Atalanta of Chester/Hanne Knutsen trial

[rotrax]

Yeah, he should've just pressed Ctrl-Alt-Del when he saw the tanker like any decent armchair sailor.

I'm interested in what he did and why so I can learn from it in case I ever get in a similar situation in the future through whatever actions I or someone else has taken. One thing that is pretty clear is that he was trying to keep clear however ill-judged his means of attempting it turned out to be. If anything his fixation with what "...anyone who is remotely familiar with that area of the Solent will be aware of what large vessels do when turning into Southampton Water" seems to have been a big part of his problem.

When anyone who comes along with the attitude that they just keep out of the way and they're too good to make a mistake then I think "Bullsh!t".

Think what you like-I am out on my boat in and around the Solent most weekends unless I have gone further afield.

One very dark rainy early morning three years ago in a similar place to where the Atalanta incident occurred the Harbourmasters launch hailed me to let me know that one of the big cruise liners was half a mile behind and coming fast. I was heading west at 6 knts under sail.I put the Genoa away, centred the main, started the donk and turned to port and headed outside the deep channel.

I've been there.

 

[lpdsn]

Think what you like-I am out on my boat in and around the Solent most weekends unless I have gone further afield.

One very dark rainy early morning three years ago in a similar place to where the Atalanta incident occurred the Harbourmasters launch hailed me to let me know that one of the big cruise liners was half a mile behind and coming fast. I was heading west at 6 knts under sail.I put the Genoa away, centred the main, started the donk and turned to port and headed outside the deep channel.

I've been there.

No doubt many thousands have been there over the years too. I've crossed that area numerous times and not hit anything. There's only one other incident I can remember where a yacht & a ship collided in that general area, so not many get it wrong.

However, just because you got avoided trouble one time doesn't mean that you might not make a mistake in the future in different circumstances. We're all human.

It does seem to me that the skipper of Atalanta made serious errors and wrong assumptions, based on the facts I'm aware of so far, but he also appears to have been genuinely trying to avoid the collision and there isn't anything that really points at him taking risks to avoid losing ground in his race. It seems his big mistake was continuing with a plan to avoid the collision well after it should've been obvious that it wasn't the best course of action. But that is just my tentative position based on the information that has been published so far.

It certainly wouldn't have been anywhere near as easy for him to turn the donk on and clear the area as it was for you in your incident. The earlier advice from the pilot boat to turn the engine on seems to have been poor advice too, so he wasn't the only one to have made a mistake. Gybe and head for your mark as fast as you can may well have been better advice.

 

[BelleSerene]

When do we get a court judgment on this case?!

 

[Plomong]

It does seem to me that the skipper of Atalanta made serious errors and wrong assumptions, based on the facts I'm aware of so far, but he also appears to have been genuinely trying to avoid the collision . . . .

Before getting to the point where it became necessary to avoid a collision, he should have been attempting to avoid a whopping-big exclusion area around the tanker, which apparently he wasn't, being content to "pass down the port side".

A much earlier turn to starboard would probably have avoided the whole mess in the first place. Many posters seem to forget that our first task as skippers should be to avoid getting into a situation where a risk of collision exists, since the latter implies one could actually occur.

Plomong

 

[l'escargot]

When do we get a court judgment on this case?!

The papers are saying Friday is the last day.

 

[l'escargot]

Before getting to the point where it became necessary to avoid a collision, he should have been attempting to avoid a whopping-big exclusion area around the tanker, which apparently he wasn't, being content to "pass down the port side"...

The exclusion zone to the side is only 100 metres.

 

[flaming]

Before getting to the point where it became necessary to avoid a collision, he should have been attempting to avoid a whopping-big exclusion area around the tanker, which apparently he wasn't, being content to "pass down the port side".

A much earlier turn to starboard would probably have avoided the whole mess in the first place. Many posters seem to forget that our first task as skippers should be to avoid getting into a situation where a risk of collision exists, since the latter implies one could actually occur.

Plomong

I don't think anyone disagrees with this. I don't think anyone thinks the collision is anything other than the fault of the yacht.

Where I think the slight difference in attitudes comes in is that I can see how the situation could evolve to continue to look like it was safe to those on board the yacht, long after it wasn't. And that the safe course may well not have been obvious once the full gravity of the situation was realised. Especially if the people on board were seeing what they wanted to see, rather than what was actually happening. A good example of this is the testimony from the nav, and the person who jumped, in this report that states that after the patrol boat spoke to them it went North, and they assumed the ship was going to follow. http://www.pbo.co.uk/news/535484/yacht-v-ship-crash-trial-continues

If you've done a lot of sailing in that area you'll know that is the normal way of things, the patrol boat does precede the ship on pretty much the course it will take. Advice stated on these boards in the past has been to never ever go between the patrol launch and the ship, and in general that's good advice, but on this occasion it appeared to be exactly the wrong thing to do.

Clearly the situational awareness was all sorts of wrong on board, and I would certainly hope to never make such a horrific mistake, but I'm not arrogant enough to assume that it couldn't happen to me.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

Judge Calloway, a keen sailor and yacht owner, asked why he had not gybed back on to port and headed North East. Mike Shrives admitted that in hindsight it would have been better but thought that by doing so he would have contravened the MPZ and passed between the escort boat and the ship.

http://www.pbo.co.uk/news/535484/yacht-v-ship-crash-trial-continues#2wZvtUAdQpvomHoQ.99

So that answers a question many of us have posed many times on this thread.

 

[Uricanejack]

Despite the entire proccess. I really have no idea what he was trying to do or not do. Im sure he made several errors of judgement but what they were is a mystery.
Why he chose to do as he did after the boat spoke to him is a mystery.
There really is no way to tell from what has been reported to determin if he was activly trying to keep out of the way until it was far to late or not.
His statement there was no danger of collision until he lost the wind. Is just the attemted excuse made by the acused. He is hardly likly to say anything which may incriminate himself.
Is he guilty of an offence. I don't know. My opinion doesn't matter just the judges.

 

[rotrax]

The exclusion zone to the side is only 100 metres.

100 Metres is far too close for me and my boat.

But what do know-I'm just an armchair sailor........................................

 

[l'escargot]

100 Metres is far too close for me and my boat.

But what do know-I'm just an armchair sailor........................................

ABP think it's enough. In that part of the Solent you sometimes have to work to get 100 metres clear of other boats, if you wanted to be sure of more you would have to avoid it altogether...

 

[DJE]

All this talk of the MPZ ignores the much wider obligation to give a clear channel to a large vessel in the precautionary area. See here:-

http://www.southamptonvts.co.uk/admin/content/files/NTMs/2012%20No%2023.pdf

Quote:-
The term ‘clear channel’ vessel is defined as: ‘a vessel greater than 220 metres in length overall which requires a clear and unimpeded passage ahead when transiting the Precautionary Area’.
Vessels may enter ‘The Precautionary Area’ maintaining a safe distance astern of a ‘clear channel’ vessel.

Seems to me that a prosecution under that LNTM would have been much simpler.

 

[rotrax]

ABP think it's enough. In that part of the Solent you sometimes have to work to get 100 metres clear of other boats..

Not just another boat though, was it.
It was a sodding great big one.
Which brings me back to my previous point about the advisability of running races in such congested waters.

It is an opinion, and, like *********s, everybody has one.

 

[l'escargot]

Not just another boat though, was it.
It was a sodding great big one.
Which brings me back to my previous point about the advisability of running races in such congested waters.

It is an opinion, and, like *********s, everybody has one.

Hardly congested with sodding great big boats is it, one every couple of hours? And it's not just the big boats you have to avoid, you're not supposed to hit the small ones either. I would question the advisability of taking big boats through an area full of racers, you don't see many artics passing through the London Marathon and the like...

 

[rotrax]

Hardly congested with sodding great big boats is it, one every couple of hours? And it's not just the big boats you have to avoid, you're not supposed to hit the small ones either. I would question the advisability of taking big boats through an area full of racers, you don't see many artics passing through the London Marathon and the like...

Are you a cyclist by any chance?

 

[l'escargot]

Are you a cyclist by any chance?

Haven't owned a bike for years, hate the things and I don't run marathons either, but I do spend a lot of time in boats in the Central Solent - you're not an ABP pilot by any chance?

 

[woodstock]

Guilty of all three charges:
http://www.pbo.co.uk/news/535496/breaking-news-roland-wilson-found-guilty

 

[Ehecatl]

+1

+1

All this talk of the MPZ ignores the much wider obligation to give a clear channel to a large vessel in the precautionary area. See here:-

http://www.southamptonvts.co.uk/admin/content/files/NTMs/2012%20No%2023.pdf

Quote:-
The term ‘clear channel’ vessel is defined as: ‘a vessel greater than 220 metres in length overall which requires a clear and unimpeded passage ahead when transiting the Precautionary Area’.
Vessels may enter ‘The Precautionary Area’ maintaining a safe distance astern of a ‘clear channel’ vessel.

Seems to me that a prosecution under that LNTM would have been much simpler.

 

[rotrax]

Found Guilty-what a surprise.................................

 

[A1Sailor]

Guilty of all three charges:
http://www.pbo.co.uk/news/535496/breaking-news-roland-wilson-found-guilty

Can he appeal? I'm not sure how they can prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that he didn't see the tanker.
Rule 5; He did not keep an adequate lookout.