Jonathan Ganz wrote:
In article t,
Bill McKee bmckee=at-ix.netcom.com wrote:
He has to avoid the tanker in the channel. If he causes the tanker to run
aground or hit a bridge piling to avoid the collision, the sailboat is going
to be liable for all damages. The tanker, the bridge, all the damage.

Bzzzzt. The tanker will not hit a bridge piling to avoid the
collision.


probably true

Bzzzzt. The tanker will not be damanged.

probably true


Bzzzzt. The tanker will not leave the channel.
Maybe not at the Golden Gate, but the was such a case in the
Chesapeake a few years back where the woman in the 25 foot boat the
got becalmed in the channel was held liable when the freighter grounded.


Bill... who has stand-on status on the ocean?

Actually, the sailboat is still the stand-on vessel, even when
crossing the TSS. It is, however, required "not to impede" the
tanker. You should know this stuff, Jon. You just took the test.


Suggestion (not a hint): Stay away from tankers.


good advice.

Doug,
I am able to manage my boat and go slow enough to avoid boat traffic, no
matter what the other boats do, but many ships are not. The ColRegs are not
written to regulate my actions but for all boat/ship traffic. I was
highlighting the obvious error you made when you said if any boat/ship is
involved in an accident, they are at fault. This is not correct.


"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:

Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.


Actually, that's VERY wide as channels go. Are you suggesting that you
cannot manage to drive your boat along a course and keep it within 100
yards or so of where it should be?

Are you also suggesting that going SLOW when close to other boat traffic
is not an option?

DSK

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

What in the world are you talking about? That is nonsense! If I see a
boat on my way north on Lake Huron and I am going to pass him. I can alter
my course by two degrees and pass him with hundreds of meters to spare.


In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation.

No, Dr. Smithers. In Bill's situation, he would be 100% responsible.
He struck the sailboat in open waters. Nowhere did he say it was in a
narrow channel.


My point is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels with
strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to
avoid
a collision under all conditions.


Yes Dr. Smithers, but not in Bill's case.

It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can
and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations where
a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.

Yes Dr. Smithers, you are correct in this instance.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
JimC,
Ignorance of ColRegs is not limited to either a sailboater or a
powerboater,
sort of like ignorance in rec.boats is not limited to any political party.
; )


Dr. Smithers, you are correct.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power in a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or barge.



"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug and JimC,

If ships were to maintain a speed and distance that would allow them to
avoid all collision, no ship would leave the dock.

What in the world are you talking about? That is nonsense! If I see a
boat on my way north on Lake Huron and I am going to pass him. I can
alter
my course by two degrees and pass him with hundreds of meters to spare.


In Bill's situation, he would have been held partially responsible due to
the speed and distance he maintained in the overtaking situation.

No, Dr. Smithers. In Bill's situation, he would be 100% responsible.
He struck the sailboat in open waters. Nowhere did he say it was in a
narrow channel.


My point is, there are many situations that occur in narrow channels
with
strong
currents/tides and winds that would not have allowed a powerboater to
avoid
a collision under all conditions.


Yes Dr. Smithers, but not in Bill's case.

It is possible that any boater can cause
an accident that the powerboater could not have avoided. The courts can
and
do assign partial blame for most accidents, but there are situations
where
a
boater is 100% responsible for an accident.

Yes Dr. Smithers, you are correct in this instance.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.

Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes
System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one
boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in
the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel
of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence
Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary
for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

Yes, there have been some ships involved in collisions in the Seaway. I
thought we were talking about problems with pleasure boats in this area.
There is no reason to have two pleasure boats collide in the St. Lawrence
Seaway and not have them both responsible.

"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message . ..
Jim C,

I think we disagreed because you thought I was referring to Bill's example
and I was not.

In reference to my comment about If ships were to maintain a speed and
distance that would allow them to avoid all collision, no ship would
leave
the dock.

If two ships are passing in a channel and one suddenly behaves in a
completely unexpected manner, the other ship will not be able to avoid the
collision. I mentioned the ship on the Mississippi who lost all power in
a
bend in the river and slammed into a shopping mall. If another ship or
barge was coming up the river, it would have hit the other ship or barge.

Dr. Smithers, are you only referring to ships not leaving the dock if there
shipping routes were only to be in River Systems or canals? or.....Are
you referring to ALL ships at sea not leaving their docks?

Just as a comment. The freighter that lost power in the Mississippi did
radio a warning to other traffic on the river which kept other shipping
away. They could not warn the pier to move out of the way. ;-) The
major factor in the ship hitting the pier was that it dropped it's anchor
and that caused the ship to swerve to the shore line. With that much mass
in motion, it takes some time to stop when the engine is not functioning.
It's rudder could not turn the ship due to the anchor that was dropped and
also it was moving with the current.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield

It is quite possible for there to be a collision with neither vessel
at fault. A small number of cases (under 5%) are resolved this way.
Mechanical failure is a primary cause, but as equipment becomes more
reliable, this is accepted less as an excuse. A failure that could
have been detected, or avoided with proper maintenance does not qualify.


Dr. Dr. Smithers wrote:
Yes I have and there are collisions between ships on the St. Lawrence Seaway
due to mechanical or human error. When this happens it is not necessary for
both ships to be at fault. One ship can assume 100% of the responsibility
even though the other ship was not avoid the collision.


"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" Ask Me about my Phd @ Diploma Mill .com wrote in
message ...
Doug,
Do you have any idea how narrow many channels are?
Take a look at the majority of the St. Law. Seaway.
Dr. Smithers, have you ever boated on the St. Lawrence Seaway?

This Seaway has HUGE wide channels in it. Large Freighter pass one
another regularly. I have 1000's of hours boating the Great Lakes
System.
There are some area's where there are channels so narrow that only one
boat
is permitted to proceed at one time through them. These are mainly in
the
30,000 Island area of Georgian Bay and in some areas of the North Channel
of
Lake Huron. In these areas the rule of Up Bound and Down Bound are in
effect. The speed limit is also in effect.

Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield