Barry Young Doesn’t Know What He’s Talking About.
Time is running out & Bolton’s cross-examination has to finish, so the Line of Sight technique to determine risk of collision is referred to Barry Young for his assessment.
Bolton describes how it has to do with the navigator’s line of sight being extended past the other vessel to whatever is the background. If the other vessel appears to be advancing on the background, it will pass ahead of own vessel. If is appearing to be receding on the background it will pass astern of own vessel. Rate of change determines the amount of clearance at point of closest approach –rapid change means plenty of clearance & slow change means less clearance. If there is no change risk of collision is indicated.
Bolton further explains – “The method known as the “Relative Bearing” has its failure in that the vessel using it must ensure that a steady course is maintained, consequently it’s regarded as unreliable & is not recommended. This Line of Sight technique is better than the compass because in some situations you haven’t got a compass or the conditions are such that a compass can’t be used. With this technique multiple vessels may be monitored simultaneously. Furthermore the Relative Bearing requires the use of some stay or object on own vessel against which the other vessel is monitored – if the navigator is in a dinghy these are not available so then it’s impractical.”
Barry Young reveals his ignorance of this Line of Sight technique – “You’ve based quite a lot of your evidence about changing bearings by lining up the vessel with land behind the other vessel, now that method is wrong. It’s inaccurate & it’s never taught in our navigation school & I can understand that you are going to try & show that it’s true but I think we could waste a lot of time. The collision regulations clearly say that you’ve got to watch the compass bearing of an approaching vessel to assess the risk of collision.”
Barry Young appears to be deliberately dishonest in misleading Judge Davis with such denigration of this Line of Sight technique which is proven to be correct, accurate, & taught in Navigation Schools, in particular the Maritime New Zealand Nautical School at which Barry Young was a tutor. His reference to “Our navigation school” is uncertain. If it refers to one he owns – there is no substantiation in official Company Records that he has anything functioning. If he’s meaning the Maritime New Zealand Nautical School, he left that a while back, so he can hardly refer to it as “ours”
As to the Collision Regulations – they do mention the use of compass bearing – they say too that all methods can be used & this Line of Sight is so accurate, it can be regarded as infallible.
Barry Young now exhibits as a display to impress Judge Davis the most incredible symptoms of Foot in Mouth Disease – “ Mr Bolton, I would fail any candidate that suggested to me that he could determine the risk of collision by watching the land in the background. If we half an hour I can prove to you that that is not a valid method of assessing risk of collision & it is not mentioned in the collision regulations.
1: The Line of Sight technique does not only watch land in the background – there may be nothing in the background except water
2: It is an excellent method of assessing risk of collision especially compared with the unreliable Relative Bearing which is not mentioned in Collision Regulations either & yet Barry Young two facedly accepts M Pigneguy’s use of it, in fact unprofessionally supports it.
3: Barry Young Doesn’t Know What He’s Talking About.
4: Paul Bossier in his “Learn the Nautical Rules of the Road” endorses this Line of Sight Technique & warns of the failings of the Relative Bearing method.
View here – http://bit.ly/NauticalRulesOfTheRoad