So, Who was right?

[summerwind]

Beutiful evening yesterday. Sitting on deck with amber nectar and watching some youngsters racing on the river in 3 dinghys. Not an organised event, just having fun. No safety boats, no Foghorn Leghorn types giving instructions. I was enjoying watching them.

Down the river comes a coxless four racing skiff (?), crewed by gorilla types going like the clappers with the tide under them. Again, no saftey boat - just having fun.

Sailing dinghys are on a broad reach, well heeled over, crews out on trapeezes etc, on the plane and also going like the clappers. They don't see the rowing skiff which is down wind and on their port side.

Coxless four don't see sailing dinghys - well, not until two of then hit it broadside. Skiff didn't sink, but sustained some damage. Sailing dinghys that hit skiff sustained damage. Some minor injuries to various people.

Now I am not a person who loses much sleep over colregs but, who had the right of way? Who pays for the damage?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

None of them keeping a good look out.

Clap 'em all in irons, confiscate their vessels.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[banana]

Were the dinghies on starboard. does a rowing boat constitute a powered vessel. wouldnt have thought so but don't know.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[chas]

I think it does

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jamesjermain]

Very good question

I got out the Colregs and, apart from a note saying that a dinghy fitted with an engine but being propelled by oars was not a power driven vessel, there was no reference to rowed boats in my copy. If they are not power driven vessels and not under sail, what is their status?

I have always believed them to be obliged to act as a power driven vessel and get out of sailing boats' way. But should they?

A coxless four is a very unhandy craft, but it cannot claim to be restricted in its ability to manoeuvre because that is specifically not allowed for in the Regs. If it were racing it still could not claim right of way because racing rules DO NOT take precidence over Colregs except between two yachts in the same regatta.

I think a coxless four (as opposed to a coxed four) should hoist two black balls to show it's not under command, and thus claim right of way.

However, in practice, I am reasonablyconfident that the rowers' insurance will have to cough up

<hr width=100% size=1>JJ

 

[tcm]

Re: Very good question

In the river dart (whih i think is where this was based?) i believe a power driven vessel is one propelled wholly or partly by mechanical means. Which means a rowing boat isn't a powered vessel - unless an oar is a (very basic) machine?

But the speed limit is 6 knots?...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jamesjermain]

Re: Very good question

Colregs apply to all vessels on the 'high seas and all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels'

They further define a power-driven vessel as any vessel propelled by machinery. Elsewhere in this particular publication it say: 'A rowing boat fitted with an outboard which is not working is not a power driven vessel.' It does not vouchsafe what it is, though.

<hr width=100% size=1>JJ

 

[bedouin]

Re: Very good question

Well technically of course, an oar is a machine.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Re: Very good question

Tricky one.
Perhaps common sense should prevail - joint/collective responsibility should be taken as neither parties were keeping much of a lookout and claims sorted on a knock for knock basis, lessons learned, everyone the wiser and it could have been a whole sight worse.

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Rob_Webb]

Re: Very good question

Interesting one, indeed, and if the colregs really are ambiguous and don't answer the question then I would try to derive an answer from common sense & logic by considering the intent of the rules.....

Surely the intent behind the power vs sail rule is to distinguish between a vessel that can stop, start and alter course more easily (power) versus one that cannot so easily (sail). I would say that a rowing boat has characterisitcs more akin to a power vessel (albeit very low power!) than a sailing boat - simply because a rowing boat can (if it wants to) stop, start and alter course relatively easily - usually more easily than sail.

The snag, of course is the issue of speed - we usually associate power with being faster than sail, whereas in this situation sail will often be faster than rowing - hence a bit of an anomaly.

And so in reality, when in a rowing boat I try to keep out of the way of sailing boats. But when sailing, I treat slow rowing boats more like a static obstacles and go around them - however, I expect a fast rowing boats (4s, 8s etc) to avoid me.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jamesjermain]

Re: Very good question

Hmmm. In my limited experience fours and eights are extremely unmanageable, with turning circles which would embarass a planet and the stopping power of a TR2 in the wet (and here I do know what I am talking about).I'd back a two-man trapese dinghy against a coxless four in a bending race any day of the week

<hr width=100% size=1>JJ

 

[FlyingSpud]

Is it possible that the row boat could be considered as overtaking? It is not clear from your description. If they were then they were at fault no matter if driven by sail, engine or a phalanx of slaves

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[trev]

Where was this incident ? The colregs apply only to the 'high seas and waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels.'
Most rivers have their own bye-laws regarding such matters.


<hr width=100% size=1>Trev

 

[capn666]

Both were in the wrong as neither was keeping a proper lookout! Also suggest that windpower is greater than manpower hence sail should give way to rowboat.
Look at that cat with those pigeons!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Cornishman]

Nearly all harbours will have local regulations which cover this sort of incident, and it would be worth looking them up before pursuing the argument further.

Saltash SC has the local pilot gig team affiliated and are very proud of them - World Champions this year!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[oldharry]

Re: Very good question

An interesting hole in the Colregs - its only a matter of time before someone builds a replica Roman Galley and they have to define a rowing boats status....

... manned by Scumsails Solent Customers the 'morning after'?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: Very good question

Surely the purpose of the Coll REgs are to define the actions to be taken by the various parties so that action and reaction by the various parties are predictable. This predicates that the various parties are in fact aware of the situation. In this case neither party appears to have been aware as an adequate lookout was not being maintained.Consequently were I to be adjudicating I would aportion the blame 50/50.


Otherwise I would on a legaistic interpretation of the rules take a rowing boat to be a power driven craft as it is propelled by machinery, albeit it very basic machinery, and should give way to a sail craft.

However in reality I would if I were in the dinghy give way to the rowing boat as they have the nanoouvrability of Joe Brand in tight leather trousers

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[graham]

Re: Very good question

I allways thought that oars give way to everything .But also both parties are to blame for failing to keep a look out and the dinghys are to blame for not taking action to avoid a collision.

There is a rowing club attatched to our sailing club ,as far as I know there have been no problems as commonsense tells you to keep clear regardless of the rules .

I have to admit that one crept up behind me doing about twice my speed and I very nearly tacked into them.My habit of taking a look around before tacking in the river saved us some embarrasment.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jamesjermain]

World Champions?

World Champions of... Errr!... Cownwall and the Isles of Scilly?

<hr width=100% size=1>JJ

 

[tcm]

Re: Very good question

I think at least some if not all of the blame should be attached to the original poster, who smugly watched the whole thing unfold from a vantage point through the bottom of his glass whilst both boats were evidently struggling to avoid him. He failed to give warning, render assistance, and so on. I do hope he's insured.

<hr width=100% size=1>