Donal wrote:
"otnmbrd" wrote in message
hlink.net...


Joe wrote:

I'm not a proponent of total immersion in the radar hood, though at
times it's necessary. I have always preferred to pull back, at times and
rest my eyes and attention .... sometimes, you might be able to see more
than you expect .... it's a total awareness thingy.


Thats OK at night or offshore, but not a good ideal in the day or
river....
It's a night vision issue. Fof blindness is somewhat like snow
blindness

Understand what you are referring to, but we'll have to agree to
disagree on this.
In many if not most cases, now, the "daylight" screens tend to solve
this problem. The greater problem applies to normal visual lookouts who
are staring/concentrating while scanning the horizon, as well as those
staring/concentrating on the radar screen ..... they tend to develop a
narrowed response to the overall picture, which causes them to miss some
things and I have frequently been surprised that when I look away, then
look back, that I pick up something that I was missing before .... G
not the easiest thing to explain.


It may not be easy to explain, but I think that you are describing the same
thing that I was referring to, when I said that "14 hours peering into the
fog" was very tiring.

5 minutes leaves you wondering if your eyes are working properly.

I've now got radar.

Not really, though your point is true. In daylight, when you are looking
visually into the fog, for a period, then stick your head back into a
radar hood, you are basically blind until your eyes adjust.
Also, though, for those on lookout (visually), I prefer to see someone
who to the casual observer, may appear to be looking at random in
different directions. In truth, they tend to spot things more quickly
and often, then the person staring on a slow arc over the horizon.


If you can not see your bow, whats he going to see or prevent at
20kts?

G One never knows for certain. Again, I'm not necessarily advocating a
constant visual lookout,


The CollRegs *do* advocate a constant visual lookout. Joe thinks it is a
waste of time. Jeff isn't sure what he thinks. I wonder what JohnE thinks?

.....EG As are we. We are just splitting that lookout between visual
out the window or just plain outside, and radar. Not all boats/ ships
can work effectively/realistically/ safely under a "purest" guidelines
for the rules.


otn

"otnmbrd" wrote in message
link.net...


The CollRegs *do* advocate a constant visual lookout. Joe thinks it is a
waste of time. Jeff isn't sure what he thinks. I wonder what JohnE
thinks?

....EG As are we. We are just splitting that lookout between visual
out the window or just plain outside, and radar. Not all boats/ ships
can work effectively/realistically/ safely under a "purest" guidelines
for the rules.


otn


The thought of being near ANY vessel thrashing around at 20Knts + in fog
scares me to death! Coastal or offshore, but the truth of the matter is that
this happens all the time and not many crashes occur (aside from the goon
who hit our local beach on the plane a couple of years ago) so a lot of folk
must be able to use radar effectivly, or just lucky. I have never noticed
ships slowing in the English channel or elsewhere just 'cause of a little
grey stuff.

As I have VERY limited experience using radar I am not the best to judge of
its use but my preference is composite. Time on the screen and time in the
open. Eyes given a chance to adjust and refocus as well as the mind. I also
like silent periods, sound from other sources, though echoing I find can and
does help with locating vessels and marks. This is based on sailing and
motorsailing on small (under 80ft vessels, most under 40ft). May be flawed
but it's my penny worth.

JohnE

"John.E" wrote in message ...
"otnmbrd" wrote in message
link.net...


The CollRegs *do* advocate a constant visual lookout. Joe thinks it is a
waste of time. Jeff isn't sure what he thinks. I wonder what JohnE
thinks?

....EG As are we. We are just splitting that lookout between visual
out the window or just plain outside, and radar. Not all boats/ ships
can work effectively/realistically/ safely under a "purest" guidelines
for the rules.


otn


The thought of being near ANY vessel thrashing around at 20Knts + in fog
scares me to death! Coastal or offshore, but the truth of the matter is that
this happens all the time and not many crashes occur

Would you be scared doing it with this boat?

http://www.tmt-llc.com/crewboats/TM667C.htm

This is the typical crewboat. This one is nicer than most-- it has
inside stern controls for offloading at the oil platform.

Joe









(aside from the goon
who hit our local beach on the plane a couple of years ago) so a lot of folk
must be able to use radar effectivly, or just lucky. I have never noticed
ships slowing in the English channel or elsewhere just 'cause of a little
grey stuff.

As I have VERY limited experience using radar I am not the best to judge of
its use but my preference is composite. Time on the screen and time in the
open. Eyes given a chance to adjust and refocus as well as the mind. I also
like silent periods, sound from other sources, though echoing I find can and
does help with locating vessels and marks. This is based on sailing and
motorsailing on small (under 80ft vessels, most under 40ft). May be flawed
but it's my penny worth.

JohnE

"Joe" wrote in message
om...

The thought of being near ANY vessel thrashing around at 20Knts + in fog
scares me to death! Coastal or offshore, but the truth of the matter is
that
this happens all the time and not many crashes occur

Would you be scared doing it with this boat?


Probably, but that is my imagination getting in the way again ;-) Just as
trollling around on a small yacht in fog and meeting it would worry me,
looking at the draft I could not even hide shallow water from it :-(
This not a reflection on the crew, just my own feelings. I think it is
probably totally impractical in a working environment when time is fuel is
money but I would rather everyone trolled around at speed to suit conditions
that would let them avoid collisions visually. One of my old teachers used
to warn us of 'radar assisted collisions', I suppose I carry this concept to
this day, probably reinforced by own lack of experience using radar and my
lack of exposure to the use of radar at the hands of a really experienced
operator.

http://www.tmt-llc.com/crewboats/TM667C.htm

This is the typical crewboat. This one is nicer than most-- it has
inside stern controls for offloading at the oil platform.

Joe


JohnE

John.E wrote:

Probably, but that is my imagination getting in the way again ;-) Just as
trollling around on a small yacht in fog and meeting it would worry me,
looking at the draft I could not even hide shallow water from it :-(
This not a reflection on the crew, just my own feelings. I think it is
probably totally impractical in a working environment when time is fuel is
money but I would rather everyone trolled around at speed to suit conditions
that would let them avoid collisions visually. One of my old teachers used
to warn us of 'radar assisted collisions', I suppose I carry this concept to
this day, probably reinforced by own lack of experience using radar and my
lack of exposure to the use of radar at the hands of a really experienced
operator.

Most "radar assisted collisions" occur because someone didn't plot the
target. Using the EBL/cursor and range rings or VRM, is not plotting.
Problem is, few recreational boaters have the ability to plot, many
"work boats" don't either ....no excuse for ships.

otn