Do I need radar to cross the channel?

[jimg]

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!

I would go for an AIS that is linked to a radar, then you can place the cursor on a a big ship target and retreive it's AIS information.

If you buy a radar why not get a combined chartplotter/radar unit?

 

[DougH]

Yawn !

Tom

You need more sleep.

 

[Montemar]

jimg
Combined radar and chartplotter was the plan though may delay AIS input to plotter simply because it will take more effort and understanding to work two different systems. I thought the extra effort would be repaid by greater understanding of how the data can be used.
Also the Belfield software in my netbook uses scanned in Admiralty charts which have more detail on them than our paper Imray charts or the charts in our little Garmin chartplotter. Particularly revealing when looking at the seabed around Portland Bill - a bit off topic I know.
Now it looks as if I shall have to get a horn as well!

 

[LittleShip]

You need more sleep.

Shush !

I have been asleep for almost the past 100 posts

Tom

 

[jimg]

jimg
Combined radar and chartplotter was the plan though may delay AIS input to plotter simply because it will take more effort and understanding to work two different systems. I thought the extra effort would be repaid by greater understanding of how the data can be used.
Also the Belfield software in my netbook uses scanned in Admiralty charts which have more detail on them than our paper Imray charts or the charts in our little Garmin chartplotter. Particularly revealing when looking at the seabed around Portland Bill - a bit off topic I know.
Now it looks as if I shall have to get a horn as well!

I would try and see if you can get some sea time on a boat with a radar and AIS and chartplotter.

I think you would understand it a lot better then, not sure a radar/plotter is much more expensive than a radar alone?

 

[Searush]

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.

Exactly. Now read the post again.

 

[DougH]

Exactly. Now read the post again.

I did read the post properly the first time and took in the part "Probably they saw us on their rader etc"

Of course you were the stand on vessel but not all large vessels are successful in taking appropriate avoiding action and it is only if you can see other vessels that you can ensure that your own boat is not put into a dangerous situation.

If one of these large vessels was not able to take the correct action and loomed out of the fog and sliced you in half it would be of no use yelling "we were the stand on vessel where the h*ll did you come from.

 

[PaulGooch]

jimg
Combined radar and chartplotter was the plan though may delay AIS input to plotter simply because it will take more effort and understanding to work two different systems. I thought the extra effort would be repaid by greater understanding of how the data can be used.
Also the Belfield software in my netbook uses scanned in Admiralty charts which have more detail on them than our paper Imray charts or the charts in our little Garmin chartplotter. Particularly revealing when looking at the seabed around Portland Bill - a bit off topic I know.
Now it looks as if I shall have to get a horn as well!

AIS, overlaid on your plotter is so simple to use. It's very cheap to fit and is very useful in identifying the course and speed of commercial traffic, in any type of visibility. As said, it isn't a substitute for radar, both are very nice to have. We have both, overlaid on a Garmin GPSMap 4010 and find it all very easy to use.

 

[Searush]

I did read the post properly the first time and took in the part "Probably they saw us on their rader etc"

Of course you were the stand on vessel but not all large vessels are successful in taking appropriate avoiding action and it is only if you can see other vessels that you can ensure that your own boat is not put into a dangerous situation.

If one of these large vessels was not able to take the correct action and loomed out of the fog and sliced you in half it would be of no use yelling "we were the stand on vessel where the h*ll did you come from.

Yes, I am aware of that, but it didn't happen & we were well aware it could & so ready to fire up the engine & get the hell out of the way if it did. On a sailing boat, you do hear oncomining engines from about 1/2-1 mile away. If they are doing 20 kts that's about 3-6 mins to start the engine, get some idea of directon of approach (that should be crystal clear in a TSS anyway!) & be ready to take avoiding action.

If I was that frightened of risk I would never drive a car, cross the road or even leave my house. Mind you I do all those things in full awareness of the risks & while doing my best to limit them where I can (including using Radar on the boat if I could afford it).

 

[timbartlett]

If one of these large vessels was not able to take the correct action and loomed out of the fog and sliced you in half it would be of no use yelling "we were the stand on vessel where the h*ll did you come from.

Particularly as there is no such thing as a stand-on vessel in Rule 19 conditions!

Rule 19 specifies very clearly what you should do if you detect another vesel by radar alone ...

(d) A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a closequarters
situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action
in ample time, provided that when such action consists of an alteration of course, so far as
possible the following shall be avoided:
(i) an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel
being overtaken;
(ii) an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.

The action required of a vessel which detects another by sound are different

(e) Except where it has been determined that a risk of collision does not exist, every vessel which hears apparently forward of her beam the fog signal of another vessel, or which cannot avoid a close-quarters situation with another vessel forward of her beam, shall reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can be kept on her course. She shall if necessary take all her way off and in any event navigate with extreme caution until danger of collision is over.

 

[Hurricane]

From what he says, it DOES seem that Searush hasn't been in a TSS in fog (and I mean proper fog where you cant see beyond the bow).
Even with radar, it's bloody scary.
And yes, you can hear engines through the fog but virtually impossible to work out where the sound is coming from.
He makes fog sound easier that it is.

I wonder how good his radar reflector is?

 

[yesod]

(e) Except where it has been determined that a risk of collision does not exist, every vessel which hears apparently forward of her beam the fog signal of another vessel, or which cannot avoid a close-quarters situation with another vessel forward of her beam, shall reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can be kept on her course. She shall if necessary take all her way off and in any event navigate with extreme caution until danger of collision is over.

so why didn't the ship in the waccuna case 'take all her way off' when they were confused by the actions of the yacht?

 

[neale]

On a sailing boat, you do hear oncomining engines from about 1/2-1 mile away. If they are doing 20 kts that's about 3-6 mins to start the engine, get some idea of directon of approach (that should be crystal clear in a TSS anyway!) & be ready to take avoiding action.

That's actually 1.5 to 3 minutes at 20 knots. 90 seconds isn't long to start the engine, get some idea of direction and take avoiding action.

 

[Montemar]

I agree regarding radar and AIS on a single chartplotter. All it needs is a separate AIS receiver that can communicate via NMEA then it should all display if I read the advertising blurb correctly.
What would be good is an AIS unit that can use the VHF aerial.

 

[Kawasaki]

You need more sleep.

Leave the Man alone
He is tired out already
What with renewing his transom and recovering from thousands of miles cruising the Irish Sea last season at 6kts whilst checking his radar and making sure His tsunami proportioned bow wave is not a danger to shipping therein

 

[PaulGooch]

<snip> On a sailing boat, you do hear oncomining engines from about 1/2-1 mile away. If they are doing 20 kts that's about 3-6 mins to start the engine, get some idea of directon of approach (that should be crystal clear in a TSS anyway!) & be ready to take avoiding action.<snip>

If i was out in thick fog, i'd hope that there wouldn't be anyone around insane enough to be doing 20 knots. Although it probably shouldn't surprise me, i've come across small angling boats in thick fog with no radar and no radar reflectors.

So, you hear a vessel approaching from your starboard side (ish, can't be 100% certain of his exact course, speed or size, you have no radar or AIS). You start the engine and prepare to take evasive action, if need be. The fog is so thick that you cannot even see the bow of your own boat. When will you take action and what will that action be ? If you wait until you see him, about your midships, it'll be too late to move. If you move before you see him, how do you know that he hasn't seen you on his radar and altered course to avoid you and you will now be moving into path ?

Doesn't have to be a super tanker with lots of nav equipment and crew on lookout, i don't fancy your chances in a small boat if you get hit by a 40 foot, 16 ton yacht.

Not to say that it isn't possible to cross the channel in a canoe with no nav gear, we all know it is. But, i prefer to give myself as much of a chance as possible, i'll stick with my radar and AIS.

Bye the way, neither costs a fortune. AIS can be fitted for less than £200. If the chart plotter will support radar, a radome is only about £800. Small stand alone radar around £1200. Garmin plotter and radar (complete), less than £2k.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

If i was out in thick fog, i'd hope that there wouldn't be anyone around insane enough to be doing 20 knots.

Only all the commercial shipping out there. They don't slow down in poor vis and some are doing a lot more than 20kts eg Condor ferries

 

[PaulGooch]

I agree regarding radar and AIS on a single chartplotter. All it needs is a separate AIS receiver that can communicate via NMEA then it should all display if I read the advertising blurb correctly.
What would be good is an AIS unit that can use the VHF aerial.

Such AIS units already exist, but costs as much as separate items.

Standard Horizon make a VHF set that includes AIS and only needs a single antenna. This will display AIS info on the VHF screen and on a plotter via NMEA. This does need at least two spare NMEA ports at the plotter though, one in and one out.

Another option is a stand alone AIS engine with a second VHF antenna. This overcomes the fact that any combined units/splitters etc cannot receive AIS whilst transmitting on the VHF and also gives you a backup VHF antenna.

A proper dual channel AIS receiver, such as the Comar AIS-2-NMEA and an antenna will set you back around £250. Easy enough to DIY fit and will show AIS targets on your plotter (if it supports AIS) or on a laptop running suitable software, that has a spare serial port or serial to USB adapter).

 

[PaulGooch]

Only all the commercial shipping out there. They don't slow down in poor vis and some are doing a lot more than 20kts eg Condor ferries

I stand corrected then Mike. Over here on the East coast we don't see much commercial stuff that fast, except the windfarm cats.

A ferry doing 20+ knots in thick fog will take some avoiding in Searush sail boat lol

 

[timbartlett]

so why didn't the ship in the waccuna case 'take all her way off' when they were confused by the actions of the yacht?

There are a number of issues raised by the Wakhuna incident, including mistakes by the watchkeepers/skippers of both vessels and some apparently questionable assessments by the investigators.

One criticism of the Nedloyd Vespucci was that it was proceeding at excessive speed: another is that its bridge team placed undue reliance on the accuracy of its ARPA. Together, these two contributed to a situation in which the Master was content with the situation up to the point at which Wakhuna slowed down. But having reached that point, he could not have stopped quickly enough. On that basis, his decision to prepare for an alteration of course rather than a reduction in speed makes a kind of sense.

And in a narrow legalistic sense, he was not infringing Rule 19e, (the one that would have required him to slow down or stop) because he had not heard Wakhuna's fog signal.

I think an important point that we tend to forget is that Wakhuna happenned in 2003. Collisions between ships and recreational craft do not happen very often. Fatal ones happen even less often: the last one I can recall was Ouzo, nearly six years ago.

There's a lot of ocean out there: you have to be seriously unlucky to find yourself sharing a bit of it with a ship!