hudson river crash

quote:
Originally posted by PeteMrrs

Rawidman says:

" . . .And apparently he did need a class to inform him that operating under the influence of alcohol should not be done"

IMHO anyone who chooses to drink while operating a boat is not going to be influenced by a classroom instructor telling them that it should not be done. You can't teach common sense.
Click to expand...
You can teach common sense and you can teach specifics such as not to operate a boat when under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.

The proof is in the significant reduction in road accidents caused by alcohol and drugs because of continual education and enforcement over the past several years.

But, if enough people believe that things can't be improved, then it's unlikely that they ever will be.

Back to the argument about the barge not being properly lit, It apparently had the legally required lighting. Regardless, if you are operating a boat and collide with something, you are at fault. It could just as easily been a floating or partially floating log, a shipping container, or any other debris in the water. These are not required to have lights.

When I boat at night, my speed is determined by my stopping distance. Put another way, I my speed is set so that I can stop in the distance I can see ahead of my boat. If the operator in this case had been using that philosophy, there would have been no accident and no lives lost and no criminal charges.
 
Ron; Just because you travel at a speed that allows you the proper stopping distance, it still will not do you any good if you can not or do not see the obstruction ahead of you.

You can allow yourself the ability to stop in 300', but if you don't see the other structure until you are 150' away than you are just SOL. Your plan, while seeming safe and prudent does not insure that there would have been no accident, lives lost or criminal charges.
 
Only the dumb and uninformed believe that mandatory education and licensing will solve the problem.
 
quote:
Originally posted by PeteMrrs

Ron; Just because you travel at a speed that allows you the proper stopping distance, it still will not do you any good if you can not or do not see the obstruction ahead of you.

You can allow yourself the ability to stop in 300', but if you don't see the other structure until you are 150' away than you are just SOL. Your plan, while seeming safe and prudent does not insure that there would have been no accident, lives lost or criminal charges.

Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my post. If I can only see 150 feet in front of my, I set my speed to where I can stop within 150 feet.
 
quote:
Originally posted by In the know

Only the dumb and uninformed believe that mandatory education and licensing will solve the problem.

Click to expand...

Only the dumb and uninformed would post what you posted.
 
Anchor Management 'hit the nail on the head', so to speak. Regulation 33CFR 88.13 states that an anchored barge reuires " 2 unobstructed all-around white lights of an intensity to be visible for at least 1 nautical mile." The problem developes when there are too many other white lights in the vicinity. From the photos I've seen on TV, that seems to be the case here. That, however, still does not absolve the pilot of responsibility for being aware of what's around him. That's why he should have been going at no-wake speed in that area. To my knowledge the news reports do not indicate that he has been charged with BWI, just with vehicular manslaughter and assault. That indicates a case for negligence. We'll see what the toxicology shows. I do believe that education and licensing could minimize these accidents. Had he taken a safe boating course he would have been aware of the required lights on a barge and the problems associated with seeing them amidst the 'white noise' of countless other lights at the construction site, and would then have known to drive at a minimal speed. And, NO, I'm not dumb or uninformed. I'm well-educated, aware, experienced, and informed. Let's keep the derogartory comments to yourself, will you, please, "In the know." They only show that you're not only not in the know, but also rather close-minded and arrogant. Hy
 
Ron;

I understood your post. Perhaps you did not understand mine.

Supose your range of vision at night is 300', and you set your speed accordingly.

You are traveling along, and all of a sudden you notice a barge at150' which previously escaped your attention.

Your reaction time is no longer sufficient and you hit the barge, having an accident, injuring passengers and bringing criminal charges upon yourself.

Or is it your contention that this could not happen?
 
quote:
Originally posted by L. Keith

Moored barges must be lighted in accordance with Rule #30 (anchor light) or may be lighted on the corners in accordance with 33 CFR 88.13.

Click to expand...


Thks for the CFR nr. So barges not projecting in a marked channel, or not restricting the channel to less than 80 meters, or not wider than 25 meters, etc... Do not need light.

A good reminder to be careful at night...
 
quote:
Originally posted by rawidman

quote:
Originally posted by PeteMrrs

Ron; Just because you travel at a speed that allows you the proper stopping distance, it still will not do you any good if you can not or do not see the obstruction ahead of you.

You can allow yourself the ability to stop in 300', but if you don't see the other structure until you are 150' away than you are just SOL. Your plan, while seeming safe and prudent does not insure that there would have been no accident, lives lost or criminal charges.

Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my post. If I can only see 150 feet in front of my, I set my speed to where I can stop within 150 feet.

Click to expand...


So what do you do when the unforeseen object is 75 feet off your bow?

I know, you pull out your boaters education handbook and skim the index for what to do. It must be covered in mandatory education and licensing, right?
 
quote:
Originally posted by PeteMrrs

Ron;

I understood your post. Perhaps you did not understand mine.

Supose your range of vision at night is 300', and you set your speed accordingly.

You are traveling along, and all of a sudden you notice a barge at150' which previously escaped your attention.

Your reaction time is no longer sufficient and you hit the barge, having an accident, injuring passengers and bringing criminal charges upon yourself.

Or is it your contention that this could not happen?

Click to expand...


"You are traveling along, and all of a sudden you notice a barge at150' which previously escaped your attention."

Of course it can happen but it's not supposed to. This indicates that you were not paying attention or "keeping a proper watch".

If an object is sitting more or less still in the water and you hit it, it's your fault. Who else's fault could it be?

Suppose a tree falls across a road and an hour later you're driving down the road and hit the tree. Are you going to blame the tree? The landowner? Or would you man up and take the blame like you should?
 
quote:
Originally posted by In the know

quote:
Originally posted by rawidman

quote:
Originally posted by PeteMrrs

Ron; Just because you travel at a speed that allows you the proper stopping distance, it still will not do you any good if you can not or do not see the obstruction ahead of you.

You can allow yourself the ability to stop in 300', but if you don't see the other structure until you are 150' away than you are just SOL. Your plan, while seeming safe and prudent does not insure that there would have been no accident, lives lost or criminal charges.

Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my post. If I can only see 150 feet in front of my, I set my speed to where I can stop within 150 feet.

Click to expand...


So what do you do when the unforeseen object is 75 feet off your bow?

I know, you pull out your boaters education handbook and skim the index for what to do. It must be covered in mandatory education and licensing, right?

Click to expand...


Dude: I think you would do better to consider this a "read only" thread in your case. It's clear you have nothing intelligent to write.
 
To the eyes of a prudent mariner, the mooring lights of a secured barge will stand out against the back lights. Back light conditions are very common and are encountered in every port of the world, you have to deal with them. To a low experience boat operator a couple of fixed white lights on an even visual level may be something not to raise alarm, but to a trained eye the mooring lights will stand out. Learn to look for the distinction that the lights show, don't concentrate on the characteristics of the individual lights.
 
quote:
Originally posted by CurrentSea

So by us you see cops, uscg, USPS volunteers, and bay constables on the water every day.
They are always pulling over people and doing safety checks.
But you never see them at night parked just outside the numerous on the water bars pulling over boaters at night.

Leave the honest boaters alone and go after the drunks.

Click to expand...


I have to say that I almost never see any enforcement people out on the water by us. Could be that I go out more during the week than on the weekends. But I rarely see a police boat, bay constable, or any other enforcement people actually on the water.
Probably the victims of budget cuts.
The rare times I do see them, I can't remember the last time I saw them with someone pulled over.
 
It was reported today on our local news station that one of the passengers was videoing the cruise during the impact on their phone. It appears that they had no idea that they were going to hit the barge. The recording kept going after impact. I am hoping that this video never gets made public but only is used to answer questions pertaining to details of the accident.
 
Wow, some of these self righteous comments are interesting to say the least.
 
Someone brought up that the media reported the pilot was charged with BUI. Did anyone verify this or are we taking the medias word as gospel?
The media has been wrong before and this might not be an exception.
Bill
 
Guys:

The operator of this vessel traveled this route early in the day (day light) going to Piermont for dinner. He had to travel around these barges or al least saw them. PLUS he lives in the area........
 
With all my belief in and support of boater education, my involvement with USCG AUX, and USCG's requirement for additional NIGHT OPS QUALIFICATION, I still know how easy it is to become distracted. Modern aircraft don't just fall out of the sky and modern boats don't just lose steering, at least with any regularity. Human Error, often Pilot/Operator Error, is the predominant factor. And within that, Loss of Situational Awareness (knowing exactly what's going on around ME and how it affects ME) is the undisputed KING of Human Error Hill.
 
quote:
Originally posted by L. Keith

To the eyes of a prudent mariner, the mooring lights of a secured barge will stand out against the back lights. Back light conditions are very common and are encountered in every port of the world, you have to deal with them. To a low experience boat operator a couple of fixed white lights on an even visual level may be something not to raise alarm, but to a trained eye the mooring lights will stand out. Learn to look for the distinction that the lights show, don't concentrate on the characteristics of the individual lights.

Click to expand...


I think there's the problem. Most pleasure boaters have very little or no experience operating at night, and simply have no clue what they are dealing with. Throw in a few drinks and they're an "accident" waiting to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top