SailNet Community - Reply to Topic

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > General Interest > General Discussion (sailing related) > sailboat and ferry collide!
 Not a Member? 


Thread: sailboat and ferry collide! Reply to Thread
Title:
  

By choosing to post the reply below you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Topic Review (Newest First)
11-20-2013 01:10 AM
Uricanejack
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccriders View Post
Rgs...
What I was trying to say is that COLREGs requires evasive action by all parties when collision is imminent. If the ferry could maneuver and did not the sailor should have been aware of the situation and taken action if only for his own good. How close would you let a fast moving vessel get to you before deciding to get out of dodge? If you are disabled then you need to display the proper signs. If you are slow moving then you need a larger danger zone.
John
They do and you are right.
In this case the Elderly Gent. Was inside the wheel house of his boat.
Yes he should have looked behind. especially in a narrow channel frequented by ferries. For whatever reason he was preoccupied and looking ahead.
The collision happened only about 5 minutes after the ferry left the dock.
I have certainly had something sneak up behind me in my open cockpit

He was vilified as a fool early on. Not quite fair. He is not innocent but it is understandable and a reminder for us all.
Remember to shoulder check, and check your mirrors.
11-19-2013 12:27 PM
ccriders
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Rgs...
What I was trying to say is that COLREGs requires evasive action by all parties when collision is imminent. If the ferry could maneuver and did not the sailor should have been aware of the situation and taken action if only for his own good. How close would you let a fast moving vessel get to you before deciding to get out of dodge? If you are disabled then you need to display the proper signs. If you are slow moving then you need a larger danger zone.
John
11-18-2013 07:53 AM
smurphny
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by capta View Post
Whatever happens on the flight deck of an aircraft moving at between 3 and 500 knots has very little similarity to the bridge of a surface vessel at 20 knots, even if the approach speed of two vessels is near 50 knots. It's apples and oranges. Cabin crews on aircraft are not usually comprised of 15 or more very hard men capable of surviving a night ashore on the waterfront of a seaport. I am certainly glad my career is at an end, because there is absolutely nothing that would get me to work with a bridge management team. I find it mildly entertaining that traditional systems and traditional methods are no longer good enough, though they have worked fairly well for 10 centuries or so. Add a couple of dozen electronic "aids to navigation" on the bridge and the captain (traditionally, the "master") is no longer capable of doing the job he did when all he had was a compass, timepiece and a sextant. I suppose they'll outlaw flogging, next. But perhaps the reason for all this balderdash is because the captains of today are men who have learned their trade at school, rather than a lifetime of experience at sea. They advance because they can pass a test, not by merit and proven accomplishment. So there really isn't one person on the bridge actually knowledgeable and experienced enough to make decisions alone!
Just like the situation that this thread is about, you advocate education, while I would send them ashore forever. The mate in the situation we are discussing turned TOWARD a vessel she was looking at; that is not an error, that is just plain stupidity, certainly a good reason, in my book, to insure she never gets the opportunity to endanger people's lives again. The captain's lack of "situational awareness" again a school term, I'm sure, because I've never heard the term on the bridge of any commercial vessel, wasn't paying attention with an inexperienced person on the helm in a narrow channel close to a port. As the kids say today, isn't that a classic FAIL? Only by pure luck did nobody die and I can't for the life of me understand why you would want to give her the opportunity to actually kill someone, next time she loses "situational awareness"?
I guess it all boils down to you're being a nice guy and thinking these girls deserve a second chance, and my being an ass*ole (admittedly) and believing that being on that bridge was their chance to do it right.
Jeeez Capta, Don't you know there's an excuse for everything now. In school, kids are taught they are simply wonderful no matter how bad they are at something. We don't want to hurt anyone's feelings by telling them they have done poorly, do we? They'll get it right next time:-)
11-16-2013 09:55 PM
Waltthesalt
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Haven't read all the posts but did the report. Some observations:
The USCG investigation is not out and that will address culpability and the Capt/Mate licenses.
After the ferry turned into the channel they had 1,000 yd of clear visibility to the Fischer 27 and another boat under sail.
The Capt was well aware of what boats were out there and what they were doing.
The ferry choose to thread the needle between the sailboats at 18 kts.
There was no bridge to bridge with the boat stating that intention.
The Capt. gave a vague order to the helmsman without watching how that would be carried out.
The investigation report has sections redacted how is that justified?
Captains have to be totally responsible for the ship:
“Responsibility is a unique concept... You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you... If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion, or ignorance or passing the blame can shift the burden to someone else. Unless you can point your finger at the man who is responsible when something goes wrong, then you have never had anyone really responsible.”


― Hyman G. Rickover
11-16-2013 09:28 PM
Steve in Idaho
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Capta -

Semantics...."situational awareness" = paying attention. Welcome to the new age.

It may be a new term, but it is widely used in the transportation industries. Maybe hasn't made it to ships yet...I don't know. My very unqualified take on it is the same - Captain wasn't paying attention at a critical moment (usually, this means there is a habit of non-attention). The reasons for that could be many - but that is the bottom line. Whether or not she should be retrained and given another chance is over my head. I am guessing that to those in management, the answer will lie somewhere between budget, legal precedent, and the degree of difficulty/expense in replacing a crew.
11-16-2013 07:49 PM
dabnis
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccriders View Post
That is what COLREGS says! Not in those words, but in effect.
John
I haven't read all the posts, but from many years experience in and out of San Francisco bay, after nearly being run down from behind one dark night, I learned it was critical to keep a good watch behind you.

Paul T
11-16-2013 07:24 PM
capta
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uricanejack View Post
Bridge resource management is not a new concept neither is closed loop communication.
They have both existed for a very long time. The new part is the name and formalising the concept.
The term comes from cockpit resource management. Which was introduced to counter the no of aircraft accidents where the Captain did something dumb and the co-pilot did not or could not speak up.

Its not about taking responsibility away from the Captain. Its about a second or 3rd pair of eyes pointing out the wood behind the tress. Helping the Captain avoid the mistake he or she might be about to make.

In this case you have a probably quite senior Captain and a very junior 2nd Mate. The 2nd Mate mention the boat was getting closer.
The Capt didnít check. Just gave a vague direction to come further left and sound the whistle if you deem it necessary.
The 2nd Mates comment was probably to little and to Late. She then made a brief error in applying the helm right instead of left. Why? It is a common error to mix left and right port and starboard.
Possibly because she was think the ferry should come right and go behind the small boat and expecting to be directed to-do so. Who know maybe she always goofs up left and right..

Unfortunately for her she was new and working with a Captain whoís decisions were very poor and led to a collision.

The report refers to the Captains lack of situational awareness. itís the 2nd mates job to help the Captain maintain her situational awareness by providing information about the vessels navigation and collision avoidance. The 2nd mate was unable to do this because she was the QM steering not the 2nd Mate looking out and using the other RADAR.

Firing the Captain and 2nd Mate. Will not improve my confidence when sailing in the San Juanís the approaching WSF vessel is going to see my boat and pass clear..
So I will stay well out of their way.
Whatever happens on the flight deck of an aircraft moving at between 3 and 500 knots has very little similarity to the bridge of a surface vessel at 20 knots, even if the approach speed of two vessels is near 50 knots. It's apples and oranges. Cabin crews on aircraft are not usually comprised of 15 or more very hard men capable of surviving a night ashore on the waterfront of a seaport. I am certainly glad my career is at an end, because there is absolutely nothing that would get me to work with a bridge management team. I find it mildly entertaining that traditional systems and traditional methods are no longer good enough, though they have worked fairly well for 10 centuries or so. Add a couple of dozen electronic "aids to navigation" on the bridge and the captain (traditionally, the "master") is no longer capable of doing the job he did when all he had was a compass, timepiece and a sextant. I suppose they'll outlaw flogging, next. But perhaps the reason for all this balderdash is because the captains of today are men who have learned their trade at school, rather than a lifetime of experience at sea. They advance because they can pass a test, not by merit and proven accomplishment. So there really isn't one person on the bridge actually knowledgeable and experienced enough to make decisions alone!
Just like the situation that this thread is about, you advocate education, while I would send them ashore forever. The mate in the situation we are discussing turned TOWARD a vessel she was looking at; that is not an error, that is just plain stupidity, certainly a good reason, in my book, to insure she never gets the opportunity to endanger people's lives again. The captain's lack of "situational awareness" again a school term, I'm sure, because I've never heard the term on the bridge of any commercial vessel, wasn't paying attention with an inexperienced person on the helm in a narrow channel close to a port. As the kids say today, isn't that a classic FAIL? Only by pure luck did nobody die and I can't for the life of me understand why you would want to give her the opportunity to actually kill someone, next time she loses "situational awareness"?
I guess it all boils down to you're being a nice guy and thinking these girls deserve a second chance, and my being an ass*ole (admittedly) and believing that being on that bridge was their chance to do it right.
11-16-2013 06:14 PM
Uricanejack
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by capta View Post
Absolutely nothing about "bridge management teams" makes sense to me. It's just some idiotic plan to spread the responsibility and decision making to the less experienced and undermine the authority of the person in charge. There was no way I would have been able to operate a freighter, with 22 men from third world countries, if I asked for opinions and advice from my crew. Totally idiotic in the real world of vessel operation.
As to; "Much better to provide additional training for both before allowing them to return to their roles."; would you have the same sentiment had the guy on the yacht not been so lucky and died? Again, total idiocy; these two people have absolutely no business on any vessel in the future. There are some people who just shouldn't be on boats of ANY sort and I believe these two women have shown themselves totally incompetent of operating any sort of boat, and I would worry if they were in a car anywhere near a loved one of mine! We're not talking of making a bad decision at the posted speed limit of 65 miles an hour, here, no, they couldn't even manage to avoid another vessel when the combined speeds of those two vessels was probably less than 25 mph. No, these two belong somewhere where they can't risk anyone's lives, including their own; say as check out girls at the supermarket, perhaps? Phooey on leniency in this case.
Bridge resource management is not a new concept neither is closed loop communication.
They have both existed for a very long time. The new part is the name and formalising the concept.
The term comes from cockpit resource management. Which was introduced to counter the no of aircraft accidents where the Captain did something dumb and the co-pilot did not or could not speak up.

Its not about taking responsibility away from the Captain. Its about a second or 3rd pair of eyes pointing out the wood behind the tress. Helping the Captain avoid the mistake he or she might be about to make.

In this case you have a probably quite senior Captain and a very junior 2nd Mate. The 2nd Mate mention the boat was getting closer.
The Capt didnít check. Just gave a vague direction to come further left and sound the whistle if you deem it necessary.
The 2nd Mates comment was probably to little and to Late. She then made a brief error in applying the helm right instead of left. Why? It is a common error to mix left and right port and starboard.
Possibly because she was think the ferry should come right and go behind the small boat and expecting to be directed to-do so. Who know maybe she always goofs up left and right..

Unfortunately for her she was new and working with a Captain whoís decisions were very poor and led to a collision.

The report refers to the Captains lack of situational awareness. itís the 2nd mates job to help the Captain maintain her situational awareness by providing information about the vessels navigation and collision avoidance. The 2nd mate was unable to do this because she was the QM steering not the 2nd Mate looking out and using the other RADAR.

Firing the Captain and 2nd Mate. Will not improve my confidence when sailing in the San Juanís the approaching WSF vessel is going to see my boat and pass clear..
So I will stay well out of their way.
11-16-2013 03:55 PM
rgscpat
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccriders View Post
That is what COLREGS says! Not in those words, but in effect.
John
And just how are you, as a slow-moving stand-on vessel with no significant speed or power reserve while avoiding other traffic in a congested area, supposed to avoid a huge vessel that is much faster than you are, and which rams you from behind while it is maneuvering erratically? The "cone of uncertainty" that big, wide ferry projected would have been huge.

"Airplane"...
Gunderson: He's all over the place! Nine hundred feet up to 1300 feet. What an *******!
Controller: I know but this guy has no flying experience at all. He's a menace to himself and everything else in the air... Yes, birds too.
Jack Kirkpatrick: Shanna, they bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash.
Rumack: Elaine, you're a member of this crew. Can you face some unpleasant facts?
Elaine Dickinson: No.
11-16-2013 03:38 PM
capta
Re: sailboat and ferry collide!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uricanejack View Post
Fortunately the boater was not seriously hurt. This could very easily have been fatal.

There were some serious inadequacies in the operation of the vessel.
What is not clear from the report is what the WSF standard operating procedure should have been.
Its very easy to just point the finger at the Captain and 2nd Mate. Firing them would placate public option but do little or nothing to prevent the reoccurrence of a similar incident in the future.

Bridge resource Management training recommended for all WSF Officers.
Closed Loop Communication. Training
Review of Training for new officers.
Fitting of VDR( wonít hep prevent will help future investigations)

One might also question the if bridge manning was adequate?
(Min on BCF large vessel 2nd Officer and QM plus a lookout)
(On a BCF Large Vessel the QM remains on the wheel the of duty QM goes to the aft end to act as stern lookout for departure)
Was there a sufficient look out?
For arrivals departures and narrow channels a BCF vessel the Master joins the bridge team the lookout may go to the anchor deck.
To what if any extent did the schedule play into the captains decision making particularly regarding speed?

The questions around WSF SOP are important if there are not any and the Captain was just doing what all the other captains do but made an error of judgement a decision to fire could be challenged.

The 2nd Officer played little if any role in the navigation of the vessel or the assessment of risk of collision she was acting as QM being trained as the QM i.e. she was steering, following the Captains orders and got an important one wrong. Went right instead of left. A common mistake.

Why would a 2nd Officer be being trained as a QM? That makes no sense.
She was a relatively new employee only 9 moths and only 1 month on this vessel and route.
Its not clear if she worked sometimes as a QM or OS and sometimes as 2nd officer or always as 2nd officer.

There is absolutely no reason to take action against the 2nd officer unless you are looking for scape goats.

Much better to provide additional training for both before allowing them to return to their roles.

(BCF Intermediate and minor vessels operate with Just a Master and QM on bridge if they have full 360 visibility. The mate often joins team for arrivals, narrow channels and fog).

BCF have screw ups as well. One of thier big ships ran over a boat killing 2 people overtaking it just after leaving Swartz Bay about 10 years ago.
Absolutely nothing about "bridge management teams" makes sense to me. It's just some idiotic plan to spread the responsibility and decision making to the less experienced and undermine the authority of the person in charge. There was no way I would have been able to operate a freighter, with 22 men from third world countries, if I asked for opinions and advice from my crew. Totally idiotic in the real world of vessel operation.
As to; "Much better to provide additional training for both before allowing them to return to their roles."; would you have the same sentiment had the guy on the yacht not been so lucky and died? Again, total idiocy; these two people have absolutely no business on any vessel in the future. There are some people who just shouldn't be on boats of ANY sort and I believe these two women have shown themselves totally incompetent of operating any sort of boat, and I would worry if they were in a car anywhere near a loved one of mine! We're not talking of making a bad decision at the posted speed limit of 65 miles an hour, here, no, they couldn't even manage to avoid another vessel when the combined speeds of those two vessels was probably less than 25 mph. No, these two belong somewhere where they can't risk anyone's lives, including their own; say as check out girls at the supermarket, perhaps? Phooey on leniency in this case.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:20 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.