Freighters vs. Sailboats

[Lodesman]

I'm with Nigel. If there's room the big ships can and will manoeuvre. When there isn't room the rules account for that. There's no need to muck with the rules, and no need to make up your own rules.

[goboatingnow]

The fact is there are many situations especially in Northern European waters where sailboats must stay clear. Extending that to non channelised waters for craft under sail less then 50m would be little hardship , would codify a situation thAt is commonplace and remove these silly debates

Dave

PS. Ships today will not respond to calls unless you name them ( in the main)

Dave

[evm1024]

I don't see a gain in changing the rules and I do see some potential failings.

Ships with licensed bridge crew "should" have the ability to assess and respond to any encounter with another vessel regardless of the size. Of course there are circumstances that make it such that there is no good answer. Be that as it may be.

If we were to change the rules to (oh say) Sailing vessels under 20 meters shall not impede power vessels we end up with a small sailboat (think 5 meters) doing 5 kt having to get out of the way of a 3 meter power boat doing 40 kt.

Ah you say we can change the rule to be Sailing vessels shall not impede power vessels over 15 meters. Now we have to make the decision is the PV more than or less than 15 meters? Confusion leads to collision.

And then there is the case where the 10 meter sailing vessel is ghosting along under light wind2 at 2 kt through the water. The 100 meter PV is aimed directly for them at 20 kt. It is clear that the SV cannot get out of the way so the SB starts up their engine. Now the SV is a PV. What to do?

DO we add another rule: SV that become PV shall retail the classification of a SV until clear? Or shall we apply PV vs PV rules.

I think you see my point. If you change the rule for sailing vessels you end up having to make a whole lot of changes that are not quite so clear on the water.....


Regards

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by evm1024

I don't see a gain in changing the rules and I do see some potential failings.

Ships with licensed bridge crew "should" have the ability to assess and respond to any encounter with another vessel regardless of the size. Of course there are circumstances that make it such that there is no good answer. Be that as it may be.

If we were to change the rules to (oh say) Sailing vessels under 20 meters shall not impede power vessels we end up with a small sailboat (think 5 meters) doing 5 kt having to get out of the way of a 3 meter power boat doing 40 kt.

Ah you say we can change the rule to be Sailing vessels shall not impede power vessels over 15 meters. Now we have to make the decision is the PV more than or less than 15 meters? Confusion leads to collision.

And then there is the case where the 10 meter sailing vessel is ghosting along under light wind2 at 2 kt through the water. The 100 meter PV is aimed directly for them at 20 kt. It is clear that the SV cannot get out of the way so the SB starts up their engine. Now the SV is a PV. What to do?

DO we add another rule: SV that become PV shall retail the classification of a SV until clear? Or shall we apply PV vs PV rules.

I think you see my point. If you change the rule for sailing vessels you end up having to make a whole lot of changes that are not quite so clear on the water.....


Regards

well I suggested it ,I specifically stated 50m , because that is identifiable. not 10 or 15

dave

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

would codify a situation thAt is commonplace and remove these silly debates

The situation is codified. Rule 18.

The things is, that where large vessels are constrained, there are typically adjacent waters where small vessels can be (outside channel markers, inshore traffic zone, etc.) which makes it relatively easy for the sailboat to not be where the freighter will be. Out in open water, there is no "safe haven" for small vessels; in this case putting the onus on the slower, less manoeuvrable vessel for avoiding action, doesn't make sense. A sailboat is 'less manoeuvrable' in this sense, because it is limited by the strength and direction of the wind, in the course(s) it can maintain, and the speed it can make good.

[markpierce]

In a channel it's usually clear what is the correct move when encountering a ship. While in the process of crossing to the starboard side of the channel (showing "red" to the ship), it was prudent for me to alter course to stay on the port side in order to avoid a confrontation with this freighter.

[donradcliffe]

Here is a good description of what can happen when a freighter meets a sailboat at night.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/4474382...-006-final.pdf

My mind's already made up on who caused this collision, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Here is a good description of what can happen when a freighter meets a sailboat at night.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/4474382...-006-final.pdf

My mind's already made up on who caused this collision, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Going from the report, I would say 50/50.

[Dockhead]

Plenty of fault to go around.

Poor watchkeeping on both vessels, although there but for the Grace of God . . .

Radar off -- at night! -- on the yacht, and AIS range set wrong. Surprising, considering the great amount of experience (25+ years each) of the yacht crew. And no radar reflector!

I thought that it was very interesting that both watchkeepers failed to interpret nav lights correctly. The ship saw the yacht's green sidelight, and yet turned to starboard. That was one of the biggest mistakes in the whole fiasco.

Watchkeeper on the yacht failed to grasp the danger in his green-to-green pass; failed to understand that he was crossing the ship's bows; failed to agree the pass early enough; failed to understand how close the ship was.

Watchkeeper on the ship had big failure of situational awareness; did not understand where the yacht was or where it was going despite having seen the nav lights.


Wow, this is what we call a cluster fork.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Plenty of fault to go around.

Poor watchkeeping on both vessels, although there but for the Grace of God . . .

Radar off -- at night! -- on the yacht, and AIS range set wrong. Surprising, considering the great amount of experience (25+ years each) of the yacht crew. And no radar reflector!

I thought that it was very interesting that both watchkeepers failed to interpret nav lights correctly. The ship saw the yacht's green sidelight, and yet turned to starboard. That was one of the biggest mistakes in the whole fiasco.

Watchkeeper on the yacht failed to grasp the danger in his green-to-green pass; failed to understand that he was crossing the ship's bows; failed to agree the pass early enough; failed to understand how close the ship was.

Watchkeeper on the ship had big failure of situational awareness; did not understand where the yacht was or where it was going despite having seen the nav lights.


Wow, this is what we call a cluster fork.

Agreed. And there but for the grace of god …. - also agreed

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

My mind's already made up on who caused this collision, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Thanks for that, the report is now printed and waiting for my watchkeepers to read, digest and learn.
Lots of mistakes on both sides, making assumptions and poor lookout.
I'll not recount the number of times I have found a badly set up radar, it worries me too much.

One other point, when my 2nd Mate does a passage plan, they are required not to draw a course line exactly over a recommended route, but to keep the recommended route some distance on the port side.
In this case, it appears both the bulky and yacht were following the recommended route very closely

[MacG]

If I compare the difficulties of sailing the North Sea Eastern Area (Europoort, Schelde Estuary) with what's happening in Oz waters, I have to giggle.

As long as I am inbound, I have to comply with the BPR - another set of rules for the inland waterways. Outside at sea I have to comply with the ZAR - alltogether another set of rules again. Traffic Lanes, Windmillparks that arise as a LLano Estacado, creating a large spot of no go area, on top of that the voluminuous commercial ship traffic.

Outside, the biggest danger is the stray fisherman following an unknown path and no watch on the bridge, more common than exception. With no regard to any yacht crossing it's path.
Inside, the very fast moving barges with no real vision unless they have a camera system installed. The Rotterdam-Germany connection via Merwede requires utmost attention. Barges doubling, sometimes tripling and leaving no way for the deep draft sailing yacht. Rules they never heard of. The biggest and the fastest is always the winner.
Amsterdam-Rijnkanaal is a real nightmare and should be avoided as much as possible.
A narrow channel with as much traffic as on an highway at rushhour, offering you the weirdest waves imagineable.

I remember clearly on one of my trips the case of a bulkcarrier with no visible nav lights that approached us as a huge black wall inside the gulf of Algeciras. No visible lights and the most minicule nav lights I ever saw when it was almost too late. And no watch on the bridge.
I approached Gibraltar Traffic Contrl for a radar check and they gave me a clear ahead.
So I do not even trust a professional radarpost to give you the correct advice.

Lessons learned and keep always in mind the the approaching ship can't see you. Most freighters do not have qualified crew on board. A captain and first-2nd mate and that is it. The autopilot will do the rest.

Some applicable laws/rulings for Rotterdam - Europoort Area Sailing:


APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Shipping Traffic Act
Inland Navigation Police Regulations (BPR)
Shipping Regulations for Territorial Waters (STZ)
Compulsory Pilotage Decree 1995
Decree on Pilot Exemption Certificate Holders Shipping Traffic Act
Regulation for Licensed (Maritime) Pilots
Regulation for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
Regulation on the Transportation of Dangerous Substances, 2007
Port Bye-laws Rotterdam 2004 – updated for 2007
Port Bye-laws Schiedam and Vlaardingen
Regulation for Communication and Pilot requests seashipping
Port Security

[LJH]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Plenty of fault to go around.

Poor watchkeeping on both vessels, although there but for the Grace of God . . .

Radar off -- at night! -- on the yacht, and AIS range set wrong. Surprising, considering the great amount of experience (25+ years each) of the yacht crew. And no radar reflector!

I thought that it was very interesting that both watchkeepers failed to interpret nav lights correctly. The ship saw the yacht's green sidelight, and yet turned to starboard. That was one of the biggest mistakes in the whole fiasco.

Watchkeeper on the yacht failed to grasp the danger in his green-to-green pass; failed to understand that he was crossing the ship's bows; failed to agree the pass early enough; failed to understand how close the ship was.

Watchkeeper on the ship had big failure of situational awareness; did not understand where the yacht was or where it was going despite having seen the nav lights.


Wow, this is what we call a cluster fork.

Yes, what a cluster ****!

I would hazard a guess that the ship was hiding behind the yacht's jib for the longest time.

This collision was easily avoidable had either watchkeeper taken the time learn how to use and understand the tools that they had available. Neither watchkeeper was doing a thorough job.

It still amazes me how many people don't take the "see and be seen" adage to heart. It is important to know how to tune and interpret a radar as well as turn it on! All the more reason to have an AIS transceiver transmitting. Anything to better the SA on the bridge decreases the chance of collision.

[El Pinguino]

A cruster fluck indeed.

Primary blame? The yacht.. altering to port in an end on or nearly end on situation ( one point to port or starboard if my memory serves).

The ship? Like Nigel I don't know how many times I have gone on the bridge to find the radar with the clutter wound right up to get rid off all those pesky little speckly bits. The 3/0 was then guilty of making a 'bold assumption' and you wonder about him altering to starboard for what he boldly assumed was Nares Rock which was still a very long way away.
At least he did go to starboard in an end on situation.

The yacht? I don't really think the radar reflector was an issue here. Nor was not running the radar on the yacht... it was a clear dark night FFS. What I would take issue with is using a tricolour at the top of the mast in what was coastal waters. Not surprising that initially it was taken to be a distant light. The yacht skipper's watch keeping was a bit less than optimum and one has to assume he was sailing under a full genoa and that is why he probably didn't see the ship until it was on top of him. Interesting no mention of having seen the ship's steaming lights at any time.
Sailing through the reef along the dotted line? As good a way as any to have lots of end on encounters not to mention having someone run straight up your bum....
And then.... to make it all come together... altering to port in an end on situation...

oh dear.....

[LJH]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

What I would take issue with is using a tricolour at the top of the mast in what was coastal waters. Not surprising that initially it was taken to be a distant light.

Assuming a level deck, if the wave height is greater than the yacht's freeboard then the yacht would be less visible using running lights instead of the tricolour.

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

The yacht skipper's watch keeping was a bit less than optimum and one has to assume he was sailing under a full genoa and that is why he probably didn't see the ship until it was on top of him. Interesting no mention of having seen the ship's steaming lights at any time.

If the yacht's skipper is not going to visually clear behind the genoa, then a periodic radar sweep would have done wonders!