Is it legal for a single handed skipper to sleep?

[GHA]

This thread seems to be about 2 different things, a singlehander on a full on racing machine doing 25kts in shipping lanes in the channel.

And the rest of us.

With a quick perusal through the mca prosecutions it seems fishing boats are the ones who get done for not under command, not us. Apart from one high profile incident off cowes on a crewed boat...

 

[jerrytug]

An unarguably valid answer - but someone asked if it were LEGAL for single-handers to sleep.
The question betrays that he doesn't WANT to think for himself and wishes to shuffle into the queue the bureaucrats wish him to occupy.
Such free-thinking is frowned upon and heavily discouraged within our modern nanny-state society, where everything is for your own good in this totally directive world (with apologies to Voltaire who was considered a dangerously radical free-thinker).

PS My insurers allow me 42 hours single handing cover or one night and the two adjacent daylight periods ;-)

PM coming!

 

[Roberto]

Have a very good look at your insurance policy.
Mine, from a well known firm, states specifically that sailing single-handed is covered PROVIDED THAT the time under way does not exceed 24 hours. Which seems reasonable enough.

Mine expressedly covered the transatlantic, plus various other bits >500nm

 

[jerrytug]

Mine expressedly covered the transatlantic, plus various other bits >500nm

PM coming

 

[Cruiser2B]

IIRC the requirement is to keep a proper lookout and then to apply the other rules to avoid any collision. So, if you have adequate means of maintaining a proper lookout which will ensure you are woken up if asleep, the you will have broken no rules.

The rule is unequivocal - it states: "Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing ..." One cannot be asleep and maintain a lookout by sight and hearing.

I wonder if the proponents here would be happy if commercial shipping operated on a "it's OK if we're asleep; the alarms are set" mentality?

 

[GHA]

I wonder if the proponents here would be happy if commercial should ipping operated on a "it's OK if we're asleep; the alarms are set" mentality?

A bit of a ridiculous comparison but they might as well be when it comes to seeing us offshore. From the few I've spoken to it's always been radar, never by sight. They also seem to do collision avoidance often before they appear over the horizon. It's nice to know they're awake but it's the technology which does the work.

 

[sailorman]

If a Ferry can hit the Dover breakwater what chance the singlehander out in the Ocean

 

[charles_reed]

The rule is unequivocal - it states: "Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing ..." One cannot be asleep and maintain a lookout by sight and hearing.

I wonder if the proponents here would be happy if commercial shipping operated on a "it's OK if we're asleep; the alarms are set" mentality?

How little people know - you set your radar guard zone for say 6nm, on intermittent sweep and the alarm to sound when anything enters that. I think that fully meets the rule!!

 

[Cruiser2B]

How little people know - you set your radar guard zone for say 6nm, on intermittent sweep and the alarm to sound when anything enters that. I think that fully meets the rule!!

How do you think radar qualifies as "by sight and hearing"?

 

[johndove]

How little people know - you set your radar guard zone for say 6nm, on intermittent sweep and the alarm to sound when anything enters that. I think that fully meets the rule!!

But do radars pick all up all the times?

 

[sailorman]

But do radars pick all up all the times?

Some cant even pick out a Hbr entrance in daylight
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-29976646

 

[Cruiser2B]

A bit of a ridiculous comparison but they might as well be when it comes to seeing us offshore. From the few I've spoken to it's always been radar, never by sight. They also seem to do collision avoidance often before they appear over the horizon. It's nice to know they're awake but it's the technology which does the work.

Don't know who you've been speaking to, but a radar blip doesn't identify a sailboat, so rule of the road doesn't come into play until the other vessel is visible. IME, on good clear days we frequently saw the sails over the horizon before getting a clean paint. There are variables due to the characteristics and limitations of the equipment that is available in any ship, but generally in open ocean I would have the primary radar at 12nm range, and periodically range out to 24; the second set was at 3 or 6, depending on the vis, and optimized to pick up small things that snuck in under the radar, so to speak. Even though we had dedicated lookouts, I spent most of the watch keeping a visual lookout as well. In restricted vis, I or the 2nd would maintain a constant radar watch, while the other handled the other tasks of the watch.

 

[GHA]

Don't know who you've been speaking to, .

The crew in ships encountered mid ocean.

And watching ships midocean change course before they appear over the horizon.

It's what happens. This was on a steel boat with a good return. Adding to that the fact that the yacht will also know of the ship before it appears the risk really is very low.

At the end of the day it matters naught what you might think, there is so little data of solo offshore sailing being a navigational danger to come to any conclusion, no changes are likely.

I would put personal injury and illness much much higher up the scale. Be scared of the boom and the galley, ships aren't much of a worry.

 

[GHA]

But do radars pick all up all the times?

Mostly , squalls the range can be reduced. Add an ais alarm and you are pushing the odds even further down. The fact is that are very few ships out there, to find one of the very few which also isn't transmitting AIS and in a squall would be possible, but very unlikely indeed. Anyway, you'd be up if a squall was coming over, with the shampoo at the ready

 

[GHA]

If a Ferry can hit the Dover breakwater what chance the singlehander out in the Ocean

Much much better

 

[Cruiser2B]

And watching ships midocean change course before they appear over the horizon.

You watch them before you can see them over the horizon? That's a talent.

there is so little data of solo offshore sailing being a navigational danger

Off the top of my head there's Coville and the Watson girl who pranged into ships, and Joyon put Idec on the rocks. I'm sure there are more.

 

[GHA]

You watch them before you can see them over the horizon? That's a talent.

AIS obviously.

Off the top of my head there's Coville and the Watson girl who pranged into ships, and Joyon put Idec on the rocks. I'm sure there are more.

Watson didn't have her ais alarm on and the other 2 are racers, not what we are talking about here at all.

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this for some reason, there really is no conclusive evidence even if you want there to be.

Solo offshore has many dangers, hitting other ships is low down the list.

 

[bedouin]

The rule is unequivocal - it states: "Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing ..." One cannot be asleep and maintain a lookout by sight and hearing.

I wonder if the proponents here would be happy if commercial shipping operated on a "it's OK if we're asleep; the alarms are set" mentality?

The rule does not require you to have constant visual coverage of all 360 degrees every second. A proper lookout is one that allows you to detect any risk that you might reasonably expect.

No vessel keeps a constant 360 visual watch so it is a matter of judgement what an appropriate interval is for surveying any particular bit of see.

Even without radar it is fine to go below for 5 minutes

 

[Cruiser2B]

, not what we are talking about here at all.

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this for some reason, there really is no conclusive evidence even if you want there to be.

Solo offshore has many dangers, hitting other ships is low down the list.

We are talking about solo sailors, so they're entirely relevant. Sure Coville was racing, but Joyon had finished his race, and the comment about Watson defies reason. AIS has its limitations, and is subject to failure. I don't have a bee in my bonnet, as you put it - I keep a constant watch, so I don't worry about hitting those who don't. If you don't expect people to have opinions that differ from yours, then perhaps boating forums are not for you.
I agree that hitting another ship in the vast ocean is far from likely, yet you called it ridiculous to apply the same logic to commercial shipping.

 

[Cruiser2B]

The rule does not require you to have constant visual coverage of all 360 degrees every second. A proper lookout is one that allows you to detect any risk that you might reasonably expect.

No vessel keeps a constant 360 visual watch so it is a matter of judgement what an appropriate interval is for surveying any particular bit of see.

Even without radar it is fine to go below for 5 minutes

It's generally fine to go a little faster than the speed limit when you're driving - by the letter of the law it's not legal, but I think most of us agree the risk can be managed, and we accept the consequences of being caught. Surely if you go below for a couple minutes, it won't matter, but if you did happen to run into something at the time, don't think your lack of lookout will be excused.
I don't understand what you're trying to prove in bringing up the absurd notion of 360º constant coverage. The OP asked a question; the answer to that is clear whether or not you wish to accept it.