AIS now primary collision avoidance tool - Radar and Visual second?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dom
  • Start date Start date
D

dom

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 Dec 2003
Messages
7,142
Visit site
The Telegraph is running an interesting article re UK Border Force Vessels' practice of switching off AIS at sea. I never viewed this as unusual, but it's coming in for criticism from serious quarters:

"Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy officer and Captain of HMS Endurance, said:

“Operating without AIS is pretty dodgy. It’s not very clever and it’s not very seaman-like.“The problem is that in a busy shipping area like the Dover Strait there are a number of vessels going through who are not paying attention and AIS is their only means of anti-collision.

​
“The merchant vessel on autopilot may not be maintaining a proper lookout, so AIS is the thing that saves your bacon because it pings on the anti-collision systems.

​
“I personally wouldn’t go to sea in any boat no matter what size without AIS, because nobody looks out the window.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/01/border-force-risking-collisions-english-channel-unseaman-like/


​
Most sailors - including me - view AIS as a backup secondary tool to support the primaries: visual and radar.

Seemingly not at sea!
 
Last edited:
Another navy idiot.
Yes you need to look out the window.

It would be pretty silly to patrol the borders and announce to all and sundry exactly where you are at all times.
Perhaps he expects the people smugglers to use AIS too?
 
Well if your boating enables looking out of the window then radar might be fine.

AIS is not for them it is for me!

But my boating involves being hands on and out there. I want to get quick, accurate information and some estimate of the risk.
That means AIS at the helm - I can usually therefore see the risk, have a clear indication of course and speed and an estimate from the algorithm in the AIS of what the possible outcomes might be.
That informs and drives my decision making and my subsequent actions.

Early in my big boat sailing we had radar. There were tense moments, trying to dash below look at the radar, make some sort of estimate on what was happening. Return to the cockpit to find the helm has probably lost the course and confused any watcher on the target vessel into thinking we were making a change in our course.

For that reason we have an AIS receiver on board, installed at the helm.

Maybe the other vessel has their radar on and may even be looking out of the window. Doesn't matter to me, as long as we have AIS then even if they are asleep at the wheel I have a pretty good fix on what they are doing.
And stay out of their way.

Also when it comes to the public enquiry it will all come out.

The real pain are the boys with all the gear and no idea. Banging along with everything on auto and probably opening another bottle of 'Bolly'. Terribly surprised seeing us having to tack to avoid their course or waving to them in a less friendly way as we cope with the wake from their close approach.
 
lw395 said:
Another navy idiot.
Yes you need to look out the window.

It would be pretty silly to patrol the borders and announce to all and sundry exactly where you are at all times.
Perhaps he expects the people smugglers to use AIS too?
Click to expand...

Only time I've not looked out the window has been in thick fog. I've spent most time at radar with someone keeping a good lookout on deck. Your eyeballs rapidly feel as if they've had a going over with wire wool after a prolonged period peering into fog. That was pre-AIS but I'd still have radar as the main plotter display today, but it would now have AIS overlay. You are going to hit a lot of things if you only have AIS without Mk1 eyeball.

I was surprised to see HMC Searcher steaming around the channel last night when I looked at MarineTraffic. I expected them to be in stealth mode. Of course it could have been a ploy and they turned it off this morning before doing a 180 in daylight.
 
Last edited:
Mistroma said:
Only time I've not looked out the window has been in thick fog. I've spent most time at radar with someone keeping a good lookout on deck. Your eyeballs rapidly feel as if they've had a going over with wire wool after a prolonged period peering into fog. That was pre-AIS but I'd still have radar as the main plotter display today, but it would now have AIS overlay. You are going to hit a lot of things if you only have AIS without Mk1 eyeball.

I was surprised to see HMC Searcher steaming around the channel last night when I looked at MarineTraffic. I expected them to be in stealth mode. Of course it could have been a ploy and they turned it off this morning before doing a 180 in daylight.
Click to expand...
I wonder how many migrant boats have AIS receivers.
 
Do ALL vessels have AIS transmitters these days?

If not, AIS is not much use in the avoidance of collisions with those that don’t?

Did the collision regs change while I’ve been landlocked?
 
dom said:
The Telegraph is running an interesting article re UK Border Force Vessels' practice of switching off AIS at sea. I never viewed this as unusual, but it's coming in for criticism from serious quarters:

"Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy officer and Captain of HMS Endurance, said:

“Operating without AIS is pretty dodgy. It’s not very clever and it’s not very seaman-like.“The problem is that in a busy shipping area like the Dover Strait there are a number of vessels going through who are not paying attention and AIS is their only means of anti
​
“The merchant vessel on autopilot may not be maintaining a proper lookout, so AIS is the thing that saves your bacon because it pings on the anti-collision systems.

​
“I personally wouldn’t go to sea in any boat no matter what size without AIS, because nobody looks out the window.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/01/border-force-risking-collisions-english-channel-unseaman-like/


​
Most sailors - including me - view AIS as a backup secondary tool to support the primaries: visual and radar.

Seemingly not at sea!
Click to expand...


Drivel.

Written by a reporter with an agenda talking about something they don’t understand.
Justified by finding a comment from clown who appears to support thier agenda. Theoretically the reporter, his editor and the paper. Can’t be acused of printing unsubstantiated BS. Hiding behind quote from a fool.
One wonders just how much editing of the fools comments was required to get to the bits they wanted.

I find it hard to believe even an EX RN officer would have made these statements without some qualifications, context.
He might be surprised to find out what he said.
 
Indeed. The chap being quoted.....or mis quoted is hardly a fool. Reserve that for the amateur yachties who always think they know best......
 
Richard10002 said:
Do ALL vessels have AIS transmitters these days?

If not, AIS is not much use in the avoidance of collisions with those that don’t?

Did the collision regs change while I’ve been landlocked?
Click to expand...

From my experience I’d say about 60% have AIS (or turn it on) until you get offshore.
 
Uricanejack said:
I find it hard to believe even an EX RN officer would have made these statements without some qualifications, context.
Click to expand...

This.

At no point does he mention Border Force in the quote. We can be confident that there's an unquoted paragraph missing where he says something like "Of course, if you need to conceal you presence turning AIS off is necessary" or that he was talking about AIS in a completely different context.
 
Captain of 'Endurance'? Well, that didn't end well for the ship....

I don't think any grey funnel line officers should be allowed to comment on any matters maritime for several reasons.

Most are either blanket folders or plumbers.

And as for the remainder?

The two USN ships in the last few years, plus the Norwegian one.

Not wanting to leave the RN feeling ignored, HMS Nottingham and last but not least HMS Brazen.... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/sack-for-officer-who-grounded-ship-1573601.html
 
Dear All,

Before having a go at any individual, please remember that the OP is quoting a newspaper!
This week an history article appeared in our local newspaper where the official submission (not mine, BTW) to the 'reporter' had been 'simplified so that 'Joe Public could relate to it' (or it may have just been ignorance).
Ship had been altered to boat; she, referring to the ship, had been altered to it; the definite article had been inserted before HMS and multi-syllabic words had been altered to mono-syllabic. Despite the changes, the originator was still mentioned - he is far from amused!

50 years ago, my grandfather would often say "Never believe a word you read in a newspaper" adding "and check the date"

Happy New Year
 
RIBW said:
Dear All,

Before having a go at any individual, please remember that the OP is quoting a newspaper!
This week an history article appeared in our local newspaper where the official submission (not mine, BTW) to the 'reporter' had been 'simplified so that 'Joe Public could relate to it' (or it may have just been ignorance).
Ship had been altered to boat; she, referring to the ship, had been altered to it; the definite article had been inserted before HMS and multi-syllabic words had been altered to mono-syllabic. Despite the changes, the originator was still mentioned - he is far from amused!

50 years ago, my grandfather would often say "Never believe a word you read in a newspaper" adding "and check the date"

Happy New Year
Click to expand...

Point taken.... my only areas of expertise are boats and bovines..... the rollocks one reads on both subjects makes me very wary of the rest of what is published...

However... my previous comments stand.

and a Happy Good Year to you..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top