Atalanta of Chester/Hanne Knutsen trial

[l'escargot]

I am not a RYA member, having decided many years ago that on almost all issues which mattered to me it was taking a line with which I disagreed, and concentrating most of its effort on issues which did not matter to me. My opinion has changed slightly since then, but not enough to impel me to rejoin. As a corollary, I refrain from criticism of the RYA.

My point was and is to do with public perception: the trial is primarily to show that the incident is being taken seriously, precisely by making a lot of noise. An MAIB report would not address this specific issue, although I am happy to wait and see if a report is published either by them or by the port authority which might contain lessons for water users. In any case, I doubt any such report would be put in the public domain while legal proceedings continue.

In July last year Yachting Monthly reported that a 20000 word report had been passed to MAIB by ABP.

 

[bedouin]

If you look at post #237 you will see a picture I took a couple of days ago standing at the point from which I am reasonably confident the video was taken from on the Parade, the transit line would be the same whatever the height of the camera. The difficulty is getting the range information to place it on that transit line.

There is no way of knowing the time that had elapsed between the collision and the shot with the gurnard cardinal in it

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

authorityies to investigate rather than prosecute

I'd cheerfully settle for a magazine article or blog post from someone who was on Atlanta on the day explaining events from their POV.

 

[A1Sailor]

The crime scene was quiet this afternoon...

That's a lovely picture. You didn't by any chance happen to see a puff of smoke then a man running away from behind a picket fence did you?

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

There is no way of knowing the time that had elapsed between the collision and the shot with the gurnard cardinal in it

Yeah, all we can be sure is that that the Gurnard shot was taken after the crunch because of the shreds of kite hanging from the anchor. I can't see any boats in the back ground that are in both shots. I'm not even sure the two sequences are from the same camera/location.

 

[l'escargot]

There is no way of knowing the time that had elapsed between the collision and the shot with the gurnard cardinal in it

I think the video is continuous, there is also another buoy in the early part.

 

[l'escargot]

Yeah, all we can be sure is that that the Gurnard shot was taken after the crunch because of the shreds of kite hanging from the anchor. I can't see any boats in the back ground that are in both shots. I'm not even sure the two sequences are from the same camera/location.

I reckon they are. It has the appearance of a camera on a fixed tripod that is moved left in one movement rather than panning.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I think the video is continuous, there is also another buoy in the early part.

The video I posted isn't continuous - it fades in and out. Maybe there's another video.

I reckon they are. It has the appearance of a camera on a fixed tripod that is moved left in one movement rather than panning.

Certainly nothing I can see to rule out it being all taken on one Camera.

 

[l'escargot]

The video I posted isn't continuous - it fades in and out. Maybe there's another video...

I am referring to the infamous one in the link back in post #1

 

[Alan ashore]

If you look at post #237 you will see a picture I took a couple of days ago standing at the point from which I am reasonably confident the video was taken from on the Parade, the transit line would be the same whatever the height of the camera. The difficulty is getting the range information to place it on that transit line.

What I meant was that if the camera was further south up the hill on that transit, then the collision would be slightly further east and the heading of the tanker at the time very slightly further to the left than otherwise.

 

[l'escargot]

What I meant was that if the camera was further south up the hill on that transit, then the collision would be slightly further east and the heading of the tanker at the time very slightly further to the left than otherwise.

I'm with you now.

 

[A1Sailor]

I'm not sure what, if anything, this adds - probably not a lot!

The detail isn't great and the turn, from which the data in the yellow box is generated, seems awfully sharp!
Copied from http://www.shipais.com/shiptrail.php?map=solent&mmsi=235598000&date=20110806

 

[A1Sailor]

I think the video is continuous, there is also another buoy in the early part.

I think the video is indeed continuous. I think Atalanta is just visible at ~1:30 as the camera pans from left to right between 1:10 and 1:35

 

[Alan ashore]

I'm with you now.

Actually I'd missed it before, but just before the crash you can see W Bramble just open to the right of the big shed; that pins the camera to the sea front, as expected.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I think the video is indeed continuous. I think Atalanta is just visible at ~1:30 as the camera pans from left to right between 1:10 and 1:35

Thanks for that, I foolishly didn't watch to the end.

There is certainly a single continuous pan from Gurnard to the Atlanta following the F40s.

So, ignoring the tide, the crunch took place about the distance an F40 can sail in 30 seconds East of a point on a line between Gurnard and Fawley tower.

I hope we hear the Atlanta's version of events today.

 

[bedouin]

I think the video is indeed continuous. I think Atalanta is just visible at ~1:30 as the camera pans from left to right between 1:10 and 1:35

It can't be quite continuous - but I agree the gap is probably only a matter of seconds.

What you notice is the change in aspect of the ship over the comparatively short period of time, we start off being able to see the front of her superstructure and we end up being able to read the name on her stern!

 

[l'escargot]

It can't be quite continuous - but I agree the gap is probably only a matter of seconds.

What you notice is the change in aspect of the ship over the comparatively short period of time, we start off being able to see the front of her superstructure and we end up being able to read the name on her stern!

The camera is initially pointing north east with the boat heading west, the boat is slowly turning north west and as it comes in line with the camera, the camera is moved to point north. The change in aspect is accentuated by the boat moving forward whilst turning and the camera then moved as well. There is also a small sailing boat with an outboard on the back that is to the left of the frame before the camera moves and is on the right of the frame after the camera moves - it's position in relation to the tanker remains the same. The soundtrack is also unbroken, I can't see any reason for someone to go to the lengths of cutting the film but then overlaying a continuous soundtrack. I think it is certainly continuous

 

[bedouin]

I think it is certainly continuous

Since there is evidently a "cut" between when we see Atlanta alongside and the shot of the bows, there would have to be 2 cameras for it to be continuous.

 

[A1Sailor]

So, ignoring the tide, the crunch took place about the distance an F40 can sail in 30 seconds East of a point on a line between Gurnard and Fawley tower.

"A-tanker-and-a-bit" eastish of that line!

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

"A-tanker-and-a-bit" eastish of that line!

In the UK the collision distance unit is the distance an F40 sail over time.

Using Tankers as a unit is the American system.