Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.
"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
... Jeff Morris wrote: Once again you show your total ignorance of the rules! Rule 19 does not require boats to slow to a safe speed, its Rule 6: On the contrary. Rule 6 requires speeds to be safe at all times, there is no explicit mention of reducing to a safe speed. Not even in 19b. Only in 19e. You're being pedantic - rule 6 mandates a safe speed at all times. If the visibility gets worse, this likely means vessels should slow down. I was only pointing out what you are also claiming, a "safe speed" is not just a requirement in restricted visibility, it always applies. Both 6 and 19b *imply* that a reduction might be mandated in some circumstances, but only 19e makes *explicit* mention of reduction, and then only in specific circumstances. Ah, that's why I quoted 19(e) and not 19(b) ??? All vessels must always proceed at a safe speed - this is one of the basics. Rule 19 says that sometimes you have to go even slower. Even slower than safe speed? No, it only means that "safe" may at times mean very slow. Even more pedantic. You might just claim the 19(e) is not required at all, since its implied by rule 6. And yes, the courts have ruled that leaving the dock was going too fast. The central issue of this discussion has been your insistance that there is no situation where a sailboat must slow down. In this he is of course mistaken. I think we are in strong agreement here. Yet rule 19 unequivocally mandates that "ALL VESSELS ... SHALL REDUCE SPEED TO A MINIMUM..." What can be clearer than that? Careful, you're misquoting. It says "...to the minimum at which she can be kept on her course", which means the vessel in question doesn't need to go any slower than the speed at which steerage can be maintained, unless (as required be the following sentence) it becomes necessary to take all way off. I've quoted this rule in full about 5 times in the year we've have this running debate. I assume the everyone is familiar with the full wording, so I sometimes only quote the "short version." Neal has claimed that it is unsafe for a sailboat to proceed at anything less than the full speed for a given wind, and therefore claims that anything less than hull speed may be unsafe. The rules are specific that there is no such lower limit - minimum steerageway may be too fast. Indeed, the courts have ruled on occasion that not dropping the anchor was too fast. But remember that the whole of 19e only applies to vessels which have heard another vessel's fog signal from apparently forward, or where an unavoidable close quarters situation already exists. Yes, again I assume everyone is familiar with the wording. But all you're saying is that this rule only applies when there's a possibility of a collision - but that's the interesting situation! This debate has gone on for over a year. The two main issues are whether Rule 19(e) requires sailboats to slow is the visibility is bad enough, and whether the "prolonged-short-short" signal of some vessels in the fog implies a standon/giveway relationship. In the current version, Neal is attempting to show that since there is a grey area where both the "in sight" and "restricted visibility" rules might apply, then there is pecking order in restricted visibility. And since there is a pecking order, sailboats need not slow down. Fortunately, no one else seem to be buying it. -- -jeff "Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information" ColRegs, Rule 7(c) |