Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Jeff Morris wrote:
What is ghosting?

An effect that can sometimes be seen on terrestrial TV sets - the set
receives the direct signal from the transmitter, and a secondary signal
which comes in a little later, typically the result of the transmitted
signal bouncing off of a building or hill.

It strikes me that a wide horizontal beam would result in a range of
reflections, or, perhaps more accurately, a reflection period which is a
function of the beam width and rotation speed.


--
Wally
www.makearatherlonglinkthattakesyounowhere.com
Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

No Jeff... I doubt I could explain that adequately expect I would think
horizontal beam width would affect resolution, range and maybe weather
penetration abilities.

CM

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
| So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal beam
width affect the
| image.
|
| -jeff
|
|
| Capt. Mooron wrote:
| Most people I've seen either find a radar image intuitively correct
| to what they see around them ... or they don't. I knew immediately
| what I was looking at on the first radar image I saw. I can
| interpolate between radar, air photo and chart in an instant. I
| mentally compensate for differences in scale and orientation. Maybe
| I'm one of the lucky few... but I assumed everyone had this ability
| to some extent.
|
| CM
|
| "Simple Simon" wrote in message
| ...
|
| But radar is different from a paper chart because
| a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
| radar does. Radar is really no different than a
| looking at something with eyes that use radio
| waves instead of light waves
|
| Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
| yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
| hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
| than the same hundred yards right off our bow.
|
| Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
| extrapolate this information mentally in order
| to match it with a chart of the same area.
|
| It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
| projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
| if looking north on a Mercator.
|
| See what I mean? But the point is the majority
| of people can't even imagine such differences
| let alone work with them.
|
| This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.
|
| S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat
| Captains
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
| ...
| Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
| comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended
| limits of an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on
| mirrors and the visual depth of field at a specific spot to
| determine this. This is one of the reasons why women generally do
| not back into a parking space... while men prefer to. I say this is
| a general trait.... I know of women who are very good with spatial
| interpretation.
|
| If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to
| resolve the image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in
| mind that often you only view the proximal reflected surface of any
| object. The "chart" on a radar screen is always oriented to the
| line of the vessel and bearing is always relative unless a fluxgate
| compass or GPS input is available. In a day or two I could easily
| have you running with a full comprehension of radar... at least as
| well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....
|
| CM
|
| "Simple Simon" wrote in message
| ...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has
| one,
| but
| not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics,
| such as compass, chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can
| just
| turn
| on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with
| it's usage. I have seen any number of people using it on a
| fairly regular
| basis,
| who
| have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
| equating that picture to their charts or vessel traffic around
| them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot
| targets,
| you
| can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
| haven't seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar
| image... tuning radar is a little more complicated ... but not
| out of the realm of the newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to
| overcome... a radar in use to confirm your plots and verify
| relative bearings is perfectly fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and
| the general population's ability to embrace technology has
| increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
| | I dare you to show the post where I claimed the above!
|
| Oh Boo Hooo Hooo cried Bob!
|
| BUSTED and caught in another lie!


Oh dear... he's wailing again.... I did not lie Bob! You did but can't
remeber where or you would be posting a link.

Bwahahahahahahahahaaa!!

CM

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Wally wrote:
Jeff Morris wrote:
What is ghosting?

An effect that can sometimes be seen on terrestrial TV sets - the set
receives the direct signal from the transmitter, and a secondary
signal which comes in a little later, typically the result of the
transmitted signal bouncing off of a building or hill.

It strikes me that a wide horizontal beam would result in a range of
reflections, or, perhaps more accurately, a reflection period which
is a function of the beam width and rotation speed.

So, at any given moment, the receiver is getting a return which is based on
the range of topographical features being hit by the beam. If those features
are different distances away (or different materials/densities?), then the
return would, I think, be confused - all sorts of possibilities for what
would appear to be several targets in the nominal direction; maybe harmonic
weirdness. I dunno - I'm half-guessing.



--
Wally
www.makearatherlonglinkthattakesyounowhere.com
Things are always clearer in the cold, post-upload light.

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

That's easy. A narrow horizontal beam width permits accurate
bearing determination and good bearing resolution while a wide
width presents a better overall picture but with degraded bearing
determination and resolution.

I hope this helps.

S.Simon - a Captain who can use a search engine really fast


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal beam width affect the
image.

-jeff

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

That's easy - here's a more complete answer than the other
one I just gave you.

Beam width is important in bearing resolution. All targets are widened by
the effective horizontal beam width. If the beam width is 4 degrees, two
targets that are one mile off will appear as one if they are closer together
than 370 feet. At two miles the targets must be separated by 740 feet, at 24
miles a six degree beam width would merge objects that were almost 1.68 miles
apart. This can make interpretation of the display difficult. Suppose you
are trying to find a harbor mouth that is 370 feet wide. Radar won't pick it
up until you get closer than a mile.

Get it?

S.Simon - a Captain who's a navigational phenom.

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal beam width affect the
image.

-jeff


Capt. Mooron wrote:
Most people I've seen either find a radar image intuitively correct
to what they see around them ... or they don't. I knew immediately
what I was looking at on the first radar image I saw. I can
interpolate between radar, air photo and chart in an instant. I
mentally compensate for differences in scale and orientation. Maybe
I'm one of the lucky few... but I assumed everyone had this ability
to some extent.

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

But radar is different from a paper chart because
a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
radar does. Radar is really no different than a
looking at something with eyes that use radio
waves instead of light waves

Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
than the same hundred yards right off our bow.

Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
extrapolate this information mentally in order
to match it with a chart of the same area.

It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
if looking north on a Mercator.

See what I mean? But the point is the majority
of people can't even imagine such differences
let alone work with them.

This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.

S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat
Captains

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended
limits of an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on
mirrors and the visual depth of field at a specific spot to
determine this. This is one of the reasons why women generally do
not back into a parking space... while men prefer to. I say this is
a general trait.... I know of women who are very good with spatial
interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to
resolve the image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in
mind that often you only view the proximal reflected surface of any
object. The "chart" on a radar screen is always oriented to the
line of the vessel and bearing is always relative unless a fluxgate
compass or GPS input is available. In a day or two I could easily
have you running with a full comprehension of radar... at least as
well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...


I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.

Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.

Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
and representative distances with respect to scale are
concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
at spatiality.

I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work




"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...

"Shen44" wrote in message

Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has
one,
but
not as
important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics,
such as compass, chart work, etc..
Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can
just
turn
on,
for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with
it's usage. I have seen any number of people using it on a
fairly regular
basis,
who
have
problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating that picture to their charts or vessel traffic around
them.
Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot
targets,
you
can
easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
haven't seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar
image... tuning radar is a little more complicated ... but not
out of the realm of the newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to
overcome... a radar in use to confirm your plots and verify
relative bearings is perfectly fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and
the general population's ability to embrace technology has
increased dramatically.

CM

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:12:19 -0400, Simple Simon wrote:



That's easy - here's a more complete answer than the other one I just gave
you.

Beam width is important in bearing resolution. All targets are widened by
the effective horizontal beam width. If the beam width is 4 degrees, two
targets that are one mile off will appear as one if they are closer
together than 370 feet. At two miles the targets must be separated by 740
feet, at 24 miles a six degree beam width would merge objects that were
almost 1.68 miles apart. This can make interpretation of the display
difficult. Suppose you are trying to find a harbor mouth that is 370 feet
wide. Radar won't pick it up until you get closer than a mile.

Get it?

S.Simon - a Captain who's a navigational phenom.

LOL, cut & paste without attribution. Tsk, tsk. The source of the above:

http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/t...il/010427.html

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

I'd never admit to reading a trawler site. . .

S.Simon

"thunder" wrote in message ...

LOL, cut & paste without attribution. Tsk, tsk. The source of the above:

http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/t...il/010427.html

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Very good - I'm surprised CM didn't know this because its rather fundamental. Basically,
features will be wider on the screen by the beam width. "Inside" features, such as a cove
or entrance that are smaller than the beam width will disappear. Buoys that are closer
together than the beam width will merge. As you point out, RB wouldn't see the entrance
at Port Jeff until he's within a mile.

This is the real reason to get larger antennas, which have a smaller beam width.

BTW, where did you get your numbers? They correspond to statute miles. We use nautical
miles here, not baby miles.


Simple Simon wrote:
That's easy - here's a more complete answer than the other
one I just gave you.

Beam width is important in bearing resolution. All targets are
widened by
the effective horizontal beam width. If the beam width is 4 degrees,
two
targets that are one mile off will appear as one if they are closer
together
than 370 feet. At two miles the targets must be separated by 740
feet, at 24
miles a six degree beam width would merge objects that were almost
1.68 miles
apart. This can make interpretation of the display difficult.
Suppose you
are trying to find a harbor mouth that is 370 feet wide. Radar won't
pick it
up until you get closer than a mile.

Get it?

S.Simon - a Captain who's a navigational phenom.

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal
beam width affect the image.

-jeff


Capt. Mooron wrote:
Most people I've seen either find a radar image intuitively correct
to what they see around them ... or they don't. I knew immediately
what I was looking at on the first radar image I saw. I can
interpolate between radar, air photo and chart in an instant. I
mentally compensate for differences in scale and orientation. Maybe
I'm one of the lucky few... but I assumed everyone had this ability
to some extent.

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...

But radar is different from a paper chart because
a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
radar does. Radar is really no different than a
looking at something with eyes that use radio
waves instead of light waves

Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
than the same hundred yards right off our bow.

Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
extrapolate this information mentally in order
to match it with a chart of the same area.

It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
if looking north on a Mercator.

See what I mean? But the point is the majority
of people can't even imagine such differences
let alone work with them.

This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.

S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all
motorboat Captains

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended
limits of an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on
mirrors and the visual depth of field at a specific spot to
determine this. This is one of the reasons why women generally do
not back into a parking space... while men prefer to. I say this
is a general trait.... I know of women who are very good with
spatial interpretation.

If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to
resolve the image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep
in mind that often you only view the proximal reflected surface
of any object. The "chart" on a radar screen is always oriented
to the line of the vessel and bearing is always relative unless a
fluxgate compass or GPS input is available. In a day or two I
could easily have you running with a full comprehension of
radar... at least as well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no
problem....

CM

"Simple Simon" wrote in message
...


I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of
relating a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.

Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.

Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
and representative distances with respect to scale are
concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
at spatiality.

I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work




"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...

"Shen44" wrote in message

Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has
one,
but
not as
important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics,
such as compass, chart work, etc..
Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can
just
turn
on,
for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent
with it's usage. I have seen any number of people using it on a
fairly regular
basis,
who
have
problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
equating that picture to their charts or vessel traffic around
them.
Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot
targets,
you
can
easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties.
I haven't seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a
radar image... tuning radar is a little more complicated ...
but not out of the realm of the newbie.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to
overcome... a radar in use to confirm your plots and verify
relative bearings is perfectly fine.

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is
over. Navigational instrumentation is now available to the
layman and the general population's ability to embrace
technology has increased dramatically.

CM

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

BUSTED and caught in another lie!


Oh dear... he's wailing again.... I did not lie Bob!

So then prove it and show everyone what an honest man you are. Where is my post
where I said I can't read a radar?
While your at it, where is the post where i claimed to be sailing with no
charts?
Hmmmmmmm?

BUSTED!

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
Very good - I'm surprised CM didn't know this because its rather fundamental. Basically,
features will be wider on the screen by the beam width. "Inside" features, such as a cove
or entrance that are smaller than the beam width will disappear. Buoys that are closer
together than the beam width will merge. As you point out, RB wouldn't see the entrance
at Port Jeff until he's within a mile.

This is the real reason to get larger antennas, which have a smaller beam width.

BTW, where did you get your numbers? They correspond to statute miles. We use nautical
miles here, not baby miles.


Blame it on a trawler website:
http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/t...il/010427.html

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

I had a hunch that was a c&p job - it was too fast and too glib. It also explains the
statute miles - trawler jockeys use baby miles in the ICW.

thunder wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:12:19 -0400, Simple Simon wrote:



That's easy - here's a more complete answer than the other one I
just gave you.

Beam width is important in bearing resolution. All targets are
widened by the effective horizontal beam width. If the beam width
is 4 degrees, two targets that are one mile off will appear as one
if they are closer together than 370 feet. At two miles the targets
must be separated by 740 feet, at 24 miles a six degree beam width
would merge objects that were almost 1.68 miles apart. This can
make interpretation of the display difficult. Suppose you are
trying to find a harbor mouth that is 370 feet wide. Radar won't
pick it up until you get closer than a mile.

Get it?

S.Simon - a Captain who's a navigational phenom.

LOL, cut & paste without attribution. Tsk, tsk. The source of the
above:

http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/t...il/010427.html

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

What!!?? The hell you say!! How could you doubt my word Bob? I'm the
epitome of honesty and truthfulness... while you are a known fabricator of
stories, a deceiver and self proclaimed thief. You have told so many lies
that you now are confused between truth and fantasy.

It's truly pathetic to see you scream Liar!... and realize you have no
recourse but to hope and pray that you can defuse the attack by sending your
accuser to find proof.

Ain't gonna happen.. No No No!

You claimed I was lying... Prove It!

CM


"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
| BUSTED and caught in another lie!
|
|
| Oh dear... he's wailing again.... I did not lie Bob!
|
| So then prove it and show everyone what an honest man you are. Where is my
post
| where I said I can't read a radar?
| While your at it, where is the post where i claimed to be sailing with no
| charts?
| Hmmmmmmm?
|
| BUSTED!
|
| RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Ghost are multiple targets that you pick up from the same actual target
on your radar screen.

Jeff Morris wrote:

What is ghosting?
-j

Wally wrote:

Jeff Morris wrote:

So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal
beam width affect the image.

I would imagine that it would have an effect not unlike ghosting.

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

I've never tried to cross my eyes and eat a dounut Bob..

Why doesn't this surprise me???

Bwahahahaha!

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Ain't gonna happen.. No No No!

You claimed I was lying... Prove It!

No problem. Here's the original post.

"I see no reason to have Suzanne learn the radar until she has a good grasp of
basic nav skills."

Now, mooron, you claimed I posted I could not read a radar, based on the above
post. Ozzy and I both called you on it. You ARE A LIAR and it's now PROVEN.

Thanks...I AM GOD HERE!

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Capt. Mooron"

Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I haven't
seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar image... tuning
radar is a little more complicated ... but not out of the realm of the
newbie.

On the contrary, I've seen and continue to see quite a few. Problem with many
is they are unable to relate the picture to the chart, since they are looking
down at the full view of an area, on a chart, they have a problem relating
their "surface" view to the chart, where some things , such as headlands will
blend, or their horizon will not allow them to match visually with that which
the radar shows.
It is, to a degree, a spatial awareness thingy G but hard to learn for many
and one that takes practice or a natural tendency to do well.

On a good percentage of newer radars, tuning is not really all that hard
.....knowing when to detune and to what degree, can be harder.

While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to overcome... a
radar in use to confirm your plots and verify relative bearings is perfectly
fine.

No argument and if you have the money, definitely get one, but .......

The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and the general
population's ability to embrace technology has increased dramatically.

LOL I'd say that ended years ago. I've seen some smaller yachts with better
equipment than larger ships.


Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

I think this was the comment:

"Yup, works great. For most of the night we had it one to look out for storms.
It was not needed to make the entrance. While Suzanne is learning basic nav,
the radar may confuse things since we're pretty new to it."

Frankly, I think you should have left is on so that you can learn more about radar, while
Suzy learned the serious stuff.


Bobsprit wrote:
Ain't gonna happen.. No No No!

You claimed I was lying... Prove It!

No problem. Here's the original post.

"I see no reason to have Suzanne learn the radar until she has a good
grasp of basic nav skills."

Now, mooron, you claimed I posted I could not read a radar, based on
the above post. Ozzy and I both called you on it. You ARE A LIAR and
it's now PROVEN.

Thanks...I AM GOD HERE!

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"


I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work


Gawd you're funny!! You don't have a clue as to what's going on, on the bridge
of a ship, do you?

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Not only should he have left it on but he is REQUIRED
BY LAW to leave it on.

RULE 7
Risk of Collision
(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the
prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision
exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.
(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational,
including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk
of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of
detected objects.

1) Booby is operating illegally and a hazard to navigation.

2) He is in violation of the above Rule and should be fined.

3) I'm going to forward his post where he admitted to turning off
his radar set to the authorities. Somebody needs to require
he sit down and learn the Rules before he is further allowed
to endanger the saftey of mariner.

S.Simon - a Captain who takes sailing seriously


"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message ...
I think this was the comment:

"Yup, works great. For most of the night we had it one to look out for storms.
It was not needed to make the entrance. While Suzanne is learning basic nav,
the radar may confuse things since we're pretty new to it."

Frankly, I think you should have left is on so that you can learn more about radar, while
Suzy learned the serious stuff.


Bobsprit wrote:
Ain't gonna happen.. No No No!

You claimed I was lying... Prove It!

No problem. Here's the original post.

"I see no reason to have Suzanne learn the radar until she has a good
grasp of basic nav skills."

Now, mooron, you claimed I posted I could not read a radar, based on
the above post. Ozzy and I both called you on it. You ARE A LIAR and
it's now PROVEN.

Thanks...I AM GOD HERE!

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"Shen44" wrote in message ...


LOL I'd say that ended years ago. I've seen some smaller yachts with better
equipment than larger ships.

Motor yachts maybe but sailboaters don't have a clue.

I've seen many a radar on small sailboats that the owners
brag about and these units are more suited to big ships than
yachts, especially sailing yachts that heel.

Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
what a sailor really needs. Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

S.Simon - a natural-born Master

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension.

I have a theory about this. It is non-sexist!!

I think that, in our society, boys are encouraged to play ball games much
more than girls are! Soccer, tennis, football and baseball ALL rqquire the
ability to anticipate where the ball is going to be at a point in the
future. These sports help to develop spatial awareness. Girls were not
encouraged to play these games in the past.


A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this.

My wife doesn't. She doesn't use the mirror at all! She recently
reversed into the bloody house - and broke a rear light!!

25 years ago, I tried to teach her how to drive. Geeeze, that was a
disaster! We had a MAJOR row after she refused to look in the mirror before
pulling out into the road. She *knew* that there wasn't any traffic because
it was a quiet Sunday afternoon.


After that, she got a driving instructor.



Regards


Donal
--

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Simple Simon wasn't doing too bad until he got down to:
Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'.

Look down? First of all, if you mount too high you can see over close in things - at the
top of a 0 foot mast, you'll miss small buoys 250 feet from the boat. Second, higher up
you'll get more sea clutter.

This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel.

Are you saying the heel angle on your mast is more higher up? I thought only my old
Nonsuch did that!

You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.


I think some of them are too low, and I don't like having it on the stern, but I don't
think thy're garbage.

S.Simon - a test-tube Master

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

bject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 09/02/2003 15:22 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"Shen44" wrote in message
...
Gawd you're funny!! You don't have a clue as to what's going on, on the
bridge
of a ship, do you?


I do, too - ask me anything.

S.Simon - a Captain who knows plenty enought to really worry
the tugboat captains.


Never been a tugboat Captain ..... not qualified.

What watch does the Captain stand?
Who is the designated "Navigation Officer"?
Who steers the ship at sea .... in port?
What are the 3M's duties?
Who maintains the radio log?
What is a deadmans switch?
How many whistle controls, on the bridge?
How many EOT's?
How many methods of steering on the bridge?
What are "Noon slips" and how many are there?
Who keeps the Bell Log?
What's in a Bell Log?
How often do you have to wind the course recorder?

G just a few, Neal .... let's see how you do

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension.

I have a theory about this. It is non-sexist!!

That's a relief.

Why? Were you worried? Feeling confused?

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

ubject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 09/02/2003 15:32 Pacific Standard Time

Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
what a sailor really needs.

ROFL .... Your lack of knowledge in another area, is screaming at us.
At sea, there is nothing wrong with using the 24mi range (though I'd admit for
his size boat, that's a bit far). You can still see targets that are closer to
you, so you can easily shift your range down for a better view .... course,
that should be a normal procedure.
Normally for Boobie, I'd suggest, in the Sound, running on the 6 or 12 mile
range, depending on conditions and what his major use is. Minimum would be 3
miles, shifting to lower (1.5 or 0.75) for a closer look at a particular target
for short periods, but NEVER leaving his radar at 0.25 mi, unless he was doing
some close in navigation, within a harbor area.
You always want to be on the longest range that allows you the best overall
picture of your area, be it traffic or navigational.
Whenever you switch to the real low ranges (0.75mi and below) you are creating
a situation of "tunnel vision" and Highly limiting your overall view of
surroundings.
Are there times that you want to be on these lower ranges? Of course, but,
these are normally only within harbor areas, or close situations in fog
(traffic) or close navigation problems .... even then, stay on the higher range
as long as possible (question of G spatial awareness).

Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

S.Simon - a natural-born Master

You're a "Natural born" something, but it ain't "Master"

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a

My radar is self leveling, folks.

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Frankly, I think you should have left is on so that you can learn more about
radar, while
Suzy learned the serious stuff.

We had quite a messy bit of sea coming in and my hands were full. Suzanne had
the nav down right. The radar was on standby and not needed.

RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Just out of curiosity .... What's the whistle signal, if any, to open a
draw bridge, in your area?

Donal wrote:
"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...

Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
comprehension.


I have a theory about this. It is non-sexist!!

I think that, in our society, boys are encouraged to play ball games much
more than girls are! Soccer, tennis, football and baseball ALL rqquire the
ability to anticipate where the ball is going to be at a point in the
future. These sports help to develop spatial awareness. Girls were not
encouraged to play these games in the past.



A man will usually automatically know the extended limits of
an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on mirrors and the visual
depth of field at a specific spot to determine this.


My wife doesn't. She doesn't use the mirror at all! She recently
reversed into the bloody house - and broke a rear light!!

25 years ago, I tried to teach her how to drive. Geeeze, that was a
disaster! We had a MAJOR row after she refused to look in the mirror before
pulling out into the road. She *knew* that there wasn't any traffic because
it was a quiet Sunday afternoon.


After that, she got a driving instructor.



Regards


Donal
--

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"Simple Simon" wrote in message

| Motor yachts maybe but sailboaters don't have a clue.

Sailboats don't hold the monopoly for poor placement and use of radar

|
| I've seen many a radar on small sailboats that the owners
| brag about and these units are more suited to big ships than
| yachts, especially sailing yachts that heel.

I haven't seen this... most units are about what you would find on a
comparable powerboat.

|
| Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
| They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
| they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
| unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
| storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
| track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
| later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
| boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
| what a sailor really needs. Radar also needs to be
| mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
| down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
| the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
| gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

I generally keep mine to about the 2 mile range... that's plenty of warning.
I'll drop to a tighter radius if in close proximity to shore. I have mine
mounted just above my Steaming Light /Deck light fixture on a ridged mount.
I found it operates well to 15 degrees heel even in rough water and showers.
Even in a storm it consistently showed a minimum of 4 buoys in a line of 10
buoys that delineated the foul ground from safe water. I have an older model
Furuno with CRT screen and 16 mile capability. I hardly ever use it beyond
the 8 mile range. When the guard zone alarm is set... the buzzer that goes
off will wake the dead. It has picked up float planes and a wooden 18 foot
sailboat miles off. We even used it to locate a missing inflatable dinghy
with the kicker still attached one dark night after it snapped it's painter
on my friend's boat which was accompanying us on the trip.

I like my radar....

CM

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

You don't know Bobsprit. He NEVER in his life has
been 24 miles from land. If he uses 24 miles all he'll
see is tall buildings. Believe me. Booby is better off
using 1/4 mile than 24 miles. He rarely gets more than
a mile or two from land. He needs to be aware of
things very close by because those are the things
he hits.

S.Simon


"Shen44" wrote in message ...
ubject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 09/02/2003 15:32 Pacific Standard Time

Sailboaters are stupid when it comes to choosing radar.
They favor the wrong features. One example is the range
they choose. Booby is a good example. He keeps his
unit on 24 mile range so he can keep track of thunder
storms while he should be using 1/4 mile range to keep
track of things that will affect him sooner rather than
later. Big and powerful is really stupid for a slow speed
boat that heels. Small and accurate at close range is
what a sailor really needs.

ROFL .... Your lack of knowledge in another area, is screaming at us.
At sea, there is nothing wrong with using the 24mi range (though I'd admit for
his size boat, that's a bit far). You can still see targets that are closer to
you, so you can easily shift your range down for a better view .... course,
that should be a normal procedure.
Normally for Boobie, I'd suggest, in the Sound, running on the 6 or 12 mile
range, depending on conditions and what his major use is. Minimum would be 3
miles, shifting to lower (1.5 or 0.75) for a closer look at a particular target
for short periods, but NEVER leaving his radar at 0.25 mi, unless he was doing
some close in navigation, within a harbor area.
You always want to be on the longest range that allows you the best overall
picture of your area, be it traffic or navigational.
Whenever you switch to the real low ranges (0.75mi and below) you are creating
a situation of "tunnel vision" and Highly limiting your overall view of
surroundings.
Are there times that you want to be on these lower ranges? Of course, but,
these are normally only within harbor areas, or close situations in fog
(traffic) or close navigation problems .... even then, stay on the higher range
as long as possible (question of G spatial awareness).

Radar also needs to be
mounted high up - the higher to better so it can 'look
down'. This isn't possible on a sailing yacht because
the higher up the worse the heel. You end up with a
gimballed mount lower down that's garbage.

S.Simon - a natural-born Master

You're a "Natural born" something, but it ain't "Master"

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

ubject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"
Date: 09/02/2003 17:20 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"Shen44" wrote in message
...

What watch does the Captain stand?
He gets to stand the watch of his choice.

Wrong. He doesn't stand a watch .... that's what he's got Mates for.


Who is the designated "Navigation Officer"?
The Mate

Wrong. The Second Mate is the designated "Navigation Officer", however, each
Mate does all his own navigating.

Who steers the ship at sea .... in port?
At sea the helmsman steers, in port the pilot steers.

Wrong. At sea, the ship is always on auto pilot, unless handling traffic or in
fog. In those cases, the "helmsman" will be steering. (Naturally, there are
exceptions that will include times other than those mentioned when one is on
"hand" steering).
LOL, the pilot rarely takes the actual "helm" going into or out of port .... he
"directs".

What are the 3M's duties?
Don't know what a 3M is - speak English!

ROFL, and you call yourself a Master..... a 3M, is a third Mate ....any idiot
knows that. Wrong .....

Who maintains the radio log?
The Mate

Which Mate? Wrong

What is a deadmans switch?
A switch that closes when not held open by the operator

Wrong. Most modern ships employ an unmanned engineroom, and some a one man
bridge watch. When an Engineer goes down into the engineroom at night to make a
"round", he sets this switch. If something should happen to him during that
round, an alarm will sound on the bridge, if he hasn't hit a "button" within an
alotted time.

How many whistle controls, on the bridge?
Automatic or manual?

Wrong ..... either (jumping the gun, but considering your responses to date,
probably valid)

How many EOT's?
EOT cranes on the bridge? None.

How many methods of steering on the bridge?
Two

What are "Noon slips" and how many are there?
Positions at noon. There are three.

Who keeps the Bell Log?
Mate

What's in a Bell Log?
Commands and times, things like full astern, full ahead.
It often contains of a standard set of symbols.


How often do you have to wind the course recorder?
Once a day if before the electronic age. You don't wind
the electronic ones.

G just a few, Neal .... let's see how you do

Better than you thought, huh.

S.Simon

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"


OOPS, hit the wrong button ..... to continue .....


"Shen44" wrote in message
...

What watch does the Captain stand?
He gets to stand the watch of his choice.

Who is the designated "Navigation Officer"?
The Mate

Who steers the ship at sea .... in port?
At sea the helmsman steers, in port the pilot steers.

What are the 3M's duties?
Don't know what a 3M is - speak English!

Who maintains the radio log?
The Mate

What is a deadmans switch?
A switch that closes when not held open by the operator

How many whistle controls, on the bridge?
Automatic or manual?

How many EOT's?
EOT cranes on the bridge? None.

Wrong. If you knew what was going on, you'd know that an EOT is an Engine Order
Telegraph.

How many methods of steering on the bridge?
Two

Wrong At least three and sometimes more.

What are "Noon slips" and how many are there?
Positions at noon. There are three.

Wrong. (Not enough info) What are the three?

Who keeps the Bell Log?
Mate

Which Mate? partial....at last.

What's in a Bell Log?
Commands and times, things like full astern, full ahead.
It often contains of a standard set of symbols.

Partial


How often do you have to wind the course recorder?
Once a day if before the electronic age. You don't wind
the electronic ones.

Wrong. They were 8 day clocks

G just a few, Neal .... let's see how you do

Better than you thought, huh.

Nope, worse ... I gave you credit, you obviously didn't deserve.

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

I thought the bell log was maintained traditionally by the oiler, and was a record of
shaft RPMs. I assume now its automatic and merged with GPS output.

Shen44 wrote:
Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"


OOPS, hit the wrong button ..... to continue .....


"Shen44" wrote in message
...

What watch does the Captain stand?
He gets to stand the watch of his choice.

Who is the designated "Navigation Officer"?
The Mate

Who steers the ship at sea .... in port?
At sea the helmsman steers, in port the pilot steers.

What are the 3M's duties?
Don't know what a 3M is - speak English!

Who maintains the radio log?
The Mate

What is a deadmans switch?
A switch that closes when not held open by the operator

How many whistle controls, on the bridge?
Automatic or manual?

How many EOT's?
EOT cranes on the bridge? None.

Wrong. If you knew what was going on, you'd know that an EOT is an
Engine Order Telegraph.

How many methods of steering on the bridge?
Two

Wrong At least three and sometimes more.

What are "Noon slips" and how many are there?
Positions at noon. There are three.

Wrong. (Not enough info) What are the three?

Who keeps the Bell Log?
Mate

Which Mate? partial....at last.

What's in a Bell Log?
Commands and times, things like full astern, full ahead.
It often contains of a standard set of symbols.

Partial


How often do you have to wind the course recorder?
Once a day if before the electronic age. You don't wind
the electronic ones.

Wrong. They were 8 day clocks

G just a few, Neal .... let's see how you do

Better than you thought, huh.

Nope, worse ... I gave you credit, you obviously didn't deserve.

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

ect: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom
Date: 09/02/2003 18:46 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

I thought the bell log was maintained traditionally by the oiler, and was a
record of
shaft RPMs. I assume now its automatic and merged with GPS output.

Actually, EG Neal almost got this one totally correct.
The "Bell" book used to be kept by the engineer on watch and another, by the
Mate on watch, while maneuvering, and was mainly a log of the time and type of
engine order, starting with SBE and ending with FWE (Some ships would call SBE
on Arrival) Symbols were used for the bells to facilitate noting them.
Some ships would also include major nav points in the Bell Book, but this was
rare.
Nowadays, this is an automated system, which includes just Engine orders and is
solely based on time .... no GPS input ..... sometimes one on the bridge and
one in the E.R.

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

"otnmbrd" wrote in message
ink.net...
Just out of curiosity .... What's the whistle signal, if any, to open a
draw bridge, in your area?


I've no idea! I can only think of one drawbridge in my sailing area, and
it opens at fixed times.


Regards


Donal
--

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Donal wrote...

I've no ideas!

we know.


RB

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Hey, I got most of them right.

Just because you responded with 'wrong' every time
because my answers didn't match yours perfectly
doesn't mean I was wrong.

The only ones I really missed was the EOT
and I was right because my use of EOT is
just as valid as yours. Unless your explain
the initials they can mean whatever they are
valid for.

All my Mate answers were right. A first, second
and third Mate is still a Mate.

My answer for a deadman's switch is also
correct. It's the accepted use of the term.

If the captain doesn't stand a watch then he's
not doing his job. A watch doen't have to be
one continuous length of time. Any time the
captain is involved and giving orders he's on
watch. Only when he's sleeping or otherwise
indisposed is he not on watch.

You're just upset because I've never even
been on the bridge of a big ship and I
managed to get most of your questions
right.

Give me a day or two training and I could
easily run a big ship successfully. Besides
that, *I* would slow down to safe speed and
give sailboats and other vessels that sounded
one prolonged/two short blasts their rightful
stand-on status in restricted visibility.

S.Simon - a Captain, who with a day's hands-on
bridge training, could run a tighter ship than Shen44.



"Shen44" wrote in message ...
ect: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom
Date: 09/02/2003 18:46 Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

I thought the bell log was maintained traditionally by the oiler, and was a
record of
shaft RPMs. I assume now its automatic and merged with GPS output.

Actually, EG Neal almost got this one totally correct.
The "Bell" book used to be kept by the engineer on watch and another, by the
Mate on watch, while maneuvering, and was mainly a log of the time and type of
engine order, starting with SBE and ending with FWE (Some ships would call SBE
on Arrival) Symbols were used for the bells to facilitate noting them.
Some ships would also include major nav points in the Bell Book, but this was
rare.
Nowadays, this is an automated system, which includes just Engine orders and is
solely based on time .... no GPS input ..... sometimes one on the bridge and
one in the E.R.

Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Subject: Radar and Basic Nav.
From: "Simple Simon"

Hey, I got most of them right.

No, you got most of them wrong, which means you flunked this test for Master
and proves my point that you don't have a clue as to what's going on on a ship.

Just because you responded with 'wrong' every time
because my answers didn't match yours perfectly
doesn't mean I was wrong.

Everytime I responded with wrong, the answer was so far incorrect or showed a
total lack of knowledge, it deserved a "WRONG".

The only ones I really missed was the EOT
and I was right because my use of EOT is
just as valid as yours. Unless your explain
the initials they can mean whatever they are
valid for.

You're great at making excuses for your lack of knowledge, but as per usual, it
doesn't cut it.
The subject in question was what goes on on a bridge of a ship .... you say you
know it all, yet you don't know the simple initials EOT, used frequently
onboard a ship.

You missed most answers.

All my Mate answers were right. A first, second
and third Mate is still a Mate.

If you had any experience or knowledge of a ship, you'd know this to be
incorrect. Mates on a ship, are specific as to duties and experience level to
be expected. For instance, what are the duties of the Chief Mate?

My answer for a deadman's switch is also
correct. It's the accepted use of the term.

We're talking ships here, your answer was/is wrong.

If the captain doesn't stand a watch then he's
not doing his job. A watch doen't have to be
one continuous length of time. Any time the
captain is involved and giving orders he's on
watch. Only when he's sleeping or otherwise
indisposed is he not on watch.

LOL You keep trying anyway, but again, it doesn't cut it. The above is also
wrong.
Watches on ships are normally 4 hours, on the bridge. The Master stands none of
these (unless he's bored or wants to monitor a new Mate).
A Master is ON CALL, 24/7 and is on watch the whole time, awake or asleep, but,
that is not what we were asking, and as expected, you blew it.

You're just upset because I've never even
been on the bridge of a big ship and I
managed to get most of your questions
right.

LOL I'm not upset .... I'm smiling, cause most of the questions I asked were
simple and basic and easily quessed, if someone had any shipboard time .....
once again ....you flunked ..... I really expected you to do better.

Give me a day or two training and I could
easily run a big ship successfully.

G Would probably take you that long to find the bridge.

Besides
that, *I* would slow down to safe speed and
give sailboats and other vessels that sounded
one prolonged/two short blasts their rightful
stand-on status in restricted visibility.

EG No you wouldn't.


Shen

Radar and Basic Nav.
 

Wally wrote:

.... It does strike me, however, that things like radar and GPS are
rather easier to get to grips with than the traditional methods with chart
and compass.

Actually, they are easier to gain a false sense of security from.

If you don't have a solid foundation in navigation basics, you can't grasp what
the GPS is trying to tell you.


All that triangulation stuff, having to account for compass
variation and deviation, tides and currents, would be quite a bit of
learning for someone who's new to it.

Yes, but piloting basics are simpler than that. If you don't understand an LOP
or bearing/distance relationships in the first place, then a GPS is going to be
useless.

GPS is only a tool. It's a marvelous tool, almost like magic, but a great wrench
does not make a lousy mechanic any better.




FWIW, I think that radar and GPS are easier to learn, and should therefore
be learned first - on the basis that some sort of skill in knowing one's
course and position is better than none.

Sorry, I disagree strongly. The basics of navigation are relatively simple and
can be phrased in three short questions:

Where am I?
Which direction should I go?
What hazards are along my course?

GPS makes it a snap to answer the first two questions, but to use the
information you need to know the questions in the first place. And sadly, it
will not help at all with the third question. Radar will help a little, with
experience reading & interpreting the targets (the one thing a novice won't
have).

Unfortunately most people who don't know how to navigate very well gain a great
sense of security & confidence from GPS. That's real nice until it leads them
into trouble.... but I guess it's job security for Sea Tow...

Fresh Breezes- Doug King