epnnf

Nobody was hurt; there was no contact.

It was near the end of my 39 mile ‘east’ route. It was in an industrial area- flat, straight, 35 mph limit. A big semi is entering the road from the other side, going my direction. It’s a four lane road, so the driver will have plenty of room and should never come near me, I thought. As the truck approaches, it looks like the two of us will be at the same place at the same time. The truck reaches the apex; the right end of the front bumper goes over the white line of the road- it used four entire lanes just for a simple left turn. I saw the whole thing go down in front of me; I safely came to a stop. I’m positive the driver intentionally tried to run me off the road; but why? What should I have done?

Milton Keynes

Semi trucks don't turn like regular cars and trucks do. They have to make wide turns due to the length of the trailers. That being said, I wasn't there so I don't know exactly what happened, but I really don't think any trucker wants a road death or accident on his record, intentional or not.

But yeah, if it was a four lane street there's really no reason he should have gone completely over the white line to make a left turn. I think if it were me in that situation and seeing a big truck pull out into the intersection, I'd probably slow down or stop if it looked like he was going to take up the entire street.

gear64

Was he coming out of a business? If so it would have been nice if he waited, but I often feel that due to their size they often feel they need to do what they need to do when opportunity is available. Often I think they have the attitude I'm the big dog everyone else will make way. I also don't envy semi drivers. I think they have a tough job, particularly in urban areas. I don't see this as intentionally malicious from what you describe. Alternatively I had an incident where a pick up truck pulled along side me on a two lane then aggressively swerved into my path forcing me off the road into the adjacent drainage ditch. They had a straight shot to easily pass me, but assume they were pissed they weren't able to pass sooner and needed to make a point.

OldTryGuy

I live by my FIL's advice taken from the scores of years he spent boating --- BIG BOAT RULES ...

CB HI

They may not want it on their record, but there have been several commercial truck dirvers that will risk it. I suppose they believe they are such great drivers that they can come close enough to a cyclist to scare them and force them off the road without a collision.

After a couple decades of truckers treating cyclist badly in Hawaii and causing enough collisions and a death, late 1990s thier insurance company(s) took notice and told the teamsters union local that if the Hawaii drivers did not put an end to it, the insurance company(s) would pull all commercial trucking insurance out of Hawaii. I noticed the drivers change in behaivior in less than a week, going from treating cyclist badly to yielding to cyclist even when they had the right of way and even giving a shaka.

For at least a decade, I did not have any problems with commercial truck drivers. In the last 10 years, I have only had a handful of problems. New drivers not paying attention to traing or old drivers that just did not care anymore, I guess.

One was a cement truck driver that intentionally forced me off the road. I caught him at a red light, entered the intersection just before the light turned green to make sure he saw me, looked back at his face and pointed to my helmet mounted camera. He gave me an entire lane when passing the second time, got well ahead of me and pulled into a bus turnout, got out and as I approached, he begged me not to report him to his company or insurance.

Another case was with a family trucking company. That owner started with one truck and as he could afford more trucks, would hire relatives to drive them. He ran the company from his home only a little over a mile from my home. One of his relatives driving a long semi dirt hauler passed me and started moving back into my lane before clear. I saw the last trailer tire in my mirror headed to kill me. I quickly bailed off the road with the trailer tire just inches from my left shoulder. I caught him at the back entry gate to Hickam Air Force Base as he was waiting to get inspected. I got video of his face and asked him to be more carfeful next time. He responded with a very bad word of what I should do with myself. So I e-mailed the owner with the details and offered the video and asked him to fix his driver. He also responded with a very bad word of what I should do with myself. I e-mailed him back noting I was a retired military Officer, that I would be contacting the military contracting Officer to send them the video and his e-mail exchange and that I would do the same with his insurance company. He responded by asking me not to report them and if I did, I would be a horrible person for causing his entire family to loose thier jobs and causing his kids to go hungary.

CB HI

And big boat owners loose their boat and maybe thier home if they mess too much with sail boats (except of course when operating in a restricted channel).

OldTryGuy

r.e. - sailboats / AnthonyTrollope's -- "That's a horse of another colour altogether."

genec

If by "big boats" you mean large commercial craft, (actually any boat, restricted in movement) there is a COLREGS rule 9 that gives large vessels ROW in restricted movement navigable waters.

One could equate this to tractor-trucks that have limited ability to maneuver in certain situations, although, I am not aware of any laws that grant ROW in such cases.

Moe Zhoost

If your FIL means to be prudent and give way to larger vessels, then this may be a valid strategy to avoid collisions. On the other hand, there are a lot of small vessels with limited speed and maneuverability that do have legal right-of-way. Assuming that a big power boat is not in a limited special category, the operator is required to alter course. Failure to do this is criminal negligence.

Of course "right-of-way" is moot if you're dead.

OldTryGuy

The "words of caution" were my FIL's way of making sure I knew when handling his 38' classic wooden Matthews or 40' fiberglass trawler or 50' wooden cruiser that even as slow as we were moving bigger vessels could require greater correction distances and even wakes must be accounted for. As for smaller stuff, the burden was by all means on me to be attentive and yield when necessary.

Wilbur Bud

One such reg that affects me locally is that once a tractor-truck is in a multi-lane roundabout, they are granted access to all lanes. How this affected me in the past is I'm ahead of the truck in the straight through lane, and I'm already in the roundabout, and then the truck enters the roundabout in the inside lane to go-around and exit after the straight through lane, pulls up beside me, turns on the indicator, and begins to enter my lane while I'm pinched off. I think it was inappropriate as I was already in the roundabout when the truck entered, but still a risk I didn't understand until I discovered this little-publicized item.

genec

Yeah I would think any overtaking by a vehicle entering a roundabout after you would still be governed by the basic "do not hit what is in front of you" rule. Thus this is inappropriate overtaking by said trucks. Now if you could just get LEOs to witness and ticket for it. SIGH.

berner

New England has many old towns with narrow streets. I'm of the opinion that tractor and trailers, when are 40' or more in length are dangerous in many towns and lengths should be restricted.

njkayaker

What sort of "small vessels"?

Speed isn't relevant. Small means the boat is less restricted. They also are typically very maneuverable.

Kayaks, for example, don't have any special privileges.

All captains have the requirement to try to avoid collisions.

Paul Barnard

Best referred to as vessels under sail.

Paul Barnard

A vessel is not technically "restricted in its ability to maneuver" by its size. It can only be ""restricted in its ability to maneuver due to the nature of its work. Right of way only applies to down bound vessels on western rivers, the great lakes and select few other waters. Otherwise the correct language is "stand-on" vessel.

Paul Barnard

You should not give way to another vessel strictly on account of its size. You should operate in accordance with the navigation rules. Unless a channel is involved, the rules don't assign favor to a vessel purely on account of it's "size." Even when a channel is involved length rarely comes into play.

Moe Zhoost

I reckon this would not be A&S without a bit of friendly nitpicking.

This is correct. A sailboat using auxiliary engine power, even if sails are set, is treated as a motor powered boat

Yes I know that size is irrelevant under the collision avoidance rules. My bringing up size was in response to the ambiguous suggestion that "Big Boat Rules". Application of the ROTR is both simple and complex and requires a lot of judgment and prudence.

My primary frame of reference is sailing. I have to admit that I have never thought about how the ROTR applies to kayaks. You are absolutely right that the ROTR say absolutely nothing about human powered vessels (which would include my sailboat when rowing it). Any of these human powered vessels may have some limitations under different conditions that the operator would have to consider when encountering another vessel. Yes kayaks may be very maneuverable, but I can tell you that when I am rowing my 600 lb sailboat with oars that are a bit too short, I am not going to be quick to get out of the way of a speeding jet ski. It all boils down to which vessel is more maneuverable in a given encounter.

Apologies to the OP. To return this thread to the topic of cycling - anyone have a pedal powered boat?

genec

Not true. The draft of a vessel may constrain it to a narrow channel, thus size IS a factor. The aspect of type of work applies to fishing vessels, ferries, dredges and other similar marine vessels. But the sheer size of a vessel can constrain it.

Paul Barnard

Everything I wrote is 100% correct. It seems to me that you may unwittingly conflating several of the rules. I said a vessel cannot be restricted in its ability to maneuver (RAM) on account of it's size. Your post above counters that by speaking to constrained by draft. They are separate restrictions in the rules and purposefully so.

It is the nature of a vessel's work that will make them RAM. Constrained is used in only one context in the Navigation Rules. Constrained by draft. That applies only in international waters not in inland waters. A vessel is never "restricted in its ability" to maneuver on account of size, draft or dimension. A vessel can ONLY be restricted in its ability to maneuver on account of the nature of its work.

Here are a few definitions from RULE 3 International: Constrained by draft isn't defined in the Inland Rules. The RAM definition definition is identical in the Inland and International rules.

(h) The term “vessel constrained by her draft” means a power-driven vessel which, because of her draft in relation to the available depth and width of navigable water is severely restricted in her ability to deviate from the course she is following.

(g) The term “vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver” means a vessel which from the nature of her work is restricted in her ability to maneuver...


Rule 9 is the narrow channel rule. It is here that size (length) matters.

(b) A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel that can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.This is where we see length come into play.

https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/navrules/navrules.pdf

Paul Barnard

That's a very important point and that is why I went straight to it in this article.

https://paddling.com/learn/navigatio...-for-paddlers/

Paul Barnard

Kayaks, vessels under oars are singled out but one time in the rules, and that is in lighting rule 25. If you are interest in knowing how the rules apply to kayaks, this is a quick and easy read. https://paddling.com/learn/navigatio...-for-paddlers/

njkayaker

So, what you said here is wrong. (Sailboats are special but that's not related to being "small vessels".) A jetski might have more responsibility to try to avoid a collision but that's not a "right of way" issue (that's implied in the "risk of collision" rule.

Moe Zhoost

Is it? How so?

njkayaker

????

https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/navrules/navrules.pdf

Avoiding collisions isn't a "right of way" issue (it's weird to talk about "right of way" here anyway). Captains have to attempt to avoid collisions regardless of any "right of way" issue.

What sort of "small vessels" are you talking about?

No, your "rowboat" here doesn't get special "right of way" privileges.