What a dick head!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chrusty1
  • Start date Start date
I heard this conversation in Milford haven -

Ship's officer: "We have a sailing boat crossing our bows"

Harbour master: "Gross tonnage rule applies".
 
You don't think then that there are times when thinking for yourself and or applying a bit of common sense is a good idea?

Do you also think that commercial traffic should have to give way to pleasure boaters that take it into their heads to do stupid things? Because if you do, you are only partly right, it is beholden on both vessels regardless of "stand on" to take action to avoid a collision. This was only demonstrated by the ferry skipper, the numbnuts in the Xboat did naff all except stand on. what a silly thing to do with very many tons of steel bearing down on you. It is behavior like that which will hasten the day of compulsory licencing.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not only have you done the unthinkable, in agreeing with me, but you have just ensured my beer at SBS!!! /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I intend visiting SBS one of the Saturdays - not the 12th as will be doing the scutlebutt Cherbourg trip. I would be pleased to meet you and buy you a drink to see whether you are as big a wind up merchant in the flesh as you are sometimes in writing posts. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I had an offer that if this thread went over a hundred posts, a certain party would buy me a beer, and you were number 100. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Still some seem intent on turning this thread around to Chrusty bashing, as they obviously think that Yachtsmen have priority over everything else in the Solent, it does seem to be the attitude that comes through these fora sometimes.

I take the view that if you can safely give a commercial vessel the road, then do it, it costs nothing, and in the long term may gain you much.
/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
You don't think then that there are times when thinking for yourself and or applying a bit of common sense is a good idea?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you are asking me what I would have done in that situation I would have stayed well out of the ferry's way.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you also think that commercial traffic should have to give way to pleasure boaters that take it into their heads to do stupid things? Because if you do, you are only partly right, it is beholden on both vessels regardless of "stand on" to take action to avoid a collision. This was only demonstrated by the ferry skipper, the numbnuts in the Xboat did naff all except stand on. what a silly thing to do with very many tons of steel bearing down on you. It is behavior like that which will hasten the day of compulsory licencing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, calling someone a dick head for obaying the rules of the road, and all the other language that you come up with, in my opinion, is over the top. There are two sides to this story as has been clearly shown by the numerous replies, and I cannot criticise either for holding their particular view.

As to compulsory licencing, surely he was doing what we all learn - the legal rules of the road - a case therefore that non-compulsory education works (or doesn't if you are that way inclined)!
 
"Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, calling someone a dick head for obaying the rules of the road, and all the other language that you come up with, in my opinion, is over the top. There are two sides to this story as has been clearly shown by the numerous replies, and I cannot criticise either for holding their particular view. "

He wasn't obeying the rules of the road though was he, he was standing into danger, but just kept on regardless, power gives way to sail and all that. He may be the stand on vessel, but if being stand on, and sticking to his guns is putting him in danger, then yes, he is being a dick head. The two sides to this story have not been shown by the replies in this thread, what has been shown very clearly is that a lot of people didn't read the original report very carefully, or if they did, they chose to ignore the comment contained therein.

Still if there is to be an enquiry about it, it will be interesting to see what transpires, as to my language, if you don't like it, don't read it. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Have followed this thread with incredulity!

How can you make such judgements based on one photgraph and some brief comments from un named sources? You have no idea what went on immediately preceding the photograph, no clear idea of the distance between the two vessels, nor what happened afterwards.

Hopefully the Cowes Harbour Master will carry out his investigation thoroughly and we will see a reasoned report in due course.

Then if the X boat or the ferry captain are found to have behaved unreasonably you can make your observations based onthe "facts" of the case.

Won't make a thread with 100 posts though, nor allow people to make fools of themselves.
 
Wow! Didn't I learn some ditty many years ago about a skipper who insisted on his rights and ended up just as dead as if he'd been wrong?

As an aside, one of my proudest moments since becoming a mobo-er was getting a wave of thanks from an X-boat skipper as a result of my courteous navigation. And there was absolutely no clenched fist involved, in case anyone thinks otherwise. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
"Erm, would it have been easier if they just spoke to eachother? "

Probably not. Easiest is to stick to colregs.

[/ QUOTE ]

History has places for those wasting time in close 1/4's situations trying to speak to each other on VHF ..


On a slightly different subject - some here have brought up the constrained by draft / restricted in ability to manouevre ... I can think of a few occasions when most on this thread would make an error in judgement on that ... eg. Some years ago I was 3rd Mate on Watch ... 330,000 Ton tanker fully laden going up the channel without lightering - not a task we relished - but that was co. orders.
So how many would stand on to that vessel ... big but low in water ... seemingly in deep water of English Channel ... Well I can tell you that the idiot who did, and called me up by VHF demanding that I alter course AND that he was racing ... got specific travel instructions. CG monitoring VHF traffic in the Channel picked up on it and gave me stick for my language, but also told the yacht to grow up and stop being a fool.
Yachts draft ? 6ft maybe ? My ships draft over 75ft ... restricted to keeping in suitable water and later the lanes ... no way I would ever turn out of my water risking far more than Torrey Canyon ever threatened.

Just thought I'd throw that one in for you lot ... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! Didn't I learn some ditty many years ago about a skipper who insisted on his rights and ended up just as dead as if he'd been wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but then again the rules are there to avoid collisions at sea, and on the whole, so long as everybody applies them in a sensible way they work.

I find this whole thing rather bizarre. It is a bit like learning to drive; passing the test, and then being told that next time you go onto a roundabout only give way to trucks because they are bigger.

We go through formal training (well most), learn the law, and then throw the book out the window, criticising (or even being abusive to) those who stick to what they have been taught.

Surely it says more about the rules/training than it does about the people trying to decide when to apply them/when not to apply them.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He wasn't obeying the rules of the road though was he,

[/ QUOTE ]

So the ferry was officially the stand-on vessel then?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't be a silly billy! I never said any such thing and well you know it, why on earth make a post like that? Also if you are going to quote, use all that I said and use it in context.

Thanks to all for a very interesting and entertaining thread, got to go and earn my crusties now. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
That could very well be the same X boat that I had to take avoiding action with when he totaly ignored my shouts of starboard not far from there
 
[ QUOTE ]
[
He wasn't in the Southampton Water or the fairway, he was in Cowes Roads approaching Cowes, well outside of the area of concern and not within QHM's jurisdiction either.



[/ QUOTE ]

Cowes fairway starts in a line between Prince consort and Gurard.
Dont you guys have charts , you dont even need to be literate to read a purple coloured line ! Southampton juristriction ends at the same place.
(there is a theroretical gap between the two of 20 m or less, you will have seen many boats on the plane on this exact track.)

[ QUOTE ]


So the ferry was officially the stand-on vessel then?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he was.

QHM, Southampton water and cowes ALL have the same regulations...........is that strange, of course not the whole world has similar regulations designed so all mariners know what to expect.

it is only a few dummies on here who believe they can sail into a power boat navigating a channel or fairway.

Cowes fairway starts at the end of southampton water/end of QHM and starts near the chain ferry.

<span style="color:blue"> NAVIGATING IN FAIRWAY
11.(a) The Master of a small vessel which is not confined to a fairway shall not
intentionally make use of the fairway so as to cause obstruction to other vessels
which can navigate only within the fairway.
(b) The Master of a vessel crossing a fairway or of a vessel turning shall so navigate
as not intentionally to cause obstruction to any other vessel.
THE SCHEDULE
The Limits of Cowes Harbour and Roads
From a public house called “The Folly" (on the eastern bank of the River Medina) due
west to the western bank of the said river thence along the line of high water mark down
the western bank of the River Medina and along the Harbour to Cowes Castle thence
following the line of high water mark along the coast to Egypt Point thence to position
Latitude 500 46'16" 9 N. Longitude 010 18'06" W. thence to Prince Consort Shoal Buoy
thence to position Latitude 500 46'06" N. Longitude 010 16'31" W. thence in a southerly
direction to the shore at the point nearest to the said last mentioned position and thence
along the line of high water mark on the eastern bank of the River Medina and along the
Harbour to the said public house called "The Folly".
So much of the area comprised within the said limits as lies to the southward of a
straight line drawn from the outer extremity of Cowes Castle to high water mark at the
outer extremity of Old Castle Point East Cowes shall be called the Harbour of Cowes
and the remainder of such area shall be called Cowes Roads



</span>

All here in B&W
http://www.cowes.co.uk/d/Harbour%20Byelaws.pdf

Try not to get confused with the term 'main' which is absent from the above bye law ! ( if anyone actually bothers to read the regulations )
The regulations state the ferry is obliged to navigate only within the fairway, even if depth of water allows him to navigate outside the fairway he is not permitted to do so.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He wasn't in the Southampton Water or the fairway, he was in Cowes Roads approaching Cowes, well outside of the area of concern and not within QHM's jurisdiction either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cowes fairway starts in a line between Prince consort and Gurard.
Dont you guys have charts , you dont even need to be literate to read a purple coloured line ! Southampton juristriction ends at the same place.
(there is a theroretical gap between the two of 20 m or less, you will have seen many boats on the plane on this exact track.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I have a chart and I saw the incident - it was south of the line between Consort and Gurnard outside of the jurisdiction of QHM and VTS, clearly within the jurisdiction of Cowes HM but the fairway starts between number 1 and 2 buoys.

So what's your point Pete? Do you want to move the whole incident into some fantasy location to fit in with another fantasy incident?
 
<span style="color:red"> 11.(a) The Master of a small vessel which is not confined to a fairway shall not
intentionally make use of the fairway so as to cause obstruction to other vessels
which can navigate only within the fairway.
(b) The Master of a vessel crossing a fairway or of a vessel turning shall so navigate
as not intentionally to cause obstruction to any other vessel.
</span>

I read that extract from Cowes HM as saying the X boat should have kept out the way as common sense also dictates.


Of course my Admiralty chart could have an error on it where it says fairway /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
 
I suspect from the reported sound signals from the ferry etc that the ferry skipper thought he had right of way and in Cowes Roads.

As he is the professional skipper until the Cowes HM gives his comments/judgement I suspect the ferry was in the right and the X boat should have given way.

Good thread though while some may criticise the speculation aspects it got the various By laws quoted, I am sure that many reviewed their knowledge of the col Regs and I learnt from Refueler that some big tankers going through the channel have a draught of 75ft.

Well I never knew that.
 
[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:red"> 11.(a) The Master of a small vessel which is not confined to a fairway shall not
intentionally make use of the fairway so as to cause obstruction to other vessels
which can navigate only within the fairway.
(b) The Master of a vessel crossing a fairway or of a vessel turning shall so navigate
as not intentionally to cause obstruction to any other vessel.
</span>

I read that extract from Cowes HM as saying the X boat should have kept out the way as common sense also dictates.

[/ QUOTE ]
You read it wrong, the Red Funnel ferry wasn't in the fairway at the time of the incident. Even if it was, as you wrongly claim, at that point of the crossing the ferry will be 400 or 500 hundred yards east or west depending on the tide so it clearly cannot only navigate in the fairway. The X boat wasn't crossing the fairway, it is open water - the "Fairway Approaches" in "Cowes Roads" - at that point.

The fairway starts between number one & two buoys despite your "purple lines" which is where the speed limit also starts. There is no imaginary 20m gap where boats can go through on the plane. You are confusing Cowes Harbour, Cowes Roads, the Fairway and Fairway Approaches which are all seperately defined.
 
"instantaneous change of direction."

A bit of artistic licence by somebody in the advertising dept perhaps ?

After the skipper has swivelled the little throttle/direction levers in the wheel box to alter course seem to remember a definate time lag before the blade things rotate through 180 degrees and provide thrust in the opposite direction.May be very wrong but there is no actual "reverse" just the ability to vector "forward" in 360 degress.
f_vt_vtmh_amv_fliegender-vsp.jpg

Probably not explained that very well.
Better still play with it Here
 
. You are confusing Cowes Harbour, Cowes Roads, the Fairway and Fairway Approaches which are all separately defined.

[/ QUOTE ]

No what is separately defined is

Main fairway


'main' fairway is not mentioned in the bylaws , only the fairway as marked on all our charts.



I read up on this 10 years ago.

as a small boat wanting to keep out the way i looked for a passage outside Southampton regs and 150 m gaps and cowes HM regulations.

Thats why loads of boats plane from prince consort to guarand and will not deviate from track , thats about the only place you will see me getting close to other boats.........sorry guys /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top