You can't tell me vessel A was not in doubt of what vessel B
intentions were.

Put yourself in his place. He is proceeding out a channel and
off to his starboard he sees a vessel that might be crossing
his path or might be turning to come in the channel. He knows
not which is the case.

He is clearly required by the Rules to sound the danger
doubt signal since a chance for a collision exists.

He clearly erred 'assuming' an action by the other vessel
when he had not communicated with the other vessel.

This negates your assumption based on scanty information
that it was OK for vessel A to sound a signal that said
"I am turning to port". It clearly was not OK when he was
required by the Rules to sound the danger signal instead.

He erred and he erred badly and, thus, his was the primary
responsibility for the collision because his actions were
the cause of the other vessel altering its course and
a collision happening.

As for B crossing the channel. He was not and never was
crossing the channel because the channel does not extent
out to some unexplained distance from the headpin.

The channel starts and stops at the first two lateral
channel markers. This idea that the channel extends
out some undefined distance is just that - an idea.
Unfortunately it is not a fact. The channel is defined
by the markers. When the markers stop the channel
stops.

Jeeeez!

CN


"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ...

Capt. Neal® wrote:
Here is an actual test question that sort of negates many of
the arguments in the collision scenario posted by Jeff Morris
(Rules test - advanced)


How does this "negate" anything I said? I've only relayed the events as
I understand them, and posed a few questions and things to consider. In
fact, your comments are just the sort of comment I hoped for.


INLAND. Your vessel is proceeding down a channel and can
safely navigate only within the channel. Another vessel is
crossing your bow from starboard to port and you are in
doubt as to her intentions. Which statement is true?

A) The sounding of the danger signal is optional

B) The sounding of the danger signal is mandatory

C) You should sound two short blasts

D) You should sound one prolonged and two short blasts.


The correct answer is B) sounding the danger signal is
mandatory.

Mandatory only if A is "in doubt." As it turned out, he was not in
doubt, and in fact, his presumption was correct. But, is A permitted
to act as he did based on the information he had at hand?

And what about the fact that B was not actually crossing the channel?
You have to sort that out first.



Answer C, you should sound two short blasts is incorrect
but that is what vessel A did. Hmmmmmm!

I would say the above question fairly describes Jeff's
scenario in which vessel A failed to sound the danger
signal as required by the Rules.


No, it really doesn't. If B was entitled to cross, then A shouldn't
have to sound the danger signal, especially since the initial sighting
was at 4 miles. You really have to sort things out step by step.



I must change my view that both vessels were equally
at fault. I would have to now say that vessel A was
primarily at fault because vessel A violated the Rules
and this violation was the primary causative factor
in the collision.

No credit until you put it all together. But most of the issues are on
the table now.