Observer
Active member
Just as a small example of how silly this idea is, imagine any old large commercial vessel (let's take Pride of Portsmouth as an example) approaching harbour with dozens of small pleasure craft in the vicinity.
So skippers all over the place, as theoretical "stand on" or "give way" vessels, decide to call up Pride of Portsmouth to agree a passing plan. Yacht A decides to exercise its stand on right and yacht B decides to give way. Not to mention yachts/boats C, D, E and F etc. That would be a real contribution to safety (not), wouldn't it?
I know MMSIs are already available on the MARS database but there is no point encouraging unnecessary use of DSC and inappropriate ship to ship calls by making them more widely available. The likelihood that this would happen is demonstrated by all the unnecessary traffic which is aleady heard on ch 16.
BTW, Pride of Portsmouth's MMSI is 233554000. Next time it's passing near you, call it up to agree a passing plan and see if the master welcomes it.
<hr width=100% size=1>
So skippers all over the place, as theoretical "stand on" or "give way" vessels, decide to call up Pride of Portsmouth to agree a passing plan. Yacht A decides to exercise its stand on right and yacht B decides to give way. Not to mention yachts/boats C, D, E and F etc. That would be a real contribution to safety (not), wouldn't it?
I know MMSIs are already available on the MARS database but there is no point encouraging unnecessary use of DSC and inappropriate ship to ship calls by making them more widely available. The likelihood that this would happen is demonstrated by all the unnecessary traffic which is aleady heard on ch 16.
BTW, Pride of Portsmouth's MMSI is 233554000. Next time it's passing near you, call it up to agree a passing plan and see if the master welcomes it.
<hr width=100% size=1>
