Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 14-07-2015, 05:42   #31
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 2,638
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pinguino View Post
Re 5 blasts and not altering course.. in that situation you would give 5 blasts long before that vid started.. and how do we know the tanker didn't alter course... ? Would only take a few degrees .. and at the end of the day she missed the runabout..not by much maybe but she did miss it....
My thoughts exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pinguino View Post
So given the choice..smack runabout or put chemical tanker on the bricks I think I know what most would opt for..
You and me both.

I wouldn't be surprised if the tanker had intended to go on the other side of the runabout, but then the lone ranger came rushing in for the rescue and cut off that route, forcing him to cut between the boat and lateral buoy. As close as he was to the hapless boat, it looked to me that he'd be even closer to the buoy.
__________________

__________________
Lodesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 05:48   #32
Registered User
 
FamilyVan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,779
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lodesman View Post
My thoughts exactly.

You and me both.

I wouldn't be surprised if the tanker had intended to go on the other side of the runabout, but then the lone ranger came rushing in for the rescue and cut off that route, forcing him to cut between the boat and lateral buoy. As close as he was to the hapless boat, it looked to me that he'd be even closer to the buoy.
I can pretty well guarantee if the Captains of the Exxon Valdez or Costa Concordia had just squished a run about- they wouldn't be a topic of global conversation today.

Especially a chemical tanker diesel, jet fuel, maybe even gasoline!- I'm with you guys- keep that one off the side walks.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
__________________

__________________
FamilyVan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 09:41   #33
Registered User
 
rognvald's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Summer: In the land of Wooly Mammoths
Boat: Pearson 34-II
Posts: 2,252
Images: 2
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

"At any rate, they didn't squash numb nuts who found himself stopped in a shipping channel regardless of why he was there." FamilyVan

"Your assessment of survival rates of small vessels being hit by ships is questionable too. Between the bow wave and the boundary layer, you have a reasonable chance of just serious damage and or just the scare of your life in a situation like this."

I know lots of professional mariners that have had yachts and even kayaks bump down their sides without so much as a scratch (to the people)." Family Van

Family,
Perhaps you might consider the possibility that the "numb nuts" you referred to above might well have been your son or daughter out for a joy ride with their friends on dad's boat and the engine stalled. Or, maybe your Mom and Dad with their best friends who just bought their first boat and are completely clueless about anything that pertains to the water. Although responsibility is theoretically twofold, a prudent mariner must always assume ignorance of the other vessel irrespective of a professional or recreational status. The small runabout was clearly disabled and the people appeared terrified.
Secondly, it would be helpful if you could provide statistics for CF members concerning collisions of big ships with small craft. Although personal beliefs/observations might seem valid to you, most people like to see documented statistics. Especially, when the potential for loss of life is an outcome.
There is an assumption made by some that everyone on the water is equally knowledgeable, competent and respectful. On our first offshore excursion into the Gulf of Mexico, we encountered a Shrimp Trawler on a fast approaching collision course with our vessel. They were not fishing/dragging nets and were traveling about 8-10 knots. We attempted radio contact several times with no answer. We altered course with a safe distance and ran parallel to the vessel as it passed. There was no one at the helm or anywhere in sight. He was the stand on vessel. Did it matter? Good luck and safe sailing.
__________________
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathrustra
rognvald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:26   #34
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Out there doin' it
Boat: 47' Olympic Adventure
Posts: 2,638
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rognvald View Post
". On our first offshore excursion into the Gulf of Mexico, we encountered a Shrimp Trawler on a fast approaching collision course with our vessel. They were not fishing/dragging nets and were traveling about 8-10 knots. We attempted radio contact several times with no answer. We altered course with a safe distance and ran parallel to the vessel as it passed. There was no one at the helm or anywhere in sight. He was the stand on vessel. Did it matter?
I normally don't look at fishing vessels as paragons of colregs virtue, but I'm puzzled by one thing - if he was was stand on, then why were you trying to radio him?
__________________
Lodesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:35   #35
Registered User
 
FamilyVan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,779
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rognvald View Post
"At any rate, they didn't squash numb nuts who found himself stopped in a shipping channel regardless of why he was there." FamilyVan

"Your assessment of survival rates of small vessels being hit by ships is questionable too. Between the bow wave and the boundary layer, you have a reasonable chance of just serious damage and or just the scare of your life in a situation like this."

I know lots of professional mariners that have had yachts and even kayaks bump down their sides without so much as a scratch (to the people)." Family Van

Family,
Perhaps you might consider the possibility that the "numb nuts" you referred to above might well have been your son or daughter out for a joy ride with their friends on dad's boat and the engine stalled. Or, maybe your Mom and Dad with their best friends who just bought their first boat and are completely clueless about anything that pertains to the water. Although responsibility is theoretically twofold, a prudent mariner must always assume ignorance of the other vessel irrespective of a professional or recreational status. The small runabout was clearly disabled and the people appeared terrified.
Secondly, it would be helpful if you could provide statistics for CF members concerning collisions of big ships with small craft. Although personal beliefs/observations might seem valid to you, most people like to see documented statistics. Especially, when the potential for loss of life is an outcome.
There is an assumption made by some that everyone on the water is equally knowledgeable, competent and respectful. On our first offshore excursion into the Gulf of Mexico, we encountered a Shrimp Trawler on a fast approaching collision course with our vessel. They were not fishing/dragging nets and were traveling about 8-10 knots. We attempted radio contact several times with no answer. We altered course with a safe distance and ran parallel to the vessel as it passed. There was no one at the helm or anywhere in sight. He was the stand on vessel. Did it matter? Good luck and safe sailing.
You guys and your statistics, what a silly question. Who do you think would compile statistics about people who weren't injured? How about you provide statistics supporting your claims since you're the one making up percentages?

Are you familiar with the concept of pacing? If you are on a ship and you require a transfer of material or personnel I can bring a small vessel out to meet you, I would request that you maintain course and speed and I would drive my boat towards you, at the last second I would turn my wheel into you and power up using bernulis principal to hold my vessel against yours, I could then leave the wheel and assist you in the transfer. Controlled collision of a very small fibre glass vessel with a large steel ship. Done it hundreds of times- never been hurt. Mere contact or close proximity will not necessarily spell disaster.

Boats are movable objects- to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So if a 30000 ton ship collides at say 10 knots with a 3000 lb boat- it isn't transferring 30000 tons of energy- only the energy required to accelerate 3000 lbs at 10 knots. Which most well built boats should be able to withstand. A glancing blow will transfer much less energy. The problem comes when the force acts downward and over comes the small vessels bouyancy, or from abrasion as it bumps down the side, or some kind of sheering force.

So you find your statistics or explain to me why death is so certain using some kind of physics or first hand experience.

I have personally witnessed ships or large vessels strike small vessels but have never directly witnessed a fatality as a result. I've been involved in several boat collisions as well- and yet here I am.

Yes- colliding with ships is very bad, something best avoided but to say death is a certain outcome is awefully dramatic.

Now if this guy had instead of dropping anchor in a shipping lane to fish, had stopped his Hyundai accent in the centre lane of a free way to have a picnic, and you witnessed a you tube video of an 18 wheeler swerving to narrowly miss the hyundai- would you call the truck driver irresponsible?

Oh right- its the water- personal responsibility doesn't exist there. At least not in some peoples opinions.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
__________________
FamilyVan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:36   #36
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Wherever the wind takes me
Boat: Bristol 41.1
Posts: 809
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lodesman View Post
I normally don't look at fishing vessels as paragons of colregs virtue, but I'm puzzled by one thing - if he was was stand on, then why were you trying to radio him?
Most likely to determine the safe side to pass, especially if he is trailing nets that may be miles in length. I often can't tell from a distance if the shrimper, for example, is actively fishing or preparing to drop a net. Better safe than sorry.

My experience is that most active small fishing boats will not answer a hail. They appear to all be engaged in fishing and no one is monitoring the VHF 13 or 16.
__________________
redsky49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:38   #37
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,243
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

It is my understanding also that you have a reasonable chance of being pushed aside by the bow wave, if the tanker is going fast enough to produce one.

If you watch this video, the ship hits the sailboat pretty much head on - and it still gets pushed aside. Unfortunately, the rig gets caught on the ship hull.

__________________
Bristol 31.1, SF Bay.
MarkSF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:39   #38
Registered User
 
rognvald's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Summer: In the land of Wooly Mammoths
Boat: Pearson 34-II
Posts: 2,252
Images: 2
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lodesman View Post
I normally don't look at fishing vessels as paragons of colregs virtue, but I'm puzzled by one thing - if he was was stand on, then why were you trying to radio him?
Sorry for the confusion. My error. WE were the stand on vessel . . . otherwise as you have pointed out-- it doesn't make sense. Thanks.
__________________
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathrustra
rognvald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:41   #39
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,243
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Maybe time to give the ship's pilot some credit? He threaded the needle very nicely. Just missed the boat, resulting in the boat harmlessly passing alongside. Hopefully, just missed the buoy too.

Sorry the two on board were terrified, but maybe that'll result in getting some lessons and safety equipment. Did you see either of them making any of the commonly accepted signs of distress? On a radio calling the tanker and/or the Coastguard?

The first thing I'd do would be to call the Vessel Traffic Service, and then the Coastguard, let them know of my situation.
__________________
Bristol 31.1, SF Bay.
MarkSF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:42   #40
Moderator Emeritus
 
David M's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay
Boat: research vessel
Posts: 10,152
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Nice maneuvering by the ship pilot. My guess is that the engine had failed and they put the anchor down. The indication is that they already had their life jackets on, which is what the Coasties tell people to do when they call in in distress.
__________________
David

Life begins where land ends.
David M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 10:58   #41
Registered User
 
rognvald's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Summer: In the land of Wooly Mammoths
Boat: Pearson 34-II
Posts: 2,252
Images: 2
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FamilyVan View Post
You guys and your statistics, what a silly question. Who do you think would compile statistics about people who weren't injured? How about you provide statistics supporting your claims since you're the one making up percentages?

Are you familiar with the concept of pacing? If you are on a ship and you require a transfer of material or personnel I can bring a small vessel out to meet you, I would request that you maintain course and speed and I would drive my boat towards you, at the last second I would turn my wheel into you and power up using bernulis principal to hold my vessel against yours, I could then leave the wheel and assist you in the transfer. Controlled collision of a very small fibre glass vessel with a large steel ship. Done it hundreds of times- never been hurt. Mere contact or close proximity will not necessarily spell disaster.

Boats are movable objects- to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So if a 30000 ton ship collides at say 10 knots with a 3000 lb boat- it isn't transferring 30000 tons of energy- only the energy required to accelerate 3000 lbs at 10 knots. Which most well built boats should be able to withstand. A glancing blow will transfer much less energy. The problem comes when the force acts downward and over comes the small vessels bouyancy, or from abrasion as it bumps down the side, or some kind of sheering force.

So you find your statistics or explain to me why death is so certain using some kind of physics or first hand experience.

I have personally witnessed ships or large vessels strike small vessels but have never directly witnessed a fatality as a result. I've been involved in several boat collisions as well- and yet here I am.

Yes- colliding with ships is very bad, something best avoided but to say death is a certain outcome is awefully dramatic.

Now if this guy had instead of dropping anchor in a shipping lane to fish, had stopped his Hyundai accent in the centre lane of a free way to have a picnic, and you witnessed a you tube video of an 18 wheeler swerving to narrowly miss the hyundai- would you call the truck driver irresponsible?

Oh right- its the water- personal responsibility doesn't exist there. At least not in some peoples opinions.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
We are drifting further off topic. The runabout did not appear in the video to be anchored. They appeared to be disabled. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Is maintaining course and speed with the right of way an excuse to kill/main/injure someone if there is a safer option? Statistics? This is what most courts and insurance companies use to determine fault . . . not heresay. I'm sure if you took the time you could provide us with some facts since you have chosen to imply that your observations represent the facts. In regards to personal responsibility, I have never claimed that it doesn't exist. I have stated that "common sense" coupled with personal responsibility and knowledge of maritime rules are used in conjunction to determine an appropriate course of action. Which of my above remarks do you find objectionable or disagree?
__________________
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathrustra
rognvald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 11:11   #42
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Boat: Beneteau Oceanis 38
Posts: 563
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Statistics? Here, let me google that for you:

Let me google that for you

USCG recreational watercraft statistics for 2014:

Total number of accidents where Navigation Rules Violation was a factor, involving recreational watercraft: 186. Fatalities: 14. Injuries: 147.

Obviously they are compiling accidents that don't include injuries. Of course, nobody is compiling statistics about near misses, because near misses aren't actually a thing.

Why are statistics important? Because they help you assess risk. Anecdotes, one off stories, create the impression that there's risk, but statistics allow you to determine if that impression is something you should worry about or not.

They help you separate what can happen from what's likely to happen.

People who don't understand statistics and risk lead lives ruled by myths and unjustified fears, and they take unnecessary risks without even realizing it.
__________________
mstrebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 11:19   #43
Registered User
 
scuba0_1's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: naples
Boat: 2005 Catalina 350
Posts: 670
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

If he was disabled why would he not call out for assistance to let everyone know there's a vessel broke down In the channel long before that ship came by. Unless he didn't have a radio either.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
__________________
scuba0_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 11:21   #44
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,243
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Could we have that again in English?
__________________
Bristol 31.1, SF Bay.
MarkSF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2015, 11:25   #45
Registered User
 
rognvald's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Summer: In the land of Wooly Mammoths
Boat: Pearson 34-II
Posts: 2,252
Images: 2
Re: Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstrebe View Post
Statistics? Here, let me google that for you:

Let me google that for you

USCG recreational watercraft statistics for 2014:

Total number of accidents where Navigation Rules Violation was a factor, involving recreational watercraft: 186. Fatalities: 14. Injuries: 147.

Obviously they are compiling accidents that don't include injuries. Of course, nobody is compiling statistics about near misses, because near misses aren't actually a thing.

Why are statistics important? Because they help you assess risk. Anecdotes, one off stories, create the impression that there's risk, but statistics allow you to determine if that impression is something you should worry about or not.

They help you separate what can happen from what's likely to happen.

People who don't understand statistics and risk lead lives ruled by myths and unjustified fears, and they take unnecessary risks without even realizing it.
Great link! Actually the statistics are higher: 4064 accidents;610 deaths;2678 injuries;39 million in damages with a 10.6% increase in deaths over the previous year. See below:

 In 2014, the Coast Guard counted 4,064 accidents that involved 610 deaths, 2,678
injuries and approximately $39 million dollars of damage to property as a result of
recreational boating accidents.
 The fatality rate was 5.2 deaths per 100,000 registered recreational vessels.
This rate represents a 10.6% increase from last year’s fatality rate of 4.7
deaths per 100,000 registered recreational vessels.
 Compared to 2013, the number of accidents increased 0.05%, the number of
deaths increased 8.9%, and the number of injuries increased 2.2%.
 Where cause of death was known, 78% of fatal boating accident victims drowned. Of
those drowning victims with reported life jacket usage, 84% were not wearing a life
jacket.
 Where instruction was known, 23% of deaths occurred on boats where the operator
had received boating safety instruction. Only 12% percent of deaths occurred on
vessels where the operator had received a nationally-approved boating safety
education certificate.
 Eight out of every ten boaters who drowned were using vessels less than 21 feet in
length.
 Operator inattention, improper lookout, operator inexperience, excessive speed, and
alcohol use rank as the top five primary contributing factors in accidents.
 Alcohol use is the leading known contributing factor in fatal boating accidents; where
the primary cause was known, it was listed as the leading factor in 21% of deaths.
 Twelve children under age thirteen lost their lives while boating in 2014. Seven
children or approximately 58% died from drowning. Four children or 57% of those
who drowned were wearing a life jacket; two were not required to by state law.
 Where data was known, the most common types of vessels involved in reported
accidents were open motorboats (47%), personal watercraft (17%), and cabin
motorboats (15%).
 Where data was known, the vessel types with the highest percentage of deaths were
open motorboats (47%), canoes (13%), and kayaks (10%).
 The 11,804,002 recreational vessels registered by the states in 2014 represent a
1.7% decrease from last year when 12,013,496 recreational vessels were registered.
__________________

__________________
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathrustra
rognvald is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
anchor

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gov Cut to Channel 5 via Hawk Channel SecondWind Atlantic & the Caribbean 2 19-11-2013 20:57
Bow vs Anchor (Anchor Won) PhilDuhs Construction, Maintenance & Refit 21 09-09-2011 06:37
Don't Trust the Weather Channel, etc . . . jjohnsonmarine The Sailor's Confessional 25 07-02-2011 07:37



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:37.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.