What a dick head!

[oceanfroggie]

The collision regs are quite simple, specific and they work - why change them?

Because they don't work! Toy leisure boats should not be allowed to impede commercial shipping in any way whatsoever.

Realistically a small sailing vessel doing say 3kts has little ability to change its course/position to get clear of a container ship doing 30kts

1. I'd love to see any container ship capable of 30kts!
2. Yes so, a small leisure vessel sail or motor unable to keep out of the way of commercial shipping should not be in their path in the first place.

Think about it - a little stick insect Cessna 152 is NOT allowed impede the progress of civilian air transport. 747s do not have to slow down or alter course to avoid "dick heads" in hang gliders! The hang glider or Cessna pilots go to jail if they put commercial air traffic in jeopardy. Any leisure sail skipper who uses the current colregs to pass close across the bow of a container ship has the mental and intellectual capacity of a turnip.

 

[l'escargot]

...Prats playing in sailing boats shouldnt get in the way of a big boat, having sailed it really isnt a problem identifying 'big boats'...

How about prats playing in motorboats, should they keep out of the way of big boats too?

 

[oceanfroggie]

How about prats playing in motorboats, should they keep out of the way of big boats too?

As said sail or motor makes no difference to the principle

Yes so, a small leisure vessel sail or motor unable to keep out of the way of commercial shipping should not be in their path in the first place

It's nothing to do with sail v power, it's about leisure toys v commercial shipping

 

[Sailfree]

Because they don't work! Toy leisure boats should not be allowed to impede commercial shipping in any way whatsoever.

Funny because the rest of the world seems to be able to work with them just a few perps on here that want to re-invent them.

I'd love to see any container ship capable of 30kts!

There was an programme on discovery ?horizon? with the master of one of the largest container ships and that did 32kts.

On my chartplotter/radar using Marpa I have seen many doing 28kts when crossing the channel. 1ml is not far off 2 mins before collision even at 25kts

Yes so, a small leisure vessel sail or motor unable to keep out of the way of commercial shipping should not be in their path in the first place.

If you had your way then sailing boats would not be allowed to do x channel.

Any leisure sail skipper who uses the current colregs to pass close across the bow of a container ship has the mental and intellectual capacity of a turnip.

Now here we agree. I instruct everyone on my boat to NEVER pass nearer than 2mls in front of ships when we are X channel. When I was on the bridge of the Queen Elizabeth the Navigation Officer thought 1 ml would still be OK. He was also certain that their RADAR (admitedly the latest) clearly showed all small yachts.

Help!! - How do you get the quotes standing out with a background and intersperse them with your replies please

 

[l'escargot]

As said sail or motor makes no difference to the principle



It's nothing to do with sail v power, it's about leisure toys v commercial shipping

Are you answering on DAKA's behalf?

 

[VO5]

Here is a nursery rhyme that explains the situation perfectly...

...Piggy on the railway,
picking up stones,
along comes an engine,
and breaks piggy's bones.

"OH!" Says the piggy,
"that's not fair!"
"Well..." says the engine,
"I"..."don't care !"

 

[Ubergeekian]

IMHO, the ColRegs need amending to give commercial shipping priority over small leisure vessels.

That's going to be fun in fog or poor visibility - two vessels not knowing who's give way and who's stand on.

 

[Ubergeekian]

Think about it - a little stick insect Cessna 152 is NOT allowed impede the progress of civilian air transport.

Yes it is. The laws or the air make no distinction whatsoever between commercial and non-commercial aircraft. The only distinction that matters is between controlled airspace and uncontrolled airspace. In the former you do what you're told and - in theory - collisions are avoided entirely by ATC; in the latter you follow a set of rules based on IRPCS, with some added bits about height.

If an Airbus flies outside controlled airspace and finds itself on a collision course with a Cessna 152 on the same level and on its left then it damn well gives way, and if it doesn't the Captain can expect to be prosecuted.

 

[Woodlouse]

I too dont want to get drawn into the same debate, thats why I left it 2 years ago, I assumed there would be an official release by now, but the incident seems to have been filed.

There isn't much to have an official release on. Barely a day goes by in Cowes when the Red Funnel doesn't give five short ones to someone or other. I'd only expect a report if there was an actual collision.

 

[Woodlouse]

As for Oceanfroggies argument here, how do you define commercial? A sailing school Bav34 when boarded by paying students is technically a commercial vessel. Should they be given right of way too?

Much simpler to keep it power and sail in my opinion. Far easier to define.

 

[Lucky Duck]

That's going to be fun in fog or poor visibility - two vessels not knowing who's give way and who's stand on.

Moreover there will need to a definition of 'commercial shipping' and therefore room for doubt its margins.

 

[Ubergeekian]

Moreover there will need to a definition of 'commercial shipping' and therefore room for doubt its margins.

Indeed. We'd have a situation where this

gave way to this

 

[Capt Cautious]

There is really very little that is not covered adequately by the existing colregs, we certainly dont need to start having any more delineation. At present we have a separate set of responsibities for vessels less than 20m in length when using/crossing IMO approved TSS. A simple solution would be to extend rule 10 to cover IMO approved VTS.
This is unlikely to happen, and we have to fall back on Rule 2, where a degree of seamanship is required by everyone, and Rule 17, which points out that we cannot simply stand on regardless - there is a point in any collision situation where both vessels are give way vessels.
The problem is not one of insufficient rules, but rules that have been inadequately taught and interpreted. This could be extended perhaps to the point of saying that they are possibly too difficult to interpret, especially for non native English speakers, so maybe we need a simple translation into todays English.

CC

 

[oceanfroggie]

Yes it is. The laws or the air make no distinction whatsoever between commercial and non-commercial aircraft. The only distinction that matters is between controlled airspace and uncontrolled airspace. In the former you do what you're told and - in theory - collisions are avoided entirely by ATC; in the latter you follow a set of rules based on IRPCS, with some added bits about height.

If an Airbus flies outside controlled airspace and finds itself on a collision course with a Cessna 152 on the same level and on its left then it damn well gives way, and if it doesn't the Captain can expect to be prosecuted.

My point is control of airspace was designed to protect and give priority to commercial air transport (ie IFR v VFR rules, airways, etc). Hence 747s does not have to route around uncontrolled light aircraft traffic. It is bizarr that outside TSS, designated channels and harbour bylaw areas that a bulk carrier or oil tanker should have to adjust course one millimetre to avoid small leisure traffic.

 

[oceanfroggie]

That's going to be fun in fog or poor visibility - two vessels not knowing who's give way and who's stand on.

Technology solves that one

 

[Ubergeekian]

My point is control of airspace was designed to protect and give priority to commercial air transport (ie IFR v VFR rules, airways, etc). Hence 747s does not have to route around uncontrolled light aircraft traffic.

Controlled airspace is designed to protect anyone flying IFR. If you're rated, and the plane has the kit, then a Cessna 152 has every bit as much right in Class A airspace as a 747.

It is bizarr that outside TSS, designated channels and harbour bylaw areas that a bulk carrier or oil tanker should have to adjust course one millimetre to avoid small leisure traffic.

Nothing at all bizarre about it. Perfectly sensible.

 

[DAKA]

Nothing at all bizarre about it. Perfectly sensible.

Interesting use of the phrase perfectly sensible

 

[NealB]

It is bizarr that outside TSS, designated channels and harbour bylaw areas that a bulk carrier or oil tanker should have to adjust course one millimetre to avoid small leisure traffic.

Nothing bizarre about it, in my view!

Why is commerce intrinsically more important than non-commerce? How do you define 'commerce' anyway?

Makes more sense to me to stick with what we've got....it generally works well (as it does on the road, too.....no priority to commerce there, either).

I must emphasise that I am not condoning the X boat (or whatever she is) in the op. From the picture, it looks like a terribly silly, and very inconsiderate, position to put yourself in.

Edit for Daka's benefit.....the schooner in the video was even more daft than the X boat...not sure what point you were making....has anyone even hinted that that ridiculously late and sudden change of course was "perfectly sensible"?

 

[Capt Cautious]

Technology solves that one

So do the rules. There are no "stand on" vessels in restricted visibility. Its a moot point about who would have to give way to who... everybody gives way. I reitterate my point about teaching and interpretation of the rules !

CC

 

[Lucky Duck]

My point is control of airspace was designed to protect and give priority to commercial air transport (ie IFR v VFR rules, airways, etc). Hence 747s does not have to route around uncontrolled light aircraft traffic. It is bizarr that outside TSS, designated channels and harbour bylaw areas that a bulk carrier or oil tanker should have to adjust course one millimetre to avoid small leisure traffic.

My experince is the commerical traffic will often adjust thier course to aviod small sailing craft crossing the Dover TSS. IIRC the obligation is not to impede the passage of craft using the TSS rather than being the give way vessel at all time while crossing.

That said if a collision still looks likely I have no hesitation in making a clear course alteration (usually) towards the ship's stern.