Low visibility

rwidman said:

Regardless of the rules, if in doubt, why not just turn on the lights and sound the horn just for your own safety?

Click to expand...

+1

markpierce said:

The captain of the cruise ship we were on declined to leave Stephens Passage to enter Holkham Bay ...

Click to expand...

Almost certainly he did not "decline" - he was prohibited by the company Safety Management System to enter that area with less than a certain visibility current and forecast.

Very little is left to the discretion of the master in operational matters such as that.

greatpapabear said:

A thought - I'll talk with the MCA this morning (The UK Coastguard and "COLREGS police") and check if they use the same definition. Could you do the same with the NOAA and we'll compare results.

Best - GPB

Click to expand...

MCA confirms fog is <1,000m.

GPB

After reading several legal cases related to "resticted vis" collisions...no mention of ANY distance caught my attention. They spent a lot of arguing the time/distance it would take to come to a stop...so it probably doesn't matter what the actual number is because when/if it goes to court...the big thing is "was vis reduced at all" and if so...what did you do to help prevent the collision.

greatpapabear said:

MCA confirms fog is <1,000m.

Click to expand...

Don't believe ships wouldn't show lights and blast horns long before visibility was reduced to a mere kilometer. For me, I'll show lights and sound horn whenever visibility is limited to their ranges.

markpierce said:

Don't believe ships wouldn't show lights and blast horns long before visibility was reduced to a mere kilometer. For me, I'll show lights and sound horn whenever visibility is limited to their ranges.

Click to expand...

While the 1000m might be a tech number in calling weather "fog" ...I doubt it has any bearing when you should think in terms of restriced visibility when boating.

The rules do infer "any" reduction in visibility...so I guess it does fall to a judgement call. (otherwise I would think a "specific" number would be a lot easier to find).

psneeld said:

While the 1000m might be a tech number in calling weather "fog" ...I doubt it has any bearing when you should think in terms of restriced visibility when boating.

The rules do infer "any" reduction in visibility...so I guess it does fall to a judgement call. (otherwise I would think a "specific" number would be a lot easier to find).

Click to expand...

I agree. I wandered off into the def of fog in itself since it was a def that I felt it might have been on interest to see where mist became fog.

However, taking the COLREGS restricted visibility def of "any condition in which visibility is restricted by fog, mist, falling snow, heavy rainstorms, sandstorms or any other similar causes" and then Rule 19 "This Rule applies to vessels not in sight of one another when navigating in or near an area of restricted visibility" makes collision avoidance action interesting, since the rules change with 19d and 19e, namely,



It's the change in avoidance actions in 19b that's always been inteetsing to me - diagram attached which I used in my article to Motor Boat and Yachting.

Have a good day.

thats is not terrible bad viz.
we sometimes arrive and leave long beach in the fog, i mean serious fog with perhaps 20 ft viz, where you navigate strictly by instruments (gps and radar) and i never go faster than idle.
when in these conditions, i have never heard anyone use their horns..

funny...New York Harbor is downright scary with all the whistle signals going off!!!

Per said:

thats is not terrible bad viz.
we sometimes arrive and leave long beach in the fog, i mean serious fog with perhaps 20 ft viz, where you navigate strictly by instruments (gps and radar) and i never go faster than idle.
when in these conditions, i have never heard anyone use their horns..

Click to expand...

There was a drwadful accident in 2011 where a passenger fast cat travelling at 38kts in thick, thick fog cut a French trawler in half, killing one of them. Thick fog and no horn signals are cited as contributory.

Wikipedia reports:

At approximately 0645 UTC on 28 March 2011 the Condor Vitesse was in collision with a Granville fishing boat, the 9.3m "Les Marquises", in the vicinity of the Minquiers reef south of Jersey while en route from St Malo in foggy conditions. Two of the French fishermen were rescued from the water by the ferry's safety boats. The skipper of Les Marquises, 42-year old Philippe Claude Lesaulnier, was rescued by another fishing boat "Joker" and transferred to Jersey's lifeboat, but died later the same day in Jersey's hospital. An inquest in Jersey revealed that Monsieur Lesaulnier died of crush injuries to the upper abdomen, and drowning. He leaves a wife and four children.

An investigation began.The French investigator, Renauld Gaudeul, procureur de la République de Coutances said that the speed of the ferry would be of key importance to the investigation. On 19 October 2011, the BEAmer released its report. In summary, "Condor Vitesse sailed from Saint-Malo in thick fog conditions; the fog horn had been inactivated very early and the visual lookout had not been strengthened. The speed had progressively reached 37 knots. In the wheelhouse almost continuous talks without any link with the watchkeeping, maintained an atmosphere not compatible with the necessary concentration to conduct a HSC in the fog. This behavior, as well as the visibility are the causal factors of the accident. When Condor Vitesse approached the Minquiers waters, both officers did not detect 2 vessel echoes ahead on starboard, the first was a ship that would be passing at a hundred of meters on starboard, the second was Les Marquises. The potter was fishing, with her radar on, without emitting any sound signals. A hand saw the HSC at the last moment but too late to alert the skipper. The collision cut the fishing vessel in two parts, while on board the HSC there was a leak in the starboard bow compartment. The aft part of the potter kept afloat for a time, allowing the two hands to stay on it until they have been rescued by the HSC crew."

Per said:

we sometimes arrive and leave long beach in the fog, i mean serious fog with perhaps 20 ft viz, where you navigate strictly by instruments (gps and radar) and i never go faster than idle.
when in these conditions, i have never heard anyone use their horns..

Click to expand...

Going slow was good. Not using a horn/whistle was bad. Anyone there show their running lights in such conditions? (I doubt it.)

We use our horns in the fog. If it's daytime we do not use our nav lights for the simple fact that nobody would see them until they ran into us. That's why we're using the horns in the first place-- can't see anything.

Marin said:

We use our horns in the fog. If it's daytime we do not use our nav lights for the simple fact that nobody would see them until they ran into us. That's why we're using the horns in the first place-- can't see anything.

Click to expand...

And for the same reason you don't turn on your automobile's headlights when it rains or it's foggy during daylight hours?

Show lights!

You seem to be under the delusion that nav lights are bright. They aren't. The requirement is that they be visible x- distance away on a clear night. If you have actually seen nav lights on, even at night, you would know that at any distance at all they are just tiny sparks of colored light. To think nav lights actually light up anything like headlights or would even be visible to another boat in the daytime in a fog is fooling yourself.

Marin, you scare me ... like some drivers in the Philippines who don't use their automobiles' headlights at night to "save" their batteries. (Oh heck. Navigational lights "can't be seen" so why bother with them.)

markpierce said:

Show lights!

Click to expand...

The only nav light in your photo is the tiny red one. The spreader lights and spotlight on your cabin top are not nav lights, they are not required, and more boats don't have them than do. And in a real fog (not that mild haze that was in that sailboat photo you posted) your spreader and spotlights wouldn't be seen very far away either. That's why God invented foghorns.

I'll argue that every bit helps (let alone the Colregs). Also, there is no reason not to show lights, not significantly reducing one's own vision, which shouldn't be confused with navigational lights. The most important thing is to be noticed/seen.

markpierce said:

I'll argue that every bit helps (let alone the Colregs). Also, there is no reason not to show lights which shouldn't be confused with navigational lights. The most important thing is to be noticed/seen.

Click to expand...

You want to turn on your lights when nobody can see them that's fine with me. I prefer to save them for when they can be seen, particularly since I don't fancy dropping the mast just to change the bulbs that burned out because we had our lights on for no reason whatsoever.

my boat had aqua signal series 25's on it...they are marginal at best...I just upgraded to series 41's which we have even on our little 26" assistance towing boats.

no pun intended but the difference is night and day...I swear they are 5 times brighter even though they are only 25 watt instead of the lower 10 watt bulbs.

the point is not so much for visibility as much as soon as the lights are recognized, the approaching vessel can make a ROR decision versus guessing if you are still just a white blob in the mist.

If your are in heavy fog and have a gaggle of spreader lights, floodlights, spotlights and every other photon producing machine sold at West Marine the only thing you will see is the bubble of fog around you. Whether the "other guy" sees your light bubble or not is debatable but one thing is for sure, you have just blinded yourself just as much as driving in fog at night with the high beams on.

I'm with Marin on the running lights issue, turn them on if it makes you feel good but since those tiny things are all but invisible except on a clear night against a dark background to someone who is looking for them you may as well just keep a voodoo doll hanging from the whistle cord for all the good they really do.

RickB said:

If your are in heavy fog and have a gaggle of spreader lights, floodlights, spotlights and every other photon producing machine sold at West Marine the only thing you will see is the bubble of fog around you. Whether the "other guy" sees your light bubble or not is debatable but one thing is for sure, you have just blinded yourself just as much as driving in fog at night with the high beams on.

I'm with Marin on the running lights issue, turn them on if it makes you feel good but since those tiny things are all but invisible except on a clear night against a dark background to someone who is looking for them you may as well just keep a voodoo doll hanging from the whistle cord for all the good they really do.

Click to expand...

I agree with most of that...but where they really shine brightly is in maritime court if anything goes wrong out there....

psneeld said:

where they really shine brightly is in maritime court if anything goes wrong out there....

Click to expand...

Which is why most commercial vessels leave them on continuously while underway, day and night, clear or not.

The only time they are turned off is at a dock where leaving them on might create confusion.

There's some really interesting debate here. For me, it boils down to,

1. What's required by the COLREGS
2. Seamanship
3. What's demanded by you boat's insurance company

In the UK, some insurance companies are now saying that cover will be limited if non-IMO complaint horns are not fitted and being used correctly. I haven't (yet) heard of the implications of not using lights.

The court investigating the Condor incident I published above, is looking at the fact that the Condor's horns were not being used correctly at the time of the accident. This is separate from the fact it was doing 38kts in almost zero vis.

An interesting mix of drivers are coming into play.

GPB

Marin said:

You want to turn on your lights when nobody can see them that's fine with me. I prefer to save them for when they can be seen, particularly since I don't fancy dropping the mast just to change the bulbs that burned out because we had our lights on for no reason whatsoever.

Click to expand...

You "save your lights for when they can be seen"? How do you know if they can be seen? What if burning the lights would have prevented a collision but you were saving them?

Replace them with LEDs which consume 1/10 the power and last for 20,000 hours or more. Then turn them on whenever there's a chance they will hep someone to see your boat and avoid hitting it.

Notice that many motorists run with their headlights on during the daytime so they can be more easily seen. I have been on some stretches of road where it is a legal requirement to drive with the headlights on, even in broad daylight for the same reason.

greatpapabear said:

............In the UK, some insurance companies are now saying that cover will be limited if non-IMO complaint horns are not fitted and being used correctly. I haven't (yet) heard of the implications of not using lights..............

Click to expand...

Oddly, as often as I see statements similar to this regarding insurance coverage, my policy has nothing like that in it. Just exclusions for racing, criminal activity (on my part), etc.

I guess I'm just lucky.

rwidman said:

Oddly, as often as I see statements similar to this regarding insurance coverage, my policy has nothing like that in it. Just exclusions for racing, criminal activity (on my part), etc.

I guess I'm just lucky.

Click to expand...

I think you are. Some are adding that sea-cocks must have be serviced in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

I've heard (but not yet tested) that some are looking to excluse boats which do not have IMO approved nav lights fitted.

In other words, anything that might show the master wasn't looking after the boat as he should. Weasel ways not having to pay out...?

Well, there's fog and there's fog. When it's foggy we boat in the fog regardless of how dense it is. Up here it tends to be very dense. We've encountered boats in this fog (knew where they were by radar) and some of them have had their nav lights on. Even when we could sort of see the vague presence of the approaching boat we could not see their lights until they were just a few boat lengths away. At night the lights would show up a lot sooner but they'd be on anyway. But in the fog we typically have here, in daylight we begin to see the boat itself long before we see any nav lights if they're on.

Heaven forbid, you're cruising at safe fwd speed with radar operating, fog horn sounding and nav lights off and are overrun by a large tanker in the fog. You sue (and get sued) and finally get your day in court. The first question asked of you is were you operating in compliance with the appropriate COLREGS. "No, your honor, I was not because I figured it wasn't necessary." Plaintiff found at fault, Plaintiff to pay all damages, CASE DISMISSED.

A couple of times I`ve been caught off the coast in sea fog which occasionally occurs in warm, not cold conditions, over here. I`d use lights, more in hope than expectation they`d help. When you use fog lights on your car, you aim them low so they shine up under the fog (well that`s what we did in car rally competition).
If using the horn, as I think we should, at what intervals should it be used? Does anyone have an automatic facility for this so you don`t watch a clock or timer?