Author |
Message |
Mark Howe
Moderator Username: unclemark
Post Number: 799 Registered: 08-2003
| Posted on Saturday, November 04, 2017 - 11:47 am: |
|
I had some trouble with the previous post. Try the actual report: http://s3.amazonaws.com/CHINFO/USS+Fitzgerald+and+USS+John+S+McCain+Collision+Re ports.pdf |
Ted Lavino
Moderator Username: tlavino
Post Number: 226 Registered: 01-2006
| Posted on Thursday, November 02, 2017 - 10:05 pm: |
|
Interesting followup regarding the two redent Navy collisions: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/crew-errors-blame-deadly-navy-collisions-report-says-1 42604219--abc-news-topstories.html |
Mark Howe
Moderator Username: Unclemark
Post Number: 140 Registered: 08-2003
| Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 08:13 am: |
|
Some of you may not realize you are no longer getting email notification of Saddleback class postings. Since we set up a new topic for Saddleback classes, nobody gets emails of any of the old topics. You will have to re-edit your profile for "Saddleback Classes" to get the notification on your email. Click "Edit Profile" on the "Utilities" section to the left and check the box for Saddleback Classes. |
Mark Howe
Moderator Username: Unclemark
Post Number: 120 Registered: 08-2003
| Posted on Thursday, September 02, 2004 - 10:33 am: |
|
Considering that we in similar circumstances would be overtaking based on the same assumptions as in the artical but would not be using signals [except perhaps the danger signal if we had the horn handy] it emphasises the importance of body language in feeling comfortable that the overtaken vessel knows we are overtaking. Another important consideration is that we look ahead of the vessel we are passing to see what events ahead of him he might need to react to so that we can anticipate his maneuvers. |
Ted Lavino
Senior Member Username: Tlavino
Post Number: 197 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Thursday, September 02, 2004 - 10:04 am: |
|
Greetings All, an excerpt from Ocean Navigator Topic: Rules of the Road Issue No.: 46 Date: 08/31/04 Title: Sounding Intent Requires a Reply This newsletter is a free monthly resource published by Ocean Navigator. You have received this newsletter as a registered newsletter subscriber. If you wish to unsubscribe or feel you have received this in error, please see the information at the end of the newsletter. Title: Sounding Intent Requires a Reply By: Jim Austin We’ll review a collision that occurred some years ago to illustrate an important Rule. A cargo vessel proceeding in inland waters was gradually overtaking a fishing vessel. The channel width was about 1,500 feet, providing adequate depth for smaller vessels to navigate toward the margins, and allowing deep-draft vessels more than sufficient room for passage. The weather was good and daylight had arrived. On this occasion, a fishing vessel was approximately 1.5 miles ahead of a cargo vessel in midchannel, and since the fishing vessel was slightly to starboard, the cargo vessel decided to pass to port. At about three-quarters of a mile, the overtaking cargo vessel gave two short whistle blasts to indicate its intent and came left approximately 10 degrees to start passing. Under Inland Rules such a signal is one of intent, so it requires a reply, either by sounding the same (one or two short) implying agreement, or decline indicated by the danger signal. Despite hearing no reply being, the overtaking vessel proceeded to pass. Without warning or signal, the fishing vessel turned to port just ahead and across the bow of the oncoming ship. The overtaking vessel stopped engines, sounded the danger signal, backed full, sounded one short and ordered right full rudder. When the fishing vessel was seen emerging safely off the port bow, engines were stopped, but suddenly the fishing vessel veered to the right and back under the bow of the oncoming vessel. Once more, the engines were backed full, but this time collision occurred with the cargo vessel’s stem striking the fishing boat on its starboard side. The latter sunk and the captain, sleeping below, was lost. The situation on the fishing vessel was thus: The captain was asleep below, and an untrained helmsman, who stated that he was unfamiliar with the Rules, was the only person on watch. He said that no whistle was heard, that the engines were unusually noisy, and that he was unaware of any vessel coming up astern. At one point he left the wheel to check an unfamiliar engine sound, and when he looked up, he saw the depth marks on the oncoming hull, at which point he spun the wheel to starboard. The hearing before a Coast Guard examiner determined that the cargo vessel attempted to pass before receiving assent from the overtaken vessel. This finding resulted in sanctions against the pilot of the cargo vessel. The subsequent appeal centered on two aspects: A. As the overtaken (thus stand-on) vessel, the fishing vessel was obligated to maintain course and speed (c/s), and not to attempt to cross the bow of the overtaking vessel. B. The overtaking vessel should not be expected to await reply (agreement or decline) from the vessel ahead, "since fishing vessels never do respond to whistle signals from ocean vessels." The officer hearing the appeal questioned whether or not the statutory duty to maintain course and speed had come into effect -- did stand-on/give-way status even exist? For a vessel to be required (expected) to fulfill its obligation to maintain c/s, it would have had to be aware that (in this case) an overtaking situation existed and that it was in the role of the stand-on vessel with the obligations that attend that privilege. With no whistle having been heard and no vessel seen coming up astern, the officer hearing the appeal referenced "a line of judicial authority holding that the duty to maintain course and speed does not attach until the vessel ahead knows of, and has assented to, the proposal of the vessel astern to pass." As for not having to await a reply, the appeal officer made two points. One, that if in fact vessels are not following the Rules (failing to reply), that does not relieve another from following them, and that if the former situation is the case, that should be dealt with as a separate matter. While recognizing that the cargo vessel did violate a statute in failing to await a reply, the multiple failures of the fishing vessel were deemed to be the primary causes of the collision. The finding of the examiner was put aside. This episode prompts a review of the difference between Inland and ColRegs requirements for passing signals. Inland maneuvering signals are those of intent and, as such, are proposals requiring either agreement (repeating the same signal) or non-agreement (sounding the danger signal of five short). Under the ColRegs, they are action or rudder signals, sounded whenever another vessel is in sight and the rudder is put over, with no response required ("in sight" should be tempered with reason!). One glitch in the ColRegs is the variation for narrow channels "when overtaking can take place only if the vessel to be overtaken has to take action to permit safe passing." In that situation, two prolonged followed immediately by either one or two short, depending on whether the intent is to pass to the other vessel’s starboard or port side. This does require a reply of assent (prolonged-short-prolonged-short) or denial (danger signal). Notice that the two prolonged are essentially an intent preface -- the one place in the ColRegs where intent is signaled and a reply is required. One thing that is never done is to give a cross signal -- replying to one blast with two, or vice versa. If that happens, confusion lurks, and the danger signal is warranted. -- Jim Austin jaustin793@aol.com Related Articles Title: Overtaking -- Part 1 (Rule13) http://cms.navigatorpublishing.com/enewsl.asp?l=453 Title: Overtaking -- Part 2 (Rule 13) http://cms.navigatorpublishing.com/enewsl.asp?l=454 Author Bio: Jim Austin, M.D. is a graduate of the US Naval Academy, later serving the Navy as a navigator and OOD on destroyers. He earned a medical degree from the university of Vermont, holds a 100-ton master's license with a radar observer endorsement, and for many years has taught sailing and navigation in Massachussets and Vermont. |
|