My seamanship question #4
 

OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

My seamanship question #4
 

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

Meeting, pass on one whistle unless other arrangements are made.

Joe

My seamanship question #4
 

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

d. None of the above

A power driven vessel shall keep out of the way of a sailing vessel

My seamanship question #4
 

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

d. None of the above

A power driven vessel shall keep out of the way of a sailing vessel

My seamanship question #4
 

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

d. None of the above

A power driven vessel shall keep out of the way of a sailing vessel

My seamanship question #4
 

I kinda feel like this is a no-win situation, but I have to jump in ...

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay. There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.

By this I assume you mean his bearing from you is 45 degrees forward
of your beam. And that bearing is holding steady.

He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4 mile.

If you're closing at 30 knots that means impact in 30 seconds.

I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is this:
a) a meeting situation

"meeting situation" is not formally defined in the ColRegs. It is
used to describe two powerboats meeting head on, or nearly so. This
does not fit that usage.

b) a crossing situation

"Crossing" also is not formally defined but is used to describe two
powerboats, and is the title of that rule. Again this does not fit.

c) an overtaking situation

Overtaking is formally defined and can be used for sailboats, but
since you seem to be saying each boat sees the other forward of the
beam, this can't apply.

So it would appear the you could use the words meeting or crossing,
but it would no be in quite the same sense that these words are used
in the ColRegs, so I don't think this could be considered any of those
three possibilities.

There is one little point: The ColRegs also use "crossing" to mean
crossing a narrow channel. Thus, although that isn't stated here, its
conceivable that the sailboat is crossing a channel, making this a
"crossing situation" under rule 9 or 10, not rule 15.



I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean. What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Mean??? There's not a mean bone in my body!


Cheers,
Ellen

My seamanship question #4
 

Ding! Right answer.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
oups.com...

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very
clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her
breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm
sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay.
There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat
heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees
forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4
mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is
this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean.
What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

d. None of the above

A power driven vessel shall keep out of the way of a sailing vessel

My seamanship question #4
 

Jeff is not a mean person.



Neither is he an average person.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I kinda feel like this is a no-win situation, but I have to jump in ...

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very
clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her
breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm
sailing along minding my own business. It's a nice day and hardly any
other boats on the Bay. There's no current because it's high tide. Off to
my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way. It looks like
he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.

By this I assume you mean his bearing from you is 45 degrees forward of
your beam. And that bearing is holding steady.

He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4
mile.

If you're closing at 30 knots that means impact in 30 seconds.

I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is
this:
a) a meeting situation

"meeting situation" is not formally defined in the ColRegs. It is used to
describe two powerboats meeting head on, or nearly so. This does not fit
that usage.

b) a crossing situation

"Crossing" also is not formally defined but is used to describe two
powerboats, and is the title of that rule. Again this does not fit.

c) an overtaking situation

Overtaking is formally defined and can be used for sailboats, but since
you seem to be saying each boat sees the other forward of the beam, this
can't apply.

So it would appear the you could use the words meeting or crossing, but it
would no be in quite the same sense that these words are used in the
ColRegs, so I don't think this could be considered any of those three
possibilities.

There is one little point: The ColRegs also use "crossing" to mean
crossing a narrow channel. Thus, although that isn't stated here, its
conceivable that the sailboat is crossing a channel, making this a
"crossing situation" under rule 9 or 10, not rule 15.



I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean.
What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Mean??? There's not a mean bone in my body!


Cheers,
Ellen

My seamanship question #4
 

Capt. JG wrote:
Jeff is not a mean person.



Neither is he an average person.


I'm at least three standard deviations from the mean.

My seamanship question #4
 

Jeff wrote:
Capt. JG wrote:
Jeff is not a mean person.



Neither is he an average person.


I'm at least three standard deviations from the mean.

Which direction?

My seamanship question #4
 

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank

My seamanship question #4
 

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank
That explains why I always see sport fishermen not giving way to
sailboats. (Really - this is by far the most common flagrant violation
I see.) They just assume the sailboat is more maneuverable.

So Frank, what additional information do you think is needed?

My seamanship question #4
 

"Jeff" wrote in message ...
| I kinda feel like this is a no-win situation, but I have to jump in ...
| "meeting situation" is not formally defined in the ColRegs. It is
| used to describe two powerboats meeting head on, or nearly so. This
| does not fit that usage.
| "Crossing" also is not formally defined but is used to describe two
| powerboats, and is the title of that rule. Again this does not fit.
| Overtaking is formally defined and can be used for sailboats, but
| since you seem to be saying each boat sees the other forward of the
| beam, this can't apply.
| So it would appear the you could use the words meeting or crossing,
| but it would no be in quite the same sense that these words are used
| in the ColRegs, so I don't think this could be considered any of those
|

DANG! Y'all are smarter than I gave you credit for. I was sure you'd all
blow it and be arguing about what degrees meeting and what degrees crossing
was just like you did with overtaking. Double dang!
My study notes say and I quote "There is no meeting or crossing situation
under the rules between a powerboat and a sailboat."
But I was right about one thing. Y'all are mean, real mean...

Cheers,
Ellen

My seamanship question #4
 

Capt. JG wrote:
Ding! Right answer.

yelp, I was thinking Motor sailing :0)

Joe



--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
oups.com...

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very
clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her
breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm
sailing along minding my
own business. It's a nice day and hardly any other boats on the Bay.
There's no current
because it's high tide. Off to my left I see a big sport fisherman boat
heading my way.
It looks like he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees
forward of my beam.
He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4
mile. I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is
this:
a) a meeting situation
b) a crossing situation
c) an overtaking situation
I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean.
What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Cheers,
Ellen

d. None of the above

A power driven vessel shall keep out of the way of a sailing vessel

My seamanship question #4
 

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:01:44 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank
That explains why I always see sport fishermen not giving way to
sailboats. (Really - this is by far the most common flagrant violation
I see.) They just assume the sailboat is more maneuverable.




So Frank, what additional information do you think is needed?

The statement, "neither vessel is channel bound"

My seamanship question #4
 

BG I love watching people pick apart these "word game" questions.

otn

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I kinda feel like this is a no-win situation, but I have to jump in ...

Ellen MacArthur wrote:
OK ya'll, here's another sailing question. I'll try to make it very
clear. Maybe I won't
get so many complaints this time. (sighing as she decides not to hold her
breath...)
I'm sailing my Tangerine (17' 6" on deck). It has no motor. I'm
sailing along minding my own business. It's a nice day and hardly any
other boats on the Bay. There's no current because it's high tide. Off to
my left I see a big sport fisherman boat heading my way. It looks like
he's on course to run right into me about 45 degrees forward of my beam.

By this I assume you mean his bearing from you is 45 degrees forward of
your beam. And that bearing is holding steady.

He's not fishing. He's just motoring along on plane. He's closer than 1/4
mile.

If you're closing at 30 knots that means impact in 30 seconds.

I think
everybody will agree I'm the stand on boat. But under the colreg rules is
this:
a) a meeting situation

"meeting situation" is not formally defined in the ColRegs. It is used to
describe two powerboats meeting head on, or nearly so. This does not fit
that usage.

b) a crossing situation

"Crossing" also is not formally defined but is used to describe two
powerboats, and is the title of that rule. Again this does not fit.

c) an overtaking situation

Overtaking is formally defined and can be used for sailboats, but since
you seem to be saying each boat sees the other forward of the beam, this
can't apply.

So it would appear the you could use the words meeting or crossing, but it
would no be in quite the same sense that these words are used in the
ColRegs, so I don't think this could be considered any of those three
possibilities.

There is one little point: The ColRegs also use "crossing" to mean
crossing a narrow channel. Thus, although that isn't stated here, its
conceivable that the sailboat is crossing a channel, making this a
"crossing situation" under rule 9 or 10, not rule 15.



I'll get even on this one. You've been mean to me so far, just mean.
What goes around
comes around. Remember that. Maybe you won't be so mean.

Mean??? There's not a mean bone in my body!


Cheers,
Ellen

My seamanship question #4
 

I just did it to flush you out!

So what do you think - is a Sunfish in irons a NUC?

jeff

otnmbrd wrote:
BG I love watching people pick apart these "word game" questions.

otn
....

My seamanship question #4
 

EG I consider most Sunfish as NUC whether in irons or not.

otn

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I just did it to flush you out!

So what do you think - is a Sunfish in irons a NUC?

jeff

otnmbrd wrote:
BG I love watching people pick apart these "word game" questions.

otn
...

My seamanship question #4
 

Good advice!

otnmbrd wrote:
EG I consider most Sunfish as NUC whether in irons or not.

otn

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I just did it to flush you out!

So what do you think - is a Sunfish in irons a NUC?

jeff

otnmbrd wrote:
BG I love watching people pick apart these "word game" questions.

otn
...

My seamanship question #4
 

One is a power boat, one is a sailboat. Given the facts presented, the power
boat must give way. There's no discussion of depth, hazards, etc.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank

My seamanship question #4
 

It doesn't have special rights.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:38:19 -0500, Frank Boettcher
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank

Where does a seaplane figure in?

CWM

My seamanship question #4
 

In the middle of the bay???

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:01:44 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:13:14 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

Ding! Right answer.

Nope. Don't know enough. Always reverts to "least manueverable
vessel"



Frank
That explains why I always see sport fishermen not giving way to
sailboats. (Really - this is by far the most common flagrant violation
I see.) They just assume the sailboat is more maneuverable.




So Frank, what additional information do you think is needed?

The statement, "neither vessel is channel bound"

My seamanship question #4
 

Capt. JG wrote:
In the middle of the bay???

Yes, that was my first thought, but there are lots of wide open bays
with a narrow channel down the middle. Galveston comes to mind.

My seamanship question #4
 

Jeff wrote:
Capt. JG wrote:
In the middle of the bay???

Yes, that was my first thought, but there are lots of wide open bays
with a narrow channel down the middle. Galveston comes to mind.

Would taht channel be International Water, though?

My seamanship question #4
 

katy wrote:
Jeff wrote:
Capt. JG wrote:
In the middle of the bay???

Yes, that was my first thought, but there are lots of wide open bays
with a narrow channel down the middle. Galveston comes to mind.

Would taht channel be International Water, though?
No, I think Galveston Bay is all Inland, but this question didn't
specify Intl.

My seamanship question #4
 

Since she was not specific, I used that (lack of) information to make my
judgement.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. JG wrote:
In the middle of the bay???

Yes, that was my first thought, but there are lots of wide open bays with
a narrow channel down the middle. Galveston comes to mind.

My seamanship question #4
 

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:38:40 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

In the middle of the bay???


The Mississippi Sound is 12-15 miles wide and it has about four north
south channels and an east west channel down the middle. St Joe's Bay
is probably about six miles wide at the widest point and it has a
channel running diagonally from the point to Port St. Joe and another
going the length of the bay.

Many fishing boats that ordinarily would leave the channel are using
it in the sound post Katrina to avoid any obstructions that have not
been cleared, marked or noted in notices to mariners.

I personnally have tacked up Gulfport small craft channel (at one
point about 40' across), with a dead engine in a boat drawing 5' and
had teenagers on sunfish screaming starboard at me. They might need
to go back to the sailing school and learn the meaning of "least
manueverable".

Frank

My seamanship question #4
 

Frank Boettcher wrote:
....

I personnally have tacked up Gulfport small craft channel (at one
point about 40' across), with a dead engine in a boat drawing 5' and
had teenagers on sunfish screaming starboard at me. They might need
to go back to the sailing school and learn the meaning of "least
manueverable".

Frank

OK, I have to ask. What is the rule of "Least Maneuverable"? Is this
some special local rule down in the Gulf? I scanned the Colregs and
it doesn't show up there.

You invoked that before but didn't quite explain. Did you mean that
the sport fisherman has right of way because its less maneuverable?

My seamanship question #4
 

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:35:33 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

I personnally have tacked up Gulfport small craft channel (at one
point about 40' across), with a dead engine in a boat drawing 5' and
had teenagers on sunfish screaming starboard at me. They might need
to go back to the sailing school and learn the meaning of "least
manueverable".

Frank

OK, I have to ask. What is the rule of "Least Maneuverable"? Is this
some special local rule down in the Gulf? I scanned the Colregs and
it doesn't show up there.

You invoked that before but didn't quite explain. Did you mean that
the sport fisherman has right of way because its less maneuverable?


Truth be known, I don't think I have ever read it. It was explained
to me in a piloting course I took many years ago in the context that
sailing vessels don't automatically have right of way over power
boats.

And it may always be determined after the fact, i.e. in the courts if
there is an incident.

Concept is simple. In the example above, my channel bound boat
tacking to windward in a narrow channel always has the right of way
over a sunfish that is not channel bound, regardless of what tack I'm
on. Because I am " least manueverable" given the narrow amount of
room I have to manuever.

If you are sailing and on intersection with a supertanker that
requires miles to stop or change course, even if not channel bound,
least manueverable is the rule.

If you are sailing and approaching a barge train of two or three coal
barges heading for the power plant, they will always be considered
"least manueverable" and have right of way.

If the sport fisherman is channel bound, and you are not, it is your
obligation to avoid, if on a collusion course that would occur in the
channel.

at least that is the way it was explained to me in the course.

Frank

My seamanship question #4
 

Frank Boettcher wrote:
OK, I have to ask. What is the rule of "Least Maneuverable"?
....

Truth be known, I don't think I have ever read it. It was explained
to me in a piloting course I took many years ago in the context that
sailing vessels don't automatically have right of way over power
boats.

I have to say I have a *huge* problem with this. I don't mean to say
that I wouldn't give a wide berth to a vessel that has a
maneuverability problem, but the way you're presenting it, we are
supposed to ignore the Colregs, and sort out situations in a way that
would place vessels on some sort of maneuverability continuum.


And it may always be determined after the fact, i.e. in the courts if
there is an incident.

The courts tend to follow a fairly strict interpretation of the rules
- departures are generally frowned upon. It does seem that they've
allowed vessels to go faster than some of the rules might imply, but
there's a lot of politics behind that.


Concept is simple. In the example above, my channel bound boat
tacking to windward in a narrow channel always has the right of way
over a sunfish that is not channel bound, regardless of what tack I'm
on. Because I am " least manueverable" given the narrow amount of
room I have to manuever.

Nope. Not buying it. If you said you were the Sunfish and you
deferred to less maneuverable boats I'd say that's very nice of you, I
often do the same. But to expect others to get out of your way just
isn't right. If I thought I needed other vessels to ignore the rules
and give me a break, I'd turn on the engine. In fact, there are a
number of such situations in my harbor where I used to sail my
Nonsuch, but now power the catamaran. If I wanted to get back into
daysailing rather than longer cruises, I get a more maneuverable boat.


If you are sailing and on intersection with a supertanker that
requires miles to stop or change course, even if not channel bound,
least manueverable is the rule.

Different case entirely. And frankly, a different discussion. If its
physically impossible for the tanker to stop, claiming "right of way"
is just plain stupid. The courts and powers that be have supported
large ship practices that appear at odds the the rules, and that we
have to live with.

However, I don't believe this applies when smaller vessels are
considered. The Colregs do a pretty good job of giving guidance for
most (2 boat) situations


If you are sailing and approaching a barge train of two or three coal
barges heading for the power plant, they will always be considered
"least manueverable" and have right of way.

Again, I'd give them a wide berth, but if they have a maneuverability
problem, all they have to do is turn turn on the RAM lights.


If the sport fisherman is channel bound, and you are not, it is your
obligation to avoid, if on a collusion course that would occur in the
channel.

Here we differ completely.

How would I know what a particular sport fisherman draws? How would
he know the maneuvering ability of Ellen's sailboat? Or my catamaran?
And why is he somehow exempt from Rule 6, which requires a safe
speed? If he's doing thirty knots, he's closing a quarter mile in 30
seconds. In the time, the sailboat might only be able to go a few
hundred feet, much less if it has to tack. No - this doesn't work.

Of course, if this situation falls under Rule 9, the sailboat should
not impede the powerboat - you don't have to invent a new rule for
this. But may be impossible for the sailboat to comply unless the
powerboat slows down.


at least that is the way it was explained to me in the course.

I can believe that an instructor advised that you should give a wide
berth to vessel that appear to be less maneuverable, that's just
common sense and simple courtesy. But to say that concept supersedes
the ColRegs just doesn't fly.

My seamanship question #4
 

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:35:33 -0400, Jeff
wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

I personnally have tacked up Gulfport small craft
channel (at one
point about 40' across), with a dead engine in a boat
drawing 5' and
had teenagers on sunfish screaming starboard at me.
They might need
to go back to the sailing school and learn the meaning
of "least
manueverable".

Frank

OK, I have to ask. What is the rule of "Least
Maneuverable"? Is this
some special local rule down in the Gulf? I scanned the
Colregs and
it doesn't show up there.

You invoked that before but didn't quite explain. Did
you mean that
the sport fisherman has right of way because its less
maneuverable?


Truth be known, I don't think I have ever read it. It was
explained
to me in a piloting course I took many years ago in the
context that
sailing vessels don't automatically have right of way over
power
boats.

And it may always be determined after the fact, i.e. in
the courts if
there is an incident.

Concept is simple. In the example above, my channel bound
boat
tacking to windward in a narrow channel always has the
right of way
over a sunfish that is not channel bound, regardless of
what tack I'm
on. Because I am " least manueverable" given the narrow
amount of
room I have to manuever.


By channel bound, are you saying it's a RAM?



If you are sailing and on intersection with a supertanker
that
requires miles to stop or change course, even if not
channel bound,
least manueverable is the rule.

If you are sailing and approaching a barge train of two or
three coal
barges heading for the power plant, they will always be
considered
"least manueverable" and have right of way.



We call that 'the rule of tonnage', though it's not really
an official rule.





If the sport fisherman is channel bound, and you are not,
it is your
obligation to avoid, if on a collusion course that would
occur in the
channel.


A lot of big sportfish type boats like to ride in the
channels of the Chesapeake Bay, even though there's plenty
of depth for them outside. Some get belligerent about moving
out of the channels.


--
Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

My seamanship question #4
 

Frank you would be CBD or RAM

Constrained by Draft or Restricted in Ability to Manuever.

CBD is three Red light Vertically. RAM is R over W or R.

If you wanted to excercise that point you should probably
show the day shapes.

Another option is the Mossberg 12 gu Pump Shotgun loaded
with Tracer Rounds.


"Scotty" wrote

"Frank Boettcher" wrote

Jeff wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

I personnally have tacked up Gulfport small craft
channel (at one
point about 40' across), with a dead engine in a boat
drawing 5' and
had teenagers on sunfish screaming starboard at me.
They might need
to go back to the sailing school and learn the meaning
of "least
manueverable".

You invoked that before but didn't quite explain. Did
you mean that
the sport fisherman has right of way because its less
maneuverable?


Truth be known, I don't think I have ever read it. It was
explained
to me in a piloting course I took many years ago in the
context that
sailing vessels don't automatically have right of way over
power
boats.

And it may always be determined after the fact, i.e. in
the courts if
there is an incident.

Concept is simple. In the example above, my channel bound
boat
tacking to windward in a narrow channel always has the
right of way
over a sunfish that is not channel bound, regardless of
what tack I'm
on. Because I am " least manueverable" given the narrow
amount of
room I have to manuever.


By channel bound, are you saying it's a RAM?

If you are sailing and on intersection with a supertanker
that
requires miles to stop or change course, even if not
channel bound,
least manueverable is the rule.

If you are sailing and approaching a barge train of two or
three coal
barges heading for the power plant, they will always be
considered
"least manueverable" and have right of way.

My seamanship question #4
 

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:30:20 -0400, Jeff wrote:

Don't care if you buy it or not, just repeating what was presented in
the piloting class. Instructor may have been all wet.

And, in the case of the sunfish, I mentioned in the original post that
my engine was inoperable. Storm was coming, I'm tacking up a narrow
channel to get to safety, rock breakwater on one side, sandy shoal on
the other side (a beach that the sunfish launched from at the Gulfport
Yacht Club) and the, sunfish several of them, are yelling starboard.
If you're telling me that Colregs would indicate that the sunfish has
only an obligation to be "courteous" and not an obligation to avoid
the destruction of property and the risk of injury, then I'll ignore
colregs and revert to common sense every time.

Frank Boettcher wrote:
OK, I have to ask. What is the rule of "Least Maneuverable"?
...

Truth be known, I don't think I have ever read it. It was explained
to me in a piloting course I took many years ago in the context that
sailing vessels don't automatically have right of way over power
boats.

I have to say I have a *huge* problem with this. I don't mean to say
that I wouldn't give a wide berth to a vessel that has a
maneuverability problem, but the way you're presenting it, we are
supposed to ignore the Colregs, and sort out situations in a way that
would place vessels on some sort of maneuverability continuum.


And it may always be determined after the fact, i.e. in the courts if
there is an incident.

The courts tend to follow a fairly strict interpretation of the rules
- departures are generally frowned upon. It does seem that they've
allowed vessels to go faster than some of the rules might imply, but
there's a lot of politics behind that.


Concept is simple. In the example above, my channel bound boat
tacking to windward in a narrow channel always has the right of way
over a sunfish that is not channel bound, regardless of what tack I'm
on. Because I am " least manueverable" given the narrow amount of
room I have to manuever.

Nope. Not buying it. If you said you were the Sunfish and you
deferred to less maneuverable boats I'd say that's very nice of you, I
often do the same. But to expect others to get out of your way just
isn't right. If I thought I needed other vessels to ignore the rules
and give me a break, I'd turn on the engine. In fact, there are a
number of such situations in my harbor where I used to sail my
Nonsuch, but now power the catamaran. If I wanted to get back into
daysailing rather than longer cruises, I get a more maneuverable boat.


If you are sailing and on intersection with a supertanker that
requires miles to stop or change course, even if not channel bound,
least manueverable is the rule.

Different case entirely. And frankly, a different discussion. If its
physically impossible for the tanker to stop, claiming "right of way"
is just plain stupid. The courts and powers that be have supported
large ship practices that appear at odds the the rules, and that we
have to live with.

However, I don't believe this applies when smaller vessels are
considered. The Colregs do a pretty good job of giving guidance for
most (2 boat) situations


If you are sailing and approaching a barge train of two or three coal
barges heading for the power plant, they will always be considered
"least manueverable" and have right of way.

Again, I'd give them a wide berth, but if they have a maneuverability
problem, all they have to do is turn turn on the RAM lights.


If the sport fisherman is channel bound, and you are not, it is your
obligation to avoid, if on a collusion course that would occur in the
channel.

Here we differ completely.

How would I know what a particular sport fisherman draws? How would
he know the maneuvering ability of Ellen's sailboat? Or my catamaran?
And why is he somehow exempt from Rule 6, which requires a safe
speed? If he's doing thirty knots, he's closing a quarter mile in 30
seconds. In the time, the sailboat might only be able to go a few
hundred feet, much less if it has to tack. No - this doesn't work.

Of course, if this situation falls under Rule 9, the sailboat should
not impede the powerboat - you don't have to invent a new rule for
this. But may be impossible for the sailboat to comply unless the
powerboat slows down.


at least that is the way it was explained to me in the course.

I can believe that an instructor advised that you should give a wide
berth to vessel that appear to be less maneuverable, that's just
common sense and simple courtesy. But to say that concept supersedes
the ColRegs just doesn't fly.