Sailing vessel and RORO ship on collision courses - what do you think of the outcome?

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by hafa

Or perhaps a misapprehension.

Yes, a better choice of word

Originally Posted by hafa

The nested conditions reminds me of the three laws of robotics.

Yes, the COLREGS and the Three Laws do have some conceptual similarities when drilled down to basics.

That's why it's rarely necessary to depart from them, because even the eventuality of a departure was considered and is included in the REGS (so a departure from the REGS isn't really a departure because it's expressly allowed - so in fact you are still following the REGS )

For some reason there is this misunderstanding that in some way the COLREGS require you to do something (especially as the standon vessel) really foolish, and life threatening, and nonsensical - but that simply isn't the case.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

Perhaps I am mistaken, (it does happen ) but I thought that the regs required a vessel to avoid a collision if it became apparent that the give way vessel was not in fact meeting their obligations. Looking forward to being educated.

Yes indeed they do. I used the word permit to make it clear that that as the standon vessel it's not necessary to standon, headlong into a collision - that you are allowed (required if a collision is imminent) to take avoiding action at any time.

Because various posts seemed to suggest that the COLREGS don't respect common sense in their requirements for a standon vessel.

But it was clear that was suggested by sailors who haven't actually read them.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by BAD ORCA

well i prefer to stay alive rather than think the world should bend to my will. Not that i disagree with you but thats not reality. which ship do you think wins when both crew think they are right or one is poorly trained, tired or doesnt give a ****?

The ship that "wins" is the one that folows COLREGs and avoids the collision through his own correct actions.



The one that "loses" is the **** **** that makes the winner take action in extremis rather than in an orderly manner.



It requires both vessels to act incorrectly for a collision to occur.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Yesterday we were broad reaching under gennaker and full main (145 TWA on starboard), heading towards our berth from a distant island. About 6 miles short of our destination we had a mid-sized RORO ship (180m long, roll on roll off car carrier) approaching from our windward (starboard) bow on a course that would cross ours at 90 degrees and with a 0.0nm closest point of approach (CPA) according to our AIS. Our boat speeds were roughly equal - 9.5kn for the ship and 9kn for us. Both of us were clearly visible and transmitting information over AIS, us class B and identified as sailing vessel and the RORO class A and commercial vessel.

We were outside of the harbour limits, there was no traffic separation scheme nor channel, and there was clear water all around with no obstructions within 3 miles.

We started watching the ship at about 5 miles distance from us. We determined that we were stand on as a sailing vessel and the RORO give way as a power vessel. The distance between us kept reducing with very little change in relative bearing, with the RORO just slightly bow forward of us. Note that our AIS continued to show 0.0 CPA.

At about 0.5nm separation, with no evident change of course or speed by the RORO, I called them on VHF 16 using their name (from AIS) and identifying ourselves as the sailboat on their port bow and our boat name. I asked what were their intentions for the crossing. A very relaxed voice replied that they were crossing our bow. I replied that we were currently on a collision course near their midpoint and that we would have to turn to starboard to take their stern. The relaxed voice came back and said to carry on, out.

We hardened up about 30 degrees and crossed their wake about 100 metres astern of them, then bore off back to our original course. Had we kept our original course and speed we would have hit them.

WTF?

poor seamanship by the ship. as a master class 1 i understand his reluctance to alter - no obstruction for 3 miles sounds a long way but it isn't for a ship, however this does not excuse him for failing to keep clear

anyway, no collision so no foul except the sour taste

imho you did everything right except i would have started talking on the vhf much earlier. if you do not get a clear agreement that he is give way vessel and what he is going to do to keep clear, play to the gallery ie there are a lot of people listening to ch16 - and it's usually being recorded. state the ship name clearly and repeatedly, and how and why he is failing to adhere to colregs.

a letter to msa might bring some result and who knows, might save another boat some dark night.

cheers,

[sailingabe41ds]

Well....I am at a loss. I am from the States, more specifically California. I have sailed in this area for over thirty years and taught that we give way to all "big commercial vessels" .
No way could I even raise the OP question. Its not even a question. The large commercial vessels would not even respond to any small sailing vessel unless we are dead in the water in front of them and then you may have to use flare guns to get their attention!
Not sure about the rest of the world...but here, tonnage rules and you are just a fly on the wall. LOL if you think any of these big tankers will change course for you.

Abe

[StuM]

Originally Posted by sailingabe41ds

Well....I am at a loss. I am from the States, more specifically California. I have sailed in this area for over thirty years and taught that we give way to all "big commercial vessels" .

And another one appears

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by StuM

And another one appears

Yup

So sad that such a lack of knowledge is being displayed here regarding the most basic fundementals of going out on a recreational boat (let alone a commerical vessel), ie: the rules of the road.

[donradcliffe]

Don't even think about the COLREGS in the Caribbean. The local ships use the tonnage rule religiously. I used to try to follow the COLREGS, but it resulted in too many situations where I had to turn abruptly to avoid the give way vessel. Now I just assume that a) no one is paying attention or b) they are playing by tonnage rules, and make my course adjustment early enough that no one has to worry about rules in the open sea. I no longer worry about poor seamanship from the ship, and I only get on the VHF when he is making unforeseen course changes.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by sailingabe41ds

Well....I am at a loss. I am from the States, more specifically California. I have sailed in this area for over thirty years and taught that we give way to all "big commercial vessels" .
No way could I even raise the OP question. Its not even a question. The large commercial vessels would not even respond to any small sailing vessel unless we are dead in the water in front of them and then you may have to use flare guns to get their attention!
Not sure about the rest of the world...but here, tonnage rules and you are just a fly on the wall. LOL if you think any of these big tankers will change course for you.

Abe

And you teach this??

[sailingabe41ds]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

And you teach this??

I should have been more clear....we are taught in sailing school that these vessels will rarely respond and you stay out of their way...I do not do the teaching. This is nothing to do with "sad" and lack of knowledge. It is just common knowledge that the tankers ignore small vessels. It does not matter what COLREGS states. If you want to stay safe....stay out of their way.
Apparently, according to donradcliffe, sailing in the Caribbean is not much different.

Abe

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by sailingabe41ds

Well....I am at a loss. I am from the States, more specifically California. I have sailed in this area for over thirty years and taught that we give way to all "big commercial vessels" .
No way could I even raise the OP question. Its not even a question. The large commercial vessels would not even respond to any small sailing vessel unless we are dead in the water in front of them and then you may have to use flare guns to get their attention!
Not sure about the rest of the world...but here, tonnage rules and you are just a fly on the wall. LOL if you think any of these big tankers will change course for you.

Abe

Well! We have now sailed over large portions of the globe, including some og the most trafficed areas and also the least trafficed areas. We have had AIS showing very close point of approach with everythign from the world's third largest ship to ramschakle old coasters. In every instance they either had already altered course (assuming they were give way) or when we called readily agreed to a 1 nm CPA.

The only exception to this was the Chinese fishing fleet we encountered between Galapagos and the Marquesas. No amount of calling on the VHF raised a reply - we assume it was becasue they did not speak english.

By not obeying the Colregs, you are throwing an unwanted and errant set of actions into the equation of avoiding a collision - causing only confusion and living up to the title of WAFI.

[sailingabe41ds]

So...I am now a WAFI because I stay out these tankers way knowing that they do not respond to calls and that they almost NEVER change their course for small vessels. We have the same situation as donradcliffe mentioned.
Welcome to my world....

Abe

[Lemsteraak]

OK, I'm confused.

I've always thought that larger vessels have rights because of more limited maneuverability. It has been a very long time but if I remember right COLREGs say that vessels over 20 meters have rights over smaller vessels and vessels under sail. US regs are vessels over 65 foot have rights over smaller vessels.

California, in contested areas like SF Bay you avoid commercial traffic and if you see a freighter you need to already be ranging them because they move deceptively fast.

Wanderbird (now Elbe #5), a famous pilot cutter I remember from SF Bay was involved in a horrible accident with a commercial ship in Germany. She was under sail and a commercial ship didn't change speed or course. A video shows the accident -
https://www.passagemaker.com/technic...erandcommander

Did she have rights being under sail?

[Fore and Aft]

JMH2002 I think you answered your own question when you asked if they had read the Colregs? I never have and doubt they would even stick in my brain if I did. When I see a large commercial vessel I personally slow down or alter course so I cross their stern. This is done long before a collision is going to happen. As far as I am concerned there are no winners if you try and argue “Colregs” with a ship that is ignoring you.
We are ten times more manoeuvrable than a large commercial vessel so why not make their life easier?
Cheers

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Yesterday we were broad reaching under gennaker and full main (145 TWA on starboard), heading towards our berth from a distant island. About 6 miles short of our destination we had a mid-sized RORO ship (180m long, roll on roll off car carrier) approaching from our windward (starboard) bow on a course that would cross ours at 90 degrees and with a 0.0nm closest point of approach (CPA) according to our AIS. Our boat speeds were roughly equal - 9.5kn for the ship and 9kn for us. Both of us were clearly visible and transmitting information over AIS, us class B and identified as sailing vessel and the RORO class A and commercial vessel.

We were outside of the harbour limits, there was no traffic separation scheme nor channel, and there was clear water all around with no obstructions within 3 miles.

We started watching the ship at about 5 miles distance from us. We determined that we were stand on as a sailing vessel and the RORO give way as a power vessel. The distance between us kept reducing with very little change in relative bearing, with the RORO just slightly bow forward of us. Note that our AIS continued to show 0.0 CPA.

At about 0.5nm separation, with no evident change of course or speed by the RORO, I called them on VHF 16 using their name (from AIS) and identifying ourselves as the sailboat on their port bow and our boat name. I asked what were their intentions for the crossing. A very relaxed voice replied that they were crossing our bow. I replied that we were currently on a collision course near their midpoint and that we would have to turn to starboard to take their stern. The relaxed voice came back and said to carry on, out.

We hardened up about 30 degrees and crossed their wake about 100 metres astern of them, then bore off back to our original course. Had we kept our original course and speed we would have hit them.

WTF?

That captain/watchkeeper was a Jerk!
.... but I agree that "intentions call?" should have been made just inside 3nm.

On a situation like that, while further away, I would have called the roro back again on 16 and after identifying ship by name , aspect, cpa and tcpa .....politely.ask Captain/WK to Repeat that his intention stated on vhf chn?? is to stand on and NOT give way?

If he confirms same intention, ask for name and advise this conversation is being recorded.

That should make him sweat a bit[emoji6]

Im quite sure his employers would not be pleased