| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 10:04 |
A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
In a situation where I boat has to run for cover from a storm to a port - is it possible for entry to the port to be refused in what is an emergency situation?
Are there any rules/practice/etc concerning this?
| deisel |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 10:51 |
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I Have Heard Of This Happening But If I Thought My Boat Or Crew Were In Danger I Would Go In Any Way, Safety First, Any Port In A Storm!!!!
| pir8ped |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 10:59 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Sometimes, the entrance to a port is more dangerous than out at sea.
Someone bought a boat from me in Devon, sailed it to some port just east of the Isle of Wight, and tried to get into the port ( it was blowing force 6, he'd been out for over 24 hours, and he was tired ). The harbour master told him to turn back, due to breaking waves on the sand bar at the entrance. He refused and got stuck on the sand bar. A life-boat pulled him back out to sea, and as soon as they let go the rope, he went back to the harbour, stuck on the sand bar again, and this time, the boat was broken in two. He survived.
I had survived several gales at sea in that boat, and it was perfectly sound. It could have survived more. He should have hove to, at sea - although I grant this is a little harder if you don't have sail!
| TigaWave |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 11:30 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
In a nutshell yes, but only if the harbour authority considers there is greater danger in entering.
I have had to enter a private harbour as a yacht in distress (broken steering) they weren't happy but had to allow us entry.
On the Portuguese coasts subject to Atlantic swells ports are often closed, trouble is you are advised to contact them by radio before entry but I know of at least one incident where there was no clear English information available to an English skipper. He entered and encountered dangerous breaking seas in the entrance channel (the swell was in excess of 10m at sea) he made it through and was greeted by the police and arrested. For some time he was given the impression the boat would be impounded.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 11:46 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
So would I - and would stay there no matter who shouted at me but I dod not know the law or the protocol.
| mikef |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 11:49 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I would say that if the harbour or marina is privately owned they can do what they want. Certainly I've heard of boats being refused entry into marinas in the Med during a storm. In the Balearics in July/Aug there are far more boats at anchor than could possibly be accomodated in harbours and marinas. Personally, I've been towed out of a marina in Ibiza against my wishes when I could'nt start my engines and been unceremoniously dumped outside so I could well imagine the same marina refusing entry to incoming boats in a storm
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 11:50 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
All that is very interesting - I agree that entrances can be dangerous but if you need to escape before the storm hits you could enter sagely just to get sanctuary but I imagine sailing in a few hours before the storm maybe more of a problem for the harbour authorities.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 11:51 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
So its seems that some countries have different rules?
Should there not be a clear international code?
| mikef |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 12:51 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I don't know that there are rules as such. We Brits have a tradition of helping other mariners in trouble but in other countries it's every man for himself
| Chrusty1 |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 12:57 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Quote:
I don't know that there are rules as such. We Brits have a tradition of helping other mariners in trouble but in other countries it's every man for himself
Absolutely Mike! It is the most important unwritten rule of the sea. I think even in foreign lands, most would go along with that?
| MapisM |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:07 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I'm not underestimating Brit traditions here, but imho it's rather a matter of being a 'sunday boater' rather than a proper mariner - regardless of the passport and the sea.
Re. regulations, isn't 'aid omission' (generally speaking, not only at sea) a criminal offense?
Now, if/how/when refusing the entrance in a marina can be qualified as aid omission, that's another matter.
But I suspect that under a declared emergency, and if those refusing the aid could not prove to have compelling reasons to do so, they do risk to be prosecuted.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:08 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Yes - all i know would go out of their way to help anyone in trouble at sea.
When i had left one port with a vessel waiting for my place as I left - the harbour master ensured that there was a place for me when I radioed in with a emergency and slowly made my way back to port.
Mind I seem to have had a few things go wrong at sea!
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:09 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
You may be right but where are the regs?
| MapisM |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:18 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Well, a quick google shot returned this and other results, but to be honest I'm not so interested to investigate further...
In practice, if and when you'll be in trouble, what else can you do aside from hoping to find sensible people willing to help?
| mikef |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:44 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
A quick google brought up this
The 1974 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS Convention) obliges the
“master of a ship at sea which is in a position to be able to provide assistance, on receiving information from any source that persons are in distress at sea, is bound to proceed with all speed to their assistance, if possible informing them or the search and rescue service that the ship is doing so…”3
The 1979 International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR Convention) obliges State Parties to:
“…ensure that assistance be provided to any person in distress at sea… regardless of the nationality or status of such a person or the circumstances in which that person is found”… and to “provide for their initial medical or other needs , and deliver them to a place of safety.”4
On 1 July 2006, amendments to the SOLAS and SAR Conventions concerning the treatment of persons rescued at sea entered into force.5 The SOLAS amendments add to and clarify the existing obligations to provide assistance, adding the words: “This obligation to provide assistance applies regardless of the nationality or status of such persons or the circumstances in which they are found"
I think that might oblige state owned harbour authorities to provide shelter but where privately owned harbours stand I don't know
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 13:48 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Its interesting because the maser of a privately owned boat/ship is obliged but it states nothing about the harbour.
The situation seems as I thought it was - regs applying to boats but the rest is not clear and relies on common sense not law ...... so my guess is that here is no specific law.
This means I have a weak case arriving in a little Cornish harbour two hours before the storm hits and whilst it is still calmish with a big cat and making sure I can stay there
| blueglass |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 19:45 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Quote:
. Personally, I've been towed out of a marina in Ibiza against my wishes when I could'nt start my engines and been unceremoniously dumped outside
what!! I would like to hear the full story on that one. Did they just leave you adrift?
| Searush |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 20:31 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I and another boat were denied access to Camaes inner harbour once (mid1980's) as there wasn't enough room. As a NWly gale was due & the bay is very exposed I sought shelter under Wylfa head. The other boat anchored off the beach and was smashed to matchwood.
Swmbo, me & the kids (age 5 & 9) had a really bad night & went ashore in a cove the following day to escape the rolling (gunwhale to gunwhale) until the wind eased & we escaped in the afternoon (into a mere F6 and overfalls) to get into Holyhead for a night & day spent sleeping!
Not exactly an "emergency" in that the boat was in good order, but there clearly was severe danger. The other couple were lucky to get out alive but lost absolutely everything on the boat. Townspeople did at least have a whip round for them for clothes, lodging & to get back home.
| mikef |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 22:17 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
We had a charging problem with one engine in our previous boat, an Azimut 46, whilst cruising off Ibiza. The starboard engine failed whilst still at sea. Not knowing what was wrong, I radioed the nearest marina, Botafoch in Ibiza Town, explained that we had lost 1 engine and begged them for a berth. At first they refused but then said we could occupy a berth until 16.00 that same day. We berthed and I got hold of an electrician who proceeded to disconnect a lot of wires and then announced that we needed new batteries. He then buggered off promising to return later with new batteries. I explained this to the marina staff but they kept insisting that we had to leave at 16.00. At the appointed time, 2 marina staff came to the boat and I demonstrated that I could'nt start either engine. They insisted that they would tow me out of the marina despite my protests. A few minutes later they returned to the berth in a dory, untied us and towed us out of the marina and dumped us inside the new harbour wall where we could do nothing but drop anchor. Anchoring is prohibited in this area because of commercial traffic docking there and in fact last year, somebody was fined very heavily for anchoring there but we couldn't move because we had no engines
The electrician did'nt return until the following day and I had to ferry him and the batteries out to the boat with the tender. As it was, the batteries were not the problem. I found out later that a faulty alternator allowed 1 battery bank to drain completely with the result that the fuel solenoid closed and shut off the fuel to the failed engine
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 09/05/2008 23:03 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
These are fascinating stories - are there anymore?
Sort of prepares you for what can happen.
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 02:07 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
To me it's a stupid question. Marina full is obvious. But there are very few uk harbours interested in who enters and only then because of the danger of outgoing ferries. You just mosey up and go in. No harbour will denny entrance especially in a storm. OK you might not get the best berth in a marina. But you will never get refused.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 07:01 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Hlb
There you go again claiming a stupid question. A perfectly peaceful thread on a valid boating topic cannot be left alone by you.
The question what the law is and that is a perfectly valid question. Sorry it does not fit in with the forum thought police code.
Also the answers have been interesting. In particular the being dumped outside without an engine working etc.
| blueglass |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 09:17 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
that's terrible. OK I ,m sure the berth was booked out to somebody else, but the somebody else had a fully functional boat. so much for helping others in distress. somehow I don't think this would happen in the UK - or am I dreaming?
| Tonybob |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 16:42 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
"This means I have a weak case arriving in a little Cornish harbour two hours before the storm hits"
Gludy is this hypothetical or was it an actual incident? If actual what was the weather forecast prior to leaving the marina?
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 17:00 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Thankfully, the Cornish harbour does not need a law, as to whether you can go in it or not. Though no doubt this Government will see it wise to invent one.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 17:05 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
It is theoretical but raised because with a drying out boat that is slower I may only be able to reach a small harbour in time to miss what is coming.
In real life I listen to the Met office forecasts but take them with a pinch of salt and do my own. So I would never plan to be out in bad weather.
I have been out in bad weather because of must do delivery trips but that was in large mon0 hull power boats and I knew what I was heading into to, although when the waves needed to be looked up to from the flybridge of a 60 foot boat - estimated at 18 feet high, I did run for cover to Plymouth with a German warship taking station up smack on my stern and covering me from the wind!
I go boating to enjoy myself not to punish myself and SWMBO so I always do my very best to avoid bad weather but I am pleased that I have had bad weather experiences on delivery trips.
There are clear rules governing the duty of a skipper in a boat to come to the aid of anyone in distress but there do not seem to be any rules governing a harbour giving aid to a boat that is trying to avoid a distress situation.
| nyx2k |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 18:25 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
please excuse my ignorance but if you're buying your new boat to do extended cruising then surely one of the main points of this boat should be that it can take Anything the weather can throw at it.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:06 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
The long range boat I will be buying will exceed Class A Ocean going and will be capable of riding out a storm..... yes.
However, there are many reasons why you would wish to avoid such a storm and many other reasons why a storm can be dangerous for any boat.
Storms see huge commercial boats founder let alone a class A pleasure boat - it would be foolhardy not to avoid a storm no matter what boat you are in - the stress on the crew - in this case SWMBO, not being the least of it.
I will always do all I can to avoid bad weather and will not sail into it unless I really have to and in that case would still try and limit it to a maximum force 8.
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:20 |
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I'll try to be more polite than Haydn but I am becoming a bit confused about what precisely the problem is.
One of the advantages of a cat is that they are less uncomfortably in bad weather and a 50ft version should be able to cope with almost anything around the British coast.
OK no-one likes the nasty stuff but its part of the game really.
As for getting to a safe haven then what is your worry. You just go in. Assuming that the place is safe to enter, and many are not in bad weather from the wrong direction. I would guess thats a common thing around Cornwall. Thats seamanship and local knowledge needed for this decision.
A couple of times I've ducked into places yachts don't normally go - once for bad weather, and once cos I was tired and needed a rest and had missed the tide and was generally fed up.
No-one even asked the question. I asumed that if there isn't a rule to say they must let you in then there isn't a rule that says you must go out if you consider it unsafe.
If you need to go in then go - and argue the case from a position of being tied up and secure. I would be amazed if anyone bothered. And if they were what could they do? Call he bobbies - doubt they would be interested - and if they were tell them you've had a drink and can't drive.
Sue you - for what - making a temporary hole in their water?
I think you are worrying about nothing - JGFDI
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:37 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I think it's just Gludys latest attempt to get the 10 million thread post. Invent somthing that's never happend, get everone het up about it. Then decide some thing has to be done about it.
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:39 |
|
|
|
Re: PS
|
As an afterthought.
Taking a 50ft cat into a small harbour in bad weather could in itself be quite a demanding exercise.
A cat is lighter than both a mono sailing boat or a power boat.
In my very limited experience of a 9m Catalac they get blown about quite q bit even under engine, and even with twin engines were quite difficult to manoeuvre in a strong cross wind.
I can imagine a big cat in a crowded harbour in a strong wind being somewhat embarrasing
I think what I'm saying is don't jump out of the frying pan into the fire.
PPS
You mention Cat A for the boat, which reminded me. Lower categories of boat used commercially can only sail within specific distance of a "safe haven"
As this is legislation there must be some definition of what constitutes a "safe have"
From that it follows that whatever harbour, port or facility constitutes a "safe haven" must allow entry - otherwise it could not be a haven.
QED I suggest
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:49 |
|
|
|
Re: PS
|
Mind, he'd be banned from Polpero, once they shut the storm gate.
| MapisM |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:58 |
|
|
|
Catch 22
|
Quote:
I think it's just Gludys latest attempt to get the 10 million thread post
If so, by repeating how useless his threads are, don't you just help him reach this target?
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 20:59 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
I am getting a bit fed up here. I do not remotely understand why you have to try to be polite.
There is not a problem. I never stated there was. I simply requested if anyone knew if there was a law on this matter and it seems no one does know of one. If there was a a law it would be interesting to know what it is - thats it - its that simple.
As often happens there were some interesting experiences relating to the subject from overseas ports and I for one learnt a bit from that. Others also seemed interested and made comments.
The thought had come to mind because a sailing cat does not have the speed to run from some storms whereas all my previous boats had that option. There is no more to it than that.
However this does not seem good enough for you and Haydn - you try to make an issue out of it.
All I can say is please try and get a life.
I have never seen this subject raised before on the forum and I and others found the small discussion interesting but some just have to step in and start the really silly points that you are making. .
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:08 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Hlb
Quote:
I think it's just Gludys latest attempt to get the 10 million thread post. Invent somthing that's never happend, get everone het up about it. Then decide some thing has to be done about it.
The only people getting as you call it 'het up about it' are you and your cronies. It was a simple peaceful discussion until you cam along with your usual anti-Gludy drivel.
Its your rudeness and stupid bullying tactics that make a lot of my threads drift away from the original subject and end up as some sort of forum row.
Please - just ignore all my threads or actually try contributing without resorting to insults.
I know that may be difficult but if you try very hard ... it can be done.
As regards the event never happening - the experiences related by other here pass what I was talking about by a mile and were a positive contribution - a shared experience.
As regards anyone making a point that any class A boat can survive anything the UK waters can throw at them is simply ignorant- just look at history of wrecks - even this last 12 months around our shores and they were large commercial vessels.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:14 |
|
Re: Catch 22
|
Mapism
You are so right - in fact they start the personal insults - it develops into a sort of schoolyard fight and everyone gathers around!!!
This thread was meant as a very simple thing and was about over when they started,
The points being made - as is often the case are totally absurd - that a class A cat should be able to take anything the UK waters can throw at it!!!!!
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:34 |
|
|
|
Re: Catch 22
|
Yes it does increase the thread count. But also adds to sanity.
Gudy said. "I have not seen this subject raised before". Or words to that effect.
Because. Theres only gludy on the planet who would ask the question.
| nyx2k |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:41 |
|
gludy
|
The points being made - as is often the case are totally absurd - that a class A cat should be able to take anything the UK waters can throw at it!!!!!
thanks gludy.
blooming great. i ask a simple question and i get called absurd. well I'll take my ignorance and my desire to learn and just [--word removed--] off shall i.
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:47 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
No, the point being made is, gludys worried that he might get banned from entering a port in a storm and was wondering if there was a law about it..
If there is a law it's. Any port in a storm.
| Chrusty1 |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 21:56 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Quote:
To me it's a stupid question.
Tell you what Haydn........seems to me that there are no stupid questions......only stupid answers??
Now you don't strike me as a stupid person, and don't take my post as me just having a pop at you, but no-one is born with all the answers, so why not cut Paul a bit of slack?
| MapisM |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:05 |
|
|
|
Adds to sanity?
|
Dunno Haydn, even accepting that sometimes Paul's threads can be seen as boring (I also joked a bit about the endless fuel consumption debates recently), I fail to understand how a pure rant can add to sanity, either in a forum or elsewhere.
Whenever I'm not interested in a thread, or find it utterly useless, i just move on.
I'm not saying that I never posted harsh comments, but I only did in reply to equally unpolite 'attacks'.
In most of your recent gludy-related posts, I often had the impression that the rant was unnecessarily started (can't remember Paul having a go at a post of yours, to start with, but I might be wrong) and at least as useless as the original post you were arguing against.
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:15 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Hang on a minute
You objected to HLB's comments
I wanted to make a similar point but tried to do it so as to avoid giving any offense.
Why object to my trying to be polite?
I don't think there is a law against walking down the street with a purple lampshade on your head.
But why would anyone bother to ask if there was unless he was considering the possibility of it happening.
All I tried to do was talk thro some of the possibilities.
Further, I did point out the bit about safe havens which indicates there might be law which at least implies the right (legally) to enter a port or harbour.
If its so important then perhaps best you consult a lawyer who can give a definitive answer
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:16 |
|
Re: gludy
|
NYX2k
I apologise for dragging you into this - I mixed you up with them other two.
There is nothing wring with your question asking it as you did in good faith and I once again apologise for placing you in the wrong camp.
I am very fed up with the antics of Haydn and co.
The the thread started out of simple curiosity and it was not in any way meant as a big subject but Hadyn and co just cannot leave it at that.
I really think they have succeeded in making a small peaceful thread with a few interesting tales into another mess which seems to be their aim.
For the record my own view on the matter is that I have never come across an unfriendly port in the UK - there may be some but I have not found them. I think there is an unwritten code - or at least I will think that until someone points to a written rule. However it seems that the same does not apply in some other countries.
On the other hand someone may have been able to point to a written rule and that would have been interesting and educational - at least to me.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:26 |
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Quote:
But why would anyone bother to ask if there was unless he was considering the possibility of it happening.
Throughout my life I have asked questions. The questions often do not relate to me. Some do, some do not. In this case the question had occurred to me for the reasons I have made clear and I simply wished to find if there were laws as a matter of simple interest. It was not vital to me, not the end of the world and it brought forward some good stories of actual events.
As always with Haydn and co instead of the subject being discussed the debate become one based on personal abuse.
I have no objection to the mickey being taken out of me as was done in a recent thread - I even joined in. However from the outset that thread was just that - taking the Mickey and poking fun at my style - that is OK with me. Haydn is not doing that.
In attacking me for raising the question and calling it stupid Haydn also devalued those who had contributed to the thread.
Well Haydn you won yet again - the thread was almost over but you waded ion with your nasty remarks and got a nice little flurry going making it difficult for anyone who wanted to contribute to return to the subject .... pathetic.
| BrendanS |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:27 |
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
I think there is an unwritten code - or at least I will think that until someone points to a written rule
This is what people are querying. What evidence do you have that there is an unwritten code or agenda?, or why are you asking the question? If most people say they have never been barred from entering a harbour or port when a storm is arriving or has arrived, the only real difficulty is whether it is actually safe to enter in the conditions at them time.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:37 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Brendan
Here come more indians!!!
I am asking the question because I knew of the law relating to boats and wondered if there was one relating to harbours....... are questions not allowed????
"What evidence do you have that there is an unwritten code or agenda?"
I think there is an understanding by UK Harbours that they would help - my evidence is the attitude of some harbours when I was in trouble on more than one occasion in my last boat - one lock stayed open 2 hours after time to get me in crippled and in a worsening weather situation.
"why are you asking the question? "
because I would like to know the answer!!! My own experience is limited in this regard and I wanted others to point to a law and share experiences.
"If most people say they have never been barred from entering a harbour or port when a storm is arriving or has arrived, the only real difficulty is whether it is actually safe to enter in the conditions at them time."
No one is arguing about the danger entering a harbour in a storm. Yet experiences were related were it seems clear you may well be barred - I would not trust a marina that dumps unseaworthy boats outside.
Now why are you going down the road of a cross examination on why I should even ask the question??? Want to join the pack?
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:39 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
You said:
"The points being made - as is often the case are totally absurd - that a class A cat should be able to take anything the UK waters can throw at it!!!!! "
Gludy said
"The long range boat I will be buying will exceed Class A Ocean going and will be capable of riding out a storm..... yes."
I said
"One of the advantages of a cat is that they are less uncomfortably in bad weather and a 50ft version should be able to cope with almost anything around the British coast."
Please tell me
Which bit is absurd
All seem quite sensible to me
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:46 |
|
|
|
Re: Adds to sanity?
|
Let's not go over the top here. I was not having a rant. I said the post was stupid, which it is. I dont see that as mortally wounding gludy.
Now. If we take note. There are hundreds reading these threads. Many very new to the sea. Not everyone is a member.
Gludy talks from experience, or sounds like it anyway.
But, no ones ever been refused entry to a harbour. Marina maybe. But thats hardly the end of the world.
Infact you can look in nearly any harbour guide book. It tells you, you will never be refused entry.
Look a bit stupid wouldnd it. Stop outside till you sink. Um, forgot, we have to send the life boat, flippin eck, oh hell elf and fking safety, arrg the pollution issues dont bear thinking about. Then there the law about having to help folk in distress. The paper work would be endless.
No, I'm just thinking of the folks on the outside, looking in. Maybe thinking of buying a boat. Wont let me back in to harbour, shock horror, stuff that for a game of soldiers.
| BrendanS |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:50 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
I think there is an understanding by UK Harbours that they would help - my evidence is the attitude of some harbours when I was in trouble on more than one occasion in my last boat - one lock stayed open 2 hours after time to get me in crippled and in a worsening weather situation
No indians involved here, just puzzled about a question which seems to suggest some undercurrent of harbours refusing access. Your own post seems to suggest that they go out of their way to help? So I'm puzzled about your original question, and some of your subsequent posts. I don't understand fully what this thread is supposed to be about? Do you have personal experience of being denied, or have heard of others being denied access, other than being warned it's not sensible to try and access a particular harbour or port, as in certain conditions, any sensible harbour master would warn you off in conditions he knows to be dangerous.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:53 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
"One of the advantages of a cat is that they are less uncomfortably in bad weather and a 50ft version should be able to cope with almost anything around the British coast."
Please tell me
Which bit is absurd
1. If there were a f10 of f11 coming in whilst the cat may very well survive it would be in considerable more danger than if it avoided the storm.
2. Anyone with sense would want to avoid such a storm because they are dangerous and stressing to all on the boat.
3. The British coast can throw up terrible weather - just look at the wrecks all around it.
The safest course of action for any skipper in a storm is to avoid the storm if at all possible. If I was in the cat I would make for the nearest sanctuary ahead of the storm. If I was caught in the storm then I would heave to and use a para anchor but I would not enjoy a bit of it and would be doing something I have never done before.
So to take the view that because you are in a boat that exceeds class A and can ride out a storm you should choose to do that instead of avoiding it, is just absurd.
| BrendanS |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:57 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
If you are going into sanctuary ahead of the storm, why on earth would they refuse you? Your logic just doesn't make any sense at all.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 22:58 |
|
Re: Adds to sanity?
|
Quote:
No, I'm just thinking of the folks on the outside, looking in. Maybe thinking of buying a boat. Wont let me back in to harbour, shock horror, stuff that for a game of soldiers.
Sorry hlb you cannot slip out like that.
At no point have I said other than I think there is an unwritten code in UK harbours - I asked a question - I waited to give my views. So its you that has caused the confusion to Newbies not me!!!
In fact by calling my perfectly valid question stupid you discourage them from being subjected to the dirt you hand out and so stop them posting.
Not once ever have I joined in a thread of yours and do what you do to me on a regular basis.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:02 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
No indians involved here, just puzzled about a question which seems to suggest some undercurrent of harbours refusing access. Your own post seems to suggest that they go out of their way to help? So I'm puzzled about your original question, and some of your subsequent posts. I don't understand fully what this thread is supposed to be about? Do you have personal experience of being denied, or have heard of others being denied access, other than being warned it's not sensisble to try and access a particular harbour or port, as in certain conditions, any sensisble harbour master would warn you off in conditions he knows to be dangerous.
No - not once have I implied that. I simply wanted to know of there was a law on it just like there is when you are skipper of a boat. Pure simple interest.
The original question was to see if there was a law I was not aware of - thats all.
As it happens there do seem to be overseas harbours that may well resist entry .
You are going way over the top looking for commies under the bed next but I suppose you feel sage as part of the pack:)
I have a telescope and ask questions about the moon but it does not mean I intend t=o go there!!!
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:03 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Poster: Gludy
Subject: Re: gludy
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"One of the advantages of a cat is that they are less uncomfortably in bad weather and a 50ft version should be able to cope with almost anything around the British coast."
Please tell me
Which bit is absurd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. If there were a f10 of f11 coming in whilst the cat may very well survive it would be in considerable more danger than if it avoided
..........................................
Blah, blah, blah, adfinitum blah.
No you would be tucked up in bed, in the harbour that your trying yer best to get banned from. Silly bugger. I'd ban yer anyway.
| BrendanS |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:04 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
You are just trolling now. Night
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:06 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
If you are going into sanctuary ahead of the storm, why on earth would they refuse you? Your logic just doesn't make any sense at all.
I never said they would - anywhere.
On your absurd logic why would a skipper refuse to try and help someone else in trouble on the sea - but there is still a law about it.
Why should anyone murder anyone else - there is still a law about it.
I simply asked the question if there was a law - I stated my view that there is an unwritten lae in the UK and was even cross examined on that.
Hlb and pack discourage so many from posting on this forum because of this truly stupid, childish behaviour the pack is exhibiting.
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:19 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Oh for goodness sake
Read the post
I never said or implied that staying out in storm conditions was preferable
Its a matter of balancing the risk.
There are many instances where staying out at sea is far safer than trying to enter a port (jumping out of the frying pan into the fire)
Surely the whole point is in f10-11 condx there are many harbours which are not safe to enter, Try a f10 N Easter anywhere on the East coast and you will be lucky to get in anywhere. There are perhaps 4 or 5 havens where you could get in between the Harwich and the Forth
I merely pointed out that a boat such as the one you are looking at buying makes that option less of a risk. I can well imagine the circumstances where I might (wrongly) try entry in a lightweight 26ft boat rather than stay out in bad condx. In a 50ft cat I would be much happier to ride it it out.
Isn't that why people buy bigger boats?
Similarly parking a small keel boat in strong winds in a crowded harbour is likely to be much less fraught than trying the same in a 50 ft cat, or at least you will do less damage.
You manage the risk as best you can - the big boat offers a different range of options
| BrendanS |
| (regular) |
| 10/05/2008 23:22 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
You are being devious. If you've been cross examined, you have a particular court case in mind? Which unwritten law are you referring to?
Just be honest, and you might get some decent answers, rather than all the gibberish.
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:00 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Let me make it very clear to you. Brendan is not in my pack. Nor me in his. Any half wit readers will be very aware of that.
Theres something about. When in a hole, stop..... dam I forgot.
To be pedantic. To rescue some one at sea. You have to do something about it. Like try to rescue them.
As a harbour master, there is nothing to do. If he tried to stop them from entering. That is murder or manslaughter if yer lucky. There is no law, saying it, again, because any harbour master refusing entry would be insane. The logic of why he may refuse, dont bare thinking about. Damage to his newly sand blasted harbour walls?? The whole thought of a harbour refusing entry is stupid. Well, there not keen on Russian war ships in plymouth, but thats entirely a different issue. They are allowed to shelter in the sound though.
Humm, it's hard work......Theres no law cos to stop entry in a storm, would be difficult or piracy...... Or as above adfinitum.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:07 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Beadle
I will answer each point.
The thread was nopt about me it was a valid question about if there were laws on the matter or not - that was it - no more no less.
"I never said or implied that staying out in storm conditions was preferable"
Then the points was meaningless because it had no bearing on the issue being discussed.
"Its a matter of balancing the risk.@
I totally agree.
"There are many instances where staying out at sea is far safer than trying to enter a port (jumping out of the frying pan into the fire)"
I totally agree/
"Surely the whole point is in f10-11 condx there are many harbours which are not safe to enter, Try a f10 N Easter anywhere on the East coast and you will be lucky to get in anywhere. There are perhaps 4 or 5 havens where you could get in between the Harwich and the Forth"
I totally agree but had already made it clear on the thread that the situation was escaping to a harbour BEFORE the storm had hit and that this might make the harbours decision more difficult.
"I merely pointed out that a boat such as the one you are looking at buying makes that option less of a risk. I can well imagine the circumstances where I might (wrongly) try entry in a lightweight 26ft boat rather than stay out in bad condx. In a 50ft cat I would be much happier to ride it it out."
That may be the case but the thread was not about me - it was about if there was a law or not governing the genera; situation.
"Isn't that why people buy bigger boats?"
Its part of the reason but has no bearing whatsoever on the issue being discussed - the issue assumes that the skipper is seeking refuge before a storm to escape the worst of the storm. Making it personal to me it to me is not what it is about.
"Similarly parking a small keel boat in strong winds in a crowded harbour is likely to be much less fraught than trying the same in a 50 ft cat, or at least you will do less damage."
True and agreed but again not even the subject of the thread.
"You manage the risk as best you can - the big boat offers a different range of options"
True and fasle a smaller but faster boat may be better. BUT again not the issue being discussed.
The discussion was not about a cat, not about me, not about anything other than a question to see if there was law.
Hlb and Co do this to me on many threads - they personalise it and take it away from the subject being discussed insulting me on the way.
If you want to start a thread discussing what best to do in a big boat then do it that. I would agree with most of what you say.
Adfter the BVI i will return to the forum and post some videos. That will be my swan song as I become a raggie and will no longer frequent this forum joining the more peaceful world of Scuttlebut where I am being helped a lot as a Newbie.
So Hlb you will soon have your kingdom all to yourself so that you can continue to censor the asking of any questions that you do not like.
| MapisM |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:08 |
|
|
|
Re: Adds to sanity?
|
Quote:Well, I guess I might be seen as gludy's advocate now, which is neither my intention nor something he needs.
Let's not go over the top here. I was not having a rant. I said the post was stupid, which it is. I dont see that as mortally wounding gludy.
Maybe you didn't want to have a rant, but I for one perceived it that way.
See, as a matter of fact, there were 20 posts before yours, openly debating the subject.
After your post, almost 40 other posts followed (as of now).
Maybe the thread was already totally stupid in the first 20 posts, but imho also most of those who followed were neither smart nor interesting for good...
And since probably my own posts are no exception in this respect, I guess I'll kiss you all good night!
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:12 |
|
Re: gludy
|
I disagree about the pack but it does not matter.
At last you discuss the subject - congratulations.
So you state there is no law - it does seem that way.
However the thread has thrown up a query over some ports overseas and that is a legitimate concern for everyone to not assume that all ports are the same.
I would say it insane to tow a MoBo with engines not working, by force, against the wishes of the skipper out of a harbour to be dumped outside does not fit with the types of harbour you describe.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:16 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Quote:
You are being devious. If you've been cross examined, you have a particular court case in mind? Which unwritten law are you referring to?
Just be honest, and you might get some decent answers, rather than all the gibberish.
I do not understand a word of what you say except the flavour is paranoid.
I have no court case in mind. I know of no court case.
I repeat my question was so simple and direct and your response above is almost unbelievable.
I am off to bed.
Goodnight and may all your dreams take place in safe harbours.
| Beadle |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:20 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
Lost interest in this nonsense.
Talking sense is clearly wasted.
OK
There isn't a law that says a harbour master has to let you enter his harbour
There!!
Very clear
Now what are you going to do about it
Maybe you should take up a different pastime just in case
That would be a relief to many of us
Don't call us - we'll call you
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 00:40 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
To carry on with the the stupid questions. Wheres the law about going down the M1, M2 ,M3 four or five. We dont ask because we all can, less it's broken. Even then they give a free tow.
The question is stupid. Because it first of all assumes that a harbour master is going to do something stupid which he has little ability to do anyway and no sane person would force some one to stay out at sea.
The whole thread is lunacy. I just joined in to add sence.
| Gludy |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 10:20 |
|
Re: gludy
|
Hlb
To ask a question to see if there is a law governing the rights of a boat at sea to take shelter from a storm in a harbour is not stupid.
The last thing you did was add sense.
Your entire approach to this is beyond belief.
1. Your analogy is also not sensible. We all know that if we pay our road tax we can drive onto the M4 but that does not give us the right to drive onto private property for example. Manmy marinas/ports can be private. Many can be commercial only etc.
2. There are many things in life that have laws governing our rights - in fact thousands of things - these laws bestow rights or remove them.
You are acting so biased that you cannot even see it. You are saying that to ask if there is a law governing this or that is stupid!!
So answer this - did that marina that towed the MoBo outside the harbour and dumped him there without engine power acting within your law? Would you trust them to let you in in a storm? Others state on this thread that they know of ports that have refused - so was that not worthy of discussion.
You harm the forum by discouraging questions - I never go onto your threads and disrupt them - even if I think they are sometimes stupid, I just leave you alone.
If I was lurking on this forum I would stay clear because you and a few others behave in this deplorable manner.
As a person I do not give in and I very much like asking questions and learning. I can also separate the questions from the person and discuss the subject without making assumptions. Its seems you find this process very difficult.
Thank you for disrupting a peaceful thread that was trundling along all Ok on its own without agro from anyone until you stick your oar in.
I am sorry if those relating stories about a boat not getting into a harbour and being wrcked and a boat being dragged out of a harbour to be dumped were not sensible points top make because the question was stupid. I suppose those that found such responses interesting like I did must be stupid in your eyes.
Also I was accused of trying to turn the thread into as mega Gludy thread - nothing could be further from the truth - it was all peaceful until you came along. What then happened is instead of a discussion on the subject of the thread there is an explosion as some other idiots join you in the hunting pack - even accusing me of being devious and something about a court case - all total madness.
Many would just not bother to answer you and would abandon when hlb and gang move in but I do not give in. I will not let you get away with it.
You have revealed to all in your clear statement that my question was stupid and that you bring sense to the proceedings just how off track you are ..... please get a life.
| hlb |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 10:42 |
|
|
|
Re: gludy
|
And you will carry on and on and on and on and on. Till everyones lost the will to live.
The End
| mikef |
| (regular) |
| 11/05/2008 21:04 |
|
|
|
Re: A safe Harbour in a Storm
|
Quote:
somehow I don't think this would happen in the UK - or am I dreaming?
Yes I think you're right. My experience is that staff at UK marinas and harbours are more helpful than Med marina staff. I don't think what happened to me would have happened in the UK. They would have tried to help me out, I hope. It's a result of the pressure on berths in the Med. Many Med marinas can sell or rent their berths many times over so they don't give a [--word removed--] about anyone, particularly short term visitors