Yachting FAIL - Jessica Watson

[zeehag]

any part of her boat hitting a freighter violates certain legal rules of the sea----why did she hit a larger ship?? only she knows. she is in the wrong no matter what the glossing over has to say. she needs to realize there needs to always be someone in cockpit and there needs to be someone monitoring her expensive tools she has for avoidance. larger ships have right of way no matter who you are . there mis rule 9 and there is rule of gross tonnage to show that is correct. i donot care how cute her pix are. i donot care how filthy rich her mommy and daddy are--she is wrong. could have been dead w rong. is a good thing she felt the hit--gawds only know the tanker didnt feel her-----she and her boat are like a tooth pick in the path of the freighter. she is fortunate to have survived her mistake.

[Endojoe]

Invisalign oughta sign on for some sponsorship.

[zeehag]

should be a company called
AVOIDABOTE

[Endojoe]

Originally Posted by zeehag

should be a company called
AVOIDABOTE

I was being an Ass, having just looked at the pictures of the poor girl smiling...but you're actually funny!

[Hurricane Harry]

It can happen to the best and have. Sorry for her./ Harry

[Artful Dodger]

If we were to have an accident with a vehicle and the other party was to leave they would charge them with leaving the scene of the accident, why must we all judge her it takes two for something to happen, she has been up front with some explanations but not other party, so in my books when someone makes no effort to defend themselves it speaks spades of guilt.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by zeehag

she is in the wrong no matter what the glossing over has to say. she needs to realize there needs to always be someone in cockpit and there needs to be someone monitoring her expensive tools she has for avoidance. larger ships have right of way no matter who you are .

And she needs to be out of the bloody shipping lane before sleeping.

There was no excuse for that simple rule.
She had thousands of miles of searoom to port, with no ships.

[Artful Dodger]

So if I get this right if in shipping lanes and no matter what precautions you take for avoidence, if your hit by a large ship they are free to head on with no explanation.

I think we should all wait until we get the report from the other side, as to why they never stopped, or radio for assitance for her, or as it seems some time later they turned off their AIS. There is always two sides no mater who's fault it is. We seem to be on her more than we should, at least that is the way I see it until all the facts are in. So I guess you who are commenting are free of guilt and are free to through stones, one should be careful as to what they sew, for they know not what they might reap, we are all human and do make mistakes.

[cat man do]

So the ship didn't stop
and the ship turned of the AIS

So what, they are totally separate incidents and in no way detract from the FACT that the sailor was in a shipping lane, seemingly sleeping, when there was so much room to port where there are no ships.

Why would I drive on a highway frequented by huge trucks with limited maneuverability, vision and no stopping power, when a short distance away is the exact same quality highway without a truck in sight?

Even worse, why would I drive on that highway full of trucks with my eyes closed (sleeping) ?

[handmer]

Sorry, I am just catching up on this thread and trying to sort fact from fiction.

cat man do, where did you read she was asleep / had her eyes closed at the time of the impact?

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by FSMike

assume that she was referring to the mast head tri-color hitting the side of the freighter when the mast came down.

Well she should have propper deck level nav lights. Those silly mast top things make it very difficult for other boats to judge distance.

Have the tricolour on if you like, but turn on the real nav lights when a target is close.

I am a bit amazed that the photo of her bow has no deck level lights at all.

Originally Posted by FSMike

At least one of us is wrong.

Point scoring? You don't need to we are all friends here.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by handmer

cat man do, where did you read she was asleep / had her eyes closed at the time of the impact?

She said she was below. But I note her blog has been changed and details now omitted.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Artful Dodger

I think we should all wait until we get the report from the other side, as to why they never stopped, or radio for assitance for her, or as it seems some time later they turned off their AIS. There is always two sides no mater who's fault it is.

60,000 tonne ships take some time to come to a stop - the articles indicated there was evidence that they had slowed (possibly in the process of stopping/turning around). They were, by Ms Watson's own account, in radio contact after the incident - if she did not require assistance then they did not need to stick around. Who says they turned off their AIS? It's a VHF transponder - once it's out of VHF range it won't be seen; shouldn't trust what you read in the papers, as they seem to have absolved the young girl of any blame. As you've said, there are two sides to the story; the only one we've heard has been full of inconsistencies (not blaming Ms Watson for this; she's been told to keep quiet while the investigation is ongoing, so the papers seem to be filling in the blanks with guesses.)

[David M]

Both parties appear to have made mistakes. Fault can always be assigned to both sides which is quite common with maritime accidents.

If the hearsay is true, I can think of a combination of at least 5 rules that were violated by both parties.

[Christian Van H]

May I be the first here to post this: :dead horsebeat::deadhorse beat: :dead horsebeat::deadhorse beat: