Topic: Who should have the right of way?

[Gambler]

Ouch, tough one.

Given the fact that we have 3 ships connected together with flamable liquids being traded between them.

I think in this case the fishing trawler needs to move.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Hey we really forget the obvious. 70,000 tons of warship don't give a ding dong diddly F if you have the right-of-way. You either get your ass out of the way, or experiance the worlds first steel enema.

[Byzantine]

I agree with Punisher.  Rules are for wussies.  I think when we all get on the highway we should just forget the rules.  If we get run over by a semi, well, tough sh!t.  And pedestrians?  F##k 'em!  Right Punisher?  Might makes right!

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

bearslayer wrote,

Ie the more maneuverable ship (NOT THE CVA) is responsible for avoiding a collision.

 Here was a situation that was presented to me when I had a job in the environment, please post how you think this situation should be resolved.

  Suppy vessel along side two frigates, refueling in process, on an intercept course with a large fishing ship, with all its lines/nets out. Who should get out of who's way?

Take care

drb

I suppose that depends on distance in relations to notification that the trawler is in the way.

Is any manuveuring is allowed when the ships are hooked up like that?

If so, given enough time, they could move out of the way of the trawler. 

If not, then Gambler is right.  The trawler needs to kick it into high gear.

[Just plain old Punisher]

I agree with Punisher.  Rules are for wussies.  I think when we all get on the highway we should just forget the rules.  If we get run over by a semi, well, tough sh!t.  And pedestrians?  F##k 'em!  Right Punisher?  Might makes right!

Umm... no, I was attempting to make a joke. Guess it failed.

When you have thousands of tons of warship bearing down on you, my first thought isn't "Hey that's against the rules!" --- I try to turn to avoid it, or if there isnt enough time, a fecal based explicitive.

[Gambler]

Umm... no, I was attempting to make a joke. Guess it failed.

When you have thousands of tons of warship bearing down on you, my first thought isn't "Hey that's against the rules!" --- I try to turn to avoid it, or if there isnt enough time, a fecal based explicitive.

Most likely followed by the actual action related to the expletive.

[Byzantine]

I agree with Punisher.  Rules are for wussies.  I think when we all get on the highway we should just forget the rules.  If we get run over by a semi, well, tough sh!t.  And pedestrians?  F##k 'em!  Right Punisher?  Might makes right!

Umm... no, I was attempting to make a joke. Guess it failed.

When you have thousands of tons of warship bearing down on you, my first thought isn't "Hey that's against the rules!" --- I try to turn to avoid it, or if there isnt enough time, a fecal based explicitive.

Sorry Punisher.  I was being cranky.  This whole topic has been answers to two separate questions.  'Right of way' is usually a legal question with some form of answer based in law.  I saw some discussion of that.  And I saw a whole bunch of people dogpiling on the other question - prudent.  It sure as he!! is not prudent to get in the way of something that is going to squash you like a bug.  But that is my point - there may be two separate answers here.  The people who wanted to just dump any legal consideration overboard were getting on my nerves a bit.  Driving in front of a CV: smart no, legal maybe.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Understood. I figured you were a little cranky and didn't take the comment personally.

But since when is the world full of smart people;)