What is the difference between Standing on and Giving way?

Although this didn’t happen to me, I have had such close encounters. Overtaking in a narrow channel, When at last minute the little guy goes from the port side across my bow to the stbd side. Note the bridge abutment. This was Sunday the 3rd. Poughkeepsie mid Hudson bridge.

If you think this is OK, Zoom in to really see what the issue is.

This is where this happened. Plenty of water EVERYWHERE for a small vessel to go.

Sam. If you are on here. Please explain. If only so I can understand what the thinking is to make sure I can avoid an incident like this in the future.

Similar issues here. People fish near a bridge, hidden behind the structure and suddenly spurt across the channel while someone is passing under,

I appreciate that you specifically avoid using the term 'right of way', because that phrasing was specifically stripped from the language on purpose decades ago.

The intention is to easily negotiate a passing and avoid a collision with limited communication. Everyone has encountered a pedestrian in a narrow space. You step left to avoid them, but they step right. Now you both in front of each other again. So you step right, just as they step left. Oops, you both laugh and someone makes a corny joke about 'dancing'. That negotition is tougher on the water.

The idea is that under specific conditions, one vessel is compelled to change course and one vessel is compelled to hold course. This avoids both boats turning from a collision course to a new collision course.

In this case, the 'Give-Way' vessel is actually the vessel in control of avoiding the collision. The give way vessel decides how the pass is going to occur.

This is where Rule #8 comes in. If you are the stand-on vessel and the 'give-way' vessel chooses to take no action, then you as the stand-on vessel are compelled to take action to avoid the collision.

The example you give brings in another set of rules. Very large commercial vessels are constrained by size, draft, and navigation. The large vessel couldn't possible navigate to avoid a collision. They can't in most cases because it would take them too long to change course or stop. Therefore, in your picture, the large vessel is the stand-on vessel and the small vessel is an simply an idiot.

Shrew said:

The example you give brings in another set of rules. Very large commercial vessels are constrained by size, draft, and navigation. The large vessel couldn't possible navigate to avoid a collision. They can't in most cases because it would take them too long to change course or stop. Therefore, in your picture, the large vessel is the stand-on vessel and the small vessel is an simply an idiot.

Click to expand...

The tug pushing the barge went full astern. By the time the engines were going full astern he grabbed his phone and took a pic. Hoping that he would start to ‘see’ the trawler again. It was ONLY by the actions of the stand on vessel that collision was avoided. I wish he had taken a before and after pic showing the guy starting out on the port bow, then as approaching the bridge the guy went directly across the bow, disappeared from sight for a few seconds. Then reappeared as the tug and barge lost speed and changed the relative vector between the two.

From my experience the small boats do not even realize they almost died!

From a practical perspective: The river is approximately 2700’ wide here. There is good water the entire channel width for small boats. The actual channel is about 450’ in the center span. The barge is around 75’ wide. How difficult is it to understand out of a 2700’ wide area that avoiding about a 75’ wide spot (in front of a large commercial vessel) is key to your survival? For that matter. Keeping a lookout wherever you are and ensuring that you keep apprised of whatever is around you to keep out of the direct front line of fire (so to speak).

In my opinion ( and it’s worth what you pay for it!). If you are seeing a large vessel at this aspect everything’s fine.

If you see a large vessel at this aspect pay attention.

If you see a large commercial vessel at this aspect you had better be either paying constant attention to changes in aspect, OR taking time to maneuver to change this aspect.

Just FYI. If you see a large commercial vessel this close, at this or a finer aspect the vessel has (for all practical means) already done all they can do to avoid collision. The rest is up to you.

cappy208 said:

View attachment 77054Although this didn’t happen to me, I have had such close encounters. Overtaking in a narrow channel, When at last minute the little guy goes from the port side across my bow to the stbd side. Note the bridge abutment. This was Sunday the 3rd. Poughkeepsie mid Hudson bridge.

If you think this is OK, Zoom in to really see what the issue is.

Click to expand...

Any radio contact? If not, I wonder if he even knew the barge was there. Looks like a pilothouse boat. Lots of folks out there driving from the PH with no clue what's behind them due to boat/window design. I love a flybridge.

cappy208 said:

This is where this happened. Plenty of water EVERYWHERE for a small vessel to go. View attachment 77055

Sam. If you are on here. Please explain. If only so I can understand what the thinking is to make sure I can avoid an incident like this in the future.

Click to expand...

Who is Sam?

menzies said:

Who is Sam?

Click to expand...

The Captain told me the name of the trawler was “Sam”. Not sure it was the dinghy name or trawler.

Hope you gave him 5 short for nothing else than to need to change underwear for being stupid.

cappy208 said:

The tug pushing the barge went full astern.

Click to expand...

This is where rule 8 comes in. The commercial vessel is still compelled to attempt to avoid the collision even though they are the stand-on vessel. He was doing his due diligence even though he had little options and the actions he took might take for longer than he has to avoid the collision. His options were limited because he shouldn't be forced to place his own vessel or crew at risk in an attempt to avoid the collision. So he's not going to steer into the shore but will attempt a full reverse to slow or stop.

The difference is during an investigation, it would come to light that the stand-on vessel attempted to take action, regardless of how potentially futile those actions might be.

The reason I posted this event is not to cry over the rules, or place blame. It is to try to understand how someone acts, doesn’t care about their surroundings and/or what can happen due to inattention and careless mistakes. I’m sure others would like to hear what was happening from the other perspective. Was there some ‘reason’. Was there some rationale for cutting across the channel?

From my 38 years experience operating tugs and tows all along the East and Gulf coasts I have seen this same ‘Nautical Squirrel’ maneuver. I have been yelled at: ‘Didn’t you see me? I’m a sailing vessel. I’m this. I’m that’. But the upshot is.... my barge is only approximately 60 to 80’ wide. How can anyone NOT stay out of danger by NOT being within that frontal area? It appears some cannot ascertain risk of collision or whether they are even IN a dangerous situation. Or how to get OUT of a dangerous situation. It’s not just ‘a Lookout’. Or who’s right and who’s wrong.

It’s about simply staying alive. It doesn’t get much more simple than that.

I am thinking a lot of rule 2 also.....the trawler wasnt acting like a prudent seaman on several levels.

Rule 9 might dictate who really is the stand on/give way..... to me looks like the tug/barge are stand on even if overtaking.

Dont know if that stretch of water has "special rules"....

And yes cappy, being on the bottom rung of the towing ladder, I can still appreciate your point the some boaters seem to have a low survival instinct. I have talked to crusty tug/tow operators who basically shrug and dont seem to care when this happens thinking if something goes wrong....so be it...and others who are a nervous wreck around rec boaters.

Two extremes for sure...... but still understandable.

Colregs are WAY to complicated for the average yachter to fully comprehend.
There’s too many what if’s, and not mes in colregs. Personal mis interpretation galore. Read just as far as they need justification. Then close the book.
‘Sailboats always have the right of way’ sound familiar? I heard that SO many times from the yacht club crowd I could puke.
‘Can’t you see me? I’m a 26’ searay!’ My boat is SO big.....

I don’t mind sharing the waterway. Heck, it’s a bright spot seeing who and what’s out and around. But the ignorance..... uggh.

I get the same thing all the time from bicyclists on the highway!
They may have the “right” to be there, but that won’t be much consolation when they’re dead...

I think Fryedaze is likely correct. Then boater made the move without looking behind. Similar to a car changing lanes without checking over their shoulder for traffic. I’ve done this a couple times. No excuse and after those two times (nothing as egregious as this case) I make sure to be diligent about making sure I am clear astern before making any course change.

cappy208 said:

The reason I posted this event is not to cry over the rules, or place blame. It is to try to understand how someone acts, doesn’t care about their surroundings and/or what can happen due to inattention and careless mistakes. I’m sure others would like to hear what was happening from the other perspective. Was there some ‘reason’. Was there some rationale for cutting across the channel?

From my 38 years experience operating tugs and tows all along the East and Gulf coasts I have seen this same ‘Nautical Squirrel’ maneuver. I have been yelled at: ‘Didn’t you see me? I’m a sailing vessel. I’m this. I’m that’. But the upshot is.... my barge is only approximately 60 to 80’ wide. How can anyone NOT stay out of danger by NOT being within that frontal area? It appears some cannot ascertain risk of collision or whether they are even IN a dangerous situation. Or how to get OUT of a dangerous situation. It’s not just ‘a Lookout’. Or who’s right and who’s wrong.

It’s about simply staying alive. It doesn’t get much more simple than that.

Click to expand...

I didn't take it as complaining. Apologies, I wouldn't have 'lectured' if I knew your credentials, as you could clearly school us the majority of things we didn't even know we didn't know.

I wouldn't bother scratching my head too hard. We like to joke about folks who behave in such a way "He's either an idiot for being oblivious or an A-hole for being aware and disregarding anyway". (The admiral and will jokingly wonder "Look at this guy, I wonder if he's an idiot or an A-hole".

Shrew already made this point earlier but it’s importance is often missed. When two boats collide it’s rarley just a case of right away. Both boats are always obligated to avoid the collision. The stand on vessel must still prove that it made Every reasonable effort to avoid the collision or it will be assigned a portion of the blame.

We have a very interesting case here in the Puget Sound between a State Ferry that was the give way vessel and had room to maneuver vs a trawler that was the stand on vessel on a long established course but operator was not at the helm. The interesting part will be how much blame is assigned to each boat.

tiltrider1 said:

Shrew already made this point earlier but it’s importance is often missed. When two boats collide it’s rarley just a case of right away. Both boats are always obligated to avoid the collision. The stand on vessel must still prove that it made Every reasonable effort to avoid the collision or it will be assigned a portion of the blame.

We have a very interesting case here in the Puget Sound between a State Ferry that was the give way vessel and had room to maneuver vs a trawler that was the stand on vessel on a long established course but operator was not at the helm. The interesting part will be how much blame is assigned to each boat.

Click to expand...

Here is a news article on the final determination. I only spotted one error in the article, which isn’t bad.

https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/new...buted-crash-between-ferry-powerboat/98497218/

It’s ok when no one is hurt. It matters when people kill themselves (or others) because of stupidity.

Think if the Naptyme owner had been killed. Down below, in the head. In a harbor. On autopilot. They make a special thing for that situation. It’s called neutral.

Part of the problem is perspective. Many rec boaters have no conception about how fast a ship is moving. I learned that lesson yesrs ago when I crossed in front of a ferry that looked really faraway to me. By the time I cleared the ferry I was at WOT and needed a change of BVDs. I received a scolding via VHF which I certainly deserved.

I would think (strictly from a self preservation standpoint) that when you see.
This (actual picture taken by professional photographer later in the morning) that you would haul azz away to stay alive! Looking at that perspective how could any one rationalize going across the bow? Think about it this way. If YOU can’t see the wheelhouse of the vessel that is going to run you over; How can they see you?

What more perspective would one need????

Using the same guys photos he took this afternoon, there is a fairly good profile shot of the tug. From my estimation this is what it would have looked like from shore. Is this acceptable crossing distance?




By my estimation this is about where the trawler was when it became visible in the pic. (Blue Circle) By law we are allowed one barge length of restricted visibility. This guy was WAY under the legal limit for required vis. Granted I wouldn't want to go to court over (I didn't see him) argument.
Remember, the trawler was OUT of sight for a bit, under the bow. It popped out on the starboard bow after crossing over. So it is really unknown how close it really got, since it was hidden. But when is too close TOO CLOSE?

Diving a single engine both in work and pleasure, and for many years flying a single engine helo in awful places and conditions....I appreciate being constantly alert for that inevirable engine failure at a bad moment.

Most people arent always ready for emergencies and neither lead or follow with the dangers in mind.

If they did, some near collisions wouldnt happen because their situational awareness would keep their distance or course safer using large margins for "errors or problems".

Even driving a twin, loss of one or loss of steering can make a close call situation turn ugly quickly.

Add all those possibilities and you really wonder about people's self preservation instincts. Understanding how they can put themselves in a collision situation under the bow of a vessel 100 times their size is just amazing to me too.

Having been on both side of the issue many time the easy answer is communication! I can't count the time I have tried to call a pleasure craft and received no answer!

True....but I cant count the times anymore I have heard a pleasure boater call a tug and less so for other types commercial craft on ch 16 with no answer.

I will suggest ch13, and the tug (other) responds right away to the pleasure boats ch 13 call.....

That's not right either.......

Back in the day we called it 'thinning the herd.' Trying to analyze why people do stoopid stuff is entertaining. These are the same folks who stand at the bottom of the escalator, barge into elevators and train cars before the door is cleared out and park in handicap spaces with their 2 yr old SUV's sans handicap tag.

They don't care, and they have no peripheral view of the world around them. They are the center of the universe. Is it true all the time, nah. But surely a lot of the time. Just one opinion. . .

the nerve of people...parking a 2 yr old SUV in a hanicapped spot.....

where am I to park my brand new Rolls?

psneeld said:

the nerve of people...parking a 2 yr old SUV in a hanicapped spot.....

where am I to park my brand new Rolls?

Click to expand...

Yeah, probably could have left that out, but then. . . .

Greetings,
Mr. ps. New Rolls? WHAT ??? You sold the Stutz?