Sailing boat overrun by motoryacht, deadly accident

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

As long as they transmit AIS and you can receive it you can greatly reduce the risk they pose.


This is a contradition. If sailboaters are less likely to cause fatalities/injuries, then sail boaters are therefore less irresponsible than power boaters.

This is the same with drunk driver vs drunk pedestrian. Who is more irresponsible?

Yes in many cases when cars are trying to hit people. This is generally an unfair analogy because pedestrians simply have to stay out of the road where on the sea there are not zones that are safe to navigate in to avoid small powerboats.

Except for that one time my cabbie decided to drive up on the sidewalk to get around traffic even though pedestrians were using said sidewalk at the time.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by SeanPatrick

A number of people have mentioned how difficult it is to judge another vessel's course at large distances. But there is an easy rule which will help you identify a collision risk very quickly - even if the other vessel is just a dot on the horizon, and all you need is your compass. Lodesman hinted at it up-thread:

CBDR ... Constant Bearing, Decreasing Range

Anyone who has read COLREGS, specifically Rule 7(d)(1) should be well aware of that

If the other vessel is not changing bearing, there are only two possibilities: they are either headed directly toward you...

No, they are not "headed directly towards you".

They are headed towards a point ahead of you and will reach it at the same time you do if neither of you alter course or speed.

[Don C L]

It is really a sad event.
In my own near-miss I can say that I was not thinking about the rules and I am sure he wasn't either. He was bearing down on me, head on. I was motor-sailing so my main was up, but I could not see his bridge since his bow was up. It was a matter of survival, and I turned 90 degrees (to port in my case because it seemed I saw more of his starboard side.) I assumed he saw me and would change course. I learned very well after this to NEVER assume anything about another boat. (Perhaps those on the sailboat in question hesitated at first, thinking the powerboat saw them.) As I changed course he began to veer slightly to my port as well which got my pulse rate up. I was at full throttle, but as was mentioned, there is a difference between changing course and changing position. It was easy for him to match my speed with only a gentle veer to follow me to port even at less than a mile. As he passed, there was no one on the bridge at all, and he had just left the harbor! I can only imagine once he was clear of the breakwater he floored it and set the AP, I don't know.
I now view EVERY powerboat with suspicion, and I apologize if that offends any powerboaters. If you are going 20 or 30 knots or more, your field of view, and your ability to react quickly, must increase a great deal to match the potential threat you pose as your speed increases. Your speed is what puts others in danger.

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by Don C L

It is really a sad event.
In my own near-miss I can say that I was not thinking about the rules and I am sure he wasn't either

All gets back to rule 8.

ColRegs Rule 8: Action to avoid collision
(a) Any action taken to avoid collision shall be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.

So easy
Unfortunately for many, common sense is non existent , then a post mortem with overcomplication with inane rules prevales.

[Franziska]

Besides what Colregs say, if I notice a powerboat that appears heading for us at an obligue angle from bow or astern I tend to preemptively take a hard turn away from them so that they can clearly see my heading direction.
Usually that clarifies everything and they take equally a turn away from us.

Of course that does not work if the powerboat does not keep a lookout or is ignorant.

Had a situation yesterday. We were at anchor in daylight with an anchor ball set and no sails hoisted.

A guy in an open fishing boat (very likely not a professional) drifts towards us in the tidal current.
He looks several times towards us and keeps drifting and babbling in his phone.
He does not move an inch on his boat.

When his steel bow was 1m from our hull (it was clear that he would hit!!)
I pushed him a way with some cursing.

He just kept babbling into his phone.

Minor issue, but it shows you can never fix ignorant unattentive idiots which can't be bothered...

[Rumrace]

In 2007 a pilot of an ocean bound boat leaving Montreal on the St.Lawrence SeaWay was charged with something which could amount to a large fine. The Pilot did not reduce speed to avoid collision and two of the four crew on a sailboat were killed.
Reading the article and understanding the location and the limitation of an ocean going vessel makes it obvious the arrogance of the sailor contributed to the death. The assumption your boat has the right of way on a transportation lane with notorious currents with a sound asleep watch sounds arrogant.
It’s not a single incident either it’s just the interesting one where charges were laid.
If I was the insurer of the sailboat I’d deny the claim as the captain placed his boat in harms way and did nothing to mitigate damage. Had the pilot lost control he could have jammed the SeaWay.

It’s not unlike being in the fast lane on cruise control at the speed limit and some thick neck driver doing 20klms slower jumps in the fast lane for no apparent reason. Selfish rude stupid who knows.
Each incident is unique. Making assumption quoting ColRegs pretty funny stuff.
Assumption and innuendo don’t stand up in court. If you were not there you are hearsay.
Until a court accepts your testimony as expert and your statement relevant it’s hot air.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Don C L

I now view EVERY powerboat with suspicion, and I apologize if that offends any powerboaters. If you are going 20 or 30 knots or more, your field of view, and your ability to react quickly, must increase a great deal to match the potential threat you pose as your speed increases. Your speed is what puts others in danger.

Just about all the discussion here is on the sailboat and whether the sailboat skipper could have possibly got out of that situation. Almost zero discussion of bad powerboat behaviour, no mea culpas... beyond some curious boasting.

No need to apologize to powerboaters, i believe. If this thread is any indication... it seems that the powerboaters here want other skippers to behave like you. Keep out of their way. It makes their lives so much simpler. If they run close to you, it's your fault.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Rumrace

It’s not unlike being in the fast lane on cruise control at the speed limit and some thick neck driver doing 20klms slower jumps in the fast lane for no apparent reason.

What province do you live in?? NOBODY in Ontario is in the fast lane at the speed limit. More like 20+ kmh over the limit.

(And nobody has any business CRUISING in the left lane; that's a PASSING lane, but there's always a few...)

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Sailor Sailor

Some states do have requirements now. For example, Virginia requires all operators of motorboats with a horsepower greater than 10 and all operators of PWCs to complete a boating safety education course and carry the card on the vessel.



https://dwr.virginia.gov/boating/edu...n-requirement/

Except most states have an exemption for renters. If you have zero experience and show up to rent a jet ski, they will show you a 1 hour video and give you a day use card. Requiring them to actually take and pass a course would not be good for business.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Rumrace

In 2007 a pilot of an ocean bound boat leaving Montreal on the St.Lawrence SeaWay was charged with something which could amount to a large fine. The Pilot did not reduce speed to avoid collision and two of the four crew on a sailboat were killed.
Reading the article and understanding the location and the limitation of an ocean going vessel makes it obvious the arrogance of the sailor contributed to the death. The assumption your boat has the right of way on a transportation lane with notorious currents with a sound asleep watch sounds arrogant.
It’s not a single incident either it’s just the interesting one where charges were laid.
If I was the insurer of the sailboat I’d deny the claim as the captain placed his boat in harms way and did nothing to mitigate damage. Had the pilot lost control he could have jammed the SeaWay...

Rumrace, that was negligence, not arrogance. And the punishment was quick and just.

Certainly in that incident the sailboat owner was hugely at fault for allowing an exhausted crew member to be solely in command at the time (of course he and the crew member died for his error). Two-off and two-on watch schedule would have been safer given the location, traffic, and lack of rest of the crew. I would be surprised if an inquiry would not have the same conclusion. And probably the insurance company would have been right to disallow the claim.

But a sailboat powering endlessly in a small circle would surely be something the ship should have avoided, even stopped before hitting it, and that is why, I think, the charges were laid.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Your "hill" is that colregs are so infallible that if there's any collision, even the victim must have disregarded them. Which, if we don't have all the fact, is not proven or even assumable.

That's the important lesson here. Not "colregs über alles".

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

There it is, folks. Bow down, yield before the mighty and fast. If they pass uncomfortably close... it's your fault, you weak and slow ones.

Your derision of the Colregs bespeaks a profound ignorance of them. We frequently see this in these here fora, where posters loudly boast of how they ignore the rules, because they are so much better at avoiding danger. What they should do is learn the rules and pay attention in these discussions when they're being told how to correctly apply them.

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

That's ridiculous. When there's such an asymmetry in speeds, interactions between recreational boats are impossible to accurately assess at 3/4 nm, and are just possible at 1/4 nm.

This is where I'm going to say you are wrong. In the subject case, this assessment could have started from the point where the other vessel comes into view. Assuming an 8-ft height of eye for someone standing at the helm in a 15m SV, and 20 ft height of the 20m MY, the MY would have been visible at 10 miles or so - just. By the time it was at 6 miles, it would be plainly obvious. An observant lookout would have ascertained a steady bearing, but even if the first bearing was taking at 6 miles, by the time it got to 3 miles, it would be plainly obvious that the bearing was steady and it was honking along at a good clip, with no apparent action taken to avoid collision, so at that point a 180 would be a viable option. Passing distance greater than 1/2 mile. No need to wait until 1/4 nm, which BTW would have been closer than when Manzo would have made his "evasive manoeuvre" assuming you believe his story.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Your derision of the Colregs bespeaks a profound ignorance of them. We frequently see this in these here fora, where posters loudly boast of how they ignore the rules, because they are so much better at avoiding danger. What they should do is learn the rules and pay attention in these discussions when they're being told how to correctly apply them.

"bespeaks"

I'm not deriding colregs, I'm deriding your victim-blaming.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Your derision of the Colregs bespeaks a profound ignorance of them. We frequently see this in these here fora, where posters loudly boast of how they ignore the rules, because they are so much better at avoiding danger. What they should do is learn the rules and pay attention in these discussions when they're being told how to correctly apply them.

Lodesman, this is the height of arrogance. You make me angry

No posters "derided Colregs"

No posters "boasted loudly"

No posters claimed they were "so much better at avoiding danger".

What is being said is that Colregs do not clearly say when or where a stand-on vessel can take action. If you think Colregs does the then kindly quote the rule and paragraph. I think the Colregs directive that says "when it is apparent to her, she may take action" is a wishy washy statement which leaves it entirely up to the stand on vessel to decide, meaning the requirement to stand on does not exist.

And what some other people are saying is that a sailing yacht must be ready to get moving and take action and get out of the way of a speeding powerboat and if they don't or don't do it early enough or fast enough, then they are at fault. If you think Colregs has any language which would support that concept the please quote it for us.

Some have even said that a sailing vessel should anticipate where a power vessel might be intending to go and be sure not to get in their way. In other words, keep out of the way of the powerboat I doubt if you can find that guidance in Colregs

You yourself has said that other sources must be studied to understand how to apply Colregs But you don't say where in Colregs these other sources are named or referenced. If you think people should be aware of these other sources please tell us where we might have run across them.

And finally you have the arrogance to say that people should pay attention in these discussions when they're being told...By who? God or just you Lodesman?

[Don C L]

In my own case there was a discussion that went something like, “he’s headed this way. He sees us, right? Should I just stay on course and let him go by? No he’s still headed toward us. I’ll turn away, he’ll see the sail and I have the best shot at getting out of his way.” Still I was only able to go 6 knots and as mentioned, a slight turn on his part meant he was still headed toward me. Did I react too slowly? Did I turn the wrong way? These are the wrong questions, the wrong place to look for culpability, when one boat is going 6 knots and the other 20 knots or more (and not keeping watch.)

[NPCampbell]

If they had been on a bluewater sailboat then the outcome would have been different. I am practicing my trolling ...