Bitter Experience Tv Filming - Page 2

Lostboy · 03 August 2006, 12:19

Interesting to know what the legal eagles would have made of it if you had chosen to drive off and leave them when you told them to get on the boat and they had refused and they had subsequently been lost.

I can't wait for the new reality TV show - The Producers - where a fly on the wall team looks at exactly what these people will do to get airtime and viewing figures!

Poly · 03 August 2006, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by WINDRIDER

personal views

that is because we live in a democracy where freedom of speech is encouraged.

Quote:

asked following legal advice

I think the word you are looking for is "told". You probaly cant answer this now - but who "asked" the MAIB? the Film crew? your lawyer?

Quote:

the ultimate responsibility for the safe operation of the vessel lies with her master.

I don't think anyone will argue with this - but surely they didn't expect you to leave them on the beach - you must have a duty of care to people no longer on the vessel. I don't think anything you posted here in the first place disputes that fact.

Quote:

The decision to enter into discussion in the public forum before the completion of the investigation process was not correct

I disagree. Unless you are subject to criminal proceedings then there is no reason not to go public with your views. If we had to wait for the MAIB report (and or any other investigations) there could be repeat occurances.

Quote:

not through any malice or malicious intent

I doesn't come across as Malicious at all - otherwise you would have named the production company, director etc.

Simon B · 03 August 2006, 13:11

Sorry to hear its come to this Windrider, I would have done exactly as you have but possibly with less restraint. It has very much sharpened my focus on briefing any occupants of our boat in the future.

codprawn · 03 August 2006, 13:19

Steam coming out of my ears again!!! Obviously someone is reading this forum who had a go at you - so whoever you are just go and.........................

Simon B · 03 August 2006, 14:52

Calm down Codders, remember the film crew may have lost an 80k camera in the melee, with attending ramifications. Let us see what transpires in the future when Windrider is not under obligation from legal advice.

Daniel · 03 August 2006, 15:15

Pleased to see you all up and running again this weekend Mr Windrider, with two shiney looking new engines

Hope any issues you are having get resolved, your boat is a good "facility" for Thanet commercially and for tourism.

WINDRIDER · 04 August 2006, 07:48

Many thanks to all for support and advice. Phone has not stopped ringing from many of you. We are running again at full tilt. From black Thursday 13th July and a seriously trashed boat, destroyed engines and mangled electronics to being fully operational with new motors, new fuel and oil lines, new wiring, repainted console and seats etc in under 13 days is impressive. Not possible without the help of a whole team out there from Rod at Jets Marivent to Paul at Highway Marine in Sandwich and Jon Price in Wales I am flattered and delighted with the way the community has gathered round and lifted us almost bodily from the sands. This coupled with the light hearted posts from Codders, Daniel and the rest of the team has made it all so much easier.
Thanks everyone.
John, WINDRIDER and her crew.

Richard B · 04 August 2006, 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lostboy

I can't wait for the new reality TV show - The Producers - where a fly on the wall team looks at exactly what these people will do to get airtime and viewing figures!

The book's called "Dead Famous" by Ben Elton

Aegean Lady · 16 August 2006, 11:35

I have been reading your sorry tale, Windrider, and hope everything turns out okay.

Your engines stalling reminds me that a similar thing happened to my husband in a Quinquari (I think that's what is was) when he was doing sea safari at the Corrywreckan many years ago.

I can't remember all the details, and he is at sea now so I can't ask him, but I think that the boat took a whole of load of water from a couple of big waves, and the engine stalled. They weren't in any imminent danger, but couldn't go anywhere. I think they eventually managed to 'hitch a tow' from a passing fishing boat or something. No-one was hurt and no damage done apart from the engine needing to be looked at.

However, my feeling was that the owner of the boat did not quite believe that the engines had stalled, and always thought my husband must have done something, despite his being an extremely experience boatman.

These boats and engines are supposed to take anything as far as I understand. I'm just mentioning this in case anyone questions that they did stall, to say that it isn't unknown. Please get in touch with us if you need more information.

quinquarimarine · 20 August 2006, 00:51

Your engines stalling reminds me that a similar thing happened to my husband in a Quinquari (I think that's what is was) when he was doing sea safari at the Corrywreckan many years ago.

A bit of misinformation here as certainly not a Quinquari Vessel as they have only been supplied to that area in the last 2 years.

A point though for all to bear in mind that there is no perfect vessel for every situation. RHIBs have come into their own as they have proved so versatile but they will still have their limitations.

A common assumtion is that being a RHIB it cannot be swamped. If it is a transom RHIB, as most are, then it can. In most cases this is whilst the vessel is underway, or capable of being put so in a short period of time and the bulk of the green will go over the transom and good bilge pumps will clear the rest. As John W. has found out there will always be a set of circumstances to keep us all on our toes.

Of course if Johns boat were not a RHIB it would have had no buoyancy on swamping and would now be part of the long list of Goodwin wrecks. I would like to think that it is testomy to the hull and systems together with Johns determination in that the vessel was recovered and put back into action in days.

It is interesting to note that Coding requires a minimum of 250mm transom height and as such can be seen to cause captivation of water. If you want a truly self draining RIB for a particular activity then the Ocean Dynamics with inboard will come to the fore.

Cheers

John
www.quinquari.co.uk

Searider · 20 August 2006, 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by quinquarimarine

It is interesting to note that Coding requires a minimum of 250mm transom height and as such can be seen to cause captivation of water. If you want a truly self draining RIB for a particular activity then the Ocean Dynamics with inboard will come to the fore.

Cheers

John
www.quinquari.co.uk

Hi John,

You're not strictly correct there. To clarify for others reading Coding requires 250mm FREEBOARD at the transom.
If you build the deck up to the top of a transom that gives 250mm freeboard then you won't trap water in the boat.
Most of the larger Halmatic RIBs do it this way.

Pacific 22 has a transom that extends about 100mm above the deck and still meets the freeboard requirement.

I do agree that whilst having a nice high transom keeps your engines away from the water and helps prevent water getting into the boat it does mean that when you are swamped there is LOTS of water in the boat.

jwalker · 20 August 2006, 23:54

Give us a definition of freeboard. Duncan, from your comments, it sounds as though freeboard is the height above the outside water level. Is this correct?

quinquarimarine · 21 August 2006, 00:41

You're not strictly correct there. To clarify for others reading Coding requires 250mm FREEBOARD at the transom.
If you build the deck up to the top of a transom that gives 250mm freeboard then you won't trap water in the boat.
Most of the larger Halmatic RIBs do it this way.

Duncan, a fair point and maybe I was being a bit too general.

Freeboard will be taken from WL to the top of the transom (at its lowest point). Of course if fitting outboards transom height will be dictated by shaft length/cavitaion plate etc. All of this will relate to how the vessel sits in the water ie. prismatic and block coeficients of the hull form. This in turn will dictate performance, fuel etc.... a long debate for another day !

If as you suggest you build the deck at the 250mm level then there can be issues with MCG/stability especialy when you have vessels with careful and fine lines. A Pacific has more displacement and less fine lines enabling a higher deck line.

If transom height is too low for coding then a second internal transom could be built( note some of the Deltas and Avons). This in many ways works well but still creates the captivation of water. Also noting your point that it is better to keep the engine as high as possible for obvious water related issues.

No such thing as a perfect boat !!

Cheers

John
www.quinquari.co.uk

Searider · 21 August 2006, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwalker

Give us a definition of freeboard. Duncan, from your comments, it sounds as though freeboard is the height above the outside water level. Is this correct?

Got it in one - and John has replied to the same effect.

It's a strange paradox that a boat with a lowish transom - that only just passes the 250mm freeboard stipulation has much less of a problem coping with the swamp test. - there will only be a few hundred mm in the stern before it pours out.

A boat with a high built in splash well - such as newer Scorpions, Cobras, Ribeyes etc have to have so much water in them before they can be truly described as swamped. - Up to your knees almost!

Lostboy · 23 October 2006, 15:15

Seeing the TV pages and listings for this week this event (or the visit to Goodwin Sands at least) is featured on TV this week, something like Coast?!

I have got extremely irritated by some of the press releases that have been circulating for the programme leading up to it which make a real deal about "the forces of nature" and other such tosh. But of course they're hardly going to say "we nearly killed ourselves, our crew and our charterer" are they!

codprawn · 23 October 2006, 16:48

Is there any footage of the incident itself - by watching such things it can teach you valuable lessons - like having nothing to do with film crews!!!

Matt · 23 October 2006, 16:59

That's crap coddders. There's lots of good film crews. I spent 5 days working with a German crew recently - and they were an absolute pleasure to work with.

Cookee · 23 October 2006, 17:50

Likewise - been working in the industry since '96 and never had a problem - having said that there is always the exception that proves the rule, and it seems that this the is the exception - not the rule!

codprawn · 23 October 2006, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadMat

That's crap coddders. There's lots of good film crews. I spent 5 days working with a German crew recently - and they were an absolute pleasure to work with.

Err it WAS a joke..................................

ScottyDog · 23 October 2006, 22:40

Directors always want to do more than the circumstances/light/hosts/crew/fees etc. will allow. Easiest surefire way to deal with it is to inform the producer the insurance cover is no longer effective (as is the case when the plan & risk assessment is not adhered to), they always panic and get the director & crew to pack up straight away. I have to resort to this almost every day, usually with regard to safety distances, stunts, health & safety etc. as it is in nobody's interest to allow them to push the boundaries.