SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Do you think he needed fresh shorts

14K views 155 replies 31 participants last post by  blt2ski 
#1 ·
Just saw a Video of an incident between a power boat and a Washington State Ferry on Sunday afternoon

Sorry I don't know how to do links. Found it by google Washington State Ferry hits Boat. Or maybe it should be the other way round.
The really surprising thing is.
apart from

Do you think he need fresh shorts?

It all looked just fine.
 
#7 ·
Link to the video;



It seems from the video that "Nap Time" was under auto pilot control and was overtaking the ferry. It also seems that the ferry was slowing before the collision, and then reversed after the collision. It also seems that "Nap Time" continued under auto pilot after the skipper came on deck.
 
#10 ·
This is exactly what every commercial skipper dreads.
The skipper must immediately notify the CG of the incident and quite possibly remain on station until an investigation team arrives. Then hours and hours (perhaps days) of CG investigations (often unpaid hours), vessel inspections (for damage) and a write up (perhaps even a black mark) in your jacket, for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
And the idiot who causes it all tootles on unaware of the havoc he's created and with no consequences. There oughta be a law.
 
#11 ·
There oughta be a law.
There are a bunch of them.

At the end, there is no sign that, despite many issues (security zone for ferry, and the ferry being give way) the ferry didn't appear to take action beyond the horn blasts until way too late.

Lots of responsibility to spread around.
 
#13 ·
Setting aside the security zone (which is predominant) it doesn't look to me like the recreational vessel was overtaking. It looks like he was stand on and the ferry was give way. That said all reports are that the small boat was on autopilot and the skipper was in the head. That means no watch.

Plenty of accountability all around. Ferry should have gone astern. Boat should not have been crossing a known ferry track with the bridge unattended. Oh - and the ferry did five blasts wrong. *grin*
 
#14 ·
Under Colregs the ferry was the give way vessel, the other boat was required to maintain course and speed (and a watch which they obviously did not do). The ferry was not constrained by draft (or anything else that would have changed the situation) and should have altered course in time to pass astern of the boat. The ferry did sound the five blast danger signal and slow down, eventually going into reverse, but the burden was on the ferry to avoid a collision by altering course in time to pass safely behind or slowing/stopping to let the stand on vessel cross safely. The boat did not have a watch manned and failed to sound any signals and ultimately was required to take action to avoid the collision when the ferry failed to alter course. Blame will be divided but I wouldn't want to be in the ferry skipper's shoes.

This happened just south of us, near Seattle. Just a couple of years ago another ferry completely ran over a sailboat here in the San Juans (also no watch) in a similar situation. Might does not make right, at least in the eyes of the USCG and Colregs, although self preservation is a strong motivator in most cases and the smaller vessel usually gives way no matter what the Colregs say.
 
#15 ·
What I see is an overtaking vessel hitting the ferry fwd of amidships?????????? They seem to be on roughly parallel courses??????????
Maybe if I had a picture of the ferry with all those railings I'd see it differently.
 
#16 ·
Just amazed at Capt. Ahole's lack of a watch. I get nervous just going down below to make a sandwich. Whenever I see a power yacht heading toward my boat I always assume they are on auto pilot and they are down below watching a game on a flat screen TV. Though I am impressed with how his boat held up after the crash. Though internally it might be a different story. Would also love to hear his conversation with his insurance company.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Strange, I see two vessels that Edit: had room for improvement with regards to their obligations. Maybe I'm getting my lefts and rights mixed up, but it looked to me like the ferry bumped into a vessel crossing and approaching from the starboard side. It kind of looked like the skipper of the ferry spent his time telling his mate to go cuss out the power boat rather than hit the brakes or take his stern.
 
#19 ·
This is info on the ferry;


Class: Kwa-di Tabil Type: Auto/Passenger Ferry
Length: 273' 8" Engines: 2
Beam: 64' Horsepower: 6,000
Draft: 11' Speed in Knots: 15
Max Passengers: 748 Propulsion: DIESEL
Max Vehicles: 64 Displacement (weight in long tons): 2415
Tall Deck Space: 9 City Built: Seattle
Auto Deck Clearance: 16' 0" Year Built / Re-built: 2010
 
#21 ·
Intuitively, it has to be hard to claim stand-on rights under ColRegs, when one is not even on watch to know. Ultimately, ColRegs also require evasive maneuvers to avoid collision, regardless of stand-on/give-way. Same evasion requirement for the ferry, however. Hard to say, if the reverse thrust was attempted prior to impact.

I will say that ******** could take a punch. Give the law of gross tonnage, I would have expected splinters.
 
#22 ·
Not sure about this boat, but I understand that some ferries have two distinct drive lines, and engage only the drive line that they intend to use for a particular trip. Starting up the opposite drive line takes some time, and may be the reason for the seeming late appearance of the prop wash in the video. If this is the case, the ferry could have been operating with full reverse thrust from the aft drive line throughout the video.
 
#23 ·
Your logic is very sound. I think if I was running the ferry in confined waters like that, I would be inclined to want both engines running and an Engineer in the engine room. But, you never know what kind of pressure there was to save on diesel, or if man power budgeting required the engineering officer to be out of the engine room. Of course there are scheduling pressures on the bridge team too, but I don't consider that to be much of an excuse, personally.
 
#24 ·
The ferry skippers have a tough job here dodging small boats in narrow channels all the time and I know from seeing countless encounters that "almost" always the recreational boats give way to them whether they should or not according to the rules. When I see that I'm going to cause a problem for one I make a course change (a big one that they can see) well before they need to start worrying about me. I'm not in a hurry, they are on a schedule. I'm sure they just expect little boats to avoid them and when one doesn't, like in this case, it turns into an emergency in a big hurry. I'm actually pretty impressed that the ferry had slowed almost to a dead stop prior to the collision, and by going to emergency reverse when it did helped push "Nap Time" away from the bow with the prop wash and probably avoided what surely would have been major damage.
 
#25 ·
Im with you, but did the ferry operator do all he could do to prevent? NO he didn't. Clearly the power Boat was on auto pilot or at least steady (collision) course for some time and noticed, apparently, still there was a collision. Both at fault only one licenses at stake. Im a sailor and a license holder and life safety aside the license holder has more skin in the game. Unfortunate but in a collision, rules aside all parties are required to do all possible to prevent. Of all the water I have ever run in Im most uncomfortable in the wash of a big tug, the power is most evident here. I could say something like I'm surprised there are no more incidents than there are but I don't want to put my mouth on it.
 
#43 ·
How much time passed between the time you SAW the reverse wash and the time the TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY THREE long ferry put it into reverse PLUS the distance traveled AFTER it finally came to a stop?
Botom line, it probably was in reverse for quite a while as the five blasts were being produced and maybe even before that.

Look at the tonnage.

I ride the Mukilteo / Clinton ferry to Whidbey and it's just a little one, but I see how much wash it generates when coming into the slip. It goes into slow reverse a good 3 or 4 minutes before even getting close to the slip.

Imho, it's 99.999% on the idiot in the pleasure boat with no one on deck.
If he REALLY needed to go when in a tight spot like that, modesty be damned. Piss over the side!
 
#31 · (Edited)
I routinely sail the waters plied by Washington State Ferries and BC Ferries. My expierience has been I follow the rules and so do they.
Only seeing the video. It looked like a crossing situation gone wrong to me. Though the experts on G Captain were saying overtaking.
The skipper of the boat in the head. Not sure where this was reported. I am sure it was quite a shock.

My take on it is he was hell of a lucky.
The Ferry unlucky.
They almost avoided a collision, the notoriety and the paper work. The Ferry crew shorts may have taken a beating.
They are extremely lucky, they very nearly killed someone. I guesstThe ferry was approaching a Ferry Dock. There are local rules about not obstructing or impeding ferries near their docks. How close the dock was is hard to tell.

The ferry is one of the newer ones. Not sure about its propulsion system. I think it is a similar design to the older ones Washington State double enders. And the Older double ended BC Ferries. McLaren.
Two Identical wheelhouse or Bridges. With identical control panels.
A Single shaft through the length of the vessel from a CPP and rudder at each end.
Two Medium Speed , Diesel main engines.
Two main clutches fore and aft of the main engines.
The ships can be run in two distinctly different configurations or modes.

Mode 1. Both ME Clutched in to main shaft. FWD end of shaft declutched and not turning forward CPP feathered.
Or
Mode 2. Both ME Clutched to the main shaft both fore and aft shafts clutched in to main shaft. CPP turning. Bridge controls throttle handles. Are identical and provide thrust in the direction they are pushed for or aft. (when all thrust is fwd, the aft CPP is pushing ahead, the forward CPP is actually pulling in astern)
The Throttles are independent and CPP's can push in opposite directions. There are handles to control the rudders independently on the bridge consol.
When running in mode 1 or when going "ahead" the forward rudder is left midship.
While on main part of the run. The ships run at full cruising speed in mode 1 just like a conventional single screw ship with a CPP and Rudder. The FWD Shaft disconnected and CPP feathered.
They ships cannot run at full speed in mode 2.
Mode 2 is used for manoeuvring into and out of docks.
To go into mode 2 the ships slows down, clutches in forward shaft, CPP unfeathers and goes to throttle setting. Depending upon ship and class. This can take up to between 60 and 90 seconds. The new ships may be able to do this faster. Even so, those would be very long seconds of waiting for the CPP to cycle up if you are trying to do an emergency stop. To avoid a collision.

From the wash it is clear the ferry was in mode 2 with the forward CPP giving lots of" astern" thrust.
It's not clear when or why the ferry went to mode 2. For Docking or to emergency stop.
It is clear it stopped in mode 2.
The boater is incredibly fortunate the ferry crew had the ferry just about stopped in the water when the collision occurred. If the Ferry had still had some forward momentum. The Boat would have been rolled right under the bow.

Imagine a boat in a blender?

No doubt there is some form of emergency stop button for the CPP but it would still be nasty.
You can tell the ferry was initially going quite a bit faster than her wash until just about impact. Because you can't see the wash till after the impact.

Scary?

Not sure what score I give them out of 10 for collision avoidance, not a passing grade 4 or less.
I will give them a pass for the emergency stop 6? 7? I would have given a 9 or 10 if they had tried to stop just a bit sooner and used the aft CPP for the astern thrust.
 
#33 ·
Do you think he needed fresh shorts
Nope he already had them down... :)

He left them helm to use the head while he apparently left it on auto-pilot (violation of COLREGS Rule 5). He has also reportedly said that he was not using his hearing aids.

"TACOMA, Wash. - A private boat and the state ferry Chetzemoka collided on the run between Tacoma and the southern tip of Vashon Island, and the Coast Guard says it could have been avoided.

It turns out that the only person aboard the boat was using the bathroom at the time of the impact."
 
#34 · (Edited)
Had this been the Martha's Vinyard Ferry during August, Nap time would have been greeted by this when he crossed the half-mile security perimeter around the ferry.

- credit Wikipedia By Petty Officer 3rd class Kelly Newlin, U.S. Coast Guard - This Image was released by the United States Coast Guard with the ID 040901-C-4938N-077

There would have been a gunner on each end of the boat.

Had Nap Time approached to within a quarter-mile, there would have been a bunch of .50 caliber and 7.62 mm holes in it.
 
#35 ·
#36 ·
Speaking of Martha's Vineyard ferries, one can't help but wonder if the Edgartown ferry has ever attempted to evade a conflict. For those unfamiliar, there are two flat top car carriers, that cross a few hundred feet of harbor, simultaneously, in opposite directions. They depart without any overt warning I've ever noticed. I personally know enough to check and see if they are loading or offloading, before crossing their path. A full ferry, with no deck movement is about to depart.
 
#44 ·
I solo motor around here a bit too. with otto now that I have one......I'm surprised this guy went below near a ferry. I have a landing just outside the marina I am at. I am ALWAYS nervous going in front of them, as one does not always know when they will take off. So it is looking at ramp to ascertain if vehicles are loading or unloading. Looking at the cars on the deck to see how many are left etc to fill/unfill.
As I have always heard or been taught, around here the ferries have right away over the other boats, including the ones coming or going in the channel from the pacific. BUT, I notice that the ferry will usually give right away to the ships in the channel. With that in mind, we do have the most BIG ships in the salish sea than any other west coast port, One will cross your bow about every 30 min on ave, including the Wa St ferries as shown, ones running up to Victoria, tugs with barges to Alaska, Summer 2-4 cruise ships a day from 4-7pm depending upon where you are in the puget sound or Admiralty straight area. Not to mention a dozen nuclear subs in Hood Canal, 2 carriers in Bremerton and support ships........Safe Boats doing testing on their foam filled inflatable style boats to the CG and other military type programs thru out the world.........
This area can be a busy place! To a degree, I am surprised more collisions do not occur. But many like myself, give these bigger boyz and girlz room vs trying to push the who has right of way over the other.

Marty
 
#45 · (Edited)
The video is being taken from the port hull of the ferry, and you cans see the railing of the starboard hull in the right edge of the video, so the camera aim is like 60-70 degrees to starboard of the ferry's course. It is clearly a crossing situation, and barring some reputed local rules (which I have never heard the existence of such type of rule), the ferry was clearly the give-way vessel.

I would expect the ferry's insurance company will pay the boater any damage, butl ding him for his contribution to the accident by failing to keep a proper lookout. However I think what is on display here is the comfort that many commercial boat operators have to cut the ColRegs rules because they expect stand-on recreational boaters to give-way, after all they have customers and are on a schedule. Probably almost always, the recreational vessel does giveway, but a licensed captain only gets complacent with that behavior at his or her own risk.

Both operators had fault here. But the boater's fault does not lessen the ferry's. Before the start of the video the ferry captain had already failed his give-way obligation, he should have already gone into reverse, or started a turn to port...

I would guess the ferry's insurance company to pay 70-80% percent of the boater's damage but I would expect the USCG to hold the ferry operator 100% at fault, I don't see how they could do less without contributing to the attitude that give-way doesn't always and really mean give way.
 
#47 · (Edited)
I can't see either one of these guys being held %100 at fault. Some thoughts to consider. It isn't clear to me whether Nap Tyme was over taking or crossing, however, when determining who was at fault, I would consider the following and how it might apply to each of the vessels.

Rule 2
Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.
(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

Rule 5
Look-out
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

Rule 6
Safe Speed

Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.

In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:
(a) By all vessels:
(i) the state of visibility,
(ii) the traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels,
(iii) the manoeuvrability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions,
(iv) at night the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter of her own lights,
(v) the state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards,
(vi) the draught in relation to the available depth of water.

Rule 7
Risk of Collision

a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.

Rule 8
Action to avoid Collision

(a) Any action to avoid collision shall be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.
(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.
(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.
(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.
(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel shall slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion.

Rule 17
Action by Stand-on Vessel
(a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.
(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.
(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.
 
#52 ·
Well that a lot of rules. Add 15 or 13 as the case may be. Looks like 15 to me.
The old guy with his shorts down, in the head, no hearing aids, full speed, auto pilot. Hits a Ferry which was possibly the give way vessel.
I guessing there was quite a few breaches of those rules by both vessels.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top