely my own musings, made while at the 'pooter with a coffee - a far cry from being out on the water in the thick of it.

Tom
 
Last edited:
nonitoo said:
Oh goody - Colregs again !!!!!

As always the devil is in the detail and the one thing you can be sure of in any court concerning the Colregs and that is that there is NEVER a 100% allocation of blame on one side, there is always a percentage split.
Click to expand...

There was at least one incident in the 80's, where there was a 100 percent blame attributed to one vessel. The vessel concerned was a sailing vessel in fog who was also racing. He decided to cut down wind resistance by removing the radar reflector and substituting crunched up aluminium foil in a sock. He was found to blame 100 percent by the court, which was very unusual given the normal argument that in fog both vessels are to blame. [Switch off pedant mode]
 
Mariner69 said:
There was at least one incident in the 80's, where there was a 100 percent blame attributed to one vessel. The vessel concerned was a sailing vessel in fog who was also racing. He decided to cut down wind resistance by removing the radar reflector and substituting crunched up aluminium foil in a sock. He was found to blame 100 percent by the court, which was very unusual given the normal argument that in fog both vessels are to blame. [Switch off pedant mode]
Click to expand...

I stand corrected !

Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top