All Activity

I still assert that even the report says "as likely as not", meaning 50:50, and for a prosecution you need to be beyond reasonable doubt. Note I've not been saying the capsize occurred where the skipper said, but I've been saying you can't rely on the location being where the modelling said. It could have been fairly much anywhere. But anyway, lets move on. What does it mean for the case if the capsize occurred where the modelling suggests it did? - as opposed to anywhere else other than where the skipper thought he was, which could be anywhere. They were heading in to anchor, in how

To roll a boat you need the following conditions; Wave height must match the beam of the boat (risk of knock-down and rolling) The boat needs to be broadside or oblique to the wave The boat needs to be struck by a breaking wave: unless the wave is breaking, the boat should ride up and over the wave regardless of the wave height in comparison to the boat length and the boat’s orientation to the wave When the wave height reaches 50% of the boat length, there is a high probability of capsizing, with more than 60% the boat is going to be capsized every time of course only

Beyond reasonable doubt. Which is why the issue of relative culpability will be important.

You must have missed the bit where the EPIRB track lined up with the drift modeling - proving that the Easterly turn wasn't Aliens but was actually the expected/modelled tidal drift. I think you have a better chance of convincing people that it was Aliens which moved the EPIRB, the Flybridge and all the debris from 1mile north east of the EPIRB activation point into the Northern tidal stream at the 10m contour. Cause you'll never convince anyone who knows anything about the tide, that a 1Nm wide eddy was moving at 6knots in a WSW direction.

I have begun to draw the conclusion that you have not actually read the report. You'll be pleased to know it wasn't Aliens. So, RCC were using a model at the time of the incident that said this is exactly what would happen - low and behold it is exactly what happened. The report further clarifies how the commission determined the location of the capsize: I am no expert, but from my simple calculations - for the flybridge to have drifted from the location the skipper claims the capsize occurred to the point where the EPIRB was activated and attached to the Fly Bridge,

"About as likely as not" As in 50:50. Yes, I have read the report. Most of it when it first came out and parts of it in the last few days.

How do you define an expert? I can be an expert in anything if you want to pay me enough. That's how it works isn't it? I do have reasonable knowledge of modelling and I know that sh*t out of a computer / model is only as good as the sh*t in. I have enough knowledge of surf beaches to know rips / strong outgoing currents can be just meters away from incoming waves / strong incoming forces. Whilst sailing I have seen tide lines with measurable currents going in random directions, normally 90 deg to the current I was in. Whilst spearfishing / snorkelling around reefs and head

I was assuming the fully spec'ed auto inflating with 250n of bouyance, auto-deploying sprayhood, light and double crutch straps, as per the ones I have on my boat. It didn't occur to me that the fisho's would be using the old manual variety. But yes, there is a wide range of opinions on LJ's, especially around risk of entrapment in upside down boats. If I were in the sea, I'd want my fully pimped LJ on, if I was inside an upside down boat with it on, well, perhaps I'd be reaching for the inbuilt strap cutter

4 stroke, right? They have very small jets, it's VERY likely a carb blockage. Take the jets out and clean them - they are very small in these motors, and will block with older fuel that has gelled a little.... Empty the fuel into your car, clean the fuel system, and fresh fuel, it will go fine....

Is this an expert opinion? Or one of those everyone-has-one opinions? If the former, then I strongly suggest you get in touch with the defense team, as they have produced no expert witness to discredit the tide modelling, and no other people that have local knowledge of the area have come forward to discuss phantom eddies. I also don't know how it was done, but that doesn't mean it wasn't and it certainly doesn't mean that I am qualified to discredit the people/teams/companies that did.

The jets in those carbs are tiny ( ours is worse, it's the 2.5hp version) so even invisibly small crap can block them. Fresh fuel less than 3 months old helps. TBH, if it hasn't been serviced in a while just drop the whole thing in to Ray Bryant and let them sort it. Then you are good for another year.

I disagree with your opinion My opinion is that seasoned fisherpeople, going on the trip of a lifetime to the Three Kings, would be smart enough to know not to inflate their LJ's until they are outside.

Flooding wasn't the issue, still wont start, but sounds like it's the thing to do. Cheers

I pulled mine apart when I feel like a pleasant easy job in the shed, dismantle the carb and soak various bits in CRC carb cleaner, then put it back together how it came apart. Starts second pull cold start and first pull every time, 2hp Yamaha. Doing that addresses things like a sticky float, grease / wax build up in the bowl and sh*t in the jets and what not. If you think you flooded it, it might just be that, but an easy strip down and clean of the carb is probably the first diagnostic step in identifying any other issues that you have mentioned.

C'mon, what else is there to the case? I'm keen to know. Do you mean the other fishing vessel that was called as a key witness that said it was too rough to leave the anchorage, but was found under cross examination to have been fishing all day? In contravention of their own SoP's if the wind was as high as they said, that one? Or the Predict Wind forecast that said 20knts easing, or the observed 10 to 12knts at the time of capsize? What more is there to the case?

I like that idea

Today it decided I needed the exercise rowing to my mooring. That wasn't too bad, it was then return journey against the tide that nearly did me in. Anyway, I digress. Friday it started no probs. Today, not so much. I did get it to fire for a few seconds. But then, really nothing. Probably flooded the carb, but I'm thinking the main issue might be the fuel pump, fuel delivery. Sounds like not enough getting through to supply carb? Anyone had similar issues? There's a couple of membranes the fuel passes through on the way to the carb. Hopefully that'll fix it. It

No as you defending the skipper all the way through. And I will say skipper was neglect on all accounts,remember dead men tell no lies. At first skipper hung to dry by no first aid cert but seems more to the case now. I will wait for the court verdict before any more discussion. Transmission over.

Don't see how that is an applicable analogy seeing as the stop sign was in the skippers head (or not) and any incoming has to be assumed at 100% probable to be safe. But I get your drift. Forgoing the WP and dragging lures over a drop off could conceivably result in some last minute fun and disincentivize stop signs. TIC.

Legally there are levels of culpability. Let's put it in an everyday setting. I stop at a stop sign, check for cross traffic, don't see any, and so I pull out into the main road. A motorcycle hits me on the right side as I pull out. I have deliberately acted, pulling out from the stop sign and prima facie causing an accident (failure to make sure the way is clear, failure to give way to the right). Was I careless? Only if it can be shown that I should reasonably have seen and so given way to the motorcycle. If, for instance, it turns out that motorcycle was travelling at

Now now, who didn't read what I wrote? If you had read what I wrote, you would see I was referring to the 4 guys that died waiting to be rescued. One was believed / confirmed dead caught in the hull at the time of the role over. Any chance you want to discuss this constructively, or are you just keen on taking potshots now?

Why do you constanly say 4 died when it was 5? Now who hasnt read the report?

This is a good and constructive post, thank you CD. My understanding was that it was confirmed 4 were alive when the helo was full with rescued people, but I do acknowledge I need to go back and confirm that. You points about PLB's are highly relevant. However, I suspect that if everyone were wearing LJ's they all would have drowned due to being trapped in the initial role over (or at least a high number). If all were wearing PLB's then the rescue outcomes would have been entirely different. I understand via FB that now punters on the charters do wear PLB's - I don't know

Solely blaming the skipper is like saying accidents should never happen. It is incredibly overly simplistic. If accidents aren't allowed to happen, why do we go to such great lengths to prepare boats for Cat 1? Offshore first aid kits and liferafts? Avoiding fatallities is about preparedness. My position is, post the capsize, preparedness was lacking at multiple levels. This is highlighted with major shortcommings in the rescue, but also a couple of basic facts no-one has gotten into yet. The liferaft didn't self activate like it was supposed to. The EPIRB didn't self activate l

Have you actually read the TAIC report? Just wanting to know if we are on the same page with the facts before we debate opinions. Delays so long in getting helo A ready they have to ask someone else to do the rescue. 5 hours without operating helos, just because. Those 4 guys were well within range of rescue. MRCC would have known 10 were onboard after phoning the EPIRB contacts, but only sent one helo... Noting the second helo was tasked cause the first helo was having a clusterfuck, the third helo was tasked the following day. MRCC only tasked one helo in the first instan