VOR boat in Fatal Collision.

[Flagman101]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Guy's,

The one thing that we can be (almost) certain of is that there was fault/blame on both vessels.

In this case, I personally suspect significant fault on both sides.

Vestas most probably had a 'watch', but it also most probably was not a very effective watch, with headsail blocking the visibility out over the port bow (I doubt at sea they had the guy standing right on the bow which they use on start lines), and spray generally reducing forward watchkeeping. And there is most definitely a question about the proper exercise of judgement ('safe speed' and 'seamanlike precautions') when you are sailing thru an area dense with small low visibility craft.

While Vestas probably had 'proper' lights, they were (probably) up 35m in the air, and not at all something the fishermen were looking for.

The fishing boat - we don't know much about, but I doubt they had proper lights and doubt they were keeping much of a watch.

I will be curious how the investigation goes and how/if the results are made public.

One question I am curious about which someone here might be able to answer - can anyone make an intelligent/fact based guess whether the fishing boat was doing the sort of fishing that qualifies as 'fishing' in the colregs (eg with gear in the water that restricts their maneuverability)? That would affect their ability to respond if they had seen vestas, especially if seen only when pretty close & closing rapidly. I doubt they were running the proper 'fishing lights'.

There is no information on the fishing boat, gear or lights other then one report of a little kerosene lamp. Facts not verified.
Also no info on if they were actively fishing or not.
The VOR65 nav lights are on the bow, stern as well as up the mast.
They also have 5 fixes 4K cameras linked to 2 digital video recorders. They will have plenty of footage.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by Flagman101

...The VOR65 nav lights are on the bow, stern as well as up the mast...

Is it legal, while under sail, to show masthead tricolour (vessel under sail) combined with bow and stern lights (normally shown only when motoring)?

[Flagman101]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

Is it legal, while under sail, to show masthead tricolour (vessel under sail) combined with bow and stern lights (normally shown only when motoring)?

I have yet to be fortunate enough to see a VOR 65 underway at night. And on video or pictures the flashes or camera light brownout the nav lights.
So how do they display them...not sure


A sailing vessel under way must exhibit side lights and a stern light. If the vessel is less than 20m in length, the sidelights and stern light may be combined in one lantern (tricolour lantern) carried at or near the top of the mast where it can be seen.
In addition to the sidelights and stern light, a sailing vessel may exhibit at or near the top of the mast, where they can be best seen, two all-round lights in a vertical line, the upper being red and the lower being green. These lights must not be exhibited in conjunction with a combined lantern (tricolour lantern).

Reminder – whenever a sailing vessel is using its engine, with or without sails,
it is a power-driven vessel within the meaning of the rules, and must act accordingly and show the appropriate shapes by day and lights by night. This means that a tricolour lantern or two red/green masthead lights must not be used under power.
Commercial shing vessel trawling
Two all-round lights, the top light green and the lower light white.
A rear masthead light is optional for shing vessels under 50m in length. As making way through water, sidelights and stern lights are shown.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by Flagman101

... the sidelights and stern light may be combined in one lantern (tricolour lantern) carried at or near the top of the mast ...

So, to summarise - no, the masthead tricolour must not be used in conjunction with bow and stern lights.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Flagman101

There is no information on the fishing boat

I am well aware of that. I was asking if anyone had any insight into what sort of fishing was done in this area. I guess you dont have such insight.



The VOR65 nav lights are on the bow, stern as well as up the mast.

I am quite aware of the colreg requirements. Would you please link source if you actually have any specific information on the V65 nav lights. I am surprised but nav lights are not mentioned at all in the class rules nor in the mast specifications, nor in any of the boat's public technical drawings that I can find.

It would be a little interesting to know if these boats were technically/legally classed as over or under 20m - might depend if the count the fixed sprit or not.

............

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Guy's,

The one thing that we can be (almost) certain of is that there was fault/blame on both vessels.

In this case, I personally suspect significant fault on both sides.

Vestas most probably had a 'watch', but it also most probably was not a very effective watch, with headsail blocking the visibility out over the port bow (I doubt at sea they had the guy standing right on the bow which they use on start lines), and spray generally reducing forward watchkeeping. And there is most definitely a question about the proper exercise of judgement ('safe speed' and 'seamanlike precautions') when you are sailing thru an area dense with small low visibility craft.

While Vestas probably had 'proper' lights, they were (probably) up 35m in the air, and not at all something the fishermen were looking for.

The fishing boat - we don't know much about, but I doubt they had proper lights and doubt they were keeping much of a watch.

I will be curious how the investigation goes and how/if the results are made public.

One question I am curious about which someone here might be able to answer - can anyone make an intelligent/fact based guess whether the fishing boat was doing the sort of fishing that qualifies as 'fishing' in the colregs (eg with gear in the water that restricts their maneuverability)? That would affect their ability to respond if they had seen vestas, especially if seen only when pretty close & closing rapidly. I doubt they were running the proper 'fishing lights'.

I'm not sure we can say with any degree of certainty at this time that the fishing boat was partly at fault.
- We don't know the type of boat.
- We don't know the specific activity they were involved in.
- There is indication they did have lights (kerosene is still acceptable if it meets standards.).

It may turn out that they were doing something putting them at fault but we have no indication of that currently.

On the other hand, flying along at 20kts in the dark in a congested area is a risky scenario as race officials admitted (quotes provided) that they knew it was congested and not all boats showed proper lights. The simple fact that they hit a boat indicates they were going too fast for conditions.

[valhalla360]

There is a very simple solution for this type of race:
- Start and end points are recorded electronically offshore in non-congested waterways.
- They can then stage the harbor exit and entrance for a convenient time during the day with no pressure to sacrifice safety.

Reality this type of race depends very little on actually seeing the boats in person as they race. It is rare that they are even within visual range of each other at the end so it's not like they are doing some exciting tacking dual into the harbor to see who wins.

Even if they are just passing thru a congested area, you could have stop and start points where the times are recorded and then a safe speed is set to traverse the area before picking up the racing mode once clear. (kind of like in car racing when there is a caution flag only it's predetermined)

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

There is a very simple solution for this type of race:
- Start and end points are recorded electronically offshore in non-congested waterways.
- They can then stage the harbor exit and entrance for a convenient time during the day with no pressure to sacrifice safety.

Reality this type of race depends very little on actually seeing the boats in person as they race. It is rare that they are even within visual range of each other at the end so it's not like they are doing some exciting tacking dual into the harbor to see who wins.

Even if they are just passing thru a congested area, you could have stop and start points where the times are recorded and then a safe speed is set to traverse the area before picking up the racing mode once clear. (kind of like in car racing when there is a caution flag only it's predetermined)

It will be interesting to see how the race organizers respond to this. Lots of pressure on them to continue business as usual, given then big dollar sponsors involved. An apology and a small settlement are their least painful solution, then continue biz as usual.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

It will be interesting to see how the race organizers respond to this. Lots of pressure on them to continue business as usual, given then big dollar sponsors involved. An apology and a small settlement are their least painful solution, then continue biz as usual.

Given it's a poor country and a couple hundred thousand to the family might be enough to make it go away, so yeah this is a real possibility.

Actually, my solution is actually better for sponsors.
- A boat that shows up at the dock at 2am isn't going to generate great photo ops and most non-hard core fans aren't going to go down to the waterfront to watch.
- If the end is say 50-100 miles offshore and they time the entrance to the harbor during the day, they can get better photo ops and locals who are mildly interested can be notified and come watch. Plus if 3-4 boats stack up at the offshore end, they can all come in the next day in a kind of parade...again a better photo op and more interesting for the casual observer.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I'm not sure we can say with any degree of certainty at this time that the fishing boat was partly at fault.

They way the colregs are written, the onus is on both parties to avoid the collision. The vast vast majority of investigations into collisions at sea result in finding some fault with both parties. Even in cases where one party simply could not have avoided the collision, they are still faulted if they did not have the exact proper lights, proper watch (including radar if available - probably not in this case) and at least try to maneuver. You still have an obligation to try to avoid a collision, even if you are fishing with gear in the water with all the proper lights showing.

- There is indication they did have lights (kerosene is still acceptable if it meets standards.).

sure, however if this is at all the sort of small 3rd world vessel that is being reports as frequent in the area and which I have seen at sea, in all likelihood their lights did not 'meet standards'. In all likelihood they did not have port/starboard lights at all, much less in the specified color frequency and brightness. Something like this (photo taken from gcaptain thread):

so, sure, I agree we dont know much and there is very remotely possibility that the fishing boat was doing everything exactly and perfectly to the book . . . . but I think it highly unlikely given what we do generally know about PRC fishing boats in the area.

also, speculation, but if I was Vestas's management I believe I would be thinking about giving up my volvo sponsorship.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Flagman101

There is no information on the fishing boat, gear or lights other then one report of a little kerosene lamp. Facts not verified.
Also no info on if they were actively fishing or not.
The VOR65 nav lights are on the bow, stern as well as up the mast.
They also have 5 fixes 4K cameras linked to 2 digital video recorders. They will have plenty of footage.

Do those cameras record all the time? If so they have images and if they are not damaging for Vestas I don't understand why they have not been made public.

Quite the contrary if they are abonatory for Vestas, meaning if it is visible that the other boat had no light at all, then it would help to finish with a lot of speculation that has been damaging for Vestas and for the VOR.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Polux

Do those cameras record all the time? If so they have images and if they are not damaging for Vestas I don't understand why they have not been made public.

Quite the contrary if they are abonatory for Vestas, meaning if it is visible that the other boat had no light at all, then it would help to finish with a lot of speculation that has been damaging for Vestas and for the VOR.

Oh, I bet the attornies put a lock down on those videos right away regardless of content...you just never know how that sort of information might be used.

[El Pinguino]

Given that this accident was most likely in Hong Kong waters these are the people that will be doing the investigating Types of Marine Accident Investigation Carried out by Marine Department

Once that is out of the way one imagines a civil claim over the loss of a life and property will follow.... along with maybe criminal charges...

I don't think this will be simply a matter of just saying sorry and slipping someone a few thou.......

[El Pinguino]

This is the sort of report we can expect to see.. http://www.mardep.gov.hk/en/publicat...ai141225_f.pdf

Given the number of crew on the fishing boat that was sunk and the photo of the survivors that shows detail of the boat that rescued them ???????????????? 10???? - ????? I suspect she was a similar boat to the one in the report I have just linked to.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Given that this accident was most likely in Hong Kong waters

Actually El P, it was NOT in HK waters, it was "just outside of Hong Kong waters", most likely in PRC designated water. That has been declared (there is a Vestas track, which clearly identifies the location/moment of impact). The fishing boat was PRC registered, and the dead fisherman was PRC.

I am told there is a pretty intense negotiation behind the scenes at the moment about the structure of the investigation.

As a further note - there is some indication that the fishing boat had an ais unit (if the boat name that has leaked is correct), but no record of it being on the day of the collision.

Pic of track - I have put a red box around the collision area