Perthshire Royal Navy officer accused of negligence after Cowes Week yacht crash

[Uricanejack]

Just a few thoughts.

Not all Naval Officers are seamen there are many diferent areas where they may pursue a carear some without ever going to sea.
I think when I watched the film clip he was far from the only boat not to keep a minimumof 1000m.
He may have been the skipper but he was not the only person on the boat. Some one could have said "hey skipper look at the big red boat"
While the Tanker may have been impeeded this does not allow them to just run into impeading Naval Officers in sail boats.
Perhalps the Pilot, OOW and Master of the tanker might not have been as dilligent or cautious as one would normally expect a profesional to be.

A prosecution for negligence will not solve anything. Better if MAIB investigated and made recomendations to help prevent reocurance.

Most ports shedule ship movments and pilot boarding times. perhalps a race committee asking a port about up coming ship movments might have helped.

In any case the best defence for negligence. Is man I'm stupid and I was sailing with stupid we had no idea we were suposed to keep out the way of the tanker. All the navy ships I've been on go round sail boats. I thought tankers would as well. Yes I might have read it some where a long time ago but I forgot. No I missed that part of the briefing. I really really wish I had known.

 

[Woodlouse]

Just a few thoughts.

Not all Naval Officers are seamen there are many diferent areas where they may pursue a carear some without ever going to sea.
I think when I watched the film clip he was far from the only boat not to keep a minimumof 1000m.
He may have been the skipper but he was not the only person on the boat. Some one could have said "hey skipper look at the big red boat"
While the Tanker may have been impeeded this does not allow them to just run into impeading Naval Officers in sail boats.
Perhalps the Pilot, OOW and Master of the tanker might not have been as dilligent or cautious as one would normally expect a profesional to be.

A prosecution for negligence will not solve anything. Better if MAIB investigated and made recomendations to help prevent reocurance.

Most ports shedule ship movments and pilot boarding times. perhalps a race committee asking a port about up coming ship movments might have helped.

In any case the best defence for negligence. Is man I'm stupid and I was sailing with stupid we had no idea we were suposed to keep out the way of the tanker. All the navy ships I've been on go round sail boats. I thought tankers would as well. Yes I might have read it some where a long time ago but I forgot. No I missed that part of the briefing. I really really wish I had known.

The fact is bylaws in the area require you to maintain a certain distance from ships navigating the channel towards Southampton. If you are racing in the solent you should be aware of this. If you aren't, then the race instructions will mention this and so you should be aware of this. The fact that other boats are in breach of the rules does not make it OK. The master and pilot on the tanker can only do so much, they would have abided by the colregs, plus the local bylaws, and could even have been constrained by draught. Whilst it's obviously not permitted for them to willfully stand on into a collision they would have been severely restricted in their ability to avoid it.

Regardless of the naval officers defence, he was in the wrong and he should probably have the book thrown at him in order to discourage any future repeat of the incident.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

Can't wait to hear what his defence case is!

It'd better be a cracker otherwise he'd have surely been better off pleading guilty

Impeding the passage of a 100,000 Ton tanker with a 5 Ton yacht does seem a trifle optimistic to be fair. As for not keeping a lookout, I absolutely refuse to believe he didn't see the 830' long, bright orange tanker. He may well have sailed straight into but I don't believe he didn't see it. The MCO should have charged him with being a total pillock and RN given him a medal for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty (I've got a couple of them).

 

[rgarside]

and could even have been constrained by draught.

Hanne Knudsen [the tanker] would definitely have been constrained by draught - its a narrow winding channel in to Fawley. The moving exclusion zone around such a ship, I think, is 1000m ahead and 200m to the sides and aft.

I'm eagerly awaiting to hear the yacht skipper's defence!

 

[Seajet]

Ships in this area often have a pilot or police boat in front to clear the way, but the moving exclusion zone is very well known.

He was obviously chancing his arm trying to get across in front of the tanker and misjudged it; as the yacht is mentioned as being a Services boat - or even if she isn't - I would think this was the traditional ' career limiting move '...

 

[Deleted member 36384]

I though it was his own boat !

Lt Wilson was the skipper of the Royal Naval Sailing Association's vessel Atalanta of Chester when it allegedly crossed the path of oil tanker Hanne Knutsen on 6 August, 2011.

Thats from the BBC link in the OP. Of course it may be wrong.

Just out of curiosity. A RN Captain is approved to command a ship and does so as part of his service in the RN i.e. not a desk jockey. For whatever reason when he is on leave, he takes command of a commercial vessel that requires a licensed Captain and would be well within his capabilities and experience. He then bends it and it's his fault. Would that transgression in a civilian environment also make him accountable in the RN environment, in an official manner?

 

[prv]

He was obviously chancing his arm trying to get across in front of the tanker and misjudged it

But this is the bit I don't get. According to the local racers who posted here at the time, he'd have been disqualified from the race the moment he went into the Zone. So there's no question of cutting it fine across the tanker's bow for a racing advantage.

Pete

 

[DJE]

Better if MAIB investigated and made recomendations to help prevent reocurance.

Most ports shedule ship movments and pilot boarding times. perhalps a race committee asking a port about up coming ship movments might have helped.

Cowes Week, ABP, Red Funnel, and SCRA took it very seriously and ran a safety seminar at RSYC early last season. ABP now provide a pilot to work onshore with the Cowes Week committee and liaise with Southampton VTS. They are also trying hard to educate pilots about the behaviour of racing yachts. I went to the seminar on behalf of our club and came away thinking that it was a serious attempt to improve the situation.

But surely there can be no excuse for not knowing about the exclusion zone around large ships in the Thorn Channel. It's on every chart and in every set of sailing instructions.

 

[prv]

Just out of curiosity. A RN Captain is approved to command a ship and does so as part of his service in the RN i.e. not a desk jockey. For whatever reason when he is on leave, he takes command of a commercial vessel that requires a licensed Captain

I don't know whether Naval command qualifications are acceptable on merchant ships. Certainly the aviation equivalent for RAF pilots and engineers does not apply.

Pete

 

[Mark-1]

But this is the bit I don't get. According to the local racers who posted here at the time, he'd have been disqualified from the race the moment he went into the Zone.

Only in the event of a successful protest so it's possible they were still racing.

So there's no question of cutting it fine across the tanker's bow for a racing advantage.

A friend watching from 50m away said they couldn't get the kite down & instead of gybing out of the way decided to carry on. If he's right it was more about can't-be-arsed-ness than racing advantage.

A naive question: Why aren't they prosecuting him for being in the exclusion zone? That strikes me as an easy conviction to get. Proving there was no lookout seems difficult and even proving the ship was impeded might be tricky if it had no room to manoeuvre at all and maintained course and speed throughout. The prosecution seem to be making life hard for themselves.

 

[l'escargot]

...Regardless of the naval officers defence, he was in the wrong and he should probably have the book thrown at him in order to discourage any future repeat of the incident.

Why would anyone want to repeat the incident? He was the give way boat under local regulations in the area of concern, he had just got disqualified for entering the exclusion zone and he got his boat mashed...

I've always been interested to hear what was said to him by the escort boat that pulled alongside him, perhaps that will come out at the court case now - I should think there have been some interesting arguments as it has taken almost 2 years to come to court and is now scheduled for a 5 day hearing, I might even go over and get myself a seat and watch.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Ships in this area often have a pilot or police boat in front to clear the way, but the moving exclusion zone is very well known.

I wonder how you are supposed to measure the 1000 m - I was always taught that its impossible to accurately judge distance over dead ground or water. Clearly he ended up well within the 200m but what if you are outside the 200m when the big ship takes a turn towards you and you cannot possibly go faster than she does?

He was obviously chancing his arm trying to get across in front of the tanker and misjudged it; as the yacht is mentioned as being a Services boat - or even if she isn't - I would think this was the traditional ' career limiting move '...

I would have thought that bwillingness to take risks would be a good thing in a naval officer. Playing safe should not be good for his career.

 

[Blue5]

He looked guilty at his court appearance on the telly

Wouldn't bother about a five day trial just put a poll on here for a few days.

 

[l'escargot]

I wonder how you are supposed to measure the 1000 m - I was always taught that its impossible to accurately judge distance over dead ground or water. Clearly he ended up well within the 200m but what if you are outside the 200m when the big ship takes a turn towards you and you cannot possibly go faster than she does...

The restriction is actually 100 metres either side although the escort boats seem to concentrate on the forward zone. It is a moving exclusion zone, that can be moving towards you at 15 knots or so. 1 minute your are not in it, the next you are as it sweeps round as the boat turns and it is the up to you to get out of the way - you have to anticipate the course of the ship and you will see small boats caught out quite often on busy days.

 

[[70521]]

Would that transgression in a civilian environment also make him accountable in the RN environment, in an official manner?

In the past I have know serving military people having been found guilty in a civil court then being tried for the same offence in a military court.

 

[uxb]

Maybe the navy should put him in charge of a submarine?

 

[Sandyman]

Why would anyone want to repeat the incident? He was the give way boat under local regulations in the area of concern, he had just got disqualified for entering the exclusion zone and he got his boat mashed...

I've always been interested to hear what was said to him by the escort boat that pulled alongside him, perhaps that will come out at the court case now - I should think there have been some interesting arguments as it has taken almost 2 years to come to court and is now scheduled for a 5 day hearing, I might even go over and get myself a seat and watch.

Good idea. You can sit there & prey for him

Nearly 2 years to get to just a magistrates court is strange. Maybe the senior grunters gave him, a baby grunter, a pierhead jump to get him out of the way. It used to happen.

 

[Sandyman]

Maybe the navy should put him in charge of a submarine?

Nah, someone would shoot him.

 

[PhillM]

but what if you are outside the 200m when the big ship takes a turn towards you and you cannot possibly go faster than she does?

A brief look at the chart makes it clear where the ships will be and where they will go. There is not a lot of deep water and so the ships are kept into well known channels. Anyone who sails the Solent soon learns where the channels are are where to keep an eye out for ships.

Outside of a race its dead easy to keep out of their way just stay out of their channels. They cannot get to you, its too shallow.

I was out a 2011 on the Saturday (my first time seeing cowes week fromt he water) and it was SOO crowded out there. I was suprised to see so many ships coming in that afternoon and wondered if ABP were pushing luck a little as it is only one weekend of the year. They could have timed movements a little more sympathetically.

 

[Resolution]

This is a very pertinent case for all those of us who sail into or from Cowes, especially the racers. Even with full knowledge of the moving prohibited zone / precautionary area rules it can be hard to judge the distances required, and very much harder to gauge exactly when the ship is going to make its turn around West Bramble. I am afraid that using phrases like " small craft must...use seaman-like anticipation of its route and the sea-room required when turning" is just an inadequate cop out.
I think that Southampton harbour authorities need to be more pro-actively responsible. At weekends or in Cowes week they know that the central Solent will be full of small craft. On these occasions why don't they send out two pilot cutters to hold station approx 200 metres apart and 1000 metres ahead of the ship? They will know the precise route the ship is taking, and if they don't have instrumentation to measure the 1000 metres then how can we be expected to?
Then it would be a simpler matter for small craft to see where the ship will be going (as opposed to its current heading) and to decide which side to clear off to.