Narrow Channel Overtaking and Sailing

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by TacomaSailor

. . .

when asked why he did not just pass me astern as had done the 52' boat that was one minute ahead of him - the other captain responded "rule 9b gives me the right of way and I should not have to deviate from my course."

At that point the marina manager told us to stop acting like spoiled . . .

And this guy claims to teach sailing?

I guess there should be no question in anyone's mind how wrong this is.

We may not know whether or not Rule 9 applies at all in this case (I don't think so, but don't know for sure), but for sure everyone knows that even if Rule 9(b) requires you not to impede him, then:

1. Your obligation to "not impede" does not confer any kind of "right of way" to him;

2. And does not relieve him of his obligations, when a risk of collision already exists, to maneuver as usual under the sailing and steering rules (Rule 8(f)), that is keep clear of sailing vessels (Rule 18), keep clear of vessels being overtaken (Rule 13; Rule 9(e)ii);

3. And does not relieve him of his obligation to follow basic principles of good seamanship and do nothing (like charging up behind you; like cutting ahead and slowing down) to increase the risk of collision (Rule 2);

4. And does not relieve him of the obligation to use sound signals when overtaking as required by Rule 9(e)i.


And IF Rule 9(b) applies to this case, then it applies equally to him -- that is, he is obligated to not impede you, just as you are obligated to not impede him.


I think that even people who think that the Coregs are "vague", will not think that they are vague on these points.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by BandB

Sometimes math is funny. It takes two to collide but only one to avoid a collision.

English is even worse.

One of the phrases I absolutely hate is "Near Miss"

Isn't that a hit?

Isn't nearly hitting something a "Near Hit"

Maybe Surely that's what wrong with the regs. We are limited by our language.

Maybe we could rewrite the regs with IF, AND & OR statements and reduce boating to a numeric exercise. Then we could put the machines in charge and we'd all have fun when the machines run the world, right?

[Pelagic]

Did not read all the replies so probably has been said

Rule 2 a&b is the only guiding principle that both skippers should have been following when 15 ft apart.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

English is even worse.

One of the phrases I absolutely hate is "Near Miss"

Isn't that a hit?

Isn't nearly hitting something a "Near Hit"

Maybe Surely that's what wrong with the regs. We are limited by our language.

Maybe we could rewrite the regs with IF, AND & OR statements and reduce boating to a numeric exercise. Then we could put the machines in charge and we'd all have fun when the machines run the world, right?

Rewrite of Colregs:

1. Be considerate
2. Yield
3. Don't wreck

[BandB]

Writing laws and regulations requires something I just don't have. I don't grasp why they must always be so complex. Why are leases today 20 pages instead of 1 or 2? Why when we buy something do we have to sign ten places? Go to court and observe one day. Case may seem simple until you watch the attorneys get into a two hour debate and require a side session in chambers to get a judge to rule over whether one or the other can ask a question. Case takes 15 minutes. Arguing over the law takes 6 hours.

Seriously take the colregs out of the picture and rerun the incident here.

Cat getting ready to overtake thinks "he's sailing and I'm not sure exactly where he's going or what kind of maneuverability he has so I'll lay back"

Tacoma thinks "Cat is approaching. Does he see me. Is he coming through. No, he's laying back." Waves a thank you wave.

Cat smiles and waves back as "You're welcome."

If Cat isn't paying attention and not thinking then simply Tacoma sees cat and thinks, he may be coming on through, slows and let's him pass, mumbles under his breath and proceeds. Cat is none the wiser there was ever an issue.

It really is no more complicated than two people approaching a door to enter a building.

[carstenb]

Tacoma - you've been a good sport about this - have cup of grog on me (yes the grog is the punishment the whip is the fun part - if the lady wielding it is prepared for more fun afterwards).

Your speed continues to be mentioned here. I can't see it has any bearing on this whatsoever. The speed LIMIT (according to you) was 5 knots. No minimum speed was indicated. You were underway and making way as fast as possible for you under the circumstances. The fact that someone else wanted to go faster, has no bearing on this situation, except as it puts some obligations on the other boat who now wants to overtake you.

If the cat is overtaking you (rule 13), here quoted in an abbreviated version:

3. Overtaking
An overtaking vessel must keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken. "Overtaking" means approaching another vessel at more than 22.5 degrees abaft[10] her beam, i.e., so that at night, the overtaking vessel would see only the stern light and neither of the sidelights of the vessel being overtaken.[6]

Then the onus is entirely on him to avoid you, despite your maneuvers. I might wonder how in the situation described (daylight) it is possible for him (or you) to dertermine that he was within the prescribed "cone" 22.5 degrees.

Assuming there might be some doubt about this, Rule 2 comes into play and he should act as if he is overtaking, making rule 13 the guiding rule.

Still I'd apportion some measure of blame to you. Partly because you could (should) have luffed a little, thereby giving him to opportunity to pass you unmolested. Luffing would also have signifyed to him that this was your intention.

The other part of assigning you some blame (and henceforth a dozen or two at the grate) is that you apparently enjoy a good lashing.

I've only been married 25 years - so my back, while scarred, is not as bloody as yours

Anyway, a very interesting discussion, which, if nothing else leads to the conclusion that the colregs can (and are) interperted quite differently.

Not to mention the potential issues raised when discussing Inland or International rules

[BandB]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Anyway, a very interesting discussion, which, if nothing else leads to the conclusion that the colregs can (and are) interperted quite differently.

Not to mention the potential issues raised when discussing Inland or International rules

Now that gives an idea too of how a maritime legal case might proceed. Lawyers law the points for hours on end, both sides calling tons of expert witnesses to testify. If in front of a jury, they're totally lost but then so is a judge. Case takes days, then judge needs weeks to give a verdict. Then it's appealed. It takes years to finally resolve as both sides plus multiple insurers all suing back and forth.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by BandB

Now that gives an idea too of how a maritime legal case might proceed. Lawyers law the points for hours on end, both sides calling tons of expert witnesses to testify. If in front of a jury, they're totally lost but then so is a judge. Case takes days, then judge needs weeks to give a verdict. Then it's appealed. It takes years to finally resolve as both sides plus multiple insurers all suing back and forth.

True - but if it were easy, then the lawyers wouldn't make any money and even Dockhead would be reduced to sailing a 17 foot dinghy

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Did not read all the replies so probably has been said

Rule 2 a&b is the only guiding principle that both skippers should have been following when 15 ft apart.

I don't actually think anyone has said that, and it is an extremely important point, maybe even the most important point.

The steering and sailing rules are practically out the window at that kind of distance, and everyone is doing everything to avoid. That's not just Rule 2, it's also Rule 17.

Rule 17 has not really been mentioned, and it is extremely relevant here:

(b)

. When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by BandB

Now that gives an idea too of how a maritime legal case might proceed. Lawyers law the points for hours on end, both sides calling tons of expert witnesses to testify. If in front of a jury, they're totally lost but then so is a judge. Case takes days, then judge needs weeks to give a verdict. Then it's appealed. It takes years to finally resolve as both sides plus multiple insurers all suing back and forth.

Yes, but the big difference between an ordinary legal case and a collision case before a maritime board of inquiry, is that in situations involving COLREGs there are practically never any "winners". Fault is virtually always found with all participants in a collision at sea. That is due to the nature of collision avoidance, and the nature of the COLREGs.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by BandB

Writing laws and regulations requires something I just don't have. I don't grasp why they must always be so complex. Why are leases today 20 pages instead of 1 or 2? Why when we buy something do we have to sign ten places? Go to court and observe one day. Case may seem simple until you watch the attorneys get into a two hour debate and require a side session in chambers to get a judge to rule over whether one or the other can ask a question. Case takes 15 minutes. Arguing over the law takes 6 hours.

Seriously take the colregs out of the picture and rerun the incident here.

Cat getting ready to overtake thinks "he's sailing and I'm not sure exactly where he's going or what kind of maneuverability he has so I'll lay back"

Tacoma thinks "Cat is approaching. Does he see me. Is he coming through. No, he's laying back." Waves a thank you wave.

Cat smiles and waves back as "You're welcome."

If Cat isn't paying attention and not thinking then simply Tacoma sees cat and thinks, he may be coming on through, slows and let's him pass, mumbles under his breath and proceeds. Cat is none the wiser there was ever an issue.

It really is no more complicated than two people approaching a door to enter a building.

Relations between landlords and tenants are among the most complex legal relations there are. I don't know where you've seen 20 pages; a well-crafted lease of commercial premises usually runs to over 100. As Einstein said -- everything should be as simple as possible -- but no simpler

I would suggest not blaming it on the lawyers . But in any case, your description of practical collision avoidance is spot on. That's exactly the way to do it, except that in the process one also ought to be aware of who is supposed to maneuver when according to the rules. This is useful guidance and brings order to the process. The give-way vessel is like the boy in a ballroom dance -- the "girl" is supposed to wait and let the "boy" make a move when the dance starts (the dance starts when a risk of collision exists and the vessels are in sight of one another). So the dinghy skipper would look at the cat and think -- I expect he should maneuver to avoid me, following Rules 13 and 18. If he does that in good time, then the dinghy skipper stands-on -- hold course and speed. That is, continues playing the passive role in the dance. If the "boy" doesn't maneuver, then the "girl" takes the active role and maneuvers herself. It is idiotic to be offended because who is supposed to be the "boy" in the dance doesn't make the expected move. It could be the "boy" didn't see you, or doesn't understand the move he is supposed to make, or just fundamentally misunderstands Rule 9 (as seems to be the case here). It's no big deal -- you just maneuver yourself, if the "boy" isn't dancing. That's the seamanlike way to do it, very well described by B&B.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

<snip>

...at that kind of distance, and everyone is doing everything to avoid. <snip>

Dogs are barking, cats are hissing, kids are crying and the wimmen' are fainting. The owner is pissing, the skipper is cringing and the mate is laughing...

[captain58sailin]

TS, you have shown a lot of class, an patience here, and I respect that. DH for the record the colregs, are based on rulings that came out of maritime courts, due to some sort of collision at sea, or grounding or some kind of disaster, so it reads like it is written by maritime attorneys. If it were written by commercial fishers, it would be really simple. "Tonnage has the right of way" , "Get out of my effing way you effing ijit", and if that doesn't work then the sound signal would be a rifle going off and the pilot house windows on the offending vessel would disappear.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Relations between landlords and tenants are among the most complex legal relations there are. I don't know where you've seen 20 pages; a well-crafted lease of commercial premises usually runs to over 100. As Einstein said -- everything should be as simple as possible -- but no simpler

Yes, I was referring to the state realtors association standard leases. You're right that some go on and on. My attorneys learned long ago not to go that long route. It's just like business presentations where someone wants to impress you with mounds of paper. An early boss of mine set 13 pages as the maximum for any handout in a meeting. You could have more supporting documents but the purpose isn't to show all the work you've done, just summary and conclusions.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by BandB

Yes, I was referring to the state realtors association standard leases. You're right that some go on and on. My attorneys learned long ago not to go that long route. It's just like business presentations where someone wants to impress you with mounds of paper. An early boss of mine set 13 pages as the maximum for any handout in a meeting. You could have more supporting documents but the purpose isn't to show all the work you've done, just summary and conclusions.

13 pages? WOW! When I was an executive I had a rule. "If you can't say it on 1 piece of A4- you can't say it" 1 page summary. Throw all the supporting documentation at me you want - don't expect me to read it