Freighters vs. Sailboats

[S/V Alchemy]

Amazed this thread is still going.

Elsewhere this morning, the subject of the Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne was raised. Basically, they ran through two destroyers in separate incidents.

Melbourne
Melbourne

While military and not civilian/commercial, these sad and deadly incidents demonstrate that the physics of ship collisions are completely impartial, and that communication and training are key. Personally, I find it hard to fault the bridge crew of Melbourne in either case. It does illustrate, however, that close quarters are dangerous even with all the gadgets in the world at your disposal.

The USN developed a training film in response to the Evans incident. Old-school, but fascinating.

The Melbourne-Evans Incident (released 1975) - YouTube

And perhaps relevant in light of the current...and protracted...discussion.

[chrisjs]

Not exactly a freighter story but an experience last year in the Chesapeake may be of interest. We were the stand-on vessel (50ft, 7kt trawler) staying our course when another somewhat faster power vessel began to head towards us. We maintained our course expecting the other vessel to change course. When they did not, we were forced to slow abruptly. The other vessel continued on without slowing. Their response when hailed on the radio was to claim that they were right because they were a "fishing vessel". It is all a matter of definition but to my mind a 60ft party boat with a few lines hanging out the back (and all but invisible to an approaching boat) is not a colregs "fishing vessel". Just goes to show that there are a lot of opportunities to get hurt out there even when sticking to the rules. Trouble is best avoided especially if the other vessel is bigger and built of steel!!

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by S/V Alchemy

Amazed this thread is still going.

Elsewhere this morning, the subject of the Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne was raised. Basically, they ran through two destroyers in separate incidents.

Melbourne
Melbourne

While military and not civilian/commercial, these sad and deadly incidents demonstrate that the physics of ship collisions are completely impartial, and that communication and training are key. Personally, I find it hard to fault the bridge crew of Melbourne in either case. It does illustrate, however, that close quarters are dangerous even with all the gadgets in the world at your disposal.

The USN developed a training film in response to the Evans incident. Old-school, but fascinating.

And perhaps relevant in light of the current...and protracted...discussion.

Absolutely relevant. Underlines the point that collision avoidance is not a joke. And that it is more complicated then just "get out of the way". The thread is long because it is an interesting and serious subject, of which many cruisers have shockingly little knowledge.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Well, it's what in the army they call a cluster f*c* -- abject failure to keep a watch and take appropriate action by the overtaking tanker, and abject failure by the ferry to keep a watch and take appropriate action, when the tanker got to less than a mile or two and was evidently not taking action. Total cluster f*c*. 40 meters is a ridiculous distance -- unacceptable -- and hundreds of passengers involved! Both officers on watch should be keelhauled.

Its a bit hard to sort out from the video, but I'd say >90% of the responsibility lies with the MAFI on the ferry. They were less than half a mile apart when the ferry left the dock without checking for traffic, then turned to cross the channel in front of the tanker. The ferry driver couldn't see behind him and was probably blissfully unaware of the tanker until one of the deckhands ran screaming into the wheelhouse, which was about 20 seconds before the tanker hit the horn.

I would assume the tanker had a pilot on the bridge, but if I were him I would have assumed the ferry didn't see me, and would have been giving 5 blasts at least a minute before he decided he had a problem--unless I was distracted by strong drink or beautiful women.

[Ex-Calif]

Regarding the ship photo - If everyone is assuming that is a passing situation (and the tug is not there and the boat is actually making way) - then it really is no "panic" - A very typical passing situation for us - a little too close for my liking and I would be altering to port or starboard slightly - whether I have the motor on and floored would depend on the wind state and what point of sail I am actually on.

Here is MarkJ and I (and a crew) in a local beer can race.

Photo 1 - Ship has been monitored for a while - he is the stand on vessel as he is in a narrow channel and restricted and constrained. We are paralleling his path staying to his port
Photo 2 - Mark and I taking a last look at the top mark. The mark is on the opposite side of the channel. You can see one of our competitors under the bimini
Photo 3 - The ship is passing - this isn't too close for us. Just a normal day in the channel
Photo 4 - The ship is past, we have beared away significantly to aim at the mark and to cross him. One of our competitors has rounded (it's actually the channel buoy)

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Captain Jeffry

Re your picture: I am never in that position where I can't see his stern. I have made all the necessary changes in my course and speed well before that proximity encounter.

As our esteemed friends from the UK would say, you are talking bollocks. If you changed your course/speed well before, then risk of collision would no longer apply and you would have no need to take his stern.

Got a lot of mileage out of this pic. As David-OJ noted, he's obviously not going 25 kts with a tug buttoned on at his stern. I got the picture from a quick google as it had the right aspect to illustrate the point that fast ship/slow sailboat risk of collision means the sailboat is basically in front of the big ship. I hadn't intended for the conversation to focus on the proximity of the ship in the picture - that's not the point whatsoever. If you are closing on a steady bearing with him, then this is the same aspect you'll see through your bino's when he's 2 miles away. It would have been the same aspect, when you peered through your bino's when he was 6 miles away. It would have been the same aspect when the only hint of his existence was a puff of smoke on the other side of the horizon. As I said previously, the advice to point at his stern does not work for every encounter and certainly not where there is a 20-kt speed differential between the two vessels.

I trust that in this case no-one would point towards the big ship
and most here would have done the nautical squirrel (great descriptor) manoeuvre when he was 2 miles away.

[cappy208]

Wow! I learned something today! The 'Nautical Squirrel'.

Awesome!

Thank you from across the pond!

[Lodesman]

BTW, the perspective in the photo makes it difficult to judge the range, but I would say based on the comparitive size of the containers, this photo was taken at a range of about 4 cables - if you were stopped or running parallel, the CPA would be around 150 metres.

[cappy208]

@Lodesman. Do you think you would be on the right edge of the photo at CPA?

Or further away. My guestimation is you would be right at the edge of the photo. And by ship width and container size should be about 18 to 20 meters off. The tug is most likely 10 meters wide. The ship is from my poor eyesight 11 boxes wide. That equates to about 31 meters width. Add another for good measure. So the ship is 33 meters. About half width gets you to the edge of the photo. I can see no way you would be.more than 50 meters.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

Regarding the ship photo - If everyone is assuming that is a passing situation (and the tug is not there and the boat is actually making way) - then it really is no "panic" - A very typical passing situation for us - a little too close for my liking and I would be altering to port or starboard slightly - whether I have the motor on and floored would depend on the wind state and what point of sail I am actually on.

Here is MarkJ and I (and a crew) in a local beer can race.

Photo 1 - Ship has been monitored for a while - he is the stand on vessel as he is in a narrow channel and restricted and constrained. We are paralleling his path staying to his port
Photo 2 - Mark and I taking a last look at the top mark. The mark is on the opposite side of the channel. You can see one of our competitors under the bimini
Photo 3 - The ship is passing - this isn't too close for us. Just a normal day in the channel
Photo 4 - The ship is past, we have beared away significantly to aim at the mark and to cross him. One of our competitors has rounded (it's actually the channel buoy)

That's a very different and incomparably safer aspect.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by cappy208

@Lodesman. Do you think you would be on the right edge of the photo at CPA?

No, well outside of the photo. I based my estimation on what I judged to be the angle (12 degrees give or take) on his bow and the range - in my experience the mark 1 eyeball isn't capable of accurate measurements, so I stress this is an estimate only. I'm a bit out of practice, but during my career spent a lot of time looking at vessels from that vantage.

For comparison, this picture was likely shot from about 500 yards - the distance between the vessels is about 35 metres.

[cappy208]

This is sort of pointing out the differences in opinion which drive the OP. Here, two professional merchant mariners can't quite agree on the distance off (approximately) of this vessel, which is NOT moving, and is in good visibility, and we have all day to assess it.

Just to let you know, the vessel in the picture is only about 160 meters long, and 33 meters wide. I find it very difficult to think that from this perspective that one would be a ship length off at CPA. And I do believe the vantage point is closer than 2 cables.

You are spot on about the Unrep photo. 509 is 23 meters wide. so the gap is about one and a half ships wide. 509

@S/V Alchemy. You are surprised? Why, have SVs stopped getting run over by ships, or have SVs learned just in 500 posts from CF how to avoid? I don't think so!

[cappy208]

You are spot on about the Unrep photo. 509 is 23 meters wide. so the gap is about one and a half ships wide. 509

But then again, you knew how far apart the Unrep line is didn't you!?

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by cappy208

But then again, you knew how far apart the Unrep line is didn't you!?

[Dulls]

Might is right. Cant be bothered to read Col regs at the moment but my understanding is that power gives way to sail unless the power vessel is displaying the shapes or lights saying otherwise. Also some harbour by laws operate in conjunction with the col regs to colour the debate.

So
Might is Right
Show your intentions early early early
Might is Right
Give the Col regs a try out.
Get AIS