On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:50:37 -0300, "Denis M"
wrote:

Back in the 80s a friend of mine was bringing a new (to him) 40 ft
sailboat back from Canada in the fog. He was T-boned by a tug boat
operated by the Canadian coast guard even though both boats were
operating their radar and were aware of each other's presence. Go
figure.

This summer while in Nova Scotia I learned that one of the sailboat got
T-boned last year.

The owner was waiting for his sailboat to be fixed. He still have problem
with his insurance.

He was motoring in heavy fog and his sailboat got T-boned by a Coast Guard
fast recue boat going at low speed.

There seems to be a pattern here. :-)

I have long felt that the main goal/direction of the Rules was to address
the interaction between ships and how they are expected to be operated.
Because of this, when you get to applying the rules to recreational
vessels some things can and do become murky due to the differences as to
how the groups can and do operate (Radar use being one ..... SOP nowadays
that shipboard radar be on at all times underway)
Naturally these points can and will be argued until a particular case
goes to court and they decide the outcome.

otn





Jeff wrote in
:

Capt. JG wrote:
I thought SF Bay was quite foggy. Am I wrong? Back when I was
saying I could do fine without radar in Maine I would also think,
"Now if I was someplace like SF Bay..."

You're right, but it's really not necessary for a couple of reasons.
First, if you have it, you have to monitor, which takes away from the
enjoyment of sailing.


This is a curious point in the rules. Since it says "if operational"
then the requirement to monitor only applies if you have it turned on.
For short trips in clear weather, I generally leave the display
stashed down below. For longer trips, I will mount it, but whether
its Off, on Standby, or Active is determined by circumstance. When
I've run this by CG "rules experts" I've always got the same answer
(which is curiously the same as the answer to other "gray area"
questions I've raised): "Your logic sounds reasonable, but remember,
if there is an accident you will have to convince the court that you
did everything in your power to prevent it."

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine,
and useful in Massachusetts. One problem now is that while in the
"old days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in
the pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape
Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 28, 7:06 pm, Jeff wrote:

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine, and
usefuOne problem now is that while in the "old
days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in the
pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

An excellent point and a major factor in my decision to install radar
that I didn't mention. Because of this factor, I was finding the fog
routes I considered acceptably safe much more restricted when I
returned to sailing in the post GPS world.


Do you have an AIS receiver? That's something I've been thinking about
getting. For me, the issue is making sure we get out of the way as
necessary. I don't think transmitting would make much diff in the bay, since
the really big stuff isn't going to be changing course.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:47:22 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 28, 7:06 pm, Jeff wrote:

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine, and
usefuOne problem now is that while in the "old
days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in the
pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

An excellent point and a major factor in my decision to install radar
that I didn't mention. Because of this factor, I was finding the fog
routes I considered acceptably safe much more restricted when I
returned to sailing in the post GPS world.


Do you have an AIS receiver? That's something I've been thinking about
getting. For me, the issue is making sure we get out of the way as
necessary. I don't think transmitting would make much diff in the bay,
since
the really big stuff isn't going to be changing course.

When sailing in poor visibility, the greatest danger seems to be from
small recreational power boats zipping around in thick fog as if
visibility was 10 miles. The commercial boats do a pretty good job of
announcing their postion heading and speed, as well as sounding the
appropriate signals. I do the same. Listening intently for even the
slightest noises is probably as important as RADAR, although not a
substitute. You need to be alert in every way at your disposal.
Otherwise, you should stay in port. During the week when most of the
center console captains are at their day jobs, things are a lot safer,
although you can never let your guard down. We also wear PFD's and
clip on in low visibility, no matter how calm conditions might be. Too
many stories of people being thrown overboard and killed in
collisions.



I certainly agree that all tools available should be used. I find lots of
people with their head stuck in their gadget (radar, gps, ais, whatever)
rather than actually looking around and listening.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:12:33 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:47:22 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 28, 7:06 pm, Jeff wrote:

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine,
and
usefuOne problem now is that while in the "old
days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in the
pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape
Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

An excellent point and a major factor in my decision to install radar
that I didn't mention. Because of this factor, I was finding the fog
routes I considered acceptably safe much more restricted when I
returned to sailing in the post GPS world.


Do you have an AIS receiver? That's something I've been thinking about
getting. For me, the issue is making sure we get out of the way as
necessary. I don't think transmitting would make much diff in the bay,
since
the really big stuff isn't going to be changing course.

When sailing in poor visibility, the greatest danger seems to be from
small recreational power boats zipping around in thick fog as if
visibility was 10 miles. The commercial boats do a pretty good job of
announcing their postion heading and speed, as well as sounding the
appropriate signals. I do the same. Listening intently for even the
slightest noises is probably as important as RADAR, although not a
substitute. You need to be alert in every way at your disposal.
Otherwise, you should stay in port. During the week when most of the
center console captains are at their day jobs, things are a lot safer,
although you can never let your guard down. We also wear PFD's and
clip on in low visibility, no matter how calm conditions might be. Too
many stories of people being thrown overboard and killed in
collisions.



I certainly agree that all tools available should be used. I find lots of
people with their head stuck in their gadget (radar, gps, ais, whatever)
rather than actually looking around and listening.


I don't think you can blame that on the equipment.


I don't and I didn't. I do offer some blame to those marketing the
equipment, since they want people to "rely" on their stuff, when one should
be relying on oneself.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Hello Roger,

Welcome "back" ...

It is a pleasure for me - again - to have the opportunity to read your
interesting viewpoints and comments.
Your inputs (comments and homepage and project descriptions etc.) are
most often very inspiring and relevant to me, and you seem to be very
well informed about "maritime stuff and technology" of all kinds ...

I'm curious - therefore - about your opinion - if any - on the new so
called 'broadband radar' ...

See f.ex

http://www.navico.com/en/Media/Press...oadband-Radar/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOWmWvojp98

http://www.cruisingworld.com/gear-an...000071492.html

Is it something you have studied? Considered? Seen for real?

When I read about it, I get the impression, that this is exactly what I
need as a supplement to my AIS receiver and chartplotter and the PC on
board. The material, I have seen, is - however - produced by the
respective marketing departments ... So your opinion would be highly
appreciated ... or some one elses opinion, who has specific experience
with this technology ...

--
Flemming Torp - X-342 - Denmark
Sailing in the busy "Nordic waters" may give several days with dense fog
....

"Roger Long" skrev i en meddelelse
...
On Sep 27, 4:57 pm, "Capt. JG" wrote:

Sure... explain away!

I'm not a huge fan of radar...

I thought SF Bay was quite foggy. Am I wrong? Back when I was saying
I could do fine without radar in Maine I would also think, "Now if I
was someplace like SF Bay..."

I looked at the small stand alone radars of size and power draw
appropriate to my boat and learned that Garmin has done a clever thing
(muc has it pains me to say since there is much I hate about Garmin in
general). Their radars do all the signal processing up in the radome
and then turn it into a signal that runs along a standard Cat 5
computer network cable like the one that probably is plugged into the
back of your computer. A clever person could certainly hack software
to make it display on a lap top. Most of their chartplotters accept
this signal. So, for less than $200 more than a stand alone unit, I
could buy a radome and a 3205 chartplotter with charts for the entire
U.S. preloaded. I essentially got a second larger and more
sophisticated chartplotter for free and a color display instead of the
BW of comparably priced stand alone radars. Instrument space is
precious on my small boat so it was also nice not to have yet another
box.

The best thing about the set up is that the radar display can be
overlaid on the chart with the GPS position. This is a huge
improvement in situational awareness. You can figure out almost
instantly whether a blip is a buoy or a vessel as opposed to going
back and forth between a dedicated radar display and a GPS or chart
transferring ranges and bearings. When you are sailing single or
shorthanded, these workload savings reduce fatigue and improve lookout
and attention to other navigational issues.

It's very difficult to run a proper radar plot in close, complex,
waters such as along the coast of Maine. Radars of this size are not
very conducive to plotting directly on the screen although some people
do it. There are enough asterisks scattered around Maine waters that
I'm reluctant to clutter up my screen with marks as well. The chart
overlay is a great plotting substitute. You can see by watching
soundings and other landmarks if a target is just wandering around
randomly and is probably a lobster boat or maintaining a straight
course and make a good estimate of speed. If it is close to
maintaining a constant bearing, it will be pretty obvious. Switching
to full screen radar mode gives your all the standard tools which I
some times use but I have to use them a lot less because I can rule
out most targets as a CPA danger just from the chart display.

There's much more of a learning curve than I expected. I spent the
first week or two thinking "Why did I spend all this money?" I
thought the overlay was pretty useless because it was so hard to find
the little red targets in the clutter. The brain trains. Now, I
little red spot pops up and my brain zeros right in on it from six
feet away at the helm. Working with it a lot in clear weather, I
developed enough trust to do my singlehanded radar running on
autopilot trusting to the advance warning. The straighter course the
autopilot can keep, (at least when I'm standing radar watch) makes the
whole picture clearer. I have the dodger in my hand and it only adds
a couple of boat lengths to the distance in which I can spring to the
controls and do a full stop or 180 turn which is much faster in my
boat. As I said, I wouldn't sail without it now.

--
Roger

On Sep 30, 6:00*pm, "Flemming Torp" fletopkanelbolle2rp.danmark
wrote:

I'm curious - therefore - about your opinion - if any - on the new so
called 'broadband radar' ...

Sorry Torp, I haven't given broadband a thought. When I went to buy
radar last spring, some people said, "This is a terrible time to buy
radar, broadband will be here next year."

I had to say, "Yeah, but I've got to have it for this spring's trip."
I've just tried not to think about it since then and be happy with
what I have.

Hopefully, someone else here can fill us in.

--
Roger Long

Don't know much about it, but it sure looks interesting. Amazing detail if
you believe the marketing hype.

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 30, 6:00 pm, "Flemming Torp" fletopkanelbolle2rp.danmark
wrote:

I'm curious - therefore - about your opinion - if any - on the new so
called 'broadband radar' ...

Sorry Torp, I haven't given broadband a thought. When I went to buy
radar last spring, some people said, "This is a terrible time to buy
radar, broadband will be here next year."

I had to say, "Yeah, but I've got to have it for this spring's trip."
I've just tried not to think about it since then and be happy with
what I have.

Hopefully, someone else here can fill us in.

--
Roger Long





--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:04:33 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:12:33 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:47:22 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 28, 7:06 pm, Jeff wrote:

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine,
and
usefuOne problem now is that while in the "old
days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in the
pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape
Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

An excellent point and a major factor in my decision to install radar
that I didn't mention. Because of this factor, I was finding the fog
routes I considered acceptably safe much more restricted when I
returned to sailing in the post GPS world.


Do you have an AIS receiver? That's something I've been thinking about
getting. For me, the issue is making sure we get out of the way as
necessary. I don't think transmitting would make much diff in the bay,
since
the really big stuff isn't going to be changing course.

When sailing in poor visibility, the greatest danger seems to be from
small recreational power boats zipping around in thick fog as if
visibility was 10 miles. The commercial boats do a pretty good job of
announcing their postion heading and speed, as well as sounding the
appropriate signals. I do the same. Listening intently for even the
slightest noises is probably as important as RADAR, although not a
substitute. You need to be alert in every way at your disposal.
Otherwise, you should stay in port. During the week when most of the
center console captains are at their day jobs, things are a lot safer,
although you can never let your guard down. We also wear PFD's and
clip on in low visibility, no matter how calm conditions might be. Too
many stories of people being thrown overboard and killed in
collisions.



I certainly agree that all tools available should be used. I find lots of
people with their head stuck in their gadget (radar, gps, ais, whatever)
rather than actually looking around and listening.


I don't think you can blame that on the equipment.


I don't and I didn't. I do offer some blame to those marketing the
equipment, since they want people to "rely" on their stuff, when one should
be relying on oneself.

Huh? You think there is some sort of conspiracy to make people not pay
attention when sailing? I rely on my navigation equipment the same
way I rely on my hull not to let the water in. That's what it is there
for.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:04:33 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:12:33 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:47:22 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
On Sep 28, 7:06 pm, Jeff wrote:

I've long been a fan of radar and feel its required to cruise Maine,
and
usefuOne problem now is that while in the "old
days" (before low cost radar and loran/gps) the only fools out in
the
pea soup were being ultra cautious, tooting horns, going slow etc,
nowadays every rich bozo thinks he can run his sportfish at 30 knots
because the radar and GPS will keep him safe. Almost every year I've
had a close call, the worst case happening a mile off of Cape
Elizabeth.
If you sail in fog, radar is needed now for defense.

An excellent point and a major factor in my decision to install radar
that I didn't mention. Because of this factor, I was finding the fog
routes I considered acceptably safe much more restricted when I
returned to sailing in the post GPS world.


Do you have an AIS receiver? That's something I've been thinking about
getting. For me, the issue is making sure we get out of the way as
necessary. I don't think transmitting would make much diff in the bay,
since
the really big stuff isn't going to be changing course.

When sailing in poor visibility, the greatest danger seems to be from
small recreational power boats zipping around in thick fog as if
visibility was 10 miles. The commercial boats do a pretty good job of
announcing their postion heading and speed, as well as sounding the
appropriate signals. I do the same. Listening intently for even the
slightest noises is probably as important as RADAR, although not a
substitute. You need to be alert in every way at your disposal.
Otherwise, you should stay in port. During the week when most of the
center console captains are at their day jobs, things are a lot safer,
although you can never let your guard down. We also wear PFD's and
clip on in low visibility, no matter how calm conditions might be. Too
many stories of people being thrown overboard and killed in
collisions.



I certainly agree that all tools available should be used. I find lots
of
people with their head stuck in their gadget (radar, gps, ais, whatever)
rather than actually looking around and listening.


I don't think you can blame that on the equipment.


I don't and I didn't. I do offer some blame to those marketing the
equipment, since they want people to "rely" on their stuff, when one
should
be relying on oneself.

Huh? You think there is some sort of conspiracy to make people not pay
attention when sailing? I rely on my navigation equipment the same
way I rely on my hull not to let the water in. That's what it is there
for.

I think they're trying to sell their wares. I'm assuming you check your
seacocks occasionally. Not to many boat manufacturers promote that when
selling the hull.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com