T&T: AIS info

Wed Nov 11 08:07:02 EST 2009

Well, I guess I am on the opposite side of this debate because in most
circumstances I would never leave home without one. I have had both a AIS
"receive only" on my prior boat and now have a Furuno FA150  (
http://www.furunousa.com/Furuno/Doc/0/JIHL779G9DOKPAN92E3ITTTNC5/FA150%20Operator%27s%20Manual%20F%20%206-11-08.pdf)
and believe it to be one of the best safety devices I have.

What formed my opinion was on a trip several years ago I was returning from
Bermuda into the Chesapeake Bay at 4am without AIS. It was very dark and
hard to see anything. The closer we got to the Bay entrance the greater the
congestion and challenges of sorting all of the traffic. It took three of us
to lookout, follow radar and pilot the boat to find a safe course arriving
in Hampton Va  3-4 hrs later. It was very stressful and from that point
forward I have had AIS.
Since then during off shore excursions there have been many times where AIS
has allowed us to sort out traffic and plot a good course. For example we
were off shore, at night, near Charleston SC going north and encountered 5
container ships all headed from different directions to the pilot area for
an early morning entry. We were able to sort out everyone in this case
calling one of the vessels by name and working out a agreed course.  I have
seen a Coast Guard vessel a month ago on the Chesapeake Bay with AIS who
hailed us by name, because he was planning an unusual maneuver.

I have been through NY harbor and the traffic there is so great that AIS is
less helpful, but was helpful in Hell's Gate on the East River where a tug
and barge hailed us by name and we worked out a safe passing arrangement
well  before we were in sight of each other. I have good use of it near
Block Island in dense fog, but having said that there are real nuts out
there running at high speeds in zero viability that you need to look for and
be very aware of because of a low radar signature and no AIS.

Some observations, first I want them to see me as much as I want to see
them. Second I have the information integrated into my chartplotter and
radar. The display on the unit is not really user friendly. It is a
collision avoidance tool (a good one) one of several you might have
including your eyes, radar, chart plotter and good watch standing. It gives
you good information about a vessels type SOG, COG that allows for a more
comfortable time frame to maneuver as well as hailing information should you
need it. Third it does not replace only supplements a good visual and alert
watch.

I do not turn on the audible alarm too annoying but rather track events on
my chart plotter.
However if you cruise mostly during the day time, rarely in reduced
visibility and in inland waterways then you might not find it as helpful or
even necessary. But even then I would really give it some thought. I think
of it like radar I run both all the time even during bright sunny days with
excellent visibility (It is a Nav rule that if you have radar it must be on
regardless of the visibility). Good to see targets on your systems and know
how everything works rather than wait for a time of reduced visibility or
darkness to turn it on and then try and figure things out.

There are many options from receive only to a newer class and less expensive
unit that is targeted to the pleasure craft market that broadcasts at less
frequent intervals. I have heard that some vessels with "older AIS"
receivers cannot pick up the signals on these newer units. And finally the
class A AIS that is typically found on commercial vessels.

Like so many things in boating there are sometimes no right or wrong
positions because of the different circumstances,  cruising needs and
budgets. I can only say again how much I value, use this equipment and feel
it has clearly enhanced our vessels safety.

Regards

John Coyle
Seabright

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Jim Healy <gilwellbear at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jim,
>
> I have a minority opinion on AIS for pleasure craft.  Simply, it is that
> AIS
> TRANSPONDERS generally do not belong on pleasure craft.  I wouldn't go so
> far as to say "prohibited," at least not yet.  Perhaps "prohibited" on
> craft
> of less than 100 ft, LOA...   But AIS use amongst pleasure craft
> owner/operators requires much more self-imposed temperance and restraint
> than I currently see demonstrated among owners.  Now, there's a
> controversial intro, eh?!
>
> So, where in the world am I coming from?  I fit a dual channel AIS RECEIVER
> on Sanctuary when we were doing the loop in 2007.  It was very helpful on
> the inland rivers in identifying and contacting tows, around bends, by
> name.
> It is helpful in arranging to meet or overtake tug-tows on the A-ICW.  But
> in large commercial harbors, it is much less helpful.  That's because there
> are so many targets coming from so many directions that visual rules
> interpreted by a knowledgeable human operator are the only way to go.  The
> clutter factor is multiplied several fold by AIS equipped pleasure craft.
> AIS is fast becoming useless - like Radar on a sunny afternoon - in places
> like Annapolis because there are just too many targets, and all you do by
> adding to that clutter is make the problem worse.
>
> Please permit an analogy: work vehicles use yellow flashing lights to warn
> of their presence.  What if personal vehicles did that?  It's legal.  You
> could do it.  What if only a small percentage of vehicles did it?  It would
> render the tool useless.  That what's happening with AIS transponders on
> pleasure craft..
>
> This week, I've had to turn off my proximity alarm several times because a
> Krogan 42 had his AIS transponder squawking, and was traveling at the same
> basic hull speed and  direction as I was.  He kept tripping my proximity
> alarm, and I just could not avoid him.  And he wasn't the only pleasure
> craft that caused that problem.  But, disabling the alarm did cause me to
> get delayed warning of overtaking and intersecting tug-tows, all because
> these pleasure craft captains like their AIS technology toy!  Why did he
> need AIS on a sunny afternoon on the Alligator River and in the Alligator -
> Pungo Canal?  When you come past a place like Thunderbolt Marine, you get a
> dozen AIS hits from pleasure craft that are on the hard.  It would be
> impossible to pick out a moving boat from the kludge of targets on the
> screen.  If you're coming through a fleeting area on the Illinois River or
> the Ohio River, it's helpful to recognize targets that have a SOG of 0.0,
> because that means they aren't moving and are not a threat to you.  I'm not
> sure that applies to pleasure craft moored at marina docks or on the hard.
> And, oh, by the way, your eyes and attention should be on the water, not on
> the chartplotter, in a situation like that.
>
> We have also observed that many classes of large ships appear to be exempt
> -
> or ignore - AIS carriage requirements.  On the Chesapeake, and at Kings
> Bay,
> Navy vessels don't use it.  I haven't seen it on Coast Guard Cutters, but I
> have seen it (in Fields Cut, this week) on a USCG inflatable patrol boat.
> Apparently, usage by these agencies varies from port to port and coast to
> coast, which alone lessens the reliability of the tool for cruising
> captains, who expect one behavior and get another.
>
> OK.  So one could argue that AIS might help in fog, or night operations.
> Better than Radar?  Maybe, maybe not.  But, a technology toy isn't license
> to operate in conditions that you would eschew without it.
>
> I think a lot of this could be avoided if pleasure craft operators would
> just use common sense and turn the units on in receive-only mode - kill the
> transponder - unless they were truly in a nav situation where AIS could buy
> them some safety.  Personally, I think that would be limited to overnight
> offshore passages, but there again, in open waters, Radar seems equally
> suitable and less invasive.
>
> My net is, the proliferation of AIS TRANSPONDERS on pleasure craft only
> diminishes the real safety value of the tool by cluttering the place up
> with
> extraneous targets.
>
> As I said, a minority opinion, but based on now 3 years of real world
> experience with an AIS receiver onboard..  I'm sure others can explain why
> my view is foolish and naive.
>
> Personally, I think you'd be better off spending the money on stabilized
> binoculars!
>
> Jim
>
> Peg and Jim Healy aboard Sanctuary,
> currently Thunderbolt, GA
> Monk 36 Hull #132
> MMSI #367042570
> AGLCA #3767
> MTOA #3436
> _______________________________________________
> http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/trawlers-and-trawlering
>
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options (get password, change
> email address, etc) go to:
> http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/options/trawlers-and-trawlering
>
> Trawlers & Trawlering and T&T are trademarks of Water World
> Productions. Unauthorized use is prohibited.