Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
says... On 8/20/11 11:55 AM, wrote: On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 09:44:26 -0500, wrote: wrote in : O The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. LOL I have feeling I'm glad I just saw this thread but wish I'd seen it's beginning.....Interpret6ation of Rules always interesting This is the story that accompanied the video. Whilst the Extreme Racing series was entertaining the crowds at this years' Aberdeen Asset Management Cowes Week, the supertanker hit a yacht which was then dismasted as its spinnaker sail was snagged by the ship's anchor. The Marine Knutsen supertanker was being guided by a pilot boat into Southampton docks and was making its presence known by repeatedly sounding its horn. By one yacht didn't seem to give itself enough time to clear the massive boat and was hit before having its mast and rigging ripped off when one of its sail got caught in the supertankers anchor. The yacht was quickly attended by several vessels offering assistance. It's not know if anyone was hurt. The incident was captured by Tim Addison for COWES.co.uk The Tories probably won't want the accident investigation subbed out to private sector investigators. What an idiotic statement. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 20/08/2011 10:46 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, wrote: In article8OGdnUEBcLTORdfTnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews. com, says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. Again, your wrong on the second video too. But the second video is not as cut and dried as the first where the sailboat was dead wrong crossing a freighter in the channel. This is near head on, and both will get blame, I would say 65/35 but might come down hard on the boat taking the pictures as it appears he made no effort to pass on the right and I didn't hear warning horns used. The oncoming boat should not have to pass his boat on the right but secondary as avoid collisions is #1. Would be interesting to see the missing minutes before the collision. Sure glad you can't afford to own or rent a boat. -- Flea party (leftie) fear, begets flea party smear. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 14:06:37 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 20/08/2011 10:46 AM, wrote: On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, wrote: In article8OGdnUEBcLTORdfTnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews. com, says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. Again, your wrong on the second video too. But the second video is not as cut and dried as the first where the sailboat was dead wrong crossing a freighter in the channel. This is near head on, and both will get blame, I would say 65/35 but might come down hard on the boat taking the pictures as it appears he made no effort to pass on the right and I didn't hear warning horns used. The oncoming boat should not have to pass his boat on the right but secondary as avoid collisions is #1. Would be interesting to see the missing minutes before the collision. Sure glad you can't afford to own or rent a boat. Well moron, again you're not too bright. As I said for the second for the second video, 60/40. I guess reading isn't your strong suit. |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 20/08/2011 2:33 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 14:06:37 -0600, wrote: On 20/08/2011 10:46 AM, wrote: On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, wrote: In article8OGdnUEBcLTORdfTnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews. com, says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. Again, your wrong on the second video too. But the second video is not as cut and dried as the first where the sailboat was dead wrong crossing a freighter in the channel. This is near head on, and both will get blame, I would say 65/35 but might come down hard on the boat taking the pictures as it appears he made no effort to pass on the right and I didn't hear warning horns used. The oncoming boat should not have to pass his boat on the right but secondary as avoid collisions is #1. Would be interesting to see the missing minutes before the collision. Sure glad you can't afford to own or rent a boat. There is nothing confusing about the second video. The boat taking the video was burdened and should have given one short blast to signal the intent and turned to starboard to pass on the right of the privileged vessel in his danger zone when he got the confirming blast . (dead ahead to 22 degrees abaft the starboard beam.) Agreed. But some blame belongs on both, but agree the boat taking the video gets the majority of the blame. No horn, and as you say passed on the right which I would bet they had plenty of time to do. If I owned the boat which the video was shot, I would fire the captain with cause and hang him to dry. -- Flea party (leftie) fear, begets flea party smear. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 16:33:32 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 14:06:37 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 20/08/2011 10:46 AM, wrote: On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, wrote: In article8OGdnUEBcLTORdfTnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews. com, says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. Again, your wrong on the second video too. But the second video is not as cut and dried as the first where the sailboat was dead wrong crossing a freighter in the channel. This is near head on, and both will get blame, I would say 65/35 but might come down hard on the boat taking the pictures as it appears he made no effort to pass on the right and I didn't hear warning horns used. The oncoming boat should not have to pass his boat on the right but secondary as avoid collisions is #1. Would be interesting to see the missing minutes before the collision. Sure glad you can't afford to own or rent a boat. There is nothing confusing about the second video. The boat taking the video was burdened and should have given one short blast to signal the intent and turned to starboard to pass on the right of the privileged vessel in his danger zone when he got the confirming blast . (dead ahead to 22 degrees abaft the starboard beam.) Yes, that's how I read it. However, both are required to avoid a collision; thus, I assigned a percentage of blame to both. You might argue with the %, but not with the conclusion. |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:51:35 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 09:46:39 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 08:44:39 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:04:15 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:00:06 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... I suspect this sailboat captain is rethinking who has the "Right of Way". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tUoUxzt9sI The bigger you are the more right of way you have. Doesn't matter if you are on the highway or on the water. According to the regulation I've read, this is incorrect a lot of the time. Read this, "The bigger you are, the more likely you are to win in an altercation." The sailboat loses. End of story. No admiralty court is going to fault the supertanker captain. Even with a proper lookout, there is no way in hell they could have seen the sailboat dart in from of them. Even if they could have, there is no way they could have stopped. Boats don't have brakes. You have to work around that. I never said otherwise. However, the statement that bigger you are gives you "more right of way" is wrong. There is no such language in any of the rules, inland or international. This is what Tim posted as a counter example, and I've included my comments: Who had the right of way here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkqKpnU8sCE The boat from which the vid was taken, obviously. However, it had nothing to do with the size of either boat. I would assign 90% blame to the sailboat and 10% to the larger boat. It was a crossing situation, but the bigger boat didn't attempt (as far as can be seen or heard) to either take evasive action or sound an alarm... five or more beeps I believe. or how about here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4qwq...eature=related You gotta remember that the larger the vessel, the slower the response time. In the case of the second vid, my reading of the rules are that it was a crossing situation, so the boat being hit was probably "right" but should have tried to avoid the collision. And, the boat that was taking the vid should have avoided the situation. I would assign 60% fault to the boat from which the vid was taken and 40% to the boat that was hit. I'm sure there is precedence that the court would look at also. Actually, after reviewing more information, I suspect the tanker captain would be ruled as contributing a certain amount of negligence to the accident. In that area, during the frequent races, there is a speed limit imposed. The tanker is clearly hauling ass. I strongly suspect it would be a case of two wrongs contributing to an inevitable accident. It's hard to tell. The only thing I didn't see (hear) was lack of warning from the tanker, but it's possible that happened and we just didn't hear it in the vid. From what I've read on maritime courts, they almost always assign some blame to both parties. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|