posted 08-02-2015 08:25 AM ET (US)        

In the late evening of July 3, 2015 on the three-day holiday weekend, a 39-year-old boater was operating a 29-foot cabin-cruiser-type boat with 12 people aboard in the West Arm of Grand Traverse Bay of Lake Michigan, near Traverse City, Michigan. The local time was about 11:30 p.m. The sun had set at 9:32 p.m. Nautical twilight had ended at at 10:57 p.m, and astronomical twilight would end at midnight. In simple terms, it was close to being as dark as possible that night.

The boat was apparently underway at some significant speed when it struck the aid to navigation known as "West Arm Lighted Buoy 8", which was presumed to be in its charted position east of a 7-foot shoal in the bay. The impact with the buoy caused considerable damage to the hull near the water line, opening up a large section of the hull, and allowing water to enter.

The operator of the boat continued underway for about 0.6-miles, arriving at the Elmwood Township Marina, where he passed through the breakwall entrance and quickly moored his boat to the T-dock at the end of the marina's A-dock. All 12 people were able to leave the boat, which then sank at the dock. Some time later, perhaps the next day, a crane was able to lift the boat out of the water and onto its trailer. The Leelanau County Sheriff said an investigation would be made and indicated the boater may be charged with reckless operation of a water craft.

Photographs of the boat appeared on the website of local broadcast TV station WWTV at

http://www.9and10news.com/story/29491992/ leelanau-county-deputies-help-rescue-12-people-off-sinking-boat

An image of the boat on its trailer showed the hull damage to be just above the water line on the starboard side of the forward quarter of the hull. Images of the boat at the dock show the boat flooded down so the stern cockpit gunwales are underwater, but the bow of the boat is still afloat. The boat was listing to starboard. The images also show that the boat has a RADAR antenna mounted on its RADAR arch. There also appears to be a GNSS antenna or receiver on the arch. From those images it seems reasonable to infer the boat had RADAR and a GPS receiver, and likely an electronic chart plotter.

The Sheriff was mentioned in the newspaper accounts saying that the West Arm Lighed Buoy 8 was also damaged by the impact, but no details were given.

Boat down flooded at dock the following day.

Close-up of hull damage.

West Arm Lighted Buoy 8, including RADAR reflector
Photos from 9and10news.com. Click images for larger versions.

It would appear that the operator of the boat had several means by which he could know the position of the West Arm Lighted Buoy 8 relative to his vessel. Since the buoy was a lighted aid to navigation and there is no basis to believe the light was extinguished, it should have been clearly visible by eye to a lookout on the boat. Since the boat had RADAR, there should have been a strong RADAR return from the very large steel buoy's RADAR reflector visible on the RADAR plan position indicator. With the buoy in its charted position, and the boat having a GNSS receiver, it should have been apparent where the boat was in relation to the buoy. Despite the buoy being visible by eye, by RADAR, and by a plot of the boat position on a chart, the operator apparently did not see it, and he piloted the 29-foot boat into the buoy.

posted 08-02-2015 10:07 AM ET (US)            

RULE 5 -- LOOKOUT
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=navRulesContent#rule5

RULE 6 -- SAFE SPEED
Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account:

(a) By all vessels:

(i) The state of visibility;
(ii) The traffic density including concentrations of fishing vessels or any other vessels;
(iii) The manageability of the vessel with special reference to stopping distance and turning ability in the prevailing conditions;
(iv) At night, the presence of background light such as from shore lights or from back scatter from her own lights;
(v) The state of wind, sea and current, and the proximity of navigational hazards;
(vi) The draft in relation to the available depth of water.

(b) Additionally, by vessels with operational radar:

(i) The characteristics, efficiency and limitations of the radar equipment;
(ii) Any constraints imposed by the radar range scale in use;
(iii) The effect on radar detection of the sea state, weather and other sources of interference;
(iv) The possibility that small vessels, ice and other floating objects may not be detected by radar at an adequate range;
(v) The number, location and movement of vessels detected by radar;
(vi) The more exact assessment of the visibility that may be possible when radar is used to determine the range of vessels or other objects in the vicinity.

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=navRulesContent#rule6

Note that a vessel with an operational RADAR has added factors which must be taken into account.

RULE 7 -- RISK OF COLLISION
(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.

(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.

(c) Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information.

(d) In determining if risk of collision exists the following considerations shall be among those taken into account:

(i) Such risk shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not appreciably change.
(ii) Such risk may sometimes exist even when an appreciable bearing change is evident, particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a tow or when approaching a vessel at close range.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=navRulesContent#rule7

Note again the vessel that is fitted with RADAR and the RADAR set is operational has additional responsibilities: "Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational..."

posted 08-03-2015 03:01 PM ET (US)            

Crippling injury or death, MCL 324.80172 - Circuit Court 2 year misdemeanor.

or,

Felonious Operation of Vessel, MCL 324.80173 - 2 year felony.

posted 08-03-2015 03:19 PM ET (US)            

When it is dark, I'd slow to a crawl if I had to look away for any reason.

Maybe it is the small boat that makes me "paranoid", I guess I can see putting my one bedroom boat on autopilot while I enjoy a cocktail with the lady on the couch....

posted 08-04-2015 04:20 AM ET (US)            

https://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/16000-16999/CIM_16500_3A.pdf

A Type 6X20LR buoy weighs 6,500-lbs.

The lantern on the West Arm Lighted Buoy 8 looks similar to a Carmanah model M860:

posted 08-04-2015 06:48 AM ET (US)         

To say he "failed to maintain proper lookout" is a broad enough indictment as to be applicable to any and every accident on the water. Hit a floating log at night, failed to maintain proper lookout, forgot to put plug in boat, failed to maintain proper lookout, ran aground, failed to maintain proper lookout, there is no accident or incident that cannot be blamed on failure to maintain proper lookout.

posted 08-04-2015 09:28 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

Hit a floating log at night, failed to maintain proper lookout,

---

posted 08-04-2015 09:36 AM ET (US)            

reckless adjective: marked by lack of proper caution

Also, I don't believe that it is entirely due to the grace of God that most of us have not already had a collision with a 6,500-lbs lighted aid-to-navigation while underway on-plane with our boats. I think the reason most of us have not collided with a 6,500-lbs lighted aid-to-navigation is that we have been exercising proper caution in the operation of our boats. Proper caution in operation of a boat is what keeps boats from routinely striking other objects, more so than the grace of God.

posted 08-06-2015 07:19 AM ET (US)            

From what I have read in this thread, I have not seen anyone who is urging that the operator of the boat be charged with a criminal violation. We do seem to have a lot of people insisting he should not be charged with having done anything wrong.

I am afraid I can't join the chorus that urges the fellow did not do anything wrong. It seems obvious to me he did something wrong--he hit a rather large, lighted, well-known aid-to-navigation. That is not proper boating. That is improper boating. I can't make a case that he ought to be exonerated.

posted 08-06-2015 10:12 AM ET (US)            

I would argue that an anchor and appropriate rode is a far more important piece of safety equipment than a flare. I'm unaware of any requirement to have an anchor aboard.

posted 08-06-2015 01:47 PM ET (US)            

Two Baltimore women were killed early Sunday [July 26, 2015] when a 37-foot boat struck a concrete abutment just south of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, emergency officials said. Six people were hospitalized in the crash, [according to a] Maryland Department of Natural Resources Police spokeswoman. The crash was first reported to authorities at 3:08 a.m. Authorities recovered one of the women's bodies at 8:20 a.m. and the second just before 1 p.m.

The group had gone out for dinner and drinks Saturday night at the Hard Yacht Cafe in Dundalk, where they met the boat's operator, age 55. He invited the group for a ride to Fells Point, where they spent several hours in the bars.

The crash occurred as the boat approached the Key Bridge on the way back to Dundalk. The boat, a Sea Ray Sundancer registered to an owner from Baltimore, struck one of four concrete abutments on the Dundalk side of the Patapsco River.

The structures are situated along the shipping channel, 50 yards from the bridge, to prevent it from being struck by boats. The bridge, which carries Interstate 695 over the Patapsco River, was not damaged, the Coast Guard said.

The above lifted in part from the local news paper. The incident early Sunday morning July 26. I happened to see the vessel being towed (with Police escort) to a boatyard located up Middle River near Baltimore.

If Rules 5, 6 and 7 had been heeded, this would not have happened. Oh, I forgot about the probable use of alcohol by the operator.

The Key Bridge spans the Patapsco River outside Baltimore, Maryland and is hard to miss. The "bumpers" or dolfins as they are sometimes called, apparently are not so hard to miss. Not the first time they have been struck by recreational boats at night.

posted 08-06-2015 03:05 PM ET (US)            

Here is a link to a very large image of the bridge, in which the four concrete island-piers can be seen:

posted 08-06-2015 02:11 PM ET (US)            

http://www.uscgnews.com/go/doc/4007/2566458/

posted 08-06-2015 03:00 PM ET (US)            

http://www.9and10news.com/story/26417006/ boat-crashes-into-north-breakwall-in-ludington

Seems like some one puts a boat on the break wall close by every year.

posted 08-06-2015 04:18 PM ET (US)            

Fort Carroll was designed by Robert E. Lee. He oversaw its construction and resided with his wife in Baltimore at that time. Constructed of granite blocks, it's somewhat unyeilding--to a SeaRay at least.