Courtesy vs the Rules of the Road

[James Baines]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Definitely not allowed to carry.... Thank Gawd....
Bludi immigrants...

It's only temporary, I assure you that I'll be back on the other side of the pond as soon as possible. I would not like to add to the E.C immigrant problems...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by James Baines

It's only temporary, I assure you that I'll be back on the other side of the pond as soon as possible. I would not like to add to the E.C immigrant problems...

ROLF.... the east coast's always been pretty temporary for me too....
much nicer west of the Isle of Wight...

[Lodesman]

I take it you feel they violated this part of rule 10:

(g) A vessel shall so far as practicable avoid anchoring in a traffic separation scheme or in areas near its terminations.

How certain are you that the dive boat was recreational? Besides research, there are other exceptions described in Rule 10:

(k) A vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre when engaged in an operation for the maintenance of safety of navigation in a traffic separation scheme is exempted from complying with this Rule to the extent necessary to carry out the operation.
(l) A vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre when engaged in an operation for the laying, servicing or picking up of a submarine cable, within a traffic separation scheme, is exempted from complying with this Rule to the extent necessary to carry out the operation.

[James Baines]

Originally Posted by sarafina

my grandfather used to yearn for something that went pop on a 50 caliber scale, mounted on top of the bow deck of the cruiser... to line up with all the skidoos that would swarm our wake... oh how he used to yearn.... Water hazards, like road hazards, and poor judgment are just part of the scenery...

A 50 Cal is perhaps a little over the top unless there are Pirates around. In those instances, It might not be enough. I assume of course that we're talking about soft drinks (Pop) or diet aids (Cal's), I would not want to invoke the anger of the forum police...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by James Baines

I would not want to invoke the anger of the forum police...

LOL.... she is the 'Forum Police'.... well... one of em

[sarafina]

I would not want to invoke the anger of the forum police...

yeah, well I have friends in low places ; -)

Prolly was over kill, but my grandpa was a big old school union man who didn't do anything half way...and those water hoppers really made his blood boil.

Since I am down graded from chevy 350's to 15hp outboards they pretty much leave us alone ; -)

[James Baines]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

I take it you feel they violated this part of rule 10:

How certain are you that the dive boat was recreational? Besides research, there are other exceptions described in Rule 10:

Actually, I was working on the assumption that common sense has value rather than pondering the legality of it all.

[Lodesman]

Without knowing the purpose of their dive, it's impossible to tell that they didn't have a good reason to be where they were. But based on your description, it's apparent they were maintaining a good lookout, and were being proactive in advising oncoming traffic - activities that are not usually indicative of a recreational boat that has stupidly anchored in a termination zone. As to your original question, since you were not personally aggrieved I would not launch a formal complaint. If such an occasion arises again, you could hail the vessel, switch to a working channel and advise them that they are anchored in a termination zone. Unfortunately, if they don't already know why they shouldn't be there, you won't likely convince them to move; if they are there for a reason, their response could range from a polite "thank you" to something far more terse. Otherwise you can assume that someone will complain if this vessel gets in their way.

[JiffyLube]

Originally Posted by doug86

The OP provided a LAT/LON for the location. Plot that, then get back to us.

I plotted those coordinates, so I guess I didn't read the original post thoroughly enough. Please accept my apologizes, and I would like to take back my reply about the USCG.

[limejucer]

Rule 10
e a vessel other than crossing vessel or joining or leaving a lane Shall not normaly enter a TSS or cross a seperation line except: In an emergency

J a vessel of less than 20m or a sailing vessel shall not impede a power driven vessel following the lane.
so to shoot back to subject it should not be there unless it was working on submarine cable?

[Lodesman]

I took a look at the chart, and have come to the conclusion that the vessel was not anchored in a traffic lane, separation zone, nor termination zone; it was instead, anchored in a deep water precautionary area. Unless there is a local rule against that, I don't really see the problem. Ships are not confined to the precautionary areas by draught, nor do they have to stay within the lines - even then the "lanes" are at least 5 miles wide, so loads of room to manoeuvre. Although he's bound to see a heavier concentration of shipping traffic, the dive boat was essentially in open ocean. Nautical Chart Viewer

[David_Old_Jersey]

If they are doing "Research" it could be to do with Global Warming - maybe they had found all the 4x4's that caused the North Sea to rise?..........8000 years ago

[psk125]

Originally Posted by James Baines

About two months ago, a fishing boat was run down by a tanker in roughly the same area, the two on board survived but I doubt they will drop anchor there again.

And I'm wondering how to deliver that advice (Without involving lawyers of course).

Perhaps they were investigating the wreck for Lloyds? A telephone call to whatever passes for the Coast Guard in Britain would provide a better answer than all our postulations from 3000 miles away. They might have a log that notes the diving operation, or be able to tell you that such activities are permitted, and under what circumstances.