Close Encounters

[ShinyShoe]

Something as described by Traona is quite likely to be over 300T gross. Displacement however is a different thing as it's a hovercraft.

IslandFlyer is 22m x 10m. At a *guess* 5m tall. Which I make 286GT. If it was a displacement boat there would be more of it in the water so my 5m guess.... would be higher and so would be > 300GT.

If I had a 200GT Hovercraft (or probably even a 20GT!) in the solent, I'd have AIS on it even if it wasnt a requirement... but I wouldn't be driving it (flying it?) like a kn*b!

 

[KevinT1]

In all my time sailing in the Solent I’ve never had the slightest concern about the redjets or the southsea ryde hovercraft whose pilots seem astonishingly skilled at threading their way through the wafis which is why I was surprised by this thread until we learned that the micreant wasn’t one of the hovertravel ones

We had an incident with the Portsmouth Ryde hovercraft, and it’s quite scary sitting in a slow moving yacht with this roaring monster coming towards you.

April / Easter weekend - quiet evening and we were under Genoa slowly going back to Chichester. There were only 3 or so other yachts out, it was dusk and we had to wait for the Tide to rise to give a comfortable depth over Chichester bar.

Bow and Stern lights on, mid Solent

We heard the hovercraft leave the beach at Ryde and could see it coming straight for us.

When it got to within 300 metres I shone the biggest torch we had onto the Genoa, with that the Hovercraft immediately swung to port and passed across our stern. We concluded that he hadn’t seen us or our lights against the land based lights

What else could I have done, we were doing max 3 knots and there was no way to anticipate which way to turn ?

 

[Giblets]

We concluded that he hadn’t seen us or our lights against the land based lights

You would have shown up on his radar though assuming your reflector was deployed.

 

[Topcat47]

Presumably there will be AIS data for the hovercraft showing his tracks.

It did, I don’t. A fellow sailor identified the hovercraft from his AIS. The MCA have the matter under investigation. I was merely appealing for footage from a third party who also witnessed the incidental close range, though not as close as mine.

 

[Blue Sunray]

You would have shown up on his radar though assuming your reflector was deployed.

So? That doesn't mean that he was looking at it.

 

[KevinT1]

You would have shown up on his radar though assuming your reflector was deployed.

Radar reflector is permanently fitted at masthead, but the fact that he changed course after I illuminated the Genoa showed he hadn’t seen us visually or any other way.

So what would you have done ? ( asking as a learning point )

 

[Topcat47]

Radar reflector is permanently fitted at masthead, but the fact that he changed course after I illuminated the Genoa showed he hadn’t seen us visually or any other way.

So what would you have done ? ( asking as a learning point )

I had a similar confrontation with Waverley some years ago. You don’t need a steamer scarcer, an ordinary torch on the Genoa or main is enough. I, too, have a masthead reflector, but it’s only n
Any good if the ridge has a watch keeper on the radar at night.

 

[lw395]

Radar reflector is permanently fitted at masthead, but the fact that he changed course after I illuminated the Genoa showed he hadn’t seen us visually or any other way.

So what would you have done ? ( asking as a learning point )

Illuminating the genoa is a very sensible course of action.
I've raced a lot out of Portsmouth, as IoW ferries go, the hovercraft are the best of the bunch. Just too damned noisy in my book.

You could look at your radar reflector. Check it's in good nick. The octo type aren't great if out of shape, I've seen the plastic housed varieties full of water or corroded internally.

 

[BelleSerene]

They also follow a route that is almost entirely predictable.
Portsmouth -> Ryde -> Portsmouth -> Ryde ...

Apart from the one I saw a month ago, North of Osborne Bay, going round in circles. We figured it was training a skipper.

 

[laika]

Apart from the one I saw a month ago, North of Osborne Bay, going round in circles. We figured it was training a skipper.

Or perhaps it had been a bit of a heavy lunchtime session?

 

[Elessar]

B

Why would you stand on to a commercial hovercraft service doing 40kts?
Most people manage to avoid them.

.

Because not following the regs and standing on as one should is a source of ambiguity that can be causal in accidents.

 

[capnsensible]

B

Because not following the regs and standing on as one should is a source of ambiguity that can be causal in accidents.

Dont forget lots of posters 'sit on' in their armchairs and 'standing up' may involve a risk of 'high blood pressure' and action to prevent that may be necessary.

 

[Yealm]

It did, I don’t. A fellow sailor identified the hovercraft from his AIS. The MCA have the matter under investigation. I was merely appealing for footage from a third party who also witnessed the incidental close range, though not as close as mine.

You don’t have AIS?
It’s such an amazing safety feature - but like vaccines, depends on ‘herd immunity’ principle !

 

[[2068]]

B

Because not following the regs and standing on as one should is a source of ambiguity that can be causal in accidents.

Without wishing to turn this into a Colregs thread, there is nothing I can find in there that prevents taking early avoiding action to prevent a a situation with a “risk of collision” in the first place.

 

[Stemar]

What prevents early avoiding action is the fact that once a risk of collision exists, the stand on vessel is required to hold their speed and course

[h=3]Rule 17[/h][h=4]Action by Stand-on Vessel[/h][FONT=&quot](a)[/FONT]

• (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way of the other shall keep her course and speed.
• (ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her maneuver alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in accordance with these Rules.

With such a big speed differential, by the time 17 (a) ii comes into play, it's hard to imagine what the slow stand on vessel can safely do the doesn't risk making matters worse.

 

[Topcat47]

No I don’t have AIS, or Radar or a transponder. There’s a limit on how much electronics you can reasonably run on a 26’ er with a Igm10. It’s a”nice to have” but in this situation, it would have been as much use as a chocolate Orange. We were in close Proximity and in clear visibility, in bright sunlght. It was useful in identifying the “ culprit” afterwards, but nothing else.

 

[Topcat47]

Without wishing to turn this into a Colregs thread, there is nothing I can find in there that prevents taking early avoiding action to prevent a a situation with a “risk of collision” in the first place.

For the love of God, when something as big and fast as a passenger hovercraft turns onto a collision course with another, much slower vessel at close quarters, the “victim” ( me ) has no chance of taking “early avoiding action”. If Snark were a TSDY, you might just have a point but it’s a sailboat and was making around 2knots through the water. You just sound like a dickhead

 

[[2068]]

You just sound like a dickhead

I’ve been called worse, and anyone that has been on these forums for some time ends up with a fairly thick skin

My reply was to Elessar, and was more about the general case of avoiding getting into a situation requiring anyone to stand on.

The way you have described it, it’s pretty clear that the Hovercraft could have done just that, a lot earlier, but you failed to include the relevant details in your original post that would have made the situation clearer.

.

 

[Topcat47]

I did not anticipate the sh1tstorm when I posted my original plea for video/photographic evidence of a potential accident. Perhaps it would have been better not to have hijacked my post to discuss collregs in the first the place.

 

[RichardS]

I did not anticipate the sh1tstorm when I posted my original plea for video/photographic evidence of a potential accident. Perhaps it would have been better not to have hijacked my post to discuss collregs in the first the place.

I'm guessing that you are new to the internet?

Richard