Freighters vs. Sailboats

[sarkastic]

Colregs state the stand on and give way vessels so that each vessel knows his part in the maneuver to avoid the collision. Colregs are written for the insurance companies to determine who will be paying the bill. In all situations it is up to you to avoid being hit by anything bigger than you. As a Navy veteran I can say that ROW is stated as "Tonnage Rules", if the other ship is that much bigger than you then get out of the way. Like sized vessels can play chicken all they want but it is not wise to play chicken with a train.

[MacG]

Sailing the busiest waters in the world, I keep always a proper distance from commercial vessels.
If in doubt (The Channel) when ships are lining up with 1 or two miles interval, I use my vhf when situation becomes unclear. For 90% I receive direct reply from the vessel I contact. They tell me to stay on course or not, their radar plotter will do the work. My steel boat gives an abundant echo.
Whatever Colregs, there are certain procedures to follow. Entering busy ports like Rotterdam and/or Dover requires a very sharp lookout and certainly contacting Port Control to report your arrival and asking fore any particular requirements.

In terms of seamanship, commercial vessels have always right of way above pleasurecraft (till a certain size) indifferent old law says that sail goes first. That counts for bridges, locks and entry to harbour.

IJmuiden sealocks are a good exampla. The lock keepr will tell you exactly what to do if you lock with a large freighter or cruise vessel. Sometimes they want me to go in first and go out first as well, other times, depending the size of the available lock, they want the commercial craft going in first and following pleasure craft.

With AIS contacts are much easier. A current problem is the often empty and unmanned bridge. Although any responsible captain shall insist on a permanent look-out, it is not seldom that A/P is set and no look-out on the bridge.

[Ex-Calif]

Many kudos for Dockheads posts and explanations of crossing management. I've posted video, pictures and first hand accounts of the crossing situations we face on every sail here. I even posted an account of sailing through the ship moorings, being the stand on vessel with a bunkering ship and almost maneuvering right as he started maneuvering to give way. My tack or maneuver in a situation where neither of us had lots of options or space could really have amde things worse for him. Basing actions on the rules is not a drama, believe me.

There are times when I want to navigate in close proximity to big ships. If I ducked to the edge of our channel everytime I saw a ship I could never win a race. Does it matter that I am out there for sport and fun? Not in my book. We share the navigable waterways. Those guys have a right to expect certain behaiviors from me. If I duck the edge of the channel, I am likely no factor. But identifying these guys early, understanding they are supposed to be speed limited to 5kts through the water allows me to have an expectation of their behavior and have some predictability on where they will be in 5, 8 or 10 minutes from now when it matters a lot to me. All based on rules.

We maneuver within 100 meters of big ships all the time. "See that guy? Yup. What do you think, cross him now? Nah, lets plan to stay to windward and cross behind. OK, lets keep an eye on him he should be here in about 6-8 minutes. Right, If we get headed we'll need to decide to cross in about 4 minutes max, otherwise we may be forced to tack away."

The other situation is crossing the Strait to Indonesia. Take a look at the AIS plots. These guys are averaging 15-18kts. They are going both ways. Crossing the Straits is like being the frog in frogger. You better know how to calculate the crossing situaiton as Dockhead so well described. These guys are all stand on vessels but I gotta get across. The rules keeps us all on the same page.

I suspect many of the "get the heck outta the way" folks get the rules. I suspect they aperate what appears to them to be vy conservatively, but really I doubt many have spent much time in close proximity to big ships. The regs work, so does being maneuverable when you have to be,

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Tony B

........When you have the right of way, it means that you can drive with impunity, and the responsibility is 100% on other vehicles without the right of way to avoid you. You are getting way too literal. The Stand-on vessel doesn't have to do anything. He just maintains course and speed. To me that is the right of way. The Give Way vessel shall alter course whether in a passing or crossing situation. He is yielding. A rose by any other name. Tony B
So if you are rolling down the highway The you are not required to keep an eye on every car standing at a stop sign waiting to drive into the highway. What ?Of course the principle of defensive driving means you should always have one eye open in case someone pulls out in front of you, in case you might somehow swerve and avoid him, but in reality if you are making 100 km/h down the highway there is almost nothing you can do -- it is really up to the other guy not to pull out in front of you. That is right of way. So, if we apply this to boats you are saying that in reality if you are making 30 kts down the channel or in a straight path in the open, there is almost nothing you can do -- it is really up to the give Way not to pull out in front of you. That is right of way?

Being the stand-on vessel is really very different. You don't have any "right of way" at sea -- that means, you have no right to just proceed with impunity and just expect give-way vessels to be 100% responsible for getting out of your way, as they would if they were cars and on land. I think you are inventing a situation that I never implied. I never stated that the Stand On vessel can travel with impunity.

That is because the Colregs are different from traffic rules on land -- both helmsmen are always responsible for avoiding a collision. Being the stand-on vessel means you are supposed to hold your course and speed at first to give the other helmsman a chance to work out a maneuver and make the first move. But since we are not talking about right of way, what happens next is different -- if the other helmsman does not or cannot execute a maneuver which resolves the situation, then you must maneuver yourself. And if you don't do it -- then you are also at fault.
So, in cars, you are saying it is different because I can cream without responsibility of using my brakes or veering away because I have the right of way? Also In a car I can drive willy nilly all over the road? Dude, you need to go back to driving school.

You have no right to just start maneuvering willy-nilly if you are the stand-on vessel -- you screw up what the other helmsman is doing. By "willy-nilly", I mean however you feel like manuevering, without regard to the Colregs, in a way which the ship helmsman cannot predict. You talk
about responsibility, where are you coming up with this? Where have I said this?
Some people are recommending this, They are?, I must have missed that. and I am obligated to say that this is wrong, unseamanlike, and dangerous. "Just ignore the Colregs and get the hell out of the way" is poor seamanship and contrary to the rules, and the kind of behavior which this attitude engenders is why commercial seaman call us "WAFIs". That is the classical WAFI attitude. I guess a typical scenario would be like this:

"Oh, Joe, did you see that big ship right there?" "Oh f*ck! Where did he come from! Turn! Turn!" "I am turning!" "No! No! Turn the other way! The other way! Quick! No, no! Turn harder!" "Oh hell, he's turning too!" Crunch.

It occurs to me that one gap between the WAFI faction here and those arguing for the importance of the rules, is that these two groups are thinking about entirely different distances. The Colregs faction is talking about what you do 4 and 5 miles out; the WAFI faction is talking about one or two cables -- entirely different situations. Maybe it would be worthwhile to put the whole discussion into the context of our tactics in general to avoid other traffic.

Let's start with one question: Do you have a hand-bearing compass in your cockpit at all times, and do you know how to use it to determine whether you are on a dangerous intersecting course with another vessel from a safe distance away? If you don't, then you are a menace if you sail anywhere you might have to share the ocean with big ships. It means that you won't even notice you have a potential problem until it's too late to do anything seamanlike to solve it.

Avoiding ships typically starts 5 or 6 miles out. Large commercial vessels travel at different speeds, but 20 knots is not uncommon. 5 miles is 15 minutes at that speed; 2 miles is 6 minutes. The vector created by your own boat's motion may reduce this amount of time. In open water, large commercial vessels will see you 90% or more of the time (you do have a radar reflector, don't you?), and the guys on the bridge will start calculating the crossing situation about 5 or 6 miles out. They will typically use a system called ARPA, which will automatically calculate a CPA using their radar data. And they WILL maneuver if they are the give-way vessel. You will make their lives a lot easier if you will hold still and let them do their jobs. At 5 or 6 miles out, it's not any big deal for them -- it might be a course correction of just a few degrees to pass safely behind you.

Most WAFIs never even know this is happening, because they don't pay attention to ships that far away, never know they are on a dangerous intersecting course, and never know that the ship has made a subtle course correction to resolve the situation. They just bob along in blissful ignorance -- and provided they happen to be the stand-on vessel AND if they don't make any unexpected manuevers, then that's ok, I guess -- in any case, it's better than if they start turning this way and that, making it impossible for the commercial seaman to calculate a safe course.

What you should be doing, if you want to graduate to non-WAFI status, is the same thing the commercial seamen are doing -- calculating the encounter from a safe distance away, using your hand bearing compass, and figuring out who is give-way and who is stand-on, and what the appropriate maneuver should be. If you are the give-way vessel, then you should initiate a course change by 3 or 4 miles out, preferably to take you safely behind the other vessel (passing ahead is not good unless you have a much larger margin of error -- preferably more than a mile).

If you are the stand-on vessel, you should hold your course and speed as you are REQUIRED to do by the Colregs, and give the other guy a chance to make the first move. Meanwhile, you are taking bearings every two or three minutes in order to verify that the other guy actually did initiate a course change. If by say 2 miles out, you are still on an intersecting course, then you need to make your own move. It should be one decisive move, and it should be a large enough course change that it is obvious to the other helmsman what you did. Tacking onto a reciprocal course is good (as long as you are 100% certain that the other vessel has not turned towards you!!!!); just heaving to to stay out of the way might be best of all. Do NOT call on the VHF if you are already two miles or less away -- it's already too late for chatter -- you will just waste time. Make a decisive move.

All this should be done before you are much less than 2 miles away -- one mile away is already close quarters and dangerous. If you find yourself on an intersecting course with a ship at less than one mile away, then you have screwed the pooch big time. Whether you were the stand-on or the give-way vessel already doesn't matter -- you screwed up if you end up that close. It should simply never happen.

I'm afraid that our anti-Colregs faction here are thinking about encounters at two or three cables distance. And so in such cases, they are actually right -- it's already too late for seamanlike manuevers and time to save your a$$ however you can. By this distance you can forget being the stand-on vessel, because a large commercial vessel cannot stop or turn fast enough to do anything at such a distance. And if because of some idiotic sailing by some WAFI a large commercial vessel finds itself on an intersecting course with a sailboat at two or three cables away, it WILL hold its speed and course -- exactly to allow the sailboat to use its greater maneuverability to resolve the situation, since the large commercial vessel already can't do anything about it at all, and by this distance may not even be able to see the WAFI.

So maybe like this we can bridge the gap a little -- once you are a couple of cables away from a commercial ship on an intersecting course, then forget about being the stand-on vessel. You have already long since screwed the pooch, and you need to get away however you can. I think that is what some of the anti-Colregs faction were trying to say, and they are right -- to this extent.

But dealing with ship encounters properly starts far earlier than that. And requires a lot more knowledge and technique than just one rule like "Screw the Colregs! Just get the hell out of the way!".


It's a shame we don't have more commercial seamen on here. I know a few, and their complaint about us WAFIs is always the same -- that we don't know the rules, and that we manuever erratically and unpredictably. They avoid other ships and boats all the time -- it's what they do on the bridge day in and day out. If we would only follow the rules, maneuver predictably, the way we are supposed to, and hold still when we are supposed to so that they can work out their own maneuvers, we will make their lives much easier, and ours much safer.

I was a commercial seaman, I had a USCG 100 Ton Masters. I know what I am doing. I also know that you are fabricating an arguement based on what I did not say nor imply. You have no idea what the difference is between staying clear and maneuvering willy-nilly is. You also have no idea when COLREGS applies. A very slight change in heading well in advance can preclude any need for even exchanging passing/crossing information. Do you radio a ship 5 miles away in the open sea, that you are going to pass him on one whistle when the 2 boats pass each other a mile apart?

You are creating an anti COLREGS faction in your own mind.
Show me the quotes where I infer having impunity, where I steer a vessel willy-nilly, am anti-COLREGS and any of your other accusations. I have many posts in this thread. Look them up and feel free to cut and past and explain each one. 3-2-1 GO!

I think it would be useful to dial down the emotion a little bit. We are just having a discussion here. There is no need to take anything personally or get riled up like this. My remarks were not necessarily addressed to you.

You are of course welcome to use terms however you like. I did not invent the distinction between "right of way" and "standing on". Those who wrote the Colregs thought that the distinction was important enough to use the terms carefully. If you prefer to ignore this and use them interchangeably -- it's your choice. In any case, the behavior expected of us is different than on the road. Your example of screaming down a channel at 30 knots is a good illustration of the principle. If you are going too fast to take effective action to avoid a collision, you are in violation, whether or not you are the stand-on vessel in a particular encounter. On the road, it's different -- you have the right to drive 60mph on a highway if that's within the speed limit, even if it means you could never avoid someone who pulls out right in front of you out of a side road.

The idea of "manuevering willy nilly" is not addressed to you. It is a - valid -- criticism of the idea that we should use the Colregs as toilet paper and just manuever whenever and however we feel like it to stay out of the way of commercial shipping. That's bad advice -- typical WAFI behavior, and as Nigel said, something the bridge on commercial ships hates -- unpredictable manuevering, invented on the spot, which ignores the Colregs. If you were not advocating maneuvering without regard to the Colregs, without waiting at least a little for the give-way vessel to maneuver, as some people were arguing, then great. Like I said, my comments were not addressed to you or to anyone in particular.

You wrote:

"I also know that you are fabricating an arguement based on what I did not say nor imply. You have no idea what the difference is between staying clear and maneuvering willy-nilly is. You also have no idea when COLREGS applies. A very slight change in heading well in advance can preclude any need for even exchanging passing/crossing information. Do you radio a ship 5 miles away in the open sea, that you are going to pass him on one whistle when the 2 boats pass each other a mile apart?"

Sorry, again, my comments were not addressed to you, and your comments have no relationship to what I wrote. I'm not sure where you get all of this or why you are so exercised. I don't think you really read what I wrote.

I specifically advocated avoiding crossing situations at the earliest possible moment, and said that a few times, I think. I think we all agree on this, actually. I never advocated using the radio and in fact specifically argued against it -- if both vessels act as required by the Colregs, there is no need to exchange passing/crossing information or get distracted by chattering on the radio. That's really the point of following the rules -- everyone knows what to do, and there is no need to improvise. "A very slight change in heading well in advance can preclude any need for even exchanging passing/crossing information." Exactly!

"You are creating an anti COLREGS faction in your own mind.
Show me the quotes where I infer having impunity, where I steer a vessel willy-nilly, am anti-COLREGS and any of your other accusations. I have many posts in this thread. Look them up and feel free to cut and past and explain each one."

One more time: My remarks, which I think you did not read very carefully, were not addressed to you. They were addressed to the idea that the rules are out the window in an encounter with a large commercial vessel, a dangerous, erroneous, and WAFI-ish idea, which will result in antics which will be perceived on the bridge of the large commercial vessel as willy-nilly maneuvers. If that's not what you said, then great! Consider that I was not talking to you! Peace, brother

[Tony B]

Sorry I took it so personal, it's just that my qoute was used.
Anyway..... Peace.

BTW, radio communications would be a great thread. Think I'll start one.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Tony B

Sorry I took it so personal, it's just that my qoute was used.
Anyway..... Peace.

BTW, radio communications would be a great thread. Think I'll start one.

Sorry, simple misunderstanding. I only used your quote as a lead-in to a discussion about the difference between right of way and standing on.

The rest of my post was just returning to the general discussion - a different theme. I probably should have broken it up into two posts.

Cheers.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

I'm quite sure you *are* surprised, because ...

no one said that. HEEEERRRRE we go again ...

Raku, help me out here, you seem to think I have misquoted you when I posted "but I am surprised though about the claim that most maneuverable vessel is to give right of way in all sections of the CRs regarding ROW"

How was I meant to interpret this part of your OP:

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

....... but the ColRegs also were written following some basic principles. One of them is that the less maneuverable ship/boat has the right of way. All the sections in CR stating who has the ROW in specific instances are based on those two principles: do everything possible to avoid a collision, and the most maneuverable vessel is to give right of way. ......

Clearly you believe you meant something different to what I clearly thought you meant but right now, I have no idea what you really meant so please tell me where / how I got it wrong.

[Tony B]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

....
The one over-arching rule, ....is that one must do everything possible to avoid a collision, but the ColRegs also were written following some basic principles. One of them is that the less maneuverable ship/boat has the right of way. All the sections in CR stating who has the ROW in specific instances are based on those two principles: do everything possible to avoid a collision, and the most maneuverable vessel is to give right of way. In a channel, clearly a freighter has to stay in the channel, but they aren't always in channels.

I think the misunderstandings here are sometimes we take things too literal. In the above statement, Raku is correctly stating the principles that these rules were made on and not the actual wording. There is a whole heirachy of ROW's based on this. Sorry, but ROW is easier to type than stating Stand-on/Give way status.
Anyway, general power boats are at the botttom. They are considered the most maneuverable. then comes sailboats. In channels we next have vessels constrained by draft. They cant maneuver anywhere except in the deepest part so they will obviously have the ROW to stay 'centered'. Usually very large vessels. Somewhere rising up in the heirarchy, don't remember the exact order, are commercial fishing vessels pulling nets. Tug boats fit somewhere in there. Yet they all have to yield to vessels with Restricted Ability to Maneuver. These are usually research vessels that must maintain a specific course or are Dredges dredging a channel. Higher up is Vessel not under command - meaning drifting with no power and no control. Each of these categories has its own set of specific nav lights. We learned these by neumonic devices - kinda like a sing song ryme to easilt remember. The last one - vessel not under command, has its mast lights mounted one red over another red. We remember it as red over red - pilot is dead.
Red over green is sailing machine. That kind of stuff.
Anyway, before I get too carried away, you can see that the more a vessel is restricted in maneuverability, the higher up it is in the pecking order of ROW's.
At least that was the way it was when I was a commercial captain.
When you are in a pleasure boat either power or sail, it normally is not necesary to know the exact pecking order because you will be yielding to all of them. What is important is to know that this pecking order exists and can be identified by day shapes and lights at night.

Also keep in mind that that you can maneuver around those of a higher pecking order with proper signals whether horn, whistle or radio and agreement by both parties.

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by foggysail

This is a CRUISER'S FORUM where I would expect to find comments/threads discussing boat sizes normally related to CRUISING, both power and sail not commercial tugs with tow encountering container ships!

Foggy

I am always open to hearing the perspective of commercial mariners, if only because they see recreational/non-professional mariners in the widest number of circumstances, both good and bad.

I also find the example of tug opposing tanker in a seaway directly analogous to that of sailboat vs. tanker, assuming the sailboat is under power.

A tug and a sailboat are likely equally maneuverable at six knots SOG and the tug would only put deeper dents in the bow of a tanker. Both vessels would be equally flattened, sunk and gone if they fail to follow the rules.

My wife and I have both taken loads of courses on pilotage, navigation and boat handling. We've both done deliveries that involved busy harbours and approaches. We understand the stand-on/give way rules, we think. If you ARE stand on, you must give the other vessel (the big ship in this case) the chance to react. You can turn in a tiny fraction of time and space if they don't.

More interesting to me is same-sized boats on collision courses, or rather "intercepts" or "crossings". This happens every summer's day. Most recreational sailors in such situations may have more familiarity with ISAF racing rules than with COLREGS, and will defer to that logic. So "are we on starboard tack" comes into play. So does shouting "HOLD YOUR COURSE" or "STARBOARD".

Is this "correct"? Informally, yes, because it honours the COLREGS injunction to avoid collision actively.

That say, if I sense a close crossing, I will make an obvious deke to go aft of the boat that I would otherwise hit midships at six knots if I didn't. I will also shout "TAKING YOUR STERN" or otherwise make eye contact to show I am aware of the potential trouble and am choosing to take action, especially if I am falling off a bit to do so.

What does surprise me at times are the number of sailboats that do not seem to maintain a watch, are obviously under AP and are barrelling along at near hull speed with a cockpit full of novel readers and drinks sippers, none of whom can be arsed to look around them. Sometimes I see boats where the cockpit is EMPTY, but the stereo is blasting and I'm close enough to see them fishing around in the icebox for another Red Bull.

They get the airhorn.

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

The big guy becomes the stand on vessel in a waterway where he is restricted by draft and or manauverability. At sea, he is a motorboat. THat noted, I also stay away and I LOVE my AIS. Its the first instrument turned on and the last shut down. I use its posted data to confirm with the big ship radio operator that he "sees" me and that we agree on a crossing. (also according to the rules).

That to me is the most useful aspect of AIS: the ability to call ships by name. They frequently can't see you, or haven't noticed you, and are pleased to find a mutually agreeable "solution" that preserves their paint job and the paperwork that crushing you would cause.

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by jackdale

First quiz question

Which vessel is at the bottom of the "pecking order"?

The jet ski?

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Tony B

I think the misunderstandings here are sometimes we take things too literal. In the above statement, Raku is correctly stating the principles that these rules were made on and not the actual wording. There is a whole heirachy of ROW's based on this. Sorry, but ROW is easier to type than stating Stand-on/Give way status. .......

Tony, I think you missed Raku's point (back on page 3). She is suggesting that "no one said that......" when by all normal interpretation, she had raised it in the OP.

At least IMO .

[jackdale]

A memory aid for remembering the pecking order. It combines some rules.

An - Anchored
Over - Overtaken
Night - NUC
Room - RAM
For - Engaged in Fishing (the gear must restrict manoeverability)
Sail - Sailing Vessel
Plus - Power Driven Vessel
Snacks - Seaplane, and
Whiskey - Wing in Ground Effect

Some of these are required to show shapes or lights indicating their status.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by S/V Alchemy

That to me is the most useful aspect of AIS: the ability to call ships by name. They frequently can't see you, or haven't noticed you, and are pleased to find a mutually agreeable "solution" that preserves their paint job and the paperwork that crushing you would cause.

Frowned upon this side of the pond.

Guidance & Regulations

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by conachair

Frowned upon this side of the pond.

Guidance & Regulations

Thanks - I posted 167 earlier, but I noticed that your post supercedes it.