Tanker ship sunk by mega-yacht near Nassau

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Srbenda

Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2021
Messages
5
Sorry for the screenshots, but I can't cut and paste from Instagram.
https://www.instagram.com/salvage_and_wreck/p/CX5zbzFLTAU/?utm_medium=copy_link
 
Here’s another link. Wow! From the link:

The 160-foot tanker was traveling on its proper watch en route to Great Stirrup Cay when it was rear-ended by the 207-foot super yacht. The catastrophic force of the collision pierced the stern of the tanker causing the tanker to sink to the ocean floor at an estimated depth of 2000 feet.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...coast-of-new-providence-island-301450791.html
 
What a world.

Where a person's yacht is WAYYYY bigger than a fuel tanker.

Hopefully all involved but the negligent can enjoy their Christmas.
 
This is the picture from the link in the OP....
 

Attachments

  • Bahamasink.jpg
    Bahamasink.jpg
    18.4 KB · Views: 438
eSysman does a good job of covering this incident, although incorrectly identified the tanker as a fishing vessel.

https://youtu.be/X0kdJ3zitKA


Yep, even having looked at the photo's of the sinking ship, he still identifies it as a "fishing vessel". . . . . doesn't make me want to rush out and subscribe to his channel . . .
 
Yep, even having looked at the photo's of the sinking ship, he still identifies it as a "fishing vessel". . . . . doesn't make me want to rush out and subscribe to his channel . . .

Yes I read the comments as well under the video. That's a good way to loose all credibility but to be real about even professional journalism, you can't believe a damn thing unless you saw it, heard it, and then you still could be wrong. I call it semi fake news.
 

Attachments

  • B59BF1EE-FDA6-4805-9760-39996639202B.jpeg
    B59BF1EE-FDA6-4805-9760-39996639202B.jpeg
    118.2 KB · Views: 111
Yes I read the comments as well under the video. That's a good way to loose all credibility but to be real about even professional journalism, you can't believe a damn thing unless you saw it, heard it, and then you still could be wrong. I call it semi fake news.

Pretty minor damage for running into a 100' tanker @ 20 knots. That doesn't seem right.

Agree eSysman jumped the gun on his report, he usually has pretty good intel but got it wrong this time. I do like his channel though and his views on the superyacht world.
 
Pretty minor damage for running into a 100' tanker @ 20 knots. That doesn't seem right.



Agree eSysman jumped the gun on his report, he usually has pretty good intel but got it wrong this time. I do like his channel though and his views on the superyacht world.
If they were overtaking as reported in the first article the closing speed would have been less. That makes more sense than the T-bone collision eSysman described.
 
I found it interesting that it was another boat that responded and gathered up the tanker crew. I would have expected the Utopia to do that, being so close at hand.
 
May have been DIW with repair parties attending to possible damage....plus the crew could have been nearly frozen from shock... some people just don't react well in emergencies.

How long was it till the other vessel picked up the survivors
 
May have been DIW with repair parties attending to possible damage....plus the crew could have been nearly frozen from shock... some people just don't react well in emergencies.

How long was it till the other vessel picked up the survivors



I think the article said what the response time was, but I don’t recall exactly. They were only 12 nm from Nassau. I would just think that the first order of business it to locate everyone and render help. It would have to be balanced against addressing damage that might further endanger people, but I would think the two activities would at least be tied for top attention. I’m sure there was a lot of “oh crap, how did we do that” going on too. It will be hard for the crew to make excuses for this one.
 
I am glad there were no death nor significant injuries.
Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

Knowing the news cycle, chances are we will never know.

Maybe we should play 2nd guess/arm chair/weekend sailor??

"Driving without due care and caution." SMIRK

In the interest of brevity and efficiency, the owner of the mega-yacht should just pay the actual value of the sunk boat and let the USCG sort out the rest.
 
I wonder if there will be environmental damages assessed for all the fuel spilled? Sure seems like there would be if it had happened in US territorial waters. The yacht should be responsible IMO.
 
Who would investigate this? Would jurisdiction be based on where the vessels are flagged or where the incident happened ?.....or who ever licensed the Captains ?
 
Who would investigate this? Would jurisdiction be based on where the vessels are flagged or where the incident happened ?.....or who ever licensed the Captains ?


My guess is that it would be investigated by the Bahamian government and the international rules of the road would apply. The government of the Bahamas is not going to miss an opportunity to collect serious fines in my opinion. They are very protective of their fisheries (as they should be) and work with the USCG on a joint basis sometimes. I bet they would treat something like this in a similar manner, though the yacht is most likely not flying a US flag.



I would not like to be the captain or owner of the yacht right now, or its insurer.
 
I’m ignorant of the fine points of maritime law but would think the megayacht was operated in a manner not consistent with keeping an adequate watch. Also not demonstrating seaman like behavior operating at a speed not consistent with safety. So violating international maritime law regardless of how it was flagged. Would wonder if that would have an effect on whether their insurance will step in and to what degree?
 
Update


 

Attachments

  • F9537A4B-39E5-469B-9EA1-5050E16B1022.jpg
    F9537A4B-39E5-469B-9EA1-5050E16B1022.jpg
    86.6 KB · Views: 68
Seems I read where cargo was 'non persistent petroleum', bottled propane and butane. But pollution from tanker's own fuel supply and lube oil still an enviro threat...
 
A little research seems to suggest (not an international maritime lawyer here) that the flag countries of the vessels involved do the investigation with resulting actions against crews and companies and the suit for damages can probably heard in any world maritime court (courts in that country that hear maritime matters) that is agreed upon by what seems to be a bunch of entities that are not likely to agree.

As to environmental damages...those damaged would probably sue in their own country and ask the flag countries to enforce the penalties.
 
A little research seems to suggest (not an international maritime lawyer here) that the flag countries of the vessels involved do the investigation with resulting actions against crews and companies and the suit for damages can probably heard in any world maritime court (courts in that country that hear maritime matters) that is agreed upon by what seems to be a bunch of entities that are not likely to agree.


interesting , thanks Scott


also I hope that Brett aka BandB will chime in with his skills nd thoughts in this field
 
Given the available history of this event would apparent malfeasance on the part of the mega yacht have any impact on insurance coverage.
 
Unless I have missed something...a pretty thin couple of news reports really lack much in accident investigation answers as to why it happened which is necessary to assign levels of blame.

Sure...I too would guess that any big insurance claim will affect marine insurance...probably worldwide the way things have been going lately.
 
Given the available history of this event would apparent malfeasance on the part of the mega yacht have any impact on insurance coverage.



I’ve never seen any policy language to this effect, bu I have only ever seen a recreational policy. I expect both boats have crew requirements in their policies, but I’ve never heard of a policy being contingent on performance of the crew.

That said, as a professional mariner, I expect you only get to make a big mistake like this once in your career.
 
I am surprised Captains don't have professional liability insurance. Your doctor, accountant, mechanic,even your basic handyman carry liability insurance. I would think if I entrusted my megayacht to a person based on their credentials of being a licensed captain, I would have some recourse if they were negligent.
 
I am surprised Captains don't have professional liability insurance. Your doctor, accountant, mechanic,even your basic handyman carry liability insurance. I would think if I entrusted my megayacht to a person based on their credentials of being a licensed captain, I would have some recourse if they were negligent.


You would think so, but liability insurance for Captains would probably be so prohibitively expensive that most Captains probably couldn't afford it . . .
 
Hopefully an insurance guy that knows will chime in...but what I believe I have seen posted before is...as to damages to the yacht...only the owner can insure ...in other words you can't insure someone else's property.


As for liability...that is often pretty cheap in comparison.


My old boss who wanted me to teach all kinds of boating/maritime related courses said he could add that business to his existing insurance for peanuts. I asked about his insurance in general which included assistance towing, tugs and barges, environmental cleanup and HAZMAT hauling, commercial vessel services, renting out captains, etc...etc... and he said overall the insurance wasn't that bad.... now that was years ago and it might have gone up...but what hasn't?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom