Choosing an intership Channel when called on 16....

[JumbleDuck]

It may be common practice to use VHF for collision avoidance. Doesnt make it right.

Perhaps you should be trying to convince the MCA of your views rather than us, since at the moment they disagree with you.

 

[BrianH]

I fundamentally disagree with you. It makes complete sense.
For example, and this is a real example, I was being overtaken by a tanker. CPA according to AIS was 80m.

Possible reasons for this:
He hasn't seen me
He has seen me and intends to turn
He has seen me and is waiting to see what I do, as many small boats behave unpredictably.

My options without VHF:
Conform to colregs (hold course and speed)
Turn to increase CPA (though if he is about to turn my chance of success is 50:50)

What I did:
Call him, by name, stated the CPA was 80m on my equipment, stated that I was stand on vessel and intended to stand on, and asked his intentions.
He said he would turn to starboard, which he did.

On what planet was not using the VHF a better solution?

I completely agree. In 2008 I had a similar incident with a high-speed ferry changing course from one at 90° to mine and coming straight at me from ahead at 1.1 nm distance, with a closing speed of 38 knots and a wavering track that suggested inattentive watch keeping. I called on 16 (with name from the AIS target list) and she immediately swung well to starboard and passed at close quarters without responding on VHF.

I posted about it here and some implied my call was incorrect, that the ship would have changed course without my intervention - that I only confused the situation.

How easy to pronounce on ideal scenarios from the keyboard - in the real world, not all OOWs are behaving according to the colregs. VHF can be an effective resort for someone about to be run down, as I saw my situation to be. I personally think there is nothing wrong with calling to ask intentions in genuine cases of doubt and will continue to do so.