In his lengthy, repetitive and rambling advertisement and self-promo (in which he shies away from ever disclosing his relationship between the two entities), John Martino (owner of Chesapeake Bay Magazine and Annapolis School of Seamanship) covered some but not all of the material points:
1. The courts will almost always find a way to "split the baby" and assess a portion of fault or blame to both parties. Read about the Stockholm and Andrea Doria.
2. I do not believe he ever mentioned the danger signal, which is of course in the Rules and everybody should have a sound signaling device handy and use it. In so doing, I have been able to avert collisions many times, just as I was about to invoke the General Prudential Rule and break the Rules, to take evasive action, but I got the other operator's attention. MANY. TIMES> MANY. DIFFERENT. SITUATIONS...power sail...you name it, even with a Navy YP boat. I am always heartily thanked by Pilots and towboats if I call them on 13 near the ship channel, or operating in their path.
3. I have followed this story, and as I recall, that fishing boat was just built as an inspected vessel (as I recall...) and was on one of its first voyages as a passenger-carrying fishing boat. It was almost certainly operated by a licensed professional, as am I, since 1980. Where did that skipper get his training??? Hmmm...hmmm.??? How come Mr. Martino never mentioned anything about the boat or its operator?
4. The amount of comments all over social media continue to press home the point that many boaters are confused and mistaken about The Rules. In other threads, some have brought up the fact that the boat was "fishing" as if it were material but it is not in this case. Even with trolling or pulling light lines (at that speed???) it was not "fishing" according to the Rules nor was it constrained in its ability to maneuver. If so, it should have displayed a dayshape...but who does that?
5. "Right of way" is an incorrect and obsolete term. Martino touched upon this in some detail...as expected, thankfully and to his credit. Each vessel is expected to act in accordance with those Rules and each is REQUIRED to break them to avoid collision if in Extremis. Similarly, even in this thread, the obsolete and incorrect terms "privileged" and "burdened" were mistakenly used.
6. If you and I were operating the powerboat, we would have had a lookout. Yes? No question!That is a Rule as well. Did this powerboat or did the sailboat?? If so, why did the fishing boat "stand on"? Did the sailboat have a lookout? If you and I were sailing, we would have been expecting that sooner or later a powerboat would be zipping by. We would have been watching that powerboat for a few minutes, assumed it did not see us and that it would "stand on" and we would have been prepared to blow the danger signal, call on 16 and be ready to stop, slow or turn. Did Mr. Martino mention VHF or a horn? I do not think I would have resorted to the engine (as some have suggested) for many reasons, including wasting the time (would it start immediately? Might you have fouled the prop perhaps? Would it have kept you from actually avoiding the collision by sailing?), whereas releasing sheets or turning sharply away, stopping would have likely averted collision. Consider this--there were only a few seconds where a collision was imminent and unavoidable, and therefore the right move within a few seconds would have lessened it to only a near-collision (or is that a near-miss? What is a near-miss?). Therefore, acting within a few seconds--on the part of one or the other or both vessels, would have averted a collision. We're not talking 200 meter freighters at possibly as much as 20 knots or tugs with barges.
7. This all comes back to knowing and following Rules that have been developed over hundreds if not thousands of years of maritime tradition and are now LAWS, as written in the Code of Federal Regulations. It's adherence to or violation of those Rules which will determine, fault, damages and punishments. So...what is happening in the courts?
8. Is there a court case? An ongoing NTSB or USCG investigation? Nobody seems to mention anything about this. Why did boating publisher and seamanship school owner Mr. Martino not say anything about this? And curiously, was Martino in any way paid to produce that video? He has a history of not disclosing his conflicts of interest, so I am as I said...curious.
9. Wow--were those folks fortunate! No injury! No sinking! The sun and good fortune were smiling that day, when I was also out on the Bay. How did the fishing boat just slide up and stop on top of the sailboat? Imagine if it hit the mast or a chainplate and the mast came crashing down--or if the sailboat or powerboat took on water rapidly and pulled one or both down!
10. Finally, as a professional boating and seamanship trainer licensed since 1980, I cannot even count how many of my prospective or actual clients are often overly concerned about docking, backing into a slip and close quarter maneuvering. I urge them all to make that a secondary or tertiary concern after open-water operations, maneuvering at higher speeds, Rules of the Road and general seamanship. Just read the USCG statistics about boating accidents and fatalities! It is almost always due to operator error in one form or another, and fatalities rarely occur at the dock or near a marina--unless of course you use yourself as a human fender. Geeze--I could tell you stories! Remember the inimitable and wise words of Captain Ron:
If anybody knows anything about an ongoing legal or investigating activity, please share it with us here. Thanks very much Paul Foer, Annapolis