Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by SailCO26</i> <br />I'm REALLY hoping this is just the media getting things wrong as usual: "<i>24-foot boat, which had 13 people on board</i>"<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Yup--the first story I saw said there were a total of 13 people on both vessels.
We've talked about this before... an anchor light in the proximity of shore lights can be deceptive and easily mistaken for shore light clutter. Depth perception is a complicated thing with a great deal of information processed by both the eyes and the brain to make judgments.
Without color shading, typical sizing, comparative sizing, granular identification, and much more... depth perception relying on binocular triangulation only can easily fail to provide certainty.
I hate very much to say this as it will certainly be controversial but the only certainty that an approaching boat identifies you as a navigation risk is if the operator or crew see your flash light beam that says, your about to run me down.
Think of it this way... the Coast Guard boat had his flashing strobes going so that he could be seen... while it is illegal to have such a strobe on your boat, it is not illegal to use your flash light to insure that your seen and to signal danger. If you had the time, you'd certainly signal danger on the radio... the flash light in his eyes for a moment is much faster.
Terrible Story. There is no doubt in my mind the Coast Guard is at Fault. With MILLIONS of radar equipment; in a crowded area; Damn. Reminds me of the idiot submarine capt'n who killed the japanese folks. I'm sure it's doesn't sit well with the coast guard; but for goodness sakes! They killed someone. Our tax dollars at work...
Maritime law rarely doles blame out to a single person because both skippers have a responsibility to have a watch set and to warn skippers of other boats of impending collisions.
Did the power boat skipper sound a horn or signal with a light an impending collision? If he didn't, then he holds some degree of blame.
Was the power boat showing running lights, if so then he was obligated to give way and didn't. If he was at anchor and showing running lights then he was errant. If he was showing no light, then he was errant. If an anchor light were not distinguishable for 360 degrees because of boat crowding, he was errant.
So... its not an easy call to lay it all on the Coast Guard skipper.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Arlyn Stewart</i> <br />So... its not an easy call to lay it all on the Coast Guard skipper. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Agreed. However, in a harbor crowded with maybe a thousand (?)boats, in the dark, with shore and boat lights everywhere, the USCG should assume that some boats are improperly lit, some lights are obstructed by passengers or other boats, and most anchored boats won't be keeping a dedicated "watch" for speeding vessels, flashlight in hand. Visibility across water at night is unbelievably tricky, especially from behind a windshield with lit instruments. A light beam from the bow can help a little, but is <i>illegal</i>. The boater might turn out to have some culpability, but the Coast Guard captain and pilot almost certainly do. On the water at night, speed kills. <i>Every mariner</i> should pay attention to the findings from the investigation and learn from this tragedy. Let's keep this thread updated as we learn more.
Isn't there some language in the COLREGS about doing whatever necessary to avoid a collision? High speed - perhaps excessive - seems a contributing factor, given all the factors of the environment.
SAN DIEGO — The owner of a boat involved in a deadly collision in San Diego Bay says a Coast Guard vessel struck his boat from behind after turning around.
Roger DeWeese told The Associated Press on Monday that his 44-year-old son was driving his boat Sunday when the Coast Guard vessel sped through a harbor where a Christmas watercraft parade was being held. DeWeese says his son told him the Coast Guard vessel turned around, and he thought it was going to turn away from his boat. Instead, he says it hit his boat from behind as he tried to speed away.
We've seen this before... only a few years ago a sailboat was run down from behind by a power cruiser while traversing a fairway. The blame was 60-40. The sailboat skipper got 40 percent because he failed to take evasive action to avoid a collision.
Sketchy media reports are not the most reliable basis for conclusions. Given time, a clear picture will come out but don't expect a follow story in a lead position. I expect to read the details in "Seaworthy" next year.
Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ. The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.