Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scouterjames]

Wowzers!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/18/fishermen-hurled-from-boat-at-57-mph-as-camera-rolls.html

[RalphH]

disturbing to see the number of boats that flew by after these guys went in the water.

Don't people know there is a legal obligation to assist in a situation like that?

[Damien]

He may have kind of took a less than ideal angle a bad angle, didn't cut across the other boat's wake.

I had a bass-style modified V hull G3.  Even though my boat topped at 44MPH, it is scary going that fast without a deep V slicing through.

Also, for the guys that appeared to zip on by.  You can't abruptly throttle down going that fast.  There is a lot going on at that speed.  If you fly by and circle back, you lessen the wake getting thrown at the men overboard and their vessel.  You reduce the risk of swamping your own boat with wash coming over your transom with a quick stop, especially a risk in a bass boat with very little freeboard.  Also, the boaters may be hard to see if you go sharply and immediately towards them after than have gone over. There would be a lot of surface turbulance from their boat and now your wake coming into the mix at the time you begin approaching increasing the risk of hitting the guys overboard.

[RalphH]

...but how do you explain:

• one boat stopped after 4 or so went by
• very close to 1 minute between when they went into the water and the 4 boats go by ; lots of time to respond as you describe
  
• none of the boats that sped by made any attempt to come back
• both of guys who went in the water were wearing PFDs and would have been visible in the water

 
rationalizations are useless particularly when the one boat that stopped proves that it was very possible & probably easy to stop and offer assistance.

My verdict is the boats who didn't stop didn't give a damn and had one concern - being first at their destination. I'd say the 1st 4 boats should be disqualified from that tournament at a minimum of not banned from competition. There are similar rules in sailing competitions.

 Bass tournaments stink in my opinion anyway - that video is just more proof what's wrong with them.

[Damien]

Because the guy that did stop had longer to see it happen and more time to throttle down as he approached.  Also, the first guy that stopped may have been closer to the back of the pack.  You can't just stop when other boats are coming up on your from behind at 60mph.  I'm not saying that some guys may be more interested in the tournament than stopping to help.  But how many boats stopping to help is enough?  How many is dangerous?

Looking at the video it was under one minute from the time of the accident to the fist boat passing in the video. In most tournament takeoffs, a boat leaves every 10 to 15 seconds. I am assuming the next 4 or 5 boats likely saw the accident and stopped out of camera view.

[Novabonker]

Maybe they just wanted to go for a swim..... Stupid is as stupid does.

[scouterjames]

disturbing to see the number of boats that flew by after these guys went in the water.

Don't people know there is a legal obligation to assist in a situation like that?

Tournament mode = no help LOL

[skaha]

--tough call
--slam on the brakes and cause a chain reaction cluster or boats behind concentrating on stopped boats and run over those in the water.
--very difficult to stop in a short distance or turn at those speeds in full trim.
--proceedures would have been discussed at pre-event meeting.

[RalphH]

so Damien at 57 mph just how much distance does a boat like this need to decelerate to the point it can turn around?

FWIW it's clear in the film the boat that had the mishap was well out of the path  of the following boats.

They were also so close to one another than if what both you and Skaha suggest is true - then they were already operating their boats in an unsafe manner.

Last point was my first - it is a legal requirement to stop and provide assistance. Maritime law in that regard is the law and I still say operators of  the following 4 boats were negligent. 

It all sucks no matter how it's slices and there is no legit excuse.

[skaha]

--I have been at events where there are safety...sweeper boats. They do not want untrained people helping out unless there is imminent danger and first at the scene is the only option to assist.
--I don't have a boat that is fast enough that the hull is just skimming over the water. Abrupt foot off the gas can cause the boat to flip.
--My boat a bit simpler... I trim down then throttle down.

--If this was not a competition that would have rules then I would agree first boat should stop to help. I don't know what the safety rules were for this event... it could be that the passing boats were not following the proceedures.
--I don't know how far away the safety crews were.

--Safety violations are usually automatic disqualification.

[GordJ]

so Damien at 57 mph just how much distance does a boat like this need to decelerate to the point it can turn around?

FWIW it's clear in the film the boat that had the mishap was well out of the path  of the following boats.

They were also so close to one another than if what both you and Skaha suggest is true - then they were already operating their boats in an unsafe manner.

Last point was my first - it is a legal requirement to stop and provide assistance. Maritime law in that regard is the law and I still say operators of  the following 4 boats were negligent. 

It all sucks no matter how it's slices and there is no legit excuse.

I don't pretend to know "maritime law" but I would argue that 50' from shore is not at sea, there is no evidence that their lives were in peril, that they signalled for help or that they needed assistance at all. We hav all seen sporting events where an injured player is virtually ignored until the end of the play and I don't see any difference here. Leave 'em for the safety boat.
If a derby came to a halt every time someone fell in the water they would have trouble finishing one.

[RalphH]

The only thing that made sense to me is that safety boats were present to provide assistance if that was in fact true. How anyone in the 4 boats that flew past could know at the time "there is no evidence that their lives were in peril, that they signaled for help or that they needed assistance" is beyond me. Any reasonable person would consider people in the water by an empty boat as 'in distress'

If interested here is a link to the law in the Canadian Context; http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/MaritimeLaw/LawArticle-389/The-Obligation-to-Render-Assistance-at-Sea.aspx

Maxiumum penalty for not providing assistance is $1 million.

The laws are similar in the US.

I'd also note that large ships that can take 20+ miles to come to a full stop are required to turn around and offer assistance if they come across people lost at sea. BC Ferries vessels regularly do this despite their requirement to adhere to a schedule & inconvenience to passengers. I've never heard of Ferry Passengers complain when such a thing happens though apparently some people who own high speed bass and jet boats would.

Cheers. 

[GordJ]

The only thing that made sense to me is that safety boats were present to provide assistance if that was in fact true. How anyone in the 4 boats that flew past could know at the time "there is no evidence that their lives were in peril, that they signaled for help or that they needed assistance" is beyond me. Any reasonable person would consider people in the water by an empty boat as 'in distress'

If interested here is a link to the law in the Canadian Context; http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/MaritimeLaw/LawArticle-389/The-Obligation-to-Render-Assistance-at-Sea.aspx

Maxiumum penalty for not providing assistance is $1 million.

The laws are similar in the US.

I'd also note that large ships that can take 20+ miles to come to a full stop are required to turn around and offer assistance if they come across people lost at sea. BC Ferries vessels regularly do this despite their requirement to adhere to a schedule & inconvenience to passengers. I've never heard of Ferry Passengers complain when such a thing happens though apparently some people who own high speed bass and jet boats would.

Cheers. 

And it is your opinion that they were "at sea"? They looked to be within 50' of shore. You are assuming that the guy climbing into the boat was in distress and..... oh never mind,  two more internet experts, you and me.

[arimaBOATER]

My first impression(s) of this vid are: as these guys said " thank The Lord they were unhurt".
These guys could have been very seriously injured or in wheel chairs.
Also the boat stayed afloat & did not flip over.
Kill switch / floatation proved their worth.
Personally I believe the other boats were quite far back & they did not see what happened.
They are going so fast they barely had time to glance over & realize why the boat is at a stand still & why are there boaters in the water.
Possibly they just thought these guys jumped in for a swim.
Or were scuba divers etc...
The boat that did check on them my guess is was travelling at a lower speed & just decided to throttle down & give a check see.
Ironically this was a concern of mine in the years I was a boater.
Going 80% throttle for 30-50 minutes & hoping not to have a steering cable breakage.
Outboard to suddenly turn at high speed. Never happened.

[RalphH]

And it is your opinion that they were "at sea"? They looked to be within 50' of shore. You are assuming that the guy climbing into the boat was in distress and..... oh never mind,  two more internet experts, you and me.

I would  leave it to judge to ultimately decide both questions