" wrote in
oups.com:

...
Sitting at the nav station typing 500 word posts and looking at a
RADAR screen every 15 min violates COLREG RULE 5. Get out of the
office and sail your boat!

Yes but just about all vessels that go off shore are in violation of
rule 5 most of the time.

Neither agree or disagree

As nearly as I can make out fishing vessels
never keep any watch at all, but even commercial carriers are pretty
bad about watch keeping at sea.

Based on what first hand knowledge?

The "good news" for small boat
operators is that it is unlikely that we will damage the vessel that
runs us down so if we don't keep a good watch we probably aren't
endangering anyone but ourselves. Still, I'm not totally in love
with Skip's watch keeping system. Leaving the RADAR on 24 miles is a
mistake.

Yes and no..... for ships, one set on 24, one on 12 with occasional
shifts down is great.... offshore for small boats, leave it on 12 ( you
should still see any closer targets if you know how to use the radar)
with occasional shifts down in reduced vis.

Most targets will not show at 24 miles and closer targets
may be lost in the clutter. Also intermittent targets will only be
evident if you watch the ppi closely for several scans.

Again, yes and no.... depends on your system....etc.

Good practice
when only one set is available is to watch the screen for several
scans at long range and then repeat at medium and then short range
periodically. It is also very important to make a careful visual
scan on a regular basis.


Nothing wrong with this.

In clear weather I've found that we almost
always make visual contact on small targets before we see them on
RADAR.


G Again, depends on your system


otn

Bob wrote in news:1186869969.246902.237930
@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

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.



Except, of course, Around Alone sailors advertising major corporations, who
seem immune from all these little indignities sleeping in their racks,
ALONE, out on the oceans.

Notice how it doesn't say anything about computers and radars with
computer......a point.

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:16:59 -0700, "
wrote:

In clear weather I've found that we almost
always make visual contact on small targets before we see them on
RADAR.

If so, I'd argue that you need a better radar. We usually pick up
small fiberglass boats in the mid 20 ft range at around 4 miles on the
radar and I often need binoculars to find them visually unless they
are under sail. Our radar is a 3 year old Furuno with a 4 kw dome
scanner about 25 feet off the water. Getting gain and sea clutter
properly adjusted is one of the keys to good performance. I also like
the electronic averaging function which combines multiple scans to
enhance the image.

On Aug 11, 9:57 pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:16:59 -0700, "

. We usually pick up
small fiberglass boats in the mid 20 ft range at around 4 miles on the
radar and I often need binoculars to find them visually unless they
are under sail.


Any of those mid 20s foot boats have wood masts????
Stealthy Bob

"otnmbrd" wrote
Comon Wilbur, ..... read rule 4, first rule of Part B, then rule 5, then
read rule 2, then go back to rule 5 "every vessel shall at ALL times"

.... then stand on your head and spell "rhinoceros" ...

Unless there are unambiguous definitions of "proper look-out" and "all
available means" and "appropriate in the prevailing circumstances" somewhere
in there, any competent attorney should be able to convince any reasonable
judge that these is more guidelines than actual rules.

"Bob" wrote
no vessel has the right of way through another vessel!

That's the whole COLREGS. The rest is commentary. (I am, in fact, standing
on one foot.)

If you really want to understand these rules, get a copy of "Farwell's
Rules of the Nautical Road". It has chapters on each rule, and
discusses all the court cases and how they've interpreted each. As far
as a "proper look-out" probably all of us violate that rule every time
we go out. Here's why:

Pg. 141 - Note 45. "The Supreme Court long ago established that the
lookout
must be exclusively employed in the lookout duties. (Supreme Court
Case
cited here).
Note 46. (court case cited here)..."a proper lookout must be someone
other
than the deck officer or helmsman"... (another court case cited)...
"required lookout can have no other duties that detract from the
keeping of
a proper lookout:.

That being said, there appears
to be a move underway to revisit the "one man bridge organization" or
OMBO.

Another comment out of Farwell's:
__________________
The term look-out implies watching and listening so that there is
awareness
of what is happening around the vessel. The emphasis is on performing
the
action, not on the person.

Senate Report 96-979 which accompanies Rule 5, permits the helmsman to
serve
as lookout:

On vessels where there is an unobstructed all-round view provided at
the
steering station, as on certain pleasure craft, fishing boats, and
towing
vessels, or where there is no impairment of night vision or other
impediment
to keeping a proper lookout, the watch officer or helmsman may safely
serve
as the lookout. However, it is expected that this practice will only
be
followed after the situation has been carefully assessed on each
occasion,
and it has been clearly established that it is prudent to do so. Full
account shall be taken of all relevant factors, including but not
limited to
the state of the weather, conditions of visibility, traffic density,
and
proximity of navigational hazards. It is not the intent of these rules
to
require additional personnel forward, if none is required to enhance
safety.

S. Rep. No. 979, 96 th Cong., 2d Sess. 7-8 (1980).
___________________________________________

The OMBO is still highly contested, and the courts still much prefer
a
dedicated lookout. Of course all this is moot unless you have a
collision
and end up in court, in which case the first thing they're going to
look at
is if you and the other boat had "proper look-outs".

* Ernest Scribbler wrote, On 8/12/2007 6:10 AM:
"otnmbrd" wrote
Comon Wilbur, ..... read rule 4, first rule of Part B, then rule 5, then
read rule 2, then go back to rule 5 "every vessel shall at ALL times"

... then stand on your head and spell "rhinoceros" ...

Unless there are unambiguous definitions of "proper look-out" and "all
available means" and "appropriate in the prevailing circumstances" somewhere
in there, any competent attorney should be able to convince any reasonable
judge that these is more guidelines than actual rules.


Actually, there are such definitions. Read a book such as Farwells
and you'll start to understand. And remember, Admiralty Courts are
not the same as the normal courts you see on TV. Actually, at some
levels in the US they are the same, but most of the time they follow
the established precedents.

Here's a link to an appeal court's ruling that I found interesting
because it is a rare case where a boat was found 100% at fault, rather
than shared blame. The sailboat, Coyote, is the vessel Mike Plant
disappeared from when the keel fell off. His fiancée inherited the
boat and chartered it to Dave Scully, who bumped it into a fishing
boat on a qualifying run. Scully was found 100% at fault, for
not having a lookout or proper lights.

http://www.law.emory.edu/4circuit/dec97/961209.p.html

What it boils down to is that if you hit something you didn't see, its
your fault. And when you start out by saying you do a scan every 15
minutes, that would be essentially admitting you didn't see something.

One curious thing is that many minor cases are really decided by
insurance companies. They will divide blame as they see fit, which
will affect the owners as far as the deductible payment. A friend was
in a simple port/starboard collision. They were on starboard, but
admitted they didn't see the other boat until it was too late. This
implied they didn't keep a proper lookout and thus were judged 24%
responsible by the insurance companies. The other boat had to pay 76%
of their deductible, they paid 24% of the other's. I assume they
figured that 48% of the issue was lookout, 52% was port/starboard.

If you want to consider something vague in the rules, think about the
way "Safe Speed" is defined, and how that applies to high speed
vessels in the fog.

"Jeff" wrote
http://www.law.emory.edu/4circuit/dec97/961209.p.html
What it boils down to is that if you hit something you didn't see, its
your fault.

Especially if you do a hit and run while asleep at the wheel at 4:30 AM
without running lights.

"Bob" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 11, 6:18 pm, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:
Rule 5 comes under Part B, "Steering and Sailing Rules" meaning
rules
for vessels steering and sailing, in other words vessels underway.
Underway vessels do not include anchored vessels which, unless
they're dragging, they're not underway nor are they steering or
sailing.



I can not agree with you on this one Wilbur. tsmweb Tom has it right.
Please read the folloing rule. My take is that nobody can hide behind
a rule as defense against poor seamanship:

"...Rule 2 Responsibility

(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner,
master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply
with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be
required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special
circumstances of the case.

(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be
had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special
circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved,
which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid
immediate danger.

Rule 2
This is often referred to unofficially as the "Rule of Good
Seamanship" or the "General Prudential Rule." This Rule first states
that all the Rules must be complied with, and the customary practices
of good seamanship must be followed. But it then goes on to recognize
that there may be "special circumstances." Its intention is to apply
common sense to the interpretation and application of the Rules, and
to prevent any perversion of the Rules to avoid the consequences of
their misconstruction or misapplication. It recognizes that a
departure from the strict language of the Rules may be required to
avoid immediate danger - no vessel has the right of way through
another vessel! There may be special situations where a departure from
the Rules is not only desirable, but is required. Should a collision
result, strict literal compliance with the Rules may not be a
defense...."

not always by-the-book Bob



If I used your and Jeff's flawed logic it would follow that your boat is
your prison. If you had to keep a lookout "at all times" it would mean
when your boat was on the hard getting the bottom painted. It would mean
when your boat was sitting on the trailer. It would mean when your boat
was in your back yard. It would mean when your boat was on a tractor
trailer rig being hauled across country. It would mean when your boat
was tied up in the slip. You could never leave your boat because the
rule says "at all times."

See how stupid it gets? Nope, in spite of what you and Jeff try to
claim, Rule 5 appears only under the Steering and Sailing rules. Hence
it only applies when steering and sailing. Anchored boats, boats tied up
at a dock, boats aground, are not steering and sailing. Don't try to
obfuscate by bring up a bunch of other rules. They don't apply in a
discussion of what Rule 5 says.

Wilbur Hubbard