Is Singlehanding >24 Hrs. Morally Wrong?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by scallowayuk

hi, my guess would be crewed yachts racing, from experience quite a few seem to think the racing rules supersede the col regs.

They do

But only between two boats racing!

"When a boat sailing under these rules meets a vessel that is not, she
shall comply with the International Regulations for Preventing
Collisions at Sea (IRPCAS) or government right-of-way rules. If the
sailing instructions so state, the rules of Part 2 are replaced by the
right-of-way rules of the IRPCAS or by government right-of-way
rules. "

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

Do Colregs say being alert and able mean you personally must be awake?

Having your lights enabled & alerting others, your AIS alert and able, and, yourself ready to instantly spring into action seems meet most administration's demands for fulfilling "proper lookout" requirements otherwise you'd be banned from going.

Except that a century of Admiralty Court cases don't support what you are saying. They require a proper and attentive lookout.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by DumnMad

Definitely eyes and ears should be available at all times but it does not say you must be awake.

So how do you keep a lookup by sight if you are asleep?

[Jim Cate]

Except that a century of Admiralty Court cases don't support what you are saying. They require a proper and attentive lookout.

If that century that you quote includes the period in which Jessica Watson and the Chinese ship collided, then some thought is needed. The court did say that she was at fault for being asleep and not maintaining watch, but assigned the majority of fault to the ship. They seem to have thought the ship, having seen her proper lighting should have avoided her... just as many here are saying others are required to avoid the sleeping soloist. Doesn't quite fit in the routine interpretation of COLREGS, but there is at least this one recent court decision to base arguments on.

Jim

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

If that century that you quote includes the period in which Jessica Watson and the Chinese ship collided, then some thought is needed. The court did say that she was at fault for being asleep and not maintaining watch, but assigned the majority of fault to the ship. They seem to have thought the ship, having seen her proper lighting should have avoided her... just as many here are saying others are required to avoid the sleeping soloist. Doesn't quite fit in the routine interpretation of COLREGS, but there is at least this one recent court decision to base arguments on.

Jim

It does. The courts allocate fault in each scenario, often to both sides. I can't see any situation where there is no watch keeper on duty while underway and where that vessel will get away with no part of the fault.

[Viking Sailor]

IMHO, if a vessel can be configured to be safely hove-to or set to a sea anchor/drogue while displaying an anchor light, it is morally and legally defensible for the crew to go below and sleep as needed. These configurations minimize the speed of the vessel effectively "anchoring" it to the local wind and sea state.

This reduction in speed greatly reduces the possibility of an energetic collision. Any collision that might occur would most likely be on the order of a vessel dragging its anchor.

AFAIK, anchoring is allowed in most areas unless it's specifically excluded. There is no specification limiting depth, scope, type of anchor, or drag. The only requirement is that you are not under command, not underway, and you display an anchor light or a black ball.

[peter57]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Yes. No one has the right to put others at risk. All the justifications and poor analogies you will receive on this thread are no more than excuses. No further explanation required. It is just that simple.

What do you do then?

Have four people with certificates to do 4hour watches every 12hours.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Viking Sailor

IMHO, if a vessel can be configured to be safely hove-to or set to a sea anchor/drogue while displaying an anchor light, it is morally and legally defensible for the crew to go below and sleep as needed. These configurations minimize the speed of the vessel effectively "anchoring" it to the local wind and sea state.

I doubt this on the legal side. A vessel is underway if it is not anchored.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Paul L

I doubt this on the legal side. A vessel is underway if it is not anchored.

Hmm... I would of thought (perhaps incorrectly) that a vessel is underway when it has way on but not underway while waying the anchor until such time the anchor has broken free of the seabed and way is established.

As for a sea anchor, perhaps it is not underway until the sea anchor breaks free of the sea.

But is a vessel considered to be anchored if lying to a sea anchor...

[oldjags]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Hmm... I would of thought (perhaps incorrectly) that a vessel is underway when it has way on but not underway while waying the anchor until such time the anchor has broken free of the seabed and way is established.

As for a sea anchor, perhaps it is not underway until the sea anchor breaks free of the sea.

But is a vessel considered to be anchored if lying to a sea anchor...

No, I would think it is probably still considered underway. Only at a much reduced speed and ability to navigate. If you are displaying an anchor light or a black ball, though, you are for all intents and purposes anchored and letting everyone else know that you're just sitting there and not able to avoid collision.

If you get hit then, one would have to assume it's the other boat's fault. A boat moving at 1 knot under sea anchor is essentially motionless. If someone hits you with you drifting at that speed, they were cutting it too close in the first place.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by oldjags

No, I would think it is probably still considered underway. Only at a much reduced speed and ability to navigate. If you are displaying an anchor light or a black ball, though, you are for all intents and purposes anchored and letting everyone else know that you're just sitting there and not able to avoid collision.

If you get hit then, one would have to assume it's the other boat's fault. A boat moving at 1 knot under sea anchor is essentially motionless. If someone hits you with you drifting at that speed, they were cutting it too close in the first place.

Improperly displaying an anchor light or ball does not give you the rights of being anchored. Would switching the red and green light sides on a boat give you new rights?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Viking Sailor

AFAIK, anchoring is allowed in most areas unless it's specifically excluded. There is no specification limiting depth, scope, type of anchor, or drag. The only requirement is that you are not under command, not underway, and you display an anchor light or a black ball.

On the contrary. You need to look at what is meant by "underway".

Cockcroft:
Clarification of the application of the word ‘underway’, Rule 3(i).
‘When applying the definition of the term “underway mariners should
also have regard to Rule 35(b) where it is indicated that a vessel may
be underway but stopped and making no way through the water.’
A vessel is only considered to be at anchor when the anchor is
down and is holding. Vessels using an anchor to turn in the river, or
riding to their chains with anchors unshackled, or dredging with the
tide, or dragging their anchors have been held to be under way

Also:
Anchor watch
The duty to keep a proper look-out applies also when a vessel is at
anchor, especially if there is a strong tide running, or if other vessels
are likely to be passing by.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by StuM

On the contrary. You need to look at what is meant by "underway".

Cockcroft:
Clarification of the application of the word ‘underway’, Rule 3(i).
‘When applying the definition of the term “underway mariners should
also have regard to Rule 35(b) where it is indicated that a vessel may
be underway but stopped and making no way through the water.’
A vessel is only considered to be at anchor when the anchor is
down and is holding. Vessels using an anchor to turn in the river, or
riding to their chains with anchors unshackled, or dredging with the
tide, or dragging their anchors have been held to be under way

Also:
Anchor watch
The duty to keep a proper look-out applies also when a vessel is at
anchor, especially if there is a strong tide running, or if other vessels
are likely to be passing by.

But it's somewhat unclear what an anchored vessel should (=could) do if they see another vessel on a collison course. Don't know any court decision of a such collision either. My own interpretention is that anchor watch is merely an "anchor watch" to see that the anchor is not dragging and thus not affecting any danger to itself and other vessels.

What comes to watch keeping and collison avoidance on all vessels I know only two cases where the fault is given to one vessel alone. So the falt generally is on both vessels regardless whether the watch on the other vessel is asleep or not. There's a lot of court cases about this. The botton line here being it takes two for a collision. Keep proper watch on your own boat is what matters and don't worry about what others do unless they run amok.

Teddy

[cyan]

Originally Posted by mud bug

I for one am so tired of people trying to legislate or push their ideas no matter how unsubstantiated they may be upon others. It always starts with "I FEEL" and then follows with what other people should not be allowed to do. I don't single hand, but I will not stand in the way of others who have the freedom to do as they please. Too many people feel that they know more than others and therefore have the right to tell them what to do. STOP IT!

This.

[Viking Sailor]

Originally Posted by StuM

On the contrary. You need to look at what is meant by "underway".

Cockcroft:
Clarification of the application of the word ‘underway’, Rule 3(i).
‘When applying the definition of the term “underway mariners should
also have regard to Rule 35(b) where it is indicated that a vessel may
be underway but stopped and making no way through the water.’
A vessel is only considered to be at anchor when the anchor is
down and is holding. Vessels using an anchor to turn in the river, or
riding to their chains with anchors unshackled, or dredging with the
tide, or dragging their anchors have been held to be under way

Also:
Anchor watch
The duty to keep a proper look-out applies also when a vessel is at
anchor, especially if there is a strong tide running, or if other vessels
are likely to be passing by.

Stu,

Sorry, I disagree with your interpretation of Rule 3(i) (General Definition -- The word "underway" means a vessel is not at anchor, or made fast to the shore, or aground.) Based upon your interpretation a vessel would be underway if tried to a floating dock, mooring buoy, or a sea anchor. So, since all of the above restrict a vessel's underway maneuvering in a similar way they are functionally equivalent.

I also have to disagree that Rule 35(b) (Sound Signals in Restricted Visibility -- A power-driven vessel underway but stopped and making no way through the water,) applies to a vessel that the captain has configured for all practical purposes to be functionally at anchor by deploying a sea anchor. The rules that apply to most cruising boats during times of restricted visibility are Rule 35(i)(j). These are the sound signals for vessel less then 20m and 12m respectively.