Apparently AIS & RADAR not Adequate Substitute for Lookout

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

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.

Sorry. I guess I got it backwards. I'm pretty sure the ferry skipper got so much of the blame because he was a pro and the other guy was an amateur.

Had it been two amateurs it probably would have been 50-50 as the pleasure boat really put himself in the dangerous position. My understanding is that the ferry saw him either dead in the water or going dead slow as they were approaching and thought it safe to pass him. It was only when he accelerated across their bow that things got exciting.

Had it been two pros . . . it probably wouldn't have happened.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

Sorry. I guess I got it backwards. I'm pretty sure the ferry skipper got so much of the blame because he was a pro and the other guy was an amateur.

Had it been two amateurs it probably would have been 50-50 as the pleasure boat really put himself in the dangerous position. My understanding is that the ferry saw him either dead in the water or going dead slow as they were approaching and thought it safe to pass him. It was only when he accelerated across their bow that things got exciting.

Had it been two pros . . . it probably wouldn't have happened.

The case makes the opposite point, I think, from the one you were trying to make.

Even in the extreme case of being overtaken, the yacht was obligated to be looking out behind, and to take action to avoid the collision, which he failed to do.

The point is that being stand-on in the initial phases of a crossing doesn't reduce your obligation to maneuver to prevent a collision if for any reason the give-way vessel doesn't resolve the situation.

That's exactly why you can't just go to sleep and tell yourself that you have the "right of way" and everyone has to "just get out of my way".

In fact being stand-on in many situations hardly changes anything. There are lots of reasons why other vessels might not maneuver, requiring you to maneuver yourself:

1. They are not in fact give-way (you are overtaking, fishing boat with certain gear out, NUC, CBD, etc.)

2. They don't see you

3. They are dealing with other traffic.

etc.

Fishing boats TYPICALLY don't maneuver -- they are busy with their work and often leave no one in the wheelhouse. They also TYPICALLY don't broadcast AIS, because they don't want competitors tracking them to the good fishing spots.

Both vessels in a crossing are required to be ACTIVE participants in the process. You can't do that when you're asleep. This is why I agree with Lodesman that round the world SOLO races are a fundamentally daft idea. If you can sort of get away with it in a slow cruising boat with good alarms set and maybe an egg timer for horizon scans, then it's a totally different ballgame on an Open 60 flying across the water at double digit speeds, and manned by the kind of foolish and untrained person described in the OP. It's only a matter of time before someone gets killed, maybe a whole family on a cruising boat not broadcasting AIS.


I shudder myself to think what it would be like to deal with a vessel like that. Imagine one of them coming up from behind, so I only get him on my one-mile radar guard zone (say I've missed him in my horizon scan and his AIS isn't working). He's making double digit speeds; I'm hove-to or sailing slowly -- I might have 3 minutes or less to impact. It might not be even possible to get out of his way.

[Sea Wolf]

Gee! Ya think?! LOL

[jalmberg]

Snore. Horse is dead, stop beating it.

[capn_billl]

AIs is great, but it has some real limitations.

You depend on the other boat to tell you where it is.

There are a lot of things that can go wrong there.

1. Bad radio reception
2. Bad GPS position (on either boat).
3. Electronics (need i say more?).

And the many boats for whatever reason don't have one.

RADAR

Not every boat shows up on one.

I've heard a noise, and had a small motorboat almost on top of me before I saw it.

I had just done a horizon scan a few minutes before, and the sea was empty.

I looked at the radar I had on, and it only showed a little sea noise until the other boat was quit close, then he dropped under my cone, and disappeared again.

(my radar is at the spreaders about 30 ft up).

Annd he wasn't transmitting AIS.

If I hadn't seen him, I would never have known he was there.

A regular 360 lookout is the only way, especially near coastal where smaller faster boats can be.

[Bill_Giles]

Don’t rely on fishing boats transmitting AIS when they are amongst fish. They will switch it off to stop alerting others that they are concentrating on one spot. These boats are wood or glass fibre so do not reflect radar well. I encountered this on the North Coast of Spain at night with visibility about one mile in the fog. Not nice. We spotted two fishing boats (invisible by AIS and radar) heading for us with complicated lights we realised that they were pair trawling and we were right between them and beat a hasty swing out of the way under sail.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by jalmberg

Snore. Horse is dead, stop beating it.

How egotistical is it to post in a thread, that you're not interested in that thread?

[Pizzazz]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

This would be a much better analogy if it wasn't completely wrong!
However it does illustrate how people can make false assumptions about the capabilities of technology when they really don't understand the technology itself. ABS does not allow you to go faster in slippery conditions. ABS does not actually allow you to stop faster in slippery conditions - in fact it can extend braking distance. It's purpose is to keep the wheels from locking so that control (ie. steering) can be maintained. Even then it can be defeated under certain conditions.

With due respect, I think I know how ABS works. The system itself does not make your car go faster as it does not add horsepower, fair enough. However, the average person breaking in slippery conditions will lock the wheels and will lose control. Yes, a few people can break better than the ABS can. A few people can manually focus better than an autofocus SLR could. Once ABS was adopted in mass, breaking distances became predictable and somewhat comparable irrespective of driver skill. This helps increase confidence and average speed on the highway in most conditions. There have been a number of studies on this and you said exactly the same after your first "show off" sentence.

[BoatBumm]

My understanding is that commercial fishing boats are notoriously secretive about where they are lest one of their competitors discovers their fishing hotspot. Therefore few if any commercial fishing boats run AIS. And I believe that the regulations permit this. They are exempt. I’m happy to be corrected if I’m wrong. And military vessels also do not usually display their position with AIS.

I single hand, but on a boat that tops out at 7 knots, and 5-6 is more typical. My “night watch” is done only in no to low traffic areas, and relies on AIS, periodic radar sweeps, a careful 360 degree look around with both the Mark I eyeballs and good 7x50 binoculars. Finally I’ll sleep in the cockpit for no longer than 30 minutes and repeat this process. It’s interesting that I have a loud alarm set for 30 minute intervals, but I almost always wake up at about 25 minutes. Am I taking a risk? Yes. But a calculated one. And given the size of my 34’ boat anything I’m likely to run into is almost certainly much larger and likely made of steel, so I’m mostly putting myself at risk, although there is the consideration that I could be making the other party in the collision feel guilty even though it’s not his/her fault. Plus disrupting their voyage.

At my slow speed I can be pretty comfortable that any other hazard is with visual range long before I’m going to hit within a half hour. The Vendee sailors cannot say that.

Also, it is abundantly clear that almost all commercial ships plying the world’s waters do not maintain an eyeball lookout. Many accounts of sailors bobbing in a life raft report watching ships sail right past them despite flares and other signaling devices.

But life has risks, and we all gotta die someday of something. No one is forcing you to be out there. Make your choices.

[Pizzazz]

Originally Posted by aqfishing

A fisherman's perspective. Firstly AIS is not a requirement in SA for my vessels...This means they have to share the shoal with other vessels instead of catching it all for themselves...This means that sadly most of the time their ais is not broadcasting.

I think we are clear on the rules and the requirements, so we are discussing our opinions. I feel it is fair that a fishing vessel or a naval ship may have a need not to broadcast and that is OK. But then the burden of collision avoidance should be on the fishing vessel or naval ship... they keep a lookout and if conditions require they can switch on the AIS or alert on the radio. Some ships have done this to me... once I got a call on the radio at night to keep clear of a warship 1, I responded I could not see them on the radar and boom suddently they showed up 2.5 nm to port then disappeared after 1 min. I thought that was more than fair given the conditions, so I stayed clear of that point even though I could not see the ship. Quite an experience actually.

[rcolesny]

As per Capt Licence course, a fishing vessel, trawling has reduced ability to maneuver and becomes the stand on vessel over a sailboat.... even if his AIS is turned off.
I suspect that all electronics failed on the sailboat. It is a combination of very bad circumstances...
OSCAR R https://www.oscar-navigation.com/ind...racing-series/ should have alarmed. I don't know where is had been m mounted, but if it was not mast head, It could have been blocked by the carbon fiber of the jib.
I more suspect an electricity supply glitch...
When it comes to keep watch, yes... But solo racers are facing this "legal" question since the first OSTAR race in 1960. This topic became even more contentious in 1976 about Club Mediterranée skipped by Alain Colas... a 236ft monster...
What ever happened, Boris is a super sailor.
To be continued.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Pizzazz

With due respect, I think I know how ABS works. The system itself does not make your car go faster as it does not add horsepower, fair enough. However, the average person breaking in slippery conditions will lock the wheels and will lose control. Yes, a few people can break better than the ABS can. A few people can manually focus better than an autofocus SLR could. Once ABS was adopted in mass, breaking distances became predictable and somewhat comparable irrespective of driver skill. This helps increase confidence and average speed on the highway in most conditions. There have been a number of studies on this and you said exactly the same after your first "show off" sentence.

When ABS brakes were adopted en masse, there was no change in braking (as opposed to breaking) distances. If anyone is stupid enough to think that ABS helps them brake in shorter distances and therefore drives faster when it's slippery clearly doesn't understand what the technology provides or the limitations of that technology. The same thing with AIS - it is a fine technology, but it has its limitations and should be considered an additional tool for safety, rather than the primary anti-collision tool. It's not designed for that role, so we should be reinforcing that message rather than trying to mandate that every vessel have multiple redundant AIS's in case one breaks.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by rcolesny

. . .
OSCAR R https://www.oscar-navigation.com/ind...racing-series/ should have alarmed. I don't know where is had been m mounted, but if it was not mast head, It could have been blocked by the carbon fiber of the jib.

Indeed an OSCAR system is a visual system, day and night sensitive cameras with AI software. It has to be mounted at the top of the mast so as to not have its view obstructed else it will be blanketed by sails and basically useless.

The top of a mast can become quite the clutter of instrumentation all competing for the limited mounting space. A fractional rigging would seem to avail mounting the forward scanning cameras a bit down from the top, rather like how radar systems are mounted ahead of the mast. I believe that OSCAR is presently only forward scanning and is not looking side to side or behind so it will not be useful in mitigating against crossing or overtaking closures. But it seems that a rotating camera scheme could readily be constructed so as to be looking all around, much like one's radar is scanning 360 degrees, albeit often with a bit of shadow of obstruction due to a mast.

Basically OSCAR is another set of eyes, aiding but should not be solely relied upon. Of keen benefit is that being top mounted it likely can see downward towards low floating objects better than a helmsperson / watch keeper sitting in a cockpit behind a dodger. Probably presently an expensive piece of kit.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Indeed an OSCAR system is a visual system, day and night sensitive cameras with AI software. It has to be mounted at the top of the mast so as to not have its view obstructed else it will be blanketed by sails and basically useless.

The top of a mast can become quite the clutter of instrumentation all competing for the limited mounting space. A fractional rigging would seem to avail mounting the forward scanning cameras a bit down from the top, rather like how radar systems are mounted ahead of the mast. I believe that OSCAR is presently only forward scanning and is not looking side to side or behind so it will not be useful in mitigating against crossing or overtaking closures. But it seems that a rotating camera scheme could readily be constructed so as to be looking all around, much like one's radar is scanning 360 degrees, albeit often with a bit of shadow of obstruction due to a mast.

Basically OSCAR is another set of eyes, aiding but should not be solely relied upon. Of keen benefit is that being top mounted it likely can see downward towards low floating objects better than a helmsperson / watch keeper sitting in a cockpit behind a dodger. Probably presently an expensive piece of kit.

The specs from the link indicate 2 cameras, looking fwd & rear, each with a 120º field of view (IR 50º).

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The case makes the opposite point, I think, from the one you were trying to make.

Even in the extreme case of being overtaken, the yacht was obligated to be looking out behind, and to take action to avoid the collision, which he failed to do.

The point is that being stand-on in the initial phases of a crossing doesn't reduce your obligation to maneuver to prevent a collision if for any reason the give-way vessel doesn't resolve the situation.

That's exactly why you can't just go to sleep and tell yourself that you have the "right of way" and everyone has to "just get out of my way".

In fact being stand-on in many situations hardly changes anything. There are lots of reasons why other vessels might not maneuver, requiring you to maneuver yourself:

1. They are not in fact give-way (you are overtaking, fishing boat with certain gear out, NUC, CBD, etc.)

2. They don't see you

3. They are dealing with other traffic.

etc.

Fishing boats TYPICALLY don't maneuver -- they are busy with their work and often leave no one in the wheelhouse. They also TYPICALLY don't broadcast AIS, because they don't want competitors tracking them to the good fishing spots.

Both vessels in a crossing are required to be ACTIVE participants in the process. You can't do that when you're asleep. This is why I agree with Lodesman that round the world SOLO races are a fundamentally daft idea. If you can sort of get away with it in a slow cruising boat with good alarms set and maybe an egg timer for horizon scans, then it's a totally different ballgame on an Open 60 flying across the water at double digit speeds, and manned by the kind of foolish and untrained person described in the OP. It's only a matter of time before someone gets killed, maybe a whole family on a cruising boat not broadcasting AIS.


I shudder myself to think what it would be like to deal with a vessel like that. Imagine one of them coming up from behind, so I only get him on my one-mile radar guard zone (say I've missed him in my horizon scan and his AIS isn't working). He's making double digit speeds; I'm hove-to or sailing slowly -- I might have 3 minutes or less to impact. It might not be even possible to get out of his way.

I agree with every point you make - except maybe "foolish and untrained". I might perhaps use "misguided". These racers are the front men for a HUGE industry trying hard (and succeeding to a large degree) to sell yachts and equipment to mostly, dare I say it, mostly foolish and untrained people. Just look at the list of sponsors! Just look at the number of boats sitting in marinas or boatyard rarely (if ever) going out! It's big, big business!

EVERYBODY has the responsibility and a role to play in avoiding the collision. It is usually when BOTH parties fail that accidents happen (although a couple of the US navy's recent encounters with merchant ships may be exceptions &#128522