Page 11 of 26 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314151621 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 260
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    River Itchen, Southampton
    Posts
    6,897

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by Uricanejack View Post
    I haven’t even read the report yet. Still.
    A Ferry overtaking a dumb ass in a boat.
    .
    Tee hee amazing summary of a load of waffle. Made me smile.

    Tee hee 2. Open goal for mobo criticism but as mobo suggested the mobo was wrong then criticising the mobo supported the mobo. Circular dilemma.
    If I’d kept my trap shut I reckon Phoenix would have been crucified here.......

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Home UK Midlands / Boat Croatia
    Posts
    18,890

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by Elessar View Post
    If I’d kept my trap shut I reckon Phoenix would have been crucified here.......
    Not a snowball's chance in hell whilst I'm on the case.

    Richard

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Boat Orwell - Me Norwich
    Posts
    7,694

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by bedouin View Post

    The ferry had very limited options for manoeuvre owing to all the small boats - especially the sailing boat on his port bow.
    I disagree that the ferry had limited options to manoeuvre. Aside from all the other options, it could have slowed down to either avoid a close crossing, or to better assess the situation.

    You say 'especially the sailing boat on the port bow', but isn't that just repeating the ferry crew's error? They had identified that there were numerous craft of potential concern towards the Calshot shore, erroneously decided they were not a hazard, then forgot to check again on that side to see if there was any change or their original assessment was correct, quite likely because they both became preoccupied with the sailing vessel to port.

    I have to say that I think the MAIB report was too generous to the ferry crew about failing to spot the mobo after they'd turned. Sure there was bright, low sunshine from that general direction, but not so glaring that you can't see the mobo wake on the the CCTV, and even if it were so difficult to see in that direction, shouldn't that only require greater attention in that direction? (Can you imagine 'I didn't look in that direction because there was a fog bank so you couldn't see much' as a defence?)

    All that said, an easily understandable (if not 'acceptable') situation on both craft.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    River Itchen, Southampton
    Posts
    6,897

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Not a snowball's chance in hell whilst I'm on the case.

    Richard
    Ha ha you can’t be a proper yachtie you’ve got one of those funny ones that are too comfy to count.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Boat Orwell - Me Norwich
    Posts
    7,694

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by RupertW View Post
    We must all have had that moment early in our boating lives - particularly after a tack - when you find yourself in the path of a monster that has been coming up behind you and you haven’t looked round to see. We mostly get way with that first mistake . . .
    I've been mostly getting away with that first mistake for years!

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,468

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark-1 View Post
    Cockcroft and Lameijer (rather an elderly copy now) tell us this:

    "The term ‘narrow channel’ is not easily defined. In deciding whether a particular stretch of water is or is not a narrow channel the Courts take into account the evidence as to the way in which seamen usually navigate the locality and the advice given by the Elder Brethren. A narrow channel need not be of any particular length and does not necessarily terminate at the last of the buoys or objects marking the channel. The narrow channel rule has been held to apply to the passage between two piers and to 100 metres (yards) outwards beyond the objects marking a harbour entrance. It was held not to apply to a recommended route between two buoys where vessels could have gone outside them in safety. Passages approximately 2 miles wide have sometimes been considered narrow channels. In considering the passage between Duncansby Head and the Skerries in the Pentland Firth (Anna Salen-Thorshovdi, 1954) Mr Justice Willmer said: For myself, I certainly see difficulties in applying the ‘narrow channel’ rule to a passage which is nearly four miles wide. I should hardly have thought that ‘narrow’ was the word to use for this passage, for it is not a particularly narrow passage. In the Faith I-Zndependence (US Court, 1992) the passage between buoys at the entrance to Delaware Bay, approximately 1.2 miles wide, was held not to be a narrow channel but it was held that good seamanship and prudent navigation require that every vessel keep to starboard if safe and practicable. Rule 9 will apply to any narrow channel connected with the high seas which is navigable by seagoing vessels unless there is an inconsistent local rule. It does not apply to lanes of traffic separation schemes although such lanes may be relatively narrow."

    The bit I've bolded seems to support both sides of the argument.
    Not covinced by your interpretation of the bit in bold. No vessel can safely go outside pier heads, whereas there are various circumstances like this case where a vessel can safely go outside a buoyed channel.

    Anyway, it's all rather mute. I'm sure they'd have avoided a collision if they'd seen each other. The fact that they didn't makes everything else merely academic.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Where life is good
    Posts
    13,377

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Occurs to me that if the ferry had sounded 5 toots... I am concerned there is a risk of collision ... for the yacht on port...

    The Phoenix might have looked over his shoulder....
    Life is too short to drink bad wine.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3,203

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Well I have read the report now and I regret referring to the the skipper of the motor boat as a dumbass.
    WTF.
    The Dumb Ass was in charge of the Ferry. With a an Assistant Dumbass as the Mate.
    Unfortunately it’s not the worst case of complacency and sheer negligence on the bridge of a ferry I have ever read but it’s pretty close.
    Extremely fortunate no one lost thier life.

    The Solent was certainly not a safe place with this operator running ferries in the area.
    No recommendations. Quite surprising, although not unknown if the operator has instigated new SOP after the event which are considered sufficiently unacceptable. Still surprisingly little detail about those new SOP.

    The standard of watch keeping on the Red Falcon was abysmally complacent beyond the point of being negligent. Well below any reasonable expectations of any professional certification anywhere.
    AIS would have made no difference nobody was looking.

    After having read the report I am not even sure which of the two dumbass’s had the conduct of the vessel
    The traveling public and anyone else on the water would have been safer if the ferry had been crewed by a brand new day skipper and a competent crew

    According to the report the crew of the vessel was 20.
    Quite a large crew for a vessel of this sise
    It appears to be a day boat with a lunch bucket crew operating two seperate shifts so there should have been no problem finding some one to be a lookout.
    Would have been helpful to know what the actual crew make up is.

    Bridge manning and crew sise on many comercial vessels is probably minimal compliance due to the comercial pressure of economics. This is a passenger ferry. Operating in busy confined waters. So one would normally expect better than minimum compliance.
    With a vessel of this sise and a 360 all round view from the bridge.
    In confined waters.
    A 2 man bridge team would be considered bare minimum compliance. The chief Officer is both the QM and the Lookout possibly has the conduct of the vessel. The Master appears to be sitting on his arse doing sweet fa. Although he too may have the conduct of the vessel and might have been looking out.

    The camera does show sunlight glare. In the direction the small power boat was.
    Cameras are much more susceptible to glare than the average eyeball.
    Clearly they never saw the power boat.
    They didn’t even know they had hit the power boat until the purser told them.
    Instead of stopping and checking to see if the vessel they had hit required assistance. They kept going. Again WTF.
    This is despicable conduct. Thank god the boat didn’t sink and nobody died. It certainly wasn’t thanks to this pair.

    They claim not to have believed they had hit another boat.
    Who cares they didn’t check?
    I believe strongly prosecutions do nothing to prevent accidents. I am a staunch supporter of the no blame approach to accident investigation carried out by the MAIB. Blame does nothing to prevent accidents.
    Very occasionally an accident occurs wher the conduct or actions of an individual involved goes beyond what can be explained by an honest error of judgement. Or an Honest error of omission. To being a wilfully culpable.
    In my opinion the Master of the Red Falcons actions fall so far below the normal expectations of the conduct of the Master or Officer of the watch to be culpable.
    The action of the Master when he continued on the voyage after being informed there had been a colision with another vessel without checking to find out if assistance was required or reporting the incident. Was culpable criminal conduct.

    I would support charges being filed against this guy.
    Less so against the chief officer. It’s hard for a junior officer to speak up about the defficancies of the guy above him.
    Though I have some doubt if he even realized what was out of order.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Beach. CA.
    Posts
    2,516

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    My company operates passenger only ferries at speeds slightly lower than the RedJets.

    The understanding of the colregs or at least the apparent ignoring them occurs on a daily basis by leisure boaters, like this case. I'm not saying we're perfect by any means and a lot of captains will use our speed and manouverablity to avoid conflicts rather than. sticking to the rules - something I personally don't agree with. We only have 2 people on the bridge unless a deckhand has come to visit or in fog where some offer extra eyes.

    All the vessels have 2 radars, AIS and 2 VHF, we have VTS and all captains have USCG radar observer certificates. People miss things when concentrating on other issues. Not saying this is acceptable but condeming a 2 man crew in a high work load is probably wrong.

    All but one of our catarmans are jet drive so stop REALLY quick if you do a crash stop. I witnessed one on a coastguard inspection - it put everyone standing on their face, not something you'd want to do with passengers aboard.

    The leisure boaters need to take some responsibility for their actions and learn basic rules of the road and seamanship.

    I. cant believe after all those years in the Solent he wasn't aware of the ferries and their routes or the other shipping in the area.

    I worked out of Southampton for about 5 years so know from experience the idiots there are there.

    Based on the report even if he had VHF I doubt he'd been listening to VTS.

    We constantly have people prepared to play chicken with 500 ton traveling at 30 kts on a known ferry route.
    Last edited by PilotWolf; 29-03-19 at 05:00.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Beach. CA.
    Posts
    2,516

    Default Re: MAIB Report Red Falcon and Phoenix collision

    Quote Originally Posted by Uricanejack View Post
    Well I have read the report now and I regret referring to the the skipper of the motor boat as a dumbass.
    WTF.
    The Dumb Ass was in charge of the Ferry. With a an Assistant Dumbass as the Mate.
    Unfortunately it’s not the worst case of complacency and sheer negligence on the bridge of a ferry I have ever read but it’s pretty close.
    Extremely fortunate no one lost thier life.

    The Solent was certainly not a safe place with this operator running ferries in the area.
    No recommendations. Quite surprising, although not unknown if the operator has instigated new SOP after the event which are considered sufficiently unacceptable. Still surprisingly little detail about those new SOP.

    The standard of watch keeping on the Red Falcon was abysmally complacent beyond the point of being negligent. Well below any reasonable expectations of any professional certification anywhere.
    AIS would have made no difference nobody was looking.

    After having read the report I am not even sure which of the two dumbass’s had the conduct of the vessel
    The traveling public and anyone else on the water would have been safer if the ferry had been crewed by a brand new day skipper and a competent crew

    According to the report the crew of the vessel was 20.
    Quite a large crew for a vessel of this sise
    It appears to be a day boat with a lunch bucket crew operating two seperate shifts so there should have been no problem finding some one to be a lookout.
    Would have been helpful to know what the actual crew make up is.

    Bridge manning and crew sise on many comercial vessels is probably minimal compliance due to the comercial pressure of economics. This is a passenger ferry. Operating in busy confined waters. So one would normally expect better than minimum compliance.
    With a vessel of this sise and a 360 all round view from the bridge.
    In confined waters.
    A 2 man bridge team would be considered bare minimum compliance. The chief Officer is both the QM and the Lookout possibly has the conduct of the vessel. The Master appears to be sitting on his arse doing sweet fa. Although he too may have the conduct of the vessel and might have been looking out.

    The camera does show sunlight glare. In the direction the small power boat was.
    Cameras are much more susceptible to glare than the average eyeball.
    Clearly they never saw the power boat.
    They didn’t even know they had hit the power boat until the purser told them.
    Instead of stopping and checking to see if the vessel they had hit required assistance. They kept going. Again WTF.
    This is despicable conduct. Thank god the boat didn’t sink and nobody died. It certainly wasn’t thanks to this pair.

    They claim not to have believed they had hit another boat.
    Who cares they didn’t check?
    I believe strongly prosecutions do nothing to prevent accidents. I am a staunch supporter of the no blame approach to accident investigation carried out by the MAIB. Blame does nothing to prevent accidents.
    Very occasionally an accident occurs wher the conduct or actions of an individual involved goes beyond what can be explained by an honest error of judgement. Or an Honest error of omission. To being a wilfully culpable.
    In my opinion the Master of the Red Falcons actions fall so far below the normal expectations of the conduct of the Master or Officer of the watch to be culpable.
    The action of the Master when he continued on the voyage after being informed there had been a colision with another vessel without checking to find out if assistance was required or reporting the incident. Was culpable criminal conduct.

    I would support charges being filed against this guy.
    Less so against the chief officer. It’s hard for a junior officer to speak up about the defficancies of the guy above him.
    Though I have some doubt if he even realized what was out of order.
    Can I respectful ask if you've ever operated commercially in the Solent?

    W.
    .

Page 11 of 26 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314151621 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to