Restricted in ability to maneuver?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jmorrison146

Some that have read them want to bicker about the difference between "becalmed" and "underway, not making way" (there is none)

Just holding position against a strong current or motoring into wind is not the same as becalmed.

In the first two situations, you are easily able to start making way - just bear off. Not so in the third.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

It does work on larger displacement boats. I can go 1.5 knots sculling my larger displacement boat. Sculling gives great maneuverability with turning strokes and is possible on much larger boats as well.

For a given meaning of "larger"
I don't consider 27ft "larger". To me that is a "small boat".

[David M]

"By the nature of her work" Pleasure boats are not at work. They are not making money at what they are doing. Their "job" is to have fun.

[AKA-None]

It is but you still have the obligation to use all means at your disposal to avoid a collision. Having an engine but not using it is completely different than not having an engine.

[Tempest245]

Originally Posted by roland stockham

As pointed out in another forum, how many boaters today would even know what NUC and RAM shapes are. They wouldn't likely know what an Anchor ball means.


This is a really important point


Who would know? Every commercial operator with a license to operate their vessel. It is part of basic training


Everyone who has done a basic course in pleasure vessel operation or read col regs. Also part of basic training


Anyone with a reasonable amount of diligence it training themselves to operate a vessel without attending formal training sessions.



I could also remind everyone that ignorance is no excuse under the law so if you cause an accident you cannot plead "who knows the law these days" as an excuse. If you doubt this try telling a traffic cop you did not realize it was still illegal to drive a car while drunk and see if they let you off!!!!


Finally remember that under the law there is no distinction between a 'Sunday sailor' in a 26 footer and a super tanker captain, as the skipper of a vessel at sea you hold responsibility for the safe operation of your vessel and adherence to all the requisite regulations (but they are simpler for the 26 footer)

You are preaching to the choir with me. I agree. However, the reality IS a bit different. California for example, where the OP boats, just recently instituted a mandatory course. It's still being phased in and won't cover everyone until 2025.

Texas covers everyone born after 1993 ( 36 years old and under)

Florida is after 1988 Started in 2010.

NY was also late to the table.

The 4 states with the highest number of boaters and fatalities, until recently had the least restrictive education requirements.

Having taught the course in NJ, I came across many students who viewed it as an annoyance, rather than an opportunity to learn. They do what they need to do to pass the course and likely wouldn't pick up a Colregs again.

Of course, that wouldn't include anyone here though. ;-)

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by StuM

For a given meaning of "larger"
I don't consider 27ft "larger". To me that is a "small boat".

The power needed is very roughly related to the boat speed squared at these low speeds since most of the drag is based on wetted surface area. If you have 4 times the surface area you can go half the speed with the same power.

Documents of chinese women sculling 60ft junks 100 years ago carrying a child on their back.

If I put a sculling oar on your boat I could scull .75 knots maybe even 1 knot in bursts, considering that my oar is crude, made of wood and sub optimal in several ways.

This is already enough to avoid collisions, and prevent you from being "becalmed", it's perplexing that almost every cruising boat doesn't carry one.

Originally Posted by AKA-None

It is but you still have the obligation to use all means at your disposal to avoid a collision. Having an engine but not using it is completely different than not having an engine.

Having an engine that you have never used and don't know how or if it will even start is basically the same as not having one in this context.

Claiming that you should have learned to use it before going is along the same lines as requiring you to practice sculling the rudder, or towing your boat with the dingy (rowing) before going.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

If I put a sculling oar on your boat I could scull .75 knots maybe even 1 knot in bursts, considering that my oar is crude, made of wood and sub optimal in several ways.

This is already enough to avoid collisions, and prevent you from being "becalmed", it's perplexing that almost every cruising boat doesn't carry one.

::thread drift::


Why people don't have sculling oars.


1) You cannot buy them except from boutique makers (e.g. Shaw & Tenney). If purchased, they are costly.



2) Most people don't have the skills or access to the raw materials to make their own.


3) Effective use requires some amount of modification of the vessel, such as the addition of a notch in the stern, or an oarlock.


4) Most sailboats have other means of backup propulsion in the event that neither the sails nor the engine will facilitate navigation. Chief among these are: towing the boat using the dinghy (whether its power source might be oars or an engine), or a paddle. Paddles are familiar, work in tight quarters, and do not require modification of the boat.


I would add that sculling technology is not well understood. My boat is similar to yours in many ways, and despite being a boatbuilder I would not know how to add a sculling oar to it. Dimensions of the oar. Balance. Materials. What sort of a lock or notch. Whether and how much it can be offset (to clear the backstay). Technique.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

My sailing boat is never "becalmed". I always am underway under sail power. There is no such thing as 0.000 knots of wind. This gives me right of way over powered vessels in open water.

....

I don't know how to work engines and consider them dangerous, so despite it being in a particular vessel (not my own) I have no possibility of actually using it and don't know if it even works.

That's a shame; all those sailors back before the age of steam would have loved to have known that sailing vessels are never becalmed. Just think of all the lives that might have been saved!

More seriously, if one considers case law (how courts have interpreted the COLREGs), a few themes become apparent:

1. A proper lookout includes not only eyes and ears, but all instruments that are available.
2. Possession of equipment brings with it a duty to see that intelligent and reasonable use is made of it.
3. VHF-assisted collisions are a thing; admiralty courts have expressed concern about the use of VHF, which has resulted in disastrous misunderstandings, rather than simply adhering to the Regs.

As to "right of way", others have already commented on that, so I'll simply toss in a brief rules quiz, where "you" are a in charge of a sailing vessel:

1. You find yourself approaching another vessel from astern. It's not a sailboat, and soon you realize it's a whale watching tour stopped to allow the passengers to watch some nearby cetaceans. Once you note the risk of collision, whose duty is it to give way?
2. You are sculling outside a narrow shipping channel as the winds have suddenly and inexplicably died down. The current, running at 3 knots, is setting you into the channel. You are in 20 feet of water, the channel is 50 feet deep. A containership is also making its way down the channel; what's your responsibility?
3. At night you find yourself approaching a vessel. It shows only a green light over a white light. Whose duty is it to give way?

[Adelie]

Are these questions taken from case law or are you the arbiter of the correct answers?

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Jammer

::thread drift::
Why people don't have sculling oars.
1) You cannot buy them except from boutique makers (e.g. Shaw & Tenney). If purchased, they are costly.
2) Most people don't have the skills or access to the raw materials to make their own.
3) Effective use requires some amount of modification of the vessel, such as the addition of a notch in the stern, or an oarlock.
4) Most sailboats have other means of backup propulsion in the event that neither the sails nor the engine will facilitate navigation.
I would add that sculling technology is not well understood. My boat is similar to yours in many ways, and despite being a boatbuilder I would not know how to add a sculling oar to it. Dimensions of the oar. Balance. Materials. What sort of a lock or notch. Whether and how much it can be offset (to clear the backstay). Technique.

There's a 5th reason: Some of us don't have the physical capability to scull.

-Chris

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Are these questions taken from case law or are you the arbiter of the correct answers?

They all have only one correct answer in accordance with COLREGs, regardless of case law
1. Rule 13
2. Rule 9
3.Rule 26 + Rule 18.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Are these questions taken from case law or are you the arbiter of the correct answers?

As StuM correctly spotted, they are based on black-letter law of the COLREGS themselves; they are not reliant on any subtleties nor do they touch upon issues where there is much debate or ambiguity. (I.e. I am not trying to be clever here.)

Someone familiar with the rules should be able to easily answer them, or be able to determine the answer with a quick look at the rules.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by requiem

As StuM correctly spotted, they are based on black-letter law of the COLREGS themselves; they are not reliant on any subtleties nor do they touch upon issues where there is much debate or ambiguity. (I.e. I am not trying to be clever here.)



Someone familiar with the rules should be able to easily answer them, or be able to determine the answer with a quick look at the rules.

One would think that the plain reading of a rule would be enough but having watched the thread about singlehanders and rule #5 and seen a whole bunch of folks fall on opposite sides of that issue . . . I’m keeping my own counsel on that question.

That said I’ve noted in watching the judiciary lo these many decades that their rulings tend to be in line with the the simple reading of the law occasionally they bring in unexpected rules and without some extant case law I’m disinclined to render a hard and fast. interpretation.

For instance the whale watching boat. They are under obligation thru various treaties to maintain a minimum distance from the whales or to come to a stop. If the whales turn towards watchers and they engage propulsion in reverse to maintain a safe distance they are failing to comply with the requirement to stand on. In the event of a collision the courts will take that into account.

If the whales are to one side of a channel and the watchers are in the middle or near the far side then they may be obstructing the channel regardless of being the overtaken vessel. You vessel can’t pass down the middle due to whales and if you are constrained by draft the their being on the far side obstructs passage.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Adelie

For instance the whale watching boat. They are under obligation thru various treaties to maintain a minimum distance from the whales or to come to a stop. If the whales turn towards watchers and they engage propulsion in reverse to maintain a safe distance they are failing to comply with the requirement to stand on. In the event of a collision the courts will take that into account.

If the whales are to one side of a channel and the watchers are in the middle or near the far side then they may be obstructing the channel regardless of being the overtaken vessel. You vessel can’t pass down the middle due to whales and if you are constrained by draft the their being on the far side obstructs passage.

All of which is totally irrelevant to the question "Once you note the risk of collision, whose duty is it to give way?"



A: You are obliged to give way.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Adelie

One would think that the plain reading of a rule would be enough but having watched the thread about singlehanders and rule #5 and seen a whole bunch of folks fall on opposite sides of that issue . . . I’m keeping my own counsel on that question.

That said I’ve noted in watching the judiciary lo these many decades that their rulings tend to be in line with the the simple reading of the law occasionally they bring in unexpected rules and without some extant case law I’m disinclined to render a hard and fast. interpretation.

For instance the whale watching boat. They are under obligation thru various treaties to maintain a minimum distance from the whales or to come to a stop. If the whales turn towards watchers and they engage propulsion in reverse to maintain a safe distance they are failing to comply with the requirement to stand on. In the event of a collision the courts will take that into account.

If the whales are to one side of a channel and the watchers are in the middle or near the far side then they may be obstructing the channel regardless of being the overtaken vessel. You vessel can’t pass down the middle due to whales and if you are constrained by draft the their being on the far side obstructs passage.

When is close, too close?

This close!

Take a way: Give way, because whales don't always signal their intentions.