Atalanta of Chester/Hanne Knutsen trial

[JumbleDuck]

It's impossible to prove they failed to make a full appraisal of the situation. They could easily have done so and simply came to an incorrect conclusion.

Ah, but then you run into Rule 7, with a breach of which you note he is also charged: "If the distance of any vessel is reducing and her compass bearing is not changing much or it is a large vessel or towing vessel at close distance, or if there is any doubt, then a risk of collision shall be deemed to exist". They would therefore need to claim not only that that they made a full appraisal, etc etc etc, but that that full appraisal left them certain that there was no risk of collision. Since a collision did, in fact, occur, that could be a tricky claim to make, particularly if the crew of the Spitfire 1 warned them of a collision risk.

Or, of course, they did everything they could reasonably be expected to do but the ship's manoeuvres frustrated their efforts.

 

[rotrax]

notwithstanding all this, it is possible to get this wrong even when you have passed across this area many times.[though not as spectacularly usually]. The other day with an empty Solent we were tacking up towards the Bramble cardinal from the west. A large ship was approaching in front of Cowes.

I was aware of the 1000 yard zone etc. I decided that as he was going to start swinging to starboard to make his turn I would tack towards the Island shore to keep out of his way. Imagine my horror when instead of starting to make his turn as normal, the ship continued close alomg the island shore for much longer than I would have expectedand at high speed and in fact seemed to be swinging in further that way. I had the speed to make it in front of him [just] but it would have looked to the casual observer is if I was chucking myself under his bows deliberately when in fact I was trying to get out of the way , my ultimate destination being Hamble.

It was all very unpleasant and lots of harsh words exchanged on board our yacht about my error of judgement. Eventually he did turn towards Calshot but he took a huge arc to do so. Oddly the next time I was out, I was coming from Hamble and crossing inside the cardinal on the edge of Bramble Bank. The tanker that came out of Southampton flew down the zone and managed a tight handbrake turn on the cardinal so much so that I had to turn circles to pass by his stern.

Its quite tricky anticipating future plans of shipping in this area, and during the added distraction of racing one can see the possibilities for getting it wrong.

That is possibly why there is an exclusion zone. Perhaps he was constrained by his draught. I seem to recall the QE2 getting stuck by Calshot as she left for Dubai.
If you keep well out of the way of large vessels you will be less likely to suffer as you did.
Frightening when it happens I imagine.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

It's impossible to prove they failed to keep a lookout that wasn't good enough to make a full appraisal of the situation. They could easily have done so and simply came to an incorrect conclusion.

Ah, but then you run into Rule 7

Maybe, but that's not what you've been saying is it? You're saying that if a ship collides by definition it must break rule 5 and you found multiple cases with google where evidence of a collision alone was enough to prove no adequate lookout was kept. You posted the first one google provided. [1] Then last night you admitted you were wrong and you agreed with me and now in post 279 you've gone back to your original position. When I picked you up on that you've moved onto another rule all together. (7)

Reading your posts is a total waste of time, so you can spend some time on my ignore list.

[1] Which said no such thing.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Maybe, but that's not what you've been saying is it? You're saying that if a ship collides by definition it must break rule 5 and you found multiple cases with google where evidence of a collision alone was enough to prove no adequate lookout was kept. You posted the first one google provided. [1] Then last night you admitted you were wrong and you agreed with me and now in post 279 you've gone back to your original position. When I picked you up on that you've moved onto another rule all together. (7)

Good old Toad.

 

[lw395]

Seems to me the yacht made an error in assessing the course of the ship, and an error in reacting correctly to that.
I'm not clear at what point, if any, the yacht's action crossed the line into illegality.

It's easy to say they ***ked up, and easy to make smug comments about staying well out of the way of tankers, less easy to be totally sure that any yachtsman couldn't find himself in a similar position.


There are about 1000 boats in Cowes Week, each of which passes in or out of Cowes Roads a dozen times. Give it a few years and 'one in a million' trains of events become inevitable.


I also wonder if the outcome had been different, perish the thought that the yacht skipper had been killed, the actions of the ship would be under greater scrutiny?

 

[flaming]

It's easy to say they ***ked up, and easy to make smug comments about staying well out of the way of tankers, less easy to be totally sure that any yachtsman couldn't find himself in a similar position.

I said that at the time, and was crucified on here.

 

[l'escargot]

I think a MAIB investigation rather than a prosecution would have been much more appropriate here. I think the actions of the tanker should be subject to much more scrutiny even if only to show they acted faultlessly, which I don't think they did. The fact that their actions aren't subject to such scrutiny could give the impression that it wouldn't be entirely favourable.

 

[fireball]

I said that at the time, and was crucified on here.

How many times have you had to "panic" start the engine? TBH, if I was racing through there with a tanker coming through and I couldn't be 100% sure of keeping out of his way then my engine would be ON but in NEUTRAL. But, perhaps I'm just more cautious.

I can understand being caught out in the MPZ - but with a verbal warning from the HM and I assume a working engine I cannot understand the Atalanta ending up on the bows of the tanker. I know the controls were down below - but there is sufficient crew onboard to detail 1 to operate it.

 

[rotrax]

How many times have you had to "panic" start the engine? TBH, if I was racing through there with a tanker coming through and I couldn't be 100% sure of keeping out of his way then my engine would be ON but in NEUTRAL. But, perhaps I'm just more cautious.

I can understand being caught out in the MPZ - but with a verbal warning from the HM and I assume a working engine I cannot understand the Atalanta ending up on the bows of the tanker. I know the controls were down below - but there is sufficient crew onboard to detail 1 to operate it.

Exactly.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I think a MAIB investigation rather than a prosecution would have been much more appropriate here. I think the actions of the tanker should be subject to much more scrutiny even if only to show they acted faultlessly, which I don't think they did. The fact that their actions aren't subject to such scrutiny could give the impression that it wouldn't be entirely favourable.

I expect we'll see an MAIB report in due course; they seem to hold off publication when a prosecution is mooted. That said, I'm not sure either what purpose this prosecution serves. Are there many yachtsmen around thinking "Coo, I was planning to cut six inches in front of a cargo ship, but I won't now because of what happened to the bloke on the Atalanta"?

I suppose there might be insurance implications. Don't some companies refuse to pay out if there's gross negligence, which a conviction in court might demonstrate?

 

[lw395]

...

I can understand being caught out in the MPZ - but with a verbal warning from the HM ......

Probably at that point they had to pick turning one way or the other, dithered a bit then turned the wrong way?
Did the HM tell them which way to turn?
Or just to get out of the way?
Did the HM actually know himself which was the correct way to turn?
And if so what was that built on or was he just better at coin tossing?

Is it a bit like that bit in Sod's Law of the Sea:
(being directed away from the firing ranges IIRC)
Which way at 4 knots?
'I suggest sinking where you are, Sir'.

 

[flaming]

How many times have you had to "panic" start the engine? TBH, if I was racing through there with a tanker coming through and I couldn't be 100% sure of keeping out of his way then my engine would be ON but in NEUTRAL. But, perhaps I'm just more cautious.

I've turned the engine on once. But that was in drifting conditions, where the whole fleet was becalmed in the channel. However then the ship just gave a single blast and drove round the lot of us.

That day (and I wasn't very far away...) there was plenty of wind to maneuver.

 

[lw395]

How many times have you had to "panic" start the engine? ......

How many times have you?

I've used an engine to avoid an errant yacht in the pre-start of RTIR.

Except in light conditions, I can't see it being terribly relevant when you've got the kite up on a half-decent racing boat.

 

[fireball]

I've turned the engine on once. But that was in drifting conditions, where the whole fleet was becalmed in the channel. However then the ship just gave a single blast and drove round the lot of us.

That day (and I wasn't very far away...) there was plenty of wind to maneuver.

except perhaps to starboard? I race dinghies enough and I know that sometimes it's going to be close and when the kite is up you have to give a bit more room as you're more restricted in your ability to manoeuvre ..

 

[fireball]

How many times have you?

No idea - lost count - I don't race big boats, and usually err on the side of caution when cruising.

One example - sailing over to Cherbourg for the Scuttlebutt rally - exiting Chi Harbour on a NEerly, sails up and drawing - engine is off. Note a ferry coming in by the Nab tower - Crew (very experienced) and I know that the ferry has to come around the corner and there's a strong possibility of us crossing the shipping channel between mainland and the IOW at the same time as this ferry is coming over - solution? Engine on to start with, monitor and then took early decision to motor forward - steaming light on (it was 5am in September - dark!) - and very nicely the ferry seemed to take his time in coming around the corner (he may not have done - but it seemed that way) - Ok, it's not a panic engine on and it's cruising - but there's one example for you. Had we been racing then we would've probably just carried on until we met the shipping channel and decided at that point.

Plenty of times when sailing with the big boat(s) we've taken the decision to start the engine, even if we're not intending on using it.

 

[Resolution]

Seems to me the yacht made an error in assessing the course of the ship, and an error in reacting correctly to that.
I'm not clear at what point, if any, the yacht's action crossed the line into illegality.

It's easy to say they ***ked up, and easy to make smug comments about staying well out of the way of tankers, less easy to be totally sure that any yachtsman couldn't find himself in a similar position.

+1
Summed up in a nutshell.

Probably he should have put the engine on , in neutral, when entering the precautionary area and while doing the assessment of where the tanker would turn.
Then when the little motor boat got in the tanker's way and the tanker pilot "jinked about" he would have been able to make for safety upwind faster.

 

[DAKA]

How many times have you?

When racing in the Humber , I've had the rudder stuck on the anchor chain of a light ship which forced us alongside the lightship in a 4-5 knot tide, (boats have sunk doing that).
The engine was running, it didnt help.

I didnt helm us on to it but I got us off, lesson learnt.......... allow a margin for error !

We did wrong, I accept we did wrong (still won the race for what it is worth as it wasnt the mark).

Why the Atlanta cant just put his hands up amazes me, perhaps he wasnt offered the opportunity to pay a fine and the authorities thought it better to punish him with the court fees on top of the fine so may as well defend ?

 

[lw395]

+1
Summed up in a nutshell.

Probably he should have put the engine on , in neutral, when entering the precautionary area and while doing the assessment of where the tanker would turn.
Then when the little motor boat got in the tanker's way and the tanker pilot "jinked about" he would have been able to make for safety upwind faster.

I don't think safety was to be found up wind, unless he could out run the tanker?
With the benefit of hindsight, he should have gybed, even if he had to let the kite halyard run.

With enough breeze to drive the boat, I would be wanting the crew set to gybe in their normal roles, not thinking which of the sheet or guy hands should be unavailable for that while below starting the engine.

 

[savageseadog]

In gliding competitions all competitors carry loggers which are checked at the end of the day, and any penetration into controlled airspace results in automatic disqualification. Does something like that happen in the sailing world too?

I've taken part in at least three RORC races for which we were issued trackers and on the Fastnet an AIS transponder was mandatory. There were TSS zones in all the races and I assume if tracker or AIS was to show a transgression then disqualification would result. I know that two or three boats were DSQ's on this year's Fastnet but I'm not sure if it was for this reason.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I've taken part in at least three RORC races for which we were issued trackers and on the Fastnet an AIS transponder was mandatory. There were TSS zones in all the races and I assume if tracker or AIS was to show a transgression then disqualification would result. I know that two or three boats were DSQ's on this year's Fastnet but I'm not sure if it was for this reason.

Thank you for that. Now, with a bit of cunning and some AIS information, it should be possible to reconstruct, post facto, any moving prohibited zones which were around during any race and check these too. Do you know if it's done?