A scary night on the water last night...

[psneeld]

I see a big to do over really not much.

There was NOT a collision so one vessel at least followed the ultimate navrule...don't have a collision.

If I was running Mike's Sea Ray, can't say I would have done much different.....

I would not have expected to have the improperly lit sailing vessel do a 90 in front of me and I would have been concentrating on the stuff just ahead, marina and bridge considering their shape and being night.

Sure I can never give up the helm, sure I can run on a set of night vision gogglles, sure I could buy a FLIR camera, sure I could maintain silence among the decks when not in the open sea.....

For gosh sakes, this is pleasure boating and sure stuff happens, but what needed to be done was done....

Probably the exact same scenario wouldn't happen to this boat again in 50 years. Its like planning for 100 year storms...almost never done entirely....because it is so costly or seemingly over the top.

Sit back, learn from it, but to say things will be different next time? Probably not if I know human nature and the reasons why we have accidents. Taxpayers paid a lot for that education...I value it and have a pretty good feel for when rules need to be changed to improve safety and when they would just be new rules.

 

[psneeld]

If the sailboat is only sailing and not using their motor.

COLREGS - Collision Regulations - Sailboats & Power Boats

the original statement was that he had a 360 degree light on his mast top...if white....he wasn't a sailing vessel even with sails up.

 

[Islanddreamer]

the original statement was that he had a 360 degree light on his mast top...if white....he wasn't a sailing vessel even with sails up.

Rule 25 states that his lighting configuration was incorrect if he had a 360 degree white light showing at the mast head. That being said, I always anticipate that the other boater will be mis-lit and do the wrong thing even during the day. What the sail boat did in his action was compounded by how he represented his vessel.

Our slip is at the head of Middle River, MD and on any given day the larger majority of boaters are not paying attention. Compounded by jet skiers, navigation becomes a tedious process. This problem is most evident on weekends. I was able to avoid a "go fast" running in the dark with no lights moving at >40 mph recently. Larger vessels purposefully passing closely waking us and others is another problem. Not to leave out the alcohol factor...

It can be a zoo out there.

 

[O C Diver]

I can see from the comments you all have posted that I should have taken more time to explain where everyone was at the sequence in this mess.

Ted, re the inconsistencies in my posts, when I said she didn't see the sailboat I should have clarified that she didn't see that it had made the course correction to cross our boat. She was aware of it from when I first pointed it out to her. My bad for not being more explicit in my postings.

I realize that every situation like this allows wide latitude for 20/20 hindsight and quarterbacking. I'm as guilty of that as most. Applying my own 20/20 quarterbacking to this, there are things I could/should have done better. I could have--
--retained control of the helm
--not answered the question my passenger asked
--kept closer track of the sailboat's course and progress

I hope this post has clarified some of the misunderstandings that came from my postings.

Fire away.

Mike,
Sorry for coming down so hard on you. In situations like this, the vessel operator only sees his side of the story. Often when retelling it, important information may unintentionally be left out. When I read these accounts, I try to view it objectively, as I assume people are looking for observations, not just a pat on the back. Clearly I didn't see the whole picture.

From your original post it appeared to me you saw the other boat, discounted it's relevance, left the helm area, your wife never saw it coming, and you had to save the day at the last minute. Clearly from your last post, that's not what happened. Thank you for clarifying it.

At the risk of making another false assumption, let me suggest this:
You were clearly able to see where he was going as you saw his navigation lights and tracked him on radar. First you saw his red when he crossed in front of you and then turned up the shore line. Then you saw his green when he changed course to cross in front of you. While you haven't indicated the speed you were traveling, from the diagram you seem to be going slow compared to the progress of the sailboat. I'm wondering if you have considered whether the sailboat saw your red navigation light with all the other cabin light coming from your boat, knew you were moving, and in which direction. At night, it's much tougher to determine course and speed of another vessel. Without seeing your red or green side light, he may have assumed you were heading in the opposite direction and thought he was passing behind you. Clearly he had a responsibility to keep track of your vessel and take action when he realized the courses were intersecting.

I can tell you from running night charters, determining speed and course of a slow moving vessel at night is very difficult without radar (and ARPA). When there is a lot of light pollution from deck or cabin lights, it can be near impossible until you're right on top of them.

Glad you were able to avoid an accident. Wonder if the guy in the sailboat learned anything.

Ted

 

[cappy208]

GFC.
If the SV was under power then it is completely different. But you have pretty much stated it was sailing heeled over.


What was the light on top of the mast? White? Red over green? Tri color? Was it an all around 360 white (anchor light)?

Some things are assumed ( in light of no dispute by you ). That the vessel was under sail and not under power.

Some things are inferred ( that the SV went from point C to imminent collision) that this was somehow the SV fault or bad judgement on their part.

You were in extremis. You HAD to do something to avoid collision. The issue is how did you get from give way to extremis? (How did the SV go from point C to directly in front of you without being seen?)

At point A you were the give way vessel.

At point B you were the give way vessel.

At point C you were the give way vessel.

How at CPA did the other guy become bonehead?

From your description the guy tacked (changed course) at 1/8 mile away. That's not 'right in front' of you.

 

[High Wire]

Sailboat probably never saw you. Good job avoiding the collision. I would have given him 5 short and a few choice words as he passed in front.

 

[O C Diver]

the original statement was that he had a 360 degree light on his mast top...if white....he wasn't a sailing vessel even with sails up.

From the boat's relative positions, it would have been impossible to determine that light as being an all around white. Could have been a 225 degree masthead light.

Ted

 

[psneeld]

Rule 25 states that his lighting configuration was incorrect if he had a 360 degree white light showing at the mast head. That being said, I always anticipate that the other boater will be mis-lit and do the wrong thing even during the day. What the sail boat did in his action was compounded by how he represented his vessel.

Our slip is at the head of Middle River, MD and on any given day the larger majority of boaters are not paying attention. Compounded by jet skiers, navigation becomes a tedious process. This problem is most evident on weekends. I was able to avoid a "go fast" running in the dark with no lights moving at >40 mph recently. Larger vessels purposefully passing closely waking us and others is another problem. Not to leave out the alcohol factor...

It can be a zoo out there.

You can always assume the other guy is not lit correctly...but you can't act on it once a rule "situation" has developed.

You either take proper action early or late....if not the result is a dangerous dance .....to a point.

My point being..... in our small vessels, heck stopping or turning on a dime is really no big deal so waiting for extremis is really a ho hum most of the time. Aggravating..... but hardly that big of a deal.

That's why all the boaters who have no clue of the rules seem so happy out there. They just assume it's a free for all and act accordingly....thus their "no worries mon" attitude.

But if people are gonna quote rules chapter and verse, then all rules need to be applied..... from actions to lights to whistles, etc...... so the "shown" lights are important...not the proper ones in the book.

 

[psneeld]

From the boat's relative positions, it would have been impossible to determine that light as being an all around white. Could have been a 225 degree masthead light.

Ted

OK...but any white light showing forward would make him a power driven vessel.

 

[Cottontop]

Sailboats tack; it's what they do.

My takeaway from all this is not to pleasure cruise at night with a bunch of people on board.

 

[CaptTom]

If you are the stand on vessel then that means STAND ON, not tack and close the CPA. The stand on vessel still carries the responsibility of avoiding the collision.

Thank you, this point is often overlooked.

 

[Islanddreamer]

PSNeeld - not inferring that it was a chapter and verse case. I've seen everything used for lighting, and it seems to be an "if it lights up, turn it on" world. You are also spot on with the bliss of ignorance of many boaters, whom may never take a minute to read or participate in a forum like this.

I'm happy for Mike that he avoided a possible bad situation even at the last minute, and also that he bared his situation hereto all. A night rescue would have made the news and not in a good way especially with any younger passengers. No one was hurt thank God.

One thing that has not been brought up is the age of the operator. Even with corrected 20/15 vision, I have the Admiral on bridge with me because I know that it is impossible to see everything, and low light can amplify issues with visibility even if your other lights are dimmed and you're operating with red ambient light. A second set of eyes can be a great assist.

mike

 

[User915]

Did I miss something? What bone head thing did the other vessel do besides not anticipating that your boat didn't have a proper watch? It was showing proper lights and had right of way. Is your complaint that its cabin lights should have been on since yours were? I hate to generalize, but that is how sea rays get a bad name.

As often, the central issue is the "spirit of generalization" which always categorizes people in stereotypes and prejudices.

If you hate to generalize, why do so now ? Do you think this as being beneficial now and also led to positive information ? Of course it is your privilege to have your own opinion about what you so-called "Sea Rays" but I see no link with the post of GFC.

Over the past year Mike (GFC) and I have shared perhaps 50 emails or more of our personal boating experiences with plenty of photos and charts attached. I can tell Mike & Tina are not kids, both of them, Mike AND Tina, are skilled, experienced qualified seafarers who are surely aware of danger to boating at day and night time. I have been boating on Columbia river which is not always easy, they provided me numerous well-considered advices and substantive information. Over here they just wanted to tell us the circumstance what led them to a possible issue, just to help us increase once again our understanding that any situation at sea (or river) is fragile and may quickly turn into a safety danger. The navigation rules is one thing, but the reality underway is quite another.

By boat - or plane - (I don't think FlyWright or any pilot would contradict me here) this kind of situation may mostly happen in areas where we are (too) familiar with, it can happen to anyone. The two last possible issues I recently met happened in places I have been many times before (Cannes Islands, France, & Angel Island San Francisco Bay).

Thank you Mike, always glad to read from your interesting adventures on the water, we therefore need to continue to be prudent as we proceed whatever the brand of the boat we are cruising...

Not arguing here, only positive outlook.

Olivier

 

[psneeld]

PSNeeld - not inferring that it was a chapter and verse case. I've seen everything used for lighting, and it seems to be an "if it lights up, turn it on" world. You are also spot on with the bliss of ignorance of many boaters, whom may never take a minute to read or participate in a forum like this.

I'm happy for Mike that he avoided a possible bad situation even at the last minute, and also that he bared his situation hereto all. A night rescue would have made the news and not in a good way especially with any younger passengers. No one was hurt thank God.

One thing that has not been brought up is the age of the operator. Even with corrected 20/15 vision, I have the Admiral on bridge with me because I know that it is impossible to see everything, and low light can amplify issues with visibility even if your other lights are dimmed and you're operating with red ambient light. A second set of eyes can be a great assist.

mike

Hope one of the eye docs can confirm this....

in USCG aviation... I was often told something similar to this....that night vision of a 40 year old is only half of a 20 year olds and the night vision of a 60 year old is only half of a 40 year olds.

that's independent of visual acuity...but I guess even there there is some connection....

Eye docs? Help!!!!!

even if that's a fairy tale...I am pretty sure night vision as you age degrades faster than many senses.

 

[SaltyDawg86]

If the sailboat is only sailing and not using their motor.

COLREGS - Collision Regulations - Sailboats & Power Boats

And in this case, the sailing vessel did NOT stand on! Know all the rules before spouting little sections that only fit your case.

This is why I'm all for making rec. boaters get a license as well. They should take the 100 question rules exam and pass it or not be on the water.

 

[BandB]

I hate when discussions turn into Colregs being quoted and right and wrong under them. Colregs discussions assume something that just doesn't exist and that is that everyone has a full understanding of them and will follow them. If the other boat or boats do not, then the only reg that matters at all is to do what you can to avoid an accident. Common sense then comes into play and awareness. It is not about being right. It is about not having an accident. This isn't about technical regulations from which various people can pull different sections and argue about which carry weight in the situation. It's about avoiding an accident.

Often avoiding an accident is done by the boat that was right according to regs, sometimes by the one that was wrong. Sometimes both boats, often just one. That's part of the beauty that one boat can screw up and you still don't have an accident if the second boat takes evasive action. If the probability of one boat making a mistake is 5%, then the probability of both doing so is only 0.25% and that is what saves us. The real numbers are probably less than 1% and 0.01%.

An accident was avoided. Ultimately that is all that matters.

For those so intent on going to regs, I ask about driving your car. If you have the green light, are you really going to pull out the regs and barrel on through even though the other car is clearly running a red light? Of course not. And you're going to be glad you stopped, even though the regs say the other car was supposed to.

Accident avoidance. That's the goal. That was achieved. In this case one boat saw what had developed and took the evasive steps.

 

[sdowney717]

And in this case, the sailing vessel did NOT stand on! Know all the rules before spouting little sections that only fit your case.

This is why I'm all for making rec. boaters get a license as well. They should take the 100 question rules exam and pass it or not be on the water.

Did the OP change his mind, he said this himself, what is with this crappy rudeness, having a bad day?
.

Now I realize that the sailboat under sail was the stand on vessel and we were the give way vessel.

 

[User915]

An accident was avoided. Ultimately that is all that matters.

For those so intent on going to regs, I ask about driving your car. If you have the green light, are you really going to pull out the regs and barrel on through even though the other car is clearly running a red light? Of course not. And you're going to be glad you stopped, even though the regs say the other car was supposed to.

Accident avoidance. That's the goal. That was achieved. In this case one boat saw what had developed and took the evasive steps.

This says it all. Very well explained and clarified in an excellent example.

 

[Fletcher500]

I have always thought this is a good idea. I know some states have some requirements in place. In CA, if you can write a check, you can get a very large boat and you are good to go with 0 training.

I am not implying we need to be rule experts...just the basics.


There is a 54 Ft high end boat with a 5 ft. Wide hole punched through it on my dock. Reportedly, his second collision in several months.

 

[Ski in NC]

Sailboat masthead lights can be a problem for me. I had one tacking across a river and with his heel the lights were barely visible. Also my eyes are generally scanning lower down where most small boat running lights are. And the tacks can be unpredictable. I think some sailboaters like challenging powerboats as some sort of sick sport.

 

[SaltyDawg86]

Did the OP change his mind, he said this himself, what is with this crappy rudeness, having a bad day?
.

The OP said what? The OP said he changed his course, that's not standing on. The rules clearly explain what stand on means. You can't alter at the last minute with out the other vessel knowing then say "I had the right of way, yoy should have moved!"

I'm having a great day, but the arm chair QBs that are giving the OP a hard time for no reason is getting a little annoying. Had there been a collision, neither would have walked away scott free in the eyes of the law. Its not rudeness, its being blunt.

 

[BandB]

There is a 54 Ft high end boat with a 5 ft. Wide hole punched through it on my dock. Reportedly, his second collision in several months.

Were they reportedly both collisions or allisions? There are far more of the latter, than of the former.

 

[SaltyDawg86]

I have always thought this is a good idea. I know some states have some requirements in place. In CA, if you can write a check, you can get a very large boat and you are good to go with 0 training.

I am not implying we need to be rule experts...just the basics.


There is a 54 Ft high end boat with a 5 ft. Wide hole punched through it on my dock. Reportedly, his second collision in several months.

I agree, they dont need to be experts, just know the meat of the rules. Va has a free basic boater safety class that everyone operating a boat must have, but I dont know that it covers. I'm sure not much given its only a few hours.

 

[twistedtree]

The way the sail boat was lit, he was telling you he was under power, and therefor the give way vessel the whole time except maybe at point A.

And even if he was under sail and lit accordingly, as others have reminded us, the stand-on vessel has an obligation to STAND-ON. It's not a game of dodge-ball.

But all the rules aside, I think these wake up calls are really valuable, just like the sinking of the Nordhavn Ghost Rider. It's so easy to overlook something that might become critically significant. Anyone who thinks they haven't is either oblivious or lying. And with experience we can become dangerously "comfortable" and start missing things even more. It's a constant exercise of checks, cross checks, and resolving discrepancies. Plus regular reminders that we are all human and need to go check and cross check again.

 

[sdowney717]

The OP said what? The OP said he changed his course, that's not standing on. The rules clearly explain what stand on means. You can't alter at the last minute with out the other vessel knowing then say "I had the right of way, yoy should have moved!"

I'm having a great day, but the arm chair QBs that are giving the OP a hard time for no reason is getting a little annoying. Had there been a collision, neither would have walked away scott free in the eyes of the law. Its not rudeness, its being blunt.

Listen to what he said,

"Now I realize that the sailboat under sail was the stand on vessel and we were the give way vessel."

I took his word for it, but yeah your quit disgustingly rude to me.

Funny but I did also have to take that boat course as I a in Va or I could not pilt my boat. Regardless does not mean anything, but i passed and that requires better than 90%, still means nothing. Just that I am no ignorant fool.

 

[GFC]

You guys are much better students of the COLREGS than I am. I admit that. I have much more to do in my life than read and memorize the COLREGS.


I saw the sailboat, saw his white mast head light and his red nav light (at point "A") and as he traveled from A to B and then to C. Given that his white light was so high, I made the determination that he was a sailboat, even though at "B" I couldn't see the boat yet. I could only see his nav lights and see his image on the radar screen.


When I said earlier that he was the stand on vessel, I was referring to the fact that he was a sailboat. Stupid me, I should have memorized that COLREGS section so I would have known he was a sailboat under power. Or, I could have pulled out my handy dandy copy of the Nav Rules, searched for the proper section to see who truly was correctly lit and who truly was the stand on vessel. Silly me.


Instead, I took evasive action to avoid a collision and we all were the better for it that night. Someone mentioned the 5 blasts of the horn and a few choice words. Had we not had a boat full of women I most certainly would have unloaded verbally on him. Discretion is the better part of valor so I chose not to turn the ears of the ladies on board to a bright red color. Had it been a boat load of guys on board I probably would have done that and they probably would have joined me in verbally abusing the sailboater.


The old saying "All's well that ends well" certainly applies here. None of my guests had to get involved with a night time rescue, everyone when home safe and in good spirits and, ultimately, that was the intended goal of our night cruise.


Continuez, il n'y a plus rien à voir ici.

 

[SaltyDawg86]

Listen to what he said,

"Now I realize that the sailboat under sail was the stand on vessel and we were the give way vessel."

I took his word for it, but yeah your quit disgustingly rude to me.

Funny but I did also have to take that boat course as I a in Va or I could not pilt my boat. Regardless does not mean anything, but i passed and that requires better than 90%, still means nothing. Just that I am no ignorant fool.

Correct, and since you have that fancy class out of the way, go buy yourself a Rules of the Road book and learn the duties of the stand on vessel..... I dont have to take that class so I dont know what it covers.

 

[Islanddreamer]

PSN - a decent article link below about night acuity over a certain age, which is another good reason to travel with a high level of caution after dark. This articles' basis is driving, but does detail some of the why's of vision deterioration. It would be good to have a doc weigh in here on the forum.

Night Vision and Driving: How Safe Are Older Drivers?

Mike - everyone is safe, and that is a very good thing.

 

[SaltyDawg86]

You guys are much better students of the COLREGS than I am. I admit that. I have much more to do in my life than read and memorize the COLREGS.


I saw the sailboat, saw his white mast head light and his red nav light (at point "A") and as he traveled from A to B and then to C. Given that his white light was so high, I made the determination that he was a sailboat, even though at "B" I couldn't see the boat yet. I could only see his nav lights and see his image on the radar screen.


When I said earlier that he was the stand on vessel, I was referring to the fact that he was a sailboat. Stupid me, I should have memorized that COLREGS section so I would have known he was a sailboat under power. Or, I could have pulled out my handy dandy copy of the Nav Rules, searched for the proper section to see who truly was correctly lit and who truly was the stand on vessel. Silly me.

Thats the wrong attitude to have, but that is the attitude a lot of rec boaters have. The "I dont care" causes a lot of damage, injuries and death. I bet thats why the sail boat turned right in front of you. I bet he didnt care enough to learn the rules. If you think you're responsible enough to own a boat, be reaponsible enough to keep people safe and not put your vessel in a position that it wouldnt have been in had you known the rules. This isnt directed only to you GCF, its directed to everyone.

 

[psneeld]

Now now GFC...


I taught the stuff for a time and use them in my profession....and I basically came to your defense early on....


That's because I have studied them and have most committed to memory...but starting to lose a few to disuse....


That's why while they are even somewhat unclear in writing, they are unclear on the water even more so.


That's why rule 2 requires all of us to act as prudent mariners at all time, rules be damned.


But if rules are to be followed, then we must try and follow as many appropriate ones as possible.


So memorizing the whole book is best left to instructors.


On the water captains should be pretty familiar with the ones they are most likely to see and use.


But as a whole...yes...this was a nice learning, low energy situation that reminds us about lookouts, crew management, situational awareness and maybe a few other things.


But as I posted before...probably not much will change because it was pretty much a nothing burger.