Not using your AIS

Hawgwash said:

As well, human behavior being what it is, contact and identifying by name tends to be more effective in tempering the big wake, fast passers and rodeo clowns; if they have AIS.

As Marin (I think it was him) said, more effective than "the white whatever."

Click to expand...

Yes sir! You are correct, it works much better to be able to call the vessel by name. That one feature makes the device very useful all by itself.

When I fly I only listen with a few brain cells to distance or common radio traffic but somehow when my N number is called my ears perk right up. Like when you are called by both your first, middle and last name by any of the woman in your life.

SCOTTEDAVIS said:

Yes sir! You are correct, it works much better to be able to call the vessel by name. That one feature makes the device very useful all by itself.

Click to expand...

Especially in 0 visibility

Does anyone know if it is involved to reprogram an AIS to a new vessel?

Thanks John

Depends on the unit. Some older models were completely user programmable. Newer units require a dealer to do the programming. You may find some units no longer supported by the distributing manufacturer. I would start by contacting the manufacturer and have model and serial number available.

Ted

Thanks, it was new last year so I guess it should not be too difficult

Northern Spy said:

I suppose if I was transitting Haro Strait on a regular basis, or goofing around in the Fraser, I would have one. But as it is, I don't see the need. I get a pretty good picture of the traffic as I fly in and out of Vancouver a couple of times a week. It can be busy, but manageable with radar, visual and VHF.

Click to expand...

Hawgwash said:

I'd rather have something to detect the stumps coming at me just under the muddy surface.

Click to expand...

That's what side-scan sonar is for.

Hawgwash said:

I've been in Chatham Sound with only a paper chart, compass and deviation table. Never had Loran because it meant buying new charts and it was accurately lousy anyway.

AIS is a tool that if I deemed it to be economical, I would get it for day to day and would certainly appreciate the security blanket effect in places like Dixon Entrance etc.

Click to expand...

AIS is less important in Dixon Entrance but more useful in Narrow Passes. Loran was a Godsend in the day for fishing vessels such as trollers fishing offshore. Tacks were often described by loran lines. It was less useful and less accurate in nearshore or coastal areas.

I upgraded to transceive AIS principally for narrow passages, particularly Active Pass. We are slow and can't "run away" from ferries. We can encounter up to 4 ferries in AP during a single transit. We want then to know who we are and our course and speed. Just the other day we were travelling up the Fraser River and the truck barge Princess Superior contacted us on 16 when they were 2 miles away. We arranged a safe pass on the VTS channel 74.


Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum

JDCAVE said:

That's what side-scan sonar is for.

Click to expand...

You use yours often?

It (Loran) was less useful and less accurate in nearshore or coastal areas.

Click to expand...

Yup.

We can encounter up to 4 ferries in AP during a single transit. We want then to know who we are and our course and speed.

Click to expand...

Throw in a few sail boats, fish boats, runabouts, a pod of whales and I don't know how those ferries do it day in and day out. I was in AP on a "Spirit of" recently; dark, dense fog. Knowing we would be meeting another BCF in AP, I went on deck. I didn't see her slide by port to port but heard her.

Hawgwash said:

You use yours often?

Yup.

Throw in a few sail boats, fish boats and runabouts and I don't know how those ferries do it day in and day out. I was in AP on a "Spirit of" recently; dark, dense fog. Knowing we would be meeting another BCF in AP, I went on deck. I didn't see her slide by port to port but heard her.

Click to expand...

I don't have SSS. It would be useful when entering poorly charted waters.

So your experience in AP is exactly where you would have benefited from AIS. If I remember correctly, you have a faster vessel than I have and have the power to get out of the way. Our cruise speed is 7.5 kts and we can't speed out of a situation. AIS targets are displayed on our plotter, along with their course and speed vector. That vector is especially important in determining a risk of collision. On Costal Explorer, you can change the forward vector on your vessel, and when you do, all the vectors of AIS targets are also changed. So when transiting in the fog, Pam is standing beside me keeping a watch out the window and I have my eyes on both radar and plotter. And if I have any concern about an oncoming ferry, I contact them immediately by name on the VTS channel and we arrange safe pass. In all instances, they thank me for making contact with them.

Jim

I thought I would try something different here.

JDCAVE said:

I don't have SSS...Lol, I didn't really think you would be dragging one of them along....So your experience in AP is exactly where you would have benefited from AIS...yes, that is why I favour it and I do think it will become manditory, if even as a means of identification. Like a licence plate. As for Marin's concern about a snowstorm of boats if AIS is mandatory, well, those bright young folks he works with would soon find the answer to that...If I remember correctly, you have a faster vessel than I...no, I am boatless right now, that's why I am hangin' here asking so many questions...if I have any concern about an oncoming ferry, I contact them immediately by name on the VTS channel and we arrange safe pass. In all instances, they thank me for making contact with them...I do the same thing transiting Vancouver Harbour at night and that's the way it should be. As part timers, we will only gain their respect if we play nicely and like on the roads, far too many don't.

Click to expand...

...and I would add that proper decorum whilst on the radio is important. All too often we hear people who have no clue how to communicate on the radio. Obviously they haven't taken power squadron's radio operators course, and likely don't have their ROC-M.


Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum

JDCAVE said:

...and I would add that proper decorum whilst on the radio is important. All too often we hear people who have no clue how to communicate on the radio. Obviously they haven't taken power squadron's radio operators course, and likely don't have their ROC-M.


Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum

Click to expand...

I agree and I've been told that, if you think it is bad now, just be glad you weren't around during the huge CB days when they were such a fad.

JDCAVE said:

Obviously they haven't taken power squadron's radio operators course, and likely don't have their ROC-M.

Click to expand...

Tiny piece of trivia for you. In the late 80s the Port Moody Squadron was the first to introduce the radio course as an unofficial part of our CPS Basic Boaters Course. Long time member Alec Smith (later of Pender Harbour) created the course that would become nationally sanctioned.

BandB said:

I agree and I've been told that, if you think it is bad now, just be glad you weren't around during the huge CB days when they were such a fad.

Click to expand...

Ten four that, big buddy.
The overlap of CB-VHF was nuts.
See ya on the flip side...Over and out.

I've had a receiver AIS for about 5 years and our current boat has a Class B transponder. At first it was more of a toy. Once the salmon tenders started carrying transponders, it was a way to avoid gillnets in Prince William Sound, and knowing where the fast ferry Chenega was. Now that we spend 4-5 month a year in SE Alaska, it is getting more like a must have. Anything from, where are the cruise ships, are we really on a collision course, to who is in the anchorage. Two encounters in Grenville channel come to mind. The first was "seeing" the Disney Wonder coming north as we were heading south in rain and fog in the narrowest part of the channel. A quick radio call told him we were going to stay tucked up against the east shore until he passed. The second was almost in the same place a month later heading north. I had no AIS targets indicated but with visibility of only 150 feet I was all over the radar. I detected a target coming south well out in the channel from our track but it would not answer a radio call, until we passed each other. I think our wake woke him up. AIS is good but not the whole answer.

Tom

tpbrady said:

Two encounters in Grenville channel come to mind. The first was "seeing" the Disney Wonder coming north as we were heading south in rain and fog in the narrowest part of the channel. A quick radio call told him we were going to stay tucked up against the east shore until he passed. The second was almost in the same place a month later heading north. I had no AIS targets indicated but with visibility of only 150 feet I was all over the radar. I detected a target coming south well out in the channel from our track but it would not answer a radio call, until we passed each other. I think our wake woke him up. AIS is good but not the whole answer.

Click to expand...

That's where I see them phasing in "mandatory."
Kinda like some highways where snow tires are mandatory in certain areas at certain times...like winter.

Rain and fog is not uncommon on our coast in the middle of summer when the marine traffic is like I5.

Hawgwash said:

Ten four that, big buddy.
The overlap of CB-VHF was nuts.
See ya on the flip side...Over and out.

Click to expand...

I laugh when I hear "What's your 20?" on the VHF and some people still know what it means!

O C Diver said:

One of the side benefits is spotting someone you recognize and getting together for dinner.

Ted

Click to expand...

Ted...we were in Elizabeth City last night...but we did not see you on the plotter.

HenryD said:

Ted...we were in Elizabeth City last night...but we did not see you on the plotter.

Click to expand...

Sorry I missed you. Running late heading South. Definitely enjoyed our evening together in June.

Safe travels!

Ted

We are on the Great Loop. The AIS transponder has made life much easier communicating with the tows on the river. There have been times when we are in a group that Fryedaze leads because we can identify the tows by name that are hidden behind the many turns in the river. Having friends with AIS is nice also. You can identify them by name long before you can see them. I can also stalk them on Marine Traffic and set up alerts.
Heres what I don't get. We are always passing half a million dollar + boats that are not transmitting or don't have it.

nwboater said:

Many older units, like mine, only receive AIS signals. Personally, I was less than enthusiastic when the FCC permitted recreational boaters to also transmit. In busy waterways like the San Juan Islands during the summer, my chart plotter display can look like it has the measles with AIS targets everywhere from all size vessels. I still prefer receiving only commercial vessel traffic. Call me a curmudgeon ;-)

Click to expand...

Either your AIS is defective, or you have it zoomed out to an unusable level. I'm always surprised at how few recreational boats in the PNW actually have AIS. Never clutters or overcrowds the screen at any usable level.

Been thinking a bit more about when I use AIS and came up with these:

Transitting north or south in Puget Sound we (obviously) stay out of the VTS area, which means we're running along either shore - and passing ferries and their docks. Sometimes you can see the cars going on / off while docked and be able to gauge a departure, but that's often difficult. The earliest notice you'll get is when their speed changes from 0 knots.

Similarly I use AIS to plan crossing the VTS when there's traffic. I really don't want to start to cross in front of one of the cruise ships leaving downtown Seattle - they tend to gather speed very quickly because...well, I don't actually know why but they seem to always be in a hurry.

Transitting the locks is another place where it's handy to know about inbound & outbound commercial traffic. Nothing you can do about it - they have priority - it's just one more data point (along with any chatter on 13) to help gauge the wait and whether to tie up for a long wait.

On reflection, then, I use AIS mostly to help avoid collisions - which, of course, I am obligated to do under Rule 7 of the NavRules:

There was a proposed change to paragraph (b) to change radar to "all electronic means" that didn't make it through because, in part, (a) really covers that anyway. So my question for those who have transmitters in "stealth mode", what are you going to tell the authorities in the event you are in a collision? Nothwithstanding BandB's concern about piracy at sea, I think you'd be in a very poor position indeed.

refugio said:

So my question for those who have transmitters in "stealth mode", what are you going to tell the authorities in the event you are in a collision?

Click to expand...

I doubt that would be a valid question as long as use is optional.

Though I tend to favour it, as another useful tool, anyone who can't avoid a collision without AIS should just stay ashore.

refugio said:

Nothwithstanding BandB's concern about piracy at sea, I think you'd be in a very poor position indeed.

Click to expand...

My piracy issue only applies in very limited situations. Not in general use and not in congested or highly trafficked areas. We only went dark in a section miles offshore and where during the entire night we didn't pick up any other boat on radar. Areas of high piracy, we'd choose to avoid rather than go dark. The area we were in was one the locals referred to as occasional petty piracy.

Hawgwash said:

I doubt that would be a valid question as long as use is optional.

Click to expand...

What part of this statement says "optional" to you?
The fitting of collision avoidance gear is indeed not required. But, if fitted and operational, its use is not "optional" in avoiding a collision.

It sounds like you may not be familiar with the NavRules. I know you don't currently have a vessel, but if you do buy a vessel 36' or longer who will be required to carry a copy of them per the Code of Federal Regulations:
Now if you believe that CFRs are "optional"....

Edit: I just realized you are in Canada. I'm pretty sure that the NavRules are harmonized to Canada, but maybe your federal regulations are different and you don't have to actually carry the NavRules.

refugio said:

What part of this statement says "optional" to you?

Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists.​

The fitting of collision avoidance gear is indeed not required. But, if fitted and operational, its use is not "optional" in avoiding a collision.

Click to expand...

This statement trips up a lot of boaters. "Appropriate" does not mean "have to use it." In a USCG presentation to our boating club a number of years ago this topic came up. A question was asked "who determines what is appropriate?" Answer- you do, meaning the captain or whoever has responsibility for the vessel.

Another question was does this mean if your boat has a working radar you have to have it on when you are underway? Answer- no. However if you have a working radar and you are involved in a collision or accident that using your radar might have prevented had you been using it then you may be deemed at least partly responsible for the accident.

I suspect the same holds true for AIS which, like radar, is not required for recreational boating. Use it if you determine it is appropriate for the conditions. If you don't think it's appropriate you are under no obligation to use it.

refugio said:

On reflection, then, I use AIS mostly to help avoid collisions - which, of course, I am obligated to do under Rule 7 of the NavRules:

(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.​

There was a proposed change to paragraph (b) to change radar to "all electronic means" that didn't make it through because, in part, (a) really covers that anyway. So my question for those who have transmitters in "stealth mode", what are you going to tell the authorities in the event you are in a collision? Nothwithstanding BandB's concern about piracy at sea, I think you'd be in a very poor position indeed.

Click to expand...

Yup! Exactly! If your got it, under the COLREGS, you're obligated to use it.

I don't agree with Marin's interpretation here. I think you'd be on thin ice if being investigated after a collision if you had it and didn't use it.

Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum

JDCAVE said:

Yup! Exactly! If your got it, under the COLREGS, you're obligated to use it.


Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum

Click to expand...

Not true according to what we were told by the USCG. The word "appropriate" is the key.

Marin said:

This statement trips up a lot of boaters. "Appropriate" does not mean "have to use it." ...However if you have a working radar and you are involved in a collision or accident that using your radar might have prevented then you may be deemed at least partly responsible for the accident.

Click to expand...

Correct, you are not required to use it under way - but you are required to use it (and every other means) to avoid collision. If you want to call that "optional"...

It is optional. The option is whether or not you are willing to risk being determined to bear some or all of the fault in the event of an accident. Judging by the number of boaters I know or have met who have radar and never turn it on, it's an option frequently selected.

I'll let you maritime lawyers duke it out.
I do have one question though;
Where would this fit in the world of black and white?

refugio said:

Mine wasn't transmitting after 5 years and I didn't know it!

Click to expand...