All about the Colregs no 3 - single handed sailing and keeping a look out

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The watchkeeper on the steamer went below to make tea. .

It was not a steamer it was a motor ship... sorry but you fell at the first hurdle.

Years since I read that report but the officer of the watch was still on watch on the bridge...

It is the norm for the rating on watch to go below to make a cuppa/ call the watch/ do cargo rounds...

The days of having 3 ratings on every watch are rather sadly long gone... the helmsman, the lookout, and the farmer..... oh well that what keeps the stuff in Walmart cheap.

I do so wish I could I could still touch type and write really long replies but since that dark day on the Rio Pongo I just have to muddle along.

[Wrong]

In truth no amount of longwinded rationalization is going to stop those of us sailing alone from doing so. It gives folks who enjoy debating endlessly something to do.

Interesting that it's the always the same characters.

Nothing more to see here. Moving on.

[weavis]

Water was low- I pulled everything up to clear the 16 inch draft and just made it in places.

So after making Cardiff, I did what all yotties do and went to Ikea. Met my sister there and spent time looking at stuff. Left the boat in The marina and will go back in a few days and bring it back.

I enjoy sailing on my own. Time to think, time to mentally switch off from the grind of healthcare and time to be one with nature. Dont have to listen to others and have to give a response one way or the other.

Almost gave in early this morning and would have succumbed to sleeping in the dock, but pushed myself.

BBQ on, and some nice Pinot Grigio in the glass.

later.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You've wisely avoided addressing the substance of my post. Bravo!

Yes, well partly because I agree with almost all of your post, but any comment I make at all will draw another epistle from you if I sign it RC me thinks. Thanks for the flowers

[Rustic Charm]

Well folks, all this talk motivated me to go out sailing Saturday, 'alone'. Wasn't much of an achievement though as I think I had a total of 2 knots of wind. And conscious of all the concerns of well meaning and experienced CF folk, when I went down stairs to make a cuppa, I kept popping my head up hoping no one from CF would see me not at the help. But, I used all available means to ensure I could spare a minute below. I had the AIS on and radio on 16 and scanning 12. Don't have radar yet, but my ears were finally tuned and before I went below I cast my eyes around 360, twice.

Next time I'm aiming on furthering my solo achievement and get out of the river.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Well folks, all this talk motivated me to go out sailing Saturday, 'alone'. Wasn't much of an achievement though as I think I had a total of 2 knots of wind. And conscious of all the concerns of well meaning and experienced CF folk, when I went down stairs to make a cuppa, I kept popping my head up hoping no one from CF would see me not at the help. But, I used all available means to ensure I could spare a minute below. I had the AIS on and radio on 16 and scanning 12. Don't have radar yet, but my ears were finally tuned and before I went below I cast my eyes around 360, twice.

Next time I'm aiming on furthering my solo achievement and get out of the river.

Well!
All you had to do was look out the window!

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by weavis

Well!
All you had to do was look out the window!

damn, there's so much to think about when going solo

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Well folks, all this talk motivated me to go out sailing Saturday, 'alone'. Wasn't much of an achievement though as I think I had a total of 2 knots of wind. And conscious of all the concerns of well meaning and experienced CF folk, when I went down stairs to make a cuppa, I kept popping my head up hoping no one from CF would see me not at the help. But, I used all available means to ensure I could spare a minute below. I had the AIS on and radio on 16 and scanning 12. Don't have radar yet, but my ears were finally tuned and before I went below I cast my eyes around 360, twice.

Next time I'm aiming on furthering my solo achievement and get out of the river.

I read the tides in a hurry and got them wrong as usual ...... Was out in next to no water and was dropping around me. Was heading for channel exit but stopped in Cardiff because even at 16 inch draft with everything pulled up I was kissing mud from time to time.............

Sailing can be poopy at times.

[CSY Man]

. damn, there's so much to think about when going solo

No, don't take safety seriously.
Jeez..(

[farm sail]

lets take a slightly differnet twist on rule 5. would a deaf couple be in violation while sail since while on watch they would not be able to use "hearing". does rule 5 prevent deaf people from sailing ?

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Well folks, all this talk motivated me to go out sailing Saturday, 'alone'. Wasn't much of an achievement though as I think I had a total of 2 knots of wind. And conscious of all the concerns of well meaning and experienced CF folk, when I went down stairs to make a cuppa, I kept popping my head up hoping no one from CF would see me not at the help. But, I used all available means to ensure I could spare a minute below. I had the AIS on and radio on 16 and scanning 12. Don't have radar yet, but my ears were finally tuned and before I went below I cast my eyes around 360, twice.

Next time I'm aiming on furthering my solo achievement and get out of the river.

Excellent work! I hope you enjoyed.

Back to this proper look out question, an acquaintance and former colleague of mine had an incident over the week end that made me think about this thread and how the ColRegs can be applied as law- when one is least expecting it. Now, I don't have any information on this incident, aside from what I've read in the news, or if I did I certainly wouldn't be sharing it on a public forum. So this is all public info from the week end news.

The skipper in question was operating a triple deck 589 passenger party boat over the week end. 3 bars, dj as well as a live band, 10 security guards in addition to the 19 crew.

About midway through the cruise, a reportedly intoxicated passenger "fell" off the stern. According to the newspaper, the passengers were able to see the man in the water as the vessel, reportedly carried on its course for some time (meaning exactly what I'm not sure). The person was never recovered and is presumed to have drowned.

In all probability the Captain will be charged with something, that's how the system works, if somebody dies on your boat or because of your boat, 9 times out of 10 you are getting charged with something. In all probability any charges laid in this case will have to do with municipal liquor violations.

However, could a good lawyer argue, that a proper look out may not have been maintained? There is nothing in the news report to lead me to believe, the captain and the mate weren't both on the bridge, doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing, using all available means.

Is it possible an investigator may ask at some point- did you have one of your 19 crew stationed on the stern with a radio- after all you had 427 partiers on board? Most investigators I'm sure would ask that question. So, is it possible in the prevailing circumstances, two officers and a rating on the bridge, steering by hand, looking out the window, using their equipment with a watchkeeping engineer on watch in the control room had failed to maintain a proper look out under rule 5?

I would say, that conclusion could be reached. Not likely, because a prudent investigator and judge will know that not all misadventures can be guarded against, but in theory it could be argued.

Conversely, RC went out on the week end and safely returned to dock without incident, in fact, he even had time to make a cup of coffee. It would be hard to argue, that given the results of RCs voyage, he did not maintain a proper look out.
Certainly in the first example, the number of people on board didn't improve the quality of the look out. Clearly, the 427 passengers were a liability, I don't imagine the security guards were of much use either. Now take away the cooks, bartenders, servers and disc jockeys and you are left with the rating and 3 officers. Maybe the rating was pressed into service as a bar back? We know the engineer was in the engine room.

Now all of a sudden we are left with the Captain and the Mate, exactly one more person then RC had for his week end cruise, but on a much larger vessel under vastly different circumstances.

The law is one big grey area, it has to be to function. Sure there are absolute laws, if you are going 45 in a 40 you are guilty of speeding, but the vast majority of situations are much much more complex.

[CSY Man]

A proper look out is there to help prevent collision at sea. (Or look for traffic and emergency signals)
Never thought look outs should be deployed to watch drunks fall in the water, or jump overboard.
Not a bad idea if the booze is flowing freely and 500 drunks are roaming the decks.
I worked on passenger ships in my youth, coastal steamers up and down the Norwegian Coast, but never had problems with people falling or jumping overboard. Booze was probably too expensive back then...

[Exile]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

A proper look out is there to help prevent collision at sea. (Or look for traffic and emergency signals)
Never thought look outs should be deployed to watch drunks fall in the water, or jump overboard.
Not a bad idea if the booze is flowing freely and 500 drunks are roaming the decks.
I worked on passenger ships in my youth, coastal steamers up and down the Norwegian Coast, but never had problems with people falling or jumping overboard. Booze was probably too expensive back then...

Based on what was described, I'm also not seeing the connection to Rule 5 or any other part of the Colregs. A party boat carrying that many passengers was presumably a USCG inspected vessel, so the rules & regs governing that area would likely govern.

[FamilyVan]

You definitely have a point Exile, but the ColRegs are not strictly limited to collision. 2(b) responsibility, refers to all dangers associated with navigation.

I take that to mean, collision, allision, grounding or in this case- man overboard.

Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Exile]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

You definitely have a point Exile, but the ColRegs are not strictly limited to collision. 2(b) responsibility, refers to all dangers associated with navigation.

I take that to mean, collision, allision, grounding or in this case- man overboard.

Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Maybe so, but I'd be surprised if the Colregs were in play, unless perhaps a navigational error, collision, grounding, excessive speed, etc. directly led to the MOB. If it was confined to a (maybe drunk) passenger falling off the boat on his/her own accord, then I would think that, for e.g., whether there were adequate crew, where they were posted, other factors pertaining to the vessel's compliance with MOB prevention & recovery, etc., would fall under the CG's rules & regs. for inspected vessels. If nothing else, it seems a stretch to have this fall under Rule 5's requirement for keeping a proper lookout. But I'm certainly no expert!

Btw, if this occurred on the Great Lakes, it is my understanding that the Inland Navigation Rules are in effect in any event, not the Colregs.

Hey Rustic -- how come your otherwise interesting & informative thread on Rule 5 refers to Rule "3" in the title?! (hey, somebody had to ask . . . .)