Crossing Separation Zones in Small Yacht

[Seajet]

Might is right

John Morris,

I feel you're putting your case a little strongly.

Re. the Ouzo, well it's very easy to forget looking behind - I remember someone refusing to do so when we said " there's a submarine coming up behind us ! " - he thought we were joking...but I'd think the onus is on the ship to look forwards, and the law court seems to have had the same opinion; also radar is not the magic answer beloved by Hollywood.

I've done a few tens of thousands of miles under sail myself, during which I've seen ships in the Channel go by with no-one on the bridge at all - open doors flapping each side...

I do go by 'might is right' and take early avoiding action; the trick is to make one's course and intentions very clear, just in case someone on the ship in question is remotely interested !

 

[Simondjuk]

When crossing in front of the bows of a ship DO NOT CROSS with less than 2 mls

A little excessive perhaps. You must wait an awfully long time to cross the Channel on busy days, and you'd probably wait forever to cross the Straits of Gibraltar.

The container ship Emma Maersk has a beam of around 60 metres and a maximum speed of 25 knots. At 4 knots, a boat covers around 2 metres a second. Therefore, if Emma were steaming at maximum speed and you were making 4 knots, you could cross her at right angles, from clear on one of her bows to clear on the other, with her at 390 metres off as you begin.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that beginning to cross a huge ship's bows with her 400 metres away would be a good idea. Simply pointing out how little time/distance is actually needed to cross. You allow around 3200 metres, or around 8 times this, and are moving at least 50% faster.

Electing to change your course and/or speed at that sort of range when you are the stand on vessel, is going to make you the cause of some serious confusion and blue language on the bridges of approaching ships.

Does your decision not to cross take anything else into account, or is it simply a flat 'No go' decision if you're going to pass ahead at <2NM?

 

[Sailfree]

A little excessive perhaps. You must wait an awfully long time to cross the Channel on busy days, and you'd probably wait forever to cross the Straits of Gibraltar.

The container ship Emma Maersk has a beam of around 60 metres and a maximum speed of 25 knots. At 4 knots, a boat covers around 2 metres a second. Therefore, if Emma were steaming at maximum speed and you were making 4 knots, you could cross her at right angles, from clear on one of her bows to clear on the other, with her at 390 metres off as you begin.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that beginning to cross a huge ship's bows with her 400 metres away would be a good idea. Simply pointing out how little time/distance is actually needed to cross. You allow around 3200 metres, or around 8 times this, and are moving at least 50% faster.

Electing to change your course and/or speed at that sort of range when you are the stand on vessel, is going to make you the cause of some serious confusion and blue language on the bridges of approaching ships.

Does your decision not to cross take anything else into account, or is it simply a flat 'No go' decision if you're going to pass ahead at <2NM?

Take the plot from the bows of a ship and if I am going to cross the line of the track <2mls we turn immediately for the stern.

The point I am making is if I decided to cross but ship changed course and then I changed course or put on more speed you only have potentially 4 min for you both to finish your waltz and decide how you are going to miss each other.

So the important decision is made at approx 2 mls from bow - do I cross in front and have less than 4 min safety margin or go behind. As I mentioned I rarely have to deviate at all as the ships have altered course some 5-6mls away having plotted that a yacht at 6kts was crossing at right angles to their bow. Happy to be only 200m or so off their sides or stern but not the naughty sharp pointy bit!!

 

[Simondjuk]

The thing is, you're the one likely to be starting the waltz!

If you make an immediate decision, how can you be sure that the situation is not already changing? As you turn to port to pass astern of a ship you should be standing on to, the ship may have initiated a turn to starboard to pass astern of you. You are now both turning to maintain a potential collision course. You need to monitor the bearing of the ship to see what, if anything, he's already up to.

That said, it's unlikely that many OOWs would consider a CPA of 2NM worth making an adjustment for as they know they'll pass safely well ahead of you, so you're probably not exciting them too much.

Often what looks like it's going to be close from a way off, and even shows a minimally changing bearing for some time, turns out to be a comfortable pass once you're within a mile to half a mile of one another and the angles begin to open up. If you can read the maker's name stamped into their anchor, you've probably stood on somewhat longer than prudent however.

 

[jimbaerselman]

We were on the French side of the Channel, and had been watching a ship lit up like a christmas tree, obviously some miles away to starboard. As it closed on us I decided to alter to Starboard, in very good time, to pass well clear if its Port side, and then behind it. No sooner had I done this, than the ship decided to turn to her Port, and therefore go in front of me! The distance off was still ok, so I turned to Port, and carried on with my intended course.

I have always assumed she picked me up on Radar, and decided to alter for a sailing vessel. I wouldn't like to have had this happen in the actual TSS though!

Good one Geoff. On radar they'd stand on (correct). On visual, if they identify you're under sail, they'll then alter course to go port (the unusual direction!) under your stern. Some will not identify you're under sail, and will stand on.

The only way to remove this uncertainty (will they or won't they realise you're under sail?) is for:

(a) you to alter course very early - 6nm or more - to point at the vessel
(b) make yourself a vessel under power - engine on, cone hoisted or motoring light on, jib rolled or down.

It makes no difference if you're in a TSS or not. This uncertainty applies to any shipping coming from starboard in any circumstances. And it is why so many yotties have more shock/horrors coming from starboard than from port.

 

[Sailfree]

The thing is, you're the one likely to be starting the waltz!

If you make an immediate decision, how can you be sure that the situation is not already changing? As you turn to port to pass astern of a ship you should be standing on to, the ship may have initiated a turn to starboard to pass astern of you. You are now both turning to maintain a potential collision course. You need to monitor the bearing of the ship to see what, if anything, he's already up to.

That said, it's unlikely that many OOWs would consider a CPA of 2NM worth making an adjustment for as they know they'll pass safely well ahead of you, so you're probably not exciting them too much.

Often what looks like it's going to be close from a way off, and even shows a minimally changing bearing for some time, turns out to be a comfortable pass once you're within a mile to half a mile of one another and the angles begin to open up. If you can read the maker's name stamped into their anchor, you've probably stood on somewhat longer than prudent however.

We beg to differ then. A distance/time limit should be determined to decide whether to go behind a potential ship. I decided that if I was crossing the bows of a ship with less than 2Nm or 4 min I make my decision what to do and go behind. With MARPA I can get the distance CPA and time to CPA so I can reduce the distance if ship is only doing say 15kts.

I repeat that I find most ships have already made a small course alteration some 5-8Nm away - I do not believe many would leave it to 2Nm. Its only a few that insist on MIGHT is right and these I give a clear berth to!

 

[GrahamM376]

We beg to differ then. A distance/time limit should be determined to decide whether to go behind a potential ship. I decided that if I was crossing the bows of a ship with less than 2Nm or 4 min I make my decision what to do and go behind. With MARPA I can get the distance CPA and time to CPA so I can reduce the distance if ship is only doing say 15kts.

I repeat that I find most ships have already made a small course alteration some 5-8Nm away - I do not believe many would leave it to 2Nm. Its only a few that insist on MIGHT is right and these I give a clear berth to!

Theory is fine but in reality, all kinds of things happen. We were under sail on passage from the Scilly isles to St Peter Port one night and SWMBO woke me up saying there were big ships both sides of us, all going the same way and she needed another pair of eyes.

On approaching the SW going shipping lane, some vessels had altered course to give way and go astern of us but the larger ones hadn't. Problem easily solved but would have been less confusing had they all held course.

 

[RobF]

To try to provide a definitive and correct answer to the OP's Question...

OP should try to maintain a heading as near as practicable at right angles to the general direction of traffic when crossing TSS. (Rule 10c)

Vessels less than 10m shall not impede safe passage of power driven vessel in TSS (rule 10j). Bill Anderson notes that this is clarified by rule 8f "a vessel must take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel." This does not mean that all vessels under 20m are the give way vessel in TSS, only that they should ensure that shipping has sufficient sea room. In the (admittedly few) TSS crossings I've done, sea room has never been an issue.

Rule 15 - the vessel which has the other on her starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall avoid crossing in front of the other vessel. The first TSS lane the OP will encounter is the South Bound TSS and the OP is technically the stand on vessel and should maintain course and speed to the best of their ability whilst crossing this lane. The second TSS lane is the North Bound lane and, as I understand IRPCS, the OP should turn sufficiently (not completely) to starboard to ensure that they pass behind the stern of the other vessel. This could be combined or replaced with a temporary reduction in boat speed.

I appreciate this is a theoretical answer, if all else fails, Rule 2 prevails!

 

[bluemoongaffer]

In the situation Sailfree and Simondjuk describe, I would have thought it would be easiest to turn to starboard and slow down (or just stop) to check if the other vessel is taking avoiding action. If they are and were planning to go astern of you, then simple to carry on in the original direction. If not, then wait until they pass in front and then carry on. This way you avoid the "both turn into each other's way" syndrome

 

[Sailfree]

In the situation Sailfree and Simondjuk describe, I would have thought it would be easiest to turn to starboard and slow down (or just stop) to check if the other vessel is taking avoiding action. If they are and were planning to go astern of you, then simple to carry on in the original direction. If not, then wait until they pass in front and then carry on. This way you avoid the "both turn into each other's way" syndrome

Its one you can't win.

The ship has been plotting you on RADAR for ages - it has your regular course and speed noted and deg say the ship has made a 1 deg deviation to pass behind you some 5 mls away - then you slow down and stop right in his new deviated path!! Ships dont turn on a sixpence and its impossible to predict a ships course until the turn is complete.

The important part of this discussion is the yacht skippers decision as to how close to the bows can you cross and when he makes his decision. I have stated mine - say 4 min at 6kts I am some 600m off the track that a ship that is 2Nm away from me - I then decide to cross behind.

Stopping was the factor in the Moody that was cut in half in the channel a few years back. For this reason I maintain speed do not circle or anything other than make a positive change of course when necessary that would quickly get picked up by a ships RADAR and collision avoidance software. I think its easier for ships to spot something positive and allow for it than someone dithering.

The important bit is to miss that naughty sharp bit called the bows!!

 

[JayBee]

.....
I've done a few tens of thousands of miles under sail myself, during which I've seen ships in the Channel go by with no-one on the bridge at all - open doors flapping each side...

Excuse me, but this is complete bullskit.

From a yacht it is absolutely impossible to see whether there is anyone on the bridge or not, let alone to see whether the bridge doors are hooked back or not.

Most watchkeepers are not wandering about on the bridge wings, but are where they should be, in the relatively dark wheelhouse, close to their comms, instruments and controls.

Best to assume the watchkeeper is there, doing what he is paid to do and not drunk, asleep or homicidal.

 

[sailorman]

In the situation Sailfree and Simondjuk describe, I would have thought it would be easiest to turn to starboard and slow down (or just stop) to check if the other vessel is taking avoiding action. If they are and were planning to go astern of you, then simple to carry on in the original direction. If not, then wait until they pass in front and then carry on. This way you avoid the "both turn into each other's way" syndrome

Dont dither that confuses them, keep a straight & constant course keeping a watchful eye with the HH compass

 

[BrianH]

Excuse me, but this is complete bullskit.

From a yacht it is absolutely impossible to see whether there is anyone on the bridge or not, let alone to see whether the bridge doors are hooked back or not.

Most watchkeepers are not wandering about on the bridge wings, but are where they should be, in the relatively dark wheelhouse, close to their comms, instruments and controls.

Best to assume the watchkeeper is there, doing what he is paid to do and not drunk, asleep or homicidal.

I too think that is unfair and a gross overstatement. However, I do know that from a yacht one can see a smaller commercial vessel's bridge deck well enough to identify if it is occupied. I also know it wasn't the channel and was a generation (or two) ago, but ...

It was in the early hours of a dark night and we were clear of the Humber estuary, close to the Outer Dowsing light vessel under sail showing the customary navigation lights. A ship was approaching from astern and as we could see port, starboard and mast steaming lights at a constant bearing, clearly on a collision course. After shining a powerful torch on the sails then at the ship without reaction, we tacked and stood out to the east to avoid the overtaking ship, which then passed quite close between us and the lightvessel. But amazingly, as she passed, the intense beam from the lightship swept round, silhouetted a small freighter and illuminated in sharp relief a totally vacant bridge - empty, no one on watch!

I also remember during the same era of sailing out of Whitby, a small coaster out of the Tees sailing south, suddenly did a 'right hand turn' and drove straight up on the beach between Sandsend and Whitby. It sat there high and dry for weeks while small boys threw stones at it, the clanging bringing the crew topsides shaking their fists. The subsequent inquiry blamed both captain and mate - the only deck officers aboard - of being drunk.

Local lore on the northeast coast had always advised giving southbound vessels a wide berth for that reason while northbound traffic could be expected to be properly under command - the crew had had enough distance from any major port to have sobered up.

I'm sure things have improved enormously in these modern times of controls and elf'n'safety' ....

 

[JayBee]

Barnac1e

However, I do know that from a yacht one can see a smaller commercial vessel's bridge deck well enough to identify if it is occupied.

With respect, you can't. Part of any bridge contains a chartroom or a separate chart space, usually aft of the wheelhouse area, where an OOW is obliged to spend some short periods of time on normal watchkeeping duties - navigational tasks, logbook entries and so on. Even if you had a direct line of sight through the wheelhouse doors, it would be necessary to see round corners to confirm your assertion.

That fact that poor watchkeeping exists is undeniable, but it is not the norm and OOWs do not routinely absent themselves from the ship's bridge.

We all know of cases of gross negligence at sea, as in any other environment, but it seems to be common (and unjustifiable) for yachtsmen to blame every close quarters encounter with a big ship on an unmanned bridge.

As others have said, be seen, avoid the pavement waltz and obey the IRPCS.

 

[BrianH]

Barnac1e
With respect, you can't. Part of any bridge contains a chartroom or a separate chart space, usually aft of the wheelhouse area, where an OOW is obliged to spend some short periods of time on normal watchkeeping duties - navigational tasks, logbook entries and so on. Even if you had a direct line of sight through the wheelhouse doors, it would be necessary to see round corners to confirm your assertion.

Yes, I concede to your point. In the particular case I cited, the fact that we had radar reflector, shone a powerful light directly and repeatedly at the ship and on the mainsail but she still ploughed on directly at us, plus the apparent visually empty bridge, makes me believe that there really was no one there.

There are areas of the world where truly poor watchkeeping exists - I have had some frightening experiences in the Adriatic with high speed ferries as the main culprits. This posting here on an AIS thread is one example.

 

[Seajet]

common Sense, no BS

Jaybee,

I'll try to ignore your 'BS' claim, and simply explain that the incident I most remember was indeed a small coaster, and I most definitely could see right through the bridge windows and doors as she went past - as it happens, on a northerly course across the shipping lanes, off Binic, N. Brittany.

That was around 1979, so after a few house moves I doubt I can find the photo I took now.

With ship Captains having to explain every expensive course change to the owners, I have always taken the 'might is right' option, and change course early and decisively to avoid any confusion.

I'm reminded of a thing re. collision rules which I read a long time ago;

'Here lie the bones of Mike O'Day, who died maintaining his Right Of Way...

He was right - dead right - as he sailed along, but now he's as dead as if he'd been wrong !'

 

[RichardS]

who died maintaining his Right Of Way...

Oh dear SJ, I think it's against forum rules to use that particular phrase, even in jest!

Richard

 

[Seajet]

RichardS,

I apologise if I've broken some rule, but the advice in that little rhyme has probably saved my and more importantly my crews' lives a few times !

 

[RichardS]

RichardS,

I apologise if I've broken some rule, but the advice in that little rhyme has probably saved my and more importantly my crews' lives a few times !

Please don't feel that you have to apologise to me Seajet. I'm totally relaxed about it. I just know that every time we have a Col Regs thread and somebody quite innocently uses the phrase "Right of Way", the balloon goes up!

Perhaps you got away with it this time!

Richard

 

[JayBee]

Seajet

....the incident I most remember was indeed a small coaster, and I most definitely could see right through the bridge windows and doors as she went past...

See my response to Barnac1e earlier.

With ship Captains having to explain every expensive course change to the owners, I have always taken the 'might is right' option, and change course early and decisively to avoid any confusion.

Whoever told you that was having a bit of a laugh. Course changes for other traffic, even yachts, are necessary, quick and simple to carry out, even on the largest vessels. One possible exception is a rudder angle/rate of turn limitation on some passenger vessels, to reduce turn-induced heeling, (see the MAIB report on the Ouzo tragedy). This can be overridden by flicking a switch on the autopilot, but that should only be necessary in a VERY close quarters situation.

Taking the "might is right" option isn't in the rules. It invites a departure from the rules, confuses a ship's watchkeeper preparing to give way and can lead directly into the dangerous "pavement waltz".

Obey the IRPCS. The alternative is anarchy, from which you may or may not escape. Getting away with the "might is right" option and promoting it as a good idea is just plain irresponsible.