International Hydrographie Review, Monaco, LX (1), January 1983

T H E DOVER STRAIT TRAFFIC

SEPARATION S C H E M E
A N D T H E COLLISION REGULATIONS
by I D. I R V I N G ' *

This paper was presented at the Symposium on Vessel Traffic Services. Bremen, April
1981. A slightly condensed version of this paper was also published in Vol. 35(1), January
1982 of The Journal o f Navigation, U.K. It is reproduced here with kind permission of the
organizers of the Symposium and the Editor o f the Journal.

IN TR O D U C TIO N

T h is p a p e r is a discussion o f th e p r o b le m s e x p e r ie n c e d by n a v ig a to rs in the
D o v e r S trait T ra ffic S e p a r a tio n S c h e m e in c o n s tru in g a n d ap p ly in g th e I n te r n a t io
nal R e g u la tio n s for P re v e n tin g C ollisions at Sea, 1972.
T h e T ra ffic S e p a r a tio n S c h e m e (TSS) in th e D o v e r S tra it is n o t n e w , h aving
b e e n in existe n ce since 1967. In te r n a tio n a l R e g u la tio n s for P re v e n tin g C ollisions at
S e a (Collision R e g u la tio n s) h a v e existed in o n e f o rm o r a n o t h e r since 1863, o v e r o n e
h u n d r e d y ea rs lo n g e r. W h y th e n , h a v e th e s e p r o b le m s s u d d e n ly m a teria lise d ?
W h e n th e c o n c e p t o f R o u te in g w a s first in tr o d u c e d it existed side b y side
w ith , b u t q u ite in d e p e n d e n tly of, th e C ollision R e g u la tio n s . I M C O 1* * 1 p r o d u c e d
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r th e c o n d u c t o f v essels in R o u t e in g S y s te m s b u t th e C ollision
R e g u la tio n s, b ein g m a n d a t o r y to all ships, w e r e t h e s u p r e m e a u th o rity . T h e n th e
1972 Collision R e g u la tio n s c a m e into force in 1977, a n d fo r th e f irs t.t im e a rule
specifically a p p lica b le to T S S s w a s included . T h is rule, R u l e 10, w a s basically an
e x tra c t f ro m th e I M C O G e n e ra l P rinciples o f S h ip s R o u te in g . It n o w a p p e a r s th at,
a l th o u g h quite suitab le as a g e n e ra l principle, it is n o t so as a legal in stru c tio n liable
to rigid, literal in te rp re ta tio n . T h a t it is c o n t a in e d a m o n g s t th e S teering a n d Sailing
R ules r a th e r t h a n in p a r t a . g e n e r a l , a n d has also b e e n selected fo r exclu siv e

(*) 120 London Road, Deal, Kent CT14 9PL, U.K.

(**) Editors note : N ow IMO (International Maritime Organization) since May 1982.
e n f o r c e m e n t w ith s e v e r e p enalties, h a s also c a u s e d its s ta tu s to be artificially
e n h a n c e d . T h is leads to conflicts b o t h w ith the o t h e r R ules a n d w ith c o m m o n s e n s e ,
a n d th u s to the p r o b l e m s to be d isc u sse d .
In M a y 1979 the N au tica l I n s titu t e D o v e r B r a n c h held a s e m in a r to discu ss
P ractical N a v ig a tio n in th e D o v e r Strait. It w a s w ell a tte n d e d by a w id e c r o s s
sectio n o f m a r i n e r s a n d by o t h e r s c o n n e c t e d w ith sh ip p in g in general. D u r i n g the
c o u r s e o f the disc u ssio n it b e c a m e a p p a r e n t th a t th e r e a r e a n u m b e r o f a s p e c ts to
n av ig atio n in the S tra it w ith w h i c h m a n y o f th o s e p r e s e n t w e re n o t h a p p y .
C o n s e q u e n t ly , a C o m m i t t e e o f B r a n c h m e m b e r s w a s f o r m e d to identify th e
pa r tic u la r p r o b le m s a n d to m a k e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s as to h o w th e y m ig h t be
e lim in a te d o r r e d u c e d in severity.
T h e need for th e C o m m i t t e e to o b ta in a b a la n c e d v ie w o f the p r o b le m s a n d
possible so lu tio n s as th e y a p p e a r to th e m a n y u sers o f the D o v e r Strait r e q u ir e d th e
d istrib u tio n o f a n u m b e r o f c irc u la rs a n d q u e s tio n n a ire s , a n d careful s tu d y o f th e
replies. T h is all to o k tim e, b u t th e C o m m i t t e e c o n s id e r e d it nec essary in o r d e r th a t
it m ig h t a void m a k in g a n y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s b as ed u p o n u n r e p r e s e n ta t iv e o r bia sed
in f o rm a tio n . I n d e e d , it w a s fear o f this th a t ca u se d th e C o m m itt e e to a v o i d m a k in g
a n y direct r e c o m m e n d a t i o n in r e sp e c t o f crossing traffic in its first R e p o r t to the
N au tica l In stitute. S in ce th a t R e p o r t , h o w e v e r , it has satisfied itself th a t it is n o w
justified in r e c o m m e n d i n g a p a r tic u la r solution. T h e w o r k o f the C o m m itt e e f o r m s
the basis o f this P a p e r w h ic h e n d e a v o u r s to e xplain the p r o b le m s a n d d e s c rib e the
re a s o n s for th e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s fo r th e ir solution.
A n u m b e r o f a b b r e v ia ti o n s a n d initials are use d for the sake o f b rev ity . A list
o f th ese is in c lu d e d for r e f e r e n c e at t h e end o f t h e P ap er.

GENERAL

T h e D o v e r S tra it a n d its a p p r o a c h e s f o r m o n e o f the w o r l d s b usiest

w a te r w a y s . P e r h a p s in e vita bly, th e r e f o r e , it has o v e r the y e a r s been th e sc e n e o f a
large p r o p o r ti o n o f th e w o r l d 's collisio n s a n d stra n d in g s. Precisely b e c a u s e o f this
it b e c a m e the site o f th e w o r l d s v e r y first T ra ffic S e p a r a tio n S ch em e. A t first the
S c h e m e w a s only v o lu n ta r y . H o w e v e r , th e in tr o d u c tio n te n years la ter o f the
I n te r n a tio n a l R e g u la tio n s fo r P r e v e n t i n g Collisions at Sea-19 72 m a d e c o m p lia n c e
w ith I M C O - a p p r o v e d T S S s m a n d a t o r y for all vessels.
T h e M a s te r o f a vessel tra n sitin g th e D o v e r S tra it to d a y has a lot m o r e in his
f a v o u r th a n he w o u ld h a v e had s o m e few y e a rs ago. D u r i n g the tran sit his vessel
will b e c o m e p a rt o f a c o m p r e h e n s i v e V essel T raffic S y stem . C o m m a n d o f his ship
will re m a in firm ly o n his b ridge, th a t being th e b est place fo r it, b u t th e v a r io u s
facets o f th e s y s te m will closely g u id e him. His c h o ic e o f r o u te t h r o u g h th e Strait
will be g o v e r n e d b y th e TSS a n d R u l e 10 o f th e C ollision R e g u la tio n s. T h e y will
a s s u re him o f a w e ll - m a r k e d p a th t h r o u g h the sh o a ls o f th e a r e a that will also keep
h im clear o f the m a n y vessels tr a n s i tin g in th e o p p o site direc tio n . His o n ly collision
th r e a ts sh o u ld c o m e fro m cro ssin g vessels a n d f r o m vessels o v e rta k in g o r being
o v e r ta k e n , b o th readily identifiable s itu a tio n s for w h ic h the Collision R e g u la tio n s
giv e clear in stru c tio n s. H e will re c e iv e o n V H F C h a n n e l 10 (British) o r 11 (F re n c h )
 I R A I T IC S E P A R A T I O N S C H E M E S A N D COERECi S 91
h a lf- h o u r ly b r o a d c a s ts fro m the C N I S giving a c c u r a t e u p - d a te s o n : adverse
w e a t h e r c o n d itio n s , defectiv e o r o ff-sta tio n nav ig atio n al m a r k s , h a m p e r e d vessels,
ro g u e s, a n d a n y o th e r c i r c u m s ta n c e s a ffec ting the safety o f n a v ig a tio n . In a d d itio n
to all this, pilots a r e available s h o u ld th e ir services be d e s ire d a n d th e y m a y be
e m b a r k e d well b e f o r e th e vessel e n te rs th e D o v e r Strait.
T o g e t h e r , th e r e f o r e , the TSS, the C ollision R e g u la tio n s , th e C N I S a n d the
P ilotage S erv ice f o rm a c o m p r e h e n s i v e p a c k a g e o f r e g u la tio n , g u id a n c e , i n f o r m a
tion a n d a d v ice to assist the M a s te r t o w a r d s a safe tran sit. H o w e v e r , th e re a re still
difficulties a n d d a n g e r s w ith w h ic h he h as to c o n te n d . A m o n g th e se a re th e s tr o n g
tidal s tr e a m s in th e Strait a n d th e tr a d itio n a l e n e m ie s o f fog a n d s to r m . T h e r e are
s o m e n e w difficulties also w h ic h arise f r o m th e p r e s e n c e o f th e TSS a n d the
ap plication o f R u le !0 o f the C ollision R e g u la tio n s. B o th o f th e se are d e s ig n e d for
g en e ral in te r n a tio n a l use, b u t th e p hysic al lim itations u p o n s e a r o o m in t h e S tra it
a n d the h eavy d en s ity o f b o th t h r o u g h a n d crossing traffic su b je cts t h e m to a s e v e r e
test w h ic h h as e x p o s e d the flaw s w h ic h w e r e first disc u sse d at th e N a u tic a l In stitu te
s e m in a r on P ra ctical N a v ig a tio n in th e D o v e r S trait in 1979. M o s t o f th e flaw s
m ig h t be e x p e c t e d to a p p e a r to s o m e e x t e n t in all th o s e T S S s to w h i c h the Collision
R e g u la tio n s apply. T h e i r effects, h o w e v e r , are p r o b a b ly m a g n ifie d in th e D o v e r
Strait by th e p a r tic u la r c i r c u m s ta n c e s prev ailing there.

V E S S E L S C O N S T R A I N E D BY D R A U G H T

V essels c o n s tr a in e d by their d r a u g h t, a s defined b y R u le 3(h), h a v e to c o n t e n d

w ith o th e r p r o b l e m s as well as th at o f h a v i n g only lim ited d e e p w a t e r in w h i c h to
navigate. T h e tides in th e S tra it c a n at tim e s set th e m s tr o n g ly t o w a r d s sh a llo w
w a te r . "S pring tides ca n have a r e m a r k a b le effect o n V L C C s n e a r the e x t r e m ity o f
b a n k s ...' [1], T h e necessity for these sh ip s to a d h e r e closely to th e ir p r e - p la n n e d
tra c k c a n m e a n th a t a r e q u i r e m e n t for t h e m to alter c o u r s e for traffic r e a s o n s m a y
be e x c ee d in g ly e m b a r r a s s in g , o r e v e n d a n g e r o u s .
T his difficulty is re c o g n is e d in the R e g u la tio n s. R u le 28 gives the c o n s tr a in e d
vessel the rig h t to e x h ib it a signal to indic ate th a t she is so c o n s tr a in e d , a n d R u le
18(dXi) r e q u ire s t h a t vessels o th e r th a n t h o s e not u n d e r c o m m a n d o r re stric te d in
th e ir ability to m a n o e u v r e shall "... if th e c i r c u m s ta n c e s o f th e case a d m it, a v o id
im p e d in g th e safe p assage o f a vessel c o n s tr a in e d by h e r d r a u g h t , ex h ib itin g the
signals in R u le 2 8 . It m ig h t be e x p e c te d t h e r e f o r e th a t th e n e e d w o u l d s e ld o m arise
for a c o n s tra in e d vessel to alter c o u r s e for traffic r e a s o n s . H o w e v e r , tim ely a c tio n
by ships t h a t s h o u l d o th e r w is e sta n d -o n is d e p e n d e n t u p o n th e ir id e n tify ing the
signal in tim e to a v o id a close q u a r te r s situation . T h e n ig h t- tim e signal is usually
readily a p p a r e n t a n d e v e n at s u c h a ra n g e th a t all t h r e e red lights a re not
individually d istin g u ish a b le, th e ex iste n ce o f th e r e d g lo w s e rv e s to a le rt th e
a p p r o a c h in g vessel. T h e d a y tim e signal is n o t so easy to see. It is a black c y lin d e r
w ith a d ia m e te r o f at least 0 . 6 m e tr e a n d a h eig ht o f tw ic e its d ia m e t e r e x h ib ite d
w h e r e it m a y b es t be seen. W h e n e x h ib ite d o v e r th e b r id g e o f a V L C C it a p p e a r s
v e ry insignifiant, e v e n w h e n se en f r o m close-to. F r o m a d ista n c e it c a n b e v e r y
h a r d to spot, e v e n w h e n its ex iste n ce is su sp e cte d . W h e n a c tio n is r e q u ir e d u n d e r
 R u le 18(dXi) b y a vessel th a t w o u ld o t h e r w i s e h a v e to s ta n d - o n , a n d th a t a c tio n is
d e p e n d e n t u p o n th e vessel seeing a n d reco g n isin g th e c ylinder, th e re is a significant
p r o b ab ility th a t th e a c tio n will n o t b e ta k e n until a close q u a r te r s situ atio n is
im m i n e n t o r h a s ac tu a lly o c c u r r e d By th a t tim e th e c o n s tr a in e d vessel is h e r se lf
re q u ir e d to give w a y w ith a t te n d a n t risk a n d the o b je c t o f th e R ule is lost.
It is t h e r e f o r e s u b m i tte d t h a t th e d a y tim e signal for a vessel c o n s tr a in e d by
h e r d r a u g h t is in a d e q u a te in p r e s e n t- d a y c o n d itio n s a n d t h a t it s h o u ld be c h a n g e d
to s o m e th in g m o r e readily d etec ted . It is su g g e sted th a t a n inc re ase in the size o f the
c y lin d e r, m o r e in k e e p in g w ith the scale o f a V L C C , a n d / o r a stipulation as to
w h e r e in th e vessel it s h o u ld be e x h ib ite d m ight se rv e the p u r p o s e . A lte rn a tiv e ly ,
p e r h a p s a h ig h -in te n sity light o f p r e s c rib e d r h y t h m a n d c o l o u r m ig h t effectively
c a tc h th e e y e a n d c o u l d also be use d a t night.

LARGE V ESSELS

S p e a k e r s a n d d e le g a te s at th e S e m in a r disc u sse d th e special p r o b le m s o f large

vessels. It w a s p o in te d o u t th a t a V L C C in the S tra it, w h e t h e r o r n o t s h e w a s
c o n s tr a in e d b y h e r d r a u g h t , w a s p r o b a b ly restricted in h e r ability to m a n o e u v r e in
a c c o r d a n c e w i t h th e R e g u la tio n s b y h e r size a n d lo w p o w e r / w e i g h t ratio. T a k in g
into a c c o u n t t h e L a n e w i d t h s a n d t h e likelihood t h a t a c r o ssin g vessel m ig h t n o t
a d o p t h e r c r o s s i n g c o u r s e until n e a r ly in the L ane, d o u b t w a s e x p r e s s e d as to the
ability o f a V L C C s te a m in g a t slow s p e e d to ac hie ve, in th e tim e available to her,
sufficient c h a n g e o f d ire c tio n o r s p e ed to a v o id a collision b y h e r o w n a c tio n s alo n e
w ith a 15 -k n o t s t a n d - o n vessel a p p r o a c h i n g on a c o u r s e at right-ang le s to hers.
D esp ite h e r inability to m a n o e u v r e a s r e q u ir e d , th e r e is n o p ro v is io n w ith in the
R e g u la tio n s fo r h e r to in d ic a te this to a p p r o a c h in g vessels. T h e definition in R ule
3(g) o f th e t e r m vessel restric ted in h e r ability to m a n o e u v r e refers to t h e n a t u r e
o f th e v essels w o r k as t h e restricting fac to r, w h e r e a s th e V L C C is restricted solely
b y h e r o w n lack o f m a n o eu v rab ility . S h e is n o t t h e r e f o r e p e r m itte d to s h o w th e
signal p r e s c rib e d in R u le 27(b) w h i c h m ig h t o th e r w is e be c o n s id e r e d th e m o s t
a p p r o p r ia t e . N o r is she able to e x h ib it th e signals c o n t a in e d in R ule 27(a) for a
vessel n o t u n d e r c o m m a n d , as th e d e finition in R u le 3(f) o f s u c h a vessel r e q u ir e s
t h e inability to m a n o e u v r e as r e q u ir e d by th e R u le s to be d u e to s o m e e x c e p tio n a l
c i r c u m s t a n c e . It m ig h t p e r h a p s be a r g u e d th a t th e c o n d i tio n s p reva iling in th e
D o v e r Strait (i.e., lim ited s e a r o o m , n a r r o w traffic lanes, h ig h den sity traffic,
n u m e r o u s c r o ssin g vessels f re q u e n tly ste erin g s tr a ig h t c o u r s e s for o n ly s h o r t
p e r io d s o f time), c o n s titu te a n e x c e p tio n a l c i r c u m s ta n c e . I f t h a t a r g u m e n t w e r e
u p h e ld , h o w e v e r , it w o u l d radically c h a n g e th e p re se n tly a c c e p te d m e a n in g o f the
t e r m n o t u n d e r c o m m a n d .
T h e C o m m i t t e e c o n s id e r e d it i m p o r t a n t th a t a V L C C sh o u ld be a b le to
in d ic ate to a p p r o a c h i n g vessels th a t she is restricted in h er ability to kee p o u t o f th e
w a y . It r e c o m m e n d s th a t special rules, sim ila r to th o s e for th e Straits o f M a la c c a
a n d S in g a p o r e ( IM C O res. A . 375 (X), A N N E X 5) b e i n tr o d u c e d for V L C C s in th e
D o v e r Strait, in c lu d in g a definition o f w h a t c o n s titu te s a V L C C an d g r a n tin g
a u t h o r i t y for t h e m to e x h ib it a signal indicating th e ir restric ted ability to m a n o eu -
vre [2]. S u c h rules sh o u ld also se rv e to c h e c k th e m is u se o f the "c o n s tr a in e d by
d r a u g h t " signal by th o s e vessels w h o presently ex h ib it it solely in o r d e r to ev a d e
their responsibility to give w ay.

HOVERCRAFT

H o v e r c r a f t first started to o p e r a te o n a regular basis in the D o v e r S tra it in

1968. Since t h e n th e ir n u m b e r s a n d th e fre q u e n c y o f c r o ssin g s has inc re ase d to th e
e x te n t that th e y n o w f o rm a significant p r o p o r ti o n o f th e c ro ssin g traffic. T h e ty p e s
o f cra ft in use o p e r a te at sp e ed s o f up to sixty k n o ts a n d , b e in g o f th e fully s k irte d "
v arie ty , are subject to drift angles, d e p e n d in g on the w in d , o f up to tw e n ty -f iv e
degrees.
A t the o n se t o f h o v e r c ra ft o p e r a tio n s in the Strait it w a s u n d e r s to o d th a t th e y
w o u ld k eep o u t o f t h e w a y o f all o th e r vessels [5], It w a s su b se q u e n tly d ec ide d th a t
the d iffe ren ce in p e r f o r m a n c e capabilities o f the v a r io u s ty p e s o f h o v e r c ra ft m a d e
this u n sa tisfa c to ry as a gen e ral Rule an d in th e 1972 C ollision R e g u la tio n s R u le 3 (a)
specifically includes n o n - d is p la c e m e n t craft in the d efinition o f the w o rd ve s se l .
H o v e r c r a f t are n o w th e r e f o r e req u ired to c o m p ly w ith th e R e g u la tio n s in th e s a m e
w a y as an y o th e r p o w e r - d r iv e n vessel, a n d g iv e -w a y o r s t a n d - o n as a p p r o p r ia te .
T h e r e are few difficulties w h e n th e h o v e r c ra ft is th e g iv e -w a y vessel. A n
alteratio n o f c o u rse o f ten de g re e s or so is usually a m p le to ac h ie v e the d esired safe
passing distance. It is w h e n th e c o n v e n tio n a l vessel is r e q u ir e d to g iv e -w a y th a t
difficulties m a y arise, a n d these are c a u s e d by th e speed a n d drift o f the h o v e rc ra ft.
W h e n a c o n v e n tio n a l ship ste am in g at fifteen k n o ts e n c o u n te r s a s ix ty -k n o t
h o v e r c ra ft crossing a t right-angles o n a collision c o u r s e th e ir c o m b in e d closing rate
is a p p r o x im a te ly s ix ty -tw o knots. W h e n th e h o v e r c ra ft is o n th e s h ip s s ta r b o a r d
side th e ship is the g iv e -w a y vessel u n d e r R u le 15. T h e a c tio n she th e n has to ta k e
to ac h ie v e a p a rtic u la r passing distance d e p e n d s u p o n th e d istance a p a r t o f the
vessels w h e n th a t a c tio n is initiated. T h a t, in tu r n , d e p e n d s u p o n th e d istan c e a p a r t
w h e n the ship first ap p re cia tes th a t the h o v e r c r a f t is a th rea t.
It is quite p r o b a b le th a t the ex istence o f the th r e a t will n o t be d e te r m in e d by
th e ship until th e h o v e r c r a f t is significantly closer th a n w o u l d be the case if b o th
w e r e ships. T h is is d u e solely to the sp e ed o f the h o v e r c ra ft. T h e fast closing rate
m e a n s th a t ev e ry m in u t e sp e n t in a sce rta ining w h e t h e r risk o f collision exists
re p re se n ts a d ec reas e in th e r a n g e o f o v e r o n e mile. W e r e th e th r e a t fro m a n o t h e r
fifte e n -k n o t ship, t h a t m in u te w o u l d r e p r e s e n t only 1 /2 mile. A dd itionally , if th e
ship is using a visual lo o k - o u t as the princip al m e a n s o f d etecting a p p r o a c h in g
vessels, the aspect o f th e h o v e r c ra ft m a y initially give t h e im p re ssio n th a t it will
pass clear a n d t h e r e b y f u r th e r delay th e realization th a t a collision situation exists.

T h e a b u n d a n c e o f o th e r d istractio ns, in th e f o r m o f ships, fishing vessels,

yac h ts, o th e r h o v e r c ra ft, a n d e v e n s w im m e r s , m a k es it u nlikely th a t th e h o v e r c r a f t
will be d etected at a r a n g e o f m o r e th a n six miles. F re q u e n tl y it will be less.
T h e r e f o r e , the ship in this e x a m p le has less t h a n six m in u t e s in w h ic h to re c o g n ise
an d re s p o n d to the t h r e a t a n d a c h ie v e th e desired result. I n o r d e r to pass 1 /2 a mile
Fig 1 - B o th t h e h o v e r c r a f t a n d t h e s h ip e a c h ha s t h e o t h e r o n its o w n p o r t side, a n d it
a p p e a r s t h a t t h e y s h o u l d p a ss cle ar. H o w e v e r , t h e w i n d c a u s e s t h e h o v e r c r a f t to m a k e a n
a n g le o f drift o f 25, c a u s i n g t h e h o v e r c r a f t to m a k e g o o d a c o u r s e a lo n g th e d o t t e d line to
p o i n t X w h e r e , u n l e s s e v a s iv e a c t i o n is t a k e n , she a n d t h e sh ip will collide. R u l e 15 d i r e c ts th e
vessel w h i c h h a s t h e o t h e r o n h e r o w n s t a r b o a r d side t o k e e p o u t o f t h e w a y . By i m p lic a tio n ,
t h e vessel w h i c h h a s t h e o t h e r o n h e r o w n p o r t sid e s h o u l d s t a n d - o n . In th is e x a m p l e ,
t h e r e f o r e . B o t h vessels s h o u l d s t a n d - o n .

fro m the h o v e r c ra ft, th e ship m u s t a lte r c o u rse s o m e fo rty deg re es to s t a r b o a r d or

re d u c e sp e e d to ten k n o ts in s ta n ta n e o u s ly . In p rac tice , a llow ing t w o m in u te s to
assess th e risk a n d ca lc u late t h e m a n u v r e , a n d fo r a d v a n c e o r r u n - o n . the
alteratio n s will be m o r e in the region o f ninety de g re e s o r ze ro knots. T his is
feasible in th e o r y b u t difficult in p rac tice an d o n e m ig h t suggest th a t it is se ldo m
a c h ie v ed . T h is m a y be d u e to th e p r o x im it y o f o th e r vessels o r possibly sim ply to
th e lack o f rea liza tio n b y n a v i g a to r s o f the r e q u ir e m e n t to ex e c u te s u c h drastic
m a no euvres.
T h e c o n f u s io n th a t m a y be c a u s e d b y the drift o f h o v e r c ra ft is d e m o n s tr a te d
by figure I. T h is is th e m o s t e x t r e m e e x a m p le likely to be m et w ith in practice. T h e
t w o vessels in th e d ia g r a m a r e c r o s s in g on a collision co u rse . E a c h vessel has the
o t h e r o n h er p o r t side. E a c h is th e r e f o r e the s ta n d -o n vessel u n d e r R ule 15 T h e
h o v e r c r a f ts yello w flashing light, r e q u ir e d by R u le 23 (b), s h o u ld serve to w a r n o f
this p r o b le m , b u t th e solu tio n r e q u ir e s a ben d in g o f the R u les by at least o n e o f the
participan ts.
H o v e r c r a f t pilots a r e well a w a r e o f all these difficulties an d , in g en e ral, take
early evasive a c tio n to a v o id a c l o s e - q u a r te rs situation [3], C a p ta in S y m s says th a t
T h e r e is n o d e n y i n g that... e v e ry h o v e r c r a f t C a p ta in a n d N a v ig a to r a p p r o a c h e s
a n y situation initially f r o m th e p o in t o f view o f a g iv in g - w a y vessel... [4], R u les 2 (b)
a n d 17 (a) (ii) o f th e C ollision R e g u la tio n s req u ire d u e re g a rd to be h a d to all
d a n g e r s o f n a v ig a tio n a n d collision a n d to a n y special c irc u m s ta n c e s , in c luding the
lim itations o f th e vessels in v o lv e d , ... a n d perm it th e s ta n d - o n vessel u n d e r specific
c i r c u m s ta n c e s to t a k e a c tion to a v o id collision by h er m a n o e u v re alone..."
respectively. T h e h o v e r c r a f t C a p ta in is p r e s u m a b ly , th e re fo r e , c o v e r e d for his
a c tio ns, a n d it m a y be said th a t t h e R e g u la tio n s, th e r e f o r e , a d e q u a te ly deal w ith the
 TR MTTC S! !' \ R \ I I ON S C I I 1 M L S A N D C OI Rl 1 ' 95

situation. But it is th e N a v ig a to r in the g iv e -w a y ship w h o h as the p r o b le m , a n d

Rule 17 goes on to r e m i n d him in p a rt (d) th a t he is n o t reliev ed o f the o bligation
to keep o u t o f th e w a y . His p r o b le m th e re fo re remains.
O n e w ay o f lessening the p ro b le m w o u ld be to include h o v e r c ra ft in Rule
18(e) a n d r e q u ire th e m , like seaplanes, to ...in general, k e e p well clear o f all
vessels a n d avoid im p e d in g their n a v ig a tio n . T h e en s u in g r e q u ir e m e n t to co m p ly
w ith the Rules in c irc u m s ta n c e s w h e re risk o f collision exists w o u ld , h o w e v e r,
result in a rev e rsio n to the p re se n t unsa tisfac to ry situation at a critical time. An
alternative solution, th a t has been received w ith s o m e interest by h o v e r c ra ft
p e rso n n e l w h e n p reviou sly discussed, is to re-classify th e a ir-cushion vehicle
flashing yellow light re q u ire d by Rule 23 (b) as a signal to indicate th at the vessel
exhibiting it will k eep o u t o f the w ay o f all vessels not e x h ibiting that signal. T his
also possesses th e m e rit of including a failsafe in that a h o v e r c r a f t ex p e rien c in g
difficulties, o r o f a type not having the m anoeuvrability o f th o s e being discussed
here, w o u ld not e x hibit the signal an d th u s fall into the c a te g o ry o f v essel.

C R O S S IN G T R A FFIC

T h e u n d o u b te d success o f the D o v e r Strait T raffic S e p a ra tio n S c h e m e in

reduc ing the n u m b e r o f collisions in the a re a has b een a c h ie v e d for the m o st part
by se parating th e o p p o s in g strea m s o f th r o u g h traffic a n d th e re b y re d u c in g the
n u m b e r o f h e a d - o n e n c o u n te rs , in m o st T SS s this w o u l d result in the virtual
elim ination o f all e n d - o n situations. In the D o v e r Strait, h o w e v e r , the n u m b e r o f
crossing vessels m a y equal o r e v e n ex ceed the n u m b e r o f t h r o u g h vessels. T h e
subject o f the p r o b le m s ex p e rie n c e d by crossing vessels, a n d the difficulties th at
crossing vessels p r e s e n t to th r o u g h traffic, b e c a m e o n e o f the principal p o in ts o f
discussion at th e S e m in a r a n d at v ario u s m e etin g s since. W id e ly differing o p in io n s
have b een e x p re sse d o f the n a tu re a n d significance o f th o s e p r o b le m s , d e p e n d in g
u p o n th e v ie w p o in t o f th e o b s e rv e r, a n d sim ilarly differing s o lu tio n s p ro p o s e d .
T h e C o m m itt e e w a s th e re fo re faced first o f all w ith the task o f ascertaining
w h ic h pro b lem s, if a n y , do exist a n d th e d eg re e o f im p o r ta n c e that sh o u ld be
atta c h e d to th e m . Being a w a r e th a t the a tta i n m e n t of p e r f e c tio n is unlikely in any
h u m a n e n d e a v o u r , a n d th a t th e sy stem a p p a r e n tly w o r k s w ell in o th e r p a rts o f the
w o rld , the C o m m itt e e h a d n o desire to solve a set o f p r o b le m s , possibly w ith the
risk o f d etracting f ro m the safety o f nav ig atio n in o t h e r w a y s , unless those
p r o b le m s w ere b o th real a n d significant. T h e p r o c e d u re d e s c r ib e d at th e beginnin g
o f this p a p e r finally led th e C o m m itt e e to th e co n c lu sio n th a t t h e principal p r o b le m s
in relation to c rossing vessels th a t significantly detra ct f ro m th e safety o f navigatio n
are :
(a) the zig-zag (dog-leg) co u rse s steered by c ro ssin g vessels in o r d e r to c o m p ly w ith
R ule 10(c);
(b) the c o n s tra in t im p o s e d by Rule 10(c) u p o n th e choice o f a safe crossing c o u r s e ;
(c) the conflict b e t w e e n Rule 10 a n d Rule 15;
(d) th e conflict b e t w e e n Rule 10 a n d R ule 17;
(e ) th e effect th a t th e k n o w le d g e o f the existence o f traffic surv eillanc e h a s u p o n
the m a r i n e r s ch o ice o f anti-collision m anoeuvres.
A f u rth e r p r o b le m , o f relatively m in o r im p o r ta n c e so far as safety is c o n c e r n e d but
w h ic h is f u n d a m e n ta l to all th e o t h e r p r o b le m s a n d w h ic h lo o m s p articu la rly large
in th e m in d s o f m a rin e r s fac ed w ith traffic surveillance b y s h o r e - b a s e d ra d a r, is;
(f) th e m e a n in g o f the p h ra se c o n ta in e d in Rule 10(c) ...sh all cro ss as n ea rly as
prac tica b le at right angles... .

The M e a n i n g

T o discuss th e last p r o b le m first, it is clear th a t th e re is s o m e c o n fu sio n

a m o n g s t m a rin e r s as to w h e t h e r shall c r o s s m e an s shall steer a c o u r s e o r shall
m a k e g o o d a course ".
D isc u ssio n at th e S e m in a r a p p e a r e d to indicate th a t the m ajority o f m a rin e rs
u n d e r s ta n d the w o r d s shall c r o s s to m e a n shall ste er a c o u r s e " , b u t it w a s
p o in te d o u t th a t case law te n d s t o lo o k u p o n s teer" as m e a n in g m a k e g o o d [6 ].
O f th o s e m a rin e r s q u e s tio n e d , in d e p e n d e n tly o f th e se m in a r, o n their u n d e r s ta n d in g
o f th e p h ra se , s o m e sixty p e r c e n t g a v e shall steer a c o u r s e as th e ir c h o ice of
m e a n in g . Interestingly , v ery few o f tho se q u e s tio n e d c o n s id e re d th a t a m b ig u ity
existed in th e w o r d i n g o f the R ule. M o s t believed th a t th e ir p articu la r in te rp re ta tio n
w a s e x p r e s s e d q u ite clearly.
T h o s e w h o s u p p o r t th e "shall m a k e g o o d a c o u r s e " in te rp re ta tio n p o in t o u t
th a t th e r e q u ir e m e n t c o n ta in e d in th e Rule is to cro ss as nearly as p r ac tica b le at
right an g les to th e g e n e ra l d ire c tio n o f traffic f lo w . T h e g en eral direction o f traffic
flow is dictated by the o r ie n t a tio n o f th e T raffic L an e s a n d is th e re fo r e fixed and
un a ffe c te d by a n y o u tsid e in flu e n c e s su c h as tide o r w in d . T h e r e f o r e , in o r d e r to
"c ro ss as n ea rly as prac tica b le a t right angles" to th a t p r e - d e te rm in e d d irection o f
traffic flow , the c rossing vessel m u s t ach ie v e a p r e - d e te rm in e d c o u r s e by allow ing
for tidal set a n d le e w a y as n ec e s sa ry . T h a t is, she shall MAKE GOOD A COURSE as
nearly as p rac tica b le at right angles".
A n additio n a l fac to r th a t r e in f o r c e s this view in th e m in d s o f n a v ig a to r s in the
D o v e r S trait is th a t th e m u c h publicised s y ste m o f r a d a r surveillan c e includes
a m o n g s t its fu n c tio n s th e policing o f th e area, a n d the detec tio n a n d re p o r tin g o f
vessels c o n s id e r e d to b e c o n t r a v e n i n g Rule 10. S h o r e b ased ra d a r is, n atura lly ,
g r o u n d stabilised a n d indicates a vessels c o u r s e m a d e g o o d . A lso naturally,
th e re fo re , m a n y m a r i n e r s loo k to e n s u r e th a t it is th e ir c o u rse m a d e g o o d th at
crosses at righ t angles.
T h o s e s u p p o r tin g th e shall ste er a c o u r s e " in te rp re ta tio n believe th a t all the
R ules c o n t a in e d in P a r t B (The Steering a n d Sailing Rules) o f t h e Collision
R e g u la tio n s direct th e m a n n e r in w h ic h vessels, u n d e r p a rtic u la r stated c i r c u m s ta n
ces, m u s t be STEERED a n d sailed. T h o s e p articu la r circ u m sta n c e s, w h e n they
involv e m o r e th a n o n e vessel, are d e fin e d by th e a sp ec ts o f th e vessels to e a c h o th e r
o r their relative b e a rin g s o r m o tio n s , all o f w h ic h are d e p e n d e n t u p o n th e ir courses
steered. It is, th e re fo r e , quite w r o n g to in tro d u c e additio n a l, irre le v an t criteria such
as set a n d le e w a y into th e in te r p re ta tio n o f ju st o n e p a r a g r a p h o f o n e p articu lar
Rule.
T h e C o m m itt e e f a v o u r s th e "shall steer a c o u r s e in te rp re tatio n , believing that
it m e e ts th e in te n tio n o f R u le 1 0 (c) by p r o d u c in g a n u n a m b ig u o u s crossing
 I R A I I 1C S E P A R A T I O N SC I H Ml S A N D C O L R H G S 97

situation b e t w e e n t h r o u g h traffic a n d cro ssin g vessels, th e r e b y e n s u rin g th a t th e re

is n o d o u b t as to w h e t h e r a vessel is fo llow ing a L a n e o r crossing it, no d o u b t as
to w h ic h R ule applies w h e n risk o f collision exists a n d t h e r e f o r e n o d o u b t as to the
action re q u ire d o f th e vessels involved. I f th e "shall m a k e g o o d a c o u r s e
in te rp re ta tio n w a s to be a c c e p te d it w o u ld im m ed ia te ly in tr o d u c e a degree o f d o u b t
to all these situations w h e n vessels are o blige d to allow for set a n d le ew ay , a n d
w o u ld r e - in tr o d u c e the d a n g e r o u s fine-angle e n c o u n t e r situ ation, this tim e b e t w e e n
c rossing vessels on rec ip ro c al tracks.

The Dog- Leg Courses Steered by Cross ing Vessels

C ro ssin g vessels, a n d in p articu la r crossing ferries, are n o w steering a

d o g -leg track in o r d e r to c o m p ly w ith th e r e q u ir e m e n t o f R ule 10 (c). T h e r esu ltan t
large alteratio n s o f c o u r s e at high s p e ed o n the e d g e s o f th e L anes m a k e
c o n v e n tio n a l ra d a r plotting difficult, can c a u s e c o n f u s io n to t h r o u g h vessels, a n d
are n o t in a c c o r d a n c e w ith basic anti-collision p re c e p ts w h ic h an ticipate that vessels
o th e r th a n g iv e - w a y vessels will m a in ta in their c o u r se a n d speed. T h e p r o b le m
b e c o m e s m o r e d a n g e r o u s w h e n a vessel a p p r o a c h in g the L anes fro m an I n s h o re
Z o n e alters c o u r se to p o r t to re m a in w ith in th a t Z o n e until it is safe for it to e n te r
the L a n e a n d cro ss a t rig ht angles" [7].
T h e principle m e t h o d o f d e te r m in in g w h e t h e r risk o f collision exists is by
carefully w a tc h in g the c o m p a s s bea rin g o f an a p p r o a c h in g vessel. I f the b e a rin g
d o e s n o t ap p re c ia b ly c h a n g e , su c h risk is d e e m e d to exist. R ule 7 - Risk o f
Collision, states the m e th o d s by w h ic h th e b e a rin g m u s t be w a tc h e d a n d c o n c l u
sions rea c h e d , a n d w a r n s o f t w o p a r tic u la r c o n s id e r a tio n s th a t shall be a m o n g s t
th o se ta k e n into a c c o u n t [11]. O ne c o n s id e r a tio n th a t is n o t m e n tio n e d , b u t w h ic h
is fu n d a m e n ta l, is th a t th e m e th o d d e p e n d s in p r a c tic e u p o n b o th vessels
m a in ta in in g a steady c o u r s e a n d speed. T h e m o m e n t e ith e r vessel alters her c o u r s e
o r sp e ed th e a n s w e r is invalidated. O nly w h e n th e a lte ra tio n has bee n c o m p le te d ,
a n d b o th vessels a re o n c e aga in m a in ta in in g a steady c o u r s e a n d speed, m a y the
exercise be rep e a te d a n d th e n e w a n s w e r e v e n tu a lly fo u n d .
T ra ffic an d n a v ig a tio n e x p e r ie n c e usually r e n d e r it im p ra ctic al for the crossing
vessel to a d o p t the right an g le crossing c o u r s e directly f r o m h er p o in t o f d e p a r tu r e
in the In s h o re T ra ffic Z o n e (ITZ). S he m u s t th e re fo r e m a k e a large alteration o f
c o u rse , o f p e r h a p s s e v e n ty d egre es, b e f o r e sh e e n te r s th e L anes. T h is m a k e s it
difficult fo r h er to assess th e likely f u tu r e traffic s itu atio n a n d increases th e
probability o f h e r p u tti n g h e rse lf into a collision situatio n w ith th r o u g h traffic w h e n
she d o es alter c o u rse .

A lth o u g h this p r o b l e m is c a u se d by th e m a n u v r e s e x e c u t e d by the crossin g

vessel in o r d e r to c o m p l y w ith R ule 10(c) as s h e starts to c r o s s the L anes, it is th e
t h r o u g h vessel th a t b e a r s th e b r u n t o f this erratic b e h a v io u r . S h e has n o ce rtain
w a y o f k n o w in g w h e t h e r a vessel o b s e rv e d in the ITZ in te n d s to cross, o r w h e n or
w h e r e she will alter c o u r s e to d o so, if th a t is h e r intentio n. T h e on ly c e rtain ty is
tha t, if the vessel d o e s s ta rt to cro ss a n d a collision situ atio n d ev e lo p s, the th r o u g h
vessel will be the o n e re q u ir e d by R ule 15 to kee p o u t o f th e w ay . F ig u re 2
illustrates th e r e a so n for this.
 It will be realized th a t the m a x i m u m tim e available for the t h r o u g h vessel to
assess the situation a n d m a n o e u v re as nec essary d e p e n d s u p o n h e r d istan c e fro m
the o u tsid e b o u n d a r y o f the L a n e plus th e distanc e o f th e crossin g vessel inside the
ITZ w h e n th a t vessel a d o p t s th e crossin g c o u rse , i.e. th e tim e d u rin g w h ic h the
crossing vessel m a in ta in s h er c o u r se a n d speed p r io r to re a c h in g th e po in t at w h ic h
she passes clear o r collision o c c u rs. A n y a s s e s s m e n t m a d e b e f o r e th e crossing vessel
a d o p t s her crossin g c o u r s e a n d s p e ed is invalidated as so o n as she do es so. It m a y
be said th a t the t h r o u g h vessel is su b je cted to a perio d o f d o u b t whilst initially
w a tc h in g th e vessel in the ITZ , fo llo w ed by su rp rise w h e n th e alteration o f up to
ninety d eg re es is m a d e to c r o s s the L anes, a n d th e n a la r m as the need for a large
anti-collision m a n u v r e b e c o m e s clear. O n e h o p e s that this o v e r-sta te s th e case, b u t
it p r o v id e s an in dication o f th e u n sa tisfac to ry n a tu re o f th e situation.
T h e length o f the p e r io d o f d o u b t, a n d the d e g re e s o f s u rp rise a n d a larm , are
ic u u L c J m e f u n n e r a p a r t m e vesseis are w h e n th e crossin g c o u r s e is a d o p te d . In
the D o v e r Strait, L a n e w i d th s o f less th a n f o u r miles, c o u p le d w ith ITZ th a t, in
places, are only o n e a n d a h a lf miles w id e , se v erely limit the m a x i m u m distan c e at
w h ic h this m a y occ u r. W h e n o th e r traffic, o r sim ple lack o f a p p re c ia tio n o f the
p r o b le m , leads to a c o m b in a t io n o f a t h r o u g h vessel n avig atin g close to th e o utside
b o u n d a r y a n d a vessel th a t w ish e s to cro ss altering o n th e ed g e o f th e L an e , the
m i n i m u m distanc e m a y be v ery s h o rt. T h e e le m e n ts o f su rp rise a n d a la r m m a y
indeed be real a n d , a d d e d to this, a n y a lteratio n o f c o u r s e to s ta r b o a r d by the
t h r o u g h vessel will d irec t h er o u t o f th e c o m p a r a ti v e safety o f th e traffic L a n e into
the t w o - w a y traffic in th e ITZ.

A In this sit u a t i o n
R u le 15 a l w a y s d ire c ts
t h e t h r o u g h vessel t o
g iv e-w av .
B In this s i tu a tio n
R u le 15 a l w a y s d ire c ts
t h e c r o s s i n g vessel to
g ive-w ay.
F ig . 2
 T R A I TI C SEPARATION S CHE ME S A ND C OERECS 99

A fu rth e r s o u r c e o f d a n g e r arises w h e n a crossing vessel a p p r o a c h in g the

L an e s realizes th a t th e a d o p t io n o f the right-angle c o u rse will result in a collision
situation w ith t h r o u g h traffic in th e Lane. S h e is th e n faced w ith ch oosing
betw een :
(a) a d o p tin g th e righ t-an g le course-,
(b) en terin g th e L a n e o n her existing c o u r s e ;
ic) altering c o u r s e to s ta rb o a r d ;
id) s to p p in g ;
or
(e) altering c o u r s e to port.
E v e r y on e o f th e se alternatives possesses d isa d v an tag es . If she a d o p ts th e
right-angle c o u r s e sh e deliberately in tro d u c e s risk o f collision w h e r e n o n e p r e
viously existed, p r o b a b ly c o n t r a v e n e s Rule 2 (b), a n d c a u se s th e th r o u g h vessel th e
difficulty discussed a b o v e . If she e n te r s the L a n e o n her existing c o u rse she possibly
c o n t r a v e n e s Rule 10 (c), will be classified as a rogue", a n d will be acutely a w a r e o f
the risk o f p u nitive a c tio n being ta k en against h er at so m e f u tu re date. A n alteratio n
o f c o u r s e to s ta r b o a r d to r e m a in outside th e L ane will m e re ly m a inta in the status
q u o as she and th e t h r o u g h vessel ste am in parallel until a n y sp eed differential
ch a n g e s th e situation. T h is is likely to take to o long to be seriously co n sid ered . T o
stop m a y be th e best alternative, b u t o nly if o th e r traffic perm its, w e a th e r
co n d itio n s are suitab le a n d th e re is se a r o o m . T h e act o f sto p p in g is n o t so readily
a p p a r e n t to o th e r vessels as a c h a n g e o f h ea ding, so an y te n d e n c y for her to fall o f f
as steerage w ay is lost m a y c a u se co n fu sio n . T h e last a lte rn a tiv e is to alter c o u rse
to p o r t to r e m a in o u ts id e the L an e u n t i l 't h e t h r o u g h vessel is past a n d clear. T his
m a y seem a t first to be th e best action to take, as it results in the vessels ste am in g
in o p p o site direc tio n s a n d th e re fo r e clearing in the sh o rte s t possible time. H o w e v e r ,
it possesses the i n h e r e n t d a n g e r o f involving a s ta rb o a r d to sta rb o a r d passing.
S h o u ld a th r o u g h vessel, o b se rv in g th e o t h e r o n h e r s t a r b o a r d side, alter c o u r s e to
s ta rb o a r d in a c c o r d a n c e w ith Rule 15 to pass astern o f her, th e likelihood o f
collision b e c o m e s b o t h real a n d im m inent.
S u c h a selection o f altern atives p u ts th e crossing vessel in an u n h a p p y
position, b u t at least she is left w ith the initiative an d k n o w s h e r o w n intentions.
T h e th r o u g h vessel c a n n o t k n o w w h a t th e y are until th e y h a v e b ee n c a rrie d out,
a n d ca n only w ait to see w h e t h e r she is su d d e n ly going to b e c o m e th e g iv e -w a y
vessel w ith not v e ry m u c h tim e in w h ic h to re spond.

T h e Constraint

R ule 10 (c) states : - A vessel shall so far as practicable av o id crossing traffic

lanes, but, if obliged to d o so, shall cross as n ea rly as p rac tica b le at right ang les to
th e general direction o f traffic flo w .
T h u s is r e m o v e d a n y ch o ice o f crossing course. A n y v a ria tio n f ro m th e right
angle c o u r s e is lim ited to th a t deviation th a t m a y be r e q u ir e d in o r d e r to co m p ly
w ith th e o th e r R u les w h e n risk o f collision exists.
If she is to c o m p ly w ith R u le 10(c) th e crossin g vessel sh o u ld not start to
cro ss until she has g a in e d a position w ith in th e ITZ fro m w h ic h she m a y steer the
right angle c o u rse w ith o u t d a n g e r fro m such navigational h az ard s as shoals in the
a re a b e tw e e n the Lanes. In the D o v e r Strait m o st crossing vessels e n d e a v o u r to
c o m b in e this w ith a gap in th e traffic in the first L ane in o r d e r to sp a re th a t traffic,
an d th e m se lv es, the p r o b le m s prev io u sly discussed associated w ith the do g -leg .
H aving o n c e started to cro ss sh e m u st p e r m it herse lf to be p recip ita ted into an y
situation that m a y lie in w a it for her. She will p ro b a b ly o b s e rv e th a t situation
d ev eloping , b u t is obliged to c o n tin u e o n her c o u rse until the d a n g e r is sufficiently
im m in e n t for o n e o f the o th e r S tee rin g a n d Sailing Rules to o v e r - rid e R ule 10. N o t
for h e r the small, early alteratio n th at w o uld p rev e n t the risk o c c u r rin g at all, for
that w o u ld place h er in c o n t r a v e n ti o n o f Rule 10(c).
T h e s a m e difficulty is e x p e r ie n c e d by vessels w ishing to cro ss o n e L an e fro m
the o th e r in o r d e r to gain th e ITZ. In the D o v e r Strait th e se are fre q u en tly vessels
b o u n d for the T h a m e s th a t h a v e arrived in the N o r t h - E a s t L ane, a n d include
V L C C s w ith their a t te n d a n t h a n d lin g problem s. F ro m Ju ly 1982, w h e n the eastern
ex tre m ity o f the E ng lish IT Z is to be m o v e d , the n u m b e r will be in creased by
vessels b o u n d for U n ite d K in g d o m east coast ports. T h e y are den ied the f re e d o m to
select the safest and m ost e x p e d ie n t co u rse th r o u g h th e traffic in the S o u th - W e s t
Lane, to w h ic h they are the g iv e -w a y vessel, a n d have to place th e m se lv e s b e a m - o n
to th e tide an d prevailing w in d at a time w h e n they w o u ld p r e s u m a b ly p refer to
pay p a rtic u la r atte n tio n to sta y in g o n track. T h e c o u rse w h ic h m a y well be safe
an d p racticable for a fast, highly m a n o eu v rab le ferry, could equally be suicidal for
a V L C C at re d u c e d speed a c ro ss the tide" [ 8 ]. If the o p p o r tu n ity to cross the
South-W est L ane at right an g les d o e s n o t arrive b e fo re the vessel r e a c h e s the are a
o f the M P C Buoy she has to give up the idea fo r the tim e being a n d c a n n o t try
again until she has ste a m e d s o m e thirty miles a r o u n d the S andettie B a n k to th e F2
Buoy [9],

The Conf lict between Rule 10 and Rule 15

R ule 10 directs th a t v essels in a T raffic S e p a r a tio n S c h e m e e ith e r follow a

L ane in the c o rre c t direction for th a t L ane o r cro ss at right angles. R u le 15 directs
that, w h e n tw o p o w e r - d r iv e n vessels are crossing so as to in volve risk o f collision,
the vessel w h ic h has the o th e r o n h er o w n s ta rb o a r d side shall keep o u t o f the w ay
and shall, if the c i rc u m s ta n c e s o f the case adm it, av o id crossing a h e a d o f the o th e r
vessel. T a k e n in dividually, b o th th e se Rules seem sim ple a n d sensible. T a k e n in
c o n ju n c tio n , as they m u s t be in a TSS, they conflict, in that any vessel crossing a
Lane th a t is obliged to g iv e -w a y to a th r o u g h vessel o n h e r s ta r b o a r d side is
directed o f f th e right-angle cro ssin g co urse o n to a co u rse against the general
direction o f traffic flow. W h e n m o r e th a n o n e th r o u g h vessel b e c o m e s in volved, as
can fre q u en tly h a p p e n , the cro ssin g vessel m a y find h erse lf obliged to steer a co u rse
directly o p p o s e d to the gen e ral d ire c tio n o f traffic flow. T h e alternativ e, w h ic h is to
slow d o w n o r stop, will ju s t as fre quently lead to p ro b le m s fro m o th e r vessels
w h ic h w o u ld o th e rw is e h ave p assed clear.
The Conflict between Rule 10 and Rule 17

This conflict m a n ifests itself as the crossing vessel alters c o u r s e to take up the
right angle crossing c o u r s e p rior to entering th e first lane. T o a n y th r o u g h vessel in
th a t Lane that has b ee n o b se rv in g her with a view to taking av o id in g action , she is
the sta n d -o n vessel a n d sh ould keep her c o u r s e and sp e ed b u t. because she is
obliged to cross the L anes, she m u st c o m p ly w ith Rule 10 (c) a n d alter course.

The Effect o f Traff ic Surveillance

T h ere is n o d o u b t that nav ig ators are a w a re o f the existence o f traffic

surveillance in the D o v e r Strait. T h ey can hardly fail to be, w h e n the y hear r e p o rts
o f ro g u e s b r o a d c a s t at h a lf-hourly intervals by the CN 1S. N o r ca n the y be
u n a w a r e o f the im p o r ta n c e attac h ed by the surveillance o r g a n iz a tio n to c o m p lia n c e
w ith Rule 10.
T h e re duc tion in th e n u m b e rs o f " r o g u e s since su rv eillan c e started d e m o n s t
rates its d e te rre n t effect a n d the im pact it has had up o n th a t p articu la r aspect o f
safety. This is n o t su rp risin g w h e n o n e co n s id ers the m a g n itu d e o f the sa nctions
that m ay be im p o sed u p o n the M asters o f s o m e vessels sh o u ld they c o n t r a v e n e
Rule 10. F o r instance. M a ste rs o f British ships m a y be fined up to 50,000. N o r can
it be surprising th a t g re a te r e m p h asis fre qu ently a p p e a r s to be placed u p o n being
seen to com ply w ith R u le 10 than on taking early action to c o m p ly with the o th e r
Steering an d Sailing Rules. Both M asters a n d Pilots o f t h r o u g h vessels c o m p lain
th a t crossing vessels th a t s h o u ld g ive-w ay o ften s ta n d -o n n o w a d a y s for m u c h
longer than used to be case b efore they g ive-w ay. This leads the s ta n d -o n vessel to
d o u b t w h e th e r th e g iv e -w a y ship will keep o u t o f the w a y , in tr o d u c e s a d a n g e r that
did not previously exist, a n d has b een b la m e d for a n u m b e r o f nea r-m iss"
situations [10]. T h e only possible reason s for this relu c tan c e o f crossin g vessels to
g iv e -w a y w h e n re q u ire d are ig n o ran c e o f Rule 15 o r u n d u e atte n tio n to Rule 10 (c).
As the m ajority o f cro ssin g vessels a re ferries a n d ...o n ly by a d h e r in g strictly to
the Rule o f the R o a d ca n a F erry M a ste r s u r v i v e " [12] the first possibility m u s t be
disregarded in m o s t cases. T h is leaves u n d u e attention to R u le 10(c) as the reason
an d o n e a ssu m es th a t this is d ue to th e o v e r-e m p h a sis a n d to o literal inte rp re tatio n
o f that Rule by the su rveillance system a n d sho re au thorities. T h e closer liaison
t h r o u g h the N au tica l Institu te o f the C o a s tg u a rd and local m a rin e r s in vo lve d in
c r o ss-C h a n n el shipp ing a p p e a r s to h ave increased u n d e r s ta n d in g a n d allayed fears,
resulting in g rea ter rea d in ess to g ive-w ay early.

The Cause

H aving identified a n d studied the p ro b le m s it a p p e a r s th a t the y all possess as

a c o m m o n cause th e r e q u ir e m e n t for crossing vessels to steer a specified co u rse .
T h a t the specified c o u r s e lies at right angles to the general d ire c tio n o f traffic flow
is in itself u n im p o r ta n t. T h e p r o b le m s are ca u se d by th e inflexibility o f the c o u rse
as it crosses th e L anes, c o u p led w ith the fre q u en t im p racticability o f its early
a d o p tio n in the ITZ.
T h e S o lu tio n

T h e r e q u ir e m e n t for vessels crossing traffic lanes to steer the specified co u rse

is laid d o w n in R ule 10 (c). T h e sugge stion th a t careful r e w o r d i n g o f th e R ule w o u ld
be the best m e th o d o f re m o v in g th e p r o b le m w a s o n e o f the first p r o p o s e d to the
C o m m itte e . T h e idea w a s stu d ied at g re a t length, b u t the difficulty lies in achiev ing
the n ec essary balan c e b e t w e e n p r o v id in g sufficient f re e d o m fo r th e crossing vessel
a n d retaining th e p u r p o s e o f the R ule by p ro d u c in g a n u n m is ta k a b le crossing
situation a n d m in i m u m cro ssin g tim e. It is c o n s id e re d im p o r ta n t to retain these
fu n c tio n s o f th e R u le in o r d e r to avo id r e d u c tio n o f its effec tiv e ness in TSS
elsew h e re . It w a s finally decid ed th a t a satisfactory ba la n c e c o u ld n o t be a c hie ved,
a n d th e C o m m itt e e co u ld initially only decide t h a t : W h ile the d a n g e r o u s crossing
p a tte r n is the easiest a n d the m o st im p o r ta n t p r o b le m identified, a c o n s tru c tiv e
solu tio n to it h as been the m o st difficult to fin d , a n d T h e a im o f the r e c o m m e n
d atio n sh o u ld be to avo id th e d o g - le g a n d to allow a single crossing c o u r s e w ith o u t
the rigidities o f the right angle, y e t at a sufficiently large angle to e n s u re th a t the
crossin g vessel is r ec o g n ised as such . T h e D o v e r B ran c h C o m m itt e e stro ngly
e n d o r s e s C o m m a n d a n t O u d e t s v ie w read o u t at th e S e m in a r th a t th e Rule is badly
w o r d e d a n d th a t th e in te rp re ta tio n d o e s n o t a c c o r d w ith the o riginal in te n tio n s o f
the legislators..." [1 3].
T h e alternative is to find a pu rely local solution to w h a t are a p p a r e n tly purely
local p ro b lem s. T h e d a n g e r s o f s u c h a solution w e r e m a d e clear at th e S e m in a r
w h e r e it w a s poin te d o u t th a t the in tro d u c tio n o f local e x e m p ti o n s f ro m , o r
a d d itio n s to, the C ollision R e g u la tio n s w o u ld in effect result in a f o rm o f D o v e r
Straits Collision R e g u la tio n s , a n d c o u ld be the p r e c u r s o r o f a w h o le series o f local
collision reg u la tio n s for v a rio u s p a r ts o f the w o rld . T h u s the w o r d I n te rn a tio n a l"
w o u ld be r e m o v e d f ro m th e title I n tern atio n al R e g u la tio n s fo r P re v en tin g
C ollisions at Sea", w ith c o n s e q u e n t c o n f u s io n a n d possible c h a o s as n av ig ato rs
g ra p p le w ith differing sets o f R u les g o v e r n in g different sections o f th e ir routes.
T o av o id this pitfall it w a s d e c id e d to investigate w a y s in w h ic h th e TSS m ig h t
be a d a p te d to b e tte r p ro v id e for th e large n u m b e r o f crossing vessels. S tu d y
in dicated th a t the p ro v isio n o f g a te s" in th e S e p ara tio n Z o n e w o u ld m erely
a g g r a v a te the situation, for b y c o n c e n tra tin g crossing traffic into a sm aller a r e a the
f re e d o m to m a n o e u v re w o u ld be fu rth e r d ec reased a n d th e risk o f collision
increased. R u le 10(c) w o u ld still a p p ly a n d the dog -leg w o u ld r em a in . T raffic
lanes fo r crossing vessels w o u ld s u f fe r fro m all th e sa m e d isa d v a n ta g e s e x c e p t th a t
R ule 10(c) w o u ld n o lo n g e r ap p ly . H o w e v e r , it w o u ld be replaced by the
r e q u ir e m e n t o f R u le 10 (b) (i) to proceed... in the g eneral directio n o f traffic flow
for th a t la n e . In a n y case, th e local to p o g r a p h y p re v e n ts th e ex te n sio n o f such
lanes sufficiently far into th e existing ITZ for th e m to be eith er practical o r effective
in r e m o v i n g the p r o b le m o f the dog-leg.
A s a t te m p ts to m o d ify eith er t h e Rule o r the TSS had failed to p r o v id e a
so lution, th e n e x t step w a s to c o n s id e r rem o v in g entirely the effects o f o n e o r the
oth er. T h is m a y be a c h ie v e d by d ec la rin g R ule 10(c) invalid in the D o v e r Straits
TSS o r by w i th d r a w in g the TSS itself.
I n v alid atio n o f R u le 10(c) in v o lv e s the in tro d u c tio n o f a local rule, w ith the
associated d a n g e r s o utlin ed p reviou sly. W i th d r a w a l o f the TSS s o u n d s like heresy.
 I RA I I IL S I T' ARA H O N SCI I Iv Ml . S A N D C O I . R LOS 103

P e r h a p s s u rp risin g ly , h o w e v e r, it w a s f o u n d th a t a f o rm o f lim ited w i t h d r a w

al o f the TSS p r o v id e s th e best solution to th e p r o b le m s y e t p ro p o se d .
Rule 10 ap plies to TSS a d o p te d by th e O rg a n iz a tio n (IMCO). W i t h d r a w a l o f a
section o f th e TSS in the D o v e r Strait r e n d e r s R ule 10 inapplicable in th a t section
o f th e Strait. C r o s s in g vessels a r e th e re fo r e freed o f the c o n s tra in ts im p o s e d by
p a r a g r a p h (c) o f th a t R ule, a n d so need n o t follow the dog-leg a n d m a y select the
best c o u rse ac ross. W i t h d r a w a l o f Rule 10 also r e m o v e s th e conflicts w ith R u les 15
a n d 17.
C o m p le te r e m o v a l o f a section o f th e TSS also m e a n s the r e m o v a l o f the
u n d o u b te d benefits a c c ru in g to th e S ch em e. T his is u n a c c e p ta b le . H o w e v e r , P art A
o f the IM C O re so lu tio n o n S h ip s R o u tein g defines in p a r a g r a p h 2.1. (j) a P r e c a u
tio n a ry A re a. T h is is : "A r o u tein g m e a s u r e c o m p risin g an are a w ith in defin e d
limits w h e r e ships m u st navigate w ith p a rtic u la r c a u tio n a n d w ithin w h ic h the
d irectio n o f traffic flow m a y be r e c o m m e n d e d " . P a r a g r a p h 2.1 (m) defines a
r e c o m m e n d e d d ire c tio n o f traffic flow as : A traffic flow p a tte r n in dicating a
r e c o m m e n d e d d irec tio n a l m o v e m e n t o f traffic in a r o u te in g sy ste m w ith in w h ic h it
is im practical o r u n n e c e s s a r y to a d o p t an e stablished d irec tio n o f traffic flow ".
A P r e c a u tio n a r y A re a , strategically p o sitio n e d to rep la ce a section o f th e TSS
a n d including r e c o m m e n d e d directions o f traffic flow for t h r o u g h vessels will serve
to :
() alert m a rin e r s to the need to n av igate w ith p a rtic u la r c a u tio n " in an a re a o f
d e n s e traffic;
(b ) m a inta in the p r e s e n t se p a ra tio n o f t h r o u g h traffic o n o p p o s in g c o u r s e s ;
(c) r e m o v e the existing p r o b le m s relating to crossing vessels as R ule 10 will not
apply;
(d) e n c o u r a g e t h r o u g h vessels that h ave b e c o m e m e s m e riz e d by the m o t o r w a y
aspect o f the T S S to g iv e -w a y w h e n it is their d uty to d o so.

Positioning, a n d the precise limits o f a P re c a u tio n a r y A re a a r e m o s t i m p o r

tant. T h e C o m m itt e e c o n s id e r th a t it sh o u ld replace as la rg e a p art o f th e T S S as is
nec essary fo r c ro s s in g vessels to derive th e m a x i m u m b ene fit, c o m p a tib le w ith
retaining th e m a x i m u m possible d eg re e o f safety fo r all vessels. T h is criterio n
req u ires th a t th e a r e a sh o u ld be so p o sitio n e d an d defin e d as to :
(/) c o v e r as m u c h as possible o f the tr a c k s w ithin th e p r e s e n t TSS th a t c ro ssin g
vessels w o u ld be e x p e c te d to follow if free o f the d u ty to cro ss at right angles,
th e re b y av o id in g c o n c e n t r a tio n o f c ro ssin g vessels a n d giving th e m m a x i m u m
fre e d o m ;
(//) replace as little o f th e TSS as is n ec essary to satisfacto rily fulfil (/'), th e re b y
limiting th e r e a s o n s for th r o u g h vessels to stray f ro m th e r e c o m m e n d e d trac ks
a n d the o p p o r tu n iti e s for those u n d e s ira b le activities p rese n tly p r e v e n te d by
R ule 10;
(/7/) c a u se t h r o u g h vessels to e n te r on a tr a c k dictated b y th e d irection o f th e lane
in w h ic h th e y a p p r o a c h the P r e c a u tio n a r y A re a a n d w h i c h m a y be m a in ta in e d
th r o u g h it a n d into the r e s u m p tio n o f th e lane, th e r e b y aiding th e c o n t in u e d
se p a ra tio n o f t h r o u g h traffic o n o p p o s in g courses.

R e q u ir e m e n ts (/') a n d (/7) ex e m plify t h e c o m p r o m is e in v o lv e d , b u t it is c o n s i

d e r e d th a t this m a y b e satisfactorily a c h ie v e d by d is c o n tin u in g th e T SS b e t w e e n a
line d r a w n fro m th e Z C 2 B uoy t h r o u g h the N o r t h - E a s t V a r n e Buoy in the
s o u th - w e s t , a n d a line d r a w n b e t w e e n th e O u te r R u y tin g e n S o u th - W e s t B u o y to
the S o u th - E a s t G o o d w i n B uoy in the n o rth -e a s t, redesignatin g the a re a b e t w e e n the
lines a P r e c a u tio n a r y A re a a n d r e c o m m e n d i n g the directio n o f traffic flow w ithin
th e P re c a u tio n a r y A re a in the s a m e d ire c tio n s a n d in the sa m e places as in the
p r e s e n t Lanes. A l th o u g h c o m p lia n c e w ith th e R e c o m m e n d e d D irection o f T raffic
F lo w will n o t be m a n d a to r y , the effects o f r e q u ir e m e n ts (//) an d (//7) a n d the
p r e s e n c e o f r a d a r surveillance will stro n g ly d isc o u ra g e th r o u g h traffic f ro m not
c o m p ly in g .
T h e C o m m i t t e e th e re fo r e r e c o m m e n d s the in tro d u c tio n o f a P r e c a u tio n a r y
A r e a as d es crib ed ab o v e . T h e A n n e x e r e p r o d u c e s the re le v a n t p a r t o f the
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n p u t to the N au tica l Institu te C ouncil.

CONCLUSION

T h e p r e s e n t D o v e r Straits T SS e n c o m p a s s e s an are a th a t is p eculiar in its

c o m p le x ity o f sh ip p in g rou tes, d e n s ity o f traffic, o ffsh o re d a n g e rs a n d c o n f in e d
s e a r o o m . T h a t p r o b le m s h a v e b ee n s h o w n to exist is no a d v e rse criticism o f the
T SS o r the C ollision R e g u la tio n s, o r o f their in te n tio n s or au th o rs. T h e m a jo r p art
o f this P a p e r is ta k e n - u p w ith d isc u ssio n o f the conflicting r e q u ir e m e n ts o f traffic
in the Strait, a n d the fact th a t the sa fe ty o f nav ig atio n has b een so greatly im p r o v e d
since th e in tr o d u c tio n o f R o u te in g s p e a k s best for its success in brin g in g o r d e r o u t
o f w h a t m a y fairly be d es crib ed as c h a o s . It is d u e only to the gen e ral im p r o v e m e n t
in safety th a t th e p r o b le m s d iscussed h a v e a s s u m e d th e im p o r ta n c e the y n o w have.
T h e C o m m i t t e e is g rate fu l to th o s e w h o o rig in a ted an d instituted the p re se n t
S c h e m e a n d its R ule, a n d it is a g a in s t th e b a c k g r o u n d o f the benefits d e riv e d f ro m
th e ir w o r k th a t the r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s p r e se n te d h ere in have been fo rm u la te d and
are p r o p o s e d .

Abbreviations Used in the Te xt

C N I S .............................. C h a n n e l N a v ig a tio n In fo r m a tio n Service

C ollision R e g u la tio n s I n te r n a t io n a l R e g u la tio n s for P re v e n tin g C ollisions at Sea,
1972
C o m m i t t e e ................. N a u tic a l In stitu te D o v e r B ra n c h C o m m itte e se t-up in 1979 to
e x a m in e th e p r o b le m s
ITZ ................................ I n s h o r e T ra ffic Z o n e
S e m i n a r ......................... N a u tic a l I n stitu te D o v e r B r a n c h "D iscussion o f Practical
N a v ig a tio n in th e D o v e r S tra it, M a y 1979
T S S ................................ T raffic S e p a r a tio n S ch em e
 I RAI I 1C S E P A R A T I O N S C H E M E S A N D COI R E G S 105

REFERENCES AND ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS

[1] C a p t . A .V . R o w EES, M R I N , M N I : P i l o tin g V L C C s t h r o u g h th e S tr a its" . P ra c ti c a l

N a v i g a t i o n in t h e D o v e r S tr a it, p. 26. N . I ., 1979.
[2] " R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r I m p r o v i n g th e S a f e ty of N avigation in t h e Dover S t r a it " ,
p a r a . 13, S e a w a y s , A p ril 1980, N .I.
[3] A s re fe r e n c e n u m b e r 2. P a r a . 23.
[4] C a p t . R. S y m s , BSc. M N I : D e v e l o p m e n t o f H o v e r c r a f t O p e r a t i o n s " . P ra c tica l N a v i g a
t io n in t h e D o v e r S tra it, p. 42, N .I., 1979.
[5] A s r e fe r e n c e n u m b e r 4.
[6] C a p t . R .K .N . E m d e n : " C h a n n e l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e s : I m p r o v i n g S a fe ty in t h e D o v e r
S t ra it " , P r a c ti c a l N a v i g a t i o n in t h e D o v e r Strait ( P r o c e e d i n g s , p. C E 1), N a u t i c a l
I n s titu te , 1979.
[7] A s r e f e r e n c e n u m b e r 2, P a r a . 3.
[8] C a p t . P .J.D . R l s s e l e , FN I : " T h e P r a c tic a l P r o b l e m s o f t h e P i l o t , P ra c ti c a l N a v i g a t i o n
in t h e D o v e r S t r a it , p. 17, N .I., 1979.
[9] A s re fe r e n c e n u m b e r 8. P a g e 12.
[10] A s r e fe r e n c e n u m b e r 8. P a g e 16.
[1 1] R u l e 7 (d). I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e g u la t io n s fo r P r e v e n t i n g C o lli s i o n s at Sea, 1972.
[12] C apt. J . A r t h u r . M N I : "P ro b lem s o f a C ro ss C h a n n e l Ferry M aster". P r a c ti c a l
N a v i g a t i o n in t h e D o v e r S tra it, p. 48 , N .I., 1979.
[13] A s re fe r e n c e n u m b e r 2. P a r a s . 5, 6 a n d 7.

ANNEXE

Extract from Rec o mmendat ions to Improve S a f e ty o f Navigation

in the Dover Strait

3.1 In a tte m p tin g a so lu tio n on th e lines discussed a b o v e , th e C o m m i t t e e h as

d r a w n heavily o n this IM C O reso lu tio n (A.378X ) e ntitle d G e n e ra l P ro v is io n s
o n Ships' R o u t e i n g . T h e follow ing e x tra c ts fro m th e re so lu tio n are q u o t e d in
s u p p o r t o f the su b m issio n :

1 Objectives

1.1 T h e p u r p o s e o f sh ip s ro u teing is to im p r o v e th e safety o f n a v ig a tio n in

c o n v e r g in g are a s a n d in are as w h e r e the d en sity o f traffic is g r e a t o r
w h e r e th e f re e d o m o f m o v e m e n t o f sh ipping is inhibited b y restric ted
s e a r o o m , th e e x iste n ce o f o b s tr u c tio n s to n a v ig a tio n , lim ited d e p t h s o r
u n f a v o u r a b le m eteo ro lo g ic al c o nd ition s.

3.2 Listed u n d e r th e precise objectives o f any ro u te in g s y s t e m , th e fo llo w in g

s u b - p a r a g r a p h s are rele v an t to the D o v e r S trait s c h e m e :
 1.2 (a) T h e se p a ra tio n o f o p p o sin g strea m s o f traffic so as to r e d u c e the
in cidence o f h e a d - o n e n c o u n te r s ;
(b ) T h e re d u c tio n o f d a n g e r s o f collision b e tw e e n crossing traffic a n d
shipp in g in established lanes;
(/") T h e re d u c tio n o f risks o f g r o u n d in g by provid ing special g u id a n c e to
deep d r a u g h t vessels in areas w h e r e w a te r d e p th s are u ncertain or
critical.

3.3 T h e C o m m itt e e s u b m its th a t w hile the D o v e r Strait sc h e m e effectively

co m plies w ith p a r a g r a p h s 1.2 (a) a n d (f) in achieving th e desired main objective
o f im p r o v in g th e safety o f n av ig atio n as stated in p a r a g ra p h 1 . 1 , th e sa m e
c a n n o t be said o f p a r a g r a p h 1 .2 (b). In fact, it could be arg u e d th a t th e s c h e m e
is p r o m o tin g quite th e o p p o site result a n d is actually increasing the d a n g e r s o f
collision b e t w e e n c rossing traffic a n d shipping in established traffic lanes.

3.5 5.4 R o u te in g s y ste m s sh o u ld be review ed, re-su rv e y e d a n d adjusted as

n ec e s sa ry , so as to m a in ta in their effectiveness a n d com patibility w ith
tr a d e p a tte rn s, o f fsh o re e x p lo ra tio n an d re so u rc e exploitation, c h a n g e s in
d e p t h s o f w a te r , a n d o th e r d ev e lo p m e n ts.
T h e C o m m itt e e m a k e s its su b m issio n on the basis o f the a b o v e provision.

3.6 6 Design Criteria

Traffic s e p a r a tio n s c h e m e s
6.7 T h e e x t e n t o f a traffic se p aratio n sc h e m e sh o u ld be limited to w h a t is
essential in th e interests o f safe navigation.

C o n v e rg in g a n d ju n c tio n areas
6.14 W h i c h e v e r o f the several available ro uteing m e th o d s is c h o s e n for use at
a r o u te j u n c tio n o r in a c o n v e rg in g area, it m u s t be a ca rdinal principle
th a t a n y a m b ig u ity o r possible so u rce o f co n fu sio n in the application o f
th e Collision R e g u la tio n s m u st be a voided. T his principle sh o u ld be
particu la rly b o r n e in m in d w h e n establishing or r e c o m m e n d i n g th e
d irectio n o f traffic flow in su c h areas.
6.15 A t ro u te j u n c tio n s the follow ing particular c o n s id eratio n s apply :
(c) th e need to en able a s ta n d -o n vessel to m a inta in a steady co u rse , as
re q u ire d b y the Collision R egulations, for as long as possible b efore
the ro u te ju n c tio n .

3.7 T h e C o m m itt e e s u b m its th a t a l th o u g h p a r a g r a p h s 6.14 and 6 .15(c) refer

specifically to c o n v e r g in g a n d ju n c tio n areas, the principles involved m u st
h a v e re le v a n c e to th e D o v e r Strait, co nsidering the high v o lu m e o f c rossing
traffic is in effect c r e a tin g a crossing ju n c t i o n .