April WNS

[mjf]

You are correct about the radio assisted collisions.

That applies to the ' vessel on my starboard bow' sort of call.

If you call the ship BY NAME (as i said) this clearly does not apply; at the range it would be easy to see the bow name (and AIS would show it too). The more info you pass the better if only to ensure he knows you are there!

 

[tcm]

total rubbish

Eh? The mobo was doing 28knots a moment ago, and he's still 200yards short (ie north) of the cargo ship/coaster's planned path, and that ship is a mile away or 5 minutes at its 12knot speed. There'e not a chance he'll have taken any action yet - we were doing 28knots a moment ago and about to clear him a mile clear ahead.

In the same five minutes that the coaster/cargo thing takes to get to this longitude, you could turn around and rumble back northwards at nine knots and be almost a mile north of his his path by the time he arrives behind.

But oh no, WNS suggests pratting around - running somehow parallel with the blimmin ship as it trundles up behind - ooer, and this presumably the very same boat that couldn't be steered in a straight line when one engine gone, wasn't it? We've already established that we're on a sick boat but we're planning something that you'd only do on a fully working boats? So then we have look at the busted engine with a random ship our backside, right? Nuts, imho.

Yet another another "only a loony would do this" solution.

 

[wp1234]

[ QUOTE ]
THANKS EVERYONE.
but his crossing distance would have been 2/3 mile which many would consider adequate, if not over generous. If he had been going round the back there would be no problem - and no WNS.

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I being stupid . If you say that his engine went kaput at a range of 1 mile off the container ship ( 1.06nm according to your diag ) how could he ever have been crossing the container ships bow at 2/3 miles ? even at full speed he would have had a bow crossing dist and CPA of less than 1 mile ... hence my answer .
Good question though !

 

[Nick_H]

For the coaster to overtake us, and then us pass say 1/4M behind him, will take almost half an hour, cos he's only catching us at 3 knots. We'll also have gone nearly 5 miles out of our way. You may have that kind of time to waste, but me, i'm turning round in a circle and going behind him.

We'll see you in the pub later, we'll be on our fourth pint.

 

[TonyJones]

[ QUOTE ]


Am I being stupid . If you say that his engine went kaput at a range of 1 mile off the container ship ( 1.06nm according to your diag ) how could he ever have been crossing the container ships bow at 2/3 miles ? even at full speed he would have had a bow crossing dist and CPA of less than 1 mile ... hence my answer .
Good question though !

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. 2/3 mile is intended to indicate two thirds of mile but for some reason the subscript 'rds' didn't appear.

Cheers
Tjay

 

[TonyJones]

Re: total rubbish

You are arguing not with me but with highly expert opinion.
You may indeed get to the pub first but it is also possible that you would never get there. The solution suggested put safety first, second and last.
But, of course, you know best.

 

[Nick_H]

Re: total rubbish

[ QUOTE ]
You may indeed get to the pub first but it is also possible that you would never get there.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, nor might you, running half an hour longer than you need to on dodgy engines. This was going quite well until the answer /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[TonyJones]

mjf

The MGN I refer to can be found at: http://www.nautinst.org/ais/PDF/uk_mgn_324.pdf

But the most relevant bit says:

In 1995, the judge in a collision case said: "It is very probable that the use of VHF radio for conversation between these ships was a contributory cause of this collision, if only because it
distracted the officers on watch from paying careful attention to their radar. I must repeat, in the hope that it will achieve some publicity, what I have said on previous occasions that any
attempt to use VHF to agree the manner of passing is fraught with the danger of misunderstanding. Marine Superintendents would be well advised to prohibit such use of VHF radio and to instruct their officers to comply with the Collision Regulations."

Best wishes
TJ

 

[Chris_d]

Re: total rubbish

I don't normaly get involved in WNS as they drive me mad, but this one seemed a much more sensible senario, your solution was my first gut instinct and is what I would do, the positon of the slower coaster is a bit vague so a 180 may be possible but turning and running parallel is the safest thing to do.

I'm afraid tcm just has it in for WNS, but up to now they have been infuriating /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[MapisM]

Re: total rubbish

[ QUOTE ]
The solution suggested put safety first, second and last.

[/ QUOTE ]Well TJ, I can accept that my own solution (turning to port) would not be the safest, even if in those sea/distances/visibility conditions I'd still would be comfortable with it because - if nothing else - it's the quicker way to get out of the mess.
But frankly speaking, I can see why anyone who suggested to turn 180° has good reasons to argue against "your" final solution, strictly from a safety viewpoint, regardless of whatever highly expert opinion it might be based on.
There is not a chance that the coaster is going to change its course at that stage, and even more so considering that it would be going towards the limit of the deep water channel by turning stbd.

 

[gjgm]

I thought there were two possibilities.. turn parallel to the oncoming ships, or turn north.
Seems to me that if you have one dickie engine, the one thing you want to do is get totally clear of everything so you can have a fiddle about without wondering if you are about to get mashed, so going parallel seems a bit pointless.
Only other thing is that while it is probably easier to turn to starboard anyway if that engine is out, I dont think turning to port is sucha no-no... its going to take you 30 seconds or less... we arent turning round in a half mile circle,but in about 30m of water, but to starboard is the prefered.
I still agree with TCM earlier comment.. I cant recall when a commercial ship changed course in any patch of water that I ve been in, so I think I'd be working on the basis that the commercial ships are likely to plough on, with only the vaguest curiosity what the plonker in the lesiure boat was doing. After all, what he has seen you do is all but stop, so he ll be expecting to pass in front of you, and go back to his novel... I reckon.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Re: total rubbish

Agree with you, tcm. Turning 90deg to starboard and waiting for a freighter to ram you up the arse is the armchair admiral's solution and not one that anyone in a small vessel close to much larger vessels would seriously contemplate when faced with the real life situation. What happens if the viz suddenly closes in?

 

[JackBartlett]

Re: total rubbish

Well said, Chris_d.

Like you, I don't usually get involved in WNS (well, maybe a bit more often than you do) /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif, because so many of the stupid suggestions drive me round the bend. Especially those who "just has it in for WNS", those who talk baby talk, and those who can't spell. If they can't be arsed to write grown-up english, I don't see why they think their opinions are worth reading.

More to the point, I agree that the 90 degree turn to starboard is the only way to go. It conforms to the colregs, and it gets you out of the way of both ships. It doesn't distract the OOW on either vessel with pointless calls on the VHF to someone who probably doesn't speak english. I don't see why anyone wants to slow down, because once you've got both ships behind you, more speed buys you more time, but that's a minor issue.

Turning to port is an absolute no-no. It's not even worth explaining why: it just is. And I'm buggered if I can see any reason for doing U turn in front of a ship. Wasn't that what that sailing boat did that got sunk by a container ship in the Channel Islands a few years ago?

 

[MapisM]

Re: total rubbish

[ QUOTE ]
Like you, I don't usually get involved in WNS (well, maybe a bit more often than you do)

[/ QUOTE ]Don't be shy, 64% of your posts so far are WNS-related. I didn't check TJ record because it would take longer, but I wouldn't be surprised if even his percentage would be lower.

 

[Nick_H]

Re: total rubbish

But this is a small motor cruiser that can virtually turn in its own length. If the OOW, from a mile away, sees the leisure boat heading off to the north then it's problem over for him, more so than if it turns 90 degs to stbd, and he then has to overtake it.

Why would any leisure boat with engine problems want to go in the wrong direction for half an hour with a cargo ship bearing down on them, when they can just move well out of the way, then pass behind the cargo ship once it's passed?

 

[TonyJones]

Re: total rubbish

MapisM

Yup, I'm with you. As I've said, my PERSONAL preference would be to turn to starboard and head North, keeping a close eye on the coaster, and now that I'm the give-way vessel, keeping out of its way. (Not sure I would ever say 'no chance' of a commercial vessel doing something peculiar, but that's not important).

However, when I ran this past a couple of people more qualified than I am, one - a Yacht Master Instructor - proffered the opinion that I've posted, saying that this would eliminate any crossing aspects and put both commercial vessels into an overtaking situation which would be the safest solution - albeit not the most convenient. But that's often the case. So I felt obliged to put that forward.

I feel it's a shame that some people can't express a difference of opinion without getting aggressive and using words like 'rubbish' and 'nonsense'. But that's how it is.

Best wishes
TJ

 

[TonyJones]

Re: total rubbish

Nick H

Please see my reply to MapisM which I hope answers that question.

Cheers
TJ

 

[TonyJones]

Re: total rubbish

[ QUOTE ]
Agree with you, tcm. Turning 90deg to starboard and waiting for a freighter to ram you up the arse is the armchair admiral's solution and not one that anyone in a small vessel close to much larger vessels would seriously contemplate when faced with the real life situation. What happens if the viz suddenly closes in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please see my reply to MapisM. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that the freighter would 'ram you up the arse'. Very few collisions occur during overtaking manoeuvres and quite obviously you could easily get out of the way of a vessel slowly overtaking you if need be.

TJ

 

[TonyJones]

IT'S A WRAP

Well, Ive done my job as best I can: produced the scenario, discussed various alternatives and presented the view of a highly experienced YM Instructor with many thousands of hours of sea time. Not everyone agrees with him, of course, and the usual suspects have reacted in their normal rather unpleasant manner. Plus ca change. But I'm sure the discussion about the Colregs has been useful to some. It certainly has for me.

Best wishes 'til next month...
TJ

 

[[2068]]

Re: total rubbish

>Please see my reply to MapisM. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that the freighter would 'ram you up the arse'.

Can I point you in the direction of the MAIB report into the sinking of the Ouzo?
HERE

Very different conditions admittedly, but any action that puts the skipper of a small leisure vessel closer to a large commercial vessel than is necessary is pushing their luck imho.

There's too many if's: turning parallel is a valid course of action:
- IF you can maintain a steady course and the engineering situation doesn't deteriorate further
- IF the commercial vessels maintain course and speed
- IF they've seen you either visually or on radar

That's three too many ifs for me. I'd be hightailing it North until I had the situation more under control.

dv.