@Technologicaltransfo it was decided both were at fault. however, it has been said the shonan maru,being the bigger ship, shoulda been aware. after they hit the ady gil they still continued to use the water cannon on the crew, so there is speculation they were trying to knock them off.
"Japan’s tsunami seems to have succeeded, where years of boycotts and protests & high-seas chases by Western environmentalists had failed, in knocking out a pillar of the nation’s whaling industry. Ayukawahama was 1 of only 4 communities in Japan that defiantly carried on whaling and eating whales as a part of the 'local culture', even as the rest of the nation loses interest in whale meat. 2 of their vessels were scheduled to participate in Japan's "research" whaling in April." japanprobe. com
Its obvious that it was ady Gil who had rammed into the bigger ship and later on played the victim. And its obvious too that some are in denial although the video footage shows otherwise.
Feb. 6 2009: "A boat with anti-whaling activists collides with a japanese whaling vessel in the Antarctic Ocean. No one was injured. Japan is condemning the clash, calling it unforgivable."
Jan. 6 2010: "A japanese whaling vessel collided with the anti-whaling powerboat Ady Gil. The vessel sunk. There was one injury reported. The japanese officials have since repeatedly refused to cooperate with investigations over this collision."
So assuming the conservatives are correct, and it was the Ady's fault.... why did the Japanese continue shooting water cannons at a sinking vessel in the middle of the Antarctic Ocean? Maritime law requires ASSISTING stranded ships/boats, not dumping more freezing cold water on-top of them.
why would anyone think that Sea Shepherd did this intentionally? if there's any media whore in sea shepherd, it's Captain Watson, not Captain Bethune. Pete wouldn't intentionally destroy his own boat, which is a big part of his life. He put millions into making that thing and he broke world records with that boat. It's basically his home for much of the time. There's no way that this was intentional on Sea Shepherd's part.
@hup2thepenguin pull your head out of your ass and look at the video! they waited till the last moment and then accelerated from a stop such that they would get hit by the ship
the ady gil is stopped, no wash from the props, when the ship gets closer the ady gil powers forward, props start turning and ady gil starts making way such that they get hit by the ship it IS100% intentional
I can't believe anyone is stupid/blind enough to not see that the ady gil did this on purpose
@fallbrookchristopher no one was in the cockpit. I didnt see the engine spitting out water when the rear came out of the water. and no one would be stupid enought to be in the cockpit of the boat while being rammed or intending to ram.
@hzuiel are you an idiot? the Sea Shepherds just shut down the Japanese Whaling Fleet this season, and they ARENT comming back! So ha! You say they arent doing anything? look at them now dumb ass
ok in no way am i rooting for japan..but does no one else thinks its fucking hilarious tht right b4 the boat got owned paul was like" i belive tht the addy gill will stop the killing of whales" and then 2 mins later the fucking boat is torn in half? or tht the peopl on the addy gill were like " ohh we r soo scared then again 2 mins later they got rammed? maybe its just me i watch this show for the fuck ups
@BASSchampion77 It is true that Bethune's arrogance is what partially caused the collision. He did not take proper steps to insure the safety of his crew. However, if Japan had not purposely run down the AG then none of this would have happened either. Both Captains share some blame.
@rosepetal108 well im just saying tht the sea shepard crew arent too bright like last nights episode the small boat teams are stuck in the ocean for 5 hours!?!?!? how do u fuck up tht bad? thts our own team
Sadly if you watch the footage from on board the whaling ship you can see the AG speed up into the path of the bigger boat, watch towards the rear of the AG you'll see the water become agitated its propulsion systems. Also, with how often the SS tends to ran the whaling boats I have no sympathy. However the fact that the Japanese label all their whaling boats as research vessels are lame.
@kamuirazielx ===> "watch towards the rear of the AG you'll see the water become agitated its propulsion systems"
That last second attempt to get out of the way is required by Maritime law. If they didn't at least try to move out of the way, they would be 100% at fault. In this case, they were found only partially at fault, for not getting out of the way sooner. (due to a failure in setting a proper watch to warn the helmsman sooner)
The SM2 was found at fault for causing the incident.
Like many others this is the fist time i've seen this footage from the ady gil, which does make it look more like the whaling vessel turned to hit them. However I still don't blame the SM2 considering the sea shepherds are known pirates and have harassed them. Plus nobody knows for sure all the details, i find it hard to believe the japanese captain would risk their boat and crew to hit the AG, even though it's a much bigger boat it still could have sustained a hull breach from that collision.
@hzuiel "all the details?" yeah you are right. "all" the details probably will never be publicly known. However, there is plenty of details known beyond what can be seen here.
@hzuiel ==> "considering the sea shepherds are known pirates"
LMAO..Sea shepherds are not pirates ROTFL.
The whole modified "pirate" flag is a joke. They are making fun of the Japanese and taunting them for calling them pirates (even though they are clearly direct action protesters, not pirates)
MOST people are smart enough to get the joke. But I guess there is always a few that miss any type of humor.
@hzuiel LOL I would tend to agree with you there because it is very dangerous what they do. However I must admit I laugh at them frequently. They are almost as funny as the old keystone cops comedies. Certainly they are far far from a professional crew!
The funniest vid I saw yet was when some blonde bimbo was arguing that hypothermia was "a matter of opinion" ROTFL
Then there was the time they tried to launch a RIB a full speed without training. LMAO Dumped them all.
@rosepetal108 Well at least not humorous in the way i was thinking. I just don't find it funny that they are out there wasting millions of dollars in a totally ineffectual way, having a tv show made about it to drum up even more money, when all they do is kiddie pranks. With the money they receive they could actually be making a difference but they dont' because they're a bunch of dumbass hippies that don't actually know anything. No scientists or whale experts involved, just smelly hippies.
@hzuiel Well of that I agree 100%. However there is two sides to that coin. The money Japan spends on research for managing commercial whaling in a marine sanctuary that doesn't allow commercial whaling is just as idiotic and pointless waste. Both sides act like children down there. The sad part is that Japans fleet is sponsored by their Government. You would expect more from a civilized nation like Japan.
@rosepetal108 Japan is very steeped in tradition, to a fault in some ways. There haven't been legitimate samurai for generations yet there are still businessmen commiting seppuku(ritual suicide) over failing. I love japanese culture but like any people they have their dark sides too, nobody is exempt from that, americans aren't, europeans aren't, middle eastern people aren't. Every group of people has good individuals and bad one, good customs and bad ones. It might seem obvious to us here but
@rosepetal108 on the flip side a lot of people in japan(and many in the rest of the world too) probably thought it was a lousy idea to invade Iraq. That didn't stop a civilized nation from starting an unnecessary war costing thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.
@hzuiel Well don't change the subject to war, because either side of whaling is not worth a real war and dead human beings.
However it would be common sense that if Japan wanted to continue the whaling tradition, they might research migration routes and locations outside the sanctuary where it might be possible to manage commercial whaling without hurting conservationist efforts.
I hunt, but would I hunt in Yellowstone? NEVER.
It is about respect and if Japan has none, they get none.
@rosepetal108 I can agree with that, but don't lump the whole country together. People hunt illegally and poach all over the US. Also most of Japan doesn't participate in whaling. It's only certain coastal villages that are the primary participants. The nation as a whole are primarily guilty of turning a blind eye to it. I know a good bit about japanese culture and I still can't even explain it very well. Probably similar reasons why they're one of the most technologically advanced countries
@rosepetal108 yet there are still little shrines everywhere and people there still almost universally set up shrines for dead relatives to pray for them.
@hzuiel When I say Japan, I am not talking about the Japanese people or culture. I am talking about the Japanese government. Even the whalers get permits issued by the Japanese government. The Japanese people themselves in general are VERY respectful. However some might say too naive about power hungry corrupt governmental officials.
That's just my opinion as a very cynical American who NEVER trusts what the Government says at face value.
@rosepetal108 Very wise to be skeptical of governments. Only someone who is willfully blind to things can ignore that the government here is corrupt, at the mercy of special interest groups and lobbyists(ie money) and gradually being turned into a third world country by greed. How could you be anything but skeptical when that's the way things are going and the politicians are complicit?
@hzuiel It's good to be skeptical of any government. It's not good to use that skepticism as an excuse to disbelieve anything you want to. (Just speaking generally.)
Article 18.2 of the 1982 U.N. Convention ( of which Japan is a member) "All ship and aircraft commanders have an obligation to assist those in danger of being lost at sea. " "A ship adrift and without means of navigation (no sail or propulsion systems) shall be considered in distress without the requirement of notification or signal"
wow so they really did head on crash into the AG. I had never seen the footage till now and I always thought is was a accident that was exaggerated to blame the Japanese. The AG was a mile away and not even moving. Thats some fucked up shit.
The AG was extremely low on fuel that it was basically a sitting duck in the water. From the video, it clearly shows that the SM2 purposely changed its course to hit to AG. Personally, I feel that the Sea Shepherds are fighting for a great cause but I don't think that whaling with ever stop. The Japanese will just find another loophole to continue what they're doing.
Both vessels are equally at fault. Obviously intentional on the part of the whalers, but easily avoidable by the Ady Gil. Reckless on one end and negligent on the other.
the thing about it isthey are out of fuel and waiting for the Bob Barker to re-fuel and u can clearly see the Nissimaru #2 turn to ram the only ship they cant out run or out manuver
@REPTILEWILLKILL Actually they were low on fuel and running at idle (about 3 knots). But you are right, they couldn't maneuver at idle speed. The AG was designed for speed and has very limited steerage under 12 knots.
You are right about the SM2 as well. They clearly made several course changes directly at the AG including one sharp change seconds before they rammed them.
Well they were just going to; coat them in acid, stink bomb them, intentionally foul their prop, use a torch on their vessel and slick the deck of a ship on antarctic waters that crews need to walk on, but they were fresh out of "peaceful attacks" so they fouled their bow.
The same way other Sea Shepherd have attempted to do to them. Seriously now look at the left of this video how many of the posts contain the word" Attack" .
Little fast boat runs out of fuel after terrorizing big slow boat for years. When big boat retaliates, little boat cries and claims foul play. Let's also not forget that the little fast boat has a big boat friend that attacked the big boat shown here less than a year before this happened. Karma's a bitch.
there floating and the ship directs an LRAD on them and turns off course and hits a boat a tenth of the size that is carrying 6 people.... The captain should be in prison
There are times when the larger vessel has right of way and there are times when it doesn't. There is no way for me to explain all the various regulations here. However if you want a source explaining it, simply go to the NZ report. It is well documented. The Ady Gil had right of way.
Your biggest failure is assuming the SM2 was trying to avoid an accident. It wasn't. Actually the SM2 was chasing and attempting to get closer.
How many idiots are going to keep posting that the larger vessel had right of way? It is FALSE.
The Ady Gil had right of way. All possible exceptions and special considerations were applied by the NZ investigation and they still found that the AG had right of way! Stop posting if you have no idea of international maritime regulations! It just makes you look like a fool!.
@rosepetal108 no vessel has right of way!!!! one of the vessels is the stand on vessel the other is the give way vessel - but all ships masters have the reponsibility to take all measures to avoid collision ..(rule8 of the "international regulations for preventing collisions at sea") ... and you cant do that if everyone is sat on the aft deck!
@poolemac That doesn't change the fact that the stand on vessel (right of way) is the Ady Gil. All it proves is that Bethune was negligent in his watch.
It also doesn't change the fact that the SM2 totally ignored right of way regulations and purposely approached the AG causing the dangerous close quarters situation in the first place.
Actually, right of way goes to the larger vessel. robjames you are not understanding of maritime law on that. Not that the Shonan should have turned into them as it looks like in one angle. Then again, what the hell were they sitting there for, they could have moved.
@rosepetal108 If i remember right in the episode they were running low on fuel and probably ran out. yes, Larger vessel does have the right away. Watch closly and you can see the japanese stir into the Addy Gil.
That simply is not true. The NZ report shows 5 pages of relevant legal provisions (International Collision Regulations) and another 6 pages of analysis. The conclusion after analyzing all the specifics in this case were:
That simply is not true. The NZ report shows 5 pages of relevant legal provisions (International Collision Regulations) and another 6 pages of analysis. The conclusion after analyzing all the specifics in this case were:
Fucking Japenese ppl. They delete all the mistakes they have done from the history book just becouse they are to much of a pussy to admit their mistakes in human history. The only good thing about the Japanese people are all the cheap crap them build that we can use as firewood
hey guys being the SMALLER ship the ady had right of way over the LARGER Shonan maru also the Ady gil was Dead in the water for time before the approach of the Shonan Maru. Thus showing to the captain of the Shonan Maru to give way. But the fact the no man was at the controls of the Ady Gil is also negligent upon the part of the ady gil crew thus making them partly reponsible. i agree with many peoples that BOTH partys are to blame but i strongly support the claim JAPAN should charge there cpt
@robjames363 dont know which maritime rules you are going by but international rules state that size is not a factor unless the vessels are in marked channels and then the larger vessel must show a verticle can to identify that she is constrained by draught. I am a ships master and I go by the rule "might has right" . Secondly the vessel wasnt "dead in the water" she was underway (easily seen by the backwash coming from the stern of the adi gil the blame as i see it is 60-40.
@robjames363 NOPE! your wrong! IF YOU WATCH WHALE WARS (LIKE ME)!!! THEN PETER HAMMARSTEAD SAID SOMEONE IS ALWAYS AT THE WHEEL OF THE ADY GIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@alexorr0011 "they deserved it they should of been driving the boat instead of arshin about"
That actually is very true (to an extent). That is Bethune's fault in a nutshell. They were "arshin about" when they should have been paying closer attention. Very unprofessional.
The SM2's fault was in ignoring right of way regulations and "attacking" with water canons. The precise maneuvering required and closing speeds were simply too dangerous for a ship that size.
In every measurement I made a conservative estimate in the favor of the SM2. The time before the collision the Ady Gil accelerated was probably closer to 8 seconds but I used 12. the distance traveled I calculated with the Ady Gil instantly accelerating to the full 6.74 knots which is impossible. I judged the angles to be closer to 90 degrees than they were. I totally ignored stern sweep in my collision zone distance calculation. Still after all that still shows collision course.
Sorry that last is probably a bit confusing. 33.5 foot beam beans 16.75 width from bow of the SM2
plus 10-15 feet back on the AG gill means 26.75 - 31.75 feet back to avoid direct collision. But the AG relative across the bow movement was around 20 feet maximum.
There is enough error to remain some uncertainty but clearly it was going to be close enough that BOTH boats THOUGHT there would be a collision before they made their last second moves.
listen to all you fuckheads using ur big lawyer words trying to sound smart... the point is PRETTY FUCKING OBVIOUS THERE IS NO NEED TO FOR WHALING TO TAKE PLACE!!!! theres plenty of other animals that arent FUCKING ENDANGERED THAT THE LITTLE SLANTY EYED CUNTS CAN HAVE FOR DINNER..
@redrocketman123 Shameful racist ignoramus. You really think talking like that has even the slightest chance of helping your anti whaling cause?
I know damn sure if you told me to stop eating MY shrimp gumbo with words like that, there would be a fight right off. Wouldn't even care what you said after.
@redrocketman123 Sorry, but they are not doing it for dinner. They spend millions each year to put the meat on ice because there is no market for it, and yet their permit to research the non endangered whales requires that they prepare the leftovers for sale and consumption. Your obvious bias and ignorance deters you from anything except childish reactionary postings.
The Japanese vessel was hundred of yards out closing in on an unpowered ship. I does not matter what reason it was there...it wasn't powered and aiming at the larger ship. They had plenty of time to make a slight course change to avoid and they chose to ram and endanger lives. They are entitled to kill 1000 whales per year. Whale take many years to reach a point where they can reproduce and they are endangered. Do the math people. They will go extinct.
@christynemarie Sorry, but you are wrong. The Ady Gill want not unpowered. The Shonan Maru #2 never was on a collision course until the AG powered into it's path. Video analysis proves that fact. It was the AG that caused the collision, and the SM did make a last seconds course change to avoid t-boning them.
Sorry, but the math does not indicate the Minke will go extinct, unless you you apply it incorrectly. Add to that, they do not take the entire allowance. Your
@JRBeaman NOT true. The Shonan Maru made a 30% change in course to starboard that put it into a collision course. This was confirmed by the New Zealand Inquiry. The last second panic'd movement by the Ady Gil had no effect. It was too late to make any difference.
Job well done Japan. Whether or not Japan did this on purpose or the Ady Gil did it on purpose, it's a win for the Japanese. Stupid Sea Shepherd. First you got your ship sunk and second, the whalers continue whaling HAHAHA stupidass Sea Shepherd.
Why it is clear the Shonan Maru 2 attacked the Ady Gil:
1. You can clearly see all four Ady Gil crew members outside the cockpit -- there was no pilot. They are dead in the water, waiting to refuel.
2. There is no logical reason why the Ady Gil, a famous, one-of-a-kind boat, would intentionally do this. It serves no purpose in the Sea Shepherd's fight.
3. Had the Shonan Maru 2 tried to avoid a collision, they wouldn't have aimed directly at the Ady Gil.
@nyamisf I think it's crazy to think Bethune would have intentionally harmed his own vehicle. If he's reckless, he's not stupid. He built the Ady Gil himself. As he says on the show, he mortgaged his house to build it.
I think it would have been easy for the Shonan Maru 2 to avoid the Ady Gil if she'd wanted to -- simply by going around it. She had plenty of time. Instead, she aimed for it and crushed it.
@nyamisf Also, I do look at this whole thing in the context of illegal whaling. The whaler's defy international law and hunt in a f-ing whale sanctuary. They travel all the way to Antarctica so they can stock whale meat in Japanese grocery stores and make a sh*t ton of money doing it. So I think the Japanese whalers are criminals anyway and should be arrested for violating international law.
lol You chose the inconclusive video on purpose when there are plenty that show better?
Look at THIS vid. @ 1:20 first shot of SM top right corner. Ship is listing to port. aft mast (dark) is to the LEFT of Bridge(white).
@ 1:30 turn complete SM no longer listing aft mast is to the RIGHT of bridge.Colision course eminent.
@ 1:31 AG starts moving forward at speed over idle. (you can see he hits throttle at 1:29 but there is a delay as in all boats between throttle and movement)
@rosepetal108 Nowhere in the video from the AG can you see the port side of the SM. Another of your lies.
You are picking pieces out to bolster your bad analysis to try and impress someone, but the fact remains, the AG moved at least one length forward and caused the collision when it should have stayed put. Give it up. More half truths.
Without eminent collision, the AG violated maritime regulations of not maintaining course and speed. That makes them also at fault IMO.
@JRBeaman First of all you are wrong. Eminent collision with respects to AG requirement to maintain course and speed is a very different "definition" than what you are defining it as. A "close call" is also considered "eminent collision" if the paths are close enough that normal maneuvers are impossible without DANGER of collision. A ship "turning" to port actually "Moves" starboard first. and vice versa. Either way the SM would have hit the AG even if it didn't move.
Emminent collision is not expected when one boat is stopped and another has a passing course across it's bow. Emminent collision was not the case here, the mechanic panicked, and the captain yelled whoa to him for his MISTAKE of powering forward because he didn't like the hose down. The AG 'mistakenly' powered into the SMs path. Reason has no bearing on cause.
If the AG powered forward 1 boat length and got hit on the nose, there was no collision course. Math.
@JRBeaman Once again read your own references. The AG helmsman who moved the AG in a panic only after he saw the SM bearing down on him in a colision course.
The entire crew of the AG also (in sworn statements) said the AG did not power forward until AFTER the SM was on colision course.
The NZ report faulted Bethune for NOT evading. For making a concious decision to sit and take it (water hoses) earlier when he had a chance to move. (before the SM turned to a collision course) Vids confirm
@rosepetal108 Making a mistake in powering forward when he didn't like the hose-down, and then claiming panic of potential collision is all twisted crap. The point is there was no eminent collision, and his reasons do not change the determination of cause. The NZ did not have all of the necessary info to make a determination, and found most of it not admissible in court and decided to find both to blame to get it off their desk. that is obvious. The court never said there was eminent collision.
@JRBeaman LOL biased crap? The helmsman is in a waterproof cabin. Of all the parties he could care less to have water spray. He panic'd because he was about to get rammed. Everyone who testified said there was an eminent colision. The SM Captain simply refused to testify.
@rosepetal108 The helmsman was ondeck with the captain. Jason, is a mechanic, and had limited visibility. When he decided to hit the throttle, the captain yelled whoa, realizing it was a mistake. That is the facts of what happened. The captain is responsible for determining eminent collision, not someone down inside the boat.
"everyone that testified" is only those from the SSCS, That means they will bias their statements. I am looking at facts to what happened to determine cause, not blame.
@rosepetal108 BTW, "The entire crew of the AG also (in sworn statements) said the AG did not power forward until AFTER the SM was on colision course." Is a lie as you can see from the videos that they were going to be passed closely but not rammed when they started to power forward.
@rosepetal108 Your logic is SO bad. If the AG moved even half a boat length forward, and the SM would have had a course to only grazed her, then the AG would have been t-boned. Instead the AG only got hit a glancing blow to the nose. So how could the SM have a collision course on the AG in the first place, proven by the video from the AG? The never did. That is where your ignorance proves you are barking up the wrong tree. Yes, they powered forward but the delay? The still moved a boat length.
@JRBeaman First of all the point of the bow of the SM is not the whole ship. SM is 33 feet beam! Nor did the SM only "graze the bow" of the AG. The SM hit squarely with its bow and drove the AG bow UNDER the SM so far that the rudder of the AG was in the air as it slid along and under the SM.
@rosepetal108 My point is that it never would have happened if the AG had not moved forward at least one boat length. The AG was still under power when it collided, and with the hull slopes of the SM, it would have been expected to have the nose dive. Did you also notice the rudder bairly to stbd? hardly the angle you would expect if it was trying to turn away from a collision. Jason F'd up. Its that plain and simple. The SM never intended to ram the AG. That is also obvious. The AG 'caused' it.
@JRBeaman You can argue the SM never "intended" to ram the AG. However the SM is not a ship (single rudder) that can make precise manuevers like the Captain tried. They misjudged at best (or purposely rammed at worst) the distances angles and speeds causing a colision course BEFORE the AG moved. Then the helmsman made a stress induced panic'd last second mistake that did not evade the collision.
@rosepetal108 You didn't read my explanation earlier?
If the SMs turn to port when the AG powered forward telegraphs their intention could not have been to ram them, as no move at all would have insured t-boning them. The AGs "intent" was to escape from the hosedown at least, and maybe a misperception of eminent collision. In either both cases there was no indication of either party wanting the collision, although the AG had the best motives to do so.
@JRBeaman The turn to port was after the colision, not before. Even the NZ rep[ort states this as I quoted already once. Not any move made by the SM was made to avoid the colision until after the colision.
Besides even if the SM had NOT YET hit the AG a turn to port would CERTAINLY cause a colision due to the stern swing. Either way the AG was getting hit.
@rosepetal108 If you believe that you are not looking at the videos. The SM turned to port before the collision, and the glancing blow on the AG als made it turn further. That is obvious from studying the videos. The stern swing would only come about the sequence of events set into motion from thew AGs move. Without that, the SM would not have turned at all, and passed right by. Maybe you are putting too much validity on the NZ's position from insufficient information and not the science of it?
@rosepetal108 I do not need to calculate mass in this equation because the drag force of the AG under it's bow at an angle would have been far more than the weight of the boat alone. Sorry, but the video shows three moves to port by the SM after it's initial stbd move. You are obviously devoid of science if you try and claim it.
What happened after the collision has nothing to do with the cause of the collision. That reversing only proves they were not out of gas as so many try and claim here.
@JRBeaman Only fools that believe Watson think the AG was completely out of gas. The AG was NOT completely out of DIESEL. The engines were at IDLE.
Laymen don't understand that effectively out of fuel and actually out of fuel are 2 different things. They were effectively out of fuel because the little they had was just enough to keep the power to the vessels systems (electricity radar etc..) working until they could be refueled.
@rosepetal108 I know that, but my initial opinion was in favor of the SSCS and partially approving of what they were doing based on the claims here. Then when I saw blatent ignorant statements, I decided to analize all the videos frame by frame, and do a bit of trig on them. I also synced up five of the videos for timing as some angles indicate different things to different people. That is when I decided to try and squash bugs like that and keep trying to stay with cause, not "fault"..
@JRBeaman You can never believe ANYTHING Paul Watson says. He actually has admitted he lies on purpose to muddle the facts. Watson actually believes we should destroy all cities over 30K population worldwide. (and a lot more crazy stuff) What a joke.
However Bethune is a totally different sort of man. He is more of a real conservationist that is honest and just happened to get hooked up with the wrong crowd.
@rosepetal108 Yeah, I noticed that along with other organizations distancing themselves with him. He is a sensationalist and helps get the car-crash crowd to pay attention so they can get more sponsor bucks for him to play pirate. Too bad Berthume was caught up in this and responsible for Jasons mistake. Like I said, I used to support them as well, until I did a little homework. It also shows how easy it is to blindly support their actions by spinning what the videos actually show scientificlly.
@JRBeaman True, however just because Watson lies doesn't mean the SM didnt ram the AG. It also doesn't mean what the Japanese are doing down there is right.
The Japanese are still whaling inside an IWC whale sanctuary. They are still using "science" permits improperly and have been asked to stop many times by the IWC. (and BTW IWC is pro whaling as long as it is done responcibly)
PS it is not a planing hull. You need to understand better how a wave piercing hull works.
@rosepetal108 I never said that. The old strawman tactic, huh?
The Japanese have a permit to do research in that sanctuary. The sanctuary protects the large endangered whales, of which the Minke, taken by the research fleet, is not endangered. I wonder how many have read their findings at the cost of 12 mil a year, that has provided good info on possibly saving them?
In any case it does not excuse the illegal acts of Watson using the good will (now trashed) of the SSCS.
@JRBeaman Thats another thing you should probably investigate more thoroughly. The Southern Minke is "data deffecient" meaning it is not known if it is still endangered or not. The NORTH Atlantic Minke (different species same common name but different scientific name) is no longer endangered. The Japanese have been told multiple times by the IWC that the permits are not supposed to be used inside the Sanctuary.
@rosepetal108 It is not endangered. The research fleet was contributed part of the data to determine that. Yes the permit restricts the amount of Minke it can take in the SH, but they take less cause they are also required to provide it as food, and they cannot afford any more freezers as the market doesn't need it. So, they take less than the full allotment. They have determined that global warming (and more) are depleting the food supply for the endangered. Maybe culling a few Minke will help?
@JRBeaman Unless you have inside data not publically released yet. The southern Minke is still "Data defencient" or by another list "threatened". I know exactly the number taken. It is listed in the IWC website each year. Many of the "minkes" are also the North Pacific species taken near Japan. (northern species don't mix with southern species)
@JRBeaman 1000 per year kill allotment but the Minke takes 6-8 years to reach breeding capability and still has a 10 month gestatation. One killed whale takes 7-9 years to replace. 103,000 Minke population. Do the math, retard. They will be hunted to extinction.
@rosepetal108 Dangerous play on the part of both captains, but neither intended for the collision, although the SSCS would benefit greatly. It was a mistake, and both boats could be found at fault for their activities. But to claim the SM had a collision course, or they intended to ram the AG is pure bullshit and lies. So drop it. The facts do not support that action. The videos also indicate that determination. Biased opinion is not fact. Fact says the AG caused it. Opinions are mixed.
@JRBeaman Read the NZ report. The SM fault was they made a 30 degree turn INTO the AG. The AG was faulted for NOT evading, not properly maintaining a watch, not informing the helmsman of the eminent danger. Endangering his crew through inaction. All these faults by Bethune are for inaction. The AG helmsman was NOT faulted at all, yet you insist he caused it. Not a single person from either vessel has testified there wasn't a collision course before the last second AG move.
@rosepetal108 Fault is a court determination. I am only speaking as to cause.
Here you go again claiming a 30 deg turn to intentionally ram. The NZ commission not finding the helmsman at fault has nothing to do with the fact he caused the AG to power forward. They were obviously not paying attention as they were laughing about their earlier illegal activities when they heard the SMs LRAD warning them of their intending approach. The SM then deployed their laser, blinding the SMs captain.
@JRBeaman lol You make so many unfounded claims I have problems answering them all before you post again. First of all the topside crew all had a much better view than any of us. Even better than anyone on the SM. Second of all your "scientific" analysis missed the 30 degree turn altogether. It also declared the initial movement of the AG well before it actually moved. and finally failed to notice the angles of approach claiming no collision course when clearly there was. Go analyse again.
@rosepetal108 Unfounded claims? State one (one at a time) and I will show you they are not unfounded.
You keep stating a 30 degree turn by the SM, and yet do not indicate how you measured it. That is only your speculative at best, and exaggerated, at the least from what I have seen.
1. The small turn to get closer was no where near 30 degrees.
2. An equal turn to port followed immediately.
3. Both moves were done before the AG powered forward.
@JRBeaman The 30 degrees is measured by the NZ inquiry using telemetry. This was recorded and the records were analysed and that is in the report you told me to read. From vids alone you can only get an estimate between 20 and 40 degrees. Since I know you really are not a scientist I will give you a hint for your math. Measure the masts. Scale that to the ship length. Measure the distance the black mast moves from left of the bridge mast to the right of the bridge mast. Use trigonometry.
@rosepetal108 telemetry? Uh, ok. I know how to do math, and I would like to see the telemetry reports as I never saw the SM on a collision course in any video, and certainly never more that a 20 degree adjustment to it's original course until the collison. I believe the 30 degree claim was the testimony of the AG crew or that from the bob barker, and never by any "telemetry" as you claim. In any case there was never a collision course till after the AG moved from DIW.
@JRBeaman Another misconception that laymen have is that the AG was at a complete stop. The AG was at IDLE and telemetry confirms that it was actually moving about 2 knots before the helmsman powered forward and at max reached only around 4 knots. The exact speeds are in the NZ report.
@rosepetal108 I believe the 2 knows seems a bit high, relative to the current, but absolute, it may be accurate. The 4 knot value is way too low as the AG was just barely on plane when it got hit, and I doubt that could be done at 4 knots. That could be due to the poor resolution of their equipment, or a fudging of the data intrepretation by a biased analist. 9 knots in a 5 knot sea could also be read as 4 knots too. so I doubt that, as it is relative velocities that matter in this case.
@JRBeaman The ady Gil does not have a planing hull. It had a wave-piercing hull. This means the hull pierces through the water rather than riding over the top
Whatever you saw that made you think it was planing is not correct.
@rosepetal108 Fast water from under the stern with none of the hull in the water indicates planing. That is from the SM video. That is also why we saw the rudders in the air as even a small swell could raise them far enough to be out of the water. Some people claim they had no rudders, that they used engine thrust differential to steer. So much bullshit to wade thru here. That's all I am trying to adjust.
@rosepetal108 Planing, as in the ass end of the boat "on-plane" which would require more that 4 knots. The sponsons should never plane, and that mans the "whole boat" would also not. The bow came out of the water a significant amount when the power was applied as well, indicating significant power was applied as would be done in a panic. Other observations support this determination as well. I try to look for collaborating evidence where possible.
@rosepetal108 Another claim in the "reports" was that both ships were on a "similar" course, & not perpendicular. The videos show the AG to be at least 45 degrees, by my estimation, from the SMs course.
Again the helmsman was on deck, and the mechanic, Jason, was the one that powered the boat forward. That is from insider info at the SSCS. Unless you believe the SM was traveling sideways, the sync'd BB footage shows no collision course as the stbd side is always visible to them until till then.
@JRBeaman This is also where you have made the same mistake in analysis. They were on a similar course up until the SM made that hard to starboard you refuse to believe. Yes by the time of collision the angles ARE sharp. But that is because the SM turned sharply starboard into the AG.
@JRBeaman IF the AG moved forward 1-2 boat lengths at a 90 angle then you are right. a very big "IF". The turn to port came AFTER the collision but I admit since it would be delayed responce the HELM ordered it slightly before collision. (rudder speed)
However the angle was not 90 degrees and the distance was not so great. Also the bow of the SM is not a mathematical point. It is a 33 ft beam ship. Also ships of that size have significant sideways movement when turning sharply. (momentum)
@rosepetal108 Thank you. But two boat lengths at a 45 degree angle (more accurate) would put them at a perfect t-bone position, where the SM turned to port 2 seconds before the collision saving their lives. How does that indicate anything except no intention to ram, by the SM?
The bow does not move to stbd when they go from a straight course to a port turn. The ass swings to stbd. But they didn't hit it with the stern, the AG powered into the path of the bow. which was not headed at them ever.
@JRBeaman You are not counting the seconds the AG was dragged under the SM. The time you are calculating for the collision is not the time they were struck..that is the time the AG finally pulled free from being dragged. By then the SM was turning to port. but it was not (or just barely started less than a second before) turning to port before collision.
@rosepetal108 Giving the analysis correctly takes more than 500 characters, and either one of us arguing over pieces with limited space can be misleading. I have done a syncd frame by frame, using the timing from each video (could be altered by the poster?) to determine my timings and findings. The statements I make are plus or minus a half second based on those videos. The one I like the best is the BB video except most people see it wrong. I could go over this in detail, but I gotta go. K?
@rosepetal108 It also indicates they would never have been hit at all. And the SM would not have made the port turn, endangering the AG with it's stern. So, your analysis proves the SM did not have a collision course with the AG at all, just gettin closer to hose them down. The SM did cause the close quarters, and the AG had right of way all over the place, but violated maritime law by not maintaining course and speed in close quarters when there was no eminent collision. So who's at fault?
@rosepetal108 Even the turn to stbd was to get closer because the hosing was not reaching, and the adjusting turn to port was to maintain a clear passing course. Even so, from the video on the AG, it still never had a collision course set for them. The LRAD was possibly to warn them that they were going to pass close?
The laser could have delayed the SM from attempting the port turn to avoid the collision. It's deployment could have caused a delay in that and possible loss of life to the AG.
@rosepetal108 "Not a single person from either vessel has testified there wasn't a collision course before the last second AG move." UH, you forgot to mention that all of these people were from the AG, as the crew and captain from the Sm has not provided any statements. That means there is only one side of the story to escape blame.
One more time. I am addressing scientifically analysis of cause here. There is plenty of blame to go around for all parties.
@rosepetal108 You are quoting out of context. That make you the liar.
The SM never had a collision course on the AG till after it moved. That is a fact proven by the video from the AG itself. Give it up. You want to root for the pirates, go ahead, but you have not refuted a single word I have stated as fact. The AG caused the collision when it powered forward. Up till then it had the total right of way for many reasons. Why? Stupid panic by mechanic Jason, not the helmsman. That is a fact.
I am not convinced. It is clear the Ozzies positioned their boat in front of the Shonan Maru.
Technologicaltransfo 2 weeks ago
@Technologicaltransfo it was decided both were at fault. however, it has been said the shonan maru,being the bigger ship, shoulda been aware. after they hit the ady gil they still continued to use the water cannon on the crew, so there is speculation they were trying to knock them off.
jimmyhoffa9 2 weeks ago
as u can clearly see the japanese rammed them, theres no dispute
todadog 2 weeks ago
those Japenese whalers are dickz
TheHdog3000 1 month ago
Vuck u whale and vuck u dolpheen
RedPhatf 1 month ago
they wrecked batmans boat
cliffthelightning 3 months ago
Hope those whalers love BBQ, because they're going to see a lot of it . . . after they die.
JediDanD 3 months ago
HAW THEEZ JAP MONKEYS DARE DOING HARM T WITE PIPL?? GOD WILL PUNHSI THEM FOR DISRMPUTING NUHTURAL ORDER!!!
El8888888888 3 months ago
"Japan’s tsunami seems to have succeeded, where years of boycotts and protests & high-seas chases by Western environmentalists had failed, in knocking out a pillar of the nation’s whaling industry. Ayukawahama was 1 of only 4 communities in Japan that defiantly carried on whaling and eating whales as a part of the 'local culture', even as the rest of the nation loses interest in whale meat. 2 of their vessels were scheduled to participate in Japan's "research" whaling in April." japanprobe. com
info145 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What I'm outraged, they should be able to launch torpedoes! To overthrow the damn Nippon!
Japaneses fuck your fkn nippon mother!
LightMusicK 3 months ago
What I'm outraged, they should be able to launch torpedoes! To overthrow the damn Nippon!
Japaneses fuck your fkn nippon mother!
LightMusicK 3 months ago
Its obvious that it was ady Gil who had rammed into the bigger ship and later on played the victim. And its obvious too that some are in denial although the video footage shows otherwise.
joetiong 3 months ago
a well placed 308 round does wonders on them sonic weapons
dtc6776 5 months ago
putas chinos de mierda!
wjmr1990 5 months ago
Put into perspective:
Feb. 6 2009: "A boat with anti-whaling activists collides with a japanese whaling vessel in the Antarctic Ocean. No one was injured. Japan is condemning the clash, calling it unforgivable."
Jan. 6 2010: "A japanese whaling vessel collided with the anti-whaling powerboat Ady Gil. The vessel sunk. There was one injury reported. The japanese officials have since repeatedly refused to cooperate with investigations over this collision."
Does anyone smell a rat?
info145 5 months ago
@info145 they called it unforgivable...? what a bunch of fucktards.
sepsepsep12 3 months ago
So assuming the conservatives are correct, and it was the Ady's fault.... why did the Japanese continue shooting water cannons at a sinking vessel in the middle of the Antarctic Ocean? Maritime law requires ASSISTING stranded ships/boats, not dumping more freezing cold water on-top of them.
apissedant 5 months ago
/watch?v=V9zuJUC-hvg&feature=related heres an opinion by an expert.
straighttailpilot 6 months ago
Thats BS why would anyone destroy that?? That has to be way to expensive to make to just scrap on purpose...
MrMhmToasty 6 months ago
why would anyone think that Sea Shepherd did this intentionally? if there's any media whore in sea shepherd, it's Captain Watson, not Captain Bethune. Pete wouldn't intentionally destroy his own boat, which is a big part of his life. He put millions into making that thing and he broke world records with that boat. It's basically his home for much of the time. There's no way that this was intentional on Sea Shepherd's part.
hup2thepenguin 6 months ago
@hup2thepenguin pull your head out of your ass and look at the video! they waited till the last moment and then accelerated from a stop such that they would get hit by the ship
the ady gil is stopped, no wash from the props, when the ship gets closer the ady gil powers forward, props start turning and ady gil starts making way such that they get hit by the ship it IS100% intentional
I can't believe anyone is stupid/blind enough to not see that the ady gil did this on purpose
fallbrookchristopher 6 months ago
@fallbrookchristopher no one was in the cockpit. I didnt see the engine spitting out water when the rear came out of the water. and no one would be stupid enought to be in the cockpit of the boat while being rammed or intending to ram.
straighttailpilot 6 months ago
YEA! SUCK IT LIBERALS!
MrThatsYe 6 months ago
japanes wii got another punishment from GOD at 10/07/2011, by EARTHQUAKE of 7.1
sandeepenjoy1 6 months ago
@sandeepenjoy1 Yeah, because obviously every single Japanese person is an evil whaler.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
SavageArms357 6 months ago
the ady gil video is off 5 sec
sillysassy73 6 months ago
RIP Ady Gil. man i loved that boat of its design i wish i could of be on it.
matthawk911 6 months ago
@hzuiel are you an idiot? the Sea Shepherds just shut down the Japanese Whaling Fleet this season, and they ARENT comming back! So ha! You say they arent doing anything? look at them now dumb ass
NobodyCaresTVStation 6 months ago
@NobodyCaresTVStation The whalers are coming back, idiot. They've said as much themselves.
DrunkyMcSwervencrash 6 months ago
japanees have no humanity for sure.
ctron21 7 months ago
ok in no way am i rooting for japan..but does no one else thinks its fucking hilarious tht right b4 the boat got owned paul was like" i belive tht the addy gill will stop the killing of whales" and then 2 mins later the fucking boat is torn in half? or tht the peopl on the addy gill were like " ohh we r soo scared then again 2 mins later they got rammed? maybe its just me i watch this show for the fuck ups
BASSchampion77 7 months ago
@BASSchampion77 It is true that Bethune's arrogance is what partially caused the collision. He did not take proper steps to insure the safety of his crew. However, if Japan had not purposely run down the AG then none of this would have happened either. Both Captains share some blame.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 well im just saying tht the sea shepard crew arent too bright like last nights episode the small boat teams are stuck in the ocean for 5 hours!?!?!? how do u fuck up tht bad? thts our own team
BASSchampion77 7 months ago
Sadly if you watch the footage from on board the whaling ship you can see the AG speed up into the path of the bigger boat, watch towards the rear of the AG you'll see the water become agitated its propulsion systems. Also, with how often the SS tends to ran the whaling boats I have no sympathy. However the fact that the Japanese label all their whaling boats as research vessels are lame.
kamuirazielx 7 months ago
@kamuirazielx ===> "watch towards the rear of the AG you'll see the water become agitated its propulsion systems"
That last second attempt to get out of the way is required by Maritime law. If they didn't at least try to move out of the way, they would be 100% at fault. In this case, they were found only partially at fault, for not getting out of the way sooner. (due to a failure in setting a proper watch to warn the helmsman sooner)
The SM2 was found at fault for causing the incident.
rosepetal108 7 months ago 2
Like many others this is the fist time i've seen this footage from the ady gil, which does make it look more like the whaling vessel turned to hit them. However I still don't blame the SM2 considering the sea shepherds are known pirates and have harassed them. Plus nobody knows for sure all the details, i find it hard to believe the japanese captain would risk their boat and crew to hit the AG, even though it's a much bigger boat it still could have sustained a hull breach from that collision.
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel "all the details?" yeah you are right. "all" the details probably will never be publicly known. However, there is plenty of details known beyond what can be seen here.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@hzuiel ==> "considering the sea shepherds are known pirates"
LMAO..Sea shepherds are not pirates ROTFL.
The whole modified "pirate" flag is a joke. They are making fun of the Japanese and taunting them for calling them pirates (even though they are clearly direct action protesters, not pirates)
MOST people are smart enough to get the joke. But I guess there is always a few that miss any type of humor.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 Nothing about what those morons do is humorous.
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel LOL I would tend to agree with you there because it is very dangerous what they do. However I must admit I laugh at them frequently. They are almost as funny as the old keystone cops comedies. Certainly they are far far from a professional crew!
The funniest vid I saw yet was when some blonde bimbo was arguing that hypothermia was "a matter of opinion" ROTFL
Then there was the time they tried to launch a RIB a full speed without training. LMAO Dumped them all.
Or the time.....lol
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 Well at least not humorous in the way i was thinking. I just don't find it funny that they are out there wasting millions of dollars in a totally ineffectual way, having a tv show made about it to drum up even more money, when all they do is kiddie pranks. With the money they receive they could actually be making a difference but they dont' because they're a bunch of dumbass hippies that don't actually know anything. No scientists or whale experts involved, just smelly hippies.
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel Well of that I agree 100%. However there is two sides to that coin. The money Japan spends on research for managing commercial whaling in a marine sanctuary that doesn't allow commercial whaling is just as idiotic and pointless waste. Both sides act like children down there. The sad part is that Japans fleet is sponsored by their Government. You would expect more from a civilized nation like Japan.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 Japan is very steeped in tradition, to a fault in some ways. There haven't been legitimate samurai for generations yet there are still businessmen commiting seppuku(ritual suicide) over failing. I love japanese culture but like any people they have their dark sides too, nobody is exempt from that, americans aren't, europeans aren't, middle eastern people aren't. Every group of people has good individuals and bad one, good customs and bad ones. It might seem obvious to us here but
hzuiel 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 on the flip side a lot of people in japan(and many in the rest of the world too) probably thought it was a lousy idea to invade Iraq. That didn't stop a civilized nation from starting an unnecessary war costing thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel Well don't change the subject to war, because either side of whaling is not worth a real war and dead human beings.
However it would be common sense that if Japan wanted to continue the whaling tradition, they might research migration routes and locations outside the sanctuary where it might be possible to manage commercial whaling without hurting conservationist efforts.
I hunt, but would I hunt in Yellowstone? NEVER.
It is about respect and if Japan has none, they get none.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 I can agree with that, but don't lump the whole country together. People hunt illegally and poach all over the US. Also most of Japan doesn't participate in whaling. It's only certain coastal villages that are the primary participants. The nation as a whole are primarily guilty of turning a blind eye to it. I know a good bit about japanese culture and I still can't even explain it very well. Probably similar reasons why they're one of the most technologically advanced countries
hzuiel 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 yet there are still little shrines everywhere and people there still almost universally set up shrines for dead relatives to pray for them.
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel When I say Japan, I am not talking about the Japanese people or culture. I am talking about the Japanese government. Even the whalers get permits issued by the Japanese government. The Japanese people themselves in general are VERY respectful. However some might say too naive about power hungry corrupt governmental officials.
That's just my opinion as a very cynical American who NEVER trusts what the Government says at face value.
rosepetal108 7 months ago
@rosepetal108 Very wise to be skeptical of governments. Only someone who is willfully blind to things can ignore that the government here is corrupt, at the mercy of special interest groups and lobbyists(ie money) and gradually being turned into a third world country by greed. How could you be anything but skeptical when that's the way things are going and the politicians are complicit?
hzuiel 7 months ago
@hzuiel It's good to be skeptical of any government. It's not good to use that skepticism as an excuse to disbelieve anything you want to. (Just speaking generally.)
DrunkyMcSwervencrash 6 months ago
it was a hit and run. the japanese didn't even respond to their mayday and just sat there while the bob barker sorted it out.
hup2thepenguin 7 months ago
how can they say that the ady gil purposely crashed into the shonan maru if the crew wasn't even inside the boat?
hup2thepenguin 7 months ago
Article 18.2 of the 1982 U.N. Convention ( of which Japan is a member) "All ship and aircraft commanders have an obligation to assist those in danger of being lost at sea. " "A ship adrift and without means of navigation (no sail or propulsion systems) shall be considered in distress without the requirement of notification or signal"
mathiastheok 8 months ago
wow so they really did head on crash into the AG. I had never seen the footage till now and I always thought is was a accident that was exaggerated to blame the Japanese. The AG was a mile away and not even moving. Thats some fucked up shit.
xchosen123 8 months ago
The AG was extremely low on fuel that it was basically a sitting duck in the water. From the video, it clearly shows that the SM2 purposely changed its course to hit to AG. Personally, I feel that the Sea Shepherds are fighting for a great cause but I don't think that whaling with ever stop. The Japanese will just find another loophole to continue what they're doing.
WingsofMemories 8 months ago
Both vessels are equally at fault. Obviously intentional on the part of the whalers, but easily avoidable by the Ady Gil. Reckless on one end and negligent on the other.
igloopez11 8 months ago
@igloopez11 it was avoidable, but i doubt that the ady gil crew would have expected that the japanese would actually try to hit them.
hup2thepenguin 7 months ago
Ah they turned right into the smaller craft(pretty obvious).
I'm all for the right of way, but there's no denying the Shonan Maru turned into the smaller vessel causing the impact.
SmalltimR 8 months ago 2
wankers
GYBEHO 8 months ago
the thing about it isthey are out of fuel and waiting for the Bob Barker to re-fuel and u can clearly see the Nissimaru #2 turn to ram the only ship they cant out run or out manuver
REPTILEWILLKILL 8 months ago
@REPTILEWILLKILL Actually they were low on fuel and running at idle (about 3 knots). But you are right, they couldn't maneuver at idle speed. The AG was designed for speed and has very limited steerage under 12 knots.
You are right about the SM2 as well. They clearly made several course changes directly at the AG including one sharp change seconds before they rammed them.
rosepetal108 8 months ago
"oooo...I'm soo scared"
you will be very soon hehe
ah the irony...
manifestgtr 8 months ago
...anybody know if the whaling fleet got bitch-slapped by the earthquake?! maybe AG sent a message from her watery grave...
BBCHEVY4X4 8 months ago
Comment removed
erichaywood7 8 months ago
whats that damn loud noise!!
snigglesthedestroyer 8 months ago
Well they were just going to; coat them in acid, stink bomb them, intentionally foul their prop, use a torch on their vessel and slick the deck of a ship on antarctic waters that crews need to walk on, but they were fresh out of "peaceful attacks" so they fouled their bow.
The same way other Sea Shepherd have attempted to do to them. Seriously now look at the left of this video how many of the posts contain the word" Attack" .
All4Grogg 8 months ago
Little fast boat runs out of fuel after terrorizing big slow boat for years. When big boat retaliates, little boat cries and claims foul play. Let's also not forget that the little fast boat has a big boat friend that attacked the big boat shown here less than a year before this happened. Karma's a bitch.
dstout74 8 months ago
lol those eco fags were hit good.. they should do some more and the superior japanese will destroy them again
xdroon3 8 months ago
fucking slit eye cunts
TheFluffyPandas 8 months ago
@TheFluffyPandas
go fuck an animal fag
xdroon3 8 months ago
there floating and the ship directs an LRAD on them and turns off course and hits a boat a tenth of the size that is carrying 6 people.... The captain should be in prison
RamboSearches 9 months ago
@shuggy555 ===> "that statment defies logic"
There are times when the larger vessel has right of way and there are times when it doesn't. There is no way for me to explain all the various regulations here. However if you want a source explaining it, simply go to the NZ report. It is well documented. The Ady Gil had right of way.
Your biggest failure is assuming the SM2 was trying to avoid an accident. It wasn't. Actually the SM2 was chasing and attempting to get closer.
rosepetal108 10 months ago
How many idiots are going to keep posting that the larger vessel had right of way? It is FALSE.
The Ady Gil had right of way. All possible exceptions and special considerations were applied by the NZ investigation and they still found that the AG had right of way! Stop posting if you have no idea of international maritime regulations! It just makes you look like a fool!.
rosepetal108 10 months ago
@rosepetal108 no vessel has right of way!!!! one of the vessels is the stand on vessel the other is the give way vessel - but all ships masters have the reponsibility to take all measures to avoid collision ..(rule8 of the "international regulations for preventing collisions at sea") ... and you cant do that if everyone is sat on the aft deck!
poolemac 8 months ago
@poolemac That doesn't change the fact that the stand on vessel (right of way) is the Ady Gil. All it proves is that Bethune was negligent in his watch.
It also doesn't change the fact that the SM2 totally ignored right of way regulations and purposely approached the AG causing the dangerous close quarters situation in the first place.
rosepetal108 8 months ago
so after the japaneese destroyed the coolest ship in the world they shot the crew that was in the wather with the wather cannon
Skibir 10 months ago
Actually, right of way goes to the larger vessel. robjames you are not understanding of maritime law on that. Not that the Shonan should have turned into them as it looks like in one angle. Then again, what the hell were they sitting there for, they could have moved.
intheair73 10 months ago
@intheair73 "Actually, right of way goes to the larger vessel"
AG had the right of way by international maritime law. That is a simple undeniable proven fact.
"Then again, what the hell were they sitting there for, they could have moved."
Agreed. Thats the fault of Bethune in not setting a proper functional watch. By the time the AG tried to move it was too late to avoid collision.
rosepetal108 10 months ago
@rosepetal108 If i remember right in the episode they were running low on fuel and probably ran out. yes, Larger vessel does have the right away. Watch closly and you can see the japanese stir into the Addy Gil.
stormy12tweleve 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stormy12tweleve "Larger vessel does have the right away."
That simply is not true. The NZ report shows 5 pages of relevant legal provisions (International Collision Regulations) and another 6 pages of analysis. The conclusion after analyzing all the specifics in this case were:
Shonan Maru 2 was the "give way" vessel
Ady Gil was the "stand to" vessel
This means the Ady Gil had right of way.
rosepetal108 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stormy12tweleve "Larger vessel does have the right away."
That simply is not true. The NZ report shows 5 pages of relevant legal provisions (International Collision Regulations) and another 6 pages of analysis. The conclusion after analyzing all the specifics in this case were:
Shonan Maru 2 was the "give way" vessel
Ady Gil was the "stand to" vessel
This means the Ady Gil had right of way.
rosepetal108 10 months ago
Fucking Japenese ppl. They delete all the mistakes they have done from the history book just becouse they are to much of a pussy to admit their mistakes in human history. The only good thing about the Japanese people are all the cheap crap them build that we can use as firewood
ConnorRCS 11 months ago
hey guys being the SMALLER ship the ady had right of way over the LARGER Shonan maru also the Ady gil was Dead in the water for time before the approach of the Shonan Maru. Thus showing to the captain of the Shonan Maru to give way. But the fact the no man was at the controls of the Ady Gil is also negligent upon the part of the ady gil crew thus making them partly reponsible. i agree with many peoples that BOTH partys are to blame but i strongly support the claim JAPAN should charge there cpt
robjames363 11 months ago 2
@robjames363 The Ady Gil was not dead in the water.
USDAChuckSteak 11 months ago
@robjames363 dont know which maritime rules you are going by but international rules state that size is not a factor unless the vessels are in marked channels and then the larger vessel must show a verticle can to identify that she is constrained by draught. I am a ships master and I go by the rule "might has right" . Secondly the vessel wasnt "dead in the water" she was underway (easily seen by the backwash coming from the stern of the adi gil the blame as i see it is 60-40.
poolemac 8 months ago
@robjames363 NOPE! your wrong! IF YOU WATCH WHALE WARS (LIKE ME)!!! THEN PETER HAMMARSTEAD SAID SOMEONE IS ALWAYS AT THE WHEEL OF THE ADY GIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
spencerseton 8 months ago
they deserved it they should of been driving the boat instead of arshin about
alexorr0011 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@alexorr0011 "they deserved it they should of been driving the boat instead of arshin about"
That actually is very true (to an extent). That is Bethune's fault in a nutshell. They were "arshin about" when they should have been paying closer attention. Very unprofessional.
The SM2's fault was in ignoring right of way regulations and "attacking" with water canons. The precise maneuvering required and closing speeds were simply too dangerous for a ship that size.
rosepetal108 11 months ago
@alexorr0011 Yes they were.
rosepetal108 11 months ago
Right video:
1:18 The AG is idling, SM pointed away, BB between them.
See distance between the SG and SM, in boat lengths.
Left video: Angle of the SM, not aimed at the AG.
1:25 the firehose is reaching about where the AG got hit. Notice distance.
Left picture shows relative course of SM to the AG, not even close to collision path.
At 1:27 SM path still across AG bow, with boat length gap, and the AG powers forward.
If the AG had not powered up, they would not have been hit.
JRBeaman 11 months ago
In every measurement I made a conservative estimate in the favor of the SM2. The time before the collision the Ady Gil accelerated was probably closer to 8 seconds but I used 12. the distance traveled I calculated with the Ady Gil instantly accelerating to the full 6.74 knots which is impossible. I judged the angles to be closer to 90 degrees than they were. I totally ignored stern sweep in my collision zone distance calculation. Still after all that still shows collision course.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
Sorry that last is probably a bit confusing. 33.5 foot beam beans 16.75 width from bow of the SM2
plus 10-15 feet back on the AG gill means 26.75 - 31.75 feet back to avoid direct collision. But the AG relative across the bow movement was around 20 feet maximum.
There is enough error to remain some uncertainty but clearly it was going to be close enough that BOTH boats THOUGHT there would be a collision before they made their last second moves.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
Lets get to the crux of the issue here. we both agree that the most likely purpose for the AG turn was to water canon hose. Correct?
We don't agree about when a collision course happened?
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Sorry typo SM2 turn...the AG didnt really turn much if any due to design
rosepetal108 1 year ago
listen to all you fuckheads using ur big lawyer words trying to sound smart... the point is PRETTY FUCKING OBVIOUS THERE IS NO NEED TO FOR WHALING TO TAKE PLACE!!!! theres plenty of other animals that arent FUCKING ENDANGERED THAT THE LITTLE SLANTY EYED CUNTS CAN HAVE FOR DINNER..
redrocketman123 1 year ago
@redrocketman123 Shameful racist ignoramus. You really think talking like that has even the slightest chance of helping your anti whaling cause?
I know damn sure if you told me to stop eating MY shrimp gumbo with words like that, there would be a fight right off. Wouldn't even care what you said after.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@redrocketman123 Sorry, but they are not doing it for dinner. They spend millions each year to put the meat on ice because there is no market for it, and yet their permit to research the non endangered whales requires that they prepare the leftovers for sale and consumption. Your obvious bias and ignorance deters you from anything except childish reactionary postings.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
This video is hilarious. What dumbasses
jenna2676 1 year ago
@Ninja7545
u mad?
Flagermus2k 1 year ago
this shouldve never happened
vicky97100 1 year ago
aren't they polluting the sea by farring on fuel?
ultimatedutchman 1 year ago
The Japanese vessel was hundred of yards out closing in on an unpowered ship. I does not matter what reason it was there...it wasn't powered and aiming at the larger ship. They had plenty of time to make a slight course change to avoid and they chose to ram and endanger lives. They are entitled to kill 1000 whales per year. Whale take many years to reach a point where they can reproduce and they are endangered. Do the math people. They will go extinct.
christynemarie 1 year ago 2
@christynemarie Sorry, but you are wrong. The Ady Gill want not unpowered. The Shonan Maru #2 never was on a collision course until the AG powered into it's path. Video analysis proves that fact. It was the AG that caused the collision, and the SM did make a last seconds course change to avoid t-boning them.
Sorry, but the math does not indicate the Minke will go extinct, unless you you apply it incorrectly. Add to that, they do not take the entire allowance. Your
JRBeaman 1 year ago 2
@JRBeaman NOT true. The Shonan Maru made a 30% change in course to starboard that put it into a collision course. This was confirmed by the New Zealand Inquiry. The last second panic'd movement by the Ady Gil had no effect. It was too late to make any difference.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@Ninja7545 lol what's your problem? you part of sea shepherd or something? lol
initialdluvr 1 year ago
Eat more chicken!
geo321100 1 year ago
Job well done Japan. Whether or not Japan did this on purpose or the Ady Gil did it on purpose, it's a win for the Japanese. Stupid Sea Shepherd. First you got your ship sunk and second, the whalers continue whaling HAHAHA stupidass Sea Shepherd.
initialdluvr 1 year ago
Why it is clear the Shonan Maru 2 attacked the Ady Gil:
1. You can clearly see all four Ady Gil crew members outside the cockpit -- there was no pilot. They are dead in the water, waiting to refuel.
2. There is no logical reason why the Ady Gil, a famous, one-of-a-kind boat, would intentionally do this. It serves no purpose in the Sea Shepherd's fight.
3. Had the Shonan Maru 2 tried to avoid a collision, they wouldn't have aimed directly at the Ady Gil.
Stop illegal whaling!
10101PT 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
nyamisf 1 year ago
@nyamisf I think it's crazy to think Bethune would have intentionally harmed his own vehicle. If he's reckless, he's not stupid. He built the Ady Gil himself. As he says on the show, he mortgaged his house to build it.
I think it would have been easy for the Shonan Maru 2 to avoid the Ady Gil if she'd wanted to -- simply by going around it. She had plenty of time. Instead, she aimed for it and crushed it.
10101PT 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
nyamisf 1 year ago
@nyamisf Also, I do look at this whole thing in the context of illegal whaling. The whaler's defy international law and hunt in a f-ing whale sanctuary. They travel all the way to Antarctica so they can stock whale meat in Japanese grocery stores and make a sh*t ton of money doing it. So I think the Japanese whalers are criminals anyway and should be arrested for violating international law.
10101PT 1 year ago
@10101PT Every one of your statements are false.
#1 There were 6 men on board and only 4 on top.
The engine was running, and Jason was below deck.
#2 There is enormous incentive for what happened in sympathy donations to their cause and publicity for the TV show.
#3 They never aimed directly at the AG.
Lastly. The research fleet has a permit to hunt a small quota of the non-endangered whales. And they never take their full quota.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
lmao take that stupid hippies!
lemmehitdatplz 1 year ago
lol You chose the inconclusive video on purpose when there are plenty that show better?
Look at THIS vid. @ 1:20 first shot of SM top right corner. Ship is listing to port. aft mast (dark) is to the LEFT of Bridge(white).
@ 1:30 turn complete SM no longer listing aft mast is to the RIGHT of bridge.Colision course eminent.
@ 1:31 AG starts moving forward at speed over idle. (you can see he hits throttle at 1:29 but there is a delay as in all boats between throttle and movement)
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Nowhere in the video from the AG can you see the port side of the SM. Another of your lies.
You are picking pieces out to bolster your bad analysis to try and impress someone, but the fact remains, the AG moved at least one length forward and caused the collision when it should have stayed put. Give it up. More half truths.
Without eminent collision, the AG violated maritime regulations of not maintaining course and speed. That makes them also at fault IMO.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman First of all you are wrong. Eminent collision with respects to AG requirement to maintain course and speed is a very different "definition" than what you are defining it as. A "close call" is also considered "eminent collision" if the paths are close enough that normal maneuvers are impossible without DANGER of collision. A ship "turning" to port actually "Moves" starboard first. and vice versa. Either way the SM would have hit the AG even if it didn't move.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 "Eminent collision"
Emminent collision is not expected when one boat is stopped and another has a passing course across it's bow. Emminent collision was not the case here, the mechanic panicked, and the captain yelled whoa to him for his MISTAKE of powering forward because he didn't like the hose down. The AG 'mistakenly' powered into the SMs path. Reason has no bearing on cause.
If the AG powered forward 1 boat length and got hit on the nose, there was no collision course. Math.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Once again read your own references. The AG helmsman who moved the AG in a panic only after he saw the SM bearing down on him in a colision course.
The entire crew of the AG also (in sworn statements) said the AG did not power forward until AFTER the SM was on colision course.
The NZ report faulted Bethune for NOT evading. For making a concious decision to sit and take it (water hoses) earlier when he had a chance to move. (before the SM turned to a collision course) Vids confirm
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Making a mistake in powering forward when he didn't like the hose-down, and then claiming panic of potential collision is all twisted crap. The point is there was no eminent collision, and his reasons do not change the determination of cause. The NZ did not have all of the necessary info to make a determination, and found most of it not admissible in court and decided to find both to blame to get it off their desk. that is obvious. The court never said there was eminent collision.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman LOL biased crap? The helmsman is in a waterproof cabin. Of all the parties he could care less to have water spray. He panic'd because he was about to get rammed. Everyone who testified said there was an eminent colision. The SM Captain simply refused to testify.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 The helmsman was ondeck with the captain. Jason, is a mechanic, and had limited visibility. When he decided to hit the throttle, the captain yelled whoa, realizing it was a mistake. That is the facts of what happened. The captain is responsible for determining eminent collision, not someone down inside the boat.
"everyone that testified" is only those from the SSCS, That means they will bias their statements. I am looking at facts to what happened to determine cause, not blame.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Excuse me, not the court, the NZ comission.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 BTW, "The entire crew of the AG also (in sworn statements) said the AG did not power forward until AFTER the SM was on colision course." Is a lie as you can see from the videos that they were going to be passed closely but not rammed when they started to power forward.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Your logic is SO bad. If the AG moved even half a boat length forward, and the SM would have had a course to only grazed her, then the AG would have been t-boned. Instead the AG only got hit a glancing blow to the nose. So how could the SM have a collision course on the AG in the first place, proven by the video from the AG? The never did. That is where your ignorance proves you are barking up the wrong tree. Yes, they powered forward but the delay? The still moved a boat length.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman First of all the point of the bow of the SM is not the whole ship. SM is 33 feet beam! Nor did the SM only "graze the bow" of the AG. The SM hit squarely with its bow and drove the AG bow UNDER the SM so far that the rudder of the AG was in the air as it slid along and under the SM.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 My point is that it never would have happened if the AG had not moved forward at least one boat length. The AG was still under power when it collided, and with the hull slopes of the SM, it would have been expected to have the nose dive. Did you also notice the rudder bairly to stbd? hardly the angle you would expect if it was trying to turn away from a collision. Jason F'd up. Its that plain and simple. The SM never intended to ram the AG. That is also obvious. The AG 'caused' it.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman You can argue the SM never "intended" to ram the AG. However the SM is not a ship (single rudder) that can make precise manuevers like the Captain tried. They misjudged at best (or purposely rammed at worst) the distances angles and speeds causing a colision course BEFORE the AG moved. Then the helmsman made a stress induced panic'd last second mistake that did not evade the collision.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 You didn't read my explanation earlier?
If the SMs turn to port when the AG powered forward telegraphs their intention could not have been to ram them, as no move at all would have insured t-boning them. The AGs "intent" was to escape from the hosedown at least, and maybe a misperception of eminent collision. In either both cases there was no indication of either party wanting the collision, although the AG had the best motives to do so.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman The turn to port was after the colision, not before. Even the NZ rep[ort states this as I quoted already once. Not any move made by the SM was made to avoid the colision until after the colision.
Besides even if the SM had NOT YET hit the AG a turn to port would CERTAINLY cause a colision due to the stern swing. Either way the AG was getting hit.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 If you believe that you are not looking at the videos. The SM turned to port before the collision, and the glancing blow on the AG als made it turn further. That is obvious from studying the videos. The stern swing would only come about the sequence of events set into motion from thew AGs move. Without that, the SM would not have turned at all, and passed right by. Maybe you are putting too much validity on the NZ's position from insufficient information and not the science of it?
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman lol Are you sure you are an engineer? Calculate the mass of the AG again and tell me again that the AG made the SM turn further.
LMAO Thats like saying you tripped on a cockroach. or a blade of grass. What a ridiculous statement from a "scientist".
What you think you are seeing is a combined turn of the SM and a reverse movement by the AG.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 I do not need to calculate mass in this equation because the drag force of the AG under it's bow at an angle would have been far more than the weight of the boat alone. Sorry, but the video shows three moves to port by the SM after it's initial stbd move. You are obviously devoid of science if you try and claim it.
What happened after the collision has nothing to do with the cause of the collision. That reversing only proves they were not out of gas as so many try and claim here.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Only fools that believe Watson think the AG was completely out of gas. The AG was NOT completely out of DIESEL. The engines were at IDLE.
Laymen don't understand that effectively out of fuel and actually out of fuel are 2 different things. They were effectively out of fuel because the little they had was just enough to keep the power to the vessels systems (electricity radar etc..) working until they could be refueled.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 I know that, but my initial opinion was in favor of the SSCS and partially approving of what they were doing based on the claims here. Then when I saw blatent ignorant statements, I decided to analize all the videos frame by frame, and do a bit of trig on them. I also synced up five of the videos for timing as some angles indicate different things to different people. That is when I decided to try and squash bugs like that and keep trying to stay with cause, not "fault"..
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman You can never believe ANYTHING Paul Watson says. He actually has admitted he lies on purpose to muddle the facts. Watson actually believes we should destroy all cities over 30K population worldwide. (and a lot more crazy stuff) What a joke.
However Bethune is a totally different sort of man. He is more of a real conservationist that is honest and just happened to get hooked up with the wrong crowd.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Yeah, I noticed that along with other organizations distancing themselves with him. He is a sensationalist and helps get the car-crash crowd to pay attention so they can get more sponsor bucks for him to play pirate. Too bad Berthume was caught up in this and responsible for Jasons mistake. Like I said, I used to support them as well, until I did a little homework. It also shows how easy it is to blindly support their actions by spinning what the videos actually show scientificlly.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman True, however just because Watson lies doesn't mean the SM didnt ram the AG. It also doesn't mean what the Japanese are doing down there is right.
The Japanese are still whaling inside an IWC whale sanctuary. They are still using "science" permits improperly and have been asked to stop many times by the IWC. (and BTW IWC is pro whaling as long as it is done responcibly)
PS it is not a planing hull. You need to understand better how a wave piercing hull works.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 I never said that. The old strawman tactic, huh?
The Japanese have a permit to do research in that sanctuary. The sanctuary protects the large endangered whales, of which the Minke, taken by the research fleet, is not endangered. I wonder how many have read their findings at the cost of 12 mil a year, that has provided good info on possibly saving them?
In any case it does not excuse the illegal acts of Watson using the good will (now trashed) of the SSCS.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Thats another thing you should probably investigate more thoroughly. The Southern Minke is "data deffecient" meaning it is not known if it is still endangered or not. The NORTH Atlantic Minke (different species same common name but different scientific name) is no longer endangered. The Japanese have been told multiple times by the IWC that the permits are not supposed to be used inside the Sanctuary.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 It is not endangered. The research fleet was contributed part of the data to determine that. Yes the permit restricts the amount of Minke it can take in the SH, but they take less cause they are also required to provide it as food, and they cannot afford any more freezers as the market doesn't need it. So, they take less than the full allotment. They have determined that global warming (and more) are depleting the food supply for the endangered. Maybe culling a few Minke will help?
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Unless you have inside data not publically released yet. The southern Minke is still "Data defencient" or by another list "threatened". I know exactly the number taken. It is listed in the IWC website each year. Many of the "minkes" are also the North Pacific species taken near Japan. (northern species don't mix with southern species)
As for analysis another time. bye
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@JRBeaman 1000 per year kill allotment but the Minke takes 6-8 years to reach breeding capability and still has a 10 month gestatation. One killed whale takes 7-9 years to replace. 103,000 Minke population. Do the math, retard. They will be hunted to extinction.
christynemarie 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Dangerous play on the part of both captains, but neither intended for the collision, although the SSCS would benefit greatly. It was a mistake, and both boats could be found at fault for their activities. But to claim the SM had a collision course, or they intended to ram the AG is pure bullshit and lies. So drop it. The facts do not support that action. The videos also indicate that determination. Biased opinion is not fact. Fact says the AG caused it. Opinions are mixed.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Read the NZ report. The SM fault was they made a 30 degree turn INTO the AG. The AG was faulted for NOT evading, not properly maintaining a watch, not informing the helmsman of the eminent danger. Endangering his crew through inaction. All these faults by Bethune are for inaction. The AG helmsman was NOT faulted at all, yet you insist he caused it. Not a single person from either vessel has testified there wasn't a collision course before the last second AG move.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Fault is a court determination. I am only speaking as to cause.
Here you go again claiming a 30 deg turn to intentionally ram. The NZ commission not finding the helmsman at fault has nothing to do with the fact he caused the AG to power forward. They were obviously not paying attention as they were laughing about their earlier illegal activities when they heard the SMs LRAD warning them of their intending approach. The SM then deployed their laser, blinding the SMs captain.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman lol You make so many unfounded claims I have problems answering them all before you post again. First of all the topside crew all had a much better view than any of us. Even better than anyone on the SM. Second of all your "scientific" analysis missed the 30 degree turn altogether. It also declared the initial movement of the AG well before it actually moved. and finally failed to notice the angles of approach claiming no collision course when clearly there was. Go analyse again.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Unfounded claims? State one (one at a time) and I will show you they are not unfounded.
You keep stating a 30 degree turn by the SM, and yet do not indicate how you measured it. That is only your speculative at best, and exaggerated, at the least from what I have seen.
1. The small turn to get closer was no where near 30 degrees.
2. An equal turn to port followed immediately.
3. Both moves were done before the AG powered forward.
That is what the videos show.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman The 30 degrees is measured by the NZ inquiry using telemetry. This was recorded and the records were analysed and that is in the report you told me to read. From vids alone you can only get an estimate between 20 and 40 degrees. Since I know you really are not a scientist I will give you a hint for your math. Measure the masts. Scale that to the ship length. Measure the distance the black mast moves from left of the bridge mast to the right of the bridge mast. Use trigonometry.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 telemetry? Uh, ok. I know how to do math, and I would like to see the telemetry reports as I never saw the SM on a collision course in any video, and certainly never more that a 20 degree adjustment to it's original course until the collison. I believe the 30 degree claim was the testimony of the AG crew or that from the bob barker, and never by any "telemetry" as you claim. In any case there was never a collision course till after the AG moved from DIW.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman Another misconception that laymen have is that the AG was at a complete stop. The AG was at IDLE and telemetry confirms that it was actually moving about 2 knots before the helmsman powered forward and at max reached only around 4 knots. The exact speeds are in the NZ report.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 I believe the 2 knows seems a bit high, relative to the current, but absolute, it may be accurate. The 4 knot value is way too low as the AG was just barely on plane when it got hit, and I doubt that could be done at 4 knots. That could be due to the poor resolution of their equipment, or a fudging of the data intrepretation by a biased analist. 9 knots in a 5 knot sea could also be read as 4 knots too. so I doubt that, as it is relative velocities that matter in this case.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman The ady Gil does not have a planing hull. It had a wave-piercing hull. This means the hull pierces through the water rather than riding over the top
Whatever you saw that made you think it was planing is not correct.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Fast water from under the stern with none of the hull in the water indicates planing. That is from the SM video. That is also why we saw the rudders in the air as even a small swell could raise them far enough to be out of the water. Some people claim they had no rudders, that they used engine thrust differential to steer. So much bullshit to wade thru here. That's all I am trying to adjust.
HEY!
I gotta run.
Merry Christmas.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Planing, as in the ass end of the boat "on-plane" which would require more that 4 knots. The sponsons should never plane, and that mans the "whole boat" would also not. The bow came out of the water a significant amount when the power was applied as well, indicating significant power was applied as would be done in a panic. Other observations support this determination as well. I try to look for collaborating evidence where possible.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Another claim in the "reports" was that both ships were on a "similar" course, & not perpendicular. The videos show the AG to be at least 45 degrees, by my estimation, from the SMs course.
Again the helmsman was on deck, and the mechanic, Jason, was the one that powered the boat forward. That is from insider info at the SSCS. Unless you believe the SM was traveling sideways, the sync'd BB footage shows no collision course as the stbd side is always visible to them until till then.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman This is also where you have made the same mistake in analysis. They were on a similar course up until the SM made that hard to starboard you refuse to believe. Yes by the time of collision the angles ARE sharp. But that is because the SM turned sharply starboard into the AG.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Here is where your credibility is obvious from the way you stae things.
"the SM turned sharply starboard into the AG. "
Sorry, the SM did not TURN INTO the AG. It turned in to close the gap,
Turn into. means it turned into the collision when the videos show a turn to port prior to the collision.
Still, there is no video to indicate it ever had a collision course.
If the AG moved 1 to 2 boat lengths forward, and the SM only hit a glancing blow off her bow, then it couldn't have.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman IF the AG moved forward 1-2 boat lengths at a 90 angle then you are right. a very big "IF". The turn to port came AFTER the collision but I admit since it would be delayed responce the HELM ordered it slightly before collision. (rudder speed)
However the angle was not 90 degrees and the distance was not so great. Also the bow of the SM is not a mathematical point. It is a 33 ft beam ship. Also ships of that size have significant sideways movement when turning sharply. (momentum)
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Thank you. But two boat lengths at a 45 degree angle (more accurate) would put them at a perfect t-bone position, where the SM turned to port 2 seconds before the collision saving their lives. How does that indicate anything except no intention to ram, by the SM?
The bow does not move to stbd when they go from a straight course to a port turn. The ass swings to stbd. But they didn't hit it with the stern, the AG powered into the path of the bow. which was not headed at them ever.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@JRBeaman You are not counting the seconds the AG was dragged under the SM. The time you are calculating for the collision is not the time they were struck..that is the time the AG finally pulled free from being dragged. By then the SM was turning to port. but it was not (or just barely started less than a second before) turning to port before collision.
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Giving the analysis correctly takes more than 500 characters, and either one of us arguing over pieces with limited space can be misleading. I have done a syncd frame by frame, using the timing from each video (could be altered by the poster?) to determine my timings and findings. The statements I make are plus or minus a half second based on those videos. The one I like the best is the BB video except most people see it wrong. I could go over this in detail, but I gotta go. K?
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 It also indicates they would never have been hit at all. And the SM would not have made the port turn, endangering the AG with it's stern. So, your analysis proves the SM did not have a collision course with the AG at all, just gettin closer to hose them down. The SM did cause the close quarters, and the AG had right of way all over the place, but violated maritime law by not maintaining course and speed in close quarters when there was no eminent collision. So who's at fault?
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 Even the turn to stbd was to get closer because the hosing was not reaching, and the adjusting turn to port was to maintain a clear passing course. Even so, from the video on the AG, it still never had a collision course set for them. The LRAD was possibly to warn them that they were going to pass close?
The laser could have delayed the SM from attempting the port turn to avoid the collision. It's deployment could have caused a delay in that and possible loss of life to the AG.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 "Not a single person from either vessel has testified there wasn't a collision course before the last second AG move." UH, you forgot to mention that all of these people were from the AG, as the crew and captain from the Sm has not provided any statements. That means there is only one side of the story to escape blame.
One more time. I am addressing scientifically analysis of cause here. There is plenty of blame to go around for all parties.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
Quotes (lies) from you own upload.
"Ady Gil-Powering forward-Note prop wash"
When clearly AG is still only at idle. No change of speed.
"No change in SM direction but AG moving forward."
When AG was still at idle and closing gap was due to SM turn to starboard.
"Shonan Maru-Still no collision course"
When clearly there was a collision course.
Your whole fail is your inexperience in judging speed and direction of either ship due to inexperience at sea. (unless you did on purpose)
rosepetal108 1 year ago
@rosepetal108 You are quoting out of context. That make you the liar.
The SM never had a collision course on the AG till after it moved. That is a fact proven by the video from the AG itself. Give it up. You want to root for the pirates, go ahead, but you have not refuted a single word I have stated as fact. The AG caused the collision when it powered forward. Up till then it had the total right of way for many reasons. Why? Stupid panic by mechanic Jason, not the helmsman. That is a fact.
JRBeaman 1 year ago
Comment removed
nyamisf 1 year ago 5