Boats Collide Head On - Page 3

Skybird · 11-23-08, 05:34 AM

I think this is a story about two guys who had to settle some old open bills.

Jimbuna · 11-23-08, 08:13 AM

I agree with Neal....it was definitely Bush at fault :p

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0ntMluaKA_c

Kapt Z · 11-23-08, 05:07 PM

dumbasses!

Task Force · 11-23-08, 06:21 PM

Bush+boat=disaster

bush+country=disaster

Sailor Steve · 11-23-08, 06:54 PM

I'm glad you know so much. Care to give a detailed explanation?

Skybird · 11-23-08, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Task Force

Bush+boat=disaster

bush+country=disaster

He wages disaster on land, in the air and on the seas!

Rockstar · 11-24-08, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Quote:

Originally Posted by Task Force

Bush+boat=disaster

bush+country=disaster

He wages disaster on land, in the air and on the seas!

wait until January 20th when Mr. Obama takes the helm. print more money for governement programs = hyper inflation (you think weimar republic had it bad). Troop pull out in ME, region in flames, europe crumbles under weight of Islam. Iran tests nuke, UN issues stern warnings.

AVGWarhawk · 11-24-08, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I blame Bush.

Yeah, it was Bush, notice the small boat is going to the RIGHT that caused the collision.

McBeck · 11-24-08, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntEater

IMHO the rammed boat had right of way, as it was on the starboard bow of the other.

Absolutely correct. The rule is that if you can see a red (port) light you must give way, as the ship to starboard has the right-of-way. This of course assumes that the ships are the same size, and there are other rules as well.

Yup..you got that right. Im reading for the exam. However, you MUST always show good seamanship, so the rule can be overruled

Hylander_1314 · 11-24-08, 01:26 PM

Trouble is, most people get a boat, but don't bother to read the regulations. Manning the helm of any watercraft should be treated the same as driving a car, or flying a plane. The idiocy I view everytime I go to the lake to go fishing is downright frightening sometimes. I go back into an area where it's supposed to be a no-wake zone, and it's rather wide on the south side of the lake due to all the tree stumps in the area, yet people on jetskis and boaters will fly through the area at top speed, and then they get a stupid look on their faces when they hit one of the stumps that are right below the surface. I've seen people go sprauling off a jetski, and their jetski sink. And the lower unit on the engine destroyed.

When I talked to the rangers, they were telling me that maybe 5 to 8% of the people even look at the map of the lake at the boat launch, and a smaller percentage of us actually pay attention to it.

So I would say with this collision, it's dumb and dumber. But by regulation the boat that the filming was done from was at fault. Maritime regulations are even more strict than general motor vehicle traffic regulations are.

Etienne · 11-24-08, 04:36 PM

The video doesn't give enough information to approportionate blame. If we assume the final situation is simillar to the original, then yes, the boat the camera is on is to blame... But then, the other boat didn't get out of the way either. (The rules clearly state that it is your responsabillity to avoid collision by any means necessary, no matter what.)

If it begun as a head-on situation with a small CPA to starboard, then there's a whole mess of arguments you can get into. It's a lot more complex than "Go to starboard" (If could be argued that since there was a CPA greater than 0, a vessel could consider itself not to be in a collision situation, and simply increasing the passing distance by going to port. If the other guy goes to starboard, considering himself to be in a head on situation, then boom.)

Size of vessel has no bearing on the rules, except where a vessel of less than 20m (IE, pleasure craft) is involved with a large vessel that can only navigate safely within the constrain of a channel, or a vessel is constrained by her draft (And that's kind of a shaky status anyway). In theory, on the open sea, a ULCC should stay out of the way of a 30 ft sailboat. Don't try it in a river.

In this case, both the vessels at cause are big enough that they should have been manned by professional mariners - the kind of people who HAVE read the regulation. Heck, a navigation degree involes something like over 120 hours of collision avoidance training. There was a time I could cite the rules word for word.

There's probably blame to be had on both sides. Rules 2, 5, 6 as usual. But from a thirty second video, you can't really go "OMG STUPID BOAT!"

Edited to add that I entirely agree with Captain Vlad's post below.

Captain Vlad · 11-24-08, 04:54 PM

That looked ridiculously avoidable. I hope no one was badly hurt.

11-23-08, 05:34 AM	#31
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,637 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I think this is a story about two guys who had to settle some old open bills. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 11-23-08 at 05:34 AM.

11-23-08, 08:13 AM	#32
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,552 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	I agree with Neal....it was definitely Bush at fault :p http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0ntMluaKA_c __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

11-23-08, 06:21 PM	#34
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,142 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Bush+boat=disaster bush+country=disaster __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time" Last edited by Task Force; 11-23-08 at 06:23 PM.

11-23-08, 06:54 PM	#35
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	I'm glad you know so much. Care to give a detailed explanation? __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

11-24-08, 01:26 PM	#40
Hylander_1314 Sea Lord Join Date: May 2006 Location: 5 Miles Inland West Of Lake Huron Posts: 1,936 Downloads: 139 Uploads: 0	Trouble is, most people get a boat, but don't bother to read the regulations. Manning the helm of any watercraft should be treated the same as driving a car, or flying a plane. The idiocy I view everytime I go to the lake to go fishing is downright frightening sometimes. I go back into an area where it's supposed to be a no-wake zone, and it's rather wide on the south side of the lake due to all the tree stumps in the area, yet people on jetskis and boaters will fly through the area at top speed, and then they get a stupid look on their faces when they hit one of the stumps that are right below the surface. I've seen people go sprauling off a jetski, and their jetski sink. And the lower unit on the engine destroyed. When I talked to the rangers, they were telling me that maybe 5 to 8% of the people even look at the map of the lake at the boat launch, and a smaller percentage of us actually pay attention to it. So I would say with this collision, it's dumb and dumber. But by regulation the boat that the filming was done from was at fault. Maritime regulations are even more strict than general motor vehicle traffic regulations are. __________________ A legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law. -John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ---------------------

11-23-08, 05:07 PM	#33
Kapt Z Grey Wolf Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: ...somewhere in the swamps of Jersey. Posts: 909 Downloads: 157 Uploads: 0	dumbasses!

11-24-08, 04:36 PM	#41
Etienne Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 695 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	The video doesn't give enough information to approportionate blame. If we assume the final situation is simillar to the original, then yes, the boat the camera is on is to blame... But then, the other boat didn't get out of the way either. (The rules clearly state that it is your responsabillity to avoid collision by any means necessary, no matter what.) If it begun as a head-on situation with a small CPA to starboard, then there's a whole mess of arguments you can get into. It's a lot more complex than "Go to starboard" (If could be argued that since there was a CPA greater than 0, a vessel could consider itself not to be in a collision situation, and simply increasing the passing distance by going to port. If the other guy goes to starboard, considering himself to be in a head on situation, then boom.) Size of vessel has no bearing on the rules, except where a vessel of less than 20m (IE, pleasure craft) is involved with a large vessel that can only navigate safely within the constrain of a channel, or a vessel is constrained by her draft (And that's kind of a shaky status anyway). In theory, on the open sea, a ULCC should stay out of the way of a 30 ft sailboat. Don't try it in a river. In this case, both the vessels at cause are big enough that they should have been manned by professional mariners - the kind of people who HAVE read the regulation. Heck, a navigation degree involes something like over 120 hours of collision avoidance training. There was a time I could cite the rules word for word. There's probably blame to be had on both sides. Rules 2, 5, 6 as usual. But from a thirty second video, you can't really go "OMG STUPID BOAT!" Edited to add that I entirely agree with Captain Vlad's post below. Last edited by Etienne; 11-24-08 at 05:06 PM.

11-24-08, 04:54 PM	#42
Captain Vlad Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Pollard, Oklahoma Posts: 679 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	That looked ridiculously avoidable. I hope no one was badly hurt. __________________ "Stop sounding battlestations just to hear the alarm."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode