All about the Colregs no 3 - single handed sailing and keeping a look out

[Uricanejack]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

So you would prefer that single handers just sail along showing normal nav lights while he sleeps? How is that less negligent?

But in fact falsely showing NUC under these circumstances is not negligent at all -- it is a technical violation of the Rule without negligence. Using the term negligence in the technical, legal sense.

I would encourage people in the first place NOT to sail without crew for longer than they can go without sleep, so that they can entirely fulfill the Rules. But some people will not listen to me -- for them single handing is a necessity, or a special adventure, or even a mystical experience, and they are just going to do it whatever we say.

Once they have taken that step, I DO, and I WILL encourage those people to heave to and show NUC while they sleep, and do that well out of shipping lanes. That is a technical violation (putting them in good company with countless tankers drifting with engines stopped waiting for a load, and all kinds of other professional mariners showing NUC without correct justification), but is the safest and most seamanlike way to deal with the problem.

Excessive pedantry on this matter can make you lose sight of the practical situation.

Clearly nobody in any authority actually gives a rats ass.
Or at least the don’t until someone dies or is seriously injured.
If it the fatality is the single hander. hopefully he dies like a gentleman without complaint. Or lady as the case may be.

So NUC the lesser weivil. ?

Technically if you heave to on a typical sailing boat. You are still underway and making way very slowly.

So to be correctly light. I should have my sidelights and stern light on. To indicate making way.

So perhaps I might as well forget heaving to and just sail along happily obvious to other vessel’s at 5 or 6 knots instead of 0.5 or 1 knots.

With my two red all rounds and my side light now an NUC under way making way.

If you are going to ignore the regulations you might as well hang for a Sheep instead of a lamb

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by StuM

Quite!

Such pedantry in eschewing the NUC signal actually ignores Rule 2 .

(a). Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

(b). In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

The courts don't like departures from the Rules under any circumstances, and Rule 2 is almost always interpreted as obligating you to do MORE than what you can find the Rules -- the main meaning of it is that you can't stop at fulfilling the bare technical minimum of the Rules and call it good, if there is something more you can do.

So I doubt if a court would ever let you off the hook for being at sea with no one on board awake, but having taken that step I do think Rule 2 requires you to do everything reasonably possible to do it as safely as possible. You are not indeed allowed to just throw up your hands and say "it's illegal ipso facto, therefore I'm not even going to try to do it in a safer manner."

Now pedantry has several levels, and we are pedants too. I hope slightly more sensible ones but still. To put all this in perspective, it is just as illegal (but not as dangerous) to leave no one awake on board when at anchor. And we all do this. Clearly this violation falls under the "rat's ass" category mentioned by UJ, although it might not if you have an accident.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Uricanejack

Clearly nobody in any authority actually gives a rats ass.
Or at least the don’t until someone dies or is seriously injured.
If it the fatality is the single hander. hopefully he dies like a gentleman without complaint. Or lady as the case may be.

So NUC the lesser weivil. ?

Technically if you heave to on a typical sailing boat. You are still underway and making way very slowly.

So to be correctly light. I should have my sidelights and stern light on. To indicate making way.

So perhaps I might as well forget heaving to and just sail along happily obvious to other vessel’s at 5 or 6 knots instead of 0.5 or 1 knots.

With my two red all rounds and my side light now an NUC under way making way.

If you are going to ignore the regulations you might as well hang for a Sheep instead of a lamb

Yes, of course, if you're "making way through the water", you are obligated you must have your side and stern lights lit up too.

What concerns actually making way (as opposed to making way slowly hove to) -- I've had this discussion with a number of experienced single handers, and they don't like the idea of heaving to because it lengthens the passage, more exposure to weather, etc. I can't really say anything more except that heaving to will be a lot safer.

I was once coming down the English channel on passage from Heligoland to Cowes, having passed the Dover Straits just after my graveyard shift watch (my favorite) started, on a beautiful starry night, and encountered -- a yacht hove to, and showing an anchor light. I guess few yachts carry two hoistable reds (I do). I thought -- this is really funny. I later looked up the yacht name and it turns out it was some American single handed circumnavigator. I thought that was pretty seamanlike, although I wouldn't personally be doing that in the English Channel (shudder).

[Jim Cate]

^^^^
Yep, I've always thought that displaying an all round white light should be an effective means of deflecting incoming traffic. It should be interpreted as a stern light, meaning that any approaching boat would assume he was overtaking and avoid.

It is what the Hiscocks and many other classic cruisers did, even when not single handing, and while not following the letter of the law, it would accomplish the intent: avoiding collision with a cruiser with no one awake.


I don't understand the antipathy towards folks who use such approaches to collision avoidance when sleeping. NO, it does not follow the law, but it helps avoid collisions and costs the other mariners very little in time or inconvenience. As the avoiding mariner passes by, he does not know (or likely care) that the light or shape was bogus... just another object passed in the night.

Jim

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

^^^^
Yep, I've always thought that displaying an all round white light should be an effective means of deflecting incoming traffic. It should be interpreted as a stern light, meaning that any approaching boat would assume he was overtaking and avoid.

It is what the Hiscocks and many other classic cruisers did, even when not single handing, and while not following the letter of the law, it would accomplish the intent: avoiding collision with a cruiser with no one awake.

I don't understand the antipathy towards folks who use such approaches to collision avoidance when sleeping. NO, it does not follow the law, but it helps avoid collisions and costs the other mariners very little in time or inconvenience. As the avoiding mariner passes by, he does not know (or likely care) that the light or shape was bogus... just another object passed in the night.

Jim

I much prefer NUC signals to an all around white, because of the potential confusion with a stern light.


And the last sentence is the heart of the matter -- the object is safe navigation, and as Stu helpfully pointed out -- Rule 2 OBLIGATES us to go beyond the letter of the Rules (and theoretically even contrary to the letter of the Rules) where necessary to attain that.


NUC accurately describes the status of a single hand vessel with the crew asleep -- vessel is "not under command"; no one on deck, no one in command, vessel will not maneuver. It conveys exactly the information which the other vessel needs to know. Whether it is based on permissable facts or not is really irrelevant to safe navigation -- that is the point. The "avoiding vessel" should not care at all, just like we shouldn't care why a give-way vessel fails to give way -- it's irrelevant -- the only thing that matters is that there is no misundertanding about that the other vessel will do. Showing NUC really clearly communicates exactly wha the other vessel needs to know.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I an't no expert but the arguments made by Dockhead and StuM passes the pub test and complies with common sense.

Just say "No" to single handers doesn't cut the mustard.

I'll drink with this guy any day..

[dannc]

Originally Posted by boatman61

I'll drink with this guy any day..

With DockHead, StuM or both?

I too would like to buy them a pint or two or three.

The problem would be at pint number two or there abouts...

Somehow, over time, just for grins and giggles, I would have to insert into the conversation the following:

• COLREGS and Right of Way.
• How many amps should I have in my house battery.
• Law of Tonnage.

Then excuse my self to go to the bathroom/head.

Later,
Dan

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by dannc

With DockHead, StuM or both?

I too would like to buy them a pint or two or three.

The problem would be at pint number two or there abouts...

Somehow, over time, just for grins and giggles, I would have to insert into the conversation the following:

• COLREGS and Right of Way.
• How many amps should I have in my house battery.
• Law of Tonnage.

Then excuse my self to go to the bathroom/head.

Later,
Dan

You should check the name on the quote..
Stu and DH would be a downer.. they just spend the time calling me an ******* for sailing solo, breaking Colregs and not having radar..

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by boatman61

You should check the name on the quote..
Stu and DH would be a downer.. they just spend the time calling me an ******* for sailing solo, breaking Colregs and not having radar..

Stu can speak for himself, but I certainly never called you an ******* (whatever the asteriks stand for) and never would.

Single handing is illegal, and dangerous to a certain extent. But as I wrote -- some people sail single handed by necessity, or because it's a special adventure, or even a mystical experience, and the world tolerates it, and I have no problem with that. To put it into perspective, sleeping at anchor with no one on watch is illegal, too.

That's the whole reason why we were digging into how it can be done in the most seamanlike way

I certainly have greatest of respect for people like you, who cross entire oceans single handed! I'm not sure whether you did it for the adventure, or because no one could stand being cooped up with you for a month, but either way -- it's an achievement!

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Stu can speak for himself, but I certainly never called you an ******* (whatever the asteriks stand for) and never would.

Single handing is illegal, and dangerous to a certain extent. But as I wrote -- some people sail single handed by necessity, or because it's a special adventure, or even a mystical experience, and the world tolerates it, and I have no problem with that. To put it into perspective, sleeping at anchor with no one on watch is illegal, too.

That's the whole reason why we were digging into how it can be done in the most seamanlike way

I certainly have greatest of respect for people like you, who cross entire oceans single handed! I'm not sure whether you did it for the adventure, or because no one could stand being cooped up with you for a month, but either way -- it's an achievement!

HI DH.. I was joking.. hence the
For myself solo sailing is a break from people.. I am not really a conversationalist and find constantly having to make small talk and listen to what for me is more gossip than anything of interest is a chore.. I am a social observer more than a participant.
Alone at sea on a boat is heaven, no regulated meal times, dress code, approval or disapproval is wonderful.. no "are we there yet" "why have you not got more sail up so we can go faster" etc etc..
There are the occasional folks who I've enjoyed sailing with but the majority can be hard work..
Sure I'm gobby on here but it's a choice to log in and participate .. at sea there's no choice.
Real life is hard work being polite and following conventions all the time..
You could say I'm a selfish bastard..
There should have been a 'they would' in there maybe.

[4eyes]

Wouldn't the logical and reasonable approach be to modify/amend colregs to add a light to the NUC to specify singlehander asleep?

So long as the reality is accurately communicated, what is the harm?

Dodging a relatively stationary single hander would be easier than dodging a slow moving fishing vessel etc.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by 4eyes

Wouldn't the logical and reasonable approach be to modify/amend colregs to add a light to the NUC to specify singlehander asleep?

So long as the reality is accurately communicated, what is the harm?

Dodging a relatively stationary single hander would be easier than dodging a slow moving fishing vessel etc.

No need to add a light; just add sleeping while single handed as a justification for NUC status. NUC status perfectly fits the case.



Won't happen, though, because no one wants to legalize being under way with no one on board awake.

[Uricanejack]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes, of course, if you're "making way through the water", you are obligated you must have your side and stern lights lit up too.

What concerns actually making way (as opposed to making way slowly hove to) -- I've had this discussion with a number of experienced single handers, and they don't like the idea of heaving to because it lengthens the passage, more exposure to weather, etc. I can't really say anything more except that heaving to will be a lot safer.

I was once coming down the English channel on passage from Heligoland to Cowes, having passed the Dover Straits just after my graveyard shift watch (my favorite) started, on a beautiful starry night, and encountered -- a yacht hove to, and showing an anchor light. I guess few yachts carry two hoistable reds (I do). I thought -- this is really funny. I later looked up the yacht name and it turns out it was some American single handed circumnavigator. I thought that was pretty seamanlike, although I wouldn't personally be doing that in the English Channel (shudder).

The world isn't going to change because of my opinion.
People who single hand will continue to do so. Races will still be organized.
The press will still report.
So NUC is as good an option as I've seen.

For the most part they are a danger to themselves. The greatest risk is being run down by a vessel which fails to see them.
Although it is also possible some of these big fast racing vessels could be the one doing the running down. If they encounter a smaller vessel.
Perhaps not a fair example, Not a single hander. The Vestas yacht hitting the fishing vessel.

So being seen.
Is probably the most important method first step in avoiding a collision.
So Good bright light, or Two Bright Red lights.

Its a long time since I've ventured offshore.
back in the day.
Sparky or later Navtex used to drop messages on my chart table.

Yacht over due. Brief description, # persons on board, often 1. Left here way back when going there. Expected a while ago.
Occasionally you would get a message hear it turned up, went to a bar on another Island.

Most just never heard from again and faded away.

What happened?
Maybe there are less now with EPIRB's

How many we bumps in the night nobody noticed.

The real problem with not being awake and keeping a lookout, you might get hit.
So I suppose its a risk some people are willing to take.

Personally I choose not to, I do sail single handed but not for distances or time frames where I would need to sleep.

Personal experience even two handed, coming up the west coast from Oregon. Only 40 ish hours, We were exhausted, Fatigue was definitely an issue.
Fatigue can impair just like drugs or alcohol.

Perhaps with time we would have settled into a better routine.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

No need to add a light; just add sleeping while single handed as a justification for NUC status. NUC status perfectly fits the case.

And eliminate Rule 5 while you are at it.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by jackdale

And eliminate Rule 5 while you are at it.

Yes, I agree -- and that's why it will never happen. As I said.