Do I need radar to cross the channel?

[Searush]

(snip)
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.

I'm glad you consider £2k to be cheap. It is about what I estimated originally & I still consider it to be a small fortune against my pension. Anyway, it would pay for quite a few cross channel ferry trips if you don't want to use your boat without radar.

I love the way everybody has to create extreme scenarios to prove how essential radar is. It must be 20 years since I was last in a situation where I might have found it useful. But then I find the shipping forecasts quite usefull & have no need to go out if visibilty is that poor.

Different artists, different strokes . . . But the simple fact remains that radar may be very usefull, but it still isn't NEEDED!

 

[sailorman]

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!

Not forgetting the (Twister - i think) run down in the Southern North Sea on a trip from Ijmuiden to Harwich, all hands lost

 

[Hurricane]

I'm glad you consider £2k to be cheap. It is about what I estimated originally & I still consider it to be a small fortune against my pension. Anyway, it would pay for quite a few cross channel ferry trips if you don't want to use your boat without radar.

I love the way everybody has to create extreme scenarios to prove how essential radar is. It must be 20 years since I was last in a situation where I might have found it useful. But then I find the shipping forecasts quite usefull & have no need to go out if visibilty is that poor.

Different artists, different strokes . . . But the simple fact remains that radar may be very usefull, but it still isn't NEEDED!

So thats the price you put on your life then.

It is very easy in the English Channel to be "caught out" by thick fog - especially during the early part of the season.

We were once travelling from Guernsey down to Jersey and found ourselves in thick fog.
Using Radar, we were able to find a track well out of the way of the Condor ferry which was travelling at over 30 knots.
But we were also able to see a small sailing boat that was sailing right in the path of the ferries.
On this occasion, radar certainly kept us away from the dangerous traffic.

I agree that you dont need the radar that often and now that we cruise in the Med we use it even less but I value my family's life more than the couple of grand that it costs to install a really useful safety aid.

There are also other benefits with radar.
For example, you can see rain and localised storms which you can avoid - especially in a mobo.
It's also a good nav aid although as I say above it then needs a little more experience to use - remember that radar is hopeless at angular measurement but extremely good at distance measurement so always fix your position using a distance fixes rather than bearings.
An then (I think someone also said that) it is a really good tool to get others on the boat involved during a boring passage. As I said it isnt difficult to use and anyone can be shown the basics in just a few minutes. So, it helps keep their minds occupied doing something useful.

 

[neale]

I'm glad you consider £2k to be cheap. It is about what I estimated originally & I still consider it to be a small fortune against my pension. Anyway, it would pay for quite a few cross channel ferry trips if you don't want to use your boat without radar.

But you don't have to pay that. I have just upgraded and sold a perfectly good stand alone Raymarine Radar on ebay for £500. They come up quite often.

 

[Robin]

I'm glad you consider £2k to be cheap. It is about what I estimated originally & I still consider it to be a small fortune against my pension. Anyway, it would pay for quite a few cross channel ferry trips if you don't want to use your boat without radar.

I love the way everybody has to create extreme scenarios to prove how essential radar is. It must be 20 years since I was last in a situation where I might have found it useful. But then I find the shipping forecasts quite usefull & have no need to go out if visibilty is that poor.

Different artists, different strokes . . . But the simple fact remains that radar may be very usefull, but it still isn't NEEDED!

Maybe a season spent in one of the areas with the busiest shipping lanes in the world where fog can and does turn up unexpectedly and not forecast might have you thinking.

Certainly you can cross the Channel without radar, or GPS, or AIS, or an engine even. We have been Channel crossing since the '70s and had none of the electrickery back then, unless you count a Seafarer echosounder and a Seafix RDF. We crossed many times in fog, often very thick fog. Can you hear the ships, no not often. It is a myth BTW that fog only occurs on calm windless days, we have crossed in a F6 with thick fog and you don't hear anything other than wind and wave noise. Mind you, back in the good old days the ships actually used their foghorns, but now I'm hard pressed to remember hearing one except inside the harbour from a ferry arriving or departing.

Would I cross now without radar? Probably, but I wouldn't chose to if fog was expected but like I said the forecasts sometimes tell porkies, especially when the strong tides in these parts throw up a fresh batch of cold water from the depths as the tide changes. You can go from 10mls vis to 20yds vis in just minutes.

 

[timbartlett]

Not forgetting the (Twister - i think) run down in the Southern North Sea on a trip from Ijmuiden to Harwich, all hands lost

Tuila (or Tiula ?) That must have been well over ten years ago -- 1999? 2000?

 

[PaulGooch]

I'm glad you consider £2k to be cheap. It is about what I estimated originally & I still consider it to be a small fortune against my pension. Anyway, it would pay for quite a few cross channel ferry trips if you don't want to use your boat without radar.

I love the way everybody has to create extreme scenarios to prove how essential radar is. It must be 20 years since I was last in a situation where I might have found it useful. But then I find the shipping forecasts quite usefull & have no need to go out if visibilty is that poor.

Different artists, different strokes . . . But the simple fact remains that radar may be very usefull, but it still isn't NEEDED!

£2k was for a plotter and radar, all brand new, i don't think that's a lot of money for what you get.

If it's 20 years since you might have found it useful, you need to get out more mate

We find it extremely useful several times a year. Radar and AIS made the recent journey we made along 150 miles of East coast much more pleasant. Some of the trip was in darkness and they both made it much easier to work out where everything was. We usually get caught in fog 3 or 4 times a year over here on the East Coast. We even go out sometimes knowing it is/will be foggy.

I do agree that neither is essential, but not only are they both very useful to have, they do definitely allow you to make trips you might otherwise not want to make.

IMO

 

[KevB]

For those of you who smirk "you can't put a price on safety" and make up all wild scenarios of what could happen, I hope your radar is attached to a catagory A boat and not a second rate cat B.. What price do you put on safety?

 

[DougH]

For those of you who smirk

Bit unnecessary Kev, why get so bitter just because some folks disagree with you.

 

[mm1]

Bit unnecessary Kev, why get so bitter just because some folks disagree with you.

Here/here mm1.

 

[Searush]

This is getting dafter every post!

Because I am poor I must be a bad family man?

Radar would allow me to make journeys I might not otherwise want to make? Pardon? But I don't want to make, them - you just told me that!

Get out more? Yes I wish I could, but I don't have many restrictions due to lack of radar, just lack of time or money.

I'm glad you can all justify spending so much on something you seldom need, but you ain't convincing me.

BTW I don't have AIS, or a DSC radio or any EPIRBs, no wind instruments, & my log isn't currently working. But I can still make safe passages - 100% safe so far, but I am well aware that could change on the next trip.

 

[yesod]

This is getting dafter every post!

Because I am poor I must be a bad family man?

Radar would allow me to make journeys I might not otherwise want to make? Pardon? But I don't want to make, them - you just told me that!

Get out more? Yes I wish I could, but I don't have many restrictions due to lack of radar, just lack of time or money.

I'm glad you can all justify spending so much on something you seldom need, but you ain't convincing me.

BTW I don't have AIS, or a DSC radio or any EPIRBs, no wind instruments, & my log isn't currently working. But I can still make safe passages - 100% safe so far, but I am well aware that could change on the next trip.

you should stop spending all your cash on underwater lights

 

[Poignard]

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!

Exactly so - the risk is trivial.

 

[KevB]

Bit unnecessary Kev, why get so bitter just because some folks disagree with you.

What are you and mm1 on about? No real answer I take it so you start getting personal.
Where do you draw the line with safety? Someone with a cat A boat may feel crossing with a cat B boat fool hardy. Who's correct, after all it blows more than a force 8 in the channel.....

A radar is not necessary to cross the channel as much as a cat A boat isn't.
Now grow up the pair of you and put your dummie's back in.

 

[DougH]

What are you and mm1 on about? No real answer I take it so you start getting personal.
Now grow up the pair of you and put your dummie's back in.

Read your post about people 'SMIRKING' and then consider if your above comments really apply to yourself.

It should be possible to debate any scenario on this forum without the thread becoming verbally abusive no matter how slight.

Talking about folks smirking is not pleasant, but if that is your take on the subject please do not expect others to applaud you.

 

[LittleShip]

BTW I don't have AIS, or a DSC radio or any EPIRBs, no wind instruments, & my log isn't currently working.

Ahhh! but the fun box is full.

The OP for this thread asked ...

"is radar necessary to cross the channel" In short the answer is No

If he had asked...

"is it necessary in fog" the answer should have been "it would be advisable"

This thread has gone on long enough and I think everybody know that..... for God sake let it die and stop back biting !

Tom

 

[KevB]

When someone implies that not having a radar to cross the channel is irrisponsible and 'what price would you put on safety' is rather condecending, asking if their radar is fitted to A cat a boat seems a good way to find out where their perception of safety lies?

Do you have a Cat A boat? If so well done, if not then why is a radar so neccessary just in case but a Cat A boat isn't? Afetr all the sea and wind can be pretty nasty in the channel.....

 

[DougH]

When someone implies that not having a radar to cross the channel is irrisponsible and 'what price would you put on safety' is rather condecending, asking if their radar is fitted to A cat a boat seems a good way to find out where their perception of safety lies?

Do you have a Cat A boat? If so well done, if not then why is a radar so neccessary just in case but a Cat A boat isn't? Afetr all the sea and wind can be pretty nasty in the channel.....

Kev, I do not disagree with any of you comments as they are your personal take on the subject and this is a forum used for debate on any subject.

Using unpleasant remarks such as people 'smirking' adds nothing to the debate and merely shows that possibly you are getting too irate.

I'm sure you are very passionate about your views but you must also accept that others do not necessary concur with them.

There is just no place for unpleasant remarks on this forum.

 

[timbartlett]

....There is just no place for unpleasant remarks on this forum.

When did that policy come in? (I must have missed it !)

 

[DougH]

when did that policy come in? (i must have missed it !)

Who mentioned policy?