On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even
changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

"Harry" wrote in message
m...
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge operator
could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the small boat,
it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even changed the
direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Or at least a camera.

"Harold" wrote in message
...

"Harry" wrote in message
m...
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even changed
the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Or at least a camera.

They do have lookouts, but are used mainly during docking and mating of
barges. A lookout could do very little but alert the captain, and the
captain could do very little, as these things don't stop and turn on a dime.

Steve

visit my blog at http://cabgbypasssurgery.com

A fool shows his annoyance at once, but a prudent man overlooks an insult.

In article ,
says...

On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even
changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

And I ought to know, I've captained on many barges in my past.

On 23/06/2010 6:26 AM, Harry wrote:
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even
changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Don't they have spotters and horns?

Can't say I have navigated those waters but if they are that long I
would expect spotters at least.
--
The bigger government gets, the more it tends to rule out common sense.

On 6/23/10 9:22 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 23/06/2010 6:26 AM, Harry wrote:
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even
changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Don't they have spotters and horns?

Can't say I have navigated those waters but if they are that long I
would expect spotters at least.


Well, on a nine barge train, the spotter would have to be on the bow of
the most forward barge to do any good. I don't know the answer to your
question.

I do know, though, that it can be very dangerous to fish in the "ship
channel" in the middle of Chesapeake Bay, because huge freighters can
"sneak right up" on you if you are not paying close attention. Another
dangerous place is near the mouth of the St. Johns River in NE Florida.
That river has significant shipping and military traffic.

On 23/06/2010 7:26 AM, Harry wrote:
On 6/23/10 9:22 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 23/06/2010 6:26 AM, Harry wrote:
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge
operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the
small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even
changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Don't they have spotters and horns?

Can't say I have navigated those waters but if they are that long I
would expect spotters at least.


Well, on a nine barge train, the spotter would have to be on the bow of
the most forward barge to do any good. I don't know the answer to your
question.

I do know, though, that it can be very dangerous to fish in the "ship
channel" in the middle of Chesapeake Bay, because huge freighters can
"sneak right up" on you if you are not paying close attention. Another
dangerous place is near the mouth of the St. Johns River in NE Florida.
That river has significant shipping and military traffic.

Agreed about fishing or parking in a shipping channel. If you do, you
want to be looking out and be sure you can get out of the way quick.

--
The bigger government gets, the more it tends to rule out common sense.

"Harry" wrote in message
m...
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge operator
could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the small boat,
it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even changed the
direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Good point... or maybe they should be restricted in how many barges they can
push in a confined space.
We have a bit of a similar controversy up here on 'road trains'... that is
18 wheelers pulling two trailers, rather than one.
Lots of safety concerns from the public.

YukonBound wrote:


"Harry" wrote in message
m...
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What
size barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the
barge operator could see anything in front of him, and, if he could
see the small boat, it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or
even changed the direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Good point... or maybe they should be restricted in how many barges
they can push in a confined space.
We have a bit of a similar controversy up here on 'road trains'...
that is 18 wheelers pulling two trailers, rather than one.
Lots of safety concerns from the public.
The two have nothing in common. Barges move at, maybe, 10 knots. At
5:30pm there was enough light to see this thing coming.

In article ,
says...

"Harry" wrote in message
m...
On 6/23/10 8:21 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:29 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:09:42 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
Tragic:

http://www.newschannel9.com/news/cre...-capsized.html

Even more so...

"None of the people in the fishing boat were wearing life jackets at
time of accident."

Sad.

It's not likely that a life jacket would have saved someone run over
by a bunch of barges and a tug. That's the problem I have with those
statistics, the "pro life jacket" people always want to assume that
wearing a life jacket would have saved the victim. And that is not
always the case. We don't wear life jackets while recreational
boating. I only ask people to wear one if they are very young or
can't swim. Wearing a life jacket is a situation by situation call.

It's hard to imagine tht these three guys could have all missed seeing
this bearing down on them. I can understand how the tug operator
might have missed seeing them.


According to the news story, the tug was pushing nine barges. What size
barges, I don't know, but that far back, it is unlikely the barge operator
could see anything in front of him, and, if he could see the small boat,
it isn't likely he could have stopped in time or even changed the
direction of that train of barges significantly.

Perhaps operators of pusher barge trains should be required to post a
forward lookout on the bow of the most forward barge.

Good point... or maybe they should be restricted in how many barges they can
push in a confined space.
We have a bit of a similar controversy up here on 'road trains'... that is
18 wheelers pulling two trailers, rather than one.
Lots of safety concerns from the public.

How is a two trailer truck rig similar to a tug pushing barges, little
buddy?