Do you keep a Constant Lookout?

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by BandB

So are you saying you'd ignore all that information from the untrained, uninformed patients?

Was my post somehow ambiguous?

[FlyingCloud1937]

The Master of Morning Haruka has over 20 years experience at sea.
At the time of the incident Morning Haruka was proceeding northwards through Cook Strait on passage from Timaru to Botany Bay, Australia. She was carrying 15 088 tonnes of gas oil and 9 813 tonnes of ballast.
Evidence of Third Officer

The Third Officer of Morning Haruka gave evidence on the incident to the Australian Maritime Safety Authority in the form of a letter. The text of the letter is reproduced in full below.

“It was a perfect weather and good visibility when MT Morning Haruka approaches the Cook Strait, as I observed there’s (sic) some fishing boats around the midway of the channel which has full of lights and even their navigational lights are not visible. As a duty officer I observed every movements (sic) of the targets around the ship through a visual lookout and with my radar (ARPA) and my watchman as well, until finally I observed that I could pass through to all fishing boats with a minimum CPA of 0.7nm without any alteration of my intended course. As I am coming closer to the Strait one fishing boat on my port bow turned round and headed towards my bow so decided to alter my course 10 to starboard just to keep clear and to have a safe distance to her. Finally I passed all fishing boats well clear with a safe passing distance and without damage to their fishing gears (sic).
After a while I received a call from ferry Boat Purbeck on VHF Ch.16 requesting me to alter my course to starboard, as I observed Purbeck is about 2.5 nm on my starboard side and she was on my almost beam, so then I refused to do that action because I don’t have enough space and I will be in close quarter situation and even risk of collision may exist if I alter course to starboard and besides I will be coming closed (sic) to nearest land, for that reasons I decided to alter my course 30 to 40 on my port side just to keep clear and to have a safe passing distance with her and even I can proceed to full circulation (sic) manoeuvre or even can slow down my engine, all action taken was agreed between Morning Haruka and ferry Boat Purbeck through VHF Ch. 16 that ferry Boat Purbeck will alter course to portside and passed on my astern (sic) and it was clearly understood between two parties. Finally ferry Boat Purbeck passed well clear astern of Morning Haruka with a safe distance. And after a few minutes I received a call from ferry Boat Purbeck on VHF CH.16 saying that I am not following the rules. As a Navigator I know that I am the give-way vessel and I’m aware about the rules but finally it was for me to decide which way to chose (sic) to avoid a dangerous situation; still
in respect to all regulations and recommendations in general.
Lastly I would say thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain my side.”


www.maritimenz.govt.nzs-and-forms/Accidents-and-investigations/


All I have to say is look out


at least every minute or 2.

Do you sleep while driving a car?

Why would you, when piloting a vessel?

Would ya do it piloting an aircraft?

Lloyd

[BandB]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

At the age of 20 years and a few months I - along with many of my peers - was unleashed on an unsuspecting world as a watchkeeper with a brand new 2nd mates ticket...standing a solo watch with just the lookout for company.

The old man would appear at about 2200 to sign his night orders and that would be it.....

Thats the way it was and thats pretty much the way it is....

And that's also more support for not assuming the person on watch is experienced or expert or even paying attention. Again I simply suggest defensive driving. It can never hurt to make contact and inform that you are aware of their presence and of your intent, that in a "if it's ok with them" tone. You don't know who is on watch or what they're doing.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

Sailor always beware, for sure.

However, the distance at which the ships will receive your transmission will be determined by the heights of the antennas involved. We have received ship transmissions over a hundred miles away. Also, for sailboat to sailboat, we have received some at 20 miles away [unusual], and not received others at 5, when we "should". I do think, though, that the ships will see us well over 2o miles away, if they're looking.

Ann

As a rule of thumb the VHF horizon in NM is about
1.23√(height of antenna in feet) as there is generally some refraction. Some atmospheric conditions can lead to superrefraction (ducting) which can greatly extend that range - up to 100s of miles in extreme cases. By the same measure there can be subrefraction that will decrease that range.

If I take my 60 ft antenna height, my signal should hit the horizon at 9.5nm, but adding the horizon range for the other ship - say 12nm for one with a 100ft antenna height; we should be seeing each other just beyond 20 miles on an average day.

Barnakiel's other point about transmit power can't be ignored. All transmissions attenuate with range - ducting minimizes those losses, but on the other hand moisture or dust can shorten the effective range. Low power transmissions should not be relied upon to have an effective range beyond about 10nm, even though they frequently surpass that.

[estarzinger]

^^ I played with a (relatively sophisticated) US military radio range calculator, and it suggested that the low (2watt) power of class B does reduce/effect its range in many circumstances below 'radio line of sight'.

We routinely see Class A (12.5w) units at 50nm (including a few class A's mounted on "yachts"), but rarely see class B beyond 12nm.

[mikereed100]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

And some think that sleep deprivation is not impairment.

Bingo.

This is why I am not adverse to catnaps while on watch with a short-handed crew. It does not matter how wide open your eyes are if your brain can't process the information it receives.

https://www.med.upenn.edu/uep/user_documents/dfd3.pdf

Sleep deprivation: Impact on cognitive performance

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by BandB

And that's also more support for not assuming the person on watch is experienced or expert or even paying attention. Again I simply suggest defensive driving. It can never hurt to make contact and inform that you are aware of their presence and of your intent, that in a "if it's ok with them" tone. You don't know who is on watch or what they're doing.

"Defensive driving" is not only a good idea, it is absolutely required by the COLREGS. At no time is anyone at sea entitled to proceed with impunity and just assume that give-way vessels will give way.

If you are the stand-on vessel, you are obligated to maneuver yourself at a certain point in an encounter with another vessel.

For that reason, unlike the situation on the road, there is almost never an innocent party in a collision at sea. Both vessels have an equal obligation to avoid a collisions -- being the stand-on vessel does not reduce this obligation; it merely determines the ordering of maneuvering at a certain stage of an encounter.

Broken record warning (with apologies, and with a supplementary pedantry warning): Collision avoidance at sea does not work the way it does on the road.

[rwidman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

.............. there is almost never an innocent party in a collision at sea. ..............

I would hope that if I was anchored out of the channel and showing a proper anchor light or ball that my percentage of guilt would be really small.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by rwidman

I would hope that if I was anchored out of the channel and showing a proper anchor light or ball that my percentage of guilt would be really small.

By the rules a constant lookout is still required at anchor. I doubt any of us do that, and wonder if it has an effect on the assignment of liability?

[Andrew B.]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

By the rules a constant lookout is still required at anchor. I doubt any of us do that, and wonder if it has an effect on the assignment of liability?

So please teach me more. If I drop anchor, then proceed to spend the night
camping on a shore some distance away leaving the boat unattended, what
COLREGS apply ?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

By the rules a constant lookout is still required at anchor. I doubt any of us do that, and wonder if it has an effect on the assignment of liability?

I had to look up Rule 5 and the guidance on that, and you are correct. However, Rule 5 does also say

• Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

Now, considering if you are anchored in a known anchorage, the circumstances and conditions would be such that the appropriate appraisal may mean very occasionally. I suspect a judge would rule, but you certainly would be the stand on vessel if you are displaying the proper marking or lights.

[rwidman]

A quick check of the rules tells me that few if any recreational boaters even come close to following them. When was the last time you displayed an anchor ball when anchored in the daytime?

And as above, when was the last time you made someone stay awake overnight to keep watch while you were anchored in a deserted cove? Or left one person onboard to keep watch while the rest went ashore?

Do you have a person as a lookout other than the one operating the boat? All the time?

I think if we had to abide by all the rules, most of us would have to give up boating.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

Was my post somehow ambiguous?

No....I just couldn't believe you were really serious about that in all circumstances including those like the one I cited. I thought maybe you'd reconsider it being useful in some situations. Obviously, I was wrong in thinking that.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Andrew B.

So please teach me more. If I drop anchor, then proceed to spend the night camping on a shore some distance away leaving the boat unattended, what COLREGS apply ?

I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or if this is an earnest question. Before the rest of villagers grab their pitchforks and light their torches it might be worth noting what I said (especially the bold):

Originally Posted by Lodesman

By the rules a constant lookout is still required at anchor. I doubt any of us do that, and wonder if it has an effect on the assignment of liability?

If you're not onboard, then you can't keep watch, you can't sound fog signals if the vis socks in; you can't sound a warning signal to an approaching vessel; you can't do anything if your vessel drags, etc., etc. Again I wonder if anyone has experienced a collision while they were away from their anchored vessel, or sleeping down below, and what were the consequences?

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by avb3

I had to look up Rule 5 and the guidance on that, and you are correct. However, Rule 5 does also say

• Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

Now, considering if you are anchored in a known anchorage, the circumstances and conditions would be such that the appropriate appraisal may mean very occasionally. I suspect a judge would rule, but you certainly would be the stand on vessel if you are displaying the proper marking or lights.

The rule says that you must maintain a sight and hearing lookout at all times - if the circumstances permit and conditions require it, then the lookout should also include radar, vhf, vtms, ais, et al.

Again, I am just as guilty as the next guy, so my question is for my benefit.