trimfast

Annapolis - Powerboat on Sailboat Crime

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ishmael said:

I love the first comment on that link...

 

I find most sail boaters take their right of way thing to an extreme that can be a bit unsafe in that they interpret it as something that means that they can do whatever they like and we’re supposed to get out of the way while they do it.

Glad you’re safe and I think you’ll settle down in time.

I boat in sail infested waters and no matter how hard I try to avoid them often still have a hard time staying clear.
 
 

"

I agree and then someone wrote it looked like the sailboat had a motor going. Now if the sailboat climbed onto the motorboat there might be an argument. Sorry when you have a vessel moving at maybe a brisk walk speed even with the motor going how much can we actually get out of the way of something on a plane going over 20 knots

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, burndoc said:

I agree and then someone wrote it looked like the sailboat had a motor going. Now if the sailboat climbed onto the motorboat there might be an argument. Sorry when you have a vessel moving at maybe a brisk walk speed even with the motor going how much can we actually get out of the way of something on a plane going over 20 knots

And then there was the ignoramous who, several times, referred to the J as having his "motors" (plural) running.

I read all the comments.  Lots of ignorance out there and I say this as someone whose early life was spent on a powerboat on the Jersey shore.  I came to sailing relatively late in life.  I was about 35 when I bought my first sailboat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mookiesurfs said:

Each?

Just one.  But it was a very nice gesture wasn't it?  He even said he'd clean for us it if we wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Marcjsmith said:

Sheesh tough crowd.   I make a factual comment about a picture and gets roasted twice over it.   Well on port tack the starboard rail would have lower making it easier for the fishing boat to launch it self up and onto the j.  Port tack.  The skipper would have been likely on the windward rail with presumably much of the crew. So it’s possible they may not have seen the power boat  barreling down on them.  Still no excuse for the power boat 

owner Kevin Ryman said a club member was sailing when the powerboat struck the vessel. The powerboat hit the starboard side, coming to rest on top of the sailboat, Ryman said.

“Our members were operating the boat in a safe manner, on a day with clear visibility and 10-12 knots of breeze,” he said. “The J/105 crew attempted to hail the approaching boat prior to the collision, otherwise signal, and take action to avoid the collision.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bowchow said:

Captain of charter vessel aint gonna be a captain no more. Doesn't matter who's to blame, both parties could have taken more affirmative action to avoid a collision.

Ok, time for a Gedanken experiment: Place the powerboat 400 ft from the sailboat on a collision course (10 seconds away at 25 knots).

Scenario 1: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to position his boat such that the powerboat collides; and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to avoid the sailboat.

Scenario 2: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to avoid the powerboat, and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to hit the sailboat. 

In scenario 1, even with a 12 year old driving the powerboat, 10 times out of 10 they do not collide. In scenario 2, if might require a 16 year old with 1 hour's experience driving the powerboat, but 10 times out of 10 they collide. I am confident enough in this outcome to bet a small fortune on it. It would be the easiest $100K I ever made. 

The logical conclusion is: the powerboat driver can dictate the outcome, collision or no collision. Conversely, the sailboat driver might have  a small influence, but only if the powerboat driver was not paying any attention at all. 

About the only thing a sailboat can do in this situation is turn towards or away from the powerboat to offer a smaller target and perhaps less damage from a glancing collision. Since the sailboat was t-boned amidships, turning probably would not have avoided a collision.

What do you thing the sailboat helmsman should have done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, DDW said:

Ok, time for a Gedanken experiment: Place the powerboat 400 ft from the sailboat on a collision course (10 seconds away at 25 knots).

Scenario 1: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to position his boat such that the powerboat collides; and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to avoid the sailboat.

Scenario 2: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to avoid the powerboat, and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to hit the sailboat. 

In scenario 1, even with a 12 year old driving the powerboat, 10 times out of 10 they do not collide. In scenario 2, if might require a 16 year old with 1 hour's experience driving the powerboat, but 10 times out of 10 they collide. I am confident enough in this outcome to bet a small fortune on it. It would be the easiest $100K I ever made. 

The logical conclusion is: the powerboat driver can dictate the outcome, collision or no collision. Conversely, the sailboat driver might have  a small influence, but only if the powerboat driver was not paying any attention at all. 

About the only thing a sailboat can do in this situation is turn towards or away from the powerboat to offer a smaller target and perhaps less damage from a glancing collision. Since the sailboat was t-boned amidships, turning probably would not have avoided a collision.

What do you thing the sailboat helmsman should have done?

Shat...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DDW said:

Ok, time for a Gedanken experiment: Place the powerboat 400 ft from the sailboat on a collision course (10 seconds away at 25 knots).

Scenario 1: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to position his boat such that the powerboat collides; and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to avoid the sailboat.

Scenario 2: have the sailboat helmsman attempt to avoid the powerboat, and have the powerboat helmsman attempt to hit the sailboat. 

In scenario 1, even with a 12 year old driving the powerboat, 10 times out of 10 they do not collide. In scenario 2, if might require a 16 year old with 1 hour's experience driving the powerboat, but 10 times out of 10 they collide. I am confident enough in this outcome to bet a small fortune on it. It would be the easiest $100K I ever made. 

The logical conclusion is: the powerboat driver can dictate the outcome, collision or no collision. Conversely, the sailboat driver might have  a small influence, but only if the powerboat driver was not paying any attention at all. 

About the only thing a sailboat can do in this situation is turn towards or away from the powerboat to offer a smaller target and perhaps less damage from a glancing collision. Since the sailboat was t-boned amidships, turning probably would not have avoided a collision.

What do you thing the sailboat helmsman should have done?

There are times when I wonder if you are truly a machinist philosopher monk.

 

However I am going to go with Scenario #3:  300ft away from the sailboat after a full days charter powerboat captain sights sailboat and alters course close to the same time sailboat helmsman decides to crash gybe to avoid the collision.  Target fixation in the next few seconds seals the deal.

What otherwise could have been a close passing with choice words becomes internet fodder and a broken boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2018 at 10:14 PM, Moonduster said:

If the yacht was motor sailing, the fishing boat had right-of-way, no?

 

I think it probably would have been hard to tell if it was motoring, as the driver of the motor boat they should have given it the benefit of doubt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is, if the powerboat is being steered by - anyone - it can easily avoid the sailboat under any circumstance. And has a legal obligation to do so. I suspect the powerboat was not being steered by someone, but rather something.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RKoch said:

owner Kevin Ryman said a club member was sailing when the powerboat struck the vessel. The powerboat hit the starboard side, coming to rest on top of the sailboat, Ryman said.

“Our members were operating the boat in a safe manner, on a day with clear visibility and 10-12 knots of breeze,” he said. “The J/105 crew attempted to hail the approaching boat prior to the collision, otherwise signal, and take action to avoid the collision.”

If this were in Florida, then next signal issued would be "Prepare to repel boarders, weapons free to Starboard!"

- Stumbling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think the two items below are helpful for the charter boat skipper:

1.       According to the owner of the sailboat the J 105 tried to alert the fishing boat: “The J/105 crew attempted to hail the approaching boat prior to the collision, otherwise signal, and take action to avoid the collision.”

2.       According to a witness on the motor boat they had neither an adequate lookout nor were they monitoring their radio: “I found the MV radio to be turned off when I tried to Mayday”.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sincerely hope that the results of the USCG inquiry eventually get posted somewhere that we can find them. All too often the initial, sensational news article is made, and there's no follow up.  I'm very interested in the results.

I wonder if the charter boat skipper's attitude will be "Well, they shouldn't have been there!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Ajax said:

I wonder if the charter boat skipper's attitude will be "Well, they shouldn't have been there!"

I have frequented a trawler forum lately, and there is some sentiment there that the sailboat may have been at least partially or perhaps wholly at fault. In other threads sailboats are frequently derided as causing problems, insisting on the right of way, tacking and jibing in annoying ways, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2018 at 12:44 PM, ROADKILL666 said:

SAD TO SEE THE DEATH OF A GOOD SAILBOAT.

Uh, it is a J boat......

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone on a power boating thread commented that racing sailboats can change direction quickly and speed off. No offense to J105 owners but we aren't talking foiling cats here. It is impressive that the J seems to be floating near its natural WL and structurally still together despite being severely T-boned. In one photo it looks like they deployed an anchor off the bow. That would have been quite a task assuming no one was on the bow during the collision someone would have had to scramble under or over the powerboat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2018 at 6:55 AM, Marcjsmith said:

Sheesh tough crowd.   I make a factual comment about a picture and gets roasted twice over it.   Well on port tack the starboard rail would have lower making it easier for the fishing boat to launch it self up and onto the j.  Port tack.  The skipper would have been likely on the windward rail with presumably much of the crew. So it’s possible they may not have seen the power boat  barreling down on them.  Still no excuse for the power boat 

While your scenario may be reasonable, looking at the photo shows light air, which means the 105 was probably barely heeling.  They are notoriously underpowered, and that flat water means they were, likely, ghosting along.

Additionally, the boom is high enough the skipper should have seen anything approaching other than what is blocked by the small jib.  Since they were hit in a t-bone fashion, it was not a blind collision.

Not roasting you.  Just offering a perspective from someone who spent many years sailing a 105.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bus. No offense taken.  

Agree on th conditions  if the j is doing 3-4 knots, not much it can do but sit watch  going hard up on the wind and trying to make for a glancing blow,  but at that low of a speed.  It won’t happen right away.  And that what power boaters just don’t understand   Sailboats can’t turn ad stop ona dime, which is why in wide open water sail boats are often the stand on vessel.  It comes down the ability to manouever    

 

Read the link link on the powerboat site. Saw this and had to laugh at the smoke pot mentality.  

“That boat you were in has to weigh at lease 10 or 12 thousand pounds and doesn’t seem to be altering the attitude of the sailboat very much. 

I find most sail boaters take their right of way thing to an extreme that can be a bit unsafe in that they interpret it as something that means that they can do whatever they like and we’re supposed to get out of the way while they do it. 

Glad you’re safe and I think you’ll settle down in time. 

I boat in sail infested waters and no matter how hard I try to avoid them often still have a hard time staying clear.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

While your scenario may be reasonable, looking at the photo shows light air, which means the 105 was probably barely heeling.  They are notoriously underpowered, and that flat water means they were, likely, ghosting along.

Additionally, the boom is high enough the skipper should have seen anything approaching other than what is blocked by the small jib.  Since they were hit in a t-bone fashion, it was not a blind collision.

Not roasting you.  Just offering a perspective from someone who spent many years sailing a 105.

Wind was reported 10-12. The J was probably heeled a little, speed roughly 6 kn.

Upthread, a poster noted that the powerboat would cover 400' in 10 secs at 25 knots.  I don't think a powerboat passing 400' away is a big concern. The J was the stand-on vessel...just my speculation but J probably saw the powerboat,  assumed the powerboat saw them and would keep clear as required, and possibly only recognized a collision course when powerboat was maybe 200' away? That's only 5 seconds to react....the equivalent of a pedestrian trying to cross a busy highway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no idea how reliable this website is, but...

https://www.thechesapeaketoday.com/2018/08/18/charter-boat-crashed-atop-sailboat-in-bay-who-was-at-the-helm-the-inexperienced-captain-or-a-man-who-has-two-dwis/

 

Quote

UPDATE: STEVENSVILLE, MD. – The man who may have been the operator of a charterboat that landed on top of a sailboat has two DWI convictions on his driving record in Maryland, along with other serious infractions.  James Eric Clough was in the Charles County, Maryland jail serving time for DWI about the same time the Coast Guard, awarded his father, Capt. Jamie Clough a captain’s license so he could take out fishing parties and eventually plowed his new charter boat over and on top of a sailboat. Exactly who was the operator of the charterboat Hunter at the time it plowed over a sailboat and parked on top of it until removed by a salvage company, remains to be explained as the Coast Guard has yet to disclose the names of the operators of the vessels involved.

Quote

Captain Jamie Clough, master of the vessel Hunter was contacted by THE CHESAPEAKE TODAY at the phone number listed on his Facebook page to book charters on Aug. 18, 2018, and asked to explain how the crash happened.

“I can’t respond to that,” said Clough. When asked if the collision was the fault of the sailboat, Clough terminated the call.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bloodshot said:

The article is a bit confusing. As near as I can tell, the father is the owner/operator of the fishing charter business. The son just got a Captain's license and was going to handle the light tackle charters (of which he appears to be an expert).  That boat appears to be equipped for light tackle fishing, but I'm no expert. The son has two previous DUIs, but it's not clear whether the son or father were operating the boat at the time.

Whats known from various other sources:  The charter boat was brand new, this was its first charter trip. I presume that means the boat had already done some sea-trials. The electronics were just recently installed,  it's possible the boat operator wasn't thoroughly familiar with their operation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RKoch said:

The article is a bit confusing. As near as I can tell, the father is the owner/operator of the fishing charter business. The son just got a Captain's license and was going to handle the light tackle charters (of which he appears to be an expert).  That boat appears to be equipped for light tackle fishing, but I'm no expert. The son has two previous DUIs, but it's not clear whether the son or father were operating the boat at the time.

Whats known from various other sources:  The charter boat was brand new, this was its first charter trip. I presume that means the boat had already done some sea-trials. The electronics were just recently installed,  it's possible the boat operator wasn't thoroughly familiar with their operation.

Sounds plausible. Also, he was blindfolded.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, weightless said:

Driving from the cockpit helm and entertaining guests?

Same same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, weightless said:

Driving from the cockpit helm and entertaining guests?

Just a guess, but I think the boat may have 2 helms, one being forward in the pilothouse. I think the aft helm is for manuvering while fighting a fish and boarding it. 

Since it was a clear day, and there was the whole bay to maneuver/avoid the sailboat, it's a safe conclusion the operator was distracted by something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RKoch said:

The article is a bit confusing. As near as I can tell, the father is the owner/operator of the fishing charter business. The son just got a Captain's license and was going to handle the light tackle charters (of which he appears to be an expert).  That boat appears to be equipped for light tackle fishing, but I'm no expert. The son has two previous DUIs, but it's not clear whether the son or father were operating the boat at the time.

Whats known from various other sources:  The charter boat was brand new, this was its first charter trip. I presume that means the boat had already done some sea-trials. The electronics were just recently installed,  it's possible the boat operator wasn't thoroughly familiar with their operation.

And a charter fishing boat needs electronics to avoid a sailboat on a nice bright sunny day?  

BTW, Rudy G. is looking for someone who can invent better excuses and blow smoke further and thicker.  Are you volunteering?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrible.  Looks like a fine pre-scrimp hull lost.  Maybe the owner should sue the crap out of fool and get a J/111?  Shame!  Hopefully no one was injured.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RKoch said:

Just a guess, but I think the boat may have 2 helms

Yeah, I'd expect two helms and, in a nicely kitted out boat like this, an autopilot. So lots of options. Clients aboard, stories to tell and fish to clean. Easy theory is that the cap wasn't looking where he was going very often. If he was driving from the cockpit I suspect his view forward would be limited at speed with the bow up. So, maybe he was looking out but couldn't see much... Or something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

And a charter fishing boat needs electronics to avoid a sailboat on a nice bright sunny day?  

BTW, Rudy G. is looking for someone who can invent better excuses and blow smoke further and thicker.  Are you volunteering?

I'm just posing the possibility that the driver was  fucking around with a new chart plotter or other electronics instead of watching where he was going. Maybe he was texting.  Obviously any moron could have seen and avoided the sailboat if they were looking out the windshield and paying attention. 

When Im passenger on a boat I always act as second set of eyeballs. A former college roommate who's a pilot taught me that...as soon as we were taxiing he'd be asking me to be additional lookout.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, evenflow said:

Terrible.  Looks like a fine pre-scrimp hull lost.  Maybe the owner should sue the crap out of fool and get a J/111?  Shame!  Hopefully no one was injured.  

What is wrong with SCRIMP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Marcjsmith said:

Maybe 20 knots was and understatement of speed

 

CAE6E56A-0F1E-4100-8106-6D99150691FA.png

Interesting that they're steering from the cockpit helm. 

The sailboat estimated speed at 25 knots, a person aboard the powerboat estimated speed at 30 knots. That's not far apart for estimates. 7 peep aboard, coolers, gear, fuel...I'm sure that takes a good bit off speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This just gets better and better. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rasputin22 said:

What is wrong with SCRIMP?

The scrimp process fills ALL voids in the laminate & core with pure resin. A hand laid up 105 runs about 350 lbs lighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm the  yacht had a couple of fucking giant white flags hoisted 40 feet in the air. Sort of hard to miss when you think about it.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? I could see that happen with heavy woven roving fabrics but not with but that is why the knitted non crimped fabrics were developed. Are you saying that hand layup can achieve fractional fiber/resin weights higher than vacuum de-bulked SCRIMP does? Please cite your 350 lb lighter reference Longy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best interior shot I could find. It looks like there's a forward wheel to starboard in the pilothouse.

Image may contain: outdoor and water

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks bogus to me.

The sailboat should be heeled and lower in the water and I'd expect more damage to sailboat's rail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, those lib sailboaters...Call Alex J and expose this conspiracy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Diamond Jim said:

Looks bogus to me.

The sailboat should be heeled and lower in the water and I'd expect more damage to sailboat's rail.

"Captain said the boat was made of Cedar plank glassed over. He told me the weight. I think he said 3500 lbs. I remember being shocked that it was so light. But the lightness probably mitigated the impact in that we didn’t sink the sail boat. Frankly I thought the boat was too light and didn’t ride that well. Twin 2 stokes."  http://clubsearay.com/index.php?threads/boat-accident-chesapeake-bay.89307/

Plenty of damage visible in the videos shared in earlier posts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rasputin22 said:

Really? I could see that happen with heavy woven roving fabrics but not with but that is why the knitted non crimped fabrics were developed. Are you saying that hand layup can achieve fractional fiber/resin weights higher than vacuum de-bulked SCRIMP does? Please cite your 350 lb lighter reference Longy.

As balsa core is laid into a curved mold, all the slits making those 1" squares open up. In a hand laid lam, there is just enuff resin gets used to bond the surface of all those squares to the outer skin. Joints between slabs of balsa also did not match up seamlessly. ALL those gaps get filled with pure resin in a infused lay up. I was hired to make 105 #3 meet the new class hull weights so have hard numbers (and experience, the class botched the measurement process) on the amount of weight needed to meet the rule.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, longy said:

As balsa core is laid into a curved mold, all the slits making those 1" squares open up. In a hand laid lam, there is just enuff resin gets used to bond the surface of all those squares to the outer skin. Joints between slabs of balsa also did not match up seamlessly. ALL those gaps get filled with pure resin in a infused lay up. I was hired to make 105 #3 meet the new class hull weights so have hard numbers (and experience, the class botched the measurement process) on the amount of weight needed to meet the rule.

Makes sense, but I'd probably rather have the interstitial spaces between the balsa blocks filled with epoxy. I gotta think that filling the gaps helps prevent them from working and breaking the bond to the skins.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Longy, I get what you are saying now. I guess it is similar when using slit foam cores but something has to fill those voids or that will leave even worse issues.  So you think that those resin starved gaps between the balsa squares are better than filled with resin so as to prevent future water migration. Save weight to start but have a more susceptible core to rot down the road. Sort a 'lesser of two weevils' dilemma. 

 

BTW, I was the 'shop flunky' that did the original R@D work on SCRIMP for Bill Seemann long before it got licensed to TP so have a pretty good idea of the pros and cons of this sort of thing. Just trying to put things into perspective and appreciate your candor. Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Speaking only from school of hard knocks & long hours in boatyards here: technically I believe it would be better to have all the 'slits' filled, making direct bonds between inner & outer skins, & isolating each 'block' of balsa. Better shear strength. Practically, I think you're just adding weight. Pure resin doesn't have any strength, esp poly resins. If there WAS some strength gain to be had, all the custom/one-off hulls would have duplicated that system in some manner. And scrimp decks still have as much of a problem with wet core from leaking fittings as the hand laid decks did, so no real life benefit to having the slits filled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2018 at 4:14 PM, Moonduster said:

If the yacht was motor sailing, the fishing boat had right-of-way, no?

 

For the purpose of the Rules of the road, here a few definitions:

(a) The word "vessel" includes every description of watercraft, including non-displacement craft, WIG craft [Intl], and seaplanes, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water.

(b) The term "power-driven vessel" means any vessel propelled by machinery.

(c) The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.

(d) The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any vessel fishing with nets, lines, trawls, or other fishing apparatus which restrict maneuverability, but does not include a vessel fishing with trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict maneuverability.

 

 

the small charter boats on the Bay, no matter how much they protest, do not automatically have "right of way" just because they have lines in the water.   Even when I'm racing, I try not to run over their lines.. we're all entitled to some space on the water.. I will give more slack to a boat running planar boards.. because, they do, in a sense, restrict their ability to maneuver.

but in this instance, it's a real stretch to come to any conclusions that put the sailboat at fault. Even in that they failed to avoid a collision is pushing it. The fishing boat was estimated by responders to have been travelling in excess of 20 kts. If nobody is on lookout, no matter what the 105 did,  it's questionable that they could have avoided every possible contact...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Way before we get into discussions about stand on and give way vessels MOONDUSTER - NO VESSEL HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY in the IRPCAS rule book.

Before we get into discussions about who gives way to who and so on

One of the fundamental rules is Rule 5 - Look out.

The fact that the sailboat was able to shout a warning kind of proves they were keeping a lookout. The fact the motor boat didn't see 2 sails sticking 30 feet up in the air process they weren't.

This is followed by Rule 6 - Safe Speed. The fact the power boat runs straight into the sailboat and couldn't take proper avoiding action proves they also broke this rule.

If, from 400 feet out (10 seconds away or so) they had simply dumped the throttle to zero the boat would have dropped off the plane and collision would have been avoided.

The person in charge of the power boat should just rip up his master's ticket to save the  court doing so.

Just sayin'

SS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, shanghaisailor said:

Way before we get into discussions about stand on and give way vessels MOONDUSTER - NO VESSEL HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY in the IRPCAS rule book.

Before we get into discussions about who gives way to who and so on

One of the fundamental rules is Rule 5 - Look out.

The fact that the sailboat was able to shout a warning kind of proves they were keeping a lookout. The fact the motor boat didn't see 2 sails sticking 30 feet up in the air process they weren't.

This is followed by Rule 6 - Safe Speed. The fact the power boat runs straight into the sailboat and couldn't take proper avoiding action proves they also broke this rule.

If, from 400 feet out (10 seconds away or so) they had simply dumped the throttle to zero the boat would have dropped off the plane and collision would have been avoided.

The person in charge of the power boat should just rip up his master's ticket to save the  court doing so.

Just sayin'

SS

Provided alcohol isn't involved, I don't think the charterboat captain's license would be revoked for an accident that had no injuries/fatalities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, longy said:

  Speaking only from school of hard knocks & long hours in boatyards here: technically I believe it would be better to have all the 'slits' filled, making direct bonds between inner & outer skins, & isolating each 'block' of balsa. Better shear strength. Practically, I think you're just adding weight. Pure resin doesn't have any strength, esp poly resins. If there WAS some strength gain to be had, all the custom/one-off hulls would have duplicated that system in some manner. And scrimp decks still have as much of a problem with wet core from leaking fittings as the hand laid decks did, so no real life benefit to having the slits filled.

End grain balsa has a lot more shear strength than slivers of polyester resin. It adds nothing. In theory, the scrimp process fills all the voids and prevents any water intrusion from migrating along the kerfs for the full length of the boat. But practically there is plenty of evidence it does not. The viscosity of the resin would have to be about the same as air to do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ras, you asked:

Are you saying that hand layup can achieve fractional fiber/resin weights higher than vacuum de-bulked SCRIMP does? 

But the question makes no sense as you can't debulk scrimp. You can certainly achieve lighter layup with hand layup of pre-preg that's been properly debulked.

Shang,

Get off your high horse already. Yes, you're correct that the words in the rules are Stand On, but the point remains the same. From the original photos and before the story unfolded, it wasn't clear whether the J105 was sailing or powered and if it had been powered it would have been the give-way vessel. Now go stuff your sanctimonious head up your self-righteous ass and stop pretending you're something you're so clearly not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have tourists all the time around where I sail on the Nofolk Broads, 15 minutes instruction and they are let out with a 45ft floating caravan, But luckily most tourist boats are limited to about 10mph and the speed limit is 4 to 6mph, though we have had the odd boat sunk by them. 

 

Also however we have a lot of fishermen, in that kayak collision, the Powerboat would be done for the collision and the angler for fishing more than 13ft from the bank from a boat in the Navigational channel. (Our rivers are a lot narrower than the place that was shown in the video)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RKoch said:

Provided alcohol isn't involved, I don't think the charterboat captain's license would be revoked for an accident that had no injuries/fatalities.

I think it's a shame that actual deaths have to occur before that happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2018 at 4:14 PM, Left Shift said:

He offered us a fish.  To make it all better.  

...and how far up his ass did you manage to make it fit...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Power boat ASSHOLE

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't troll at high speed in the bay. It's actually boringly slow trolling for rockfish. Like 3 kt. So seems very unlikely they were actually fishing at the time. And reports they were returning to port would seem to confirm that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know why there was the boating while high tread...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the OP on the searay forum is already trying to get his thread taken down and delted his post.... 

god I hope someone got a digital copy of his "testimony"

 

Winch1995

Winch1995 Member

 
66
 
May 5, 2017
 
Sea Ray
 
5.7L carb, BII
Please delete this thread.
 
Last edited: Today at 7:57 AM
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Marcjsmith said:

the OP on the searay forum is already trying to get his thread taken down and delted his post.... 

god I hope someone got a digital copy of his "testimony"

 

S
 

I always get a good laugh out of times when this happens.  Many of the individual entries have already been edited/deleted out.  Too bad some are quoted here, particularly the one about having to turn on the radio...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put money down that the powerboat was being operated from the second station in the cockpit and the operator was having a good old time with the boys.  Second station appears to be on the starboard side.  Sailboat would have been coming from the port side and his view was blocked by the cabin house, fisherman on board, or the bow depending on running attitude of his new boat.  Dude fro the Sea Ray Forum who was on board stated that the VHF was in the off position.  Nobody ever saw it coming...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly the sailboat owner should have started pumping water into his boat to lower it in the water.  that way the power boat could have gone right over the top of him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marcjsmith said:

the OP on the searay forum is already trying to get his thread taken down and delted his post.... 

god I hope someone got a digital copy of his "testimony"

 

Winch1995

Winch1995 Member

 
66
 
May 5, 2017
 
Sea Ray
 
5.7L carb, BII
Please delete this thread.
 
Last edited: Today at 7:57 AM
 
 
 

Pretty sure the thread was already sent to the investigating team prior to him requesting his delete...... Some people just don't understand what posting online can do I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NaptimeAgain said:

You don't troll at high speed in the bay. It's actually boringly slow trolling for rockfish. Like 3 kt. So seems very unlikely they were actually fishing at the time. And reports they were returning to port would seem to confirm that. 

 

no kidding..    so when do you troll at high speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to news reporting? It's been 3 days. Is this not newsworthy enough for at least a single newspaper to assign a reporter to investigate, maybe interview captain and passengers on either boat?  It's just enough to print this picture, do an internet search of boat owner and DWI history, and move on?  

I would think the speed is over reported, I find it difficult to believe the charter boat comes to a stop within 15 feet of initial impact and nobody aboard the charter boat was ejected or seriously injured in a fall at 25 knots (28 mph). It's not like there are airbags or seat belts.

Would someone with a subscription to www.marinetraffic.com look to see if the charter boat may have been transmitting AIS at the time of the crash, then the speed would be known, maybe even something about the track would be interesting. I found it difficult to do a proper search of marinetraffic without a subscription, searching on the boat name Hunter alone didn't get a hit. Ideally look for an american flagged boat that last transmitted the day of the accident in that vicinity, and keep in mind boats change name without the new name being programmed in the AIS. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's not news worthy at all. Can you imagine of every car accident got press coverage? The only reason for the article was the picture was good click bait.

Nothing to see here, move along

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trimfast said:

Pretty sure the thread was already sent to the investigating team prior to him requesting his delete...... Some people just don't understand what posting online can do I suppose.

You mean the truth could be held against you?

I'm sure there is an cached version of it somewhere.  But I doubt it will likely be needed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Moonduster said:

Ras, you asked:

Are you saying that hand layup can achieve fractional fiber/resin weights higher than vacuum de-bulked SCRIMP does? 

But the question makes no sense as you can't debulk scrimp. You can certainly achieve lighter layup with hand layup of pre-preg that's been properly debulked.

Moon, wouldn't you consider that when you pull the vacuum on the SCRIMP laminate stack before you open the valves to the resin supply would properly de-bulk the layers of laminate?  How can you state that 'you can't debulk scrimp'?

8 hours ago, Moonduster said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

 

no kidding..    so when do you troll at high speed?

On the internet?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

 

no kidding..    so when do you troll at high speed?

wahoo fishing, but not in CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Occam's Razor would say simplest explanation probably the likeliest.   Failure of Lookout and excessive speed considering the non-lookout on  Hunter, J-boat (no motor in use) unable to do much if anything to "avoid" the imminent collision.

Likliest result?   Both have insurance, both pay off their insureds for damage/loss, and adjust the liability between each other (100% fault on motorboat, adjusters won't dick around with a case like this, pay it and settle).  Personal injury lawsuits?  Maybe, but probably not. 

The licensed operator, who may be an okay captain when looking, but wasn't looking??   Hmmmm...plea agreement reached with Coast Guard I.O. and the Administrative Law Judge,  license suspended for 12 months, with 6 months suspended, unless he screws up again?   And the imposition of the 6 months might be timed to take place in the off-season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, b393capt said:

What happened to news reporting? It's been 3 days. Is this not newsworthy enough for at least a single newspaper to assign a reporter to investigate, maybe interview captain and passengers on either boat?  It's just enough to print this picture, do an internet search of boat owner and DWI history, and move on?  

I would think the speed is over reported, I find it difficult to believe the charter boat comes to a stop within 15 feet of initial impact and nobody aboard the charter boat was ejected or seriously injured in a fall at 25 knots (28 mph). It's not like there are airbags or seat belts.

Would someone with a subscription to www.marinetraffic.com look to see if the charter boat may have been transmitting AIS at the time of the crash, then the speed would be known, maybe even something about the track would be interesting. I found it difficult to do a proper search of marinetraffic without a subscription, searching on the boat name Hunter alone didn't get a hit. Ideally look for an american flagged boat that last transmitted the day of the accident in that vicinity, and keep in mind boats change name without the new name being programmed in the AIS. 

 

 

Maybe too soon to complain about the lack of local reporting in naptown.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/anne-arundel/bal-capital-gazette-shooting-victims-20180628-storygallery.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2018 at 7:56 PM, Bowchow said:

Captain of charter vessel aint gonna be a captain no more. Doesn't matter who's to blame, both parties could have taken more affirmative action to avoid a collision.

 

"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision. "

 

"(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist."

 

Charter captain should be tried for negligence.

As a Sailor, this is my worst nightmare.

As a Captain, this is my worst nightmare.

 

All you can do is roll your eyes and thank god no one was hurt.

Assuming captain was sober, and it was failure to keep a proper lookout from a captain with a good record otherwise, and no injuries, I wouldn't expect there to be a criminal prosecution by a local DA or Federal prosecutor.  Rather, an administrative proceeding against his license by the Coast Guard, probably resolved with a (civil) plea agreement and some sort of license suspension.

I agree it's most fortunate no one injured.  Unlike the situation in Clear Lake a few years ago.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2018 at 7:56 PM, Bowchow said:

Captain of charter vessel aint gonna be a captain no more. Doesn't matter who's to blame, both parties could have taken more affirmative action to avoid a collision.

 

"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision. "

 

"(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist."

 

Charter captain should be tried for negligence.

As a Sailor, this is my worst nightmare.

As a Captain, this is my worst nightmare.

 

All you can do is roll your eyes and thank god no one was hurt.

Assuming captain was sober, and it was failure to keep a proper lookout from a captain with a good record otherwise, and no injuries, I wouldn't expect there to be a criminal prosecution by a local DA or Federal prosecutor.  Rather, an administrative proceeding against his license by the Coast Guard, probably resolved with a (civil) plea agreement and some sort of license suspension.

I agree it's most fortunate no one injured.  Unlike the situation in Clear Lake a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2018 at 7:56 PM, Bowchow said:

Captain of charter vessel aint gonna be a captain no more. Doesn't matter who's to blame, both parties could have taken more affirmative action to avoid a collision.

 

"Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision. "

 

"(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist."

 

Charter captain should be tried for negligence.

As a Sailor, this is my worst nightmare.

As a Captain, this is my worst nightmare.

 

All you can do is roll your eyes and thank god no one was hurt.

Assuming captain was sober, and it was failure to keep a proper lookout from a captain with a good record otherwise, and no injuries, I wouldn't expect there to be a criminal prosecution by a local DA or Federal prosecutor.  Rather, an administrative proceeding against his license by the Coast Guard, probably resolved with a (civil) plea agreement and some sort of license suspension.

I agree it's most fortunate no one injured.  Unlike the situation in Clear Lake a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, zoomee said:

I don't understand what the shooting victims have to do with anything.

I had viewed this article from the Baltimore sun you are perhaps referencing, none of the passenger or crew were interview or quoted.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/anne-arundel/ac-cn-boat-collision-20180817-story.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, IStream said:

Mardi Gras is starting early...

Oops.  Nonresponsive "submit" button.   I'm ready for my breathalyzer now  ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, nolatom said:

Oops.  Nonresponsive "submit" button.   I'm ready for my breathalyzer now  ;-)

Just a warning this time, son. Have a good time out there but remember to stay safe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites