"Donal" wrote in message
...
I've read them many times. You've admitted that you don't know them.

That is just plain stupid. I don't know them off by heart. However, I
have studied them - and I try to be aware of what my responsibilities are.

I cross the busiest shipping lanes in the world 6-8 times a year. I've
even crossed them in fog, without radar, a couple of times.

Did you cross one of the TSS's in the Channel? If so, how did you know you
weren't impeding a vessel in the TSS?

What's your point? Are you bragging that you violated the Rules and lived? Are
you claiming that because you survived this proves you know the rules?

BTW, did you have a reflector? Do you know what your radar visibility is?




Perhaps you think that they don't apply?

That's a childish argument. Do you claim that everyone that disagrees
with you
is claiming the ColRegs don't apply?

You appear to be saying that the kayak may not traverse a shipping lane in
fog.

You said "The problem is that small boats without radar, that are not good
reflectors,
will be invisible. ***They have no business being out in fog****."
[my *'s]

I don't understand how you reach these conclusions.


Both rules 9 and 10 are specific that small vessel shall not impede the progress
of large ones in certain situations. A kayak without radar has no ability in
the fog to determine if it is impeding, therefore, it cannot fulfill its
obligations. This isn't a complicated issue; if I said vessels without lights
have no business traveling at night, you would likely agree.

I also claim the Rule 2 frowns on stupidity, but that argument seems too subtle
for you.

....
Yes, the kayak has the same rights of navigation as the tanker
within the COLREGS and VTS requirements.
What do you mean?
He means that the kayak has the same rights of navigation as the tanker.
Where do the ColRegs talk about the rights of any vessel?
Silly question. Nobody claimed that the CollRegs talked about rights.

I thought you just did. Rick keeps talking about the "right" of the kayak to
there. I claim the kayak has obligations it cannot fulfill.




Do you think that the Coll Regs don't cover meering, or passing
situations
between Tankers and kayaks?

Again with the childish arguments.

Why is that childish?

Because I have shown several times the ColRegs specifically cover this, in a way
the proves the kayak doesn't belong in a TSS. Just because you don't understand
doesn't mean I'm ignoring the rules.

This is childish in the same way that claiming that not voting for Bush is
traitorous.




Although rowboats and kayaks are hardly mentioned in the rules, they do
fall
under the "all vessels" category and thus have the same obligations as
other
vessels to proceed at a safe speed, maintain a lookup, etc. The also have
the
obligation to behave in a seamanlike manner, which includes avoiding large
vessels when effectively invisible.

That is a ridiculous argument. What is a kayak supposed to do if fog
descends unexpectedly?

Get the hell out, quickly! The only way that the kayak can begin to cross the
TSS is if it can determine that it is not impeding a large vessel. Presumably,
if fog comes in during the crossing, it will be safe to continue across. That
wasn't so ridiculous, now was it? What would be ridiculous is claiming that
since you're already there, it must be safe to stay in the TSS for the rest of
the day.




The rules are quite also explicit that the rowboat should avoid crossing a
VTS
channel.

Is this what you are referring to?

(c) A vessel shall, so far as practicable, avoid crossing traffic lanes but
if obliged to do so shall cross on a heading as nearly as practicable at
right angles to the general direction of traffic flow.

That is not quite the same as your statement.

Its pretty darn close, almost word for word. But you're right that in good
visibility it is permitted to row across the a channel if you really have to.
But the next part is more significant - you must do this only if you can fulfill
the obligation not to impede.



It goes further:
"A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not
impede the safe passage of a power-driven vessel following a traffic
lane"

I must assume these rules are even more important when the kayak is
effectively
invisible.



I was serious - he was agreeing with me. The kayak has no business being
in a
VTS, or a restricted channel, or a security zone, especially in the fog.

So, if a kayak is traversing a shipping lane at right angles in fog, and it
gets hit by a ferry(only using radar) doing 25 kts, how would you
approportion the blame?


As I said several times, I don't mean to endorse Joe's claim that 25 knots is
safe in the HSC (Houston Ship Canal). Each case has to be considered on its own
special circumstances. Further, as Rick has claimed, I don't think I can second
guess the courts, and I don't know of any such precedent. However, I would have
little sympathy for a kayaker who crossed the Bay of Fundy, knowing that he
would cross the path of the Fast Cat, likely in thick fog. On the other hand,
there is a 35 knot ferry on the Boston/Salem run that I think should drop its
speed for the last 3 miles of its trip, rather than the last half mile as it now
does. The last time I had to use its channel in the fog I was terrified it was
going to run up my butt! And I have radar and a good reflector. However, this
is because the Cat uses the small channel that is the only alternative to the
primary large ship channel - it does this to save 1/4 mile on the trip.



You want to play captain, you take the responsibility that comes
with
the job.

I'm glad you agree with me.

Ahhh! Good. You realise that the kayak will sometimes be the "stand
on"
vessel!


You think so? Where in the rules can any vessel be "standon" in the fog?
The
only time it can be standon is "in sight of another vessel" while being
overtaken.

Even in fog, vessels can be in sight of one another.

Ah, the "Neal" argument! But you know this is not what we're talking about.


You really should read the rules sometime, Donal.


I have, look further back up the thread.


OK. I'll do that. ... Nope, still no indication you've read them.