Dangerously unintelligible VHF exchanges

[capnsensible]

Don’t have to go far to get unintelligible VHF comms - lots of non standard terms used in UK waters.

An outfit called BUTEC spend hours calling people and getting no responses. Partly because they fail to realise that many have no idea what the acronym BUTEC is, and they never explain their location and purpose. If they do manage to get a reply they want to “Chop” rather than switch channels, and “Roger” this and “Roger” that.
Was amusing last time past them when they spent literally 45 minutes repeatedly trying to contact a yacht - who clearly had their VHF switched off. What was more amusing, latterly they spent over 20 minutes trying to make contact with one of the three guard boats in the area to go and physically intercept the yacht. We could see BUTEC, the yacht and the guard boats - but for 20 minutes their own guard boat failed to respond on Channel 16 ! By the time they answered the yacht was in the middle of their live range.

I've not heard the vhf chatter. But I've spent many hours dived on the range waiting, along with a couple of hundred other people, for a clear range to conduct trials costing hundreds if not millions. Frustrating.

For some reason, didn't often have the same problem at the twin site, AUTEC in the Bahamas.

 

[Supertramp]

I’ll put my hand up. One of the very very rare occasions when I’ve called up a ship was a year or two ago. I was motor sailing across the channel and I am that sad mariner who actually had a cone up point down to show our status. A ship coming from starboard had the cone obscured to him by our genoa, so I called him up and explained I was motoring and I was altering for him in accordance with IRPCS. He was very gracious and said thank you….

I think that is good use of VHF.

Thick fog, Irish Sea, sailing, closing the shore to anchor and on a slowly converging course with a Northbound coaster travelling slowly parallel to me for over an hour. I carried on my course and expected him to pass ahead. I monitored his speed, course and position on AIS. Eventually I sighted him abeam a few hundred yards off, looking very large. He had slowed to 4.5 knts. My speed was dropping with the wind and dusk. I called him up and explained my intention to turn and pass behind him. He replied OK and that he was watching me and had slowed to let me pass ahead. We thanked each other and I passed behind his stern. All very clear and courteous. He was Polish.

Without AIS I would have been in nervous ignorance until hearing his engine. Without VHF communication I would not have been comfortable altering course when so close to a ship in fog.

 

[Irish Rover]

I've not heard the vhf chatter. But I've spent many hours dived on the range waiting, along with a couple of hundred other people, for a clear range to conduct trials costing hundreds if not millions. Frustrating.

For some reason, didn't often have the same problem at the twin site, AUTEC in the Bahamas.

You lost me, guys. I'm not big on acronyms or are they initalisms?

 

[boomerangben]

In aviation there is an exam to ensure you have sufficient understanding of the English language to be able use the radio effectively. I get that commercial aviation spends much of its time under positive control from air traffic control but I am surprised that maritime radio operators (by which I mean anyone on board who might operate the radio) don’t have to demonstrate competence in English

 

[Stingo]

You lost me, guys. I'm not big on acronyms or are they initalisms?

It's something to do with restricted areas where the military play with explosive things

 

[finestgreen]

You lost me, guys. I'm not big on acronyms or are they initalisms?

BUTEC - Wikipedia

 

[capnsensible]

Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center - Wikipedia

 

[Irish Rover]

Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center - Wikipedia

BUTEC - Wikipedia

I think Ireland might have one of those as well. We've no submarines and only one operational small ship so I think it's located in County Kildare somewhere so the lads can get to work on the bus.

 

[capnsensible]

I think Ireland might have one of those as well. We've no submarines and only one operational small ship so I think it's located in County Kildare somewhere so the lads can get to work on the bus.

Naval Service left with two ships to patrol Irish waters due to manpower crisis

Seems not many want to catch that bus.....

 

[Irish Rover]

Naval Service left with two ships to patrol Irish waters due to manpower crisis

Seems not many want to catch that bus.....

Yeah, I guess that's what happens when a country reaches full employment with one of the best paid work forces in Europe. I heard a good few of the lads from the navy got jobs in the passport office processing passport applications from hundreds of thousands of would be Paddys from Britain.

 

[penfold]

Don’t have to go far to get unintelligible VHF comms - lots of non standard terms used in UK waters.

An outfit called BUTEC spend hours calling people and getting no responses. Partly because they fail to realise that many have no idea what the acronym BUTEC is, and they never explain their location and purpose. If they do manage to get a reply they want to “Chop” rather than switch channels, and “Roger” this and “Roger” that.
Was amusing last time past them when they spent literally 45 minutes repeatedly trying to contact a yacht - who clearly had their VHF switched off. What was more amusing, latterly they spent over 20 minutes trying to make contact with one of the three guard boats in the area to go and physically intercept the yacht. We could see BUTEC, the yacht and the guard boats - but for 20 minutes their own guard boat failed to respond on Channel 16 ! By the time they answered the yacht was in the middle of their live range.

Seems like a a failure of training to use equipment provided(VHF in this case; calling their guard boats should be by DSC) and a failure of planning; there are guard boats and there's no reason the guard boats shouldn't act autonomously to intercept boats on course to enter the range if the bloke on the shore monitor has nipped to the toilet.

 

[capnsensible]

Seems like a a failure of training to use equipment provided(VHF in this case; calling their guard boats should be by DSC) and a failure of planning; there are guard boats and there's no reason the guard boats shouldn't act autonomously to intercept boats on course to enter the range if the bloke on the shore monitor has nipped to the toilet.

It would be nice, but impossible, to hear the other side of the story?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Liverpool got given offside in the most horrendous mis-communication, and everyone spoke English (guessing).

I gave a school talk in Liverpool once. The teacher had to translate the questions the class asked me; I REALLY couldn't understand the Liverpool dialect!

 

[requiem]

I'm, at best, an average amateur small pleasure boat operator. Colregs leave a huge amount to discretion. For instance let's assume I'm see a boat approaching from my port side. I'm stand on. When do I decide he's not going to give way and take evasive action and what's my best course of action? I'd be inclined to turn to port to pass by his stern. But if he decides to do the right thing at the same time as me we increase the risk of collision.
I'm probably setting myself up for a roasting here, but, what the hell.

One suggestion, in case you have not already done so, is to take the time to actually read through the COLREGS. It's not overly-long, but I suspect too often people learn from summaries and miss some of the details. For example, the wording can be quite precise, and missing something like the definitions in Rule 3 would set someone up for misinterpretations. (This isn't to say there are no points of confusion; otherwise we wouldn't have texts like Cockcroft's or Farwell's.)

As you've realized, trying to take his stern has a risk. That's probably also the reason for Rule 17(c):

A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances at the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.

Commentaries and case law can help with the "when", but we can work backwards from the rules as well. Rule 8, "action to avoid a collision", contains some oft-neglected phrases as "made in ample time" and "result in passing at a safe distance". Rule 17 also gives you the option to manoeuvre "as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action". Put into practice, this suggests your own threshold for acting should be one that avoids putting you into a close-quarters situation, and the specifics would of course depend on the vessels and other circumstances of the case. Note that even though 17(a)(ii) is a "may", requirements of good seamanship may on occasion transform that into a "must". Finally, at some point before you hit that threshold, Rule 34(d) calls for 5 blasts, so add a little bit of cushion to allow for a response.

 

[Irish Rover]

One suggestion, in case you have not already done so, is to take the time to actually read through the COLREGS. It's not overly-long, but I suspect too often people learn from summaries and miss some of the details. For example, the wording can be quite precise, and missing something like the definitions in Rule 3 would set someone up for misinterpretations. (This isn't to say there are no points of confusion; otherwise we wouldn't have texts like Cockcroft's or Farwell's.)

As you've realized, trying to take his stern has a risk. That's probably also the reason for Rule 17(c):


Commentaries and case law can help with the "when", but we can work backwards from the rules as well. Rule 8, "action to avoid a collision", contains some oft-neglected phrases as "made in ample time" and "result in passing at a safe distance". Rule 17 also gives you the option to manoeuvre "as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action". Put into practice, this suggests your own threshold for acting should be one that avoids putting you into a close-quarters situation, and the specifics would of course depend on the vessels and other circumstances of the case. Note that even though 17(a)(ii) is a "may", requirements of good seamanship may on occasion transform that into a "must". Finally, at some point before you hit that threshold, Rule 34(d) calls for 5 blasts, so add a little bit of cushion to allow for a response.

Thanks. I have read the colregs, more than once, and, when I encounter a situation where I have a doubt, I do try to refer back. But the reality is colregs are complicated, unwieldy and off putting and, as a result, ignored by many boaters. At least here in the Aegean, many boaters don't even seem to be aware there are rules for passing, crossing and overtaking. This has become much worse in the last few years with an influx of many new and younger boaters. I don't know the solution.

 

[Roberto]

I’ll put my hand up. One of the very very rare occasions when I’ve called up a ship was a year or two ago. I was motor sailing across the channel and I am that sad mariner who actually had a cone up point down to show our status. A ship coming from starboard had the cone obscured to him by our genoa, so I called him up and explained I was motoring and I was altering for him in accordance with IRPCS. He was very gracious and said thank you….

I call ships on the vhf too, mostly in specific cases like crossings at very tight angles: typical cases a green/red right astern becoming more and more intense while remaining green+red, or similarly vessels proceedings from around the bow, when even AIS CPA jumps uncomfortably port/stb/port/stb... I ask if they have seen me, and if they want me to maneuver, typical answer being "yes we have seen you, keep your speed and course" so everyone is happy.

 

[john_morris_uk]

I call ships on the vhf too, mostly in specific cases like crossings at very tight angles: typical cases a green/red right astern becoming more and more intense while remaining green+red, or similarly vessels proceedings from around the bow, when even AIS CPA jumps uncomfortably port/stb/port/stb... I ask if they have seen me, and if they want me to maneuver, typical answer being "yes we have seen you, keep your speed and course" so everyone is happy.

I don’t generally call ships. (Perhaps twice in over thirty years?) I’m not sure I’d ask ‘Do you want me to move?’ in your described situation. If I really had to ask anything, I might ask,’Have you seen me?’ and ‘What are your intentions?’ After all, as the vessel being overtaken the rules require you to hold your course and speed.

 

[Roberto]

I don’t generally call ships. (Perhaps twice in over thirty years?) I’m not sure I’d ask ‘Do you want me to move?’ in your described situation. If I really had to ask anything, I might ask,’Have you seen me?’ and ‘What are your intentions?’ After all, as the vessel being overtaken the rules require you to hold your course and speed.

Yes, just trying to be nice.
There are videos of Vendee Globe skippers filming themselves while shouting on the VHF "ship on my ... bow I am a sailboat with right of way [sic] you must maneuver"

 

[doug748]

Regarding your last point that's why I started a separate thread and referenced the report in relation to the Arctic Ash sinking which does conclude the VHF exchange was the most probable cause.
I'm no expert on Colregs. I'm, at best, an average amateur small pleasure boat operator. Colregs leave a huge amount to discretion. For instance let's assume I'm see a boat approaching from my port side. I'm stand on. When do I decide he's not going to give way and take evasive action and what's my best course of action? I'd be inclined to turn to port to pass by his stern. But if he decides to do the right thing at the same time as me we increase the risk of collision.
I'm probably setting myself up for a roasting here, but, what the hell.

Given a reasonable grasp of the rules, you have the nub of the matter for most of these conundrums - At what point does a collision course become a risk of collision?

I think the rules are drafted very well as they have to cope with a huge range of possible situations and in the most difficult cases it will frequently be a matter of judgement - seamanship.

I almost never use VHF. This is my technique in a typical situation, I have posted this before, so apologies:




"I'm not keen on using radio either. Use it early and you are in danger of inflaming an innocent situation, use it later and you are wasting valuable time, esp if singlehanded.

Assuming AIS, I don't mind getting within .5 mile CPA of a ship that has altered for me, it's reasonable to assume he is not going to change course again and is on the ball.

For others I use a patent 15minute - 10 minute collision rule. For example in a 90deg crossing situation for a ship doing twice the speed of your sailing boat (say 12kts vs 6kts)...

At 15minutes to collision you are starting to pick up the bow wave of the ship. He my have been visible for 6 or 8 miles and his AIS may have told you he has not altered for you.
He is just over 3 miles away.
(You need to be prepared for a 90deg change of course at this point, which may mean starting the engine)
At 10 minutes to collision he is about 2 miles away and looming large. At this point (in practice a couple of minutes before) I alter onto the reciprocal of the ships course.

After change of course you watch him like a hawk for the next minute........this is the danger period when the watch officer may wake up and do something daft, soon you are passing fast and the danger is soon past as well. After the dodgy minute, even a dozy or drunk watchkeeper opening another bottle should not react, he would see you passing clear at 1 mile CPA."


.

.

 

[Frogmogman]

Liverpool got given offside in the most horrendous mis-communication, and everyone spoke English (guessing).

It was the first thing I thought of when I read the thread title