100mph in Southampton Water

[rib]

who was the driver ?

 

[snooks]

The drivers excuse for flipping the boat was that he thought he saw a diver down SMB. The fact that it was not does not take away from the fact that it COULD have been. If I drive at 150mph on the motorway it is not an excuse that it happened to be empty at the time despite the fact I didn't check it. You are making the mistake of assuming that something is absolutely fine simply because a particular consequence did not happen, through no effort of the driver. The course was NOT clear and for all he knew there could have been half a dozen divers and a swimming race on.





How would he know. He didn't check. He thought there were divers down so he obviously hadn't checked.


It may be perfect yet he misjudged a pot buoy that obviously had been there all day and hit another marker buoy. The fact conditions were perfect actually makes it worse as he has little excuse for his errors.



It may have been the time and the place but it was still irresponsible. If I drive round a race track at the time I booked it doesn't excuse the fact I don't wear a seatbelt or appropriate safety gear or that I haven't informed the local authorities that I have arrived or checked that the track is clear. Worse still to do it with others in the vehicle who haven't the experience I have.

They alerted Hamble HM to their intentions prior to leaving.

Yachts travel at 6-8 mph and still manage to get caught up on pot markers.

 

[Sandy]

I am not in to banning. All I want is for people to act responsibly and have consideration for other members of the public. I felt on this occasion they lost touch with what was a sensible and considerate maximum speed in Southampton Water and having read the comment from the owner/driver of the powerboat I realise that he still just does not 'get it'.

Our perception of danger changes as we gain experience. As a young climber I never dreamt of solo climbing, the pinnacle of my Scottish mountaineering was a solo winter climb called Point Five on Ben Nevis.

I strongly suspect that an ex-world speedboat champion was well within his comfort zone that morning .

 

[pmagowan]

They alerted Hamble HM to their intentions prior to leaving.

Yachts travel at 6-8 mph and still manage to get caught up on pot markers.

Yes, fine. I don't get your point. Are you saying this was just another day on the water, no problems here, nothing to learn, carry on. Swimmers sometimes bump into things too but luckily they are rarely doing 100mph so their safety checks focus on other stuff.

I am afraid regulations are inevitable if we are unable to accept when someone needs to learn from their mistakes. I suspect motorboats are going to face the brunt of that and it would be very hard to argue against compulsory licensing when someone could simply point to the thread on the mobo forum and say "look, they have no insight into the dangers they pose and reasonable actions to mitigate them".

 

[pmagowan]

Our perception of danger changes as we gain experience. As a young climber I never dreamt of solo climbing, the pinnacle of my Scottish mountaineering was a solo winter climb called Point Five on Ben Nevis.

I strongly suspect that an ex-world speedboat champion was well within his comfort zone that morning .

You think a man with his son unconscious, drowning in a capsized boat was within his comfort zone? He may have thought he was prior to the 'accident' but he was obviously overestimating his own skill and luck.

 

[sarabande]

I strongly suspect that an ex-world speedboat champion was well within his comfort zone that morning .

His comfort zone clearly includes the ability to seriously injure his passenger ? And that same comfort zone extends to not being able to safely evade a hitherto unseen object in the water.

Momentum is a (part) product of the square of the velocity, it's not a linear function. Double the speed, quadruple the momentum; work out the figures for doubling the speed from 10, to 20, then 40, then 80. The driver should lose his licence; there is no excuse for failing to carry out standard assessment and safety procedures; he was the person in charge of the vessel.

 

[Lyndsey Doyle]

Good morning, a simple question: Surely high speed testing should be done out at sea? Why couldn't they leave the solent and exercise their turbocharged penis-gourd in a safe place?
He should be punished by the law, so it makes the headlines, and the HM should have a long hard think about speed limits in Southampton Water.
Enjoy the sunshine LD

 

[dom]

The bottom line is that they crashed and thus something went badly wrong. In this case it is clear that wasn't simply a random mistake or unpreventable mishap. Someone was driving a boat with insufficient care considering their speed. They took insufficient care of their passengers and had insufficient understanding of their surroundings. That buoy could have been divers, like he thought, and he was unable to safely avoid them.

If you own a boat you have a responsibility to other water users, your crew and your hobby to act in a reasonable manner. In a sailboat that could mean obeying colregs or warning crew of the boom. On a 100mph speedboat that means making sure your course is clear and that everyone on board is wearing their protective equipment. That buoy did not suddenly appear, I presume it was there all day. Everyone makes mistakes but when there is a catalogue of mistakes leading up to a crash causing serious injuries and risk to life then you must question the judgment of the skipper.

We don't need more regulation but we do need people to take responsibility for their actions and to learn from them. A failure to do so, or an attitude of protectionism does risk regulation being imposed.

Well argued, sensible advice and a well placed warning shot.

 

[Glisferox]

Surely this accident could have happened it he'd been a good boy and done his test in the Western Solent or some other, less enclosed, area of water? He was, after all returning to the Hamble, post test.

It seems a little odd that the MAIB don't say what speed he was doing when he hooked, so I presume less than 87Kts and more than their suggested speed limit of 40kts.

I wonder if, to an extent, the MAIB are conflating two events in order to make some point.

The pictures look like they came from a video, would this have found its way onto YouTube? In which case are the MAIB worried about something like a YouTube meme developing around speed testing in Southampton Water. At which point they may like it to stop before some idiot, there will be one, tries it on a busy Saturday as the Hamble empties.

Just a thought

 

[dylanwinter]

Surely this accident could have happened it he'd been a good boy and done his test in the Western Solent or some other, less enclosed, area of water? He was, after all returning to the Hamble, post test.

It seems a little odd that the MAIB don't say what speed he was doing when he hooked, so I presume less than 87Kts and more than their suggested speed limit of 40kts.

I wonder if, to an extent, the MAIB are conflating two events in order to make some point.

The pictures look like they came from a video, would this have found its way onto YouTube? In which case are the MAIB worried about something like a YouTube meme developing around speed testing in Southampton Water. At which point they may like it to stop before some idiot, there will be one, tries it on a busy Saturday as the Hamble empties.

Just a thought

surely no solent mobo driver would speed when there are lots of other boats around... say on a saturday morning

that would be really inconsiderate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz-kTbAB7sI

 

[johnb15]

His comfort zone clearly includes the ability to seriously injure his passenger ? And that same comfort zone extends to not being able to safely evade a hitherto unseen object in the water.

Momentum is a (part) product of the square of the velocity, it's not a linear function. Double the speed, quadruple the momentum; work out the figures for doubling the speed from 10, to 20, then 40, then 80. The driver should lose his licence; there is no excuse for failing to carry out standard assessment and safety procedures; he was the person in charge of the vessel.

If you want to use mechanics, get your facts right. Momentum is not a a function of velocity squared, it is the simple product of mass x velocity. Kinetic energy is, however, a function of velocity squared.

 

[Seven Spades]

I have no connections, that I know of, with the parties involved and have never been on a Vector boat or involved with the company.

I have however driven powerboats at over 90mph in the Solent and been on board boats doing a similar speed on Southampton Water many times, as well as doing over 100 mph in the Solent.

It amazes me that after one accident there is sudden outrage :0) Yet there are many accidents on yachts everyone is happy to forget.

Funny how, after decades boat travelling at high speed up Southampton water – when it's not busy so they aren't inconveniencing anyone – it hasn't been a problem.

How often has this sort of accident happened? The fact I don't know, and I'm not aware of another incident like this in the last 15-20 years would suggest it's pretty safe to have been doing what they and many others have been doing. By contrast, I can think of many incidents in the Solent involving yachts.

Even with speed limits in place it's still possible to get permission from VTS to exceed those limits, so the odds are this accident would have still happened, the only difference would be that VTS would have known about the testing.

Accidents happen. If you get upset about speed and want to save lives, go to any local road with a 30mph zone and campaign there. There are better places to concentrate your efforts than a wide open and well-protected stretch of water.

I think you are correct in this. Southampton water is a really good flat piece of water and as long as no one is around at the time and good look out is kept then there is unlikely to be a danger to other people. The lack of restraints within their boats seems to have been the root cause of the problem and I agree the speed of the accident is probably no where the maximum use on the run and in all likelihood iOS less than half.

Does any one know if the boy is all right now?

 

[dunedin]

I know people just can't resist using the 100mph figure when they are putting their case for why this incident happened but have they not read the detail of the report. The driver had already completed his "100mph" run and then completed a 180 degree turn before accelerating back up to the region of 90mph before he decelerated on the approach to the Hamble and then upon reaching the turning point started his turn into the river. It was during this turn that he saw the pot markers ahead and took the avoiding action. Although his speed wasn't recorded at the time of the incident it was clearly not 100mph and given he was about to enter the Hamble it was likely considerably less than some are supposing.
.

The 100mph bit is hardly irrelevant, just because the boat was travelling at a slightly lower speed when it crashed out - when it was unable to survive taking avoiding action, resulting in serious consequences (near fatal), at the lower speed.
Just imagine the potential consequences of the avoiding action being needed at the higher speed, which could have been even worse for all parties.

 

[dunedin]

I used to drive in excess of 140mph on British motorways pretty much on a daily basis. I wonder how many people on here think that isn't "safe" either?

See, I knew someone would bite.

No questions, no attempt to establish circumstances, background or experience, straight in there with the assumption that it was dangerous and illegal. You see the headline figure and that's it.

Pretty much sums up many of the posts on here about the powerboat incident.

So go on, explain the "circumstances, background & experience" that makes you think you were being safe doing 140mph on British motorways on a near daily basis?
Unless you were in the old Capital Radio traffic helicopter above the road, as a petrol head fast car enthusiast I can't think of ANY way that could be anything other than "nutcase" unsafe behaviour- but happy to be educated.
(NB And I really really hope the answer isn't a police officer as there is no way there is a safe reason for police to do these speeds either, other than perhaps once a year with helicopter overseeing and guiding)

Hence my post that the root issue is people doing these extreme speeds who believe they have superhero abilities - who generally don't

 

[Triassic]

So go on, explain the "circumstances, background & experience" that makes you think you were being safe doing 140mph on British motorways on a near daily basis?
Unless you were in the old Capital Radio traffic helicopter above the road, as a petrol head fast car enthusiast I can't think of ANY way that could be anything other than "nutcase" unsafe behaviour- but happy to be educated.
(NB And I really really hope the answer isn't a police officer as there is no way there is a safe reason for police to do these speeds either, other than perhaps once a year with helicopter overseeing and guiding)

Hence my post that the root issue is people doing these extreme speeds who believe they have superhero abilities - who generally don't

The only exemption to the speed limit on UK roads is for vehicles being used for emergency service purposes, so given I have indicated I wasn't driving illegally I think even you can probably work that one out.

If you are a "petrol head fast car enthusiast" then I suggest you take the time to research some of the principals behind advanced driving techniques and when you do you may begin to understand that speed is entirely subjective to the prevailing circumstance and the information available at that time. I'm afraid you're not going to get that lesson condensed into a few lines by me on here.

 

[dunedin]

The only exemption to the speed limit on UK roads is for vehicles being used for emergency service purposes, so given I have indicated I wasn't driving illegally I think even you can probably work that one out.

Holy Heck ! Per my PS, if "individual emergency services" crews are doing 140mph on motorways "on a near daily basis" (and presumably police, as fire and ambulance vehicles can't reach these speeds) then they need to be investigated and prosecuted pronto. Statistically it must be extremely rare for a police vehicle to come within catch distance of a car doing over 140mph - and even more rare to the point of near zero probability for a 140 mph chase to be safe.
Either you are bragging big time - or the tracking of police vehicles is insufficient. I will refer

And the relevance here again, in my view, is people's unrealistic belief in their own superhero abilities, which causes accidents in very high speed power boats outside an organised race or test course

 

[Triassic]

Either you are bragging big time - or the tracking of police vehicles is insufficient. I will refer

Feel free to refer. Pretty much all police cars these days are fitted with the equivalent of a black box so numerous parameters, including speed, are recorded. An FOI question to pretty much any force you like ought to bring you the information you seek. Just ask for the data from their driving school cars, at least that way you can be assured it was properly sanctioned and not some officer out on a jolly..... because I'm sure you think that goes on all the time to.

 

[Seven Spades]

The only exemption to the speed limit on UK roads is for vehicles being used for emergency service purposes, so given I have indicated I wasn't driving illegally I think even you can probably work that one out.

If you are a "petrol head fast car enthusiast" then I suggest you take the time to research some of the principals behind advanced driving techniques and when you do you may begin to understand that speed is entirely subjective to the prevailing circumstance and the information available at that time. I'm afraid you're not going to get that lesson condensed into a few lines by me on here.

Quite right many cars are built and designed to be perfectly safe at 140mph or more; people get very funny about speed limits but do not understand how safe some cars are. Many cars can be driven around a track for hours and hours at huge speeds quite safely and watching Top Gear or Fifth Gear is good evidence that this is so. It's the circumstances that dictate the safe speed to travel.


It was Jack Sears testing an AC at 185mph on the M1 that caused a political storm and the introduction of the 70MPH national speed limit three years later.

 

[Triassic]

I don't think Dunedin is challenging the ability of a vehicle to travel at these speeds, it is the choice of location he is disputing hence it's relevance to this thread. I used the car analogy because there were those that seemed to stipulate that under no circumstance would it be safe to use those speeds on Southampton water, regardless of the circumstances prevailing at the time or the experience and skill of the driver, and the dynamic risks involved for both activities are remarkably similar.

It would for example be a bit daft to prohibit police cars from exceeding 100mph on a motorway because shortly after doing so one of them skidded on diesel whilst taking an exit ramp at 70mph.....?

 

[titian]

It would for example be a bit daft to prohibit police cars from exceeding 100mph on a motorway because shortly after doing so one of them skidded on diesel whilst taking an exit ramp at 70mph.....?

As analogys go, the above is excellent.

As I understand it, the crash was not on the speed test route but was whilst returning, post speed test, to the Hamble River at a somewhat lower speed.