ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

It was about 2700kt miles from Cabo to Hilo Hawaii, 6 weeks in hawaii
waitinig for the Pacific Hi to stabilize then about 2700 from Oahu to
Astoria at the mouth of the Columbia.
We took the Bajahaha down from San Diego to Cabo, then spent the season
in Mexico. We decided to go back to the North West via Hawaii to take
advantage of the Monitor wind vane. It is an old Swan 38, mono hull. We
were able to keep the speed up pretty well and had fairly good wind on
the way over, usually from kept speed up to 4.5 to 7kts, with only one
day with less. On the way back we went further because we had to go
around the high, but had better wind and went a bit faster. If we got
over 7.5 I would slow it down. Small crew, and I didn't need anything
to break a long way from a chandlery.
Only had one problem on the trip. Rod went through the motor in
Cabo, only had 400 hours on it, and Yanmar paid for everything. I, like
many cruisers, have a web site at harlanadventures.com. If you look on
yachtworld.com you will see it for sail in Portland OR.

Beancounter, what type of boats are you looking at?

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

ericson 38...1984 - 1990 ... will
initially be doing solo sailing, w/crew
later...


"Beancounter, what type of
boats are you looking at?"

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

I would take a look at installing an "active radar reflector" such as
the Sea-Me unit ( http://www.sea-me.co.uk/index.html ). It amplifies
and retransmit received radar signals to make you a much bigger target
on the other ship's radar. That way the other ship's computerized
anti-collision systems will wake up and take notice.

These are quite popular in the UK and really seem to work. I've got one
on my boat (British built). I have a feeling these are not strictly
legal in the US and I don't turn mine on except when offshore. The unit
also has a red light at the nav station that lights (and can be hooked
to an alarm) whenever radar is sweeping the boat. Cost is about $700,
it uses little power, and requires just a 12"x1" antenna at the top of
the mast.

I have no connection with this company other than being a happy
customer (it's really fun to look like a 300' ship). I also keep a good
watch!

Carl

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

"Carl" wrote in message
oups.com...

I would take a look at installing an "active radar reflector" such as
the Sea-Me unit ( http://www.sea-me.co.uk/index.html ). It amplifies
and retransmit received radar signals to make you a much bigger target
on the other ship's radar. That way the other ship's computerized
anti-collision systems will wake up and take notice.

These are quite popular in the UK and really seem to work. I've got one
on my boat (British built). I have a feeling these are not strictly
legal in the US and I don't turn mine on except when offshore. The unit
also has a red light at the nav station that lights (and can be hooked
to an alarm) whenever radar is sweeping the boat. Cost is about $700,
it uses little power, and requires just a 12"x1" antenna at the top of
the mast.

I have no connection with this company other than being a happy
customer (it's really fun to look like a 300' ship). I also keep a good
watch!

Carl

Why do you have the feeling it's not strictly legal in the US?

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

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

On 23 Oct 2005 09:33:24 -0700, "Carl" wrote:


I would take a look at installing an "active radar reflector" such as
the Sea-Me unit ( http://www.sea-me.co.uk/index.html ). It amplifies
and retransmit received radar signals to make you a much bigger target
on the other ship's radar. That way the other ship's computerized
anti-collision systems will wake up and take notice.
///
I have a feeling these are not strictly
legal in the US and I don't turn mine on except when offshore.
///
Carl

I can't imagine why this device would be legislated against.
It is quite analogous to wearing reflective garments at night when
riding a bike.

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

excellent ... than you carl

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

i would state "see and be seen" is a logical
goal...some of my bias will be from my flying
expierences....the tool looks good to me...(see-me-unit)...

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

The enhanced reflector is nice but not on my wishlist.
I think it's much more important to see others early than being seen
by others. The interesting part is the radar-detection-feature.
That made me think... why not use a police-radar-detector that costs
like usd 50,= ? Ok, add a few bucks to make it waterproof...
Thanks for getting me started.

Len
S/v Present


On 23 Oct 2005 09:33:24 -0700, "Carl" wrote:


I would take a look at installing an "active radar reflector" such as
the Sea-Me unit ( http://www.sea-me.co.uk/index.html ). It amplifies
and retransmit received radar signals to make you a much bigger target
on the other ship's radar. That way the other ship's computerized
anti-collision systems will wake up and take notice.

These are quite popular in the UK and really seem to work. I've got one
on my boat (British built). I have a feeling these are not strictly
legal in the US and I don't turn mine on except when offshore. The unit
also has a red light at the nav station that lights (and can be hooked
to an alarm) whenever radar is sweeping the boat. Cost is about $700,
it uses little power, and requires just a 12"x1" antenna at the top of
the mast.

I have no connection with this company other than being a happy
customer (it's really fun to look like a 300' ship). I also keep a good
watch!

Carl

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

Brian,

I agree that I want to see him early and your radar detector idea might
work. Still, if a 600 ft ship is approaching at 22 knots, I don't want
to be the only guy trying to get out of the way.

On the "legal" issue. I'm probably overly suspicious of the FCC's
interest in anything that transmits (although my radar transmits on the
same frequency). I just can't figure out why you don't see these things
around. I've never had any faith that a radar reflector that's small
enough to put up in the rigging can do much good.

Carl

ocean crusing & anti collision tactics....
 

Len wrote:
On 23 Oct 2005 17:48:19 -0700, "Carl" wrote:
After sighting by eyes or radar (or,thanks to your post,my new 50usd
radardetector) I'll turn on my marine-pc and my 250usd ais-receiver.

I'll be able to see the 600ft ship's course and speed and when needed
I'll hail this ship by it's right name on vhf70 or call it by dsc
using it's unique mmsi-number. After identyfying myself and my
position we'll discuss and verify the probably one and only right way
to avoid any risk of a collision-course.

Here in the Netherlands the government is contemplating making ais
mandatory (also for 300t vessels and indeed also for yachts) cause
freigthers increasingly tend to use ais as sole informationsource over
radar. This is imo a good development. Ais will work 100% when
everybody, everywhere uses it. One might expect these rules will find
their way into supernational legislation.

Len, following your post about AIS Live I went to check into what was
active in my cruising area, the Adriatic. Zilch - zero - nada - not a
single AIS equipped ship was reporting in the entire Adriatic Sea,
although clearly the system was active as there were a few clusters
around Malta, Athens and Marseilles when I included the whole Mediterranean.

Now I know there are masses of freighters and large ferries converging
on Trieste, Venice, Rijecka, Ancona, Bari, Split, etc, etc. every day of
the year, indeed, I had a hair-raising close call with a monster, 50
knot, catamaran ferry 10 nm off the Croatian coast last year - but it
would seem that AIS would not have helped me.

It is likely that all the small companies that can avoid installation
until the mandatory 2008, under whatever regulations they fall under, or
are illegally avoiding installing, or the crews are not bothering to
activate if they are installed, are doing so.

Best,
BrianH.