Yacht vs Supertanker

[Anchorhandler]

'morning Polwart

Yours is a valid question however the biggest obstacle in educating people to the dangers is knowing where and who to target.
People from all over the south coast of the Uk keep their boats on the Solent with others coming from as far afield as Manchester and Leeds. (maybe even further but I know of two vessels owned by Residents of the aforementioned towns). It would be both impractical and uneconomical for us to target ALL sailing schools and marina's in the Solent's 'catchment area' and as you quite rightly mentioned, it is no more our place to police the sea as it the place of a road haulage company policing the roads and other drivers.
I used to believe in the case for compulsory qualifications however a lot issues we suffer as a commercial operation can not be attributed to lack of knowledge but are the result of arrogance and lack of experience.

Standards afloat have (from our point of view anyway) definitely dropped.

For information, any vessel entering the Solent that is 'constrained by her fraught will have on of the harbour masters launches escort her in (termed 'SP' ( Southampton patrol) ) and SP will do her best to clear a path for inbound vessel. Unfortunately on busy days SP is required to be in 6 different places at once and sometimes struggles to cope. On occasion SP will give out writen warnings to boaters that were deemed to have created a dangerous situation but this again entails SP leaving her 'clearing' duties ' to chase down the guilty yacht or motorboat to issue the notice... Not always easy to do.

Simon

[jokaboat]

As a Solent boater I am well aware of the moving exclusion zone that applies and the sheer folly of getting anywhere near any large vessel entering or leaving Southampton Water. It amazes me that anyone could be so stupid to put themselves in front of something that big and expect it to get out of their way.

As I understand it, and it seems common sense, it is the duty of any vessel entering any port or controlled area of water to find out any "local rules". It doesn't matter whether they are a local or foreign visitor.

As such there is NO excuse for the Cowes week incident. An excuse of "I was racing" is no excuse at all. Sadly too many weekend water users have no knowledge of even basic colregs, hence the basic power gives way to sail argument that we see only too often (often spouted by a yacht using it's motor).

I've been rammed by a yacht when I was at anchor! And got a load of abuse because I should have moved out of their way as they were sailing

[9D280]

Yeah, knowledge of rules etc is appaling everywhere - Picture the scene off Greenock when the QE2 did her "final lap" tour.

The docking plan was to "spin her round & berth facing downstream" (pretty standard practice for berthing at the old Container terminal). So, having the tugs poised ready to perform the pirouette, QE2 engages reverse to loose some way & gives the obligatory 3 blasts..... Replied to by much waving & three return squeaks on "ravers foghorns" by the vast majority of spectating boats (and before you nit pickers jump in, no, the entire fleet didn't suddenly stop & go backwards!)

Same thing every other time the Waverley tries to berth / depart somewhere.....

[PeterM]

I heard a 'rumour' that the yacht skipper has/is/will be find between 7 - 10k for this little blunder .... and it was the same who went (jumped according to rumour) over the side.....

[jokaboat]

Originally Posted by PeterM

I heard a 'rumour' that the yacht skipper has/is/will be find between 7 - 10k for this little blunder .... and it was the same who went (jumped according to rumour) over the side.....

That says it all

So the skipper faced with dooming his crew is the first to bail out

And he an "alleged" senior RN chappie

[Poly]

Originally Posted by jokaboat

As such there is NO excuse for the Cowes week incident. An excuse of "I was racing" is no excuse at all. Sadly too many weekend water users have no knowledge of even basic colregs, hence the basic power gives way to sail argument that we see only too often (often spouted by a yacht using it's motor).

I haven't heard that claim used as a defence anywhere associated with this case? To me it looked like he got himself in a bad place and then decided to try and stop to avoid a collision? If that is the case it was a bad decision but has nobody here ever made a stupid mistake? Anybody here ever bumped their car or gone aground on a known hazard? Nobody has ever suddenly become aware of a hazard much later than they really should have and only really escaped by good fortune? Unless I've missed it the owner/skipper of the vessel hasn't tried to claim it wasn't his fault. The fine suggested here is in pretty big (and possibly rightly so). Imagine what you would need to do it your car though to attract that sort of penalty.

Now whilst the skipper was clearly in the wrong - I'll be amazed if the MAIB ignores the bigger picture of the decisions to put a yacht race and big vessels in the same place at the same time.

Originally Posted by Anchorhandler

'morning Polwart

Yours is a valid question however the biggest obstacle in educating people to the dangers is knowing where and who to target.
People from all over the south coast of the Uk keep their boats on the Solent with others coming from as far afield as Manchester and Leeds. (maybe even further but I know of two vessels owned by Residents of the aforementioned towns). It would be both impractical and uneconomical for us to target ALL sailing schools and marina's in the Solent's 'catchment area'

I'd bet the yachting mags would love a follow up article on the dramatic pictures that prompted this thread (which will largely be old news by they time they get printed). I'm sure the RYA would also be keen to talk - I bet their instructors are always looking for new materials/resources and your photographs, together with "bridge eye views" (preferably annotated with some "arrows" to show the stopping distance / turning radius etc. would all be useful.

Now I'm not sure who should really be doing this (as well at asking yacht clubs/schools/marinas in the area to put up posters / flyers etc (no need to target individual owners - all but the smallest of boats go through a small number of "disembarkation points" before getting in your way)! Perhaps it is the HM's job - but it sounds like they are taking a reactive stance - so someone need to be more proactive.

and as you quite rightly mentioned, it is no more our place to police the sea as it the place of a road haulage company policing the roads and other drivers.

No but rest assured that if you were a haulage company which had a problem with "stupid people" getting in the way of people reversing into your yard, (the equivalent to a tanker arriving at the terminal) then the burden would be on you to operate a safe system of work - which might involve banksmen, signage, warning announcements etc. If there was a problem with cyclists riding on the pavement outside the refinery getting in the way of road-tanker drivers I believe your company would be trying to address it.

[jokaboat]

I haven't heard that claim used as a defence anywhere associated with this case?

Mea culpa, I was applying a oft used excuse but not specifically linked to this case.

Now whilst the skipper was clearly in the wrong - I'll be amazed if the MAIB ignores the bigger picture of the decisions to put a yacht race and big vessels in the same place at the same time.

From other sources I understand that the course should not have taken him into the exclusion zone. Hence why none of the other competitors were in a similar risky position.

"bridge eye views"

I doubt if that would show much as the crew on the tanker bridge would not be able to see the yacht that close in.

No but rest assured that if you were a haulage company which had a problem with "stupid people" getting in the way of people reversing into your yard, (the equivalent to a tanker arriving at the terminal) then the burden would be on you to operate a safe system of work - which might involve banksmen, signage, warning announcements etc.

As with all large vessels in the zone there was a pilot escort vessel as well as a number of tugs. It is illegal to enter the zone between the pilot and the large vessel regardless or who or what you are, or what you are doing. The pilot tries to enforce the 1Km limit ahead of the large vessel. It is also usual for VTC to put out an announcement on Channel 12 which the yacht should have been monitoring as it was in the Port of Southampton controlled area.

Apart from the fact that something that big is obvious enough in itself without any warning from anyone else I would have thought!


Just a few observations.

[Poly]

[QUOTE=jokaboat;416311From other sources I understand that the course should not have taken him into the exclusion zone. Hence why none of the other competitors were in a similar risky position. [/quote] Yes alI don't know the details. There are certainly other vessels which look reasonably close? I find it difficult to judge distance from photos/videos though. I'd be surprised if that was the only boat in that race which enterred the exclusion zone.

I doubt if that would show much as the crew on the tanker bridge would not be able to see the yacht that close in.

Well that was kind of what I was getting at. (I didn't mean this specific incident). I saw a picture in a book or magazine several years ago which showed you can see sweet fa from the bridge of a container vessel - perhaps 1/2 a mile ahead is completely blind, and a yacht at 1 mile is pretty small looking and at 20 knots only 3 minutes away - there was a kind of arrow/vector on the picture showing how far the ship could realistically get out the way at full turn. Combined with anchorhandlers pics above which show just how small and insignificant a yacht is (I had to look twice at both pics just to find it!) and how far away a yacht is which is considered "at close quarters" (I bet the skippers thought they were quite far away).

As with all large vessels in the zone there was a pilot escort vessel as well as a number of tugs. It is illegal to enter the zone between the pilot and the large vessel regardless or who or what you are, or what you are doing. The pilot tries to enforce the 1Km limit ahead of the large vessel. It is also usual for VTC to put out an announcement on Channel 12 which the yacht should have been monitoring as it was in the Port of Southampton controlled area.

but if close calls are happening a lot then the system is not effective at controlling the risk. A system which works on paper, but only because it is illegal for the yacht to be in the "at risk" position is pointless if the yacht doesn't know (or care) that it is breaking the law. IMO a single pilot launch at a busy time in the middle of cowes week is probably inadequate, as Simon says even in "routine traffic" it is not practical for them to desert their post to enforce/warn every vessel that encroaches the protected zone.

Apart from the fact that something that big is obvious enough in itself without any warning from anyone else I would have thought!

Indeed. Although it would be interesting to hear the yacht skipper's explanation as its hard to believe that it had gone completely unnoticed. Just as the ship should have been on maximum awareness so should the yacht with all the other traffic that was around. Of course maybe they had a mechanical failure - the only close call I had with a ship when sailing was when our rudder broke in mid channel.

[willk]

And we wonder why training/certification is compulsory in Europe?

This sort of behavior is outrageous and I can't imagine why commercial traffic should have to bear the responsibility for avoiding flotillas of lemmingesque amateur boatsters.

They are not supposed to be there at that time. Just as they shouldn't be driving the wrong direction on roads, or skate boarding on runways.

Five blasts and be done with it!

[Poly]

Originally Posted by willk

And we wonder why training/certification is compulsory in Europe?

This sort of behavior is outrageous and I can't imagine why commercial traffic should have to bear the responsibility for avoiding flotillas of lemmingesque amateur boatsters.

They are not supposed to be there at that time. Just as they shouldn't be driving the wrong direction on roads, or skate boarding on runways.

Five blasts and be done with it!

So yachts or other vessels never get in the way of commercial traffic in areas where they are certificated/licensed? Just as car drivers never deviate from the rules? Doubt it would actually reduce the frequency of close calls and the ability to apply "sanctions" (i.e. disqualification) would require capacity to gather evidence and enforce - which we are apparently not doing even when there are big fines to collect.

[J S]

Originally Posted by Polwart

I saw a picture in a book or magazine several years ago which showed you can see sweet fa from the bridge of a container vessel - perhaps 1/2 a mile ahead is completely blind, and a yacht at 1 mile is pretty small looking and at 20 knots only 3 minutes away - there was a kind of arrow/vector on the picture showing how far the ship could realistically get out the way at full turn. Combined with anchorhandlers pics above which show just how small and insignificant a yacht is (I had to look twice at both pics just to find it!) and how far away a yacht is which is considered "at close quarters" (I bet the skippers thought they were quite far away).

Some pics and diagrams for reference. This is from a 330m tanker, slightly bigger than what you usually find in the Solent but should provide some ideas.

James

[Anchorhandler]

No but rest assured that if you were a haulage company which had a problem with "stupid people" getting in the way of people reversing into your yard, (the equivalent to a tanker arriving at the terminal) then the burden would be on you to operate a safe system of work - which might involve banksmen, signage, warning announcements etc. If there was a problem with cyclists riding on the pavement outside the refinery getting in the way of road-tanker drivers I believe your company would be trying to address it.

[/QUOTE]

Errm actually no.....if we operated a haulage yard and 'stupid people' were causing an abstruction to wagons turnng into the yard (from a public highway) we would be looking at contacting the local council's traffic managment department to see if anything could be done. It would be their resposibility to install signage/warnings. Yes, the burden would be on us to do something but we would be powerless to change anything outside of our yard perimiter. In the case of near miss's on the Solent, a very similar situation exists.....yes we as a company would like to reduce the number of yacht/boats entering the restricted zone (both around commercial ships and alongside the refinery) but all we can do is complain to ABP. We have no power or jurisdiction to inforce any of the local by-laws.

The problem is more noticable here on the Solent because of the density ratio of leisure/commercial traffic. Unfortunately there is only a limited number of Harbour Master launches (SP's) and to expect every commercial vessel entering the Port of Southampton's waters to be escorted would be unrealistic.

I do agree the real problem needs to be tackled at source...ie; the leisure boater however as i have previously mentioned, i'm not convinced mandatory qualifications would be the answer. (Well not the qualifications available to us at the moment anyway). Quite a high proportion of incidents we experience are caused by pure arrogance and not as a result of a misunderstanding of the rules and regulations.
I spend 90% of my time leisure boating on the continent where qualifications are insited on before taking to the water however even 'over there' i have witnessed some stunning examples of poor seamanship. The biggest issue i have in both countries is what appears to be, not a lack of boat handling/navigating skills but a lack of common courtesy to other boaters both leisure and commercial.
Some boaters out there seem to know the rules but deliberately choose to ignore them. (and that i'm afraid will not change even WITH mandatory qual's)

Simon

[Anchorhandler]

Originally Posted by J S

Some pics and diagrams for reference. This is from a 330m tanker, slightly bigger than what you usually find in the Solent but should provide some ideas.

James

'Evening James...

If i was a betting man i would say that looked suspiciously like a 'British' Petroleum tanker.....

Simon

[captnjack]

Originally Posted by J S

Some pics and diagrams for reference. This is from a 330m tanker, slightly bigger than what you usually find in the Solent but should provide some ideas.

James

I am not trying to blame the tanker here...

But given the advances in close circuit video feeds there's really no reason to a 450+m blind spot anywhere. Mount a webcam on the bow and stream the numpties onto the internet live!

[J S]

Originally Posted by Anchorhandler

'Evening James...

If i was a betting man i would say that looked suspiciously like a 'British' Petroleum tanker.....
Simon

You would be correct simon, did the green deck give it away . The picture is of a Bird Class ship and the diagrams are from a P Class VLCC that im currently sailing on.

Originally Posted by captnjack

I am not trying to blame the tanker here...

But given the advances in close circuit video feeds there's really no reason to a 450+m blind spot anywhere. Mount a webcam on the bow and stream the numpties onto the internet live!

You would think they would fit them yes, the current ship im on has a camera mounted on the foremast which allows some degree of vision but still isn't mounted in the correct position to provide good viewing of small boats at close range ahead.

James

[Anchorhandler]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by J S

You would be correct simon, did the green deck give it away . The picture is of a Bird Class ship and the diagrams are from a P Class VLCC that im currently sailing on.

...not much of a challenge really was it?.

Probably have an unfair advantage as during my 'early' years at sea i spent quite some years serving aboard Esso's old international fleet (Esso Kawasaki, Hawaii Honolulu and Demetia) and used to pop across the sea-island at Ras Tanura to visit freinds on the old Brittish Ranger.....that and many of the new fleet are frequent customers here at Fawley/BPJ....

In what capacity are you sailing as?

Have a good trip at any rate....

Simon

[captnjack]

Originally Posted by J S

You would think they would fit them yes, the current ship im on has a camera mounted on the foremast which allows some degree of vision but still isn't mounted in the correct position to provide good viewing of small boats at close range ahead.

James

So if not for this well suited for this purpose what is the foremast camera being used for? Or is it just a compromise all the way around?

I mean I have a backup camera on my pickup truck, color and everything. Its in the tailgate pointing down at about a 75deg angle. The viewfinder is in the rearview mirror. I can back up to the trailer hitch in one go perfectly everytime, and parallel park where most people couldn't believe.

[Anchorhandler]

Originally Posted by captnjack

So if not for this well suited for this purpose what is the foremast camera being used for? Or is it just a compromise all the way around?

I mean I have a backup camera on my pickup truck, color and everything. Its in the tailgate pointing down at about a 75deg angle. The viewfinder is in the rearview mirror. I can back up to the trailer hitch in one go perfectly everytime, and parallel park where most people couldn't believe.

Hey Captnjack

if i may answer also..

Think of it this way.....

you install a camera in the front grill of your pick-up truck just under the hood to cover the 'blind spot' area that you can not see from the driving position....
Now think of the practicalities of using this camera as, unless your driving extreemly slowly, by the time you see on the screen something in front of you and you apply the brakes, your probably going to hit it!.....
Camera's mounted on the forecastle of large commercial ships only have limited effectivness for the same reason. You may be able to see something in the blind spot in front of the bow but the odds are your going to struggle to alter course or stop in time to avoid an incident.

A camera mounted on the bow of the kutsen ship during the Cowes incident would have been very little help in avoiding the collision.

Its a valid question though.

Simon

P.S. like the viewfinder built into the rear view mirror...not seen one of those...very cool indeed!

[captnjack]

Originally Posted by Anchorhandler

Hey Captnjack

if i may answer also..

Think of it this way.....

you install a camera in the front grill of your pick-up truck just under the hood to cover the 'blind spot' area that you can not see from the driving position....
Now think of the practicalities of using this camera as, unless your driving extreemly slowly, by the time you see on the screen something in front of you and you apply the brakes, your probably going to hit it!.....
Camera's mounted on the forecastle of large commercial ships only have limited effectivness for the same reason. You may be able to see something in the blind spot in front of the bow but the odds are your going to struggle to alter course or stop in time to avoid an incident.

A camera mounted on the bow of the kutsen ship during the Cowes incident would have been very little help in avoiding the collision.

Its a valid question though.

Simon

P.S. like the viewfinder built into the rear view mirror...not seen one of those...very cool indeed!

Yeah not so much thinking the tanker could actually do anything sustantive in this case. But in other cases it may relieve alot of pilot anxiety over "where did that boat go"? Maybe when its not all that obvious they have made a suitable course correction etc. Or maybe when they aren't actually in the blindspot at all and have moved elsewhere. Sometimes its not about what's in the blindspot, its confirming what isn't. Not to mention it would be great evidence in an inquiry. Or for that live internet feed

[dnv]

Originally Posted by willk

And we wonder why training/certification is compulsory in Europe?

This sort of behavior is outrageous and I can't imagine why commercial traffic should have to bear the responsibility for avoiding flotillas of lemmingesque amateur boatsters.

They are not supposed to be there at that time. Just as they shouldn't be driving the wrong direction on roads, or skate boarding on runways.

Five blasts and be done with it!

I do not know the answer, but I can share some experience from my part of Europe.
I am living in Hamburg, one of the busiest ports in Europe and in the world. I do not know the actual figures of how many yachts (sail) are between the North Sea and Hamburg. An indication could be, that the Marina in the west of Hamburg is considered to be Europe's biggest in tidal waters with 2000+ berths.
We have sailing regattas with up to 150 competitors, from short distance to races down the river and up again. The racing area is the river, ie a channel marked by buoys plus varying space at each side. It is difficult, with lots of tide and difficult weather.
Each and every sailing instruction is referring to colregs, local by-law, and gives commercial traffic right-of-way.

We have not seen incidents like the one at Cowes Week for quiet a while. A reason might be, that the local clubs have established a good relationship with Coast Guard, Port Authority and the Pilots. In practical terms, reps of clubs and authorities meet at least once per year - typically in the winter - to discuss issues. In addition, we are arranging for "get to know" meetings to raise understanding for each other.

The result is, that for many years in a row no near miss or even incident was recorded by pilots, coast guard, or port authority.

In terms of certification, a certificate for vessels with more than 5HP on the engine is compulsory by law. In addition, the German Sailing Association requires skipper to have a certificate issued by the German Sailing Association and valid for the area if racing in Germany.

Maybe the explanation is not certification or a good communication between authorities and yotties. Maybe it is, that the WAFI's are on the Baltic Lake, which is much easier to sail.

kind regards
Jan