David vs Goliath

[imagine2frolic]

P.E.

It takes no effort at all to make a pretty lady look pretty. As Lat38 says...LOOKING GOOD, your just modest!

[dacust]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

dan,

I see the impact at 143312. I don't see how you figure SB was more than a boat-length away, and am curious how you came up with that? I figure she's 30 feet or even less in the first photo. To cover that in 18 seconds, she must have been doing 1 knot. Also SB travels from MF's bow down to the midpoint - so MF travelled 100-150 feet in the same time. So her speed by those calculations was 3-5 kts. This does not match with the photographer's estimate of MF's speed, nor with what the visual clues show, so you can see where I have my suspicions about the accuracy of the timestamps. Regardless, it is apparent to me that MF's speed is 3 to 5 times faster than SB's.

I'm not following the other forum or Perkin's blogs - does he state anywhere what speed they were going?

Kevin

First of all, I agree with HyLite. Most of this conjecture is maeningless. But figuring the speed is a fun exercise for me, so...

Kevin,

I started this post to justify what I originally said, but the more I look at it, I think you are right. I think I was subconsciously judging the distance from the bow to the impact point through visual impression instead of objective analysis. Given MFs movement, that of course would be impossible. Somehow SB looks too large to be all the way up to the bow, but I now think it is much closer to the bow than I thought. So, compared to my earlier estimates, that would reduce the predicted speed of SB to a speed lower than the slowest prediction of my original post. As far as to MFs speed, I think I already had a range wide enough to where it just moves the guess of a speed further towards the upper end of the range I gave. At the moment, I don't think I'll re-calc. Maybe later.

Thanks for pointing that out.

As a stretch, it could also be conjectured that MF is going MUCH slower than it looks, and SB is indeed, further down MFs side than it appears. Even now, when I look at it, the perspective makes it look to me like SB is at least 1/4 aft of the bow. I don't REALLY think that is the case, but it's possible.

An aside. After examining that photo, (20081004_143254_2666) it appears to me that's a lens somewhere between normal and wide-angle. I'm gonna make a wild guess and say about 40-45mm (35mm film equivalent, actual could be longer if it's not a full frame CCD). The angle combined with the focal length of the lens makes it hard to say where SB was in relation to MF in the first photo of the sequence.

-dan

[dacust]

Originally Posted by dacust

Most of this conjecture is maeningless.

It's also meaningless, but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

[Lodesman]

Since we've had Peter Lyons and Tom Perkins quoted from another site, I thought in the interest of fairness this should also be brought over to this thread:

"I personally know the sailers of the Stand By, both gentleman in their 50's and 60's who have been sailing on the bay for decades. They are excellent sailers and they have said the Falcon turned in front of them. However, as they are not billionaires, they appear to be losing the battle of your opinions. Immediately after the collision the two parties were in radio contact with each by radio. These gentleman are sick over this and do not deserve the some of the more negative comments posted."

[BassAckwards]

Maltese Falcon - Eyewitness on Treasure Island


"On October 8th, 2008 Sailor (anonymous) says:
We had just walked to the shore of Treasure Island after enjoying a gorgeous afternoon of Dragon Boat Racing at the Dragon Boat Festival. We saw the Maltese Falcon coming from the Golden Gate Bridge and we started taking pictures of her. We just watched her sail through the bay along the Barbary Coast through to the Bay Bridge. Then she turned around and started heading back in our direction. As she came closer to us on Treasure Island, we noticed a small motor boat chasing close behind it and also a sailboat coming ever so close. We continued taking pictures of her, then we noticed that the sailboat had changed course ever so slightly and started heading in the path of the oncoming Maltese Falcon. I kept on telling my girlfriend they were going to hit, then the Maltese Falcon sounds her horn and then...collision. You could hear it all the way to Treasure Island.
Once the sailboat hit the Maltese, it looked as if the sailboat decided to take off and headed toward the direction of the Bay Bridge. I noticed that the Maltese Falcon had changed course and she looked as if she would be going after the sailboat. Not sure what happened after that, but we did see the collision and if Ihad to place blame, looks as if the sailboat had come too close and caused the collision."

Maltese Falcon Involved in Collision | YachtPals.com

[BassAckwards]

Maltese Falcon Collision - I WAS THERE


"On October 7th, 2008 Sailor (anonymous) says:
Look at the picture. The small sloop sails high up underneath the Falcon. The massive sails of the Falcon alter the local wind direction. Note in the first picture that the two boats are at about a 45 degree angle to each other and that the small sloop is just staring to notice that she passing head to wind. In other words, she was on Port tack and while sailing up to get a good look at the Falcon (who has to sail much much lower - because she's a square rigged ship and because she was going about 14 at the time) she got caught in the draft of the Falcon's sails. This backwinded the jib of the sloop and spun her around. Just to leeward of the Falcon, the wind is not going the same direction as it is to windward of her. So, with the headsail backwinded the sloop spun and even though the skipper of the sloop cast off the sails almost entirely (clear from the second picture), her momentum and the fact that he couldn't really get the sheets all the way out caused him to hit the Falcon.
Two reasons that the Falcon is not at fault.
1) A boat shall not tack so close as to prevent the newly disadvantaged yacht to keep clear. Obviously, the Falcon could not possibly tack in response to the sloop tacking so closely. Again - see the first picture where the sloop is tacking literally within 40' of the side of the Falcon.
2) Regardless of any port/starboard situation, in COLREGS (just like in the sailing rules) all skippers are required to avoid collisions if at all possible. This poor soul could have easily avoided the collision by simply heading down hard. But, he wanted to be close to the big boat to have a look.
I watched it - I was there. There was absolutely nothing the Falcon could have done to avoid, after the sloop tacked. And the Falcon was 100' (ONE HUNDRED FEET) past the sloop with it's bow when the sloop tacked and smacked her."

Beau

Maltese Falcon Involved in Collision | YachtPals.com



Including the photographer, there are 3 witnesses who tell a fairly consistent story in what they saw. I have a hard time reconciling the fact that the SB left the scene and had to be chased down. If someone crashed into my boat, I would want to talk with them, not leave the scene.

BassAckwards

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by BassAckwards

Including the photographer, there are 3 witnesses who tell a fairly consistent story in what they saw.

One says SB turned a little, another said SB was on stbd tack and turned a lot, and the other claimed SB was on port tack - how is that consistent? And the guy that claimed to be there stated that MF's bow was 100 feet past SB before SB turned - so we have to believe SB is capable of going 50 kts (or MF was only going 1 kt) Yeah right!

I have a hard time reconciling the fact that the SB left the scene and had to be chased down. If someone crashed into my boat, I would want to talk with them, not leave the scene.

Well according to one source they made radio contact immediately - can you reconcile that?

[BassAckwards]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

One says SB turned a little, another said SB was on stbd tack and turned a lot, and the other claimed SB was on port tack - how is that consistent? And the guy that claimed to be there stated that MF's bow was 100 feet past SB before SB turned - so we have to believe SB is capable of going 50 kts (or MF was only going 1 kt) Yeah right!



Well according to one source they made radio contact immediately - can you reconcile that?

Everyone has a tolerance for logic, its just not as well developed in some. Good luck.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by BassAckwards

Everyone has a tolerance for logic, its just not as well developed in some. Good luck.

[imagine2frolic]

I am bumping this back to the top. I am wondering if there is anything new?

[JohnT]

The MF has a pilot on board – look at the sequence of photo’s and you will see the H flag flying from the port fwd spreader, with the US courtesy flag on stb.

Now, I do not know what the port regulations are in SFB but in most ports all vessels must keep clear of vessels under pilot when within the port limits. Sailing vessels would fall under port regulations and the general ColRegs do not apply. Maybe I am wrong but it would be interesting for somebody in the know (of the SF port regulations) to have some input.

John

[Pelagic]

John, where have you read that rule that a vessel with a Pilot is considered hampered?

[JohnT]

Pelagic,

I did not say hampered - what I said is that vessels that are in port limits usually have to comply with special port regulations of the specific port. For instance, many ports have a regulation that all pleasure or recreational vessels (which normally do not require a pilot) must stay well clear of vessels that are under pilot and maneuvering within port limits. This is the reason that once a pilot is on board your vessel, you are required to show that you have a pilot on board by hoisting the H signal flag. The MF is flying the H flag. As a pleasure or recreational vessel within most port limits, your navigation falls under the port regulations and are required to comply with them.

All I was trying to find out, as a person not from SF, is what the port regulations of the port of SF state regarding pleasure or recreational vessels in regard to them maneuvering in close proximity of a vessel under pilot. In some ports, as per the port regulations, vessels not requiring a pilot, such as a small recreational vessel, must keep well clear of a vessel under pilot which is inside the port limits. Nobody appears to have looked at this aspect of the incident.

By the way, was it your vessel on the hard it the Elliot Basin in Cape Town a few months back?

John

[Christian Van H]

I'm sorry to be so blunt, but I've been sailing a long time, and I understand very well what the pics show; two freakin' idiots sailing into the side of a mega-yacht. Don't EVEN bother quoting the COLREGs to me. The MF actually completely blotted out their sun and horizon. Jeez, cant we EVER take responsibility for ANYTHING anymore? Don't bother analyzing anything, and don't ever try this at home. IMHO, Chris

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by JohnT

Pelagic,

By the way, was it your vessel on the hard it the Elliot Basin in Cape Town a few months back?

John

Not me