Apparently AIS & RADAR not Adequate Substitute for Lookout

[StuM]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

I think everyone is forgetting that the entire incident turns on whether the fishing boat was actually fishing or not.

If fishing gear was in the water, Boris would have been required to alter course.

If the fishing boat was just steaming, however, the fishing boat would be considered a power vessel required to give way to a sailboat under sail.

Lest we forget Rule 17 (b):
When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

Or the ferry captain who was found 33% responsible for running over a small boat (again killing two people) when threading his way through the pleasure boat fleet off Horseshoe Bay.

If that was the 1985 incident, I believe the ferry took 2/3 of the blame, for failing to give way when overtaking. The pleasure craft got 1/3 of the blame almost entirely for failing to lookout.

[LittleWing77]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

Sure it does. The fishing boat has just as much responsibilty as the yacht to avoid a collision.

And it was not an overtaking situation, the bow of the fishing boat hit the starboard side of the racing vessel...

Originally Posted by StuM

Lest we forget Rule 17 (b):
When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

Which I already said, Stu. (Post #83, quoted above)

I just think everyone is getting their knickers in a twist over Boris, but of course the fishing vessel had equal responsibility.

If the fishing vessel had been keeping appropriate watch, why was there not a VHF hail to Boris? Why did the fishing vessel not manouvre to avoid collision?

Tunnel vision does not make one right.

Also, Stu, just a little aside: the almost-collision Boris had earlier was with a commercial tanker who initially refused to alter course until Boris informed them that he was a yacht under sail. That was when Boris replied, "Ha!" That quote/exchange you cited was NOT related to the fishing vessel incident...

Cheers, All.
LittleWing77

[donradcliffe]

Ah, the armchair sailors chime in again. I recall a collision between one of the fully crewed RTW boats and a fishing boat. The race boat was coming into Hong Kong finish at full roar in the middle of the night. In spite of radar, AIS, no autopilot and 4 or 5 lookouts, the racers sunk the fishing boat and killed her captain. **** happens.

I remember blasting along the west coast of Nicaraugua one night in a Papagao. Saw a rowboat out fishing with no lights just in time to miss him by half a boat length. It could have gone badly for me that night, and I don't think I'm in a position to criticize others for their bad luck.

[JPA Cate]

If you're a Vendee Globe racer, there are many risks you try to minimize: you have an autopilot that scans ahead, and tries to steer the boat enough away from its course that you set, as it sees it; you have AIS, with it's alarm; you have radar with its alarm, as well. It's just my opinion, but I just don't think anyone would anticipate all would fail so close together! What an awful thing to happen.

I sure as heck wouldn't want that on my watch!

Ann

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

If you're a Vendee Globe racer, there are many risks you try to minimize: you have an autopilot that scans ahead, and tries to steer the boat enough away from its course that you set, as it sees it; you have AIS, with it's alarm; you have radar with its alarm, as well. It's just my opinion, but I just don't think anyone would anticipate all would fail so close together! What an awful thing to happen.

I sure as heck wouldn't want that on my watch!

Ann

There was no indication that he even had his radar switched on.

His comments indicated deep ignorance about collision avoidance.

I think Stu's comments were very fair.

An no, we're not "armchair sailors".

I've done some racing, and I have spent a lot of time sailing among racers (especially in the Solent). It is my impression that competence in collision avoidance is not sufficiently prioritized among racers, not by a long shot. In my experience, they typically consider themselves to be as if out on a football pitch, as if the sea were a sports field where non-participants are just in the way.

That comment -- "Get out of my way, I’m a sailboat. I have right of way!" Is quite typical, and is deeply wrong on multiple levels. It's very right to condemn this.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

If the fishing vessel had been keeping appropriate watch, why was there not a VHF hail to Boris? Why did the fishing vessel not manouvre to avoid collision?

the almost-collision Boris had earlier was with a commercial tanker who initially refused to alter course until Boris informed them that he was a yacht under sail.

Why would you assume the FV hadn't tried to raise him on VHF? If he was asleep, down below he may not have heard it. The reason FV comes above SV in the pecking order is that it can be very difficult for them to manoeuvre.

We've only got one perspective on the bulker incident - for all we know, Boris was overtaking and insisting on "right of way". To even use that term is to show profound ignorance.

[ausnp84]

Originally Posted by chrisr

sorry but i'd like to inject some facts into the debate

until i retired few years ago i was a director of a shipping company. one of our vessels came into collision with a fishing boat, a bit east of tasman island (near hobart). the fishing boat ran into our stb side ie we were give way vessel. nobody injured / fair bit of damage to F/B and a few paint scratches for us.

the mate on watch & the lookout were charged and pleaded guilty to failing to keep a proper lookout.

collision liability and costs were settled on 50/50 basis, as everyone on the F/B was asleep !(nb : we felt very hardly done by because the F/B were not charged with failing to keep a proper lookout as well, but that's what you get when a local collides with a foreign flag).

cheers,

Not the first time I’ve heard about fishing boats keeping an inadequate watch or acting with no regard for others in Biscay.

I lost my catamaran in a collision in southern Biscay two years ago as the FV involved wasn’t keeping a visual watch, and somehow didn’t see it on radar either. IIRC they weren’t fishing at the time, and their argument was my boat wasn’t sailing (the delivery skipper confirmed they were).

Add to that, on my last Biscay crossing we were almost in a collision as an FV made a last second manoeuvre to get close and point out to us some dolphins. Nice of him to do, but it was very nearly an expensive gesture.

Boris would have considered all risks and only shut his eyes IF he absolutely needed to. Be it a racing incident, bad luck, or failure to keep way, his frustration is understandable and the majority of the armchair experts (99% of whom have zero Vendee / multi-month offshore racing experience) racing to criticise him is pretty poor.

N

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by ausnp84

Not the first time I’ve heard about fishing boats keeping an inadequate watch.

I lost my catamaran in a collision in southern Biscay two years ago as the FV involved wasn’t keeping a visual watch, and somehow didn’t see it on radar either. IIRC they weren’t fishing at the time, and their argument was my boat wasn’t sailing (the delivery skipper confirmed they were).

Add to that, on my last Biscay crossing we were almost in a collision as an FV made a last second manoeuvre to get close and point out to us some dolphins. Nice of him to do, but it was very nearly an expensive gesture.

Boris would have considered all risks and only shut his eyes IF he absolutely needed to. Criticising him without being in his shoes (ie. the tail end of a Vendee) is pretty poor.

N

They were keeping an AIS watch only in spite of having radar, of the 14 crew 13 were asleep down below. I am even suspicious as to their nav lights as I did not see any in the direction they came from though I could see two set of green lights way off to stbd.
It was in the dark hours just before dawn around 0430 and we were making 6 knots under 1/3rd jib only with an E wind and beam seas up to 3metres average and after scanning the horizon I went down to check our position and calculate a course for when the wind went S later in the day according to forecasts..
The collision took out the stbd bow as they crossed us at an angle from the port. and the port bow was buckled as the boat rounded and impacted their hull and the mast snapped just above the gooseneck...
I did not even realize there had been a collision as we had been pounding badly in the seas for 2 days because of the low freeboard and I had been keeping speed to a minimum so my first thought was "we've lost the mast".
I rushed into the cockpit to find the hard bimini crushed down so made my way under it to the side deck to see the mast gone and the bimini flatted by the heavy boom.
Up ahead I saw the fishing boat laying about 500metres away beam on with lights being switched on.
They tried to convince me to abandon ship but after cutting away the mast and rigging I decided it was possible (in my opinion) to motor slowly in once the sea settled later.
In the end they towed us from the stern the 80nm into Viviero, N Spain.
My reluctance to abandon ship was based on not being prepared to abandon my evidence as to the facts of the event versus the story they would try to tell.. plus the owner had most of his gear on board as he was joining the boat in Almerimar after finalizing affairs in the UK.
I had bust his boat and was damned if he was going to lose who knows what else if I abandoned it.
The final outcome is still unknown as understandably I am not high on his 'Must stay in touch' list.

[ausnp84]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The final outcome is still unknown as understandably I am not high on his 'Must stay in touch' list.

Funnily enough I dropped you a message last week re: another delivery but it didn’t go through on Whatsapp...

The court case is still pending! Although thanks to you nursing the boat in / preservation of evidence, the FV’s statement that they weren’t keeping a visual watch, plus their AIS track, etc etc, the insurer is confident of winning their case against the FV.

I’ll of course let you know when I hear more.

N

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by ausnp84

Funnily enough I dropped you a message last week re: another delivery but it didn’t go through on Whatsapp...

The court case is still pending! Although thanks to you nursing the boat in / preservation of evidence, the FV’s statement that they weren’t keeping a visual watch, plus their AIS track, etc etc, the insurer is confident of winning their case against the FV.

I’ll of course let you know when I hear more.

N

Cheers mate.. good to know.
Don't have What's app anymore.. in fact have dumped all Zuckerberg products and also now considering adding Google once I decide on a new e-mail provider.. Yahoo ain't what it was.
Stay well..

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by ausnp84

the majority of the armchair experts (99% of whom have zero Vendee / multi-month offshore racing experience) racing to criticise him is pretty poor.

Y'know I don't need to try heroin to know that it's a stupid idea. Same way I can be critical of these solo RTW escapades. I've said it before and I'll say it again - there is no point to them being solo - it's just a stunt. The reality is, that with all the shore support, they're not really doing on their own anyway. Thinking of the discussions on drone-boats, it's only a matter of time before these things are being piloted remotely 24/7, with a lone occupant to "legitimize" the solo aspect, just like a NASA chimp. Sure they'll get a button to push, or switch to flip, but in reality it'll be "sit back, have a banana and enjoy the ride.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Y'know I don't need to try heroin to know that it's a stupid idea. Same way I can be critical of these solo RTW escapades. I've said it before and I'll say it again - there is no point to them being solo - it's just a stunt. The reality is, that with all the shore support, they're not really doing on their own anyway. Thinking of the discussions on drone-boats, it's only a matter of time before these things are being piloted remotely 24/7, with a lone occupant to "legitimize" the solo aspect, just like a NASA chimp. Sure they'll get a button to push, or switch to flip, but in reality it'll be "sit back, have a banana and enjoy the ride.

I agree entirely. It's a fundamentally daft idea. But if you're going to do it, you could at least take all possible precautions, like properly setting a radar guard zone rather than relying on AIS (as it sounds like he was doing). And take responsibility if it goes sideways, rather than whining about your right of way, another's vessel not broadcasting AIS, etc. Of course taking responsibility is little comfort to anyone if you run down and kill someone, like the Vestas team did. This incident is worthy of harsh criticism, and it would be good for all of us to actually understand why.

[Montanan]

FYI:

OSCAR helps prevent costly Vendee Globe collisions
3 November 2020

https://www.mysailing.com.au/offshor...obe-collisions

Eighteen of the 33 IMOCA competing in this winter’s solo lap of the planet have been fitted with the latest OSCAR system. This comprises a compact, lightweight masthead-mounted box containing forward-looking day and night cameras, linked to OSCAR’s processor down below that in turn connects to any type of display.

Ships of old used to have a man ‘up the crow’s nest’ able to survey the expanded horizon from the top of the mast – it is here that the shout ‘LAND AHOY’ comes from in pirate films. OSCAR performs a similar duty, only it does so electronically day and night continuously. OSCAR's innovation is to use artificial intelligence, and more precisely artificial vision, the technology that enables a machine to analyse, process and understand images.

OSCAR is making its contribution to the development of safety at sea. It is not the perfect or ultimate anti-collision system, but it is pioneering a technology that will contribute greatly. It will also improve with every mile sailed, for like a human being, the more OSCAR learns and the more experience it gains, the better it performs. The 18 IMOCAs it is fitted to in this Vendée Globe will each provide huge learning opportunities to fine tune the database, at the core of OSCAR.

A reliable collision warning system is the holy grail of marine safety aids. While OSCAR is being put through its paces and continues to ‘learn’ on solo non-stop round the world race boats, its applications elsewhere are far-reaching, starting with all types of pleasure boats that venture offshore, but also for ships and commercial vessels and of course the many un-manned boats currently under development around the world.

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by StuM

True, but potentially misleading, it's not the signing that makes them law.
"The Parties to the present Convention undertake to give effect to the Rules..."
There is one further step which makes them law beyond signing the treaty. Countries have to enact legislation giving COLREGS the force of law. But I am not aware of any signatories that have not done so.

Don't you think your point is moot? The Convention REQUIRES every signatory country to pass the necessary enabling statutes and, as you have pointed out, every country has done so. Therefore COLREGS (with some local additions and modifications - we have some in Canada) are LAW in every maritime nation.

I stand by my initial position!