Colregs Etiquette

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by GrowleyMonster

So, I have been doing some reading and thinking about this.

When you are docking a power driven vessel and you take the engine out of gear, do you stop being a power driven vessel for that moment? That would be a ludicrous claim.

We are moving into lawyers slicing and dicing the meaning of terms.

If you are coasting into the slip, it could be argued, that the boats motion is a direct result of the propulsion generated by the prop and that makes your motion the direct result of being under power.

Of course, the other boat may not be aware that you stopped using the prop for propulsion because your engine stalled, so if the sails are up for some strange reason, they should assume you are under sail until proven otherwise.

Of course, power vs sail is largely irrelevant in a marina fairway as the limited room to maneuver typically takes precedence.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by wingssail

1. I think you are not considering that the sailboat (in the case I illustrated in post #122) is trying to remain out of the way of the powerboat for as long as possible. And I didn't say 10 seconds. And in the case I described sailing close to the obstruction before tacking reduces the amount of time, (and number of tacks) spent in an area where the powerboats frequent. Not to mention that the wind and current may be better permitting a better course to windward.

2. The sailboat while sailing is obligated to maintain course and speed, (subject to normal maneuvering, including tacking) and cannot "take early and effective action" because THAT is not "standing on".

What becomes tricky is when wind and sea conditions, or obstructions, force a sailboat to change course or speed in a way that makes the closing situation more critical. To the unaware powerboater "he just turned right in front of me" and infuriates them, but it does not change their obligation to avoid the sailboat and the sailboat, once his tack has been completed, still must maintain course and speed, if possible.

Referring to the older part of the thread where it was indicated a sailboat can't wait or slow down for 45 seconds to let a power boat finish a pass before tacking across the power boats course. If you feel the need to tack in front of a power boat last second because your alternative is to run up on the rocks, you were already pushing the limits for when you should have considered tacking. Lots of sailors do it really mucking up people trying to get up a narrow channel.

Taking early and effective action avoid the need to play the "standing on" game or sets you up so you can hold course for the 45 seconds needed for the passing maneuver.

Obstructions are one thing as the power boat likely has knowledge of them. Wind/Sea conditions forcing a turn would be far less likely and mostly for the convenience of the sailboat as opposed to a need.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

I've previously said that it cannot be externally assumed whether a boat is motoring or not. The change of status has to initiate from the boat in question. Exactly because of what you mentioned, where they may have a mechanical problem that makes the engine unavailable for propulsion even though it's running.

The electric motor situation is an interesting one. I hadn't thought of that.

Realistically, the time this is most likely to become an issue is for a boat sailing into a confined channel. They've already started the engine, but are still sailing with the engine in neutral. Logically, because they've made the engine ready for use, they should indicate motorsailing status (out of courtesy) instead of just continuing to sail and potentially making the situation more challenging for everyone else in the channel.

My point was the people jumping to the assumption that if they can see exhaust that the boat is under power and should be treated as such. That's faulty logic unless there is clear confirmation that the boat is operating under power.

In principal, the motor/sailing vessel is technically in the wrong also for not making clear what their propulsion method is but the authorities are happy to fault both skippers, so that doesn't absolve you for making a faulty assumption.

As far as entering a narrow channel, usually, it's readily obvious as the crew is pulling the sails down and you can see the prop wash. If they've simply started the engine but are continuing to strictly use sail power, they are still considered to be a sail vessel.
- Might simply be warming up the motor. Way back before fuel injection, had a car and if you didn't let it warm up for a few minutes, it would frequently stall when you put it in gear. They might simply be warming the motor up for similar reasons, so when they are ready to switch to motor vessel status, it's ready and reliable. Would you consider an engine that running but highly susceptible to stalling to be under power?

[boatman61]

Getting a bit desperate to prove a point..

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by GrowleyMonster

So, I have been doing some reading and thinking about this.

When you are docking a power driven vessel and you take the engine out of gear, do you stop being a power driven vessel for that moment? That would be a ludicrous claim.

When you are running the engine of a sailboat in a narrow channel or pass, in close proximity to other vessels, bridges or other structures, why are you running the engine, if it is not in gear? So it is ready in all respects for immediate maneuvering. If the main engine is running and requires only the throw of a lever to apply mechanical Astern or Ahead propulsion, it is a power driven vessel. If there is no intent to use the prop while maneuvering closely to other vessels, why run the engine?

Sorry. Engine running, power driven vessel. Taking the engine out of gear is a maneuvering method no different from putting rudder amidships, or a ploy to be taken as a sailing vessel. I am not saying that it is not a good idea to start the engine in a close quarters situation, only that you get no get out of jail free card for having the transmission in neutral. The maneuverability condition with the engine running but in neutral is essentially the same as the maneuverability condition with the engine engaged. Same can be said for an EP boat with the system energized but the throttle set at zero. A twist of the knob or flick of a lever sends power immediately to the prop.

That's that. Case closed.

BTW even in the US, while it is seldom actually enforced, recreational vessels are still required to show appropriate identifying lights or shapes.

HOWEVER, in a crossing situation, another vessel has no choice but to assume that a vessel is a sailing vessel, without clear indication that the engine is in use. Standby is in use. So the other guy, like most, is not showing a day shape or steaming lights. If he has his propulsion machinery operating, then it is a power driven vessel. However the vessel assuming this had better be very sure of himself if appropriate shapes or lights are not displayed. And he still must take action when collision is otherwise imminent, and may take action when there is doubt regarding another vessel's intentions or actions as per Rule 17.

Finally, situations like that are where your VHF can very easily and simply clarify intentions and facilitate agreement. A cheap handheld VHF very likely costs less than lunch for you and the admiral and is quite adequate for the task in such a case. So the other guy has his turned off. Still, it would be good to have other boaters hear your call to him, should a disaster occur in spite of your best(?) efforts to avoid it.

The point of the rules is to avoid collisions and in service to that have vessels make it clear what their stays is.
My reading of the rules is that the default assumption is that any vessel you see is a power driven vessel in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Such evidence would include:
A. Sails up
B. Oars deployed.
C. Anchor ball hoisted
D. Various other indicators lights or day shapes indicating the vessel is a sub category of power vessel.

In the specific case of a vessel docking with the engine in neutral, technically they don’t meet the rules definition but they do meet the intent of the rules. Unless they have their sails up in which case the should hoist and lower a cone every time they shift out of gear or back in.
Or if sails weren’t up NUC dayshapes but that would not be appropriate unless they had suffered a machinery casualty.

The goal of the rules is for vessels to clearly identify their status to other vessels at a distance. If a vessel with sails up and engine running does not have a motoring cone up then you are obligated to treat it as a vessel under sail.
If they have the engine in gear and there is a collision you will carry a greater percentage of liability for not treating it as a sailing vessel even though they weren’t following the rules.

Rules for watercraft are not the same as rules for cars.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by wingssail

There are some participants in these threads who are adamant, based on that rule, that a give way vessel, even a tiny, slow, sailboat, must carry on without course or speed change even if the oncoming powerboat has not given any indication of it's intention, until the collision is absolutely imminent. Then they are allowed (required) to take action.

I don't think I've seen anyone state that. I think you might be twisting what people say, to the absurd.

Most of us, who advocate the proper application of Rule 17, tend to subscribe in one way or the other to Cockcroft's 4-stages model, where there are stages where (1) you must stand on (maintain course/speed), (2) you may take action if the give-way vessels apparently isn't, and (3) you must take action as the give-way vessels can't avoid by its action alone. It's all in the Rule:

Rule 17
Action by Stand-on Vessel
(a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.

(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Adelie

The goal of the rules is for vessels to clearly identify their status to other vessels at a distance.

Originally Posted by wingssail

There are some participants in these threads who are adamant, based on that rule, that a give way vessel, even a tiny, slow, sailboat, must carry on without course or speed change even if the oncoming powerboat has not given any indication of it's intention, until the collision is absolutely imminent. Then they are allowed (required) to take action.

What this does, however, is result in a problem for a sailboat which is unable to maintain course and speed due to wind or sea conditions (or obstructions).

Now personally I think that my nerves could not take that and rule or no rule, I am going to change course well in advance (if I can) even if I am the stand on vessel so that I am not sailing into the path of a powerboat or ship and depending on him avoiding me when I have not seen any indication that they have even seen me. But we need to be aware that this is contrary to the Colregs.

Not necessarily; the "allowed" and "required" phases are not required to commence at the same time. The problem with 17(a)(i) is that by the time it's too late for the stand-on vessel to take effective action, it may also be too late for the give-way vessel. That's why 17(a)(ii) is there.

Thus it's perfectly consistent with the Colregs for the give-way vessel to take action as soon as their own minimum safety buffer (accounting for vessel size, current conditions, how long it takes you to tack, etc) has been reached and the other vessel has yet to take action.

Originally Posted by wingssail

As has been stated, the sailboat should plan ahead and try to avoid situations where it a sudden course change would result in a dangerous situation and powerboats should be aware that sailboat's courses are as unpredictable as the wind and stay well clear.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Freudian slip?

Lazy shorthand as I already admitted.

Speaking of psychology, it's quite interesting to note that there's almost zero discussion about the discourtesy of a powerboat choosing to run at speed so close to sailboats as to create a colregs situation. .. There is only lawyering about who should do what in that avoidable situation.

[Sojourner]

Originally Posted by GrowleyMonster

Was the collision in a narrow channel (what is narrow to a yacht and what is narrow to a 1000' ship are not exactly the same) that the tanker had to remain within, for safe passage? Constrained by draft, maybe? There is a rule for that. Many sailboat skippers think that as a sailing vessel, they always "have right-of-way" LOL. I suppose it is a very comforting thing to believe in. Regardless, you are right, Ego battles cost a lot in money and lives. You should always have an "out" when passing near a ship. Being right doesn't always keep you and your vessel safe.

Not in the slightest, this was open waters between Greece and Turkey. Broad daylight. Incredible

But the rest of this thread illustrates my other point... even a bunch of actual sailors cannot come close to agreeing on colregs; what are the odds that the charter captain bearing down on you is the one guy in the world that actually knows them to take the 'correct' action?

[GrowleyMonster]

Originally Posted by Sojourner

Not in the slightest, this was open waters between Greece and Turkey. Broad daylight. Incredible

But the rest of this thread illustrates my other point... even a bunch of actual sailors cannot come close to agreeing on colregs; what are the odds that the charter captain bearing down on you is the one guy in the world that actually knows them to take the 'correct' action?

No guarantee on that at all. The human element will screw up any well conceived or well intentioned plan or system, eventually; even repeatedly. Which is why I try very much to simply avoid other traffic when sailing recreationally. Yeah that's tough, not to mention inconvenient, but every effort helps. The more time I am in open water and clear of other vessels, the safer it is.

Funny thing, every collision or near collision I can think of has one thing in common. There was at least one other vessel present. Likewise, every allision has some fixed object or structure in close proximity or it could not happen. Giving yourself some elbow room at the very least gives you plenty of time to analyze a situation and formulate a workable plan to keep the vessel safe from the madman or cheerfully oblivious/ignorant person at the conn of another other vessel. Time even to consult the hard copy of Rules that everyone keeps handy on the bridge, I am sure. Yeah that is thinly veiled sarcasm but there are folks who do so, and study, bend down page corners, place sticky notes, highlight, underscore, and make margin notes. It is a fine practice that I would encourage.

Sailors, both recreational and professional, argue all the time over the finer points of the Rules. It's like religion. You would think everyone would be happy to just know that there are other people who believe in a God or Gods, but NOooooooo..... However, a sound and in depth knowledge of the Rules is a great asset and never a handicap.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

Rule 34(d). 5 blasts will do, but the rule is phrased as "at least five short and rapid blasts on the whistle". So 8 blasts fits the rule.

Sadly I believe that 5 short blasts are the required audible warning, not 8 nor any other that someone may dream up. The sound signals are an international " language" and as such making up one's own interpretation is meaningless.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

Sadly I believe that 5 short blasts are the required audible warning, not 8 nor any other that someone may dream up. The sound signals are an international " language" and as such making up one's own interpretation is meaningless.

Nope, COLRGES does indeed say "at least five", not just "five".

Rule 34(d)
When vessels in sight of one another are approaching each other and from any cause either vessel fails to understand the intentions or actions of the other, or is in doubt whether sufficient action is being taken by the other to avoid collision, the vessel in doubt shall immediately indicate such doubt by giving at least five short and rapid blasts on the whistle.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by StuM

Nope, COLRGES does indeed say "at least five", not just "five".

Rule 34(d)
When vessels in sight of one another are approaching each other and from any cause either vessel fails to understand the intentions or actions of the other, or is in doubt whether sufficient action is being taken by the other to avoid collision, the vessel in doubt shall immediately indicate such doubt by giving at least five short and rapid blasts on the whistle.

Ok, I concede, however I have found that five is recognised by most however if you or others don't then so be it.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

Ok, I concede, however I have found that five is recognised by most however if you or others don't then so be it.

Althoug COLREGs do say "at least", Night_Sailor's post is the first time I've ever heard of anyone actually advocating anything other than the conventional five blasts.

[Lodesman]

I think 5 or 6 should be interpreted as the 34(d) signal, but if you sound 8, it's probably meant to be Rule 36:

Rule 36
Signals to attract Attention
If necessary to attract the attention of another vessel any vessel may make light or sound signals that cannot be mistaken for any signal authorized elsewhere in these Rules, or may direct the beam of her searchlight in the direction of the danger, in such a way as not to embarrass any vessel. Any light to attract the attention of another vessel shall be such that it cannot be mistaken for any aid to navigation. For the purpose of this Rule the use of high intensity intermittant or revolving lights, such as strobe lights, shall be avoided.

Subtle difference.