Who should be blamed in this collision???
- Thread starter Leonidas
- Start date
Topcat47
Well-known member
Interestingly, I was told in conversaton, today, that the crewmember had bailed out when he saw the collision was imminent. Perhaps this post ought to be in "Scuttlebutt".
I've said my piece earlier. The grunts on the side apart everyone in the cockpit shares some of the blame but the Skipper should be the one to carry the can....it goes with the job description.
I've said my piece earlier. The grunts on the side apart everyone in the cockpit shares some of the blame but the Skipper should be the one to carry the can....it goes with the job description.
Spyro
Well-known member
In the video from th OP it looks like the crewmember falls in at 6 seconds into the clip, the tanker collides at 10 secs. That made no difference as to whether there was a collision or not. Is it possible he saw it coming, was sitting on the rail and jumped?
Last edited:
Oscarpop
New member
Watch this clip instead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI&feature=related
It is better quality and does show the crew member "fall" at 23 seconds.
Regarding whether the crew fell or jumped, the crew member goes overboard 5 seconds before the impact.
He could have jumped for his own life. Either way the skipper shouldnt have been there ten seconds beforehand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI&feature=related
It is better quality and does show the crew member "fall" at 23 seconds.
Regarding whether the crew fell or jumped, the crew member goes overboard 5 seconds before the impact.
He could have jumped for his own life. Either way the skipper shouldnt have been there ten seconds beforehand.
Last edited:
Spyro
Well-known member
Yes better clip and my money is on he jumped. Every one on board would have been hanging onto something with all they had.
Simondjuk
Active member
Good lord. I thought the ultimate example of a group of wildly speculating, judgemental people had to be a bunch of pilots picking over the aftermath of a crash, until now!
Oh, and for the record, the MAIB don't blame anyone.
Oh, and for the record, the MAIB don't blame anyone.
ctva
Well-known member
Yup!
VicS
Well-known member
I reckon it was the skipper .. and the crew threw him overboard .. but not soon enough.
Why does the incident not appear as a "current investigation" on the MAIB website. Both of the recent incidents on the Thames do
Reverend Ludd
New member
Simondjuk
Active member
VicS,
Given the high-profile nature of this incident, I'd have thought it likely, but it's possible it may not be investigated.
The MAIB's primary role is investigating accidents affecting or caused by commercial shipping, and save for having the yacht's port shrouds and spinnaker dangling from her anchor, there wasn't much effect on the tanker. Neither could she have been particularly causative to the collision.
If there had been injuries or fatalities to the crew of either vessel, an investigation would have been a certainty.
Given the high-profile nature of this incident, I'd have thought it likely, but it's possible it may not be investigated.
The MAIB's primary role is investigating accidents affecting or caused by commercial shipping, and save for having the yacht's port shrouds and spinnaker dangling from her anchor, there wasn't much effect on the tanker. Neither could she have been particularly causative to the collision.
If there had been injuries or fatalities to the crew of either vessel, an investigation would have been a certainty.
VicS
Well-known member
Some of the MAIB investigations seem to be into relatively trivial incidents so I have often wondered who/ what determines which are investigated.
This one put the entire yacht crew's lives at risk. One I believe received some not too serious head injuries.
I wonder if we will ever get to know of all the circumstances.
Simondjuk
Active member
I suspect that the decision whether or not to investigate in this case would be based on an initial assessment of whether or not anything could have been done by the tanker and/or pilot boat crews which may have prevented the collision. If the thinking is that there was not, there wouldn't be much benefit to maritime safety by spending lots of money investigating.
I think most of the more trivial incidents investigated have a commercial aspect of some kind and/or could lead to a useful safety recommendation. In this instance, such a recommendation might conclude, 'Little yachts should not be sailed under the bows of big ships.'
Who knows though, it might be that it will be investigated and will appear on the MAIB site soon enough.
I think most of the more trivial incidents investigated have a commercial aspect of some kind and/or could lead to a useful safety recommendation. In this instance, such a recommendation might conclude, 'Little yachts should not be sailed under the bows of big ships.'
Who knows though, it might be that it will be investigated and will appear on the MAIB site soon enough.
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
Apropos an investigation, my understanding is that the driver is frightfully well connected in the maritime establishment, so some hushing-up strings may be being pulled.
Know what I mean, old boy?
Know what I mean, old boy?
Scotty_Tradewind
Active member
Isn't the law 1000m ahead and 100m to each side of shipping that's in a Zone?
Quote........Ken
Apropos an investigation, my understanding is that the driver is frightfully well connected in the maritime establishment, so some hushing-up strings may be being pulled. end Quote
I didn't see a Blue Ensign?
Quote........Ken
Apropos an investigation, my understanding is that the driver is frightfully well connected in the maritime establishment, so some hushing-up strings may be being pulled. end Quote
I didn't see a Blue Ensign?
Last edited:
LONG_KEELER
Well-known member
Would love to know what his parting words were......................
sailor211
Active member
Quote........ I didn't see a Blue Ensign? :)[/QUOTE said:
Poignard
Well-known member
Seen from the grassy knoll
Good-oh! A new conspiracy theory.
Someone told me, strictly in confidence, that the man who jumped overboard was Lord Lucan (or was it Martin Bormann? I can't remember)
Good-oh! A new conspiracy theory.
Someone told me, strictly in confidence, that the man who jumped overboard was Lord Lucan (or was it Martin Bormann? I can't remember)
Oscarpop
New member
" You f*ckin' moron, you're going to get us all killed"
or possibly the slightly more pithy;
" ships, I see no ships"
Sans Bateau
Well-known member
You are all trying to judge what happened based simply on a You Tube video.
None of you know what was said by the escort boat to the sailing boat or when it was said, you dont know what the rate of turn of the tanker was, was it turning at all? You can only guess from the video where the yacht was before it came into view, how long had it been in the exclusion zone? From the video, you can only see what was in front, by a short distance, and to the port side of the tanker. What was happening on the stbd side? Was anything else happening on the stbd side?
I dont believe any of you know the answers to any of these questions and I'm sure there will be a lot of other evidence available to the MAIB or ABP for their investigation that is currently only known by certain people who are not sharing that information on the forum, leaving the rest of us to guess.
None of you know what was said by the escort boat to the sailing boat or when it was said, you dont know what the rate of turn of the tanker was, was it turning at all? You can only guess from the video where the yacht was before it came into view, how long had it been in the exclusion zone? From the video, you can only see what was in front, by a short distance, and to the port side of the tanker. What was happening on the stbd side? Was anything else happening on the stbd side?
I dont believe any of you know the answers to any of these questions and I'm sure there will be a lot of other evidence available to the MAIB or ABP for their investigation that is currently only known by certain people who are not sharing that information on the forum, leaving the rest of us to guess.
ctva
Well-known member
Seeing as this is such a highly visible incident with what could have very easily been multiple fatalities, the MAIB would find it difficult to justify not investigating.
The MAIB investigate any and all incidents they consider relevant to marine safety and learning regardless of commercial, fishing or leisure. Just take a look at their reports which make for very interesting reading.
The MAIB investigate any and all incidents they consider relevant to marine safety and learning regardless of commercial, fishing or leisure. Just take a look at their reports which make for very interesting reading.
