Collision and demasting

[Bmarler]

I don't understand the Monday-morning QB'ing here. Two boats collided - that we know. Two needles in a haystack met. We can surmise all we want but that risks whisking away a learning experience. The undertone is "obviously, someone wasn't keeping adequate watch or there would be no accident. I always keep watch, therefore this would never happen to me...." Which means nothing need be learned - everyone knows they need to keep an adequate watch.

So explain something to me: Two vessels manned by experienced mariners collided. Can anyone really say that they are somehow more careful or more experienced than the crew on those two boats?

Peter

i agree with this point of view. many of us here have been piloting out various craft for years, if not decades without a serious event like this happening. we're careful sure, also lucky?
i'll be remembering his story next time i'm running in darkness.

 

[Don L]

One thing is still bothering me, if the F/V say the sailboat and realized they were on a collision course, in addition to turning on their lights (all or just adding the work lights) they should have been sounding the emergency signal or if there was even more time, sound signaling for what kind of passing was intended. That could add a big chunk of liability on the F/V.

**** based on what the CG told me they said, if they had just changed course instead of trying to get us on the VHF the collision would not have happened!

 

[psneeld]

**** based on what the CG told me they said, if they had just changed course instead of trying to get us on the VHF the collision would not have happened!

If fishing, the F/V was not obligated or supposed to turn as the stand on until in extremis because they might turn INTO you, but at some point, then yes they should have been turning if they could.

Talking on the radio doesn't prevent anyone from turning a boat at the same time.

Only a discussion with the F/V captain (maybe crew) could shed light on why he didn't turn or waited so long, and only some kind of electronic nav plot history would really be proof to prove it.

If he was fishing, and the USCG got to the F/V in time, and I have worked fishing vessel cases where it did happen, they pull data from his chartplotter (assuming he has one) to verify some of his actions.

 

[rslifkin]

Talking on the radio doesn't prevent anyone from turning a boat at the same time.

Exactly. Attempting to talk to the other boat and figure out the situation doesn't override the idea of "if the other guy isn't fixing the situation, do something before you run out of options".

 

[psneeld]

Exactly. Attempting to talk to the other boat and figure out the situation doesn't override the idea of "if the other guy isn't fixing the situation, do something before you run out of options".

Taking action as the stand on vessel is one of the hardest decisions a captain has to make.

Turn to early and the other guy turns the same way into you...now you took action that caused a collision...even if the other guy was completely wrong on several levels.

Turn too late and the same outcome occurs... so depending on the boat and situation it can be ether pretty easy or not so much to avoid collisions.

When towing, I had no real means of showing or communicating that me as a tow vessel was RAM (Restricted in Ability to Maneuver) or not.... so I had to always assume the other (usually pleasure boater) would not know what to do if I was RAM or that they even knew what that was. Yet if I needed that breathing room, and trying to communicate on the radio that I did, and the other vessel never responded, I was in that pickle as stay stand on or take the chance and start a turn that if they did at the same time I may not have been able to recover from it

 

[SteveK]

I was on board a CG vessel with seasoned crew at night, one on the radar, one steering, the captain, you get the picture. I noticed that our course was slowly veering. Situational awarness. As a guest I asked if their intention was to pass in front of the moving vessel we were approaching.
You could hear a pin drop for the next hour as they all realized what almost happened.

I have been on board with volunteer CG aux members multiple times in the dark and they could not see what I saw even as I pointed to it.
Night vision that depends on lighting will fail every time.

This was an accident where no one was injured or killed.
The lesson should be that it CAN happen to you.

 

[Delta Riverat]

The best way to see stuff in the dark is not to look at it.

 

[mvweebles]

I've thought a bunch about this thread (and had a well-meaning nudge in the background).

Here's my takeaway: in this instance, had at least one of the vessels been equipped with radar and actively monitored it, this accident would not have happened. No excuses - no "they didn't have AIS" or "they didn't respond to VHF" or "they didn't have lights on" or "they're under sail" etc.

So here's the good news: For approx $5k, any boat can have radar and can control their own destiny assuming they know how to use it.

As mentioned up-thread, I have a decent radar. But I wish I had spent more money on the antenna.

Peter

 

[Hippocampus]

Long term sailor. Note he following.
There’s a huge variation in intensity in returns from different radar reflectors. We used a trilobed reflector mounted 45’ up just above the mounting for our radar on a 65’ mast. Statements about intensity of returns are wild guesses in the absence of detailed data concerning the vessels involved, reflectors and radars involved.
Colregs states you are to use all aids available. To meet this we had three MFDs. One at nav station, one under the hard dodger and one at the helm. Both iPads and both phones could also have the screens on them. I routinely monitored the screens when below even if not on watch. I slept during the day. It’s my primary responsibility to lower risk as the skipper not my wife or other crew. I insisted on two up whenever I thought risk was elevated. The person next up would be the second watch stander unless I thought risk was sufficiently elevated in which case it would be me.
Radar can miss fish boats. North of PR there’s often a host of fish boats with poor reflection and no AIS. In US waters AIS data from fish boats is much more common. Have had occasion to “see” vessels on AIS when radar has not been definitive and confusing. Strongly encourage the use of AIS transceivers. Not just receivers. Wife was on watch as we transited gulf of Maine at dusk in light rain so poor visibility. Multiple fish boat trawling in front of us. One called us by name and helped her thread through them safely. She felt no need to call me up but I came up and only observed. AIS is very helpful.
At landfall we typically drop sail. Headsails obscure vision. Exception is low traffic and when you can reliably see under or around. Wonder with her under a non glass dodger in the cold if her vision was decreased.
Watch on the sailboat was usually done at the helm. There’s a VHF remote there. If done under the hard dodger with a handheld there.
Running lights and even higher lights on fish boats are often very hard to see. Those bright white working lights obscured everything.
In my view Coregs state they do not apply if collision is imminent. Rather you should do whatever is necessary to avoid collision. That applies to both vessels. Here a miss by just a few more feet would of had a benign outcome.
It takes ~1/2 h to get your best night vision. Although radar and AIS are very helpful vision and a un obstructed periodic 360 remains key. I have no idea as to apportion of blame from information available. I would suggest for cruising boats both power and sail.
A watch means watching. It means being able to get an unobstructed 360. Watch standing where vision is limited isn’t the place to be on watch. On our current boat will admit sometimes don’t leave the pilot house (which does have aft facing windows) but rather use the aft camera. Coastally being overtaken by a vessel on AP is a real concern.
Use all means available at the watch position. Having AIS and radar on screens you can’t see isn’t helpful.
VHF is only helpful if you can transmit and the other vessel is listening. I’m amazed wherever I am -offshore, mid ocean, in the AICW- how often the other vessel isn’t responsive. I now view VHF as a sometimes thing and act accordingly. Don’t depend upon it.
Same with AIS
“For example, as of May 31, 2014, all European Union flagged fishing vessels over 15 meters in length are required to be equipped with AIS and as of March 1, 2016, all commercial U.S. flagged fishing vessels over 65 feet in length are required to be equipped with AIS.”
So don’t depend upon it.
Same with radar. Maybe it’s better but it’s not perfect. Don’t fully depend upon it.
But you can depend on your eyes in the absence of fog or pouring rain. Sometimes you may only see a wake or a shadow as the other vessels obscures the horizon or shoreline but it’s unusual to not have any clue even with a poor moon. Don’t think there’s stones to throw here beyond the possibility that appropriate vigilance was not applied by one or both of the vessels involved.

 

[Davil1]

Excellent review.
Take it at heart!!!

Will only add my personal practice.

On coastal passages, no longer solo, have crew, and both in the cockpit during nighttime or reduced visibility.

Sleep during day!!!

In my experience, coastal traffic (less than 20 miles from shore) has increased.

Most coastal passages on the East Coast can be done with one overnighted (2 are exceptions)

Night hours after May are shorter, thus the inconvenience of staying awake is not a biggy.

 

[mvweebles]

On the way down Baja with the Baja Ha Ha rally, I'd say over 90% of the 110 rally boats were broadcasting AIS signals, a much higher percentage of transponder usage than I anticipated.

I think there is some myth about radar, especially amongst sailors. For some reason, they believe their vessels do not return much of an echo. On pre-digital radar sets, casual users would often over-tune radar and hide targets, but auto-tuning has gotten so much better these days. For example, with my modest Simrad 4G "36-mile" radar, I have no problem picking-up sailboats at least 5-6 miles out. From reading CruisersForum, sailors seem to rely on visual watch standing and eschew radar. Perhaps this is because the radar display is often below; or if at the binnacle it's small; and the antenna is rarely gimbaled so reception isn't great. Compared to powerboats, sailboats have some inherrent disadvantages when it comes to radar.

Hippocampus, I will take issue with one thing in your excellent post: "You can trust your eyes." While I agree with the general sentiment (visual needs to be included in watch standing), looks can often be deceiving. Background lights. Gauging distance. Missing something that's there. There are a lot of ways visual watch standing can go awry. Self-tuning radar is much better now than it was even 10-years ago so operator error is reduce

QUESTION: Sailboats are the vast majority of cruising boats (and I include coastal cruising). But my hunch is powerboats are much more likely to be equipped with radar. Why?

Peter

 

[SteveK]

....................

QUESTION: Sailboats are the vast majority of cruising boats (and I include coastal cruising). But my hunch is powerboats are much more likely to be equipped with radar. Why?

Peter

Peter, radar works well when level. Sailboats are often heeled over reducing forward vision, getting a good read on water on one side and sky on the other. Plus not many cockpits have waterproof room for displays.

I also wonder about night vision being affected by looking at a monitor.

 

[Jeff F]

QUESTION: Sailboats are the vast majority of cruising boats (and I include coastal cruising). But my hunch is powerboats are much more likely to be equipped with radar. Why?

I suspect that historically power has been a concern for sailors, so they are less likely to use radar routinely. And they typically travel at slower speeds than power boats, so perhaps the need is less generally.

 

[sunchaser]

Peter, radar works well when level. Sailboats are often heeled over reducing forward vision, getting a good read on water on one side and sky on the other. Plus not many cockpits have waterproof room for displays.

I also wonder about night vision being affected by looking at a monitor.

Radar and heeling concerns were addressed decades ago with leveling devices. As I recall Edson made one that worked well. There are others.

 

[Davil1]

Sailor's use of radar question may be related to power consumption, if motor sailing no problem, if only sailing, power use potentially a concern depending on total Amp reserve.

 

[O C Diver]

I also wonder about night vision being affected by looking at a monitor.

Most radars now have a guard zone. Pretty simple to setup between 2 and 3 miles to notify you of approaching objects so you aren't glued to the radar screen.

Ted

 

[psneeld]

I don't think most of today's nicer cruising sailboats are any less likely to have Radar than power. But agree those that truly are cruising, I think a higher percentage of low budget cruisers are sailors that do without a lot of amenities, including Radar, and only carry basics to include just the required safety items.

Both categories depend heavily on the "budget" and "use". Either category without radar can easily be bumped into coastal anytime, day or night.

Sailors with a decent budget can't complain about power usage these days with low wattage Radars/lights/etc and solar/lithium setups.

 

[Pascall]

If you can't rely on your radar, it means that the equipment is not up to scratch or the operator's knowledge.
Sailing on the major rivers in Europe, busiest in the world, with little space and very intensive shipping traffic, you trust the radar for 100%, otherwise you would not be able to sail blindly.

Greeting

Pascal.

 

[SteveK]

Radar and heeling concerns were addressed decades ago with leveling devices. As I recall Edson made one that worked well. There are others.

OK, if you say so.

 

[SteveK]

Most radars now have a guard zone. Pretty simple to setup between 2 and 3 miles to notify you of approaching objects so you aren't glued to the radar screen.

Ted

Perfect

 

[Don L]

My radar stopped working a few years ago. But even back when it did work I didn't run it much on a clear night as it was power hog.

The fishing boat said he had his radar on, but it didn't pick us up. We have a LOT of metal on our boat and our 22 year radar before if died could pick out a sea buoy mile away.

We were healed and at 5 degrees at the most.

 

[Mac G]

Okay. I expect you will all excoriate me and run me through the coals now as you all seem firm proponents of radar, and am not saying you should not have one; However, any electronic device should only be used as an assistance, an additional tool to have. After all, what if a lightning strike or some big battery problem knocks out all your electronics? What then?

Back in the 1960's when I was a newbie learning from the old salts of the day, very few pleasure vessels power or sail were equiped with radar. No one had gps. No one had a chart-plotter. We learned to stand watch by "standing" and getting up out of the cockpit and viewing the horizon from the mast where your eye is higher above the horizon. You cannot see well from behind a dodger down in the cockpit, especially if there are seas, or if your eyes are being blinded by lights left on down below. If you don't like getting wet or feeling cold then buy better gear to wear or take up a different sport.

And your night vision will be blinded and compromised from staring at a screen. Expecting to be able to see anything in the darkness after looking at anything lighted is foolish. Back then, the only thing in the cockpit with a light was the binnacle, and that was only very dimly lit. Now days I see folks with big colorful brightly-lit chartplotters mounted to their binnacles!
I always kept electronics down below where they are dry and unable to blind the night watch. Always held a paper chart on deck too and nowdays many folks do not even carry paper charts for their itinerary.

Am an old-school proponet of dark decks when standing watch. And a firm believer in getting up and looking around frequently. Have sailed many miles for many years in all conditions with no radar. Am not saying don't get one, but am suggesting it should not be relied on to the sacrifice of basic watch-standing prinicples.

 

[Larry M]

My radar story: We were crossing the Indian Ocean in our 43’ sailboat when we hailed a US flagged container ship. We gave them our position and asked what their intentions were since they were within three miles of us and closing. The conversation went something like, “where are you?” “We don’t see you on radar and we just had it serviced.” I repeated our position and then “Oh, there you are”. We chatted back and forth for a while and it came out that their radar gain was turned down too low. Our closing speed was about 20 knots.

 

[Pascall]

Okay. I expect you will all excoriate me and run me through the coals now as you all seem firm proponents of radar, and am not saying you should not have one; However, any electronic device should only be used as an assistance, an additional tool to have. After all, what if a lightning strike or some big battery problem knocks out all your electronics? What then?

Back in the 1960's when I was a newbie learning from the old salts of the day, very few pleasure vessels power or sail were equiped with radar. No one had gps. No one had a chart-plotter. We learned to stand watch by "standing" and getting up out of the cockpit and viewing the horizon from the mast where your eye is higher above the horizon. You cannot see well from behind a dodger down in the cockpit, especially if there are seas, or if your eyes are being blinded by lights left on down below. If you don't like getting wet or feeling cold then buy better gear to wear or take up a different sport.

And your night vision will be blinded and compromised from staring at a screen. Expecting to be able to see anything in the darkness after looking at anything lighted is foolish. Back then, the only thing in the cockpit with a light was the binnacle, and that was only very dimly lit. Now days I see folks with big colorful brightly-lit chartplotters mounted to their binnacles!
I always kept electronics down below where they are dry and unable to blind the night watch. Always held a paper chart on deck too and nowdays many folks do not even carry paper charts for their itinerary.

Am an old-school proponet of dark decks when standing watch. And a firm believer in getting up and looking around frequently. Have sailed many miles for many years in all conditions with no radar. Am not saying don't get one, but am suggesting it should not be relied on to the sacrifice of basic watch-standing prinicples.

Radar is absolutely not a tool if you sail on radar, if you sail on radar you sail blindly on radar.
If you don't sail on radar, the radar is a tool and you can use it as an extra pair of eyes.

Greeting

Pascal.

 

[O C Diver]

I run radar most of the time. This means 500 to 1,000 hours a year. You're not going to be good with it if you don't run it during daytime, on nice days, when you can see and confirm what the radar is telling you. Your not going to be good with it if you run it on the auto settings. You need to learn to manually adjust the gain, rain and sea noise rejections without loosing the targets.

Radar is a tool that you have to learn to use and interpret the information. This is like sailing. Your not a sailor if you run the sails up on your boat a few days. Mastering a sailboat involves learning how the boat sails, how close to the wind you can point, when to reef, when to change jibs, and how much weather you're comfortable in with that boat.

This is Lake Superior running the South shore in 2022.


This is an hour later. Not the time you want to learn what you don't know about running your radar.


Ted

 

[mvweebles]

Okay. I expect you will all excoriate me and run me through the coals now as you all seem firm proponents of radar, and am not saying you should not have one; However, any electronic device should only be used as an assistance, an additional tool to have. After all, what if a lightning strike or some big battery problem knocks out all your electronics? What then?

Back in the 1960's when I was a newbie learning from the old salts of the day, very few pleasure vessels power or sail were equiped with radar. No one had gps. No one had a chart-plotter. We learned to stand watch by "standing" and getting up out of the cockpit and viewing the horizon from the mast where your eye is higher above the horizon. You cannot see well from behind a dodger down in the cockpit, especially if there are seas, or if your eyes are being blinded by lights left on down below. If you don't like getting wet or feeling cold then buy better gear to wear or take up a different sport.

And your night vision will be blinded and compromised from staring at a screen. Expecting to be able to see anything in the darkness after looking at anything lighted is foolish. Back then, the only thing in the cockpit with a light was the binnacle, and that was only very dimly lit. Now days I see folks with big colorful brightly-lit chartplotters mounted to their binnacles!
I always kept electronics down below where they are dry and unable to blind the night watch. Always held a paper chart on deck too and nowdays many folks do not even carry paper charts for their itinerary.

Am an old-school proponet of dark decks when standing watch. And a firm believer in getting up and looking around frequently. Have sailed many miles for many years in all conditions with no radar. Am not saying don't get one, but am suggesting it should not be relied on to the sacrifice of basic watch-standing prinicples.

I think a lot of sailors would agree with you - that visual watchstanding of the horizon (vs the instruments) should be primary, that radar is ancillary. Sailors also worry a lot more about keeping night vision intact by avoiding any onboard lighting. I disagree with how they prioritize deck watch. To me, it's an eco-system that you use the information at hand judisciously. At night or degraded visibility conditions, radar will advance in priority, perhaps above all else. Radar will almost always pickup a target well in advance of the human eye - an exception may be seeing running lights on a clear dark night.

The OP was not running radar. I had dinner last night with a couple on a 43-foot Beneteau sailboat who, while they have radar, it's down below but they mirror the images on iPads at the helm. Barely adequate in my opinion.

In my opinion, a modern cruising boat needs radar. Watchstanding needs to include paying attention to the instruments, especially radar. The human eye is fallable, increasingly so under poor visibility conditions.

Peter

 

[Don L]

Open Seas who told them:

- They were fishing with their nets out doing 2 knots
- They didn’t see us on radar
- We didn’t have our lights on
- They tried to call us on the VHF
- We told them to leave

So I have now seen the report from Open Seas. In it they say they were trawling for shrimp, that be were motoring, didn't have our nav lights on before or after the collision, and that we appeared intoxicated.

We of course know for fact we were under sail, had our lights on, and had not been drinking.

 

[psneeld]

Are you say they were lying to the USCG about fishing which then would make you the stand on vessel?

 

[CharlieO.]

Are you say they were lying to the USCG about fishing which then would make you the stand on vessel?

I think they are saying they were trawling for shrimp and Don was motoring- not under sail.

 

[lwarden]

You're not going to be good with it if you don't run it during daytime, on nice days, when you can see and confirm what the radar is telling you. Your not going to be good with it if you run it on the auto settings. You need to learn to manually adjust the gain, rain and sea noise rejections without loosing the targets.

Ted

This is great advice which I always strongly suggest when I help out new boat owners. The last thing you want to have is be relying on radar in an emergency situation and not be familiar with the sorts of inaccuracies it has with physical and AIS targets, lag, scale, etc.