Collision and demasting

[psneeld]

If he were dragging a shrimp net, he would have been dragging the OP's 41-foot sailboat too since it was the boom that dismasted his sailboat. Not sure how you square that except to say the fishing boat wasn't fishing, which means he was unlikely to have been doing just 2-kts.....and makes it more possible that he had no work/deck lights on.

Peter

Depending on the rig of that fishing vessel, if the nets were deployed, and rigged to the outermost part of the outrigger, couldn't the sailboat pass under the rigger, close enough to the F/V to hit it as described, then pass right over the nets?

Like the automobile world, some boaters sre using dashcams now that our inland waterways are crazy at times....

 

[rslifkin]

The whole story just sucks. Life can change so quickly.A couple things i am confused about. I have two fixed VHF radios and a handheld. One on 16 and the other scanning.
Did you only have the one handheld or did i miss something?
The most concerning thing to me is why would the boat leave when there was obviously a person in need. I would never consider leaving a fellow boater in distress even if they ask me to go unless i was absolutely certain they could get home safely or the coast guard was on scene.
Its just sad they left you.

Sailboats typically have their VHF antenna on the mast, so once the mast is gone, the fixed mount VHF is useless (leaving them with just a handheld).

 

[PierreR]

Depending on the rig of that fishing vessel, if the nets were deployed, and rigged to the outermost part of the outrigger, couldn't the sailboat pass under the rigger, close enough to the F/V to hit it as described, then pass right over the nets?

I would think the mast from a 40 ft sailboat was long enough to snag the net anyway. Assuming the sailboat passed over the net, how long does it take and how easy is it for a shrimp boat pulling a net to do a 180 deg turn come back, stop and offer assistance?

 

[mvweebles]

Depending on the rig of that fishing vessel, if the nets were deployed, and rigged to the outermost part of the outrigger, couldn't the sailboat pass under the rigger, close enough to the F/V to hit it as described, then pass right over the nets?..

I suppose anything is possible. But since nets are designed to ensnare and entangle, seems highly improbable that a 41 foot sailboat with mast, boom, sail, and rigging plus a keel and rudder to slip though unmolested. But who knows.

Peter

 

[Jerbro]

There was no problem seeing them when it was too late heading directly at us. 20 minutes before I was in the cockpit looking around from the helm and saw no lights near us.

If people want to say a lit up commercial fishing boat wasn't visible till they were a boat length away to us that is fine. I posted the events as it happened and the lights on/off are a he said/he said.

It looks like the extent of “dark” fishing is a globally recognised issue … interesting map in here. This is more about being electronically visible.. https://globalfishingwatch.org/impacts/stories/satellite-radar-imagery-helps-reveal-the-true-scale-of-hidden-fishing/

 

[psneeld]

If a shrimper (probably working that close to shore) is probably bottom dragging and 2 miles off near Mantanzas inlet is around 60 feet deep. the only thing in the top 20 feet of water I would guess to be the cables to the otter boards..

Just my guess but just as plausible as many of the suppositions being made.

 

[psneeld]

I would think the mast from a 40 ft sailboat was long enough to snag the net anyway. Assuming the sailboat passed over the net, how long does it take and how easy is it for a shrimp boat pulling a net to do a 180 deg turn come back, stop and offer assistance?

I really can't say, but that is one reason they are stand on vessels over power and sail....

But we have no idea how much into a set or haul back they were into at the time and whether they pulled nets before turning or started a turn and pulled or were pulling even as they were alongside.

To many holes to say what was really going on....I think I will just let the USCG figure it out and see if any holes are really every filled.

 

[PierreR]

If a shrimper (probably working that close to shore) is probably bottom dragging and 2 miles off near Mantanzas inlet is around 60 feet deep. the only thing in the top 20 feet of water I would guess to be the cables to the otter boards..

Just my guess but just as plausible as many of the suppositions being made.

2 mile offshore near St Augustine is probably 30-40 ft of water.

 

[Old Sea Dog]

That is the elephant in the room for me.

Bingo. Trawlers, from what I have seen, lower their booms as soon as there is room. So essentially out the inlet and lower the booms. They are not trawling so no lights except nav lights. No nets deployed so running to get to their grounds. Minimal watch as most crew are resting for work ahead. Autopilot on with watchstander phone in hand. Quick glance then back to the phone screen. Don states he had a hard time "understanding" the crew on trawler, not hearing. Possible language barrier that would lead me to believe, in this day and age, some may not necessarily be legal. Hence the hasty departure of trawler.
Just a possible scenario......
S#itty situation all around.
So sorry for you and your wife Don.

 

[psneeld]

2 mile offshore near St Augustine is probably 30-40 ft of water.

I thought it was 12NM south, 2 offshore . Near Mantanzas inlet, my chart has 50+ to 60 feet with an average tidal range of 5 or so feet.

Even if 30-40 feet, nets along the bottom wouldn't necessarily foul a close aboard sailboat.

If it was a shrimp boat, fishing near the outflow from the inlet may be a prime spot. I can't say how close they are allowed to fish near shore but if running tracks perpendicular to the coast and heading out, then turning northbound...as Ted posted, their lights could have been lost in shore lights. Though I do admit that is not a heavily populated area and they might have light restriction on the beaches for turtle nesting.

 

[Don L]

let's be clear here

BOTH boats were at fault and I have not said otherwise.

 

[mvweebles]

I don't understand the Monday-morning QB'ing here. Two boats collided - that we know. Two needles in a haystack met. We can surmise all we want but that risks whisking away a learning experience. The undertone is "obviously, someone wasn't keeping adequate watch or there would be no accident. I always keep watch, therefore this would never happen to me...." Which means nothing need be learned - everyone knows they need to keep an adequate watch.

So explain something to me: Two vessels manned by experienced mariners collided. Can anyone really say that they are somehow more careful or more experienced than the crew on those two boats?

Peter

 

[psneeld]

Bingo. Trawlers, from what I have seen, lower their booms as soon as there is room. So essentially out the inlet and lower the booms. They are not trawling so no lights except nav lights. No nets deployed so running to get to their grounds. Minimal watch as most crew are resting for work ahead. Autopilot on with watchstander phone in hand. Quick glance then back to the phone screen. Don states he had a hard time "understanding" the crew on trawler, not hearing. Possible language barrier that would lead me to believe, in this day and age, some may not necessarily be legal. Hence the hasty departure of trawler.
Just a possible scenario......
S#itty situation all around.
So sorry for you and your wife Don.

Good points...

 

[Jeff F]

This is a sobering story. Glad you guys are OK.

Have you heard from your insurance? Based on your damage assessment it wouldn't surprise me if the boat is a write off.

 

[Osprey69]

I am reminded why I considered not posting the story.

Given the inevitable responses...I am surprised you did.

 

[lwarden]

I am reminded why I considered not posting the story.

I'll just leave this here...

https://youtu.be/uLlv_aZjHXc?si=VTVmz_aXqrF4K5_J

 

[Mac G]

am not more careful nor experinced that those who know more than me here; but some of us do things differently and we can learn from each other.

Here is what I used to do back when I was an offshore sailor - I would stand at the mast, wrap my arm around a shroud or do whatever was necessary to maintain balance, and then scan the horizon with binoculars, day or night.
Never liked hanging out behind a dodger because the visibility down low and behind that plastic eisenglass is poor, especially when wet.

I may be unusual because as a former IOR offshore racing bowman I am used to walking all around the boat all the way to the bow in any conditions.
I remember my first nighttime offshore race back when I was a teenager and we encountered a squall and had to drop the main and go under storm jib only. The visibility was poor and our skipper, an older wiser gentleman, was standing at the mast trying to look for a lighted buoy we needed to honor.

In the ignornace of my youth I remember thinking that his standing up there would create adverse windage and cause us to lose corrected time and our
standing in the race. That is how clueless I was back then that I put something as trivial as windage and the race over our own safety.

Now I always walk the boat and keep a lookout and encourage my wife who did not grow up the same sea legs as me to do the same thing.
Am not second-guessing anyone but rather suggesting a practice that has served me well on many occasions and one that I still do to this day.

 

[psneeld]

let's be clear here

BOTH boats were at fault and I have not said otherwise.

Yep, said the same in post #9.

 

[PierreR]

let's be clear here

BOTH boats were at fault and I have not said otherwise.

This is the response of a seasoned knowledgeable sailor. I am amazed at the number of people I have conversations with that think the rules of the road are written in stone with a clear right and wrong answer for the courts in a collision between two boats.
Many state that they will stand on right to the collision if they feel they have the right of way.

 

[psneeld]

I don't understand the Monday-morning QB'ing here. Two boats collided - that we know. Two needles in a haystack met. We can surmise all we want but that risks whisking away a learning experience. The undertone is "obviously, someone wasn't keeping adequate watch or there would be no accident. I always keep watch, therefore this would never happen to me...." Which means nothing need be learned - everyone knows they need to keep an adequate watch.

So explain something to me: Two vessels manned by experienced mariners collided. Can anyone really say that they are somehow more careful or more experienced than the crew on those two boats?

Peter

It not something that everyone can do...

But all those years spent on SAR missions, myself and lots of crew developed a sense to noticing things that are out of place. To this day my eyesight isn't that much better than most people I hang with, but I am almost always the one who see things like wildlife, dropped small objects, things in the dark, etc....long before others. Some are better at it than me.

When I ran assistance towing vessels, often in the dark and at speeds others probably wouldn't... I noticed unlit markers or obstructions by the lack of light _(even stars going dark). Often experienced boating friends would ask how did I know it was there. It wasn't because I saw something, it was noticing that I no longer was seeing something that should be there.

I almost got rundown off the Florida Keys by a freighter. My fiancé was on watch and said something about an unusual red and green star. The vessel was so close that the running lights were at that high of an angle, but it was the massive lack of light that told me it was the hull blocking starts and shore lights. Thankfully a quick tack and I avoided getting run over.

My claim to fame on Kodiak Island fishing for salmon, was one night I started catching them when my friends who were laughing at me for trying but then got interested how I could see the fish. I couldn't, but when I focused on a light colored rock and it disappeared, I would cast upstream and get the occasional hookup.

So my longwinded answer is some people can do things others can't or can't till they learn certain tricks of watchkeeping. That is one I gratefully have developed and has kept me from collisions for a very long time.

In the case of the shrimper...I totally get that their watchstander was either nonexistent or distracted/asleep... have pulled or helped pull many a boat off the beach that ran run up there for the same reason.

 

[SteveK]

Is this a record?
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 32 (17 members and 15 guests)

 

[Don L]

Given the inevitable responses...I am surprised you did.

I want people to read it and learn whatever lessons they can. But don't want to feel I am under any attack by people who were not there. The only "guessing" on my part I included in my original posts was whether the fishing boat was in fact fishing and whether they had their lights on earlier than moments before the collision. Far as "fault" neither those really matter because both boats were responsible to avoid a collision.

BTW - in a post a few ago someone wrote "if they feel they have the right of way". I wish people would STOP using this "right of way" term as it does not exist and there is no such thing on the water.

 

[Davil1]

I don't understand the Monday-morning QB'ing here. Two boats collided - that we know. Two needles in a haystack met. We can surmise all we want but that risks whisking away a learning experience. The undertone is "obviously, someone wasn't keeping adequate watch or there would be no accident. I always keep watch, therefore this would never happen to me...." Which means nothing need be learned - everyone knows they need to keep an adequate watch.

So explain something to me: Two vessels manned by experienced mariners collided. Can anyone really say that they are somehow more careful or more experienced than the crew on those two boats?

Peter

=========================================
to the first

Sh..t happens.
Accidents occur.
Need to accept it, and mostly assess risk tolerance.
That is why I check this forum, actively searching for a powerboat, my days of offshore/coastal to be changed to protected inland waterways.



to the second, that worries me because we are missing the chance to learn.

==========================
My contribution.

All the electronic gadgets and gizmos are wonderful IF THEY ARE FULLY CHARGED!!!!!!

I carry 3 (yes you heard right 3 VHF portables)

now fully Standard Horizon system since the old radios died.

One portable is connected to the remote connection in the base radio down in the cabin.

This radio has its own bracket clipped by the pedestal in the cockpit.

Second is a hand portable ”always fully charged”, this radio is sort of used while I am moving in the cockpit and the first hand held cable is too short.

The third radio is also a Standard Horizon, the smallest available, chosen because it is very small, waterproof, and have it clipped on my life vest as an added safety tool.

I have USB long cables to the cockpit to maintain charge on all electronic aids, that includes tablets, cell phones, etc.

My observation:
I think the "dark commercial fishing boats” is overblown, not to say they do not exist, (hard to quantify what we do not see), but by direct visual contact with radar and AIS on most times they are lighted.

Does not apply to the OP because there was no visual as reported.

Other comment.

OP checked his bow light, it was on.

I turn the running lights religiously as prescribed with a nagging question (I sail), that light mounted on my pulpit is Coast Guard approved with a range of 1 NM!!!!
My bow is about 8 ft? above sea level, in a seaway with swells running.the boat rolling and pitching will make that tinny little light visible with luck half of the times.

In this regard, powerboats have a better chance as those navigation lights can be mounted higher.

Second finding,
my last cruising, the bow light was failing intermittently, on examination found the bulb contact totally corroded, because those lights are not waterproof sealed, since then replaced with HALO, more expensive but necessarily.


PS

sail or power, we are fortunate, let's enjoy it.

Disclaimer

No warranty from the management
Living can be hazardous to your health

 

[Mac G]

we also flew a radar reflector 24/7 off the flag halyard at our starboard spreader.
That one was one of those metalic-coated cardboard ones so it was soft on the sails.
We had another real-deal metal reflector we would hoist up the backstay on a separate halyard we rigged up back there. We would hoist that in more dubious conditions (so then we had two) but the soft one stayed up all the time day or night rain or shine.
In our local waters we have to look out for tugs pulling barges on very long tow lines where one might incorrectly think they are looking at two separate independent vessesls.
And though yes indeed they are separate, they are connected by a guillotine cable that will dismast you in a heartbeat.
And speaking of "right-of-way" there have been numerous instances where we were on starboard, or leeward of another sailing vessel and clearly had rights but we would tack away or avoid the situation if we got sense that they did not see us or did not know what they were doing.

 

[Marco Flamingo]

My experience with most shrimp trawlers at nkght.....

My experience when working on a shrimp boat was that the deck lights were only on when deploying and retrieving the net. We "headed" the shrimp onboard, meaning we partially processed them, so if it was a good haul, the deck lights might be on for an hour after a tow to process and clear the deck. Then at least an hour running dark. We didn't have radar so when running w/o deck lights during a drag, the "rig man", the captain, and I all spent a lot of time looking out for the running lights of other boats. In cases where we headed for an anchorage before dawn, it was just running lights, but everyone was still "on watch" until the anchor was down.

I have seen boats run on autopilot so that all onboard can get some sleep. In the Gulf of Alaska, we picked up a crab boat at +15 miles. The officer on deck calculated a collision course. Several others on the bridge did the same calculation. Definitely within our allowed closest point of approach (CPA). Although early morning, the captain was asleep in his quarters. At a certain distance and apparent CPA, standing orders were to wake him. He came up and also tried to hail the vessel on the VHF. We came to a dead stop to avoid collision. The boat's running lights were not on, so either somebody had turned them off the previous hour or it had been running dark.

Everybody got binoculars and the captain had us approach within several hundred yards to try to see if there was a problem aboard. We had a good view looking down into the pilot house and there was nobody there. As it crossed our bow, the captain ordered to blow the horn. Nobody appeared. We prepared to chase and lower our fastest the tender. Then somebody appeared on the back deck. The incident was reported to the CG, but I'm not sure what happened.

My standard operating procedure when a vessel is approaching is to assume that nobody is in the pilot house. That's if I see them coming.

 

[sunchaser]

In that area if a shrimper is engaged in fishing is that vessel deemed stand on over pleasure craft whether power or sail?

 

[psneeld]

In that area if a shrimper is engaged in fishing is that vessel deemed stand on over pleasure craft whether power or sail?

Yes according to NAVRULE #18.
Rule 9 Narrow Channel
Rule 10 Traffic Schemes
Rule 13 Overtaking vessel.
So if the fishing vessel was overtaking the sailboat, then the F/V would be give way.

—INLAND—
Steering and Sailing Rules
RULE 18
Responsibilities Between Vessels
Except where Rules 9, 10, and 13 otherwise require:
(a) A power-driven vessel underway shall keep out of the way of:
(i) a vessel not under command;
(ii) a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver;
(iii) a vessel engaged in fishing; and
(iv) a sailing vessel.

(b) A sailing vessel underway shall keep out of the way of:
(i) a vessel not under command;
(ii) a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver; and
(iii) a vessel engaged in fishing.

(c) A vessel engaged in fishing when underway shall, so far as possible,
keep out of the way of:
(i) a vessel not under command; and
(ii) a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver.

(d) A seaplane on the water shall, in general, keep well clear of all vessels
and avoid impeding their navigation. In circumstances, however, where risk
of collision exists, she shall comply with the Rules of this Part.

 

[sunchaser]

So if as PS notes above, is the following correct?

According to the USCG Open Seas was fishing thus was the stand on vessel. Thus Don’s SV was give way.

 

[rslifkin]

Even if they were fishing and therefore stand on, that doesn't relieve them of their obligations. If Don was unable to see them (for whatever reason) and therefore not taking avoiding action, they're still obligated to avoid a collision once it's apparent that the SV is not doing so.



Multiple things had to have gone wrong (and we can't really determine what at this point) for both vessels to be unaware of each other and not taking avoiding action until the last second.

 

[psneeld]

Even if they were fishing and therefore stand on, that doesn't relieve them of their obligations. If Don was unable to see them (for whatever reason) and therefore not taking avoiding action, they're still obligated to avoid a collision once it's apparent that the SV is not doing so.



Multiple things had to have gone wrong (and we can't really determine what at this point) for both vessels to be unaware of each other and not taking avoiding action until the last second.

All good info, that would be Rule#2

—INTERNATIONAL—
General
RULE 2
Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner,
master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply
with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required
by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the
case.
(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had
to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances,
including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a
departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

From this only an investigation and hearing could determine the amount of liability assigned to each vessel. Probably both would be apportioned the blame.

One thing is still bothering me, if the F/V say the sailboat and realized they were on a collision course, in addition to turning on their lights (all or just adding the work lights) they should have been sounding the emergency signal or if there was even more time, sound signaling for what kind of passing was intended. That could add a big chunk of liability on the F/V.