takes a licking and keeps on cruising
- Thread starter starcrafttom
- Start date
At first I thought that boat needed a white light over a red light until I saw that the boat had been aptly named "Nap Time"!!!
Nap Time was the give-way vessel and the ferry was the stand-on vessel. The ferry was properly maintaining course. Careful when Nap Time comes up on the used market in a couple weeks!!
Nap Time was the give-way vessel and the ferry was the stand-on vessel. The ferry was properly maintaining course. Careful when Nap Time comes up on the used market in a couple weeks!!
cmetzenberg
New member
I was just logging on to post this. It's a great case study for us all to learn from. The USCG gets to have a field day with both captains. Being the stand on vessel all the way into a collision is not following the colregs. I guess the ferry captain thought the law of gross tonnage was a real thing?
The lesson; stay frosty and don't trust any other vessel around you.
The lesson; stay frosty and don't trust any other vessel around you.
Marco Flamingo
Active member
Sunshine makes us real sleepy here in Seattle. The only people who are awake on a ferry are always tourists.
Mark
Mark
Pacificcoast101
Member
In spite of the colregs I have one outstanding rule of boating; Let the Wookie Win. If the other vessel is big enough to cause damage, let it go.
cmetzenberg":2yxzuqt7 said:
Which vessel is the stand on vessel? "A vessel which as the other vessel to Starboard is the give way vessel, the other is the stand on vessel"
Basically the "danger zone" is the area from dead ahead to 2 points (112.5*) aft the starboard bow.
Nap Tyme is the stand on vessel, the Ferry is the give way vessel. Is she constrained by her draft? No,
Lets see the ferry is giving 5 blasts of the whistle, regularly within the first 6 seconds the video--and we don't know what happened before that. My suspicion if we had the VHF radio on, we would have heard a warning on Channel 16.
The Ferry has already gone into full reverse very close to the time of the vessel hitting, so I suspect that the ferry had already started to reverse and slowed by the time the vessels collided.
Was this adequate. Is this in a narrow channel? NO 9b does not apply.
Both will be cited. According to some sources the skipper of Nap Tyme was in the head and the boat on auto pilot.
Irregardless, it shows that one should never leave a vessel on autopilot without an adequate watch.
I know your PNW folks deal with ferries every day. We deal with tugs and tows. No matter, who is the "give way". I always make it obvious that I will take the stern of any larger vessel which is difficult to maneuver.
I have also been in situations under sail, where I was the stand on vessel, and when there was any question I would call the larger vessel on the radio. Although the ferry or tugs are more maneuverable than a 800 foot ship, they are somewhat limited, and I sure give them the benefit!
cmetzenberg
New member
I really feel there could have been more done on behalf of the ferry. He should have altered course to starboard early on. Easier to do that than take way off. I guess he is just used to people staying out of his way cause he's a working boat. Sure, the weekend warrior was being a....weekend warrior. I Know it's easy to monday morning quarter back this, but come on! hard to starboard and full astern.
After Sept 11, 2001 most of those ferry runs had 2 USCG escorts. There were many drills for years regarding terrorist attacks on these runs. Something like this happens, shows how vulnerable we are. After Katrina hit, seems most of the coast guard zodiacs went to Louisiana and never returned. I remember going to a 6 week squadron course in 2006 and it was told that any boat making a direct line at a commercial ferry would be fired upon, questions asked later.
starcrafttom
Active member
So I see a lot in this video. First a denial of tonnage. You can be right or you can be dead right. If this guy was at the wheel he is a fool. I doubt he was at the wheel. After the hit the Nap time is still under power, look at the prop wash, and tries to turn back on course. Auto pilot was most likely on. Yes just guessing but I think good guesses.
I dont know the waters in that area but there seems to be a small reef just out of the ferry dock. So room to maneuver ?? No idea. But I have been told that the ferrys are not allowed out of their pre-approved lanes.
the ferry must have dropped a lot of speed prior to contact or that boat would have been kindling in a 20 knot hit.
I dont know the waters in that area but there seems to be a small reef just out of the ferry dock. So room to maneuver ?? No idea. But I have been told that the ferrys are not allowed out of their pre-approved lanes.
the ferry must have dropped a lot of speed prior to contact or that boat would have been kindling in a 20 knot hit.
Fifty years ago the Navy had me learning COLREGS off by heart. We also learned, "Right of way is what a vessel gives you. If they don't give it you don't have it. In that case do something about it."
In those days we studied RAC - radar assisted collision. These days I suspect autopilot is much more of a problem.
In those days we studied RAC - radar assisted collision. These days I suspect autopilot is much more of a problem.
The several ferry runs in the central Puget Sound probably do more rescues of boaters, canoers, kayakers etc than fellow boaters or the coast guard. We are pretty fond of our ferry system. It only takes a few meetings of a ferry to figures out how to do it expeditiously and with no drama.
Saxe Point
New member
chimoii":2dh6sus1 said:
What a great piece of fundamental wisdom, indeed common sense. All the other rules are subordinate to this one.
thataway":160vmbo3 said:
Yes, this.
Ferry should have altered course per colregs. I wrote that poorly and in haste. I seem to have edited out the part in the beginning where I speculated the video was a mirror image, until I confirmed it wasn't because I could read the name.
Don't anyone listen to what I wrote about the stand-on and give-way, Dr. Bob states it correctly. There are numerous exceptions that go along with draft constraints that would make the stand-on vessel revert to the ferry, The first being the vessel not being under command, and showing a white light over a red light. if it were engaged in fishing (flying two black triangles pointing in at each other like an hourglass), constrained in its ability to maneuver. It's possible the ferry was constrained in its draft or ability to maneuver, but none of these things really matter. There is no "right of way" on the water, stand on and give way are just guidelines. No operator is justified in an unmodified course that results in a collision, rather, operators are required to avoid a collision. Neither boat did that.
Nappy is very very lucky he wasn't just a little faster. It came very very very close to getting hit broadside. That easily could have been the ferry's bow straight into its beam and then the boat could roll, get trapped under the ferry and ground up in its wake.
colbysmith
Active member
From what I've heard, and little I've seen, the ferry's feel they have the right away always. I understand they have a schedule to maintain, and most folks will respect that and give way. But I would agree with whoever said both captains will probably have a lot of explaining to do at the hearing! And if you have to use the loo, at least go DIW! and get out of any known ferry lanes! Colby
smittypaddler
New member
To help me remember the rule, I use the phrase, "The boat on the right has the right of way, so I show her a green light." There's no doubt both skippers are going to be penalized in this, but the only wrong I see in the ferry skipper's case was not taking evasive action in time. He must've been thinking, "There's no way that twerp of a boat is going to stand on and compete with a ferry," until it was too late. If he hadn't slowed down, the twerp would've been in bits and pieces. But the poor ferry skipper might have his livelihood jeopardized for what looks to me like a one-time error in judgement, while the other guy can't even lose his skipper's license, which he probably doesn't have..
It's very hard to tell from that video if:
a) The ferry captain maneuvered other than to slow down. It's clear he slowed down but not clear exactly when that started. The boat he hit would have suffered far more damage had the ferry not been slowed prior to collision. It appears the ferry may have turned to port in an attempt to avoid collision but since the camera is not fixed relative to the ferry, we can't tell.
b) We also don't know if there was any other vessel(s) to the starboard side of the ferry that would make a starboard turn unsafe. We just can't see over there from the video and no reporting yet indicates the exact situation.
So before we assume that the ferry captain bears some of the responsibility, lets wait for a more complete report.
What does seem clear at this point is that the recreational boat was on autopilot at the time of collision with no-one at the helm. So clearly part (and maybe all) of the blame lies there.
a) The ferry captain maneuvered other than to slow down. It's clear he slowed down but not clear exactly when that started. The boat he hit would have suffered far more damage had the ferry not been slowed prior to collision. It appears the ferry may have turned to port in an attempt to avoid collision but since the camera is not fixed relative to the ferry, we can't tell.
b) We also don't know if there was any other vessel(s) to the starboard side of the ferry that would make a starboard turn unsafe. We just can't see over there from the video and no reporting yet indicates the exact situation.
So before we assume that the ferry captain bears some of the responsibility, lets wait for a more complete report.
What does seem clear at this point is that the recreational boat was on autopilot at the time of collision with no-one at the helm. So clearly part (and maybe all) of the blame lies there.
Marco Flamingo
Active member
A Seattle news station said last night that they were going to have the skipper of the small vessel on to explain what happened. Then, I never saw that segment of the news and can't find anything about it online. Maybe the skipper, or his attorney, thought that an interview wasn't a good idea.
I had always heard that the State ferries have a designated traffic lane in which they have the right of way and I have always treated it that way even when sailing. If they don't, what gives them the right to blast their horns at fishing boats, sailboats, etc.? I'm on the ferries a lot, so I see this a lot.
As to the ferry captain not taking evasive action soon enough, yeah, maybe. One assumption that we have to make is that the small vessel was on autopilot and tracking straight. If so, a radar calculation on board the ferry would have shown whether the small vessel was going to be too close. But . . . what if the captain of the small vessel pulled back on the throttle to make sure that he would pass behind the ferry and then went below. Now he's thrown off the bridge's prior calculation. Better yet, what if he thinks that his boat tracks fairly straight and he wasn't even on autopilot and went below "just for a second." The earlier calculation would again be off and a new "curving course" would be difficult to calculate. Or maybe both speed and direction varied prior to the collision. Both ideas sound stupid, but we have evidence of stupidity.
It's hard to tell from the video, but it looks like the ferry may have been stopped. The woman taking the video walks back to get away from the impending collision, and that makes it look like the ferry is going forward. It would be difficult for the ferry to make a fancy evasive maneuver if it is stopped or even slowed to 1 or 2 knots. And in trying to evade, it's always possible to make something worse. Just let the guy hit the stationary ferry.
I think that that the ferry was essentially stopped. Even though it was one of our smaller ferries, it would have climbed up and over that boat if the ferry was even doing half speed. That's what I expected to see. When the boat just glanced off, I knew that the ferry captain had saved the day.
Personally, I think that the ferry skipper did all that was required. No loss of life. No loss of property. What more can the other party expect if they choose to go below while their boat is motoring across a known ferry lane? No sympathy from me.
Mark
I had always heard that the State ferries have a designated traffic lane in which they have the right of way and I have always treated it that way even when sailing. If they don't, what gives them the right to blast their horns at fishing boats, sailboats, etc.? I'm on the ferries a lot, so I see this a lot.
As to the ferry captain not taking evasive action soon enough, yeah, maybe. One assumption that we have to make is that the small vessel was on autopilot and tracking straight. If so, a radar calculation on board the ferry would have shown whether the small vessel was going to be too close. But . . . what if the captain of the small vessel pulled back on the throttle to make sure that he would pass behind the ferry and then went below. Now he's thrown off the bridge's prior calculation. Better yet, what if he thinks that his boat tracks fairly straight and he wasn't even on autopilot and went below "just for a second." The earlier calculation would again be off and a new "curving course" would be difficult to calculate. Or maybe both speed and direction varied prior to the collision. Both ideas sound stupid, but we have evidence of stupidity.
It's hard to tell from the video, but it looks like the ferry may have been stopped. The woman taking the video walks back to get away from the impending collision, and that makes it look like the ferry is going forward. It would be difficult for the ferry to make a fancy evasive maneuver if it is stopped or even slowed to 1 or 2 knots. And in trying to evade, it's always possible to make something worse. Just let the guy hit the stationary ferry.
I think that that the ferry was essentially stopped. Even though it was one of our smaller ferries, it would have climbed up and over that boat if the ferry was even doing half speed. That's what I expected to see. When the boat just glanced off, I knew that the ferry captain had saved the day.
Personally, I think that the ferry skipper did all that was required. No loss of life. No loss of property. What more can the other party expect if they choose to go below while their boat is motoring across a known ferry lane? No sympathy from me.
Mark
Good to hear someone come out in favor of the Ferry skipper. Generally there are two in the forward wheel house.
Even this "small ferry" is 273 feet long, and in the neighborhood of 2700 tons! Cruising speed 15 knots..Two 3000 hp engines, spinning 10 foot diameter props .I agree and think that the aft engine/prop had been put in neutral and then reverse some time before the video stopped. I also believe as a last ditch maneuver the foreward engine and prop had been engaged (the prop thrust, in "forward" for that engine) would slow even faster than the aft engine in reverse. Thus the large prop wash we see.
Considering the 100 yard exclusion zone that exists, even though the ferry was give way vessel, I believe that they did all that they could to prevent collision--and because of what was done, the life of this idiot was saved.