3 ms·

The difference between your 30' boat and that 250' cutter is that captain had a Furuno radar 120' up on a mast, giving him a 30 mile horizon. His bridge team ca

The difference between your 30' boat and that 250' cutter is that captain had a Furuno radar 120' up on a mast, giving him a 30 mile horizon. His bridge team calculated contact problems so far out they never came within 5 miles of the contact. You didn't even know a cutter was there.

yardie 9y ago
Uh yes I know the cutter is there. They announce almost every damn second on the VHF they are there and to keep a 1000ft clearance. I assume your friend never has to dock, maneuver in harbors, or navigate a TSS. Because those are the places where the rules are used. ColRegs are not even a factor at 5nm CPA. Your friend could save his crew a lot of time and brain power. Instead of trying to calculate every other ships CPA knowing who the stand on vessel and a bit of VHF work is also good seamanship. Finally, your friend may or may not even see me 30 miles out. Sailboats have such a small radar signature I had to install a radar reflector to avoided being run down by commercial.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  I hope I have not misrepresented the coastguard or one of its officers by misremembering a post or conflating two different ones. I have not been able to locate the original, but I am sure that there was no implication that the vessel would be operated in a manner that violated either the letter or spirit of the rules in circumstances in which they apply. I took it to mean that the vessel was navigated in a manner to avoid, where reasonably feasible and all else being equal, creating a situation where the rules did apply, and, in particular, put an onus on other vessels to take action. My thinking, not clearly expressed and which should probably have been posed as a question, was that if naval vessels are traveling in congested waters with AIS in passive mode, would it not be reasonable to assume the possibility that you have not been seen and be prepared to take evasive action? If so, I would guess that software could help with identifying developing situations, and perhaps proposing a course of action, even if the naval vessel is not communicating its location to other ships. Such a system would be less capable than aviation's TCAS, but perhaps still useful. This may all be moot if, as has been suggested, the problem is found to be with the training of naval officers in ship handling.
  - yardie 9y ago
    Pardon me, I thought of that as well that maybe there was something lost in translation. I've never known a USN or USCG vessel to deviate from those rules out of courtesy. Since sailing is an international experience you want to adhere to ColRegs as close as possible. Because an action might be interpreted the wrong way and then an accident can happen. Unlike other opinions. USN vessels are not invisible. While they don't transmit AIS they're easily painted under radar and even consumer radar can calculate a vessels CPA using ARPA/MARPA. ColRegs are easy to understand and it works in the 2D coordinate space. If we are bearing down on each other ColRegs say we both turn right. And that's all there is to it. Now, there are other regs for all types of scenarios; powered vs sail, sail vs sail, powered vs towed, etc. I believe TCAS is overkill for a situation that can be sorted out with 10 seconds of VHF.
    - killjoywashere 9y ago
      > I've never known a USN or USCG vessel to deviate from those rules out of courtesy Ah, not out of courtesy. More out of just pointedly staying away. See, on most USN ships, the OOD has to call the CO if any ship's CPA is within 5 miles, or some other parameters are violated (you deviate from course more than 10 degrees, more than 10 degrees rudder, etc). So the game is to use all the leeway you have to avoid any situation that would require the captain's attention. So, at least in my day, we kept ourselves engaged at night that way. The Fitzgerald's situation, I can at least understand why the CO wasn't on the bridge. For the McCain, where was the CO when the ship was in the Strait? What else on that ship could have possibly been more important than navigating the Strait?

yardie 9y ago

Uh yes I know the cutter is there. They announce almost every damn second on the VHF they are there and to keep a 1000ft clearance. I assume your friend never has to dock, maneuver in harbors, or navigate a TSS. Because those are the places where the rules are used. ColRegs are not even a factor at 5nm CPA. Your friend could save his crew a lot of time and brain power. Instead of trying to calculate every other ships CPA knowing who the stand on vessel and a bit of VHF work is also good seamanship. Finally, your friend may or may not even see me 30 miles out. Sailboats have such a small radar signature I had to install a radar reflector to avoided being run down by commercial.

mannykannot 9y ago
I hope I have not misrepresented the coastguard or one of its officers by misremembering a post or conflating two different ones. I have not been able to locate the original, but I am sure that there was no implication that the vessel would be operated in a manner that violated either the letter or spirit of the rules in circumstances in which they apply. I took it to mean that the vessel was navigated in a manner to avoid, where reasonably feasible and all else being equal, creating a situation where the rules did apply, and, in particular, put an onus on other vessels to take action. My thinking, not clearly expressed and which should probably have been posed as a question, was that if naval vessels are traveling in congested waters with AIS in passive mode, would it not be reasonable to assume the possibility that you have not been seen and be prepared to take evasive action? If so, I would guess that software could help with identifying developing situations, and perhaps proposing a course of action, even if the naval vessel is not communicating its location to other ships. Such a system would be less capable than aviation's TCAS, but perhaps still useful. This may all be moot if, as has been suggested, the problem is found to be with the training of naval officers in ship handling.
- yardie 9y ago
  Pardon me, I thought of that as well that maybe there was something lost in translation. I've never known a USN or USCG vessel to deviate from those rules out of courtesy. Since sailing is an international experience you want to adhere to ColRegs as close as possible. Because an action might be interpreted the wrong way and then an accident can happen. Unlike other opinions. USN vessels are not invisible. While they don't transmit AIS they're easily painted under radar and even consumer radar can calculate a vessels CPA using ARPA/MARPA. ColRegs are easy to understand and it works in the 2D coordinate space. If we are bearing down on each other ColRegs say we both turn right. And that's all there is to it. Now, there are other regs for all types of scenarios; powered vs sail, sail vs sail, powered vs towed, etc. I believe TCAS is overkill for a situation that can be sorted out with 10 seconds of VHF.
  - killjoywashere 9y ago
    > I've never known a USN or USCG vessel to deviate from those rules out of courtesy Ah, not out of courtesy. More out of just pointedly staying away. See, on most USN ships, the OOD has to call the CO if any ship's CPA is within 5 miles, or some other parameters are violated (you deviate from course more than 10 degrees, more than 10 degrees rudder, etc). So the game is to use all the leeway you have to avoid any situation that would require the captain's attention. So, at least in my day, we kept ourselves engaged at night that way. The Fitzgerald's situation, I can at least understand why the CO wasn't on the bridge. For the McCain, where was the CO when the ship was in the Strait? What else on that ship could have possibly been more important than navigating the Strait?