Is Singlehanding >24 Hrs. Morally Wrong?

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

One on the boat, one for the life raft, one on the ipad, one a friend gave me on departing and the crew brought their own It is important to know where you are.

So your interpretation of the rule says the skipper has no discretion and all available means have to be used all the time.

Just because they are available doesn't mean they are needed.
I argue that avoiding collision means the skipper has to use all available means where they are useful or needed including his/her brains to "keep proper lookout at all times" and it includes looking after the health of the crew which could mean all going down below and closing the hatch.

Don’t be ridiculous. You’re just trying to be argumentative and know very well that I’m not suggesting that you must use every electronic gadget available all day long when they’re not needed. But whoever is on watch must use their eyes and ears and brain (to process what their eyes and ears and electronics are telling him) all day long, and they also must use all other available aids that are appropriate in the prevailing circumstances to make a full appraisal of the situation and risk of collision. In other words, you are required to use all available electronic aids only as needed (no requirement to run radar 24/7 in good visibility) but you must keep someone on watch using their eyes and ears and brain at all times. Rule 5 doesn’t give you the option of using your brain to decide to stop using your eyes and ears. Doing that might seem like a good thing for your crew but it violates rule 5 and it also turns your vessel into a moving hazard to navigation that all other nearby vessels will now have to attempt to avoid on their own because you have abdicated your half of the responsibility you are required to bear for ensuring separation from them.

If you, as skipper, find yourself in a situation where everyone aboard is so fatigued that no one can function well enough to stand watch, then I agree that you have no choice but to violate rule 5 and rest your crew until they are ready to resume their watchkeeping responsibilities. During this time when no one is keeping a proper watch, in order to minimize damage your vessel might do to others, while not addressed in the Colregs, it makes sense to me that you use AIS and radar alarms and use bright lights to make yourself as visible as possible, and slow down to slowest possible speed or heave to. After such an occurrence where you were forced to violate the Colregs, before again going to sea I would hope that you would asses the circumstances that led to it and make whatever adjustments necessary to ensure it doesn’t happen again. That might mean changing how you manage your crew or it might mean choosing to wait for better weather conditions or it might mean adding additional crew or it might mean modifying your vessel so it’s easier for off watch crew to get necessary rest. But if you choose to go to sea it’s your responsibility to abide by all the Colregs to the maximum extent possible and if you are underway with nobody, at a minimum, using their eyes and ears to detect other vessels and avoid collisions, you are intentionally violating rule 5.

[swordds]

So should single handed ocean races and single handed cruising simply be banned? It was a fully crewed Volvo ocean racer that collided with a Chinese fishing vessel killing a fisherman. Hopefully no single handed sailor would be crazy enough to race through such a crowded area on a stormy night. As a single handed sailor one of the things that most attracts me to sailing in the U. S. Is that the nanny state hasn’t yet regulated most of the fun out of it.

[TeddyDiver]

Lucky me still having both hands

Claim:
Being anal is not the point of Colregs and even suggesting it's illegal to singlehand is moraly wrong.

and why:
Before anything else everybody should themself behave in a way not being a nuisance or a danger to other traffic and worry less what-if's of others as long they act accordingly. If not then there's a reason to complain and judge the particular vessel in question.
Every vessel (and skipper) make a sometimes a violation against the rules, if not yet then it's coming eventually..

Teddy

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

Lucky me still having both hands



Claim:

Being anal is not the point of Colregs and even suggesting it's illegal to singlehand is moraly wrong.



and why:

Before anything else everybody should themself behave in a way not being a nuisance or a danger to other traffic and worry less what-if's of others as long they act accordingly. If not then there's a reason to complain and judge the particular vessel in question.

Every vessel (and skipper) make a sometimes a violation against the rules, if not yet then it's coming eventually..



Teddy

I agree that being anal isn’t the point of the Colregs, and instead their aim is to provide a set of guidelines or rules that will keep everyone as safe as possible.

You’re also right that everyone eventually will violate the rules in one way or the other, but most skippers don’t go to sea planning to break the rules every day they are at sea.

I personally wish the Colregs would spell out some guidance regarding just what a singlehanded sailor should do when he inevitably feels exhausted, both so he’d know what he must do in order to remain legal and others would know what to expect from singlehanders and everyone would be safer. By not addressing the issue of singlehanded or short handed crews crossing oceans they are putting these people in a position where they can’t possibly comply with rule 5 and other vessels see them pop up on their radar and expect them to give way but they don’t because they are asleep and that puts a greater burden on the crewed vessel that must accept 100% of the responsibility to deconflict them. Some folks think singlehanders shouldn’t exist at all and others think it’s ok for them to blast off in racing sailboats that sail at speeds most of our cruisers would have trouble avoiding if one was bearing down on us and some of us think that singlehanders owe it to everyone else to at least make themselves highly visible while sleeping and slow down to minimize the damage if they do hit someone. But I wish there was guidance that recognized the reality of singlehanders and get us all on the same page so we’d know what to reasonably expect from them and they’d know what was expected of them.

[Dockhead]

Someone further up the thread pointed out that this thread is about the moral, not legal side of the question. Indeed this discussion has pulled the thread off topic. So I started a new one, in case anyone is interested in continuing the discussion.


It's here: http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...94#post2698294



I answered some of the posts in this thread, on that one.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I agree that being anal isn’t the point of the Colregs, and instead their aim is to provide a set of guidelines or rules that will keep everyone as safe as possible.

You’re also right that everyone eventually will violate the rules in one way or the other, but most skippers don’t go to sea planning to break the rules every day they are at sea.

I personally wish the Colregs would spell out some guidance regarding just what a singlehanded sailor should do when he inevitably feels exhausted, both so he’d know what he must do in order to remain legal and others would know what to expect from singlehanders and everyone would be safer. By not addressing the issue of singlehanded or short handed crews crossing oceans they are putting these people in a position where they can’t possibly comply with rule 5 and other vessels see them pop up on their radar and expect them to give way but they don’t because they are asleep and that puts a greater burden on the crewed vessel that must accept 100% of the responsibility to deconflict them. Some folks think singlehanders shouldn’t exist at all and others think it’s ok for them to blast off in racing sailboats that sail at speeds most of our cruisers would have trouble avoiding if one was bearing down on us and some of us think that singlehanders owe it to everyone else to at least make themselves highly visible while sleeping and slow down to minimize the damage if they do hit someone. But I wish there was guidance that recognized the reality of singlehanders and get us all on the same page so we’d know what to reasonably expect from them and they’d know what was expected of them.

Yes, and I understand the dilemma but in reality it's like comply, don't comply, comply and so on. And that includes both singlehanders and crewed vessels, as dogwatch takes a pee or reads a book or singlehander taking a quarter hour nap but nobody else can determine what's the appropriate time to be "not actively in watch" with all means becouse it allways depends of the circumstances. The point is everybody does this one way or another but it's left for the individual mariner to decide what's prudent and what are the risks involved. IMO anyone claiming singlehanding being too risky should improve their own watchkeeping abilities as in a collision the quilty one is looking back at you in the mirror.
As has been said before nobody is suggesting sleeping close to coastal or more crowded waters but on the open ocean where even abandoned boats float free for months or longer without nobody knowing nothing about them. If there's something to worry about I'd suggest to worry about floating containers which are more numerous than sleeping singlehanders and much more difficult to spot.

Teddy

PS. In the end it boils down in the outcome, no incident no violation.

[James S]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

Where is my rock?

Me too..

[ArmyDaveNY]

I think we have been missing something in this discussion and that is whether the vessel is under way. I don't think anyone would argue that one needs to keep a lookout when anchored. Certainly one still has to monitor things so make sure they are not dragging and so on, but I don't think anyone would expect the vessel to have a lookout while anchored.


If we accept this, then the next logical step is to consider what Dockhead pointed out earlier. There is nothing wrong with taking a nap under certain circumstances, such as not in shipping lanes, not in well traveled areas, away from shore, etc. If you're not underway, does this mitigate your need for a lookout? In particular, if you are 1,500 NM from shore, and are hove to, and in the middle of nowhere, does this change things?

I would think that a board of inquiry would consider that and assign either no blame or more likely reduce the amount of blame it assigns to you if there were an incident.

[AKA-None]

So from some perspective does this mean it’s morally wrong for a deaf sailor to stand watch by themselves? Not asking about legally as that is now a different thread, but morally? And I’m not trying to be difficult but I want to know if I and my friends now have a moral obligation to have multiple hearing watch standers on the boat. Sufficient to cover sleep and illness or injury?
Do we now become passengers?

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

So from some perspective does this mean it’s morally wrong for a deaf sailor to stand watch by themselves? Not asking about legally as that is now a different thread, but morally? And I’m not trying to be difficult but I want to know if I and my friends now have a moral obligation to have multiple hearing watch standers on the boat. Sufficient to cover sleep and illness or injury?
Do we now become passengers?

Well, let's start with what is the moral obligation in the first place. To avoid exposing others to unreasonable risks? Say?



A deaf sailor certainly can't perform the "hearing" part of a proper lookout, and wouldn't be allowed to be a lookout on a commercial vessel. If you take watchkeeping seriously, you might consider leaving a deaf person alone on watch to be suboptimal. Whether it's actually immoral or not, people will have different opinions about. I would, personally, stick with "suboptimal".


As to multiple watchkeepers -- this is a much discussed topic on commercial vessels. There are many cases which held that one person on the bridge steering the vessel and at the same time performing the lookout function was not adequate under the particular circumstances. There is a MGN about manning requirements for lookout, for UK flag vessels. I've never heard of its being actually required anywhere on pleasure vessels, but the fact that it often is required on commercial vessels, should be a clue, as to the challenge of properly running any vessel, including a pleasure vessel, with only one person on board.

[AKA-None]

So morally I would need a minimum of two other people assuming no one is incapacitated.

Interesting topic that I hadn’t considered previously.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

So morally I would need a minimum of two other people assuming no one is incapacitated.

Interesting topic that I hadn’t considered previously.

Here you go.....
This I consider really immoral!
The mating habits of a virgin sailboat with a power boat being displayed in public.

I also suspect that the little motorsailor that is conceived..... will be really ugly!

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Here you go.....
This I consider really immoral!
The mating habits of a virgin sailboat with a power boat being displayed in public.

I also suspect that the little motorsailor that is conceived..... will be really ugly!
Attachment 175664

Must happen a lot more than most people realize because there are an awful lot of these around:

[john61ct]

Great for a quick trip to Cuba

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Must happen a lot more than most people realize because there are an awful lot of these around:

Yes it does, I had one of those mate with an old classic schooner fishing rig and I got my stargazer [emoji4]