Collision today

[Daveinet]

Holy s---! 16 pages worth... lemme sum it up:

Not really. While there is a lot of bantering, there is also nuggets of useful information. Fact is, since no one was hurt, it really doesn't matter the outcome as much as discussions like this full of hypotheticals make us all more aware, and hopefully safer boaters.

 

[Ron20324]

Holy s---! 16 pages worth... lemme sum it up:

Juice, you might find some other forum to your liking alot more.

 

[jssailem]

especially dealing with Wa State Ferries

 

[907Juice]

Ron, jump to conclusions much? Ever heard of a joke? Look it up, you might like them.

 

[genec]

I wonder if a .308 would qualify?

I do keep a refillable air horn in the cockpit most of the time. The tank is about the size of a coke bottle and is designed to fit in a cup holder. It has a schrader valve for refilling. I don't know how long of a blast the tank will support, but I do know it could be used multiple times before refilling. It is very loud, and has an obnoxious tone - lower than the co2 ones. I've only used it once to clear the beach where I was trying to dock. A quick bump from about 150 feet out cleared everyone out of the way.

The biggest problem I have is that the normal distance that power boats deviate to avoid me is way too late for me to take steps to avoid them. That being said, seeing a power boat on a collision course does not mean I expect a potential collision. Since most boats deviate late, I can only consider them on a collision course if they are about 200 feet away. In all the years I sail on the most busy lake per sq ft in the country, I have only had 1 boat that made me nervous. They were making a big arc. I could only guess where they would end up, as it was impossible to predict their trajectory. They did pass within about 100 ft of my boat. I was trapped between their path and thin water. They were coming up on my tail, which makes avoidance more difficult.

BTY: Wearing the whistle is in case you are MOB, so you don't get run over.

I have multiple whistles!

I only mentioned the whistle as I have had those canned air horns fail, when I thought they were perfectly fine... And I keep the whistle just as handy.

But on to a bigger question... where did you get your refillable horn?

I have one for a bicycle, but it has a hose and remote horn.

Of course I am assuming that the whole mechanism is more robust than those disposable canned air horns.

 

[jssailem]

wonder if a .308 would qualify?

It would be a loud noise. Might make issues worse if miss aimed. Justified use maybe, as an attacking power boat could be identified as an attacker intent on doing imminent grave bodily harm to you and your passengers.

It would be going to the extreme. Necessarily would have to be available and ready. Might be a problem to also handle the sheets and control the boat.

Maybe you could just ask a patrolman to go sailing and guard the boat while aboard. This would create a whole new concept in “Sail boat security “.

 

[Daveinet]

But on to a bigger question... where did you get your refillable horn?

[URL] https://www.amazon.com/Ecoblast-Sport-Rechargeable-Air-Horn/dp/B009LNUISQ[/url]
I bought it at Cabelas, but I don't see this specific one listed any more. I'm pretty sure it is louder than the canister ones. It also has a flow control if you don't need it to be as loud.

 

[Gunni]

Here’s your refillable air horn!

Seriously, the Plastimo boat horn is plenty loud. You can even make it play Reveille (if you know how), which is useful when you are trying to find the skipper on a errant boat.

 

[jssailem]

Since options are being suggested.. Go all the way. Including a siren to chase the guy down and pull him over when his wake upsets your day.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M8QWL1G/ref=sspa_dk_detail_2?psc=1

 

[Gunni]

One of the kids gave me that thing a few years ago. Helps when you need to call assembly to the table or announce that the Happy Hour has officially ended. Pretty much a fun toy.

 

[jssailem]

Pretty much a fun toy.

That is what I had in mind.

 

[Tally Ho]

Not ignoring it because we don't know exactly what the guy means by his statement. Like me, he could have peeked around his sail and seen a power boat headed towards him about 1/2 mile in the distance. That's a lot of distance and never causes me any sense of alarm. If I was alarmed by every boat that is headed in my direction 1/2 mile away, I would probably not sail. A boat 1/2 mile away headed in my direction doesn't necessarily say that something bad is going to happen.

But that's less than a minute away at the power boat's speed. It's not uncommon to see a boat and then divert your attention away from it for a minute. I'll admit, if I detected that it is moving fast and on a collision course, I'd be more inclined to pay attention more diligently. But I can understand how they may have taken for granted that the boat would change course. 999 times out of 1000, the other boat would change course.

I'm just saying that if it was my decision, which it is not of course, I wouldn't place any blame on the sailboat captain. I would think it is ridiculous under this circumstance.

I agree with @Scott T-Bird. If I see a powerboat 1/2 mile away, I am not too concerned, and right or wrong would assume “he is going to bear off”.

And Colregs aside, I would find it ridiculous to hold the sailboat captain at fault. Getting run over by a power boat...come on, power boat should be at fault.

Greg

 

[Ron20324]

Sorry, folks I should have gone by the sailboat on "picture Wednesday". They have covered the damaged area. On Tuesday I could walk up to it. There is a VEE notch in the hull. Along the toerail, about 40 inches. The hole and the cracks go just down to the water line. Cabin bashed in, ports fallen out. Nice lifelines, though, as they stayed together, but pulled the pushpit out of the deck.

 

[Stu Jackson]

And Colregs aside, I would find it ridiculous to hold the sailboat captain at fault.

Hahahahahaha.

Rules aside...???

Really?

 

[Daveinet]

My observation is that there is no way the power boat hit the sailboat at 30 knots. At 30 knots, it would have been well over the other side, not resting in the middle. No doubt the power boat dropped the throttle, which meant it lost all steering. Yes, it was still up on plane, but no doubt the speed had dropped off considerably.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Hahahahahaha.

Rules aside...???

Really?

Well, really … I could be wrong, but I don't see anything in the rules that dictate how this is to be judged. Apparently, you think it is 50/50 because the sailboat captain is equally at fault? Or would you have the sailboat captain 100% at fault because he failed to get out of the way? I thought John indicated that there is a hierarchy in these rules. So would that mean that it could be judged 75/25 or 90/10 or 95/5 (go ahead, pick any percentage), mostly against the power boat captain? My argument is that it should be 100% against powerboat because his fault was particularly egregious and the sailboat captain's fault was de minimis.

PotomacDaysailer is correct, in my opinion, that the collision isn't necessarily prima facie evidence (a great term in this argument - thanks PD! ) that both parties are culpable.

The rules don't dictate the specific judgement, or do they? The judgement will take into consideration the application and hierarchy of the rules, I think. Aside from that, I suppose the insurance companies will decide the judgement outside of a maritime judgement. We may never know the outcome.

 

[Monterey385]

My observation is that there is no way the power boat hit the sailboat at 30 knots. At 30 knots, it would have been well over the other side, not resting in the middle. No doubt the power boat dropped the throttle, which meant it lost all steering. Yes, it was still up on plane, but no doubt the speed had dropped off considerably.

He had outboards and probably would not have lost steering unless he threw it into reverse. He probably pulled back on the throttle which probably squatted the stern and lifted the bow. If he was on autopilot at the time it would explain why the angle remained 90 degrees. The sail may also have caught him and dampened forward motion (and the water does give a bit)

Well, really … I could be wrong, but I don't see anything in the rules that dictate how this is to be judged.

I think you are correct on the technical issue of how it should be judged. That is why there are courts, judges, and panels depending on the situation. The rules will help inform those who have to make a determination.

Apparently, you think it is 50/50 because the sailboat captain is equally at fault? Or would you have the sailboat captain 100% at fault because he failed to get out of the way? I thought John indicated that there is a hierarchy in these rules. So would that mean that it could be judged 75/25 or 90/10 or 95/5 (go ahead, pick any percentage), mostly against the power boat captain? My argument is that it should be 100% against powerboat because his fault was particularly egregious and the sailboat captain's fault was de minimis.

Just because there is shared responsibility and fault because we all have a responsibility to avoid collision, to me that does not automatically suggest 50/50. Personally I had this at 80/20 until the sailor's news account was shared with his own words … which IMHO dropped it to 60/40 (power/sail) … this is mostly because they did not report an attempt to turn the boat or stop its forward momentum. To the extent either happened and were unreported, I think it could go as high as 99/1.

My argument is that it should be 100% against powerboat because his fault was particularly egregious and the sailboat captain's fault was de minimis.

Here is where I break down a bit on the sailboat captain's fault being de minimus … if his passenger was killed and he could have turned the boat to avoid it … he would have been culpable for the result. In order for it to be 100% against the powerboat, I would have needed to hear from the powerboat captain that he adjusted course to hit the sailboat (ie. active ramming).

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Here is where I break down a bit on the sailboat captain's fault being de minimus … if his passenger was killed and he could have turned the boat to avoid it … he would have been culpable for the result. In order for it to be 100% against the powerboat, I would have needed to hear from the powerboat captain that he adjusted course to hit the sailboat (ie. active ramming).

There's solid logic in that. I see your point!

 

[Monterey385]

There's solid logic in that. I see your point!

Makes sense that we are both from Jersey

 

[PotomacDaysailer]

I would put the blame at 98.8725% power, 1.1275% sail, + or - .000125%.

Just kidding!

Seriously I think anything less than 95% on the power boat would be extremely hard to justify.