On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, "gonefishiing" wrote:
[i]
[In an near commercial shipping lanes on the
L.I.S.] out for a late night sail last week, which
i do a lot . . . . i spot a . . . tug and barge and . . .
realize . . . he is headed right at me and steaming.
* * * [Soon thereafter] i spot another ship
(freighter) steaming [more or less parallel to me]
and a quick visual calculation tells me i can cross
his bow without problem and also because [if he
is going where i speculate] he needs to turn behind
my stern . . . .

[ SNIPPED: ruminations about having "assum[ed]"
might do depending on "possibilities" about the poster
further speculates the freighter would "need" to
do, if his guess about the possibilites he made was
correct. ]

[As it turned out] they passed "safely" at my stern,
. . . . [but] really too close for comfort . . . .

not to negate my responsiblity, i think constrained
by draft here is a relative term, if it even applies.
they each had a mile of room . . . behind me . . . to
manuveur and cannot understand why they would
choose to approach so closely, as my actions were
clear, my course was appropriate and consistent and
meant to give each a wide berth . . . . and for
whatever it may be worth, i think everyone took
the correct actions i believe i was the stand on vessel
the freighter was 2nd in pecking order the tug/barge
gave way

what would you have done differently?

This is essentially the classic "no brainer" with the better and
anyway more important question is what ought you have done
differently:

Especially for folks who sail "a lot" (whether day or night) in the
area to which you refer -- unless, based on very careful and very well
experienced supported observation, it is _very_ clear that the smaller
sailboat will certainly be able to avoid collision assuming _not_ what
you did but, instead, that the tug/barge and freigher are and will
turn onto and (despite shinging a bright flash-light on one's sails)
will remain on a direct/collision course -- your attempt to "assume"
what the other vessels will do based on what you believed to be
"possibilities" in light of what you legalistically argue to be a
"relative" rule is, to put it politely, nuts.

To the contrary, _regardless_ what the printed rule may appear to say,
it is plain from the above that, though you escaped disaster, you
certainly do here attempt to "negate [your] responsibility" because
there is a much simpler "rule" (albeit of real-life - and, sometimes,
of [otherwise avoidable] death, even if not clearly published by the
USCG or in "Sailing for Idiots" and it is simply this:

Except for the above-noted qualificationk sailboats ought take action
(and also: responsiblity) to stay out of the way of on-coming
tugs/barges and freighters, especially when (as you say occurred for
you) they appear to be within two miles away, EVEN IF they do not
clearly appear to be on-coming. I.e., PRESUME that they are out to
kill you, then take the appropriate evasive action. Its pretty
simple. Andeven (and, perhaps especially) on "dark nights" pretty
clear. And simple.


Granted, in the L.I.S. area to which you refer, some sailers behave
otherwise and, apparently especially on Wed. or Thurs. racing nights,
occasonally challenges the tug/barge or freigher (with resulting
whistle-blowing and frustrated commercial captains screaming on the
VHF). But for those who want to continue to sail "a lot" at night
(and, for that matter, during the day) in that area, the better
"assumption" for you would have been your answer to the question:

If both other boats do not see me (even if I believe they do see me)
and if both also alter their course so that they will be headed
directly for me if I don't alter my course, where in light of what I
do see ought I go to avoid a collision?