WSF Collision with yacht

[QUOTE=Steamer;193128]

WSF’s history of cowboy captains and general incompetence shows it operates with a culture of disregard for rules, and that is ultimately the reason this happened.[/QUOTE]

Elwha on the rocks

It’s pretty safe to say that the findings will be that both are to share the blame. ALmost always shakes out like that. You can decontruct the situation all the way back to Nap Thyme a quarter mile out (by the look of his wake) was already on a CBDR.

The law will tell both to “STOP running into each other, pretty please.” I was being cheeky yesterday bringing up the Stand On vessel thing.

[QUOTE=lm1883;193135]Why are we always first to eat our own?[/QUOTE]

Because we know what it tastes like, we know where the meal comes from. Because it is likely to be us if we screw up as badly. We know how the thought process works and can probably come very close to recreating the dialog on the ferry bridge.

The master of the ferry had no way of knowing that perhaps the yacht driver had collapsed from a heart attack and there were a bunch of little kids onboard trying to figure out how to stop the boat or call for help … or some other off the wall reason for it to continue on course. Why the yacht driver did nothing is actually irrelevant, the fact that the ferry master did nothing until it was too late to avoid a collision in spite of the inaction of the yacht is the heart of the matter.

The ferry master saw the whole thing unfold before his supposedly professional eyes and still rammed the yacht midships … COLREGS doesn’t say the master of the give way vessel has the right to stand on if the other vessel is under the control of a blind deaf-mute or an idiot or an incapacitated person, someone taking a leak, or not under control at all. But it does state very clearly what actions must be taken and when.

Actions to avoid collision must be positive and made in AMPLE TIME and need not be a change of course alone i.e. the watch officer should have stopped or at least slowed his vessel long before we see crash stop attemped. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE COLREGS about waiting to see what the other vessel’ s operator was going to do. It should have automatically been to say he would stand on. The burden is CLEARLY on the ferry’s officer to avoid this collision regardless of the angle of impact or whether the other vessel had a person at the helm or not. Puget Sound is International rules so does not involve proposing a maneuver to the stand on vessel.

[QUOTE=lm1883;193137] First the stand on vessel collided with the ferry, not the other way around. [/QUOTE]

Yeah, the yacht rammed the ferry’s bow with its port side midship rail … must have had bow and stern thrusters going full tilt to pull that one off.

And you say I am speculating about a video!

My “bias” is based on working on WSF ferries and the system’s own history of f-ups and coverups.

The reality is the ferry t-boned a stand on vessel. The hearings will apportion blame accordingly. If the CG even investigates it.

HEY SMAILS YOU SCRATCHED MY ANCHOR!!!

We’ll be able to find the USCG investigation results here:

https://cgmix.uscg.mil/IIR/IIRSearch.aspx

The National Transportation Safety Board investigation (if it goes that far) here:

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/marine.aspx

Is this really worth the effort to find out? They bumped. Nobody died. End of story. Nothing will happen to the guy driving the ferry. They smash into docks and keep their cushy union jobs.

If I was the guy in the yacht I would lawyer up, sue WSF for emotional distress caused by a paralyzing fear of going to the bathroom, get a bundle of cash and buy a bigger boat.

[QUOTE=Lee Shore;193145]If I was the guy in the yacht I would lawyer up, sue WSF for causing me to develop a paralyzing fear of toilets, get a bundle of cash and buy a bigger boat.[/QUOTE]

You come up with some good ones. :rolleyes: Cheers

ok, so I’m a engineer but I always thot those lines on the map saying “ferry crossing” would mean that before you cross them you’d go take a leak first, then determine whether it was leaving port or just got there… I sure as hell wouldn’t ‘dare’ a wsf!

[QUOTE=jimrr;193150]ok, so I’m a engineer but I always thot those lines on the map saying “ferry crossing” would mean that before you cross them you’d go take a leak first, then determine whether it was leaving port or just got there… I sure as hell wouldn’t ‘dare’ a wsf![/QUOTE]

I think recreational boaters should be tested on the COLREGS and other basics and issued licenses just like recreational car drivers and private pilots have to pass a test to get a license but in this case it may not have helped because YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID!

He probably lost that chance when instead of saying “hey, I was the stand on vessel, the ferry rammed me.” He instead admitted to being in the head, probably because he has very little if any knowledge of COLREGS.

[QUOTE=LI_Domer;193156] He instead admitted to being in the head, probably because he has very little if any knowledge of COLREGS.[/QUOTE]

What is the ferry captain’s excuse?

What’s worse, “He’s a stupid amateur so he deserved to be run over by a pro like me” or “I didn’t see any traffic ahead so I put the autopilot on while I went to take a leak”?

[QUOTE=Lee Shore;193145]If I was the guy in the yacht I would lawyer up, sue WSF for emotional distress caused by a paralyzing fear of going to the bathroom, get a bundle of cash and buy a bigger boat.[/QUOTE]

It is not too late … doing something stupid doesn’t mean someone else has the right to right to ram you. The events show very clearly that both idiots were in violation of COLREGS and failed to exercise good judgement. One needed to fulfill a biological necessity, the other thought he was immune to the regs and physics. Which one is the biggest idiot?

A “good” lawyer might claim that the physiological and psychological stress of extreme bladder pressure was responsible for the lapse of judgement. I suppose the ferry captain’s lawyer could say that the emotional stress of his having to change course for an amateur idiot was more than he could handle and should not be held responsible. Sort of like the insanity defense.

[QUOTE=Lee Shore;193153]I think recreational boaters should be tested on the COLREGS and other basics and issued licenses just like recreational car drivers and private pilots have to pass a test to get a license but in this case it may not have helped because YOU CAN’T FIX STUPID![/QUOTE]

Boating Licence is standard requirement in many countries: http://www.eba.eu.com/regulatory/icc

Here is the Norwegian requirements: https://www.sjofartsdir.no/en/recreational-craft/certificates/boating-license-and-icc/
Curriculum for the test can be found in a linked PDF above.

The Royal Yachting Association in UK may be more relevant: http://www.rya.org.uk/knowledge-advice/boating-abroad/icc/Pages/hub.aspx

[QUOTE=ombugge;193165]Boating Licence is standard requirement in many countries …[/QUOTE]

Here is a table of US requirements by State: http://www.nasbla.org/content.asp?contentid=265

[QUOTE=Steamer;193167]Here is a table of US requirements by State: http://www.nasbla.org/content.asp?contentid=265[/QUOTE]

I remember reading that some have tried to get legislation introduced in Congress to license boat operators but lobbyists representing boat manufacturers squelched it. Business as usual.
As far as our representatives in Washington are concerned, it’s perfectly ok for any fool with money to buy a 75 foot yacht that does 30 knots or a sailboat that can’t get out of its own way and run it without knowing that there is such a thing as right of way rules on the water. Or for that matter a guy like Watson of Green Peace can load up a full size ship with impressionable teenagers and put their lives in danger.

[QUOTE=Steamer;193167]Here is a table of US requirements by State: http://www.nasbla.org/content.asp?contentid=265[/QUOTE]

I found this advertisement for BoaterExam, on-line safety courses for US Boaters by State: http://www.boaterexam.com/
Any opinion on the relevance and efficiency of this type of courses??

[QUOTE=ombugge;193169]Any opinion on the relevance and efficiency of this type of courses??[/QUOTE]

It’s better than nothing at all but many states only mandate PWC operators and there’s no uniformity. Ideally, the licensing should be handled at the federal level but in reality we’d end up with another bloated dysfunctional bureaucracy soaking up tax dollars like a black hole.