Sad case of deaths at sea.....not keeping watch

[rotrax]

I agree, More people need to be educated, i have just completed a PBL2 and i learned ALOT. Big eye opener i must say and i know that is the bottom rung in the nautical world and i will still be learning till the day i die,However sometimes as a qualified "professional" its easy to cut corners and be negligent. It's a fine line between knowledge and overconfidence.

Look at most trades,

The newly qualified guy takes time to achieve 100% precision and quality in the work piece as what he's learned is still fresh but an old timer will cut 100 corners for the same result. Which can lead to accidents.

Thats why sites nowadays need constant proof of updated paperwork and upto date CSCS.

First Mate and I took a CC course 18 years ago, bought a share in a modest boat and gained some experience.
With FM's redundency money we had enough to buy a 33 foot Gibsea.
Two senior moments since then resulting in two serious vessels. And in excess of 25,000 NM's at sea.
The hours on the water, after a proper grounding, has been the most benificial.
Training is fine, but you cant beat experience. IMHO.
I know one YM with whom I would feel unsafe with on Tooting Bec Common Pond..........................

 

[MystyBlue2]

First Mate and I took a CC course 18 years ago, bought a share in a modest boat and gained some experience.
With FM's redundency money we had enough to buy a 33 foot Gibsea.
Two senior moments since then resulting in two serious vessels. And in excess of 25,000 NM's at sea.
The hours on the water, after a proper grounding, has been the most benificial.
Training is fine, but you cant beat experience. IMHO.
I know one YM with whom I would feel unsafe with on Tooting Bec Common Pond..........................

Totally agree. Paperwork gets you knowledge, experience makes you a pro!

 

[madabouttheboat]

I know one YM with whom I would feel unsafe with on Tooting Bec Common Pond..........................

You can't get a YM without the relevant experience. Are you sure they are a real YM and not just got their theory part?

 

[madabouttheboat]

IMHO, compulsory training will not result in a noticeable change in accident statistics. What will happen is that people will get the minimum they need, like in France where you see the Bateaux Ecole boats fishing a fender out of the marina before certificates and Gauloises, and then go on to completely ignore what they learnt and still find themselves involved in accidents like you see and hear about in the Med and other places where training is required.

When you look at the examples of driving, you realise that training, even quite strict training followed by a not insignificant test, still leaves plenty of people who really shouldn't be behind a steering wheel with a result of all sorts of stupid and easily avoidable accidents, including looking at phones, being under the influence, etc etc

 

[Sandy]

Like what?

Compare crime rates of spain,India, USA etc to UK.

Then compare how strict the justice systems are.

Then compare jail times for them crimes.

Speaks volumes...

I'll take that as a no.

Look at the USA figures. Then come back and talk about criminal justice and re-offending rates.

 

[anoccasionalyachtsman]

I'll take that as a no.

Look at the USA figures. Then come back and talk about criminal justice and re-offending rates.

He also mentioned the exemplary Indian Justice system - not sure how it deals with paedophiles, but its record on rape is a little tarnished.

 

[MystyBlue2]

I'll take that as a no.

Look at the USA figures. Then come back and talk about criminal justice and re-offending rates.

Bigger population than here. When they say life they mean it!

Look at it as a percentage not numbers.

Life here means 20years but if you volunteer as a chef we will let you do 10 instead. And we wonder why the country is in a state pffft.

 

[masterofnone]

hi, I think it is unbelievable the skipper got such a lenient sentence, if this was a road traffic offence, his negligence would have been a contributory factor.

 

[Sandy]

Totally agree. Paperwork gets you knowledge, experience makes you a pro!

So, let's return to the original issue.

The MAIB, which are excellent at writing forensic reports on accidents, stated that the skipper of James 2 had neither knowledge or experience. Now add a significant amount of intoxicating liquor. I would be interested in what the toxicology reports said.

Given the incident that was, in my opinion, survivable, if James 2 had been correctly lit, the transom had a higher freeboard, life jackets worn, VHF or pyrotechnics used and crew sober, was the court not right in considering the actions of the skipper of James 2 in sentencing?

When night sailing I leave my phone in my bunk. I know how easy it is to get drawn into "stuff" on the internet. I've even seen inexperienced crew get drawn into looking at the chartplotter and not what is around them. On a sailing vessel you need to be looking at the sails to helm efficiently and the chart plotter is not going to tell you where the boom is and that you are about to decapitate one of your crew!

I will declare that before retirement I was a safety engineer and have written reports when things have gone seriously wrong. I read the report with a slightly different view to the general public as I understand why certain things are said and what things are unsaid.

 

[MystyBlue2]

So, let's return to the original issue.

The MAIB, which are excellent at writing forensic reports on accidents, stated that the skipper of James 2 had neither knowledge or experience. Now add a significant amount of intoxicating liquor. I would be interested in what the toxicology reports said.

Given the incident that was, in my opinion, survivable, if James 2 had been correctly lit, the transom had a higher freeboard, life jackets worn, VHF or pyrotechnics used and crew sober, was the court not right in considering the actions of the skipper of James 2 in sentencing?

When night sailing I leave my phone in my bunk. I know how easy it is to get drawn into "stuff" on the internet. I've even seen inexperienced crew get drawn into looking at the chartplotter and not what is around them. On a sailing vessel you need to be looking at the sails to helm efficiently and the chart plotter is not going to tell you where the boom is and that you are about to decapitate one of your crew!

I will declare that before retirement I was a safety engineer and have written reports when things have gone seriously wrong. I read the report with a slightly different view to the general public as I understand why certain things are said and what things are unsaid.

If it wasn't james 2 it could have been another ship or rocks.

If he was on his fone/laptop on social media that is totally unacceptable and should be punished just like he would be if he did that behind the wheel of a road vehicle.

If there was a moped on a motorway infront of me,I was not paying attention as i was on my fone texting and i killed him, Yes he shouldn't have been there but i definitely should be punished and done for manslaughter as it could have been avoided if i was paying 100% attention.

Btw manslaughter is more than 12months that Marr has been given.

Either way IMO he has skimmed through extremely lightly and with outcomes like that will not be a wake up call for the future.

Sometimes you need to make an example of someone for the rest to wake up and pay attention.

This will happen again.

 

[Achosenman]

First Mate and I took a CC course 18 years ago, bought a share in a modest boat and gained some experience.
With FM's redundency money we had enough to buy a 33 foot Gibsea.
Two senior moments since then resulting in two serious vessels. And in excess of 25,000 NM's at sea.
The hours on the water, after a proper grounding, has been the most benificial.
Training is fine, but you cant beat experience. IMHO.
I know one YM with whom I would feel unsafe with on Tooting Bec Common Pond..........................

I think I should clarify. I don't believe training is the end. It is the start and lays the foundation to start building experience and knowledge. It helps you stay safe while you learn and enjoy sailing in whatever form that takes. Like driving or flying, there will always be a handful of willful idiots and criminals. There is no helping them. However, most normal people welcome education and the chance to improve. Sometimes they just need a nudge to do it.

What should have been a non-event or at least, a very survivable incident, turned into a tragedy. Does anyone really think the James 2 skippers preparations, actions and decisions were correct in this saga?

 

[rotrax]

You can't get a YM without the relevant experience. Are you sure they are a real YM and not just got their theory part?

Yes, he has both, plus a pilots licence.

I have Coastal Skipper, FM Day Skipper.

He has a boat in Spain, rarely sails it, could not reef it when I was last aboard and used the mast of a 27 metre Dutch yacht - the tallest in the Marina - as a mark to find the harbour entrance.

The Dutch yacht was moved to Menorca and he was stuffed!

I doubt he has sailed 200NM's since he got his YM.

Which was 17 years ago.

 

[Sandy]

If it wasn't james 2 it could have been another ship or rocks.

If he was on his fone/laptop on social media that is totally unacceptable and should be punished just like he would be if he did that behind the wheel of a road vehicle.

If there was a moped on a motorway infront of me,I was not paying attention as i was on my fone texting and i killed him, Yes he shouldn't have been there but i definitely should be punished and done for manslaughter as it could have been avoided if i was paying 100% attention.

Btw manslaughter is more than 12months that Marr has been given.

Either way IMO he has skimmed through extremely lightly and with outcomes like that will not be a wake up call for the future.

Sometimes you need to make an example of someone for the rest to wake up and pay attention.

This will happen again.

Nope, another ship would be properly lit, if rocks then the skipper will know that he needs to take care. Re read the report and think of the conditions that they were heading out to sea and ask yourself if you would expect to see another unlit vessel in that position. I disagree with you assessment of "skimmed through lightly". Even if he had been keeping a proper lookout could he have seen James 2? Try it one dark night, go out in company with another boat, go below for half an hour, get them to turn off their lights and engine then come back on deck and then spot them.

The law covering Road Traffic and Maritime Traffic is different because more people get killed on the roads due to collisions than at sea. You can only prosecute under the relevant law. Clearly CPS felt that a manslaughter was totally inappropriate as the charge fails on two elements; being intentional and an unlawful act. From the press coverage can anybody see any of David Marr's actions being intentional or unlawful? He clearly did not intend to swamp James 2 and is it unlawful to use a smartphone while on-watch?

The whole reasoning behind the Air Accident Investigation Branch, Marine Accident Investigation Branch and Rail Accident investigation Branch is for the respective industries to wake up and pay attention. They do so by writing the report, working what went wrong and why it went wrong. I would encourage anybody to spend some time reading a selection, they are fascinating reading, then ask yourself what you would have done in the same situation.

David Marr has been set as an example, he has gone to prison. While his sentence is not the "lock him up and throw away the key that some would like" it will reverberate round both the fishing and leisure craft communities, after all there are 15 pages about the topic here there will be more pages on different forums. I am sure that all of my fishing friends who go out in small boats will think about their navigation lights/freeboard/VHF/Pyrotechnics and volume of intoxicating liquor before they set out to drift a cross a river/harbour mouth on a quiet night where they know there is traffic.

 

[Pye_End]

If it wasn't james 2 it could have been another ship or rocks.

Possibly not. Ships tend to be lit at night, and rocks tend to be charted. The trawler watch leader may well have been convicted for not being able to see in the dark - without being there, we have no idea.

 

[MystyBlue2]

They could be lit up like blackpool illuminations, If hes on his fone, not paying attention he could hit ANYTHING is my point.

Day/or night if your looking at your fone, not looking where your going you can hit ANYTHING

 

[penberth3]

.........The law covering Road Traffic and Maritime Traffic is different because more people get killed on the roads due to collisions than at sea. You can only prosecute under the relevant law. Clearly CPS felt that a manslaughter was totally inappropriate as the charge fails on two elements; being intentional and an unlawful act. From the press coverage can anybody see any of David Marr's actions being intentional or unlawful? He clearly did not intend to swamp James 2 and is it unlawful to use a smartphone while on-watch?........

Don't know about unlawful as such, but it should be covered (i.e. banned) in the company's safety management system.

 

[MystyBlue2]

Don't know about unlawful as such, but it should be covered (i.e. banned) in the company's safety management system.

Which now should be classed as death by dangerous driving. Thats what i believe it is for the road.

And alot more than 12 month

 

[Pye_End]

They could be lit up like blackpool illuminations, If hes on his fone, not paying attention he could hit ANYTHING is my point.

Day/or night if your looking at your fone, not looking where your going you can hit ANYTHING

But they weren't lit up, which is the point - and you do not know how much attention to the outside the watchkeeper was taking. All you are doing is guessing based on a few seconds on Whatsapp.

 

[MystyBlue2]

But they weren't lit up, which is the point - and you do not know how much attention to the outside the watchkeeper was taking. All you are doing is guessing based on a few seconds on Whatsapp.

So if i hit an unlit cyclist and kill him whilst being on my fone my defence lawyer can say "He was only on his fone for a few seconds your honour" and get me a reduced sentance and drop the charges from death by dangerous driving to driving without due care and attention?
Regardless if the cyclist was in the wrong in the first place, I would get HAMMERED because i was on my phone, They would use it as ammo and all other factors would be bye the bye.

Big differences in jail time between death by dangerous driving and driving without due care and attention.

Dont think the judge or the jury will be sympathetic and say "Well ok Dan we will let you off lightly this time seen as it was only a few seconds"

A crime is a crime simple as.

And IMHO the punishment does not reflect the lives lost and the crime committed.

 

[Simi]

AIS should be fitted to all vessels that go to sea the alarms may have warned on of them soon enough to do something