Do I need radar to cross the channel?

[Montemar]

Boatmike -Thank you, I completely agree and a Radar course looks essential. Also the sort of ranges you mention ( and allowing for antenna height ), should be good for broadband radar based on the manufacturer's claims.

My point about AIS being useful in the collision in Timbartlett's post was that it may have helped the yacht skipper as he failed to understand his radar.

Many thanks to everyone for all the very helpful advice.
Life being what it is buying and learning radar is a good way of ensuring we will never come across any fog

 

[sailorman]

Boatmike -Thank you, I completely agree and a Radar course looks essential. Also the sort of ranges you mention ( and allowing for antenna height ), should be good for broadband radar based on the manufacturer's claims.

My point about AIS being useful in the collision in Timbartlett's post was that it may have helped the yacht skipper as he failed to understand his radar.

Many thanks to everyone for all the very helpful advice.
Life being what it is buying and learning radar is a good way of ensuring we will never come across any fog

[My point about AIS being useful in the collision in Timbartlett's post was that it may have helped the yacht skipper as he failed to understand his radar.]

A 90 deg alteration to port by the yacht in good time instead of dithering would have sorted the issue but had he ( the yacht ) kept his course & speed the ship would have known what action to take. the ship will only alter course to clear @ a mile or two,the bridge can clearly see whats happening especially if the yachts course & speed are constant

 

[boatmike]

Boatmike -Thank you, I completely agree and a Radar course looks essential. Also the sort of ranges you mention ( and allowing for antenna height ), should be good for broadband radar based on the manufacturer's claims.

My point about AIS being useful in the collision in Timbartlett's post was that it may have helped the yacht skipper as he failed to understand his radar.

Many thanks to everyone for all the very helpful advice.
Life being what it is buying and learning radar is a good way of ensuring we will never come across any fog

You are absolutely correct that AIS is a wonderful adjunct to radar especially if interfaced with a good chartplotter. Especially valuable is the instant readout of a vessels course and speed which makes the situation immediately obvious where radars information is relative. It can also show "hidden" targets that don't show up on radar like one vessel behind another or just beyond a headland with no line of sight. In other words your own course and speed and tidal vectors and leeway have to be taken into account with radar which is where most confusion lies and sometimes AIS will show vessel movements not obvious on the radar screen. Having said this AIS in my opinion is an adjunct to radar not the other way around. Both are good but one compliments the other not replaces it.

 

[Searush]

Now, let me see, AIS, Chartplotter & Radar; hhhmm, about 3 grand's worth at a guess. Lots of the boats that cross the channel cost less than that to buy in the first place. Not saying the stuff isn't nice to have or usefull - but so much depends on the funds available.

My chartplotter is free s/w on the netbook I am typing this on, AIS & Radar are beyond my means - but that still doesn't mean I wouldn't cross the channel. Seamanship is free to aquire, but invaluable in use.

 

[Montemar]

Thanks Searush but not as much as that. £1700 for radar plus perhaps some bits to install it but AIS is on a dongle (£100) that I can plug into my netbook to work with the Belfield chartplotter software and GPS. So not £3k but still buys rather a lot of diesel.
However I took boating up 2 years ago, it is a wonderful way of life and I put safety at the top of the priority list. Your experience may enable you to stay safe but I will have to learn it on courses and pay for the necessary equipment as a substitute of sorts. I should have started younger!

 

[hlb]

Now, let me see, AIS, Chartplotter & Radar; hhhmm, about 3 grand's worth at a guess. Lots of the boats that cross the channel cost less than that to buy in the first place. Not saying the stuff isn't nice to have or usefull - but so much depends on the funds available.

My chartplotter is free s/w on the netbook I am typing this on, AIS & Radar are beyond my means - but that still doesn't mean I wouldn't cross the channel. Seamanship is free to aquire, but invaluable in use.

So Searush old mucker, could you explain to us newbies, just how to cross the chanel, and I do mean the English chanel, in fog and with out radar. Please explain just how you are going to miss a whole line of ships, first going one way and then the other.. Or are you just relying on them to miss you.??

I've found that with more than twenty knots available, I've some times had to stop, to let them pass by, or turn to fit through a gap between them, and that is in broad day light. Even then, the radar helps, by telling me just how far the next ship is away.

 

[Searush]

So Searush old mucker, could you explain to us newbies, just how to cross the chanel, and I do mean the English chanel, in fog and with out radar. Please explain just how you are going to miss a whole line of ships, first going one way and then the other.. Or are you just relying on them to miss you.??

I've found that with more than twenty knots available, I've some times had to stop, to let them pass by, or turn to fit through a gap between them, and that is in broad day light. Even then, the radar helps, by telling me just how far the next ship is away.

Sarcasm doesn't become you Haydn. I would simply have to turn back if it got too foggy wouldn't I? I would guess that more than half the boats crossing the Channel do it without Radar - how do you think they cope? Or do you think that no-one could survive any channel crossing without radar, cos that's what "Necessary" implies.

I have crossed the Traffic Zones under sail (racing) & it is "fun" but not that hard to pass reasonably close astern of one & well ahead of the next. On the return trip it was foggy & we had neither radar or AIS but luckily didn't see a single ship. Possibly cos they saw us on their radar & we didn't do anything unpredictable, so they could easily avoid us.

Sure it's great if you have it, or can afford to buy it, but it is NOT "necessary" as thousands prove every year by crossing without it. Seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[timbartlett]

Sarcasm doesn't become you Haydn. I would simply have to turn back if it got too foggy wouldn't I? I would guess that more than half the boats crossing the Channel do it without Radar - how do you think they cope? Or do you think that no-one could survive any channel crossing without radar, cos that's what "Necessary" implies.

I have crossed the Traffic Zones under sail (racing) & it is "fun" but not that hard to pass reasonably close astern of one & well ahead of the next. On the return trip it was foggy & we had neither radar or AIS but luckily didn't see a single ship. Possibly cos they saw us on their radar & we didn't do anything unpredictable, so they could easily avoid us.

Sure it's great if you have it, or can afford to buy it, but it is NOT "necessary" as thousands prove every year by crossing without it. Seems pretty obvious to me.

Neither radar, nor AIS, nor a chart plotter, nor GPS, nor VHF radio are "necessary". I (and many others) have crossed the channel many times without them.

But perhaps the fervour with which Searush expresses his position stems from the fact that it is a lot easier to do without them on a steady platform with an outside steering position and at four or five knots, than it is on a motor boat that bounces along at five times that speed and flick-rolls if you slow down, and where your view of the world is obscured by tinted glass and the reflections of acres of white GRP.

 

[hlb]

Sarcasm doesn't become you Haydn. I would simply have to turn back if it got too foggy wouldn't I? I would guess that more than half the boats crossing the Channel do it without Radar - how do you think they cope? Or do you think that no-one could survive any channel crossing without radar, cos that's what "Necessary" implies.

I have crossed the Traffic Zones under sail (racing) & it is "fun" but not that hard to pass reasonably close astern of one & well ahead of the next. On the return trip it was foggy & we had neither radar or AIS but luckily didn't see a single ship. Possibly cos they saw us on their radar & we didn't do anything unpredictable, so they could easily avoid us.

Sure it's great if you have it, or can afford to buy it, but it is NOT "necessary" as thousands prove every year by crossing without it. Seems pretty obvious to me.

But I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all, I simply want to know what you would do if met by fog, in mid Chanel. Turning back might well not be an option, as you would then have to re pass another line of ships, that you have already past.

I've not crossed the channel once, but more times than I can remember.

If the Russian roulette policy works for you, so be it.

 

[karl74]

But I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all, I simply want to know what you would do if met by fog, in mid Chanel. Turning back might well not be an option, as you would then have to re pass another line of ships, that you have already past.

I've not crossed the channel once, but more times than I can remember.

If the Russian roulette policy works for you, so be it.

Simples! If you get caught in fog use your Fog Horn

 

[boatmike]

Simples! If you get caught in fog use your Fog Horn

This post seems to have been taken over by radical fundamentalists! If you are going to be deliberately obtuse you actually don't need a boat to cross the channel either. All you need is a bucket of lard and you can swim across! Some of us however prefer to stay warm and dry and above all safe.....

I have a cartoon image in my mind of you sitting in mid channel in a pea souper parping a pathetic little wind horn with super tankers bearing down on you. There are old sailors and bold sailors but very few old bold sailors....... Apart from you and Searush....... Who from his avatar has already jumped in to swim!

 

[karl74]

This post seems to have been taken over by radical fundamentalists! If you are going to be deliberately obtuse you actually don't need a boat to cross the channel either. All you need is a bucket of lard and you can swim across! Some of us however prefer to stay warm and dry and above all safe.....

I have a cartoon image in my mind of you sitting in mid channel in a pea souper parping a pathetic little wind horn with super tankers bearing down on you. There are old sailors and bold sailors but very few old bold sailors....... Apart from you and Searush....... Who from his avatar has already jumped in to swim!

Well thank you for your comment. Deliberately Obtuse I don't think so, factual I think so.
The fact is you don't know me so therefore don't make assumptions as to my character. As it happens I have more than enough saftey and navigational equipment on my boat of which includes no less than two forms of AIS.
How ever the question to Searush was. "What would he do if caught out in the middle of the channel when the Fog closed in". And I mearly stated a fact as of Rule 35 of the International Rules of the Road. Which is to sound a Fog Horn.

So as you put it whilst i'm sat in my Pea Souper parping a pathetic little wind horn that Super Tanker is also Parpping his Not so Pathetic wind horn Also I may add with his "Fog Lookouts" Who belive it or not are Listening out for Pathetic Wind Horns from little Pea Soupers as you so elegantly put it.
So just incase you have forgot the said rule I have taken the trouble to cut and paste it for you.

Rule 35 - Sound Signals in Restricted Visibility Return Arrow

In or near an area of restricted visibility, whether by day or night the signals prescribed in this Rule shall be used as follows:

(a) A power-driven vessel making way through the water shall sound at intervals of not more than 2 minutes one prolonged blast.

(b) A power-driven vessel underway but stopped and making no way through the water shall sound at intervals of no more than 2 minutes two prolonged blasts in succession with an interval of about 2 seconds between them.

(c) A vessel not under command, a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver whether underway or at anchor [Inld], a vessel constrained by her draft [Intl], a sailing vessel, a vessel engaged in fishing whether underway or at anchor [Inld] and a vessel engaged in towing or pushing another vessel shall, instead of the signals prescribed in paragraph (a) or (b) of this Rule, sound at intervals of not more than 2 minutes three blasts in succession, namely one prolonged followed by two short blasts.

(d) A vessel engaged in fishing, when at anchor, and a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver when carrying out her work at anchor, shall instead of the signals prescribed in paragraph (g) of this Rule sound the signal prescribed in paragraph (c) of this Rule. [Intl]

(e/d) A vessel towed or if more than one vessel is towed the last vessel of the tow, if manned, shall at intervals of not more than 2 minutes sound four blasts in succession, namely one prolonged followed by three short blasts. When practicable, this signal shall be made immediately after the signal made by the towing vessel.

(f/e) When a pushing vessel and a vessel being pushed ahead are rigidly connected in a composite unit they shall be regarded as a power-driven vessel and shall give the signals prescribed in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this Rule.

(g/f) A vessel at anchor shall at intervals of not more than 1 minute ring the bell rapidly for about 5 seconds. In a vessel 100 meters or more in length the bell shall be sounded in the forepart of the vessel and immediately after the ringing of the bell the gong shall be sounded rapidly for about 5 seconds in the after part of the vessel. A vessel at anchor may in addition sound three blasts in succession, namely one short, one long and one short blast, to give warning of her position and of the possibility of collision to an approaching vessel.

(h/g) A vessel aground shall give the bell signal and if required the gong signal prescribed in paragraph [(g) / (f)] of this Rule and shall, in addition, give three separate and distinct strokes on the bell immediately before and after the rapid ringing of the bell. A vessel aground may in addition sound an appropriate whistle signal.

(i/h) A vessel of less than 12 meters in length shall not be obliged to give the above mentioned signals but, if she does not, shall make some other efficient sound signal at intervals of not more than 2 minutes.

(i) A vessel of 12 meters or more but less than 20 meters in length shall not be obliged io give the bell signals prescribed in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this Rule. However, if she does not, she shall make some other efficient sound signal at intervals of not more than 2 minutes. [Intl]

(j/h) A vessel of less than 12 meters in length shall not be obliged to give the above mentioned signals but, if she does not, shall make some other efficient sound signal at intervals of not more than 2 minutes.

(k/i) A pilotage vessel when engaged on pilotage duty may in addition to the signals prescribed in paragraph (a), (b) or [(g) / (f)] of this Rule sound an identity signal consisting of four short blasts.

(k) The following vessels shall not be required to sound signals as prescribed in paragraph (f) of this Rule when anchored in a special anchorage area designated by the Secretary:

(i) a vessel of less than 20 meters in length; and
(ii) a barge canal boat, scow, or other nondescript craft. [Inld]

 

[PaulGooch]

If Searush crossings were when he was a young man, he wouldn't have had radar or AIS, they would not have been invented. Plus, the English Channel would have been very quiet, apart from a few wooden sailing ships.

 

[Searush]

If Searush crossings were when he was a young man, he wouldn't have had radar or AIS, they would not have been invented. Plus, the English Channel would have been very quiet, apart from a few wooden sailing ships.

Nice try, but the mid-90s (1990's, not 1890's ) were not significantly less tanker/container ship plagued than now, sure traffic has increased, but the recession means that it hasn't increased as much as it might.

But this is all getting too daft as people make up specific scenarios to prove their point. I mean, what would you do if you radar failed Haydn? The same as me I guess, carry on carefully or turn back depending on the weather & how far you had got. I doubt you would call for the Lifeboat cos your life was in danger.

Tim's point is a good one tho, I do often forget how different a planing or semi-D MoBo is from a boat under sail, or even a sailing boat under power with a small amount of steadying sail up.

 

[DougH]

On the return trip it was foggy & we had neither radar or AIS but luckily didn't see a single ship.

Am I missing something here?

Searush, it was foggy, how the h*ll are you going to see the other vessels.

Lets face it, you had no idea if other vessels were in your vicinity or not.

 

[DougH]

Simples! If you get caught in fog use your Fog Horn

When folks make statements like that I do wonder if they have ever been out in fog.

When you hear another boats sound signal in fog it is very very difficult to determine the direction of the signal let alone the course, speed and size of the vessel.

Fog (not mist) is scary.

 

[boatmike]

When folks make statements like that I do wonder if they have ever been out in fog.

When you hear another boats sound signal in fog it is very very difficult to determine the direction of the signal let alone the course, speed and size of the vessel.

Fog (not mist) is scary.

So are some of the posts on here!

 

[LittleShip]

Yawn !

Tom

 

[oceanfroggie]

Do you need radar to cross the channel?

Do you need a cup, glass, or bottle to drink water from a tap or river? Not really, but it's plainly more comfortable to drink from a fluid container of some sort. Much the same as radar in reasonable visibility, but a little different when vis is poor.

 

[karl74]

When folks make statements like that I do wonder if they have ever been out in fog.

When you hear another boats sound signal in fog it is very very difficult to determine the direction of the signal let alone the course, speed and size of the vessel.

Fog (not mist) is scary.

For the record I have been at sea more times than I care to remember in Fog (not mist) and on numerous occasions have been a Fog look out looking for smaller vessels who may not have the luxury of radar equipment onboard that may have been unfortunate enough to be caught out in the Fog

Yes I agree it is a some what eerie environment and that it is hard to determine from which direction sounds are comming from.

How ever you are some what detracting from the original question to which I commented on, (Which I can only imagine is to try and belittle me or assume that I have no experience or knowledge of the subject). Which was
"What would you do if half way accross the channel and got caught in Fog with no radar" To which I answered You would use a Fog horn. So you would have to rely on what means you may have available to you which would be a fog horn and as you know all merchant vessels have to use as well in poor visabilty as well as having look outs.
Adequate perhaps not but if thats all you have then it's better than nothing, is it not?
So a question to you. What would you do if out in Fog and your radar equipment failed? It might not happen but it could.
And another question. What do you do if your electronic chart plotter should fail. I expect your answer would be to use your paper charts. So whats the difference.
The luxury of electronic equipment onboard has only been around for a very small period in the grand scheme of things yet our for bearers seem to have managed ok in the past.
One would like to think that when you was taught your semanship that whilst it's ok to use electronic equipment you should never rely on it and that you should be able to cope without it.