Another MCIB Report
- Thread starter Irish Rover
- Start date
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-known member
More food for thought, thanks.
Given that it's a bit 'he said/she said' I wondered what the ship's data recorder picked up. Something recorded its course, but I'd have hoped that radio and sound transmissions would be too, and so would help ascertain which narrative was closer to the truth?
Having said that, I'd rather be in a 5kt yacht trying to avoid a 7kt ship than the other way round.
Given that it's a bit 'he said/she said' I wondered what the ship's data recorder picked up. Something recorded its course, but I'd have hoped that radio and sound transmissions would be too, and so would help ascertain which narrative was closer to the truth?
Having said that, I'd rather be in a 5kt yacht trying to avoid a 7kt ship than the other way round.
RichardS
N/A
The ship's course was recorded by AIS. If the yacht had installed an AIS receiver/transceiver then the accident would have been avoided. I'm somewhat surprised that anyone who night sails would not install AIS as it's not expensive and it's easy to install. I only sailed once at night without it and that was enough.
Richard
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-known member
You'd hope so, but I'm not so sure.
RichardS
N/A
Provided it is working properly, and unlike VHF it usually soon becomes apparent if one's AIS is not working properly, it is difficult not to see from miles away whether a collision is likely and what one should do to avoid it. The kind of misunderstanding of the two vessels relative positions and courses, which appears to have arisen in this incident and is particularly likely to arise at night, should be eliminated.
Richard
doug748
Well-known member
Yes, I think AIS drastically improves your situational awareness. In a dodgy case like this, where the two lone boats are heading toward each other, you can alter at 5 miles, or more, long before a risk of collision arises.
.
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-known member
As I implied, it should. Having seen the ship in plenty of time this yacht either didn't alter course or did, but to port. If they didn't even take a bearing then what's the likelihood that anyone could be bothered to go and look at an AIS display?
RichardS
N/A
My AIS display is the chartplotter display so one cannot really avoid looking at it. If you're a regular night sailor, it would certainly be worthwhile connecting up the plotter.
Richard
capnsensible
Well-known member
These tools certainly help a lot in reducing the risk of collision. No doubt about it.
My question is, would you refuse to sail at night on a boat without a plotter and without an AIS?
westhinder
Well-known member
They are very useful indeed, but not having them wouldn’t stop me sailing at night. After all that’s what we did before we had them.
Provided visibility is good, I even find it easier to interpret crossing situations at first sight as the lights give better idea of the angles involved. Of course a handbearing compass soon clears up the situation.
It is a strange story. Either fatigue must have troubled their perception of the situation or at least one of the parties’ recollections are flawed.
capnsensible
Well-known member
Agree. People are fallible after all.
RJJ
Well-known member
Definitely.
Many of us are "fortunate" that we learned our skills before gizmos made it easier. I love AIS, but I try to think of it as backup rather than the first thing I look at. That way I force myself to use the compass and to decipher the lights for myself. Given few of us sail as often as we'd like, I think it's important to keep the skills warm.
I notice more recently-qualified sailors tend to look to the AIS first.
If you say "I wouldn't go without it" then you've created a much bigger problem if it breaks down.
Achosenman
Active member
Personally, I use everything I have to hand day or night, starting with the Mk1 eyeball then gadgets and toys.
ridgy
Well-known member
Oddest thing for me is that having decided to go to Kilmore Quay and almost getting there he then decides he doesn't fancy a night entry after all, and then chooses to sail twice as far as he just has. If I was setting up for a night in the pub I definitely wouldn't be suddenly in the mood for a night at sea. Seems an odd plan B if he suspected that plan A might be marginal when he got there.
RichardS
N/A
I would still sail but I would be a lot more careful and precise about taking bearings, using binos, getting a second opinion etc. without the AIS there to remove a lot of the uncertainty. If there's a wind blowing and a swell, bearings etc can be very unreliable especially at night even for a very experienced sailor whereas AIS is not troubled by such vicissitudes.
Richard
capnsensible
Well-known member
IT is if the other vessel doesn't have AIS. ??
RupertW
Well-known member
I still have only once sailed at night with AIS - which I found very confusing but I’m sure I would quickly get used to it.
Personally I have always found ship dodging in decent visibility at night very easy snd confess neither of us use hand bearing compasses except me occasionally for fun as there are other (in my view) simpler techniques to check if a bearing is constant thst are easier to manage. I used to use the hb compass a lot for position checking pre-GPS.
I don’t find it any harder without a plotter either in waters where fog is very rare but if I was back in UK waters Im sure I would have both. But I’m not against gadgets where they are vital, I wouldn’t attempt to anchor without a working ice-maker.
dunedin
Well-known member
Did you read the report? The yacht believed it was the stand on vessel.
But there seems to be some rather confusing (at least to me) aspects. By the stated courses of yacht 000 and ship 160, the ship lights should have been to the port side of the yacht. But the report states, and the emails from crew confirm their view, that the yacht saw the lights on their starboard side. This inconsistency between course and observation side doesn’t seem to get picked up in the report.
And if, using the courses and positions listed in the report, the ship turned 60 degrees to starboard, how the heck did the yacht collide with the port side of the ship. The courses and positions don’t seem to add up?
An alternative interpretation that does seem to fit more of the facts would be that the ship was actually already clear on the starboard side of the yacht, but the crew picked up the wrong radar image and swung hard to starboard, straight into the yacht which had otherwise been basing safely past. Or am I missing something?
Clearly two way AIS would have helped, both prevent the accident and investigate any accident. But it does seem odd the relative positions and courses.
Also slightly worrying that the report seems to be quick to blame things on the yacht crew not having formal / paper qualification in navigation and COLREGs - whereas the crew apparently had 50 years sailing experience, and had covered a LOT of miles.
Very easy for bureaucrats to leap to a need for mandatory paper qualifications, even though 6 months experience and a bit of paper is not necessarily safer than somebody who has perhaps sailed safely since before RYA certificates were invented.
RichardS
N/A
anoccasionalyachtsman
Well-known member
Yes I did read it. And yes, the yacht believed that it was stand on. The ship reported seeing the yacht's light turning red, and in that case I think it was right to take the action that it did. I think most of us know that our nav lights will change colour like that in waves (if we're nearly pointing at an observer), and so will always adjust course to make absolutely sure that it doesn't happen. The narrative says that they made no alteration of course, so maybe they didn't do that.
Personally I'm finding it hard not to fault the yacht's inaction, but do wonder if they had a mis-aligned tricolour which would certainly confuse the situation.