What can happen when you cut off a ferry

[goboatingnow]

In my experience, establishing VHF comms, while in extremis, is a waste of time. It can also lead to confusion in dense traffic areas and can mislead in certain circumstances.

On a one to one its fine, though often unnecessary.

Again, Im struck by theses who have little real experience of dense commercial traffic and the issues that arise. most here are talking about simple one to one situations.

BUT , stuff happens and there are times when you find yourself on a collision course , you then need to know and apply your rules.

Dave

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by CatInHand

Seems like you're suggesting common sense as opposed to rule of law.

Dunno about other places, but here the ferries are big, white, have a schedule and have a route. You can avoid them. They may not adhere perfectly to schedule or route, but if you are around where they go, you should be looking for them. It's common sense.

Following proper collision avoidance procedures, which includes following the rules, is not "opposed" to common sense, on the contrary.

If you know enough about ferry routes to avoid being where they are going to be, before you get into a tangle with them, then this is absolutely good practice and no kind of violation of the rules.

This becomes relatively easy if the ferries stick to channels, but you can navigate outside of them. You just stay out of the channels where possible, and cross them only if nothing is in sight. That's also good practice, and I do the same whenever I can, although with my 8 feet of draft I am often constrained to channels myself.

The problem is that these practices, while very good , are not enough to avoid collisions in all situations, particularly in open water. In particular, there has been vigorous objection from many sides to the idea that as long as you keep a close enough watch, you can just "keep out of the way". Well, unless you know ahead of time where the ferry is going (because they have particular routes, which you have wisely learned), the information you get from your eyeballs is not enough to for you to know how to keep out of the way, from a safe distance, and with a slow boat which needs a lot of time to travel several cables out of harm's way. That's what the whole debate is about.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

I've had a couple of comments in this thread but none about interpreting the COLREGS cuz I'm not dealing with them often enough to have any expertise whatsoever. I haven't bothered to call my buddy ferryboat skipper cuz I'm sure he would agree with the pros here in this discussion. It amazes me that the contentiousness can continue as long as it has.

Mac warned us pages ago that he, for one, was tired of reading another "Raku-centric" thread. So many threads are. I mention this as prelude to a week or so ago in a technical discussion another poster was having a go and challenging everything Commodore Bash said. The poster wasn't a newbie apparently but I think Bash has shown his bona fides often enough to not be challenged a lot. He was also mature enough to let it go at some point.

Another current thread is about the situation in Oriental, NC. It's very clear what the consensus of CFers is and yet the OP hangs in there with very little support from anyone. At some point, stubbornness and argumentativeness morphs into trollishness. I don't see what the payoff is for these folks.

Just sayin'.

Here's is my post of not too long ago....it is what I have seen of people who have just enough knowledge to be dangerous on the internet. Eventually things get straightened out...but it it's worse than a root canal sometimes...


"If anyone rereads a lot of threads, eventually you see how original comments when challenged by people who have a lot of experience/authority behind their posts quickly wither...those "original comments" become more and more clearly defined and so become ever more closer to the truth.

Then after awhile when it's decided that everybody is right to a point...then the "who me...I never meant/said that" runs it's course till it develops into the "OK all you smart/experienced/professional guys are just ruining the internet"... "

The payoff is that they are being heard...right or wrong....that's why eventually after a bunch of highly credentialed people blast them a new one...they eventually morph to neutral ground (some are actually smart enough to know it's there the moment they posted their somewhat incorrect quip) and then get all huffy with the 'experienced/knowledgeable crowd.

Some will actually post a long drawn out story...defend it like it's their child...have it posted neck and neck with an older thread that shows the story is being recycled incorrectly and then get so outrageous the threads are closed before the real truth comes out....

I stand corrected...what IS the payoff for these people???

[goboatingnow]

The problem is that these practices, while very good , are not enough to avoid collisions in all situations, particularly in open water. In particular, there has been vigorous objection from many sides to the idea that as long as you keep a close enough watch, you can just "keep out of the way". Well, unless you know ahead of time where the ferry is going (because they have particular routes, which you have wisely learned), the information you get from your eyeballs is not enough to for you to know how to keep out of the way, from a safe distance, and with a slow boat which needs a lot of time to travel several cables out of harm's way. That's what the whole debate is about.

+1 , and I don't know how many times we have to say it,

dave

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

In my experience, establishing VHF comms, while in extremis, is a waste of time. It can also lead to confusion in dense traffic areas and can mislead in certain circumstances.

On a one to one its fine, though often unnecessary.

Again, Im struck by theses who have little real experience of dense commercial traffic and the issues that arise. most here are talking about simple one to one situations.

BUT , stuff happens and there are times when you find yourself on a collision course , you then need to know and apply your rules.

Dave

Whether or not to use the VHF to help untangle a developing collision situation is a big debate, and I'm not sure there's any clear answer to it.

The MCA (the UK maritime agency, the most respected maritime agency in the world) strongly frowns on using the radio when a risk of collision exists. They warn that using the VHF can be a deadly distraction at a critical moment, that it can be difficult to establish communications, that you can end up communicating with the wrong vessel, with tragic results (they cite a concrete case), etc. The MCA says that the proper response to a developing collision situation is to fully concentrate on following the Rules and correct procedure and maneuvering order, to untangle the situation, and skip chattering on the radio. See: Guidance & Regulations

On the other hand, when I discussed this and other collision avoidance procedure issues with a bunch of professional mariners over on GCaptain, all of the professional mariners said they wanted to hear from us on the radio. Their argument, I think, was that they don't particularly trust us to know the Colregs or to maneuver in the correct way, and it is useful for them to hear our intentions.

So despite the MCA advice, I do tend to give a call nowadays if I'm not sure about another vessel's intentions. Now that I have AIS, it is vastly easier since you know the name of the ship you have a problem with, and can establish communications without faffing about, wasting time, sowing confusion, etc. What I hear, without exception, when I do call, is something like "Of course I see you. I am passing 5 cables behind you; I altered course 10 miles ago."

These are cases -- when I feel compelled to call on the radio -- when it "doesn't feel right" to me, despite having accurate MARPA and even AIS. Imagine if I made a 180 degree turn, to "get out of the way", as it might seem to me, because the crossing "didn't feel right". Instead of passing 5 cables ahead, I would have been tacking right back under his bows, something I cannot perceive with my eyeballs. Really underlines the danger of these ad-hoc maneuvers.

I've started to trust the AIS more, and I've started to learn to interpret it to understand exactly what the other helmsman has planned. Crossing 5 cables ahead of a fast-moving car carrier would have been totally unacceptable to me a year ago. But now with a little interpretation, I can see whether or not he sees me, and has the crossing under his control, and that gives much more confidence.

Interestingly (thread drift alert) -- in a perpendicular crossing, the CPA does not occur when you cross his bows -- it occurs somewhat later. But the key thing is what is the distance when you cross his bows, because once you are across, the risk of collision falls off drastically and the minimum safe clearance becomes less. So the absolutely terrifying 0.4nm CPA is usually actually 5 cables ahead, which seems to be standard crossing practice in the Channel. My previous rule was never less than two miles, if passing ahead of a fast ship. With AIS, it's all very different.

[goboatingnow]

I agree with MMSI and ships names things have got a lot easier. Paradoxically now with AIS, I rarely see the need to go on the VHF at all. I also find with the poor english often displayed on the radio that often things can get confused.

Im with the MCA on this , but I do see your issues. generally I don't call in crossing situations. I only call ships when I have time to spare. the white flare is a good idea, I must put one in the cockpit.

I also agree that with AIS, the tendency is to stick to the COLREGS as you have more info as to ships courses.

mind you 5 cables, is close at night

dave

[goboatingnow]

The only information we had was that he was paying attention to his radar while a ferry was barreling down on him.

That may or may not make him partly to blame, but the overriding point is that an overtaking vessel MUST keep clear and it clearly did not.

Can you not accept that

dave

[Paul Elliott]

You know what they say about wrestling with pigs? You get dirty and the pig likes it.

I'm liking this "debate" way too much. So as not to be that pig, I will withdraw from the field until something new comes up.

[boatman61]

We have a Century..... +
World record for Biggest Wave Ever !! Bristol Tenn. 130k + - YouTube

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

... I am not aware that there is any littoral state which did not sign the Convention, but interestingly, among the very few reservations to the Convention, and I believe the only material one, was made by Canada, which insisted on reserving the right to formulate its own version of Rule 10. Since the other states signed subject to Canada's reservation, they agreed that Canada may may make an exceptional deviation from the Rules.

...I trust this is a sufficiently precise answer to your question?

Much more precise thank you

You can see the status of IMO conventions here: IMO | Status of Conventions
Not surprisingly the usual banana republics (Iraq, Somalia) haven't signed, but there are a few surprising ones in there too.

I'm unaware of any great difference between Canada's rule 10 and the ROW's, other than a few added paragraphs. I'm interested to hear more about it, if you can expand on the point?

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Following proper collision avoidance procedures, which includes following the rules, is not "opposed" to common sense, on the contrary.

If you know enough about ferry routes to avoid being where they are going to be, before you get into a tangle with them, then this is absolutely good practice and no kind of violation of the rules.

This becomes relatively easy if the ferries stick to channels, but you can navigate outside of them. You just stay out of the channels where possible, and cross them only if nothing is in sight. That's also good practice, and I do the same whenever I can, although with my 8 feet of draft I am often constrained to channels myself.

The problem is that these practices, while very good , are not enough to avoid collisions in all situations, particularly in open water. In particular, there has been vigorous objection from many sides to the idea that as long as you keep a close enough watch, you can just "keep out of the way". Well, unless you know ahead of time where the ferry is going (because they have particular routes, which you have wisely learned), the information you get from your eyeballs is not enough to for you to know how to keep out of the way, from a safe distance, and with a slow boat which needs a lot of time to travel several cables out of harm's way. That's what the whole debate is about.

One reality of WA state ferry routes is that they exist only in general. The boats navigate as they need to in order to avoid traffic, and sometimes apparently only for a change in scenery. Heading south, I have seen ferries avoid the mile wide channel between Frost Island and Blakely, and pass between Blakely and Willow Island, which is a channel around 400 feet wide. Why? Cause it's more interesting, I suppose.

If I see a ferry off to starboard ahead, I may edge over to port to reassure the ferry I'm paying attention, but the idea that in these waters one would scurry out of the way every time a ferry heaves into sight is moronic.

The point is that these ferries are highly maneuverable, and have to be because of the amount of pleasure boat traffic they contend with a few weekends out of the year. I've been overtaken by them oh, maybe 500 times, and they generally keep 100 yards away or so. In this case, one ran over the top of a sailboat traveling in the same direction, and while the sailboat captain should be watching, his fault is general while the fault of the ferry captain was specific - running over another vessel you are overtaking. This happened in clear weather without anyone on the bridge of the ferry bothering to look at their radar or what was in front of them that could be clearly seen by passengers.

Fortunately, the CG inquiry won't be paneled with Internet goof balls belaboring navigation nonsense, so this inquiry should be brief, and we might learn something from it.

[goboatingnow]

Boatie you old sea dog.

[goboatingnow]

damm pipped again

dave

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

PS as a good sailor , you should be able to recite the main pieces of the COLREGS from memory !!!
dave

Uh, oh.

I have a terrible memory. I write things down, and then put them in the first place I'll look-- otherwise, I'd forget where I put them.

I was going to post something else...

[boatman61]

Hic