Re: Eye lead time
well said, dingbat. I'm one of those busy harbor/open waters boaters, too. We say, "Keep your head on a swivel." the "eye lead time" is a very small part of what you have to do.
But it's clearly an important one, there is obviously a minimum time you need to retace to a hazard to be safe.
We all naturally compare motor boat drving to car driving, but there are way too many differences to make the few similarities matter. For example, on an interstate, you really only need to worry about what's behind or in front of you, and on the surface of the road. Perhaps boating in a long canal is like that. But not driving on a neighborhood street or boating on busy creek full of docks and marinas. On the road, cars generally restrict travel to the road. Boating is like being in a big unmarked parking lot.
Even on a long canal, the dynamic properties of water still erase most of the simularitites.
Boats: no brakes and generally not as manueverable. Watch 360 above the surface. Watch the surface straight ahead, and also "watch" what's under it (not a concern on cars!). Watch what's above (weather) also not as much a concern with cars (a 15 mph change in wind speed in a boat would be of equal concern of a tropical storm/blizzard on a car). Severe injury from impact (no selt belts, airbags, safe design) and risk of drowning! But the immediate effects of a break-down are usually harmless. Boats also require more maintenance, more "on the road" repairs, more safety/emergency/repair equipment , and more skill to operate.
The normal human visual field is only 170 degrees, there could be no humans with 360 degrees visual field. Also, when you are moving forward, isn't what's ahead of you most important? Also the average (central) visual acuity of the healthy human eye is between 20/12 and 20/16. But the portiton of the visual field with this acuity much narrower and depends on the level of ambiant light.
No seat belts, airbags, safe design means that occupant can easily be ejected even in a low speed collision. But even with those passive safety features, a high speed collision can still be fatal. Do note that even cars didn't used to have them, and today, most public transit vehicles, includi all rail bourne ones still don't.
Cars: more obstructed view (e.g. car coming out a side street); more restrictions (stop lights/signs; lanes of travel) and danger from people ignoring them; lower margin of error (ditches/walls/curbs on the sides); higher speed = longer stopping and greater likelihood of skidding or rolling. If you break down suddenly (flat front tire) especially in traffic you are more likely to get creamed by another driver.
Other drivers: Who's to say whether the threat from other drivers acting stupid is worse on the water or on land. For me at home (urban drving on land, experienced boaters mostly on water) land is worse. I surmise from comments here that many of you have your lakes full of morons but land traffic isn't so bad, comparatively. Of course, the "holiday weekend" traffic can be bad both places!
Has anyone here ever heard of the Peltzman effect? It has been suggested that many humans increase risky behaviour in response to a safety regulation/feature.
The use of seat belts, airbags and safe design means that the (unconcinous) offsetting risky behavior encouraged by the safety regulation is more likely to have a negative impact. It seems to me, and this may strike many technically minded men as counter intuative, that someone who is less likely to fail to yield may still be more likely to crash into the stand on vehicle if they
do have one.
Just because you are less likely than another driver to have an accident doesn't mean you are a safer driver, right?