Yacht v red tanker

[Spyro]

.

He was in any case too close given the regulations in force in that area.

Plomong

He was just too close never mind the regulations, he should never have got into that position.

 

[simon barefoot]

I've had a few eek moments, but they generally havent involved me sailing into an oncomming tanker thats 100 times bigger than me and which I've already been told not to go near. What was the pillock thinking? Personally I'd ask the crew if they wanted the skipper done for attempting to drown them! Purely my ill informed opinion, of course.

 

[Searush]

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........

.

I'd agree with that & sorry I didn't understand your meaning.

 

[Penton Hooker]

Perhaps the arrogance was not in cutting across the bows of a tanker, or not accepting that the bulk of the ship would have an effect on the wind, but in appealing against the quoted fine. I understood that the skipper of the yacht was a naval officer, that being the case he would potentially have a lot to loose in regard to reputation.

 

[sighmoon]

Perhaps the arrogance was not in cutting across the bows of a tanker, or not accepting that the bulk of the ship would have an effect on the wind, but in appealing against the quoted fine. I understood that the skipper of the yacht was a naval officer, that being the case he would potentially have a lot to loose in regard to reputation.

Unfair to call it arrogance. He stuffed up, as anybody is capable of doing. What does he have to lose by appealling the fine? He has £20k to gain.

There but for the Grace, go I.

 

[boomerangben]

I don't know the exact circumstances of the accident and to a certain extent I am guilty of (aren't we all?) conducting a trial by YouTube.

I doubt there is much hope in appealing against guilt on the basis that we all have to do our best to avoid collision, regardless of right of way). But would it not be worth appealing in an attempt to get the fine reduced?

 

[graham]

In marine accidents fault is almost never 100% one sided.

Sure the yacht was in the wrong place but if the ship did sound an incorrect sound signal (I am not saying they did) It could be the basis of an appeal that could shift some blame to the ship and reduce the fine.

I heard of a ship at anchor in fog being hit by another that had to accept some small percentage of responsibility because they made no attempt to heave up/slip the anchor and get out of the way.

 

[dharl]

In marine accidents fault is almost never 100% one sided.

Sure the yacht was in the wrong place but if the ship did sound an incorrect sound signal (I am not saying they did) It could be the basis of an appeal that could shift some blame to the ship and reduce the fine.

.

Marine Accidenta are NEVER 100% one sided..Rule 2 takes care of that one and keeps all the lawyers rich and happy!

++
Rule 2

(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master, or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.
++

Irespective of the local rules (1000m ahead etc), the Tanker was also constrained by her draft so all other vessels and also there is rule 9...

++
Rule 9


Narrow Channels

(b) A vessel of less than 20 meters in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel which can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.
++

either way it was a nasty accident and it could have been a lot worse, thank God it wasnt!

 

[LouisBrowne]

The video suggests that the yacht would probably have managed to cross the tanker's bow if the spinnaker trimmer had stuck to his job and not let go of the sheet.
Having said that, the yacht really had no business being in that position: regardless of whether the accident happened in the Solent the exclusion zone the yacht was clearly the give way vessel.
Then again, to avoid the tanker otherwise than by crossing its bow, the yacht would have had to sail round it which would have meant an extra half mile and placed it down wind and down tide of its course so it is easy to imagine the skipper having a rush of blood.

 

[prv]

Then again, to avoid the tanker otherwise than by crossing its bow, the yacht would have had to sail round it which would have meant an extra half mile and placed it down wind and down tide of its course so it is easy to imagine the skipper having a rush of blood.

But he was racing, so if he crossed in front of it even by half a mile he'd have been disqualified so what would have been the point?

Pete

 

[VicS]

FWIW

Hypothermia is having an abnormally low body temperature

Hyperthermia is having a abnormally high body temperature.

 

[LouisBrowne]

But he was racing, so if he crossed in front of it even by half a mile he'd have been disqualified so what would have been the point?

Pete

Out of curiosity I had a look at the Cowes Week Notice of Race and Sailing Instructions: I couldn't find anything in either of them that requires competitors to comply with local bye-laws (such as the exclusion zone).

I find this very odd and I may have missed the relevent bit, but if there is no provision in the SIs or the NoR the yacht could not be disqualified.

 

[r_h]

Out of curiosity I had a look at the Cowes Week Notice of Race and Sailing Instructions: I couldn't find anything in either of them that requires competitors to comply with local bye-laws (such as the exclusion zone).

I find this very odd and I may have missed the relevent bit, but if there is no provision in the SIs or the NoR the yacht could not be disqualified.

You mean this bit:
(taken from the Sailing Instructions: http://www.aamcowesweek.co.uk/web/download/2011/AAMCW11-BGSailingInstructions.pdf)

COMMERCIAL SHIPPING
Southampton Harbour Byelaws (changing RRS 60)

(a) Boats shall observe the Associated British Ports (ABP) Southampton Harbour Byelaws 2003 (see page 12) at all times and avoid any close quarters situation with large commercial shipping. Particular note should be made of Byelaws 10 & 11 and Associated British Ports Southampton Notice to Mariners No . 3 of 2011 giving details of a moving prohibited zone, which ranks as an obstruction for the purposes of RRS 19 and 20.

(b) Protests for infringements of B17 .1(a) may be brought only by the race committee who may initiate a protest as the result of a report from an ABP Pilot or Patrol boat . Note that ABP may initiate court proceedings against boats that infringe this byelaw.

Use of engine - as permitted by RRS 42 .3(h)
(a) In order to avoid the risk of collision with commercial shipping that is under way, a boat may use her engine, or any other means of propulsion, without retiring...

 

[LouisBrowne]

Yes, that would be the one!

 

[Plomong]

He was just too close never mind the regulations, he should never have got into that position.

Agree.

Plomong

 

[l'escargot]

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...

Can you delete this post, I can't find anything in it to disagree with...

 

[dt4134]

Out of curiosity I had a look at the Cowes Week Notice of Race and Sailing Instructions: I couldn't find anything in either of them that requires competitors to comply with local bye-laws (such as the exclusion zone).

I find this very odd and I may have missed the relevent bit, but if there is no provision in the SIs or the NoR the yacht could not be disqualified.

The preamble to Part II of the RRS would cover it. The Byelaws would count as government right of way rules, but even if they didn't, rule 9 of the IRPCS is clear enough.

 

[Tidewaiter2]

Time to draw a line under this one?

You mean this bit:
(taken from the Sailing Instructions: http://www.aamcowesweek.co.uk/web/download/2011/AAMCW11-BGSailingInstructions.pdf)

COMMERCIAL SHIPPING
Southampton Harbour Byelaws (changing RRS 60)

(a) Boats shall observe the Associated British Ports (ABP) Southampton Harbour Byelaws 2003 (see page 12) at all times and avoid any close quarters situation with large commercial shipping. Particular note should be made of Byelaws 10 & 11 and Associated British Ports Southampton Notice to Mariners No . 3 of 2011 giving details of a moving prohibited zone, which ranks as an obstruction for the purposes of RRS 19 and 20.

(b) Protests for infringements of B17 .1(a) may be brought only by the race committee who may initiate a protest as the result of a report from an ABP Pilot or Patrol boat . Note that ABP may initiate court proceedings against boats that infringe this byelaw.

Use of engine - as permitted by RRS 42 .3(h)
(a) In order to avoid the risk of collision with commercial shipping that is under way, a boat may use her engine, or any other means of propulsion, without retiring...

Between my post and this, I think we've established by IRPCS, RRS, Cowes Week rules, ABP by-laws that the yacht should not have been anywhere near the tankers bows (1000m)or side(100m).
He gambled his crews lives and his boat just for a race place- he lost big time, but no one died, Thank the Gods.
The legal millstones will grind on and small. The lawyers will all buy new laminate sail suits or have their classic woodies refurbed at EYH this winter.

Until the legal process ends, and we find out the final decision, I think it's time to move on....
to what anchor the tanker was using and which is best for snagging spinnakers

 

[Golf Charley]

Does anyone know if he got his spinnaker back?

 

[lenseman]

. . . . I think it's time to move on....
to what anchor the tanker was using and which is best for snagging spinnakers

Ooooh, cool Would that be a thread about anchors or the pink thread that was part of the spinnaker of the yacht that hit the tanker?