Whale wars new boat is sinking

[binch]

He who rides a tiger cannot dismount at will.

What characterises this thread is
(a) those whose emotions cloud their sea judgement.
(b) those who do not understand that handling a large ship is very different to handling a small boat, and that one must take account of another vessel's domaine, and its potential manoeuvrability, if danger of collision exists.
(c) if a collision seems to be unavoidable, the stand-on vessel should do all she can to avoid collision, but failing that to minimise damage and/or casualties.
(d) that experience of anti-submarine techniques shows that to deliberately ram a smaller vessel is extremely difficult and rarely successful if the target vessel takes any sort of evasive action.
Theoretic knowledge is one thing but manoeuvring ships at close quarters takes pratcical experience. It is not always a simple matter to adjudicate and the MAIB does it very well.
I have my opinion on this collision, but it has to be hedged about with caveats.
I've been a Master Mariner since 1951, and am a Fellow of the Royal Inst of Nav. I'm still learning and do not wish to give my opinion.

 

[Ceirwan]

This video taken from the SS boat, Bob Barker, clearly shows the Jap boat sharply turning course (it's leaning into the turn) and aims to ram the AG midships.

Just as a note as I've seen this posted twice, its been a while since my boat was in the water but as far as I remember boats don't lean into a turn like an aircraft. If i'm turning to starboard I expect my boat to heel to port.
If your saying he's leaning into a turn towards the Earthrace boat I'm pretty sure that means he's actually turning to port.

(I'm not voicing an opinion on 'who done it' just on the turn)

 

[binch]

When a ship starts to turn, the force of her rudder under water makes her heel slightly into the turn. As soon as the angular momentum increases, she comes back upright and while turning further, she heels ouwards and continues so. This is the critical heel on turning.
It is the same feature that makes a listing ship turn towards her hight side

 

[nathanlee]

(a) those whose emotions cloud their sea judgement.

I totally agree with your post. However, for everybody else, have you seen the whale wars series? The sea shepherd lot are reckless and behave like a bunch of uni kids running a boat. I have no doubt that the skipper is experienced, but heck does he ignore it sometimes.

The point is, they are in the southern ocean. It's serious business, and they are acting very poorly. Protest against the whale slaughter, heck I'll even support you, but not like this. It's childish, and in a place not child friendly.

 

[Moodyjim]

It looks very clear to me that the Jap is deliberatley tracking the AG with a turn to the right to aim at her then a turn to the left as the AG moves left to right in the SS vid (trying to get out of the way IMO) in order to run her down.
It seems to have been overlooked by many posters that SS go after illegal activities, so more strength to their collective elbows and horrocks to the illegals.

 

[Coaster]

It seems to have been overlooked by many posters that SS go after illegal activities, so more strength to their collective elbows and horrocks to the illegals.

What illegal activity were the Japanese involved in at the time of this incident? I mean illegal, in terms of actual law and juristiction, as opposed to immoral or other value judgment.

 

[Moodyjim]

In a whale sanctuary I think. Read "snooks" link above.

 

[Coaster]

In a whale sanctuary I think. Read "snooks" link above.

Thanks for your reply. I've looked at 5 of Snooks' posts but couldn't see a reference to a whale sanctuary. The Guardian article was interesting though. Greenpeace evidently regard Watson as a menace.

I thought that the recent incident occurred in the Southern Ocean, well away from any particular country's territorial waters? If so, presumably there couldn't be a legally enforceable sanctuary?

I freely admit that I don't know many of the facts and would welcome more information.

 

[webcraft]

.
Hmmmm . . .

Direct action is OK but you mustn't break the Colregs eh?

Where is DAKA when you need him?

- W

 

[Major Catastrophe]

What illegal activity were the Japanese involved in at the time of this incident? I mean illegal, in terms of actual law and juristiction, as opposed to immoral or other value judgment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Whale_Sanctuary

Most of Sea Shepherd's anti whaling activities takes place in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, which is not recognised by all countries. In 2008 the Australian Federal Court ruled it was illegal under Australian law for the Japanese whaling fleet to kill whales in the Sanctuary.

 

[robin_99]

But imagine if a group of Japanese environmentalists came over here and tried to disable cod fishing boats with floating ropes to foul their props and stink bombs to disrupt fishing etc

Imagine if a group of Japanese enviromentalists had gone to the Grand Banks of Newfoundland to take on the factory ships in the 1980s. Had they been effective, there might still be a cod fishery there! Instead, the Canadian government "managed" the largest cod fishery in the world to extinction. I have no doubt the Canadian government would have been just as pig-headed in "protecting" the cod from eco-terrorists as the Japanese government is in "protecting" the whales. Lets hope the whales don't suffer the same fate

Best,
Robin

 

[robin_99]

What illegal activity were the Japanese involved in at the time of this incident? I mean illegal, in terms of actual law and juristiction, as opposed to immoral or other value judgment.

The Internation Whaling Commission introduced a moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986. The Japanese are not engaged in commercial whaling. They are killing around 1000 whales per year for "research". And the whale meat just happens to end up in fish markets and sushi restaurants ...

Best,
Robin

 

[robin_99]

Protest against the whale slaughter, heck I'll even support you, but not like this

The problem is that protesting simply does not work. Protesters protest and the whalers keep whaling. Watson and crew are not there to protest, wave banners, etc. They are there to save the lives of whales, as many as possible. And their methods are effective. They have probably saved a thousand whales in the last several years. Commercial whaling was banned in 1986 and the Japanese have set out to capture around 1000 whales per year in the name of research. All the negotiating at the IWC, protesting by Greenpeace, etc. has changed nothing in 20 years.

Best,
Robin

 

[robin_99]

Sea Shepherd violent?

To those who are shocked by the "violent" methods of Sea Shepherd, I wonder what the whales think? Who would they consider to be more violent, the small group of people who are trying to save them by ramming, throwing stink-bombs, and deploying prop foulers (which never seem to work?), or the larger group of people who are trying to kill them with explosive-tipped harpoons?

Best,
Robin

 

[planteater]

In 2008 the Australian Federal Court ruled it was illegal under Australian law for the Japanese whaling fleet to kill whales in the Sanctuary.

Maybe the Australian navy should take the job on and not leave it to the amateurs.

 

[Woodlouse]

I don't have the time to read the whole thread except for the first page. But as for who's at fault, if Sea Shepherd weren't out there trying to ruin what is actually a legal (though unpopular) industry then it would never have happened. Like Greenpeace and PETA I'm afraid I rank them as ecoterrorists and so deserve just about everything that comes to them as a result of their actions. (Interesting to note that my spellcheck recognises 'ecoterrorist' but not 'greenpeace'.)

I didn't think that boat would last long in that line of work. Either she was going to go in a collision with a ship or iceberg (kevlar sheathed my arse) or the southern ocean would have seen to her.

As for Whaling, personally, having read a lot about it I would actually like to try whaling before denouncing the practice as barbaric. I cannot believe that many of these protesters have even actually tried to see both sides of the story, and every account of whaling you read thats been written by someone who has experienced it has hardly been negative. Even Allan Villiers, who was on the first modern whaling expedition in the Ross Sea doesn't denounce it.

 

[lenseman]

The Ady Gil, formally Earthrace has finally sunk:


(AFP) – 2 hours ago

SYDNEY — A high-tech anti-whaling powerboat that was badly damaged in a collision with Japanese fishermen sank overnight after salvage attempts failed, activists said on Friday.

The super-fast "Ady Gil" trimaran, which had its front end sheared off in the smash, was being taken to an Antarctic port when the tow line snapped, Peter Hammarstedt, first officer of the "Bob Barker" ship, told AFP.

"The Ady Gil was taking on too much water, it became too heavy on the tow. More and more of the vessel was under water," he said.


Full story here:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hSrI1-fqtDRNkZhe19Z2qt09OIHQ

 

[Jamesuk]

Could it have been a stunt to bring the "Whaling fight" to the headlines again?>>?

 

[NickiCrutchfield]

Or steering jammed with ropes placed in the water by those stupid protesters on the small boats (who accelerated into the path of the ship)It is they who should be arrested for putting lives at risk and dangerous "driving"

But they only put their own lives at risk. No one on the big boat was going to have a problem with their actions.

 

[snooks]

But they only put their own lives at risk. No one on the big boat was going to have a problem with their actions.

The peeps on the big ship would have had a big problem if their ship was dissabled by the ropes and stuff trailed by the SSCS.

Imagine having to tow a ship through a southern ocean storm...I don't think the tow would last long. And with no form of steerage or power how long before the ship founders?