Dem folks gots big problems when this gets to court. Using an autopilot
in fog is a no-no, and this shows part of the reason why.

otn

wrote:
The report in the most current issue of "Soundings" of the recent L.I.
Sound collision-caused death (from a heart attack triggered by the
crash) of an otherwise *very* experienced/skillful and also
asssertedly safety-oriented captain/sailor when the J-105 in which he
was sleeping, crewed by his son and a friend, was motoring late at
night in the fog toward Block Island and was hit and sunk by a large
commercial cruiser reports that the J-105's two crew saw the
approaching motor boat (said to be moving at +/- 6 kts) but could not
disengage their autopilot in time to take evasive action . . . thus
raising the question:

How many of us who occasionally use these sorts of instruments take
the time and make the effort to be sure that crew actually knows how,
f'rinstance, to disengage an autopilot, etc., Etc. (however
"simple"/easy, and "obvious"?, one might think that and related
operations ought be and usually are)?

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003, otnmbrd wrote:

Dem folks gots big problems when this gets
to court. Using an autopilot in fog is a no-no,
and this shows part of the reason why.

One of the quites raised but not yet (reliably) reported (and to which
I don't know or suggest the answer) is, of course, whether the large
motor boat folks were relying on *their* autopilot.

(There have been conflicting reports about the motor vessel's speed
and its operator's reputation for care.)

wrote:
. . . . "Soundings" . . . reports that the
J-105's two crew saw the approaching
motor boat . . .but could not disengage
their autopilot in time to take evasive
action . . . .