It's obvious you've never sailed in fog..... your statements are akin to
Bobsprit talking about sailing. Neither has merit.

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
|
| It's simple. Information is not scanty when
|
| 1) I hear the fog signal of a vessel forward over a period of time and
| it's bearing is not changing and the signal is getting louder.
|
| 2) I must follow the Rules that states if there is any doubt that a vessel
| is on a collision course then assume it is indeed on a collision
course.
|
| 3) I know Rule 8 states a course change early and pronounced is perhaps
| the best way to avoid a close quarters situation so I follow Rule 8
and
| change my course early and evidently so as to avoid a close quarters
| situation.
|
| S.Simon
|
|
|
|
| "Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
...
| Simple Simon wrote:
|
| "Tim Roberts" wrote
|
| Are you saying that in restricted visibility, you would change course
| regardless of whether you had a visual confirmation of the other
vessels
| position?
|
| Yes I would. The Rules require me to.
|
| Good, that's what I like to see, Cap'n. Nice reasoned argument.
| So, pray tell, which particular rules require this?
|
| Would you care to say how, without knowing where the other vessel
| is, you can ensure your action *will* result in the vessels involved
| passing at a safe distance (rule 8d) and not result in another close
| quarters situation, in this case with the same vessel (rule 8c)?
|
| Note that rule 8e also requires you to slow down if necessary.
|
| Rule 8 is in section I, by the way, so applies whether in sight
| or not.
|
| Would you also care to explain how, by altering course to avoid
| a vessel of the position of which you are uncertain, you are not
| violating rule 7c by making assumptions on the basis of scanty
| information?
|
|
|