Who should be blamed in this collision???

[maxi77]

+ I can become a lot more forgiving to those who unitentionally caused an incident in their civilian activities, if in their day to day job they could be called upon to put thir lives on the line for me and country.

I see no advantage to be gained by the' lynch mob' getting their way as replicated by the tabloids of late.

Mind you as some one 'on the retired list' I feel fully entitled to be critical. No one is suggesting a lynch mob rather normal justice takes it's course if the regulations were broken, though at present I find it very difficult to see any way that the driver could be considered not at fault.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

well bye for now... have to go, the sunny climes of the shores of Turkey await.
Hope you'r not all still at it in a couple of weeks

 

[VicS]

well bye for now... have to go, the sunny climes of the shores of Turkey await.
Hope you'r not all still at it in a couple of weeks

Keep good watch out for large tankers

Hanne Knutsen is in the North sea at the moment between Stavanger and Skagen

 

[petersto]

another plonker

If you want to see another plonker have a look at watchet harbour and a yacht and the balmoral either on you tube or ybw bristol channel surely its not beyond the small boat sailor to realise that there are people out there that do it for a living what do they think of some of our antics

 

[l'escargot]

If you want to see another plonker have a look at watchet harbour and a yacht and the balmoral either on you tube or ybw bristol channel surely its not beyond the small boat sailor to realise that there are people out there that do it for a living what do they think of some of our antics

I would be careful of holding up people that "do it for a living" as examples, there are far more examples out there of them cocking up.

The QE 2 on the Brambles Bank, the coaster that cut Hythe Pier in two and the Solent Scene ending up on the rocks during an ash scattering ceremony are some local ones that spring to mind.

 

[VO5]

The skipper of the racing yacht is a plonker.
He put the lives of himself and his crew at grave risk, racing or no racing.
It is all testosterone and no brains and he deserved the outcome he experienced.
It is madness to try a stunt like that one.
There is just no excuse to close a moving target in that way, and a massive one at that.
The tanker could not stop or even alter course in time for a yacht that disregards all the rules of prudent seamanship and decides to play chicken and creates a close quarters situation deliberately.
Probably in the closing seconds the yacht could not even be seen from the bridge of the tanker.
Shocking it is...

 

[fireball]

I would be careful of holding up people that "do it for a living" as examples, there are far more examples out there of them cocking up.

The QE 2 on the Brambles Bank, the coaster that cut Hythe Pier in two and the Solent Scene ending up on the rocks during an ash scattering ceremony are some local ones that spring to mind.

Waverly and a few piers?

 

[Poignard]

HMS Vanguard trying to demolish the Still & West pub!

 

[lukedh]

I am persuaded to go along with the analysis by Flaming on a previous post. 'Roly' is an experienced skipper well used to sail racing in these waters. The object of a race is to win the race, not to be disqualified or commit suicide. Even if Flaming is not quite correct, a sequence of events unfolded which left the yacht in a complete f*** up. The skipper did not get into this mess deliberately to win a race.

There are clear contributing factors such as:

Failing to keep any or any proper lookout.

Failing to so manage his vessel so as to avoid a collision.

Being in an exclusion zone and - maybe - not heeding the advice of the 'blue boat'.

All of which he is responsible for.

I believe it was Fireball who replied to my previous question and gave us the race rule requiring yachts to observe the exclusion zone. The race committee - at their discretion - may - disqualify an entrant who disobeys this. I understand from a previous post that this kind of behaviour was nipped in the bud in Australia when the race committees did just that. No more trouble with commercial shipping no more lives put in danger. No need to change any rule, just enforce the ones we have.

Of course rules only work when they are adhered to but as I pointed out above you don't enter a race to be disqualified. I only hope that if this goes to an enquiry, a crew member was injured, there is a strong recommendation to to the yacht race committees that they must enforce the existing rule. Oh yes, and skippers to keep a look out.

And another thing, please don't jump into the oggin in front of large ship when they are about to turn - they have humongous bow thrusters.

Now if Roly has a mess bill to pay.

 

[davidpbo]

QUOTE (Fireball): ...one springs to mind .... LOOK WHERE YOU'RE GOING !!

Hear, hear!

and watch where others are going.

 

[dancrane]

In respect of racers entering the exclusion zone...

QUOTE (Lukedh): ...the race committee - at their discretion - may - disqualify an entrant who disobeys this.

Why on earth is this discretionary? It's the one fairly sure way to prevent life-threatening recklessness.

 

[maxi77]

HMS Vanguard trying to demolish the Still & West pub!

That was more a great ship objecting to ignomy of the knackers yard. The great Warspite also objected quite strongly

 

[VicS]

To get back to the subject of the thread.

It is interesting to plot the approximate course of the Hanne Knutsen through the area and compare it with the expected course of Atalanta of Chester.

The course of the Hanne Knutsen can be plotted with a reasonable degree of certainty from AIS information.

Altalanta was on a spinnaker run which would have been the leg of the course from Aquaspec racing mark to S Bramble. Wind at the time was about 12knots 244° according to Bramblemet

The course of Hanne Knutsen is shown in red on the diagram below and an expected course for Atalanta in pink.

However it can be deduced from the video of the incident that the collision occurred much earlier in the Hanne Knutsen's turn than is suggested by the diagram. Probably about 3 cables SSE of the intersection of the pink and red lines.

The video also shows Atalanta on a southerly heading with the spinnaker collapsed immediately before impact.

Nothing seems to fit with any theory that Atalanta was cutting across the bows of a ship for the sake of winning a race. She was heading in the wrong direction for that to be the case.
She was also somewhat south of the course one might expect.

So why was Atalanta in that position, on a southerly heading with a the spinnnaker not full?
Total screw up?
Gear failure?
Misunderstanding of instructions from the escort vessel?
Bad instructions from the escort?

 

[Leonidas]

I can't see how the RYA or any other organisation taking interest, would help anything.

If a skipper wants to be a tit and play chicken with a ship then they're going to do it regardless.

This is how other contributors to Yachtpals.com sees it. The closing sentence is relevant to the point that current situation is far from perferct . Lobbying by respected organizations may just be able to bring some changes. Interestingly Milford Haven apparently suspends commercial shipping activities for one hour either side of starting times.

reply


Yacht collision with ship - How fast through a crowded channel?



On August 8th, 2011 Sailor (anonymous) says:


"Cowes Week is an event, or rather a series of events, which is fairly well known. Certainly local vessel traffic should have been aware, and routing a ship through the area is something that would be, one might assume, done with great care. They would proceed very slowly, with lookouts, and with sound signals. We do know that the ship here seems to have done all of those things properly. What we do not know is what the skipper of the sailboat was thinking when he tried to pass IN FRONT of a massive ship moving at what appears to be around 5 knots."

Routing the ship alternatively, I guess they can't do a lot about as they have to stick to the channel, but that ship appears to be going faster than 5 knots and is certainly not making any sound signal so I doubt any look outs were posted effectively.

As stupid as the yacht skipper was in attempting (or worse still not noticing) crossing a VLCC I can't help thinking that the VLCC watch keeper should have been aware of how congested the Solent may be during a well publicised event. Certainly my home port of Miford Haven, which has even bigger VLCCs and VLGCs than Fawley, makes the commercial vessels aware that there is a once a year event on and taht extra care and reduced speeds will be neccessary. Milford Haven Port Control even prohibits the movement of commercial traffic for an hour either side of start time. Due to this we get the boats away safely and after that we do the normal avoid commercial shipping at all costs. With such a two way appreciation of each other I am pleased to say that we have never had an incident such as that of Atlanta of Chester

Atlanta versus Hanne Knutsen boat collision



On August 13th, 2011 Sailor (anonymous) says:


The captain of the Atlanta has suffered quite a lot of miscredit and I could try to clarify the event a bit more. Hanne Knutsen was initiating a turn to starboard for entering the Thorn Channel, entrances to Southampton, when the incident occured. What the film and photo footage do not show is a power pleasure craft on the starboard side of Hanne Knutsen obstructing her ability to continue her turn to starboard. The turn had to be aborted in order to clear the power boat which for unknown reasons was not able to move out of the way. The captain of the Atlanta did most likely observe that the Hanne Knutsen started turning and in the heat of the race calculated that he would pass in front of her. When the turn was aborted it was already too late and the crash was inevitable. As mentioned above the Hanne Knutsen was passing in an "Precautionary Area" stating that all vessels of 20m and below should keep clear of a distance of 1000m ahead and 100m to either side. The yacht skipper was clearly in breach of these regulations but as an yachtsman myself I may understand his decision. The primary question in my opinion is how the port authority may allow a regatta of this size to take place in such a busy traffic lane, or to say it another way, how could they allow a tanker of this size to pass through the area in the midst of the busiest time of the regatta?

 

[dancrane]

That tanker was definitely going more than 5 knots...

...but, perhaps these vessels' paths could be understood better, seen from the sixth floor of the Gurnard Book Depository?

I regret to say I'm bored with this, now. If, if there had been any weird, mysterious or abstruse justification for the course and position taken by the Atlanta of Chester, wouldn't the yacht's much-criticised crew have explained all about it by now, for the sake of restoring their reputations?

Why the silence on their part? Why, except embarrassment, about the simple reasons suggested here, from the start...

...it was a grand military cock-up.

 

[VicS]

That tanker was definitely going more than 5 knots...

Yes it was. According to the AIS data it approached and entered the precautionary area at a little over 11 knots.
It had slowed to 7.8 knots as it turned off Egypt point
was doing 6.3 knots as it entered the Thorn channel.

But these speeds will have to be corrected for the tide if you want speed through the water.

 

[Jenchristy]

I dont like seeing this disasters happen...what seems to be the problem with the crew...

 

[flaming]

Vic

Alcantra's kite is/was an asymmetric. And with the tide running east I'm sure their first thought on rounding aquaspec was to get into the deep water. So it's entirely possible that their tactical plan was to sail to a point south of south bramble and then gybe onto port for the mark.
As to why they are then seen pointing south with the kite flapping, if you scroll up there's a link to another video shot from a rib that appears to show them broaching as they enter the shot. Which would account for them pointing south.

 

[VicS]

Vic

Alcantra's kite is/was an asymmetric. And with the tide running east I'm sure their first thought on rounding aquaspec was to get into the deep water. So it's entirely possible that their tactical plan was to sail to a point south of south bramble and then gybe onto port for the mark.
As to why they are then seen pointing south with the kite flapping, if you scroll up there's a link to another video shot from a rib that appears to show them broaching as they enter the shot. Which would account for them pointing south.

Yes something like that could account for them being well south of a straight line between the two marks. Stronger tide as well perhaps esp off Egypt point. i was not intending to suggest that they got there by accident or specially to cut across the bows of the Hanne Knutsen!

I'd seen the other video but its not that clear ( assuming I am looking at the same one as you). I felt something must have "gone wrong" to put them on a southerly heading. I just does not make sense for it to be deliberate although I guess if they'd carried on sort of eastwards while the tanker tuned in a large arc to the west of them they would have been in a big wind shadow for several minutes. Maybe they suddenly realised they needed to stay to windward of it!

I wonder if there will be an investigation and if we will know the conclusions.

 

[l'escargot]

...but, perhaps these vessels' paths could be understood better, seen from the sixth floor of the Gurnard Book Depository?

I regret to say I'm bored with this, now. If, if there had been any weird, mysterious or abstruse justification for the course and position taken by the Atlanta of Chester, wouldn't the yacht's much-criticised crew have explained all about it by now, for the sake of restoring their reputations?

Why the silence on their part? Why, except embarrassment, about the simple reasons suggested here, from the start...

...it was a grand military cock-up.

Perhaps they realised that the majority of critics on here aren't really bothered with facts having made their minds up based on a YouTube video whilst sat in their computer chairs - and on that basis aren't really bothered about what they have to say. I'm sure they haven't been silent and explained things in full to those that matter.