David vs Goliath

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Tao,

Avoiding action by the give way vessel is to be positive, large enough to be readily apparent to the other vessel, and done in a timely manner. In my hypothetical scenario MF would have failed in this regard - would she still be only 33% to blame?

Agree there is probably a report, but suspect it may be years before it sees the light of day.

Now that I've re-read some of the earlier posts, Kevin, including my own, I need to correct some things:

1 - Where I wrote "port-to-port" I should have written "starboard-to-starboard."

2 - You're also correct that Perkins never stated that Stand By had altered course to port, but that Falcon's alteration of course to port had created a situation where the vessels were on courses that would result in a 200 foot separation as they passed one another. Perkins does claim that Stand By ". . . was originally on a roughly reciprocal course to that of the Falcon . . ." and I guess that means before Falcon altered course to port to create the claimed 200 foot separation.

3 - I also have a clearer understanding of what you were asking in apportioning blame; i.e. based on your hypothetical, how would one apportion blame? Given the scenario you've laid out, Falcon is probably at least 50% at fault, and possibly as much as 100%. However, I still am of the opinion that your graphics haven't quite captured the situation that day.

As to whether it will be years before the CG report ever sees the light of day - well, remember, this is San Francisco we're talking about and there are anarchists everywhere. I will only be surprised if it doesn't leak, probably sooner, rather than later!

TaoJones

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by TaoJones

Where I wrote "port-to-port" I should have written "starboard-to-starboard."

I gathered that.

Perkins does claim that Stand By ". . . was originally on a roughly reciprocal course to that of the Falcon . . ." and I guess that means before Falcon altered course to port to create the claimed 200 foot separation.

That's open to interpretation, I suppose. It's not really clear in Perkins' statement - I took it to mean they were on roughly reciprocal courses after MF altered to port but before SB altered to stbd. Since MF's alteration was slight, it could be assumed that their courses were roughly reciprocal before and after MF's turn.

However, I still am of the opinion that your graphics haven't quite captured the situation that day.

Fair enough. I'm curious as to which scenario people find more plausible than my hypothesis:

1) Two sailors on Stand By didn't see the world's largest privately owned yacht on a clear day from a few hundred feet away;

2) The crew of Stand By typically tack without handling their sails;

3) The crew of Stand By takes pictures without a camera;

4) The crew of Stand By inexplicably lost control and weathercocked, while in MF's lee;

5) That Haight-Ashbury hippies toke up on the bay;

6) The crew of Stand By deliberately rammed the Maltese Falcon, to become famous?, sue a rich guy?, suicide pact?; and/or

7) That upon passing the bow of MF, Stand By altered 90 degrees to starboard and accelerated to at least 16 kts?

Have I missed any?


Kevin

[David M]

Prediction: Stand By gains as much notariety the Cosco Busan.

[Lodesman]

One aspect that hasn't been discussed - the master of Maltese Falcon, by his own admission manoeuvred his vessel which has the wind-blocking capacity of an apartment building, 200 feet upwind of another sailboat. This would seem to be an obvious, if not deliberate attempt to take the privileged vessel's wind. I haven't been sailing long enough to know what etiquette normally applies in such a situation, but given they weren't racing, to me it seems a tad rude.


Kevin

[FrankZ]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

... but given they weren't racing, to me it seems a tad rude.


Kevin

Two boats, same water.. of course it was a race.

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

One aspect that hasn't been discussed - the master of Maltese Falcon, by his own admission manoeuvred his vessel which has the wind-blocking capacity of an apartment building, 200 feet upwind of another sailboat. This would seem to be an obvious, if not deliberate attempt to take the privileged vessel's wind. I haven't been sailing long enough to know what etiquette normally applies in such a situation, but given they weren't racing, to me it seems a tad rude.

About the only thing Maltese Falcon could do that day was to hold her course, with at best minor adjustments. The spectator fleet was drawn to her as if they were mosquitos to a bug-zapper. In my opinion, any pleasure craft who sailed into harm's way got what they deserved, COLREGS be damned.

There. I've said it.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

About the only thing Maltese Falcon could do that day was to hold her course, with at best minor adjustments.

BS! She's clipping along with bone in her teeth and there's not another vessel anywhere near her in any of the photos leading up to the collision.

COLREGS be damned.

Well, that seems to be the consensus. How very disturbing.

[Stillraining]

Originally Posted by Chief Engineer

This is getting to the point where we should be looking at "The Grassy Knoll"

Pretty sure there was a Second boat...

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

About the only thing Maltese Falcon could do that day was to hold her course,...

And slow down...

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

In my opinion, any pleasure craft who sailed into harm's way got what they deserved, COLREGS be damned.

I just wanted to put my "COLREGS be damned" quote in its original context.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

I just wanted to put my "COLREGS be damned" quote in its original context.

So commercial craft should have right of way at all times?

I don't disagree that SB had opportunity to avoid. Just trying to understand the COlREGS be damned statement.

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

So commercial craft should have right of way at all times?

I don't disagree that SB had opportunity to avoid. Just trying to understand the COlREGS be damned statement.

My point is simply this: Darwin trumps COLREGS. If you put yourself in harms way you should not rely on the regulations to protect you.

I have already given my opinion on the collision.

By the way, I certainly observe COLREGS and do my best to sail in a safe manner. But I avoid, where possible, putting myself in a position where my safety is dependent on the other vessel following the rules.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

I don't disagree that SB had opportunity to avoid. Just trying to understand the COlREGS be damned statement.

Whatever the rights or not under the ColRegs the skipper of the small vessel was very foolish to get himself into the position he ended up in against a much larger and less manoeuvrable vessel (even if it should turn out to be that the small vessel was the stand on vessel).

This foolishness has been made an offence here in NZ (at least) by legislation requiring all vessels under 500gt not to impede any vessel that is greater than 500gt while in harbour limits (which generally extend quite a ways out to sea). A very sensible piece of legislation in my view, but is sad that it is found to be necessary.

[Chief Engineer]

Anybody ever rememberr those Pages in Chapman where they showed a "scad" of boats and described the various right of way rules?

You can see that for real in Baltimore harbor any weekend

[Hiracer]

Originally Posted by 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

I agree. COLREGs are for figuring out liability after the fact. Common sense is how you avoid asking the COLREG question in the first place.

I once had a large ferry try to run me over in the fog. I kept turning starboard to go port-to-port--eventually turning 90 degrees from my original bearing, and that SOB kept turning port into me. I couldn't believe my radar screen. When he appeared out of the fog, horn a blaring and bearing right over us, I heard my wife whimper. We got clear, barely, and I have had a very clear understanding of the value of COLREGs ever since.

When the light turns green and I drive across an intersection, I look to see who is running the red light. Only an idiot doesn't look.

SB was piloted by idiots.