Grand Banks run over by a freighter

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
SeaHorse II said:
I have a VHS of home movies shot by John Wayne and others. Here's a comment by the Duke on drinking.
Click to expand...

Not sure which side of the drinking stance the post is supposed to comment on....:D

I don't care if someone doesn't drink...cracks me up when someone who drinks thinks they can lecture others. The statistics of alcohol and fatalities has been sensationalized and shown to be incorrect not only on HOW the data was gathered...but how it was/is applied.

Let's get back to distracted driving...both cars and boats...then we can seriously talk about qualifications (or lack of) and abilities (or lack of) so I can easily show why almost no one should be allowed to drive a recreational boat....:rolleyes:

But I'd rather stick to a much simple and more realistic topic of getting run over by a freighter..:thumb:
 
angus99 said:
Maybe it would be best to learn the difference between a diagnosis and an opinion.

We had a licensed captain aboard with many years of commercial experience. The crew, collectively had over 100 years of blue water experience.

Is there a subject you don't feel compelled to lecture on?
Click to expand...

:nonono:
I like Rick B's "lectures'.

I've learned a lot from them in the past 6 months and if i don't agree, i still like hearing a different viewpoint.

That's what makes this forum so valuable.:thumb:

And by the way, the guy that got run over, didn't he have a commercial captain on board??:facepalm:

Richard B, though not the Rick B
 
Maybe he only lecture on things he knows about AND lectures as if a teacher to student...not necessarily in any other fashion.

Guess things are all relative depending where you sit.
 
psneeld said:
Not sure which side of the drinking stance the post is supposed to comment on....:D
Click to expand...
The "stance" as you put it, doesn't support either side of the drinking question. It does, however, point out what one beloved American thought. :blush:
 
RickB said:
Certainly - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Impaired - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary



Diagnosis - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Opinion - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Click to expand...

Yes!!! Citations!!! Does getting citations thrown at you by RickB allow me to move up from "senior member" to "guru"? Surely this is a right of passage.

Rick, why do you feel it necessary to make assumptions about an incident that happened to me and about which you have zero first-hand knowledge? I was expressing a conviction that the tug captain was in some way impaired based on interaction with him and observing his actions. We didn't administer a breathalizer (which I suppose you would have challenged as well) but it seemed "certain" to all of us (who were actually present) that there was some sort of impairment. Could we be wrong? Sure, but I don't think so. Anyway, sorry my story presented too great a temptation to pontificate about the shortcomings of recreational boaters.
 
SeaHorse II said:
The "stance" as you put it, doesn't support either side of the drinking question. It does, however, point out what one beloved American thought. :blush:
Click to expand...

I can sympathize with John Wayne's remark about not trusting people who are a tad "different"...and in today's world I can sympathize
with those that don't drink....

As I said before..it's the people that like to talk about "alcohol" in a vacuum and blame it for things that "other" reasons are the root cause that piss me off.

It's the new world where "political correctness" and "lying to one's self" is the norm.
 
angus99 said:
Rick, why do you feel it necessary to make assumptions about an incident that happened to me and about which you have zero first-hand knowledge?
Click to expand...


Well, since you asked ... I haven't made any assumptions, at least none that I have posted here.

All the assumptions posted on this thread have been those of others.

I know nothing of the incident, and never posted a single thought about it. I have read what you published as a certainty and feel that at a reader I am entitled to comment on what any reasonable person might interpret as an accusation of impairment of a professional in the performance of his duties.

If you knew with certainty that the the person on the radio was impaired, did you pass that "knowledge" along to the CG? Not all that certain or just decide to let it slide until pulling it out when a sea story is called for? Didn't care if someone else was placed in harm's way because of a certainly impaired operator?
 
Last edited:
No assumptions? Or does framing them as questions mean they don't count?

RickB said:
If you knew with certainty that the the person on the radio was impaired, did you pass that "knowledge" along to the CG? Not all that certain or just decide to let it slide until pulling it out when a sea story is called for? Didn't care if someone else was placed in harm's way because of a certainly impaired operator?
Click to expand...

Can't tell you why the captain didn't raise the Coast Guard on that night 20 years ago--perhaps he should have. Possibly he thought it might not be a priority for them 300 or so miles offshore.

You have every right to comment, of course; as I do to ask how you came to be the grand inquisitor of the Trawler Forum.
 
Just as a sidenote- a new law in WA went into effect today-LE can take a breathalyzer test on the water. same standard as DUI, BUI is now a gross misdemeanor, $5,000 fine and up t0 364 days in jail. Refusal to take the breath test is an automatic civil infraction, ie a ticket.

Also, in the John Wayne piece, the writer of the article said Wayne's captain "died from a fatal heart attack.' Wonder if anyone has died from a non-fatal heart attack.
 
THD said:
Also, in the John Wayne piece, the writer of the article said Wayne's captain "died from a fatal heart attack.' Wonder if anyone has died from a non-fatal heart attack.
Click to expand...
Self explanatory! Non fatal!:blush::blush:
 
THD said:
Just as a sidenote- a new law in WA went into effect today-LE can take a breathalyzer test on the water. same standard as DUI, BUI is now a gross misdemeanor, $5,000 fine and up t0 364 days in jail. Refusal to take the breath test is an automatic civil infraction, ie a ticket.

Also, in the John Wayne piece, the writer of the article said Wayne's captain "died from a fatal heart attack.' Wonder if anyone has died from a non-fatal heart attack.
Click to expand...

When you say LE can take a breathalyzer...what departments?

The USCG has been able to do it there (or anywhere) ever since breathalyzers were approved evidence in courts....at least in federal court but usually they just enforce the BUI of the state.
 
BruceK said:
Boats don`t have rear view mirrors. The view aft, unless helming from the FB, is often obstructed. Does anyone have a rear view camera, like ones activated on some autos with bad rear vision, by selecting reverse? I`m guessing larger vessels have cameras all around.
Click to expand...
Mine does actually Bruce, another plus for no aft cabin, big rear window and door, (with equally big window), and the old-fashioned upper steering chain conduit stainless pole thingie - ideal for fixing stuff, like a rear view mirror to...
 

Attachments

  • Image007.jpg
    Image007.jpg
    78.7 KB · Views: 161
Last edited:
Ohh, good. Back to the original topic.

This incident got me thinking about buying an inexpensive home CCTV system with maybe 4 cameras. One ahead, one behind (from the flybridge or mast), maybe one in the engine room and one extra somewhere.

Running from the lower helm would be safer, and monitoring the engine room from the flybridge would be nice. I know some security systems have "night" cameras, not sure how they'd do in a dark engine room, but it's a thought.
 
CaptTom said:
Ohh, good. Back to the original topic.

This incident got me thinking about buying an inexpensive home CCTV system with maybe 4 cameras. One ahead, one behind (from the flybridge or mast), maybe one in the engine room and one extra somewhere.

Running from the lower helm would be safer, and monitoring the engine room from the flybridge would be nice. I know some security systems have "night" cameras, not sure how they'd do in a dark engine room, but it's a thought.
Click to expand...


Up close they are fine as the LED infrared illuminates (and I know there are different specs) out to about 15-20 feet or so...not useful as a traffic identifier and seeing nav lights on a small screen I think would be difficult.

I'm still not sure why people on a TRAWLER forum are so worried about traffic in general (sure in confined waters, narrow channels)...but at speeds up to 8 knots or so...I leave the wheel and walk around whether on autopilot or not...sometimes to get a better view, sometimes just to get the blood flowing.

I could see this issue maybe with 25 knots boats or so...something I never really did as a delivery captain...but on my boat...at 6.3 knots I'm hardly ever at the wheel.
 
PS-as far as I am aware from looking at the new law, it addresses local LE with respect to the breathalyzer. The Seattle police have a pretty active marine unit. That should also include the fish & game guys as well.

DUI (and BUI) have recently become a really big issue in WA as there have been several horrific accidents in the last six months or so in the Seattle area.

Like you, I do a walk-around on a very regular basis. I do have a rear-facing camera (installed for docking) and it really does not help that much as it is a pretty wide angle lens and the distance view is a bit distorted.
 
psneeld said:
When you say LE can take a breathalyzer...what departments?

The USCG has been able to do it there (or anywhere) ever since breathalyzers were approved evidence in courts....at least in federal court but usually they just enforce the BUI of the state.
Click to expand...
---------------------------------------------
Washington State law / courts only recognize tests conducted on a "Breathalyzer" (BAC), BAC is not portable and about the size of a desk top PC laid on its side or take the driver to a clinic for a blood draw. Wa. LE Officers can use a handheld PBT to determine intoxication, but it's not mandatory, no penalty for refusing and the PBT results can not be admitted as evidence in court .

The Fed's and some other states allow the use of Portable Breath Test devices (PBT's) and taking their PBT test is manditory, the results are admissible in their court system.

A revised Washington BUI law went into effect July 1st.
The High Lights:
Changed BUI from a Misdemeanor to a Gross Misdemeanor
Increased the penalties for BUI in several areas. The penalty for refusing to submit to a breath test is $1000. Conviction of BUI was raised to $5000.
The legislature also revised the current law to include testing for Marijuana and set a presumptive level of "under the influence" of THC, since it's legal here now.
It also empowered State Law Enforcement Officers with authority to conduct boating accident investigations and issue State charges.
 
Last edited:
CaptTom said:
Ohh, good. Back to the original topic.

This incident got me thinking about buying an inexpensive home CCTV system with maybe 4 cameras. One ahead, one behind (from the flybridge or mast), maybe one in the engine room and one extra somewhere.

Running from the lower helm would be safer, and monitoring the engine room from the flybridge would be nice. I know some security systems have "night" cameras, not sure how they'd do in a dark engine room, but it's a thought.
Click to expand...

I recently did this in the ER and am pleased with the results. We discussed on this thread. I have not connected a rear facing camera. I'm thinking of getting a GoPro to record fishing activity. It might not have the resolution needed for boat ID at a distance, though.

http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s4/cameras-power-requirements-10011.html
 
I've heard that some camera systems have a "reverse" feature. The image would look like the view one would expect to see in a rear-view mirror. That would make backing into a slip, for example, like backing a car into a parking space....thoughtless.
 
I know this is an ancient thread, but I went looking for this story on line after meeting the guy that went down with the trawler. The link to the articles are no longer active so perhaps access to a written account is now lost. The owner of the 38' Grand Banks was docked next to me in Mackinaw City, MI last week and related the story to me. I was amazed at the story and that this guy actually lived to tell the story. It was a 30 minute condensed version of the event. He's doing well and now owns "Kinship" about a 45' Grand Banks (sorry I'm not familiar with the models) and calls Hessel, MI his home port. When I asked if the "Loop" was in his future, he said his days navigating major waterways was over. It was then, he began to relate the story. I'd love to find any documentation of this event if anyone has a source.
 
All my seagoing career I have heard ships calling toy boats and asking for their intentions.


Usually in places the big boys have to be and not the toy boats.


I am surprised that more people don't get run over....


The joke is.... it is easier to payout to the surviving families than to slow these big boys down or go aground toy boats.



Think long and hard about whose way you are purposely getting in.


Don't get me wrong...I am the first to argue that commercials don't have the right over recs (usually) in many waters, but to clog many shipping channels because your nav skills lack isn't one time to push your rights.
 
Last edited:
So many things should have mitigated this.

This is my backyard and I have spent my life in close proximity to these ships and these channels in both large boats, fishing boats, and kayaks. If the freighter is heading upstream he will push a bigger bow wake, so big that most boats surf off the wake long before making contact with the ship. I could not read the article as it is no longer there. Was the GB anchored? Was he hit be a downstream freighter? What was he doing in the channel not paying attention and not at the controls? Did he not hear the five blasts of the freighters horn when the freighter realized the GB was in his path? Every captain in this waterway is a US licensed captain, authorized to navigate these waters. No foreign captains are allowed to pilot the Detroit River, Lake St,. Clair, or the St. Clair river. These poor captains have to put up with all manner of nonsense mostly from smaller craft. A Grand Banks is usually not something they have to contend with. The draft and weight of the GB makes it a more vulnerable target because it does not push away as easily as jet skis and fishing boats. Again, I could not read the article, but unless the GB had lost power there is no excuse for this happening. A freighter cannot and will not navigate around an obstacle such as a pleasure boat. Never got close to a freighter that I was not trying to get close to. Now ocean going freighters in the open ocean? Those things scare the hell out of me at night. I always pass behind if I can. The odds of what happened here if the GB was not anchored are very unlikely. If he was anchored in the channel............well that should not have happened. He should have drifted out of the channel and reset. Wish I could have read the account. Maybe I will get the chance to ask first hand as I am in Hessel with some regularity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
I am trying to sell a donated 36' Grand Banks
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
Delta Riverat
Delta Riverat
M
36' Grand Banks Cutless Bearings
Replies
2
Views
675
Old Sea Dog
Old Sea Dog
E
1979 36 Albin 1979 36 Grand Banks
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
psneeld
psneeld
rgano
An old acquaintance going on the block
Replies
3
Views
671
rgano
rgano
L
Just bought a Grand Banks 36
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
ronobrien
R

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom