Did I have to give way? Plus short-long blast.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by requiem

From eyeballing the coordinates that's a relatively small box (half-mile by a mile) focused on the terminal. If the cruise ship was 3 miles to the East, I don't think he was in that zone.

However, the cruise ship also has a "roving" security zone (100 & 500 yards) around it as I believe someone else posted far up-thread.

Yeah, I was the someone who posted that up-thread.


Edit - didn't see the arrow, looked like the area was much larger given where the text was.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

For the OP,

Check US Coast Pilot vol 7, chap 2, sect 165.1324.
If you do not have this pub, you can download it here (recommend you do so): https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publ...lot/index.html

Awesome reference Lodesman!!! Each of the nine volumes has the COLREGs included so if one carries the pertinent regional Coast Pilot reference publication one is also carrying the required copy of COLREGs onboard your boat. Greatly appreciate your providing this, shall make for interesting reading.

§ 165.23 General regulations.
(3343) Unless otherwise provided in this part:

(3344) (a) No person may enter a safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or the District Commander.

(3345) (b) No person may bring or cause to be brought into a safety zone any vehicle, vessel, or object unless authorized by the COTP or the District Commander.

(3346) (c) No person may remain in a safety zone or allow any vehicle, vessel, or object to remain in a safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or the District Commander; and

(3347) (d) Each person in a safety zone who has notice of a lawful order or direction shall obey the order or direction of the COTP or District Commander issued to carry out the purposes of this subpart.


(3349) § 165.30 Security Zones.
(3350) (a) A security zone is an area of land, water, or land and water which is so designated by the Captain of the Port or District Commander for such time as is necessary to prevent damage or injury to any vessel or waterfront facility, to safeguard ports, harbors, territories, or waters of the United States or to secure the observance of the rights and obligations of the United States.

(3351) (b) The purpose of a security zone is to safeguard from destruction, loss, or injury from sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents, or other causes of a similar nature:

(3352) (1) Vessels

(3353) (2) Harbors

(3354) (3) Ports and

(3355) (4) Waterfront facilities:

(3356) in the United States and all territory and water, continental or insular, that is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

(3357) § 165.33 General regulations.
(3358) Unless otherwise provided in the special regulations in Subpart F of this part:

(3359) (a) No person or vessel may enter or remain in a security zone without the permission of the Captain of the Port;

(3360) (b) Each person and vessel in a security zone shall obey any direction or order of the Captain of the Port;

(3361) (c) The Captain of the Port may take possession and control of any vessel in the security zone;

(3362) (d) The Captain of the Port may remove any person, vessel, article, or thing from a security zone;

(3363) (e) No person may board, or take or place any article or thing on board, any vessel in a security zone without the permission of the Captain of the Port; and

(3364) (f) No person may take or place any article or thing upon any waterfront facility in a security zone without the permission of the Captain of the Port.

§ 165.1324 Safety and Security Zone; Cruise Ship Protection, Elliot Bay and Pier 91, Seattle, WA.
(4167) (a) Safety and Security Zones. (1) The following area is a safety and security zone: All waters within the following points: a rectangle, starting at

(4168) 47°37'53"N., 122°23'07"W., thence south to position

(4169) 47°37'06"N., 122°23'07"W., thence east to position

(4170) 47°37'06"N., 122°22'43"W., thence north to position

(4171) 47°37'58"N., 122°22'43"W. This zone will be enforced only during the arrival and departure of Large Passenger Cruise Vessels at Pier 91, Seattle, Washington.

(4172) (2) The following area is a safety and security zone: All waters within 100 yards of Pier 91, Seattle, Washington, at approximate position 47°37'35"N., 122°23'00"W. This zone will be enforced only when a Large Passenger Cruise Vessel is moored at Pier 91.

(4173) (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart D, no person or vessel may enter or remain in either Safety and Security Zone except for vessels authorized by the Captain of the Port or Designated Representatives.

(4174) (c) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section;

(4175) Facility Security Officer means the person designated as responsible for the development, implementation, revision and maintenance of the facility security plan and for liaison with the COTP and Company and Vessel Security Officers.

(4176) Large Passenger Cruise Vessel means any cruise ship over 100 feet in length carrying passengers for hire. Large Passenger Cruise Vessel does not include vessels inspected and certificated under 46 CFR, Chapter I, Subchapter T such as excursion vessels, sight seeing vessels, dinner cruise vessels, and whale watching vessels.

(4177) Official Patrol means those persons designated by the Captain of the Port to monitor a Large Passenger Cruise Vessel security and safety zone, permit entry into the zone, give legally enforceable orders to persons or vessels within the zone and take other actions authorized by the Captain of the Port. Persons authorized in paragraph (e) to enforce this section are designated as the Official Patrol.

(4178) (d) Authorization. To request authorization to operate within 100 yards of a Large Passenger Cruise Vessel that is moored at Pier 91, contact the onscene Official Patrol on VHF-FM channel 16 or 13 or the Facility Security Officer at 206–728–3688.

(4179) (e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned warrant or petty officer may enforce the rules in this section. In the navigable waters of the United States to which this section applies, when immediate action is required and representatives of the Coast Guard are not present or not present in sufficient force to provide effective enforcement of this section in the vicinity of a Large Passenger Cruise Vessel, any Federal or Washington Law Enforcement Officer may enforce the rules contained in this section pursuant to 33 CFR 6.04-11. In addition, the Captain of the Port may be assisted by other Federal, state or local agencies in enforcing this section.

(4180) (f) Waiver. The Captain of the Port Puget Sound may waive any of the requirements of this section for any vessel or class of vessels upon finding that a vessel or class of vessels, operational conditions or other circumstances are such that application of this section is unnecessary or impractical for the purpose of port security, safety or environmental safety.

[Lodesman]

I guess it's within the realm of possibility that the master of the cruise ship had his chart system set to a range where it appears at first blush that the area around Magnolia bluff is a restricted area. I'd assume a pilot would know better, but I don't know if a pilot is actually required.

[Montanan]

It is rather unclear from the description as to relative positioning and courses the OP's J-120 sailboat and the cruiseliner were on. It would be enabling if positions could be provided so that one could ascertain if the sailboat was in or near the TSS and / or in the Safety and Security Zone of Elliot Bay.

OP:
"The situation:

Puget sound, not far from Seattle. I was on a J-120 (40') under sail, on port tack. I was close-hauled, about a 1.5-2 miles from land, heading toward the shoreline. I intended to tack away when I got about 1/4 mile from shore.

Far to starboard, (at least 3 miles) I saw a cruise ship coming out of Seattle, That presumably would be from the cruise ship terminal at the north shore of Elliot Bay roughly going to cross my course, roughly on a collision course, and picking up speed. She was paralleling the coast, probably as close as her draft would safely allow. The cruise liner was apparently picking up speed having undocked and was headed towards the TSS and would be required to enter the TSS at a narrow angle, hence to enter in a Southwest or Northwest course, diagonally to the north / south TSS. And would be constrained by draft from going closer to shore, but required to parallel the shore to realize a narrow entry into the TSS"

Follow on post of OP, #11:

"3) She had 3 miles to change course, and would have needed to turn only a few degrees astern of me.

4) Elliot bay is 1.8 miles wide between West Seattle and Magnolia. It would be nearly impossible to navigate elliot bay and never come within a mile of a big ship. Your description of coming within a mile of a ship as "very dumb" (a phrase, btw, sure to heighten emotions, rather than illuminate) might be right on in the open ocean, or even further into Puget Sound, but is naive in the context of Elliot Bay."

Cal40john post #17:

"The cruise ship terminal is less than 3 miles from West point, the point of the outside of the bay. So you can't see the cruise ship until it pulls out of the dock less than 3 miles from you. Magnolia Bluff has shallows for more than a half mile out from shore in the area he's talking about. Most of the ships for some strange reason tend to turn to deeper water when coming out of the north end of Elliot Bay and seem to be happy that you're sailing into the shallow water out of their way."

[Jammer]

The security zone doesn't appear on the OpenCPN screen shot.


It is fairly small, 1/4 mile by 1/2 mile, extending straight out from the cruise terminal (Smith Cove). I don't think it is relevant to this discussion.

[Montanan]

OP, #1:

"she blasted short-long. I don't know whether to be embarrassed or not, but I don't know what short-long means. But my crew was preparing to tack anyway. Not 15 seconds later, she blasts 5-short, which obviously I do know what that means! 3 seconds later, we tack away, and all ends well. We never came closer than about 1/4 of a mile. That sounds close, but Elliot bay has so much traffic, that in context, I don't think it was alarming."

Seems appropriate action, albeit perhaps earlier action could have been warranted when there was greater distance.

The OP was aware of a collision course and was preparing to take evasive action. The cruise liner provided an awareness sound signal which can not be confused by other specific navigation sound signals with a short long blast of her horn, which would make heads on all other vessels in earshot to swivel towards the direction the sound emitted, then shortly after the cruise liner emitted a specific sound signal, five short blasts. The first sound signal provided auditory directional awareness and the second sound signal a clear message. The message being an expression of the status of THEIR situational awareness, that being: "I am unclear as to YOUR intentions."

It seems the cruise liner was trying to make clear the sailboats intentions. Clarity of intentions aids in determining a course of action.

The OP then within seconds made clear their intentions by tacking away which was an action the OP apparently had previously considered and had been preparing to take.

Result: "and all ends well. We never came closer than about 1/4 of a mile. That sounds close, but Elliot bay has so much traffic, that in context, I don't think it was alarming."



The hindsight evaluation issue is that the OP was visually aware of an apparent collision course or close approach at a longer distance; the question is whether action should have been taken at an earlier time to resolve the apparent closing approach. Sooner is typically better than later as to resolving navigational hazards, kind of like deciding when to reef down your sails when the wind becomes challenging. Indecision is a decision, not always the best decision. Communicating on Channel 13 early on would seem to have been appropriate, a brief discussion would likely have resolved the matter, that is what radios are for, if you got one, use it. If one is just out day cruising / racing or WAFIng, I find the simplest and safest approach towards dealing with closing with a large or working vessel is to simply adjusting my course when I have navigational room and lower risk to clearly pass astern in a crossing situation, Crossing ahead of a large boat or a working boat with a sailed boat requires a Plan B if the wind shifts or drops off such that one can no longer stand- on by keeping the same speed and course. If I chose to stand-on and cross ahead when their is modest distance, I'll have my engine running and monitoring its status to have a relatively high degree of confidence that it will be immediately operational and allow me to motor, or motor sail out of danger, yet motoring is Plan B and I don't like to rely on a Plan B, engines fail from time to time, hence my fall back being Plan C, i.e., Plan Chickenshit and just cross astern of things that are intimidating. Plan C does not need to attempt Plan A [Cross Ahead] or Plan B [comBustion power]. Giving way, far away, makes for clarity of my intentions when I am enjoying WAFIing. Back in the day when I would race in San Francisco Bay, if I came upon commercial traffic, I just figured those vessels to be like the placement of hazards on a golf course, just things to avoid, basically being adhoc additions to the markers that were deployed by the race committee that make things more interesting and taking the long way around kept me out of chancing landing in the rough so to speak. I generally find the aft side of a large boat to be the finer of close perspectives.

Enjoy the Salish Sea, just don't try communicating in Salish on VHF as not many, if any of the skippers will understand you. Few of the natives / First Peoples, living here in Montaña on the Flathead Nation reservation of the Confederated Salish tribes and the Kootenai tribe still speak their respective native language, albeit many of the prominent the signs on the highway are in three languages, tends to truly confuse the tourists as they wonder what country they are in, that being Native Indian Country, the rest of us being just migrants or visitors. If you speak Salish on your VHF, expect to hear five short blasts as everyone will be stating: I am unclear as to YOUR intentions.

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by Jammer

Last weekend I was out on the river. I met a commercial vessel going down the river and working his way across the channel diagonally, quite gradually across, towards me. Not understanding his intent I turned to starboard coming quite close to the limits of the channel given my draft. The vessel continued towards me and sounded one whistle. Almost automatically, I turned further to starboard, sounding one whistle myself, while the commercial vessel turned hard to port.


And sounded one more whistle.


I turned to port. It was closer than I would have liked, less than a mile, more than a boat length. Well, more than the length of MY boat, anyway.



I called him up on 13 and explained that I was a skipper of very small mind, and that there is much about the Inland Rules that I do not understand. Least of all did I understand the meaning of one whistle, as I was taught and brought up to believe that it conveyed an intent to pass port side to port side.


It was then explained unto me that one whistle was meant as a reminder that it was his river and I should perhaps find someplace else to play of a Saturday morning.


I am checking my charts to see if there is some other way to get from Winona to St. Paul. Thus far, the alternative routes all appear to involve a trailer.

At that point, I would have tooted dididaadit / diddidaa (short short long short / short short long

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Jammer

The security zone doesn't appear on the OpenCPN screen shot.


It is fairly small, 1/4 mile by 1/2 mile, extending straight out from the cruise terminal (Smith Cove). I don't think it is relevant to this discussion.

It's probably not relevant - my bad for bringing it in, but as I said at a certain rangescale on the NOAA chart viewer - which I assume matches up with a particular chart (maybe 18441), the warning about the security zone aligns with the larger hashed area that extends around Magnolia bluff, which on closer inspection indicates the outer limit of the cable area. If one didn't see the small arrow and assumed that the normal convention of tilting script from the standard east-west to align with a feature means it is connected with that feature, then one could possibly assume the security zone is much larger than it is. See here:

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Jammer

It was then explained unto me that one whistle was meant as a reminder that it was his river and I should perhaps find someplace else to play of a Saturday morning.

"I've been taking video and have recorded this conversation; wanna bet your ticket the USCG agrees with you? Out"

[Smooth Move]

Here lies the body of Michael O’Day who died maintaining the right of way . He was right — dead right — but dead just the same

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

It's probably not relevant - my bad for bringing it in, but as I said at a certain rangescale on the NOAA chart viewer - which I assume matches up with a particular chart (maybe 18441), the warning about the security zone aligns with the larger hashed area that extends around Magnolia bluff, which on closer inspection indicates the outer limit of the cable area.

In a way it's still relevant: the OP mentioned he never came closer than about a 1/4 mile, which also happens to be the limit of the security zone around the cruise ship when underway.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

"I've been taking video and have recorded this conversation; wanna bet your ticket the USCG agrees with you? Out"

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

"I've been taking video and have recorded this conversation; wanna bet your ticket the USCG agrees with you? Out"

The next day I had a chat about the whole thing with the supervisor of the local marine safety detachment of the USCG. I don't know if anything came of it. I would like to think that it may have resulted in a friendly chat on the phone with the perp and a note in his file.


I am happy to get out of the way of commercial vessels but I cannot do so unless they act predictably or make their expectations or wishes clear in advance. Which is, in part, what this thread is about.

Originally Posted by requiem

In a way it's still relevant: the OP mentioned he never came closer than about a 1/4 mile, which also happens to be the limit of the security zone around the cruise ship when underway.

I don't see where there's a 1/4 mile security zone around a cruise ship that's under way. Maybe I've just missed it -- a cite would help. On the other hand, even the security zones around naval vessels aren't ordinarily that large.

[cal40john]

Originally Posted by Smooth Move

Here lies the body of Michael O’Day who died maintaining the right of way . He was right — dead right — but dead just the same

The OP is sailing towards shoal waters that one could reasonably expect the ship not want to turn towards or perhaps even alter course further out into deeper waters. So your plan is for the OP to alter course into the path that you think the ship is going to turn to when you believe the ship thinks you're stand on and you're going to hold your course.

This is not a cut and dry situation. This is not an area where ships are necessarily holding a constant course.

The example I've brought out before is where the ship is exiting the TSS and is turning, you don't know where the turn is going to end. There are small boats all over the bay half are stand on, half are thinking I don't want to be dead right and randomly turning all over the place. And you can be 1/2 mile to 3 miles away when you see that the ship isn't going to Tacoma and starts its turn into Elliot Bay.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Smooth Move

Here lies the body of Michael O’Day who died maintaining the right of way . He was right — dead right — but dead just the same

This little parable, which has a useful lesson for land drivers, is entirely inapplicable to COLREGS problems. It has nothing to do with anything we are talking about. Because there is no "right of way" to "maintain"; in fact no "rights" at all. You cannot be "dead" and "right", at sea. I know I harp on this, but it's crucially important to understand.

[Pete17C]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

This little parable, which has a useful lesson for land drivers, is entirely inapplicable to COLREGS problems. It has nothing to do with anything we are talking about. Because there is no "right of way" to "maintain"; in fact no "rights" at all. You cannot be "dead" and "right", at sea. I know I harp on this, but it's crucially important to understand.

of course not, at sea, it would be 'dead starboard'?