How can I trust YM?

[Sadlermike]

I note that, in the February issue of YM, Puilla-Dobhrain has moved nearly100 miles west to the Western Isles. Loch Moidart has drifted from the mainland to be part of the Western Isles.

If I cannot rely on the accuracy of such basic information, what can I rely on in the new dumbed down (sorry, ‘bite sized’ information for the ‘internet age’) YM?

 

[Greenwichman]

I have learned the hard way that radar assists more collisions than it prevents. These thoughts occurred to me as I read with mounting alarm the article by Alan Hickman in January's YM.

Alan does not know his Rule of the Road in restricted visibility. His 'near miss' is bad enough, but the 'lessons learned' re-affirm his shortcomings. Worse, others may take them as sound advice, which they are not.

For instance:

"Perhaps he was satisfied with my initial course since he never made the five-blast sound signal....." Rule 34 is clear that manoeuvring signals are only made by vessels in sight of one another.

He twice refers to give-way/stand-on vessels. Rule 19 is clear that in fog no one has 'right of way' over anyone else.

Given Alan's radar beamwidth (about 5 degrees), the slowly changing relative bearing of the other vessel, and the fact that he was creating "...a vector triangle in my mind...", he was probably in contravention of Rule 7(c): Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information.

He says that he should have called the other vessel on VHF....whereas, with other vessels within VHF range, calling on VHF should not have been contemplated in fog, as confusion would have been compounded.

His plan to pass one mile ahead of a fast moving contact in fog is plain madness. At the speed of the closing contact (say 20 knots), the vessel is travelling 1 mile every 3 minutes. Would you put yourself at this kind of risk, minutes from being run down with no means of knowing whether you have been detected? What if you lose headway in the grain, either as the engine fails or the wind dies?

How, indeed, do we trust YM?

 

[Talbot]

A classic case of a little bit of knowledge being dangerous.

A lot of these articles can be read and dismissed as nonsense when you have the relevant experience. It is the newcomers to this way of life that read the articles and consider them to be accurate that have already placed themselves one step closer to disaster.

Most journalism these days is dumbed down to the point where they are lucky to get the right date on an article, and there does not even appear to be an attempt to investigate items from anything other than the writers viewpoint.

 

[Sgeir]

Disnae matter as it keeps us all on our toes. Recent edition of Sailing Today had a diagram that confused West Loch Tarbert Argyll with Loch Tarbert Jura.

Keep up the confusion I say. Otherwise we'll have nothing to grumble about.

 

[jimi]

Yup agree, it made ny blood run cold when I read it. To get into that situation was quite plainly madness.

 

[Superstrath]

I agree that the radar article in the Jan issue was alarming. That the writer was ignorant and foolish is fair enough, but surely YM should take some responsibility and have his ill-educated amateur thoughts analysed by a professional and comment accordingly, or at least correct him before publishing.
In the Feb issue there is a similar story, but presumably fictional since it is the "Question Of Seamanship" column. The answer points out that the skipper is in error if he believes that the other vessel has a give way obligation.
It almost appears that this column has been written to put right the errors of the January article. I would have thought that a more obvious method should have been used. I do think that magazines have a responsibility to ensure that they get this sort of thing right - after all, they are the only form of regular "education" that most leisure sailors get.
As for disinformation about the location of Scottish anchorages, That's ok with me. We know where they really are!

Alistair

 

[Birdseye]

I suppose that if you navigate using YM, then I would be worried by the re-location of the areas concerned.

But then I really would excite the ire of "greenwichman" who apparently has never done anything so daft.

In the real world we all make mistakes. Being at sea in fog in a small boat is a mistake, but not always avoidable. Crossing so close in front is not ideal, but not always avoidable. And fog makes little real difference provided radar is aboard and functioning. As indeed do the colregs outside a courthouse.

Anyway, must keep working at it and one day I too might be perfect ! But not according to my wife.
: /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[jimi]

Two things scare me most
1) Big Ships moving fast
2) Fog
The combination I find terrifying!!

 

[Stingo]

Follow their advise, mess it up, then become a token yank and sue them for zillions.

If you're successful, remember to send me a quarter of your gains using unmarked notes stuffed into large brown paper bags.

 

[webcraft]

It's Puilladobhrain, not hymenated . . .

And anything that keeps the crowds away will be a blessing. To give the article its due it did say that the anchorage was just over an hour's sail South of Oban, which obviously means it isn't in the Utter Hebrides.

The contribution was made by Martin Lawrence, who has written the excellent pilot books we all use. Seil IS an island off the West coast of Scotland, so the description isn't totally inaccurate.

I was a bit surprised that only two Scottish anchorages were included, but as I said before, if it keeps the crowds away . . .

- Nick

 

[A1Sailor]

There were a number of inakkurakies in the article about Largs in the January edition as well. Nothing life threatening but disappointing.

 

[snowleopard]

not quite as scary as the colregs instructor at BRNC who taught a whole generation of captains that ships following a TSS had right of way over vessels crossing.

 

[ShipsWoofy]

Christ, if that were true sailing to France would become suicide if you look at the AIS live web page.

 

[snowleopard]

it was reported on this site not long ago that there had been several nasty situations in the dover straits where naval ships stood on when ferries approached them from starboard. AFIK it's not an urban myth.

 

[Aja]

Puilladobhrain

Busy enough place as it is. We only stop there when waiting for the tide (usually overnight) but too busy a place to be still what it once was, a peaceful overnight stop.

Donald

 

[longjohnsadler]

Re: Puilladobhrain

Yes, truly a place these days where a few rocks need to be 'nuked' to make more room...

 

[graham]

Birdseye I have to take exception to your comment that" fog makes little difference with a functioning radar" fair enough to say that Radar makes fog a hundred times more safe.but surely the HUGE difference is the absence of a given right of way vessel in fog.And that the radar stops beeing just an aid and becomes vital in busy waters.

No matter how much experience with radar and limited vis you may have the tension allways goes up several notches when it occurs.

Fully agree with one part of your post about all of us making mistakes .I worry about people who set themselves up as "experts".

 

[peterb]

It's not just the absence of a "right of way" vessel (incidentally, there's no such thing anywhere in Colregs). It's also that both vessels are give-way vessels, and that Colregs specify what they should do. Rule 19(d) specifies that a vessel taking avoiding action against another vessel forward of the beam shall as far as possible avoid an alteration of course to port. Which way did Elanik turn? To port!

 

[Greenwichman]

Ouch, Birdseye! Oh yes, I have done daft things (and continue to do them!), my point was that YM might at least try to help us get things right ......

 

[graham]

Its fine knowing the "rules"chapter and verse.Problem is it doesnt pay to presume the other person does(or that theres even anyone awake on the bridge).

It surprises me how often people have a fairly good grasp of the rules that apply to 2 vessels in sight of each other but dont appreciate that the same rules dont apply in fog.

I was on a yacht recently with someone who had obviously studied the rule book to some length but motoring head on towards a motorboat showing us a clear red white and green he couldnt understand why I was altering to stbd(In his words "your crossing his bows")I had to fairly forcefully ask him to shut up and think about it.. The point I am rambling towards is that its the application of the rules in real situations that can only be learned by experience.