When Do COLREGS Begin to Apply?

[ QUOTE ]
I think the daftest collision was between the Vega OBO's of E. African coast

[/ QUOTE ]

Err, Victoria/Camperdown?

See Andrew Gordon's excellent "The Rules of the Game: Jutland and British Naval Command"
 
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to try to tread very carefully here...and will be very intersted by anything that Calamity and Refueller have to say on this subject.

I am paraphasing something I wrote in Lloyds List years ago:

Here goes:

The first collision regulations for powered vessels meeting did not include the concept of a "stand on" vessel - both ships were obliged to give way.

The vessels that need one vessel to "stand on" when meeting are sailing vessels when close hauled, for obvious reasons, but for some reason this concept "infected" the rules for power driven vessels.

This is the single commonest cause of collisions between ships.

There is a school of thought amongst seamen who think about these things that we should revise the 72 IRPCC fundamentally, and replace the rules for vessels in sight of one another with the rules for vessels that detect each other by other means.

In effect, this abolishes the stand on rule for power driven vessels, and acknowledges the fact that almost all ships today detect one another by radar.

I think there is a good case for the IMO to look very hard at this.

However, there is a body of professional opinion that disagrees.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not old enough to remember the pre-72 Rules and would not consider contradicting you on this matter. With regards to other means, (such as AIS?) this is already taken care of (sort of) in Rule 5 and Rule 7.

I agree that there is a case for re-writing the Rules, but in many cases I would defy anyone to re-write them in such a way as they would cover all circumstances and contingencies and that they would make sense, not just in English but internationally as well. The current rules, although they can appear hard to initially understand, not least learn (no that isn't a dig at anyone, just a statement of fact apparent to anyone who first picks up a Rule book) are I would suggest, pretty good at covering all the bases.

Considering your point specifically, I suppose, the easiest re-write would be a rather bland "if you sight (or detect) another vessel by any means, you shall determine whether a risk of collison or close quarters situation is developing. If so, you shall take action to avoid said collision and/or prevent the close quarter situation".

However, almost immediately we are into realms of just when does a close quarters exist and when does this situation develop into a risk of collision. What action should you take (turn to stbd/port, slow down etc) in order to prevent this - would it be the same for everyone or like Rule 19 avoild "avoid an alterastion to port for a vessel forward of the beam unless overtaking it and avoild altering towards a vessel abaft the beam". Further, what if the other vessel (or yourself for that matter) were NUC or RAM, or were a Fishing or Sailing vessel. Obviously, (an)other rule(s) are now required to amplify these points and before you know it, we are back to something similar to the current IRPCS.

In sum: I don't have an answer - I'm not that academically or legally minded, but you raise an interesting point that is worthy of further consideration (and please believe me, although this sentence may look like it, I'm not patronising you).

God, I love discussing the Rules - there's always someting to learn. Refueller, any comments?
 
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rules surely apply, as soon as you've dropped your lines attaching the vessel to shore, regardless of whether a collision risk (however that might be considered) exists at that particular time.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I thought that we'd established that the question wasn't about when Colregs/IRPCS take effect, but rather when are two vessels, to whom risk of collision will or does exist, bound by their requirements to stand on or give way?

========================================

Sorry Headmaster!
 
[ QUOTE ]
I thought that we'd established that the question wasn't about when Colregs/IRPCS take effect, but rather when are two vessels, to whom risk of collision will or does exist, bound by their requirements to stand on or give way?

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to work in a similar field (fire) where an often-asked question was "How safe is it?". The answer was usually that you can't quantify safety, you can only quantify risk. Safety is an absolute term, risk is relative. And the condition of zero risk rarely (if ever) happens.

As an example, if I were riding a bike along a coast path I might consider that I would be completely safe from colliding with a submarine. Yet such a collision has happened; it is related in a book called "Accidents will happen" (I believe by Anne Burns).

So there is really no point at which risk of collision does not exist. There will be conditions of higher or lower risk, but never zero. The point of COLREGS is surely at the other end of the scale: to prevent the occurrence of 100% risks, where collision is certain. The stand-on vessel surely must take action before such a point is reached.

But when still remains a moot point. As stand-on vessel (sail v a small coaster) I have stood on until there was no possibility of the other vessel giving way, and we were less than a cable apart. But I knew my boat, and knew that however much the other vessel tried to collide with me (and that's what it felt like!) I could avoid him. In fact, delaying my action until the last minute meant that I was more certain of his response, or of his ability to respond. (Funny how ships are feminine until they are collision risks!) Risk can vary from very small right up to 100%; had I not taken action we would have reached the 100% point within the next minute. If two ships had done the same thing then collision would have been certain; only the manoeuvrability of a small boat meant that the risk was small.

Should I have taken action earlier? I don't believe so. Would I have been condemned in court? It didn't arise, I took "action to avoid collision by [my] action alone, as soon as it [became] apparent to [me] that the vessel required to keep out of the way [was] not taking appropriate action in accordance with these Rules."
 
In reality it will always depend on the situation, what is a quite acceptable CPA in a narrow channel and what is acceptable in the open sea are completely different, as is what is acceptable between two small craft and two VLCCs.

In my days in the Submarine Service we tended to try and make early 'navigational' alterations to drive the target bearing in the desired direction rather than wait until a close quarters situation actually existed and we became obliged to follow the presrcriptions of the Colregs. This practice tends to reduce the occasions when you actually get into a 'close quarters' situation to a minimum.

Thus in the case of the contact at 12 miles on a steady bearing I would make a relatively small alteration to ensure that the CPA when it came was reasonable and sensible for the situation
 
[ QUOTE ]
In my days in the Submarine Service we tended to try and make early 'navigational' alterations to drive the target bearing in the desired direction rather than wait until a close quarters situation actually existed and we became obliged to follow the presrcriptions of the Colregs. This practice tends to reduce the occasions when you actually get into a 'close quarters' situation to a minimum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Admit it - you did this just to avoid making a report to the skipper /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my days in the Submarine Service we tended to try and make early 'navigational' alterations to drive the target bearing in the desired direction rather than wait until a close quarters situation actually existed and we became obliged to follow the presrcriptions of the Colregs. This practice tends to reduce the occasions when you actually get into a 'close quarters' situation to a minimum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Admit it - you did this just to avoid making a report to the skipper /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Wishful thinking, all my skippers needed to be told of course or speed alterations so they got you one way or the other, though I did report once when there was a Clyde fishing fleet, " Fishing boarts from green 45 to red 90, I will feal my way past them."

I did twice call the skipper to the bridge, once for a large fishing boat in the irish sea that actually turned onto a collision course, and once for a tanker acting erratically in the clyde, as we went into Inchmarnock water to ide behind Bute his NUC lights came on and he reported a total steering failure on VHF.
 
[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rules surely apply, as soon as you've dropped your lines attaching the vessel to shore, regardless of whether a collision risk (however that might be considered) exists at that particular time.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I thought that we'd established that the question wasn't about when Colregs/IRPCS take effect, but rather when are two vessels, to whom risk of collision will or does exist, bound by their requirements to stand on or give way?

========================================

Sorry Headmaster!

[/ QUOTE ]

And take in mind that there are vessels of high and slow speed ... so for one CR exists at greater distance / earlier than another.
 
[ QUOTE ]


And take in mind that there are vessels of high and slow speed ... so for one CR exists at greater distance / earlier than another.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not just speed but the handling characteristics of the vessel that matter too, a 20kt ferry can stop or turn with far greater ease and efficiency than a 20kt VLCC.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


And take in mind that there are vessels of high and slow speed ... so for one CR exists at greater distance / earlier than another.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not just speed but the handling characteristics of the vessel that matter too, a 20kt ferry can stop or turn with far greater ease and efficiency than a 20kt VLCC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would love to see a 20kt VLCC !!

But the essence of your reply is correct !
 
[ QUOTE ]
Wishful thinking, all my skippers needed to be told of course or speed alterations so they got you one way or the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

All my skippers allowed the OOWs to change course, usually up to 5° without report, in order to regain or maintain the navtrack. Your comment about "navigational corrections" reminded me of the common practice where the OOW uses the 5° to open the CPA beyond the reporting minimum. Totally wrong - I would never do it /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

PS: I never understood why their CSOs specified 5°, when our training always encouraged 6° to regain track - simpler mental maths /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
My response was based on the assumption that one was ontrack thus opening out the CPA would take on off track, not always an acceptable idea without informing the skipper. In reality the more you told the skipper the more he trusted you, and the less often the helmsman would report "captain in the tower".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top