Examples of a two crew watch rotation for an ocean crossing?

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

So if there are "few" collisions, whatever that means, you think you should just ignore the rules and don't worry about it?

Just a quick Google brings up dozens of fatalities, sinkings, serious injuries of people on sailboats colliding with ships offshore.

Sailboats get run down by ships every year, and people get killed sometimes. Is that enough information for you?

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/coll...loss-of-1-life

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/coll...inking-of-ibis

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/coll...ahkuna-sinking

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/sink...oss-of-3-lives

https://nypost.com/2006/09/22/sailbo...ter-collision/

https://gcaptain.com/yacht-racers-ki...ent-collision/

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/coll...people-injured

Particularly instructive is the Orca/Shoreway collision, which occurred in 2014. A guy was sailing with his wife and just ducked below just for a minute to take a leak. During this time the yacht collided with the Shoreway and sank, taking the guy's wife to a watery grave.

"Safety lessons:

It is essential that all vessels maintain a proper lookout at all times."

MAIB writing about the Orca/Shoreway collision, https://www.gov.uk/government/public...proper-lookout

"At all times" means what it says.


Attachment 214997


The Orca after being raised from the seabed after fatal collision with the Shoreway.

With just a cursory look at those links it was apparent they didn't fall into the "offshore passage" category of collision. Lets try and stay focussed on the issue and topic.

[kmacdonald]

We are talking about ocean crossing passages here. Not congested waterways or inshore-nearshore sailing. There is a HUGE difference in the watchkeeping required for the two DIFFERENT scenarios. Maybe not different legally but practically.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

With just a cursory look at those links it was apparent they didn't fall into the "offshore passage" category of collision. Lets try and stay focussed on the issue and topic.

Good idea! Back to OPs question? Clearly, there is one vote for no active watch-standing is needed as long as you have electronics. Noted.

In an effort to move on......

I appreciate the OP's last post explaining that he has more comfort than his wife. I was in the same position when Cheryll and I took our first trip from San Francisco to the Channel Islands off Ventura, about 300 nms. A lot was related to night time passage where everything is amplified. If I had it to do again, I'd do a few more passages with a third crew before cutting hack to just the two of us. Really makes a big difference.

That was 20-years ago. We still laugh about it. But mostly we remember it was an amazing trip. Weather was generally good - on the way down, we had 8-foot swells at 30+ seconds with bright sunshine. Our old displacement trawler rode like an old Buick Electra on a country road. Lots of whales and a really nice run.

Peter

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

Good idea! Back to OPs question? Clearly, there is one vote for no active watch-standing is needed as long as you have electronics. Noted.

I'm sorry you din't understand. I clearly said the AIS was on watch and I clearly meant on an OFFSHORE PASSAGE. I didn't say having electronics, I actually said using an AIS zone alarm.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

I'm sorry you din't understand. I clearly said the AIS was on watch and I clearly meant on an OFFSHORE PASSAGE. I didn't say having electronics, I actually said using an AIS zone alarm.

To my mind, sounds like a distinction with barely a difference, but so noted.

I stand corrected - should have read "One vote for no watch needed as long as there is an AIS zone alarm set and you're on an offshore passage."

Apologies for the confusion. Sleep tight.

Peter

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

With just a cursory look at those links it was apparent they didn't fall into the "offshore passage" category of collision. Lets try and stay focussed on the issue and topic.

Most of those cases are offshore.


Here's a collision with a ship on a transatlantic crossing, 90 miles off Penmarch, just a couple of years go: https://www.yachtingworld.com/news/s...wBHY2fJr9Wm.99



Far offshore there is less traffic and less risk, relatively speaking, but that doesn't mean none. My near-miss occurred after 2000 miles of not seeing a single other vessel.



Some discussion on this exact topic from YBW:


"Two recent cases. One friend was on a transat and came up the hatch to talk to the on watch guy. Right behind them was a large ship. The Watch had not looked behind for a while and had not seen it. He got it on the radio and was convinced that they had not been seen, despite what the ship said, as they should have altered course some time before. This was the first vessel seen in two weeks. AIS? The ship had it turned off and the yacht an RX only.
"Other friend coming back solo from Madeira, looks around and goes below. Around 15mins later is struck a glancing blow by a large reefer, causing extensive damage. He elected to abandon and was picked up by another ship. The one that hit him did not stop, despite radio contact. He had no AIS, as engine less and limited electrics. Again, he had not seen a ship for a couple of days.
"So it is a risk."
https://forums.ybw.com/index.php?thr....455680/page-2


Moral of the story -- just because you're far offshore and haven't seen a ship in weeks, doesn't mean there is no risk of collision.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

. . . "One vote for no watch needed as long as there is an AIS zone alarm set and you're on an offshore passage.". .

For the record, there is no such thing as an "AIS zone alarm". AIS alarms work according to set minimum CPA and maximum TCPA, not zones.


Many vessels offshore don't broadcast AIS, so AIS alarms, even if we assume they function perfectly (which you can't), do not give assurance of detecting another vessel.


This is poor advice based on, I guess, no experience.

[Red Sky]

I always bring up the story of the “Aegean”, the 37’ Hunter that ran into N. Coronado Island during the Newport Beach/Ensenada race in 2012. 7+ Kts. into the rocks after the watchstander fell asleep. I do it during dinner on the first night. Just something for everyone to keep in mind.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

This is poor advice based on, I guess, no experience.

Of course it's poor advice. It's awful advice. There are a number of reasons vessels turn-off their AIS Tx - piracy being one. Forgetfulness/Laziness being another. At least run with radar that tells you what's out there.

The OP asked for examples of managing short-handed crew situations. Turning on the electronics (excuse me....AIS) and going to sleep is one way. I consider it highly irresponsible and I'm guessing all but a few die-hard contrarians do too. The OP has already been very clear that he is looking for traditional watch-standing approaches. For posterity, it is an option and it's actually probably a good thing it is included in the discussion. The only thing good I can say about this suggestion is it's better than sleeping with no electronics (excuse me.....AIS). It's like saying smoking two packs a day is better than three.

Peter

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

Of course it's poor advice. It's awful advice. There are a number of reasons vessels turn-off their AIS Tx - piracy being one. Forgetfulness/Laziness being another.

The OP asked for examples of managing short-handed crew situations. Turning on the electronics (excuse me....AIS) and going to sleep is one way. I consider it highly irresponsible and I'm guessing all but a few die-hard contrarians do too. The OP has already been very clear that he is looking for traditional watch-standing approaches. For posterity, it is an option and it's actually probably a good thing it is included in the discussion. The only thing good I can say about this suggestion is it's better than sleeping with no electronics (excuse me.....AIS). It's like saying smoking two packs a day is better than three.

Peter

Indeed. I think we might also consider the possibility that this particular recommendation was not actually made in a serious way, but rather to provoke. I'm not going to use the "T" word

[kmacdonald]

I guess fatigue is never a factor in accidents at sea and can be ignored in forming a rational watchkeeping schedule. You see, it's not a binary decision. There are other factors at play, if you want to consider them of course.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

I guess fatigue is never a factor in accidents at sea and can be ignored in forming a rational watchkeeping schedule. You see, it's not a binary decision. There are other factors at play, if you want to consider them of course.

A reasonable comment for a change.


Of course fatigue is a factor -- a huge factor. Managing fatigue is a key part of crew resource management.


There are a lot of responsible ways to manage crew fatigue. A two man crew may be stretched thin, especially in bad weather or with mechanical problems or some other challenge, but there should almost never be any reason, even with only two on board, for both to be sleeping at the same time. 6 hours of sleep is only 25% of the day.

[kmacdonald]

When and under what conditions would crew sleep over ride the requirement for a human watch? Is that even possible? Is a sleep deprived watch even worth having? Its really hard to quantify and begs for common sense to be used.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

I most emphatically di

To me, it is morally wrong, as well as legally wrong to "turn in and go to sleep," as a "normal" practice when there is an able bodied person to stand a watch while the skipper sleeps. If you want to make love, it comes out of your off watch, not his, and may be a quickie.

.

Ann

Would you care to elaborate on that thought Ann? If you dont mind that is.

[slug]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

A reasonable comment for a change.


Of course fatigue is a factor -- a huge factor. Managing fatigue is a key part of crew resource management.


There are a lot of responsible ways to manage crew fatigue. A two man crew may be stretched thin, especially in bad weather or with mechanical problems or some other challenge, but there should almost never be any reason, even with only two on board, for both to be sleeping at the same time. 6 hours of sleep is only 25% of the day.

To manage fatigue I slow down

Things happen slowly at 3 knots