Professional Pilot ignoring Colregs

[wholybee]

Originally Posted by carstenb

I am simply amazed at the vitriol that is being spouted here. For those that have read my OP and other comments, we called the ship in order to AVOID any potentially dangerous situation.

We did not sail into any dangerous situations. I noted that had we CONTINUED to hold speed and course when we saw him speed up, THEN we would have ended in a close CPA.

WE did not continue with speed and course, we slowed down and laid ahull while he passed and proceeded into the harbor. At no time was there an acute situation
But this was due to our observing Rule #2.

Sorry fellas - but you apparently still are not reading the OP.

To each their own opinion. Ours is still that the pilot/master of the vessel should have called us back to inform us that they were going to enter the harbor ahead of us.

After 8 years of sailing across much of the world and entering many large and busy harbors, I can say that this is one of only two times out of many that a ship has not spoken with us on the VHF and agreed who was going to do what and in what order..

Normally we find that big ships like the communication and they are quite happy when we call them so everyone is on the same wavelength

Your experiences may vary

cheers

I read the post. What I gather is that you *thought* there was a dangerous situation, and the large vessel did not recognize that. Had you held course and speed, you would have passed at about 1/4 mile, which is *not* a near collision in that situation. And so the other vessel continued on course knowing there was no danger, and you panicked and slowed down.

And, while VHF communication is common for collision avoidance, while entering a confined space of a harbor, the ship probably has other important things to do, such as communicate with the port captain or traffic control, and you interrupted them. At the very moment you hailed them on 16, they might have been on 12 discussing their intentions with traffic.

Just move on and don't get bent out of shape about it. It isn't a big deal.

[Uricanejack]

Rules exist to provide guidance for the wise and for the adherence of fools.

If you feel the Pilots conduct was worthy of complaint as a breach of the rules.
Make a report.
Its quite easy just call the VTS watch commander on the phone. He or She will make a note of it.
Might be a bit late now for the watch commander to save the radio and radar data.
The Watch commander will pass your complaint on. To USCG and the Pilotage Authority.
They will look in to it. They may or may not agree with you. They will definitely contact the ship, the shipping co and Pilot and Pilotage authority.

If you want to be less formal.
CHRIP
A voluntary anonymous reporting system through Safety at sea. If CHIRP look into it they will do the contacting and come up with a brief report with recommendations. Getting published in a professional maritime publication.

Having read the OP the info is limited.
My conclusions. There was no near miss. There was hurt feelings.
If the Pilot had called back and asked to go ahead the OP would have been happy.
The Pilot for whatever reason did not. Call the OP back.
The Ships OOW, Master Didn't call the OP back.

The OP called, The Pilot answered. Said what he said Im bigger ect.

1/4 mile CPA. 2.5 cables roughly 500m (463m) Ahead, Astern, Abeam not mentioned.
of a 40ft sailboat doing 6 knots.
Presumably the pilot did not alter co to Strb to pass astern of the sailboat.
Instead after arriving on bridge requested the ship increase speed and head S into Port. Passing 1/4 mile ahead of the sailboat. I probably wouldn't have. Id prefer 1/2 mile ahead.

To the Sailboat, Open Water.
To the Pilot Probably not so much.

To me, It doesn't cost me much to be polite. Sometimes it's even quite helpful.
Not everyone see it this way, Being Polite, Sometimes you don't get the desired response.
Perhaps the Pilot was just having a bad hair day. So flippant response.

Presume both vessels knew each others intent plan post discussion. The Ship was going to keep going because it was bigger. The Sailboat willingingly, reluctantly giving way or accepting CPA as is.

Unusual? Maybe, Certainly American waters passing arrangements are quite common place. Other areas not so much.

The application of Might is Right, I'm impotent I'm going anyway. I guess some do.
I did know someone who had a reputation for this sort of thing. Eventually he did kill someone.

This Pilot might be a prima donna or a dick head. At least he or She knew the OP had seen his ship and knew what was happening. Rather than just assumption the small boat would get scared and get out of his or her way.

[Watermann]

The approach to a harbor, boarding of the pilot and the master-pilot exchange is one of the busiest times on the bridge of a ship.

While the pilot's tone may have been crass (and since he is also human, could just be having a bad/grumpy day), it's entirely possible that he took a look at the situation, figured you to be "no factor" and not worth spending more than a passing moment of attention. In a short transit port like San Juan, the pilot's immediate attention is going to be, first of all, assessing the condition and handling of the ship, figuring out exactly where he is and shaping up for the channel, movement of other deep draft traffic in the harbor, making his plan for meeting/making up the assist tugs and communicating all of this with the master/bridge team as well. The mental model that a pilot makes is well "ahead of the ship" than most people realize.

Also, the ship was not likely lying ahull at 1 kt while boarding the pilot. Unless boarding at anchor, the ship is going to be doing anywhere between 6-10 kts and, depending on the sea conditions, turning to make a good lee.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Actually, we weren't "Trying to assert our rights" we WERE trying to avoid a potentially nasty situation by calling the freighter and agreeing who was going to go first, what everyone's intentions were etc.

By the by - the freighter was lying ahull when we called him

Really? You wanted to 'go first'?!

Oh my.

[requiem]

Ooh... another COLREGs thread!

Let's see... first off, a basic rule is that one should not negotiate crossings that violate the COLREGs. That's well-established in case law, and won't go well for you if it ends badly. (I'm talking International Rules here, not US Inland). This is part of why other authorities recommend against wasting time on the VHF instead of acting in accordance with the Rules.

That said, the VHF is a good tool to reduce confusion when time is available. If confident of each other's identities (e.g. via AIS) and time's a'plenty, there's no harm in clarifying intentions.

Second, one must consider the limitations of the vessels involved. The space required for the larger ship to maneuver, both in terms of avoiding a close quarters situation and effectively making an entry to the channel, will be much larger that for a smaller vessel.

The most recent case I can think of involving a ship approaching a narrow channel made it to the UK Supreme Court (the Evert Smart collision with the Alexandra 1). The collision happened in the pilot boarding area outside the channel, and thus the case was about the relation between the crossing rule and the narrow channel rule. A relevant part of the ruling might be "The crossing rules are overridden only when the approaching vessel is shaping to enter the channel, adjusting her course so as to reach the entrance on the starboard side of it, on her final approach." (Incidentally this collision was also facilitated by an overheard, and mis-heard, VHF call).

My impression is that the pilot may have a bit of a cowboy attitude that could eventually land him in a sticky situation. Going back to my first point, I'd be hesitant to assume any obligation for a call-back. (Particularly when the pilot has just boarded; lots of "human factors" in play here that will make such things easily forgotten about.) Instead, I'd continue to navigate per the rules and treat any additional response as a bonus.

Hard to speak to the danger without knowing more about the relative positions of the vessels. What was the original CPA and distance/bearing between vessels? How close to shore? I'm assuming the pilot was boarding around the 3 mile line? In open water a quarter mile is awfully close, and particularly so at night.

I'm assuming the pilot saw OP on AIS and felt it would be no trouble to sprint ahead. If OP wasn't transmitting AIS and was merely a radar return, that would be particularly bad (surprise, that little blip's a warship!).

[more]

1- answer on radio to small craft from big ship is crazy. i newer answer on radio to small craft (small craft is 150 ft and under 5000 tons)
2- smal craft must Give way – or stand on ws big comercial
As yachties we are the bottom of the pecking list as far as the Colregs are concerned. We are required to give way to most other craft, even to fishing vessels and to other power-driven vessels if they are in narrow channels, traffic separation schemes or constrained by their draught.
The second part applies as much to us as to large vessels. You must understand that a 100,000-tonne ship has very limited manoeuvrability. She must appreciate that a yacht is relatively tiny, very slow and may be limited by the wind and sea state when taking avoiding action.
500,000-tonne ship this small 250,000 tonne ship must Give way – or stand on
this ship need 12-20 nm to stop for turn in full speed need over 20 nm. almost all 50,000 tonne ship and up dont have revers or neutral. for neutral must turn engine off, for reverse must turn engine off, and start
in colision big ship and under 5000 tonne ship always gulty this small ship

in mostly country (usa special) court rather ruled that personal watercraft (PWCs) were not ‘vessels’
do you teched in school Colregs ,do you obligated to have certificated Colregs in your contry to be captain of your vessel. Keep clear & keep out of the way This is where judgement and experience come into play. Essentially, both terms mean ‘don’t get too close’,

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by SailingHarmonie

What might ‘seem to be true” to you is just not the case, and is not the intent of the definition of RAM. RAM status is NOT applicable to any vessel under pilotage, entering a harbor, or in a narrow channel.

A vessel’s ‘work’ is not being underway, but something else that it is doing other than navigating.

There are many situations where it might be inconvenient for a vessel to maneuver, but those do not make it RAM. A good example would be a cargo ship drifting, I.e., underway but not making way. There is no special status to such a vessel, they are just motor vessels and are treated under the rules as such. Now, a sailboat that holds course and forces a close quarters situation with a ship drifting at a fraction of a knot is clearly violating the spirit of the rules if not a specific chapter and verse.

Indeed. RAM is grossly misunderstood by many sailors. RAM does not exist without the signals, and "nature of her work" is dredging, etc., not maneuvering into a harbor. In that case however Rule 9 usually applies.


Cargo ship drifting is underway, and subject to all the ordinary rules, unless it shows NUC signals. That being said common sense should be applied to particular situations, and this is in fact required by Rule 2. Never force a close quarters situation if there is reasonable way to avoid it.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

That being said common sense should be applied to particular situations, and this is in fact required by Rule 2. Never force a close quarters situation if there is reasonable way to avoid it.

Indeed and despite many of the posts above, claiming we panicked etc etc, At no time was there any "panic" nor unreasonable concern.

A situation was foreseen and we called on the VHF to ensure the situation did not develop into something that no one liked.

This is called observing Rule#2.

We do not like passing within 1/4 mile of big ships (as someone noted, where is their antenna. Had we continued and their antenna is on the front end of the ship, we would have been more like 1/2 cable length - now we are definitely out of our comfort zone.

The other point is we were being courteous. Big ships frequently consider craft like ours to be WAFI. By calling we opened the opportunity for future actions to be agreed upon, thereby leaving no doubt for the shipper/pilot of the ship as to our intentions

[rslifkin]

To me, the biggest thing that bothers me is that the pilot basically proceeded in a way that presents as a "screw you" and indicated the same when contacted (with the "we're bigger" response). The end result outcome isn't what I see as the issue, it's how the ship went about it. Had they called back once the pilot got upstairs and said "normal speed to approach the harbor is 10 kts, it'll work better if you follow us in" then I'd see no issue with that.

Basically, it's not the actual actions of the ship that are the issue, but those actions not being predictable (even when communication was attempted) and the apparent "screw you" attitude the ship pilot displayed.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Indeed and despite many of the posts above, claiming we panicked etc etc, At no time was there any "panic" nor unreasonable concern.

A situation was foreseen and we called on the VHF to ensure the situation did not develop into something that no one liked.

This is called observing Rule#2.

We do not like passing within 1/4 mile of big ships (as someone noted, where is their antenna. Had we continued and their antenna is on the front end of the ship, we would have been more like 1/2 cable length - now we are definitely out of our comfort zone.

The other point is we were being courteous. Big ships frequently consider craft like ours to be WAFI. By calling we opened the opportunity for future actions to be agreed upon, thereby leaving no doubt for the shipper/pilot of the ship as to our intentions

Bit of thread drift, but "where is the antenna" is a crucially important question and it's poor that ordinary plotters don't give any representation. As AIS transmits data about LOA, beam, and antenna location.



OpenCPN takes this data and builds a scale image of the vessel - incredibly useful. O's AIS implementation is totally superior to anything you can get on your plotter.

[Snore]

@carstenb you are 100% right to be upset. To those who challenge his actions, thanks for reinforcing my decision to retire. Comparing an open water crossing to going up the Chesapeake, it absurd!

COLREGS works if everyone follows it. Stand-on vessels should stand-on. In open waters, I have had numerous large vessels alter course to allow me to stand-on. If it is anywhere near close to shore, regardless of who was stand-on, I will radio that I would alter course to accommodate their apparent course and advise the other vessel to please stand-on and that I would give way. That is what tried to do Carsten! Unfortunately, after being told to standby, the pilot just did what he wanted. 'In a perfect world' the master should have grabbed the radio and said something.

In theory, you could contact USCG PR and ask someone to review the tape of CH 16. But to what end?

[boatman61]

Lotsa serious folk here..
I'da just looked at the humour in the reply.. as for my actions given the CPA I'd have adjusted my speed accordingly to maintain what I considered a safe distance.
Not that I'd have made the call in the first place unless my course had me crossing his bow.

[more]

Originally Posted by Snore

COLREGS works if everyone follows it. Stand-on vessels should stand-on.

not ,in mostly country (usa special) court rather ruled that personal watercraft (PWCs) were not ‘vessels’
down in food chain ,swimer,diver 300 meter from shore,kayak,kanu paddle boat 300 meter from shore. by law you can kill without any law problem. small yacht under 2000 tonn, and now floating container,trunk,garbage.
do you want court case you can find worldwide. on open see 12-200 nm from shore nobody real win in court. outside 200 nm no jurisdictions.
this is simply,but if end more info hire 1000-10000$ hour marine lawyer .carstenb can hire lawyer and sue this cargo ship or call port autority,cost guard

but if you wish sail in EU,med simply move from cargo ship,if you drive car move from first aid,police,firefigthing vechicle

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by carstenb

Please see above - I believe you have not read my original post clearly

thank you

Yup, I read it the first time.


Just being realistic. I've been in very similar situations before (I sail near Baltimore and cross channels and observe pilot boarding frequently).


The pilot was rude and what he said was technically incorrect. But the communication was clear, which is important. A polite discussion would not have increased safety, it would have just taken longer and introducedambiguity as to what was going to happen.



And is it polite, to impede in any way, a ship with a large crew and a value of thousands of dollars per hours, when I am just a pleasure boater? Many years ago my first boss told me to never interrupt a working man. It's still true. I wouldn't hold up a man mowing the grass, let alone a ship.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Bit of thread drift, but "where is the antenna" is a crucially important question and it's poor that ordinary plotters don't give any representation. As AIS transmits data about LOA, beam, and antenna location.

Not just "where is the antenna?", but "what specific points are used for the CPA calculation?". The answer to the latter may change between when the target is first detected and when the packet with the ship information is received.

However, and this is part of why AIS isn't blessed for collision avoidance, AIS data may be incorrect. Particularly when entered manually, such as the ship dimensions or antenna position. Supplementary data like AIS should be used to mitigate risk, not justify increasing it.

The pilot may have made his assumptions based on a report of the earlier conversion, or based on AIS. The former would have been rude; the latter would have been a mistake. (Particularly in the dark of night.)