l'escargot
Well-Known Member
It doesn't look like it from the tracks on the video, I don't think it had turned enough for the MPZ to swing over Atalanta.
Roland Wilson Guilty!
- Thread starter cryan
- Start date
It doesn't look like it from the tracks on the video, I don't think it had turned enough for the MPZ to swing over Atalanta.
fireball
Well-Known Member
The width exclusion is from the side of the vessel - so you have to add HK's width to the distance too - I would've thought (but I've not looked in detail or measured) that the Atalanta would've been in the exclusion zone - not at the point of the gybe to starboard, but soon after?
bedouin
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately it IS part of Colregs. It is stated explicitly that a vessel can be required "not to impede" and be "stand on" at the same time
John.edwards
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately it IS part of Colregs. It is stated explicitly that a vessel can be required "not to impede" and be "stand on" at the same time
where? citation?
awol
Well-Known Member
All together now .....
Rule 8f(iii) A vessel, the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the Rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision.
bedouin
Well-Known Member
This is pretty basic Colregs - any boat owner should be able to explain this to you.
Otherwise if you are interested it is very well worth getting a copy of the rules for yourself and reading them.
lw395
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately it IS part of Colregs. It is stated explicitly that a vessel can be required "not to impede" and be "stand on" at the same time
Well that makes perfect sense to me, standing on is often the quickest way of getting out of the way.
jrc1983
Well-Known Member
She was CBD and was flying the correct day shape; it was flown from the port yard of her main mast. Not easy to see on a big ship, but then the rules stipulate that the cylinder only has to be 0.6m diameter with a length of 1.2m.
jrc1983
Well-Known Member
See Flickr photos here: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7155/6646195241_7cd4dd9d5a_o.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7003/6646194501_e2b3dbcabf_o.jpg
They're not great, but you can see the black cylinder on the port side of her main mast, inboard from the Bravo flag.
Uricanejack
Well-Known Member
Its not so much about the small sailboat being still a "stand on" vessel
As it was pointed out boldly.The tanker, even big red ones remains a "Give way" vessel.
Both vessels failed to follow one of Darwins basic rules for survival.
Don't hit the Big Red Boat. Or the little one with a pink sail.
As it was pointed out boldly.The tanker, even big red ones remains a "Give way" vessel.
Both vessels failed to follow one of Darwins basic rules for survival.
Don't hit the Big Red Boat. Or the little one with a pink sail.
lw395
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone on the water really cared one iota whether there was a black cylinder deployed.
AFAIK the MPZ refers to 'any vessel over 150m', which hypothetically might include one not CBD.
robertj
Well-Known Member
he made a mistake plain and simple, no one else ever made a mistake before?
The total judicial proceedings are over the top some what, but that's for another reason I feel.
A slap on the wrist would have sufficed.
The total judicial proceedings are over the top some what, but that's for another reason I feel.
A slap on the wrist would have sufficed.
rotrax
Well-Known Member
Given that the case was defended by the Skipper of Atalanta, do you really think there was ANY possibility of him accepting a slap on the wrist?
I have no evidence, but I suspect his attitude during interview pushed the prosecution.
Perhaps a "Fair cop-I done it-it was me!" may have got him a b*llocking.
Who knows -all we can say is that justice has been done. If the result is different to what we expected we can argue the toss on here.....................
robertj
Well-Known Member
justice with the judge making a financial burden on the poor chap so much that it is ridiculous!
Yes you're are right you don't have any evidence of his interview attitude.
Too heavy handed in my opinion just a test for more financial fines on the boating fraternity.
Yes you're are right you don't have any evidence of his interview attitude.
Too heavy handed in my opinion just a test for more financial fines on the boating fraternity.
rotrax
Well-Known Member
Dont break the rules then you are unlikely to be fined.
l'escargot
Well-Known Member
I think you have been watching too many detective movies. He wouldn't have been hauled in and subjected to "good cop, bad cop". It would have been a brown envelope dropping on his doormat with a summons in it...
rotrax
Well-Known Member
I suspect, like me, that you can only surmise what happened post collision.
I cant imagine the Skipper not having a face to face interview, but of course I may be wrong.
Unless he posts on here to let us know we shall remain in the dark................
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Maybe he is posting here!
A1Sailor
...
What is it?
l'escargot
Well-Known Member
I don't need to surmise, it is how the legal system works. It was a summary offence, he would have been summoned for a committal (preliminary) hearing which is where the charges are put to him and the court decides whether there is enough evidence to proceed. That would be the nearest he gets to an "interview"
