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

The Race organizers, Royal Yacht somthing or other ( the real villians in this case ) need to communicate with VTS & Soton pilots not the other way round. Also an RN officer who wont take a risk should be sacked.....
 
Seatrout said:
I would argue that you need simpler rules such as I suggested, NOT more complex rules.

Having sailed down your gaff I was stressed and unrelaxed. My yacht is insured as a 'pleasure craft', and that was not pleasurable, so my assumption is that the insurance was thus invalidated?
Click to expand...

I have a lot of sympathy with your desire for simpler rules. (Think taxes for a moment.) But unfortunately when so many of us are trying to use the same bit of water it does get more tricky.
 
prr said:
The Race organizers, Royal Yacht somthing or other ( the real villians in this case ) need to communicate with VTS & Soton pilots not the other way round. Also an RN officer who wont take a risk should be sacked.....
Click to expand...
Cowes week has been organised by Cowes Combined Clubs, which latterly became Cowes Week Limited, since 1964 - it includes representations from all the Cowes clubs not just the RYS. They consult with and provide risk assessments for all the harbour authorities as well.

If you look here: http://www.southamptonvts.co.uk/Live_Information/Recreational_Events/ you will see all events are communicated to VTS, not just Cowes Week. With a list that long I think it is amazing that there has only been one incident of this type in living memory.
 
For what it's worth my guess as to his defence will be that they were caught out by the tanker's turn to port as it passed Prince Consort.

I.e. I suspect that what happened is that they saw the tanker aiming to pass North of them and disregarded it as a threat. That boat (raced against it a few times) has a bit of a sea sweeping Kite, so I'd guess that as their next mark was Prince Consort itself they lost sight of it behind the kite, only becoming aware that it was no longer aiming North of them at quite a short range. Then they were trapped - couldn't bear away as they knew it was about to turn to starboard, and couldn't go up as they were already about as high as they could be with the kite and no time to drop. Have a look at this video - shows them broaching as they enter shot - and so I guess they were trying to go high but failed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6CjpHFNteI
 
PhillM said:
Bosun Higgs said:
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.
Click to expand...

That's only ever going to happen if the Cowes Week organisers shoulder the penalty payments and associated costs of delaying commercial shipping!
Click to expand...
 
The race organisers and the port authority have done a lot to work together, it's just that people will always take risks and especially in race situations. We've sailed in The Solent for many years and regularly see yachts sailing too close for comfort to ships. It's a narrow water way for the amount of traffic it carries but there's room for all!
 
jrc1983 said:
That's only ever going to happen if the Cowes Week organisers shoulder the penalty payments and associated costs of delaying commercial shipping!
Click to expand...

Why should they? Commercial shipping doesn't own the sea or have rights to payments from leisure sailors any more than haulage contactors own the roads and have rights to payments from leisure drivers.
 
Uricanejack said:
The Tanker Pilot OOW and Master while not charged are far from innocent. Not enough evidence not guilty.
Click to expand...

Precisely what would you have expected them to do in this circumstance? They would not have been able to stop or take effective avoiding action in time.
Do you know what it's like to take a large vessel through the Cowes week regatta with hundreds of craft around you, them all heading in different directions? Collision avoidance in such situations is effectively reactionary as you're simply unable to make any assumptions or anticipate what those small craft will do, even those which appear to be moving clear (not that you can do that anyway, even in open waters).
By and large the only effective way to get through is to plough on, sounding the whistle and hope Southampton Patrol can chase off the nearest 'bogies'. Zig zagging all over the channel, or slowing down/stopping with a tide running is simply not an option.
 
Twister_Ken said:
Just a little extra to ponder. My understanding is that the entire crew were RN officers, some entitled to wear far more gold braid than the skipper. Yet none of them seems to have appreciated that they were standing into considerable danger. Perhaps a touch of the Nelsonian "Steer for the sound of the guns"?
Click to expand...

maybe thats his defence?
If his crew outranked him and one of them said "go for it", would he then have to disobey a senior officer? maybe he's trying to offload the blame on to one if them, or get the issue turned over to martial law instead of civil. I wonder if the martial law applies to an RN crew in and RN boat in civil circumstances.
 
chewi said:
maybe thats his defence?
If his crew outranked him and one of them said "go for it", would he then have to disobey a senior officer? maybe he's trying to offload the blame on to one if them, or get the issue turned over to martial law instead of civil. I wonder if the martial law applies to an RN crew in and RN boat in civil circumstances.
Click to expand...

It isn't an RN boat, it is privately owned by the skipper.
 
Wasn't there some question mark over the sound signal given by the container ship?
This Sunday outside Cowes a large container vessel gave 8 blasts. You'd think they would get it right.

Getting back to the yacht in question, I understand there were only two on board who thought they weren't going to hit the ship. The skipper and the tactician. Everyone else was convinced they would hit. (Inside knowledge.)
 
l'escargot said:
Why should they? Commercial shipping doesn't own the sea or have rights to payments from leisure sailors any more than haulage contactors own the roads and have rights to payments from leisure drivers.
Click to expand...

The point previously made was that ABP should effectively close down or restrict access to Southampton. Doing so would cause ABP a fair degree of financial strife, especially with the container ship companies who operate to a fixed schedule.
So it comes down to this - is it logical to restrict access to an internationally important port involved in the large scale import/export of containers, bulk, general cargo and petroleum products simply because a number of people with too much money and who treat their leisure occupation as some kind of holy cause want to have some fun?
 
chewi said:
maybe thats his defence?
If his crew outranked him and one of them said "go for it", would he then have to disobey a senior officer? maybe he's trying to offload the blame on to one if them, or get the issue turned over to martial law instead of civil. I wonder if the martial law applies to an RN crew in and RN boat in civil circumstances.
Click to expand...

Nah, the skipper is the man. Rank of crew irelivent.
 
Talulah said:
Wasn't there some question mark over the sound signal given by the container ship?
This Sunday outside Cowes a large container vessel gave 8 blasts. You'd think they would get it right.
Click to expand...

Rule 34 para d. ........at least 5 short and rapid blasts......

Obviously he knows more than others!

Sorry, couldn't resist, no offence meant.
 
Talulah said:
Wasn't there some question mark over the sound signal given by the container ship?
This Sunday outside Cowes a large container vessel gave 8 blasts. You'd think they would get it right.
Click to expand...


"The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention
of Collisions) Regulations 1996

Rule 34 - Manoeuvring and warning signals

(d) When vessels in sight of one another are approaching each other and from any cause either vessel
fails to understand the intentions or actions of the other, or is in doubt whether sufficient action
is being taken by the other to avoid collision, the vessel in doubt shall immediately indicate such
doubt by giving at least five short and rapid blasts on the whistle."

I suppose that anything over five blasts is intended to add emphasis!
 
Talulah said:
Wasn't there some question mark over the sound signal given by the container ship?
This Sunday outside Cowes a large container vessel gave 8 blasts. You'd think they would get it right.

Getting back to the yacht in question, I understand there were only two on board who thought they weren't going to hit the ship. The skipper and the tactician. Everyone else was convinced they would hit. (Inside knowledge.)
Click to expand...

Wasn't it a tanker or were there 2 incidents.

Also, you can give as many blasts as you want.

"When vessels in sight of one another are approaching each other and from any cause either
vessel either vessel fails to understand the intentions or actions of the other, or is in doubt
whether sufficient action is being taken by the other to avoid collision, the vessel in doubt shall
immediately indicate such doubt by giving at least five short and rapid blasts on the whistle. Such
signals may be supplemented by a light signal of at least five short and rapid flashes."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top