Don't anchor in the channel and this won't happen.

[onestepcsy37]

Bahamian sailing rules. Da biggest boat got da right o way.

Do you actually think that tanker can alter course or stop in time to avoid the moron? I thought the idiot was going to catch his anchor rode in the ships prop. Now that would have been funny!

Right or wrong, stay out of the way of big ships. They can't turn on a dime or stop in a hurry.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by onestepcsy37

Do you actually think that tanker can alter course or stop in time to avoid the moron? ... They can't turn on a dime or stop in a hurry.

They sure can't stop in a hurry - 50,000 tonnes carries a lot of momentum. Also in a crash stop, there's a tendency for the ship's heading to slew way off course - so stopping or reversing the engines is usually not the first option for collision avoidance particularly in a channel. As far as turning, there is a bit of an assumption here that they can't turn. In reality, a vessel of this size can generally complete a 90º turn at full speed, in 1/3 - 1/2 mile. Interestingly they turn faster laden, than in-ballast. For a 5-10º course change, it requires a few hundred yards.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Were they anchored or stalled and adrift?
Probably didn't help much to have the "rescue" boat blocking the other reasonable escape route; forced the big guy to thread the needle between the sitting duck and the buoy. Did you hear the guy telling Horizon Athena to stop on the radio - like that could happen?

From what I could see in the video the ship had long committed to a course before the rescue boat blocked the option of passing on the other side of the stalled/anchored boat. If you look at the start of the video the resue boat is still quite far off and there is plenty of room between the rescue and the other boat if the ship had chosen to go that way. By that time it was far too late for the ship to alter to pass on the other side.

[Lodesman]

You can't possibly tell that! When the video starts, the "rescue" boat is already in the way of the tanker and on it's port bow. The video doesn't focus on the tanker at all, so there's no way to tell if it was turning or not. And it sure as heck was not too close for it to have completed a small turn - it's almost two shiplengths back from the stranded boat when the video starts.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

You can't possibly tell that! When the video starts, the "rescue" boat is already in the way of the tanker and on it's port bow. The video doesn't focus on the tanker at all, so there's no way to tell if it was turning or not. And it sure as heck was not too close for it to have completed a small turn - it's almost two shiplengths back from the stranded boat when the video starts.

The ship and the stalled boat are both visible in the very opening frame of the video. From the perspective the ship is at most only a few hundred yards from the stalled/anchored boat. Also at that time there is clearly plenty of room between the rescue boat and the stalled boat for the ship to pass between the two if had been able to.

However at 300-400 yards away it is far too late for a ship of that size to alter course at all. It is obvious that the ship is already committed to passing the stalled boat on the far side and would be unable to change that decision at that point.

[captain58sailin]

What is far more dangerous is being sucked into the propeller, once past the bow, the movement of the tanker hull through the water sucks the smaller vessel into him and it is possible for the propeller to chop him into bits, safer with a loaded tanker than with an empty.

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by captain58sailin

What is far more dangerous is being sucked into the propeller, once past the bow, the movement of the tanker hull through the water sucks the smaller vessel into him and it is possible for the propeller to chop him into bits, safer with a loaded tanker than with an empty.

To expand on the concern that the stern presents in this (and many other) scenario is, if the Tanker crew had elected to perform a large helm movement to starboard (many mariners will instinctively avoid port alterations in collision avoidance situations), not only could he have swung out of the channel (bad), but it would have been hard to prevent the stern from sliding over/into the run about.

As he got closer to the edge of the channel (depending on water depth), his control over his ship would have become increasingly precarious.

Same thing with backing the snot out of her, he would likely have yawed all over the place, especially if its shallow, maybe still hit the run about and put her aground outside the channel.

A little scoot to starboard seems like pretty reasonable action to me.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[rognvald]

"The outcome of the grounding may well end up with greater loss of life than if the occupants of the small craft do indeed perish as a result of the collision.

The skipper of the tanker knows this, knows that those other potential deaths may be folks innocent of any error or wrongdoing, and knows that a large environmental insult is quite likely if he grounds the tanker. The decision isn't so simple as Roganvald's "save a human life" stance suggests." Jim Cate


Wow! Another laurel for humanity! I can only imagine, based upon my personal code of ethics, how I would deal with killing an innocent person(s)( in this case most likely disabled in the water) if it could have been prevented. It is obvious there are those on this Forum who can rationalize this act for the "public good" or to prevent unknown/unforeseen "potential deaths." You have a split second to make a decision that you will live with for the rest of your life. Based upon previous remarks, it is obvious that there are some who could easily rationalize running down the runabout irrespective of the consequences.
For me, the horse has been thoroughly thrashed and opinions on all sides have been well vented. It is, however, interesting to see how people think about things and frequently I am quite surprised. Kudos to all for an intelligent, honest discussion . . . but right now I'm thinking "Rocna or Manson"-- now that's a real discussion. Good luck and safe sailing. Captain Rognvald--Knight Errant lost in the 21st Century.

[NOLA_sailing]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"You have a split second to make a decision that you will live with for the rest of your life.

This is why maritime pilots get paid so well. As previously mentioned, it appears the pilot (directly or via the helmsman) was able to thread the needle in a manner that spared the bay boat without compromising the control and safety of the tanker.

Also, the bridge of that tanker had access to data that is immeasurable in the video. Were the wind and/or current acting in such a manner that the pilot was confident that the bay boat was drifting to port and therefore kept to the starboard side of the channel? Was any commercial traffic heading down the channel in the opposite direction that, despite being at a distance, made any alteration to port a potential for a much more catastrophic collision?

Finding out where this video takes place can eliminate (or possibly foster) a good bit of the speculation here.

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"The outcome of the grounding may well end up with greater loss of life than if the occupants of the small craft do indeed perish as a result of the collision.

The skipper of the tanker knows this, knows that those other potential deaths may be folks innocent of any error or wrongdoing, and knows that a large environmental insult is quite likely if he grounds the tanker. The decision isn't so simple as Roganvald's "save a human life" stance suggests." Jim Cate


Wow! Another laurel for humanity! I can only imagine, based upon my personal code of ethics, how I would deal with killing an innocent person(s)( in this case most likely disabled in the water) if it could have been prevented. It is obvious there are those on this Forum who can rationalize this act for the "public good" or to prevent unknown/unforeseen "potential deaths." You have a split second to make a decision that you will live with for the rest of your life. Based upon previous remarks, it is obvious that there are some who could easily rationalize running down the runabout irrespective of the consequences.
For me, the horse has been thoroughly thrashed and opinions on all sides have been well vented. It is, however, interesting to see how people think about things and frequently I am quite surprised. Kudos to all for an intelligent, honest discussion . . . but right now I'm thinking "Rocna or Manson"-- now that's a real discussion. Good luck and safe sailing. Captain Rognvald--Knight Errant lost in the 21st Century.

Rog, you have an interesting risk management philosophy for some one who choses to cruise for recreation. As much as a ship captain is expected to be a good ship handler, navigator and resource manager, the skill that will most separate a captain from say the second mate or the senior engineer is his ability to manage risk.

Using your black and white approach to risk management, it would be very difficult for a captain to leave the dock knowing all the hazards of the sea that could bring harm to his crew and the public as well.

If a captain sailed in any weather all the time- surely he would lose or damage his ship eventually.

If he never sailed, he'd lose his job- rather quickly. The nature of the job requires a constant balancing of risk, trying to chose the lesser of two evils, often with little time to make the decision.

Coming from a background of search and rescue, followed by commercial carriage of passengers, it feels very natural for me to see some one weigh multiple options, pick one that seems the best at the time- based on experience and training, and deal with the out come after the fact as best they can.

Somebody who manages risk to the best of their ability, with the information available to them, even if faced with uncertain outcomes, isn't a bad citizen. We need those people to make society function, if everybody chose a career free of risk, we would likely fail as a society.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[hpeer]

You guys see a lot in that video.

All i can tell for sure is the boat went up for sale the next day.

[rognvald]

"Somebody who manages risk to the best of their ability, with the information available to them, even if faced with uncertain outcomes, isn't a bad citizen. We need those people to make society function, if everybody chose a career free of risk, we would likely fail as a society." FamilyVan


And, if everyone lived without moral/ethical compunction, we would be living, once again, in the Dark Ages and "would likely fail as a society." FamilyVan, I hope you can see that this has become a circular discussion with no equitable resolution possible since the viewpoints previously expressed represent the core values and accumulated life experiences of contributors who vary greatly in their lives and appear at peace with their conclusions. Yours (ethics/experiences) are clearly different than mine, but I can assure you they have nothing to do with my competence, resolve or ability to function and compete at high levels on many playing fields because my value of human life is different than yours. This inferred assumption, of yours, is patently absurd since you can have no possible intimate or general knowledge of the accumulated abilities and accomplishments in my life. And, this is how I prefer it to be since I am not running for President and it has no bearing on a discussion of ethics. Call a spade a spade? You might be looking at a diamond and not have a clue. Good luck, good sailing Dr. Freud and, by the way, . . . I don't think I'll be keeping my next appointment.

[SVNeko]

I like the way the fools take their lifejackets off as soon as 1/2 the ship passed.

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"Somebody who manages risk to the best of their ability, with the information available to them, even if faced with uncertain outcomes, isn't a bad citizen. We need those people to make society function, if everybody chose a career free of risk, we would likely fail as a society." FamilyVan


And, if everyone lived without moral/ethical compunction, we would be living, once again, in the Dark Ages and "would likely fail as a society." FamilyVan, I hope you can see that this has become a circular discussion with no equitable resolution possible since the viewpoints previously expressed represent the core values and accumulated life experiences of contributors who vary greatly in their lives and appear at peace with their conclusions. Yours (ethics/experiences) are clearly different than mine, but I can assure you they have nothing to do with my competence, resolve or ability to function and compete at high levels on many playing fields because my value of human life is different than yours. This inferred assumption, of yours, is patently absurd since you can have no possible intimate or general knowledge of the accumulated abilities and accomplishments in my life. And, this is how I prefer it to be since I am not running for President and it has no bearing on a discussion of ethics. Call a spade a spade? You might be looking at a diamond and not have a clue. Good luck, good sailing Dr. Freud and, by the way, . . . I don't think I'll be keeping my next appointment.

I concede, you're morally superior to me. However, if I need a an insurance agent, statistician or mariner I'll know who not to call.

Sent from my XP7700 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[GILow]

Not sure if I missed this in all the interesting comments, but FWIW the ship probably did sound a collision warning, well before the video starts. Which is exactly why the video shows a whole stack of rubber-neckers on the observing boat. Toot, toot, toot, toot, toot! "Hey, what's going on?!" "Oh boy, look at that little boat, he's gonna get clobbered for sure!" "Quick, who's got a camera!?"

Sadly the five short blasts are something I hear all too frequently where I sail, where the racers and fishing boat seem to delight in making life difficult for the big boats. From my far too many observations the ships give lots of warning.

Matt


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum