The Master of a Vessel
D Parker
excellent point in the "RYA sailing school to avoid thread" and I am afraid
it got lost in the clutter.
In the case of an emergency, like a Man Over Board, the lack of a designated
skipper will lead to immediate problems. More likely, a keystone cops event
will occur rather than a proper MOB retrieval.
The safety of the vessel and crew depend on a good management structure.
The following is taken from commercial vessel law. Its doubtful that it
would vary too much for recreational boaters.
Firstly, Small Vessels operating commercially under the British Flag or in
British waters must comply with the Merchant Shipping Regulations or an MCA
Code of Practice. refer
http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-survey___certification/mcga-dqs_st_cvs_code_vessel_safety.htm
Secondly,
"master" includes any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a
vessel;
"crew" includes every person, other than the master or a pilot, employed or
engaged in any capacity on board a vessel;
refer. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/uksi_20063224_en.pdf
Therefore a ten year old kid steering a dinghy is deemed to be the master of
the vessel, just as an adult is in a yacht.
In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then both
persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible persons
with all the onus and liability shared.
Thats not a great scenario IMHO. If your not at the wheel, why take
responsibility for someone elses mistakes. There are gaol terms in this
stuff. Why do it? Why hold an insurance policy on the boat but leave
yourself personally liable for the actions of others? I dont get it.
DP
Dave Bulllar
"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
news:45aab614$0$27947$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Excuse me for starting a new thread on the subject but someone made an
> excellent point in the "RYA sailing school to avoid thread" and I am
> afraid it got lost in the clutter.
>
> In the case of an emergency, like a Man Over Board, the lack of a
> designated skipper will lead to immediate problems. More likely, a
> keystone cops event will occur rather than a proper MOB retrieval.
>
> The safety of the vessel and crew depend on a good management structure.
>
>
>
> Therefore a ten year old kid steering a dinghy is deemed to be the master
> of the vessel, just as an adult is in a yacht.
Nowhere does it say or imply that the person holding the steering wheel or
tiller is deemed to be the master.
He could well be the boatswain.
Yes it is important that someone be in charge and take control, but even
that does not necessarily mean take the wheel.
>
> In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then both
> persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible persons
> with all the onus and liability shared.
>
> Thats not a great scenario IMHO. If your not at the wheel, why take
> responsibility for someone elses mistakes. There are gaol terms in this
> stuff. Why do it? Why hold an insurance policy on the boat but leave
> yourself personally liable for the actions of others? I dont get it.
>
I don't understand your philosophy here.
If I am in charge of a vessel and a crew member to whom I have given a task
makes a silly mistake then I must take responsibility for misjudging his/her
competence, but he/she must take a share of responsibility for making the
mistake.
If I were teaching my ten year old to sail a mirror dinghy and he was
steering and he hit a swimmer then
I should not have let him steer where people were swimming.
That my view.
--
Dave
Peter Köhlmann
< snip >
> In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then both
> persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible persons
> with all the onus and liability shared.
>
> Thats not a great scenario IMHO. If your not at the wheel, why take
> responsibility for someone elses mistakes.
And that is where all this "shared, no one better than the others" fails
completely if there is an incident.
All will point to the helmsman as being the responsible one, even if he is
on his first trip ever with a boat. After all, he is "the one making the
important decisions" at the time. Even when he isn't
> There are gaol terms in this
> stuff. Why do it? Why hold an insurance policy on the boat but leave
> yourself personally liable for the actions of others? I dont get it.
>
That is the problem. *Someone* has the responsibility. Not all of them. And
it also cannot change with the helmsman or other arbitrary things, as in a
case of an incident nobody is prepared to take the blame alone. This is the
very reason democracy does not work on a boat. It works well for items
like "what to have for supper, where to go to next (if possible)" and other
stuff not important for the safety of boat and crew.
--
Klingon function calls do not have 'parameters' -
they have 'arguments' - and they ALWAYS WIN THEM.
Alisdair
"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
news:45aab614$0$27947$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Therefore a ten year old kid steering a dinghy is deemed to be the master
> of the vessel, just as an adult is in a yacht.
>
> In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then both
> persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible persons
> with all the onus and liability shared.
A youngster could easilly be steering a vessel under the command of someone
else, in the way a provisional car licence holder can be driving whilst
being accompanied by a full licence holder; the licence holder is very
likely to be prosecuted for the driver's shortcomings.
Holding the tiller doesn't necessarily make you master.
> Thats not a great scenario IMHO. If your not at the wheel, why take
> responsibility for someone elses mistakes. There are gaol terms in this
> stuff. Why do it? Why hold an insurance policy on the boat but leave
> yourself personally liable for the actions of others? I dont get it.
>
You don't trust anyone else to steer for you? When you cast off, do you do
it yourself in case your crew get it wrong? Do you do all the cooking in
case your crew don't know how to light a gas stove and set fire to the boat?
Do you anchor while you use the heads? Do you use the heads on your crew's
behalf because they may do something with the seacock that will sink the
boat?
Alisdair
Jack Dale
the skipper / master. I seldom take the helm.
On ACC boats there may be a couple of helmsmen: one to start, one for the
race. Some even have a different helmsman for windward and leeward legs.
Alinghi for example :
Skipper:
Brad Butterworth
Helmsman:
Jochen Schuemann, Peter Holmberg, Ed Baird
On ocean races there are more than a few helmsmen; but just 1 skipper /
master.
Jack
"Peter Köhlmann" <peter.k...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:eoeha4$dqv$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
D Parker
"Dave Bulllar" <comesail...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:Zf2dnRxp7fWlITfY...@bt.com...
>
> "D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
> news:45aab614$0$27947$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> Excuse me for starting a new thread on the subject but someone made an
>> excellent point in the "RYA sailing school to avoid thread" and I am
>> afraid it got lost in the clutter.
>>
>> In the case of an emergency, like a Man Over Board, the lack of a
>> designated skipper will lead to immediate problems. More likely, a
>> keystone cops event will occur rather than a proper MOB retrieval.
>>
>> The safety of the vessel and crew depend on a good management structure.
>>
>>
>
>>
>> Therefore a ten year old kid steering a dinghy is deemed to be the master
>> of the vessel, just as an adult is in a yacht.
>
> Nowhere does it say or imply that the person holding the steering wheel or
> tiller is deemed to be the master.
> He could well be the boatswain.
It certainly infers it. Here's the quote again.. "master" includes any
person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a
vessel;
In command would easily be discribed as being at the helm..
DP
D Parker
"Peter Köhlmann" <peter.k...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:eoeha4$dqv$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
Yep.. I agree 100%
DP
D Parker
"Jack Dale" <jack...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:F7Bqh.153971$hn.11763@edtnps82...
> The helmsman may not be the skipper / master. As an instructor, I am
> always the skipper / master. I seldom take the helm.
>
> On ACC boats there may be a couple of helmsmen: one to start, one for the
> race. Some even have a different helmsman for windward and leeward legs.
Yes. And it is then the job of the coroner, police etc to assertain
liability over any incident.
DP
D Parker
"Alisdair" <ne...@agurney.com> wrote in message
news:eoek9f$633$1$830f...@news.demon.co.uk...
Now you're just being ridiculous. Of course people perform assorted duties
on board any vessel. However there "must" be a chain of command. Albeit,
friendly and congenial on my boat. I expect the same when crewing on OPBs.
DP
D Parker
> news:45aab614$0$27947$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
>> Therefore a ten year old kid steering a dinghy is deemed to be the master
>> of the vessel, just as an adult is in a yacht.
>>
>> In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then
>> both persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible
>> persons with all the onus and liability shared.
>
> A youngster could easilly be steering a vessel under the command of
> someone else, in the way a provisional car licence holder can be driving
> whilst being accompanied by a full licence holder; the licence holder is
> very likely to be prosecuted for the driver's shortcomings.
> Holding the tiller doesn't necessarily make you master.
Read the Legislation again. We are talking about the water. Not a car!
It clearly states...... the "master" includes any person (except a pilot)
having command or charge of a vessel;
Of course, if the kids dad was onboard he would most likely be the one
facing any charges in the event of an incident. However, with no Dad on
board the kid is more than liable.
DP
Jack Dale
And that would tend to be the master; not the helmsman.
(Confused by the comment.)
Jack
D Parker
Not exactly Jack. Yes the master (Captain if thats who you are refereing to)
would be liable. However, under the law the master would easily be
considered to be the helmsman of the moment.
It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
DP
Jack Dale
>
> It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
> any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
> helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
As an instructor, I seldom take the helm, but I am always master of the
vessel. While I may not be in control, I am in command. I have standing
orders that I am to called if we see any another vessel. Quote below:
STANDING ORDERS WAKE OR CALL the skipper IF:
a.. You see any lights, ships or objects
b.. You notice approaching weather; lightning or low, dark clouds to
windward
c.. Increase in wind speed or change in direction
d.. Rapidly falling barometer
e.. Unidentifiable sounds
f.. IF IN DOUBT, ANYTIME FOR ANY REASON
The skipper who knows that he/she will be awakened by the crew for these or
any reason ALWAYS sleeps better!
On an trip that requires that I sleep underway, these standing orders are
read and initialed by all the crew.
If you "Google" standing orders from other vessels you will find similar
orders.
Jack
__________________________________________________
Jack Dale
ISPA Yachtmaster Offshore Instructor
CYA Advanced Cruising Instructor
Director, Swiftsure Sailing Academy
http://www.swiftsuresailing.com
__________________________________________________
Ian
D Parker wrote:
> In the case of an emergency, like a Man Over Board, the lack of a designated
> skipper will lead to immediate problems. More likely, a keystone cops event
> will occur rather than a proper MOB retrieval.
That's a very bad example. What would you do if the skipper was asleeep
when someonwent overboard - wake him/her up and ask what to do?
> In the case of "Shared responsibility", as some posters profess, then both
> persons would be deemed to be master. Thus deemed the responsible persons
> with all the onus and liability shared.
Fine by me.
> Thats not a great scenario IMHO. If your not at the wheel, why take
> responsibility for someone elses mistakes.
The same question could be asked of any skipper who ever leaves the
helm, or sleeps.
> There are gaol terms in this
> stuff. Why do it? Why hold an insurance policy on the boat but leave
> yourself personally liable for the actions of others? I dont get it.
That seems to assume that skipper = owner...
Ian
Ian
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> And that is where all this "shared, no one better than the others" fails
> completely if there is an incident.
> All will point to the helmsman as being the responsible one, even if he is
> on his first trip ever with a boat. After all, he is "the one making the
> important decisions" at the time. Even when he isn't
When Chris and I talked about shared responsibility, we were referring
to groups of similar experience going sailing.
Ian
Ian
D Parker wrote:
> Now you're just being ridiculous. Of course people perform assorted duties
> on board any vessel. However there "must" be a chain of command.
Why?
Why can't two people who know and trust each other share the
responsibility? Would you expect a husband and wife who own a boat
jointly and have sailed together for twenty years, to have a "chain of
command"?
Ian
Duncan Heenan
Being master is a management role. I doubt if the Master of the QE2 ever
takes the helm.
Peter Köhlmann
No. Being at the helm means "being at the helm". Quite often relativly
inexperienced people are at the helm. They are not "having command" or
are "in charge" of the vessel then.
--
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend: and inside a dog,
it's too dark to read." -- Groucho Marx
D Parker
"Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:1168845952.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Man.. you ever been married? I can guarantee there is a chain of command!
DP
D Parker
"Duncan Heenan" <pleasenospamme...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in
message news:45ab3bbb$1...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
Valid point. However youre talking about the Captain- a rank given. Not the
position of the moment.
Is the Captain the Master when he is Off Watch? I believe his CO would then
be the master. Not that I know. I no zip about shipping. Other than they
hurt the gelcoat if you hit one.
DP
Duncan Heenan
watch. The Officer of the Watch is the Offcier of the Watch, which has
delegated authority, but the Master is still responsible overall.
toad
> The Master is always the Master, unless relieved of command, even when off
> watch. The Officer of the Watch is the Offcier of the Watch, which has
> delegated authority, but the Master is still responsible overall.
I may be wrong but I've always assumed there is some measure of joint
responsibility in all boat crews. I seem to recal that not long ago
there was a pair doing a delivery trip in a power boat. While the
skipper was asleep the bloke on the helm hit one of the bouys in the
needles channel and sank the boat. I'm pretty sure the helmsman paid a
far larger share of compensation than the Skipper. ISTR it wasn't the
skipper of the Pride of Bilbao that got arrested over the Ouzoand in
HMS Nottingham ISTR the Skipper wasn't even on board at the time of the
incident.
Speaking for myself I want my share of the blame/credit on any boat I'm
crewing on. If we win a race, I played a key role. In the same way if
we t-bone a brand new boat on the start line, then I played a key role.
Whether the legal position supports that I'm not sure and I don't
really care.
chrisR
Who is responsible when "George" has the Helm? ;-).
ChrisR
Peter McLelland
not, and maritme law is something that has developed over very many years.
Your personal relationship with the crew and other officers of a vessel is
one thing and that is completely up to you, the legal chain of reponsibility
on the other hand is well defined and not optional. If you are in law the
master of a vessel you are responsible unless you can show that you took all
reasonable precautions.
Peter
Peter McLelland
"chrisR" <ch...@noyachtsmen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45ab...@nntp.onyx.net...
>
>
> Who is responsible when "George" has the Helm? ;-).
>
> ChrisR
>
watch leader etc come before george in the pecking order of responsibility.
Peter
Chris Tietjens
> "Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1168845952.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > D Parker wrote:
> >
> >> Now you're just being ridiculous. Of course people perform assorted
> >> duties
> >> on board any vessel. However there "must" be a chain of command.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > Why can't two people who know and trust each other share the
> > responsibility? Would you expect a husband and wife who own a boat
> > jointly and have sailed together for twenty years, to have a "chain of
> > command"?
> >
> Because legal resposibility is defined by the law
If only it was defined somewhere.
Ian
Peter McLelland wrote:
> "Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1168845952.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Why can't two people who know and trust each other share the
> > responsibility? Would you expect a husband and wife who own a boat
> > jointly and have sailed together for twenty years, to have a "chain of
> > command"?
> >
> Because legal resposibility is defined by the law whether one likes it or
> not, and maritme law is something that has developed over very many years.
> Your personal relationship with the crew and other officers of a vessel is
> one thing and that is completely up to you, the legal chain of reponsibility
> on the other hand is well defined and not optional. If you are in law the
> master of a vessel you are responsible unless you can show that you took all
> reasonable precautions.
Have you read the rest of this thread, and the related one?
What evidence do you have that a master is necessary on a small
pleasure vessel in UK waters?
What evidence do you have that the post of master cannot be shared?
What evidence do you have that the post of master has to be held by one
person throughout a voyage?
"I'm just going below to make tea, dear."
"That's fine dear. I'll be master for a bit shall I?"
"Yes, dear."
Evidence, that's all that's needed. Evidence.
Ian
Ian
Peter McLelland wrote:
> I see the smiley but george is only part of the crew and the master and the
> watch leader etc come before george in the pecking order of responsibility.
"Master" and "watch leader", eh? Do you appoint a boatswain, purser and
ship's carpenter as well?
What qualifications does a "master" need to assume this awesome
responsibility?
Ian
Graham Frankland
"Peter McLelland" <peter.m...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45abd3bd$1...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> Because legal resposibility is defined by the law whether one likes it or
> not, and maritme law is something that has developed over very many years.
> Your personal relationship with the crew and other officers of a vessel is
> one thing and that is completely up to you, the legal chain of
> reponsibility on the other hand is well defined and not optional. If you
> are in law the master of a vessel you are responsible unless you can show
> that you took all reasonable precautions.
> Peter
>
an answer to my question - when a pleasure boat under 24 metres (those >24
come under different rules for manning) goes to sea in the UK, does one of
those on board have to be appointed "Master" for the voyage.
The answer is NO, provided it is "pleasure" and not a coded boat. Read on,
copy of e-mail follows:-
Dear Sir,
Thank-you for your telephone enquiry of today, I can confirm that for
pleasure vessels outside of the scope of manning regulations there are
no manning requirements.
In such a circumstance I suggest following the advice below i
determining whom is responsible for passage plans. The following text is
an extract of IMO Resolution A.893(21), which is available on the MCA
website by following the link below...
https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4/solas/index.html
In most deep-sea vessels the master delegates the initial
responsibility for preparing the plan for a voyage to the officer
responsible for navigational equipment and publications (hereafter
referred to as the navigating officer.) On smaller vessels, including
fishing vessels, the master or skipper may have the responsibility of
the navigating officer for voyage planning purposes. Prior to departure
the navigating officer will prepare the detailed voyage plan from berth
to berth in accordance with the Guidelines and to the master's
requirements. If the port of destination is not known or is subsequently
altered, the navigating officer must extend or amend the original plan
as appropriate.
Kind regards,
snip
UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency
105 Commercial Road, Southampton
Because the content of the e-mail is marked private for the addresse only, I
have deleted the senders name, title, department and phone no. Nothing has
been snipped or added from the content.
When talking to various people during the shuffle from department to
department, various other points were made which, although not law, are
worth bearing in mind. Some of these have already been mentioned in various
posts.
Although a Master does not have to be appointed for all the voyage, the
person in charge (The Master at the time) must make out a passage plan
required under SOLAS.
It should be made clear to everyone on board who is in charge "at the time"
all the time. ie every time he/she changes.
IF an accident were to occur under circumstances where no-one would admit to
being the "in charge at the time", a court would most likely hold the most
qualified person or owner (if he was on board) responsible for not having
taken control. Anyone with a commercially endorsed qualification would be
at the top of the list.
All insurance policies demand that the insured "act with all due care". If
you can't demonstrate this, in a situation where no-one is clearly in
command and there's an accident, they are within their right not to pay out,
leaving the participants to meet any claim which, if injury or death is
involved could bankrupt them.
Personally, I don't have any argument with those comments.
Graham.
chrisR
"George" is the autopilot on most boats AFAIK :-)
ChrisR
Peter McLelland
>
> Peter McLelland wrote:
>
>> I see the smiley but george is only part of the crew and the master and
>> the
>> watch leader etc come before george in the pecking order of
>> responsibility.
>
> "Master" and "watch leader", eh? Do you appoint a boatswain, purser and
> ship's carpenter as well?
Of course, but they all usually me
>
> What qualifications does a "master" need to assume this awesome
> responsibility?
>
Under UK law in non commercial pleasure craft none what so ever, evn so that
lack of qualification does not absolve the lucky master of his obligations
at law
Peter
Peter McLelland
>
> Peter McLelland wrote:
>> "Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:1168845952.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>> > Why can't two people who know and trust each other share the
>> > responsibility? Would you expect a husband and wife who own a boat
>> > jointly and have sailed together for twenty years, to have a "chain of
>> > command"?
>> >
>> Because legal resposibility is defined by the law whether one likes it or
>> not, and maritme law is something that has developed over very many
>> years.
>> Your personal relationship with the crew and other officers of a vessel
>> is
>> one thing and that is completely up to you, the legal chain of
>> reponsibility
>> on the other hand is well defined and not optional. If you are in law the
>> master of a vessel you are responsible unless you can show that you took
>> all
>> reasonable precautions.
>
> Have you read the rest of this thread, and the related one?
>
> What evidence do you have that a master is necessary on a small
> pleasure vessel in UK waters?
Knowledge of the requirements of thelaw my boy
>
> What evidence do you have that the post of master cannot be shared?
The fact that the term is always singular when applied to a ship
>
> What evidence do you have that the post of master has to be held by one
> person throughout a voyage?
It is normal for it to be oneperson but I am sure it could be arrangedif you
really wanted it to belike that.
>
> "I'm just going below to make tea, dear."
>
> "That's fine dear. I'll be master for a bit shall I?"
>
> "Yes, dear."
The master leaving the deck simply requires him/her to ensure that a
suitably responsible person is in charge during his/her absense.
>
> Evidence, that's all that's needed. Evidence.
>
Seek and ye shall find
:-)
Peter
D Parker
snip
>>
>
> "George" is the autopilot on most boats AFAIK :-)
>
> ChrisR
Ray, is also quite popular. Names after his grand daddy Ray Marine ;)
DP
Chris Tietjens
Sincere thanks for that.
i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk
wrote:
>HMS Nottingham ISTR the Skipper wasn't even on board at the time of the
>incident.
I think that you will find that he was aboard, albeit that he had just
touched in helicopter, having been ashore. He immediately, and
publicly as I recall, put his hand up and accepted responsibility. The
inquest gave him the lightest slap on the wrist that they could,
prolly because he had been so ready to accept responsibility and had
not tried to slope shoulders.
Ian
Alan Frame
> "Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote:
[]
> > What qualifications does a "master" need to assume this awesome
> > responsibility?
> >
> Under UK law in non commercial pleasure craft none what so ever, evn so that
> lack of qualification does not absolve the lucky master of his obligations
> at law
For pleasure vessels under 80 T or <24 metres long - bigger ones (up to
3000 GT) are also OK as long as they comply with S26 of the manning regs
and don't carry more than 12 passengers or cargo
See the "Manning" section on:
http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-survey___certification/mcga-dqs_st_cvs
_code_vessel_safety/mcga-dqs-cvs-pleasure_craft_info_pack.htm?printout=1
Or look it up in an RYA logbook....
rgds, Alan
--
99 Ducati 748BP, 95 Ducati 600SS, 81 Guzzi Monza, 74 MV Agusta 350
"Ride to Work, Work to Ride" SI# 7.067 DoD#1930 PGP Key 0xBDED56C5
i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk
wrote:
>
>"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
>news:45ab0924$0$27944$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
>> any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
>> helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
>
>As an instructor, I seldom take the helm, but I am always master of the
>vessel. While I may not be in control, I am in command. I have standing
>orders that I am to called if we see any another vessel. Quote below:
>
I'm not joining in the "debate" but just want to know. If you go
on-board a boat to instruct the owner, are you still the skipper? Is
this agreed up front with the owner?
I did a week as unpaid hand in this situation and dont remember it
being discussed. Although the instructor clearly knew more and was
more experienced, I considered that the owner was skipper. I think the
other crew did also.
However, in other situations the skipper has not been the owner.
Assumptions either would seem to be a problem, if there is any room
for doubt.
Ian
Jack Dale
<i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk> wrote in message
news:jg3oq2thmfqf0fmv2...@4ax.com...
> on-board a boat to instruct the owner, are you still the skipper? Is
> this agreed up front with the owner?
>
> I did a week as unpaid hand in this situation and dont remember it
> being discussed. Although the instructor clearly knew more and was
> more experienced, I considered that the owner was skipper. I think the
> other crew did also.
>
> However, in other situations the skipper has not been the owner.
> Assumptions either would seem to be a problem, if there is any room
> for doubt.
I do discuss it the owner. On the last trip I was the "master." We wrapped
a prop with a gennaker sheet; I discussed with the crew (including the
owner) where we should go to clear the mess up. His response was, "Jack
your are the skipper - your call.."
The owners know more about their boats, the operation of the systems and
their capabilities. I know more more navigation, colregs, weather,
seamanship, etc..
On a skippered charter, the charterer pays all costs, including insurance
and the deductible. They are responsible for damages, unless I am
negligent.
Jack
Graham Frankland
news:0j2oq2ljetdns8vul...@4ax.com...
over command.
Graham.
Graham Frankland
news:jg3oq2thmfqf0fmv2...@4ax.com...
>
> I'm not joining in the "debate" but just want to know. If you go
> on-board a boat to instruct the owner, are you still the skipper? Is
> this agreed up front with the owner?
>
> I did a week as unpaid hand in this situation and dont remember it
> being discussed. Although the instructor clearly knew more and was
> more experienced, I considered that the owner was skipper. I think the
> other crew did also.
>
> However, in other situations the skipper has not been the owner.
> Assumptions either would seem to be a problem, if there is any room
> for doubt.
>
> Ian
>
skipper, but of course there's nothing to stop an instructor who doesn't
trust his judgement from refusing to go.
I explained in another thread, when I had an instructor on board for my Day
Skipper trip (long sail in winter) it was by agreement that he was in
charge due to my inexperience at that time. I would suggest it's a very
important point to clarify before arranging any trip with people you don't
know or own boat tuition.
Graham.
Jack Dale
Otto Helm is my mine.
Jack
D Parker
"Jack Dale" <jack...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:VLUqh.143316$rv4.126660@edtnps90...
hehe... clever!
DP
Duncan McC
Frankland" <gfranklandattiscalidotcodotuk> says...
And I think that sums up what the majority have been saying here all
along. It's common sense really eh. We can argue black n' blue about
the Master of different sized boats, from small sailing dinghies to
large yachts - but I think most here can work out who the Master of the
vessel is - at any time on any boat.
Anyone disagreeing gets keel hauled at 8am tomorrow - and that's an
order! :)
--
Duncan
PyroJames
chrisR wrote:
It's "Monty" on DW, but he is a vane gear.
PyroJames.
Ian
Graham Frankland wrote:
> I've spent quite a bit of time on the phone with the MCA and, at last, have
> an answer to my question - when a pleasure boat under 24 metres (those >24
> come under different rules for manning) goes to sea in the UK, does one of
> those on board have to be appointed "Master" for the voyage.
>
> The answer is NO, provided it is "pleasure" and not a coded boat.
Thank you very much, Graham. It's good to have an authoritative answer
at last.
Ian
Cerumen
> In command would easily be discribed as being at the helm..
>
galley or wherever the Captain is at the time.
--
Chris, West Cork, Ireland.
Cerumen
> It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
> any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
> helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
>
The captain is, refer to the RN ship that hit Wolf Rock? off Australia some
few years ago, the ships captain had just reboarded via helicopter and was
"in command" even though not steering and was therefore liable.
toad
The skipper got the lightest possible sentence and shared
responsibility with three others.
"Lt Denney, 28, officer of the watch responsible for the ship's safety
that night, admitted negligently causing the crash and was dismissed
from his current ship. Lieutenant-Commander John Lea, 38 - who had
been in charge at the time - and Lieutenant Andrew Ingham, 27, pleaded
guilty to negligence in allowing the ship to be stranded. The former
was dismissed from his current posting while the latter received a
severe reprimand. "
Cerumen
"toad" <toad_of...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1168959112.4...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
be guilty even though he had only been on board for a few minutes and was
nowhere near the helm.
Alisdair
"Cerumen" <spa...@example.com> wrote in message
news:eoio6b$sur$6...@reader01.news.esat.net...
I have photos of HMS Nottingham playing around Loch Melfort and the Sound of
Jura last year.
They were doing well over 20kts around some areas that were last surveyed in
the 19th century, and which have some dubious soundings.
Either they have better charts than I have, or there they think there's only
one Wolf rock....
Alisdair
Jack Dale
"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
news:45ab0924$0$27944$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
> any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
> helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
No, the helsman is not in charge or in command. The term captain does not
appear in Crewing regulations, manning regulations, or SOLAS.
The helsman may be a mate. The quote below is from Crewing regulations in
Canada:
"mate" , in respect of a ship, means a person, other than the master, a
pilot or a rating, who has charge of the navigation, manoeuvring, operation
or security of the ship.
They may be in charge of the manoeuvring, but they are not in command of the
vessel.
Jack
Jack Dale
"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
news:45ab0924$0$27944$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> to) would be liable. However, under the law the master would easily be
> considered to be the helmsman of the moment.
>
> It all comes back to that one line in the legislation. "master" includes
> any person (except a pilot) having command or charge of a vessel; Is the
> helmsman in charge at the moment of impact?
From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_%28nautical%29
Captain is the traditional customary title given to the person in charge of
a ship at sea, but on most legal documents in the merchant shipping
industry, he or she is correctly referred to as the ship's Master. A
nautical "captain" may be a civilian or a naval commissioned officer of any
rank.
From Maritime Law - Fall 2002 - Birnberg
http://www.myhastings.org/outlines/MaritimeLawFall02.doc
Maritime law doesn't allow ship's master to abdicate his authority to the
pilot. SO may b/c personally liable through respondeat superior for the
master's negl in failing to assert command when CP's conduct was obviously
improper
Legally the person in command is the Master, not the captain.
Jack
Cerumen
"Alisdair" <ne...@agurney.com> wrote in message
news:eojp92$b6b$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
why not?
PyroJames
Jack Dale wrote:
Err, the "master" and the "captain" are one in the same. From your
above reference, SO is Ships Owner, CP is Compulsory Pilot.
So legally the Captain/Master is in command. In some instances the
Ships Owner may be liable for damage to ship/cargo/other vessels if
they were aware of the failings of the Master/Captain.
PyroJames
toad
In the case of Wolf Rock a chart plotter would seem to have been
useful. If you can't be bothered to plot a position on a paper chart
you might still glance at your position automatically plotted for you.
Don't RN officers have minions to continuously plot their position for
them? Many leisure sailors plot their position every hour when out of
sight of land, you'd imagine a ship with a paid crew would be able to
manage at least once every ten minutes.
Ian
PyroJames wrote:
> So legally the Captain/Master is in command. In some instances the
> Ships Owner may be liable for damage to ship/cargo/other vessels if
> they were aware of the failings of the Master/Captain.
Have you been following the Solway Harvester case?
Summary as I understand it. Fishing boat (based in Kirkcudbright but
crew from Isle of Whithorn) lost with all hands off the Isle of Man.
Suggestions that the vessel had serious seaworthiness defects: liferaft
welded to the rails, for example. The owner was prosecuted, but
acquitted on the legal basis that the master (deceased) was in charge
of the vessel and could have declined to sail if he thought the vessel
unseaworthy. Latest news is the the owner has declined to appear at the
inquest now being held on the Isle of Man.
Ian
PyroJames
Ian wrote:
No, not been following that one. I am a bit tied up with ships that
have burnt/exploded.
I would have thought that the owner could only argue that he was not
responsible if he claimed not to have knowledge of the situation. From
memory this is in the owners favour, in an much that the burden of
proof lies with the prosecution to show that the owner did have
knowledge, rather than the owner proving that he didn't.
PyroJames.
PyroJames
PyroJames wrote:
Just been reading the MAIB report, and it would appear that the skipper
was legally responsible for the state of the vessel, and was in
constant touch with the owner over the SH's state. It appears that
anything raised by the skipper was rapidly dealt with, so the owner
would be on reasonable ground to claim they were unaware of defects.
I can find any reference to liftrafts being "welded" to rails, although
they did fail to inflate and were overdue for service. They did release
from the SH, and were found downwind at the time.
There seem to be stability issues which revolve around failure to close
doors and fit scuttles, but little that I can see to put responsibility
at the owners feet.
PyroJames.
PyroJames
PyroJames wrote:
Bah humbug. Read "can not" for "can"
Jack Dale
"PyroJames" <DrPyr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1169025701.9...@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Err, the "master" and the "captain" are one in the same.
Agreed. They are often used synonymously. The legal title is "Master"; it
is a "job" description. The collogial term is "Captain"; in the pleasure
craft community it is an honorific title. Captain is also a formal title
used in the Merchant Marine and the Navy. But not all Masters are Captains;
Bligh was a Lieutenant.
> So legally the Captain/Master is in command. In some instances the
> Ships Owner may be liable for damage to ship/cargo/other vessels if
> they were aware of the failings of the Master/Captain.
The point I am making is that here is a difference between being the Master
(in commmand) and the helmsman (in control).
Jack
toad
> "PyroJames" <DrPyr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1169025701.9...@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Err, the "master" and the "captain" are one in the same.
>
> Agreed. They are often used synonymously. The legal title is "Master"; it
> is a "job" description. The collogial term is "Captain"; in the pleasure
> craft community it is an honorific title. Captain is also a formal title
> used in the Merchant Marine and the Navy. But not all Masters are Captains;
> Bligh was a Lieutenant.
I think you're getting a bit confused about the term "Master" in the
RN. In the RN in Bligh's day "Master" was a non-commisioned rank. Bligh
had sailed on other RN ships as a Master but became an officer and was
eventually Captain (the title given to the commanding officer who, as
you say, could be any rank) of various ships including HMS Bounty.
Before he joined the RN he had been (IIRC) master in the sense we use
it today of some kind of merchant ships (coal?) on the East Coast.
toad
I'm getting Cook and Bligh mixed up. Cook _had_ served in the RN as
master, and also in the Merchant Marine. I'm pretty sure Bligh only
sailed as Midshipman and Officer in the RN.
My point holds true, in Blighs navy "Master" was an NCO and Bligh was
absolutely _not_ Master on the Bounty. He was Captain in the
'Commanding Officer' sense.
toad
I have to eat my words a third time. Bligh did not start as midshipmap.
He, like Cook, came up from the ranks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bligh
Either way, In Bligh's Navy, the master was not the Captain.
toad
Ahhh, no he didn't he _was_ a toff and he _did_ start as Midshipman:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bligh
"He was signed up for the sea at the age of seven in the same city.
Whether he went to sea at this tender age is doubtful, as it was common
practice to sign on a "young gentleman" simply in order to rack up the
required years of service for quick promotion. In 1770 he joined H.M.S.
Hunter as an able seaman, the term being used only because there was no
vacancy for a midshipman. He became a midshipman early in the following
year. "
Has Patrick O'Brien taught me nothing?
Graham Frankland
I'm in charge type introduced himself to someone as Assistant Harbourmaster
whereas the Harbourmaster, who was very obviously pissed off with him said -
no, you're merely my assistant.
We're presumably only talking about the UK terms but abroad things differ.
To me, in this country, the term "Captain" in normal everyday use implies a
professionally qualified mariner or senior air pilot. In reality, we could
(but most never would) call anyone in charge of a boat, quite correctly,
"the" Captain or "the" Master.
We call in at Penzance and the greeting is usually a friendly "mornin
skipper" but in some other countries they often use the title Captain which
for some silly reason I feel uncomfortable with - too formal for my liking.
Americans OTOH all seem to want addressing as Captain, even on pleasure
boats which, in some ways, seems to belittle the well qualified
professionals. Reminds me of when I started work as an apprentice, we even
had to address the bloody foreman as Mr.
Graham.
i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk
wrote:
>
><i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk> wrote in message
>news:jg3oq2thmfqf0fmv2...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 05:15:46 GMT, "Jack Dale" <jack...@telus.net>
>> I'm not joining in the "debate" but just want to know. If you go
>> on-board a boat to instruct the owner, are you still the skipper? Is
>> this agreed up front with the owner?
>>
>> I did a week as unpaid hand in this situation and dont remember it
>> being discussed. Although the instructor clearly knew more and was
>> more experienced, I considered that the owner was skipper. I think the
>> other crew did also.
>>
>> However, in other situations the skipper has not been the owner.
>> Assumptions either would seem to be a problem, if there is any room
>> for doubt.
>
>
>I do discuss it the owner.Snip
Can you say that on all occasions both you and the owner are fully
aware who the skipper is?
Ian
Jack Dale
<i...@atsandelldot.codot.uk> wrote in message > Can you say that on all
> aware who the skipper is?
>
> Ian
Yes.
Jack