Is Singlehanding >24 Hrs. Morally Wrong?

[gamayun]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

[snip] I think that almost all of us would agree that it's morally wrong to go to sea on a crewed vessel intending to sleep through your watches without telling your shipmates and hope the radar and AIS alarms work properly. As an on watch crew member you have an obligation to keep a proper watch by sight and hearing and whatever other means are appropriate.

Is it morally wrong to be reading an Ipad/smart phone during the majority of one's watch on a crewed boat?

[magentawave]

Originally Posted by john61ct

Are these "regs" enforced by anyone but insurance companies?

Anyone been jailed for singlehanded passagemaking?

Not yet, but the walls, i.e. our freedoms, keep closing in so it wouldn't surprise me to hear about some lunatic politicians wanting to outlaw singlehanding.

[magentawave]

Originally Posted by gamayun

Is it morally wrong to be reading an Ipad/smart phone during the majority of one's watch on a crewed boat?

Not at all as long as you look up every once in a while and check. I mean, it's not like all of a sudden a ship is bearing down on you at 100 MPH.

[john61ct]

https://youtu.be/LRpeOuBk5yQ

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

It's not being pedantic to accept that "Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and hearing..." doesn't mean some vessels sometimes don't have to keep any lookout because they deem the risk of collision low and they really want to cross an ocean singlehandedly and they're really feeling tired. Keeping a proper lookout by sight and hearing at all times isn't an obscure detail, it's one of the most important elements of good seamanship.

Using the excuse that lots of other cargo ships or Navy ships or couples also don't keep good watches, while unfortunately true, isn't an excuse for setting out to sea knowing that with your current crew complement (just yourself), keeping a 24/7 watch will be impossible. Unfortunately, as has been proven all throughout seagoing history, even the best intended watchkeepers sometimes miss seeing things they should have easily seen. But fortunately, those who wrote the colregs had the wisdom to require BOTH vessels that might be involved in a collision to be keeping a watch so it's unlikely that both will be temporarily distracted or having an off moment at the exact same time and as a result blunder into each other. But singlehanders, while they are sleeping, aren't providing their half of the safety margin that we all depend on the rules to give us. For those who use egg timers or micronaps, if you don't get any REM sleep for a few days and as a result gradually become fatigued, your brain is working about as well as if you are legally drunk, not acceptable. There's no getting around it, we need to get adequate sleep in order for our brains and our senses to work as they should.

I think that almost all of us would agree that it's morally wrong to go to sea on a crewed vessel intending to sleep through your watches without telling your shipmates and hope the radar and AIS alarms work properly. As an on watch crew member you have an obligation to keep a proper watch by sight and hearing and whatever other means are appropriate. It's obvious that you owe that obligation to your fellow crewmembers but you ALSO owe it to the crew of every other vessel out there that you might encounter and they owe that same obligation to you and we all depend on that on "every vessel at all times." That's why I do think it's morally wrong to intentionally be underway at sea with no-one on watch, whether there are 50 qualified watchkeepers aboard or just 1.

But I realize that long distance singlehanding has been going on for a long time and probably always will. So, I think the rules should be changed to allow for a singlehander or any other vessel whose master determines that his crew is so fatigued that a proper watch can't be kept, to do something like heave-to with spreader and deck lights brightly shining (and a light signal or day shape that would let other vessels know their status) to make the vessel as easy to see as possible while the crew recharges their batteries. It's not as good as if they were keeping a watch as rule 5 requires, but at least they aren't going to run anyone down and they are keeping their vessels kinetic energy to a minimum while no one is at the helm. The rules right now don't provide for that. Rather than making up rationalizations about how you're really abiding by rule 5 with your eyes closed because your AIS is turned on, etc. the rules should be adjusted to reflect the reality that singlehanders exist and make a way for them to do it legally and help make other nearby vessels aware that no one is on watch. But as rule 5 currently reads, long distance singlehanders can't possibly comply with it, and since all vessels at sea are required to, they are both breaking the rules and putting others at an additional risk that the other vessels have no way of being aware of by choosing to engage in singlehanded sailing. At sea or on land, when you lead others to believe one thing (your vessel has someone on watch 24/7) but actually are doing another thing that puts those others at even a small additional risk they have no way of being aware of, that sounds like an immoral act to me, and since I enjoy singlehanding along the coast and would like to do some longer distance singlehanded sailing, I really wish the rules would be adjusted so I could legally "pull over to the curb" and take a snooze while remaining in compliance with all of the COLREG's.

You have misunderstood the point of Colregs. It's not that everybody at all times should follow the rule to the letter but only when there's other traffic involved. If you have means to notice other traffic in time there's nothing preventing you to do what ever in the mean time as if nobody saw you sleeping or whatever it didn't happen.

Teddy

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

You have misunderstood the point of Colregs. It's not that everybody at all times should follow the rule to the letter but only when there's other traffic involved. If you have means to notice other traffic in time there's nothing preventing you to do what ever in the mean time as if nobody saw you sleeping or whatever it didn't happen.



Teddy

LOL, that’s one of the best rationalizations I’ve seen yet! You do realize that the whole point of standing watch is to determine IF and WHERE there is other traffic relative to your position so you can avoid hitting them. If you already knew that, then you’d be right that there would be no point in standing watch all night. But unfortunately you don’t know that.

Rule 5 says that we must use sight and sound as well as other available means. It doesn’t say you can use the other available means instead of sight and sound.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

....So, I think the rules should be changed...

Nope if you choose to operate in a less safe manner, you should be held responsible.

Reality is when fault is determined it's rarely 100% to one party but it's pretty easy to shift a few percentage points to the guy down taking a 1/2hr nap....and rightly so.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by gamayun

Is it morally wrong to be reading an Ipad/smart phone during the majority of one's watch on a crewed boat?

If it causes you to fail to maintain a proper watch...sure.

The flaw in a lot of these arguments is you presume that if other people do things that are wrong...it's OK for you to do things that are wrong.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by john61ct

Are these "regs" enforced by anyone but insurance companies?

Anyone been jailed for singlehanded passagemaking?

They are used to help determine liability after collisions occur. You won’t get arrested by the international police just for violating a Colreg. But I think that’s why we are discussing the morality of it. The point of having Colregs is to form a compact that everyone at sea follows so others know what to expect when our paths cross in order to help us deconflict ourselves. Without them we’d all, from supertanker to Navy warship to small singlehander, operate our vessels in a way that reflected only our own vessels self interest and that would result in much carnage, especially for those of us on the low end of the might makes right scale. So we have a set of rules we all are obligated to follow in order to do our part to avoid conflicts. We can’t credibly declare ourselves exempt because one rule or another is inconvenient for us.

But rules aside, it seems only common sense to me that if you are going to operate any piece of machinery large enough to hurt someone else then you should watch where you’re going. If you become so fatigued that you cant do that then the least you can do is to stop moving and make yourself as visible as possible so hopefully others who actually are standing watch as the Colregs require can more easily see and avoid you. When a singlehander sleeps while underway he is basically designating himself to be the privileged or stand on vessel for all crossing situations, but any traffic he may encounter doesn’t know that and may not figure that out until both vessels are in danger. I know we all think that we are “special” so we should automatically be granted a waiver for rules we don’t like, but that doesn’t seem very fair to those poor suckers who accept the rules at face value and follow them. For the Colregs to work as designed they must be followed by everyone at sea. That’s why you follow them, not out of a fear of being arrested.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

You have misunderstood the point of Colregs. It's not that everybody at all times should follow the rule to the letter but only when there's other traffic involved. If you have means to notice other traffic in time there's nothing preventing you to do what ever in the mean time as if nobody saw you sleeping or whatever it didn't happen.

Teddy

Teddy, this is NOT about COLREGS, it is about the Seamanship of maintaining a proper lookout.

It is not only ships you can run into.

Obviously solo sailors are unable to maintain a proper lookout, but I don't consider that immoral.

To me they are just another floating object not under command.

Being fully crewed it is our job to not hit them.

However, if I see one of my crew on watch, not keeping a focussed lookout to the best of their abilities....To me....that is immoral !

[DumnMad]

"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper lookout by sight and hearing..." is different from "Every vessel shall continuously without looking away maintain a proper lookout by sight and hearing..."
Proper is the key word and "all times" is different from "all the time."

I am confident the Colregs writers know their language and know the rules include the realities of single handing.

Single or crewed with zero visibility during a blackout night storm your proper lookout by sight can be best acheived by responding to and reading off radar or ais alarms?
When asleep with an ear for the alarms, wind changes and sail noises you are maintaining watch at all times? (I suspect earplugs are a Colregs no-no.)

[Tetepare]

Originally Posted by olaf hart

Let the person who has not dozed off on a night watch cast the first stone...

Where is my rock?

[jkleins]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

....

When a singlehander sleeps while underway he is basically designating himself to be the privileged or stand on vessel for all crossing situations, but any traffic he may encounter doesn’t know that and may not figure that out until both vessels are in danger. I know we all think that we are “special” so we should automatically be granted a waiver for rules we don’t like, but that doesn’t seem very fair to those poor suckers who accept the rules at face value and follow them. For the Colregs to work as designed they must be followed by everyone at sea. That’s why you follow them, not out of a fear of being arrested.

You have made some fairly good arguments until here but I would put this one to rest. No singlehander has ever put themselves up as the no longer needing to follow the stand on give way rules of the road. The only argument they make is that the watch system they have with electronics allows them to be notified of the need to determine whether they are the burdened vessel as well as would be achieved with them awake. No singlehander expects another vessel to avoid them. They expect that they will be awakened in time to make any decision about collision avoidance in plenty of time.
If you want to argue that current technology cannot do this or other aspects of that decision go ahead but saying singlehanded seems are somehow expecting special treatment just isn’t true.

Jim

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by jkleins

The only argument they make is that the watch system they have with electronics allows them to be notified of the need to determine whether they are the burdened vessel as well as would be achieved with them awake. No singlehander expects another vessel to avoid them. They expect that they will be awakened in time to make any decision about collision avoidance in plenty of time.
If you want to argue that current technology cannot do this or other aspects of that decision go ahead but saying singlehanded seems are somehow expecting special treatment just isn’t true.

Jim

That is just another silly rationalization.

Obviously a Radar will not spot a fishing net and two small canoes on either end frantically waving.

A small fast vessel coming up thier shadow sector or any myriad of conditions when radar returns are compromised by weather.

I would much rather they just simply admit that they sometimes depend on the other vessels seeing them and thank us...... rather than pretending they are 'always' in control 24/7

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

That is just another silly rationalization.

Obviously a Radar will not spot a fishing net and two small canoes on either end frantically waving.

Most singlehanders would never sleep if they were within say 25-30 miles of the coast unless heaved too

Not too many small canoes out that far.

Radar and AIS can give warning of any other obstacles