Is radar like the extinct typewriter?

[Exile]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Awwww..!!
That's a sweet way to say I'm a weird old bastard...

No, just weird & old.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

7. Risk of collision
Vessels must use all available means to determine the risk of a collision, including the use of radar (if available) to get early warning of the risk of collision by radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects. (e.g. ARPA, AIS).

I have repeatedly heard this Colreg "interpreted" to mean that, should you suffer a collision while not using an otherwise functional onboard radar, you could be held liable to the extent radar may have helped to avoid the collision. In other words, the logical extension of Rule 7 could be interpreted to mean that if there is an available working radar onboard then you must use it, even on a clear, sunny day in a low-traffic area. Seems like a stretch, but this may explain why you usually see radar arrays on commercial ships (among others) always spinning regardless of traffic or conditions.

[Pelagic]

There is a bit of truth in that Exile, but only in the sense that a commercially licensed watchkeeper has more to loose as they are held to a higher standard in the courts, than an amateur.

I think that is why some of us on here with big tickets and command experience with $60 million+ vessels seem pedantic.

We are forced to be by the expectations of those who hire us and those who license us.

[El Pinguino]

I recall being told by a Port Phillip Sea Pilot in the not too distant past ( OK it was 40 years ago... seems like just yesterday) that if involved in a collision in port waters the first question you would be asked was ' did you have a lookout posted on the focsle?'

Any collision and you are stuffed before you begin...

[Pelagic]

In a major collision where the blame should be assigned 100% to one vessel because their actions were totally negligent, their lawyers will try and nitpick the actions of the other watchkeeper, their Bridge management and Master's orders to try and reduce the award amount.

What they basically teach you in Marine College at the Master Mariner level is how to protect yourself from those lawyer tricks and to follow the COLREG Rules until a departure is warranted due to proper seaman ship.

Luckily, in Marine Law, there are already a lot of Legal precedents of ship collisions where the judgements are based on advice from Elder Brethren who counsel the Judge as to whether a lookout on the bow was necessary or bridge only was sufficient... and how the Radar should have been used at the time.

You learn to keep a detailed log of;
weather and visibility,
record the tests for fixed and variable errors of your navaids,
prepare a passage plan on a paper chart with radar parallel indexes (PI) of of all dangers noted
Log that PI is used by watchkeeper on one Radar display as well as using GPS driven electronic charting systems ECS.......

Your written standing orders as to allowable CPA (closest point of approach) is clearly defined.....as is when any deviation requires the Master to be called as well as the details of watchkeeper hand overs.

You log when nav lights are turned on (never off),
confirm when nearing fog banks or reduced visibility, log that you have posted extra lookouts and reduced speed .(even if it is just the cook on the Bridge and your speed drops very little.)

Note in fog that you started sound signals .....and due to traffic density...note when you switch to hand steering

Basically they are judging your professional bridge management with the other vessel....

... and if your log shines and their log and actions are crap......you will get a 100% award and your watchkeeper keeps his license as does the captain.

[El Pinguino]

Speaking as one who has never been involved in a major prang.....

These days any incident leads to a government enquiry which just looks at what happened with a view to making sure it doesn't happen again... these people https://www.atsb.gov.au/marine.aspx .. it doesn't involve insurance
If someone is hurt or killed then the dealing with of people... their tickets.. locking them up etc is another enquiry...
And then there is the insurance... case history and all that ... dodgyshippingmonrovia.v.the bognorbiscuitcompany1904..etc.
The last one is where the $$$$ are

[valhalla360]

It's not some lawyers trick.


If it's plausible that the radar would have shown you something and you had it off by definition, you weren't using all available means and therefore are in violation of the colregs.


This is the same as rear ending a car. The assumption is you were following too close for conditions regardless of what idiot move the guy in front made.

[alansmith]

Wow guys! Can everyone just take it down a couple of notches? Me thinks I fell in with a bunch of high school kids who thinks God only know what. Everyone of you are competent sailors I would hazard to say. I think Boatman has been doing his way for a zillion years and is comfortable with his way and competent in doing it. I tell u one thing for sure... seek to understand ...seek not to judge. That is biblical in context. If u lost your electronics for whatever reason.... I think Boatman changes nothing and feels confident in his methods.

If he doesn't need radar... doesn't want radar... that is his mindset and he is responsible for his own skin. People who love radar see it as a valuable resourceful tool ...swear by it. Who can find fault in that? But to be questioning people's professional approaches to seamanship when they been doing it forever... how can anyone find that to be a profitable tangent to this valuable thread about radar and AIS?
Respect goes a long way in this world. When we 'diss' another person's reputation that is going over the line. It creates ill feelings amongst brethren and sisters. It certainly doesn't enhance your reputation in so doing it either.
I love this forum because I can learn so much about boats and things related. There is so much knowledge within here. I love that people willingly are able to proctor neophytes or offer 'another' perspective.

[alansmith]

pelagic, thanks for sharing how it goes on the bridge of commercials. That was a cool insight.

[weavis]

What I like about RADAR.

There is no need for anyone else to switch on something. A reflector on the vessel would be nice but not necessary.

Its down to me and my experience with RADAR and what system I have. The ability to have a warning that something is there is fantastic.

I grew up with it in an area where thick fog was common place... I could navigate carefully with it and be (relatively) safe. My problem was not me hitting anything, rather those darned inshore trawlers in a hurry to get out on the tide who were too fast sometimes for the conditions.

I love RADAR... but then I have over 30 years experience using it...

[conachair]

Originally Posted by weavis

I love RADAR... but then I have over 30 years experience using it...

Fitted one about 12 years ago. Maybe half a dozen days using it so far. But it was worth it on those days

Which isn't actually true, it's on every night solo offshore, but don't let that get in the way of a good post

Point being it's not often needed, but when it is it is simply wonderful!!

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

There is a bit of truth in that Exile, but only in the sense that a commercially licensed watchkeeper has more to loose as they are held to a higher standard in the courts, than an amateur.

I think that is why some of us on here with big tickets and command experience with $60 million+ vessels seem pedantic.

We are forced to be by the expectations of those who hire us and those who license us.

Makes sense Pelagic for you commercial guys and other pros running large vessels (re: interpreting Rule 7 to keeping radar on all the time). For better or worse, I have thus far also been of the mindset to keep my radar on at all times when underway. But then with a large battery bank & generator, I don't have the energy limitations of many. My thinking has been to utilize all available tools, and radar is certainly an effective one. But then most of my passages thus far have been coastal, and perhaps I'd think differently about it if crossing an ocean. Can't imagine not turning it on at night, however.

Hey, call me 'lazy' . . . .

[sailjumanji]

Have AIS and 4G radar, and latest charts on GPS. We use the radar in fog, and when passage making in the Gulf of Mexico at night, especially offshore Louisiana. Lots of single wellhead platforms without lights, and not on charts. Lots shown on charts that are not there now. So using the charts to preplot avoidance course is futile, and you just have to stay alert entire time.

Or take the ICW, or go all the way offshore into shipping lanes.

[Adelie]

The thread title is: "Is radar like the extinct typewriter".

Rather than the implied question I will answer the plain text question.

No radar is not like the extinct typewriter. The typewriter was supplanted by computer and print because it did most of the jobs a typewriter did only better. It was easier to edit the final product, it was easier to fill in boilerplate, it was easier to create multiple versions of the same document, multiple fonts and sizes can be used in a single document, tables and graphs can be inserted.

The advantages of typewriters included lower cost to purchase and maintain and the ability to operate without a power supply.

One of the typewriters last adantages to be lost was filling in forms. This was only lost once internet access had approached saturation. Until then people without Internet had to be able to neatly fill in forms they'd picked up, such as government forms and job applications. The last typewriter factory closed 5yr ago. There was still a market but not big enough to support a production line.

Typewriters did one thing, put letters an a page and computer/printers did that, with more sizes and fonts plus they do other things like tables and graphics.

Radar does a number things: detects weather, detects land formations, detects other vessels, detects bouys and other objects all in the actual relative locations and announces your position to others operating radar in the same band.

The best weather forecast can't warn you that a squal will hit in 3min. It can't show you the way around the squal that is 10-15min away.

AIS can't show you a vessel that isn't transmitting.

GPS and a chart plotter can't tell you here you actually are relative to a landmark that was incorrectly mapped. It can show you misleading info about about the buoy that dragged its anchor and now is in the channel rather than next to it.

Other instrument now do some of the functions only radar could and do them better, indicate time and PCA for a passing vessel.

Nothing will replace some of the functions of radar so it is likely radar will be around a long time.

That said it may not be something you want or particularly need.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Adelie

The best weather forecast can't warn you that a squal will hit in 3min. It can't show you the way around the squal that is 10-15min away.

Yep

Before



After a gybe