Liquid Vortex trial starts

[Searush]

I would imagine RNLI video everything. The bits that end up in the public domain are in newscasts or issued by them.

Yes, I am pretty sure that there are head cams on some helmets, plus fixed cameras around the boat. It would be daft if it wasn't all recorded these days & downloaded for each service. As you say, it provides magnificent publicity material & also excellent training footage.

But the RNLI is not in the dock, is it?

 

[jimi]

I really wonder what strange world we live in when a suggestion that wash from the lifeboat caused this issue is taken seriously. All I can do is shake my head in amazement.

 

[A1Sailor]

But the RNLI is not in the dock, is it?

Nope.
Southampton Crown Court 4: Charles George Frederick Sturrock & Jason Manning...

 

[DAKA]

Where was DAKA that day?

certainly wouldnt have been trying to get round Dover in anything above F8.

Headland amplification from Dover and Cap gri nez
current funnelled through the same gap


Jeeeez, the guy should be prosecuted, charging money proportioning to be a professional , unbelievable who the RYA give a ticket to, you just need to read some of the posts on this forum from some who claim to be instructors to realize the whole system needs complete overall in desperate need of something like this to highlight individual responsibility.

 

[Bav34]

Just found the charges, some surprise me:

Jason Manning, director of owners Hot Liquid sailing Ltd, and Sturrock face a string of charges relating to safety breaches under the Merchant Shipping Act.

Manning, 36, of Pluto Road, Eastleigh, denies three charges relating to checking weather forecasts, standard operating procedures and failing to contact HM Coastguard.

Sturrock, 50, from Much Wenlock, Shropshire, denies four charges relating to planning of the voyage, complying with standard operating procedures, failing to identify and assess risks to the vessel and crew and to sailing at night without proper equipment.

The case has been brought by the Southampton-based Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

 

[Uricanejack]

Simple physics. the interfearance patern When two waves cross they add together. if completely out of sync and the same sise they will cance out. where in sinc they will double in sise
where they are diferent sise effects will be proportional. a 2m high wave crossing a 2m high wave will not mean a 4m high wave thoug. it is the volume of water in the wave which doubles.
The comparative sise of life boat wake to storm force wind wave would be only a ver slight increas in wave hight. the more likly cause of reported "freak" would be other swell's, wind against current, decrease in depht. or just the confused sea state in a storm.

 

[Talulah]

Just found the charges, some surprise me:

Still can't find the charges.
Those are just "relating to" and don't specify the "You are charged with...."

 

[viago]

Does anyone know why the trial seems to have disappeared from the press AND from the Court in Southampton?

something to do with stonehenge and ley lines, often happens around there.

does anyone know what sort of trial doesnt have a charge sheet?

from bav34's post, cant see much of that sticking.

what equipment, other than lights and a hot toddy, is specifically compulsory for night passage?

 

[fireball]

Manning, 36, of Pluto Road, Eastleigh, denies three charges relating to checking weather forecasts, standard operating procedures and failing to contact HM Coastguard.

I guess that means they're not happy with the principle's position on allowing one of his boats to plan a trip that may have included a F10 ... ?
I really hate prescriptions on where/when we're allowed to sail - it should be up to the individual (in this case Mr Manning) on what is considered acceptable. I just hope the outcome of this case doesn't start a process of encroaching on those freedoms.

Sturrock, 50, from Much Wenlock, Shropshire, denies four charges relating to planning of the voyage, complying with standard operating procedures, failing to identify and assess risks to the vessel and crew and to sailing at night without proper equipment.

Planning - dunno - I don't have all the facts - what was his passage plan? Did he really intend to go all the way come what may?

Standard Operating Procedures - what did he forget to do?! Or was this failure to abort the passage when MCGA would've considered it prudent?

Failing to Identify and Assess risks - I think this is fair - whilst others did similar trips, CS is the only skipper we're aware of that continued ... the fact that the boat and crew arrived seems to be more by luck than judgement.

Sailing at Night without Proper Equipment - ??!!?? This is/was a coded boat - what Proper Equipment was missing?! Other than the appropriate lights I'm not aware of any special requirements for night sailing by leisure craft - is it any different for commercial sailing yachts?


Whilst I accept that a charter/school yachting co have a duty of care to their customers, I fear that this incident, together with HL's previous "mishaps" is going to have a negative impact on other schools & charter co's and their skippers.
Even if legislation isn't brought in to force co's to submit passageplans for approval - I would think insurance co's are likely to require restrictions on activities when strong winds are forecast ...

 

[pipemma]

Manning, 36, of Pluto Road, Eastleigh, denies three charges relating to checking weather forecasts, standard operating procedures and failing to contact HM Coastguard.

Sturrock, 50, from Much Wenlock, Shropshire, denies four charges relating to planning of the voyage, complying with standard operating procedures, failing to identify and assess risks to the vessel and crew and to sailing at night without proper equipment.

I dare say it's just more sloppy reporting, but I don't see how my two bolds above can be consistent. If there is a complaint about the SOPs in the first place, how can CS then also be charged with something relating to compliance therewith?

 

[awol]

I believe there was an absence of illuminated compass, according to press reports.

 

[fireball]

I dare say it's just more sloppy reporting, but I don't see how my two bolds above can be consistent. If there is a complaint about the SOPs in the first place, how can CS then also be charged with something relating to compliance therewith?

Possibly ...

But - as with vehicles - the Skipper is in charge - it is up to him to ensure the vessel and crew complies with regulations in place.
Eg - TS's - it's the skippers responsibility to ensure they obey them.
Lights - I would think it's the skippers responsibility to ensure they're working before departure if planning any movement in the dark.
Just like with Cars - it's the DRIVER who is responsible for the vehicle and it's compliance with the law - ie Road tax, insurance, tyre wear ...

 

[mikefleetwood]

I believe there was an absence of illuminated compass, according to press reports.

Can't see that made much difference in this case - he seemed to be heading in the intended direction

 

[fireball]

I believe there was an absence of illuminated compass, according to press reports.

Did they get lost then?! FFS - is that it?

Would they have taken them to court just for an un-illuminated compass? I doubt it ...

 

[rotrax]

It appears from Bav 34's post that a sailing school is expected to operate under the Merchant Shipping Act. If that is the case, and unlike me, who was unaware of that fact, JM & CS were aware it is right and proper that the case is tried. After all, the first time is an accident, the second coincedence but the third time is on purpose. IMO of course.

 

[Bav34]

Just to confuse you if you saw it, I posted, re-read Pipemmas !! observation and can see the discrepancy he pointed out. I still feel its the nearest to the official charges that we have had so far.

 

[alant]

I really wonder what strange world we live in when a suggestion that wash from the lifeboat caused this issue is taken seriously. All I can do is shake my head in amazement.

Ever been near a motorboat (or even a RIB) when it stops dead after a fast run? The wave produced will swamp many boats, including the one stopping.

 

[alant]

Just found the charges, some surprise me:

Jason Manning, director of owners Hot Liquid sailing Ltd, and Sturrock face a string of charges relating to safety breaches under the Merchant Shipping Act.

Manning, 36, of Pluto Road, Eastleigh, denies three charges relating to checking weather forecasts, standard operating procedures and failing to contact HM Coastguard.

Sturrock, 50, from Much Wenlock, Shropshire, denies four charges relating to planning of the voyage, complying with standard operating procedures, failing to identify and assess risks to the vessel and crew and to sailing at night without proper equipment.

The case has been brought by the Southampton-based Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

"of Pluto Road, Eastleigh"

Charges seem a bit mickey mouse IMO!

 

[Blue5]

Ever been near a motorboat (or even a RIB) when it stops dead after a fast run? The wave produced will swamp many boats, including the one stopping.

And you think the RNLI would not be aware of this.................its certainly becoming an amusing thread

 

[jimi]

Ever been near a motorboat (or even a RIB) when it stops dead after a fast run? The wave produced will swamp many boats, including the one stopping.

I have indeed , but however in this case the Lifeboat came out because there was a request for help, not that there was a request for help because a lifeboat came out and swamped them!!!


I'm glad this case was brought because its obvious these cowboys are a danger to their paying customers .. how many other sailing schools have as many incidents in such a short time? If no case had been brought it would be a clear signal that there was no teeth in the regulation and unfortunately iiresponsible idiots spoil it for everyone else. I learned that in my first year at primary school ...