Do you use a Daytime Black ball at Anchor?

[Training Wheels]

Most “sailing vessels” these days also have machinery for propulsion.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I agree the regs state they are required. I must admit, I’m not a blind follower of laws and regs all the time. If they make no sense to me, and the consequenses are few (as with this case), I don’t necessarily unquestionably obey.

… but as always, it’s possible I’m wrong.

Mike you crazy socialist libertarian you... I was actually surprised how close socialist and libertarian were on a lot of those political comparison charts/surveys.

It would interesting to ask (probably in a broader field) how many people consistently use anchor lights alongside how many use the day shapes. Here on the west coast I would guesstimate that anchor light compliance is only about 70% and day shapes are virtually zero. I think it might have something to do with recreational boater density vs proximity to population centers (i.e. enforcement).

I will say that in all the anchorages that are rife with derelict boats and mooring ball explosions I don't ever recall seeing a mooring ball.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Well, I don't disagree with any of this.


If you thought I said that it's NEVER obvious whether is anchored or underway -- I didn't mean to say that, and that's obviously not true. I meant to say that it's NOT ALWAYS OBVIOUS -- a different proposition entirely.


I agree that in small boat anchorages it will usually be pretty obvious and I doubt that the ball is often conveying much useful information.


I agree that it becomes much more important in places where you have vessels both anchored AND under way, and so this affects ships more than it does small boats.


As a libertarian, I also agree that your conscience should be your guide as to what rules you follow and which ones you ignore. It's up to you as long as you do it with open eyes and will be man enough to take the consequences, if you get it wrong.


As to the cone -- as I said, I don't always show it, so I do not always follow the Rules myself either. If I am motorsailing far from any traffic, or for short periods, I often don't bother -- it's much more trouble than the ball.


There is some risk where I sail of even getting fined for that -- the Rule requiring a cone is actually enforced quite actively, more so than the ball. But sometimes I take the risk because it's just too much of a faff going forward and dealing with it while underway, and if the weather is strong I just avoid the foredeck as a matter of principle unless there is some really dire necessity.



I have a water separator on the exhaust of the main engine, so there is no visible water when the engine is running, so it's harder to catch me anyway


But I use the ball religiously. It's just part of my anchoring procedure. It's not really any trouble, and it's just satisfying to be buttoned down, well anchored, showing the proper shape. I even did this in the Arctic! YMMV.

Thanks DH. Just a few comments and then we can move on to other more important things, like how to wash your pants at sea.

I don’t think I stated or implied that you said "that it's NEVER obvious whether [a boat] is anchored or underway.” If I did, that was in error. I did, and do, question the uselessness of an anchor shape in actually collision avoidance.

I can see how it is another piece of information. And I suppose one can envision a scenario where it might even be useful information, but surely the PRIMARY information regarding safe navigation comes from observations that do not require an anchor shape.

Put simply, ANY navigator should be making decisions based on observations of boat vectors. A boat at anchor will be observed to be moving slowly, or not at all. Whether it is actually anchored, or not, seems largely irrelevant to the navigation decision. Safe navigation already requires that I take the observed boat motions into account. A little black ball, which may not always be easily visible, seems rather irrelevant. I assume this is why it is so rarely used (at least in areas I have traveled).

I acknowledge the potential insurance benefits, and we’ve heard a few references to examples, but I would rather see verifiable proof of their impact in case law before fully accepting this is a significant factor. Same goes for enforcement. I know in my case I’ve never seen any enforcement on this issue, even during blitzes of LEO activity in tightly packed anchorages here in Canada where it would have been an easy thing to do.

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by Training Wheels

Most “sailing vessels” these days also have machinery for propulsion.

Ja, Ja. That's why we carry the cone, nicht wahr?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Mike you crazy socialist libertarian you... I was actually surprised how close socialist and libertarian were on a lot of those political comparison charts/surveys.

“Socialist libertarian” … I like it .

Originally Posted by Macblaze

It would interesting to ask (probably in a broader field) how many people consistently use anchor lights alongside how many use the day shapes. Here on the west coast I would guesstimate that anchor light compliance is only about 70% and day shapes are virtually zero. I think it might have something to do with recreational boater density vs proximity to population centers (i.e. enforcement).

This seems consistent with my experience. Like I say, maybe it’s a Canadian thing.

I am all for proper anchor lights. They make perfect sense to me. They provide useful information to avoid collisions in the real world. And I’m sure they would also factor into any insurance claim (but I am not very focused on this aspect of the question).

I see little actual value in anchor day shapes (other than to obey the law). If anything, I can more easily see the use of an underway day shape (the cone) as having some practical use.

[admiralslater]

My wife is a retired lawyer who did insurance defence work for 30 years . After the introduction of mandatory seatbelt laws , if a collision victum was not wearing a seat belt , a percentage deduction was made even if they were not at fault in the collision. By not wearing the seatbelt they were deamed to have contributed to their injuries by negligence. Not using the proper shapes lights etc. Would amount to the same IMO.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by admiralslater

My wife is a retired lawyer who did insurance defence work for 30 years . After the introduction of mandatory seatbelt laws , if a collision victum was not wearing a seat belt , a percentage deduction was made even if they were not at fault in the collision. By not wearing the seatbelt they were deamed to have contributed to their injuries by negligence. Not using the proper shapes lights etc. Would amount to the same IMO.

Thanks admiralslater. I appreciate the logic. I’m asked for actual evidence.

It makes sense that it would enter into the insurance/blame calculation. And given the low usage rates of anchor shapes (at least in some areas), it must be a fairly common occurrence. Yet actual evidence presented so far seems surprisingly thin.

But again, I’m really focused on actual value in collision avoidance. Seatbelt usage DOES improve outcomes. I remain skeptical that anchor day shapes have a similar positive impact.

[psp2psp2]

I use one most times, especially after seeing people getting ticketed by the coast guard in Italy and Holland for failing to do so.


http://www.myageofsail.com

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

I have 3 masters tickets to protect and an insurance company to rely on. It's worth it to me to follow the rules.

You probably already know the farther you get from North America, the more dayshapes you see. I can't recall any boats anchored in Brittany during my RYA course there that didn't have dayshapes, and the various fishing boats had them running bow to stern in clear view at all times.

On a related note, there was zero chatter on the VHF and when a call on 16 did go off, it was very brief and professional-sounding.

I, too, would rather be the "best kind of correct".

[Golden-Spirit]

Yes we always rate a back ball at anchor. Apart from maritime law and letting others know you are definitely at anchor no matter how obvious it is there is one other consideration. Once many years ago when completing an insurnace claim form, one of the first leading questions was: What signals were displayed at the time of the incident? Knowing how many insurance companies are quick to collect premiums but always find ways of reducing a pay-out this is my other reason!

[SVRocinante]

Originally Posted by bluez06girl

When reading the USCG Regulations, it states that during the daytime a vessel under 50 meters shall hoist a ball shape forward where it can best be seen. Black balls should be 0.6 meters in diameter.

Does anyone do this?

Yes, we do.
We run it up on our port spreader halyard in place of our radar reflector.

[waterman46]

Seems like one more unnecessary rule, and never have I seen one hoisted from a yacht at anchor. But if you wish, don't let that stop you.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by waterman46

Seems like one more unnecessary rule, and never have I seen one hoisted from a yacht at anchor. But if you wish, don't let that stop you.

So pretty much like stop signs ... not a real rule, merely a suggestion

[Martkimwat]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

No, I don’t use day markers; neither anchored nor underway. Legally I know I should, but I am pretty sure I’ve NEVER seen any boat with such a marker, although it could be I’m just not looking for them.

(I always use proper anchor and running lights at night. Even in designated anchorages or on moorings.)

My view is one of function and common sense. The purpose is to avoid collision. It makes perfect sense at night to use lights. The point is to be seen, and to communicate information. During the day my vessel is visible. Adding a black or triangle shape is not going to save my vessel from a collision. If you can’t seem my boat, and navigate appropriately, then a day shape won’t change that.

But as per the previous anchoring thread, I suppose it might help with the legal liability side.

Being seen is not the same as knowing what you are doing, I have often been annoyed to find I have been the 'give way' boat to a boat seemingly moving slowly under power, only to find that it is at anchor and not moving. Similarly I have been the 'stand on vessel' and cursed a seemingly 'give way vessel for not changing course, again only to find it is at anchor, but in neither case is it obvious until relatively close to, as they have not been displaying a black ball. This is in the Solent where people anchor in all sorts of places, including areas of heavy traffic ie, most of the Solent. Might be different in an out of the way spot, but I personally would not take the risk. If you are hit, you will be held partly culpable.

[taxwizz]

So...Those of us who anchor just remember that our first action on dropping the hook is to get our balls up the mast.