Boat sinks in Jersey
- Thread starter rich
- Start date
jfm
Well-Known Member
Insurance does cover this as said above, if it's a normal policy. So owner is ok. However insurance co then owns by subrogation the owner's rights against skipper, such as they are. So the question is whether owner could in theory sue skipper. Ordinarily no, but if skipper reckless then yes possibly (and also could depend on employment contract wording). Report didn't say he was reckless, which helps. But this is not a total fantasy theory I'm afraid.Hmm... And why, exactly? It would be worrying if insurances shouldn't cover mistakes - no matter how big.
Can you imagine insurance companies pretending that Schettino refunds from his own pockets the costs of what followed his mistake!
Regardless, I can't get my head round the reason why one should HOPE for that outcome...
Portofino
Well-Known Member
Re: Pershing 62 sinks
Ok skip the “ first time “ bit - how’s it look now ?
Even more damming .
There’s no mention of his previous experience with that boat , one way or the the other ,if anything the report ( agree could be better written ) leads a reader from outside to think he did not know even how to switch the nav lights on.
Indeed there’s a section about having to go outside Fwds to visually check .As if there no leds etc inside signalling they are on .If so he did not know it seems to me he knew that .
Anyhow take out the 1st time it’s still the rate of meters covered in the time ( see the report position s and clock ) .
Just seems odd most locals ( execept drunks + drugs ) in there familiar boats to them don,t hit static objects .
Agree with your x check method for in darkness etc ,but he fact he was local makes it worse for him so I was offering an olive branch for the bow high and disorientation .
In my previous boats life with rag n stick plodding about at less than 5 knots mean,t night passages were essential to get anywhere far ,with obviously loads of x ck time .
Ok skip the “ first time “ bit - how’s it look now ?
Even more damming .
There’s no mention of his previous experience with that boat , one way or the the other ,if anything the report ( agree could be better written ) leads a reader from outside to think he did not know even how to switch the nav lights on.
Indeed there’s a section about having to go outside Fwds to visually check .As if there no leds etc inside signalling they are on .If so he did not know it seems to me he knew that .
Anyhow take out the 1st time it’s still the rate of meters covered in the time ( see the report position s and clock ) .
Just seems odd most locals ( execept drunks + drugs ) in there familiar boats to them don,t hit static objects .
Agree with your x check method for in darkness etc ,but he fact he was local makes it worse for him so I was offering an olive branch for the bow high and disorientation .
In my previous boats life with rag n stick plodding about at less than 5 knots mean,t night passages were essential to get anywhere far ,with obviously loads of x ck time .
jfm
Well-Known Member
Re: Pershing 62 sinks
Only that he hit the buoy and he surely wouldn't set an A/P on a course for the buoy. But I see your point: I should have concluded that he wasn't using ap in track mode, but he might have been using it in auto mode, and either not have looked at plotter or not had the 'CoG for next 10 minutes" line activated on the plotter ( in either case, very bad practice at night imho).
Portofino
Well-Known Member
Look @ the pic in the report .
There’s only 6 mins from the 1st leaving without nav lights to the last “ within 1sec of the buoy “
And 1min from “ turning past “ the incoming- to the “ within 1sec of the buoy “ - the last pic .
Remember turning to port to avoid the incoming vessel actually increased his distance and thinking time from the buoy
So why If are so familiar with the boat did he let rip and attempt to get it up to cruise so close in if you knew they can be tricky going through 18-28 knot phase from a bow high POV ?
Does not smack of person who knows the boat or if incompetence is measured on a notional scale assuming he’s was experienced with the boat then the pointer has just moved a few places to the R .
I would have thought in 2.2 ( his experience level ) there would have been a mention like
“ the skipper has known the boat for [ inset your time ] and done [ insert your number ] trips on her ?
That’s not there - why ?
There’s only 6 mins from the 1st leaving without nav lights to the last “ within 1sec of the buoy “
And 1min from “ turning past “ the incoming- to the “ within 1sec of the buoy “ - the last pic .
Remember turning to port to avoid the incoming vessel actually increased his distance and thinking time from the buoy
So why If are so familiar with the boat did he let rip and attempt to get it up to cruise so close in if you knew they can be tricky going through 18-28 knot phase from a bow high POV ?
Does not smack of person who knows the boat or if incompetence is measured on a notional scale assuming he’s was experienced with the boat then the pointer has just moved a few places to the R .
I would have thought in 2.2 ( his experience level ) there would have been a mention like
“ the skipper has known the boat for [ inset your time ] and done [ insert your number ] trips on her ?
That’s not there - why ?
BelleSerene
Well-Known Member
Because the quality of the report, and by the look of it, the investigation, was low. JFM remarked on it earlier. It’s a poor relation to an MAIB report, for instance.
BlowingOldBoots also observed as you do about the lack of inquiry into relevant areas of experience, in #99.
jfm
Well-Known Member
Exactly- Belle Serene and others above have this exactly right. It's not in the report because the report is self evidently a poor job. The report's author can't even string sentences together correctly. The report omits details of radar and several other things, and it loses sight of cause and effect, eg the off nav lights might indicate a sloppy skipper but beyond that were irrelevant.
Fact is that boat was in regular use every few days all of the summer before the crash, with same skipper, and almost every time it left the marina it did the small roads channel then turned right and passed the very buoy that it hit that night. I know this because its home berth was right in front of my jersey apartment. So, skipper wasn't a newbie with Arnies. No worries.
Actually I miss the view. The new silver Pershing 72 is parked in a different spot. My view is now tetleys' targa 47.
Fact is that boat was in regular use every few days all of the summer before the crash, with same skipper, and almost every time it left the marina it did the small roads channel then turned right and passed the very buoy that it hit that night. I know this because its home berth was right in front of my jersey apartment. So, skipper wasn't a newbie with Arnies. No worries.
Actually I miss the view. The new silver Pershing 72 is parked in a different spot. My view is now tetleys' targa 47.
Last edited:
MrB
Well-Known Member
Sounds to me as distraction-bad luck on the day, who hasn't dinged their car? As said in a previous post about flying, it's easy to get disorientated very quickly! Live and learn. The owner has a new bigger boat so I don't think he is too traumatised! Lot's to learn from this but it all worked out ok with no one hurt.
MapisM
Well-Known Member
Re: Pershing 62 sinks
He might have used auto rather than track for the temporary course alteration (that's what I would have done with a Raymarine a/p, anyway), forgetting to revert to track mode afterwards.
Or maybe, reverting to track mode after resetting the XTE, without realizing that the buoy was now in the way of the next WP.
Which is the danger of resetting XTE after a course alteration, exactly as I tried to explain with the previous map.
Yup, all agreed.
He might have used auto rather than track for the temporary course alteration (that's what I would have done with a Raymarine a/p, anyway), forgetting to revert to track mode afterwards.
Or maybe, reverting to track mode after resetting the XTE, without realizing that the buoy was now in the way of the next WP.
Which is the danger of resetting XTE after a course alteration, exactly as I tried to explain with the previous map.
Bathdave
Well-Known Member
I agree with this and other comments that the quality of the report leaves much to be desired
tetleys
Well-Known Member
i had better make sure i behave myself when onboard if i am being watched by jfm !!
will pm you about that beer
cheers
tetleys
will pm you about that beer
cheers
tetleys
Seastoke
Well-Known Member
why do you think the pershing moved
petem
Well-Known Member
Seastoke
Well-Known Member
In such a hurry too
does he have shore to ship missiles on his balcony
nicho
RIP
Mr Googler
Well-Known Member
benjenbav
Well-Known Member
Don't know the detail; haven't read the report. But I do worry about casual criticism of the skipper. As you say, we all make mistakes and, as something of an enthusiast for Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin books, it seems to me that the world's best sailor put about six ships on the rocks over the course of a career that finished with an Admiral's flag.
MrB
Well-Known Member
As did Alex Thompson in the Route Du Rhum the other day after leading it from day one! We all make mistakes. On the other hand and hasn't been mentioned, insurance job? Doubt it but who knows? I do concur though, don't judge with only half the information.
BelleSerene
Well-Known Member
Which half of the relevant information was missing from the investigative report?
Last edited:
