Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This is likely a simple one, but I am not clear, so here goes.

The other day I was on somebody else’s boat with three more experienced guys. I had the helm briefly and we were coming downwind into a harbor, heading toward a tight channel. I had the wind on the starboard quarter, not quite dead downwind, so, starboard tack. Motor was off.

A much larger sailboat to port was headed toward us on a beam reach, starboard tack. Initially they were forward of us at about 300 degrees, but it looked to us like they would just pass behind us by a whisker. It looked like they had the engine off. 

I wanted to change course and not chance it but the best way would have been to jibe soon, and then again to correct course for the channel entrance. I also thought that though we were nearly at a right angle to the other boat they were farther down wind so they were leeward. The other guys said no, we are on starboard and we are entering the harbor, so we are stand-on. I was not sure what entering the harbor had to do with it but the guy who owned the boat said hold course. So I did. The other boat passed behind us by about 15’ with the people on board yelling at us and making bad faces.

Who was right?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, KillickThere said:

Who was right

Get a copy of the collision regulations and read it, then give it to your owner. Google it.

If you don't know the answer to that one you both wont know much else that you should.

You and the rest of the boating public will appreciate it, otherwise you will get to be known as an asshole on the water.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Colregs apply.

My diagram says that they were to leeward of you.  So "Big boat" is Starboard leeward and you "Little Boat" are approaching Big Boat from the "Green Quadrant" as Starboard weather.  So you have rights to SAFELY cross, but they likely have limited ability to maneuver and 15' certainly is not my definition of safe (except in J-24s).  

So...There is "right" and "dead right". 

Entering the harbor has nothing to do with it unless you were actually in the channel, then overtaking boat stays clear.  It does sound like you may have been the overtaking vessel, which flips the rights issue around if you are in the channel.  

Why is this even an issue on an afternoon sail?   Slow up and go behind.  Or jibe and jibe back. Your "more experienced" people were being pig-headed.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Colregs apply.

My diagram says that they were to leeward of you.  So "Big boat" is Starboard leeward and you "Little Boat" are approaching Big Boat from the "Green Quadrant" as Starboard weather.  So you have rights to SAFELY cross, but they likely have limited ability to maneuver and 15' certainly is not my definition of safe (except in J-24s).  

So...There is "right" and "dead right". 

Entering the harbor has nothing to do with it unless you were actually in the channel, then overtaking boat stays clear.  It does sound like you may have been the overtaking vessel, which flips the rights issue around if you are in the channel.  

Why is this even an issue on an afternoon sail?   Slow up and go behind.  Or jibe and jibe back. Your "more experienced" people were being pig-headed.  

Thanks, it shouldn’t have been an issue. I thought he was he stand on but whether he was or not I wanted to let him pass. I thought the other boat was leeward but you could argue we were overtaking. But I wasn’t the captain and it want my boat. In the moment I was not going to get into an argument about it on the boat. He made the call, that was the call.. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BOI Guy said:

Get a copy of the collision regulations and read it, then give it to your owner. Google it.

If you don't know the answer to that one you both wont know much else that you should.

You and the rest of the boating public will appreciate it, otherwise you will get to be known as an asshole on the water.

Yeah I did read it and Google it, fuckstick, and it wasn’t clear to me. Sometimes it isn’t.  Buy hey, thanks for telling me to read the colregs and how Google works, admiral nelson.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

RULE 12 Sailing Vessels

(a) When two sailing vessels are approaching one another, so as to involve risk of collision, one of them shall keep out of the way of the other as follows:

(i) when each has the wind on a different side, the vessel which has the wind on the port side shall keep out of the way of the other;
(ii) when both have the wind on the same side, the vessel which is to windward shall keep out of the way of the vessel which is to leeward; (iii) if a vessel with the wind on the port side sees a vessel to windward and cannot determine with certainty whether the other vessel has the wind on the port or on the starboard side, she shall keep out of the way of the other.

(b) For the purposes of this Rule the windward side shall be deemed to be the side opposite to that on which the mainsail is carried or, in the case of a square-rigged vessel, the side opposite to that on which the largest fore- and-aft sail is carried.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup that is what I read. So he was to leeward, he was stand on and I was correct. All the stuFf about the channel, running with the wind and overtaking is noise in this case. Hence the bad words and angry faces.

  • Like 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KillickThere said:

Yup that is what I read. So he was to leeward, he was stand on and I was correct. All the stuFf about the channel, running with the wind and overtaking is noise in this case. Hence the bad words and angry faces.

I dunno, it sounds like the other boat is being precious to me.   Assuming both boats are keeping a proper look out then the risk of collision should be low, unless one or boat are limited in manoeuvrability.  If you are looking out, then you have to assume the other person isn't.  
 

you're both out for a casual sail, it sounds like it would have really been no skin off the other guys nose to pinch up a bit for a ways out to make sure it was a safe crossing.   Also, they don't know if you're stuck on a particular heading so can't manoeuvre. 
 

IMHO if your are pulling the colregs out in the circumstance you described, both boats have failed basic seamanship.  The latter boat in this case has chosen to make the scenario something to be grumpy about, or they weren't keeping a look out and were surprised.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point about Col Regs is for both boats to know what to do. So if the stand on boat starts wandering randomly around the ocean to be nice then a simple situation can turn complicated. The other thing that's important is to make big changes of course and make them early, again do there's no doubt.

  • Like 9
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like you were the give way vessel being to windward on the same tack but in any case the first rule is to avoid collision. Outside of a race environment there is no excuse to cross anyone's bow within 15ft like that.

The proper move would've been to make a deliberate course change so it's clear you're altering and pass astern. Passing astern you can just aim at them (assuming they're moving) and pass as close astern as you want.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you that they were the stand on vessel, but if they were beam reaching they could easily have just luffed behind your stern & completely avoided anything they felt uncomfortable about. Sounds like someone just wanted to feign being upset & morally indignant for their guests.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, climenuts said:

The proper move would've been to make a deliberate course change so it's clear you're altering and pass astern. Passing astern you can just aim at them (assuming they're moving) and pass as close astern as you want.

Unless you a stbd tack cruiser cat trying to duck a port tack race mono (that isn't keeping a proper lookout) in a Wednesday arvo fun race, in which case you're rooted no matter what.

:ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KillickThere said:

I had the wind on the starboard quarter, not quite dead downwind, so, starboard tack

So you were sailing by the lee ?? 

Otherwise you should have been on port tack . . 

with no rights at all 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KillickThere said:

Yeah I did read it and Google it, fuckstick, and it wasn’t clear to me. Sometimes it isn’t.  Buy hey, thanks for telling me to read the colregs and how Google works, admiral nelson.

Score positive five for appropriate response. Minus several million for misspelling of Fuck-stick. Always a capitol F and hyphen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KillickThere said:

you will get to be known as an asshole on the water.

maybe not just on the water

 

4 hours ago, Parma said:

if they were beam reaching they could easily have just luffed behind your stern & completely avoided anything they felt uncomfortable about

They are required to stand on, that's what they did

Don't get upset when someone yells at you for failing to get out of the way, its to help you learn you fucked up.

If your offended by their yelling harden up, you fucked up.

If you don't want them to do it again, get out of the way next time.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hitchhiker said:

Score positive five for appropriate response. Minus several million for misspelling of Fuck-stick. Always a capitol F and hyphen.

You are entirely correct. I’m new here, I will do better.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, justsomeguy! said:

Why? Fucksticks don't deserve it.

I off-handedly nicknamed a new sales guy at work Fuck-stick and it stuck. I only called him that like twice. 40 years later everybody still calls him that. I think his wife calls him that, and probably his mom, the parish priest, etc. Felt guilty for a few yrs but now I think the rest of humanity looked at the guy and thought, yeah, complete Fuck-stick.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, loneshark64 said:

 40 years later everybody still calls him that. 

Well, seems it has become a proper noun in Fuck-stick's case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were windward, you were give-way. If you were overtaking (approaching from more than 22.5° abaft his beam), you were give-way. If you passed close enough to give apprehension of collision you didn't really meet your obligation. 

If there had been a collision and he hadn't maneuvered you'd both be in the wrong, but you moreso. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

They are required to stand on, that's what they did  They are not required to "stand on" but if they are inexperienced and wish to risk a collision they may do so. Are you saying that you would have stood on regardless?

Don't get upset when someone yells at you for failing to get out of the way, its to help you learn you fucked up. I don’t know any experienced sailors who yell at other boats or who think that yelling at another boat will help that other boat learn anything. You must be new.

If your offended by their yelling harden up, you fucked up. So you're saying that anytime some anxious credit card captain gets excited and yells it means the other boat is wrong? Where is that in the Colregs?

If you don't want them to do it again, get out of the way next time. We are all willing to avoid anxious boaters who might not have a great deal of experience and might react foolishly in situations the rest of us would consider quite ordinary. There are a few boats here that have been identified as boats to keep an eye on: “look out for that guy, he does stupid shit sometimes”

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parma said:

They are not required to "stand on"

22.17 Action by stand-on vessel
(1) If one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other must keep its course and speed.

Care to make up any other rules "bullshit" while your at it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, justsomeguy! said:
8 hours ago, loneshark64 said:

 40 years later everybody still calls him that. 

Well, seems it has become a proper noun in Fuck-stick's case.

Sometimes, the shoe fits

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

So you were sailing by the lee ?? 

Otherwise you should have been on port tack . . 

with no rights at all 

Have you ever considered learning to sail yourself Professor? He states that he was on starboard tack yet you claim he is on port.

I need to amend my nick-name for you.

You are an argumentative beardy old homo.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

22.17 Action by stand-on vessel
(1) If one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other must keep its course and speed.

Care to make up any other rules "bullshit" while your at it?

AJ, the way you say it makes it sound like they are required to smash into another vessel if the are the "stand on" vessel, but the fact is they could have just luffed behind the other boat if they wanted to and nobody would have been arrested or thrown in jail.

I'm sure everybody on these forums (except maybe you) has been in a situation where they were the stand on vessel but took avoiding action because it was the intelligent thing to do.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Have you ever considered learning to sail yourself Professor? He states that he was on starboard tack yet you claim he is on port.

I need to amend my nick-name for you.

You are an argumentative beardy old homo.

Please stop quoting AJ. I have him on ignore for a reason.

Thank you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, KillickThere said:

You are entirely correct. I’m new here, I will do better.

Did you post the requisite pic of your wife or girlfriend's, or both, tits? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Have you ever considered learning to sail yourself Professor? He states that he was on starboard tack yet you claim he is on port.

I need to amend my nick-name for you.

You are an argumentative beardy old homo.

Thank you…

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, George Dewey said:

Did you post the requisite pic of your wife or girlfriend's, or both, tits? 

I haven’t seen my wife’s tits in years. I don’t have a girlfriend but I’m still in love with Miss Oct 1975 F4EAEB64-1550-451F-9DB5-BD0C15E8D715.jpeg.59d65d5a25dec55f4f2f0bc9745b147a.jpeg

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

22.17 Action by stand-on vessel
(1) If one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other must keep its course and speed.

Care to make up any other rules "bullshit" while your at it?

Keep reading. It's literally the next couple of sentences:

Quote

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 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.


(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.

The basis of COLREGS/IRPCAS is that if a collision occurs almost certainly both parties are in the wrong. If you stand on and let the other fellow hit you, you broke the rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule 2 (Responsibility)

 

(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 precautions 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.

https://www.ecolregs.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item&id=45&Itemid=505&lang=en

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mid said:

which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

Keep reading. It's literally the next couple of sentences:

I realise that, but the next bit only comes into play once the other boat has proven to be an asshole. Probably the owner, not so much the helmsman in this case.

My statement was in response to Parma, first name possibly Rod, who claimed the rules did not say you had to stand on, clearly they do. 

9 hours ago, Parma said:

They are not required to "stand on"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Parma said:

Please stop quoting AJ. I have him on ignore for a reason.

Thank you.

Sorry but he is too much fun to poke.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Parma said:

I'm sure everybody on these forums (except maybe you) has been in a situation where they were the stand on vessel but took avoiding action because it was the intelligent thing to do.

 

Yup....  Always assume the other boats will do something stupid and act accordingly, Ideally well before you need to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BOI Guy said:

I realise that, but the next bit only comes into play once the other boat has proven to be an asshole. Probably the owner, not so much the helmsman in this case.

My statement was in response to Parma, first name possibly Rod, who claimed the rules did not say you had to stand on, clearly they do. 

 

Remarkably similar argument style to AJ, misquoting, misdirecting and taking isolated quotes out of context.

Your statements are erroneous. Just go ahead and man up with a mea culpa.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BOI Guy said:

I realise that, but the next bit only comes into play once the other boat has proven to be an asshole. Probably the owner, not so much the helmsman in this case.

My statement was in response to Parma, first name possibly Rod, who claimed the rules did not say you had to stand on, clearly they do. 

 

Well OK, point taken. Clearly there are times when the stand-on vessel is required to stand on. 

Until she's not...

 Shame on Parma for citing the rest of the rule. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Have you ever considered learning to sail yourself Professor? He states that he was on starboard tack yet you claim he is on port.

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Seriously?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

Um, you may want to reread the definitions.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of which, there was a guy in our marina who got those red & green "port" & "starboard" stickers but put them on the wrong side. Took him several months to realize his mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

15' that might as well been a mile, 

I was doing ALIR (Olson 30) and we were to windward  of a 34' something , they wanted us to come up , I refused , They were yelling and screaming and throw up the red flag once we passed them they came up passing my stern by inches  and ran aground hard on Shag Wong  reef off of Montauk  , I happen to running the reef within feet, local knowledge? They drop the protest flag

So they are may factors one being navigable water

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

 

22 minutes ago, Parma said:

No. You have to stand on regardless. You must hold your course no matter what because it's required.

Went to same school?

Had same mother?

One of the problems with Democracy is that these people get to make decisions that affect other people.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Killick,  yours was an intelligent question from the only bright light on your boat.  The fact that you are approaching and converging on a narrower piece of water (harbor entrance or marked channel) doesnt change the windward yelds to leeward rule.  

I echo what JimC said about big course changes as a "signal" to another boat who may be in doubt or somewhat clueless.  Some times (more with power than sail) the safest way is to make a 360 round turn away from the traffic and try again.  Even though for you it wouldve meant tack and then jibe. 

You weren't sure if leeward boat was under power.  If he was, he technically should show a "day shape" meaning an inverted cone shape in the fore triangle, black in color.*

The main point here is your boat buddies were idiots on the Colregs.  Don't sail with them again if you don't have to, what other steering and sailing rules don't they understand?

 

*at which point everyone in this thread will burst into laughter.  No recreational sailor uses day shapes.  They interfere with a jib anyway.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

Basketball Pain GIF by Where's My Challenge?

You really are a bloviating stupid cunt aren't you...

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Not for nothing said:

15' that might as well been a mile, 

I was doing ALIR (Olson 30) and we were to windward  of a 34' something , they wanted us to come up , I refused , They were yelling and screaming and throw up the red flag once we passed them they came up passing my stern by inches  and ran aground hard on Shag Wong  reef off of Montauk  , I happen to running the reef within feet, local knowledge? They drop the protest flag

So they are may factors one being navigable water

Hailing for water, when you are on the edge of a shoal, used to be one of the very few mandatory hails in sailing. If you knew you were near to running aground, and refused their right-of-way, you would have been in the wrong to not hail.

I say "used to be" because the rules authorities have decided to change the rules every four years, and I am no longer interested in keeping up. But they might not have gotten around to changing this one yet, better check.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/281965/msn1781.pdf

If you are the keep clear boat, you should not only keep clear, but make it obvious you are keeping clear.  

Pretending the stand on boat does not exist is not a solution, neither is blaming the stand on boat for standing on, neither is judging the stand on boat for calling the keep clear boat an ass for failing too make any effort to keep clear. 

The rules are written to prevent 2 vessels colliding when trying to avoid each other, like 2 people passing in a corridor bumping into each other when trying to avoid each other, but with supertankers. 

The rules are very simple.  

If you are in charge of a vessel at sea, you need to know and apply the rules.  

The rules allow the stand on vessel to keep clear if the keep clear vessel is failing to keep clear, but the rules don't require the stand on vessel to like the ignorant fuckwit he is having to keep clear of.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Hailing for water, when you are on the edge of a shoal, used to be one of the very few mandatory hails in sailing. If you knew you were near to running aground, and refused their right-of-way, you would have been in the wrong to not hail.

I say "used to be" because the rules authorities have decided to change the rules every four years, and I am no longer interested in keeping up. But they might not have gotten around to changing this one yet, better check.

FB- Doug

I was the one  hailing for water  , but that was a long time ago , as we were heading north with a west wind and windward boat and the reef was off our port side, of our keel ( that's how close we were), they had plenty of water to their leeward , so water wasn't an issue for them, or it wasn't an issue until they headed up , behind us and ran aground , 

hope that makes sense , wish  I could draw a picture to make it clearer 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

He wrote that the wind was on the starboard quarter, so he either was sailing by the lee, or was actually on port tack. 

you ignorant slut

image.png.c177b3465042fec28e4636f1c835976f.png

With my level of experience I hesitate to comment, but in my mind “by the Lee” would be if I had the wind just on the starboard quarter but almost dead down wind and the sails started to back or at least flutter. I may have that wrong. 

In this case it was not that. More of a very broad reach, sails full. Starboard tack...

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Parma said:

No. You have to stand on regardless. You must hold your course no matter what because it's required.

No, that’s BS. The only thing a vessel must do is look at her radar. I read it right here:

Quote

(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.

That’s it. That’s the only thing. Just read the rule, it’s obvious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2021 at 11:25 AM, JohnMB said:

Um, you may want to reread the definitions.......

You are correct. I made a mistake bigly - no excuses. 

Wind on the starboard quarter means you are on STARBOARD rack. 

Mea culpa 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TJSoCal said:

No, that’s BS. The only thing a vessel must do is look at her radar. I read it right here:

That’s it. That’s the only thing. Just read the rule, it’s obvious.

Nope, you're wrong-o, matey-o !

There is a new law which requires the stand on vessel to deliberately smash into the give way vessel regardless of anything else. Apparently common sense, experience, courtesy and just plain old good seamanship are now illegal. It’s all on the updated version of the test for the California boater’s card required prior to charter.

Edited by Parma
emphasized for stupidity
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KillickThere said:

More of a very broad reach, sails full. Starboard tack...

I agree with you on that.  Sorry for my earlier post that was incorrect. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:
On 7/17/2021 at 11:25 AM, JohnMB said:

Um, you may want to reread the definitions.......

You are correct. I made a mistake bigly - no excuses. 

Wind on the starboard quarter means you are on STARBOARD rack. 

Mea culpa 

"Bailiff! Whack his pee-pee!"

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

I agree with you on that.  Sorry for my earlier post that was incorrect. 

Well Done Prof, it takes a big man to admit when they are wrong. I just hope I can show the same strength of character should I ever be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2021 at 11:53 AM, KillickThere said:

Thanks, it shouldn’t have been an issue. I thought he was he stand on but whether he was or not I wanted to let him pass. I thought the other boat was leeward but you could argue we were overtaking. But I wasn’t the captain and it want my boat. In the moment I was not going to get into an argument about it on the boat. He made the call, that was the call.. 

True, but the next time just start hailing the other boat, asking if they want to go in front or behind or whatever. It's his boat but if he didn't trust your judgement he shouldn't have put you on the stick entering a harbor.

  Pretty much everywhere except on the race-course, start with the assumption the other guy is just some guy who doesn't know shit. Common in the pleasure-boating world. Start the "conversation", and with a smile on your face and a friendly tone everything will work out.  JMHO.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parma said:

Nope, you're wrong-o, matey-o !

There is a new law which requires the stand on vessel to deliberately smash into the give way vessel regardless of anything else. Apparently common sense, experience, courtesy and just plain old good seamanship are now illegal. It’s all on the updated version of the test for the California boater’s card required prior to charter.

Ha, fake news. Everyone knows "California" isn’t a real place. They made it up for that SNL skit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2021 at 5:25 AM, maxstaylock said:

The rules are written to prevent 2 vessels colliding when trying to avoid each other, like 2 people passing in a corridor bumping into each other when trying to avoid each other, but with supertankers. 

And that's fine, but two yachts on a pleasure cruise heading in two different directions in what sounds basically like open water should never be in the position they need rules to avoid bumping in to each other. 
 

There are two fundamental principles I live by out on the water:

1) I have ultimate control of what my vessel does and does not do 

2) until proven otherwise, the other guy is an idiot, act accordingly

if you don't need to be in the same corridor then don't. If you do, make your intentions clear, loud, and early, and only assume the other guy will respond if they acknowledge.

There is nothing worse than someone who is in the "wrong" making a panic change of course at the last minute.   
 

If you are going to be an idiot, be a predictable idiot.  Better still, never put yourself in a position where you need to trust the behaviour of idiots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Well Done Prof, it takes a big man to admit when they are wrong. I just hope I can show the same strength of character should I ever be wrong.

I'm sure that you've considered the possibility at one time. But only once...

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2021 at 4:21 PM, BOI Guy said:

maybe not just on the water

 

They are required to stand on, that's what they did

Don't get upset when someone yells at you for failing to get out of the way, its to help you learn you fucked up.

If your offended by their yelling harden up, you fucked up.

If you don't want them to do it again, get out of the way next time.

 

Completely agree BOI Guy

The IRPCAS are quite clear. Both vessels have an obligation to avoid a collision BUT that is best served by the stand on vessel completing their obligation to "stand on". In other words to maintain course thus avoiding confusion to the situation that already clearly confuses many sailors.

The give way vessel, in this case the vessel to windward, should give way by altering course in such a manner that it is clear to the stand on vessel that such action is being taken.

On multiple occasions I have seen 'experienced' racers sailing free screaming starboard at a close hauled yacht (or not sailing so far off the wind) also on starboard coming towards them. This even to the extent they throw up the flag and are pissed off when THEY get the penalty. Racing Rules of Sailing Rule 11 is taken almost  directly from IRPCAS Rule 12 (a) (ii)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

I'm sure that you've considered the possibility at one time. But only once...

FKT

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

So you actually are, in fact, and as evidenced by the above, a married woman?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LB 15 said:

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

Well, that puts your humility index a long way in front of AJ, so there's that.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, shanghaisailor said:

The IRPCAS are quite clear. Both vessels have an obligation to avoid a collision BUT that is best served by the stand on vessel completing their obligation to "stand on". In other words to maintain course thus avoiding confusion to the situation that already clearly confuses many sailors.

I kind of think of it in terms of zones. Size of the zones depends largely on the size and speed of the vessels in question.

There's a far zone where the vessels are relatively far apart (but still in sight and still able to appreciate that risk of collision exists) where I think it's OK for a stand-on vessel to make a course/speed change to put some bearing drift on the other fellow and eliminate a close-quarters situation. Of course you still need to monitor the other boat to make sure they didn't also make an alteration that put you back on CBDR.

In the middle zone, stand-on should generally stand on so that give-way can predict her movements and avoid.

In the near zone, per COLREGS 17(a)(ii), stand-on should evaluate whether give-way is or is likely to take appropriate action and, if the answer is "no", make a bold maneuver herself to reduce risk.

And in the "Oh Shit" zone where both boats must maneuver if collision is to be avoided, 17(b) kicks in and the stand-on vessel must maneuver.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A slightly off-topic tidbit.  In fog or other restricted vis, the normal rules (stbd over port, leeward over windward, sail over power) no longer apply.  It's all Rule 19, no one has the right of way, all must stop or proceed with caution.  Yes, we tend to use those other rules as a guide in avoiding each other, but there's no stand-on or give-way vessel. any more, at least in a legal sense.

Racers may collectively decide in the sailing instruction to use those rules regarding fellow racers, if I recall it right.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, nolatom said:

Racers may collectively decide in the sailing instruction to use those rules regarding fellow racers, if I recall it right.  

World Sailing has set up experimental rules for Restricted Visibility (Appendix RV) that attempt to do a better job than just "Use IRPCAS at night" in the sailing instructions. I think opinions are mixed as to which is better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nolatom said:

A slightly off-topic tidbit.  In fog or other restricted vis, the normal rules (stbd over port, leeward over windward, sail over power) no longer apply.  It's all Rule 19, no one has the right of way, all must stop or proceed with caution.  Yes, we tend to use those other rules as a guide in avoiding each other, but there's no stand-on or give-way vessel. any more, at least in a legal sense.

Racers may collectively decide in the sailing instruction to use those rules regarding fellow racers, if I recall it right.  

Actually in IRPCAS no one ever has the absolute "Right of Way" as I understand it.

The  two definitions are "Stand On" & "Give Way"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TJSoCal said:
18 hours ago, nolatom said:

Racers may collectively decide in the sailing instruction to use those rules regarding fellow racers, if I recall it right.  

World Sailing has set up experimental rules for Restricted Visibility (Appendix RV) that attempt to do a better job than just "Use IRPCAS at night" in the sailing instructions. I think opinions are mixed as to which is better.

That's kinda dumb IMHO, first of all there is no rule in racing that sets aside IRPCAS. Secondly there is no reason why the racing rules work less well in limited visibility. There is no acknowledgement in the RRS for "I didn't see him, that's why we hit him" so why suddenly make allowances for it?

AFAIK the IRPCAS are -always- in force. And the racings really don't contradict them much at all, except with mark-room.

FB- Doug

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

AFAIK the IRPCAS are -always- in force. And the racings really don't contradict them much at all, except with mark-room.

Hmm, I could interpret RRS 4.1 and preamble to Part 2 to mean that boats agree to use RRS instead of IRPCAS with respect to other racing boats. There are instances where you can't observe both - overtaking is a prime example, close cross (or even a close duck) by a port tacker is another.

I think the main issue they're trying to deal with is luffing/overtaking at night & in low vis. Regular RRS (11 & 17) doesn't really do the job safely.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

Hmm, I could interpret RRS 4.1 and preamble to Part 2 to mean that boats agree to use RRS instead of IRPCAS with respect to other racing boats. There are instances where you can't observe both - overtaking is a prime example, close cross (or even a close duck) by a port tacker is another.

I think the main issue they're trying to deal with is luffing/overtaking at night & in low vis. Regular RRS (11 & 17) doesn't really do the job safely.

Sure it does. Give-way vessels have to keep clear, stand-on vessels are required to give sufficient room to give-way vessels to keep clear, all are required to avoid collision. That doesn't change IMHO with loss of visibility. It just widens the margin that both need to give, also true of heavy air, current, etc etc. Do we have seperate rules for all those conditions?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

It just widens the margin that both need to give

I feel like you're reading a lot into the definition of Keep Clear, and there would be a lot of potential for boats in an incident to disagree on the margin required based on their assessments of the conditions. I think the RV rules are trying to remove some subjectivity.

As you can see from the list of experimental rules, it looks like WS is continuing down the path of specialized rules for specialized disciplines. We've already got appendices for match racing, kites, boards, team racing, radio-controlled, etc.

And for the record, at this point I'm neither an advocate nor an opponent of RV. I think it's interesting and will be interested to see how it works out on the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the top of the thread…there is never a situation where anger and yelling is appropriate. The stand-on vessel should have done the appropriate thing much sooner: Signals, turns, speed, etc. The stand-on cannot know the situation on the other traffic. Both vessels were presumably recreational, pleasure ya know, so…

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Colregs for restricted vis are pretty much common sense--slow to minimun, so if you've got a CPA of zero in a crossing situation, you both have to slow and stop if necessary until the close-quarters situation is history.    Rather than starboard tack boat gets to keep course and speed.  

And if you're making 9 knots in thick fog, you're likely ignoring Rule 19 as to safe speed.  But racers will do it, hell it's a race. So you collide with another 9-knot fellow racer, neither of you can claim "unsafe speed".  But I guess you can claim port-starboard if the Racing Rules provide for it.  

Just don't set up your race anywhere near where regular commercial traffic (or other pleasure boat traffic) is likely to exist--you'll lose to them in an admiralty case, and the "civilians" will hate racers even more than they already do.

 

Sorry I brought all this up, it was a perfectly good thread without it.  But I have an excuse--I just finished renewing a small-tonnage captain's license.  Ask me what lights a submarine shows when surfacing at night..

;-)

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2021 at 3:07 AM, Parma said:

No. You have to stand on regardless. You must hold your course no matter what because it's required.

wrong , dangerously wrong .

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nolatom said:

The Colregs for restricted vis are pretty much common sense--slow to minimun, so if you've got a CPA of zero in a crossing situation, you both have to slow and stop if necessary until the close-quarters situation is history.    Rather than starboard tack boat gets to keep course and speed.  

And if you're making 9 knots in thick fog, you're likely ignoring Rule 19 as to safe speed.  But racers will do it, hell it's a race. So you collide with another 9-knot fellow racer, neither of you can claim "unsafe speed".  But I guess you can claim port-starboard if the Racing Rules provide for it.  

Just don't set up your race anywhere near where regular commercial traffic (or other pleasure boat traffic) is likely to exist--you'll lose to them in an admiralty case, and the "civilians" will hate racers even more than they already do.

 

Sorry I brought all this up, it was a perfectly good thread without it.  But I have an excuse--I just finished renewing a small-tonnage captain's license.  Ask me what lights a submarine shows when surfacing at night..

;-)

 

...when being towed by a hovercraft, greater than 50m in length, under sail, restricted in its ability to manouevre...

(Uphill in the snow)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Black Sox said:

...when being towed by a hovercraft, greater than 50m in length, under sail, restricted in its ability to manouevre...

(Uphill in the snow)

Aw, that's an easy one--

Lit up Frosty the Snowman forward, striped candycanes port and starboard, and video of "It's a Wonderful life" on the stern

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites