Harbour Safety. Float plane collision coal harbour

ziggy said:
Wonder if the Control Tower failed to warn the aircraft. Guess it will all come out in the investigation. Having said that, the chart for Victoria Harbour is much easier to use for boaters.
Click to expand...
https://vocaroo.com/1i5SKCJmbu4Q

Take off clearance from Harbour Tower is at 47 seconds on this clip.

"Express 5209, caution for the westbound boat in Northern Alpha, takeoff northwest at your discretion."
 
sly_karma said:
Possible scenario: boat operator sees floatplane taxi downwind, figures he should hustle across to fuel dock/private dock, or otherwise be stuck waiting for plane to take off. Beaver pilot receives clearance amd throttles up, can't see boat crossing into lane. Boat operator unprepared for speed of an aircraft, and engine noise is being pushed downwind away from them. Suddenly they're both trying to occupy same piece of space and time.
Click to expand...
speed of boat will be a factor in the investigation, 5 knot area according to the map.
 
I can see it being difficult to know where aircraft are planning to be operating when they are landing west and taking off north west.

I may be a bit harsh here, but there was likely only one professional operating between these two and right of way, aircraft zones, whatever, the pilot had a duty to wait and ensure his slide was going to be clear of boat traffic.

I have a lot of time operating aircraft and it's always your responsibility to ensure and do the utmost diligence to ensure your takeoff and landing area is clear before you put the power levers forward. I have some seaplane time on the coast too - I was taught to assume that every boat I saw was piloted by an oblivious fool and operate accordingly.
 
Fixit said:
for the purposes of discussion, dont collision regs apply to float planes the same as boats? and from the very limited perspective that above video shows, that would make the fishing vessel the stand on vessel and the plane should have gave way?
Click to expand...
Yes Colregs Rule 3 applies. Seaplanes are expected to alter course. As you point out the boat would be the stand on vessel.
 
I have had hundreds of flights in float planes mostly up the coast out of Campbell River and Port Hardy and my absolute closest call was landing in Nanaimo harbour and a boat (16-18' fiberglass) was going across from from Newcastle not seeing us and the pilot didn't see the boat. I shouted when I saw just before we touched down, operator saw the plane last minute and cut the throttle. As we touched down the wave off the float sprayed over the bow and windshield of the boat. At that time there was beacons in the harbour that pilots would activate by clicking radio transmit on an assigned frequency. The boat should have given way but the pilot checking is the last link in that safety chain.

As far as pilot visibility I feel that beavers have pretty decent cockpit visibility except as they accelerate to get up on step and decelerate off the step. That plane was certainly up on step before it hit but maybe too close to the boat to see that low. Pilot should have easily seen it during taxi out. Typically pilot is on the left side in those planes however can be flown from either side as the yoke flips to either side (if pedals are installed).
 
I like how you put it Misfit: "I was taught to assume that every boat I saw was piloted by an oblivious fool and operate accordingly." X2. Very accurate.

Another issue not often described in the boat/plane situations that make it into the news - are logs & deadheads. Landing - there should be no excuse for not seeing debris & dangers and landing in a safe area & taxi-ing to dock. Taking off is another story altogether.

While the plane is being loaded - winds & tides push stuff around even if you saw the dangers while landing. And a single engine loaded Beaver has a very long take off runway on the water. In places where logs are exported from rivers - that is a dangerous combination. Had more than a few close calls in this scenario. Those close calls & others with boats piloted by an oblivious fool never make the news.

Visibility & mountain passes are additional issues.
 
The boater was completely clueless here, like how do you not see or hear a float plane taking off that close. They didn't even adjust course or alter speed. Having said that its also up to the Pilot to make sure its safe to take off.
 
Unreel said:
The boater was completely clueless here, like how do you not see or hear a float plane taking off that close. They didn't even adjust course or alter speed. Having said that its also up to the Pilot to make sure its safe to take off.
Click to expand...
Agreed! Lots of conjecture in this thread but I will imagine the pilot has an abundance of training and experience when contrasted with that boat operator. The PCO course is a freaking farce. Where in the "training" was this common boat/aircraft scenario brought forward? Too many novices satisfy themselves with the arrogant "I'm the stand on vessel?" focus, when the over-riding rule is always to do whatever is necessary to avoid a collision.

In Comox Harbour, we have 4 take-offs and landings each summer day. Lots of dinghy sailors and boaters from the 3 marinas moving through or sailing within the aircraft zone. No good reason for boats not staying clear. The planes will typically have 8 passengers on board, put at risk. Boaters have a choice of hectares of water and time at their disposal. The Harbour Air pilots, not so much. A collision here is another "not if but when" catastrophe in waiting.

Boaters, get over yourselves and use a little sense or Darwin will cull the PCO crowd.
 
M1SF1T said:
https://vocaroo.com/1i5SKCJmbu4Q

Take off clearance from Harbour Tower is at 47 seconds on this clip.

"Express 5209, caution for the westbound boat in Northern Alpha, takeoff northwest at your discretion."
Click to expand...

Is takeoff clearance different than landing clearance?

I thought the plane invovled in the collision was landing in the harbour.

Do both take off and landing aircraft share the same Frequency and ATC?
 
Last edited:
Ya that thing was taking off, I've never ever seen a seaplane in Vancouver harbor land on that approach, they always land aimed back at the seaplane docks.
 
Aquaholic said:
The boat operator must have been knocked out, or on the floor, as the boat continued on to run into the plane remnants after the initial collision. That is a disturbing view. We will soon learn the regs and right of way rules for this situation.
Click to expand...
Maybe he just drove over to the plane to see if everyone was alright?
 
www.facebook.com

‏‏٣٢٢ ألف‏ مشاهدة‏ · ‏‏١٫٢ ألف‏ تفاعل‏ | Seaplane crashes into boat in Vancouver’s Coal Harbour ‘Several’ passengers were treated for injuries and sent to hospital after a Harbour Air floatplane collided with a pleasure boat in Coal Harbour on Satur

Seaplane crashes into boat in Vancouver’s Coal Harbour ‘Several’ passengers were treated for injuries and sent to hospital after a Harbour Air floatplane collided with a pleasure boat in Coal...
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
Bill 310 said:
Is takeoff clearance different than landing clearance?

I thought the plane invovled in the collision was landing in the harbour.

Do both take off and landing aircraft share the same Frequency and ATC?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the aircraft was taking off.

Vancouver Harbour is controlled airspace with a single frequency. All aircraft operating in it - taking off, landing, transiting - are are subject to and require clearance from an ATC controller in the Harbour Tower.

1000017087.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top