Is Singlehanding >24 Hrs. Morally Wrong?

[CSY Man]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

Look in the mirror as it takes two for a collision..

Aha, that justifies somebody sailing thorugh the night while asleep?
What planet are you from?

[valhalla360]

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.

People are taking this comment out of context. I suspect everyone knew exactly what he meant but suddenly went all legalistic to defend their actions.

Probably a better way to say this is:

No one has the right to put others at an unacceptable risk and the colregs were developed to define what is unacceptable risk at a societal level.

So if you accept the colregs represent sound safe seamanship, there is no way to meet them while single handing for more than a few hours and thus you are morally wrong as you are operating in an unsafe manner.

If you think the colregs are flawed and you set your own moral boundaries...you can justify anything you like but then you don't get to come down on someone if they ignore the colregs and force you off course when they are the stand on vessel because you determined that following the colregs is based on what you feel is important and safe.

Some general comments on the excuses:
- If there are two of you and one is incapacitated, you are single handing: This is infinetly safer as a single hander would have no one crew left.
- Single handers get into fewer accidents because they are in remote open sea areas: When correct for miles sailed in congested waters vs remote open ocean, I suspect the assumption is far from true. It's just that the vast majority of miles are coastal sailing in congested waters.
- Single handers are only putting themselves at risk: Except, that death can impact friends and family. Rescue services often get put in bad situations trying to rescue someone.
- Other boaters do stupid stuff: Does this even need a response? Bad seamanship on someone else's part does not justify bad seamanship on your part.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by StuM

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. "

I think you missed the point. Many racers don't seem to care if they are interacting with another race boat or just someone out cruising. They apply the racing rules.

[GTom]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

Aha, that justifies somebody sailing thorugh the night while asleep?
What planet are you from?

If a "machine" (actually multiple machines) is watching? In 2-3years self driving cars will bring you home yourself sleeping/no one behind the wheel.

Not in coastal waters but in regions where you expect others to have radar, AIS or at least a boat with a decent radar cross section. Again car analogy: I don't expect peds on a highway, neither feeling responsible in the case I hit one.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by kellyp08

Is single handing your car (like when I drive from Manhattan to Northeast Harbor, Maine to get to the boat ) “morally wrong”? Seems to me that one can do a helluva lot more damage driving along in a car at 65 mph than cruising along in your boat at 7kts in, like, the ocean?

Some key differences:
- Assuming no traffic issues, the drive is about 8-9hrs. Most healthy normal people can stay awake and alert for 8-9hrs. No one is able to stay awake and alert for a week straight.
- Most cars are only good for 3-5hrs continous driving at which point you must leave the roadway, come to a halt and fill up. At that point, you can take a break. (or do they have in transit fueling between Manhattan and Main?).
- If you get exceedingly tired after 1hr, you have the option to pull off, find a parking lot and take a nap in a designated area away from traffic. I've yet to see a rest area on the open sea where I can pull in, take a nap and then continue on. Have they started installing these mid-Atlantic?

As there can only be a single person driving a car at a time and the situation you describe is well within the capability of a human to stay awake and alert, society has deemed it reasonably safe.

You will note, that driving tired is actually illegal for all drivers and for commercial drivers they go so far as to record and document time at the wheel.

If you are paranoid about "big brother", the technology is here to document who was at the wheel and for how long in new cars. Newer cars track driver reactions, seat position, etc... and it's not hard to correlate to a particular driver.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by conachair

Last one not that much in it IMHO.

Is a slack crewed boat morally wrong?

Sure, taking a large incompetent crew out is wrong.

That's the flaw in comparing a highly skilled solo sailor to an unskilled crew. The skill level is obfuscating the issue of multiple crew vs single hand.

The fact there are incompetent multiple person crews doesn't negate the fact that a solo sailor has to sacrifice proper watch-keeping.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

- Single handers are only putting themselves at risk: Except, that death can impact friends and family.

BAN EVERYTHING!!!!


Righto

[StuM]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I think you missed the point. Many racers don't seem to care if they are interacting with another race boat or just someone out cruising. They apply the racing rules.

In which case they are prats who shouldn't be on the water. And they should be dealt with under RROS 69.1 "conduct that may bring the sport into disrepute"

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by CSY Man

Aha, that justifies somebody sailing thorugh the night while asleep?
What planet are you from?

1# Who is sleeping thorough the night?
2# If you keep watch you are not in danger.
3# Why, for heavens sake, some are so condemning what others do as it's no concern to them (2#)
4# Earth, third stone from the sun

BR Teddy

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by conachair

BAN EVERYTHING!!!!


Righto

Where did I suggest banning anything?

I was merely pointing out the argument that their actions only impact themselves is a false argument.

We can't argue moral until we define the impacts. The moral argument is much different depending on who is affected.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by StuM

In which case they are prats who shouldn't be on the water. And they should be dealt with under RROS 69.1 "conduct that may bring the sport into disrepute"

I believe you are finally coming around to the original point....a large percentage of racers are prats who don't realize that the rules don't supersede the colregs nor do they appear to give a rip about RROS 69.1.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Alan Mighty

I doze off and find this thread has expanded many pages since this:



I'll take my cue to thank StuM and to laud Norman Cockcroft. He is unaccountably not mentioned in Wikipedia. Nor is Captain J N F Lameijer.

So what minimum ought a Wikipedia page on Norman Cockcroft say? Something like this:

Yorkshire-born Captain Alfred Norman Cockroft (1930-2015), went to sea aged 16 as an apprentice (for 16 shillings 8 pence a month) on an oil tanker and worked his way on merchant ships from 3rd Officer to 2nd Officer and 2nd Mate in 1952. In 1956 Norman Cockcroft gained his Extra Master certificate from the Sir John Cass College; that college then employed him to teach the course. From 1958-1970 he organised and taught the Extra Master course at the King Edward VII Nautical College (later London Metropolitan University) as Senior Lecturer. He remained in association with the LMU until 1984 and also worked as a consultant until 2000 specialising in maritime collisions and strandings. He became a Member of the Royal Institute of Navigation in 1963, a Fellow of the RIN in 1976, and was awarded the gold medal of RIN in 1982. He published in Britain his "Guide to the Collision Rules" in 1965 when the 1960 COLREGS came into force. Commercial demand for his book and the 1972 IMO conference that revised the 1960 COLREGS led to "A Guide to the Collision Avoidance Rules: International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea" in 1976 with Captain Lameijer, who participated in the 1972 IMO conference, as co-author.

And unlike Stephen Hawking, no one ever accused Norman Cockcroft of domestic abuse towards women.

I corresponded with Cockcroft in his last years. He was lovely and gracious and very much interested in my COLREGS problems and questions.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Where did I suggest banning anything?

It's implicit loud and clear. You think single handing is wrong therefore shouldn't happen.

Luckily the real world doesn't listen

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by boatman61

For those armchair sailors and harbour hoppers who spout the rules verbatim I dont think you even begin to realise the thought and planning that goes into the exercise..
Until you do I will just mark you down as the cruising worlds version of Jehovah's Witnesses.. the world will end..

Having been a boatwright/cruiser for over 45years, on three boats I built myself, covering tens of thousands of miles, sailing to and living in over 20 countries, and for 15 years, with no home base except my boat... I speak from experience.
My first two boats were mostly sailed single handed, in day hops, maintaining a proper watch. I now cruise with my wife, and we maintain a constant watch.


There have been times when I sailed within feet of a huge floating tree, debris galore, another boat (with the moron skipper asleep down below), etc, not to mention hundreds of commercial vessels that could have run me down, had I not been on watch. Then there is the thousands of floating containers!


If the clearly “additional risk” of not having someone on watch 24/7 were only more risk for THAT vessel, then that is their choice and THEIR assessment to make as to the “danger” of it.


This is a moot point, however! Except as it relates to ships, collisions at sea effect the other boat as well, and not maintaining watch 24/7 when underway, whether one is single handed or not, is an utterly selfish and irresponsible thing to do.
This is a no brainer...


I have been passed by other sailboats at sea, within 50’, with their having no running lights, and no one on watch. It is VERY hard to see such a boat!


Even with a proper masthead light, in a white out rain, big seas, or when tired and/or sea sick, it takes BOTH skippers to avoid a collision.


This is such common sense, that only an inexperienced or irrational person would disagree.


ALL VESSELS MUST MAINTAIN WATCH WHEN UNDERWAY, 24/7!

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

This is BS. A disciplined watchkeeper does not stare at the moon for 30 minutes, or the chartplotter. It doesn't take that long to tie their shoes. They don't read a book and don't even go for a piss. They're on watch, and they do that for the duration of their watch. There is a world of difference between taking 10 seconds to jot a note in the log or check the chart, and going to sleep, even if just for 20 minutes.

That’s a glib and superficial misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the points I was making. Try not to skim read, it does you no favours. I also think your view is extreme and unreasonable. Taking a pee is not done on a fully crewed vessel? Try to tell that to the typical fisherman at the helm of his boat. He’ll tell you that’s the least of it.