Secluded, Quiet Harbor Mouth
- Thread starter jon b
- Start date
Was he breaking the speed limit?
I know that the "Steam gives way to sail" does not apply in the confines of a harbor, so I guess he must be speeding?
I know that the "Steam gives way to sail" does not apply in the confines of a harbor, so I guess he must be speeding?
Ha ha... No wake zone inside the harbor mouth. The right of way for a non powered vessle still applies in a harbor though I believe.
International COLREGS Rule 9.(b)
(b). A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.
(b). A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2015
- Messages
- 252
- Reaction score
- 110
- Location
- New York
- Website
- www.worldmediafilm.com
They are both significantly less than 20 metres in length and the sailing boat is clearly more restricted in its maneuverability.
Sadly the motorboat was being a ****!
I agree the motorboat was at fault for creating a wash, but the rules of the road are clear about navigating within a confined space and well worth reading up on.
I know this because I hold a commercially endorsed Yachtmasters Certificate and have done for 17 years..
The part about the "20 metres" means that only vessels that are in excess of 20 metres are allowed to "Impede" smaller vessels, for obvious reasons...
I know this because I hold a commercially endorsed Yachtmasters Certificate and have done for 17 years..
The part about the "20 metres" means that only vessels that are in excess of 20 metres are allowed to "Impede" smaller vessels, for obvious reasons...
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2015
- Messages
- 252
- Reaction score
- 110
- Location
- New York
- Website
- www.worldmediafilm.com
They were both restricted in their ability to maneuver so share the same status, the motorboat was the overtaking vessel and as such is the give way vessel ...... it should NEVER have passed in front of the other boat regardless of causing a wake or wether or not the other vessel was a sailboat
Correct but there's a lot of room to maneuver behind the sailboat here and this is still a no wake zone. Courtesy always wins... Same for us flying UAVs right?
The motor boat did not pass in front of the other boat, it was proceeding down the harbor close to the portside and the yacht tacked across the harbor to cross his path and thereby creating a dangerous situation.
Yes of course the motor vessel should have slowed down and simply passed astern of the yacht, In an ideal world the yacht would have looked back to see if any traffic was coming before tacking across the harbor and in this situation could have avoided this near miss by doing a full 180 degree turn, waiting for a few seconds for the motor boat to pass and then tacking to starboard when the way was clear.
Both skippers of the vessels still have a duty of care to avoid a collision, no matter who they perceive to be "At Fault".
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2015
- Messages
- 252
- Reaction score
- 110
- Location
- New York
- Website
- www.worldmediafilm.com
Not disagreeing ...but note the sailboat was had to tack because of the boundary of its navigable channel and did so before the powerboat was even its the picture. in fairness the sailboat also took evasive action by bearing away a little from its normal tack.
The powerboat was clearly seeing the port side of the sailing boat which, in my opinion, was entitled to hold its course in these circumstances.
Had there been a collision I suspect the powerboat would have been found to have been at fault.
No then.... BACK TO DRONES ..... lol
The powerboat was clearly seeing the port side of the sailing boat which, in my opinion, was entitled to hold its course in these circumstances.
Had there been a collision I suspect the powerboat would have been found to have been at fault.
No then.... BACK TO DRONES ..... lol
You would absolutely correct if they were not restricted by the confines of a narrow channel.
This situation is exactly why Rule 9(b) was introduced..
#############
A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.
#############
It is the habit of yachtsmen of tacking within a confined channel in the mistaken belief that they have the right to do so.
You could argue that the yachtsman in this instance also broke the cardinal rule of failing to keep a proper look out at all times.
Anyway, I can see I am not going to convince you, so as you say, back to drones..
Similar threads
