Visit our Popular Forums

**Wotname** · 19-06-2015, 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Annapolis

Can we beat this dead horse anymore? The OP has responded and admitted his mistake after numerous opinions and facts presented above in response were apparently unanimous in their admonition of the OP. Or are we all so restricted in our own ability to maneuver out of the way of this thread?

First up, this thread is NUC

Second up, the OP didn't really make any mistake except to be thinking the cruise vessel demonstrated bad seamanship. I believe we have universally applauded him for willing to see the error of his ways.

What has been added to the thread is a more complete explanation of why he was correct to stand on initially and then to alter course after communicating with other vessel in order to avoid a collision.

IMO from the facts given, the OP demonstrated good seamanship and followed the Colregs to the letter.

four winds · 19-06-2015, 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by d4raffy

http://youtu.be/_VHXRYXzEVU

Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Most can tell by listening to this. But just in case.

snopes.com: Lighthouse and Aircraft Carrier

transmitterdan · 19-06-2015, 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wotname

First up, this thread is NUC

Second up, the OP didn't really make any mistake except to be thinking the cruise vessel demonstrated bad seamanship. I believe we have universally applauded him for willing to see the error of his ways.

What has been added to the thread is a more complete explanation of why he was correct to stand on initially and then to alter course after communicating with other vessel in order to avoid a collision.

IMO from the facts given, the OP demonstrated good seamanship and followed the Colregs to the letter.

I agree. From what we know it all worked exactly as it should. It should be a lesson to all that the cruise ship captain made himself available to discuss the problem. A lot of sailors think the big ships don't see and/or care about them. That's not true at all. Sailboats and slow moving trawlers give big ship drivers the willies on many occasions.

But in collision avoidance there is no "rule of tonnage" nor does might make right. Ducking and running for cover...

**Lepke** · 19-06-2015, 19:34

It is a rule that in restricted waters, smaller vessels keep out of the way of draft restricted vessels. That means sailboats, too. Prior to retirement, my experience has been navy or commercial. My earlier yacht experience has mostly been bad, dodging or assisting none too bright people. Especially people that read "sail has the right of way over power" and then go out to force the issue without reading the fine print.
I've sailed enough to know that changing a tack is no big deal. Changing course with a ship in draft restricted waters can be. In the navy, the ship type I sailed, slid 750 yards sideways in a turn at normal cruising speed. As I'm sure you know, ships pivot roughly in the center. That means the bow moves one way and the stern the other. An unnecessary turn could move the stern into shallow water. Because of that fine seaman and cruise ship captain Francesco Schettino, cruise ships are probably more cautious now. How about giving people that have to make their living on the water a little room.

**Dockhead** · 20-06-2015, 02:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lepke

It is a rule that in restricted waters, smaller vessels keep out of the way of draft restricted vessels. That means sailboats, too. Prior to retirement, my experience has been navy or commercial. My earlier yacht experience has mostly been bad, dodging or assisting none too bright people. Especially people that read "sail has the right of way over power" and then go out to force the issue without reading the fine print.
I've sailed enough to know that changing a tack is no big deal. Changing course with a ship in draft restricted waters can be. In the navy, the ship type I sailed, slid 750 yards sideways in a turn at normal cruising speed. As I'm sure you know, ships pivot roughly in the center. That means the bow moves one way and the stern the other. An unnecessary turn could move the stern into shallow water. Because of that fine seaman and cruise ship captain Francesco Schettino, cruise ships are probably more cautious now. How about giving people that have to make their living on the water a little room.

The thing about restricted waters, is that you know where the other vessel is going to be going. That makes it easy to plot a course to keep you out of the way, before a risk of collision arises. This principle (required by Rule 2) applies whether or not you have a Rule 9 situation.

Obviously, stay out of buoyed channels and approach lanes when there is traffic, and stay away from ships following contour lines near shore. Obviously, avoid ships altogether when you can.

But you can't simplify that to something like a "rule of tonnage", which doesn't exist and which is a bad idea as a blanket principle, and in fact is often just an excuse for not knowing anything about collision avoidance. It's not and can't be that simple. Sometimes you do get into a risk of collision and maneuvering situation, and then you have to follow the rules for those situations.

Some people have brought up Constrained by Draft -- keep in mind that such vessels are not stand-on to sailing vessels. This status applies only in extraordinary cases, and when signals for CBD are displayed, and other vessels "avoid impeding" them, rather than "keep out of the way" of -- a different idea. These rules almost never apply to us -- I don't think I've ever seen the signal for CBD even once. Unlike RAM, which you see all the time on dredgers. This also only applies if signals are displayed.

The rule which most often applies in situations like those discussed here is Rule 9 -- we must not impede the vessels which can only navigate in a narrow channel or fairway. This applies VERY OFTEN in harbors, bays, approach lanes. "Not impeding" is a different concept from standing-on and giving way. It applies before the phase where giving way and standing-on happen -- a risk of collision doesn't need to exist, and vessels don't need to be in sight of one another. In plain English, it means just "stay the **** out of the buoyed channels and fairways until there's no traffic; you must not create a situation which forces a ship to maneuver when he's following a defined fairway or channel". "Narrow" is not defined, but in my opinion this applies to just about any defined fairway or channel.

d4raffy · 21-06-2015, 02:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by four winds

Most can tell by listening to this. But just in case.

snopes.com: Lighthouse and Aircraft Carrier

A counter web tactic - put out by U.S. Military to cover their embarrassment !

Yours .... RN retired 😄

Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Group9 · 22-06-2015, 08:07

I don't know what changes people perceptions and judgement on the water.

How many people driving down the highway, would take on an 18 wheeler that drifts into their lane on the highway just because he is not supposed to be there?

Chrisgo · 22-06-2015, 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by markpierce

Crossing stand-on vessels, please maintain your course. I've got a bridge abutment to starboard:

Why don't I get this?

Sailor g · 02-07-2015, 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Group9

I don't know what changes people perceptions and judgement on the water.

How many people driving down the highway, would take on an 18 wheeler that drifts into their lane on the highway just because he is not supposed to be there?

+1 Not all understand the momentum involved with large trucks or ships. Recently, an 18 wheeler driver hit the last straw from cars cutting him off. He had a hammer out the window and was screaming at the last driver who did.

It's also simple manners. We crossed shipping lanes all the time with tanker & container ships. We would call to let them know we would cross behind, if it was even close on the AIS path (ships were accelerating from port). We have been thanked many times by the ships.

We also saw a near accident so it made it even more clear. A sailboat was crossing in front of a tanker & obviously no one was awake because the tanker was turning, reducing speed and sounding the horn without getting a response from the sailboat. We called-also with no response. All I saw was a big flash of white & heard a big roar. I thought it was the boat but it was the sails crashing from the wind off the tanker. It came so close that it turned and went parallel with the tanker-must have scrapped the sides. Someone popped up to see their boat was inches from the tanker. That experience would change anyone's view of the rules vs. the reality of momentum. :shudder:

**Dockhead** · 02-07-2015, 10:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Group9

I don't know what changes people perceptions and judgement on the water.

How many people driving down the highway, would take on an 18 wheeler that drifts into their lane on the highway just because he is not supposed to be there?

Behavior connected with the phrase "take on" is not even vaguely appropriate on the water. With respect, if you think that the Rules allow you to do something you could call "taking on" another vessel, you don't understand how they work.

sailorboy1 · 02-07-2015, 11:09

I think the point is that you don't argue rules on the road with a 18 wheeler.

transmitterdan · 02-07-2015, 11:18

The Colregs actually address the corollary to the oncoming 18-wheeler. If the stand-on vessel determines that the give way vessel is not maneuvering to avoid collision then all necessary action to avoid collision must be taken with sufficient time to succeed. Any idea that the Colregs are in any way akin to playing chicken with an oncoming lorry misses the entire concept. Being the stand on vessel requires paying close attention and always having a safe "way out" of any situation.

Steve Bean · 02-07-2015, 11:50

For a true story of U.S.Navy vs. a rocky shore, look up Point Arguello Navy disaster.

**Dockhead** · 02-07-2015, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

I think the point is that you don't argue rules on the road with a 18 wheeler.

Yes, and the point is wrong. You never "argue the rules" -- the situation can't arise between two skippers who understand the rules and follow them.

When you are obliged to stand on, you give control of the crossing to the give-way vessel. If he doesn't take control, you cheerfully take over yourself. This is required by the rules, in the point quoted above, and in other points.