Overtaking Vessel Wanting you to Speed Up

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

A lot of folks seem to be hung up on your speed, but I would guess you've underestimated it. 1.5 kts is granny on her walker - speed. If your speed was similar to others, then I suggest you may have been closer to 3-4 kts (walking or fast walking speed).

I voted, you were stand-on. I have to ask: when you say "masters license" what is the actual ticket?

I agree, her speed would have been around 3 as she had good steerageway

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Saltysailor2

Thank you all for your comments.

I joined this group to post this question. I am very impressed with the thoughtful responses that I will continue to be active in this forum.

So here is what I am summing up.

What I would do if in the situation again in this order:

1. I would speed up as much as I felt safe to do.

2. I would still recommend that he contact me on the radio. I believe a lot can be resolved on the radio. For example if I could not speed up enough for him, I could let him know that early so he could take other actions if needed and not waste his time asking again. If for example I was about to speed up momentarily after clearing an obstacle that I saw that he did not I could share that information.

3. After speeding up as much as I could or saying "no" if I could not speed up at all I would just continue on my way. No need for a second response since I will not put my vessel or passengers in danger.

Other comments:

I enjoyed the technical side of this discussion as well. I think that it is clear that just because a vessel is towing something it does not make it a vessel engaged in towing for the purpose of right or way. The fishing boat was good example.

There were many assumptions that I did not speed up because he was rude. That was never the case and I never said that. However who knows how one would react if someone said can you please speed up and then smiled. Would I take more risks for a smile than a scream. Probably, but even then only up to a point.

One point that only a few touched on was that the give way vessel thought he was the stand on vessel. If he knew he was the give way vessel would he have acted differently even before entering the channel and afterwards?

Thought:

The funny thing about Masters licenses is that you test once and renew but don't need to re-test (like driving a car). So you could forget who has right of way over time. I make it a practice to study the rules of the road every year as if I am studying for test. I do agree with the folks that said the rules are not everything but that is what rule 2 is for. So I guess there is no way of getting away from the rules since breaking rules is part of rules. Sort of.

Saltysailor2,

I think you are being tough on yourself as a result of another operator's panicked reaction and lack of preparation.

I would certainly pick you over him to be in command of my boat.

Let us know your same speed next time out but I am sure it is above 1.5 for a 40ft boat unless you are jogging in and out of gear.

Using VHF in the PNW is common and especially maneuvering at close quarters in Marinas, where captains calmly agree on a course of action, rather than screaming over engine and wind noise.

You were prepared to communicate, yet the operator behind you wasn't.

Don't understand why some people keep making excuses for him.
He has more to learn than yourself, but keep on learning.....as we all do

Fair Winds!

[Tim Godber]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

I think technically he was the "a&&hole vessel" and you were the "get-the-hell-outta-the-way-vessel"

Best call I ever heard was on the ICW when a New York powerboat powered through at speed, and a Texan guy called on Channel 16 "XYZ, were you born the perfect A***ole or do you practice". No response recorded.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by psneeld

But I do have an issue with people who can see that another vessel is struggling and either ignore the situation or hold their ground thinking the rules are everything.

I have ducked down side fairways, backed out of narrow places, etc...etc...when I see that a vessel has little chance of success without aging the Captain...I try and accommodate...even if it's a little more risk to me but a lot more risk to him if I don't.

+1,000,000

That really sums it up, in my opinion.

Leaving aside Rule 2, this is a straightforward overtaking situation. The guy with the side tow is supposed to keep clear.

But we can't leave aside Rule 2. If he's struggling behind you, you need to do something to help him out, even if it means some inconvenience or slight risk to yourself. Could the channel have possibly been so narrow that it was impossible to get over to starboard, cut the throttle, and let him pass by? Or was it really unsafe to speed up a little? I reckon there are pretty few channels, outside of the confines of a tight harbor, where a 40' sailboat is even capable of an unsafe speed.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

I am not sure the communications issue isn't a red herring. His request was clear, your reply was clear.

A protracted discussion on the radio wouldn't have likely solved anything.

+1

I agree with this.

Another irrelevant factor is whether the other guy was behaving like a jerk or not. Or maybe that's wrong -- maybe it is relevant -- if the other guy is behaving like a jerk, you can be sure that he will not be applying principles of good seamanship, so steer a wide berth. The other guy behaving in an unseamanlike manner imposes an additional obligation on good seaman to get out of the way, whatever the other rules say -- Rule 2.


And one more factor, is this phrase: "I won't put myself or my passengers in danger" -- that smells wrong to me. Sounds like a rationalization of unfriendly and perhaps even unseamanlike behavior, to me, and not a rule which can possibly be followed in practice. You and your passengers are already in danger, going out to sea in the first place. Slight danger, and slighter yet if you are a good seaman and well prepared, and the weather is decent, and the vessel is well prepared. But I can guaranty that I could go on board any vessel at all and find 20 or more different points which could be safer -- so on any one of 20 different points (number taken out of the air; might really be 50 points), the skipper is putting himself and his passengers in some kind of danger -- probably slight in case the vessel is in good order, but perfection doesn't exist -- and my point is that "I won't put myself in danger" is unfulfillable -- doesn't exist.

And what kind of danger is anyone being put in at 5 knots versus 4 knots or whatever, for a couple of cables? More than the danger you put your passengers into by letting your seacocks go for 15 years rather than changing them at 10 (say)? Do you have a liferaft? Do you have a backup liferaft? (I do.) Does everyone on board have a PLB on their persons? Do you have a MOB signalling system? Did you buy a boat with watertight compartments? You are putting your passengers in some danger every time you go out, in dozens of different ways.

[Pelagic]

Dockhead you might be over thinking this a tad )

OP was setting up to berth on the first finger pier

Focused on assessing wind and current at her maneuvering speed.

Relaxed and Watching for any opposing traffic in front.

Mentally lining up for a 180 and berthing.

Then bozo behind tells OP to speed up, even though he will be going into the same set of Finger piers.

Personally I would have just ignored him and focused on docking my boat.... which was the only safety issue at the moment.

This is on the level of parking at Walmart and you have an impatient driver behind you.

[MarkJ]

I would have slowed down even more.

Maybe cracked a beer and started the BBQ...

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

I would have slowed down even more.

Maybe cracked a beer and started the BBQ...

You forgot 'and hoisted signal number 1.'

[Hudson Force]

I see options for the operators of both vessels to have relieved the problem. The "stand on" vessel in front could have placed a look out on the bow for a quicker view of traffic at the intersections and increased their speed at intervals. In additon, they could have turned off the channel at an intersection in the marina into the wind or current set to allow for the easy pass. With the burden on the overtaking vessel, I would see the option of standing abreast against a piling on the beam to wait for clear passage at a higher speed or taking some temporary movement into a side channel, also into wind or current set, to buy some time for a faster speed out the main channel. Best of all would have been for the vessel with the side tow to have viewed the clear and safe passage before departing and to have made notice on the VHF that he needed clear passage out with his side tow.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Dockhead you might be over thinking this a tad )

OP was setting up to berth on the first finger pier

Focused on assessing wind and current at her maneuvering speed.

Relaxed and Watching for any opposing traffic in front.

Mentally lining up for a 180 and berthing.

Then bozo behind tells OP to speed up, even though he will be going into the same set of Finger piers.

Personally I would have just ignored him and focused on docking my boat.... which was the only safety issue at the moment.

This is on the level of parking at Walmart and you have an impatient driver behind you.

That's not how I understood the situation. I thought they were in a channel, not inside the marina already. But I agree with you - if they were inside the marina, then your analogy fits.

[valhalla360]

Strikes me as neither wanted to be the stand on so they were both looking for justification.
- I'm not buying the safety aspect. Even if you bumpted it up to 4kts, you could always have sounded the before crossing and intersecting fairway. This strikes me as after the fact justification.
- Several times the OP has said "it seemed" like he had enough speed for steerage. You know the old saying about "assume". So while towing offered no special status, he could still claim limited ability to manuver.
- The towing guy clearly could have handled the situation better also to defuse the situation (more polite communications, advance vhf call, etc.).

In terms of who was the stand on, I don't believe we can clearly state it one way or the other as we don't know if he really needed to go faster or if you really couldn't go faster. It appears you came to different conclusions.

Luckily it all turned out fine.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Strikes me as neither wanted to be the stand on so they were both looking for justification.
- I'm not buying the safety aspect. Even if you bumpted it up to 4kts, you could always have sounded the before crossing and intersecting fairway. This strikes me as after the fact justification.
- Several times the OP has said "it seemed" like he had enough speed for steerage. You know the old saying about "assume". So while towing offered no special status, he could still claim limited ability to manuver.
- The towing guy clearly could have handled the situation better also to defuse the situation (more polite communications, advance vhf call, etc.).

In terms of who was the stand on, I don't believe we can clearly state it one way or the other as we don't know if he really needed to go faster or if you really couldn't go faster. It appears you came to different conclusions.

Luckily it all turned out fine.

Stand on is pretty clear if you go with the simple rules... Pelagic makes good points that enough legal "precedent" needs to be factored in...while great...many boaters even licensed captain's 15 minutes after the rules test for their license barely know the rules let alone obscure legal precedents.

So as many have said...you fall back to rule 2 and good seamanship...and from there we have the full rainbow of opinions what is correct.

[BigBoater917]

This was an overtaking situation and the OP was the stand on vessel. There really isn't anything else to consider here. A 40' trawler should easily over power a 20' run about on a hip tow. Both in weight and power, how else does a 75' tug move a 300' barge alongside? If the other guy kept going a put him self in a bad spot that's his issue.
It also seems like we're starting to equate a license with experience or expertise, that's another trap to be avoided.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by BigBoater917

It also seems like we're starting to equate a license with experience or expertise, that's another trap to be avoided.

Wizard: Why, anybody can have a brain. That’s a very mediocre commodity. Every pusillanimous creature that crawls on the earth—or slinks through slimy seas has a brain!

"You don't need a brain. What you need is a diploma!"

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by BigBoater917

This was an overtaking situation and the OP was the stand on vessel. There really isn't anything else to consider here. A 40' trawler should easily over power a 20' run about on a hip tow. Both in weight and power, how else does a 75' tug move a 300' barge alongside? If the other guy kept going a put him self in a bad spot that's his issue.
It also seems like we're starting to equate a license with experience or expertise, that's another trap to be avoided.

The trawler can easily overpower the tow if he is able to use his power. If he's stuck behind a pokey boat going abnormally slow, he may not be able to use that power effectively. In which case, limited ability to manuver comes into play. Then it gets messy regarding if the tow could have delayed his transit (we don't know the underlying situation or when both boats started and their relative positions)

I'm not sure I trust (one way or the other), if the OP was traveling at a reasonable speed for conditions. First, he tried to document how safe he was by going slow then when it was pointed out that the speed suggested was abnormally slow, he changed his story. It may be that he just doesn't know but it certainly leaves it unclear if and how speed was impacting the situation.

I do agree, that having a piece of paper doesn't prove a whole lot of proof of ability by itself.