Reverend Ludd
New member
What we don't know from the video is whether or not the three hoots were in fact the last three of five.
Yacht v red tanker
- Thread starter boatbuilder
- Start date
VicS
Well-known member
No implication of any fault on the part of the Ouzo crew was intended. Merely a response to the previous posters comment, "I find it pretty reassuring how well the yacht fared, all things considered."
The Ouzo must have been in a very similar collision, although probably with a ship travelling much faster that the tanker in this incident. It did not fare so well nor did the crew!
My message is do not be reassured by the fact that Atlanta of Chester and her crew survived. They were just lucky!
prv
Well-known member
Heh, that's true, and more or less exactly what I said last time this incident was debated. I used the analogy of a headlight beam. My point was widely pooh-poohed
Pete
Blueboatman
Well-known member
The poor bloke was just attempting a spectacular crash gybe to get on YouTube and it sort of worked
Too many stories of ships arriving in foreign ports with mast bits wrapped around their for'd ends. You wanna play with the big boys....
More concerned about Bosuns leg drama-surely that is one for an ambulance chaser if ever there was?
Too many stories of ships arriving in foreign ports with mast bits wrapped around their for'd ends. You wanna play with the big boys....
More concerned about Bosuns leg drama-surely that is one for an ambulance chaser if ever there was?
Sandy
Well-known member
Thanks for posting these VicS, they have been interesting reading.
Tidewaiter2
New member
As a retired cycle commuter
The main thing is that she was found guilty, so you can start civil proceedings for damages and injuries- as I did when knocked off my bike in a bus lane below Waterloo Station by a USA 'executive' in a beamer.
That really hits their pockets- NCB, time costs etc.
The main thing is that she was found guilty, so you can start civil proceedings for damages and injuries- as I did when knocked off my bike in a bus lane below Waterloo Station by a USA 'executive' in a beamer.
That really hits their pockets- NCB, time costs etc.
GuyS.
New member
I would have thought the basis of the yachts appeal is a non starter. Regardless of the number of hoots the skipper heard or thought he heard, common sense should have told him that there was no way the tanker would be turning to head up the Medina but was always going to turn to head up Southampton water.
Even if the skipper of the yacht wasn't local and so not familiar with the movement of commercial traffic in the Solent, all of this would have been covered in the extensive sailing instructions he would have received from Cowes week organisers.
£20k initially seems steep but pales into insignificance if a crew member had been seriously injured or there had been a loss of life.
shaunksb
Well-known member
shaunksb
Well-known member
That's an interesting point but didn't the Ouzo crew die several hours after the collision? IIRC one of them lasted longer than the other two which I assume means that the collision didn't kill any of them, being immersed in the sea did.
.
Searush
New member
Oh? And would they have been in the sea for several hours if not hit by the ferry? Nope, they wold have been well on their way to their destination, enjoying a pleasant cruise.
With respect (but not much) I think that is one of the poorest comments I have seen on here in a long time. The OP didn't suggest that they died in the collision, but rather as a consequence of it - which is quite simply true.
D
Deleted member 36384
Guest
It was mentioned in Yachting Monthly that the engine controls were down below (starter button / key I assume). It was implied that had they been available near the helm then there was a chance to power up and keep clear at the last moment. All very well on hindsight.
VicS
Well-known member
Yes IIRC without reading the report again something like that.
The boat sank either as a result an encounter with ferry or as suggested at the subsequent trial perhaps following an encounter with another ship.
Three people died. Dead is dead no matter how caused. Physical injury, hypothermia or drowning.
The crew of the Altanta were luckier.
Sailfree
Well-known member
By virtue of owning a boat you must be a rich bugger and fines should be 200 times that for poor car owners.
Legal and Justice and Fair are never words that are found together in my experience
l'escargot
New member
Who imposed the fine? Any such proceedings will be in the public arena.
Plomong
Well-known member
At first review, it would seem to me that, had he continued on as he was, instead of feathering his sails, he would probably have just managed to pass ahead of the tanker unscathed. However, by slowing, combined with the possible start of a turn to starboard of the tanker, he ran out of options.
He was in any case too close given the regulations in force in that area.
Plomong
shaunksb
Well-known member
Thanks for that Steve.......
I did think VicS was refering to the collision by mentioning the higher speed in the Ouzo case.
I thought it unlikely that anyone would die of hyperthermia by going unoticed for 12 hours on a sat afternoon in the solent........
.
boatbuilder
Active member
All I wanted was an update of the situation
Lakesailor
New member
The forums don't work like that
SAWDOC
Active member
Don't know if this point has been discussed in the many posts on the incident but I was intrigued as to whether the yacht was hit underwater by the tanker or whether it was caught in its significant bow wave and turned to port. My point being that it there was no physical contact and the spinnaker had not tangled in the anchor, the yacht could have escaped completely unscathed.
Second query - several posts above refer to no-one being injured in this incident. Surely the crew member who jumped prior to the incident suffered injury?
Second query - several posts above refer to no-one being injured in this incident. Surely the crew member who jumped prior to the incident suffered injury?
T
timbartlett
Guest
If it was vice versa, then he could have a good ground for appeal:-
the yacht was approaching from the ship's starboard side. So if the ship had indicated that its intention was to turn to starboard, it would have passed astern of the yacht. If the yacht had altered course to port (to pass astern of the ship) it would have been altering course into the very same patch of water as the ship. If the yacht had altered course to starboard, it might not have made any difference, other than that it would have collapsed his chute -- which is what may well have happened.
Good grief - when you're in a hole stop digging. Having screwed up in pursuit of race points, risked his crews' lives and injuring some of them then wrecked his boat he now wants to wriggle out on a technicality? He saw the ship and kept going
I'm puzzled by the common assumption that it was arrogance or recklessness. It could have been, of course, but isn't it equally likely that he simply misjudged the situation? Or amI the only one on YBW who has ever had an "Oh 5hit" moment?
+1
The ship that ran into the East Goodwin Light vessel a few years back (because her watchkeeper was too busy doing paperwork to look out of the window) got fined less than £5k.
Besides, such an excessive fine leaves the guy little option but to appeal. If it had been £200, then probably pay up and avoid the aggro. If it had been £2k, then it's probably not worth gambling the costs of an appeal against the possibility of an acquittal. But it's got to be worth taking a punt to save £20k... especially if he's got legal insurance. The insurers would like it, too, because if he "wins" they could go after the shipping company for the damage!
