All things COLREGS

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by rwidman

I have only once seen turn signals on a boat and that was on a smaller boat designed to be trailered. It had a wiring harness to be connected to the trailer and the boat turn signals and brake lights were synchronized with those of the trailer.

Some boaters will give an indication of their intentions, many more will not. Many operators are distracted by other things and of course there are the boats running on autopilot.

I know how to give indications of my actions.

I don't doubt you do Rwidman. Powerboats tend to be easier to read in general. They also tend to be more destination oriented- making them easier to read. I generally prefer meeting power boats to sailboats.

Turn signals aren't required, often a boats general location and the direction they're pointing is indication enough. It doesn't necessarily need to be a conscious effort.

My problem with some- mostly sailboats, and sorry racers, but mostly racing sailboats, cruisers don't tend to do it as much, are those who intentionally push rights that don't exist, show off and generally act like idiots.



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

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by rwidman

The problem with that is, you may be forced to continue well past your destination by a passing boat. Most of us would just slow or stop but we know that's against the regulations.



In my area, it's a given that they do not know the rules and it's a high probability that they are not entirely sober. Also in my area, it's possible to rent boats with no experience necessary. You could say that the system is broken down.

Let's put this in a pipe and smoke it:

On the AICW (in the USA), it's common practice for a faster boat approaching a slower boat to get on the VHF and request a "slow pass". This means that the boat being passed slows to the speed where it can maintain steerage and the passing boat slows down to no-wake speed and completes the pass. The passing boat then resumes speed as does the boat that was passed.

On the surface, this is a direct violation of the COLREGs, yet it's viewed as a common courtesy on the ICW.

You're reading something into the ColRegs that isn't there, if no risk of collision exists, communication has been established and an overtaking strategy has been established whether through verbal or non verbal communication, then no violation exists or could be interpreted to exist by reasonable seamen.

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

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by rwidman

The problem with that is, you may be forced to continue well past your destination by a passing boat. Most of us would just slow or stop but we know that's against the regulations.



In my area, it's a given that they do not know the rules and it's a high probability that they are not entirely sober. Also in my area, it's possible to rent boats with no experience necessary. You could say that the system is broken down.

Let's put this in a pipe and smoke it:

On the AICW (in the USA), it's common practice for a faster boat approaching a slower boat to get on the VHF and request a "slow pass". This means that the boat being passed slows to the speed where it can maintain steerage and the passing boat slows down to no-wake speed and completes the pass. The passing boat then resumes speed as does the boat that was passed.

On the surface, this is a direct violation of the COLREGs, yet it's viewed as a common courtesy on the ICW.

I do not actually think that the ICW "slow pass" is a violation of the COLREGS at all. The give-way vessel has actually requested that the stand-on vessel change its speed, and this deviation, which is sensible under the circumstances, has been agreed by both. Just like a green-to-green pass, which under some circumstances is correct and proper, if properly arranged (and if you're damned sure you're talking to the right vessel).


As to continuing past your destination -- sometimes that's the price of following the rules, and not turning in front of someone. Fortunately, our vessels make very quick u-turns, when the coast is clear

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

You're reading something into the ColRegs that isn't there, if no risk of collision exists, communication has been established and an overtaking strategy has been established whether through verbal or non verbal communication, then no violation exists or could be interpreted to exist by reasonable seamen.

You type (or think) faster than I do!

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

The original question was not limited to a specific rule - or from my reading of it, to the international colregs. The poll asked does a vessel ever have 'right of way' - if that vessel is downbound on the Great Lakes etc, then it has right of way. The other part of my original post was that 'right of way' is not written in the IRPCS, but as a concept it could be argued to exist within them - to illustrate that I chose to discuss the 'not impede' rule from IRPCS. I don't know how you think parts of the IRPCS should be excluded from the discussion.


Oh nonsense - one is not exclusive of the other. I live in a western democracy - I have many "rights", including that of freedom. Do I not have obligations? Of course I do - I'm obliged to obey the law. If I don't abide by those obligations, I might find my right to freedom curtailed.

I said I was out, but I still had wifi this morning. That's likely to change, so it may be awhile before I'm able to respond.

I like the way you think and explain things.
I've not spotted anything you have explained I'd disagree with at all.
I know nothing about you but you clearly have an understanding that shows real knowledge and experience and seem to have a mind to delve into what is really being proposed rather than what you simply want to get across. I think I'll learn heaps from you. Thank you.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

This sounds a little labour intensive to me. Have you ever seen this done?

It's not so often such situation arises (need to manouver against the expected way) that it would be a burden. It would also be a foreseeable situation. If there's a hurry you blow the horn, one short to starboard, two to port. Or light signal..

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

It's not so often such situation arises (need to manouver against the expected way) that it would be a burden. It would also be a foreseeable situation. If there's a hurry you blow the horn, one short to starboard, two to port. Or light signal..

No harm n it I guess

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

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by OldFrog75

Might not have intended it to be tricky but I interpreted it as such. As I stated earlier, in my case #4 was a given (as compared to #3) because they specifically referenced what the COLREGS do and do not say.

#1 and #2 did not mention COLREGS and since I do a lot of racing where those rules do specifically mention "right of way", I am one of the 5 who answered #2 as true because in racing circumstances boats do by rule have "right of way".

I realized the title seemed to imply that all the answers were meant to be regarding the COLREGS but the poll itself asked if a vessel ever has the right of way and I chose to answer based upon the way the answers were literally written. Had all 4 answers included COLREGS in their desciptions then I would have answered #1 as true and #2 as false. (Ex-Cali used the word precision and either I was being too precise or the options weren't precise enough).

Good thing this question wasn't on any of my certification exams because I would have out foxed myself and gotten it wrong...I guess

Fun exercise though

You are correct, question 3 and 4 were very specific questions in relation to the COLREGs, which is why I worded it like that.

Questions 1 and 2 were not, which is also why I did not include COLREGs in those questions.

Therefore, you answered correctly by taking the literal wording of the questions. I did not attempt any 'trick' involved in the questions. I would point out that in my opinion you can only get question 4 wrong. There is no wrong answers to 1, 2 and 3 in my opinion. They are subjective depending on how you reason them. And I intended them that way.

The instructions for the poll also included that more than one answer was possible.

I've also noted that since a few started questioning the poll wording, another 17 polers have cast their vote and the percentages still havn't really changed much.

Thank you for your input.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

That's me done, attack me as you desire. I won't be further responding to it.

You made a a number of references to statements as being bullying there when they weren't. I think you might be a little sensitive on the issue?

Relax dude

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

............ If there's a hurry you blow the horn, one short to starboard, two to port. Or light signal..

Blow the horn around here and you will likely get a hand signal in return.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by rwidman

Blow the horn around here and you will likely get a hand signal in return.

A few years ago whilst coming up a river I approached a big private cabin cruiser and I couldn't see him taking any action to move to let me pass and as it was low tied I couldn't move any further over. So I have him the doubt sig on my air horn but got no answer. I still couldn't see any change so I gave him two squirts and moved over to Port where I had some water and as he passes me he yells out, 'what's the %^$^&# problem?' with his hands in the air. I yelled back, 'just saying hello', to which he calmed down and put his thumb up.

very common down here.

[goboatingnow]

I have to interject ( after being banned from car driving on cf it seems ! ) , a vessel which should not be impeded confers an obligation on other craft , it confers no " right " on the constrained vessel. Should the vessel suspect that a collision may occur , it must change course and speed as best it can to avoid should collision

I have long argued the definition of impeding. Where one to take it at face value , one could never cross busy shipping lanes without breaking the COLREGS.

One can easily see the application obligations when crossing any busy TSS. Despite me being a yacht , one will regularly see ships in a TSS change course within the confines of the TSS to open CPAs as I cross the TSS. I am mindful of my obligation to not impede , they are mindful of the obligation to act to prevent possible collision.

To return to my car analogy. I drive down a busy two lane highway , with a minor road crossing it. I of course , monitor the crossing and it's traffic , just like a ship is obligated to do exactly the same

The difference is I have a right of way , the obligation rests 100% with the driver on the minor road to perform a safe crossing , I can simply assume that he will stop at the stop signs and only proceed when the way is clear. That is not to say I do not maintain a " lookout "

That is a right of way

At sea this does not apply. Both vessels in a crossing maintain obligations to avoid collisions. The nearest analogy with road users , might be the four way stop .

I see no interpretation on this thread that changes the view of many that rights are not conferred by the COLREGS in any circumstances


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

A few years ago whilst coming up a river I approached a big private cabin cruiser and I couldn't see him taking any action to move to let me pass and as it was low tied I couldn't move any further over. So I have him the doubt sig on my air horn but got no answer. I still couldn't see any change so I gave him two squirts and moved over to Port where I had some water and as he passes me he yells out, 'what's the %^$^&# problem?' with his hands in the air. I yelled back, 'just saying hello', to which he calmed down and put his thumb up.

very common down here.

5 shorts indicating uncertainty followed by 2 shorts- while overtaking? The guy might have had a MM license and been a member of the bar and not known what you were trying to communicate.

If I'm reading this right you gave him 5 short while over taking? Do the world a favour and stick to policing- in Australia. I'll avoid Australia.

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

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

5 shorts indicating uncertainty followed by 2 shorts- while overtaking? The guy might have had a MM license and been a member of the bar and not known what you were trying to communicate.

If I'm reading this right you gave him 5 short while over taking? Do the world a favour and stick to policing- in Australia. I'll avoid Australia.

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

Well, you read it wrong, though I can see why you think it's 'overtaking'. But no, we were 'passing'. I was going up and he was coming down. Or if your a mainlander in Australia, then I was going down and he was coming up. Either way, we were 'passing'.

[ozskipper]

Originally Posted by Duct Tape

No vessel ever has a " right of way ". At no point in the entire colregs is " right of way " ever mentioned. You have " stand on " and " give way " vessels. A " stand on vessel" must hold its course and speed up until such a point avoiding action MUST be taken to avoid a collision. In a collision BOTH vessels are to blame with the "give way" vessel apportioned a greater share of that blame depending on circumstances...

Even thats not quite right I believe. The "give way" vessel as you call it is actually the "burdened Vessel"