Please will forum review this article about new Sunk VTS?

[shmoo]

I have put an article on the WCC website about the new Sunk VTS and precautionary area here:Changes in Sunk Area. The article includes a link to the relavant Notice to Mariners.

Can I call on forum's legendary expertise to do a bit of peer review please? The RYA bumf on this stuff is a bit, let's say, unclear.

 

[DanTribe]

At first glance this scheme would seem to make life more difficult for us yachties.
I often find that area difficult. Probably because you'r tired after a North Sea crossing, and the seas are more confused because of the shoaling water and I always seem to do it at night. Add a bit of erratic ship dodging at roundabouts, doesn't sound much fun.
Hopefully it won't be as confusing as I think.
Dan

 

[shmoo]

Yes, quite.

It all looks very complex at first reading, which is why we are trying to do something about demistifying it. I just want lots of folks to look at what we have done to increase the chances of it being demistified and right!

We go to the Channel by going outside all the sandbanks and that runs us slap in the this lot, and folks going to and returning from the Netherlands are going to have to deal with it.

It *may* make big ship movement more predictable than now, but the jury is out.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Has this been seen by the RATS committee at the Cruising Association? It's quite good at sifting through this sort of thing and even making representations to 'them' if felt necessary.

 

[Bergman]

Would seem to be similar to the system at the Humber mouth.

That seems to work all right - not heard of people having problems there.

 

[stevebirch2002]

If its "Sunk" how will we see it........ /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[shmoo]

I have often thought that naming an important waypoint Sunk was displaying a little too much bravado.

 

[peterb]

[ QUOTE ]
Has this been seen by the RATS committee at the Cruising Association?

[/ QUOTE ]

Meeting coming up on Tuesday, 8 May. I'll raise it.

 

[Neil_M]

Have just overlaid this onto SC1406 and it does seem to present a considerable obstacle to small craft navigation, particularly when combined with the wind farms in the area to the S. It looks like it forces small craft into shoal areas over the banks around the Inner Gabbard and Galloper in particular.

Coming out of the Suffolk rivers bound for Holland you seem to be forced either to sail N of the Shipwash and Inner Gabbard (through the overfalls) or well S towards S Galloper.

Either way it makes a N Sea crossing significantly longer and more complicated with unclear benefits in terms of avoiding commercial shipping. I hope I'm proved wrong...!

 

[peterb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Has this been seen by the RATS committee at the Cruising Association?

[/ QUOTE ]

Meeting coming up on Tuesday, 8 May. I'll raise it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I duly raised it, to find that there had been no consultation with CA. Now we are trying to find out whether there has been any consultation with small craft interests, for instance with the RYA. Doubt if we can do much at this stage (though there were some suggestions) but it may help in future with similar schemes.

The difficulty is that this is an IMO scheme, and IMO generally consult at government level. The question then is to what extent did government consult?

 

[shmoo]

Thanks for raising it.

HHA did put this out for consultation last year on their web site. I tried, in fairness not too hard, to get folks interested at the time but the general feeling was it was all about big ships and would not affect us.