What signals and who has right of way

[MYAG]

At risk of being crucified, the other boat, because it's much bigger - period.

I just made a long trip, during which most of the traffic we met was from commercial ships, and almost invariably we HAD to turn to port while we were the stand on vessel (and a pretty visible one btw, with also AIS turned on).
One chap onboard is a former captain of a 140' yacht, who also made some transatlantic crossing.
The first time the above happened, I told him that we were supposed to NOT alter course and speed, and all he said was yeah, right...

At last, someone in the real world and the first bit of safe practical advice in this thread. Yes, yes, we all know what the regs try to say and dont say etc , but any of you who have undertaken a passage of any significance (and I dont mean a cruise from bay to bay however far to and from your home marina) will understand MapisM's comments. Love to know what you all would have done at night, stand on eh???

 

[jfm]

Love to know what you all would have done at night, stand on eh???

Hang on though. The boat on which the photographer was standing was the give way boat anyway. Even under the blimmin colregs. So whether the boat approaching was ship or a glastron bowrider he should have got tf out of the way anyway

I do agree your/Mapis's general comment where you are theoretically the stand on vessel but it's a plastic boat and there is a massive ship at close quarters. But that's not what was happening in this (somewhat daft) thread

 

[MYAG]

Hang on though. The boat on which the photographer was standing was the give way boat anyway. Even under the blimmin colregs. So whether the boat approaching was ship or a glastron bowrider he should have got tf out of the way anyway

I do agree your/Mapis's general comment where you are theoretically the stand on vessel but it's a plastic boat and there is a massive ship at close quarters. But that's not what was happening in this (somewhat daft) thread

Exactly, that's what I was referring to generally, particularly because the thread didnt have a point or question as self admitted there was no danger of a collision.

 

[Rum_Pirate]

In this particular scenario there was no issue:

The picture was zoomed, he seems closer than he really was.

My boat passed well clear of him and there was no danger of collision (unless I had broken down and stopped dead when passing with him on my Starboard side).

The other guy passed 1/3 - 1/2 miles behind me.
I suspect that there is less clearance in the Solent etc in UK.

The were no other vessels in the vicinity (nobody mentioned that).

As had been said before he may have turned slightly to avoid any trolling lines, but he would have passed (on his original course) well clear of my vessel and the lines (even if they were 300 yards out) even if he had not turned.

Trolling fishing lines does not give you any special rights, you can easily manouver out of the way.

If the vessels had been closer, or traveling much faster, than my boat would have to give way; by making a large course correction to Starboard (well before crossing his bow) and then pass Port to Port, then resume original course.

However, as I said the vessels were well apart, so no issue.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

At risk of being crucified, the other boat, because it's much bigger - period.

I just made a long trip, during which most of the traffic we met was from commercial ships, and almost invariably we HAD to turn to port while we were the stand on vessel (and a pretty visible one btw, with also AIS turned on).
One chap onboard is a former captain of a 140' yacht, who also made some transatlantic crossing.
The first time the above happened, I told him that we were supposed to NOT alter course and speed, and all he said was yeah, right...

I have to admit I also respect the 'might is right' rule as well in that I will alter course or more usually stop in order to avoid a crossing situation with commercial traffic but this does sometimes lead to a situation in which I dont know what to do. Where do you draw the line between commercial traffic who you will give way to and non commercial traffic who you expect to respect the ColRegs? Some years ago I was involved in a close quarters crossing situation with a superyacht off the coast of SoF. The superyacht was clearly the give way vessel but failed to alter course. In order to avoid a collision I stopped in the water. As the superyacht passed across my bows, some of the crew came on to the deck and started swearing and gesticulating at me! Clearly they expected me to give way to them simply because I was the smaller boat.
So I ask anyone who advocating 'might is right' when it comes to crossing situations, where do you draw the line?

 

[MYAG]

I have to admit I also respect the 'might is right' rule as well in that I will alter course or more usually stop in order to avoid a crossing situation with commercial traffic but this does sometimes lead to a situation in which I dont know what to do. Where do you draw the line between commercial traffic who you will give way to and non commercial traffic who you expect to respect the ColRegs? Some years ago I was involved in a close quarters crossing situation with a superyacht off the coast of SoF. The superyacht was clearly the give way vessel but failed to alter course. In order to avoid a collision I stopped in the water. As the superyacht passed across my bows, some of the crew came on to the deck and started swearing and gesticulating at me! Clearly they expected me to give way to them simply because I was the smaller boat.
So I ask anyone who advocating 'might is right' when it comes to crossing situations, where do you draw the line?

I wouldn't advocate might is right. I would also never "expect" any commercial traffic to respect the regs, but of course some do. Its a good question Mike but I think the term "all things being equal" in terms of restriction and manouverability needs to be prescribed when implementing the regs, rule 15 in particular. In reality this is what mostly happens in open water and is somewhat expected, rightly or wrongly by large traffic. If you are bearing on a super tanker in your GRP boat, clearly things are not equal and so I would take the option first here and steer to pass him safely. Rule 17 makes provision for this and gives you the option anyway as the stand on vessel.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I wouldn't advocate might is right. I would also never "expect" any commercial traffic to respect the regs, but of course some do. Its a good question Mike but I think the term "all things being equal" in terms of restriction and manouverability needs to be prescribed when implementing the regs, rule 15 in particular. In reality this is what mostly happens in open water and is somewhat expected, rightly or wrongly by large traffic. If you are bearing on a super tanker in your GRP boat, clearly things are not equal and so I would take the option first here and steer to pass him safely. Rule 17 makes provision for this and gives you the option anyway as the stand on vessel.

Yeah but thats easy. Clearly a sensible helmsman in a mobo is going to try to avoid a crossing situation with a supertanker even in open water although I think our friends over on Scutyerbutt might take a different view on that. Effectively though what we are doing here is re-writing elements of the colregs and thats a bit dangerous. I take your point concerning restricted manouvreability but those conditions are specifically addressed in the colregs. Rule 17 does oblige the stand on vessel to take action to avoid a collision but it does also oblige the stand on vessel to maintain course and speed until it is clear that the give way vessel is not taking the appropriate action. It also specifically prohibits the stand on vessel from making a turn to port in this situation so anyone who turns to port to avoid a crossing situation with a larger give way vessel is effectively breaking two of the colregs!

 

[semisimple]

I wouldn't advocate might is right. I would also never "expect" any commercial traffic to respect the regs, but of course some do. Its a good question Mike but I think the term "all things being equal" in terms of restriction and manouverability needs to be prescribed when implementing the regs, rule 15 in particular. In reality this is what mostly happens in open water and is somewhat expected, rightly or wrongly by large traffic. If you are bearing on a super tanker in your GRP boat, clearly things are not equal and so I would take the option first here and steer to pass him safely. Rule 17 makes provision for this and gives you the option anyway as the stand on vessel.

It must be bloody confusing to commercial traffic who are paying attention, when you're altering course when he would expect you to stand on. Aren't the rules about predictability, he can predict what you're going to do and you can predict what he'll do. Obviously if you can avoid a risk of collision from developing that's fine and you might as well but unless it's from quite a distance won't you just end up confusing the big ones?

My POV as a raggie...

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

It must be bloody confusing to commercial traffic who are paying attention, when you're altering course when he would expect you to stand on. Aren't the rules about predictability, he can predict what you're going to do and you can predict what he'll do. Obviously if you can avoid a risk of collision from developing that's fine and you might as well but unless it's from quite a distance won't you just end up confusing the big ones?

My POV as a raggie...

Yes agreed although I think if you take action early enough and obviously enough, it will signal to the larger vessel that you are seeking to avoid a crossing situation and no confusion will arise. I'm pleased that a yottie has entered the debate. When in a stand on situation with a large commercial vessel, do yotties invariably maintain course and speed in the expectation that the larger vessel will always respect the colregs?

 

[MYAG]

It must be bloody confusing to commercial traffic who are paying attention, when you're altering course when he would expect you to stand on. Aren't the rules about predictability, he can predict what you're going to do and you can predict what he'll do. Obviously if you can avoid a risk of collision from developing that's fine and you might as well but unless it's from quite a distance won't you just end up confusing the big ones?

My POV as a raggie...

Its the larger traffic I am referring to, not confusing at all if you alter slightly a good distance away. Much easier all round to prevent a crossing situation ocurring in the first place and puts a stop to the will he/wont he game in your head.

 

[jfm]

Where do you draw the line between commercial traffic who you will give way to and non commercial traffic who you expect to respect the ColRegs? Some years ago I was involved in a close quarters crossing situation with a superyacht off the coast of SoF. The superyacht was clearly the give way vessel but failed to alter course. In order to avoid a collision I stopped in the water. As the superyacht passed across my bows, some of the crew came on to the deck and started swearing and gesticulating at me! Clearly they expected me to give way to them simply because I was the smaller boat.
So I ask anyone who advocating 'might is right' when it comes to crossing situations, where do you draw the line?

I think you raise a good point there Deleted User. It's a separate question of course

I always nudge course a few miles away to give way to a give way commercial ship, and by doing it very early you completely avoid having to do any complex mental gymnastics. Easy peasy. That includes nudging course to port 2 degrees when the supertanker is crossing me from my port side. All easy peasy.

But what do you do in the confines of (say) the French riveira, close to the coast, where your choices on avoiding action might be say 0.5-1 mile away or less, when a 35m mini superyacht plays "big boy" against you in an 18m or 25m plastic boat? That is tricky. I have been there and felt that Mr 35m skipper was guilty of bad form. I don't know the right answer but FWIW I define "might" to be about 60m or more, though I accept that is a bit random

 

[MapisM]

LOL, I knew I was opening a can of worms with my statement...
Fwiw, I fully agree that the rules are clearer than the on-the-water behaviours, and in this sense I understand why someone think that steering to port as a stand on vessel is a sacrilege.
We discussed that to death also in the past, IIRC.
All I'm saying is that it happens, all the time. And it seems to work just fine.
In my last trip, only in two occasions - at night - we've been exactly head to head with ships, with the AIS reporting a CPA of a few hundreds feet.
A call to the other vessel, agreeing to pass either port to port or stbd to stbd took just a minute - job done.

Btw, size is one thing, but not the only one. Personally, I give way also to smallish work boats.
After all, we're out there for pleasure, while commercial folks spend their life on the water to earn a crust... Not to mention that some of them provide us with great fresh food. Respect!

 

[semisimple]

Yes agreed although I think if you take action early enough and obviously enough, it will signal to the larger vessel that you are seeking to avoid a crossing situation and no confusion will arise. I'm pleased that a yottie has entered the debate. When in a stand on situation with a large commercial vessel, do yotties invariably maintain course and speed in the expectation that the larger vessel will always respect the colregs?

Its the larger traffic I am referring to, not confusing at all if you alter slightly a good distance away. Much easier all round to prevent a crossing situation ocurring in the first place and puts a stop to the will he/wont he game in your head.

Yes I suppose if you alter far enough away so no collision course even exists then the prudent thing is to alter.

I don't know about some of the crazy racing yotties (and my experience is restricted to the channel) but I will avoid getting into a situation where either of us becomes stand-on/give way from far enough away, but once it has developed then I do tend to stick to my course. So far I haven't met a ship that hasn't altered just enough to let me through.

I think whatever happens, being predictable is the most important thing?

 

[timbartlett]

I think whatever happens, being predictable is the most important thing?

+1

www.dft.gov.uk/mca/msn_1781-2.pdf

Rule 17
Action by stand-on vessel
(a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

The bolding is mine, but the basic text is straight from the colregs.

If you arethe stand on vessel then:
- by the time you perceive a risk of collision that is sufficient to make you think you want to alter course, then Rule17 has already kicked in enough to make standing on compulsory
- you are not relieved of that obligation until "it becomes apparent" that the other vessel is not taking sufficient action. But you cannot, realistically, argue that "it's obvious that the watchkeeper on the other vessel is going to break the law" when he is five or six miles away.
- if the other guy really has left it much too late, then both vessels are required to do something about it.

Worth bearing in mind that it's at least ten years since IMO introduced a requirement that ships had to have a turning circle of less than five ship lengths, and a fully laden stopping distance of fifteen lengths. Many ships are much older than that, but five lengths has been a perfectly realistic figure for a long time.

It does not take "twenty miles to stop" or anything like that. And while it may (for some ships) be a right royal PITA to change speed without warning, it does not cost thousands of pounds or take a cast of thousands for a ship to alter course

 

[chanelyacht]

If any member of the public might be reading this in years to come, please do not do what Henry says. Please realise the boat about to run you down has right of way and you have an obligation to get out of the way

Just as bad as the post you complain about!

No vessel has "right of way". No such thing exists. You will also find, very clearly in IRPCS, the statement that nothing within the rules shall exonerate the skipper/master from, in effect, acting to avoid a collision - therefore continuing to bear down on a vessel that isn't doing what he might want is not excused by being the stand on vessel!

You're right in your analysis that the post you mention was wrong, but don't then make it doubly worse by encouraging people to believe that a right of way exists.

 

[John100156]

Did you have clear day shapes up? If not, perhaps you should have altered course to pass his stern, if in doubt, perhaps 5 horn blasts might have clarified the situation or a radio call, mind you it looks as if you are well passed so perhaps he tracked you, throttled back a bit and to be certain gave you a wide berth by altering his course a few degrees to port? Not a big issue....

Now if it were a supertanker, get the heck out of there fast.....

 

[jfm]

Just as bad as the post you complain about!

No vessel has "right of way". No such thing exists. You will also find, very clearly in IRPCS, the statement that nothing within the rules shall exonerate the skipper/master from, in effect, acting to avoid a collision - therefore continuing to bear down on a vessel that isn't doing what he might want is not excused by being the stand on vessel!

You're right in your analysis that the post you mention was wrong, but don't then make it doubly worse by encouraging people to believe that a right of way exists.

Oh FFS a blooody traffic warden on the forum. If you actually read my posts above you'd see I expressly acknowledged that there is no "right of way" in colregs and I said that I was using the term merely as shorthand*. Anyone who actually read what I wrote instead of just reaching for their parking ticket book knows that. And yeah I'm fully aware the stand on skipper has obligations in 17 to avoid collisions too, but that doesn't belong in the answer to OP's question. Lighten up.

* I wrote that because I feared a traffic warden might appear. And I was right

 

[chanelyacht]

Oh FFS a blooody traffic warden on the forum. If you actually read my posts above you'd see I expressly acknowledged that there is no "right of way" in colregs and I said that I was using the term merely as shorthand*. Anyone who actually read what I wrote instead of just reaching for their parking ticket book knows that. And yeah I'm fully aware the stand on skipper has obligations in 17 to avoid collisions too, but that doesn't belong in the answer to OP's question. Lighten up.

* I wrote that because I feared a traffic warden might appear. And I was right

Ah, but you wrote your reply in the spirit of a possible future reader in years to come whi might not have bothered to read the rest - and so did I!!

That'll be £60 please

 

[PaulGooch]

Did you have clear day shapes up? If not, perhaps you should have altered course to pass his stern, if in doubt, perhaps 5 horn blasts might have clarified the situation or a radio call, mind you it looks as if you are well passed so perhaps he tracked you, throttled back a bit and to be certain gave you a wide berth by altering his course a few degrees to port? Not a big issue....

Now if it were a supertanker, get the heck out of there fast.....

What day shapes did you have in mind John ?

 

[timbartlett]

...No vessel has "right of way". No such thing exists. You will also find, very clearly in IRPCS, the statement that nothing within the rules shall exonerate the skipper/master from, in effect, acting to avoid a collision - therefore continuing to bear down on a vessel that isn't doing what he might want is not excused by being the stand on vessel!...

Yes and no.

Yes, there is no such theing as "Right of Way". With due respect to JFM, the words "Right of Way vessel" are actually longer than the words "Stand On vessel", so they are not really "shorthand". They do, however, give the misleading impression that not altering course is a "right" or privilege that is yours to give away. It isn't: it's an obligation. No matter how irksome it may be, standing on in circumstances that require you to do so is just as much a requirement of the rules as keeping a lookout or displaying thecorrect lights.

No, in that Rule2 is not an all-purpose cop-out that allows us to flout any rule we feel like. For some reason, people seem inclined to forget that the first sentence of Rule2 is:

(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules ...