US Yachtie hits rocks in NZ

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by exfishnz

In this scenario (in an NZ harbour), both of these vessel's would have already contacted Harbour Control & been provided a report of harbour movements of all ships/fishing vessels etc (we had to do it every time we left the berth or were about to enter harbour limits). I would expect that the masters of both vessels, upon seeing a vessel of similar size (or larger), should be prudent enough to be cautious when navigating around each other & possibly even make vhf contact if unsure of her intentions. Also, vessels over 500 tons have to have a pilot (I think this is exempted when a captain has visited a port a certain amount of times).

Do vessels report their tonnage to Harbour Control on check-in? What if the ships met in Marlborough Sound - is there a Harbour Control there? What if one is passing by a harbour, within the demarcation line, but not actually entering or leaving the harbour - does it check in?

Re Southern Salvor:

* What if she reduces speed (or stops)?

Worst case scenario - the vessel to port alters to stbd and collides with the now stopped SSalvor.

* What if she alters course away from the other vessel?

Better - TCPA will be extended, but at some point additional manoeuvres will be required.

* What if both helmsmen contact each other by vhf to clarify intentions?

In this scenario, this is probably the best solution, but then it raises the possibility of a "VHF-assisted collision."


JMO - am looking forward to reading how others see it.


Kevin

[exfishnz]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Do vessels report their tonnage to Harbour Control on check-in?

If you're not local (i.e. harbour control already familiar with your vessel) then yes. When we've gone to other ports (in NZ) to unload fish etc, we've reported our length, draft, tonnage & persons on board (note that this data is also needed by the harbour master to assign a suitable berth for your vessel).

What if the ships met in Marlborough Sound - is there a Harbour Control there?

As MidLandOne stated, the whole Sounds is covered as a harbour.

What if one is passing by a harbour, within the demarcation line, but not actually entering or leaving the harbour - does it check in?

I would assume yes (given that the vessel has entered those waters).

Worst case scenario - the vessel to port alters to stbd and collides with the now stopped SSalvor.

I don't think a prudent master would do that. However, as you state, there could be a "worst case scenario".

Re: 500 ton rule navigation questions

I'm not sure what other comment I can offer you on the subject. Perhaps there's a pilotage/captain type forum online that may have current (or former) pilots/captains from NZ whom can answer your questions.

[Alan Wheeler]

Do vessels report their tonnage to Harbour Control on check-in?

For Picton Harbor, ch 19 is used to report shipping coming and going through the sounds and the Harbor. When exiting/entering Tory channel, a ten minute advanced warning on ch 16 must be given before entering/exiting so other vessels know. This warning is required by all, no matter what size you are. There are other narrow water ways around the country that require the same warnings.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by Wotname

OK, I surrender, what is the joke? I bet is has something to do with Aussies or am I being too sensitive

It is actually Beacon Hill so I reckon that becomes "Beckon Hill" if one is from Seedknee in Oz .

John

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by exfishnz

Re: 500 ton rule navigation questions

Perhaps I can add an additional bit of information Exfishnz in case not known (but as far as I am concerned this is not part of a discussion document for the Canadian Navy ).

The requirement for pilotage around the country's ports is based on the ship's gross tonnage. Depending on the port it is either 500 gross tons or 100 gross tons (or in a couple of cases there is a length requirement of 40m as well as or instead of the 500T, and in the case of Westport, which has been mentioned with respect to its bar in another thread, a draught of 3m as well as tonnage).

This means that any vessel over 500 gross tons will within harbour areas have a pilot on board unless the vessel's master is exempt - as is the case for the Cook Strait ferries, for example.

Naval vessels are always exempt which may explain why in one NZ port there is a very deep V shaped repair in one of the docks where a naval vessel went straight ahead into it . However, I think foreign ones generally take a pilot (maybe always?) these days (lets hope so in the case of one particular navy ).

[cantxsailor]

I don't much care what the regulations say I'm going to stay far out of the way of ANYTHING bigger than me. I traverse one of the busiest channels anywhere(Houston Ship Channel) on a regular basis and can tell you for sure the "Law of Gross Tonnage" is alive and well. I would no more take a chance that any given SHIP a) can see me, b) could avoid me or c) would even attempt to do so than fly to the moon.

In our little section of the channel I will not cross until I can see both directions for at least a mile. This means I have to(after coming out of our little side channel) travel on the wrong side of the channel and outside the markers. It's plenty deep and I do just ride the markers. It's not because I HAVE to do this but by choice. I really just want to stay out of the way.

As for the sailor who wrecked. He made a mistake in judgement and it cost him his boat. In my case there would be nothing the police or courts could that would be worse than that.

How did this get from a discussion about an unfortunate sailor to a pissing match between self appointed admirals and experts on maritime law?

The information was interesting but the tone was a bit overly testy.

I for one can attest to the fact that after 14days at sea islands DO sometimes just pop up from nowhere(figurativly of course). I fell asleep after a 14day salmon trolling trick and ran up on Vancouver Island in clear broad daylight. There were 2 of us on board, both nodded out. Pretty embarassing.

Oh and ya the sound of hitting the rocks will wake you up pretty quick...........m

[MidLandOne]

Will get the thread back on track then - just for you, you understand .

Originally Posted by cantxsailor

Oh and ya the sound of hitting the rocks will wake you up pretty quick...........m

There was an embarrassing case here a while back with a deep sea fishing boat heading to the fishing grounds. It went up on the rocks directly under a lighthouse which made for great news photos.

The watchkeeper reported in the accident investigation, along the lines you mention - "I remember being handed the watch and the next thing I remember was ..." .

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by cantxsailor

I don't much care what the regulations say I'm going to stay far out of the way of ANYTHING bigger than me. I

While I agree in general with this philosophy around here we have ships (piloted and not), tugs (towing and not), pilot boats, cranes, ferries, fishing boats, power boats, sailboats, kayaks (believe it or not) and other vessels.

I give way pretty much to all ships as they are 99% of the time restricted in maneuverability or constrained by thier draft. I give way to tugs towing.

Tugs not towing, ferries, fishing boats and anything else I generally hold course and speed and watch the other guy carefully. If it looks like it will be close, I will always give way.

I think this is how it's supposed to work.

The tugs and ferries are generally excellent about changing course early and positively. The fishing boats are the worst. They act like you don't exist.

[exfishnz]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

I give way pretty much to all ships as they are 99% of the time restricted in maneuverability or constrained by thier draft. I give way to tugs towing.

Perhaps someone should also tell the Singaporean navy.

In January 2003 the Singaporean naval vessel “RSS Courageous” was involved in a collision with the container vessel “ANL Indonesia” in the Malacca strait. 4 female crew of the naval vessel were killed.

Note how the container vessel only has some scrapping/denting (& possibly minor ripping) on its bow, yet the naval vessel broke in half.

(click to enlarge)


(click to enlarge)

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

.....I give way pretty much to all ships as they are 99% of the time restricted in maneuverability or constrained by thier draft. I give way to tugs towing.

Tugs not towing, ferries, fishing boats and anything else I generally hold course and speed and watch the other guy carefully. If it looks like it will be close, I will always give way.

I think this is how it's supposed to work.

.....

I think so to

[rossad]

I have been asked by the designer of the yacht (remember the American that sailed into Great Barrier) is to ad this to this forum.
AND - would like to say personally that emotions and inner feelings run deep for many people reading your pervious cotton thread writtings.


For the forum

Re Charles Whipple and his yacht Resolution.
After leaving Tauranga with a months test sailing under his belt, and under pressure to leave as no extension to his visa was possible . Note that he had already had two extensions totalling 18 months and two weeks on a 9 month visa.
He left on the best weather window advice available from the Metservice and both Customs and Immigration were ok with the idea that although already beyond his visa time he needed to wait for that window, and both had said dont go until you are ready. He left when he felt that he was ready.( I cast off the bow lines)
While the yacht was performing well and he'd made good progress in often really foul weather, when about 100 miles west of North Cape , the brand new Vetus brand fuel tank developed a major leak allowing diesel all over the inside of the cabin making the boat very dangerous, and as the fuel was carried upstairs by his movement the decks and cockpit were becoming increasingly risky so he turned back southward along the coast toward Tauranga to come back and fix it.
He believed that he was about 50 miles off when he went to bed, but was navigating on a large scale chart rather than a local one and a small error in plotting his position on the chart was a big error on the water.

He will be posting a detailed story that should put a stop to all the conjecture on www.duckworksmagazine.com in the next few days for anyone interested.

John Welsford
Designer,
Yacht " Resolution"
and freind of Charlie Whipple .

[GordMay]

Charlie’s (Charles T. Whipple) account of the events leading up to the terrible event and the grounding itself are available at “The Special Report: The Fate of Resolution”, at Duckworks:
Duckworks - Special Report: The Fate of Resolution

[exfishnz]

Originally Posted by rossad

I have been asked by the designer of the yacht (remember the American that sailed into Great Barrier) is to ad this to this forum.......

If I'm reading this correctly, then this happened just after midnight & there was a navigational (plotting the course on the chart) error. I don't think this incident has anything to do with single handed sailing at all[1].

[1] That is unless the grounding area is well marked with night time navigational aids.

[donradcliffe]

Unfortunately, it has everything to do with fatigue, which has everything to do with singlehanding. It is also a good advertisement for chartplotters, which give fatigued sailors a clearer picture of their situation.

[exfishnz]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Unfortunately, it has everything to do with fatigue, which has everything to do with singlehanding

Fatigue can also happen with multiple crew.