"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

"Rick" wrote in message
news
Jeff Morris wrote:

Yes, and if the family of a fool that runs across a highway at night
in
black
clothes has a good lawyer, I'd be an unhappy driver, also. That
doesn't
change
who's right.

Being "right" has nothing to do with it.


So, are you claiming that because a kayak could be found anywhere, its
illegal
for any vessel to ever proceed in the fog? Are you saying the kayak
has the
right to cross in front of a tanker?

No, I am saying that the guy who runs over the kayak will be found in
the wrong to some degree.

I appreciate that blame is is usually shared. But if a kayak crosses an
oil
tanker, what blame do you assign to tanker?


Read the Coll Regs!

Perhaps you think that they don't apply?





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.

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



And remember, I'm no trying to defend the sportfisherman doing 40
knots in
the
fog; I'm just saying there are places the kayak doesn't belong.
You're
claiming
the kayak has the right to go anywhere and do anything he pleases.
"Using
all
his resources" is not an excuse for not using his brain.

I am not "claiming the kayak has the right to go anywhere and do
anything he pleases" I am stating that the kayaker has the right to
maneuver where and how he pleases, just as you do, within the bounds of
COLREGS and if in a VTS area, the rules applicable to that area.


In other words, you're agreeing with me. Thank you.


No, he isn't.
You seem to be saying that the kayak has no rights at all.





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!



Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

I'll admit that 25 knots does seem excessive in a lot of situations, and
its
rather unlikely that I would be going over 7 or 8 knots in thick fog (and
even
that would often be considered excessive). But there are no fixed rules
for
this.

What do you mean by "no fixed rules"??

Do the ColRegs mention a speed limit? The only say a "safe speed." It is up to
the captains, local authorities and,with hindsight, the courts, to determine
what a safe speed is in a given situation.


AFAIK, there are very strict rules that govern the behaviour of vessels in
fog.

That's the problem. You don't know, but you're assuming there are such rules.
I thought you took the YachtMaster course - what did they teach you there?


Are you suggesting that big ships are exempt from the Coll Regs?

Now you're talking like an idiot. You're assuming there are fixed speed limit
somewhere in the ColRegs, and I'm advocating ignoring them.



I'm sure the Bar Harbor Fast Cat Ferry doesn't slow much in the fog,

My copy of the Coll Regs does not mention the "Bar Harbour Fast Cat Ferry".
I was under the impression that the Coll Regs were more authoritive than
your local ferry's skipper.


You're blithering again. Why do you claim the ferry ignores the ColRegs? I
mention this particular vessel because its speed and route has been studied
carefully. And it travels regularly in the fog.




and
there is a chance some idiot is crossing the Bay of Fundy in his sea
kayak.


I don't believe that "idiocy" is an issue when trying to determine "stand
on" status. Am I wrong?


How is "standon status" involved here? Are you claiming that a kayak is
"standon" in the fog? What DO they teach you in YachtMaster class?



There's always "the slightest chance," someone could be rowing across the
Atlantic. Should all traffic stop because of a slight possibility?

Read the Coll Regs. I believe that the issue is covered.

Yes it is:

(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the
owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences ...
of the neglect of any precaution which
may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special
circumstances of the case.

This means, amongst other things, that stupid behaiviour is frowned upon.

A row boat has the same right as an oil tanker to use the Atlantic. The
Coll Regs were designed to make it safe for both of them.


Sure. If it takes the same precautions. Radar. Radar reflector. Full time
watch. Frankly, I think long distance single handers are clearly breaking the
rules.




Absolutely. Positively. Meditate on Rule 2 for a while. Every seaman
would
agree its folly to cross a shipping lane in the fog in a stealth kayak.


Where can you buy one of these "stealth kayaks"?

Well, this is all a bit hypothetical. You started it questioning if the ColRegs
require a radar reflector.


Are you so far out on this limb that you are having to use the concept of
fictional craft to back up your position?

I haven't bothered to look at Rule 2, .... because your position seems
ludicrous. I have read the Coll Regs in the past, and I believe that each
vessel has a duty to keep an adequate lookout.

Jeez Donal, is this another case of "I don't know the rules but they must say
what I think is right"?



You seem to be suggesting that vessels have an obligation to be seen!!!

Well Golly! I think you're finally catching on!!! The court's have ruled over
and over again that a vessel forfeits its rights (I know this isn't the right
way to say this) if it doesn't show proper lights, or sound the proper signals.
They have also held that its OK travel at some speed if a proper radar watch is
maintained. They have also held that vessels shouldn't leave dock, or cross
channels if they don't have radar. Frankly, I don't know of a case where
someone was held at fault for not having a reflector, but perhaps no one has
been dumb enough to do it; or never got very far in a law suit.









Do the Coll Regs place any duty on a vessel to keep a look out for
other
vessels?


Of course. How does a vessel without radar do this in the fog?

By travelling slowly ... and keeping a lookout. If the fog is very thick,
then the vessel travels *very* slowly.


You mean like not crossing a shipping lane?








"Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information"
ColRegs,
Rule 7(c)


I think that is what I was saying!!


No. You're ignoring reality. You're claiming that all large vessels
should
never proceed in the fog, because there's a chance of running over an
invisible
kayak in the middle of the ocean. You're taking a situation with a huge
amount
of gray area and trying to make it black and white; that's not the way the
world
works.


You raised the issue of "scanty information".

In thick fog, a skipper has scanty information.

The Coll Regs suggest that you should post a lookout, and that you should
slow down to a safe speed in fog.

Why do you have a problem with this?
It's all very simple. DO NOT travel at a speed where poor visibility
means that you cannot take the necessary avoiding action.

I never said you shouldn't have a lookout. I've only claiming that radar
permits a vessels to maintain a higher speed. And that it is accepted practice
to do this in certain locals. And that vessels that are poor radar targets
should avoid these locals.

"Rick" wrote in message
link.net...
Jeff Morris wrote:

I appreciate that blame is is usually shared. But if a kayak crosses an oil
tanker, what blame do you assign to tanker?

Without being too pedantic, it is not in my job description to assign
blame. There will be a board of Coast Guard officers to handle that
chore. It will be a decision based on more than I know about the
circumstances.

In other words, you don't know.

So what is a safe speed for a tanker in a VTS in the fog? You keep evading the
question. Should all shipping shut down in the fog?


Yes, the kayak has the same rights of navigation as the tanker within
the COLREGS and VTS requirements.


What do you mean?

I mean the kayaker has the same right to displace that water as the
tanker operator. They must both adhere to the rules applicable to those
waters and their operation upon them.


In other words, you don't know.

You're claiming that the kayak has the right to travel in a VTS in thick fog?
I think not.



In other words, you're agreeing with me. Thank you.

I am simply stating the facts that should be obvious to anyone who is in
command of a vessel on navigable waters.

In other words, you don't know.

Have you advised kayakers that that have a right to cross large ships in the
fog? Do you tell kids to play in the street?


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


I'm glad you agree with me.

You don't need my agreement to be correct. I also believe that while
tradition and job security may dictate some coonass going like a bat out
of hell down the Atchafalaya or the HSC in zero visibility tradition
won't hold water in the hearing room or in court afterwards. Job
security ends at the point of impact.

To be honest, I've never seen the HSC, except as a tourist. But I thought that
major portions of it are a security zone, closed to all recreational traffic.
I don't know if 20 knots would be considered unsafe there; my only reference is
that in New England, 6 or 7 knots or faster is common for ferries in thick fog.
At this speed, it would be impossible to avoid a kayak that was not seen on
radar, not matter how good the lookout is.

As an example, the report on the collision in zero visibility between the Bar
Harbor Fast Cat and a fishing boat out of Yarmouth found little fault with the
ferry, even though it was going 13.4 knots in the channel. Almost all of the
contributing factors in the final report had to do the actions of the fishing
boat, its speed was too fast (9 knots) for the mediocre quality of its radar, it
continued to cross after acknowledging the presence of the cat, etc. Although
the incident caused an uproar, the ferry continues to operate, doing over 40
knots in open water. (All of the issues had to do with the approach channels at
Yarmouth and Bar Harbor.)
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/mari...1/m98m0061.asp

If the speed of the ferry was not considered an issue in this incident, I have
trouble seeing how the ferry would be found at fault if the other vessel were an
invisible kayak.

"Donal" wrote in message
...


I appreciate that blame is is usually shared. But if a kayak crosses an
oil
tanker, what blame do you assign to tanker?


Read the Coll Regs!


I've read them many times. You've admitted that you don't know them.

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? Grow up, Donal!







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?

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

Again with the childish arguments.

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.

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





And remember, I'm no trying to defend the sportfisherman doing 40
knots in
the
fog; I'm just saying there are places the kayak doesn't belong.
You're
claiming
the kayak has the right to go anywhere and do anything he pleases.
"Using
all
his resources" is not an excuse for not using his brain.

I am not "claiming the kayak has the right to go anywhere and do
anything he pleases" I am stating that the kayaker has the right to
maneuver where and how he pleases, just as you do, within the bounds of
COLREGS and if in a VTS area, the rules applicable to that area.


In other words, you're agreeing with me. Thank you.


No, he isn't.
You seem to be saying that the kayak has no rights at all.


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.






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. You really should read the rules sometime, Donal.

Jeff Morris wrote:

In other words, you don't know.

No, I don't. How could I possibly know what a Coast Guard hearing board
would decide? Or what a civil court will determine in a wrongful death suit?

All I know for sure is what measures I must take to avoid ever having to
find out.


So what is a safe speed for a tanker in a VTS in the fog?

A safe speed.


You keep evading the question.

I made every effort to answer the question as clearly as possible. There
are no one word answers for all conditions and for the very brief set of
conditions and circumstances you outlined. Welcome to the real world of
boating.

You refuse to accept that vessel operations are not as simple and clear
cut as you wish they were. If you are looking for someone to tell you
exactly what to do in each and every condition then do not sail as master.

Should all shipping shut down in the fog?

Maybe, maybe not, it all depends.

You're claiming that the kayak has the right to travel in a VTS in thick fog?
I think not.

You may think what you like. Just don't bet your license or your life
savings on that sort of thinking.

Just 'twixt us, it behooves you to stop "thinking" what "rights" another
vessel operator has and learn what they really are and how it effects
your own operation.

Have you advised kayakers that that have a right to cross large ships in the
fog? Do you tell kids to play in the street?

Has anyone advised you to continue this absurd argument?

Why don't you stop playing on the internet and read the COLREGS. If you
have problems understanding who can do what when and where, ask someone
who lives by those rules, ask the CG who administer the rules and sit on
the hearing boards. What you want to think or believe might just get you
in a lot of trouble some day.

If the speed of the ferry was not considered an issue in this incident, I have
trouble seeing how the ferry would be found at fault if the other vessel were an
invisible kayak.

Perhaps because there were factors in that collision which you are not
aware of or don't understand.

The only way you will know why and how the CG came to their conclusion
is to read the report in its entirety and then read it again after
getting a few years experience in a wheelhouse as a master. If you still
disagree with their finding then come back here and tell us why they
were wrong.

Rick

In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

Got to agree with Joe on this issue of remembering outlines/picking
differences.

I don't disagree that one can become familiar with a coastline/river from
the radar picture.

I disagree with the proposition that a Radar watch(at 25 kts) can be
considered " an effective lookout".

I'd tend to agree with you. Mind you, radar can be *very* good. We have
2 on our icebreaker and I've steered through heavy sea ice using the
radar image to see where the leads are. Lotta fun and it doesn't really
matter if you turn a little wide or tight since it's OK to crunch over
stuff in the way.

Anyway, if damn fools are considered as worth the trouble of saving,
then running at 25 knots on radar only in heavy fog isn't prudent.
Personally, I wouldn't regard anyone stupid enough to go out onto a
busy waterway, in heavy fog, sans lights, radar reflector, radar, sound
signals, radio and in a hull that is a poor radar reflector as worth
saving. Anyone that stupid is a hazard to navigation and we're all
better off without them.

PDW

In article , Jeff Morris
wrote:

"Rick" wrote in message
link.net...
Jeff Morris wrote:

I appreciate that blame is is usually shared. But if a kayak crosses an
oil
tanker, what blame do you assign to tanker?

Without being too pedantic, it is not in my job description to assign
blame. There will be a board of Coast Guard officers to handle that
chore. It will be a decision based on more than I know about the
circumstances.

In other words, you don't know.

So what is a safe speed for a tanker in a VTS in the fog? You keep evading
the
question. Should all shipping shut down in the fog?

By Donal's logic, there isn't a safe speed. Given that the
time/distance taken for a tanker to stop/turn vastly exceeds the
distance a human can see in thick fog, a tanker is always at risk of
running over a kayaker insisting on being the stand-on vessel and
therefore cannot navigate safely.

So, yeah, Donal's basically arguing that shipping has to come to a
standstill if the lookout can't *see* further than it takes the ship to
stop or change course, because a kayak couldn't be reliably detected by
radar. Nice thought, pity about its practicality.

PDW

Bull**** Rick. You're just pontificating to hide that fact that you know you're
wrong. I made a comment that kayaks should avoid shipping channels in the fog,
and you saw this as an opportunity to play second rate pedagogue.

Yes I agree that any collision is bad news and should be avoided. And the any
master would be well advised to consider all possibilities.

However, if you believe that a small kayak, effectively invisible to radar,
could be anywhere, then it would be impossible to proceed in thick fog. Large
vessels have stopping distances far greater than visibility in thick fog - there
is absolutely no way avoid a collision even in good visibility.

Further, you seem to be claiming that the kayak has no obligation to follow the
rules. The only way that any speed is a "safe speed" is if you can assume that
all parties will behave in a reasonable manor. What speed is safe if a vessel
suddenly alters course and crosses in your path?

And you even admitted, in your convoluted way, that I'm right in the case of a
VTS. Isn't that what you meant when you said "kayak has the same rights of
navigation as the tanker within the COLREGS and VTS requirements."? Obviously,
you don't mean the kayak has the same rights, you mean that the kayak is
obligated to follow the rules of the VTS, which require it not to impede the
tanker.

So, you're the captain of a tanker? What do you do in the fog? If you give
your "maybe yes, maybe no" bull**** to your owners, you're out of a job.


"Rick" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Jeff Morris wrote:

In other words, you don't know.

No, I don't. How could I possibly know what a Coast Guard hearing board
would decide? Or what a civil court will determine in a wrongful death suit?

All I know for sure is what measures I must take to avoid ever having to
find out.


So what is a safe speed for a tanker in a VTS in the fog?

A safe speed.


You keep evading the question.

I made every effort to answer the question as clearly as possible. There
are no one word answers for all conditions and for the very brief set of
conditions and circumstances you outlined. Welcome to the real world of
boating.

You refuse to accept that vessel operations are not as simple and clear
cut as you wish they were. If you are looking for someone to tell you
exactly what to do in each and every condition then do not sail as master.

Should all shipping shut down in the fog?

Maybe, maybe not, it all depends.

You're claiming that the kayak has the right to travel in a VTS in thick
fog?
I think not.

You may think what you like. Just don't bet your license or your life
savings on that sort of thinking.

Just 'twixt us, it behooves you to stop "thinking" what "rights" another
vessel operator has and learn what they really are and how it effects
your own operation.

Have you advised kayakers that that have a right to cross large ships in the
fog? Do you tell kids to play in the street?

Has anyone advised you to continue this absurd argument?

Why don't you stop playing on the internet and read the COLREGS. If you
have problems understanding who can do what when and where, ask someone
who lives by those rules, ask the CG who administer the rules and sit on
the hearing boards. What you want to think or believe might just get you
in a lot of trouble some day.

If the speed of the ferry was not considered an issue in this incident, I
have
trouble seeing how the ferry would be found at fault if the other vessel
were an
invisible kayak.

Perhaps because there were factors in that collision which you are not
aware of or don't understand.

The only way you will know why and how the CG came to their conclusion
is to read the report in its entirety and then read it again after
getting a few years experience in a wheelhouse as a master. If you still
disagree with their finding then come back here and tell us why they
were wrong.

Rick

Jeff Morris wrote:

Bull**** Rick. You're just pontificating to hide that fact that you know you're
wrong. I made a comment that kayaks should avoid shipping channels in the fog,
and you saw this as an opportunity to play second rate pedagogue.

What kayaks should do in the fog is spelled out in the COLREGS. What you
think they should or should not do is irrelevant.

Further, you seem to be claiming that the kayak has no obligation to follow the
rules. The only way that any speed is a "safe speed" is if you can assume that
all parties will behave in a reasonable manor.

You are ranting now. Please quote exactly where and when I said the
kayaker has no obligation to follow the rules. I stated very plainly
that both vessels are compelled to follow the rules.

If you are going to start playing games and making up crap to suit your
position, or lack of one then go play by yourself. I won't waste time
with a belligerent amateur. You are beginning to sound like Nil.

What speed is safe if a vessel
suddenly alters course and crosses in your path?

Those are separate circumstances. You are playing games.

you don't mean the kayak has the same rights, you mean that the kayak is
obligated to follow the rules of the VTS, which require it not to impede the
tanker.

I mean the kayaker has every right to operate in or across the lanes
subject to the VTS operating limitations and procedures and COLREGS.

I am not going to waste a bunch of time on this with you, if you can't
comprehend the fact that there is no compilation of precise rules to
cover each and every possible combination of weather, visibility,
traffic, vessel type, and operator mindset then you should stay home or
at least stay away from other boats in all conditions.

What you think of my answers is no more valid than what you "think" a
kayak paddler is allowed to do.

Rick

"Rick" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Jeff Morris wrote:

Bull**** Rick. You're just pontificating to hide that fact that you know
you're
wrong. I made a comment that kayaks should avoid shipping channels in the
fog,
and you saw this as an opportunity to play second rate pedagogue.

What kayaks should do in the fog is spelled out in the COLREGS. What you
think they should or should not do is irrelevant.


So tell us. What do you think the ColRegs say? Especially regarding kayaks in
a VTS. You keep saying that I should read the book, but its looking like you
never have.

Further, you seem to be claiming that the kayak has no obligation to follow
the
rules. The only way that any speed is a "safe speed" is if you can assume
that
all parties will behave in a reasonable manor.

You are ranting now. Please quote exactly where and when I said the
kayaker has no obligation to follow the rules. I stated very plainly
that both vessels are compelled to follow the rules.

You stated very little "plainly." But you started by saying they have the same
rights as everyone; I claim they have different obligations.


If you are going to start playing games and making up crap to suit your
position, or lack of one then go play by yourself. I won't waste time
with a belligerent amateur. You are beginning to sound like Nil.

What speed is safe if a vessel
suddenly alters course and crosses in your path?

Those are separate circumstances. You are playing games.

No. You started this by claiming the kayak has the right to cross shipping
lanes in fog. Since the ColRegs specifically say they can't impede a
power-driven vessel in the VTS, they would be violating the rules just the same
as the vessel that behaves erratically.


you don't mean the kayak has the same rights, you mean that the kayak is
obligated to follow the rules of the VTS, which require it not to impede the
tanker.

I mean the kayaker has every right to operate in or across the lanes
subject to the VTS operating limitations and procedures and COLREGS.


Bull****. You're saying he has the right to do it unless he doesn't. The
ColRegs say he doesn't have the right to impede. Without radar, in the fog the
kayak can't tell if he might be impeding. Therefore, he shouldn't be there.
Its really very simple. You're just so wound up pontificating that you can't
see this.

I am not going to waste a bunch of time on this with you, if you can't
comprehend the fact that there is no compilation of precise rules to
cover each and every possible combination of weather, visibility,
traffic, vessel type, and operator mindset then you should stay home or
at least stay away from other boats in all conditions.

I think this should apply to you.


What you think of my answers is no more valid than what you "think" a
kayak paddler is allowed to do.


You haven't given any answers. You've only claimed you know everthing and your
not sharing.