Singlehanded passage making, Best Practices

[john61ct]

Many choose to not single-hand long passages.

But that is the topic of this thread.

[John A]

Originally Posted by john61ct

Many choose to not single-hand long passages.

But that is the topic of this thread.

True. But most forums are used as a platform for negative judgement.

I'd like to voice a word of caution on the dependents of AIS and Radar.
Not everyone has them!
Your AIS will only detect other AIS signals. Stuff headed in your direction who either don't have their unit on or boats/ships with no AIS can run you down.

Sometimes Radar signals get lost in the clutter or nobody is looking at the Radar.

When you're down below tinkering with your electronic stuff. Nobody is keeping a proper watch.

Sail Safe

[conachair]

Originally Posted by John A

I'd like to voice a word of caution on the dependents of AIS and Radar.
Not everyone has them!
Your AIS will only detect other AIS signals. Stuff headed in your direction who either don't have their unit on or boats/ships with no AIS can run you down.

Sometimes Radar signals get lost in the clutter or nobody is looking at the Radar.

When you're down below tinkering with your electronic stuff. Nobody is keeping a proper watch.

Sail Safe

It's been touched on a few times, mid ocean it's very uncommon to come across anything not transmitting, and if it's rough enough to set off lots of false radar alarms then you just don't sleep for long, lots cat naps. Never that bad for long anyway. No one has managed to come up with a single incident of a solo boat offshore with functioning ais/radar alarms so the odds must be pretty low.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

...



No. Just no. Yes the OP asked us not to deal with the legality of singlehanding but that is NOT what NUC means: "The COLREGs state in Rule 3(f): The term “vessel not under command” means a vessel which through some exceptional circumstance is unable to manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel." You aren't going to fly dayshapes or lights for a minesweeper are you? Don't run them for NUC. It's just wrong. Do. Not. Do. That.

So you think it's better to show normal nav lights and give the dangerously false impression that the vessel is under command and able to comply with the Rules?

I disagree entirely. NUC is the accurate description of the status of a vessel underway with no one awake. A sleeping single hander is not entitled to that status according to that Rule, but once you're already violating Rule 5 it is far better to accurately communicate the real situation. In fact I think you may even be OBLIGATED under Rule 2, to show NUC.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

So you think it's better to show normal nav lights and give the dangerously false impression that the vessel is under command and able to comply with the Rules?

I disagree entirely. NUC is the accurate description of the status of a vessel underway with no one awake. A sleeping single hander is not entitled to that status according to that Rule, but once you're already violating Rule 5 it is far better to accurately communicate the real situation. In fact I think you may even be OBLIGATED under Rule 2, to show NUC.

Agree completely! So much better to claim NUC when not actually entitled than to claim normal watchkeeping and responses.

If you are in fact NUC, why not let every one know that you won't respond normally in an encounter.

Jim

[conachair]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Agree completely! So much better to claim NUC when not actually entitled than to claim normal watchkeeping and responses.

If you are in fact NUC, why not let every one know that you won't respond normally in an encounter.

Jim

Disagree with your disagree

A properly run solo boat should be indistinguishable from a crewed boat to other vessels IMHO. Expecting some kind of special treatment from others should be unnecessary and means you aren't doing your job properly. Heaving to for a snooze under a couple of reds is a bad idea out there and shouldn't be necessary. Though can come in really handy to make some lunch or whatever.

[Toaster]

Originally Posted by John A

There are many more passages than just the North Atlantic, Just as there are many, many more boats in the ocean than sailboats.

<snip>

2 or 3 sailboats? Really?
a

I've done two Pacific crossings. First from Seattle to Hilo, we saw zero sailboats. Once offshore, we saw four fishing boats and one container ship.

Second crossing from Honolulu to San Fran, we saw one sailboat, but this was because it was another racing boat on the return delivery after the TransPac that had set off a couple days after us (and was faster). That was the only boat we saw until we got close to the mainland.

The Pacific is a big, big ocean!

You do see a lot of garbage though. On the second crossing, we snagged an old fishing net while we were motoring through the Pacific High. A single hander would have to deal with this on their own - diving off the boat to cut it free. With crew it was no big deal.

[JohnHutchins]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

So you think it's better to show normal nav lights and give the dangerously false impression that the vessel is under command and able to comply with the Rules?

I disagree entirely. NUC is the accurate description of the status of a vessel underway with no one awake. A sleeping single hander is not entitled to that status according to that Rule, but once you're already violating Rule 5 it is far better to accurately communicate the real situation. In fact I think you may even be OBLIGATED under Rule 2, to show NUC.

YES.

They come from the Convention on the International Regulations for PREVENTING Collisions at Sea.

They exist from a desire to and as part of a project to PREVENT collisions at sea.

They do this in three ways.

FIRST, they include rules requiring the master of every vessel at sea to *be aware* of the risks of collision as they develop (e.g. rules 2, 5, 7.

SECOND, they include rules to help the master of every vessel at sea to *predict* what other vessels will do. These are the rules governing, for example, who gives way and who stands on.

THIRD, they include rules requiring the master of every vessel at sea to *inform* other vessels of information helpful in deciding on a course of action that will avoid collision. These are the rules governing signals.

Their primary purpose is not to be a municipal code for the seas, their primary purpose -- their *only* purpose as the colregs themselves (rather than the colregs as part of some nation's body of law) is to help avoid collisions at sea.

A judge may treat them as a code of law. An enforcement agency may treat them as a code of law. You, as a mariner, should treat them as *a way of avoiding collisions*. In practice this means you should strive to be aware of the risks around you. You should behave as the colregs direct so that other mariners will know what to expect of you. And you should *communicate* to other mariners that they must expect something different of you when you are not behaving as the colregs direct. The way to communicate that is the not under command signal. As far as other vessels are concerned you *are* an exceptional circumstance -- a vessel that is not going to give way even in those circumstances where giving way would be required. Communicate that fact to other vessels. Period. If you do not you are increasing the risk of a collision at sea. The colregs should never be read to require someone to increase the risk of a collision at sea. That is the point of rule 2.

Re-emphasizing because capital letters aren't enough. They are not a priority system. Priorities exist only to create predictability and are chosen not because some traffic is favored over other traffic, or privileged, or has special rights, they are chosen because avoiding collisions at sea will be most effective if the most maneuverable boat is given the choice of what avoidance action to take and because (where there's no innate difference in maneuverability) because some rule is better than no rule because having a rule makes things predictable and not having a rule keeps everyone guessing. Another thing that keeps everyone guessing is *not conveying critical navigational information like *I am not in command of my vessel right now*.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by conachair

Heaving to........ ..... can come in really handy to make some lunch or whatever.

Though without the reds!

[Viking Sailor]

Three Questions concerning vessels operating on the high seas:


1) What do you think will happen when a Navy or Merchant ship comes across a vessel displaying NUC that dosen't respond to attempts to communicate?


2) Why would a ship, that is in compliance with rule 5, collide with any observed/detected vessel? (The implication here is that only two single handed vessels should ever collide.)


3) How could single handed vessels be operated to reduce the chance of collision?

[Suijin]

Originally Posted by Radsmoots

No one seems to be mentioning how much electrical power it takes to have a radar on all the time, plus the AIS, autopilot, GPS, and all the rest. Also, after too many false alarms from guard zones I stopped using them and just made sure I kept a better lookout. I don't trust that any other boat or ship is keeping a good watch and and plan accordingly.

The whole low/high tech debate is really unanswerable and a matter of personal experience and opinion.

Personally, after an *extremely* close call with a 500’ freighter at night while hove to in a gale 400 miles from anywhere, I think using as much technology as you can is just prudent.

In life, experience shapes out perspective on things. A bad experience, even one that is statistically improbable, will change your behavior.

[mikeyboards]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

I just finished reading Foolish's paper on nutrition, and I have to thank him publicly for it.

There is a whole lot of interesting information, all documented as to sources, and extremely applicable for improving alertness while singlehanding. Highly recommended.

Ann

yes indeed ,very helpful and a great effort for our benefit.thank you.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

..............

I disagree entirely. NUC is the accurate description of the status of a vessel underway with no one awake. A sleeping single hander is not entitled to that status according to that Rule, but once you're already violating Rule 5 it is far better to accurately communicate the real situation. In fact I think you may even be OBLIGATED under Rule 2, to show NUC.

So two wrongs do make a right

[john61ct]

Yes "in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is."

Violating COLREGs in this case seems to me most practical.

But it would be great if people could address the question #1 asked above, assuming it was asked sincerely.

[john61ct]

Related thread http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ge-203510.html