Ferry And Powerboat Collide

[TJ D]

Hi Paul,

I got this from Seattle VTS, that they consider the ferries to be a part of the TSS rule regarding pleasure boats. I was talking to them on the phone regarding a different matter, and I asked them about it.

Now, I have not been able to find this specifically in writing, so it's possible that the person that I was talking to was in error, but VTS was my source. I never looked into it beyond this, however.

I believe that they would be happy to answer this via telephone if you need confirmation. If my info is in error, I would like to know that too.

TJ

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

I don't believe that the ferries are participating in VTS, and this one was not operating in a VTS lane. It was not the powerboater's obligation to keep clear, other than the 100-yard exclusion zone. It *was* the obligation of both vessels to operate according to COLREGS, and neither one did so.

It would have been prudent and polite for the powerboat to alter course early enough that his intentions would be obvious, but this is not a COLREGS obligation.

So a question: Does the 100-yard exclusion zone have priority over all other COLREGS requirements? Does it negate the regular stand-on / give-way rules? I honestly don't know.

Good question.

I'm not sure how difficult it would be to understand: do NOT get within X yards of a ferry.

The recreational boater was clearly getting too close to the ferry.

Am I missing something?

[TJ D]

Paul, if you are on your boat in Friday Harbor, turn on VHF 5A, and you will hear them participating in the VTS system.

It's possible that I have bad info regarding the TSS exemption, but I promise you that these guys are talking to traffic all day long. Next time you're around a VHF, give it a listen. In fact, VTS strongly recommends that recreational boaters maintain a listening watch on the appropriate VTS channel for their area.

TJ

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

Good question.

I'm not sure how difficult it would be to understand: do NOT get within X yards of a ferry.

The recreational boater was clearly getting too close to the ferry.

Am I missing something?

I am pretty sure that the answer to the question is NO -- an exclusion rule does not modify in any way the COLREGS. If Rules 9 and 10 do not modify the steering and sailing rules, then how could a non-COLREG local regulation modify them? So the fact that there was an exclusionary zone would not have changed one iota of the ferry's obligation to maneuver and avoid the collision.


But the main point which has been made by many in this thread -- the bloody trawler should never have been there in the first place -- is absolutely valid.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

<snip>

But the main point which has been made by many in this thread -- the bloody trawler should never have been there in the first place -- is absolutely valid.

1. Yes, I agree.

2. Let's not forget the rec boat skipper was DOWN BELOW NOT KEEPING A LOOKOUT.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

. . . 2. Let's not forget the rec boat skipper was DOWN BELOW NOT KEEPING A LOOKOUT.

Indeed.

But who of us has not left the helm to take a leak, while single-handing, or make a cup of coffee? There but for the grace of God go I.

A very sobering lesson.

[SV DestinyAscen]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Indeed.

But who of us has not left the helm to take a leak, while single-handing, or make a cup of coffee? There but for the grace of God go I.

A very sobering lesson.

Yep - interval between eyes out and eyes on book/inside galley/etc must be proportional to risk of traffic. Guy was lucky he hit a ferry. If he hit a sailboat there would have been injuries.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Indeed.

But who of us has not left the helm to take a leak, while single-handing, or make a cup of coffee? There but for the grace of God go I.

A very sobering lesson.

There's a time and a place for everything.. that's why I keep an empty 2litre jug by the helm when traversing congested area's.

[jeremiason]

There was a very long discussion on G CAPTAIN about this...

I think the video was made, before the news released the story of the Captain of the Trawler not having a proper lookout.

The G Captain discussion, points out that the Trawler was the stand on vessel and therefore the Ferry would be the Giveway Vessel

https://www.facebook.com/27223368885...4692622878886/

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I believe that a document was posted which showed that this particular channel is NOT a "narrow channel" for COLREGS purposes?

But even if Rule 9 applied in this case, Rule 9 is indeed not relevant to the obligations of both vessels once the risk of collision arose.


In the grander scheme, of course, the pleasure vessel should have kept well clear of commercial traffic operating over a predictable route using well-marked channels. I think everyone can agree about that. This would be required by Rule 2 even if Rule 9 did not apply. This would be considered as one factor in evaluating fault, but again, would not be considered in evaluating the appropriateness of either vessel's maneuvers once the risk of collision arose.


As to Rule 10 -- this applies only in TSS's, so completely irrelevant here.

That's exactly the way I read it.

A key point being the local "100 yard exclusion zone" applicable to the ferry.

Until the powerboat breached that limit, the ferry skipper was probably correct in maintaining his course and heading. The problem being that it took the powerboat very little time to cover that last 100 yards, giving the ferry insufficient time to completely avoid the collision.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Indeed.

But who of us has not left the helm to take a leak, while single-handing, or make a cup of coffee? There but for the grace of God go I.

A very sobering lesson.

In a traffic area like that? Not me! Pee in the scuppers and forget about a coffee* until you are in a safer location.

(*Except in my "galley up" cat where I still have good visibility when putting the kettle on )

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by TJ D

Hi Paul,

I got this from Seattle VTS, that they consider the ferries to be a part of the TSS rule regarding pleasure boats. I was talking to them on the phone regarding a different matter, and I asked them about it.

Now, I have not been able to find this specifically in writing, so it's possible that the person that I was talking to was in error, but VTS was my source. I never looked into it beyond this, however.

I believe that they would be happy to answer this via telephone if you need confirmation. If my info is in error, I would like to know that too.

TJ

I don't understand how a ferry can be subject to the TSS lane rules when they are not in a designated TSS lane. Just calling in to VTS would not be sufficient -- a vessel outside of a TSS lane doesn't magically gain extra protection just because they contact VTS on the radio.

Also, even inside a TSS lane the general rules of navigation still apply.

Have you read the paper by the VTS Director that I linked? This seems to contradict what you were told over the phone.

Of course this is academic, at least for me. So far I've always been able to give the ferries (and ships) a wide berth by altering course / speed early enough to avoid any misunderstanding. I will continue with this policy whenever possible.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by TJ D

Here is a link that explains rule 9 and 10's relevance here to this situation. For regulatory purposes the powerboat in question falls under rule 10, and 9 also applies.

Apologies to the poster who found my post to be nonsense. Perhaps the USCG can explain it better.

http://ptyc.net/wp-content/uploads/D...r-Ferries-.pdf

Bottom line, it was incumbent on the pleasure boat to keep clear. The ferry still shouldn't have hit him, however.
But, the initial fault is very much the pleasure boat's.

TJ

I have the distinct impression you're confusing VTS with TSS - the Vessel Traffic (Management) System (VTS/VTMS) is the overall traffic director within the area - they maintain radio and radar contact over most of the area and control movements and access to restricted areas. Commercial vessels and all vessels of a certain size are mandatory participants. Small vessels may participate, but are not obligated to do so. While in some respects they act as traffic cops, and can direct the movements of participants, they have little control over non-participants. Rule 10 is not in effect in the entire VTS area, but is certainly in effect within and adjacent to the TSS in the VTS area. Your postings have nothing supporting your previous statements, and I'm assuming your "phone call with Seattle Traffic" would not stand up in court.

[Lodesman]

Some people seem to think the 100 yard security exclusion zone somehow excuses ferries etc from needing to follow the rules. If the ferry is the give-way vessel in a crossing situation, it would be incumbent on the ferry to take sufficient action to maintain its 100 yard exclusion zone. If in a situation where another vessel would have to come inside that exclusion zone, then permission is to be sought/given and the various other rules such as the speed limit take effect. The exclusion zone would only be 500 yards on a ferry when the Port authority puts that rule into effect (such as when a credible terrorist threat exists) - then it would be announced via notam and securite calls, and armed coast guard boats would be swarming the sound.

[TJ D]

Hi guys,

My understanding from VTS is that ferries, when operating on published routes, are considered to be operating in a traffic lane. I don't sail in Puget sound any more, so all my interaction with commercial traffic is on 'equal footing', as it were.

I would suggest a call to USCG sector Seattle for clarification. It's possible that I have the ferry portion of their having right of way under rule 9/10 wrong, but I certainly do understand the difference between vessel traffic service and a traffic separation scheme. The reason for the mixing of terms is that the vast majority of vessels utilizing vts are also utilizing the tss for most of their route.

Anyway, I'm out. It's late here in England.

Have a good day, TJ