Not really true. You need to get away from this habit, that if it's not
specifically written, it's not there.

In Rule 2 one is advised that one is responsible for whatever one does
or doesn't do and they must take the necessary precautions and act in a
seaman like manner. In other words, you are to act and govern the
movement of your vessel in such a way that you avoid a collision. Every
vessel and set of circumstance vary, so there is no way one could give a
set of numbers for speeds which would cover all of those needs .... YOU,
are to determine and apply those numbers .... YOU are to know what is
safe speed for your vessel and your conditions. YOU are responsible, not
the courts (G They only decide if you were or weren't and to what degree).
Rule 6 Tells you exactly what "Safe Speed" is, it just doesn't list any
numbers, since those numbers can vary so greatly from vessel to vessel
and condition to condition.

If in doubt, stop, recite rule 2, understand it, and THEN start over.

otn

Simple Simon wrote:

Yes, since the COLREGS do not specify what safe speed is
is remains the Captains decision to decide safe speed under
the circumstances he finds himself in.

Unsafe speed is only determined if and when a collision occurs
and it gets hashed over in court. This is another problem with
the Rules. They say vessels should proceed at a safe speed at
all time but then NEVER define what a safe speed is.

S.Simon


"otnmbrd" wrote in message ink.net...

Dang, I missed this one.
Hey Neal .... are you saying, that as the Master of a large motor
vessel, it is up to me to decide "Safe Speed", so that it's ok for me to
decide that since I have two radars (10cm and 3cm) and a Mate watching
one and me the other, it's OK for me to feel it safe to proceed at 20 k?
Just want to be sure where we stand.

otn

Ronald Raygun wrote:


Simple Simon wrote:



All well and good but you must ask yourself who is
the arbitor of what is a safe speed for a particular
vessel? It is clear in my mind it is the Captain of
the vessel who determines what is or is not a safe
speed for any particular situation or circumstance.


OK



The bottom line is I am the Captain of my ship and
if I say five or six knots is a safe speed then no other
man can dispute it.


OK, except for the relatives of the folks who drowned as
a result of your poor judgement.



Only if there is a collision and there is a court case can
a judge determine that I was wrong.


OK, but why put it to the test? Why not act in a way that
no judge will determine that you ewere wrong?



Even then, it is
only a legal decison to determine liability


It is indeed that, but not only that.



and still
does not take away a Captain's right to determine
what is a safe speed.


Not retrospectively, no, but The Rules form the basis not only
of civil but also of criminal proceedings. You could have
your puny licence rescinded. They'd take away the captain's
right to captain. Just think of the consequences, man!
A life sentence -- condemned forever to being an armchair
sailor. Unthinkable!

Heh, heh, at least in the "liberal" UK we don't need licences.



I have to admit I might be the
give-way vessel by virtue of the fact that all vessels above
me in the pecking order give the same signal. Therefore,
I am ready to give-way the moment the other vessel
comes in sight and I see what it is. This proves there
is a pecking order (give-way/stand-on) in or near an
area of restricted visibilty as I have claimed all along.


Why is this such an important point to prove? Pecking order
exists only under what aviators would call VFR, i.e. only
under section II. It is quite apparent from the rules that
vessels can be "in sight" even though "in or near an ARV".
So what?