"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
"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.

That is just plain stupid. I don't know them off by heart. However, I
have studied them - and I try to be aware of what my responsibilities are.

I cross the busiest shipping lanes in the world 6-8 times a year. I've
even crossed them in fog, without radar, a couple of times.


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?

You appear to be saying that the kayak may not traverse a shipping lane in
fog.

You said "The problem is that small boats without radar, that are not good
reflectors,
will be invisible. ***They have no business being out in fog****."
[my *'s]

I don't understand how you reach these conclusions.




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?

Silly question. Nobody claimed that the CollRegs talked about rights.



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

Again with the childish arguments.

Why is that childish?



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.

That is a ridiculous argument. What is a kayak supposed to do if fog
descends unexpectedly?



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

Is this what you are referring to?

(c) A vessel shall, so far as practicable, avoid crossing traffic lanes but
if obliged to do so shall cross on a heading as nearly as practicable at
right angles to the general direction of traffic flow.

That is not quite the same as your statement.


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.

So, if a kayak is traversing a shipping lane at right angles in fog, and it
gets hit by a ferry(only using radar) doing 25 kts, how would you
approportion the blame?


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.

Even in fog, vessels can be in sight of one another.

You really should read the rules sometime, Donal.


I have, look further back up the thread.


Regards


Donal
--