How necessary is AIS?

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Not only are those of us without AIS idiots who can't navigate, but our wives are ugly and our kids are stupid. I hope that clears up the real world.

For those that use the "why wouldn't you get all the things ....." how many of you have gotten night vision systems? After all it greatly makes night boating safer and just makes sense doesn't it?

Because the cost to benefit ratio is so poor for night vision systems. They cost a lot and deliver very little useful benefit. Where the marginal cost of adding AIS is low, and the benefit is high. Pretty simple trade-off.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Yes, I bet you guys are right about the fishing vessel. When I lived in a port city I had a view of all the shipping vessels going by. It was rare, but not uncommon to pull of the AIS screen and see nothing for a given ship that was in front of my house. For whatever reason not all ships display the requisite signals.

My point (as I'm sure you all get) is that AIS provides a partial picture of reality. In our screen-driven world too many people mistake what they see on their ipad or chartplotter with what is actually in front of them or under them.

AIS is without a doubt a useful tool. But it is certainly not necessary in any waters I'm familiar with, and this includes busy shipping channels.

DotDun, thanks for that info. It's nice to learn my paranoia is occasionally justified [emoji6].

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Not only are those of us without AIS idiots who can't navigate, but our wives are ugly and our kids are stupid. I hope that clears up the real world.

For those that use the "why wouldn't you get all the things ....." how many of you have gotten night vision systems? After all it greatly makes night boating safer and just makes sense doesn't it?

Originally Posted by Kenomac

I was firmly in the AIS is nice but not necessary "camp" having only an AIS receiver until my AIS epiphany took place two years ago, now we have two ais units onboard, the Standand Horizon VhF receiver and now the Vesper Marine Watchmate. Two years ago we found ourselves twice in very windy conditions 35-50 knots sailing or motoring at night being able to see the ferries and freighters on radar and AIS receiver, but not knowing if they could see us. When contacted via VHF, the ships did acknowledge us and "see us" but it showed me the importance of being "seen" by the BIG BOYS and GIRLS. They can't always see you on their radar.

It's only a matter of time before the "AIS isn't important camp" each individually experience their own epiphany, until then.... it's like discussing the subject with a tree. I can certainly understand not wanting ais or needing it and even poo pooing the idea if all you've ever done is day sailing and short coastal hops, but as soon as one ventures out beyond the comfort zone... AIS is really nice in that it lets the BIG guys know you're out there.

Like I wrote earlier in the thread, "....It's like discussing the subject with a tree" until the AIS epiphany takes place.

Myself included among the trees until two years ago.

[smj]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Several posters have suggested more accidents could or do happen because people are fixated on screens, or as Mike just said the screen dosent always reflect reality.
Imo just silly arguments, no one is suggesting just stare at a screen and ignore everything else or that everything out there will be on that screen. Its like a chartplotter, often coming into anchorages I stop looking at it completely in order to focus 100% on whats immediately around me(coral).
If some use these "screens" incorrectly this dosent reflect a failing in the technology, it reflects a failing in the user.

You are experienced but others are not. I was on a boat that ran onto rocks because the captain stared at the screen and not his surroundings. This was in the ICW, a 300' wide channel. He said he was using the chart plotter and radar to stay in the middle of the channel. WTF?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by daletournier

...
If some use these "screens" incorrectly this dosent reflect a failing in the technology, it reflects a failing in the user.

Very true Dale. My point was not that people use it badly, therefore it is bad. I'm simply responding to the question (is it necssary?) and trying to provide real answers based on actual data. You (and others) seem to be saying AIS Tx IS necessary. The evidence I see does not bare this out.

Now, if you want to present it as a cost-benefit analysis, then I might be with you. I think AIS Rx is a good deal. And it may be the Tx versions have now come down in price. When I looked at them they were many hundreds more expensive, but that was at least three years ago now. It would still be a larger install project (unless that tech has changed as well). And I still don't like the idea of transmitting my data to all and sundry. But I understand the cost-benefit perspective.

Until I see actual evidence all I can tell you is that in traversing rather busy shipping zones I have not found AIS to be necessary. Fun at times (what is that ship, and how fast/direction is it going). Useful in planning squeeze areas through narrows and locks. And rarely to communicate by name. But none of these are necessary. Generations of small vessel mariners managed without this doodad. If it was such a boon to safety we'd see it in the stats.

It's a useful tool. It's not necessary, until the governments all mandate it so ... which is not something I want to encourage.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Like I wrote earlier in the thread, "....It's like discussing the subject with a tree" until the AIS epiphany takes place.

Myself included in the tree camp until two years ago.

Nothing worse than someone who's kicked an addition or found religion. It's like talking to the sky [emoji6].

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Several posters have suggested more accidents could or do happen because people are fixated on screens, or as Mike just said the screen dosent always reflect reality.
Imo just silly arguments, no one is suggesting just stare at a screen and ignore everything else or that everything out there will be on that screen. Its like a chartplotter, often coming into anchorages I stop looking at it completely in order to focus 100% on whats immediately around me(coral).
If some use these "screens" incorrectly this dosent reflect a failing in the technology, it reflects a failing in the user.

In fact it happens there have been several aviation accident where the pilots have sort of become fascinated with the screens and flown into the ground, the FAA has a name for those aircraft although I have forgotten what it is.
Had a kid pick me up at a local airport in the company Cessna 210, he took off from Dawson Ga headed toward Albany Ga, a distance of maybe 10 miles, you could easily see Albany, however he got flustered trying to program Albany into the GPS that he didn't do anything else, the whole time the engine was screaming at take off RPM, finally I couldn't stand it anymore and I told him that I was going to reduce RPM before it blew up, he was locked into having to program that GPS when the airport was in sight.

[smj]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

In fact it happens there have been several aviation accident where the pilots have sort of become fascinated with the screens and flown into the ground, the FAA has a name for those aircraft although I have forgotten what it is.
Had a kid pick me up at a local airport in the company Cessna 210, he took off from Dawson Ga headed toward Albany Ga, a distance of maybe 10 miles, you could easily see Albany, however he got flustered trying to program Albany into the GPS that he didn't do anything else, the whole time the engine was screaming at take off RPM, finally I couldn't stand it anymore and I told him that I was going to reduce RPM before it blew up, he was locked into having to program that GPS when the airport was in sight.

One of the guys that programmed their autopilot to go to the buoy waypoint and ran into it was a pilot. Great with instruments but he kinda sucked at eyeball navigation.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Nothing worse than someone who's kicked an addition or found religion. It's like talking to the sky [emoji6].

Your time will come.... or rather, your "Oh Schitt!" moment.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I don't understand how stats can not reflect what would seem to be logical. For instance I have read numerous times that anti lock brakes change the accident rates for automobiles not all, no effect. How, why?

On the fishing boat thing yes, they don't like having them, ones around my home port would only program the MMSI number in the thing, nothing else at all. I believe they don't like it because they feel it's giving away their fishing grounds I guess, sort of like the treasure hunters, think they like displaying exact position all the time?

Statistics and statisticians should remain unmentioned. I checked carefully. A vessel equipped with anti lock brakes has never been involved in a collision at sea.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by smj

One of the guys that programmed their autopilot to go to the buoy waypoint and ran into it was a pilot. Great with instruments but he kinda sucked at eyeball navigation.

I remember my first coastal navigation course prior to GPS. We were warned about not setting a course on the chart that intersected with a buoy. Always use an offset. Too much risk of the helmsman following the compass and driving into it. There was suggestion to remove the compass as a solution.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Paul L

I remember my first coastal navigation course prior to GPS. We were warned about not setting a course on the chart that intersected with a buoy. Always use an offset. Too much risk of the helmsman following the compass and driving into it. There was suggestion to remove the compass as a solution.

We have a "post of the week" winner!

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by smj

You are experienced but others are not. I was on a boat that ran onto rocks because the captain stared at the screen and not his surroundings. This was in the ICW, a 300' wide channel. He said he was using the chart plotter and radar to stay in the middle of the channel. WTF?

I understand, but stupid is stupid its not the technology's fault. Just use it properly.
Ive seen the same here recently (cocos keeling) we came in at first light, blowing hard, we dropped anchor outside the anchorage which wasnt overly comfortable. The plotter said we were fine to go in BUT the sun was in my eyes and there's no way I'm heading into a unknown to me coral anchorage with out good vis, we were very tired but choose to sit it out until the sun was higher in the sky. Since then I've seen a couple of boats come in at first light just using their plotters, I don't have that much faith. How you use the equipment is upto you but don't blame the equipment for consequences of your actions.
Btw, I came in earlier than anticipated due to another boat entering the anchorage, I was able to record his ais track on open cpn which showed me the path was clear....another great use of ais.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Very true Dale. My point was not that people use it badly, therefore it is bad. I'm simply responding to the question (is it necssary?) and trying to provide real answers based on actual data. You (and others) seem to be saying AIS Tx IS necessary. The evidence I see does not bare this out.

Now, if you want to present it as a cost-benefit analysis, then I might be with you. I think AIS Rx is a good deal. And it may be the Tx versions have now come down in price. When I looked at them they were many hundreds more expensive, but that was at least three years ago now. It would still be a larger install project (unless that tech has changed as well). And I still don't like the idea of transmitting my data to all and sundry. But I understand the cost-benefit perspective.

Until I see actual evidence all I can tell you is that in traversing rather busy shipping zones I have not found AIS to be necessary. Fun at times (what is that ship, and how fast/direction is it going). Useful in planning squeeze areas through narrows and locks. And rarely to communicate by name. But none of these are necessary. Generations of small vessel mariners managed without this doodad. If it was such a boon to safety we'd see it in the stats.

It's a useful tool. It's not necessary, until the governments all mandate it so ... which is not something I want to encourage.

But Mike the necessary argument can apply to so many things on our boats, what's truely necessary to get from A to B? You are right Ais is not necessary, but where does the "not necessary list start and stop" maybe the question needs to be rephrased?

[Jim Cate]

Here's a situation where a tx AIS really does help:

Along the east coast of Oz there's quite a bit of coastal ship traffic, compounded by folks entering and leaving various ports... lots of enormous colliers in particular. No traffic separation zones either, outside of some large ports. It isn't unusual to have four or fiv vessels converging on a small area, coming from several different directions, and hapless you are in the middle of that area. Those ships, all with class A AIS, have been calculating their means of avoiding each other for some miles and many minutes. They've got it sorted... and then your puny radar return pops up, right in their way. All their calculations and negotiations are stuffed, and anxiety reigns for them and you as you see on your AIS rx the chaos developing. If you had been transmitting your class B signal, they would have been well aware that a WAFI was present, and you would have been part of the calculations from the start.

May not happen every day, but we've been in such a situation with four vessels, two N bound, two S bound, all converging on the area where folks make the turn around Cape Howe at the SE corner of the Oz mainland. Damn glad they knew well in advance that we were there!

If we have and use AIS, maybe they won't call us WAFIs so much!

Jim

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Here's a situation where a tx AIS really does help:

Along the east coast of Oz there's quite a bit of coastal ship traffic, compounded by folks entering and leaving various ports... lots of enormous colliers in particular. No traffic separation zones either, outside of some large ports. It isn't unusual to have four or fiv vessels converging on a small area, coming from several different directions, and hapless you are in the middle of that area. Those ships, all with class A AIS, have been calculating their means of avoiding each other for some miles and many minutes. They've got it sorted... and then your puny radar return pops up, right in their way. All their calculations and negotiations are stuffed, and anxiety reigns for them and you as you see on your AIS rx the chaos developing. If you had been transmitting your class B signal, they would have been well aware that a WAFI was present, and you would have been part of the calculations from the start.

May not happen every day, but we've been in such a situation with four vessels, two N bound, two S bound, all converging on the area where folks make the turn around Cape Howe at the SE corner of the Oz mainland. Damn glad they knew well in advance that we were there!

If we have and use AIS, maybe they won't call us WAFIs so much!

Jim

Excellent point Jim! I've experienced several similar situations and some you wouldn't think possible, which is why we switched over to transmitting.

You might remember that two years ago I sounded just like the "receive only" guys, not wanting others to know where I am. All it takes is one close call to wake up.

The BIG guys and little guys with AIS all know where we are and how to reach us if necessary. Communication is a two way street, not one way with "receive only," although receive only is still better than no AIS at all.

The "receive only" camp are folks who've most likely never been out in stormy conditions at night, where visibily stinks and other BIG guys are possibly crossing paths.