Liquid Vortex trial starts

[toad_oftoadhall]

Taking account of the bit about... "a person to which this section applies", it does seem a shame that the solo sailor who also got into trouble and had to be rescued does. ot come under the Act... Or does he?

There's been much debate about that but possibly it doesn't apply:

“Not without hesitation …” Lord Phillips CJ concluded s.58 applies “only to a master employed as such” (para 40). The reasoning was that if that were not so, the owner of a yacht registered in the United Kingdom who damaged it would be guilty of a criminal offence with a maximum punishment of two years imprisonment.

http://webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/2006/issue2/grant2.html

But yes, if S58 applies to Leisure sailors then entering the RTIR could be a criminal offence punishable by 2 years in clink!

 

[Pye_End]

Both the forecast and the actual winds would have allowed them to get to Dover before the storm hit them.

If you look at Jimi's post, they left at 1430 with a F10 forecast for 'later'. Presumably this was issued for the midday shipping forecast, so the F10 was expected in the wee hours of the morning. It then says that the 1930 forecast (issued for 1754?) was the same, but this isn't clear as to whether the F10 was still expected 'later', or within the earlier forecast's timeframe. Either way there was always a good chance that they would not get to Dover before the F10 hit.

I would also wonder how practical Dover would have been to enter in the hours leading up to the full force of the storm.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

If you look at Jimi's post, they left at 1430 with a F10 forecast for 'later'. Presumably this was issued for the midday shipping forecast, so the F10 was expected in the wee hours of the morning. It then says that the 1930 forecast (issued for 1754?) was the same, but this isn't clear as to whether the F10 was still expected 'later', or within the earlier forecast's timeframe.

YBWers have been into the forecast and actual winds in a great deal of detail and Charlie Sturrock's version is spot on. (See the earlier thread, link somewhere above).

I don't see the relevance of the 14:30 forecast. Between that forecast and the rescue there had been two more forecasts and they'd passed: Chichester, Shoreham, Brighton, Newhaven and Eastbourne. They'd heard that forecast, knew some nasty weather was on the way and had made a flexible passage plan to deal with it. You or I might have decided to duck into Newhaven rather than Eastbourne or Dover, but I'm not sure it should be a criminal offence not to.

Either way there was always a good chance that they would not get to Dover before the F10 hit. I would also wonder how practical Dover would have been to enter in the hours leading up to the full force of the storm.

That's why they kept the passage plan flexible they could have gone into: Chichester, Shoreham, Brighton, Newhaven, Eastbourne in plenty of time.

 

[pugwash94]

Further to my earlier post about the MAIB description of the wind speed being designed to sensationalise - it has also dawned on me that the film footage made available show the boat motoring to windward.

I may be mistaken but was the wind not SW and the passage W - E.

If so the footage seems to have been selected to make the conditions appear worse.

It also occurs to me that the object of trial by jury is trial by one's "peers". It seems to me that non-sailors would be hard pushed to decide whether the skipper's decision making was reasonable. In a case like this shouldn't we consider have a jury of sailors?

 

[fireball]

But they didn't - and it was getting so strong that they had to take the foresail down and were going to motor into Dover ? That's when the big wave struck.
With 1/2? The crew sea sick and a storm forecast - was it such a good idea to have carried on as he did?

I have no idea on the wind strength they had when they reduced sail to nothing but I can honestly say I've never put it all away to motor - I've always had a bit of genoa out - and I'm quite cautious when it comes to sail plan.

 

[pugwash94]

But they didn't - and it was getting so strong that they had to take the foresail down and were going to motor into Dover ? That's when the big wave struck.
With 1/2? The crew sea sick and a storm forecast - was it such a good idea to have carried on as he did?

I have no idea on the wind strength they had when they reduced sail to nothing but I can honestly say I've never put it all away to motor - I've always had a bit of genoa out - and I'm quite cautious when it comes to sail plan.

Like you, I am mystified by the idea of taking all sail down and motoring. It is a sailing boat - it does actually work under sail, a little foresail will steady the boat and unlike an engine will rarely let you down at the critical moment!

This is also why I still use a No1, 2, 3, and storm jib. It does mean more effort, changing down earlier and a few interesting moments on the fore deck but I am genuinely relaxed that boat and I can handle almost anything the UK weather can throw at us. The boat is 31 feet and we are both middle-aged.

 

[Searush]

The roller reefing had jammed tho hadn't it? That's how I remember it from the last thread. Unlikely to have had a small jib available?

Funny how the last thread was full of condemnation for the skipper & this one doesn't think he should be in court.

 

[Jean]

A reminder of just what the skipper said in his tweet on Mon 2nd Jan before he set sail (he later clear all tweets but I had already copied them at the time):

"Sailingboy55 Sailing Boy
Great F8/9 maybe even F10 Tue!!! At least it's from west so just run under storm jib!!! May even use Trysail!!!!"

So it seems that he was quite happy to set off with this forecast AND "run under storm jib, and maybe trysail too! Having been caught out in such conditions, rather him than me.

 

[pugwash94]

Curiously I first thought the Skipper was nuts based on the news reports I was hearing - Force 10 forecast and inexperience novice crew.

But then it transpires that his novice crew included another Yachtmaster, and some day skippers. The forecast was for a 10 later. I then noted the way MAIB described the wind and then looked at the film and the fact that it appears to have been selected to make things appear worse than they actually were.

None of the crew were seriously injured - bruised jaw and bruised ribs - and we have all had seasick crew at one time or another.

I am just beginning to wonder whether this is a witch hunt based on the two previous incidents. Each should be judged separately on its merits!

PS - Did not see the post about the Tweet until after I posted this - I am now somewhat less supportive. However it may have been a deliberate attempt to give his less experienced crew some heavy weather experience. To experience your first gale when skippering a boat would not be fun and with the way many skippers seem to fast track it is likely that this is often the case.

 

[Pye_End]

YBWers have been into the forecast and actual winds in a great deal of detail and Charlie Sturrock's version is spot on. (See the earlier thread, link somewhere above).

I don't see the relevance of the 14:30 forecast. Between that forecast and the rescue there had been two more forecasts and they'd passed: Chichester, Shoreham, Brighton, Newhaven and Eastbourne. They'd heard that forecast, knew some nasty weather was on the way and had made a flexible passage plan to deal with it. You or I might have decided to duck into Newhaven rather than Eastbourne or Dover, but I'm not sure it should be a criminal offence not to.



That's why they kept the passage plan flexible they could have gone into: Chichester, Shoreham, Brighton, Newhaven, Eastbourne in plenty of time.

I have been through these two threads:http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303863&page=3 and http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=299316&page=12 and cannot find any information on the forecasts that they would have had underway. There is one quote from Mainsail (I think) to say that the forecasts subsequent to that lunchtime forcast were all consistent, although, too late, at 4am this then worsened.

So I cannot find anything to suggest that once past a safe haven (wherever/whenever that was) that they considered to have a good enough forecast to continue. It appears to me that they were gambling that 'later' was after 17 hours rather than 12.

 

[Pye_End]

The forecast was for a 10 later.

They were at sea when the 'later' occurred.

 

[awol]

Funny how the last thread was full of condemnation for the skipper & this one doesn't think he should be in court.

My memory from the posts of the time is of a gung-ho ****** tweeting proof that he was well aware of the F10 forecast. The trip was time-limited by the LBS entry rules with a crew who had paid >£200 for a mile-building "opportunity". Day Skipper tickets meant that some had spent at least a week on board a boat. Either this or another of the company's trips did not have the requisite qualified crew. Of course my memory could be faulty.

I await the outcome of the case with interest.

 

[A1Sailor]

My memory from the posts of the time is of a gung-ho ****** tweeting proof that he was well aware of the F10 forecast. The trip was time-limited by the LBS entry rules with a crew who had paid >£200 for a mile-building "opportunity". Day Skipper tickets meant that some had spent at least a week on board a boat. Either this or another of the company's trips did not have the requisite qualified crew. Of course my memory could be faulty.

I await the outcome of the case with interest.

+1

 

[LittleSister]

However it may have been a deliberate attempt to give his less experienced crew some heavy weather experience. To experience your first gale when skippering a boat would not be fun and with the way many skippers seem to fast track it is likely that this is often the case.

A Force 10 in confined, busy, waters with significant tidal flow - that would sure as hell be 'some' heavy weather experience, wouldn't it?

Both the RYA and I agree that getting experience beyond fair weather is important, and no, ideally you wouldn't want your first gale as a skipper. However, there is a BIG difference between a gale and a Force 10.

Whether the Force 10 materialised or not, that was on the cards, as he well knew. It doesn't sound from his tweet that he was gambling on missing it. If it was a gamble, it was one he couldn't be sure he could afford to lose, I would have thought.

 

[lw395]

Curiously I first thought the Skipper was nuts based on the news reports I was hearing - Force 10 forecast and inexperience novice crew.

But then it transpires that his novice crew included another Yachtmaster, and some day skippers. The forecast was for a 10 later. I then noted the way MAIB described the wind and then looked at the film and the fact that it appears to have been selected to make things appear worse than they actually were.

None of the crew were seriously injured - bruised jaw and bruised ribs - and we have all had seasick crew at one time or another.

I am just beginning to wonder whether this is a witch hunt based on the two previous incidents. Each should be judged separately on its merits!

PS - Did not see the post about the Tweet until after I posted this - I am now somewhat less supportive. However it may have been a deliberate attempt to give his less experienced crew some heavy weather experience. To experience your first gale when skippering a boat would not be fun and with the way many skippers seem to fast track it is likely that this is often the case.

There are some boats that should cope with F10, and some boats not intended to.
There is also a big difference between going out in strong winds taking a risk with your own life, and doing so as a line of business.
Yachting can be dangerous, people do get hurt. If the paying guests understand that and want to take the risk in order to build their skills, that may be OK, within limits.
I feel I don't know the full facts.
It's sort of a question of intent as much as the actual deeds IMHO.

 

[PeterR]

The roller reefing had jammed tho hadn't it? That's how I remember it from the last thread. Unlikely to have had a small jib available?

Funny how the last thread was full of condemnation for the skipper & this one doesn't think he should be in court.

According to the skipper’s report Liquid Vortex had dropped her mainsail and was sailing under a number 3 jib. There was no roller reefing so if the jib was proving too much sail area the only way of reducing sail was to drop it and raise a storm jib.

As he was only 12 miles from port and with a weak crew it seems reasonable to drop the jib and motor. In any case once the jib jammed in the luff groove and was cut away leaving 3 metres in the track it would have been difficult to hoist the storm jib unless there was a removable forestay or it was the sort that went over the jib.

I don’t think there was anything wrong in taking the weather window to get east from Southampton but passing Eastbourne with the possibility (even likelihood) of meeting a F10 before reaching Ramsgate seems crazy unless a later forecast moved the arrival of the storm back. He should have known that Dover is not safe for a yacht to enter in such conditions. Personally, in such circumstance I would have not gone past Eastbourne without calling the CG to confirm the latest forecast although I find it odd that not doing so has become a potential criminal offence). Perhaps the court hearing will clarify things (although by the tone of present reporting I doubt it).

I agree it sounds odd that they needed to drop the jib if it was only blowing F7 as the skipper claims. They would have been travelling at 8 knots or more plus a knot of tide under them so the wind over the deck would only have been in the low 20 knots. Plus which the crew was injured when the yacht was pooped. You can get thrown into the wheel by any steep sea but you only get pooped with liferafts washed away (as was reported) by big breaking seas which don’t happen with wind over tide in a F7 unless you are in a race.

I suspect that he is down playing the wind speed at that time as I doubt the RNLI would have launched as a precaution if that is all there was.

For those who have not been downwind in a light boat in a gale this video of an X 34 in 42 knots shows that a number 3 is perfectly reasonable in heavy weather.

 

[davidej]

I'm an East Coast man so don't know these Channel ports well.

But isn't Eastbourne pretty difficult in a SW gale, ditto Brighton. I don't know Shoreham or Folkstone.

If I found myself out there - Dover East entrance would seem the best bet.

 

[A1Sailor]

Without wishing to repost everything in the "big" thread, the Skipper was interviewed on BBC News immediately after he came ashore - at the top of the ramp from the pontoons in Ramsgate. I watched it on TV. He stated that the problem was all down to the "freak wave". A crew member was also interviewed, and if I remember correctly said he thought they were going to die.
I would imagine these might be available to the court.

 

[Searush]

Without wishing to repost everything in the "big" thread, the Skipper was interviewed on BBC News immediately after he came ashore - at the top of the ramp from the pontoons in Ramsgate. I watched it on TV. He stated that the problem was all down to the "freak wave". A crew member was also interviewed, and if I remember correctly said he thought they were going to die.

I would imagine these might be available to the court.

Isn't thinking you are going to die, & even wishing you could, a normal symptom of seasickness?

 

[Deleted member 36384]

Isn't thinking you are going to die, & even wishing you could, a normal symptom of seasickness?

Or abject fear caused by the wind, waves, motion and sound, I would opine as well.