Interesting near collision

[rwidman]

........... If you're the stand on vessel, then stand on..

It's far from that simple unless both parties agree in advance on which boat is the stand on vessel.

In this case, the sailboat may have thought he was the stand on vessel because he was under sail, but the freighter thought he was the stand on vessel because he was restricted in his ability to maneuver.

If you are in a 30' boat, power or sail and you see a 1,000' cargo ship bearing down on you, you would be an idiot to argue about who is the stand on vessel.

Don't be a dumbass, get the hell as far out of the way as possible.

 

[Alaskaflyer]

It's far from that simple unless both parties agree in advance on which boat is the stand on vessel.



In this case, the sailboat may have thought he was the stand on vessel because he was under sail, but the freighter thought he was the stand on vessel because he was restricted in his ability to maneuver.



If you are in a 30' boat, power or sail and you see a 1,000' cargo ship bearing down on you, you would be an idiot to argue about who is the stand on vessel.



Don't be a dumbass, get the hell as far out of the way as possible.

So ignore the rules and simply stay out of the way of everyone? Sounds like my mother’s strategy for driving the freeways.

One is not concerned with who thinks they are the stand on vessel, one is concerned with who actually is either by rule, or once signaled. As a back up we have the rule to take extraordinary measures to avoid a collision regardless of the rules, when someone is breaking them. Sounds good to me.

 

[Alaskaflyer]

By the way I’m OK with the general statement of, if you can’t be bothered to learn the navigation rules then stay the hell out of the way of everyone, especially me.

 

[psneeld]

Irrespective to "right of way" laws.

If you are on the road [a hwy in particular] in a sports [or even a luxury] car... and... for one reason or another a full sized [in close proximity to you] huge, loaded tractor trailer either needs too or errantly actuates a maneuver that does or may imperil your staying safely on the road:

1. Do you fight the big truck for position?

2. Do you do your best to maneuver your vehicle out of harms way?

I always chose #2 on the road or on the water. That's the answer. What's the question??

Art, I know you have a lot of years on the water...but this comparison blows my mind....out of all comparisons of boats to cars to plane..this might be the worst.

Colregs make sense if you really understand both the rules and vessels of all sizes.

Staying away from big ships is basically rule 2 if you stay far enough so the other guy has no doubt there is no conflict. But once you are withing the confusion zone....NOT following the rules is both dangerous and illegal as the Colregs are mentioned in the CFRs and you can be fined.

So as long as you act early, your thinking is fine, but once beyond that point, it is just plain wrong.

 

[psneeld]

The ore carrier was never limited in its ability to maneuver, it was stand on by rule 9 and in the eyes of ordinary and prudent seaman (rule 2).

Agreement in maneuvering is wise, but not necessary to establish stand on or give way.

 

[markpierce]

typical ship and small boat interaction

Traveling westward near the northern shore of Carquinez Strait off Benicia, I noticed a large ship overtaking me. I delayed my usual crossing to the southern shore from the former railroad ferry terminal to avoid the ship's passing. After the last turn of the strait, the ship encountered a plethora of sailboats racing eastward to Stockton. (Navigable waters at this point is about 500 yards wide.) All the boats avoided interfering with the ship's progress. (The racing rules required boats to avoid interference.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carquinez_Strait

 

[OldDan1943]

Hey, here's a thought. Radio the ship and ask him his intentions.
Of course he might answer, "To run over your silly little bitty boat if you don't get out of my way."
Well, at least you got your answer. Now, what you do with that bit of information is all up to you.
You can argue how your boat is the 'stand on' and all the time that ship is getting closer driven not only by the engine but also the current.
What is the most prudent decision on your part?

 

[Blissboat]

The ore carrier was never limited in its ability to maneuver, it was stand on by rule 9 and in the eyes of ordinary and prudent seaman (rule 2).

Agree that the ore carrier was the stand-on vessel. However, it was Dave / Wayfarer's posts #80 and #113 that convince me that the Cuyohoga was indeed limited in her ability to maneuver. Reason: a turn was necessary, and under the Colregs as well as according to common practice, a turn to avoid collision must be early and significant enough to be noticeable and unambiguous. Any significant turn to port would have placed the Cuyohoga in jeopardy.

Rule 8 - Action to Avoid Collision

(a) Any action taken to avoid collision shall be taken in accordance with Rules 4-19 and shall if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.

(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.

(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.

(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.

 

[Porgy]

“...Cuyohoga was indeed limited in her ability to maneuver.”

“Vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver” is a defined term. While it includes, “but not limited to” the examples in the definition make it pretty clear what types of situations and vessels are intended. Just being a big ship in a channel with current running isn’t one of them.

Wayfarer’s posts should be convincing that the St. Clair is indeed a narrow channel subject to Rule 9. Additionally, it is a buoyed channel and while maybe 1,200 ft. wide in parts, very soon narrows by half to 600 ft. for the bridge. The St. Clair is also a VTS area suggesting movement of ships requires particular scrutiny to maintain safe passage.

 

[Wayfarer]

Correct Mr. P. Cuyahoga was not restricted in her ability to maneuver. She was just a regular ol' power driven vessel. If they'd met like this in the middle of Lake Huron or the South Pacific, it would have been the 'Hog's job to get out of the way of the HMS Backwinded Mains'l.

In this context, the narrow channel rule applies for sure, and it was entirely incumbent on the sailboat to not have been there in the first place.

(a) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway
shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which Iies on
her starboard side as is safe and practicable.
(b) A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not
impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a
narrow channel or fairway.
(c) A vessel engaged in fishing shall not impede the passage of any other
vessel navigating within a narrow channel or fairway.
(d) A vessel shall not cross a narrow channel or fairway if such crossing
impedes the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within such
channel or fairway. The latter vessel may use the sound signal prescribed in
Rule 34(d) if in doubt as to the intention of the crossing vessel.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to dodge boats like this. in the middle of summer on the big opening day of Slobfish season, I might have to take evasive action a dozen times in one river trip. Sometimes it feels like I'm trying to fly an X-Wing through a cloud of Tie fighters.

As often as not, after I've blown the danger signal three times, and nearly run aground trying to keep from murdering a family of four and their dog, they smile and wave at me. They had no idea they were ever about to die. No clue at all. It's absurd.

 

[Blissboat]

“...Cuyohoga was indeed limited in her ability to maneuver.”

“Vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver” is a defined term. While it includes, “but not limited to” the examples in the definition make it pretty clear what types of situations and vessels are intended. Just being a big ship in a channel with current running isn’t one of them.

Wayfarer’s posts should be convincing that the St. Clair is indeed a narrow channel subject to Rule 9. Additionally, it is a buoyed channel and while maybe 1,200 ft. wide in parts, very soon narrows by half to 600 ft. for the bridge. The St. Clair is also a VTS area suggesting movement of ships requires particular scrutiny to maintain safe passage.

Fair point about the definition(s) of RAM, in Rule 3(g). Cuyohoga was not "restricted" in the sense intended by the rule. On the other hand, her maneuvering options were limited by multiple external factors, like wind, current, and proximity to hazards such as the riverbank.

 

[OldDan1943]

The ship was running with the current, that will reduce the ability to maneuver.

 

[Porgy]

Ship was running north into Huron. Against the current. Unless there is some current anomaly I’m not aware of.

 

[OldDan1943]

The ship was running WITH the current if it was going into the St Clair river.

 

[psneeld]

Fair point about the definition(s) of RAM, in Rule 3(g). Cuyohoga was not "restricted" in the sense intended by the rule. On the other hand, her maneuvering options were limited by multiple external factors, like wind, current, and proximity to hazards such as the riverbank.

Thus rule 9 as Dave and I have pointed out (and any others).

Limited maneuverability in this case is due to the width of the channe...thus rule 9.

And why 9 says smaller vessels that are not limited in manueverability.....or vessels that are limited because they are under sail must stay out of the way of vessels that for all the reasons described above make a narrow channel challenging for larger vessels.

 

[Benthic2]

From Wayfarer's post I can see how the freighter can't use the entire width of the waterway on his port side because if he does, he won't make the turn. My problems is that it seems unreasonable to expect the average recreational skipper to understand that since they don't have any kind of professional training or experience on 250+ foot boats.
I know a lot of guys here are very experienced and trained but imagine you are an untrained rooky for a moment. You see a big boat....you see a lot of space behind you....it seems obvious that the freighter will just pass behind you. You don't even begin the colreg evaluation process because there is no imminent collision. Then, all of a sudden your sailboat gets stuck in an eddy current, you point too high into the wind and you lose all forward momentum......then the freighter turns much sharper than you expected and all of a sudden you are crapping your shorts, and you can't steer a boat that isn't moving.

I honestly think the sailor didn't see the crisis developing because he didn't know the freighter couldn't go where he expected it to go, and he didn't expect his own boat to stall like it did.

 

[psneeld]

This thread like most threads involving the rules show the difference between experience and just reading the rules. One can read the rules and memorize them....but knowing how all the different rules work together or separately is a tricky thing to understand.

Even the judgement call to know at what distance and circumstance can you do whatever you want....or are in the stand on/give way situation. Even experienced people can debate each situation. But that debate is way more concise than all the opinions thrown about in discussions full of people with greatly varying backgrounds. At least about most rules topics. Accident review....maybe less so.

 

[psneeld]

From Wayfarer's post I can see how the freighter can't use the entire width of the waterway on his port side because if he does, he won't make the turn. My problems is that it seems unreasonable to expect the average recreational skipper to understand that since they don't have any kind of professional training or experience on 250+ foot boats.
I know a lot of guys here are very experienced and trained but imagine you are an untrained rooky for a moment. You see a big boat....you see a lot of space behind you....it seems obvious that the freighter will just pass behind you. You don't even begin the colreg evaluation process because there is no imminent collision. Then, all of a sudden your sailboat gets stuck in an eddy current, you point too high into the wind and you lose all forward momentum......then the freighter turns much sharper than you expected and all of a sudden you are crapping your shorts, and you can't steer a boat that isn't moving.

I honestly think the sailor didn't see the crisis developing because he didn't know the freighter couldn't go where he expected it to go, and he didn't expect his own boat to stall like it did.

It's why I stay in these discussions to hopefully ensure others learn a bit about the rule itself as well as why that rule is used and how it helps.

So let's say you are a large vessel captain/pilot. This situation happens.

You have 2 choices....do what you think keeps your vessel safe, saving maybe dozens of lives aboard and possibly ashore, averting environmental and infrastructure damage and hope and pray the sailing vessel avoids your bow.

Or, avoid the sailing vessel and make sure 4 or 5 people are safe and take the risks mentioned above?

The best part is ....if the sailing vessel holds course and speed.....definitely in the wrong. So now the large vessel to prevent collision alters course enough to probably miss the sailboat. But now the sailboat chicken out and alters course too ( now correct according to rules). Now the large vessel has to manuever back again but if at exactly the wrong time.....not enough room, time, etc to avoid missing other problems.

That's why boaters who think of it as a hobby are taking on a lot of risk if they frequent the same waters as larger vessels and don't study the rules.

 

[Art]

IMO - Sail boat captain in OP video was solely [legally] at fault for coming too close to collision circumstances.

RULE 2
Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner,
master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.
(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had
to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances,
including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a
departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

—INTERNATIONAL—
Steering and Sailing Rules
RULE 9
Narrow Channels
(a) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway
shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on
her starboard side as is safe and practicable.
(b) A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not
impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a
narrow channel or fairway.
(c) A vessel engaged in fishing shall not impede the passage of any other
vessel navigating within a narrow channel or fairway.
(d) A vessel shall not cross a narrow channel or fairway if such crossing
impedes the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within such
channel or fairway. The latter vessel may use the sound signal prescribed in
Rule 34(d) if in doubt as to the intention of the crossing vessel.
(e)
(i) In a narrow channel or fairway when overtaking can take place only
if the vessel to be overtaken has to take action to permit safe passing,
the vessel intending to overtake shall indicate her intention by sounding
the appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(c)(i). The vessel to be
overtaken shall, if in agreement, sound the appropriate signal
prescribed in Rule 34(c)(ii) and take steps to permit safe passing. If in
doubt she may sound the signals prescribed in Rule 34(d).
(ii) This Rule does not relieve the overtaking vessel of her obligation
under Rule 13.
(f) A vessel nearing a bend or an area of a narrow channel or fairway
where other vessels may be obscured by an intervening obstruction shall
navigate with particular alertness and caution and shall sound the
appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(e).
(g) Any vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid
anchoring in a narrow channel.

—INLAND—
Steering and Sailing Rules
RULE 9
Narrow Channels
(a)
(i) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway
shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies
on her starboard side as is safe and practicable.
(ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(i) and Rule 14(a), a power-driven
vessel operating in narrow channels or fairways on the Great Lakes,
Western Rivers, or waters specified by the Secretary, and proceeding
downbound with a following current shall have the right-of-way over an
upbound vessel, shall propose the manner and place of passage, and
shall initiate the maneuvering signals prescribed by Rule 34(a)(i), as
appropriate. The vessel proceeding upbound against the current shall
hold as necessary to permit safe passing.
(b) A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not
impede the passage of a vessel that can safely navigate only within a
narrow channel or fairway.
(c) A vessel engaged in fishing shall not impede the passage of any other
vessel navigating within a narrow channel or fairway.
(d) A vessel shall not cross a narrow channel or fairway if such crossing
impedes the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within that
channel or fairway. The latter vessel shall use the danger signal prescribed
in Rule 34(d) if in doubt as to the intention of the crossing vessel.
(e)
(i) In a narrow channel or fairway when overtaking, the power-driven
vessel intending to overtake another power-driven vessel shall indicate
her intention by sounding the appropriate signal prescribed in Rule
34(c) and take steps to permit safe passing. The power-driven vessel
being overtaken, if in agreement, shall sound the same signal and may,
if specifically agreed to take steps to permit safe passing. If in doubt
she shall sound the danger signal prescribed in Rule 34(d).
(ii) This Rule does not relieve the overtaking vessel of her obligation
under Rule 13.
(f) A vessel nearing a bend or an area of a narrow channel or fairway
where other vessels may be obscured by an intervening obstruction shall navigate with particular alertness and caution and shall sound the
appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(e).
(g) Every vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid
anchoring in a narrow channel.

 

[mvweebles]

Colregs make sense if you really understand both the rules and vessels of all sizes.

Staying away from big ships is basically rule 2 if you stay far enough so the other guy has no doubt there is no conflict. But once you are within the confusion zone....NOT following the rules is both dangerous and illegal as the Colregs are mentioned.

In my opinion, this post from psneeld captures it. Make efforts to avoid crossing situations with large ships - turn circles, course change; whatever. But once you are in a crossing situation (which may vary based on circumstsnces), the Rules apply. You have a responsibility and obligation to know the Rules and abide by them, not make-up a proxy ("tonnage") even if well intentioned

Peter

 

[Hippocampus]

As express in my earlier post I agree with Art’s highlights. Sailboat should have been as close as safe on the starboard side of the channel. If he was no threat of a crossed would have occurred and this thread wouldn’t exist. This has nothing to do with prior experience nor sail/power nor anything else. Any boat power or sail going down current or up, in any point of sail

i) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway
shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies
on her starboard side as is safe and practicable.

Period QED done

 

[Art]

In my opinion, this post from psneeld captures it. Make efforts to avoid crossing situations with large ships - turn circles, course change; whatever. But once you are in a crossing situation (which may vary based on circumstsnces), the Rules apply. You have a responsibility and obligation to know the Rules and abide by them, not make-up a proxy ("tonnage") even if well intentioned

Peter

RULE 2
Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner,
master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.
(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had
to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances,
including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a
departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

I repeat this quote:

"... which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

 

[Hippocampus]

Still,agreeing with Art. You go Art. Posting what I’m thinking.

 

[Art]

TY Hippo!

 

[Benthic2]

Psneeld brings up an interesting consideration. I hope I never have to decide between options based on dollars vs lives, or which option causes lesser loss of life.

......to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances,
including the limitations of the vessels involved,.....

The circumstances and vessel limitations are only known to people who drive big ships. I don't think the average weekend skipper knows how to handle a freighter and therefore is unable to act on limitations that he is not aware of. I have no idea how quickly that ship can stop, turn, or slow. I would have no idea how it responds to windage or current.

There seems to be concensus that the sailboater is in the wrong because of the limits of the freighter but how can we expect the sailboater to know those limits ?

 

[Porgy]

The ship was running WITH the current if it was going into the St Clair river.

In the video The Cuyahoga was traveling north toward the Blue Water Bridge. The current of the St. Clair runs south into Lake St. Clair then eventually to the St. Lawrence River. Pretty much all downhill until Quebec where it becomes tidal.

 

[psneeld]

For those that believe in the law of tonnage.....please read a LOT of maritime expert's explanation of the rules including the maritime court decisions supporting those opinions, then please get back to me.

Rule 2, often known where I have been is known as the "general prudential rule".... not the "any thing I want rule."

 

[psneeld]

Psneeld brings up an interesting consideration. I hope I never have to decide between options based on dollars vs lives, or which option causes lesser loss of life.




The circumstances and vessel limitations are only known to people who drive big ships. I don't think the average weekend skipper knows how to handle a freighter and therefore is unable to act on limitations that he is not aware of. I have no idea how quickly that ship can stop, turn, or slow. I would have no idea how it responds to windage or current.

There seems to be concensus that the sailboater is in the wrong because of the limits of the freighter but how can we expect the sailboater to know those limits ?

First..... you know it now because of " experience". Even if experience come from listening to others on land.

Two.... you experience it first hand on the water through years of graduating though boating levels and gaining experience from others.

Three....The NASBLA book and course most states require now discusses staying away from large ships. That's the advantage of classroom learning. A good teacher will explain the difference between the early manuever and the stand on when in close.

Four....learn and understand the rules by discussing them with experienced professionals. Understand why the rules apply to ALL vessels, clearly state something like an open water crossing responsibility then turn around and state rule 9 which negates the simple crossing rule. There size matters and goes further to say sailing (understood as possibly being less manueverable) still must stay out of the way of larger vessels over 20 meters.

Five....one thing usually taught in the basic safety certification courses is that the course covers a lot of aspects of boating that many may never see or do. Again, a decent instructor reminds all that this is only the beginning and further knowledge should be gained.

Six...even the erroneous (in my opinion) comparison with trucks and cars gives the life experience (not direct maritime rule making/following) the bigger objects usually take more room to stop and turn. That's where when all else fails, the general prudential rule (2) discussing ordinary seaman ( not to be equated with recreational boater skill level)alludes that the final act of colliding should be avoided at nearly all costs.

 

[Hippocampus]

Greatly appreciate PS’s perspective as a pro. Will humbly offer the opportunity this thread provides to express some pet peeves I’ve developed as an amateur owner/operator.
Certificate of competence is mandatory in some parts of the world. For the US believe it would be too hard a climb and goes against my desire to have government involved in my life to the smallest degree possible. However, see no problem with insurance companies devising a simple test of knowledge of the rules of the road and giving a credit on premiums upon passing it. Just the basic rules of the road. Not lights nor day signals. Maybe sounds . Not onerous but enough to keep people out of most dangerous situations. Also there’s both programs and slide rules that allow you to sort out lights, day signals and sounds very quickly. They’re cheap. As part of the CG inspection some form of them could be included.
Any vessel not human powered operating in federal waters should have a AIS transceiver. Not a receiver. At this point would consider it the price of admission. Costs have come down enough I think if you can’t afford it pick another hobby. I’m no 1%er but won’t operate any boat where dangerous crossing situations might arise without one. Spend time on center console fish boats. Cost of transceiver palls compared to fuel costs for a day or one piece of fishing equipment.
I run a dry boat. No alcohol while we’re moving. Love my sundowners and single malt but anyone that is going to helm is sober. I won’t have the AP on without someone sober and attentive at the helm. Seeing all kinds of boats from 60’ sportfish to 30 something sailboats under AP and no one anywhere near a helm drives me nuts. Same with VHF unattended or just not on or on but open mike.

In the current example you can be sure the ship had a transceiver on. The sailboat should have been attending to traffic. The sailboat could have raised the ship long in advance of the incident. If the sailboat had a transceiver and was monitoring his VHF the ship could have raised him long in advance. Either the sailboat could have fallen off to starboard or have been told to long in advance. The simple fairly cheap technology exists. How much is your life and that of your loved ones worth? Is it such a struggle to stay sober and at the helm when operating a boat? Your job is to keep the water out, people in and moving to your destination . Partying or BSing with your friends or listening to tunes isn’t in the job description. Sure do that but make sure you can do your job first and foremost.

 

[OldDan1943]

and then there is a spot on AICW..... headed south, river Stbd side going to the ocean (cut), AICW crosses the river, if a ship or boat approaches from the Stbd, who has the right of way?