Speed in Fog

[jonjo]

Re: AIS the last defence

> programmed to sound an alarm if a CPA of less than "x" were
> calculated for a vessel detected.

Sounds doable, in fact I imagine that as PDA electronics get repackaged for the marine market you will probably be able to select whether the proximity warning sounds like Scotty from the Star Ship Enterprise or Holly from Red Dwarf.

When Category B AIS becomes a reality it will be reassuring to think of a 30ft GRP yacht showing up on a big ship screen with equal prominence to a super tanker, until that is, the software people downsize screen icons according to AIS broadcast length.

Let's hope they do not permit a function to mute small craft otherwise one could imagine a situation where an OOW says "damn this JOG fleet", hits a button and the racing fleet disappears from screen.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Re: AIS the last defence

I agree AIS would be nice but for me it would be in addition to radar not instead of, for the simple reason that I want to be able to see. Plus of course there would be small boats about without either AIS or radar. In fact small boats are often the most problematic when fog comes down since some turn back, some carry on, some slow down, some sit in the middle of the fairway fishing and some idiots still carry on at 25kts!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Ahem!

I also see no reason why ships should have to slow down in fog for the same reasons as Mirelle gives. I also see no need for them to make sound signals as I am unsure for what purpose such signals would serve, especially in densely trafficed areas.

It is easy to make incorrect judgements as to how ships should be navigated from our own on board 6 knot poor visibility (electronic or eyeball) and exposed environment.

I do not think that anyone has noted that if the yacht which was run down in the English Channel had not had radar then it would almost certainly have proceeded without incident. All radars on small yachts are toys and their operators almost always amateurs - one should not judge the performance of modern ship radars by them. If one does not know how to use the toy correctly then I think the recent accident has shown that one is probably safer without it, relying entirely upon the plots of ones own vessel upon the invisible ships about you and assisting the maintenance of those plots by sailing a sensible and predictable course.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Change the collision regs

If that is the case. The current rules require a safe speed and sound signals, changes should not be decided by individual Masters because of pressures from Owners.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Sailfree]

Re: Change the collision regs

While I know its impractical! but what speed or watch regimes would the big ships adopt if we packed our small yachts with explosive so that a resultant collision would sink and kill them rather than just us!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

Throughout this thread

only one person has made any comment on sound signals.

He seems to think that they are confusing. If they are the only information available to a small yacht - which will often be the case - then they will be useful.

COLREGS requires sound signals, their use should be enforced.

I know from bitter experience just how valuable they are. Crossing the Channel in 1965 in unforecast fog which descended (rose) 4 miles from shore we could rely only on sound signals to have any chance of avoiding a collision. We came within 50 yards of a vessel not sounding signals, but otherwise avoided all dangers.

I am sure passengers on ferries, liners and others would understand the need to help avoid killing people by the sounding of signals in fog.

I have also seen from big ship experience how, even at a safe speed that, the plot can quickly become confused and that small targets (even if held) can easily be lost.

We need active responders for yachts at a reasonable price and the use of sound signals must be enforced on all at sea in fog.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[brianhumber]

Re: Throughout this thread

Hmm, I would agree that a Loud Clear Fog Signal is an asset to Nav if there are few ships around. However in busy waters where vessels are taking different courses such as South of Nab I find them confusing.
An interesting thread, but I cannot help thinking trying to insist high speed ferries, container ships et al slow down in fog these days is a bit like our grandparents inisting the developing cars stayed at walking pace in the early 1900s

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: Throughout this thread

We do not drive along the road in fog all blasting our horns in case there is a pedestrian or bicycle ahead, even though we do not have the advantage of having radar in our cars, and I do not see why ships should be any different. The basic problem is a watchkeeping one, and in some very few areas one of traffic density, it is not a speed or noise making ability one.

Air Traffic Control gets over this (because of the technical situation of aircraft not being able to maintain an adequate watch themselves) by putting the watch to a large extent in the hands of others for whom it is a dedicated task ie if they don't do it they are out of a job. That, of course, is not possible on ships.

Watchkeeping was the issue in the recent yacht sinking in the English Channel, but in that case the poor watchkeeping was mainly in the hands of the yacht - they took confusing actions in order to avoid a collision which had they maintained their course would never have happened. I have been on the periphery of a number of accidents where the ship's watchkeeping has been the problem so in no way am I defending ships - interesting examples were a large ocean going fishing vessel which went onto the rocks directly under an en route light (the watchkeeper "I remember being handed the watch, the next thing I remember was going aground under the light"), and a journalist phoning the owners of a large passenger ferry asking them if they knew one of their vessels had just gone aground to which they disbelievingly asked how he knew as they at that stage knew nothing about it "Well I am on board it and we were sailing along in the dark and we came to a sudden stop and now there is this great big cliff in my face".

Some years ago a large cruise ship was lost here when the pilot very inadvisably took the vessel through a gap in a reef through which it had little chance of surviving. The enquiry was not very searching and the word in the industry (upon which I make no judgement) was that all on the bridge were as drunk as newts. The pilot subsequently sailed as master on other ships. So pilots are not immune from poor watchkeeping/navigation either.

Blowing horns and reducing speed will not make any difference at all to watchkeeping, although good watchkeeping may result in ships reducing speed in specific conditions. I doubt whether those specific conditions would include the event of zero (eyeball) visibilty as a ship hitting another vessel at any speed at which steerage can be maintained will be a disaster purely because of the stored energy in its inertia.

I would suggest that there is perhaps more chance of a ship maintaining a proper radar watch (3 cm and 10 cm when coastal) seeing a small yacht at night than there is of them seeing its lights if visibility is not perfect but adequate (eg from rain, seas). Do we now propose that for the sake of yachts that ships should also slow down at night?

While we do not have the traffic density problems faced in the Channel we still have yachts being run down here. However, in the instances I can recall, the problem has been a watchkeeping problem on the yacht (eg 1. Foreign yacht run down coastal by ship in poor weather, wife on yacht was on watch but down below at the time, she survived but lost her husband and her 2 children. 2. Yacht went under the tow of of a large tug and coastal barge at dawn, watch person on yacht had very poor unassisted vision and was not wearing her spectacles at the time).

It would seem to me that there are ways that better watchkeeping could be enforced on ships (but not so easily on yachts) and suggest that is where attention should be directed. Poor watchkeeping on yachts, which I would suggest is a bigger problem, is in our own hands.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

The analogy of cars and ships

is not totally inappropriate. Cars by law must slow to be able to stop within the distance they can see. So should ships.

But it is not appropriate when referring to sound signals. Ships are mostly operated professionally and have crews to ensure that all operations are carried out legally. The laws which govern their operation at sea have been accepted by nearly all maritime nations and should be adhered to.

There is some important points to remember, yachts and small boats are often not equipped with radar, are not often seen on radar by ships at much more than five miles and may only know another vessel is nearby or approaching through the use of sound signals.

Everyone should use them in restricted visibility and abide by the COLREGS. There is no valid excuse not to.

<hr width=100% size=1>