Another OOPS with ferry

burgundyben said:
If as it says on the report that it happened near Calshot then likely the ferry would have been in the area marked on the chart where a bylaw gives commercial vessels right of way.
Click to expand...

There’s a moving prohibited zone that applies around a vessel > 150m long.
Red Funnel is about 90m?
But the VTS notes do say that the small stuff should give all large vessels there “a wide berth”.
 
Last edited:
I suppose there will be an MAIB report on this, eventually. In the mean time, and at the time of the accident, common sense and a basic knowledge of the IRPCS should prevail now and should have prevailed then.

No matter how many vessels might have been in close proximity, ALL vessels have an absolute obligation to avoid a collision. This applies even if you are the stand on vessel. You MUST avoid a collision even if the other vessel is not giving way. (From my ancient daykipper notes).
 
Looking at the damage to the Doral in that pic in the link it's hard to understand how it could sustain so much damage and yet so little, if you see what I mean.

It looks like it got hit by something fairly pointed (bow?) smack in the port side. If the ferry had hit it at ninety degrees, surely it would have rolled the smaller boat straight under? If the ferry had hit the Doral a glancing blow, I would have thought there would be less damage to the smaller boat? I think they possibly had a very lucky escape or the ferry was moving very slowly at the time of impact.

Looking forward to reading the MAIB report! :)
 
colhel said:
I'm surprised (and amused) some on here are referring to the Doral as the Stand On vessel
Click to expand...

Why? I get that people see a problem with standing on to large vessels, and to a large extent I agree that not being in that situation in the first place is the best course of action, but unless there is a specific rule to the contrary, a small leisure boat approaching on the starboard side of a commercial boat is the stand on vessel. The rules do not give commercial vessels any special privileges outside of a few specific circumstances and nothing I have seen so far in this incident would apply. If this turns out to be nothing more than two pig headed skippers refusing to give way, with no other circumstances to take into account, the red funnel skipper will surely have to take the larger part of the blame.
 
If you're faced with getting hit by something big on the port side, no matter who is right or wrong, this is what I do: throttle back and let them go first. No big deal.


Trying to upload a pic but as always this site doesn't ack very well and seems to have got worse recently so it may not appear.
 

Attachments

  • avoidance.jpg
    avoidance.jpg
    172.3 KB · Views: 0
Most people on here will have a passing knowledge of who is and isn't the stand on vessel. There will always be situations with complications and uncertainty but for my half a Euros worth I would advocate making your descision early and making it clear.

Don't keep heading straight for the other vessel thinking you will pass close astern, give them a clear sign with the boat's body language. Make a definite move to say don't worry, I've seen you and intend to pass on this side. Particularly if the other vessel is a commercial one they will react correctly, they won't be weaving around unsure of what they plan to do.

If you are in any doubt possibly because the other vessel is sailing and might tack then be prepared, you might have to slow or take avoiding action.

There are also times when speeding up is the solution to make absolutely sure you don't arrive in the same bit of water at the same time. This is especially the case when the other vessel is large and heading on a definite course.

We don't know what's happened here so possibly best not to speculate at this stage. It will all come out in the wash and we can learn from the accident then.

Henry :)

Oh, and I'm with you Andy. "Have you seen the......" is a familiar call here as well :)
 
I'm beginning to have a tin foil hat suspicion the ferry captain just doesn't like leisure craft in his waters.
 
Just to labour a point, stand on does not give you right of way, it's what the other vessel should expect you to do, there is no right of way
 
According to the rags the Doral skipper is in disagreement with you. He's livid and threatening legal action :D
 
Surely if commercial craft are underway it's simply bad manners to hinder them whilst undertaking a leisure activity.

ATB,
John G
 
Jegs said:
Surely if commercial craft are underway it's simply bad manners to hinder them whilst undertaking a leisure activity.
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable view and if you can always position yourself so that a potential collision-avoidance situation doesn't arise, then it's a helpful courtesy to the commercial OOW.

However, once a situation does arise, if you are the stand-on vessel then the law says you have to stand on, so that he can plan his avoidance manoeuvre with confidence. Doing anything else at this point is neither courteous or helpful. You are only released from the obligation to stand on once it becomes clear that the other vessel is not taking action.

(Note that none of this applies to the Red Funnel / Doral incident since neither skipper was aware of the other at all.)

Pete
 
I was surprised that the report did not apportion blame in some way. I know they says that is not what they are there for but it seems strange when you read it and there is no real conclusion. The fiery is implicitly blamed as they say following a review etc the matter is closed. But ...

1. yes the ferry was stand on
2. the Doral clearly did not look about at all - so much so as to run into the part of a ferry. A lookout is required. Not noticing a ferry from some distance is going some.
3. The Doral had no VHF. This is astounding. I won't take the rib or inflatable sail boat out within one in a waterproof cover.
 
jrudge said:
I was surprised that the report did not apportion blame in some way. I know they says that is not what they are there for but it seems strange when you read it and there is no real conclusion. The fiery is implicitly blamed as they say following a review etc the matter is closed. But ...

1. yes the ferry was stand on
2. the Doral clearly did not look about at all - so much so as to run into the part of a ferry. A lookout is required. Not noticing a ferry from some distance is going some.
3. The Doral had no VHF. This is astounding. I won't take the rib or inflatable sail boat out within one in a waterproof cover.
Click to expand...
I don’t get that J. Ferry was give way and ran into that path of the doral, not other way around.
Ferry was mostly to blame and its seamanship was far worse than doral‘s.
I suspect that’s why the report avoids a conclusion.
Must say I couldn’t help but find the report lacking objectivity, and it seemed to me to want to increase degree of blame on that doral guy because that was a more convenent conclusion. But seems clear the ferry was mostly to blame. That would be true even if the ferry had turned back to help, but astonishingly it didn’t.
 
Sorry I meant the Doral was stand on.

I agree the ferry would have got a “d” in his school report but I also feel the Doral would have got a” must try harder”. For once actually “ he spends his day looking out of the window” might have been a good thing in this case!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Barton Seagoon
Containers fallen into the Solent
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
wonkywinch
wonkywinch
M
Galeon in the 50ft Class – Hoping to Borrow a Bit of Owner Wisdom
Replies
4
Views
381
Elessar
Elessar

Share this page

Top