"Simple Simon" wrote in message ...
Extremely thick fog is mostly a myth. Yes, it occurs on
occassion but the general run of the mill fog is not so thick
that vessels can collide without ever seeing one another.


Hummm... Obviously this person has never spent any time in the pacific
northwest in the summer. I was at about 43N and 30 miles off when I
watched two 300 foot boats plow into each other because of fog. Do you
remember how the nose of that paper airplane you use to make looked
after a few nose dives?

Trust me, the mate was not considering a "pecking order" when that bow
loomed out of the mythical mist at a whoping 2.8 knts!

Damn the COLREGS.......no speed ahead!

Chris
Freya 39


At any rate, the worst case scenario of pea soup thick fog
is but one case of restricted visibility and the majority of
the other cases definitely allow in-sight situations in or
near an area of restricted visibility. In sight situations
are ruled by the in sight rules which specify give-way and
stand-on status for vessels in sight of one another.

Jeff, Otnmbrd, Shen44 and Rick have up till now maintained
there is NEVER a stand-on vessel in or near an area of
restricted visibility while I have maintained there IS a stand-on
and give-way vessel in or near an area of restricted visibility.

I'm right and they're wrong - that's the bottom line.

I maintain that my sailboat even in a thick fog is going at
a safe speed by virtue of the fact that the hull speed is less
than seven knots max. Many fogs have little or no wind so
I may well be going even slower. Even if the winds are brisk
in a fog and I'm going hull speed I'm still going at a safe speed.
In effect, I'm standing on and I'm doing it completely legally.

If I hear the fog signal of a motor vessel I know right away
if and when we come in sight of each other I am the stand-on
vessel and the motor vessel is the give way vessel unless I'm
overtaking the motor vessel which is not likely at all considering
they all think safe speed is 10-15 knots instead of the usual
20-30 knots - let's face the facts here for once. Therefore,
I keep going at my safe speed of five or six knots and try
to determine by the sound signal if there's a danger of collision.
If I determine there is a danger of collision I change course -
I'm certainly not going to take all sails down and come to
a stop and become a sitting duck to be run over and sunk
by a ship not keeping an adequate lookout and going too
fast for the conditions. This would be causing a collision and
not avoiding a collision - a violation of the RULES.

Yet this what the arrogant tugboat captains are saying the
Rules require me to do. WRONG! When a motor vessel
hears the fog signal of a sailboat or any other boat above
it in the pecking order it knows before even coming in sight
of that vessel that the motor vessel is the give way vessel
in a close quarters situation and a close quarters situation
in most cases of restricted visibility in an in sight situation.

This is what I call the abbreviated pecking order. That
there is an abbreviated pecking order proves there is a
give-way and stand-on vessel in restricted visibility.

If and when the motor vessel and sailing vessels come
within sight of one another the motor vessel already knows
it is the give-way vessel in all but the overtaking situation.
(we're not talking narrow channels, traffic schemes, etc,
here - we're talking at sea.) This means the
give-way/stand-on status exists in or near an area of
restricted visibility.


S.Simon - knows the practical application
as well as the letter of the Rules.



"Tim Roberts" wrote in message ...
Sorry Jeff,

It seems I also missed much of the earlier thread.

I was agreeing with the point that thick fog is not the only type of
restricted visibility.

Now that I have discovered a bit more about the original thread, I should
perhaps add a couple of points;

First Point:

Rule 19 Very definitely applies to all vessels at sea by virtue of Rule 1
(Application)

'(a) These Rules shall apply to all vessels upon the high seas and in all
waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels'


Second Point:

Did Neal really claim that you don't get wind in fog?
He perhaps needs to understand the process by which sea-fog is formed. It
happens when warm, wet air comes into contact with a sea that is colder than
it's own dew point. The only way sea fog disperses is 'normally' with a
change in wind direction which brings in dry air which is able to absorb the
moisture in the fog. Continued wind from the same direction merely feeds
more moisture, and thus, more fog! If the same wind direction continues for
long enough - the fog gets thicker and thicker.

I have certainly been in situations where I have been sailing in thick fog.
I find it safer than motoring because you can hear other vessels sound
signals much easier than with an engine on.

Sorry to bore everyone with this pedantry, but I lecture in both COLREGS and
Meteorology amongst other things.





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Very good Paul, that sums it up!

(1) The captain is responsible for all of his decisions regarding safe
speed. (And other decisions too!)

(2) The court decides "in perfect hindsight" whether or not the
decision(s) was correct.

I like it.

Capt. Frank

paul cooke wrote:

(deity I hate top posting but this is too messed up to fix...)

You, as master of the ship/vessel/bathtub/whatever, decide what _you_
consider to be a "safe speed" for the conditions... however... the courts
_always_ get the benefit of perfect hindsight when it comes to the crunch
and you then have to be prepared to justify your choice of "safe speed"...
if you are around to do so...

Simple Simon wrote:


Finally, the voice of reason. Thanks for setting things
right with respect to this question of who determines
safe speed.

S.Simon


"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
nk.net...

Otn,

Neal is right. In the absence of posted limits, it is up to the master
to decide what safe speed for their vessel is. Your decision "should be"
logged as you are legally responsible for that decision. Notice I say
"should be", It is not required, but could be used in your defense.

Capt. Frank

otnmbrd wrote:


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?

"Lady Pilot" wrote in message
news:Aolkb.2941$B_2.204@okepread02...
So what kind of woman would like to hear the same argument for many
months? Maybe your ex-wife?

You think that you wouldn't produce thar same argument for many months???
Honestly! Women are perfectly capable of producing the same argument for
many years.

Next Tuesday is my 25th wedding anneversiary. Earlier tonight, my wife
tried to ask me how much I wanted on my dinner plate.

SHE KNOWS HOW MUCH I WANT!! For 25 years she has given me too much food
every single bloody night! Every single night since we got married, I've
left food on my plate.

I still get carrots served to me. I've never eaten a single bloody carrot
in 25 years. WHY do I still get carrots on my plate?

Regards


Donal - who really doesn't understand women.
--

ROFL, Trust me Donal it doesn't get any easier after 25

Donal wrote:

"Lady Pilot" wrote in message
news:Aolkb.2941$B_2.204@okepread02...

So what kind of woman would like to hear the same argument for many
months? Maybe your ex-wife?


You think that you wouldn't produce thar same argument for many months???
Honestly! Women are perfectly capable of producing the same argument for
many years.

Next Tuesday is my 25th wedding anneversiary. Earlier tonight, my wife
tried to ask me how much I wanted on my dinner plate.

SHE KNOWS HOW MUCH I WANT!! For 25 years she has given me too much food
every single bloody night! Every single night since we got married, I've
left food on my plate.

I still get carrots served to me. I've never eaten a single bloody carrot
in 25 years. WHY do I still get carrots on my plate?

Regards


Donal - who really doesn't understand women.
--

It's a hint that she wants you to live up to your fantasies.

Cheers MC

Donal wrote:

"Lady Pilot" wrote in message
news:Aolkb.2941$B_2.204@okepread02...

So what kind of woman would like to hear the same argument for many
months? Maybe your ex-wife?


You think that you wouldn't produce thar same argument for many months???
Honestly! Women are perfectly capable of producing the same argument for
many years.

Next Tuesday is my 25th wedding anneversiary. Earlier tonight, my wife
tried to ask me how much I wanted on my dinner plate.

SHE KNOWS HOW MUCH I WANT!! For 25 years she has given me too much food
every single bloody night! Every single night since we got married, I've
left food on my plate.

I still get carrots served to me. I've never eaten a single bloody carrot
in 25 years. WHY do I still get carrots on my plate?

Regards


Donal - who really doesn't understand women.
--

Donal wrote:



I still get carrots served to me. I've never eaten a single bloody carrot
in 25 years. WHY do I still get carrots on my plate?



Do you bump into things at night?

Cheers
Marty, (who gets his billberry)

"Donal" wrote:

"Lady Pilot" wrote:
So what kind of woman would like to hear the same argument for
many
months? Maybe your ex-wife?

You think that you wouldn't produce thar same argument for many
months???
Honestly! Women are perfectly capable of producing the same
argument for
many years.

Heh. Well...

Next Tuesday is my 25th wedding anneversiary.

Congrats on 25 years!

Earlier tonight, my wife
tried to ask me how much I wanted on my dinner plate.
SHE KNOWS HOW MUCH I WANT!!

How would she know if you had a late lunch, or was extra hungry from
doing more physical labor than usual? Do you expect her to be a mind
reader?

For 25 years she has given me too much food
every single bloody night! Every single night since we got married,
I've
left food on my plate.

Maybe she got the habit from her mother who got it from her
mother.....

I still get carrots served to me. I've never eaten a single bloody
carrot
in 25 years. WHY do I still get carrots on my plate?

They do say that your tastes change about every seven years. Maybe
she thought you would try them after all these years?

Donal - who really doesn't understand women.

Maybe you should just ask her then?

LP

"Lady Pilot" wrote in message
news:bOXkb.4604$B_2.981@okepread02...

Donal - who really doesn't understand women.

Maybe you should just ask her then?


I _have_ asked. Believe me, I've asked.

Regards


Donal
--

I _have_ asked. Believe me, I've asked.

Regards


Donal

Hey! Stop your grousing! You get tea served in bed every morning. Be =
grateful.

--=20
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Pockets of Resistance wrote:

3. If you are a powerboat, sod off.

Not if the geezer at the helm, with the bimbo in matching mettalic jacket,
has a heart attack!

Seahag