Solo Sailing & Lights displayed

[Idiens]

Sway - I'm glad your not in government, otherwise we might have to abandon boating.

In the mean time, avoid collisions.

[Boasun]

These may be points to argue in the courts.
1. Single handing, there will come a time where you are totally exhausted and need to sleep. Thus you are incapacitated through the exhaustion and your vessel is no longer under command.
2. By displaying the appropriate signal for Not Under Command you are indicating that your vessel can not maneuver as may be required. (due to your exhaustion.)
3. Due to your exhaustion you can no longer abide by Rule 5.
4. Add the extenuating circumstances are whether your vessel is hoved too or sailing under auto pilot. This would have to discussed also.
You would think that there should be appropriate day/night signals for the solo sailor. And at the present time The only one that even comes close to fitting the situation is the "Not Under Command" signals and maybe "Restricted in Maneuverbility."
Should there be a separated signal strictly for the solo sailors?
But then would we be able to start a tradition of displaying such signals when we are exhausted? One solo sailor (was in a collision with a ship) was admonished by the courts for not maintaining a proper lookout. He was not displaying any signal what so ever. Could it have help him in a court of law if he did so?
So we should be asking ourselves these questions and maybe asking the learned Judges of the courts these questions also and hopefully set a precedent to our favor.

What do you think??
What does the Race Committees of those single handed races around the world and across the seas think? Or do they even have an opinion on this?

[sailingdog]

I think Boasun's logic on it is good... and that it would make sense for a single-hander to display the red-over-red lights or ball over ball dayshapes.

[BarryL]

Hello,

According to the US Coast Guard web site:

The term "vessel not under command" means a vessel which through some exceptional circumstance is unable to maneuver as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel.

I don't think being tired or exhausted qualifies as an exceptional circumstance.

Here is the definition of rule 5:

Rule 5
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

So if you are a single handed sailor, and you are sleeping, you are breaking rule 5.

Barry

[sailingdog]

If you've been up for four days straight, guiding your boat through a storm and collapse from exhaustion, I think that does qualify as an exceptional circumstance. Most of the boats that qualify for Not Under Command would be incapable of dodging a boat that was headed for them, and IMHO, makes whether you can keep a legal lookout a moot point. If your boat can't do anything to avert the collision, does it really matter if you see the impending collision or not???

[Widowmaker]

A vessel is NUC who through some EXCEPTIONAL circumstances is unable to maneuver as required by the rules. It says nothing about keeping a proper lookout. If there was an incident you would be found guilty of displaying improper lights (sleeping is not exceptional), and not keeping a proper lookout.

It doesn't matter because if you have been in an incident you have already broken rule 2 and 6. Now you are just MORE at fault.

[sailingdog]

Collapsing from exhaustion and sleeping are two different things IMHO.

[JohnRPollard]

Originally Posted by Boasun

Should there be a separated signal strictly for the solo sailors?

Yes. Might I suggest Golf (Want a Pilot -- too tired to steer this damn boat anymore), Kilo (Desire to Communicate -- I may be a misanthrope, but now I'm getting pretty sick of myself too), or Victor (Require Assistance -- guess I really can't go it alone afterall)?

More seriously, "No."

When individuals choose to undertake a solo voyage of extended duration they are knowingly choosing to violate the COLREGS by virtue of their inability to maintain a proper lookout at all times. Most who do, get away with it by pure luck, or rather by odds that generally favor them. Some are never heard from again, while still others end up in court futilely defending their actions after a collision or allision incident.

But it's inconceivable that the rules would or should be modified in any way to encourage or sanction this violation. How about if we let the truckers drive as many hours as they want, too?

[JimHawkins]

Rule 5
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

This is a bit vague. The prevailing circumstances of a solo sailor include that there's only one person on board, and after some period of time he will be very tired. But of course I'm interpreting this literally, and the courts will interpret it as they choose.

Originally Posted by sailaway21

Quoting Farwell's Rules of the Nautical Road
... has caused the courts to hold a vessel in collision without a proper lookout at fault unless it can be proved that the other vessel was discovered as soon as a proper lookout would have discovered her.

Modern electronics may allow the sleeping solo sailor to claim he discovered the other vessel as soon as any lookout would have discovered her.

[JimHawkins]

Originally Posted by JohnRPollard

How about if we let the truckers drive as many hours as they want, too?

No, truckers are just land-based stinkpotters. No need to cut them any slack.