Cruisers Forum
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 04-12-2017, 16:27   #1081
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 3,482
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Cate View Post
For the master mariners out there: from the bridge of your ship, can you hear the sound signals from a typical yacht?
If you don't hear anything, how do you know if a signal was being sounded?

I've heard buoys' bells, which suggests to me that within a mile or so, a small vessel's fog signal could be picked up. Will it be picked up? - as Nigel says newer generation vessels tend to fit microphones - us old farts still open the bridge doors and put the lookouts outside - so it depends on the ship.

Funny thing about fog - sound travels faster and farther, but the direction can be very deceptive. If in thick fog, I'd suggest small vessels still sound the signals and keep a good listening lookout.
Lodesman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2017, 16:32   #1082
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 3,482
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinrod View Post
The pleasure of "pleasure boat operator" will be lost forever for far to many people who simply aren't willing to pursue boating because of over-regulation and licensing.
Do you have a PCOC, Rod?

Do you think this has prevented people from pursuing boating?


NB - for the non-Canucks, PCOC is Pleasure Craft Operator's Certificate/Card/Competency (depending on who you ask or where you look)
Lodesman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 01:38   #1083
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Boat in Puerto Lucia, Ecuador, Body in SE Australia, Heart in Patagonia....
Boat: Westerly Sealord
Posts: 5,946
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Cate View Post
For the master mariners out there: from the bridge of your ship, can you hear the sound signals from a typical yacht? These would include the electronic braying from some VHF units, compressed gas horns or ones blown by lung power? (Not many alternatives seen on sailing vessels these days, things like the bellows operated "Board of Trade" horns described by Arthur Ransome in old "Swallows and Amazons" books involving the UK in the thirties.)

My take is that for ships, and likely for smaller commercial vessels or even motor yachts, our sound signals from any distance beyond "about to collide" are inaudible. Is that true? Even the powerful sirens on ships are only required to be audible at two miles IIrC.

Jim
Jim, there is an easy way to check. One day with about a fifteen knot breeze blowing and your Honda gen set purring away on the poop to provide a bit more 'ambient'.... big ships are quite noisy beasts.... send Ann a few miles away and get her to blow her hooter and ring your bells gongs and cymbals when she gets there....

Report back on what you hear
El Pinguino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 10:05   #1084
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Originally Posted by ramblinrod
I am quite sure, there are much bigger and more urgent issues that will assist the boating community; and will have a much, much, much, much greater impact.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu Jackson View Post
For example? Really. I believe that avoiding collisions would be topic # ONE.
RamblinRod: Improving gun control, war on drugs, gambling addiction eradication, are just a few things that would far better serve the boating public (and everyone). Lets spend taxpayer dollars on things that could reduce pain and suffering and improve standard of living.

Boater licensing?

Won't change a damn thing but make the sport less accessible.

I agree that accessibility to education and skills development is very valuable.

I propose that rather than pushing for increased licensing, everyone concerned with boater competence, donate 20 hours per year to provide free and accessible boater education (forum participation doesn't count).

Make it free. No membership or other obligation required.

This will make education and skills development accessible to all.

Consider offering a free 2 hour navigation and collision avoidance demonstration on your boat to 10 couples, one couple at a time.

(Note: Those who do not wish to be educated, will not voluntarily spend one second on it, and if forced to, will generally ignore it, and spend no effort to retain or apply what they probably didn't learn.)

In other words, one can lead a horse to water, those who will drink, will become hydrated, those who won't, will die of thirst.

Mandating training and licensing for recreational boaters would be the same thing.

It is mostly a tax grab.

The actual improvement in boater competence, will not be worth the restriction to boating accessibility.

So did you lead the cruise?
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 11:41   #1085
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 3,482
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Ramblinrod, do you have a PCOC?
Lodesman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 12:06   #1086
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post
It's all too obvious...

Yet you continue . . .
To me, it is all too obvious that you believe you are correct, when you are completely wrong about so many things, but specifically...

I don't believe I misunderstand any of the basic concepts regarding boat navigation and collision avoidance, that are needed to be a safe and competent rec boater.

Nor do I believe I have made any erroneous statements (other than those I have already acknowledged and corrected).

Just because someone disagrees with me, does not make my position wrong, it just makes it different from theirs.

When I am convinced my position on a subject is incorrect, I acknowledge it, adopt a new position, and move on.

If I have not changed my position on a subject, it is because I have not been convinced my original position was wrong.

PS, I know I don't have all the answers, but I don't post anything unless I believe it is true.

I expect this is the same for most people, yourself included.
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 12:16   #1087
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post

But you're wrong (to the extent I understand that last sentence).

Nobody is "trying to shove all responsibility for collision avoidance on the commericial ship."
Exsqueeze me?

What are you talking about?

I agree with this statement completely.

I have never stated, expressed, or even thought otherwise.

So why do you consider my position on this statement to be incorrect?

(I think it may be identical to yours and everyone else's, at least I most certainly hope it is.)

Is this yet another strawman argument?

Post a position that isn't mine, and then argue against it as if it was?
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 12:41   #1088
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lodesman View Post
Ramblinrod, do you have a PCOC?
I choose not to respond to personal questions (other than my opinion) in public forums.

Post Edit: (Even then, I choose which questions I respond to and which I don't, and sometimes it is based on the individual making the query and whether I believe their motives are sincere.)

This should not be construed or assumed as an answer either way to your question.

It is merely a response option for the reasons stated.

Post Edit:

The question that should be asked is, "Has any level of rec boater licensing been mandated in a given jurisdiction?"

(There sure are.)

And the next question should be, "What measureable impact has this had on boating safety?"

(By the sounds of everyone claiming there are so many boaters that don't understand basic Colregs or anything boating for that matter, I would suggest little. If someone has any empirical data to refute this by all means post, this is something I would love to be proven wrong on.)

And the next question should be, "Based on this, would additional licensing requirements make boating safer?"

(I don't believe so, based on my current opinion.)

And the final question should be, "Considering all pros and cons, would it be worth it?"

In my opinion, likely not.
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 13:27   #1089
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: May 2011
Location: PDX
Boat: Gulfstar 50
Posts: 1,831
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

I am not a fan of mandatory boater licensing. In the USA only the USCG can issue licenses (plus or minus a few exceptions).

States can require minimum levels of education and implement them through their boater education card programs.



Below is a table of statistics compiled by the USCG for 2016. It lists training sources to deaths and injuries.

Simple calculations shows that for no training (No education) there are about 0.12 deaths per boat for boats involved in accidents. For State education (a boater educations card) we see 0.046 deaths per boat for boats involved in accidents.

Of course these are not statistics where we compare accident rate vs education/training.

It is however quite clear that the death rate for boats involved in an accident is 2.6 times lower for those with a state issued boater education card. Thus we can conclude that education/training does have an effect.

Training source........vessels..deaths..injuries
American Red Cross..... 6......... 0..... 1
Informal.................. 160....... 16... 97
Internet Course.......... 86......... 5... 52
State Course............ 790........ 37. 444
US Power Squadrons... 59......... 0... 23
USCG Auxiliary......... 154.......... 9... 82
Other...................... 280......... 13. 124
No Education.......... 2242....... 271 1300
Unknown................ 1470....... 341. 736
No Operator.............. 720.......... 9... 44
evm1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 13:36   #1090
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: May 2011
Location: PDX
Boat: Gulfstar 50
Posts: 1,831
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinrod View Post
I choose not to respond to personal questions (other than my opinion) in public forums.
I do not see this as a personal question. It is simply an attempt to establish your bonafides.

You speak forcefully and with conviction when expressing your opinion. Your style often comes across as being very forceful and unyielding.
evm1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 14:33   #1091
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 4,908
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinrod View Post
To me, it is all too obvious that you believe you are correct, when you are completely wrong about so many things, but specifically...

Specifically what?? That's relevant to the discussion that is. (i) Commercial vs. recreational vessel standards vs. their respective responsibilities/liabilities in the event of a collision? (ii) Safe distances to leave in crossing situations? (iii) Whether running both deck & tricolor lights are authorized under the Colregs? Studying the Colregs has been a learning process for me, and I've certainly been wrong before. Just ask Lodesman & Jackdale! Additional corrections are always encouraged & welcomed. (No Jack, not on CC but the Colregs please. )

I don't believe I misunderstand any of the basic concepts regarding boat navigation and collision avoidance, that are needed to be a safe and competent rec boater.

I'm not sure anyone challenged your personal competence as a boater, and I'm pretty sure I never did. I do understand, however, that you often seem to perceive it that way.

Nor do I believe I have made any erroneous statements (other than those I have already acknowledged and corrected).

Which ones have you "already acknowledged and corrected?"

Just because someone disagrees with me, does not make my position wrong, it just makes it different from theirs.

If it's purely an opinion, then yes. If it's factual, then no. For a combo of both, it depends. For e.g., stating that the Rules authorize the running of both deck & tricolor lights is factually wrong, but your opinion that it may provide better visibility to other vessels in certain situations is just that, namely your opinion. Whether it's violative of the Rules but may be worthwhile doing anyway is yet another type of opinion with add'l variables to consider. My personal opinion is that whether or not the Rules require the "best" instruction in any given circumstance is less important than the overall consistency & predictability they provide given the medium they are intended to govern in. So I tend to try to stick with the Rules, and am always trying to better understand them.

When I am convinced my position on a subject is incorrect, I acknowledge it, adopt a new position, and move on.

A list please.

If I have not changed my position on a subject, it is because I have not been convinced my original position was wrong.

You have already stated & amply demonstrated your motivations.

PS, I know I don't have all the answers, but I don't post anything unless I believe it is true.

I expect this is the same for most people, yourself included.
I try, but sometimes what I believe may be true at the time I posted turns out to be wrong, either as a factual matter or an opinion I have that is no longer supportable or persuasive. This is usually demonstrated with further study or by others generous enough with their time to correct me. This is why public forums like CF have been so valuable for my re-education into sailing after being away so long. It's all too easy to get wedded to certain preconceptions that turn out to be wrong. In fact, it's the more typical human nature I believe.
Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 14:49   #1092
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post
[COLOR="navy"]
Specifically what?? That's relevant to the discussion that is.
As indicated in the referenced post you clipped off.

Asked an answered clearly and concisely.

Please stop these BS posts.
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 15:04   #1093
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 4,908
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Originally Posted by Exile

But you're wrong (to the extent I understand that last sentence).

Nobody is "trying to shove all responsibility for collision avoidance on the commericial ship."

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinrod View Post
Exsqueeze me?

What are you talking about?

I agree with this statement completely.

I have never stated, expressed, or even thought otherwise.

So why do you consider my position on this statement to be incorrect?

(I think it may be identical to yours and everyone else's, at least I most certainly hope it is.)

Is this yet another strawman argument?

Post a position that isn't mine, and then argue against it as if it was?
You've used the "strawman" term so much I'm surprised Kenomac hasn't yet posted a cartoon to lighten things up a bit.

Sounds like we both agree with the obvious, namely that not all responsibility necessarily falls on the commercial ship. Where we have differed before (but perhaps this is one of those items you've now changed your position on ) is that responsibility for an incident or collision is generally apportioned based on fault alone, and not the status, training, or "standards" required of different types of vessels. In other words, we should not assume that a commercial ship will get out of our way solely because they have crew with superior training, or because they have superior collision avoidance equipment onboard. I think this may be a common (but understandable) misperception.

In fact, there is support in the Rules that if a recreational vessel has a functioning radar, AIS, and/or VHF -- even though it may not be required -- failure to use it in an incident involving a collision with a commercial vessel that is required to have these items may subject the recreational vessel to liability if use of such equipment could have helped prevent or mitigate the incident. In other words, different "standards" don't generally translate to different levels of "responsibility."
Exile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 15:26   #1094
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 3,482
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramblinrod View Post
I choose not to respond to personal questions (other than my opinion) in public forums.
It's hardly a personal question, and it has a lot to do with the current topic. A bit odd, running the "it's personal" gambit when you post your name and that of your business.

Quote:
Post Edit: (Even then, I choose which questions I respond to and which I don't, and sometimes it is based on the individual making the query and whether I believe their motives are sincere.)
You go off on a rant every time you think someone is putting words in your mouth, but you have the temerity to speak for me about my motives?
Pray tell Rod, what motive would I have for asking if you have a PCOC, and whether or not you believe this program has kept people from getting into boating? I would think as a marine service provider in Canada, you would have a good inkling if newbies stopped coming into the shop after the implementation of the program.

Quote:
The question that should be asked is, "Has any level of rec boater licensing been mandated in a given jurisdiction?"
Duh!
And the next question should be, "What measureable impact has this had on boating safety?"
Answered - thanks evm
And the next question should be, "Based on this, would additional licensing requirements make boating safer?"
Well the answer above seems to point to a 'yes'
And the final question should be, "Considering all pros and cons, would it be worth it?"
No, honestly I think your questions are too generic, whereas mine are specific to your experience - if you would care to answer truthfully?

I assume, given your location that you do have a PCOC, so let's dispense with that one. Will you care to answer the question about whether or not you feel the PCOC program has scared people away from boating? I won't ask you if you think it's made boating safer in Canada - it wouldn't take long to pull up the figures that say it has.
Lodesman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2017, 16:08   #1095
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lake Ontario
Boat: Ontario 38 / Douglas 32 Mk II
Posts: 3,250
Re: Collision Avoidance, Cones of Uncertainty, and Appropriate CPA

Quote:
Originally Posted by evm1024 View Post
I do not see this as a personal question.
Huh?

A question asked of an individual person about their own self, is by very definition a personal question?

It certainly isn't a general question.

I stated my position on this.
ramblinrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
collision

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Challenge: Collision Avoidance! Pelagic Challenges 53 18-08-2017 19:54
CARD Collision Avoidance Radar Detector multihullsailor6 Marine Electronics 12 27-12-2015 21:12
Collision Avoidance - Tsunami Debris rreeves Health, Safety & Related Gear 22 03-05-2012 07:23
Collision Avoidance in Mexico: AIS or Radar or ? no_bad_days Pacific & South China Sea 27 19-09-2011 15:40
Distance to Horizon & Collision Avoidance GordMay General Sailing Forum 7 19-06-2009 00:18

Advertise Here


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:10.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.