Thread for Basic COLREGS Questions

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by justwaiting

2. More prescriptive rules in relationship to vessels powered by sail would require that all masters of vessels understanding sailing (not going to happen). In fact the Colregs even recognize that in some cases even other sailors may not be able to determine what tack you are and and provides for where there is doubt that you will assume that you are the give way vessel.

Not quite true, at least not in the UK back in the early 80's when I sat for my Second Mates ticket.
One of the questions frequently asked in the oral examination was on the lines of something like this.

You are on watch at night, good vis, and with a moderate wind from the North, you are on a course of NE x N when you see a single green light 4 points on the port bow, and the bearing is steady
1) What is it?
2) What actions are you going to take?
3) Between what compass point headings is the other vessel on?

This is a good question to test the candidates knowledge of the Colregs, including actions to take to avoid collision, and also to test knowledge of arcs of visibility of navigation lights, and finally, to be able to know what headings a sail boat can keep given the wind direction.

Now I dont know about how other countries examine Mates and Master's, but this is how it is done in the UK.

[El Pinguino]

Course is between SxE and NExN ... just did that sans paper and pencil.... I think its right

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Course is between SxE and NExN ... just did that sans paper and pencil.... I think its right

Based on sailing 4 points to the wind, spot on, although some grumpy examiner would say that if the sail boat was on a course of SxE, then you would be seeing both side lights.
At least they were good enough to let us use paper and pencil, being in that room tended to scramble the head a touch.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by nigel1

Based on sailing 4 points to the wind, spot on, although some grumpy examiner would say that if the sail boat was on a course of SxE, then you would be seeing both side lights.
At least they were good enough to let us use paper and pencil, being in that room tended to scramble the head a touch.

So tell him SxE1/4E.......

Based on sailing 4 points off the wind it would be NE... missed that

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by robbievardon

. . . I fail to understand how a vessel in a stand on situation following the rules can have less right to decide how it should cross the path of the give way vessel than the give way vessel which in itself is probably the most frequent cause of collision at sea. Stand on is stand on,give way is the prescribed option for the give way vessel, bearing in mind that the No 1 aim is to avoid a collision so that in all cases a collision is the fault of both Masters. . . . . .

This is a deep question!

But I think that the answer is clear --

Simultaneous maneuvers cause collisions. So there just isn't any other way to do collision avoidance except to give one vessel the right to set up the crossing, and that vessel is the give-way one.

So I believe that the stand-on vessel has no choice but to accept the solution of the give-way vessel, at least until he has completed his maneuver.

Once the give-way vessel has completed his maneuver, then if the stand-on vessel has a reasonable doubt that the maneuver was adequate to create a safe crossing, then he has the right to maneuver himself, but he is obligated to give the give-way vessel a reasonable chance first.

Alternatively, you can call and discuss passing arrangements.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by bmz

. . .
As I've said earlier, we should all understand the Colreg terminology and use it when appropriate. But it is not appropriate to use it as an attack on a commentor, where there is no substantive difference between the words he used and the Colreg terminology, and where the terminology itself is not the issue (like my original statements that commenced this thread).

I've been at sea and am only just catching up on this thread. Seems to have grown legs!

As to showing the substance of the difference in the concept of "standing on" versus the concept of "right of way" -- contrary to this, the question has been answered in an extremely detailed way by various people. Try Post #1 in this thread just for one example. If anyone still thinks they are "sort of the same" and just "semantically" different -- then there's probably nothing else which can be said about it.

As to "burdened and privileged" -- the difference between the plain meaning of these terms, and terms used in the COLREGs is even greater. Far from being "privileged", if you are the stand-on vessel, you are actually more burdened than the give-way vessel. You are burdened with the obligation to hold your course and speed while the give-way vessel has something more like a privilege -- the privilege of initially determining how the vessels will cross.

And if the same person who insists that it is OK to use such terms, also advises sailors to ignore their legal obligation to stand on at certain times in certain crossings -- then it is quite clear that the problem is much greater than mere semantics.

[justwaiting]

Originally Posted by nigel1

Not quite true, at least not in the UK back in the early 80's when I sat for my Second Mates ticket.
One of the questions frequently asked in the oral examination was on the lines of something like this.

You are on watch at night, good vis, and with a moderate wind from the North, you are on a course of NE x N when you see a single green light 4 points on the port bow, and the bearing is steady
1) What is it?
2) What actions are you going to take?
3) Between what compass point headings is the other vessel on?

This is a good question to test the candidates knowledge of the Colregs, including actions to take to avoid collision, and also to test knowledge of arcs of visibility of navigation lights, and finally, to be able to know what headings a sail boat can keep given the wind direction.

Now I dont know about how other countries examine Mates and Master's, but this is how it is done in the UK.

Point taken.

I may well have misunderstood what some were calling for - but i got the impression that it was far more understanding than you gave in that example..

I know that some commercial captains have a hell of a lot of knowledge of sails. British tickets had to be earned, the old man earned his the hard way ending up with British Foreign Going Masters Unlimited. Unfortunately some of the Maritime collages do not have the same standards to be met.

The only ticket i ever got was a Coxwains so that i could continue to skipper my commercial fishing boat.

[robbievardon]

Dockhead,surely the give way vessel has no choice but to accept the stand on vessel will maintain speed and course and act accordingly and not the reverse as you seem to suggest? Additional question for all; I have frequented a port where access is limited by the narrowness of the chanell and a red/green light system is employed. Red for do not enter,green to proceed. If a vessel on approach is given a green light does this mean it has "right of way" over all other traffic?
Transmitterdam,I still await your response to my reply to your post

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

This is a deep question!

But I think that the answer is clear --

Simultaneous maneuvers cause collisions. So there just isn't any other way to do collision avoidance except to give one vessel the right to set up the crossing, and that vessel is the give-way one.

So I believe that the stand-on vessel has no choice but to accept the solution of the give-way vessel, at least until he has completed his maneuver.

Once the give-way vessel has completed his maneuver, then if the stand-on vessel has a reasonable doubt that the maneuver was adequate to create a safe crossing, then he has the right to maneuver himself, but he is obligated to give the give-way vessel a reasonable chance first.

Alternatively, you can call and discuss passing arrangements.

Incorrect.

The stand on vessel must stand on until the give way vessel cannot avoid collision based on their own maneuvers. In other words do not change course or speed unless you absolutely must to avoid collision. The give way vessel is supposed to make it clear they will give way. For all you know, they may be holding a collision course with you until they pass an obstacle you can't or didn't see, before they make the turn. If you turn for no good reason, and a collision results, when the give way vessel had a perfectly good solution, guess what?

[transmitterdan]

Robbie,

No, there is no concept of right of way in the COLREGS when sailing in international waters. Each country is free to make its own rules inside the demarcation line. In the US there is one situation where a right of way exists during a passing on certain rivers where a down stream vessel has right of way and determines the passing strategy. In such a case the upstream traffic can generally hold position over ground owing to the downstream current. There is no way a downstream vessel can hold position.

In the hypothetical case you mentioned several posts back I think rule 9 would confer give way status to the sailing vessel. The sailing vessel should not impede the progress of a vessel constrained in her ability to maneuver. Sails up does not mean stand on against all other non-sailing vessels as many seem to believe.

Local vessel traffic control does not confer any "rights". Rather it creates obligations. For example, when the light is green you should not just sit there because somehow you think you have the right to do as you please.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by robbievardon

Dockhead,surely the give way vessel has no choice but to accept the stand on vessel will maintain speed and course and act accordingly and not the reverse as you seem to suggest?

Well, sure, but the point is that the give-way vessel is free to maneuver as he likes, and has lots of choices of what to do. The give-way vessel must maneuver, but is in command of the crossing. The stand-on vessel must "hold still" and is not allowed to maneuver.
This is during ONE PHASE of a crossing -- that phase which begins at the time that vessels are in sight of one another and a risk of collision exists, and ends when the stand-on vessel has a reasonable doubt that the give-way vessel is taking adequate action.

Originally Posted by robbievardon

Additional question for all; I have frequented a port where access is limited by the narrowness of the chanell and a red/green light system is employed. Red for do not enter,green to proceed. If a vessel on approach is given a green light does this mean it has "right of way" over all other traffic?. . . .

That would not be a COLREGs matter, but a question of local rules.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

. . . In the hypothetical case you mentioned several posts back I think rule 9 would confer give way status to the sailing vessel. The sailing vessel should not impede the progress of a vessel constrained in her ability to maneuver. Sails up does not mean stand on against all other non-sailing vessels as many seem to believe.. . .

A more advanced COLREGs question is this one:

How does the obligation to "not impede" under Rules 9 and 10 interact with the obligation to stand-on under Rule 17?

The COLREGs are not actually as obscure or hard to understand as many people say they are -- they are actually very beautifully constructed. However, this question is a bit of a brain-twister!

[robbievardon]

Back again,but I need to pose a few more questions to all. I am sure many of us older sailors use the words we learned as young sailors and have no misunderstandings of what they refer to. The introduction of the motor car into the discussion seems utterly rediculous to me. If you were to walk down the street and ask people what the various nautical terms meant, what sort of response would you expect to receive? Would a nuclear scientist fair better? I doubt it so how about some realism here. If the subject is for sailors then forget the eronious comparisons. Understanding the intended meaning and acting accordingly surely is the aim. How about "keep on going as you are" for the stand on vessel and "avoid a crash" for the give way? That should be easy to remember. The manic dependence on electronics really worries me, I meet so many people (sailors or should I say boaters to be correct) who do not even have a chart aboard their vessel (sorry sailboat or motorboat should I say) who would be completely lost (Literally) if they lost their electrical systems and don't tell me that is impossible,how about a fire to fry your cables or instruments or just simple short circuit to flatten batteries. I am just reading about a would be round the world sailor who got into that situation in the middle of the Indian Ocean but by shear luck was able to contact land and get advice on how to restart their engine to charge up the system. Too little time seems to be allotted to watch keeping ON DECK and early action to avoid collisions. As mentioned elsewhere multi million dollar warships with all their electronics still have collisions perhaps because in many cases there are few "windows " to see out of. I see no reason why sail should not alter course to pass under the stern of a merchant vessel so long as the action is taken well in advance and the intention is clear even though this is not required by the C.regs. Is it really so time critical to a sailboat compared with a mechantman who may be racing to catch a tide to get into dock. I faced this decision recently

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

A more advanced COLREGs question is this one:

How does the obligation to "not impede" under Rules 9 and 10 interact with the obligation to stand-on under Rule 17?

The COLREGs are not actually as obscure or hard to understand as many people say they are -- they are actually very beautifully constructed. However, this question is a bit of a brain-twister!

The Colregs might be beautifully constructed, but your question is one of the biggest stumbling blocks of all the Rules.
First point, Rules 9 and 10 apply to fairly constricted stretches of water. A TSS lane might be typically 2 to 3 miles wide, and a narrow channel a lot less. These are distances which if applied to two vessels in open waters would have the stand on vessel taking action if the give way vessel had failed to do so.

So we not only need to look at Rules 9, 10 and 17, we need to look at Rule 8, specifically 8f, which outlines the actions required.

Look at a narrow channel situation, if risk of collision exists, there is not a great deal of time between establishing the risk and actual collision.
This is why it is imperative that the vessel required not to impeded the passage, or safe passage of another vessel, must take action as soon as possible, and give the other vessel sufficient room. But, in doing so, the action of the vessel required to not impede, must take into account any action that the other vessel may make, as that vessel may have decided that risk of collision does exist and takes action.
So for example, if a small boat is crossing a channel and has a constrained vessel following the channel, on a steady bearing port bow, prudent action might be to stop, slow down, reverse course, or parallel course of the other vessel. A turn to port to cross astern may end in tears, the danger being that the constrained vessel has decided that risk of collision is imminent and makes a turn to starboard (which is correct)

The not to impede bit means don't get into a position which sets up a risk of collision scenario, and taking early action complies with 17(a)(ii)

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

Incorrect.

The stand on vessel must stand on until the give way vessel cannot avoid collision based on their own maneuvers. In other words do not change course or speed unless you absolutely must to avoid collision. The give way vessel is supposed to make it clear they will give way. For all you know, they may be holding a collision course with you until they pass an obstacle you can't or didn't see, before they make the turn. If you turn for no good reason, and a collision results, when the give way vessel had a perfectly good solution, guess what?

This is a generally very good analysis, but not quite correct in one detail -- concerning WHEN the stand-on vessel is allowed to maneuver.

Rule 17 says

"The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules."

The stand-on vessel MUST take action at a different point:

When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid
collision.

You don't have to wait until you "absolutely must in order to avoid collision." But otherwise, a very good description of the correct behavior of the stand-on vessel, and good explanation of why the stand-on vessel should not casually leave off standing-on.