Rules of the road - entering a channel

[Windracer]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

No they don't have ROW. Assuming you're motoring (you haven't clarified that), it would be head-on or crossing, in which case you should either alter to stbd along with the opposing vessel, or stand-on while the opposing vessel avoids you. Presumably you are keeping to stbd as much as possible to allow the other vessels room to manoeuvre around you. If you are waiting for the bridge you should try to loiter on the northern/western side of the channel. I'm sure there must be sufficient gaps in the traffic for you to cross.

Yes Lodesman, you understand that i said the powerboat was off my port bow, crossing in front. So i do keep to my stbd but have to find a gap to get through which is not easy on weekends - which of course is when most of our friends want to sail. Btw i do not have sails up in the channel and definately not while positioning and stalling for the drawbridge to open. Thanks for thr input. I will have my horn ready and my phone on video!

[Windracer]

Originally Posted by requiem

I agree with this; I'm not seeing anything that would confer special status on traffic heading from the bascule bridge to Spring Lake, and there looks like plenty of space to maneuver.

But, if they drive boats the way people drive cars, I can see plenty of tailgating! Personally in such a mess I prefer to find a better time ("don't be there in the first place"). Apart from that, a few related thoughts are:

• Speeding up is almost universally bad, particularly in a potential collision situation. If you had a gap and the other, er, gentleman tried to close it that's rather inappropriate.
• I'd also consider it poor form to hold up a boat making for an opened drawbridge; not only are you holding up the boat, you are holding up road traffic.
• It appears the "main" channel is that heading into spring lake. However, assuming the other vessel is not some massive barge, I also don't see that mattering here.
• Buy a GoPro.

Thanks very much requiem, not just for taking my "side" but for you logical input. I do feel a bit bad when holding up traffic on 31 at the drawbridge but it sure is cool going under it. I'll have my phone on video from now on in case there is ever a more serious complaint or incident. Happy boating to you.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by cappy208

Then look in Colregs in US Inland and please find the 'constrained by draft' reference. Rule 18. Knowing that both these examples have occurred INSIDE, under Inland rules.

There is implied reference that when in INLAND waters everyone should be taking draft into account (with no special designation (( lights or dayshape)) necessary).

There are 4 major differences between international and inland CBD is one of them.

What do you mean "taking draft into account"?

There is no such thing as CBD in the Inland Rules at all, and so draft is NOT taken into account in who stands on and who gives way in the order of maneuvering set forth in Inland Rule 18, under any circumstances.

Nor is "draft taken into account" in Rule 18 under the International Rules EXCEPT in very specific, and actually rare cases, where a vessel is actually CBD and showing shapes or lights for that.

Where draft IS taken into account is as just one factor in determining whether a vessel can "safely navigate outside a narrow channel or fairway" under Rule 9. There is no difference between Inland and International versions of Rule 9 which is relevant to this case.

[rslifkin]

Taking draft into account is a courtesy thing in some cases, rather than anything that's actually in the rules. If 2 boats are passing opposite direction in a channel, if you know one side is much deeper than the other and the other boat likely draws more water than you, courtesy would be to let them pick their side and go with it. I've had people try to squeeze into a 30 foot gap between me and a breakwall (and scream at me to move over) because they couldn't understand why I was staying to port in a channel that was severely shoaled on the stbd side (and they were in a small boat that drew maybe 2 feet, less if they trimmed the drive up).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

Taking draft into account is a courtesy thing in some cases, rather than anything that's actually in the rules. If 2 boats are passing opposite direction in a channel, if you know one side is much deeper than the other and the other boat likely draws more water than you, courtesy would be to let them pick their side and go with it. I've had people try to squeeze into a 30 foot gap between me and a breakwall (and scream at me to move over) because they couldn't understand why I was staying to port in a channel that was severely shoaled on the stbd side (and they were in a small boat that drew maybe 2 feet, less if they trimmed the drive up).

Certainly agree with this, but we were talking about the Rules.



This kind of thing is ordinary seamanship which is required by Rule 2, but doesn't affect the order of maneuvering. Such a situation might also be one of a multitude of reasons why you would know or suspect that an otherwise give-way vessel can't give way, which may free you of the obligation to stand on under Rule 17 so that you can take the initiative despite being the stand-on vessel:


17(a)(ii) The latter vessel [the stand on vessel] may however take action to avoid collision by her maneuver 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.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Windracer

I will have my horn ready and my phone on video!

My recommendation is on entering the larger channel, is to immediately set on a course that takes you across the channel fairly expeditiously. If you spot a gap in the traffic and can plan to hit that, so much the better. Maintain course and speed as much as possible. If someone crossing from port isn't giving way, film them, sound 5 short blasts, then do what you need to do to avoid a collision. Almost guaranteed they won't have a clue what the whistle means, but when you report them to the local CG, you'll have proof that you did everything you should have. Make sure you get their reg. number or boat name and hailing port.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

when you report them to the local CG, you'll have proof that you did everything you should have. Make sure you get their reg. number or boat name and hailing port.

It has not been my experience that the local CG does anything with such reports. In general, I believe that installing the boat equivalent of a dashcam, implies a disregard for Rule 18(b) and Rule 2.

The situations where a yacht cannot avoid a collision are rare and usually involve a substantial disparity of speed. In those cases the facts are rarely in doubt.

Many other vessels will disregard the rules, more often out of ignorance rather than malice. The length of threads like this one and the combination of confidence and ignorance that so many posts betray is bad enough -- it's worse out on the water. I try to understand and follow the nav rules, and cultivate an attitude of forbearance towards those who do not.


I do find that it is difficult to maintain the proper sense of aplomb when dealing with certain craft with a mistaken sense of entitlement. I am practicing. I think it is critical to my enjoyment of sailing to be able to do this.


I don't believe that it does anything to improve the situation to rat people out to teh authoritiez (who don't care), or to try to "educate" them (they're not listening).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Jammer

It has not been my experience that the local CG does anything with such reports. In general, I believe that installing the boat equivalent of a dashcam, implies a disregard for Rule 18(b) and Rule 2.

The situations where a yacht cannot avoid a collision are rare and usually involve a substantial disparity of speed. In those cases the facts are rarely in doubt. . . .

I agree! I think it's a public service to report violations, even if there are no consequences of it.

But going so far as to video crossings seems -- weird, to me, even kind of -- unseamanlike. The whole attitude seems wrong. If another vessel is not maneuvering in the required way then you simply take over and deal with it yourself. Cheerfully. With all focus on managing the crossing, no time for outrage.

And no way should you be PLANNING to get into a collision, such that you want a video record to prove whose fault it was. You won't prove anything -- if there was a collision -- except as you say in a case where there is a very large difference in speed -- then you are for sure at fault, it hardly matters who failed to maneuver when. So why video anything?

Originally Posted by Jammer

. . . Many other vessels will disregard the rules, more often out of ignorance rather than malice. The length of threads like this one and the combination of confidence and ignorance that so many posts betray is bad enough -- it's worse out on the water. I try to understand and follow the nav rules, and cultivate an attitude of forbearance towards those who do not.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

And no way should you be PLANNING to get into a collision, such that you want a video record to prove whose fault it was.

Originally Posted by Jammer

In general, I believe that installing the boat equivalent of a dashcam, implies a disregard for Rule 18(b) and Rule 2.

No one suggested ignoring rule 2 - specifically I said:

Originally Posted by Lodesman

...then do what you need to do to avoid a collision.

As to whether the CG or CG Aux does anything about it, depends obviously on the individual officer I suppose, but from a safety standpoint they should at least try to educate someone who clearly doesn't understand the rules. Someone in a uniform pointing out the required give way action is probably more effective than yelling across the water, or single-digit ASL.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

. . . but from a safety standpoint they should at least try to educate someone who clearly doesn't understand the rules. Someone in a uniform pointing out the required give way action is probably more effective than yelling across the water, or single-digit ASL.

Sure, I agree.

But I think that "yelling across the water" and "single-digit ASL" is also really unseamanlike. I think being much bothered by others' failure to comply with the Rules, itself reflects a mistaken idea that the Rules give you some kind of "rights" which others are obligated to "respect". And devoting attention to being upset about what someone else is doing is a dangerous and unseamanlike distraction from your real job in such moments.



I like what Jammer posted above.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

from a safety standpoint they should at least try to educate someone who clearly doesn't understand the rules.

I think the grand fallacy here is the idea that this is a problem that can and should be solved. It can't be, whether you try enforcement or deliberate close calls or, how shall we say, 1:1 peer-based education.


https://www.uscgboating.org/statisti...statistics.php


According to the USCG, "navigation rules violation" is the 7th leading primary contributing factor in boating accidents and the 8th leading factor in boating fatalities. Navigation rules violation is cited as the primary cause in 21 out of the 613 fatalities reported, less than 4%.


The contributing factors responsible for most of the fatalities are the usual suspects:

• Inebriation
• Failure to keep an effective lookout and other forms of inattention
• Excessive speed
• Inexperience
• Weather
• Hazardous waters

As a result, the safety-related education and enforcement activities (leaving aside revenue-related, environmental, and fishing enforcement) are related to alcohol use, excessive speed, weather awareness, and basic boat handling skills. And to mitigations like PFDs.



Besides, the rules aren't simple enough to explain while issuing a ticket without resorting to various oversimplifications like those being complained about upthread.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Sure, I agree.

But I think that "yelling across the water" and "single-digit ASL" is also really unseamanlike. I think being much bothered by others' failure to comply with the Rules, itself reflects a mistaken idea that the Rules give you some kind of "rights" which others are obligated to "respect". And devoting attention to being upset about what someone else is doing is a dangerous and unseamanlike distraction from your real job in such moments.



I like what Jammer posted above.

If you recall in his first post, he indicated that he had been "sternly rebuked" by the other boater, who was apparently ignorant of what the rules actually require. So my advice was specifically to avoid getting into an argument out on the water.

I don't think I suggested getting bothered or upset - in fact I think what I suggested is a productive method to avoid that. I hear what Jammer is saying, but I disagree entirely with his last line - at best it's defeatist, at worst it's negligent. If you saw a dangerous or drunk driver, you'd call the police - no? So why would you wilfully ignore a dangerous boat driver?

I agree that trying to educate people directly is rarely fruitful. I've tried it and they don't listen. I literally told one guy's passengers to not get back on his boat, because he would get them killed. That was right after he nearly got them killed.

I've never dealt with the USCG Aux, but it might be worthwhile for windracer to get in contact with the local branch and see what they can offer. He might be able to convince them to put a boat out there to monitor the chaos on the weekends and possibly dispense some much-needed education.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Jammer

The contributing factors responsible for most of the fatalities are the usual suspects:

• Inebriation
• Failure to keep an effective lookout and other forms of inattention
• Excessive speed
• Inexperience
• Weather
• Hazardous waters

I despair when these studies come out and say something like "violation of the rules only account for such and such" then post a list like this with the "real" reasons. #1 is a violation of the law in most jurisdicitions. #s 2 and 3 are both violations of colregs

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Jammer

I think the grand fallacy here is the idea that this is a problem that can and should be solved. It can't be, whether you try enforcement or deliberate close calls or, how shall we say, 1:1 peer-based education.

who ever said anything about "deliberate close calls"? I think it can and should be solved - it's the reason I participate in these fora
Besides, the rules aren't simple enough to explain while issuing a ticket without resorting to various oversimplifications like those being complained about upthread.

Seriously, we're talking about rule 15 - the "crossing rule". If there is any one rule that a powerboater needs to know, that's it. It would be nice if they knew the rest of them, but realistically that's their prime directive.

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

If you saw a dangerous or drunk driver, you'd call the police - no?

Less often as the years go by. They consider these calls a low priority. In most cases the car will reach its destination or leave the jurisdiction it's in before they can interdict it. They also have to be able to follow long enough to develop probable cause before making a stop.

So why would you wilfully ignore a dangerous boat driver?

1) It is unlikely to produce an enforcement response and therefore serves no purpose



2) Placing the call distracts me from more pressing matters, among them attending to the operation of my own vessel, the needs of any guests that may be on board, and my quiet enjoyment of the water.



3) The 90% of boat drivers that don't follow the inland rules are not "dangerous" as they are not exceptional. Whichever boat forced me to tack so they didn't have to turn is different from the others only in that our paths crossed