Jeff Morris wrote:

I'm not so sure of that. Rule 19 is pretty clear that any movement may be
inappropriate, and vessels have been held completely at fault for leaving the
dock without radar.

Well, I am not going to get into a Nilesque ****ing match over how many
angels can dance on a copy of the COLREGS but if you run over the
kayaker, chances are extemely high you will not be a happy boater.

The kayaker was using all his resources. Were you? Why didn't you have a
lookout on the bow? Why were you going so fast? Only a half knot?, well,
since you didn't have time to turn you were going too fast then weren't
you? You will hear that at the hearing and the lawsuits later. So would
that tanker captain if he or she ran over a kayaker in those conditions.

Rick

"Rick" wrote in message
hlink.net...

Well, I am not going to get into a Nilesque ****ing match over how many
angels can dance on a copy of the COLREGS but if you run over the
kayaker, chances are extemely high you will not be a happy boater.

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.



The kayaker was using all his resources. Were you? Why didn't you have a
lookout on the bow? Why were you going so fast? Only a half knot?, well,
since you didn't have time to turn you were going too fast then weren't
you? You will hear that at the hearing and the lawsuits later. So would
that tanker captain if he or she ran over a kayaker in those conditions.


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? You're trying to apply a relative standard
in an absolute way.

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.

-jeff

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.

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

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.

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

Rick

"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?



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

What do you mean?


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.


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

I'm glad you agree with me.


Rick

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.

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'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.

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.

Rick

"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.

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 , 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

"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
...


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.