Go Back   Trawler Forum > Trawler Forum > General Discussion

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-10-2015, 08:49 AM   #21
City: gulf coast
Country: pinellas
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,757
I don't like lower helms either. In good weather I like being up top. In bad I want the best visibility.

Commercial traffic here goes about 20 KTS. Not hard to over take a slow boat.

bayview is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 02:59 PM   #22
Senior Member
loafs and fishes's Avatar
City: Michigan
Country: USA
Vessel Name: loafs and fishes
Vessel Model: Nimble Nomad
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 207
Maybe they didn't even have radar. The picture in the article says it's a GB 36 "similar to the one" they were driving, not the actual boat.

Well I was born in the sign of water
And it's there that I feel my best
The albatross and the whales
They are my brothers
loafs and fishes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 03:20 PM   #23
City: Hotel, CA
Country: Fried
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,576
Originally Posted by loafs and fishes View Post
Maybe they didn't even have radar. The picture in the article says it's a GB 36 "similar to the one" they were driving, not the actual boat.

That was my take reading the article. Where does it say they had a radar not being used? That kinda information would normally be front and center in this kind of article.
Craig - AKA Some Clueless Idiot

The person who is saying something is impossible should not interrupt the person who is doing it.
CPseudonym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 03:35 PM   #24
Scraping Paint
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
I read that article not long after it came out. A link had been posted to the GB Owners forum.

The gist of the discussion that followed on the forum was that, despite the well-written account and the feeling of the folks that got run over that it was not their fault.... it was.

In addition to their not using or paying attention to their radar (assuming it worked) they were boating in restricted waters with heavy shipping and they were not paying attention to what was behind them. Poor visibility out the back of the boat is not a viable excuse in my and others' minds.

If the visibility out the back sucks, and one is smart enough to realize that in a confined area with ships and stuff rearward visibility is important to have, then you take whatever steps are necessary to ensure you have rearward visibility even if it means having someone stand out on the deck in the rain.

In the late 1970s I filmed on board Matson Lines' then-new roro ship Matsonia on its regular run from Oakland to Honolulu and Hilo for a television commercial. There was a seat in the peak of the bow with a windshield and a phone for a crewman to talk to the bridge when the ship was maneuvering into and out of a harbor and call out potential problems like small boats. As I recall, the vessel in the GB rundown was equipped the same way.

I also recall that it was either unmanned of or the fellow who was supposed to be there was distracted or not paying attention. In any event, some fault was attributed to the ship.

But the bottom line is that the GB crew was not paying attention aft when they should have been. In my opinion being tired, being in uncomfortable weather, and so on are all valid reasons for something bad happening but they are not valid excuses.

To me and my wife, the same rule applies to our boating as to our flying: know your limitations and don't exceed them. The crew of the GB didn't and did.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 03:39 PM   #25
O C Diver's Avatar
City: Fort Myers, FL... Summers in Crisfield, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Slow Hand
Vessel Model: Cherubini Independence 45
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,379
Article says the boat had an old style radar. Not sure if that means an old CRT with the rubber cone you stick your face into or something newer. Certainly didn't sound like they were using it when the bridge tuned out to be a barge and tug.

The more you analyze the story, the more it seems the delivery captain and crew weren't quite so impressive and the whole trip was poorly conceived. An 8 to 10 day trip, running 24 hours a day, on an old boat that none of them had run before, going up the NJ ICW at night, and then crossing lake Erie in November. Seems like there was a good reason that all those other delivery captains declined.

I'm tired of fast moves, I've got a slow groove, on my mind.....
I want to spend some time, Not come and go in a heated rush.....
"Slow Hand" by The Pointer Sisters
O C Diver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 03:49 PM   #26
Capt.Bill11's Avatar
City: Sarasota/Ft. Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 4,540
Originally Posted by loafs and fishes View Post
Maybe they didn't even have radar. The picture in the article says it's a GB 36 "similar to the one" they were driving, not the actual boat.
"and we had the older-style radar equipment which came with the boat."
Capt.Bill11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 03:50 PM   #27
hmason's Avatar
City: Westport, CT
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Magic
Vessel Model: Grand Banks 46 Europa
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,481
When transiting the AICW, we are frequently approached from behind and often at a high rate of speed. Some of the boats are not significantly Radar reflective and are often hard to discerne on the often very cluttered Radar screen. For this year's trip south I plan to augment the Radar with a rear view mirror. Any addition to safety is a plus.

When transiting areas with heavy ship traffic I stay well out of the shipping lanes. Places like Delaware Bay, the Chesapeake, and the Cape Fear River are heavily transited by big ships. The first time you encounter ships underway you will appreciate just how fast they are moving. Kind of like a building traveling at 20+ kts.

Magic, 1996 Grand Banks Europa
Westport, CT and Stuart, FL
hmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 05:06 PM   #28
Ski in NC's Avatar
City: Wilmington, NC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Louisa
Vessel Model: Custom Built 38
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,720
Interesting that in the legal case, they found that the ship had a lapse in their bow watch, and that was where the case got some purchase. Yet the GB had no watch aft even with zero helm vis in that direction.
Ski in NC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 06:32 PM   #29
bligh's Avatar
City: Santa Cruz, CA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Frisky
Vessel Model: 99 Nordic Tug
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,083
Great account. I read it the first time it came out and just re-read it. I agree with others. Here are the points I got from the story;
1; November or not, the fly bridge was the place to be piloting that boat from at night.
2; There was no mention of the radar other than they had an older one.
3; There was no outside watch person on the GB. who was keeping a 360 degree watch. The GB crew admitted as much that the watch was not sufficient.
4; The freighter crew had a lapse in their bow watch which contributed to the collision
5 The freighter did not signal by radio or horn which also contributed to the collision.
6 The owner praises his insurance company but the insurance did not pay for any of the recovery work. You would think a basic policy would have some sort of liability built in to it.
7 That guy was scared to death when it happened!

bligh is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012