Steve49Except in this case it doesn’t look anything like a crossing situation (one covered by Rule 15), but rather with the Russian ship approaching from astern, it seems much more like an overtaking situation (one covered by Rule 13).
R
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken. (b) A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with another vessel from a direction more than 22.5° abaft her beam, that is, in such a position with reference to the vessel she is overtaking, that at night she would be able to see only the sternlight of that vessel but neither of her sidelights.
(c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether she is overtaking another, she shall assume that this is the case and act accordingly.
(d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not make the overtaking vessel a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken vessel until she is finally past and clear.
Additionally there is more to Rule 17 than just section (a)(i) that you quoted above.
(a)
[INDENT] (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her course and speed.
[/INDENT] [INDENT] (ii) The latter vessel may, however, take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
[/INDENT] (b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.
(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances at the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.
(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.
Which basically states that it is every ships responsibility to avoid collision. So whether an overtaking situation or a crossing situation, both ships are at fault for allowing themselves to get that close. The Collision Regulation rules leave no doubt on the fact that there is no such thing as a collision that is 100% the fault of one ship.
Regards,
Steve
Steve49Damage to four merchant ships in UAE waters.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48264499
Obviously no confirmation who/how or what caused the damage but can’t help to raise already heighted tensions in the area.
Interestingly after months of training to integrate with the Abraham Lincoln CSG, the attached Spanish frigate has been withdrawn at the request of the Spanish Government after just a couple of days in the 5th Fleet area.
“For the moment the frigate Mendez Nunez has left the combat group,” a defence ministry spokesman told the AFP news agency. “It’s a temporary withdrawal… as long as the American aircraft carrier is in this zone.”
Steve49RAF 100th Anniversary flypast
Steve49Australia choose the Type 26.
There’s a good chance that their first unit would enter service before the first RN one.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44649959
Actually it seems that the 1st ‘Hunter Class’ will be the 4th Type 26 to enter service.
Steve49Seventh Astute Class confirmed to be name HMS Agincourt
Steve49Look’s like an Su25 has been lost over Syria.
Steve49But reading between the lines it would seem some aircraft were damaged.
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4856695
“At the same time, the defense department noted that information about the destruction of seven planes by the militants at the airbase of Khmeimim in Syria on December 31 does not correspond to reality. “Kommersant’s report on the alleged” virtual destruction “of seven Russian military aircraft at the Khmeimim-feyk airbase The Russian air group in Syria is combat-ready and continues to fulfill all tasks for its intended purpose in full,” the Defense Ministry said”.
Denies ‘destruction’, but seems to leave the door open to later confirm some were ‘damaged’.
Steve49Ministry of Defence announce to build first 3 Royal Navy Type 26 frigates.
Multi-billion pound defence deal secures thousands of UK jobs
£3.7 billion to build 3 frigates, that’s just madness…
Not least when you consider that much of the warfighting equipment is going to be reused from Type 23’s.
Steve49AGI Liman appears to have been sunk, but it is reported that all the crew have recovered.
Steve49Seems to have been confirmed by Russian MoD.
Steve49[QUOTE=Starfish Prime;2344945] 2. Cargo plane shoot down 3 days prior, rumoured to be a Buk.
Except that the Ukrainian An26 (’19 Blue’) shot down at about 21000-feet on the 14th was probably downed by SA.13 (though strong rumours say it was downed by a Russian fighter using an AAM). Up to and including the 17th there was no credible evidence about an operational Buk (post incident SIGINT analysis and hindsight doesn’t really count).
As noted on numerous occasions the diversion was requested by the pilot. Without the benefit of hindsight, what would have been more negligent, to order a pilot to fly through an identified storm system to avoid an unknown SAM threat or respond to a normal weather routing request? Unknown by all, numerous airliners were in the firing line that day, MH17 just had the misfortune to be the one that was hit.
Blame who you want, but the simple fact remains that the persons responsible for this disaster, are those who deployed the Buk system and fired the missile. The rest is just smoke and mirrors.
Steve49I’ve no interest in adding to the never ending ‘political’ debate, but it’s interesting to note how the two sides of this tragic event have reported it…
One side said
1. It was shot down by a Rebel operated Buk SAM system
One side said variously
1. It was shot down by a Ukrainian Su25
2. It was shot down by a Ukrainian Su27 (remember that ridiculous ‘satellite picture’)
3. Was shot down by a Ukrainian Buk, either in a failed attempt to kill Putin or to just the gain UN support for their war efforts
4. Was shot down by a Ex Ukranian Buk system after Ukrainian ATC deliberated diverted it into the target zone
5. Ok it was shot down by a Rebel operated Buk, but it’s not their fault as the aircraft shouldn’t have been there
Now the rights and wrongs of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine are a mixed bag of arguments, but the shooting down of a civilian airliner flying at 33000 feet is clearly beyond any justification to me. No right thinking person believes that the rebel operators set out to kill 298 innocent civilians, but by operating a high altitude air defence system this was a risk that any assessment of the situation should have identified.
On the fateful day they claimed a transport, but hit a airliner, the best solution would have been to admit their error and try to move on. However instead we’ve had the unsettling spectacle of seemingly never ending attempts to divert attention and justify the unjustifiable.
Steve49For the record I’ve tried view the report but every link to it seems to be dead.
It only took me one google search to find the JIT site…
https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-vliegramp/presentaties/presentation-joint/
Steve49Thomas Mair is a recent immigrant ?
No… Perhaps you can blame it on mental health issues… I forgot that collective blame only seems to matter in these cases when they’re carried out by an immigrant or muslim, but bad people do bad things whatever the reason… That being said this mutated thread really has no place in the Aviation forum.
The simple answer to the BREXIT question is nobody knows what effect it will have on the UK aviation and everything else at the moment is just unguided speculation. Almost certainly for now everything will remain the same, AIRBUS aren’t going to move out of the UK next year and the Typhoon project will carry on, but maybe when it comes to investing in the future, that’s when the effects could be felt, but the is for now truth nobody knows, because nobody knows what form the BREXIT will take.
Steve49Current affairs is telling us how it finishes, see France for details.
Details of what…? Terrorism or the actions of evil individuals is an international thing. Whatever form BREXIT takes, it will not make the UK any safer than it is today, to think otherwise is just deluded.
Being in the EU didn’t allow/cause the 7/7 Bombings or the murder of Lee Rigsby (or Joe Cox for that matter) to happen and being out will do no more to prevent future outrages. Bad people do bad things…
Sign In
