Speed in Fog

[ponapay]

I dare say that most of the posters in this forum will have a cautious approach to fog and would probably take great care.

But what of the professionals?

I travelled on a ferry a year or so back (from Norway to UK) in thick fog. I asked to be allowed to talk to the officer of the watch or preferably the captain. I was taken to the bridge, the vessel was proceding within 5 miles of the coast at 22 knots, visibility was less than 100 metres.

The vessel was not sounding fog signals, did not reduce speed, did not have any extra lookouts. There was only one officer and a helmsman on the bridge.

At a suitable moment I asked the officer of the watch (2nd officer) whether they normally sailed at that speed in fog and why they did not make sound signals. The response was they were well clear of the coast so yes speed was no problem - he reckoned he would pick up any vessels with plenty of warning. And no they never sounded signal at sea as it annoyed the passengers. I pointed out that at the time of year there were many yachts sailing across the N Sea and that many would not be picked up beyond 3 miles and they would only know he was there if he sounded fog signals.

On arrival in UK I reported through the confidential reporting system that I felt this was dangerous.

On a subsequent crossing with the same company (12 months later) also in fog but on a busier route, the vessel reduced speed to about 15 knots but still did not sound fog signals.

The RYA, MCA and everyone travelling on vessels in such conditions should make their feelings heard. Please use the confidential reporting system.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

I should add

the URL for Confidential Reporting www.nautisnt.org then select MARS.

The report I refer to above was Number 47 of 2001

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[peterb]

Re: I should add

Get it right. It's www.nautinst.org/

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[VicS]

Read the MAIB report on the collision between a yacht and a large container ship in the channel last May <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_maritimesafety/documents/page/dft_masafety_026317.pdf>here</A>
You may be surprised

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=purple>Ne te confundant illegitimi.</font color=purple>

 

[tillergirl]

What about the use of VHF. I am surprised that no one tried that although I suppose that from the yacht's point of view (mistaken) the ship was going to pass clear - but if the master of the ship was confused (or says he was) as to the actions of the yacht immediately before what we now know was the collision why did he not try a VHF call - or do we think that would have confused things more?

Also I am surprised that a yacht, completely dismasted apparantly remained quite clearly on the radar plot in the wake of the ship. Really?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Sybarite]

Some make interesting reading

Whoops Report No. 200305
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was heard recently on Channel 12 VHF, whilst transiting the Thames Pilotage area, during the hours of darkness, good weather and good visibility. The vessel involved was pilot exempt :-

Ship XXX Ship on my starboard bow distance 1.3 miles this is the Ship XXX, come in please.

No answer

Ship XXX Ship on my starboard bow distance 1.3 miles this is the Ship XXX come in please.

No Answer

Port Control Ship XXX, this is Port Control, who are you trying to contact?
Ship XXX The vessel on my starboard bow - I wish to inform him that he has a problem with his navigation lights.

Port Control Ship XXX, this is Port Control, the only object on your starboard bow at that distance is the Red Sand Towers.

No Answer

For those not familiar with the Thames Estuary, the Red Sand Towers are one of the old wartime forts which are clearly marked on charts, and buoyed.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[VicS]

I think the time element may have been a factor. I forget what range they had the radar set at but from the time the yacht made its confusing change of speed to impact could only have been a few minutes. How would you have made the call, how long would it have taken to establish who was calling whom and just how would you have conducted the ensuing conversation. They each new the other was there and they each thought they had taken the correct action even if they were to pass rather close.

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=purple>Ne te confundant illegitimi.</font color=purple>

 

[maxi]

From the mouth of the Master of a famous Red Ensign passenger liner, whose name is often stated as "two initials and a number more than one"

"When we encounter fog, we reduce speed and make a PA announcement to the passengers - after all, 3000 witnesses can't be a bad thing - then the engineers slowly wind the revs back on over the next hour or so". How cynical is that??

I have also encountered her in thick fog, typically the year that she was painted grey for the Falklands, making her even harder to see. No sound signals whatsover
at any time, although at the time she actually was at reduced speed.

As a navigating officer from the 60's, we ALWAYS reduced speed in fog and ALWAYS had a lookout forward on the fo'c's'le - today you are lucky if there is just one man on the bridge, in a comfy chair behind steamy windows and listening to Radio 1, in other words not a lot of use.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[oldharry]

Its not at all a comfortable thought that many commercial vessels now depend on proximity alarms rather than the human eye.

Travelling on a Cross Channel ferry a few years back from Caen, we ran into a fog bank half an hour out. No discernible drop in speed, and from the forward saloon directly below the bridge, the bow jackstaff was barely visible. I was just rather glad not to have been out there in my own boat thta morning.

The prpoblem is that with incredibly tight turnround schedules, mainy channel ferries have to keep going. The Portsmouth ferries turn round is around 2.5 hours, and other comap[nies run even tighter schedules. Sailing on Swansea Cork recently, they acheived turn round in just over 1.25 hours! Mind you they had adverse low tides, so presumably the skipper was pushing to get out of Swansea as quickly as he could before LW!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[brianhumber]

Re: Speed in Fog - Inevitable

Yes I am a chicken with respect to Fog. We must accept todays commercial pressures and advances in radar etc has and will continue to lead to commercial ships not reducing speed in Fog or posting lookouts on the bridge wings/bow as happened when I was at sea in the 70s.
We have to avoid them. I suspect its only a matter of time before more collisions and legislation on small vessels ensues.
I know its Friday but my glass seems half empty today rather than half full.
Brian


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Superstrath]

When I was a cadet in the 70's, I was shown round a US-owned container ship in Hong Kong. It claimed to be the world's fastest freighter at the time, and had all the (then) latest in electronics, including plotting devices. They proudly showed a radar plot from a foggy approach to New York - a busy kind of place - with a target approaching head on showing a closing speed of around fifty knots. Turned out to be the same world-famous cruise liner. Imagine the mess a collision at fifty knots would make!
I well remember being posted to the bow in fog, and also ringing the forward bell and banging a gong aft when anchored in restricted waters.
Seems to have gone by the board now.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ianwright]

>We must accept todays commercial pressures <

No, we must not. We must insist on seamanship, common sense and the Colregs.
In the meantime, in fog or under blue skies I act as though commercial ships are on rails and unmanned.
I find it safest.

IanW

<hr width=100% size=1>Vertue 203, Patience

 

[Rowana]

I was also at sea (BP Tankers) in the early 70's, but down the engine room. The most boreing thing was being on stand-by in fog. None of this bridge control malarky, it was answer the telegraph, and drive the engine from the control platform. We always used to slow down in fog, and I also remember the bell & gong routine at anchor.

Anyone else out there who can drive a 4-handed Doxford.
(For the un-initiated, it was said you needed 4 hands to drive one, but if you were quick, you could manage with 2!)

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Nauti Fox]

Not the British Curlew by any chance?

<hr width=100% size=1>No dear,the water goes in the other one.

 

[wpsalm]

Re: Speed in Fog - Inevitable

Having a lookout on the bow in fog is a waste of manpower. reducing speed in fog is a waste of time. and blowing a bloody fog horn every 2 minutes is irratating as hell...sailing a small boat in fog is bloody dangerous. and if you don,t like it stay home...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[zefender]

Re: Speed in Fog - Inevitable

It's difficult to see how many people would actually "enjoy" sailing in fog. But then I note from your profile that you describe yourself as "not a particularly keen sailor" - does this include fog or any conditions?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Re: Speed in Fog - Inevitable

Like it or not there ARE rules that say reduce speed in fog and use sound signals.

Nobody likes being out in fog, least of all in small boats maybe with our families on board, sometimes though it happens. And when it does it would be nice to think that those who do it for a living obeyed the rules and had some thought for human life.

I expect you will know some of the Masters who ploughed into the sunken Tricolor at full speed despite the continuous navigational warnings being broadcast, buoyage etc

Me, I long ago realised that most ships are run by uncaring, unprofessional maniacs and to treat them all as such. I have just been proved right.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[maxi]

Re: wpsalm

Obviously got your ticket in Bombay, but then again, there may be something in what you say...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[wpsalm]

Re: wpsalm

Fog limiting visibility to say a couple hundred feet, reduce speed from 16knts to what ? 12knts...doubt that would make much difference. in order for a reduction in speed to be effective a vessel should be able to stop within half the distance of visibility ...no visibility all shipping must stop all the world,s commerce must come to a halt for the sake of a few foolhardy pleasure boats....ships show up well on radar and manage for the most part to avoid colisions. small boats take their chances...as for requiring special consideration because you,ve got your familly onboard...bloody hell.. A good radar set, an active radar reflector and a little common sense...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rowana]

<<Not the British Curlew by any chance? >>

It was indeed. Joined in August 1973 and left in January 1974.

I was on quite a few of the "Bird boats" - British Merlin (twice), British Malard, British Curlew, British Fulmar, British Cygnet. I was also on a couple of the old "16's" - British Crusader & British Patrol (twice). All between 1969 and 1975.

It was the oil crisis of 1974/75 that made me transfer to BP Exploration on the Forties field. Worked for BP offshore and in Aberdeen until the end of 1995.

What about yourself ??

<hr width=100% size=1>