Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Objective criteria for identifying risk of collision are an indispensable prerequisite for the safe conduct of vessels and for efficient navigational assistance i. I N T R O D U C T I O N . Vessel traffic service systems (VTS systems) have been established, throughout the world, in areas of high traffic density. These systems, operating with such tools as VHF radiotelephony, land-based radar installations and ship's data processing, gather information to respond to collision and grounding danger, to organize traffic flow and assist allied activities. It is expected that VTS systems should effectively reduce the number of collisions in the VTS area. But efforts for collision avoidance can only be successful if the VTS operator in front of the shoreside radar screen is precisely instructed as to which measurements he has to make to identify a risk-of-collision situation. Uncertainties about the direction in which ships must take evasive action arise in VTS areas, where ships are free to engage in encounters.Collision avoidance rules for sea-going ships cover two different principles, one applying to ' fairways', and one applying to the ' open sea'. For both environments, unequivocal and easy-to-follow rules must exist to determine risk of collision, and in which direction evasive action must be taken. As far as headon situations in fairways are concerned, Rule 9 of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea meets these requirements:A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on her starboard side as is safe and practicable (Rule 9 a). This wording does not describe a collision situation. However, it is obvious that there does exist risk of collision between vessels proceeding along a fairway in opposite directions, when either of these vessels claims the space to the lefthand side of the fairway centre-line. There is then a definite instruction to take evasive action towards the right-hand edge of the fairway. Distances between vessels, time to closest approach, as well as distances to the fairway centre-line or the fairway edge can be measured and may, therefore, be used for the identification of a risk-of-collision situation. There is not much room for doubts as to what VTS operators should do. They have to verify each vessel's compliance with the obligation to keep clear of the fairway centre-line in the face of oncoming traffic. o 2. UNCERTAINTY AT SEA. When a ship is heading for the open sea, having left the fairway's lateral buoyage, the one-and-only ' Rule 9' must give way to as many as nine other rules, some of them imprecise and liable to various interpretations. Despite the uncertainty and diversity of these rules there is one 389
Objective criteria for identifying risk of collision are an indispensable prerequisite for the safe conduct of vessels and for efficient navigational assistance i. I N T R O D U C T I O N . Vessel traffic service systems (VTS systems) have been established, throughout the world, in areas of high traffic density. These systems, operating with such tools as VHF radiotelephony, land-based radar installations and ship's data processing, gather information to respond to collision and grounding danger, to organize traffic flow and assist allied activities. It is expected that VTS systems should effectively reduce the number of collisions in the VTS area. But efforts for collision avoidance can only be successful if the VTS operator in front of the shoreside radar screen is precisely instructed as to which measurements he has to make to identify a risk-of-collision situation. Uncertainties about the direction in which ships must take evasive action arise in VTS areas, where ships are free to engage in encounters.Collision avoidance rules for sea-going ships cover two different principles, one applying to ' fairways', and one applying to the ' open sea'. For both environments, unequivocal and easy-to-follow rules must exist to determine risk of collision, and in which direction evasive action must be taken. As far as headon situations in fairways are concerned, Rule 9 of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea meets these requirements:A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on her starboard side as is safe and practicable (Rule 9 a). This wording does not describe a collision situation. However, it is obvious that there does exist risk of collision between vessels proceeding along a fairway in opposite directions, when either of these vessels claims the space to the lefthand side of the fairway centre-line. There is then a definite instruction to take evasive action towards the right-hand edge of the fairway. Distances between vessels, time to closest approach, as well as distances to the fairway centre-line or the fairway edge can be measured and may, therefore, be used for the identification of a risk-of-collision situation. There is not much room for doubts as to what VTS operators should do. They have to verify each vessel's compliance with the obligation to keep clear of the fairway centre-line in the face of oncoming traffic. o 2. UNCERTAINTY AT SEA. When a ship is heading for the open sea, having left the fairway's lateral buoyage, the one-and-only ' Rule 9' must give way to as many as nine other rules, some of them imprecise and liable to various interpretations. Despite the uncertainty and diversity of these rules there is one 389
THE STEERING and sailing rules are changing with the development of available sources of information. This latest development is of special interest, as radar navigation has prompted a return to the principles of the 'Larboard Helm Rule'-if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not appreciably change, each of the vessels involved shall alter course so as to place herself to the right of the line of compass bearing to the approaching vessel'.This rule offered simple sailing instructions: each party to an encounter was required to take action. There was no stand-on vessel and no right of way. Our modern steering and sailing rules are based on the right of way of the vessel on the starboard side and this gives rise to difficulties unknown in the days of the larboard helm rule:(i) There are two vessels on collision course, one large and slow-acting, the other small and manoeuvreable; the smaller vessel can easily take avoiding action. As, however, she is approaching from starboard she is the stand-on vessel. The large vessel, though restricted in her ability to manoeuvre is thus obliged to take avoiding action.(ii) The officer on the bridge of the stand-on vessel recognizes risk of collision. The navigator on the bridge of the burdened vessel is distracted from his duty of keeping a proper look-out. Our existing rules require avoiding action on the part of the vessel that has not recognized the risk of collision.The larboard helm rule requires action by both vessels as soon as risk of collision has become imminent. After being in force for 2 3 years it was abolished when in 1863 the leading shipping nation changed its mind and it was decided to replace it by 'right of way'.Before gyro and radar were introduced and before precise course information for the helmsman or automatic pilot was available, the larboard helm rule contained one serious defect. The rule only comes into force when risk of collision has been established and risk of collision could then only be determined to any degree of certainty at very short distance, especially in reduced visibility. The opposition to the larboard helm rule may have been ashore rather than at sea, it must have been a very unpractical instrument for those whose responsibility it was to assess damages and pronounce judgement; no party could then prove the existence of risk of collision but both parties were required to take 403
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.