Sailboat Right of Way

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

And what would that difference be, exactly?

Rule 8(f):

(i) A vessel which, by any of these Rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or the safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this latter obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by the rules of this Part.
(iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this Part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision.

Any questions?

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

We haven't actually heard from the OP whether it was a narrow channel or not. And rule 9 does not make sailboats the give-way vessel in a narrow channel - the sailboat is required to not impede; in a steering and sailing situation the normal stand-on/give-way assignments are in effect. It should also be noted that a 45 ft MV, being under 20m, is also required to not impede.

This rather critical lack of information is why I won't argue a hypothetical.

We are likely all picturing different scenarios here, obviating the quest for "one right answer" in accordance with the Rules.


For instance, I am picturing the very busy, quite restrictive channel next to my club. My YC is immediately beside the Western Gap to Toronto's Inner Harbour. (TORONTO WESTERN GAP CRUISING CANADA canadian boating,cruising navigation harbors) I would guess it's about 500 metres long and about 90 m. wide. There are shoaling parts at the south west corner. While it is no longer a particularly commercial entrance (that would be the much larger Eastern Gap), there is cruise boat (up to 200 feet) traffic, a cross-channel ferry to the airport, and it can have up to 50 sailboats and power boats in it on busy summer weekend at a time.

There is a six knot speed restriction, and, if you have any sort of motor, you must use it. Nonetheless, there are kayaks, canoes, sailing dinghies and every type of small craft. The western end is subject to focusing waves from the prevailing wind, and swells of four to six feet (up against the steel and concrete walls) are not uncommon.

Throw in the roar of nearby commuter airplanes, and it's a recipe for disaster.

Nonetheless, I see full sized sailboats (35 feet or better), which I strongly suspect have working inboards, randomly making short tacks, wall to wall, on periods of low(er) traffic in this channel. The ferry skippers make a point of blowing air horns and charging out of their slips at points seemingly designed to inconvenience sailors, but that's another story. The sailing sailboats will occasionally screw up or otherwise imperil themselves in front of some large steel booze cruiser, and they don't understand that PHYSICS CAN'T READ THE RULES, and no, a 1,000 ton barque isn't going to swerve in a channel only five times its beam.

Anyway, a "fairway" half a mile wide is quite different from an excavated trench with plate steel sides. How I would approach the situation from either side would be far different, and, as has been pointed out, would be better resolved by actions designed to avoid the application of the Rules at all.

[daddle]

In the court or in the protest room the jury cannot fabricate facts. The OP here has given us precious little, and poorly communicated at that. OP said both fairway and channel. Nothing about draft constraints. Nothing about width.

It may have been a fairway in a marina. Docks both sides. Narrow. The OP had no business overtaking no matter what the rules. What did he hope to do with the 60 seconds he hoped to save? Or maybe it wasn't. Makes for the endless argument we have here.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Rule 8(f):


Any questions?

None at all. You cannot be the stand-on vessel and yet be obligated to not impede. All the rules which which establish who is the stand-on vessel and who is the give-way vessel say "shall not impede" and "shall keep clear" -- that is how the Colregs define a give-way vessel. They nowhere say, for example, that a sailboat under sail is the stand-on vessel when encountering a motor vessel. They say "a power-driven vessel underway shall keep out of the way of . . . a sailing vessel". That means that unless some other rule applies, a sailing vessel under sail is the stand-on vessel when encountering a motor vessel.

A sailboat under sail is the give-way vessel with regard to a vessel proceeding in a channel which cannot safely navigate outside a channel, and certain other cases we have discussed.

Rule 8 says the opposite of what you think. 8(f)(i) says that if you are obligated not to impede, then you have to take early action to allow the other vessel to pass by -- that is, if you are obligated not to impede, then you are the give-way vessel. 8(f)(iii) does not make a vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" the stand-on vessel. It means that the stand-on vessel is also obligate to take action to avoid a collision if necessary -- if the give-way vessel fails to take action or if the action is insufficient. It also means that the stand-on vessel is obligated to follow Rules 8 (a) through (d) which govern the way in which you take action, if you take action.

Rule 16 defines what is a "give-way vessel" and what a give-way vessel is supposed to do. It says "Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear." That is, if according to the rules you are supposed to keep clear or not impede, it is you who has to initiate action -- you are the give-way vessel.

Rule 17 defines being a "stand-on vessel" and what the stand-on vessel is supposed to do. It says that if you encounter another vessel, and that vessel is supposed to keep out of your way according to the rules, then you are supposed to hold your course and speed to give the other vessel a chance to manuever -- holding your course and speed is "standing on", by definition.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by daddle

In the court or in the protest room the jury cannot fabricate facts. The OP here has given us precious little, and poorly communicated at that. OP said both fairway and channel. Nothing about draft constraints. Nothing about width.

It may have been a fairway in a marina. Docks both sides. Narrow. The OP had no business overtaking no matter what the rules. What did he hope to do with the 60 seconds he hoped to save? Or maybe it wasn't. Makes for the endless argument we have here.

Indeed, but that doesn't stop us from speculating. Based on the same assumptions, we still have people coming up with different answers. So the discussion is useful to deepen our knowledge of the Colregs.

If the OP was not in a narrow channel, then he was not the stand-on vessel. He did say that the shore was quite close -- it sounds like a narrow channel. But if not -- then he was the give-way vessel.

If the OP was overtaking the other boat -- that is, if he was approaching from more then 22 1/2 degrees from abaft the beam of the other vessel -- then likewise, he was the give-way vessel and should have kept clear of the sailboat. Rule 13 trumps all other rules in Part B, Sections I & II, which is pretty much all of the rules governing who is the give-way vessel.

An interesting question is what the Colregs would say about a case where a sailboat tacked in front of another vessel, suddenly putting itself in a position where the other vessel is overtaking as defined in the rules. It seem wrong to me -- creating a risk of collision with the tack -- but I don't think the rules prohibit that.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by daddle

In the court or in the protest room the jury cannot fabricate facts. The OP here has given us precious little, and poorly communicated at that. OP said both fairway and channel. Nothing about draft constraints. Nothing about width.

It may have been a fairway in a marina. Docks both sides. Narrow. The OP had no business overtaking no matter what the rules. What did he hope to do with the 60 seconds he hoped to save? Or maybe it wasn't. Makes for the endless argument we have here.

OK, so do we all now agree that IF the OP was indeed in a narrow channel, and IF the OP was approaching the other boat from less than 22.5 degrees, that he was the stand-on vessel? The rules are very clear about this; I hope no one is confused any more.

[markpierce]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

OK, so do we all now agree that IF the OP was indeed in a narrow channel, and IF the OP was approaching the other boat from less than 22.5 degrees, that he was the stand-on vessel? The rules are very clear about this; I hope no one is confused any more.

Not at all. Have no reason to believe both vessels were or were not constrained by draft, but the reasonable assumption is that both were constrained in their maneuverability due to their draft, even presuming the channel was narrow enough to be constraining. So, I see it only as a sailboat vs power boat issue so the sailboat was privileged unless it had been overtaking the powerboat, which it was not.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by markpierce

Not at all. Have no reason to believe both vessels were or were not constrained by draft, but the reasonable assumption is that both were constrained in their maneuverability due to their draft, even presuming the channel was narrow enough to be constraining. So, I see it only as a sailboat vs power boat issue so the sailboat was privileged unless it had been overtaking the powerboat, which it was not.

I think you are confusing Rule 18 (d) -- vessel constrained by draft -- with Rule 9 -- narrow channel. We are not talking about Rule 18 (d), we are talking about Rule 9, which says that "a vessel of less than 20 meter or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel which can navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway."

I think that the OP said that he could not sail out of the channel, which would be a common situation for a largish cruising sailboat navigating in a channel.

If you like, we can add one more assumption: the OP was motoring in a channel, and because of his draft he could not safely operate outside of it.

If that was not the case, then the OP was NOT the stand-on vessel. But do we agree that if it was the case, then the OP WAS the stand-on vessel?

It's irrelevant, by the way, whether or not the smaller boat could or could not operate outside the channel. Rule 9 applies to ANY sailing vessel under sail. If he has tacking back and forth across the channel, a situation I have been in myself in Poole Harbor, it is likely that he was not so constrained; otherwise he would not likely have enough room to tack. But again -- that's not relevant.

[markpierce]

No, Dockhead. Both vessels are under (well under) twenty meters in length, and you're still presuming the smaller vessel wasn't also constrained by the channel.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by markpierce

No, Dockhead. Both vessels are under (well under) twenty meters in length, and you're still presuming the smaller vessel wasn't also constrained by the channel.

I stand corrected -- if the smaller vessel was also constrained, then the OP ALSO has a Rule 9 obligation, so neither is burdened by the other by Rule 9. You're right!

[markpierce]

Thank you, Dockhead. I was getting ....

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You cannot be the stand-on vessel and yet be obligated to not impede.

Maybe you should re-read Rule 8(f) - it says quite clearly that one can be stand-on and still be obligated to not impede. In fact that's the whole point of rule 8(f).

All the rules which which establish who is the stand-on vessel and who is the give-way vessel say "shall not impede" and "shall keep clear" -- that is how the Colregs define a give-way vessel.

Rule 16 defines what is a "give-way vessel" and what a give-way vessel is supposed to do. It says "Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear." That is, if according to the rules you are supposed to keep clear or not impede, it is you who has to initiate action -- you are the give-way vessel.

Rule 16 - Action by the give-way vessel is in Section II - Conduct of vessels in sight of one another. Rules 9 and 10 are in section I - conduct of vessels in any condition of visibility. Give-way (rule 16) and stand-on (rule 17) are two conditions that only apply when vessels are within sight of each other; not impede applies in all conditions of visibility. That is but the first difference.

They nowhere say, for example, that a sailboat under sail is the stand-on vessel when encountering a motor vessel. They say "a power-driven vessel underway shall keep out of the way of . . . a sailing vessel". That means that unless some other rule applies, a sailing vessel under sail is the stand-on vessel when encountering a motor vessel.

And what does rule 17(a)(i) say? Where one one of the vessels is the give-way vessel, the other is the stand-on vessel. You can't omit rules as you please; they are meant to be taken together.

A sailboat under sail is the give-way vessel with regard to a vessel proceeding in a channel which cannot safely navigate outside a channel, and certain other cases we have discussed.

No, it is not - it is required to not impede; so long as the large vessel is not impeded, it shall stay out of the way of the sailboat.

Rule 8 says the opposite of what you think. 8(f)(i) says that if you are obligated not to impede, then you have to take early action to allow the other vessel to pass by -- that is, if you are obligated not to impede, then you are the give-way vessel. 8(f)(iii) does not make a vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" the stand-on vessel. It means that the stand-on vessel is also obligate to take action to avoid a collision if necessary -- if the give-way vessel fails to take action or if the action is insufficient. It also means that the stand-on vessel is obligated to follow Rules 8 (a) through (d) which govern the way in which you take action, if you take action.

Rule 8 is pretty clear. 8(f)(iii) makes a vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" the give-way vessel. Best you read it again and don't presume what I think.

Rule 17 defines being a "stand-on vessel" and what the stand-on vessel is supposed to do. It says that if you encounter another vessel, and that vessel is supposed to keep out of your way according to the rules, then you are supposed to hold your course and speed to give the other vessel a chance to manuever -- holding your course and speed is "standing on", by definition.

A vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" is not required to hold it's course and speed - there is nowhere in the rules that require it to. It is not, therefore, a 'stand-on vessel'.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Maybe you should re-read Rule 8(f) - it says quite clearly that one can be stand-on and still be obligated to not impede. In fact that's the whole point of rule 8(f).

Sorry, but it says nothing of the kind. It says:

"(iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision."

It says nothing about not impeding. It says this vessel -- the stand-on vessel by definition -- is not relieved of its obligations under other rules of the part just because it is the stand-on vessel.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Rule 16 - Action by the give-way vessel is in Section II - Conduct of vessels in sight of one another. Rules 9 and 10 are in section I - conduct of vessels in any condition of visibility. Give-way (rule 16) and stand-on (rule 17) are two conditions that only apply when vessels are within sight of each other; not impede applies in all conditions of visibility. That is but the first difference..

Originally Posted by Lodesman

And what does rule 17(a)(i) say? Where one one of the vessels is the give-way vessel, the other is the stand-on vessel. You can't omit rules as you please; they are meant to be taken together..

17(a)(i) says "Where one of the vessels is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed." It means that the vessel which is not required to keep out of the way is supposed to hold course and speed -- that is what "standing on" means -- holding course and speed. If you encounter a vessel which is required to keep out of your way, you are the stand-on vessel. That is what I have been saying.

An obligation to stay out of the way of another vessel, and an obligation not to impede another vessel, both make you the give-way vessel. How can you "not impede" without giving way? How do you imagine standing-on while not impeding? It's a contradiction.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

No, it is not - it is required to not impede; so long as the large vessel is not impeded, it shall stay out of the way of the sailboat. .

This is illogical. If the large vessel is required to maneuver to avoid, this is the very definition of being impeded. In order to "not impede", you have to give way and stay out of the way of.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Rule 8 is pretty clear. 8(f)(iii) makes a vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" the give-way vessel. Best you read it again and don't presume what I think. .

Nothing whatsover about giving-way is said in 8(f)(iii). Rule 8(f)(iii) reminds the skipper of the stand-on vessel that even though he is the stand-on vessel, he still must:

Keep a lookout (Rule 5)
Maintain a safe speed (Rule 6)
Be aware of a risk of collision (Rule 7)
Take avoiding action, if it is taken, in particular ways (Rule 8)

It does not change the status of the stand-on vessel as the stand-on vessel, and it does not mean that the stand-on vessel suddenly becomes the give-way vessel in Rule 9. It says "comply with the rules". It does not change them.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

A vessel "the passage of which is not to be impeded" is not required to hold it's course and speed - there is nowhere in the rules that require it to. It is not, therefore, a 'stand-on vessel'.

To force another vessel to maneuver to avoid a collision because you are standing-on is to impede it. What else does the word "impede" mean? Impede means to hinder, interfere, get in the way of. You are right that the obligation to stand-on of Rule 17 does not apply to Rule 9. But just because you are not required to stand-on does not mean you do not have the right to stand on -- this is a logical fallacy.

Wherever the Rules say that you are supposed to stay out of the way of another vessel, or that you are supposed to not impede another vessel, you are the give-way vessel.

[HappySeagull]

"A sailboat under sail is the give-way vessel with regard to a vessel proceeding in a channel which cannot safely navigate outside a channel, and certain other cases we have discussed."
Huh?
Assume channel was "Fairly Wide" as OP said in the very first post.That's enough.Room to sail says it all.If he'd had other excuses,I'm sure he would have dragged them in by now..Constraint of draft don't apply in boats certainly not between any two sail-BOATS with one motoring.The intent of your quote is to keep sailboats clear of SHIPS in a general way but the captain of an excessively deep boat must be extra careful- that's all.We can't all stop and compare drafts.

[capn_billl]

Rule 17 defines being a "stand-on vessel" and what the stand-on vessel is supposed to do. It says that if you encounter another vessel, and that vessel is supposed to keep out of your way according to the rules, then you are supposed to hold your course and speed to give the other vessel a chance to manuever -- holding your course and speed is "standing on", by definition.

This says it all. Whether the sailboat was the standon vessel or not. If it was the stand on vessel, it is required to maintain course and speed allowing the power boat to pass by its stern. If it is the give way vessel it has the obligation to keep clear. Either way altering course to turn an overtaking situation into a crossing situation is a clear violation of the rules.

The basics of this situation is as the power boat is approaching the sailboat in a channel, the sailboat is tacking away from the powerboat, who then incorrectly assumes the sailboat will maintain course and speed until clear of the overtaking situation. Both are past the no wake zone and have accelerated to full cruising speed, (30knts for the power boat, 1-5 knts for the sailboat beating into the wind). The sailboat then tacks, changing course bringing it into a collision course with the power boat who then has to make an emergency stop to keep from running over the sailboat who suddenly turned under his bow. This does NOT constitute standing on under COLREGS. Nor does it constitute giving way. COLREGS specifically states neither boat in a close quarters situation has the right to turn into the other vessels course, thus changing a close quarters situation in to a near collision.