This is my response, possibly wrong. S should not have altered coarse but may have been reacting to the close-quarters situation being forced by P as she is required to do by Corlegs Rule 17 (a) (ii), (b) & (d). To those not used to racing, a boat who intends to pass very close to the stern of another boat can certainly appear to be on a collision course. P created this situation by not observing Coregs Rule 7, part a and Rule 8, parts a, b, c & d and Rule 16.
P should have not tried to pass so close the the stern of S that it resulted in a close-quarters situation, P should have passed at a safe distance. Safe distance, as in what would appear safe to a reasonable observer. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C .,_c._1416/page-3.html#docCont International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 with Canadian Modifications Rule 7 Risk of Collision (a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist. (b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects. (c) Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information. (d) In determining if risk of collision exists the following considerations shall be among those taken into account: (i) such risk shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not appreciably change, (ii) such risk may sometimes exist even when an appreciable bearing change is evident, particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a tow or when approaching a vessel at close range. Rule 8 Action to avoid Collision (a) Any action to avoid collision shall be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship. (b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided. (c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation. (d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear. (e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel shall slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion. (f) (i) A vessel which, by any of these Rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel. (ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or the safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this latter obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by the rules of this Part. (iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this Part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision. Rule 16 Action by Give-way Vessel Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear. Rule 17 Action by Stand-on Vessel (a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed. (ii) 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. (b) 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. (c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side. (d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way. On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 14:11, Hoyt, Mike via CnC-List <[email protected]> wrote: > A friend described a situation from the past weekend that I would like to > pose to the collective brain trust on this list. There were three boats > involved. All three were out day sailing. Two boats were travelling the > same direction and the owners knew each other so they had an impromptu > “race” as they were tacking upwind in a commercial harbour. These two > boats had no verbal agreement to race but they were each trying to best the > other. The third boat had a couple likely in their sixties out sailing by > themselves. > > > > One of the two boats that was “racing” was on port tack (we will call this > P) while the couple out sailing was on stbd tack (S). The heolmsman on P > decided he would pass close by the stern of S. P passing astern of S is in > my mind obeying Colregs in Canada. However since P was being competitive P > planned to pass close by the stern of S. Before this could happen S tacked > to port at close quarters not giving P sufficient room to avoid a > collision. The boats ended up colliding with the sides of the hulls > touching but no readily apparent damage or injury to either party. P > hailed to S asking if everyone was OK and received no response and both > boats proceeded on their way. > > > > So my question. Is a port boat passing close astern of a Stbd boat > sufficient to satisfy the Colregs? Does S radically altering course > without giving P room to keep clear mean that S has violated Colregs? > > > > I know that if this was an organized race that according to RRS S would be > at fault. I am wondering how this would be interepreted under Colregs? > The third boat was involved only as a witness > > > > Thankfully I was not involved in this in any way. > > > > Mike > > Persistence > > Halifax, NS > > _______________________________________________ > > Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each > and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - > use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray > >
_______________________________________________ Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
