AIS, Receiver or Transmitter

[weavis]

Originally Posted by skipmac

One more thing I would add, adhering to the requirements of Colregs and common sense also do not mean one cannot also act courteously.

Of course one should always treat other boaters no matter what size or type of boat, with courtesy and respect but at some point common sense and ultimately Colregs must take precedence.

Of course.

However I make the assumption that they do not know the regs and am prepared to work within them till its time to move out the way...

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by weavis

However I make the assumption that they do not know the regs and am prepared to work within them till its time to move out the way...

And if it gets to be time to move out of the way and you do so that is still following the regs so you're golden.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by uncle stinkybob

I'm noticing a trend with what would seem to be the anti ais folks. Looks like a higher percentage go by their own common sense rather than colregs. So now not only are you not using a useful tool for other vessels to navigate safely, your confusing the crap out of every vessel near you because of your uncommonly common sense. If you don't want ais, fine, no problem, but at least stick to colregs in dealing with other boat/ship traffic so they have a clue on what your intentions are.

Please don't lump me in your sweeping generalization. I do not advocate abandoning COLREGS procedures in any way. "Common sense" is a poor way to run a railroad. In the face of a potential collision situation the best thing for everyone is for everyone to follow the 'rules of the road', so to speak. But the absolute best thing is to not get into these situations. I try and act early. Makes 'common' sense to me .

As I've said, and in answer to the OP, I have AIS-Recieve only. It is exactly the tool I require. And yes, I have a well-used hand bearing compass

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

I agree 1,000,000%%%%%%% . . .

So you agree 0.000000001?!?


A house is but a boat so poorly built and so firmly run aground you would never try to refloat it.

[Pete7]

Interesting debate. As an early adopter of AIS I still only have a receiver and would upgrade to transmit if it wasn't for the x3 price of a transmitter which hasn't fallen quite as far as I thought they would. The other issue is sailing in very heavy traffic areas as I do, is people glued to looking at monitors instead of using Mk 1 eyeball and applying the collision regulations and any local rules.

[DotDun]

In the spirit of the OP's intentions, the very best and absolute way to let the other vessel on a collision course with you to see/know your intentions is an AIS transceiver. That is why they were invented!

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Adelie

So you agree 0.000000001?!?


A house is but a boat so poorly built and so firmly run aground you would never try to refloat it.

I think you will find that you have one too many 0's there

[uncle stinkybob]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Please don't lump me in your sweeping generalization. I do not advocate abandoning COLREGS procedures in any way. "Common sense" is a poor way to run a railroad. In the face of a potential collision situation the best thing for everyone is for everyone to follow the 'rules of the road', so to speak. But the absolute best thing is to not get into these situations. I try and act early. Makes 'common' sense to me .

As I've said, and in answer to the OP, I have AIS-Recieve only. It is exactly the tool I require. And yes, I have a well-used hand bearing compass

I would not lump you or anyone . I respect your opinion and your own knowledge of what works for you where you sail. I live on the Straits of Juan de Fuca, the shipping traffic is huge, freighter's, cruise ships, barge tows, ferries, fast foot ferries, fishing boats, tour boats, pleasure boats from power to sailing of every size and description know to man, half at least which are being operated by drunk, deaf, blind, ego maniac's. There is no, I repeat NO, not getting in to these situations if I leave the dock. I have eyes, they work well, I've not evolved fog penetrating eyes, no super hero night vision, so I try to rely on all possible approved safety devices, AIS tx/rx do that, rx doe's not. I have my grand children and daughter aboard a lot, I need to know I did my best to keep them safe as well. It's ok, you chose for you, but not using a device like this to it's full potential is not about just you, it's about every person on every vessel around you or crossing your course. Just watch, this will become required on private vessels meeting parameters every where eventually. Some harbors around the world already have.

[uncle stinkybob]

Originally Posted by DotDun

In the spirit of the OP's intentions, the very best and absolute way to let the other vessel on a collision course with you to see/know your intentions is an AIS transceiver. That is why they were invented!

It's why they were invented!

That sum's it all up in a wee little nut shell.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by uncle stinkybob

I would not lump you or anyone . I respect your opinion and your own knowledge of what works for you where you sail. I live on the Straits of Juan de Fuca, the shipping traffic is huge, freighter's, cruise ships, barge tows, ferries, fast foot ferries, fishing boats, tour boats, pleasure boats from power to sailing of every size and description know to man, half at least which are being operated by drunk, deaf, blind, ego maniac's. There is no, I repeat NO, not getting in to these situations if I leave the dock. I have eyes, they work well, I've not evolved fog penetrating eyes, no super hero night vision, so I try to rely on all possible approved safety devices, AIS tx/rx do that, rx doe's not. I have my grand children and daughter aboard a lot, I need to know I did my best to keep them safe as well. It's ok, you chose for you, but not using a device like this to it's full potential is not about just you, it's about every person on every vessel around you or crossing your course. Just watch, this will become required on private vessels meeting parameters every where eventually. Some harbors around the world already have.

Ah, I was just getting all warm and fuzzy, but then you just couldn't resist the little jab could you? Yup, makes me utterly amazed how any of us survived all these decades before the wonder of AIS.

I've asked twice, so I'll try again. Where is the data that shows AIS has improved collision rates? It's been around for long enough, and we certainly have the historic data to do a good comparison. I've looked for the obvious studies, and can't find them.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

.......

I've asked twice, so I'll try again. Where is the data that shows AIS has improved ( decreased ?) collision rates? It's been around for long enough, and we certainly have the historic data to do a good comparison. I've looked for the obvious studies, and can't find them. .......

Well this paper http://helcom.fi/Lists/Publications/...ing%202012.pdf covering 2004/2012 in the Baltic suggests a general downward trend in ship/ship collisions over the period ...see Table 14...

Number of collisions between ships as a percentage of total number of ships out there and also - I think - in actual numbers has been decreasing for many years... starting with radar, then traffic routing , then ARPA, ECDIS, and now AIS... all lead an incremental decrease in casualties.

This report http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads...w_for_wwf_.pdf looks at 'total loss'.. 44 ships lost due to collision globally over a 15 year period.... mainly down to old ships and dodgy 'flags'... combine the two and you don't attract the cream of the crop as bridge watchkeepers.

How many collisions have been avoided due to AIS is like asking how many pedestrian accidents are avoided by people taking a day off work...who knows?

It isn't a big deal for the watchkeeper on any ship ( not constrained by draft etc etc etc ) to make a small alteration for a yacht he has on AIS at 10 miles or so. Radar? Lets forget all about guard zones.... first he spots the echo at maybe 4 miles or so then he has to watch the bearing for some minutes ( even ARPA isn't instantaneous ... ) by which time you are down to a couple of miles and it is all starting to get a bit messy..

[uncle stinkybob]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Ah, I was just getting all warm and fuzzy, but then you just couldn't resist the little jab could you? Yup, makes me utterly amazed how any of us survived all these decades before the wonder of AIS.

I've asked twice, so I'll try again. Where is the data that shows AIS has improved collision rates? It's been around for long enough, and we certainly have the historic data to do a good comparison. I've looked for the obvious studies, and can't find them.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

To ask how we survived without it is just plain silly and non-sensical. Perhaps the question should be how many could be saved because of it's wide spread use? Also I'm not sure myself on how to acquire date on what did not happen. Anyone?

[hoppy]

If you play around shipping, you have the money and you are upgrading your electronics, there is only correct answer.

Anything else you are fooling yourself and putting your and your crews life more at risk than need be.

I also think that having an AIS transponder should be now considered a common courtesy that small boat owners should extend to commercial shipping. Let them see you 10+ miles out and make a course change then rather than them only spotting you at 1 mile (at night assuming your <12m yacht only meets the minimum requirements of Colregs rule 22).

I'm sure the watch keeper will be more appreciative of you when he sees you because he knows where to look rather than as a surprise resulting in an urgent course correction.

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You would never call the bridge of a ship and say "I'm stand on and need you to alter course", as in RWidman's ridiculous mischaracterization. You would ask what his intentions are, and you might even start out by saying "Do you see me? I'm not comfortable with our CPA and will now alter to port -- could you please hold your course and speed?" The VHF call would be to make damned sure that he is not just about to alter course himself, which would be dangerous.

Yes, that is what I was referring to.
Where I am we have a very active port and shipping lane close by. I was just out today and, as is common, a large car-hauling freighter peeled out of the port a mile and a half away. I say that because they ramp up to about 10 knots or more pretty quick. I guess because we are all used to it and know to stay out of the way, things go well. We know where they are headed and what they are doing. And then once in the shipping lane (seven miles away) they are not inclined to veer out of it. I did have one blast his horn at me once many years ago because he thought I was too close (less than a mile) I guess. So I defer to your rule of 3 or 4 miles, certainly, but here, for me, that is still quite a bit of room because we generally know where the bigger ships will be and to avoid them. So to be a mile or 2 from the shipping lane when one passes may not be unusual and I would say not considered hazardous by all concerned. The trick is though to be absolutely sure of where the shipping lane is! In the good ol' days of ded reckoning and RDFs and LORAN, if you had it, it was a lot more of an adventure! GPS, Radar and AIS (transceivers especially,) make everything so boringly safe now it's just no fun anymore!

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Don C L

....... I did have one blast his horn at me once many years ago because he thought I was too close (less than a mile) I guess. So I defer to your rule of 3 or 4 miles, certainly, but here, for me, that is still quite a bit of room because we generally know where the bigger ships will be and to avoid them. So to be a mile or 2 from the shipping lane when one passes may not be unusual and I would say not considered hazardous by all concerned. ....

He was probably quite happy with your 'less than a mile' but didn't want to you to get any closer........