Collision and Dismasting

[TomM]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

That's an interesting point of whether they told CG they were leaving. I mostly don't know what was comms were going on over the VHF at time, I was busy! The fishing boat could surely hear us on our handheld from 100 yards away as the CG could hear us.

The CG heard you but not the other vessel?

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by davil

============================

thank you for posting

In a way goes to the heart of the question
Why the F/V left the scene of the accident?

Yes I know, he was told by D to leave the proximity to his sailboat because the debris, BUT even if interpreted to leave does not exonerate or relieves him from his duty.

Very disturbing.

The CG told me there is no law saying they had to stay around

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Jammer

I am not sure that active AIS is particularly useful because many vessels either don't have receivers or don't utilize them (particularly lower-budget fishing vessels and tugs). Radar, with an active (human) radar watch being kept, is the more valuable piece of electronics, IME. I use it all the time and I especially use it at dusk. No commercial fishing boat can evade my radar even if they turn off their AIS and run dark.

I have to disagree. I think that this incident spotlights the importance of AIS.


The fishing boat won't broadcast, I know. I think that's stupidity on the part of the fishing boat, and a staggering omission on the part of regulators. But it's fact.


The fishing boat has radar, probably a good one. And the skipper has far too much to think about to look at it -- if he is even in the pilot house.


AIS receive is super cheap. It's included in many or most (or all?) VHF radios these days. While it's not free, return on investment is huge.


Even a fishing boat who is intentionally running dark "should" have AIS receive. And unlike radar, AIS receive makes it super easy to set collision alarms that have zero false positives, and miss zero boats that are broadcasting.


Unfortunately, AIS transceiver is a bit of a cost/benefit hurdle for sailboats. Not passing any judgment on those that don't have it. Not sure if SailorBoy did or didn't.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by davil

============================

thank you for posting

In a way goes to the heart of the question
Why the F/V left the scene of the accident?

Yes I know, he was told by D to leave the proximity to his sailboat because the debris, BUT even if interpreted to leave does not exonerate or relieves him from his duty.

Very disturbing.

I'm really ambivalent on this. Understanding that there was room for misunderstanding (I think SailorBoy has stated as much), how long should the fishing boat stay on scene? If he heard (or wanted to hear) "I'm good, go away," is he bound to hang around? When the sailboat gets moving, does he follow (maybe the boat doesn't have enough fuel, for instance?). Maybe till the USCG shows up (not happening)?


I really think that when the other vessel says "move on, I'm good" the duty to stay is over, especially since the USCG was already in the loop. I don't think there is an obligation to render unwanted assistance.

[Amapola]

We are so sorry this happened to you.

Susan & Bob

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

how long should the fishing boat stay on scene?

Either until relieved by other vessels or when there is no longer any danger to life or vessel.

I don't think there is an obligation to render unwanted assistance.

It's a tricky area. Certainly governmental rescue authorities have been known to provide unwanted assistance including insisting on evacuating vessels in peril.



There may also be an obligation to stand by.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I really think that when the other vessel says "move on, I'm good" the duty to stay is over, especially since the USCG was already in the loop. I don't think there is an obligation to render unwanted assistance.

Agreed. 46 USC 2304 is the duty to render assistance law. Basically you have to render assistance to any individual found at sea in danger of being lost, so long as it doesn't imperil your own vessel. Essentially you have to respond to a "mayday." As you said, no need to render assistance where it's not required.

[davefromoregon]

I make a once a year trip up and down the Washington coast that takes 26-30 hours from Astoria to Neah Bay. So, not at the level of some of the commenters here but not irrelevant either. This discussion reminds me and perhaps others to revisit our safety strategy.

1) some part of the trip is at night.
2) we go through fishing grounds.
3) I have radar and use it continually.
4) we monitor channels 16 and 13
5) I have kiddie AIS. Ie internet based send and receive AIS which is better than nothing. It may be time to rethink this.
6) I do not have a radar reflector and will be remedying that.
7) correct lighting is always in use somewhat prior to dusk.
8) someone is always on watch.

The fishing boats have almost always had lights on. I’m not sure of instances where they haven’t. However, thick fog is not unusual at night.

As for the radar reflector, I’ve had preemptive conversation with commercial ships and they’ve told me that they already had me on radar a couple miles away( nearing astoria on the Columbia )before the call. (Pre AIS).

[Jammer]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I have to disagree. I think that this incident spotlights the importance of AIS. [...]

Even a fishing boat who is intentionally running dark "should" have AIS receive. And unlike radar, AIS receive makes it super easy to set collision alarms that have zero false positives, and miss zero boats that are broadcasting.

Even if that were true it doesn't make it likely that a fishing boat will take those steps.


Many boats lack AIS receive. Some boats equipped with AIS receive do not set collision alarms because they do produce false positives either because of deliberate close approaches or because of other vessels spoofing their location.


IME AIS adoption is too low for it to be dependable, a situation that is unlikely to improve in the foreseeable future.

[OneBoatman]

Great that you and wife came through it OK. It is an achievement to proud of for sure that you were able to get your wits about you and cut yourself free of your rig having responded quick enough to sustain less than catastrophic damage. In my experience even though we may expect the persons on duty of commercial, military, and fishing vessels to be under command as competent and honest skippers, sadly that isn't always the case. Many it seems will only yield to other vessels clearly larger than their own. Getting any captain to admit they were underway and running without displaying proper lighting, absent irrefutable proof, will likely never happen. Leaving the scene is practically speaking unconscionable, and I believe is a ding at a minimum on his license. Having made a number of night passages, and only my boat to receive AIS, I do use radar at night even in clear weather. This truly is a wake-up call for everyone that we should teach our mates and crew to faithfully use our radars when making a passage at night and work to avoid being so tired as to be anything less than extra vigilant. Also good to remember not only to be looking for those ahead but also those behind so as not to run down by any vessel from astern.

[Otium]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Oh hell... that really sucks. So sorry to hear this news Don. Just glad to hear you and your wife were uninjured.

Hope the recovery goes well.

Ditto here. Very sorry to hear about this incident. Thankfully you and your wife are OK.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by davefromoregon

5) I have kiddie AIS. Ie internet based send and receive AIS which is better than nothing. It may be time to rethink this.

Rethink this!


On receive side, it is "better than nothing." But not by much. It only receives where you have a volunteer base station picking up signals. Far from complete coverage! It also lags by minutes to hours -- most assuredly not reliably the 90 second (or whatever it is) update by AIS B, and nowhere near AIS updates.


On the transmit side, it is almost useless. It is only on the internet. The only people who will see it are others who are playing in the kidde pool. The most important people (merchants, etc) won't see it.


Sure, keep transmitting, because it is better than nothing.


Upgrading to receive is an absolute no-brainer. It requires a new VHF that has AIS receive (for example, this one https://www.amazon.com/STANDARD-HORI.../dp/B089YV4XYQ) at $374. Connect two wires to the chart plotter, and you have AIS receive. And it is on your chart plotter that you are already looking at -- not some other device you have to also look at.


But really, when you are there, why not go here: https://defender.com/en_us/simrad-rs...-000-14818-001 and for $1,300 you are done. No second VHF antenna, no new wires (you do need to mount the GPS puck). But that is $800 more, and not as easy a decision.

[svfinlandia]

Originally Posted by Orion Jim

Luckily you and your wife were not injured. This is the type of nightmare scenario which any sailor can relate to. I presume you are not equipped with AIS?

Don
I am really, really sorry to hear this story, and I echo everyone else’s sympathies.
It probably would not have mattered if you had your AIS turned on or not since most fishing vessels, do not have AIS, or if they do, they do not turn them on.
Why was your main VHF radio not turned on? I always thought that handheld radios were only mostly good for while at anchor to talk to other anchored boats.

Al, S/V Finlandia

[davil]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I really think that when the other vessel says "move on, I'm good" the duty to stay is over, especially since the USCG was already in the loop. I don't think there is an obligation to render unwanted assistance.

===================================
the problem here is the colliding vessel witnessing the couple struggling to free their boat from dangerous debris, they were observing their behavior as “under the influence"?
a more likely description of their struggling and in shock.

And yes, will have been prudent on their part to stay and provided assistance if needed.

From Don report do not believe he clearly stated "we are good, go away”

This was not an accident on the highway, where people could walk away,
this was in the ocean, at night, they did not wait until the sailboat was underway in a safe fashion AFTER securing the clearing of the debris, and no way to determine if it was really seaworthy.

Maybe they did not have a legal obligation, but they just hit the sail boat and caused serious damage
it goes against any seafaring tradition as well as human concern.

Totally disagree with their leaving been ok.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by svfinlandia

Don

Why was your main VHF radio not turned on?

Probably was on, but they lost the antenna mount