Motorboat accident

Snooks - these powerboats are dangerous things ... I'd stick to photographing the ones with pointy sticky bits in future!! ;)
 
Oh Graham

I'll write more tomorrow, a bit tired now.

A few points, the photoboat was stationary, Monte Carlo 42 was flat out. Top speed is 35 knots.

I wasn't running the shoot, someone on the flybridge was, I just went out to get some shots of a different boat.

Damage on MC42 runs about 35 feet along the port side. The only place this damage could have come from is the flybridge of the photo boat.

There are marks on the transom that would seem to tie up with a stern drive.

I won't comment on the driver of the powerboat. But the quick thinking of the photoboat driver got the boat into a marina within 5 mins. Probably saving the boat which was sinking at the time.

After seeing the damage of the MC42, it would appear the MC42 went over the top of me!

I, and everyone else on board was very lucky. I could easily be a red mess on two boats, and when the everything went black I thought I was

You have spoiled it now...

Just because you were the one there, on the boat, doing the test, knowing what speed each vessel was doing, seeing the crash, being in the crash, nearly dying and have the pix to prove it.....Does not mean you know all the facts...

Leave that to the good folk of the forum....

Glad you are ok, I am assuming you have your little blue card with you now... ;)
 
Having blown up the photo, I would describe the damage as 'serious' both the side moulding off the hull have been ripped away from the deck moulding and the transom has been ripped off, that's pretty bad!!
 
When I used to do MBM cruises, I was often the 'photo' boat. For this, I found the best way was for my boat to be at displacement speed on a constant heading whilst the boat to be photographed did it's thing accross the transom. Although well briefed for the event, I, too, on more than one occasion, had concerns as to how close some boats would try to pass. Was this adrenolin fired daring, driving into the sun and being somewhat blinded, or what? Whatever it was made me stop taking pics of boats....

I'm not putting forward a reason why the accident reported above was caused. Just making my own comment on being a photo boat.
 
I'll write more tomorrow, a bit tired now.

A few points, the photoboat was stationary, Monte Carlo 42 was flat out. Top speed is 35 knots.

I wasn't running the shoot, someone on the flybridge was, I just went out to get some shots of a different boat.

Damage on MC42 runs about 35 feet along the port side. The only place this damage could have come from is the flybridge of the photo boat.

There are marks on the transom that would seem to tie up with a stern drive.

I won't comment on the driver of the powerboat. But the quick thinking of the photoboat driver got the boat into a marina within 5 mins. Probably saving the boat which was sinking at the time.

After seeing the damage of the MC42, it would appear the MC42 went over the top of me!

I, and everyone else on board was very lucky. I could easily be a red mess on two boats, and when the everything went black I thought I was

Good report thanks for taking the time to post it :)
Really scary :eek:
I wish you a full and speedy recovery :)
 
You have spoiled it now...

Just because you were the one there, on the boat, doing the test, knowing what speed each vessel was doing, seeing the crash, being in the crash, nearly dying and have the pix to prove it.....Does not mean you know all the facts...

Leave that to the good folk of the forum....

Glad you are ok, I am assuming you have your little blue card with you now...

When I read Graham's account, my blood ran cold. Neale had rather downplayed the incident which, rightly or wrongly, most of us perhaps do not expect journalists to do. Anyway, I'm glad Graham is on the mend. Hope no after effects.
 
Thanks everyone, I'm safe and well and off work.

Here is a bigger version of the images from the back of the boat.
_GS_8463.jpg


I was standing on the starboard side of the cockpit at the time of impact

If you look at the aft end of the flybridge you can see damage from where the 36 odd feet of the Monte Carlo 42's pulpit and guard rail scraped by.

How did I survive? I really don't know.

At the time I thought I was dead, until I everything started to get lighter. When I realised I was alive I felt such euphoria...Now I'm just sore and emotional
 
You lucky boy, hope you've done the lottery this week! Are those 2 dents on the bathing platform a result of the props? If so then do the euro millions too!:)
 
Blimey, that is really chilling, seeing the bigger photo. Looks like the 42 went down the stbd side of the photoboat, and that's the side you were on. Sheesh. The two dings in the bathing platform look like outdrives of the 42 made them? I think you should buy your guardian angel some flowers Graham. Glad you're ok (if a little shaken)
 
Whilst

Blimey, that is really chilling, seeing the bigger photo. Looks like the 42 went down the stbd side of the photoboat, and that's the side you were on. Sheesh. The two dings in the bathing platform look like outdrives of the 42 made them? I think you should buy your guardian angel some flowers Graham. Glad you're ok (if a little shaken)

I am gutted that Graham now has a somewhat better work related ambulance story than my own, I think this picture illustrates just how lucky he was.

I think the only way to understand it would be to take your own tender to the bow of your boat stand up and imagine it thundering down at a rate of knots....and then imagine the drives giving you a haircut.

Very lucky boy, I shall buy you a pint once you are off the pills.

Did the new camera get wet?
 
From how it looks and discussing the incident with other journalists the impact to starboard looks as if is the V from the hull, the gouge on the left it is thought came from the port stern drive.

The hull of the MC42 was punctured on the starboard side, which caused a bit of confusion, when all of its damaged was on the port side.

This is purely speculation by a group of journos, but it's thought the course of the MC 42 was around 30º off to starboard than that of the photo boat and that the hole in the MC42's hull came from the starboard bulwark on the Antares. The transom of the 9.8 slides back and forward (well it used to anyway) to make the cockpit bigger or the bathing platform bigger. That was taken out by the bow of the MC 42 with ease. The MC42 then appears to have continued going forward hitting the bulwark on the way, passing over the cockpit on the bulwarks or what was left of them, passing the flybridge which left the damage down the MC42s port side, the port stern drives could have caused the damage to port on it's way past as the wood on the deck looks torn.

Whatever happened it wasn't pretty
 
From how it looks and discussing the incident with other journalists the impact to starboard looks as if is the V from the hull, the gouge on the left it is thought came from the port stern drive.

The hull of the MC42 was punctured on the starboard side, which caused a bit of confusion, when all of its damaged was on the port side.

This is purely speculation by a group of journos, but it's thought the course of the MC 42 was around 30º off to starboard than that of the photo boat and that the hole in the MC42's hull came from the starboard bulwark on the Antares. The transom of the 9.8 slides back and forward (well it used to anyway) to make the cockpit bigger or the bathing platform bigger. That was taken out by the bow of the MC 42 with ease. The MC42 then appears to have continued going forward hitting the bulwark on the way, passing over the cockpit on the bulwarks or what was left of them, passing the flybridge which left the damage down the MC42s port side, the port stern drives could have caused the damage to port on it's way past as the wood on the deck looks torn.

Whatever happened it wasn't pretty

That looks truly horrible. :eek: I am delighted you seem to be ok. I think you are a very lucky man! Hope the sprains/bruises/aches heal soon.
 
Top