Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the CollRegs
which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances
and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk
of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!

http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
..pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

The UK's Marine & Coastguard Agency obviously think that Joe represents a
Clear and Imminent threat to American sailors.

Perhaps Jeff, Joe, or otn, can produce a link which shows that the US
Coastguard thinks that Joe's behaviour is legal???


Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahaaaaaa!

Regards


Donal
--

I become increasingly convinced, that you are either a lawyer or
politician

Donal wrote:
Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

No he didn't, and I can't conceive how you arrived at that conclusion.

He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the CollRegs
which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances
and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk
of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!

http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
.pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

I have to believe that this statement is out of context. Voice (VHF) is
an acceptable alternative to sound signals for "passing situations" in
the waters that Joe is discussing. I would not be surprised that this is
becoming acceptable, world wide.

And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

No, but like everything, it's limitations must be addressed.

The UK's Marine & Coastguard Agency obviously think that Joe represents a
Clear and Imminent threat to American sailors.

Perhaps Jeff, Joe, or otn, can produce a link which shows that the US
Coastguard thinks that Joe's behaviour is legal???

Read the Inland Rules for the US (Rule 34 h )


otn

"Donal" wrote in message ...
Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the CollRegs
which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances
and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk
of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!

http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
.pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

The UK's Marine & Coastguard Agency obviously think that Joe represents a
Clear and Imminent threat to American sailors.

Perhaps Jeff, Joe, or otn, can produce a link which shows that the US
Coastguard thinks that Joe's behaviour is legal???


Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahaaaaaa!

Regards


Donal
--

Donal your name calling is quite childish.

The rule states
"as well as by all available means appropriate " VHF Radar ect. If
you can not hear anything but your vessel then listening is not one of
the available means that would be appropriate to avoid collision is
it?.

Joe
MSV RedCloud

"Donal"

Lanod posted this fake link with no usefull info what so ever,

http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167


Guess they change the web-site eh Lanod?

Joe

"Donal" wrote in message news

Snip the foaming at the mouth and the ****** mis-information

Perhaps Jeff, Joe, or otn, can produce a link which shows that the US
Coastguard thinks that Joe's behaviour is legal???


You already posted rule 5

Please read it again.

If you have a radio you better use it or your breaking the rules.

Your digging yourself in deeper and deeper yachtmaster wanna be.

BTW did you ever post your yachtmaster # ?



Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahaaaaaa!

Your fake laugh is proof you do want to be like bobspittle.


Regards


Donal
--

"Joe" wrote in message
m...
"Donal" wrote in message
...
Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the
CollRegs
which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing
circumstances
and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the
risk
of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!


http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
.pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

The UK's Marine & Coastguard Agency obviously think that Joe represents
a
Clear and Imminent threat to American sailors.

Perhaps Jeff, Joe, or otn, can produce a link which shows that the US
Coastguard thinks that Joe's behaviour is legal???


Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaahaaaaaa!

Regards


Donal
--

Donal your name calling is quite childish.

"...fire with fire"!

I am conducting this discussion according to *your* rules.


The rule states
"as well as by all available means appropriate " VHF Radar ect. If
you can not hear anything but your vessel then listening is not one of
the available means that would be appropriate to avoid collision is
it?.


You are not even trying to hear anything!!! You Also omitted the first part
of the rule!

"***Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing*** as well as by all available means appropriate ...."

Furthermore, is it impossible to hear anything because you are going at full
belt? If you reduced your speed from 25 kts, to say 6 kts, would a proper
lookout be able to hear other fog horns?


You seem very willing to accept the bit of Rule 5 that start with "as well
as....". Why don't you accept the bit that starts with "Every vessel
**shall** .."?

The UK's Marine & Coastguard Agency (MCA) is the official body that is
responsible for maritime safety in UK waters. They have issued a bulletin
that highlights the dangers of your approach to navigation. I've posted a
link to the bulletin,
http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
, and you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge it. The MCA have quoted
examples of unnecessary collisions that were caused by people who, like you,
were so irresponsible that they used VHF as their "hearing" watch.

Perhaps you didn't read the link?


Regards


Donal
--

"Joe" wrote in message
om...
"Donal"

Lanod posted this fake link with no usefull info what so ever,

Sorry! It was there yesterday. I checked it. Honestly.



http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167


Guess they change the web-site eh Lanod?

Try this.
https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4...n03/167%20.pdf

Fortunately, the MCA still have the warning on their site!!!!
They really did change the web site! it was there when I posted the link
.... honestly!!


Regards


Donal
--

"otnmbrd" wrote in message
hlink.net...
I become increasingly convinced, that you are either a lawyer or
politician

Honestly, I've only ever acted in a legal capacity for an individual named
Lucifer.

If I ever enter into politics, I think that I will be an anarchist ... and
of course we will have to dissolve our party as soon as we found it!


Donal wrote:
Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

No he didn't, and I can't conceive how you arrived at that conclusion.

Yes, he did! He is the sole lookout on his high-speed barge, and he sits in
the wheelhouse looking at his radar, ans listening to his VHF in fog.



He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the
CollRegs
which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing
circumstances
and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the
risk
of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!


http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167
.pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

I have to believe that this statement is out of context. Voice (VHF) is
an acceptable alternative to sound signals for "passing situations" in
the waters that Joe is discussing. I would not be surprised that this is
becoming acceptable, world wide.

Did you read the link? Perhaps, like Joe, you found that it had
dissappeared. Here is another location.
https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4...n03/167%20.pdf






And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

No, but like everything, it's limitations must be addressed.


Addressed????


Joe seems to be completely its limitations!



Regards


Donal
--

Donal wrote:
"otnmbrd" wrote in message
hlink.net...

I become increasingly convinced, that you are either a lawyer or
politician

(repeat above)

Donal wrote:

Joe has told us that he uses his VHF, in fog, as his "hearing" lookout.

No he didn't, and I can't conceive how you arrived at that conclusion.


Yes, he did! He is the sole lookout on his high-speed barge, and he sits in
the wheelhouse looking at his radar, ans listening to his VHF in fog.

G No he didn't. First off, you assume he is the sole lookout ....
other post indicate he may be, and he may also be using the crew, when
available.
"Listening to his VHF in fog" .... We all listen to our VHF's (at least
we should) in fog AND clear conditions. Most of us have learned to
listen without appearing to do so, while concentrating on other sounds
around us, which we are also listening to/for. The use of VHF to talk to
and pass information about passing situations, in fog and clear weather
is common practice, especially in the waters he is referring to.
Just like, using radar as a collision avoidance system is fraught with
possible dangers of collision, when not used properly, so is the use of
VHF transmissions, when the agreed upon action is not carried out or
backed up with information from the radar, or other sources, as to it's
feasibility.
Sorry Donal, you were reaching, and it doesn't fly.




He is stupid enough to believe that he complies with Rule 5 of the

CollRegs

which state:-
=====================================
"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and
hearing as
well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing

circumstances

and
conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the

risk

of
collision."
=====================================
What do the experts say about the use of a VHF in fog?

Guess what, they say that Joe is a menace! Here's a link!



http://www.seamanship.co.uk/M_Notice...ion/pdf/MGN167

.pdf

"Although the use of VHF radio may be justified on occasion in collision
avoidance, the
provisions of the Collision Regulations should remain uppermost, as
misunderstandings
can arise even where the language of communication is not a problem."

I have to believe that this statement is out of context. Voice (VHF) is
an acceptable alternative to sound signals for "passing situations" in
the waters that Joe is discussing. I would not be surprised that this is
becoming acceptable, world wide.


Did you read the link? Perhaps, like Joe, you found that it had
dissappeared. Here is another location.
https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4...n03/167%20.pdf

I read the link after this posting.(couldn't find it the first time) I
can understand what they are saying, but, feel that the point they are
making is the same point as has been made so many times regarding the
use of radar, without a proper plot .... i.e., if you don't back up the
basic communication with follow-up confirmation (radar - plot) then you
are very apt to find yourself in a collision situation, i.e., the VHF
communication is not in and of itself, a guarantee.






And Joe's incompetence is further demonstrated by this little snippet:-

"There have been a significant number of
collisions where subsequent investigation has
found that at some stage before impact, one or
both parties were using VHF radio in an
attempt to avoid collision. The use of VHF
radio in these circumstances is not always
helpful and may even prove to be dangerous."

So, Joe's use of the VHF is "dangerous"!

No, but like everything, it's limitations must be addressed.



Addressed????

Yes, addressed. Just like there is no guarantee that because you have a
boat on radar that your actions to avoid collision will be correct, at
least until you make a complete plot and observe the results of your
actions, there is no guarantee that a passing agreement between vessels
made on VHF, will lead to a safe passing, until and unless you follow-up
that agreement to be sure it is being carried out and safe.
BTW, I see you made no mention of the US Inland Rules which talk about
VHF communication for "passing agreements".

otn

Donal..... In case you haven't figured it out, otn is maintaining a no
argument, no name calling discussion on this subject.
To date, you are seriously losing the major points being discussed with him.
Forget your post with Jeff and Joe .... there are many conditions we all deal
with that don't work all the time, work sometimes, and are greatly influenced
by our individual experience for a particular area of operation.
Never forget Rule 2 .... apply it to your area and conditions, and always know,
that what you may know or have used as normal conditions, may not apply to a
particular area or condition that you now find yourself, in.
Many modern vessels rely on radar, as their main source of information for the
routes they travel. Conditions may say that this is sufficient, or not, and in
the case of a collision, it will easily be proved .... not.
The point of this whole discussion, is the reality of what one can expect ....
the reality of what one must deal with .... the reality of .... Oh Chit...I
didn't think of that and should have.
No system is perfect, will guarantee safety, can be relied on solely ..... Rule
2.....You are responsible for what you do, don't do, what you should do, what
you shouldn't do.......etc.

Shen