"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"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.


So what did I say that was not consistent with any of this? You really
were
trolling, weren't you?

No, Jeff.

I was having a polite discussion with Joe, in which I was trying to point
out that he was a criminally negligent, stupid, CollReg breaching idiot when
he was travelling through busy waterways at 25 kts, without keepint a proper
lookout. You decided to join in - and your initial post defended Joe's
position. DON'T disagree with this before you go back and read the
thread!!!


Then you tried to claim that a kayak has "no buisness in a TSS". However,
the CollRegs do not support you on this. You also suggested that a vessel
could proceed under radar watch alone. I know that you later tried to deny
this, however most of us can still see your post on this matter.

You used all sorts of twisted phrases to try to suggest that a vessel in a
TSS does not really need to keep a proper lookout. If you wish to deny this
particular accusation, then please feel free. Be warned, I will have a
field day at your expense if you decide on this particular course.

You also suggested that my arguments were childish .... you suggested that I
didn't know much about the CollRegs ... and you generally behaved as if you
were more authoritive on marine matters.


You assumed that my modesty equated to ignorance. Assumptions are
dangerous.


Regards


Donal
--