Restricted in ability to maneuver?

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by grandma

We have them on board our boat. If you don't, it is your responsibility that you have abrogated.

Good for you. You may be one in a hundred that even knows what day signals are. Somehow I doubt the OP does. My point was recreational boaters in general don't.

[Rckjck99]

Originally Posted by Cpt Pat

I've had a discussion here once before about this definition, and the arm-chair admiralty law attorneys screamed at me, and beat me over the head with their letter-of-the-law-not-its-spirit partial readings of the COLREGs.

But I'm going to bring it up again because these two situations have occurred:

1) I'm becalmed. Mine is a sailboat, not an wind assisted motor vessel. So becalmed means: unable (not just "restricted") in my ability to maneuver. I don't carry oars on board to maneuver Viking-style.

2) I'm either hove-to or hanging from a sea anchor in nastiness and unable to turn more than a few degrees either side of my current course.

I was taught that restricted in the ability to maneuver (RAM) was a designation left entirely to the master's discretion. If the vessel can't maneuver normally such that it can't behave the way the masters of other conflicting vessels can reasonably expect, it is RAM. More legalistically:

As defined in Rule 3(g) of the Navigation Rules, a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver (also called a RAM vessel) is one “which from the nature of her work is restricted in her ability to maneuver as required by [the Navigation Rules], and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel.”

That sure seems to be the case if I'm becalmed, hove to, or using a sea anchor. The only available alternative is to scuttle my boat to move vertically (down) out of the way.

The whole point of RAM is to alert other vessels that you can't give way in order to prevent a collision. And I'm not going to sit there, shaking in my boots that I might offend a lawyer, and get crunched because I didn't communicate my situation (not everyone speaks good English on the radio - but they can see a RAM status from a Class A AIS transponder). I doubt the Coast Guard would accept a fear of arm-chair lawyers as an excuse for a collision.

So Sea Lawyers, put on your powdered wigs and black robes and tell me: what other options do you propose? Anti-gravity hovering over the surface, maybe? Shouting "sécurité" on the radio with long descriptions every few minutes when becalmed - for hours on end (until someone mercifully puts a torpedoe into my boat to make me stop)?


(It's easy to spot the folks who have little or no open-sea experience. They don't understand that the rules are solely intended as a practical set of guidelines to prevent collisions -- not to satisfy their pedantic proclivities.)

Brother, you’re NUC, throw up 2 balls, 2 red lights, or 2 Red
lights above your red & green and keep a look out! I literally just earned my OUPV today so it’s all pretty fresh...

[grandma]

The OP posed a question in which he attempted to make the case that a becalmed sailboat with no engine was RAM. He was not - he was NUC.


For practical purposes, it makes no difference which it is, because the action required is the same. The boat/ship in question has to do whatever is necessary to avoid a collision. That's the bottom line.


Since he has little propulsion, it may be more difficult but the obvious answer is to communicate with other vessels in the best way he can so that they know the situation. Lots of good examples in this thread of the way other people have done that in perilous situations.


IMO, there is really no further discussion required. Not that my opinion will keep people from going on discussing this.

[CaptBobR]

Sailboats are never “restricted in their ability to maneuver” you might be under way not making way but that’s not the same.
I once saw a sailor do a Morse code “D” on his sail which indicated maneuvering with difficulty but that is not RIAM
I strongly advise against trying to come up with interpretations on the Rules of the Road. I also advise learning both the International and Inland Rules.

[grandma]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Good for you. You may be one in a hundred that even knows what day signals are. Somehow I doubt the OP does. My point was recreational boaters in general don't.

That's true - and they probably would not know what the signals were if they were displayed.

In practical terms, one just keeps a lookout and tries to avoid collisions with other boats/ships - keeping the rules in mind but neither assuming that the other boats will know the rules, nor that the other person at the wheel will be sober or awake. You can't count on the other boat/ship seeing a sailboat visually or on a radar. Follow the rules as far as possible, but do what you can in advance to get out of the way of the bigger boats (so that it isn't necessary to decide who is the stand-on boat) and try not to run over or hit the smaller ones.

In my experience (which is not that great), ferries, shrimp boats, and gambling boats (that go out beyond the 3 mile limit so that people can gamble and they stay out there all night and then come back to shore) are some of the least likely to pay attention to other boats. Also sailboat racers are pretty much focused on the race. The big ships, and the tow boats are the opposite - they usually know and follow the rules and are helpful.

[Montanan]

A sailboat that is hove-to is a sailboat that is underway making limited way, but is definitely capable of hoving-off and making greater way with very little effort. Thus not RAM.

A sailboat that is moored to a sea anchor is similarly a boat underway making limited way, but which can also readily be unfastened from its mooring and caused to make greater way. Thus not RAM.

The boat is being commanded when it is placed at hove-to and when placed on sea anchor, [or with a drogue be that a speed limiting drogue or a drogue that nearly halts the boat].

Even a boat at temporary dropped ground tackled anchor or fixed ground tackle mooring is not restricted in ability to maneuver and is required to weight anchor or cut anchor in order to make way to avoid a collision / allision when the look-out becomes aware that their anchored / moored boat is at risk of collision / allision. You don't get to just sit there standing-on your rode end blithely observing a boat endangering yours, such as when another boat drags anchor or when a boat enters an anchorage or crosses an anchorage. It should not take one long to completely discharge their rode and raise a jib or motor away, or to just pivot by sail power or motor power while retaining anchor. The thing about collisions is that you only need to miss by a bit, but preferably by much more than just a bit.

[paul2884]

In the case of a sailing boat in a flat calm with no engine you have no way to manoeuvre, wouldn't that be more like "not under command"? Same as a motor vessel with total engine failure.
Heaved to generally is a choice and you do have the ability to get underway and manoeuvre so I wouldn't think this would give you stand on writes

[Auspicious]

I'm late to this party also. I have read the entire thread however although I'll admit that my eyes glazed over a few times.



My overall observation is that some people confuse their own opinion with fact, and that increasing volume equates with truth. Accordingly when I offer my opinion I will attempt to label accordingly.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

However, if you are equipped with an engine and it has broken down, then that is a classic NUC situation and you are justified in showing NUC.

Agreed. A simplification of terms, in no way intended as a replacement for the proper definitions in the rules, is that RAM applies when everything is operating as it should be but maneuvering is difficult. An analogy is that someone morbidly obese is RAM. Even better, a young couple at a boat show--she in high heels--pushing a stroller with an infant and dragging along a dog is RAM. *sigh* NUC is for when something has failed or otherwise gone wrong. If the stroller in the previous analogy loses a wheel they are NUC. *grin*


I have shown RAM a number of times over the years, mostly while towing deployed sensors or vehicles. In addition to the examples cited in the rules, an aircraft carrier in air operations, a survey ship towing side scan sonar, or a research vessel with an ROV deployed are RAM.



No analogy is perfect and mine doesn't really lead to a clear path for the OP with regard to a sailboat with sea anchor or drogue. On the one hand everything is functioning as intended but on the other the weather has "failed." My personal tendency (opinion) would be RAM since everything is on purpose but I wouldn't be upset with someone showing NUC. In either event one is showing that not all is right with the world.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

For example, it is extremely common for tankers which are drifting and waiting for a load to show NUC. This practice has gone on for years. If their engines are shut down intentionally and there is no mechanical fault, there is no justification for NUC status in this case, and there have been a lot of complaints about it, but the practice continues. The explanation given by shipping companies is that although it's not strictly by the book, it's a good practical solution which gives other vessels the correct information they need, to know how to deal with such vessels, so promoting safety in a practical, if not strictly legal way.

I think it is also worth noting that times and systems change. It takes a long time to bring a steam ship on line from 'cold iron' while a diesel can be started pretty quickly. On the other hand, I'm not sure I would consider letting a steam plant go cold while underway (see below) qualifies as good seamanship. When I sailed on the SS New Jersey Sun it took hours to get steam up.

Originally Posted by jmorrison146

When becalmed you are underway, but not making way, neither Not Under Command (NUC) or RAM.

I had to pick someone to respond too - no offense. There is a whole lot of angst here when the definitions are really quite simple. A vessel is underway if not tied to a dock, anchored, grounded, or otherwise moored. A vessel is making way if they significantly moving. The challenge to understanding appears to be that they are not mutually exclusive. A vessel making way is underway. A vessel underway may or may not be making way. All thumbs are fingers but not all fingers are thumbs. Reflect on grammar school discussion of Venn diagrams and subsets.

Originally Posted by CaptBobR

Sailboats are never “restricted in their ability to maneuver” you might be under way not making way but that’s not the same.
I once saw a sailor do a Morse code “D” on his sail which indicated maneuvering with difficulty but that is not RIAM
I strongly advise against trying to come up with interpretations on the Rules of the Road. I also advise learning both the International and Inland Rules.

It took 154 posts to reach this important point, important to the discussion both because of where the OP is and because it goes to a common misuse of vocabulary. Americans, being what we are, often fiddle with international agreements. Accordingly we have our own version called the US Inland rules. They are substantially the same as the COLREGS with some differences, to wit the status "Constrained by Draft" is in the COLREGS but *not* in the Inland Rules. US NOAA charts show a demarcation line inside which Inland Rules are in effect. What makes this more challenging is that most American boaters (power or sail) rant on about COLREGS when they should be talking about the Inland Rules. That they can't get this simple thing correct is sobering. The USCG even publishes https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/navRules/navrules.pdf the rules that explicitly show the differences.



Americans! *grin* Does anyone else remember how long it took us to transition from black cans to green cans? We still can't get cardinal marks right. I digress.



The upshot for me is that whether running before a drogue or lying to a sea anchor the point is to communicate status to others to avoid a collision. In that respect RAM or NUC is a discrimination that makes little if any difference. Class B AIS makes no discrimination - you are simply underway (see above). Class A AIS for those so outfit makes a discrimination but it is not clear to me that the watchstander on another vessel would act differently on the basis of that information in the OP scenario. There is no substitute for using the VHF to cut to the chase.



Oh, a pet peeve. Please watch verb conjugation. You do NOT 'hove to.' You heave to. I will heave to. I am hove to. At the yacht club bar, you decided to heave to or you were hove to. Vocabulary and grammar are important. To use words incorrectly while dissecting the COLREGS and splitting the hairs on angels dancing on the head of a pin does nothing for credibility. Jeepers.

[CaptJPMcGuire]

[QUOTE=Cpt Pat;2954788]I've had a discussion here once before about this definition, and the arm-chair admiralty law attorneys screamed at me, and beat me over the head with their letter-of-the-law-not-its-spirit partial readings of the COLREGs.

But I'm going to bring it up again because these two situations have occurred:

1) I'm becalmed. Mine is a sailboat, not an wind assisted motor vessel. So becalmed means: unable (not just "restricted") in my ability to maneuver. I don't carry oars on board to maneuver Viking-style.

2) I'm either hove-to or hanging from a sea anchor in nastiness and unable to turn more than a few degrees either side of my current course.

Never mind the whole discussion about NUC or RAM ---KISS---Drop your anchor-all the rode out! Display an all around white ---and hit the sack!.
So what if your anchor drags --then your either NUC or RAM you have NO liability !
Of course you must log and claim that you anchored in good water over good ground and tested the anchors holding g before you dragged 100 miles to sea!

[Happ]

(It's easy to spot the folks who have little or no open-sea experience. They don't understand that the rules are solely intended as a practical set of guidelines to prevent collisions -- not to satisfy their pedantic proclivities.)

You are absolutely wrong on your last statement! The rules are there to protect everyone from harm. What you are forgetting is there are always 2 boats involved. In you scenario about being becalmed with your sails up and no auxiliary the other vessel if powered needs to keep clear. If he is another sailboat he’s not moving either so not a problem. If he is a larger sailboat that is getting wind then he is the overtaking vessel and must keep clear. Period.

In your second case if you under drogue or hove to you must maintain a proper watch. Then you can notify anyone of your situation via VHF. Which is required to be on anytime you are underway.

[exMaggieDrum]

Around the Puget Sound the USCG will stop vessels (power, sail, whatever) and do safety inspections (and also look for illegal activities). I am sure they do so in most common shipping and sailing bodies of water in the US. I think Canada does and I know Australia and New Zealand do.


The USCG is pretty strict and they will normally write up a deficiency on a boat which does not meet safety standards. A friend of mine and his wife were sailing on the East Coast going north and they were stopped for an inspection. They were written up for not having a waste disposal placard displayed. The USCG insisted they head to port and get this corrected before continuing their voyage even if it meant going south to the nearest anchorage or dock. They talked them out of that promising to correct it at their next port.


I have spoken and know of many other vessels here who have been inspected with similar results. If you are in port they will basically say you cannot get underway without bringing their vessel up to compliance with these arcane rules (many of which have nothing to do with the COLREGs.


I have never heard of them giving a boat a deficiency because they did not carry a sculling oar and the "proper" means of utilizing it. Nor I have I heard of them writing up a boat because it was not carrying ALL the various balls and lights as would be used for RAM and NUC, except for the little emergency flags (orange background with a black circle) and up to date flares and signaling devices. So it would seem that they don't think not carrying all the black balls and red signals is higher priority than having the waste/oil disposal placards and "standard" flares and other basic signaling devices on board.



Why they do the one and not the other is unknown to me and others in my sailing circle. Seems like this would be a higher priority than the placards.



Just a comment. Personally I have carried large signal flags and flares both inshore and offshore but have not had the balls or a means to hoist red lights separate from my navigation and anchor lights. Australia and New Zealand in my experience and from readings are much stricter in general but I do not know if they require recreational boats to carry the balls/triangles and special lights.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by exMaggieDrum

Around the Puget Sound the USCG will stop vessels (power, sail, whatever) and do safety inspections (and also look for illegal activities). I am sure they do so in most common shipping and sailing bodies of water in the US. I think Canada does and I know Australia and New Zealand do.


The USCG is pretty strict and they will normally write up a deficiency on a boat which does not meet safety standards. A friend of mine and his wife were sailing on the East Coast going north and they were stopped for an inspection. They were written up for not having a waste disposal placard displayed. The USCG insisted they head to port and get this corrected before continuing their voyage even if it meant going south to the nearest anchorage or dock. They talked them out of that promising to correct it at their next port.


I have spoken and know of many other vessels here who have been inspected with similar results. If you are in port they will basically say you cannot get underway without bringing their vessel up to compliance with these arcane rules (many of which have nothing to do with the COLREGs.


I have never heard of them giving a boat a deficiency because they did not carry a sculling oar and the "proper" means of utilizing it. Nor I have I heard of them writing up a boat because it was not carrying ALL the various balls and lights as would be used for RAM and NUC, except for the little emergency flags (orange background with a black circle) and up to date flares and signaling devices. So it would seem that they don't think not carrying all the black balls and red signals is higher priority than having the waste/oil disposal placards and "standard" flares and other basic signaling devices on board.



Why they do the one and not the other is unknown to me and others in my sailing circle. Seems like this would be a higher priority than the placards.



Just a comment. Personally I have carried large signal flags and flares both inshore and offshore but have not had the balls or a means to hoist red lights separate from my navigation and anchor lights. Australia and New Zealand in my experience and from readings are much stricter in general but I do not know if they require recreational boats to carry the balls/triangles and special lights.

Hmm, does that have a potential double entendre?

Just wondering.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

I'm late to this party also. I have read the entire thread however although I'll admit that my eyes glazed over a few times.

. . .

Oh, a pet peeve. Please watch verb conjugation. You do NOT 'hove to.' You heave to. I will heave to. I am hove to. At the yacht club bar, you decided to heave to or you were hove to. Vocabulary and grammar are important. To use words incorrectly while dissecting the COLREGS and splitting the hairs on angels dancing on the head of a pin does nothing for credibility. Jeepers.

Well while we are discussing pets, when my pet cat, called Peeve, gets sick aboard my boat, it gacks and heaves too and that seems to often correspond to adverse sea conditions when our boat is often lying hove to. So we heave to and hove to, too. Sometime we all become sea sick and join in heaving too and when we remark after the fact about our experiences we admit to having hove too. Nothing like heaving your past meal's particles.

But then while we are on to the subject of grammar, I recall learning that a preposition is also a poor choice of word to end a sentence with.

[Bycrick]

That, sir, is errant pedantry, up with which we shall not put. — Churchill

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Well while we are discussing pets, when my pet cat, called Peeve, gets sick aboard my boat, it gacks and heaves too and that seems to often correspond to adverse sea conditions when our boat is often lying hove to. So we heave to and hove to, too. Sometime we all become sea sick and join in heaving too and when we remark after the fact about our experiences we admit to having hove too. Nothing like heaving your past meal's particles.

But then while we are on to the subject of grammar, I recall learning that a preposition is also a poor choice of word to end a sentence with.

Loved it, thanks!