BoatBanter.com - COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- ASA (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/)

- - COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility. (https://www.boatbanter.com/asa/17932-colregs-final-word-pecking-order-restricted-visibility.html)

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

ROFL

otn

Simple Simon wrote:

Sea fog and land fog are two different animals.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message nk.net...

I guess in pieman land you get light fog only. Here in North Calif you get
friggin fog so thick you can not see the front of the car from the drivers
seat!
Bill

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

Extremely thick fog is mostly a myth. Yes, it occurs on
occassion but the general run of the mill fog is not so thick
that vessels can collide without ever seeing one another.

At any rate, the worst case scenario of pea soup thick fog
is but one case of restricted visibility and the majority of
the other cases definitely allow in-sight situations in or
near an area of restricted visibility. In sight situations
are ruled by the in sight rules which specify give-way and
stand-on status for vessels in sight of one another.

Jeff, Otnmbrd, Shen44 and Rick have up till now maintained
there is NEVER a stand-on vessel in or near an area of
restricted visibility while I have maintained there IS a stand-on
and give-way vessel in or near an area of restricted visibility.

I'm right and they're wrong - that's the bottom line.

I maintain that my sailboat even in a thick fog is going at
a safe speed by virtue of the fact that the hull speed is less
than seven knots max. Many fogs have little or no wind so
I may well be going even slower. Even if the winds are brisk
in a fog and I'm going hull speed I'm still going at a safe speed.
In effect, I'm standing on and I'm doing it completely legally.

If I hear the fog signal of a motor vessel I know right away
if and when we come in sight of each other I am the stand-on
vessel and the motor vessel is the give way vessel unless I'm
overtaking the motor vessel which is not likely at all considering
they all think safe speed is 10-15 knots instead of the usual
20-30 knots - let's face the facts here for once. Therefore,
I keep going at my safe speed of five or six knots and try
to determine by the sound signal if there's a danger of collision.
If I determine there is a danger of collision I change course -
I'm certainly not going to take all sails down and come to
a stop and become a sitting duck to be run over and sunk
by a ship not keeping an adequate lookout and going too
fast for the conditions. This would be causing a collision and
not avoiding a collision - a violation of the RULES.

Yet this what the arrogant tugboat captains are saying the
Rules require me to do. WRONG! When a motor vessel
hears the fog signal of a sailboat or any other boat above
it in the pecking order it knows before even coming in sight
of that vessel that the motor vessel is the give way vessel
in a close quarters situation and a close quarters situation
in most cases of restricted visibility in an in sight situation.

This is what I call the abbreviated pecking order. That
there is an abbreviated pecking order proves there is a
give-way and stand-on vessel in restricted visibility.

If and when the motor vessel and sailing vessels come
within sight of one another the motor vessel already knows
it is the give-way vessel in all but the overtaking situation.
(we're not talking narrow channels, traffic schemes, etc,
here - we're talking at sea.) This means the
give-way/stand-on status exists in or near an area of
restricted visibility.

S.Simon - knows the practical application
as well as the letter of the Rules.

"Tim Roberts" wrote in message

...

Sorry Jeff,

It seems I also missed much of the earlier thread.

I was agreeing with the point that thick fog is not the only type of
restricted visibility.

Now that I have discovered a bit more about the original thread, I

should

perhaps add a couple of points;

First Point:

Rule 19 Very definitely applies to all vessels at sea by virtue of Rule

1

(Application)

'(a) These Rules shall apply to all vessels upon the high seas and in

all

waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels'

Second Point:

Did Neal really claim that you don't get wind in fog?
He perhaps needs to understand the process by which sea-fog is formed.

It

happens when warm, wet air comes into contact with a sea that is colder

than

it's own dew point. The only way sea fog disperses is 'normally' with a
change in wind direction which brings in dry air which is able to absorb

the

moisture in the fog. Continued wind from the same direction merely

feeds

more moisture, and thus, more fog! If the same wind direction continues

for

long enough - the fog gets thicker and thicker.

I have certainly been in situations where I have been sailing in thick

fog.

I find it safer than motoring because you can hear other vessels sound
signals much easier than with an engine on.

Sorry to bore everyone with this pedantry, but I lecture in both COLREGS

and

Meteorology amongst other things.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

Finally.
John Cairns
"Tim Roberts" wrote in message
...
Just one final point. Take some time to examine reports from the Marine
Accident Investigation Board, they're easy enough to find on the internet.
The bottom line is that in a collision situation both Masters are to blame
as the rules clearly state that both parties are equally responsible for
avoiding collisions, regardless of 'Pecking Order'.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

Comments interspersed:

Simple Simon wrote:

And, as usual, you're twisting the facts into a pretzel you
can munch with copious quantities of beer when you're
motoring along in your twin-diesel powered catamaran!

Comments interspersed.

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...

Yes Charles, you missed the beginning of this discussion, which has gone on for about a
year.

Neal has always maintained that Rule 19 doesn't apply to sailboats - they are not required
to slow down in the fog. He's trying to weasel out it now by claiming that since there
are some situations where you might apply "in sight" rules that could also qualify as
"restricted visibility" that sailboats are always standon.

I only maintained the part of Rule 19 that says all vessels must slow
down to a safe speed only applies to those vessels NOT already
going at a safe speed. You have steadfastly refused to recognize
the fact that slowing down to a safe speed applies only to those
vessels going at a fast and unsafe speed for the conditions. My
little sailboat going at hull speed of a little over six knots is going
at a safe speed therefore I am not required by the Rules to slow
down.

Totally wrong and another indication of your incompetence.

As for the in-sight situation it is common to have in-sight situations
in or near an area of restricted visibility so it follows that in-sight
Rules often apply in or near an area of restricted visibility so it
becomes apparent that stand-on/give-way does indeed exist in
or near an area of restricted visibility, hence a pecking order
exists in all its glorious ramifications.

This is a vain attempt to cover your butt, because you've been shown
that a pecking order doesn't exist, which means sailboats are not stand
on when vessels are not in sight .... i.e. Neals Damage Control

Neal started by claiming sailboats should travel at full speed since it was unsafe for
them to slow down. He claimed there is never wind in fog, and that thick fog was a myth
that didn't really exist. He claimed that sailboats don't have to slow down because they
are inherently incapable to going at unsafe speeds, regardless of the conditions. Now
he's trying to construct a grey area scenario do prove his case.

I never said 'should' I said 'could'. There is a difference ya know. I said most
fogs don't have winds. Sail on an inland lake, sail in southern Florida, sail on
a river and you will find many situations where there is fog and little of no wind.

Bull chips

I did say small cruising sailboats like mine with hull speeds of six knots
or less are already going at a safe speed so they are not required by the
Rules to slow down to a safe speed. This is so obvious I'm surprised you
keep failing to get it.

More Bull chips

As for a gray area. I'm doing nothing but giving concrete situations that
happen day in and day out and applying the Rules to them to come to
my valid conclusions that you happen to disagree with but have little
or nothing to support your opinions when I clearly do.

S.Simon - does not allow people to spin the facts in typical
liberal fashion.

The above is nothing more than NDC (Neal Damage Control) incompetently
attempted.

otn

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

More NDC .....ignore....
we've all ready been over this, O stupid one .... you are just now
beginning to understand how to separate "in sight" from "not in sight"
when it comes to restricted visibility ....actually, I'm really becoming
worried about your basic mental capacity to reason.

otn

Simple Simon wrote:

If I'm backpedaling furiously then you're flogging that dead
horse frantically with whips in both hands. You continue to
argue using the discredited thick fog scenario and that simply
will not discredit my facts about restricted visibility being all
sorts of situations where in-sight circumstances eventuate
within the area of restricted visibility and in-sight Rules come
into play.

What don't you get about vessels being in sight in or near
an area of restricted visibility?

S.Simon

More NDC (Neal Damage Control)

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

ROFL You're dinky little license and sailboat, will NEVER make you one
of the "Big Boys"..... never mind your lack of experience and/or knowledge.

otn

Simple Simon wrote:

Go pick your nose or something constructive like
that because it's clear you have too little knowledge
to play with us big boys!

S.Simon

"Rick" wrote in message nk.net...

Simple Simon wrote:

So, to set things straight with respect to the ongoing
and lame and just plain incorrect arguments presented
by Jeff Morris, Shenn44, Otnmbrd, and Rick, here's
four facts that cannot be disputed.

??? Why drag me into your fantasy world, Nil?

All I ever did was call you a nautical wannabe. The last thing in the
world I would ever do is argue about the COLREGS with the Cliff Claven
of a.s.a.

Shenn and Otnmbrd are unlimited masters with a career at sea actually
operating ships so I do believe they are a bit more qualified to
interpret the COLREGS than, what is it you claim to hold, a 6 pack MOTOR
ticket or something?

The only thing I can see in your post that cannot be disputed is this
determined adherence to your nautical fantasy life and your peculiar
need to shop it around so many newsgroups.

Rick

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

Good points, one comment interspersed.

otn

Tim Roberts wrote:

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.

O.K just to throw another little spanner in the works - even if there is a
pecking order in restricted visibility, the argument that sailing vessels
need not slow down doesn't carry any weight if the other vessel is involved
in fishing (though who'd fish in fog?).

EG What's fog got to do with fishing? Trust me, they fish in fog.

Fishing vessel sound signal = 1 Long & 2 Short
Sailing vessel sound signal = 1 Long & 2 Short

Many Other vessels also sound 1 Long & 2 Short

How do you know the other vessel isn't a fishing vessel

Sailing vessels must keep out of the way of fishing vessels even in Simple
Simon's pecking order (surely! or maybe this will just add fuel to another
pointless argument from Simon).

As you can't tell what the vessel is (because you haven't seen it) -
prudence requires you to slow down - THE RULES require you to slow down -
just in case it IS a fishing vessel and you have to give way.

Also, I have skippered many yachts that sail (and steer) quite happily at 2
knots, so this can't slow down (must maintain hull speed) approach is a load
of ********. 7 knots is not a safe speed for a yacht in restricted
visibility! Would you sail into a berth at 7 knots? I don't think so.

There are no grey areas in the IRPCS. Just in the way we interpret them.
Clearly there are some out there who are not employing common sense and
employing safe practice when they are at sea.

Just one final point. Take some time to examine reports from the Marine
Accident Investigation Board, they're easy enough to find on the internet.
The bottom line is that in a collision situation both Masters are to blame
as the rules clearly state that both parties are equally responsible for
avoiding collisions, regardless of 'Pecking Order'.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

Yup, they are different. Not. The causing effect may be different, but the
fog is the same. And we get sea fog on the coast. Watched sea fog for many
years growing up, coming both through the Golden Gate and over the Marin
Headlands and San Franciso. Knowing when I got out of school, the frikken
fog would get us at about 3:30 pm. And could not run the convertible top
down with the date. Grew up next to Berkeley in the hills.
Bill

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

Sea fog and land fog are two different animals.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...
I guess in pieman land you get light fog only. Here in North Calif you
get
friggin fog so thick you can not see the front of the car from the
drivers
seat!
Bill

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...
Extremely thick fog is mostly a myth. Yes, it occurs on
occassion but the general run of the mill fog is not so thick
that vessels can collide without ever seeing one another.

At any rate, the worst case scenario of pea soup thick fog
is but one case of restricted visibility and the majority of
the other cases definitely allow in-sight situations in or
near an area of restricted visibility. In sight situations
are ruled by the in sight rules which specify give-way and
stand-on status for vessels in sight of one another.

Jeff, Otnmbrd, Shen44 and Rick have up till now maintained
there is NEVER a stand-on vessel in or near an area of
restricted visibility while I have maintained there IS a stand-on
and give-way vessel in or near an area of restricted visibility.

I'm right and they're wrong - that's the bottom line.

I maintain that my sailboat even in a thick fog is going at
a safe speed by virtue of the fact that the hull speed is less
than seven knots max. Many fogs have little or no wind so
I may well be going even slower. Even if the winds are brisk
in a fog and I'm going hull speed I'm still going at a safe speed.
In effect, I'm standing on and I'm doing it completely legally.

If I hear the fog signal of a motor vessel I know right away
if and when we come in sight of each other I am the stand-on
vessel and the motor vessel is the give way vessel unless I'm
overtaking the motor vessel which is not likely at all considering
they all think safe speed is 10-15 knots instead of the usual
20-30 knots - let's face the facts here for once. Therefore,
I keep going at my safe speed of five or six knots and try
to determine by the sound signal if there's a danger of collision.
If I determine there is a danger of collision I change course -
I'm certainly not going to take all sails down and come to
a stop and become a sitting duck to be run over and sunk
by a ship not keeping an adequate lookout and going too
fast for the conditions. This would be causing a collision and
not avoiding a collision - a violation of the RULES.

Yet this what the arrogant tugboat captains are saying the
Rules require me to do. WRONG! When a motor vessel
hears the fog signal of a sailboat or any other boat above
it in the pecking order it knows before even coming in sight
of that vessel that the motor vessel is the give way vessel
in a close quarters situation and a close quarters situation
in most cases of restricted visibility in an in sight situation.

This is what I call the abbreviated pecking order. That
there is an abbreviated pecking order proves there is a
give-way and stand-on vessel in restricted visibility.

If and when the motor vessel and sailing vessels come
within sight of one another the motor vessel already knows
it is the give-way vessel in all but the overtaking situation.
(we're not talking narrow channels, traffic schemes, etc,
here - we're talking at sea.) This means the
give-way/stand-on status exists in or near an area of
restricted visibility.

S.Simon - knows the practical application
as well as the letter of the Rules.

"Tim Roberts" wrote in message
...
Sorry Jeff,

It seems I also missed much of the earlier thread.

I was agreeing with the point that thick fog is not the only type of
restricted visibility.

Now that I have discovered a bit more about the original thread, I
should
perhaps add a couple of points;

First Point:

Rule 19 Very definitely applies to all vessels at sea by virtue of
Rule
1
(Application)

'(a) These Rules shall apply to all vessels upon the high seas and
in
all
waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels'

Second Point:

Did Neal really claim that you don't get wind in fog?
He perhaps needs to understand the process by which sea-fog is
formed.
It
happens when warm, wet air comes into contact with a sea that is
colder
than
it's own dew point. The only way sea fog disperses is 'normally'
with a
change in wind direction which brings in dry air which is able to
absorb
the
moisture in the fog. Continued wind from the same direction merely
feeds
more moisture, and thus, more fog! If the same wind direction
continues
for
long enough - the fog gets thicker and thicker.

I have certainly been in situations where I have been sailing in
thick
fog.
I find it safer than motoring because you can hear other vessels
sound
signals much easier than with an engine on.

Sorry to bore everyone with this pedantry, but I lecture in both
COLREGS
and
Meteorology amongst other things.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

otnmbrd wrote:

ROFL You're dinky little license and sailboat, will NEVER make you one
of the "Big Boys"..... never mind your lack of experience and/or knowledge.

Nil couldn't get a job as a messman, he simply is not qualified. If he
was fit enough, could afford and pass the training, and somehow managed
to get an STCW certificate his attitude would get him kicked off at the
first port anyway.

Have seen a lot of his type dragging their gear down the gangway over
the years, one trippers who found out it takes more than a big mouth to
be a seaman.

Nil is singing and dancing now, backed into a corner, shown to be a
fraud and nothing more than just another internet wannabe ...

Rick

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.

Subject: COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted
visibility.
From: "Simple Simon"

ROFL, Trust me Neal, Gawd Help the SOB Mate who didn't post lookouts, or
additional lookouts, in a timely manner in times of restricted visibility, or
the lookout who didn't pay attention, when "otn" was Master..... speaking from
experience.......

Shen

ps When you learn how ships and big boats operate, we can discuss those
operations.....until then you'll always be a "rank amateur" with a highly
developed "wannabe" attitude and knowledge base.

I gotta give you credit, Capt. Shen, at least you
understand the meaning of keeping a proper
lookout. It appears your compatriot otnmbrd
hasn't a clue.

Is is any wonder with the likes of otn operating
ships that there will always be plenty of collisions
that could have and should have been avoided.

S.Simon

COLREGS - The final word on pecking order in restricted visibility.