Jump to content


3 dead in N2E


  • Please log in to reply
2552 replies to this topic

#201 'moondance44

'moondance44

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,165 posts
  • Location:Dodgy Bit Of Stamford, CT and The Cows, Graveyard of LIS where bluefish get blown off wire leaders

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:12 PM

Is channel 13 preferred over ch 16 ? (less VHF traffic?)



Everyone monitors 16 so that's the channel I would hail them on, then once comms are established switch to a working frequency.

Sailing in fog is another whole subject. I wouldn't be out there in fog without a radar. I know people do it, but just the thought of sailing down the SOCAL coast in fog without a radar sends shivers down my spine.




That seems funny.
I'd guess I've had 100 pct success contacting commercial traffic on 13 and less so on 16

#202 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,762 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:21 PM

AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required



what????

AIS does not require radar.

#203 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,537 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:26 PM

AIS has NOTHING to do with radar and FLARM is a very specific type of "AIS" for gliders that would have no use on a boat that I can see or airplanes either outside of gliders unless you can convince everyone to buy one.


AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required



what????

AIS does not require radar.



#204 sleddog

sleddog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 195 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:32 PM


Condolences to all involved in this tragedy.

OCEAN ARIADNE was last tanker moored offshore PEMEX Terminal, Rosarito Beach through Friday. Debris field was reported by media as approx. 8 miles west of Rosarito, three miles south of South Coronado, where OA likely transited, her AIS possibly non-operative.

If I were CG, I would want to meet this ship before she arrives at March Point Terminal, Anacortes, WA, ETA 1300 PDST May 1. Just sayin'


where are you getting that ship name?


AIS receiver Pt.Loma (shipfinder.com) shows OVERSEAS ARIADMAR (apologies for error in name in original post) at Pemex Terminal, Rosarito Beach, prior to tragedy. Her outbound departure/track to Anacortes is not recorded at marinetraffic.com until she appears approx. 150 miles WNW of Pt.Conception on 4/29/12 at 17:08Z. Since then, OA has been steaming N. at 10 knots. You can Google this ship for more info.

#205 Or45

Or45

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Location:Sd
  • Interests:Sailing surfing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:39 PM

I was one of the guys that found the bodies. What mess. Condolences to family and friends.

#206 Anonymous Anarchist

Anonymous Anarchist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 377 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:44 PM

Here's a link to the radar reflector study mentioned in an earler post. It makes a pretty good argument for carrying and deploying one of these gadgets. We've always used one, we have also made a conscious distinction between watchkeeping while in a shipping lane and watchkeeping while not in a shipping lane. The lanes are clearly shown on the charts.

Radar Reflector Report

aa

#207 'moondance44

'moondance44

    Anarchist

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,165 posts
  • Location:Dodgy Bit Of Stamford, CT and The Cows, Graveyard of LIS where bluefish get blown off wire leaders

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:48 PM



Condolences to all involved in this tragedy.

OCEAN ARIADNE was last tanker moored offshore PEMEX Terminal, Rosarito Beach through Friday. Debris field was reported by media as approx. 8 miles west of Rosarito, three miles south of South Coronado, where OA likely transited, her AIS possibly non-operative.

If I were CG, I would want to meet this ship before she arrives at March Point Terminal, Anacortes, WA, ETA 1300 PDST May 1. Just sayin'


where are you getting that ship name?


AIS receiver Pt.Loma (shipfinder.com) shows OVERSEAS ARIADMAR (apologies for error in name in original post) at Pemex Terminal, Rosarito Beach, prior to tragedy. Her outbound departure/track to Anacortes is not recorded at marinetraffic.com until she appears approx. 150 miles WNW of Pt.Conception on 4/29/12 at 17:08Z. Since then, OA has been steaming N. at 10 knots. You can Google this ship for more info.


OK THANKS. I COULDNT FIND IT IN THE REGISTRY. I guess at her next port they will be checking for some bttom paint.

#208 inquiring Mind

inquiring Mind

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 465 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:49 PM

AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required


7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.

#209 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,762 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:51 PM

Here's a link to the radar reflector study mentioned in an earler post. It makes a pretty good argument for carrying and deploying one of these gadgets. We've always used one, we have also made a conscious distinction between watchkeeping while in a shipping lane and watchkeeping while not in a shipping lane. The lanes are clearly shown on the charts.

Radar Reflector Report

aa


aren't they basically saying that passive reflectors don't achieve much?

#210 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,842 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:54 PM

http://www.maib.gov....s/2007/ouzo.cfm


Without wanting to hijack discussion of the Aegean tragedy, it is perhaps worth saying that whereas the MAIB report seems to leave little doubt that the Pride of Bilbao was responsible for Ouzo's sinking, that was not the conclusion of a criminal prosecution. See http://news.bbc.co.u...ire/7131177.stm

#211 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:56 PM

Thanks. Flarm has many advantages in cost, intelligence and ease of use. It will, or others like it, be the futures anti collision system. It works phenomenally well in aircraft, especially gliders which are far faster and more manueverable. Now it is coming into rail industry, mining, and many more. Ships would be a piece of cake! But anything is better then eyeballing lights! The sailing, shipping industry needs a standard system. We are all very lucky this kind of accident does not happen more regularly. It easily could become far more common based on present safeguards.


AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required


7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#212 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,537 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 30 April 2012 - 01:59 PM

???
WTF?
We *DO* have a standard system, I have it, and it works well.
:unsure: :unsure:


Thanks. Flarm has many advantages in cost, intelligence and ease of use. It will, or others like it, the futures anti collision system. It works phenomenally well in aircraft, especially gliders which are far more manueverable. Ships would be a piece of cake! But anything is better then eyeballing lights! The sailing, shipping industry needs a standard system.



AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required


7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#213 K38BOB

K38BOB

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,540 posts
  • Location:Bay Area

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:00 PM


I've raced some dozens of times across the English Channel at night, crossing the traffic lanes going into and out of Europe's major container ports. Some comments:

1. There have been at least two incidents local to here in the last 15 years where (non-racing) yachts were run down by ships, in one of which the entire crew was killed. In neither of those incidents was the ship involved ever conclusively identified, despite paint tests etc.

2. When 20,000 tons of steel are heading for you at 15 knots, "whose fault would an accident be" is not the appropriate question to be asking. If there is not much wind, you'd better be prepared to motor out of the way. If you care anything for your safety you've got to assume that ships are not going to avoid you.

3. Sailing instructions here allow you to use the engine for collision avoidance and declare it after the finish. It would not result in DSQ.

4. Unless you've got radar, the only way offshore at night to know conclusively if you are on a closing bearing is to repeatedly take bearings on a hand-bearing compass. Crew on watch have got to have one and know how to use it.


There's another way. If you only see 1 colored light and the boat is turning and then you see 2 colored lights...thats a problem. Especially if they ascend and become bigger and further apart.

#214 Bowgirl

Bowgirl

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,481 posts
  • Location:LIS via Lake Ontario
  • Interests:Heineken HPDO, Tempest sailing, tending orchids

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:01 PM

@Bowgirl - The link to the UK report is an excellent read. Very thorough. Highly recommended.


I crossed the shipping lanes just outside of the Bay of Biscay at night in May 2007 on a 60' sailboat. We kept clear of everyone, but having read that account, and looking at the size of the objects we were avoiding (from a safe distance) made me realise how difficult we could be to spot from way the hell up there.

#215 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,762 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:01 PM

Thanks. Flarm has many advantages in cost, intelligence and ease of use. It will, or others like it, the futures anti collision system. It works phenomenally well in aircraft, especially gliders which are far more manueverable. Ships would be a piece of cake! But anything is better then eyeballing lights! The sailing, shipping industry needs a standard system.



there is a standard system - It's called AIS, it costs $150 at the low end...

pretty much all large commercial vessels have it installed now - yes, there are a few exceptions, but that's a problem with regulations, and implementation, not a problem with the system.

many many cruising and racing yachts have it installed also - i can't remember the last time i sailed on a boat that wasn't just a day sailer that _didn't_ have one.

#216 vikram

vikram

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 50 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:10 PM

not soon enough - its cheap and easy - radar and ais is better

Starpath has excellent (seriously excellent) online courses for all this and Colregs too - can't recommend highly enough





Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required





#217 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:13 PM

The question is no steps, baby steps or the right step (Flarm in my opinion) if a standard is to be promoted or a mandate installed.

I have had the uncomfortable experience of dodging freighters in the night many, many times. I would hate to see this happen again to anyone. We can solve this problem with enough grit. Unfortunately we all know it very likely won't happen until this scenario plays out a few more times... To be different somebody needs to become a leader, big time and demand real action. Is one accident enough to make it happen?

If something does come of this, FLARM is my recommendation although it is clearly not the standard or the easiest path. AIS seems good as well, but is it simple enough? Flarm is like having a radar detector in size, turn it on and it beeps like mad is a potential collision exists with a graphical display of exactly where the threat is and it's relative motion (turning or not) for both targets. I am less familiar with AIS and it's capabilities.

I wish us all luck and sincere condolences to all affected. Really sucks to hear of all of this tragedy. Be safe all.

Thanks. Flarm has many advantages in cost, intelligence and ease of use. It will, or others like it, be the futures anti collision system. It works phenomenally well in aircraft, especially gliders which are far faster and more manueverable. Now it is coming into rail industry, mining, and many more. Ships would be a piece of cake! But anything is better then eyeballing lights! The sailing, shipping industry needs a standard system. We are all very lucky this kind of accident does not happen more regularly. It easily could become far more common based on present safeguards.



AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required


7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#218 Greyhawk

Greyhawk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,586 posts
  • Location:New Hampshire / Maine
  • Interests:cruising and racing on the Gulf of Maine and beyond

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:15 PM

ISAF Offshore Special Regulations 3.29.1.n already require AIS Transceivers for boats racing in Category 1 and Category 2 races (and recommends them for Cat 3 races, 3.29.1.o), and have done so since 2010. Or course, US Sailing Prescriptions turn this into a recommendation rather than a requirement...

#219 Marvin

Marvin

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • Location:Mississauga, ON, Canada
  • Interests:Sailing (Duh!)

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:16 PM


Here's a link to the radar reflector study mentioned in an earler post. It makes a pretty good argument for carrying and deploying one of these gadgets. We've always used one, we have also made a conscious distinction between watchkeeping while in a shipping lane and watchkeeping while not in a shipping lane. The lanes are clearly shown on the charts.

Radar Reflector Report

aa


aren't they basically saying that passive reflectors don't achieve much?


That was also my understanding... most passive radars reflectors don't even meet the OSR minimum reflection requirements.

#220 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,762 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:18 PM

ISAF Offshore Special Regulations 3.29.1.n already require AIS Transceivers for boats racing in Category 1 and Category 2 races (and recommends them for Cat 3 races, 3.29.1.o), and have done so since 2010. Or course, US Sailing Prescriptions turn this into a recommendation rather than a requirement...


but SI's over ride the US Sailing prescriptions, and Newport-Bermuda requires at least a receiver.

#221 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:18 PM

So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...

???
WTF?
We *DO* have a standard system, I have it, and it works well.
:unsure: :unsure:



Thanks. Flarm has many advantages in cost, intelligence and ease of use. It will, or others like it, the futures anti collision system. It works phenomenally well in aircraft, especially gliders which are far more manueverable. Ships would be a piece of cake! But anything is better then eyeballing lights! The sailing, shipping industry needs a standard system.



AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLARM

Flarm in mining: http://www.safe-mine.com/


Anyone want over/under on how long to:
AIS receive required
AIS transceiver required


7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#222 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,672 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:22 PM

Any anarchists in anacortes?

#223 R Booze

R Booze

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,172 posts
  • Location:43 miles from both Mexicos.....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:27 PM

Any anarchists in anacortes?



Hobot?.....

#224 Canal Bottom

Canal Bottom

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Location:Jupiter Island

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:31 PM

A crew or 4? 1:30 AM? From the cockpit of a small boat you can have less than 10 minutes before a large modern ship appears on the horizon and runs you down. Much less if the ship is coming out of the lights from shore. On a short handed watch, late a night, have you ever gone 10 minutes without looking directly astern or under a sail? Nod off or relax for just a few minutes and you may not have a clue until you hear the bow wake. CRUNCH!

#225 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,537 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:34 PM

Are you being deliberately dense or what?
First off, you have NO IDEA if the boat in question had AIS or if the ship/sub/tug/whale/UFO/whatever that hit it had AIS either.

Second, my AIS receiver IS about the size of a deck of cards. The intelligence is in the plotter and you can have all kinds of bells, whistles, and disco lights go off if you want to. Self contained AIS units including the display screens with CPA alarms are readily available. The idea that AIS is too hard to use is ludicrous and utterly unproven as having anything to do with this incident.

Third, when I am flying a 1500 pound airplane I can destroy a 400,000 pound airplane as well as vice versa. EVERYONE has skin in the game. Some third world POS freighter skippered by someone with a ticket from Bob's School of Boats and Nigerian Scams may not give a shit if they run you over. It won't hurt them one bit.

So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...



#226 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:35 PM


[
Are you saying that there won't be any lawsuits filed? Against NOSA?


Well, no one can promise that stupid suits won't be filed, but you can promise that there won't be a judgment for the plaintiff. What, exactly, would be the grounds of the suit? Are you assuming that Orange County small claims court has jurisdiction over events in international waters? You realize that Admiralty law explicitly indemnified all parties that are not directly involved in the cause of the collision. Can you outline a basis for a lawsuit against NOSA that could be heard in state court?


OC small claims court? Ahhhhhh.......

The action could be for wrongful death. The issue would be whether or not NOSA was negligent.

One could argue that NOSA (that is, the NOSA Board), in it's unsatiable qwest for more revenue, broadened the scope of the event to include those who would be less likely to possess the skills necessary to venture out on an overnight race, crossing dangerous and busy commercial lanes, and did nothing to ensure that all entries were qualified to deal with such circumstances.

There were no criteria around something as simple as swimming ability, or knowledge of the COLREGS, or instruction on how to navigate busy channels at night, or how to read running lights, or safety measures like carrying flares at the ready near the helm. What criteria were established to be able to stand watch and be responsible for the boat and the lives of the crewmembers sleeping below?

One could argue that NOSA, knowing full well that the race had been expanded to include wingnuts, and knowing full well that night time sailing in shipping lanes was dangerous, did nothing but focus on additional revenue. Infact, by offering valuable monetary incentives, like a two year Lexus lease, NOSA altered the very nature of the Ensenada Race and induced folks to enter who might not have ever ventured offshore.

But - the race had been run for 65 years with no serious incident... Yes, true, but prior races were restricted to racing classes, those that presumably had the skills to go offshore. Further, the event had been run by experienced and knowledagble racers at NOSA...


So, those might be the positions taken by an avaricious attorney. Do not confuse those positions with my personal position, and send me angry messages, as I am an Ayn Rand disciple. And I did not vote for BHO.

The question remains, what will now be the fate of the Ensenada Race? Gird your loins, NOSA, and call your D & O policy holder. The sharks are circling.

#227 Greyhawk

Greyhawk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,586 posts
  • Location:New Hampshire / Maine
  • Interests:cruising and racing on the Gulf of Maine and beyond

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:35 PM

So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...


The flaw is that not every vessel is yet mandated to have an AIS transmitter, much less a receiver.

#228 More Faster

More Faster

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Location:Bayfield, Wisconsin
  • Interests:Sailing, Windsurfing, Hogfarming, Skiing, Snowboarding, Diving,Curing Herpes.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:37 PM


Speculation:
I'm not familiar with those aboard the H37 in this incident. With only four aboard, at night, in light air, it's likely that 1-2 were below, if not 3.


Why would 4 be only? I have done many 100-170 M races with a crew of 4 and I think it is enough. There are only 1-2 nights and it is enough to have one person sleeping. In a cruising class there maybe only 1 or 2 on deck at night, but most likely the ones with most experience.

Reports have stated 4 aboard. I'm not questioning or commenting on the size of the crew.

#229 us7070

us7070

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,762 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:39 PM

So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...




i think that we are guessing that one of the boats did not have an operational AIS, or maybe they weren't monitoring it...

and yes, it can give an audible alarm.

1/2 an hour ago you thought AIS required radar to work - maybe you should learn about the system.

#230 kent_island_sailor

kent_island_sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,537 posts
  • Location:Kent Island!

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:39 PM

The Gov Cup grew to over 400 boats and everything that floated seem to enter. The organizers realized they had a bunch of n00bs that were clueless at best and restricted entries by requiring some prior experience to filter the worst of the "only time I sail at night all year" types out.



[
Are you saying that there won't be any lawsuits filed? Against NOSA?


Well, no one can promise that stupid suits won't be filed, but you can promise that there won't be a judgment for the plaintiff. What, exactly, would be the grounds of the suit? Are you assuming that Orange County small claims court has jurisdiction over events in international waters? You realize that Admiralty law explicitly indemnified all parties that are not directly involved in the cause of the collision. Can you outline a basis for a lawsuit against NOSA that could be heard in state court?


OC small claims court? Ahhhhhh.......

The action could be for wrongful death. The issue would be whether or not NOSA was negligent.

One could argue that NOSA (that is, the NOSA Board), in it's unsatiable qwest for more revenue, broadened the scope of the event to include those who would be less likely to possess the skills necessary to venture out on an overnight race, crossing dangerous and busy commercial lanes, and did nothing to ensure that all entries were qualified to deal with such circumstances.

There were no criteria around something as simple as swimming ability, or knowledge of the COLREGS, or instruction on how to navigate busy channels at night, or how to read running lights, or safety measures like carrying flares at the ready near the helm. What criteria were established to be able to stand watch and be responsible for the boat and the lives of the crewmembers sleeping below?

One could argue that NOSA, knowing full well that the race had been expanded to include wingnuts, and knowing full well that night time sailing in shipping lanes was dangerous, did nothing but focus on additional revenue. Infact, by offering valuable monetary incentives, like a two year Lexus lease, NOSA altered the very nature of the Ensenada Race and induced folks to enter who might not have ever ventured offshore.

But - the race had been run for 65 years with no serious incident... Yes, true, but prior races were restricted to racing classes, those that presumably had the skills to go offshore. Further, the event had been run by experienced and knowledagble racers at NOSA...


So, those might be the positions taken by an avaricious attorney. Do not confuse those positions with my personal position, and send me angry messages, as I am an Ayn Rand disciple. And I did not vote for BHO.

The question remains, what will now be the fate of the Ensenada Race? Gird your loins, NOSA, and call your D & O policy holder. The sharks are circling.



#231 sailmakered

sailmakered

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Location:Alamitos Bay, CA

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:42 PM

[quote name='Ludicrous Speed' timestamp='1335790983' post='3692861']
AIS requires radar. Needs to be simple. Flarm is GPS and radio based. Requires nothing (no radar). Simple. Does not require interpretation. Intelligent, predicts possible turns of both vessels.

My thoughts are with those lost & their loved ones. Bad month....bad month.

AIS does not require radar. I use my AIS through a netbook with free openCPN chart plotting software. With my GPS it calculates all CPAs for AIS signals & alarms can be configured. You must be a flarm dealer.

#232 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:43 PM

Are you being deliberately dense or what?
First off, you have NO IDEA if the boat in question had AIS or if the ship/sub/tug/whale/UFO/whatever that hit it had AIS either.

Second, my AIS receiver IS about the size of a deck of cards. The intelligence is in the plotter and you can have all kinds of bells, whistles, and disco lights go off if you want to. Self contained AIS units including the display screens with CPA alarms are readily available. The idea that AIS is too hard to use is ludicrous and utterly unproven as having anything to do with this incident.

Third, when I am flying a 1500 pound airplane I can destroy a 400,000 pound airplane as well as vice versa. EVERYONE has skin in the game. Some third world POS freighter skippered by someone with a ticket from Bob's School of Boats and Nigerian Scams may not give a shit if they run you over. It won't hurt them one bit.


So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...


The AIS system does have some practical limitations. For example, whilkst sailing across teh Med several summers ago, the screen was almost blanked out by all the ships and yachts that had the system on. The frequency of use actually mitigated much of the benefit. So, even though on a 80' boat, the onus was on us to play dodge ball. Which, of course, we did.

There is no real substitute for an alert watch, trained in the realities of sailing in potentially dangerous situations. You can't effectively and safely fly a plane on instruments nor can you sail a yacht on instruments.

#233 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:45 PM

The Gov Cup grew to over 400 boats and everything that floated seem to enter. The organizers realized they had a bunch of n00bs that were clueless at best and restricted entries by requiring some prior experience to filter the worst of the "only time I sail at night all year" types out.




[
Are you saying that there won't be any lawsuits filed? Against NOSA?


Well, no one can promise that stupid suits won't be filed, but you can promise that there won't be a judgment for the plaintiff. What, exactly, would be the grounds of the suit? Are you assuming that Orange County small claims court has jurisdiction over events in international waters? You realize that Admiralty law explicitly indemnified all parties that are not directly involved in the cause of the collision. Can you outline a basis for a lawsuit against NOSA that could be heard in state court?


OC small claims court? Ahhhhhh.......

The action could be for wrongful death. The issue would be whether or not NOSA was negligent.

One could argue that NOSA (that is, the NOSA Board), in it's unsatiable qwest for more revenue, broadened the scope of the event to include those who would be less likely to possess the skills necessary to venture out on an overnight race, crossing dangerous and busy commercial lanes, and did nothing to ensure that all entries were qualified to deal with such circumstances.

There were no criteria around something as simple as swimming ability, or knowledge of the COLREGS, or instruction on how to navigate busy channels at night, or how to read running lights, or safety measures like carrying flares at the ready near the helm. What criteria were established to be able to stand watch and be responsible for the boat and the lives of the crewmembers sleeping below?

One could argue that NOSA, knowing full well that the race had been expanded to include wingnuts, and knowing full well that night time sailing in shipping lanes was dangerous, did nothing but focus on additional revenue. Infact, by offering valuable monetary incentives, like a two year Lexus lease, NOSA altered the very nature of the Ensenada Race and induced folks to enter who might not have ever ventured offshore.

But - the race had been run for 65 years with no serious incident... Yes, true, but prior races were restricted to racing classes, those that presumably had the skills to go offshore. Further, the event had been run by experienced and knowledagble racers at NOSA...


So, those might be the positions taken by an avaricious attorney. Do not confuse those positions with my personal position, and send me angry messages, as I am an Ayn Rand disciple. And I did not vote for BHO.

The question remains, what will now be the fate of the Ensenada Race? Gird your loins, NOSA, and call your D & O policy holder. The sharks are circling.


Good on them. Sounds like you have competent race management.

It's actions like you describe that will prove to be quite damaging for the crack team at NOSA.

#234 Dawg Gonit

Dawg Gonit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,073 posts
  • Location:Channel Islands (oxnard), Calif

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:49 PM

This morning on the Local LA news they were questioning the safety of Sailboat Racing in the waters off of Calif.

Time for the Nanny State to pass some stupid laws..............................

#235 WhiteLightnin'

WhiteLightnin'

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,705 posts
  • Location:Anacortes, Wa
  • Interests:Seriously, when was the last time you read the Constitution? Bill of Rights?

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:51 PM

Only about 20-30 of us! We will be watching for the arrival.Pics will follow (if the is anything to take pics of)

WL

Any anarchists in anacortes?



#236 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:52 PM

LS,

Do you actually any REAL information that the boat that was crushed to bits had AIS and somehow didn't know how to use it, or are you blowing stuff out some orifice like your incorrect earlier remark about AIS requiring RADAR?

Look, I'm all for folks having AIS, it really works extremely well and does NOT require a RADAR unit to function. It is a lot easier to use if it's linked to a chart plotter, which will display the course and speed of each AIS transmitter equipped vessel nearby. But even a child can use AIS with a paper chart, a straight edge and a protractor. For that matter, one can link the AIS that works with my system to my iPhone and iPad and have pretty color pictures of where everyone (who has a transmitter) is located and where they are going, the name of their ship, what their last port was ask what port they're headed to. Again, that isn't necessary, just nice to have.

I have flown sailplanes and things happened MUCH more quickly there. Perhaps FLARM is better there, I have never seen one. I tend to look out the windows when flying, just as when I'm driving. On the ocean, between one object moving at about 5 knots and another moving at about 20 knots there is plenty of time to draw lines on paper charts and see if there's going to be a close pass or collision. Sure folks don't see each other sometimes, but the problem is NOT that things are happening too fast. There is plenty of time to get out of the way of a 20k ships, and most don't move that quickly.

What I believe we on this "chat room" actually know about this accident is that the boat is in small pieces, three people are dead, one person is missing, and that the USCG hasn't released any additional information because they don't know anything more. All the rest of this, like your supposition that AIS is too hard to use and that in some way that is proven by the "3 dead bodies and another person missing" is just goof balls on SA making shit up - pretty normal behavior for this place. But, seriously, when you don't know if the boat even had AIS, why in the world would you use it as "evidence" that AIS has "got some kinks."

Why don't folks take a deep breath and make SOME attempt to stick to facts - I know it's SA and I know that's asking a lot.

My heart goes out to anyone who knew these folks and stumbles into this place and this discussion. Hopefully, someone will warn them off or the first one in will let them know what a bunch of clods we are.

BV



So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...


???
WTF?
We *DO* have a standard system, I have it, and it works well.
:unsure: :unsure:

...snip...

7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#237 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:53 PM


So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...




i think that we are guessing that one of the boats did not have an operational AIS, or maybe they weren't monitoring it...

and yes, it can give an audible alarm.

1/2 an hour ago you thought AIS required radar to work - maybe you should learn about the system.


AIS is not so useful when there are a lot of boats in the area, all using it. The alarm constantly goes off prompting just turning off the device.

Then relying on an alert and trained watch captain. Oh, the horror!

#238 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:56 PM

+1 to KIS about the Bob's School Of Marine Navigation and Nigerian Scams.... Not all ships out there are meeting COLREGS etc. requirements

Without wanting to hijack discussion of the Aegean tragedy, it is perhaps worth saying that whereas the MAIB report seems to leave little doubt that the Pride of Bilbao was responsible for Ouzo's sinking, that was not the conclusion of a criminal prosecution. See http://news.bbc.co.u...ire/7131177.stm


Dunno about UK or where the criminal trial was held, but in the USA,
  • the standard for the Prosecutor(Plaintiff) in a Criminal Trial to prevail is "Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"
  • the standard for the Prosecutor/Plaintiff in a CIVIL trial (and Admiralty law trials are mostly CIVIL trials) is "By the Preponderance of Evidence".
Hence OJ Simpson was found Not Guilty in his Criminal trial, but "Responsible" in his "wrongful death" civil trial....Wierd, but that's atleast the diff under US Law.

I've used AIS in busy and potentially confusing Shipping lanes (the inbound turn marks into Straits of Juan De Fuca where you can have ships from a variety of directions at 25knots all slotting in to align into the VTS AND adjusting their speeds) And it was damned helpful. You can get basic AIS transponders, or you can have AIS transponders with collision alarms (to go to the FLARM approach) where you set a "radius" and if a vessel within that radius is displaying a bearing and speed to collide with you, the collision alarm goes off. You can get standalone devices or ones integrated into your PC Nav software http://www.offshores...ob_nthrp160.htm
http://www.defender.com/product.jsp?path=-1%7C344%7C1209728%7C1215767&id=1283473

And anyone doing a race like the Newport-Enchilada is already spending $$$ so $500 ain't gonna be the "we can't go" break the budget cost.

As for "lots of boats" - yes the alarm can be going off often. But on a moonless night, against a lit up shore, I'd rather have AIS giving me an idea where to look to see if it is a problem.

#239 jhc

jhc

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,672 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:12 PM

Only about 20-30 of us! We will be watching for the arrival.Pics will follow (if the is anything to take pics of)

WL


Any anarchists in anacortes?


That ship should be impounded by US customs.

#240 pseudocrow

pseudocrow

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:15 PM

Might have to take a close look when she arrives. Very sad circumstances. Condolences to the families and friends of those lost.

WL


Condolences to all involved in this tragedy.

Overseas Ariadmar (Corrected Vessel Name) was last tanker moored offshore PEMEX Terminal, Rosarito Beach through Friday. Debris field was reported by media as approx. 8 miles west of Rosarito, three miles south of South Coronado, where OA likely transited, her AIS possibly non-operative.

If I were CG, I would want to meet this ship before she arrives at March Point Terminal, Anacortes, WA, ETA 1300 PDST May 1. Just sayin'


At the risk of contributing to unwarranted speculation, Q88.com says that during a Port State Control Vessel Inspection of Overseas Ariadmar on March 9, 2012 in Corpus Christi that "Master reported the S-Band RADAR inoperable. Arrangements were made immidiately to repair in the Port of Corpus Christi." Q88.com further reports that on March 9, 2012 this deficiency was resolved: "Recieved a technicians report form Mackay attesting to the repair of the S-Band RADAR. Technicians identified the encoder as inoperable and replaced said encoder in the scanner of the S-Band RADAR."

Probably completely unrelated, but still ...

#241 CowboyKell

CowboyKell

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,151 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach, California

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:15 PM

Like everyone else on this thread I have no REAL info on what happened out there. What I can’t get out of my head after seeing that AIS track someone posted earlier...Your bobbing along at night at 0.3 knots....typical....you see a freighter behind you and by either checking the AIS on your plotter or by identifying the light pattern you discern it is going to overtake/pass somewhat to port of you, no need to start the engine.....then the ship makes a sudden right turn and it's too late.

#242 Vogel515

Vogel515

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:Sailing, snowboarding, skiing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:16 PM

My prayers go out to the family and friends of those who were lost.

I have nothing of material to add to this thread, but between this and the LSC incident, the co-owner of my boat, and myself have been reviewing our safety procedures and in this case, our rudimentary knowledge of radio protocols have become very apparent. Besides our ability to call a launch or hail an RC boat, we would be nearly clueless what the correct radio protocol would be to alert a large vessel that we were disabled.

A few links I have found:

http://www.coastalbo...adioBasics.html
http://www.seakayak....525735500740A6E

If anyone has anything a bit more concise, it would be appreciated. I'd like to laminate the document and place it near our radio.

#243 dogwatch

dogwatch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,842 posts
  • Location:South Coast, UK
  • Interests:Racing in all forms.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:18 PM

Dunno about UK or where the criminal trial was held, but in the USA,

  • the standard for the Prosecutor(Plaintiff) in a Criminal Trial to prevail is "Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt"
  • the standard for the Prosecutor/Plaintiff in a CIVIL trial (and Admiralty law trials are mostly CIVIL trials) is "By the Preponderance of Evidence".


Yes it is the same here. Afaik there was however no civil case.

#244 windjunkee

windjunkee

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Location:Redondo Beach, CA
  • Interests:sailing, running, working

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:20 PM

We were out there, 30 miles south and west of Aegean. It was a very clear night and large ships could be seen from very far away. We saw one freighter that was very poorly lit. But we saw it, watched its direction and bearing and remained clear. Aegean was in cruising class, which allows us of the engine. Even a PHRF class boat, though, should not hesitate to fire up the engine if a collision with a freighter was a potential risk. I've been in races where we were drifting with large ships bearing down on us. We had the key in the ignition ready to take appropriate evasive action.

As much as this is a horrible tragedy for the loss of life, experience and logic leads me to conclude this is crew error and nothing more.

#245 Lee G

Lee G

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,514 posts
  • Location:the rough part of Stamford

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:26 PM


Only about 20-30 of us! We will be watching for the arrival.Pics will follow (if the is anything to take pics of)

WL


Any anarchists in anacortes?


That ship should be impounded by US customs.


Why, because a few clowns on SA speculate that she may have been near the incident?

I am sure the USCG will be asking the ships crew plenty of questions on arrival, and will conduct a through investigation. Thats their job, and they do it pretty well. Lets not bust out the torches and pitchforks just yet.

My thoughts are with the friends and family of the lost sailors.

#246 Delta Blues

Delta Blues

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,808 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:32 PM



[
Are you saying that there won't be any lawsuits filed? Against NOSA?


Well, no one can promise that stupid suits won't be filed, but you can promise that there won't be a judgment for the plaintiff. What, exactly, would be the grounds of the suit? Are you assuming that Orange County small claims court has jurisdiction over events in international waters? You realize that Admiralty law explicitly indemnified all parties that are not directly involved in the cause of the collision. Can you outline a basis for a lawsuit against NOSA that could be heard in state court?


OC small claims court? Ahhhhhh.......

The action could be for wrongful death. The issue would be whether or not NOSA was negligent.

One could argue that NOSA (that is, the NOSA Board), in it's unsatiable qwest for more revenue, broadened the scope of the event to include those who would be less likely to possess the skills necessary to venture out on an overnight race, crossing dangerous and busy commercial lanes, and did nothing to ensure that all entries were qualified to deal with such circumstances.

There were no criteria around something as simple as swimming ability, or knowledge of the COLREGS, or instruction on how to navigate busy channels at night, or how to read running lights, or safety measures like carrying flares at the ready near the helm. What criteria were established to be able to stand watch and be responsible for the boat and the lives of the crewmembers sleeping below?

One could argue that NOSA, knowing full well that the race had been expanded to include wingnuts, and knowing full well that night time sailing in shipping lanes was dangerous, did nothing but focus on additional revenue. Infact, by offering valuable monetary incentives, like a two year Lexus lease, NOSA altered the very nature of the Ensenada Race and induced folks to enter who might not have ever ventured offshore.

But - the race had been run for 65 years with no serious incident... Yes, true, but prior races were restricted to racing classes, those that presumably had the skills to go offshore. Further, the event had been run by experienced and knowledagble racers at NOSA...


So, those might be the positions taken by an avaricious attorney. Do not confuse those positions with my personal position, and send me angry messages, as I am an Ayn Rand disciple. And I did not vote for BHO.

The question remains, what will now be the fate of the Ensenada Race? Gird your loins, NOSA, and call your D & O policy holder. The sharks are circling.



It is interesting all of the legal theories that you suggest could be attempted against NOSA. The reality is, the sport has been designed by lawyers from Day 1 to protect the race organizers. The organizing authorities reponsibilities are to "Start a Race" and "Finish a Race." I sure don't ask for more or less from any race or regatta I go to.

Where the line is drawn is reinforced in the rules as follows:

"4 DECISION TO RACE
The responsibility for a boat’s decision to participate in a race or to continue racing is hers alone."

Nobody forced this Hunter 37 to enter this race, it was their option. Nobody forced them to start or continue in this race, they chose to. They chose their safety equipment (USCG minimum required meeting the country's laws). They chose their crew. They chose their course, they chose their watches, they chose everything.

There are no laws requiring race organizers to test participants, there is no national database of educational classes attended and passed for participants. Do your own survey and you'll find most boat owners have not even taken a USCG Aux or US Power Squadron course. But around the bar, every person will brag how experienced and how much knowledge they possess. But good luck finding this knowledge tested in writing and results posted.

As you know there's a requirement for motor vehicles - drivers license, which shows a minimum of knowledge and skill. There is no such equivalent in boating. Some rumyuckle can buy a boat this afternoon with no experience and no training, go sailing for the first time ever and go out sailing in a hurricane. And you want to suggest that is someone else's fault in society that it occurred? No, we love sailing because we do take personal responsibility for out actions. Someone spill a hot cup of coffee on their lap on a sailboat? They deserved it. They can't blame someone else.

To me it is admirable that we have succeeded as one of the final frontiers of freedom with very little government influence. And that personal responsibility is still in force in this sport.

#247 R Booze

R Booze

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,172 posts
  • Location:43 miles from both Mexicos.....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:34 PM



Only about 20-30 of us! We will be watching for the arrival.Pics will follow (if the is anything to take pics of)

WL


Any anarchists in anacortes?


That ship should be impounded by US customs.


Why, because a few clowns on SA speculate that she may have been near the incident?

I am sure the USCG will be asking the ships crew plenty of questions on arrival, and will conduct a through investigation. Thats their job, and they do it pretty well. Lets not bust out the torches and pitchforks just yet.

My thoughts are with the friends and family of the lost sailors.


Occupy Oil Tankers?....


#248 Krispy

Krispy

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Location:San Fran
  • Interests:mountain climbing, running, uh, sailing.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:35 PM


So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...


The flaw is that not every vessel is yet mandated to have an AIS transmitter, much less a receiver.


All commercial vessels are required to have AIS. It is optional on recreational boats. AIS is stupid proof. The kink Lud is referring too is likely dual-purposing your VHF antenna for AIS. Two minutes of research will dispel the misconception. I don't know of any other issues. As an owner/skipper, having sailed from SF Bay to La Paz, countless coastal trips in pea soup fog around fishing vessels, etc, you simply cannot rely on radar, radar deflectors and trying to hail on VHF. That is very crude technology and should only be relied upon to detect and/or warn other small vessels, not large ones. If it was a collision, which seems most likely, a simple $500 AIS transponder would have alerted the bridge of the large vessel to the impending collision. Another avoidable tragedy!!

#249 Rondog

Rondog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:SoCal

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:38 PM

Condolences to all.

Nice boat. Looks like they were well equipped and even had an emergency o/b as well.

Should have been a fun cruise....

Attached Files



#250 CowboyKell

CowboyKell

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,151 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach, California

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:47 PM

Condolences to all.

Nice boat. Looks like they were well equipped and even had an emergency o/b as well.

Should have been a fun cruise....

Is the crew in that picture wearing an Obama mask?

#251 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:50 PM

+1

Maybe we should wait for some facts and stop getting pissed at each other, making assumptions and stupid statements. Then you can have an argument.
Cheers
Aaron


+1


Maybe we should wait for some facts and stop getting pissed at each other, making assumptions and stupid statements. Then you can have an argument.
Cheers
Aaron


+1




#252 Loco Gato

Loco Gato

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Location:Morro Bay

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:02 PM

My heart goes to the families and friends of those lost souls. Also to those that aided in the recovery and search.



Now, please Lord, save us from keyboard sailors!

#253 masameet

masameet

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17 posts
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:04 PM

Does anyone have any knowledge about commercial ship tracking? I.e., assuming that Aegean was hit by a large commercial ship (which is what the speculation seems to be, given the size of the small size of the debris that has been found), and contact with the sailboat was lost at 1:30 a.m. (can't remember date), wouldn't it be possible for maritime authorities to find out what ships were in the vicinity at the time? Or would this not be possible?

Sorry if this has been covered in this thread already --haven't had time to read through it.


This website tracks arrivals and departures via AIS and includes mapping: MarineTraffic.com

#254 robmur

robmur

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:07 PM

In none of the published photos of the Aegean do I see the crew wearing PFDs. I can't help but wonder if this had some bearing on the fatalities.

I cannot see a radar reflector either, but would expect it be mounted higher up that the photos I have found show.

Some of the online reports do mention the boat having radar installed, but it is possible (even likely) that it would not be in use in such benign conditions.

My thoughts and prayers are with the friends and families of those lost. A very tough month for all sailors in California.

#255 Somebody Else

Somebody Else

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,994 posts
  • Location:Southern California
  • Interests:Shootings, just like HotRod!

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:13 PM

It easily could become far more common based on present safeguards.

Explain how it could become more common.

I claim it could -- no, is -- less common based on present safeguards.

#256 robmur

robmur

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:19 PM

The charter listing for the boat at Marina Sailing <http://members.marin...htName=aegean#> does not list AIS on the equipment list. It does list Radar. I suspect AIS was not present.

photos at <http://members.marin...chtName=Aegean> clearly show a VHF mounted at the helm.

#257 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:25 PM

In one N2E, I think 2003, it was cold, raining & breezy (20kts or so) as we pushed at about 10-11 kts past Rosarito; a large commercial MV with several vertical lights on it approached from the south and then turned just in front of us. As it went by I said to the owner "Say, doesn't that mean it's towing something?" The owner goes "Shit!!" and goes up hard as the towed barge w/o lights crossed maybe 5-6 lengths in front of us.

That tug operator knew we could not see the cable or tow and would not have felt a thing if the barge had smashed right up & over us.

I suspect this is what happened to the Aegean.

Raised a toast yesterday to the sailors lost in April 2012.

#258 Knee Deep-N-Cider

Knee Deep-N-Cider

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 172 posts
  • Location:St. Louis, MO

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:33 PM

Looks like this may have been part of their learn to sail classes-

Title: Ensenada Race ASA 104/106- Long Beach
Date: Saturday, April 28
Time: 12:00:00 AM
Description: Be a part of the most famous yacht race on the west coast and get your ASA 104 and 106 at the same time! This 125 mile race is a perfect mix of fun and adventure. You’ll compete with hundreds of boats for one of 50 race category trophies. You can also earn your ASA 104/106 certifications! The ASA class is $895.00 for the four days. Text books, testing fees, and provisions are included. Call the Long Beach office for more info 562.432.4672.

http://www.marinasai....com/events.php

#259 kmp1284

kmp1284

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Location:Boston

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:36 PM

In none of the published photos of the Aegean do I see the crew wearing PFDs. I can't help but wonder if this had some bearing on the fatalities.


The cause of death here is 'blunt force trauma' so no, PFD's wouldn't have made an ounce of difference.

#260 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:39 PM




[
Are you saying that there won't be any lawsuits filed? Against NOSA?


Well, no one can promise that stupid suits won't be filed, but you can promise that there won't be a judgment for the plaintiff. What, exactly, would be the grounds of the suit? Are you assuming that Orange County small claims court has jurisdiction over events in international waters? You realize that Admiralty law explicitly indemnified all parties that are not directly involved in the cause of the collision. Can you outline a basis for a lawsuit against NOSA that could be heard in state court?


OC small claims court? Ahhhhhh.......

The action could be for wrongful death. The issue would be whether or not NOSA was negligent.

One could argue that NOSA (that is, the NOSA Board), in it's unsatiable qwest for more revenue, broadened the scope of the event to include those who would be less likely to possess the skills necessary to venture out on an overnight race, crossing dangerous and busy commercial lanes, and did nothing to ensure that all entries were qualified to deal with such circumstances.

There were no criteria around something as simple as swimming ability, or knowledge of the COLREGS, or instruction on how to navigate busy channels at night, or how to read running lights, or safety measures like carrying flares at the ready near the helm. What criteria were established to be able to stand watch and be responsible for the boat and the lives of the crewmembers sleeping below?

One could argue that NOSA, knowing full well that the race had been expanded to include wingnuts, and knowing full well that night time sailing in shipping lanes was dangerous, did nothing but focus on additional revenue. Infact, by offering valuable monetary incentives, like a two year Lexus lease, NOSA altered the very nature of the Ensenada Race and induced folks to enter who might not have ever ventured offshore.

But - the race had been run for 65 years with no serious incident... Yes, true, but prior races were restricted to racing classes, those that presumably had the skills to go offshore. Further, the event had been run by experienced and knowledagble racers at NOSA...


So, those might be the positions taken by an avaricious attorney. Do not confuse those positions with my personal position, and send me angry messages, as I am an Ayn Rand disciple. And I did not vote for BHO.

The question remains, what will now be the fate of the Ensenada Race? Gird your loins, NOSA, and call your D & O policy holder. The sharks are circling.



It is interesting all of the legal theories that you suggest could be attempted against NOSA. The reality is, the sport has been designed by lawyers from Day 1 to protect the race organizers. The organizing authorities reponsibilities are to "Start a Race" and "Finish a Race." I sure don't ask for more or less from any race or regatta I go to.

Where the line is drawn is reinforced in the rules as follows:

"4 DECISION TO RACE
The responsibility for a boat’s decision to participate in a race or to continue racing is hers alone."

Nobody forced this Hunter 37 to enter this race, it was their option. Nobody forced them to start or continue in this race, they chose to. They chose their safety equipment (USCG minimum required meeting the country's laws). They chose their crew. They chose their course, they chose their watches, they chose everything.

There are no laws requiring race organizers to test participants, there is no national database of educational classes attended and passed for participants. Do your own survey and you'll find most boat owners have not even taken a USCG Aux or US Power Squadron course. But around the bar, every person will brag how experienced and how much knowledge they possess. But good luck finding this knowledge tested in writing and results posted.

As you know there's a requirement for motor vehicles - drivers license, which shows a minimum of knowledge and skill. There is no such equivalent in boating. Some rumyuckle can buy a boat this afternoon with no experience and no training, go sailing for the first time ever and go out sailing in a hurricane. And you want to suggest that is someone else's fault in society that it occurred? No, we love sailing because we do take personal responsibility for out actions. Someone spill a hot cup of coffee on their lap on a sailboat? They deserved it. They can't blame someone else.

To me it is admirable that we have succeeded as one of the final frontiers of freedom with very little government influence. And that personal responsibility is still in force in this sport.



Good points.

However, consider that a waiver of claims, before a negligent act, is not a bar to a lawsuit.

Next comes the issue of the very validity of a waiver of liability. Courts have held that a waiver of liability for negligence is against public policy. And if against public policy, then the courts will not uphold it.

Nimrod the Sailor (NtS) simply cannot be held accountable for risks that he could not possibly be aware of. This issue has far more meaning if the waiver clearly stated the dangers inherent in racing at night, in busy shipping lanes and the need to have qualified folks in charge, at all times, of each vessel. It did not say that severe injury, even death, is a risk of the event.

So, ordinary negligence or gross negilence?

Now, the question therefore becomes: was NOSA negligent in inducing Nimrods to race without informing them of the dangers and doing very little to educate them or set standards for entries?

Which begs the question, what is the standard of care for conducting an overnight race in international waters and in potentially hazardous conditions? We know the Transpac has very strict standards for entries, equipment, and experience. As does Cabo, the Fastnet, etc. We see Kent Island in a post above comment that his club reacted to an influx of Nimrods by establishing new standards for a local race.

Having said all that, please be aware that I do not advocate the potential positions described above. I am just pointing out a probable outcome driven by avaricious, blackhearted lawyers.

#261 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:40 PM

In one N2E, I think 2003, it was cold, raining & breezy (20kts or so) as we pushed at about 10-11 kts past Rosarito; a large commercial MV with several vertical lights on it approached from the south and then turned just in front of us. As it went by I said to the owner "Say, doesn't that mean it's towing something?" The owner goes "Shit!!" and goes up hard as the towed barge w/o lights crossed maybe 5-6 lengths in front of us.

That tug operator knew we could not see the cable or tow and would not have felt a thing if the barge had smashed right up & over us.

I suspect this is what happened to the Aegean.

Raised a toast yesterday to the sailors lost in April 2012.


As a question, why didn't you folks clearly understand the meaning of three vertical white lights?

#262 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:45 PM

I was one of the guys that found the bodies. What mess. Condolences to family and friends.


Your comment is in rather poor taste. Please consider the family that might be reading this.




#263 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:47 PM

In none of the published photos of the Aegean do I see the crew wearing PFDs. I can't help but wonder if this had some bearing on the fatalities.

I cannot see a radar reflector either, but would expect it be mounted higher up that the photos I have found show.

Some of the online reports do mention the boat having radar installed, but it is possible (even likely) that it would not be in use in such benign conditions.

My thoughts and prayers are with the friends and families of those lost. A very tough month for all sailors in California.


This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.

First, why would one fly a radar detector at 1:00 in the afternoon, at the start of the race, in bright sunlit conditions?

Secondly, given that they were in heavy traffic lanes, in foreign waters, with the usual hoarde of Mexican fishing boats, some without lights - why wouldn't you have the radar on?

And this poster is why it is dangerous out on the water.

#264 robmur

robmur

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:49 PM


In none of the published photos of the Aegean do I see the crew wearing PFDs. I can't help but wonder if this had some bearing on the fatalities.


The cause of death here is 'blunt force trauma' so no, PFD's wouldn't have made an ounce of difference.


Has the coroner released a cause of death, or do you have some information on that? All I have read says they were found in the water, no cause of death attributed.

#265 12345

12345

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,063 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:54 PM

This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?

#266 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:57 PM


This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?


You take legitimate courses from, e.g. the CG, gain boathandling skills in day races, and act as crew on overnight races, but not in a position as watch captain or skipper.

#267 starrchallenge

starrchallenge

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Location:Swampscott, Massachusetts
  • Interests:Still enjoy a nice Mount Gay after a fine day racing Yachts. More time at Sea the better.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:00 PM

This is a tragic accident and my thoughts go out to the Families. This is not supposed to happen, yet all of us who have spent time on the water at night, know how easily this could happen!
How many times have you been tracking the progress of commercial traffic, only to see them change course? I must admit I have had some hold breath moments, getting out of the way.

I fear the focus on blame will be painful for all involved, yet all of us know we have had some close calls. Please go easy on the assessment of crew error. This is not something that can be substantiated and is insensitive to speculate at this time. Having spent 4 years on a Coast Guard Inshore Search and Rescue vessel, I do know the families will seek out all manner of info of what happened, and this forum will likely form part of their search for answers. So please be as sensitive as the situation calls for.

We have lost members of our sailing community. Let us remember them without judgement. This was a tragic accident.



#268 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,205 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:03 PM



This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?


You take legitimate courses from, e.g. the CG, gain boathandling skills in day races, and act as crew on overnight races, but not in a position as watch captain or skipper.


Yes, Yes

having won in the N2E in 2009 is no qualification for doing such an offshore race

Must take classes, read books &/or post on SA Posted Image

#269 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:03 PM



I've raced some dozens of times across the English Channel at night, crossing the traffic lanes going into and out of Europe's major container ports. Some comments:

1. There have been at least two incidents local to here in the last 15 years where (non-racing) yachts were run down by ships, in one of which the entire crew was killed. In neither of those incidents was the ship involved ever conclusively identified, despite paint tests etc.

2. When 20,000 tons of steel are heading for you at 15 knots, "whose fault would an accident be" is not the appropriate question to be asking. If there is not much wind, you'd better be prepared to motor out of the way. If you care anything for your safety you've got to assume that ships are not going to avoid you.

3. Sailing instructions here allow you to use the engine for collision avoidance and declare it after the finish. It would not result in DSQ.

4. Unless you've got radar, the only way offshore at night to know conclusively if you are on a closing bearing is to repeatedly take bearings on a hand-bearing compass. Crew on watch have got to have one and know how to use it.


There's another way. If you only see 1 colored light and the boat is turning and then you see 2 colored lights...thats a problem. Especially if they ascend and become bigger and further apart.


Excellent comment.




#270 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:06 PM



This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?


You take legitimate courses from, e.g. the CG, gain boathandling skills in day races, and act as crew on overnight races, but not in a position as watch captain or skipper.


I gained much experience volunteering on deliveries with well respected skippers in the Gulf of Mexico, where there is a lot of varied traffic, AND ULFOs. There is no substitute for seeing these lights at night for yourself.




#271 usa241

usa241

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:09 PM

Every news report and article talks about a "Race tracking device". Can someone shed some light on this. There were NO trackers for the N2E race. Did they have a personal one like Spot? And I'm not talking about AIS.

#272 ProaSailor

ProaSailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Location:Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:10 PM

And if the men onboard were Theo Mavromatis's regular crew, as one news report stated, then these guys had done this race before, probably even as the crew in 2009, when Mavromatis won his class. Earlier posts named the crew, but another news source is naming three different and (apparently) younger men: Joseph Stewart, Michael Patton and Kevin Rudolph.


5th Crewman: Crash 'Should Not Have Happened'

Mike Patton backed out of the Newport Beach to Mexico Yacht Race after his mother fell ill.

The bodies of three members of the crew—Bill Johnson of Torrance; Joe Stewart of Bradenton, Fla.; and Kevin Rudolph—were discovered tethered to the boat wreckage Saturday, and the search for the boat's owner and skipper, Theo Mavromatis, was called off Sunday afternoon.



#273 DoRag

DoRag

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,919 posts
  • Location:Where the sun doesn't shine.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:11 PM




This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?


You take legitimate courses from, e.g. the CG, gain boathandling skills in day races, and act as crew on overnight races, but not in a position as watch captain or skipper.


Yes, Yes

having won in the N2E in 2009 is no qualification for doing such an offshore race

Must take classes, read books &/or post on SA Posted Image


Actually, he "won" in a cruising class. That doesn't count.

The next question is, what were the qualifications of the watch captains?

Your turn...

#274 robmur

robmur

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:14 PM


In none of the published photos of the Aegean do I see the crew wearing PFDs. I can't help but wonder if this had some bearing on the fatalities.

I cannot see a radar reflector either, but would expect it be mounted higher up that the photos I have found show.

Some of the online reports do mention the boat having radar installed, but it is possible (even likely) that it would not be in use in such benign conditions.

My thoughts and prayers are with the friends and families of those lost. A very tough month for all sailors in California.


This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.

First, why would one fly a radar detector at 1:00 in the afternoon, at the start of the race, in bright sunlit conditions?

To answer: Many boats, especially cruising boats, ship permanently mounted radar reflectors. In my experience, it is usually the harder core racers that deploy them when warranted, cruisers either have them 'up' or not.

Secondly, given that they were in heavy traffic lanes, in foreign waters, with the usual hoarde of Mexican fishing boats, some without lights - why wouldn't you have the radar on?

To answer: They =may= have chosen to rely on 'eyes and ears' watchkeeping rather than used their radar. Conditions were by all accounts benign, visibility was good, and a lack of concern could have led them not to switch it on. Obviously, it should have been on, but that doesn't mean it was. They would have had to consciously chosen to switch the radar on, and =may= have chosen not to. We don't, and likely never will know if it was in use. As with PFDs, which I assume they had and apparently chose not to use, at least at the start of the race.

And this poster is why it is dangerous out on the water.

Dorag, not sure why my questions make me dangerous on the water. My radar reflector is permanently mounted, and my radar does go on at night as a standard operating procedure. PFDs are on all my crew before we leave the dock and are required attire when on deck and under way, and my AIS transceiver is always on. Having safety and collision avoidance equipment aboard and using it are two different things.



#275 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:15 PM


In one N2E, I think 2003, it was cold, raining & breezy (20kts or so) as we pushed at about 10-11 kts past Rosarito; a large commercial MV with several vertical lights on it approached from the south and then turned just in front of us. As it went by I said to the owner "Say, doesn't that mean it's towing something?" The owner goes "Shit!!" and goes up hard as the towed barge w/o lights crossed maybe 5-6 lengths in front of us.

That tug operator knew we could not see the cable or tow and would not have felt a thing if the barge had smashed right up & over us.

I suspect this is what happened to the Aegean.

Raised a toast yesterday to the sailors lost in April 2012.


As a question, why didn't you folks clearly understand the meaning of three vertical white lights?


We did: it went from being dark, rainy & with a big chute up (all of which limited visbility) to watching a vessel come out of the murk, to watching it pass well outside of us, to watching it suddenly & amazingly turn across our path, to focusing on it to the realization that it was a tug and that somewhere out in that murk was likely a big old rusty tow barge.

In the states the tug operator would most likely have shined a light on the tow just to be certain we saw it. Down south they don't do that sort of thing. It's a different view of the way things are done which sort of view & attitude probably contributed to what happened to the Aegean.(I'm guessing!)

#276 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:16 PM

Because most sailors who race light offshore distance races have little more than a clue of what they are doing. I think it's a miracle that fatal collisions with commercial traffic are not more common. I think that that it is amazing how few collisions have occured to date. I would not be surprised if more accidents happened in the future as a basic law of averages (amazingly lucky so far minus this mishap, see countless comments of close calls, etc here). There tremendous risk of collision in the sport as it exists today. No foolproof system is in place or mandated. Got it?

It easily could become far more common based on present safeguards.

Explain how it could become more common.

I claim it could -- no, is -- less common based on present safeguards.



#277 DA-WOODY

DA-WOODY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,205 posts
  • Location:I'm in Sunny..-. Warm..& ..Dry San Diego . and your not :-)
  • Interests:Prime + 1 3/4

    COUGARS COUGARS & More COUGARS

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:19 PM





This post is illustrative of why inexperienced people should not be allowed in overnight races.


So how is one to gain experience in overnight races if you wont allow them to?


You take legitimate courses from, e.g. the CG, gain boathandling skills in day races, and act as crew on overnight races, but not in a position as watch captain or skipper.


Yes, Yes

having won in the N2E in 2009 is no qualification for doing such an offshore race

Must take classes, read books &/or post on SA Posted Image


Actually, he "won" in a cruising class. That doesn't count.

The next question is, what were the qualifications of the watch captains?

Your turn...


http://redondobeach....t-aboard-aegean

While the search continues for the missing crewmember of the Aegean, a Redondo Beach-based yacht that may have collided with a larger ship while competing in a race from Newport Beach to Mexico, one of the registered crewmen is safe at home on his boat in King Harbor.

Mike Patton told Redondo Beach Patch that his mother took ill, so he backed out of the annual Lexus Newport Beach to Ensenada Yacht Race at the last minute.

"Everyone's been saying I'm the luckiest guy in the world," Patton said. "I don't feel that way."

The bodies of three members of the crew—Bill Johnson of Torrance; Joe Stewart of Bradenton, Fla.; and Kevin Rudolph—were discovered tethered to the boat wreckage Saturday, and the search for the boat's owner and skipper, Theo Mavromatis, was called off Sunday afternoon.

Patton speculated that Mavromatis went down with the Aegean.

"Theo's a tremendous skipper," he said, adding that the sailboat's owner was almost "fanatical" about safety.

"That was the safest crew I've ever seen, almost to the point of ridiculousness," Patton said. "I know that boat intimately, and there's no way it should have happened."

He described the other crewmen as confident men who "all worked really well together."

The team of Mavromatis, Patton, Johnson, Stewart and Rudolph aboard the Aegean won last year's Newport Beach to Ensenada race. It was Johnson's first race, Patton said.

"They're all good," he said. "There's not someone who didn't know what they were doing."

Patton can't help but wonder if his presence would have made the boat sail 10 seconds faster or slower, thus avoiding the collision—which, in his opinion, never should have happened.

"I know those waters," he said. "I know where they were. I’ve been there. I know there's traffic there, but it's not that heavy.

"This is just horrendous."




Hay I thought you were flicked ??? Posted Image



#278 R Booze

R Booze

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,172 posts
  • Location:43 miles from both Mexicos.....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:20 PM

Because most sailors who race light offshore distance races have little more than a clue of what they are doing. I think it's a miracle that fatal collisions with commercial traffic are not more common. I think that that it is amazing how few collisions have occured to date. I would not be surprised if more accidents happened in the future as a basic law of averages (amazingly lucky so far minus this mishap, see countless comments of close calls, etc here). There tremendous risk of collision in the sport as it exists today. No foolproof system is in place or mandated. Got it?


It easily could become far more common based on present safeguards.

Explain how it could become more common.

I claim it could -- no, is -- less common based on present safeguards.



There's a one-click link around here somewhere that lets you buy an ad very easily.....

#279 VALIS

VALIS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,606 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:25 PM

"...Two race participants who were in the area at the time the Aegean disappeared said they saw or heard a freighter. Cindy Arosteguy of Oxnard, Calif., remembers hearing on her radio someone say, "Do you see us?" as she saw a tanker about a half-mile away. "I got back on the radio and said, 'Yes, I see you,'" she said. "It was definitely a freighter."

- copied from the report on the SA home page.

I think this must be media garble. Two days or less after the incident, she "remembers hearing..someone"(??) but doesn't know who she heard? From the way it is reported, I infer that she assumed she was conversing with the freighter she could see. But what if she had actually heard the "Aegean" asking the freighter if the freighter saw them, and then her response was interpreted by the crew of the Hunter as coming from the freighter and everything was okay?

I strongly doubt, and sincerely hope, that this is not what happened.

My heartfelt condolonces to the families and friends of the crew, and to the local sailing community.


To continue this line of speculation, I just saw this on another forum:

I just talked to a returning racer on the docks, he heard the whole conversation on the radio. He heard the yacht contact the freighter twice, called it by name, and the freighter answered, guy with broken English. He said several times- "Do you see me, do you see me?" The witness said he couldn't make out what the freighter said in return.



#280 Dixie

Dixie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,695 posts
  • Location:SF

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:26 PM

Condolences to all.

Nice boat. Looks like they were well equipped and even had an emergency o/b as well.

Should have been a fun cruise....


So sorry for them, their friends and families. Fair winds.
Too much loss here in California. We talked a lot about this accident (and are still suffering our losses from LSC) during our opening day festivities. Completely unrelated sailing accidents, both fairly random, and both gut wrenching.

Again so very sorry.

#281 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:27 PM

I searched AIS this AM and the article I read said radar was required for advanced "Flarm like" functionality. Whatever, fine. Flarm or AIS...fine. In this case it appears AIS failed.

The truth is that you (small racing sailboat) are a sitting duck out there at current. Nothing is mandated. Is the ship monitoring AIS? Does the equipment work? Is the Captian drunk? Is the sailboat monitoring, etc. Is a mandate enforceable and how long would it take to get up and running, etc? Can you see each other? These accidents are waiting to happen...

AIS is not mandatory, correct?

In general if it was foggy, wavy or blowing 25 kts your in a shit sandwich with or without electronics. No ability to hear or see then ship or its barge or towcable until way too late. Replace fog with night and its nearly as dire. We all know radar reflectors are useless.

So what is going to happen? Answer...nothing until this happens again, and likely yet again.

Some kind of low cost, easy to use and highly reliable technology is needed to prevent these highly preventable accidents.

For f sake...I get it...AIS requires no radar. Fine....

LS,

Do you actually any REAL information that the boat that was crushed to bits had AIS and somehow didn't know how to use it, or are you blowing stuff out some orifice like your incorrect earlier remark about AIS requiring RADAR?

Look, I'm all for folks having AIS, it really works extremely well and does NOT require a RADAR unit to function. It is a lot easier to use if it's linked to a chart plotter, which will display the course and speed of each AIS transmitter equipped vessel nearby. But even a child can use AIS with a paper chart, a straight edge and a protractor. For that matter, one can link the AIS that works with my system to my iPhone and iPad and have pretty color pictures of where everyone (who has a transmitter) is located and where they are going, the name of their ship, what their last port was ask what port they're headed to. Again, that isn't necessary, just nice to have.

I have flown sailplanes and things happened MUCH more quickly there. Perhaps FLARM is better there, I have never seen one. I tend to look out the windows when flying, just as when I'm driving. On the ocean, between one object moving at about 5 knots and another moving at about 20 knots there is plenty of time to draw lines on paper charts and see if there's going to be a close pass or collision. Sure folks don't see each other sometimes, but the problem is NOT that things are happening too fast. There is plenty of time to get out of the way of a 20k ships, and most don't move that quickly.

What I believe we on this "chat room" actually know about this accident is that the boat is in small pieces, three people are dead, one person is missing, and that the USCG hasn't released any additional information because they don't know anything more. All the rest of this, like your supposition that AIS is too hard to use and that in some way that is proven by the "3 dead bodies and another person missing" is just goof balls on SA making shit up - pretty normal behavior for this place. But, seriously, when you don't know if the boat even had AIS, why in the world would you use it as "evidence" that AIS has "got some kinks."

Why don't folks take a deep breath and make SOME attempt to stick to facts - I know it's SA and I know that's asking a lot.

My heart goes out to anyone who knew these folks and stumbles into this place and this discussion. Hopefully, someone will warn them off or the first one in will let them know what a bunch of clods we are.

BV




So why are there 3 dead bodies and another person missing? Apparently it's got some kinks. Does AIS work well enough for the ship and the sailboat? Not everyone is a rocket scientist. It needs to be, and should be, brutally simple for both parties to identify each other and avoid. The current standard seems to have a flaw...


???
WTF?
We *DO* have a standard system, I have it, and it works well.
:unsure: :unsure:

...snip...

7070 is correct - AIS requires only a VHF receiver and a GPS plus a means to process and display the derived information. It is a mature technology in the marine industry and has become quite economical. FLARM, while it may possibly be a good system, is not in everyday marine use. I'm not advocating this, but mandatory use of AIS would not be terribly onerous at this time. I just installed the Standard VHF with integral AIS receiver, and while I have overcomplicated its implementation, I have found it to be a very useful device, rivaling radar for anti-collision purposes.



#282 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:30 PM


And if the men onboard were Theo Mavromatis's regular crew, as one news report stated, then these guys had done this race before, probably even as the crew in 2009, when Mavromatis won his class. Earlier posts named the crew, but another news source is naming three different and (apparently) younger men: Joseph Stewart, Michael Patton and Kevin Rudolph.


5th Crewman: Crash 'Should Not Have Happened'

Mike Patton backed out of the Newport Beach to Mexico Yacht Race after his mother fell ill.

The bodies of three members of the crew—Bill Johnson of Torrance; Joe Stewart of Bradenton, Fla.; and Kevin Rudolph—were discovered tethered to the boat wreckage Saturday, and the search for the boat's owner and skipper, Theo Mavromatis, was called off Sunday afternoon.

Tethered? All 3 on-watch in the cockpit?




#283 VALIS

VALIS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,606 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:32 PM

I searched AIS this AM and it said radar was required for advanced function. Whatever, fine. Who cares. Flarm or AIS...fine. In this case it appears AIS failed.


Ludicrous, please do yourself a favor and do a little more searching and reading about AIS. You obviously still have serious misconceptions about it. Trust me on this.

And you say AIS failed??? You have no way of knowing if the lost boat even had AIS capability. Please think this through.

#284 Rondog

Rondog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:SoCal

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:34 PM


"...Two race participants who were in the area at the time the Aegean disappeared said they saw or heard a freighter. Cindy Arosteguy of Oxnard, Calif., remembers hearing on her radio someone say, "Do you see us?" as she saw a tanker about a half-mile away. "I got back on the radio and said, 'Yes, I see you,'" she said. "It was definitely a freighter."

- copied from the report on the SA home page.

I think this must be media garble. Two days or less after the incident, she "remembers hearing..someone"(??) but doesn't know who she heard? From the way it is reported, I infer that she assumed she was conversing with the freighter she could see. But what if she had actually heard the "Aegean" asking the freighter if the freighter saw them, and then her response was interpreted by the crew of the Hunter as coming from the freighter and everything was okay?

I strongly doubt, and sincerely hope, that this is not what happened.

My heartfelt condolonces to the families and friends of the crew, and to the local sailing community.


To continue this line of speculation, I just saw this on another forum:

I just talked to a returning racer on the docks, he heard the whole conversation on the radio. He heard the yacht contact the freighter twice, called it by name, and the freighter answered, guy with broken English. He said several times- "Do you see me, do you see me?" The witness said he couldn't make out what the freighter said in return.



I've never done an o/n race, is it typical for the crew to tether in when sleeping or does this suggest that everyone was up top?

#285 Rondog

Rondog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:SoCal

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:35 PM

Dang you guys post fast! LOL!

#286 Rail Meat

Rail Meat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,181 posts
  • Location:Mystic, CT
  • Interests:My ride: An OCD designed Class 40

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:37 PM

I appreciate the posts from the professional mariners. Very helpful perspective. Thanks for those.


I have radar, an AIS transceiver, and an active radar reflector in addition to my passive radar reflector. Some of my own real life experience:
  • Radar is a pretty huge power suck, at least until the more recent digital units. That limits its use for at least my kind of application. It also does not include any of the helpful information that comes with AIS, can be difficult to tune properly in bad weather, and adds weight to the mast.
  • The passive radar reflector is next to useless. I have engaged passing ship traffic in discussions to see if they could see me, and the answer has always been a negative.
  • The active radar reflector works better. The same ships could see me once I turned on the active reflector, so long as they were looking
  • There are many times when I would hail a freighter on the open ocean with the two of us being the only ships around, and not receive any response. My VHF was known to be working
  • With AIS, now when I hail I can actually use the ship's name and my sense is that I get a much higher response rate than prior to me being able to hail by name.
  • AIS works a lot better when you have it integrated to a charting program (plotter or Expedition) and can use all the additional functionality such as point of closest intercept, the name detail, etc.
  • Every boat I have encountered on the high seas was using AIS.
  • On the coastal US, all of the large freighter traffic that I see is using AIS. The boats that typically do not have AIS are small pleasure power boats and sail boats, as well as the commercial fishing fleet.
  • My experience in the English channel and coast last summer seems to demonstrate that the European boats have much higher adoption rates of AIS than in the US.
  • If you have AIS integrated into a charting program, the fact that every one around you is transmitting does not matter. Zoom to your patch of the ocean and see the points of closest intercept.
I have no idea if these guys had AIS or even if they did if it would have prevented the accident, but I do know that I have found it to be the most helpful of the available collision avoidance tools.

My condolences to the family and friends of those that were lost.

#287 VALIS

VALIS

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,606 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:40 PM

Nobody is clipped on when down below. These three would have been topsides. It's a short race, so some of the off-watch crew might have been on deck. Sometimes when I'm feeling really green I will sleep on deck, and then I'm definitely tethered.

#288 Estar

Estar

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,567 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:41 PM

There are many times when I would hail a freighter on the open ocean with the two of us being the only ships around, and not receive any response. My VHF was known to be working



You need a female voice synthesizer! I have only about a 30% response rate when I call on the VHF but Beth gets about a 75% response rate!

#289 CruiserJim

CruiserJim

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 375 posts
  • Location:Alamitos Bay, CA
  • Interests:Sailing, road cycling, reading.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:42 PM

Again, my thoughts and prayers for the crew and their families and friends. Seeing Mike Patton interviewed on TV last night was gut wrenching.

Participants in offshore sailing, like other adventure sports, are attracted to it in some part because things can go wrong. It is invigorating and life-affirming to meet and overcome a challenge. And deep down, we know it is not a true challenge unless it really can go wrong and we have to rely on ourselves to get out of it.

Do we do everything we can to make it safe? Of course. But who decides what actions, equipment and preparation are "enough"? Traditionally in sailing these ultimate issues have been left to individual participants, with some minimum levels specified by government (flares, PFDs, etc.) as well as those who sponsor organized events. I would not want to see this change. If we want thrill seeking where someone else is responsible for the outcome, we'd save a lot of money buying tickets to Disneyland rides rather than crazy-expensive boats.

By all accounts Aegean and her crew were more than adequately equipped for this race and nothing more than the victims of a tragic accident. We can learn from it and continue to make things safer with use of technology such as AIS, but we don't live in a perfect world. Technology still breaks down and people make mistakes, even with all the best tools.

#290 Ludicrous Speed

Ludicrous Speed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 699 posts
  • Location:Spaceball 1

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:43 PM

I'm with you all here. No blame or emotion.

I'm just trying to suggest that it's a serious problem in need of a better solution (or solutions).

In gliders Flarm is not mandated in the US it's optional. Flarm is mandated in Europe (surpise surprise). Big debates in the US at current with similar problems (collistions resulting in fatalities). Even with Flarm or AIS the risk will still exist. But this is likely the only means to rapidly reduce the risk of the accidents like this in any significant way. Flarm "see's" transponders by the way as well as ADSB and other flarms. They easily could be designed to see the marine transponder if not already.


I searched AIS this AM and it said radar was required for advanced function. Whatever, fine. Who cares. Flarm or AIS...fine. In this case it appears AIS failed.


Ludicrous, please do yourself a favor and do a little more searching and reading about AIS. You obviously still have serious misconceptions about it. Trust me on this.

And you say AIS failed??? You have no way of knowing if the lost boat even had AIS capability. Please think this through.



#291 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:48 PM

Rondog,

The use of tethers is a long hard fought topic on SA. Let's not go there. Being tied to the boat with a tether probably wouldn't have been much help if something ran oner the boat. Something, BTW, that we don't know to be a fact, it's just more conjecture.

To specifically answer your question, many folks leave their harnesses on and tethers connected to a hard spot while below in a berth. I do. From my quarter berth I can get up, visit the chart table or galley and go on deck to the helm without unclipping my long (six foot) tether. That's just a safety precaution as I don't trust the long tether at sea. Once I'm at the helm I clip-in with a short tether that is short enough that I can't actually fall off of the boat. I clip-in in this way whenever I'm performing a task, like trimming the jib and especially when reefing.

Despite all of the above, having grown up in S. Calif. and having sailed on dozens of Ensenada Races I would have been shocked to see a crew clipped in in 4 to 6 knots of wind and flat seas. People just don't think that's dangerous enough to bother, and for the most part it isn't. Sadly, the only really dangerous thing on a beautiful night of light winds and flat seas are other vessels, and that seems to have come true. Again, we don't know any of this yet, clipped in not clipped in, run over not run over, it's all conjecture.

BV

#292 CowboyKell

CowboyKell

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,151 posts
  • Location:Newport Beach, California

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:49 PM

Again, my thoughts and prayers for the crew and their families and friends. Seeing Mike Patton interviewed on TV last night was gut wrenching.

Participants in offshore sailing, like other adventure sports, are attracted to it in some part because things can go wrong. It is invigorating and life-affirming to meet and overcome a challenge. And deep down, we know it is not a true challenge unless it really can go wrong and we have to rely on ourselves to get out of it.

Do we do everything we can to make it safe? Of course. But who decides what actions, equipment and preparation are "enough"? Traditionally in sailing these ultimate issues have been left to individual participants, with some minimum levels specified by government (flares, PFDs, etc.) as well as those who sponsor organized events. I would not want to see this change. If we want thrill seeking where someone else is responsible for the outcome, we'd save a lot of money buying tickets to Disneyland rides rather than crazy-expensive boats.

By all accounts Aegean and her crew were more than adequately equipped for this race and nothing more than the victims of a tragic accident. We can learn from it and continue to make things safer with use of technology such as AIS, but we don't live in a perfect world. Technology still breaks down and people make mistakes, even with all the best tools.


And so here is the truth of it.

Thank you Jim.

Unfortunately, I would bet the "adventure" of the sport will probably be legislated out in San Francisco soon. SoCAL to follow? Probably. The world (and seas) are getting crowded and I am feeling old.....and claustrophobic.

#293 ProaSailor

ProaSailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Location:Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:51 PM

Here's a link to the radar reflector study mentioned in an earler post. It makes a pretty good argument for carrying and deploying one of these gadgets. We've always used one, we have also made a conscious distinction between watchkeeping while in a shipping lane and watchkeeping while not in a shipping lane. The lanes are clearly shown on the charts.

Radar Reflector Report

aa


Agreed. And just to summarize a few of its conclusions:

· The Sea-Me is the recommended product if power is available
· If power is not available then the passive Large Tri-Lens reflector is
recommended
· It is recommended that poorly performing radar reflectors are not fitted as it
is possible that the user could be lulled into a false sense of security believing
that their chances of detection has been enhanced.




#294 pogen

pogen

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,869 posts
  • Location:SF Bay

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:55 PM

... Flarm ...Flarm... Flarm ...


Please buy an ad if you want to continue to promote this gadget. AIS is the adopted standard for maritime use world-wide and works very well if you own the gear, turn it on, and look at it.

#295 Rondog

Rondog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Location:SoCal

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:57 PM

"...Two race participants who were in the area at the time the Aegean disappeared said they saw or heard a freighter. Cindy Arosteguy of Oxnard, Calif., remembers hearing on her radio someone say, "Do you see us?" as she saw a tanker about a half-mile away. "I got back on the radio and said, 'Yes, I see you,'" she said. "It was definitely a freighter."

- copied from the report on the SA home page.

I think this must be media garble. Two days or less after the incident, she "remembers hearing..someone"(??) but doesn't know who she heard? From the way it is reported, I infer that she assumed she was conversing with the freighter she could see. But what if she had actually heard the "Aegean" asking the freighter if the freighter saw them, and then her response was interpreted by the crew of the Hunter as coming from the freighter and everything was okay?

I strongly doubt, and sincerely hope, that this is not what happened.

My heartfelt condolonces to the families and friends of the crew, and to the local sailing community.


Yup, I doubt that happened as well. Would have made no sense for the yacht to call out to the freighter like that nor would there be anything the Captain of the ship could have done. I would have to believe Aegean would have done everything possble to get out of the way ASAP.

#296 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:57 PM


"...Two race participants who were in the area at the time the Aegean disappeared said they saw or heard a freighter. Cindy Arosteguy of Oxnard, Calif., remembers hearing on her radio someone say, "Do you see us?" as she saw a tanker about a half-mile away. "I got back on the radio and said, 'Yes, I see you,'" she said. "It was definitely a freighter."

- copied from the report on the SA home page.

I think this must be media garble. Two days or less after the incident, she "remembers hearing..someone"(??) but doesn't know who she heard? From the way it is reported, I infer that she assumed she was conversing with the freighter she could see. But what if she had actually heard the "Aegean" asking the freighter if the freighter saw them, and then her response was interpreted by the crew of the Hunter as coming from the freighter and everything was okay?

I strongly doubt, and sincerely hope, that this is not what happened.

My heartfelt condolonces to the families and friends of the crew, and to the local sailing community.


To continue this line of speculation, I just saw this on another forum:

I just talked to a returning racer on the docks, he heard the whole conversation on the radio. He heard the yacht contact the freighter twice, called it by name, and the freighter answered, guy with broken English. He said several times- "Do you see me, do you see me?" The witness said he couldn't make out what the freighter said in return.


It sounds like at least 2 or the 4 crew were quite experienced. There is some evidence (life raft onboard, tethered to debris, experienced skipper) this crew was practicing safe-sailing...accidents can and will continue to happen.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_YACHT_RACE_DEATHS_FLOL-?SITE=FLPET&SECTION=HOME






#297 Whisper

Whisper

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,447 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 06:01 PM

Although I've been a lawyer for 25 years and am therefore used to this behavior, I'm nauseated by the circle jerk of amateurish issue-spotting and speculation that's playing out here--do you asswipes think you're preparing for a maritime bar exam? The armchair rule promulgation crap is also annoying. And to the FLIM FLAM whatever mofo who can't work a radar and doesn't know what AIS is, STFU!!!

Several of you seem surprised that a 37-foot sailboat could go unnoticed by a large ship, yet I suspect more go unnoticed than noticed. My boat is on the Main Channel of Los Angeles Harbor, and I'm passed by dozens of large container ships, auto carriers, tankers, cruise ships, and tugs with barges every day. They regularly pass within a couple (of my) boat lengths in the narrow channel, and I feel invisible and irrelevant sitting there in broad daylight. As they approach, my view of the bridge becomes obscured by the bow from a surprisingly long distance away.

These ships are huge! I once had an engine failure on a windy day in the channel, and was immediately blown toward a docked container ship. I did not regain maneuvering ability until I was within two boat hooks from the hull--meanwhile my mast top, which is nearly 60 feet above the waterline, passed safely UNDER the flare of the bow! A watch on the bow would not have been able to see me at that point. Fortunately, I got the hell out and back to my slip safely. I shudder to imagine if that ship were under power at the time.

#298 gray tabby

gray tabby

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Location:SF
  • Interests:SF bay racing

Posted 30 April 2012 - 06:08 PM


Again, my thoughts and prayers for the crew and their families and friends. Seeing Mike Patton interviewed on TV last night was gut wrenching.

Participants in offshore sailing, like other adventure sports, are attracted to it in some part because things can go wrong. It is invigorating and life-affirming to meet and overcome a challenge. And deep down, we know it is not a true challenge unless it really can go wrong and we have to rely on ourselves to get out of it.

Do we do everything we can to make it safe? Of course. But who decides what actions, equipment and preparation are "enough"? Traditionally in sailing these ultimate issues have been left to individual participants, with some minimum levels specified by government (flares, PFDs, etc.) as well as those who sponsor organized events. I would not want to see this change. If we want thrill seeking where someone else is responsible for the outcome, we'd save a lot of money buying tickets to Disneyland rides rather than crazy-expensive boats.

By all accounts Aegean and her crew were more than adequately equipped for this race and nothing more than the victims of a tragic accident. We can learn from it and continue to make things safer with use of technology such as AIS, but we don't live in a perfect world. Technology still breaks down and people make mistakes, even with all the best tools.


And so here is the truth of it.

Thank you Jim.

Unfortunately, I would bet the "adventure" of the sport will probably be legislated out in San Francisco soon. SoCAL to follow? Probably. The world (and seas) are getting crowded and I am feeling old.....and claustrophobic.



+10




#299 DRIFTW00D

DRIFTW00D

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,380 posts
  • Location:Blue Water Area Great Lakes

Posted 30 April 2012 - 06:12 PM

AIS receiver Pt.Loma (shipfinder.com) shows OVERSEAS ARIADMAR (apologies for error in name in original post) at Pemex Terminal, Rosarito Beach, prior to tragedy. Her outbound departure/track to Anacortes is not recorded at marinetraffic.com until she appears approx. 150 miles WNW of Pt.Conception on 4/29/12 at 17:08Z. Since then, OA has been steaming N. at 10 knots. You can Google this ship for more info.


SHIPSPOTTING.COM



OVERSEAS ARIADMAR - IMO 9273624


Posted Image


PAST POSITION

2012 May 1st, 20:00:54 UTC Anacortes / 2012 April 24th, 17:00:45 UTC Rosarito /


Home port:Majuro, Class society:Lloyd´s Shipping Register, Build year:2004, Builder*:Stx Offshore & ShipbuildingJinhae, South Korea


Owner:Overseas Shipholding GroupNew York Ny, U.s.a


.Manager:Osg Shipmanagement GreeceAthens, Greece



#300 ChristianSch

ChristianSch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Location:S Chesapeake Bay
  • Interests:Hobie33

Posted 30 April 2012 - 06:14 PM

This race was ISAF category 3 with AIS Transponder recommended.

In category 2 the AIS Transponder is already a must.

There is a big difference pricewise between AIS receiver andtransponder !!!!
Not sure about the powerconsumption of a transponder vs. receiver.







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users