| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
"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 |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"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 |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"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. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should all shipping shut down in the fog? For perfect safety, yes indeed. Is it a perfect world? Hmmm.... Peter Wiley wrote: 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. And it would run the price of gas up when the refineries couldn't get deliveries on time. I have to disagree with Rick's post above, a kayaker has little business in the shipping lanes to start with. In fog? WTF?? There are plenty of places to use small recreational craft such as kayaks, sailing dinks, etc etc, without getting in the way of shipping. In theory, one might have 'every right' to do so. But in theory, you have the right to play tiddleywinks on the interstate. Try it some time. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Peter Wiley" wrote in message . .. 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. No, No, No! That in definitely *not* the impression that I intended to convey. I was simply arguing that a vessel should not travel at 25 kts in fog without a lookout. The guy in the kayak cannot expect ships to slow beyond the point where they lose the ability to steer. I guess that for most big ships that this is about 4-5 kts???? In reality, I know that they will exceed this speed. When I cross the TSS in fog, I expect that most ships will be doing about 12 kts, and that some will be doing 18 kts. I also expect/know that some of them won't be sounding their fog horns. The kayak is taking a chance when he crosses the TSS. However, that does not mean that the ships in the TSS should carry on as if there was no risk. If you wish to do 25 kts through the Antartic, in fog, then I have no objection. If you do the same thing in a busy waterway, then I think that you are in breach of the CollRegs. Regards Donal -- |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|