# Right of Way?



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

On land, as you know, pedestrians have the right of way.

At sea, do sailboats have the right of way?


----------



## Totuma (Jul 27, 2017)

It's not that clear-cut.
https://www.google.com/search?q=sailing+rules+right+of+way&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1-ab


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

I appreciate that link. That was helpful. I went to another link that was also on that page and I read the following quote:

“ A sailboat that is sailing generally has the right of way over motorboats........”

Immediately after that “it said but “there are some exceptions......”

And this quote: “ A sailboat that is sailing generally has the right of way over motorboats.”

Interesting stuff! A bit confusing, but then again, I’m a bit blockheaded (lol)!


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Glad to see you are looking into this, if you plan to operate a vessel on the water. The rules, known as ColRegs (collision regulations) are far more complex than just sailboats and powerboats. While a sailboat does generally have priority or is stand on (there is no such thing as a right of way on the water) over a powerboat, it does not, if that powerboat is Not Under Command, Restricted in ability to Maneuver, Constrained by Draft, Fishing (which is not all forms), or within a narrow channel. Further, if your aux motor is running, you are considered a powerboat, by regulation, even if your sails are still up. 

There are many boater safety courses, even online, that you would find helpful.


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)




----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Rules always become a forum battle. But people get confused. Last week in Long Island Sound I was sailing hard with full sail. I look up and there is a tug boat (not pushing or towing anything, so just a powerboat) on my port and we are converging. I hold course, that I had been on for over 20 minutes, waiting for the tug to make some sign that he is going to take action. I finally can tell he isn't and we are going to hit and sound my horn. At the time the tug finitely changes course and we miss by maybe 50 feet. Afterward we are both on the VHF with the tug telling me I need to review my "rules" and this went on a few minutes till I pointed out about those white sheet like things on boat are called sails and I was the stand on boat. So a tugboat captain didn't know rule #1 and tried to cover it by using that I was on his starboard side so I should have gave way.

BTW - I think is is bad to think of rules as giving a "right of way". When boats collide there is basically a rule that says both boats are at fault.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

The only "official" place that I have ever found the term "right of way" is the US Inland Rules. It does not exist in International ColRegs.

In the real world there is only one practical rule .... He who is biggest wins.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

So a ship shows up on AIS. You have the rags up and steering by vane so changing course is a PIA. You are in international waters. You pick him up at 16m and his course isn’t changing so reasonable to assume he’s on AP. 
Colregs says you are stand on. He isn’t draft restricted. You are in the open ocean with miles of water under you. He isn’t restricted in by steering nor is he fishing. He has nothing in tow. You are now over five miles apart but will intersect- who makes the course correction? You do. Not even worth hailing him except to remind him you are there. Pull on the control loop and fall off. Retrim and watch him go by. 
These endless threads discussing are of intellectual interest no doubt. I like them and look forward to them but ultimately Don has it right. Do you want to die screaming “I have right of way” or use common sense?
We have the basic stand on/ burdened rules as a sticker on the nav instruments box at the helm so anyone with the wheel in their hands can glance down at them. We are strict that the boat follows them. Still it’s pretty useless if many others don’t. First rule. Stay away from the jerks then argue colregs if you’re in a pissy mood. Otherwise think “whatever” and enjoy the sail.


----------



## TQA (Apr 4, 2009)

Best of all the yacht driver was a Royal Navy Captain


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

To me its, who has the obligation to give way over who has the right of way.

Bottom line each skipper has the responsibility to avoid a collision/give way regardless of the rule they believe applies. The rules are not hard and fast either but are intended to be overridden when the situation requires it to avoid a collision (See Bold Underlined parts of Rule #2 below).

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 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.*​
Boats traveling against the current, since they can more often reduce speed to match the current and hold position, generally have the obligation to give way to boats traveling with the current.

Then there are rules about your obligation to give way to other sailboats restricted by the direction of the wind in their sails with the provision that if you are unsure then you need to assume the other guy is restricted and give way.

The exceptions are basically boats restricted by draft (biggest wins especially in restricted depth where there is only one course available for them) or active task being performed (dredges, pipe or cable laying boats, fishing trawlers, long line boats, tugs, boats performing a rescue, etc) have the right of way even over sail boats.

Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up.

Course changes should be sufficiently large enough to be evident to the other boat and yet not create risk to other boats in the area.

See the details posted at the USCG Navigation Center WebSite: https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=NavRulesAmalgamated

We had one speeding power boat blasting his horn at a Certified 100 Ton Captain and Sailing Instructor who was out stopped in a RIB, in the middle of performing a rescue and the guy was cussing and swearing at him to move coming in close without reducing speed further endangering the victims with his wake. He even swung about and came back to continued his tirade about having his right of way violated totally ignoring the capsized boat and the people in the water. The instructor told him to review the regulations about avoiding boats performing rescues while he continued with rescue operations. The other boater did not offer to assist and sped off still cussing and swearing. A few minutes later the guy was seen having become a guest of the Harbor Police and his boat was being towed away.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Regardless of other rules you are permittted to shoot sportfishers who pass you in a narrow channel dragging a 6' wake.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up.


We had this discussion several years ago and I do believe that "the engine running" is not the criteria for "motor sailing". The engine must be in gear and actually part of the motive power of the vessel. 
As many of us have or have had, engine drive refrigeration systems, quite often the engine is running for this purpose and not as motive power for the vessel, ie; not in gear.
I think this is best illustrated by the three blast rule which states "my engines are going astern" rather than "my vessel is going astern".


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

capta said:


> We had this discussion several years ago and I do believe that "the engine running" is not the criteria for "motor sailing". The engine must be in gear and actually part of the motive power of the vessel.
> As many of us have or have had, engine drive refrigeration systems, quite often the engine is running for this purpose and not as motive power for the vessel, ie; not in gear.
> I think this is best illustrated by the three blast rule which states "my engines are going astern" rather than "my vessel is going astern".


So my powerboat is not a powerboat if I put it in neutral ?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Two points in this discussion, larger commercial vessels are deemed to have limited maneuvering ability even out in the ocean. The tug would fall in a gray zone since it is obviously more manueverable than a bulk hauler, but still less manueverable than a typical powerboat of the same length. 

In either case I would have treated the bulk hauler and the tug as the stand on vessel. 

Also I didn't see anyone touch on one of the cases where a sailboat is the give way vessel relative to a powerboat. When a sailboat is approaching a powerboat from astern , the sailboat needs to yield to the powerboat.

This doesn't happen all that often but in a good breeze my boat is often faster than sailboats that are motoring, or slower trawler yachts, but also run into this in channels where a powerboat may be going slower than the speed limit and I might be able to sail at the speed limit. As a broad generality I typically adjust my sails to slow down rather than pass the power boat in a restricted channel. 

Jeff


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

I just give way as a general rule, even when I was running larger powerboats. I don't want to hit anyone and I don't want anyone to hit me, even if I have the right of way. Better safe than sorry.

Gary


----------



## flandria (Jul 31, 2012)

On land we all know about defensive driving and will avoid a collision if someone makes an error or fails “to give way”. It is no different on the water, except consequences can be more dire. Rules, yes, but safety first.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I tug boat motoring along in the middle of LIS isn't restricted, its just a power boat!!!! If stand on boats don't stand on that's how both boats end up turning into each other! I find stand on boats suddenly for no reason giving way almost much a problem as give way boats not doing so.

Far as shooting at the sport fishing 6' wave making boats, isn't it sad that you when see one of those you would be willing to make a large bet that they wouldn't do anything to reduce the wake they are going to hit you with?


----------



## BarryL (Aug 21, 2003)

Hey,

I (generally) understand the 'stand on / give way' stuff. That said, when I am out sailing, if I detect another vessel on a collision course with me, I do not wait very long to change course. Over the years I have learned a few things:
1. Charter fishing boats (20-100 passengers) don't use AIS, change course all the time, and don't care at all about the col-regs. They will go where they want when they want and the hell with anyone else. The exception to this is when they are returning to their home port. In that case they travel in a straight line at a steady speed - but don't move for anything other than the Bridgeport / Port Jeff ferry or large bulk carriers. I try very hard to stay away from them. 
2. The Bridgeport / Port Jeff ferries travel in straight lines, don't move for anyone, and are not shy about using the horn. I am fine with this and stay out of their way. They appear on AIS, but don't seem to respond to hails on channels other than 16. 
3. Large Sports Fisherman seem to be always on autopilot. They move at high speed (20+ kts) travel in a straight line and are pretty easy to avoid.
4. Large yachts (75-200') seem to be the best behaved. In summer on the Long Island sound it is common to see these vessels moving to / from New York City. They seem to be captained by professionals who are aware of other vessels, will alter course to avoid collision courses, and are polite on the radio
5. Jet skis are the worst.

Barry


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

boatpoker said:


> So my powerboat is not a powerboat if I put it in neutral ?


If not tied to a dock, or anchored a vessel is "underway". If you're a powerboat in neutral 
( drifting) you would still fall under the Rules of vessels meeting while underway.

That said, If I see recreational power vessels fishing a drift, or just hanging out, I'll adjust my course to avoid them.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

boatpoker said:


> So my powerboat is not a powerboat if I put it in neutral ?


Are you trying to be funny?
"*Sailboats* that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."
When is your boat *ever* a "*sailboat*"?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

BarryL said:


> Hey,
> 
> I (generally) understand the 'stand on / give way' stuff. That said, when I am out sailing, if I detect another vessel on a collision course with me, I do not wait very long to change course. Over the years I have learned a few things:
> 1. Charter fishing boats (20-100 passengers) don't use AIS, change course all the time, and don't care at all about the col-regs. They will go where they want when they want and the hell with anyone else. The exception to this is when they are returning to their home port. In that case they travel in a straight line at a steady speed - but don't more anything other than the Bridgeport / Port Jeff ferry or large bulk carriers. I try very hard to stay away from them.
> ...


Keep in mind, that as the stand on vessel, under the rules it is your responsibility to maintain course and speed. By altering course for no apparent reason, you could be confusing the other vessel and create a situation that puts both vessels in peril.
That is not to say you shouldn't keep clear of commercial vessels, but keep this in mind when you do decide to alter course when you are the stand on vessel.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

tempest said:


> If not tied to a dock, or anchored a vessel is "underway". If you're a powerboat in neutral
> ( drifting) you would still fall under the Rules of vessels meeting while underway.
> 
> That said, If I see recreational power vessels fishing a drift, or just hanging out, I'll adjust my course to avoid them.


And then the other day there was the charter fishing boat that was the ONLY boat around me for miles. He HAD to of course motor right into my path and then STOP. Tried calling him on vhf to ask if he planned to stay there but of course he didn't answer.

That wasn't the first time I've seen this. I've even had those fishing boats change course to come near me. My theory is that they feel the people on the boat get a kick from seeing the sailing boat up close out in the open. Either that or they are trying to get close so that some of their flies move to our boat, because that always happens.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Jeff the monster container ships and even very large crude carriers aren’t limited in maneuvering when 10 to 16 miles off. They are actually able to turn a full 90 degrees in that distance and a one or two degree course change would mean they would avoid coming close. Still it makes absolutely no sense to expect them to do this. They are all about least time and least fuel for a given transit. It rude and unreasonable to expect them to turn so I never do. In fact usually change course as soon as I get a closest distance off the AIS. I don’t want them within two miles of me.
Being a “pro” has nothing to do with following colregs. Some of the “captains” on the big charter cats out of St. Martin and BVI are the rudest and clueless skippers I’ve seen. 
Agree the big sport fish are a close second. Piecing our way through the race on the way to sag from block in the fog was passed on both sides by groups of them. They were all wide open. Here we are ringing the bell and tooting our horn. There they are with feet between them at full throttle. Could see if a small boat was inching along they would be toast. Made a bunch of 90 degree turns to stay away from the targets but a boat without radar wouldn’t have a chance.
Later found out there was some big tournament going on. But so what. What they were doing was just unsafe. Sure they could stay away from each other and maybe see something big as a target in front of them but a small boat would have no chance.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> And then the other day there was the charter fishing boat that was the ONLY boat around me for miles. He HAD to of course motor right into my path and then STOP. Tried calling him on vhf to ask if he planned to stay there but of course he didn't answer.
> 
> That wasn't the first time I've seen this. I've even had those fishing boats change course to come near me. My theory is that they feel the people on the boat get a kick from seeing the sailing boat up close out in the open. Either that or they are trying to get close so that some of their flies move to our boat, because that always happens.


Generally, it makes no sense at all for a sport fishing vessel of any type (party boat or the sports fishermen w/outriggers) to place themselves anywhere near where you might be heading. Should they hook a decent size fish, you would be a danger to their fishing operations and could, in the worst case scenario, cost them a world record and its attendant a big bucks reward. 
Unless you consistently sail over the drop-offs or seamounts that fishermen tend to frequent, the actions above simply mystify me.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

capta said:


> Are you trying to be funny?
> "*Sailboats* that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."
> When is your boat *ever* a "*sailboat*"?


Only when you are purely sailing and not when combination motor sailing or simply motoring with the sails down/flaked.

Some are under the impression that just because its a sailboat whether they are sailing, motor sailing or just motoring that by default they always have the right of way which most here know is not really the case.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> Only when you are purely sailing and not when combination motor sailing or simply motoring with the sails down/flaked.
> 
> Some are under the impression that just because its a sailboat whether they are sailing, motor sailing or just motoring that by default they always have the right of way which most here know is not really the case.


boatpoker, who this post is directed to, has a motorboat. To the best of my knowledge, he has never had a sailboat.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

capta said:


> Generally, it makes no sense at all for a sport fishing vessel of any type (party boat or the sports fishermen w/outriggers) to place themselves anywhere near where you might be heading. Should they hook a decent size fish, you would be a danger to their fishing operations and could, in the worst case scenario, cost them a world record and its attendant a big bucks reward.
> Unless you consistently sail over the drop-offs or seamounts that fishermen tend to frequent, the actions above simply mystify me.


They mystified me also. Based on my experience with boats fishing I should sta fishing as it appears I'm good at finding the best spots. One on these days they will catch "the big one" and try to reel me in :devil

Btw - seems a lot of powerboaters with a fishing pole think they are a "fishing vessel"


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> Btw - seems a lot of powerboaters with a fishing pole think they are a "fishing vessel"


If it ain't got a basket in the rig, it is nothing more than a motorboat with aspirations to be more! lol
Sport fishermen are not deemed "fishing boats" under the rules.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

capta said:


> We had this discussion several years ago and I do believe that "the engine running" is not the criteria for "motor sailing". The engine must be in gear and actually part of the motive power of the vessel.





capta said:


> "*Sailboats* that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."


Your posts seem contradictory to me.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

boatpoker said:


> Your posts seem contradictory to me.


"Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up." was a quote from another poster, and the statement "We had this discussion several years ago and I do believe that "the engine running" is not the criteria for "motor sailing". The engine must be in gear and actually part of the motive power of the vessel." was my response.
Where is the contradiction when I disagree with the first statement and back the opinion up with the second? 
Your posts at times leave me confused. Perhaps it is a problem with translation?


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Power driven vessel is defined in the Colregs. Its defined as a vessel that is proppelled by machinery.

A sailboat running its engine for the fridge or to charge the batteries should be no more propelled by machinery then a vessel charging its batteries with solar panels.

However, when i am trying to determine if a vessel is sailing or motor sailing the cues I look for include exhaust and coolant water flow, so I could see the situation leading to confusion.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Arcb said:


> Power driven vessel is defined in the Colregs. Its defined as a vessel that is proppelled by machinery.
> 
> A sailboat running its engine for the fridge or to charge the batteries should be no more propelled by machinery then a vessel charging its batteries with solar panels.
> 
> However, when i am trying to determine if a vessel is sailing or motor sailing the cues I look for include exhaust and coolant water flow, so I could see the situation leading to confusion.


The rules call for day shapes and lights at night to indicate these things. If a mariner chooses *not* to display the proper indication, then those viewing that vessel can only make their actions based upon what they surmise. 
Most often I agree, an exhaust does indicate to me that the other vessel is motorsailing, especially if it is a cat going to weather. However, should he not be motorsailing, an assumption that it is can cause problems, as it did me one day when rounding West Cay, Bequia. I got yelled at because my assumption was apparently wrong. Oh well, I never saw the boat again.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

There is one thing I know about - fishing regs. If a vessel is actively engaged in fishing, trolling, lines in the water, nets in the water, retrieving pots, etc..., they have the right away. Now, while traversing to and from the fishing grounds, they do not - it's pretty simple. 

More than once I have seen sailboats sail over trolled lures and cut them off, which would really piss off anyone that just had a $25 lure cut off for no good reason at all. I don't really give a damned if you were under sail or not, there is no reason for this kind of discourteous activity to take place. I have always done my best to give these guys a wide berth, and I am sure that was appreciated. 

I was once aboard a charter fishing boat in Southern Maryland when a woman running a motorized sailboat with her sails down damned near hit the anchored fishing vessel, missing it by only a few feet. At the time, the fishing was red hot and monster bluefish were in the chum slick as the boat approached. The captain of the fishing boat yelled at her, and she gave him the finger and yelled back "Sailboat - I have the right-away." What an idiot!

Just be courteous all the time and there will never be a problem, at least that's the way I see it. 

Gary


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

travlin-easy said:


> More than once I have seen sailboats sail over trolled lures and cut them off, which would really piss off anyone that just had a $25 lure cut off for no good reason at all. Gary


On the other side of the coin, I don't know how many lures I've lost to motorboats that cross my stern way too close when I'm sailing. The dive and tour boats in the BVI have a particular predilection for this, actually altering course to do it intentionally. I finally got so tired of losing lures when sailing there that I rigged up about 20 feet of 4 mm davit cable instead of lures and towed it from a rod and line. Probably a bit hard on cutlass bearings, that.


----------



## ps23435 (Jul 13, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> Two points in this discussion, larger commercial vessels are deemed to have limited maneuvering ability even out in the ocean.
> /QUOTE]
> 
> There is no "limited maneuvering ability" in the rules (International or Inland); there is a vessel "restricted in ability to maneuver" which under the COLREGS is a very specific term (which is why I am parsing words here): The term "vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver" means a vessel which from the nature of her work is restricted in her ability to maneuver as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. (Rule 3) A large commercial vessel may or may not fall in this category. The general examples given for a vessel restricted in ability to maneuver under the Rules include a vessel laying, servicing or picking up a navigation aid, submarine cable, or pipeline; a dredge; a vessel engaged in surveying or underwater operations; a vessel engaged in replenishment, cargo or personnel transfer while underway; a towing vessel with a tow that severely restricts the towing vessel and her tow from deviating from their course; a vessel launching or recovering aircraft; a mine-clearing vessel. Just being a large, commercial vessel isn't on the list. I don't disagree that it may be smart to consider a larger commercial vessel as not getting out of our way (when we are on smaller, more maneuverable boats), it's just not specific in the Rules.


----------



## ps23435 (Jul 13, 2011)

A comment about vessels engaged in fishing. There has been some discussion of vessels with fishing lines (and lures) over the side, that is "trolling and whether they are entitled to the privileges afforded "fishing vessels" under the COLREGS. Rule 3(d) specifically addresses this: "In accordance with Rule 3 (d) (General definitions) the term “vessel engaged in fishing ” means any vessel fishing with nets, lines, trawls or other fishing apparatus which restrict maneuverability, but does not include a vessel fishing with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict maneuverability." I suppose one could argue that fishing from poles over the side hinder maneuverability, but somehow I don't think that would get far, the rules presume that trolling does not restrict a vessel's maneuverability. Just something to consider. Personally, I don't push the issue and of course stay away from folks out fishing, it's easier to alter course, even tack/gybe then stand on principle!


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

capta said:


> "Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up." was a quote from another poster


I was not being highly detailed in that post and presumed that most would get the in gear part. I would not waste fuel by using the main engine to charge a battery and would have a more fuel efficient and cleaner inverter generator running for that purpose but only run it when solar or potentially a water turbine was not up to the task. I really hate to waste fuel (perhaps better said use fossil fuel at all if I can help it).

Currently I run only outboards as I dislike giving interior space away to engines and dealing with their through hulls, dirt, etc inside the boat plus only have a 15 foot picnic boat and will probably stay small for the foreseeable future. Current outboard does not have electric start or a charging system either.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> I was not being highly detailed in that post and presumed that most would get the in gear part. I would not waste fuel by using the main engine to charge a battery and would have a more fuel efficient and cleaner inverter generator running for that purpose but only run it when solar or potentially a water turbine was not up to the task. I really hate to waste fuel (perhaps better said use fossil fuel at all if I can help it).
> 
> Currently I run only outboards as I dislike giving interior space away to engines and dealing with their through hulls, dirt, etc inside the boat plus only have a 15 foot picnic boat and will probably stay small for the foreseeable future. Current outboard does not have electric start or a charging system either.


There are times when a liveaboard must use whatever means are available, even if that is the 175 amp alternator on the main engine, to charge the batteries.
As much as the dream of sustainable power is appealing, the reality, especially on a boat, is that it is not a sure thing, and fossil fuel power generation is sometimes necessary. It certainly isn't a waste if one needs it occasionally, and I'd bet that most cruising sailors have a much smaller carbon footprint than those living and working ashore who preach about it.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

New reels catch fish so purchase some Wednesday.


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

My goodness!! I CERTAINLY didn’t expect this topic to generate such activity, nor migrate to a discussion about fishing lures! It’s been VERY entertaining here, to say the least! 

“Thank you,” one and all, for this journey thus far!!


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

outbound said:


> So a ship shows up on AIS. You have the rags up and steering by vane so changing course is a PIA. You are in international waters. You pick him up at 16m and his course isn't changing so reasonable to assume he's on AP.
> Colregs says you are stand on. He isn't draft restricted. You are in the open ocean with miles of water under you. He isn't restricted in by steering nor is he fishing. He has nothing in tow. You are now over five miles apart but will intersect- who makes the course correction? You do. Not even worth hailing him except to remind him you are there. Pull on the control loop and fall off. Retrim and watch him go by.
> These endless threads discussing are of intellectual interest no doubt. I like them and look forward to them but ultimately Don has it right. Do you want to die screaming "I have right of way" or use common sense?
> We have the basic stand on/ burdened rules as a sticker on the nav instruments box at the helm so anyone with the wheel in their hands can glance down at them. We are strict that the boat follows them. Still it's pretty useless if many others don't. First rule. Stay away from the jerks then argue colregs if you're in a pissy mood. Otherwise think "whatever" and enjoy the sail.


I agree with what you said here; but being as much of a rookie as I am, about knowing the lingo, I would need an interpreter to decipher almost all of the navigational jargon you used within the response you gave.

I will call on another common phrase: "better to be right and alive, than dead right!"

Someone else said (and I will paraphrase)......the bigger the vessel, the righter the way. That makes sense, but it also sounds arrogant on some level. Makes me think of that picture from recent history (was it in China) of the guy standing in front of that tank, and the tank crew not running him over.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Soupy1957 said:


> My goodness!! I CERTAINLY didn't expect this topic to generate such activity, nor migrate to a discussion about fishing lures! It's been VERY entertaining here, to say the least! !


That's because you are a newbie. Those of us who have been on the site a while knew what would happen.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

capta said:


> There are times when a liveaboard must use whatever means are available, even if that is the 175 amp alternator on the main engine, to charge the batteries.
> As much as the dream of sustainable power is appealing, the reality, especially on a boat, is that it is not a sure thing, and fossil fuel power generation is sometimes necessary. It certainly isn't a waste if one needs it occasionally, and I'd bet that most cruising sailors have a much smaller carbon footprint than those living and working ashore who preach about it.


The plastic boat probably evens that out a bit unfortunately as the recent thread on most countries being a bit remiss when it comes to recycling them on a very large scale brought to our notice.

Lets not sidetrack things too far from the topic of who has the Obligation to Avoid another Vessel.

One thing that can reduce confusion is having a good horn on your boat and using your sound signals when encountering within 1/2 mile.

SOUND SIGNALS:
1 short blast (1 second) I want to pass you on my port side (Hint: PORT = 1 syllable = 1 short blast)
2 short blasts I want to pass you on my starboard side (Hint: STARBOARD = 2 syllables = 2 short blasts)
3 short blasts Engine is in reverse
5 short blasts Danger, or do not understand approaching boat's intentions
1 prolonged blast (4-6 seconds) Warning:

Entering or exiting a blind turn
Nearing an obstructed area
Leaving a dock or a berth

1 prolonged blast every 2 minutes Power-driven vessel operating in low or restricted visibility
1 prolonged blast + 2 short blasts every 2 minutes Sailing vessel operating in low or restricted visibility

The other vessel should respond with the same signal if they agree.


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

The " Rules" are not difficult to understand and follow. The problems arise when people don't take the time to read and understand the rules; or, they just don't give a Rat's #$#. Anyone with a large enough wallet can Purchase a boat and get on the water. Many States now require a Safety Course be taken to operate a vessel, but I've found ( having taught those courses ) that many boaters look at that as annoyance rather than an opportunity to become more knowledgeable. " I've been boating for 25 years, why do I have to take a class!" 

I'd venture a guess that other than professionals and avid boaters like those on this site, 90 % or more of the recreational boaters think a horn signal means " get out of my way" and treats them like a car horn. Or, if they knew what they meant, they have long since forgotten. 

The Title of this thread is " Right of Way" . But we know that, that term only exists in the " Inland Rules" ( Rule 14) on The Great Lakes or Western Rivers, or Specified Waters for vessels traveling Down bound with the current. The Good news is that, The question is being asked. It's the people who never ask or don't care that typically cause us grief.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> The plastic boat probably evens that out a bit unfortunately as the recent thread on most countries being a bit remiss when it comes to recycling them on a very large scale brought to our notice.
> 
> Lets not sidetrack things too far from the topic of who has the Obligation to Avoid another Vessel.
> 
> ...


Obviously, sound signals are only of use if both parties understand their meaning, which, unfortunately, is not the case most of the time. 
I haven't taken any state 'safe boater's course' (or whatever they are called) or ASA courses, so I don't know if they touch on sound signals in these, but the level of proficiency shown by the average bareboater down here leads one to believe that a knowledge of sound signals would be a forlorn hope when a situation occurs in which they might be of help.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

tempest said:


> The " Rules" are not difficult to understand and follow. The problems arise when people don't take the time to read and understand the rules; or, they just don't give a Rat's #$#. Anyone with a large enough wallet can Purchase a boat and get on the water. Many States now require a Safety Course be taken to operate a vessel, but I've found ( having taught those courses ) that many boaters look at that as annoyance rather than an opportunity to become more knowledgeable. " I've been boating for 25 years, why do I have to take a class!"
> 
> I'd venture a guess that other than professionals and avid boaters like those on this site, 90 % or more of the recreational boaters think a horn signal means " get out of my way" and treats them like a car horn. Or, if they knew what they meant, they have long since forgotten.
> 
> The Title of this thread is " Right of Way" . But we know that, that term only exists in the " Inland Rules" ( Rule 14) on The Great Lakes or Western Rivers, or Specified Waters for vessels traveling Down bound with the current. The Good news is that, The question is being asked. It's the people who never ask or don't care that typically cause us grief.


Fortunately they are moving away from Right of Way as the need or obligation is to Avoid other vessels.

There are now only two Right-of-Way instances defined in the Regs and both are related to Vessels with a following current operating in a narrow channel having the right of way.
https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=NavRulesAmalgamated

In Florida they are making it mandatory to take the boaters safety coarse before they will let you register a boat but only if you were born after a certain date however I feel that they should just make it mandatory to take the coarse or show proof that you already have and received a passing grade. They turned over motorcycle testing and licensing to the Motorcycle Safety Foundation and make it mandatory to retake the Basic Riders Course if you get a ticket for a serious infraction plus impound your bike until you return with a certificate indicating you received a passing grade and I really believe the same should be done with boats. If boaters in general won't clean up their act on their own then this may become the only practical solution.


----------



## Tanski (May 28, 2015)

Why can I perfectly picture this guy sailing around with his hand mashed on the horn button because he is always within a half mile of anthor boat.....with the rule book in the other hand.......



SeaStar58 said:


> The plastic boat probably evens that out a bit unfortunately as the recent thread on most countries being a bit remiss when it comes to recycling them on a very large scale brought to our notice.
> 
> Lets not sidetrack things too far from the topic of who has the Obligation to Avoid another Vessel.
> 
> ...


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Tanski said:


> Why can I perfectly picture this guy sailing around with his hand mashed on the horn button because he is always within a half mile of anthor boat.....with the rule book in the other hand.......


There was nothing overly anal about his post. That was a cheap shot.


----------



## SeaStar58 (Feb 14, 2018)

Tanski said:


> Why can I perfectly picture this guy sailing around with his hand mashed on the horn button because he is always within a half mile of anthor boat.....with the rule book in the other hand.......


Possibly because your an extremist or prone to ridiculing others? Otherwise I wouldn't know why you would picture that or even bring it up.

I have rarely have had to use my horn or whistle but do know how to if need be. If you pilot a boat then just like you need to know how to use hand signals when driving a car or truck you really need to know how and when to use horn signals on a boat.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

I've been through the "sailing, engine in neutral--what AM I??" question before. Finally settled it with whomever it was by asking our Coast Guard Captain of the Port (and his Deputy who was also the "designated Rules Guru" and a knowledgeable seafarer), what they thought, at an industry lunch. Here's my takeaway from them:

a) Been sailing, getting near harbor, probably will sail in but might possibly need engine later on, no harm to have it ready, it's in neutral, hasn't been in gear since I cranked it over?? "You're a sailboat under the rules", say the Magi, you ain't "propelled" (and, if over 12 meters, you don't have the conical shape up, Rule 25)

b) Been sailing, still sailing, but have used the engine in gear a little here and there recently, probably will again, but during the "situation" it's in neutral? "You're a powerboat, been using actual "propulsion", that neutral is just another "engine bell order", shoulda put the cone up, too" (or the steaming light after dark). It's called, "motorsailing, dummy"..

This wisdom sounded reasonable to me, on the sailboat.

But--I concede that if I'm the tugboat, I'm being asked to be a mind-reader about Mister "Sailor" and his friggin' motor. That's what the cones are for. You're under 12 meters, or your pertinent thought is, "what's a 'cone'?" Please make it easy on tug guy, and just behave like a powerboat.

Normal commercial sailors would use whistle signals (maybe even with a whistle light also), or since the last hundred years or so, a radio, to make the agreement. We yachties don't tend to do either, so the best way for us to "signal" remains a large enough change of course that the other boat can't possibly miss it. In really close quarters, I've resorted to hand signals, way better than nothin'.

PS: There's also the "Rule of Displacement", written down nowhere, but very useful in one's quest to live to see another day so you can type about the Colregs at your desk.


----------



## PhilCarlson (Dec 14, 2013)

Having been curious from time to time if I was going to be run down, or wondering why that big motor yacht went out of their way to pass 50 ft off my bow, I've come to realize that the biggest problem, at least as I see it in Tampa Bay, is boaters having no understanding of the waters they are navigating... no chart, no chartplotter, or no interest in either. 

I've encountered 40+ foot yachts that feel the need to pass dangerously close rather than leave the shipping channel, never mind that they have 30 feet of water for a mile in any direction. Either they think that being in the channel grants them stand on, or really have no idea of the surrounding water depth. 

I'll bet they wonder why they get flipped off so often.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

SeaStar58 said:


> If boaters in general won't clean up their act on their own then this may become the only practical solution.


Enter the "nanny state"!
Perhaps if most state safe boating courses were actually to teach safe boating rather than for revenue collection, they might make a slight difference. But driver's license tests are a great deal more difficult to pass than the safe boating certificates and include a driving test in a vehicle, yet a whole lot of people are still injured and killed in automobile incidences every year in the US.
Oddly enough, down here where there is no enforcement, licensing or effective remuneration for damages, there seem to be a lot fewer incidences and problems on the water than the states with 'safe boating certificates', even though a great many of the boat operators are definitely unqualified to operate the vessels they are operating.
Personally, I like being treated as an adult, responsible for my own actions, not having the state regulate every aspect of my life. There are a few unlit channel markers down here upon which every once in a great while, some drunk yachtie in his dink kills himself, coming home from the bar. The new to the area yachties scream and petition the government to do something, but they never do, and in a week or two the hubbub dies down until it happens again.
It's not like these marks are invisible every time one goes to the dinghy dock in daylight! It's not like *every* yachtie doesn't know they are dangerous! It's just that in the eyes of the local governments we are adults and if we choose to be stupid and kill ourselves, then that is *our* choice and problem! 
I felt the same way about helmet laws on bikes and seat belt laws, though to me, seat belts make sense. None of it needs to be regulated, IMO, but left to the discretion of the driver.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

PhilCarlson said:


> Having been curious from time to time if I was going to be run down, or wondering why that big motor yacht went out of their way to pass 50 ft off my bow, I've come to realize that the biggest problem, at least as I see it in Tampa Bay, is boaters having no understanding of the waters they are navigating... no chart, no chartplotter, or no interest in either.
> 
> I've encountered 40+ foot yachts that feel the need to pass dangerously close rather than leave the shipping channel, never mind that they have 30 feet of water for a mile in any direction. Either they think that being in the channel grants them stand on, or really have no idea of the surrounding water depth.
> 
> I'll bet they wonder why they get flipped off so often.


I have a sort of "lookout vigilance scale" for powerboats (Lake Pontchartrain for me, where i teach sailing from time to time)

Early in the day, powerboat is heading "down-sun"?? He may be sober, and will probably see me.

Later in the day, especially on weekends? May be tipsy or drunk, may be on autopilot, may not see me, though if he's heading down-sun, maybe he will. Up-sun? Forget it, and forget the rules until powerboat visually proves otherwise.

I want my students to live. Makes it much easier teach them ;-)


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

SeaStar58 said:


> Fortunately they are moving away from Right of Way as the need or obligation is to Avoid other vessels.
> 
> There are now only two Right-of-Way instances defined in the Regs and both are related to Vessels with a following current operating in a narrow channel having the right of way.
> https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=NavRulesAmalgamated
> ...


They aren't moving away from "Right of Way" AFIK it was never there to begin with.

Florida, Texas and New York are the three states that incur the most on-water fatalities every year. It makes sense since they have the largest number of boats. YET, until fairly recently those same states had the most Lax regulations.

Most deaths occur however on Inland lakes, in boats under 23' , on a sunny day. The absence of Life Jackets and the Presence of alcohol are major contributing factors.

All things considered, it's still safer than driving.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

Maybe I've been around her long enough that the moderators will allow me to give something away for free.

Sailing Lessons in Connecticut ? Enjoy Sailing Skip The Work

Click on the free rules of the road on-line course.

It is free and even if you think you know them I'll bet you that you don't get 100.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I find it kind of funny/sad that sailors need clarification of when they are sailing


----------



## Jagl (Jul 16, 2018)

Always a good idea to follow the rule of gross tonnage. My sailboat vs a large ship...I’m good to fall off a bit.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

This idea that sailboats always have the right of way seems to be one of the more common - and dangerous - misconceptions of noob sailors. As others have pointed out, just the use of the term "right of way" conveys a fundamental misunderstanding of what all this is about. Of all the classes of vessels captured by "New Reels Catch Fish *S*o Purchase Some Wednesday" sailboats are pretty far down the pecking order. There are an awful lot of other vessels that sailboats must give way to. It all becomes common sense when you grasp the simple concept that the less maneuverable vessel is stand on. Have some empathy and assess the other vessel's situation. Someone purely under sail will be stand on vs. most recreational power boats (as long as you're sure that Sea Ray driver is actually at the helm and can see over his bow). But a barge, freighter, or NUC will always be stand on vs. a recreational sailboat.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

True story about sailboat "right of way". I was sailing 2nd mate on a commercial survey vessel, about 140 ft. We had some environmental samples to collect in a rather busy harbour. The skipper himself was driving because we were anticipating problems, specifically with pleasure boats, sailboats and especially racing sailboats. I was on watch. 

I made a Securite call an hour out including our sample destination, 15 minutes out and 5 minutes out. We were showing correct RAMN days shapes, gear down on the starboard side, safe to pass on the port. 

We put the gear down on the starboard side in DP mode meaning we were stationary. We had about half a dozen sailboats literally screaming expletives at us for not yielding to them as they were sailboats and had right of way, while we were stationary, with gear down, displaying RAMN shapes.

These werent dinghy sailors they were dudes on nice yachts, 35, 40, 50 Footers, folks who you would think should know something. From my observation, sailboaters can be every bit as bad as Jet Skiiers and Charter fishermen, possibly worse.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Arcb,

This just reinforces my dad's favorite sayings "The average person is well below average and common sense isn't very common these days." Dad was pretty darned smart from my perspective. 

Gary


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

Arcb said:


> True story about sailboat "right of way". I was sailing 2nd mate on a commercial survey vessel, about 140 ft. We had some environmental samples to collect in a rather busy harbour. The skipper himself was driving because we were anticipating problems, specifically with pleasure boats, sailboats and especially racing sailboats. I was on watch.
> 
> I made a Securite call an hour out including our sample destination, 15 minutes out and 5 minutes out. We were showing correct RAMN days shapes, gear down on the starboard side, safe to pass on the port.
> 
> ...


Yet another text that I will need a translator for, just because I am THAT new, and unfamiliar with the language (lol).


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

everyone feeling "safe" yet?


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Soupy1957 said:


> Yet another text that I will need a translator for, just because I am THAT new, and unfamiliar with the language (lol).


I guess the jargon/acronyms were RAMN- Restricted in Ability to Maneuver, sometimes misused to define any cumbersome vessel, but it actually describes vessels restricted by the nature of their work. Some one already gave the full descripption.

DP is Dynamic Positioning. It means a boat that uses thrusters to hold a stationary position.

I guess my point is when in doubt, come about, there is no harm in altering early and giving way to a working or fishing vessel.

At the very least don't stand there with your white linen pants clinging to your butt with beer frothing from your mouth and dribbling down your ascott screaming "can't you see I am racing here!". Nobody cares, they really don't.


----------



## Gladrags1 (Apr 9, 2003)

Don0190 said:


> Rules always become a forum battle. But people get confused. Last week in Long Island Sound I was sailing hard with full sail. I look up and there is a tug boat (not pushing or towing anything, so just a powerboat) on my port and we are converging. I hold course, that I had been on for over 20 minutes, waiting for the tug to make some sign that he is going to take action. I finally can tell he isn't and we are going to hit and sound my horn. At the time the tug finitely changes course and we miss by maybe 50 feet. Afterward we are both on the VHF with the tug telling me I need to review my "rules" and this went on a few minutes till I pointed out about those white sheet like things on boat are called sails and I was the stand on boat. So a tugboat captain didn't know rule #1 and tried to cover it by using that I was on his starboard side so I should have gave way.
> 
> BTW - I think is is bad to think of rules as giving a "right of way". When boats collide there is basically a rule that says both boats are at fault.


The tug Captain is partially correct in that the powered boat must yield to the powered boat on the right.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ThereYouAre (Sep 21, 2016)

Sloop was on port tack and should have avoided the Cat-Ketch which was on starboard tack. IOW the rammer was at fault.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Gladrags1 said:


> The tug Captain is partially correct in that the powered boat must yield to the powered boat on the right.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So what does that have to do with a sailboat?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Had it happen again today. I was on a port tack doing 7 knots and there's a sailboat on my stbd on a starboard tack and we are converging. So once I can tell we aren't looking good I bear away to my starboard to go behind him (I'm giving way because he's on a starboard tack and I do it well before I needed to). When I complete that I look up to find we are converging faster now because he didn't hold course and instead beared away to his port. :hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer

In the end he went behind me because I couldn't really do anything that wouldn't have been a crash move. Or course he gave me that "look" as he went by.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Don, as you can apparently see, no good deed goes unpunished. 

Gary


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

Don0190 said:


> Had it happen again today. I was on a port tack doing 7 knots and there's a sailboat on my stbd on a starboard tack and we are converging. So once I can tell we aren't looking good I bear away to my starboard to go behind him (I'm giving way because he's on a starboard tack and I do it well before I needed to). When I complete that I look up to find we are converging faster now because he didn't hold course and instead beared away to his port. :hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer
> 
> In the end he went behind me because I couldn't really do anything that wouldn't have been a crash move. Or course he gave me that "look" as he went by.


That is EXACTLY why there is NO SUCH THING as "Right of Way." In this case, the skipper on starboard tack acted as if he had the right to do whatever he pleased, when the rules actually state that the stand-on boat has the basic OBLIGATION to retain her course and speed.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

jwing said:


> That is EXACTLY why there is NO SUCH THING as "Right of Way." In this case, the skipper on starboard tack acted as if he had the right to do whatever he pleased, when the rules actually state that the stand-on boat has the basic OBLIGATION to retain her course and speed.


That is the textbook argument, but Don's statement that he gave way "well before I needed to" could imply that the vessels weren't yet close enough that the other vessel had any stand-on obligation.

These things are never completely black-and-white. Without being there, or having an NMEA log of both vessels' tracks and speed data, there is no way to know for sure.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

TakeFive said:


> That is the textbook argument, but Don's statement that he gave way "well before I needed to" could imply that the vessels weren't yet close enough that the other vessel had any stand-on obligation.
> 
> These things are never completely black-and-white. Without being there, or having an NMEA log of both vessels' tracks and speed data, there is no way to know for sure.


We were close enough, I was there!!!!!


----------



## JoCoSailor (Dec 7, 2015)

TakeFive said:


> New reels catch fish so purchase some Wednesday.


Only New reels catch fish so purchase some Wednesday

In case anyone hasn't read enough about ColREGS Rules I'll throw in "Overtaking"

INTERNATIONAL
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken.

INLAND
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules 4 through 18, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken.


----------



## JoCoSailor (Dec 7, 2015)

Arcb said:


> True story about sailboat "right of way". ....<Clip>...
> 
> These werent dinghy sailors they were dudes on nice yachts, 35, 40, 50 Footers, folks who you would think should know something. From my observation, sailboaters can be every bit as bad as Jet Skiiers and Charter fishermen, possibly worse.


Being a "dinghy sailor" I think I should take offense to that .....but then there are folks in our club that think "we have to" keep out of the way of powerboats when they are fishing with just a rod & reel.........


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

JoCoSailor said:


> Being a "dinghy sailor" I think I should take offense to that .....but then there are folks in our club that think "we have to" keep out of the way powerboats when they are fishing with a rod & reel.........


Don't take offense, I am very much a dinghy sailor myself. However, there is a perception that folks dropping a quarter million on a boat are likely to have gone to some effort to educate themselves.

All of the best sailors I have known *are or have been dinghy sailors and most of the top sailing athletes have strong dinghy back grounds and many prefer dinghies and sport boats for fun and recreation.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

More than once I’ve taken to luffing or changing course to sail parallel to another vessel until there’s either no possibility of them hitting me or I’m certain of their intentions.
There’s a rule when riding a street bike. “Act like you’re invisible “. Think unfortunately it often applies when sailing as well. 
My bugaboo with dinghy sailors is when the race is set up by their commiso they have no choice but to pass through a narrow channel twice. You enter the channel before the race starts and then they descend on you. Arrrg....


----------



## danvon (Dec 10, 2012)

That spinnaker halyard in the tanker crash video is some seriously strong stuff!


----------



## Solandri (Sep 7, 2012)

Don0190 said:


> Had it happen again today. I was on a port tack doing 7 knots and there's a sailboat on my stbd on a starboard tack and we are converging. So once I can tell we aren't looking good I bear away to my starboard to go behind him (I'm giving way because he's on a starboard tack and I do it well before I needed to). When I complete that I look up to find we are converging faster now because he didn't hold course and instead beared away to his port. :hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer:hammer
> 
> In the end he went behind me because I couldn't really do anything that wouldn't have been a crash move. Or course he gave me that "look" as he went by.


IMHO the "rules" aren't there to figure out who is right or wrong. They exist to clarify what the other guy will do when you're in a last-minute collision-imminent situation and there's not enough time for both vessels to communicate to each other their intentions. When both of you only have enough time to take one corrective action, the possibility exists that both of you may take corrective actions which avert the original collision-imminent situation, but create a new one. Precisely what happened in the above situation because one party didn't obey the rules.

The rules exist to prevent one party's corrective action from nullifying the other party's corrective action. And if obeyed by both parties, turn the collision-imminent situation into a safe situation. For a non-sailing example, there was a mid-air collision over Germany in 2002 between an airliner and a cargo plane. The controller recognized a collision was imminent in time, and gave instructions to avert it. The computerized system designed to prevent such collisions (TCAS) worked as designed and instructed both pilots to take corrective action. Both pilots knew a collision was imminent and took corrective action. So how did they collide?

TCAS automatically ordered one plane to climb and the other to descend. But by chance the controller ordered the climbing plane to descend (50/50 chance). In that situation TCAS has priority over the controller - the pilot is supposed to obey TCAS and disregard the controller, because TCAS is communicating with the TCAS system on the other plane to guarantee both planes get different commands. But the pilot chose to obey the controller instead, and descended. That resulted in both planes descending, and they collided killing 71 people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Überlingen_mid-air_collision

So to reiterate, the rules aren't about who is in the right and who is in the wrong. They're about colliding or not colliding. I think that's why they were originally written using the terms stand-on and give-way vessel. Saying one vessel has the right of way implies that vessel has rights the other vessel does not, when that's not the case. It's about making sure both vessels behave in a predictable manner so corrective actions successfully resolve the situation, not who has rights and who doesn't.

Ideally you will recognize a situation developing far enough in advance that you can take steps to assure you never even get to the point where the rules kick in. If I see a boat a mile away which looks like is on a collision course (its relative bearing to me does not change), I take steps to avoid it long before we're anywhere close enough for the rules to kick in. Doesn't matter if I'm approaching from the starboard or on starboard tack and theoretically have right of way. I take steps to prevent the situation from ever developing to the point where the rules will matter. Even if it means I have to swing wide and take 5 minutes longer to enter the harbor.

The only people I expect to live by the rules are racers. Their sport often puts them in close enough proximity that the only thing preventing a collision is the assumption that the other boat will obey the rules. For general boating and navigation, you're gambling with your boat and possibly your life on the assumption that the other boat will obey the rules. And as both the above examples show, that's a poor gamble because people often don't obey the rules. Why take that risk? Remove the possibility of a collision long before it ever gets to the point where the rules matter. The rules are a last-ditch safety net, but only work if both parties obey them. Why take that chance when you can simply avoid falling?


----------



## colinalleck (Jan 29, 2014)

Also Many yachties forget if they are sailing faster than a power boat and are overtaking, they are responsible to keep clear.

But don’t forget the primary requirement of the rules and that is to take such action as to avoid a collision


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

Because I’m a complete noob, I suppose I can get away with asking........

To ME, a “dingy,” is that small little boat a person takes from shore, to GET to their boat, moored (sp?) out in the bay. 

No? 

I’ve read reference in some of your postings, about “dingy sailers,” and it confuses me.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Soupy1957 said:


> Because I'm a complete noob, I suppose I can get away with asking........
> 
> To ME, a "dingy," is that small little boat a person takes from shore, to GET to their boat, moored (sp?) out in the bay.
> 
> ...


A sailing dinghy


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Rule 13.186.a.3b says you can run those over if they are sailing back and forth across the narrow channel.







Someone can now write up some long preachy post correcting me like I'm some nob who has never been on the water.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> Someone can now write up some long preachy post correcting me like I'm some nob who has never been on the water.


Certainly! :wink

As to the main thrust (I'm not really sure, I only scanned the posts as it's too hot in Amsterdam to give a rats butt.

If you alter course too early and the other dude alters course too, then you come back to your original course. 
Keep doing this until the idiot realises what to do.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Soupy1957 said:


> Because I'm a complete noob, I suppose I can get away with asking........
> 
> To ME, a "dingy," is that small little boat a person takes from shore, to GET to their boat, moored (sp?) out in the bay.
> 
> ...


Small sailboats usually 20 ft and under. They are usually open boats with no cabin, no ballast and often no engine.

They come up in right of way discussions because, due to the lack of motors, they are far more likely to be encountered under sail in narrow channels because sailing is almost always easier than paddling. Tacking back and forth across a narrow channel can put them in conflict with their obligation to maintain course and speed and in some cases their obligations not to impede the passage of vessels restricted to narrow channel.

The other boats that come up a lot are casual racing sailboats because, like dinghys, they are often actually sailing and like to set up their race courses in busy public water ways. This is largely to reduce transit time between the yacht club and their race course as races are often week days after work or similar. Further more racing sailors have two sets of rules they follow for collision avoidance, one is their sporting rules the other are the ColRegs (which is the actual law). The very nature of an around the bouys sailboat race often puts it into direct conflict with the ColRegs because as boats round their marks they are failing to meet their obligations under the ColRegs. The decision not to meet their obligation to maintain course and speed often makes racing sailboats in harbours the burdened or give way vessel in spite of having their sails up.

Often times cruising sailors will fire up their engines in heavy traffic or narrow channels, which makes them power boats in the view of the ColRegs and much less frequently in conflict with other waterway users than the above two categories.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Two quick add-on's to Arcb's post. For most of my lifetime, the term 'dinghy' (also spelled 'dingy') has referred to a particular hull form (the shape of the boat), so you might sometimes see 40-50 foot boats referred to as a 'dinghy' . 

And while Arcb is right that racers operate under both the racing rules and CoLReg's, which are the navigation laws (except in certain inland waters, and European countries), there are very few conflicting rules in each of these. Instead the Racing Rules address circumstances which do not occur in ColRegs, such as a mark rounding, and when one boat gains or losses rights over another boat. By the same token ColReg's addresses issues that are not relevant to the race rules, such as running lights or horn signals. 

Jeff


----------



## PhilCarlson (Dec 14, 2013)

nolatom said:


> ... and forget the rules until powerboat visually proves otherwise....


The Law of Gross Tonnage trumps all.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Jeff_H said:


> Two quick add-on's to Arcb's post. For most of my lifetime, the term 'dinghy' (also spelled 'dingy') has referred to a particular hull form (the shape of the boat), so you might sometimes see 40-50 foot . referred to as a 'dinghy' .
> 
> And while Arcb is right that racers operate under both the racing rules and CoLReg's, which are the navigation laws (except in certain inland waters, and European countries), there are very few conflicting rules in each of these. Instead the Racing Rules address circumstances which do not occur in ColRegs, such as a mark rounding, and when one boat gains or losses rights over another boat. By the same token ColReg's addresses issues that are not relevant to the race rules, such as running lights or horn signals.
> 
> Jeff


Jeff, its not the rules of round the bouys racing that puts it in conflict with the ColRegs, its the culture. I agree if the rules of racing were followed a race participant would be obligated to maintain course and speed if other non race particpant waterway user was in the immediate area until traffic clears the area. However, this is not what happens in practice. In practice when they round their mark they fail to meet their ColRegs obligations and voluntarily become the burdened vessel. Many still expect other users to respect their sailing hierarchy for vessels within site of one another, but at this point, they have already opted out. They should be staying out of every ones way now.

Was not aware of the hull shape thing for dingy. Interesting. I am reading Roger Barnes: Dingy Cruising Companion right now. In the first chapter he describes the origin of the word dingy as coming from Hindi when the Britiish Navy was active in India they started using the term dinghy/dinghy to decsribe the centre board working vessels carried by British naval vessels.

I am sure your use of the term is correct as well, probably more than one way to use the word.


----------



## ThereYouAre (Sep 21, 2016)

The boat you use to get from shore to your yacht is a tender. These days most tenders are inflatable motorized dinghies, but rowing/sailing dinghies are still fairly popular and some minimalists use kayaks and canoes as tenders.

If you own a mega yacht than your tender might be a cabin cruiser.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

...or a helicopter.


----------



## GeorgeB (Dec 30, 2004)

I empathize with your lament, Don190. Out here in Blustery San Francisco, we encounter shifts and "puffs" all the time so at one moment you are on port and passing comfortably astern of a Stb boat then the next moment he is getting knocked and you are being lifted into a crossing situation. If the other boat is a fellow racer or it appears by his trim and helming that he is experienced, I'll get a little closer before I duck. If the other boat's heading is all over the place (perhaps indicative of a less experienced helmsperson), I'll alter course earlier then duck as to not freak him out. On Stb tack, I'll hold my line, but be prepared to duck if the other [inexperienced] skipper is having a hard time figuring out his port from starboard. Fortunately, the wind is usually in the twenties in the afternoons here which keeps the majority of the inexperienced skippers out of the slot.

Rule 13.186, you mean Texas Dept of Public Safety and corrections, Chapter 13 - Controlled Substances, Precursor Chemical Laboratory Apparatus: Inventory?


----------



## Tuna Driver (Sep 17, 2011)

So we were anchored waiting for a race to start. Not uncommon in SF Bay with a flood and no wind. This larger cruising boat comes drifting down on us yelling for us to get out of the way. We're anchored! Oh! Much running around to fend off. They couldn't start the engine. Sort of our fault. We put up our day shape, with a tinge of red face, but wondered if they even knew what a black ball meant. The thrumming anchor rode went completely unnoticed. Anyone ever have this happen to them in the BVI?


----------



## Tuna Driver (Sep 17, 2011)

capta said:


> Enter the "nanny state"!
> Perhaps if most state safe boating courses were actually to teach safe boating rather than for revenue collection, they might make a slight difference. But driver's license tests are a great deal more difficult to pass than the safe boating certificates and include a driving test in a vehicle, yet a whole lot of people are still injured and killed in automobile incidences every year in the US.
> Oddly enough, down here where there is no enforcement, licensing or effective remuneration for damages, there seem to be a lot fewer incidences and problems on the water than the states with 'safe boating certificates', even though a great many of the boat operators are definitely unqualified to operate the vessels they are operating.
> Personally, I like being treated as an adult, responsible for my own actions, not having the state regulate every aspect of my life. There are a few unlit channel markers down here upon which every once in a great while, some drunk yachtie in his dink kills himself, coming home from the bar. The new to the area yachties scream and petition the government to do something, but they never do, and in a week or two the hubbub dies down until it happens again.
> ...


Perhaps the states involved have the courses because they do have a problem. In California, the course is quite good. Teaches all aspects of safe boating including basic light and sound signals. It is phased in with the younger boaters required to take it first. The old salts who already know all there is to know have some years to learn from the younger ones who pay attention.


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

Tuna Driver said:


> Perhaps the states involved have the courses because they do have a problem.


Of course they do. Almost all regulations exist because a-holes act like a-holes or because ignorant/inconsiderate people endanger other people. Most of the remaining regulations are in place to protect newcomers from competing against existing businesses. It's business interests that most want and impose the "nanny state" upon the rest of us.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

jwing said:


> Of course they do. Almost all regulations exist because a-holes act like a-holes or because ignorant/inconsiderate people endanger other people. Most of the remaining regulations are in place to protect newcomers from competing against existing businesses. It's business interests that most want and impose the "nanny state" upon the rest of us.


That's too cynical. I truly believe the boater safety programs exist to make sure boaters (especially those renting those "aqua crotch rockets" on impulse) take some time to recognize the dangers and safe practices on the water. It's no different than a car - even if you're not an a-hole, you pose a safety threat to yourself and others if you don't get some basic training.

Not every government regulation is a conspiracy, and not every incompetent boater is an a-hole.


----------



## ps23435 (Jul 13, 2011)

jwing said:


> Of course they do. Almost all regulations exist because a-holes act like a-holes or because ignorant/inconsiderate people endanger other people. Most of the remaining regulations are in place to protect newcomers from competing against existing businesses. It's business interests that most want and impose the "nanny state" upon the rest of us.


Not sure what "business interest" would want to impose boater safety requirements. Seems to me it would be quite the opposite, business would want as few requirements as possible. In my state (VA) the mandatory boater safety class is free (or you can do online and pay a pa small fee); there is no financial interest of the state in play. As a boater, I appreciate that other boaters out there with me might just have a basic level of knowledge. Frankly, I have seem more then one "expert" who "doesn't need any government required class" not really know what they are doing.


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

TakeFive said:


> That's too cynical. I truly believe the boater safety programs exist to make sure boaters (especially those renting those "aqua crotch rockets" on impulse) take some time to recognize the dangers and safe practices on the water. It's no different than a car - even if you're not an a-hole, you pose a safety threat to yourself and others if you don't get some basic training.
> 
> Not every government regulation is a conspiracy, and not every incompetent boater is an a-hole.


I agree. Non-a-hole, incompetent boaters are the "ignorant/inconsiderate people endanger other people" that I specified in my explanation of the so-called "nanny state."


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

ps23435 said:


> Not sure what "business interest" would want to impose boater safety requirements. Seems to me it would be quite the opposite, business would want as few requirements as possible. In my state (VA) the mandatory boater safety class is free (or you can do online and pay a pa small fee); there is no financial interest of the state in play. As a boater, I appreciate that other boaters out there with me might just have a basic level of knowledge. Frankly, I have seem more then one "expert" who "doesn't need any government required class" not really know what they are doing.


Boater safety regulations are due mainly to the "ignorant/inconsiderate people [who] endanger other people" whom I previously specified. As for the business interests who would want to impose boater safety requirements, surely you can come up with a few. The purveyors of boater safety classes is an obvious one. Insurance underwriters is another.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

jwing said:


> Non-a-hole, incompetent boaters are the "ignorant/inconsiderate people endanger other people" that I specified in my defense of the so-called "nanny state."


I think you're revising history here and trying to have it both ways. Your frequent use of the words "nanny state" are derogatory. You're not defending it at all, you're ridiculing it and suggesting conspiratorial motives behind reasonable safety requirements. I call BS.

Requiring basic boater safety training is a good thing, no matter how hard you try to throw shade on training firms and insurance underwriters.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Will apologize. I was the dumbie who started the conversation about small, unpowered racers. Still, I remain uncertain and stressed as what to do.
Here in Naragansett bay it’s not infrequent to have a flock of racers heading toward you and the rest of the flock going in your direction or crossing you as you enter or exit a harbor. The distance between individual boats approaches your beam and is definitely below your turning radius. Adhering to one racers colregs prerogatives means violating another’s. Although you are moving faster then them to ensure a responsive helm you still feel an obligation to run the channel holding to starboard side to allow other significant vessel free access in and out of the channel. 
Often due to the size of the fleet or the absence of wind these racers occlude the channel for quite some time.
I contend this is unsafe. I contend that restrictions due to time or distance to a suitable race course does not supersede the obligation of the race committee to lay out the course in a safe manner. If that can’t be done then DON’T RACE. 
Rant over.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

BTW the thought that bigger wins is specious in my thinking. I have no desire to hit and sink a dinghy with a couple of kids in it.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I don't run over the little race boats, butI go through the race sometimes. Maybe if they wouldn't do the race in the channel I would go around, but I'm not going 5 miles around to the next channel or through the shallows to avoid them.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

outbound said:


> Will apologize. I was the dumbie who started the conversation about small, unpowered racers. Still, I remain uncertain and stressed as what to do.
> Here in Naragansett bay it's not infrequent to have a flock of racers heading toward you and the rest of the flock going in your direction or crossing you as you enter or exit a harbor. The distance between individual boats approaches your beam and is definitely below your turning radius. Adhering to one racers colregs prerogatives means violating another's. Although you are moving faster then them to ensure a responsive helm you still feel an obligation to run the channel holding to starboard side to allow other significant vessel free access in and out of the channel.
> Often due to the size of the fleet or the absence of wind these racers occlude the channel for quite some time.
> I contend this is unsafe. I contend that restrictions due to time or distance to a suitable race course does not supersede the obligation of the race committee to lay out the course in a safe manner. If that can't be done then DON'T RACE.
> Rant over.


After you sink the first 10 boats the rest learn to keep out of your way.


----------



## Soupy1957 (Jul 21, 2018)

TakeFive said:


> ...or a helicopter.


Ah, the life of the wealthy! Thankfully something I never was cursed with!


----------



## maxwell (Aug 3, 2018)

"Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."

To be clear: these sailboats are "powerboats" even in NEUTRAL.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

maxwell said:


> "Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."
> 
> To be clear: these sailboats are "powerboats" even in NEUTRAL.


Cite your source. It's motorized propulsion that makes a motorboat.

This is largely an academic exercise for me, because I prefer to run my motor with a load (i.e., in gear), but in event of a collision the subsequent investigation might focus on these details in determining obligation to stand on vs. give way.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

maxwell said:


> "Sailboats that have the engine running are considered power boats even if the sails are up."
> 
> To be clear: these sailboats are "powerboats" even in NEUTRAL.


You aren't reaching enough:

ANY boat with a fishing pole on board in a locker somewhere is a fishing boat, even if the line isn't in the water

:batter:chainsaw:hammer:clobber:thewave:


----------



## GeorgeB (Dec 30, 2004)

TakeFive, the "sailboat is considered a motor boat if the engine is on and out of gear" question is answered on page 97 of the current issue of Boat U.S. Magazine. As my insurance company believes this to be a fact, than it makes sense that I should too.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Don0190 said:


> You aren't reaching enough:
> 
> ANY boat with a fishing pole on board in a locker somewhere is a fishing boat, even if the line isn't in the water
> 
> :batter:chainsaw:hammer:clobber:thewave:


 The ColRegs clearly define what is a Fishing boat" and these guys don't count.


----------



## newsailorbr (Aug 2, 2018)

Good to know about that i'm new sailor very constructive


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

GeorgeB said:


> TakeFive, the "sailboat is considered a motor boat if the engine is on and out of gear" question is answered on page 97 of the current issue of Boat U.S. Magazine. As my insurance company believes this to be a fact, than it makes sense that I should too.


I completely understand your logic for this. I read the article. However, I would like to know how Boat U.S. arrived at this conclusion. Perhaps, I'll write them and ask.

The Rules State: " Propelling Machinery, if fitted, is not being used" A sailboat's engine can be used as both propelling machinery and as a generator. Additionally, since it it takes 2 seconds to turn my engine on even if it's off, no different than a power-boater drift fishing, what would preclude me from always being considered a power boat?

If a power driven vessel encounters a sailboat under-sail ( with it's engine on solely for charging purposes) in a meeting or crossing situation how would it know that it should be treated as another power-boat? It would seem to me that unless there is clear evidence that a sailboat is being propelled by machinery ( sailing directly into the wind, or a displaying a Day shape) both vessels would by default have to treat each other as Power and Sail, otherwise confusion would reign.

In reading Rule 25, Lights and Shapes, It states " A Vessel proceeding under Sail when also being " Propelled" by machinery Shall exhibit forward where it can best be seen a conical shape etc. (At night, a sailboat under power would exhibit a steaming light. ) 
Here the rules seem to clearly distinguish being "propelled" from simply being "on". Otherwise it would have been just as easy for them to write " a Sailboat proceeding under-sail with it's engine on.

I don't see any of this as a source of major concern. This topic does seem to come up regularly though. There has to be some "official" interpretation out there somewhere.


----------



## Scandium (Mar 27, 2018)

capta said:


> Enter the "nanny state"!
> Perhaps if most state safe boating courses were actually to teach safe boating rather than for revenue collection, they might make a slight difference. But driver's license tests are a great deal more difficult to pass than the safe boating certificates and include a driving test in a vehicle, yet a whole lot of people are still injured and killed in automobile incidences every year in the US.
> Oddly enough, down here where there is no enforcement, licensing or effective remuneration for damages, there seem to be a lot fewer incidences and problems on the water than the states with 'safe boating certificates', even though a great many of the boat operators are definitely unqualified to operate the vessels they are operating.
> Personally, I like being treated as an adult, responsible for my own actions, not having the state regulate every aspect of my life. There are a few unlit channel markers down here upon which every once in a great while, some drunk yachtie in his dink kills himself, coming home from the bar. The new to the area yachties scream and petition the government to do something, but they never do, and in a week or two the hubbub dies down until it happens again.
> ...


So safety classes are both unnecessary, but also inadequate?

And you'll have to provide some incident statistics to prove that there are fewer accidents "down there" where there are no safety classes vs places that mandate them. And that also has to control for the traffic levels, experience of boaters etc etc.

I have no problem with people injuring themselves, but they can also crash into others or injure passengers. That's (IMO) precisely the role of the state; to control and minimize the harm you can cause to others. In that regard I agree seat belt laws are dumb, since not using it will only harm yourself and nobody else.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

boatpoker said:


> The ColRegs clearly define what is a Fishing boat" and these guys don't count.


Did you make some assumption that I didn't know that? Was there not enough sarcasm in my post to convey my message, if not I will edit that post.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

tempest said:


> machinery ( sailing directly into the wind, or a displaying a Day shape) .


:laugh:laugh:laugh 30 yrs between Lake Superior and Antigua and I've seen 3 inverted cone day shapes in use.

I am almost always the only one in an anchorage flying an anchor ball.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Scandium said:


> And you'll have to provide some incident statistics to prove that there are fewer accidents "down there" where there are no safety classes vs places that mandate them.


Yes, his use of "it seems like" makes it appear that his is pure speculation.



Scandium said:


> So safety classes are both unnecessary, but also inadequate?
> 
> I have no problem with people injuring themselves, but they can also crash into others or injure passengers. That's (IMO) precisely the role of the state; to control and minimize the harm you can cause to others...


The reason I've expressed my annoyance at some attitudes here is precisely what you're saying. We get the people complaining about incompetence of other boaters, and how they're doing things that jeopardize the safety of others. But then those same complainers go off with their libertarian stuff about how "the nanny state" has no role to play in requiring even the most minimal demonstration of competency. Sorry, guys, you can't have it both ways.


tempest said:


> ...I read the article. However, I would like to know how Boat U.S. arrived at this conclusion. Perhaps, I'll write them and ask...


I am curious too. I've asked a number of licensed captains (including my own OUPV and endorsement instructors) about this and gotten mixed answers, though a non-unanimous opinion that suggested sails up + motor running out of gear was treated as a sailing vessel. Since I don't do this, my sole concern is how to treat another vessel approaching me, since I may have an obligation to stand on or give way. And until I hear otherwise, my own actions will be dictated by day shapes. If he has no day shape up, I'll treat him as a sailing vessel even if I see exhaust coming out of his engine (generator?) exhaust. And if he has a day shape up and I'm under sail, I'll stand on. Because ultimately that is what the investigators would likely look at.

The article is not online yet, so I had to wait until I got home to pull it out of my mail pile. I'm glad they highlighted this "myth," since it is a dangerous misconception that sailboats always have some so-called "right of way." However, the whole thing about engine running in neutral is worthy of further discussion, until someone can come up with a statement of the COLREGs that's more definitive than just the opinion of one captain. Note Charles Fort's comment:



> But this is not a hard-and-fast "no exceptions" statement of the rules...


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Still the reality is many look to see if the wet muffler is spewing water. If I see that I assume that sailboat is under power unless something persuades me otherwise. So even when I’m sailing and just have the genset on so I’m spewing water I assume others will look at me and assume I’m under power. Therefore in practice this whole conversation is moot. The thoughtful sailor behaves as though he is under power and burdened any time water is coming out from his hull. A friend who runs a large boat told me he behaves that way even if it’s just the AC or he hails the intersecting vessel to tell them otherwise.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

So I'm hard on the wind portbow,tide the same, heading northwest to Victoria .One other vessel on the ocean. Navy ,about 150 ' coming east from Esquimalt .Fast,. I stand on. getting a tad concerned. At the very last second I round up and tack. About 100' away a bunch of dorks on the brige of the grey boat. I motion WTF? One of the dorks points to the two balls hidden in the mass or anntenii just close overhead. That makes me relived as I had thought poorly of them. Jeeze I had the whole of the Straights of Waunda to play in while they had a job to train for.


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

outbound said:


> Still the reality is many look to see if the wet muffler is spewing water. If I see that I assume that sailboat is under power unless something persuades me otherwise. So even when I'm sailing and just have the genset on so I'm spewing water I assume others will look at me and assume I'm under power. Therefore in practice this whole conversation is moot. The thoughtful sailor behaves as though he is under power and burdened any time water is coming out from his hull. A friend who runs a large boat told me he behaves that way even if it's just the AC or he hails the intersecting vessel to tell them otherwise.


The only way another vessel can see if I'm spewing water is if they're astern of me and, Maybe in a crossing situation, But difficult to spot @ 25 knots. Certainly not in a head to head meeting.

If you're "sailing" with the engine in neutral or you're sailing and have your Genset or AC on, and you start giving way to powerboats I believe you risk muddying the waters for "them". They need to know how to maneuver. If I'm not mistaken, You are over 12 meters, and should be displaying a cone when operating under both sail and power. That should remove doubt and allow you to operate your gen-set and AC while underway, under sail, and stand-on to power driven vessels. ( recreational)


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

tempest said:


> should be displaying a cone when operating under power.


In my experience the vast majority of sailors know nothing of this rule.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

tempest said:


> ... If I'm not mistaken, You are over 12 meters, and should be displaying a cone when operating under both sail and power. That should remove doubt and allow you to operate your gen-set and AC while underway, under sail, and stand-on to power driven vessels. ( recreational)


I had read over on ybw.com that there was no <12 meter exemption for the inverted cone, but I just pulled out my COLREGs and found just such an exemption on Rule 25e. So for boats under 12 meters (and the vast majority of larger recreational sailboats under motor power who violate this rule), we are left to hope we can either see their exhaust or make assumptions based on "no way he could be going that fast with those sails luffing like that".

This is important because in a potential collision situation, giving way when you should stand on could put you at fault due to the confusion it creates with the other vessel. Simply "being polite" is not safe in a true collision situation. Best practice would be to give way with a clear maneuver in plenty of time (i.e., before you have any obligation to stand on) so the other vessel can respond appropriately. Don't let anything get to the point of emergency avoidance. Of course, if you have 6 vessels converging in close quarters, you may not have that luxury.


----------



## ps23435 (Jul 13, 2011)

The question of whether a sailboat under sail but with it's main engine running in neutral remains a sailing vessel or is now a power driven vessel is one that seems endlessly debated. In fact, the COLREGS is somewhat ambiguous on this using the terminology in Rule 3(c) that a "sailing vessel means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, it fitted, is not being used." The meaning of the engine "being used" seems key but that is still unclear. Different references interpret if either way. Since ultimately a court would determine it were there a collision, I like going to the classic reference "Farwell's Rules of the Road" (the latest edition updated in 2005). Farwell's provides in depth discussions in light of court decisions interpreting the rules. On the question of a sail vessel running it's engine in neutral, Farwells states: "The question turns on the meaning of "being used," and may therefore depend for its answer in the circumstances. The better view is to focus on the maneuverability of the craft. If the engine is available for maneuvering the vessel it seems reasonable to expect her to take advantage of the greater maneuverability." (p 63). Farwell's cites to only one court decision which appears to be from an old (1878) case in Nova Scotia (which I could not locate). So it seems this hasn't been a major problem, at least not one reaching US courts. Seems to me that we must all again rely on our good judgment under the circumstance- I for one always take the most conservative approach and agree with the above poster to not get into extremis in the first place!


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

Thanks. Farwell's was the reference I was looking for. It doesn't surprise me that the only citation is from 1878. As I mentioned, I've never seen it as a real issue under most circumstances. I enjoy the " discussion" though. The circumstances would always be a factor. 

I would note, that a sailing vessel with sails up, may not be able to simply stop and take all way off, the same way that most power boats can. Which would often make it the lesser maneuverable vessel of the two.


----------



## solarfry (Sep 6, 2008)

I would recommend not getting into an argument on "right of way" with a powerboat. Yes he can avoid you easily but maybe it's on Auto Pilot and no on one stands watch. A powerboat running 30+ mph offshore is not someone to tangle with. In any case there is no right of way anymore. You are in the obligation to avoid a collision. All the rules you learned in the past are mute now. The rule is "Avoid a Collision" . Don't be Dead right. 

Why do powerboats run 30+ mph offshore? The boat runs much smoother over 30 and crappy between 29 and 12.


----------



## solarfry (Sep 6, 2008)

Sorry tried 3x to delete this and it would not delete


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Had an interesting encounter today, in open water. I had my main up and was motor sailing hard on the wind. Blowing 18 kts. Forward and to my starboard is an incoming powerboat, positioned to cross my bow. Since we are both being propelled by machinery, the powerboat is stand-on, so I fall off 30 degrees to starboard to take his stern easily. For the next 30 seconds, it’s clear the powerboat will cross well ahead of me. There is no risk of collision, but he hasn’t crossed my bow yet. Suddenly, as we get closer, he makes a hard turn to his port and avoids me altogether. 

My first thought was he thought we were “sailing” and he had a responsibility to give way, despite the fact that would have crossed my bow with plenty of room. When I see a sailboat hard on the wind, with just a main, making good speed, I know he’s motoring. He may not have known. 

On the other hand, he may just be ignorant altogether and couldn’t even tell who was going to cross whom. 

Since no paint was swapped, all’s well that ends well. I think that’s in the rules. :wink


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

Of course if you were south of Brenton Point you should have had the required inverted cone raised, although doing so may just increase the likelihood that such poweboats would pass closer to see what it is.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Morild (Mar 31, 2013)

Minnewaska said:


> Had an interesting encounter today, in open water. I had my main up and was motor sailing hard on the wind. Blowing 18 kts. Forward and to my starboard is an incoming powerboat, positioned to cross my bow. Since we are both being propelled by machinery, the powerboat is stand-on, so I fall off 30 degrees to starboard to take his stern easily. For the next 30 seconds, it's clear the powerboat will cross well ahead of me. There is no risk of collision, but he hasn't crossed my bow yet. Suddenly, as we get closer, he makes a hard turn to his port and avoids me altogether.
> 
> My first thought was he thought we were "sailing" and he had a responsibility to give way, despite the fact that would have crossed my bow with plenty of room. When I see a sailboat hard on the wind, with just a main, making good speed, I know he's motoring. He may not have known.
> 
> ...


Did you display your day signal for motor sailing?
Shapes and Lights


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

sailingfool said:


> Of course if you were south of Brenton Point you should have had the required inverted cone raised...


I think he is technically required to show the inverted cone in both International and Inland water.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

If in order to follow the rules you need to pull out the book, it’s too late. Rules threads are endless and only really prove that basically no one knows the rules.

The safest thing people can do is assume every boat they come across is being driven by me. I don’t know the rules so you should protect yourself by staying out of my way!!!!!

See how simple it is.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I’ve yet to see a day shape on any sailboat that doesn’t have a red light at the top of their mast at night.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I’ve haven’t seen any sailboat once outside coastal waters of any nationality that doesn’t have send/receive AIS in some years.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

The 30kts boat isn’t a trawler nor a ship nor a sailboat maybe a big sport fish with a good helmsman or a fast ferry or a clueless inebriated jerk. Assume the later and run parallel to him until he’s past or his intentions are clear. As most appropriately stated if they are not near you they can’t hurt you. 


We use running lights when coastal but the tricolor offshore. Unless the sea is flat running lights are to low on most sailboats (except very large ones) to be constantly visible.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

outbound said:


> I've haven't seen any sailboat once outside coastal waters of any nationality that doesn't have send/receive AIS in some years.


How do you know?

Btw I don't have AIS.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Then you haven’t been near me. Still I stand by the statement once you’re beyond 200m virtually everything has send/receive. If they don’t pop up I try to call them to tell them know their apparatus isn’t working. 
I have day signals. There are very few occasions it’s appropriate for put them to use. I’m not going to hang anything to travel a 1/8th mile into a harbor or during the brief period before the sails are up or when adrift with no one on the horizon to briefly deal with something or in an anchorage with other boats anchored all around me. And in my travels this behavior appears quite normative.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

TakeFive said:


> I think he is technically required to show the inverted cone in both International and Inland water.


Actually inland it is optional, I had to bone up on this detail after an arguement with State Police captain in Boston Harbor

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

sailingfool said:


> Actually inland it is optional, I had to bone up on this detail after an arguement with State Police captain in Boston Harbor


I don't think it is optional for his 54' boat.


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

sailingfool said:


> Actually inland it is optional, I had to bone up on this detail after an arguement with State Police captain in Boston Harbor
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


It's not optional inland, over 12 meters. ( only optional for less than 12 meters) It's Required of all sailing vessels International.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

tempest said:


> It's not optional inland, over 12 meters. ( only optional for less than 12 meters) It's Required of all sailing vessels International.


True clarification, at the point of the references discussion I was operating a J29 thus the position that I took...

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Yup, I don’t even own day shapes. Nor do literally any of my boating friends. 

Coincidentally, I was recently anchored immediately next to a USCG Cutter in Sommes Sound and they naturally had their day shape up. When they departed, they had a deck crew of a half dozen running around to square it all away.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Yup, I don't even own day shapes. Nor do literally any of my boating friends.
> 
> Coincidentally, I was recently anchored immediately next to a USCG Cutter in Sommes Sound and they naturally had their day shape up. When they departed, they had a deck crew of a half dozen running around to square it all away.


Wow ! I had no idea the USCG was so inefficient. My 102lb. wife hoists our anchor ball in about 2 seconds on her way back from the foredeck after dropping our hook.

I don't ever want to stand in front of a judge and say . "no sir, I was not displaying the proper signals. I didn't think it was worth the 2 second effort".


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

I always had at least one round fender. big orange. In a black plastic bag ,makes a decent anchor shape . The other was on the end of my prawn trap line.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> ...
> So a tugboat captain didn't know rule #1 and tried to cover it by using that I was on his starboard side so I should have gave way...


Huh? If you were on his starboard side, you were the stand-on vessel!

(138 posts in this thread and nobody noticed that? :grin)


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Huh? If you were on his starboard side, you were the stand-on vessel!
> 
> (138 posts in this thread and nobody noticed that? :grin)[/QUOTE
> 
> The rules apparently don't matter to lots of commercial vessels, except maybe to each other.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch (Nov 26, 2010)

> The rules apparently don't matter to lots of commercial vessels, except maybe to each other.


That is not my experience, at least not on the Chesapeake Bay which is the most traffic-dense area where I have sailed. The ubiquitous crabbers always change course for me when I am sailing, at least when they are on their way to and from their lines. Of course, when I see them working I give them a wide berth, just common sense and common courtesy. Also, have had tugs calling me on the VHF asking what are my intentions, suggesting 'two whistle' crossings etc. It may help that I have (active) AIS.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Wow ! I had no idea the USCG was so inefficient. My 102lb. wife hoists our anchor ball in about 2 seconds on her way back from the foredeck after dropping our hook.
> 
> I don't ever want to stand in front of a judge and say . "no sir, I was not displaying the proper signals. I didn't think it was worth the 2 second effort".


Please, that's a little self righteous. 2 seconds? You know I didn't mean they needed that deck crew solely to lower the day marker. You also know you are one of the very few who fly one on a recreational boat.

Note, I wasn't displaying one, while anchored immediately next to the USCG, and they took no notice of it. I was 200 feet away. I came in and dropped the hook, with them all watching from deck. They even waived, both when I arrived and when they departed hours later.

For that matter, hit google and let me know if anyone in New England has ever been cited for this, or lost a case before a judge, when failing to display one on a recreational boat.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Please, that's a little self righteous. 2 seconds? You know I didn't mean they needed that deck crew solely to lower the day marker. You also know you are one of the very few who fly one on a recreational boat.
> 
> Note, I wasn't displaying one, while anchored immediately next to the USCG, and they took no notice of it. I was 200 feet away. I came in and dropped the hook, with them all watching from deck. They even waived, both when I arrived and when they departed hours later.
> 
> For that matter, hit google and let me know if anyone in New England has ever been cited for this, or lost a case before a judge, when failing to display one on a recreational boat.


Glad ignoring the ColRegs work for you.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Glad ignoring the ColRegs work for you.


Get over it, BP. I drive over the speed limit too and don't always cross the street at the intersection. You?

I see zero value in these antiquated day shape rules that few know, so would provide zero improvement in collision avoidance. I turn on my anchor light at night. I see no improvement in safety from flying the ball, during the day. The fact that I'm not moving, in an anchorage, and there is a rode off my bow is about all you'll get and I don't see any judge disagreeing. I truly can't say I've ever seen a recreational boat display one, so the approach is work for well more than me.

Government rules do not always make one safer.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

We’ve been out cruising. Anchored in Bristol as some friends I’ve not seen for a year were there(saw them on AIS). Did see an anchor ball!!! It was on a French flagged super marabu. So I have seen one and stand corrected.
Still agree with Minnie. Look around gentlemen this is a rule more not followed then followed. Would note it makes some sense flying one if you’re anchored outside a designated anchorage. Otherwise it’s nonsensical.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

You may pick and choose the ColRegs you think are worthless or worthwhile.
I prefer to follow them as best I can, especially when so little effort is involved to do it right.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I’m surprised people sound like they are sailing or motoring through an area of anchored boats, yet don’t appear to be able to tell the boats to be avoided unless they have a black ball hanging.

And there there’s the motoring sailboat cone .........


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Don0190 said:


> I'm surprised people sound like they are sailing or motoring through an area of anchored boats, yet don't appear to be able to tell the boats to be avoided unless they have a black ball hanging.
> 
> And there there's the motoring sailboat cone .........


I'm not surprised at all considering what I see going on out there


----------



## Scotty C-M (Aug 14, 2013)

Boatpoker. I just looked at your avatar picture. At anchor (or mooring), without a black ball hanging.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Scotty C-M said:


> Boatpoker. I just looked at your avatar picture. At anchor (or mooring), without a black ball hanging.


Not sure what avatar you are looking at but that photo is my boat tied to a dock in a harbour on Lake St. Clair the day before she belonged to me.

In this attached photo taken in Cape May you'll see she looks quite a bit different and is displaying an anchor ball.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Scotty C-M said:


> Boatpoker. I just looked at your avatar picture. At anchor (or mooring), without a black ball hanging.


Not sure what avatar you are looking at but that photo is my boat tied to a dock in a harbour the day before she belonged to me.

The picture in my profile is also before I owned her

In this attached photo taken in Cape May you'll see she looks quite a bit different with all the changes we made and is displaying an anchor ball.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I just thumbed through the content of the RI boater safety course. No where did I find day shapes covered. This is simply one of those rules that is still on the books, that no one seems to care about. It's like those laws that say it's illegal to hold a chicken bbq on a Sunday. 

I'm not criticizing anyone, if they choose to use one. Only that there is nearly zero advantage to doing so, at least in our neck of the woods. I might even argue that going out on the foredeck to fly the cone, could be unsafe, in some circumstances. If this is enforced in other locales, so be it.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Perhaps my commercial experience, education, several masters tickets and hundreds of insurance claims investigations over the years has tainted my outlook. I just prefer to do it right. Others can do as they please.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Fair enough. I think BoatUS should lobby to have the requirement removed for recreational vessels, at the least.


----------



## Captain_Mike13 (Jul 31, 2018)

To me, I love my sailboat way too much! I don't care who has the right away! I will hail you on channel 16 and if I get no answer or they do not change course I will give way and get the hell out of the way and live to sail another day!


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

Minnewaska said:


> I just thumbed through the content of the RI boater safety course. No where did I find day shapes covered. This is simply one of those rules that is still on the books, that no one seems to care about. It's like those laws that say it's illegal to hold a chicken bbq on a Sunday.
> 
> I'm not criticizing anyone, if they choose to use one. Only that there is nearly zero advantage to doing so, at least in our neck of the woods. I might even argue that going out on the foredeck to fly the cone, could be unsafe, in some circumstances. If this is enforced in other locales, so be it.


Colregs includes shape rules because they help makes other rules work consistently and practically. The risk of ignoring them, is that if your vessel is involved in an accident where you are otherwise not at fault, you are likely to be assessed some fault for failure to meet your Colregs obligations.

Just my professional opinion on this, but I do carry both shapes and recommend using them


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Good attitude. Also monitor 13 when there’s commercial traffic around. Lastly schedules kill. Never be in such a rush that you can’t wait for things to either clear out or sort out.
It’s worth being polite on the vhf.
wife and I were going to Maine. I was asleep with her on watch. She faced a slurry of fish boats. Some dragging. Some with nets out. Their decks were awash with lights too the point she couldn’t see nav lights and there so many of them she couldn’t sort out their relative heading. No AIS. She called on the vhf. “Sir could you please help me or should I wake my husband?” One called back and said “ no worry I’ll talk you through us. Switch to seven two”. And he did. I came up and she told me the story. That guy was just a good soul. For all the badmouthing of the fishboats and stinkpotters some are truly gentlemen.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

sailingfool said:


> Colregs includes shape rules because they help makes other rules work consistently and practically. The risk of ignoring them, is that if your vessel is involved in an accident where you are otherwise not at fault, you are likely to be assessed some fault for failure to meet your Colregs obligations.
> 
> Just my professional opinion on this, but I do carry both shapes and recommend using them


Proportionate fault is the outcome of all collision investigations, especially if both vessels are underway. Each has the ultimate fallback requirement to avoid collision, regardless of the others actions.

I hear your point about the shapes, but honestly have a hard time believing it in real life. No one knows what these shapes mean and I can't actually recall a collision scenario that would have avoided, if both parties had them and knew what they meant. Has anyone ever known a case where a recreational boat was cited for not displaying a shape, or an investigation influenced as surmised above? I've literally never heard of either in 40 years on the water.

Complicated lights and shapes are as antiquated as treating a fever with leaches. We have far superior technology today.

To be clear, I do think port, starboard and stern lights, make sense. But all the configurations for fishing, towing, over 50m, under 50m, or my fav... minesweeper, etc, are ridiculous. Even those that passed the tests can't recall them a month later. Dumb.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I bought a slide rule that explains the light displays. It’s fun to look at after you’ve adjusted your course on the basis of your AIS or radar vectors.
Still it’s good to know the tow display. Cues you in to look for the tow. Getting caught between the two is a big no no.


----------



## tempest (Feb 12, 2007)

The Rules DO provide for exceptions for Anchor Light and Day Shapes. Under 20 meters in a designated anchorage, and under 7 meters everywhere else. So if you're 65 feet or less and in a designated anchorage you don't have to do anything. That should cover the average boater. 

The cone is optional for sailboats 39 feet or less inland, which probably covers the average sailing vessel. 

Both shapes can be purchased for about $30. I suppose The CG could eventually make a rule that requires every sailing vessel over 39 feet to transmit an AIS signal that indicates whether you're under power or sail. Perhaps they have considered that, and recognize that such a rule would also generate controversy. So for the time being they've chosen to keep the low cost alternative on the books and have obviously chosen not to enforce it for recreational vessels given their limited resources and other priorities. Which is fine. 

If I anchor for lunch or a swim in an area that's not a designated anchorage, I will display a day shape, ( it takes a couple of minutes) and leave the AIS on. Whether or not people know what it means or not, I feel that I have met my obligation. 

I'm licensed and Drug tested, even though, I'm not operating under my license when on my own boat, I choose to comply with what's currently on the books. Other's can choose to do what they want, The sky won't fall and death is not a likely outcome of non-participation.


----------



## skipmac (Oct 31, 2007)

In 40 years boating in the US I have seen almost no anchoring balls or inverted cones and I agree that in the US using them contributes only slightly to safety. However, if you are ever in any kind of collision or accident the use of proper dayshapes will very likely come up. If for no other reason this justifies their use in my book.


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

Scandium said:


> ...I have no problem with people injuring themselves, but they can also crash into others or injure passengers. That's (IMO) precisely the role of the state; to control and minimize the harm you can cause to others. In that regard I agree seat belt laws are dumb, since not using it will only harm yourself and nobody else.


I almost agree with you there. I don't think that seat belt laws are dumb because the people that have to clean up the mess are generally public employees. When somebody walks away from a car wreck, there is much less time/money pressure on the police, rescue, courts, and other bureaucracy than when somebody goes flying into, or through, a windshield.


----------



## Scandium (Mar 27, 2018)

jwing said:


> I almost agree with you there. I don't think that seat belt laws are dumb because the people that have to clean up the mess are generally public employees. When somebody walks away from a car wreck, there is much less time/money pressure on the police, rescue, courts, and other bureaucracy than when somebody goes flying into, or through, a windshield.


Well, but that's kinda their job isn't it..? Or just fine the deceased for not wearing a seatbelt and use that to pay for it, or figure something else out. I don't think state-control of solely self-harming behavior is the best answer.. But that's just me.

But yes, this is a minor point really. The gist is that recklessly driving a boat because you don't know safety or right of way rules has way more potential to harm others. So I have no problem with mandating at least some education. The people who see that as some big-government plot to infringe on their god-given freedom are usually a bit special..


----------



## jwing (Jun 20, 2013)

Scandium said:


> Well, but that's kinda their job isn't it..?


Yes, it is their jobs. And it is the responsibility of good citizens to behave in a manner that minimizes the need for government services, regulations, and taxes. Safety regulations sometimes have a public benefit beyond the concern of the victims.



Scandium said:


> So I have no problem with mandating at least some education. The people who see that as some big-government plot to infringe on their god-given freedom are usually a bit special..


Amen, brother!

Now to tie those two points together I cite the example of the lake that I sail upon: The state does require a safety course certificate. On the other hand, I have never seen any law enforcement or SAR boats on the lake. That's because people there generally act safely and respectfully. Government does not need to hire dedicated lake LEOs, nor purchase and maintain the equipment such LEOs would need.


----------



## skipmac (Oct 31, 2007)

Scandium said:


> Well, but that's kinda their job isn't it..? Or just fine the deceased for not wearing a seatbelt and use that to pay for it, or figure something else out. I don't think state-control of solely self-harming behavior is the best answer.. But that's just me.


Well yes that is the job of emergency responders but as someone with an ER doctor in the family, just because it's her job doesn't make it any easier to deal with traumatic injuries, especially unnecessary ones.

And on one hand I also don't like the government regulating my behavior but I also feel very strongly that someone's right to do what they like ends when it affects me or others. For example, lots of drivers in the US have little or no medical insurance. They wreck while not wearing a seatbelt, suffer serious injuries and the rest of us pay for it.



Scandium said:


> But yes, this is a minor point really. The gist is that recklessly driving a boat because you don't know safety or right of way rules has way more potential to harm others. So I have no problem with mandating at least some education. The people who see that as some big-government plot to infringe on their god-given freedom are usually a bit special..


I love how tactfully you worded this. :grin

Personally I think it's insane that in most states anyone with the money can buy a speedboat that will exceed 100 mph and legally drive on the public waterways with zero training, permits, license or restrictions.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

The FAA had no reservation requiring every private aircraft to make a minimum $5k upgrade to their transponders, so they could be better identified. Many of these private planes cost about the same as the average sailboat. Marine rules are antiquated. Do you think there are more marine or aviation collisions? 

Most States seem to have some training requirements already. I think they are minimally effective and, as I mentioned, don’t cover day shapes. I am a controversial advocate that after your first rescue, you must either pass a rigorous safety course, or be liable for future rescue costs. Many disagree with this and I admit, there are flaws. 

WRT seatbelt laws, unless you refuse assistance, you become a burden on the system, during an accident. The number of first responders is a direct correlation to volume. They don’t just exist. Failing to wear them is forcing your neighbor to pay to have them available. That’s no different than forcing the rule. 

When I was a kid, while I always wore a helmet on a motorcycle, I was a strong opponent of helmet laws. Same principal, personal choice, not hurting anyone but yourself. However, older and bit wiser, I’ve clearly realized that peer pressure plays a big role in those decisions, especially amoung the young. While one kid may want to wear a helmet, they may not, if no one else is.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Both an Arai and a brain bucket are deemed compliance. Nothing even the law can fix stupid. Jeff Noseworthy knows this and points it out regularly.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Scandium said:


> ... Or just fine the deceased for not wearing a seatbelt...


You do realize how ridiculous this statement is, right? Brings new meaning to the word "deadbeat."


----------



## Scandium (Mar 27, 2018)

TakeFive said:


> You do realize how ridiculous this statement is, right? Brings new meaning to the word "deadbeat."


No? Just take it out of any insurance? Or the estate? If they have nothing of value sure let it go. But most will leave some behind. You act dumb; you pay up. Dead or alive.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> Same principal, personal choice, not hurting anyone but yourself. However, older and bit wiser, I've clearly realized that peer pressure plays a big role in those decisions, especially amoung the young. While one kid may want to wear a helmet, they may not, if no one else is.


That is one of the reasons why I wear a life jacket whenever I go sailing.

I would hate to have some teen point to me and say Why should I wear a life jacket? That old guy doesn't wear one and he managed for almost 70 years.

I would rather the story be: Wow that old guy wears a life-jacket and he is sailing instructor maybe I should too.

I think peer pressure plays more than a big role. I would suspect it is over 90%.

I notice that the young Coast Guard guys all wear a life jacket but of course, for them, it is the ultimate peer pressure.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

davidpm said:


> That is one of the reasons why I wear a life jacket whenever I go sailing..


That's a good point. Exactly why some offshore race rules mandate all crew are wearing life jackets at the start and finish.

I have to soul search this one a bit. I do wear a pfd, but not all the time. Only at night, in rough weather or when I might be concerned about going overboard and my wife not getting back in time, such as frigid water offshore. My jacket also has a PLB attached. But I do not wear one in tame conditions, at least not on this boat.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

outbound said:


> Both an Arai and a brain bucket are deemed compliance. Nothing even the law can fix stupid. Jeff Noseworthy knows this and points it out regularly.


I think you are using the term brain bucket to refer to those half helmet skull caps that don't even come over one's ears. I use the term to refer to all helmets. Ironically, most of those half helmets do not carry DOT approval and yet I never see anyone cited for it. To get DOT approval, they require the kind of thick insulation of a real helmet and then look stupid. Make that, more stupid.

I've owned a Harley nearly all my adult life. I am/was the typical Harley client, professional during the day, dress like you're in a gang for a ride. The Harley culture was to look like a "biker". I didn't go overboard, but a skimpier helmet, denim jacket (which is useless protection), etc. Maybe 15 years ago, or so, I was introduced to the BMW motorcycle culture (precedes the autos, btw). The first thing that attracted me to it was the focus on traveling with your bike and putting on miles. My Harley was uncomfortable, by the next town, but I looked cool. Then I came to realize that BMW riders, in 180 degree contrast to Harleys, love to show off all the armored clothing they acquire. It was cool in the BMW world to have a nice looking pair of armored pants, or a top of the line full faced new helmet. ATGATT was a new shorthand. All The Gear, All The Time. As I have aged past the Best By date for me to feel invincible, this makes way more sense to me.

I still own my Harley. I haven't ridden it in years, and for several prior to that, it was once per year around town, just to see that it still ran. It's more a personal museum piece for me now. My K1600 is my main ride now and I wear ATGATT.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I briefly raced dirt so started riding with full gear. Then through a a one lung beemer, airhead, Bonnie, duc, fundura, heritage, road glide, KTM adventurer, Wing etc. always worn gear. Been aHOG and Yankee beemer member.
So since my teens always had a Shoi or Arai on my head. Didn’t need to be told.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

outbound said:


> .....Didn't need to be told.


Most neurologists don't. Not the standard.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> I have to soul search this one a bit.


Totally get that.

I take it off when at the dock but feel guilty about that because more people fall off a dock than fall off the boat.

It would be like if you had an insurance app on your phone for the car.

You are not driving that day so turn it off.

Only going to the store so turn it off.

Going for a long drive in the rain turn it on, unless you forget.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Must admit we don’t wear harnesses nor jackets if day sailing and at least two in the cockpit on a pleasant day.
They do go on if going forward, at night, in even moderate weather, if alone or if you just feel you should. All kids and those new to sailboats are asked to be jacketed and depending on our judgement harnessed. 
Everyone is instructed in mom rules and how to deploy the mom 8. So don’t think it presents much of a risk.
There’s always a a libertarian v liberal internal conflict about such things but as long as you haven’t injured someone who you haven’t asked and received permission think libertarian should win out.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Since this has become a little bit of a dumping ground for near-miss reports, I'll write up what happened to me today.

It was Pirates and Wenches weekend at Rock Hall, which I have always used as an excuse to get out of town on my boat. Although I've never attended it, descriptions of the event seem to always include the words drunken and debauchery. I really have nothing against this event, as long as outsiders don't poach all the parking spaces at our marina (which are supposed to be for marina tenants only). I'd just rather be out sailing than sweating to death in a silly costume.

I am not sure if alcohol played a factor in what happened today. It certainly didn't play any factor on my end, since we drank nothing other than water all day.

We had a nice, gentle daysail and were returning to the slip around 3 pm. Just before I enter my marina's fairway I need to pass daymarker "4E", which is directly across from the end of my dock. In order to get into the fairway, I need to honor the marker (1 ft depth if you pass on the wrong side, as many have discovered the hard way), make a quick 30° turn to the right, then 30° back to the left. This positions me right in the fairway between my dock "B" (on the left) and the next dock "A" (on the right).

A couple hundred feet before I got to 4E, I noticed a runabout with about 6 people approaching 4E from my right. I immediately shifted into neutral since he was stand on, and I was barely making way as I got to 4E. However, he did not maintain course and speed, instead going into reverse and backing up. Initially thought he was giving way to me, but I quickly realized that he had stopped alongside a boat at the T-head of dock A to talk with someone. Seeing this, I shifted into forward to maintain steerage for my quick right-left jog. Just as I completed my left turn toward the fairway, the runabout starts moving forward in front of me, even though all heads on the boat are turned away from me engaged in the conversation. There was no way I was going to be able to stop, and if he didn't reverse immediately he would be coming across my bow less than 20' in front of me. I did go into reverse in a futile effort to stop, but I also grabbed my air horn and blasted an ear-shattering shriek in his direction. He immediately looked up with shock on his face. But rather than pull backwards, he gunned it in front of me and avoided a collision by about 10'. He never even looked back as he high-tailed it out of there. I then had difficulty maneuvering into the fairway, as my prop walk had turned my boat away from my slip and brought my bow perilously close to the boats on A dock. I eventually made it into the slip.

I've never had a close call like that one, and I do wonder if alcohol might have been a factor.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Had a close call with a lobster boat the other day here in Maine. I had changed direction to stay clear of him as I could tell they were bringing up pots, but right when I got to the closest point to him he turned and started motoring toward me. I had to do a crash tack and he still almost hit me. I don't think he was even considering that there were other boats in the world.

The waters just seem to be more dangerous the past month.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I'm not sure if the lobsterman would have impacted, I wasn't there. I do know I routinely see them on a course that would conflict, but turn for a pot pickup/drop at the last minute. Most often, I think they are genuinely powering toward a pot and just aren't going to concern themselves with the nervousness it creates in the passing recreational sailboat. 

That said, I highly suspect they screw with the recreational boater too. I would find them powering into a stand-on position (assuming I'm motoring). Not until I gave way, would they suddenly turn and it was no longer where they were going.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

TakeFive said:


> Since this has become a little bit of a dumping ground for near-miss reports, I'll write up what happened to me today.
> 
> It was Pirates and Wenches weekend at Rock Hall, which I have always used as an excuse to get out of town on my boat. Although I've never attended it, descriptions of the event seem to always include the words drunken and debauchery. I really have nothing against this event, as long as outsiders don't poach all the parking spaces at our marina (which are supposed to be for marina tenants only). I'd just rather be out sailing than sweating to death in a silly costume.
> 
> ...


It's hard to judge these situations without being there, but from my experience, I think the lesson here is thinking that other boaters will know, let alone follow, the stand-on rules in tight quarters in a marina. At best, the only "rule" I've ever seen observed when coming and going to the dock is altering course slightly to pass port to port in a head-on situation, and this is only because I think it's natural for people to do this because they are used to driving on the right side of a road. Aside from that, the rule I follow around the docks is to let everyone go until I have a clear path, or eye contact and a hand signal letting me know that someone is yielding to me. There is no stand-on rule that I've ever observed in a marina. Not saying it doesn't apply, just that it's not observed and so it's meaningless. Which is likely why you got a rude response to your air horn, which in my opinion was just a waste of your compressed air.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

Being from Mass Bay originally, "marinas" were a "what's that?" sort of thing, we all used moorings. So the normal rules applied, but the main thing in beating into Marblehead Harbor was not the guy on starboard, is was all the moored boats--can I fetch or not?? Pinch it out, or bear off under his stern? Or just tack away? Into what? You learned close-quarters sailing pretty quickly, or got taken off the helm in favor of someone who had learned.

Since moving south, in marinas, and approaches, I agree with what Caberg just said. And when you have to make a sharp turn around a buoy, "holding course" isn't generally possible. "Where's he going, into what slip?" is, I think, a "special circumstances" situation under Rule 2. So I use hand signals or whatever. You have to make it up as you go along. And if it goes wrong, it's at very low speed (we hope). "Always approach the dock at the speed you would like to hit it" applies here in a way, just substitute "other boat' for "dock"....


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

This guy had backed up and was carrying on a conversation with a boat to his starboard. He then shifted into forward without looking to see where he was going

My air horn was not a waste of compressed air. My air horn is what made him look up. Its use was necessary because it was the last resort before a collision.

I did not get a rude response to my air horn. He looked shocked, which was appropriate in that circumstance. He was driving forward without looking forward, and needed the horn to wake up.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

In our marina, I must come to a full stop in the fairway outside our marina, begin to backup and make a turn to port, back down the fairway that contains my side slip, which has a boat in front and behind, then parallel park to starboard. The point is, no one expects this. 

If we can visually get a conflicting boats attention, either my wife or I may just tell them or point and they get the picture. More than once I will hail “all vessels in the vicinity of xxxxx”, this is sv passing the fuel dock, be advised, etc, etc.”. It’s worked, as I’ve seen trailing vessels slow their approach. T5, I know it’s Mon quarterbacking, but I wonder what would have happened with a hail.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Yes, it is Monday morning quarterbacking, but that's how we learn.

Realistically, the whole thing took about 10 seconds, although I've replayed it in slow motion in my head dozens of times. I did briefly consider hailing him, but two things were interfering with that. First, as a small runabout with six people apparently talking, I doubt they had a VHF, and doubt they would have heard the hail. (Also note that I had no idea that they, among the many boats around, would be the one to go in front of me.) Second, our dog was barking (because my wife was up on the bow), which I hoped right up to the very end would get their attention. The dog's presence in the cockpit with me was another reason I did NOT want to blow the air horn. Predictably, he jumped about a foot when I blew it. Fortunately, he was tethered so he could not go overboard.

As for others' suggestions about making eye contact, in normal conditions that would have been feasible. But with the P&W event winding down the harbor was VERY busy. There was a boat behind me, and another coming from port who appeared to be giving way to me, boats rafted up inside "the square" in the harbor, and I bet there were others around the corner at Waterman's ready to come out next. It's just not possible to make eye contact with EVERYONE in the harbor before making way. Am I supposed to interrupt every conversation that everyone is carrying on to ensure we've made eye contact? Also, there was no way I could know this guy would be the one to run in front of me until he actually did it. I was suspicious only because he was the closest to my fairway, but it could have just as well been the guy to my port that would make an unexpected lunge in front of me (though I think he was further away).

But I get your point that with a busy harbor a securite could have been prudent - but only if I could get the dog to stop barking his own securite call!


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

VHF would be relatively pointless around my marina. No one's listening. When it's very busy, you just have to wait until you feel that you have the best grasp on what others are doing, and always be prepared to bail on your plan if someone makes an unexpected move. Ideally, you recognize in advance a boat who may do something unexpected because they are not paying attention, and you wait until it becomes clear what they intend to do. Hopefully no one is moving fast enough to cause injury or significant damage if contact were to occur, and it's just a matter of shoving off one another. That happens. Best to remain calm and keep cool; it's not the time to unleash your fury at those reckless drunken stinkpotters. They probably look just as dimly at the sailors in their cute sperry docksiders and slow unmaneuverable boats. I would say it's more art than science, and there's no perfect way to get from point A to B around big busy dock systems. I'm not a fan of blasting an air horn in a crowded marina. It causes more confusion than anything, and is just going to leave a rude vibe. A light tap on a horn to get someone's attention and then communicate intentions is different than a big air horn blast.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

caberg said:


> ....I'm not a fan of blasting an air horn in a crowded marina. It causes more confusion than anything, and is just going to leave a rude vibe. A light tap on a horn to get someone's attention and then communicate intentions is different than a big air horn blast.


In practice, what you recommend would probably have done the job. However, technically, a short blast is supposed to signify you will be passing to starboard (on my port side). A long blast is either saying you're getting underway or you are announcing a warning, which would have been appropriate in this case.

I would have had to been there to say, but intuitively I don't find it rude for someone to sound a signal to get someone's attention. In fact, I'd like you to do so to get my attention, if I'm making a mistake. Anything to avoid swapping paint.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

I dunno, T5 said "_I also grabbed my air horn and blasted an ear-shattering shriek in his direction_" when the boat was 10' away. It sort of sounded like the air horn was more of a "_hey a hole..._" kind of blast, especially since T5 seemed to hold a negative view of the type of folks who were attending whatever event was going on at his marina that day.

Fully agree that you can't really second guess someone without having been there, but T5 shared his experience here and presumably expected to be critiqued. My take away was that it was kind of a poor interaction on both sides, but hey, one of my favorite sayings is, all's well that ends well.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

A few details:

He was not 10' away from me when I blew the horn. Prior to his accelerating further, I would estimate he was about 40' away from my bow, and I was at the helm 34' behind the bow, so I was more like 70' away from him. It was only after he decided to speed up (instead of reversing course) that he passed 10' from my bow.

In the split-second that I had to decide what to do, I did actually think about whether to do 1, 2, or 5 blasts. (Strictly speaking, I think the 5 short blast "doubt" signal would have been the technically correct one). I did not want to be obnoxious, I just wanted him to stop talking to the other boat and look up to see the imminent hazard he was creating. So I did the shortest blast I could. But even a short blast from an air horn is ear-shattering. It did the trick, because he looked up immediately.

Was the air horn overkill? I knew that my dog was barking and that did not get his attention. The whistle that hangs from my helm was no louder than my dog's bark. I'm a few seconds from an imminent collision, so I'm going to grab the loudest frickin' thing within arm's reach. The choice was clear. It was not overkill IMO, and was appropriate for the situation.


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

The only close call I have encountered along those lines was when I was fueling up at a gas dock in Deale. The outside dock was already in use by a center console powerboat, and the gal at the marina instructed me to pull bow first into the launch ramp pier, where she could reach me with the gas hose when he powerboat was finished.

Shortly after I began to gas up, a 44 foot sport fisherman backed up parallel to the dock just vacated by the center console boat. He threw those twin diesels into reverse, revved up the engine and came straight at me. I yelled at the top of my lungs and he came to an abrupt stop just two feet from the side of my boat.

After gassing up, I noted that the wind was blowing down the creek at about 20 MPH and asked him to use his boat hook to hold me off if the wind started to push me towards him. As I backed up, the boat didn't seem to respond properly, then I heard a loud bang and one of his outriggers dropped to his deck. He screamed with rage that he was gonna sue me, shaking his fist.

Ironically, the entire problem was caused by him. When he backed up, his outriggers passed into my standing rigging, which neither of us noticed at the time. I didn't look up when I began to back out, because there was no reason to think there was anything up there that would be in my way. My biggest concern was the wind and tide. 

I gave him my insurance information, and he gave me his, but I had no damage whatsoever. I immediately called my insurance company and told them what happened, and they called the marina and confirmed my story with the lady at the marina. The weird thing was he claimed it was all my fault, and my insurance company actually paid this guy $6,000 for the damage, more than enough to replace all the outriggers on the boat, while only one was damaged. I contested their decision, yet they still insisted on paying this Ahole. Fortunately, they didn't raise my rates because of this incident.

The ruling, which was done by some kind of insurance claim judge, was that because he was still tied to the dock and I was moving, I was at fault. What a crock of $hit!

Gary


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

travlin-easy said:


> The ruling, which was done by some kind of insurance claim judge, was that because he was still tied to the dock and I was moving, I was at fault. What a crock of $hit!
> 
> Gary


Obviously, from your point of view, he was an idiot. But I can sort of see the judges point of view. If a guy is parked in the worst possible place, taking up all the room and being a real jerk about it and you run into him it makes sense that the guy moving is held responsible.

Good lesson though to look up. I probably would have done the same.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

I had a horn incident a few years ago.

I was skippering either this boat or the sister ship. http://www.sailctaccess.org/gallery-2--the-ships?lightbox=i316r\\

I had about 6 handicap people with me. The sistership lost the motor so I was hip towing her back to the slip.

My little 8hp was working for all she was worth I had about 2 knots and barely steerage way.

We were going down a narrow fairway looking to turn into an even narrower fairway to get to our slip.

A buy about 6 boat lengths ahead of us started backing his huge Bertram with him watching his fenders and not that he was going to block the fairway.

I blasted him because if I stopped I would have lost control and been washed into boats parked alongside. I probably had a dozen people many handicap so I wasn't about to worry about anything else.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

davidpm said:


> ........ so I wasn't about to worry about anything else.


This is the right takeaway, I believe. When it comes to the safety of the vessel and/or crew, one should not concern themselves with anything else. Not the dog, not feeling obnoxious, etc. It's understandable why people do consider these other matters, but it should be trained out. First, fly the plane, as they say. Doesn't matter what everyone else is squawking about, until that job is fully under control.


----------



## roverhi (Dec 19, 2013)

The ships I've encountered, when they aren't restricted by draft, etc, expect a sailboat to maintain their course and they will so what they need to do to avoid a collision. Once or twice when I've made large course changes to try and get out of the way they've let me know via horn signals that I screwed up there avoidance maneuver and should have maintained heading. Those damn horns are loud and get your attention real quick.


----------



## rpludwig (Mar 13, 2017)

speaking of colregs:

Nine survive boat collision in Chesapeake Bay - Capital Gazette


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

roverhi said:


> The ships I've encountered, when they aren't restricted by draft, etc, expect a sailboat to maintain their course and they will so what they need to do to avoid a collision. Once or twice when I've made large course changes to try and get out of the way they've let me know via horn signals that I screwed up there avoidance maneuver and should have maintained heading. Those damn horns are loud and get your attention real quick.


There is a subjective component to the ColRegs. Stand on doesn't apply, until there is a risk of collision, but it does not set a specific distance for that. In other words, what would otherwise be the stand on vessel, is free the maneuver out of the way, prior to any risk of collision. This subjectivity is, in part, why most accident investigations attribute fault to both parties. Along with the catchall rule that everyone must avoid, regardless of the standon rules.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

rpludwig said:


> speaking of colregs:
> 
> Nine survive boat collision in Chesapeake Bay - Capital Gazette


Hard to imagine what happened. The skipper of the commercial stinkpot must have held a USCG license. Even the dumbest ticket holder I've ever met knows to give way to a sailboat, with her sails up.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Obviously the sailboat didn't display on AIS.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Betcha the blow boater tacked right in front of that poor sport fisher  .


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

Minnewaska said:


> Hard to imagine what happened. The skipper of the commercial stinkpot must have held a USCG license. Even the dumbest ticket holder I've ever met knows to give way to a sailboat, with her sails up.


Of course the sailboat may have been under power in which case, based on the starboard side impact, the sailboat would have been the give way vessel.

The worse rule abuse that I see on the water is the widespread failure of the give way vessel to make an 'early and obvious' change in course. Instead, sail or power, the give way operator waits to the last few seconds to avoid. This bad habit is much more pernicious with powerboats due to their speed. Several time a weekend I make dramatic course changes under sail to head away from the path of as an oncoming power vessel. Maddening.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

The powerboat was not fishing at the time of the accident - it was either traveling to, or from, the fishing grounds. This is evidenced by the fishing rods being in the transport holders, which are situated atop the cabin - not the trolling holders, which are situated along the gunwale and across the stern of the boat. Someone on the powerboat, obviously, was not paying attention to what they were doing. 

The powerboat was a 6-pack, uninspected vessel, which is also obvious because there is no life raft aboard, which is required on charter vessels carrying more than 6 passengers. The life raft is usually stored atop the cabin. Somebody is in a world of $hit for this one! 

Gary


----------



## rpludwig (Mar 13, 2017)

wonder if that J is fixable?

and can't imagine the PB is not at fault, the CG findings will be interesting...(as usual).


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

sailingfool said:


> Of course the sailboat may have been under power in which case, based on the starboard side impact, the sailboat would have been the give way vessel....


Pretty academic point. It's possible, but how many motor sailers fly both their jib and main?

The most plausible scenario I can think of, that would attribute blame to the sailboat, would be if they didn't stand on and moved into the stinkpots way. I find that hard to believe, however.


----------



## slap (Mar 13, 2008)

rpludwig said:


> wonder if that J is fixable?
> 
> and can't imagine the PB is not at fault, the CG findings will be interesting...(as usual).


Mast was still up - if all they have to do is fix the hull and replace the boom it might be repairable for less than the value of the boat. If the mast has to be replaced too, then it might be totaled by the insurance company.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Major problem is that half the boat operators are below average intelligence.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Charter company's logo seems fitting in this case:


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Fishing skipper's bio seems to indicate that it was a brand new boat, or at least newly added to the fleet this year.

Sailboat's club statement on the matter:



> Date: August 17, 2018
> 
> This morning at approximately 11:30am, a member of the Chesapeake Boating Club was under sail on one of the Club's J/105s when they were struck by a 35' powerboat. The J/105 was struck amidships on the starboard side, with the powerboat coming to a stop on top of the sailboat. Thankfully, no one was injured. Our members were operating the boat in a safe manner, on a day with clear visibility and 10-12 knots of breeze. The J/105 crew attempted to hail the approaching boat prior to the collision, otherwise signal, and take action to avoid the collision. We would like to thank the Coast Guard and Department of Natural Resources for their rapid response to the scene.


----------



## Rob Bibber (Aug 29, 2018)

Capt Len said:


> Major problem is that half the boat operators are below average intelligence.


Same is true of some sailboat operators too. Back when I was a lobsterboat captain I was hauling up a trawl of traps in heavy tide current. I was restricted of movement. Because of the current I had to put the boat in gear every minute or so as I hauled in the line with my traps on it. Just as I did this I looked up and a sailboat under full sail was passing from port no more than ten feet off my bow. I had to reverse engines to prevent a collision. The other guy even had the nerve to flip me off...


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rob Bibber said:


> Same is true of some sailboat operators too. Back when I was a lobsterboat captain I was hauling up a trawl of traps in heavy tide current. I was restricted of movement. Because of the current I had to put the boat in gear every minute or so as I hauled in the line with my traps on it. Just as I did this I looked up and a sailboat under full sail was passing from port no more than ten feet off my bow. I had to reverse engines to prevent a collision. The other guy even had the nerve to flip me off...


Yes, sailors can make mistakes, and can double down by doing rude stuff.

But I'm just curious, since you were RAM, and apparentiy did this on a regular basis, did your have your ball-diamond-ball dayshapes up? Or failing that, did you at least issue a securite over the radio so people weren't guessing?


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

^^^ A fishing vessel who has their maneuverability restricted by their gear/ hauling nets etc. shows 2 cones or a basket, they should not claim RAMN.


----------



## Rob Bibber (Aug 29, 2018)

TakeFive said:


> Yes, sailors can make mistakes, and can double down by doing rude stuff.
> 
> But I'm just curious, since you were RAM, and apparentiy did this on a regular basis, did your have your ball-diamond-ball dayshapes up? Or failing that, did you at least issue a securite over the radio so people weren't guessing?


"dayshapes"? LOL nope. These are commercial fishing boats that do this every day (weather permitting). Nobody should have to guess. If you see a working lobsterboat that isn't moving between stops then it is on gear and RAM.

Most inshore lobster fishing boats are <20M. Most are half that or less. Mine was 34 ft or about 10.3M


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

Rob Bibber said:


> ...If you see a working lobsterboat that isn't moving between stops then it is on gear and RAM.
> 
> Most inshore lobster fishing boats are <20M. Most are half that or less. Mine was 34 ft or about 10.3M


FWIW su h lobster boats would be 'fishing' not 'RAM' just read the Colregs definitions, although the distinction does not matter to a recreational boater requires to give way.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

In my current neck of the woods people in small boats quogue using a real long pole. You’d have to be down to two betz cells held together with a spirochete to not know the one person in the boat isn’t going to move. Still both power and sail mess with them. Rude, just rude regardless of who’s doing it.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I know this is going to turn into a classic Sailnet pissing match, but it needs discussing.

First, I will say that I personally don't mess with crab boats in the Chesapeake. I generally motor through crab trap areas and don't put the sails up until I'm in too deep water for crab traps. I've never dealt with lobster traps, so I can't speak to how I would deal with them.

But there are some misconceptions expressed here vs. what my OUPV instructor told us. And maybe he's wrong, but COLREGs seems to support him. Basically, a commercial lobster boat (or crab boat) picking up traps is not necessarily a "vessel engaged in fishing" as defined in COLREGs:



> *Rule 3*
> The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any vessel fishing with nets, lines, trawls, or other fishing apparatus which restrict maneuverability, but does not include a vessel fishing with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict manageability.


If you're not actively towing something substantial in size (as might be done using outriggers), you're probably not restricted in ability to maneuver, so you're not automatically stand on vs. a vessel purely under sail. And even if you were (hypothetically) stand on, you still have a responsibility as the stand on vessel to maintain course and speed. If you're pulling up a trap and jogging your motor to stand still (or creep forward slowly) vs. a strong current (as Bibber described), you're not a "vessel engaged in fishing", but you may be RAM as he rightly suggested. But as RAM, if you're using your motor to creep along in the current (so you can haul in your trap), you are obligated to maintain your course/speed (which would be close to zero) until the sailing vessel has passed. Being RAM (or, if you insist, a vessel engaged in fishing) does not give you the right to change course/speed at will to go to your next trap. And that sounds like what Bibber may have been doing in that situation. He mentioned hauling in a trawl of traps, but based on what COLREGs says, I do not believe that merely hauling in trawls of traps (without being engaged in towing them) qualifies as stand on. Merely being a commercial fishing boat does not make you a "vessel engaged in fishing" according to COLREGs.

And it is explicitly clear from COLREGs that commercial charter boats pulling trolling lines are NOT stand on vs. a vessel under sail, even though seemingly 90% of them act like they are.

I agree that it is generally not good practice to mess with commercial fishing vessels. But I think rudeness (and violation of COLREGs) can go both ways.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

A fishing vessel hauling in a string of traps (other apparatus) is engaged in fishing. Its the very definition of engaged in fishing, its the hauling in of the nets or traps that restricts their maneuverability. Trawling ie dragging nets with spreader doors is one specific type of fishing- trawling, but when a a stern or side trawler is backing down on their nets to retrieve them, their behaviour is similar to a lobster boat collecting traps. When hauling nets a trawler does not change its status from fishing or trawling to RAM.

There is a rule specifically for vessels engaged in fishing and it describes every type of fishing which severely restricts a vessels maneuverability.

There is a seperate rule for RAM which specifically describes types of work that are considered RAM and the description omits all types of fishing from the description, because fishing that restricts maneuverability already has its own rule. Just like s sailing vessel doesn't get to claim RAM status, even if their preventer or whatever restricts their maneuverability- they are sailing.

Its not hard to imagine the chaos if every lobster boat and trawler all of a sudden decided hauling nets and traps gave them RAM status. If that happened ships landing air craft, cable laying ships, under water survey ships, Coast Guard bouy tenders and ships and lighters involved in fuel transfers would have to give way to every little lobster boat and trawler that didnt think to steer clear of the survey area or transfer area etc.

A vessel engaged in fishing is engaged in fishing, it doesn't get to elevate its status to RAM when it starts doing the work of fishing. This distinction might not matter much to yachts because they give way to both engaged and fishing and Restricted in Ability to Maneuver, but the distinction matters to mariners operating RAM vessels because they need to know where they stand in the hierarchy as a matter of conducting their day to day buisiness. I think most fishing masters also know they don't rank above or equal to CG Bouy Tenders, Offshore supply vessels transferring oil at sea, aircraft carriers landing aircraft and the like (RAM).

Its all pretty clear in ColRegs rule 3 General Definitions.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Arcb said:


> A fishing vessel hauling in a string of traps (other apparatus) is engaged in fishing. Its the very definition of engaged in fishing, its the hauling in of the nets or traps that restricts their maneuverability. Trawling ie dragging nets with spreader doors is one specific type of fishing- trawling, but when a a stern or side trawler is backing down on their nets to retrieve them, their behaviour is similar to a lobster boat collecting traps. When hauling nets a trawler does not change its status from fishing or trawling to RAM.
> 
> There is a rule specifically for vessels engaged in fishing and it describes every type of fishing which severely restricts a vessels maneuverability.
> 
> ...


What you said disagrees with what my training captain told our class, but it makes sense so I'll accept it.

However, the definitions are not entirely clear. I pasted the definition of "vessel engaged in fishing" above, and it contains exclusions for certain types of fishing, including trolling lines and other activities the do not restrict maneuverability sufficiently to make the fishing vessel stand on.

So accepting the fact that a lobster boat pulling in traps is a vessel engaged in fishing, I still assert that his obligation as a stand on vessel is to maintain course and speed. When he is done pulling in one trap and ready to move to the next trap, he does not have the right to suddenly lurch out in front of an oncoming vessel. That seems like it may be the situation that Rob Bibber described. In fact, I would contend that if he is maneuverable enough to quickly change his speed and direction on the way to the next trap, he is not truly restricted in his ability to maneuver (which is required to be "vessel engaged in fishing").

Nobody has "right of way" - it's either stand on or give way. And stand on comes with specific obligations.

Also, my training captain made it clear that the COLREGs definitions are based on what a vessel is currently DOING, not what kind of design the vessel is. A fishing boat pulling into the harbor is not engaged in fishing, so has no special privileges. A sailboat under motor power is a power boat. It's all about the current activity (which changes), not the boat design (which stays the same).

As I said before, I don't mess with commercial crabbers. I have seen them lurch in front of oncoming boats on the way to the next float, often without even looking around to see who is coming. They should not do that. But I stay far enough away that it's irrelevant for me personally.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

TakeFive said:


> So accepting the fact that a lobster boat pulling in traps is a vessel engaged in fishing, I still assert that his obligation as a stand on vessel is to maintain course and speed. When he is done pulling in one trap and ready to move to the next trap, he does not have the right to suddenly lurch out in front of an oncoming vessel. That seems like it may be the situation that Rob Bibber described. In fact, I would contend that if he is maneuverable enough to quickly change his speed and direction on the way to the next trap, he is not truly restricted in his ability to maneuver (which is required to be "vessel engaged in fishing").
> 
> Nobody has "right of way" - it's either stand on or give way. And stand on comes with specific obligations.
> 
> ...


I agree with i think all of this. The fishing vessel is not engaged in fishing when transiting between traps, only when its maneuverability is restricted.

I do have a bit of experience in this area. Spent 11 years as QM and then Navigator on RAM vessels, mostly scientific/survey vessels. Then tried my luck as Skipper on a 60 ft stern trawler before getting into the passenger business.

When a RAM vessel is restricted, its really restricted. In our case we might have scientific gear over the side to depths some times exceeding 500 ft, some times multiple pieces of gear simultaneously on multiple winches, ships crane might even be in play, DP might be engaged. The ship really can't maneuver out of the way of anything wothout causing damage. Ships landing aircraft are down right dangerous to maneuver. Drede barges and bouy tenders often have gear on the bottom anchoring them in place, spuds for dredge barges, bouy anchors for bouy tenders.

Fishing vessels, while very restricted when hauling gear, are not as restricted as some of the examples above, and more importantly have greater opportunity to control the time and place to recover their gear.

There is a critical time when hauling gear when a fishing vessel has almost no ability to maneuver (when backing down on nets or traps) but that time frame is generally relatively brief and the vessel is nearly stationary at that point. However, short handed fishing vessels are not sending their crew out to swap their basket/cones for a ball diamond ball during the 5 or 20 minutes this takes.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I love 'rules" threads and the resulting disagreements.

It always makes me feel so safe to be out among my fellow boaters


----------



## Gregrosine (Feb 10, 2013)

It's your responsibility to take measures necessary to not hit anyone.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

Don0190 said:


> I love 'rules" threads and the resulting disagreements.
> 
> It always makes me feel so safe to be out among my fellow boaters


I'm assuming you are being tongue in cheek but for new people, I would like to emphasize that it does not have to be as dangerous as it might seem.

The reality is that everyone is responsible to not get into an accident.

If everyone takes that responsibility seriously never intentionally asserts rights to the point of causing a dangerous situation and always anticipate all possible close calls there will seldom if ever be a problem.

These technical discussions help us review the rules and of course are important after the fact to the lawyers.

From a practical point of view if I'm sailing a 35' sailboat I'm never going to intentionally put myself in any situation where there is any question of my safety.

I am willing to do a 180-degree turn, stop, reverse, start the engine, use the radio or horn whatever it takes to make sure any potential situation is resolved long before any rule slicing is necessary.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Not all that tongue in cheek because every rule thread goes the same way, people disagreeing or showing they don’t understand and follow the rules.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Sometimes, the "rule-breaker" is doing so from ignorance, sometimes from arrogance, and sometimes from malice. I think I saw one example of each the last time I was out sailing. My marina, along with several others and a couple of yacht clubs, is on a relatively narrow and shallow river. The channel is about 40 wide, and at low tide, 8 feet deep at best. Last weekend, there were two kayakers paddling along in the river. It's almost dead low tide, but there they are, smack in the middle of channel, paddling alongside each other, just moseying along, not paying attention to the line of about 8 boats behind them trying to get upriver. Someone ahead of me gave them an air horn blast and motioned for them to move out of the channel, which they did. As we passed them, they gave a friendly wave. Pure ignorance. Earlier, on the way out of the river, a large powerboat came up from behind me (I was doing about 4 knots on my engine), passed me on my port side, then cut right in front of me. A Colregs violation? Probably not; he passed me (no signal, but hey, I've never heard a yacht use one in all my years), then avoided me while I maintained course and speed. Scared me a bit, though. The "malice" example: a jetskiier. While out sailing, I saw a small powerboat (prob. around 20 ft) cruising by at full plane. Right behind him, I saw a jetskiier purposefully playing in the powerboats wake ("surfing" the wake). The people in the powerboat were frantically waving at this guy to go away, but he kept on, with the powerboat trying to shake him off by a cutting sharp turn. It didn't take long for the jetskiier to either lose interest or get the message, as he was gone quickly. My view of the whole episode lasted less than 10 seconds. Quick quiz: what rules did the jetskiier violate?


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Don0190 said:


> Not all that tongue in cheek because every rule thread goes the same way, people disagreeing or showing they don't understand and follow the rules.


...which proves that the discussion here has significant educational value.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

TakeFive said:


> ...which proves that the discussion here has significant educational value.


Since I can't count on running across the 100 or so boaters to read this, it proves it's scary in the real world and mostly a waste of time to debate online


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

But it's not scary out there. If this thread proves anything, it's that most people don't have a good grasp of the rules, but nonetheless we all navigate our boats around just fine with our common sense. Boat collisions are very rare, and usually caused by a mix of inattention and freak circumstance. No need to be scared, just take normal precautions as usual and you'll be fine.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

caberg said:


> But it's not scary out there. If this thread proves anything, it's that most people don't have a good grasp of the rules, but nonetheless we all navigate our boats around just fine with our common sense. Boat collisions are very rare, and usually caused by a mix of inattention and freak circumstance. No need to be scared, just take normal precautions as usual and you'll be fine.


This is true in the vast majority of cases. But the risk in violating COLREGs is that the guy who gives way when he should stand on could cause a collision if the other guy also changes course at the same time, putting the two vessels on a collision course and now clueless of what to do next.

Something very similar to this happened to me last Sunday. I was sailing along the southwest shore of Gibson Island on starboard tack, beating toward the daymarks for the entrance to Magothy River with just enough clearance on my course to make it without tacking. Another sailboat was approaching from my port, on port tack. I expected him to tack behind me, but he stubbornly continued on a collision course with me. I was concerned that if I turned to go behind him, he might tack at the same time (since he was the give way vessel), and if I got caught in irons I'd be a sitting duck for a collision. So I got on the handheld radio: "Sailing vessel approaching from my port, please state your intentions." Nothing. I repeated, "Sailing vessel approaching from my port, we are on a collision course. Please state your intentions." He responded, "I am stand on. You must give way to me." I replied, "Copy, I will give way to avoid your imminent collision." Once we were clear of each other, I radioed back that he should have been the give way vessel. His glib response was, "I just figured it would be easier for you to give way." This boat was basically the same size as mine with no indication of any restriction in his ability to maneuver. As he passed, I noticed that he had someone in the cockpit with him, but neither of them looked interested in getting off their butts to grind a winch. Of course, this evasive maneuver now caused me to run out of water, requiring two additional tacks to get to the Magothy daymarks. Easier my a$$.

I certainly did not let this ruin my day, but it is a good example of why COLREGs should be followed. If every passing vessel needs to get on VHF to determine intentions, the radios would be cluttered with unnecessary chatter.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

TakeFive said:


> This is true in the vast majority of cases. But the risk in violating COLREGs is that the guy who gives way when he should stand on could cause a collision if the other guy also changes course at the same time, putting the two vessels on a collision course and now clueless of what to do next.
> 
> Something very similar to this happened to me last Sunday. I was sailing along the southwest shore of Gibson Island on starboard tack, beating toward the daymarks for the entrance to Magothy River with just enough clearance on my course to make it without tacking. Another sailboat was approaching from my port, on port tack. I expected him to tack behind me, but he stubbornly continued on a collision course with me. I was concerned that if I turned to go behind him, he might tack at the same time (since he was the give way vessel), and if I got caught in irons I'd be a sitting duck for a collision. So I got on the handheld radio: "Sailing vessel approaching from my port, please state your intentions." Nothing. I repeated, "Sailing vessel approaching from my port, we are on a collision course. Please state your intentions." He responded, "I am stand on. You must give way to me." I replied, "Copy, I will give way to avoid your imminent collision." Once we were clear of each other, I radioed back that he should have been the give way vessel. His glib response was, "I just figured it would be easier for you to give way." This boat was basically the same size as mine with no indication of any restriction in his ability to maneuver. As he passed, I noticed that he had someone in the cockpit with him, but neither of them looked interested in getting off their butts to grind a winch. Of course, this evasive maneuver now caused me to run out of water, requiring two additional tacks to get to the Magothy daymarks. Easier my a$$.
> 
> I certainly did not let this ruin my day, but it is a good example of why COLREGs should be followed. If every passing vessel needs to get on VHF to determine intentions, the radios would be cluttered with unnecessary chatter.


That's 2 near misses for you in as many weeks. I guess you are really unlucky, or sail in really congested waters, or something else is going on.

For the sake of discussion, I wonder if your rigid adherence to the rules actually causes you more difficulty.

I just don't see these types of situations very often, and I'm on the water several days a week in an area with lots of recreational boaters, many of who I am sure have never even heard of colregs. In my experience, people start making course changes far enough ahead that intentions become obvious and nothing scary happens. Especially when it's 2 boats under sail. I'll give you that a power boat bearing down without an operator clearly paying attention can get my attention.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

caberg said:


> ...For the sake of discussion, I wonder if your rigid adherence to the rules actually causes you more difficulty...


For the sake of discussion, I'll point out that giving way when I was the stand on vessel is the opposite of rigid adherence. I was in a situation where doing this unilaterally would have been a hazard (because he could have been preparing to give way simultaneously with me, putting us back on a collision course), so I contacted the other vessel on VHF.

Every situation requires analyzing the potential hazards of several different options. In this example I was close-hauled with a lee shore. Simply steering behind this boat further ahead of time would have put me on a course to quickly run aground (if I tacked), or caused me to get caught in irons while being blown toward a lee shore (if I pinched or hove too). What I did was fully appropriate for the circumstances.

The two examples I cited were not representative or typical - the vast majority of sails are totally uneventful. This example was in an area where I was constrained by draft, and the other was Pirates and Wenches weekend with dozens of boats heading home at the end of the event. Both are unusual in my experience.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

mstern said:


> Sometimes, the "rule-breaker" is doing so from ignorance, sometimes from arrogance, and sometimes from malice.


I'll add that some just make a mistake too. It's human error.

There is also a category I can't put a word to, but I'll call it the highway speed limit syndrome. Everyone breaks some rules a little, with impunity. Although, I'm not suggesting collision avoidance is one.



> My marina, along with several others and a couple of yacht clubs, is on a relatively narrow and shallow river. The channel is about 40 wide, and at low tide, 8 feet deep at best. Last weekend, there were two kayakers paddling along in the river. It's almost dead low tide, but there they are, smack in the middle of channel, paddling alongside each other, just moseying along, not paying attention to the line of about 8 boats behind them trying to get upriver. Someone ahead of me gave them an air horn blast and motioned for them to move out of the channel, which they did. As we passed them, they gave a friendly wave. Pure ignorance.


I get it, we have the same issue routinely. However, what ColReg are they technically violating? It lacks common sense and intelligence, but I think they have a right to navigate.



> Earlier, on the way out of the river, a large powerboat came up from behind me (I was doing about 4 knots on my engine), passed me on my port side, then cut right in front of me. A Colregs violation? Probably not; he passed me (no signal, but hey, I've never heard a yacht use one in all my years), then avoided me while I maintained course and speed. Scared me a bit, though.


Yup, other than a signal, this one passes muster by the substance rule. If no one swaps paint, there is no practical violation, just academic.



> The "malice" example: a jetskiier. While out sailing, I saw a small powerboat (prob. around 20 ft) cruising by at full plane. Right behind him, I saw a jetskiier purposefully playing in the powerboats wake ("surfing" the wake). The people in the powerboat were frantically waving at this guy to go away, but he kept on, with the powerboat trying to shake him off by a cutting sharp turn. It didn't take long for the jetskiier to either lose interest or get the message, as he was gone quickly. My view of the whole episode lasted less than 10 seconds. Quick quiz: what rules did the jetskiier violate?


I'm looking forward to your answer. If the jet skier was not overtaking, which seems to be the case, they had no obligation to give way. I suppose one could argue safe speed and distance. I dislike the jet skiers as a general rule, not a ColReg rule.


----------

