Crossing Separation Zones in Small Yacht

[Seajet]

OK, so he's leaving it a bit late, but he's still got time to take action.

You have his MMSI and a visual contact, why not call on VHF and ask his intentions?

If you feel a collision is imminent (well, in 5 minutes time...) and feel you must respond then do the job properly and take clear avoiding action - turn at least 90 deg. to starboard. Just slowing down is ambiguous (esp. a sailing yacht - he may think you're in a lull).

It's not about being b****y minded about it - just obvious and proper in your behaviour. Just because you know what you have in mind doesn't mean he does unless you make it clear or call on the VHF.

+1, early & obvious course alterations save lives and are simple common sense, also happen to follow the collision avoidance rules...a chap I know who's a very experienced ship Captain agrees.

I simply can't understand why people are suggesting playing chicken with
ships anyway, it's not that I'm 'terrified of them', just simple maths, ship 1000's of tons & takes ages to turn, versus own pride & joy, 1.5 tons & spins on a sixpence!

Read the ColRegs again, ' No craft under 20 metres LOA will impede a merchant vessel '.

I think the allusion to cycling in front of a lorry is also particularly appropriate.

 

[john_morris_uk]

+1, early & obvious course alterations save lives and are simple common sense, also happen to follow the collision avoidance rules...a chap I know who's a very experienced ship Captain agrees.

I simply can't understand why people are suggesting playing chicken with
ships anyway, it's not that I'm 'terrified of them', just simple maths, ship 1000's of tons & takes ages to turn, versus own pride & joy, 1.5 tons & spins on a sixpence!

Read the ColRegs again, ' No craft under 20 metres LOA will impede a merchant vessel '.

I think the allusion to cycling in front of a lorry is also particularly appropriate.

Show me ANYWHERE where someone has suggested playing chicken with a ship?

The Colregs on no craft under 20 m not impeding etc applies to TSS not open water - which is where the discussion has moved to.

Its nothing to do with cycling in front of a lorry. Its all about assessing the risk of collision and responding in proper time. My real beef is this illusion that is perpetuated by people who think that they 'always keep out of the way', when in reality half the time they weren't in the way in the first place, and when they were in the way (in their language) 99% of the time the ship would have avoided them if given half a chance.

Ships don't stop very easily, but they do alter course much more easily then you give them credit for. They also obey the IRPCS nearly all the time, and they DO get annoyed by yachts who prat about altering course in some unpredictable manner.

 

[Skysail]

Not quite right:

(j) A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the safe passage of a power-driven vessel following a traffic lane.

'shall' is a bit stronger than 'will' ......

But in open water it does not apply - if that is where we are now.

.

 

[Simondjuk]

Even in busy shipping areas, it's not actually that often you end up precisely on a collision course. It's a big sea afterall.

I think many problems are caused by yacht skippers who are paranoid about getting within half a mile of a ship and create issues where none exist by behaving erratically at a mile or two, maybe more.

When the stand on vessel, maybe 7 times out of 10 in a situation which 'looks close' to those of a nervous disposition, if the yacht just stood on as they should, they'd pass safely without either party altering course or thanks to a small course alteration already made by the ship. 2 times in 10, the yacht makes a paranoia induced move that's either unnecessary or confusing to the ship, and a fraught time ensues for one or both parties. Leaving only about 1 time in 10 when a true near collision situation actually existed from the outset. In these instances I stand on and watch closely. Most often the ship will make a course alteration before I decide that it's time to take action. In the rare instance that time actually comes, I use the VHF (Yes, I know this is advised against in some quarters, but I want a quick and definitive answer to a very simple question.) Almost without exception, when I ask their intentions, they say that they were already aware of me and are in the process of altering course to pass ahead/astern of me. If I have not got a response at this point, I take utterly decisive action in order to show an entirely different aspect. I think this has happened only once, and that vessel was a rubbish lighter operating in the Bay of Cadiz, so hardly likely to have been crewed by the creme de la creme of seamen.


As for the question posed by Barnac1e, from his track, it looks to me like the ship has already made, or is making, a slight course alteration to starboard. I'd stand on and see how it developed, 5 minutes is a long time. As it stands, I suspect he intends to pass ahead, making the gap at the crossing point a bit larger with a slight deviation to starboard.

 

[bedouin]

Not quite right:

(j) A vessel of less than 20 metres in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the safe passage of a power-driven vessel following a traffic lane.

'shall' is a bit stronger than 'will' ......

But in open water it does not apply - if that is where we are now.

.

The only case I can imagine where that rule actually means anything in a TSS is if the circumstances make it dangerous for the "give way" vessel (i.e. the ship) to change course, and the only circumstances I can think of that would cause that would be the proximity of other shipping.

As others have repeatedly pointed out, acting unpredictably is far more likely to endanger others than sticking to the rules.

 

[Seajet]

For the last time, who said anything about manouvering 'unpredictably' ?!

I get a feeling I'm talking to accountants who think they should push their and sadly their crews' luck and sod anyone else - to save 5p & 5 minutes or - 'make the other guy give way' - as if they're still in their car -, rather than experienced ( and courteous as well as safety conscious ) seamen.

I have said ' if in doubt change course EARLY & OBVIOUSLY ! '

If that is too hard to work out, there's no point continuing this discussion; Good Luck !

 

[BrianH]

At 18.7 knots this ship would have needed a very small alteration to starboard to pass clear ahead of you and may well have been about to do so when you reduced speed and made this action unnecessary. I agree that if this was the case, he left it a little late and I would have tried calling him earlier, before taking any action myself. If there was no response I would then have taken the action required by the IRPCS and made a large alteration to port, AWAY from the approaching danger.

it looks to me like the ship has already made, or is making, a slight course alteration to starboard. I'd stand on and see how it developed

My interpretation of the ship's track (as well as my assumption at the time) shows no deviation whatsoever, a constant 248 degrees. To stand on would, in my opinion, have raised the probability of a much closer collision scenario.

But in open water it does not apply - if that is where we are now.

We are not, the ship was still well in the westerly TSS lane exiting Trieste.

turn at least 90 deg. to starboard. Just slowing down is ambiguous (esp. a sailing yacht - he may think you're in a lull).

Hardly ambiguous when he can see my headsail furling and speed dropping from 5.5 kts to 2 kts with a resultant CPA showing an easy clear ahead.

So quite a mixture of advice - even a conflict of.

"I would have tried calling him earlier" - JayBee -
"You have his MMSI and a visual contact, why not call on VHF and ask his intentions?" - Sea_Spray -

Here we have a consistent and sensible point. I did consider it and I did have the MMSI - but no AIS data connection to the VHF so the fiddly procedure of keying in the MMSI number for a DSC call put me off - and my ancient single channel AIS receiver is slow to synchronise with the static data sentence (every six minutes) so was missing the ship's name.

So yes, that was where I was remiss. Never mind, worse things happen at sea and all's well that ends well. Thank you all for your thoughts.

 

[Simondjuk]

It appears there's a kink to starboard in the ship's track between the inner range ring and the compass rose. It may be due to a gap in the AIS data though.

What did your hand bearing compass tell you was happening?

 

[BrianH]

It appears there's a kink to starboard in the ship's track between the inner range ring and the compass rose. It may be due to a gap in the AIS data though.

I presume you mean the 2nm range ring and the target icon. You must have a much higher resolution monitor than I do. I certainly did not observe any course change within that distance (0.64nm) and I had been monitoring both visually and the screen AIS track for quite some while. If the ship had indeed changed course I think it would have done so by enough to be clearly evident on its AIS data track - no point doing so by some minuscule amount.

What did your hand bearing compass tell you was happening?

Nothing, it was below in its storage on the bulkhead. I believe the bearing differences we are discussing would have been indistinguishable and lost in the standard errors I get when taking sights on a moving deck.

 

[[2574]]

JayBee said this "If there was no response I would then have taken the action required by the IRPCS and made a large alteration to port, AWAY from the approaching danger."

and then we have this:

then do the job properly and take clear avoiding action - turn at least 90 deg. to starboard. Just slowing down is ambiguous (esp. a sailing yacht - he may think you're in a lull).

Are both decisions correct or is one completely wrong? I think a turn to port might be safer as a starboard turn may induce another collision course were the ship to be initiating a port turn to pass behind the yacht? (And there starts the pavement waltz)

rob

 

[JayBee]

Robih

I think a turn to port might be safer as a starboard turn may induce another collision course were the ship to be initiating a port turn to pass behind the yacht? (And there starts the pavement waltz)

exactly so...

 

[Poignard]

I think a turn to port might be safer as a starboard turn may induce another collision course were the ship to be initiating a port turn to pass behind the yacht? (And there starts the pavement waltz)

rob

That is what John Goode recommends in one of his books as the best option.

If he recommends it that's good enough for me.

 

[sailorman]

That is what John Goode recommends in one of his books as the best option.

If he recommends it that's good enough for me.

Red > Red

 

[Pye_End]

I think a turn to port might be safer as a starboard turn may induce another collision course were the ship to be initiating a port turn to pass behind the yacht? (And there starts the pavement waltz)

Does the 'pavement waltz' exist where we have a yacht capable of a 90 degree shift in well under 10 seconds, whereas a ship may only alter its heading by one or two degrees in the same time. Find it hard to envisage with such disparity between vessels.

 

[BrianH]

Red > Red

Exactly.

In fact, that Turkish RoRo ferry was the first of four in-line in that traffic separation lane. The next, Star Lady, was still giving me a CPA that I was not prepared to cross her bows with, so I gybed onto a parallel, 180 degree course until I could gybe back and pass clear ahead of the third, a little further back.

I love my AIS !!!

Edit: in fact, Simondjuk, it is possible to see from this screenshot that the original ship, the RoRo ferry, had even turned slightly to port when she was obviously going to clear me.

 

[Elemental]

I think a turn to port might be safer as a starboard turn may induce another collision course were the ship to be initiating a port turn to pass behind the yacht? (And there starts the pavement waltz)
rob

Upon reflection I think you may be correct that a turn to port could be safer as you're moving away from the danger (although he'll still be closing on you at a good rate). Turning to starboard though will take you nearer to his stern and therefore safe water (plus at night your nav lights go green->red, immediately leaving him in no visual doubt you have changed course).

However, apart from a call via VHF (it's worth practicising MMSI operation) then I would still be waiting a little longer (still 5 mins to CPA) before changing course, whilst perhaps preparing the boat for avoidance action.

 

[sailorman]

Upon reflection I think you may be correct that a turn to port could be safer as you're moving away from the danger (although he'll still be closing on you at a good rate). Turning to starboard though will take you nearer to his stern and therefore safe water (plus at night your nav lights go green->red, immediately leaving him in no visual doubt you have changed course).

However, apart from a call via VHF (it's worth practicising MMSI operation) then I would still be waiting a little longer (still 5 mins to CPA) before changing course, whilst perhaps preparing the boat for avoidance action.

Red to Red leaves no doubt to the other vessel & the only safe option.
a ship will only alter as much as he has to, he has better equipment that you & also is trained to use it.

 

[JayBee]

Exactly.

In fact, that Turkish RoRo ferry was the first of four in-line in that traffic separation lane. The next, Star Lady, was still giving me a CPA that I was not prepared to cross her bows with, so I gybed onto a parallel, 180 degree course until I could gybe back and pass clear ahead of the third, a little further back.

I love my AIS !!!

Edit: in fact, Simondjuk, it is possible to see from this screenshot that the original ship, the RoRo ferry, had even turned slightly to port when she was obviously going to clear me.

A couple of comments:

I seem to have previously missed the fact that all this action was taking place in a TSS!

Would it not have been easier to come up onto a parallel course, turning away from the oncoming Ro-Ro instead of gybing? That way you could have waited for the ships to pass and would not have ended up travelling in an illegal direction in a TSS.

If the first Ro-Ro turned slightly to port having cleared you, it seems likely that she was returning to her original course, having made a small alteration to starboard to give way to you in the first place.

Am I missing something else here?

 

[aluijten]

I love my AIS !!!

Sorry for the small thread drift, but what software are you using in this screen. It looks quite nice.

To the discussion: I'm following this with interest. The problem is that I'm inclined to agree with all, depending on the view I'm taking.

In the end, seeing 250 meters of heavy steel coming at me, I'm not so sure if could hold my nerve being on the stand on vessel...

A.

 

[BrianH]

Would it not have been easier to come up onto a parallel course, turning away from the oncoming Ro-Ro

Do you mean why not make the same manoeuvre as I did for Star Lady? Yes, that was an option - I decided to slow down and wait. I got bored with waiting once I saw Star Lady was also going to get in the way and thought I'd get sailing again.

instead of gybing?

The wind was SSW, on my port quarter. I had to gybe to head NE on a parallel course to Star Lady.

That way you could have waited for the ships to pass and would not have ended up travelling in an illegal direction in a TSS.

How was it illegal? I was crossing a TSS at right angles - more or less.

If the first Ro-Ro turned slightly to port having cleared you, it seems likely that she was returning to her original course, having made a small alteration to starboard to give way to you in the first place.

No, she didn't make "a small alteration to starboard to give way" to me; she may well have delayed her turn to port, necessary to join the southbound TSS of the northern Adriatic once out of the immediate Gulf of Trieste TSS (see diagram on earlier post).