Fail: Sea Shepherd

[McDuck]

Dont know if there has been a thread on it yet..... but here is the vid....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YskxrX0bNKQ

Dont think they can blame the whaler for that one...

[JimO]

the news said the japs rammed them didnt look like that to me....fukkem greeny cnuts

[Jantar]

Dont know if there has been a thread on it yet..... but here is the vid.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YskxrX0bNKQ&feature=player_embedded

Dont think they can blame the whaler for that one...


the news said the japs rammed them didnt look like that to me....fukkem greeny cnuts

The rules of the sea clearly show the Japanese were in the wrong.


15. Crossing situations
When two power-driven vessels are crossing, the vessel which has the other on the starboard side must give way.

[McDuck]

But the rules also stait when one is over 500 ton the 500 ton ship has right of way...

[JimO]

the dumbcunts drove into the side of the jap ship, i would say that puts them in the wrong, i love the last bit where the greeny cunts get blasted with the hose after the boat gets munched

[McJim]

Yep - Earthrace was definately under power to ensure the collision occured. Seems the daft bastards can't tell the difference between several thousand tons of steel hulled whaler and a light skiff with 3 fisherman on it :rofl:

[Hahn]

Then there's the video showing the Steve Irwin coming up from behind and ramming the Whaling ship....
Turns out a little carbon fiber boat can't do the same... idiot greenies!

[McDuck]

Then there's the video showing the Steve Irwin coming up from behind and ramming the Whaling ship....
Turns out a little carbon fiber boat can't do the same... idiot greenies!

But it had Kevlar!

[McJim]

Do the Sea Shepherd boats not need to come to Bluff or Dunedin to refuel? If so why don't we organise an anti-Sea Shepherd Demo complete with stink bombs (like they use) we could even get some old dunger cars and ram their staff when they are on shore leave. :rofl:

[peasea]

Everyone's having a whale of a time................

[JimO]

interisting reading the comments ..eh jimbo

[Virago]

The rules of the sea clearly show the Japanese were in the wrong.

That's the greenies' modus operandi - approach from the starboard, force the ship to change course. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum.

Followed by weeping and wailing when the Japs eventually refuse to change course.

They keep upping the stakes, effectively committing piracy.

[Hahn]

Everyone's having a whale of a time................

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ckcwDL3XYI

[peasea]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ckcwDL3XYI

Thats so lame.
I think I'm going to blubber.

[peasea]

That's the greenies' modus operandi - approach from the starboard, force the ship to change course. Rinse and repeat ad nauseum.

Followed by weeping and wailing when the Japs eventually refuse to change course.

They keep upping the stakes, effectively committing piracy.

Like you'd know anything about anything.......................

[JimO]

notice they are flying the scull n crossbones, that makes them pirates dont it ........arrr

[Lias]

Generally speaking my politics are diametrically opposed to the sort of people you'd expect to see crewing a sea sheppard boat, but honestly we need to send the navy out and fucking sink those whalers.

I hand on heart want John Key and Kevin Rudd to send in the frigates and sink the jap whalers, with all hands on boards, and no warning shots fired.

It's not that I'm all that attached to whales, but I have major issues with the japanese fleets coming down to OUR part of the world to steal natural resources. If they want to go whaling, let them do it in their waters, not ours.

[LBD]

From Colregs....(Maritime collision regulations)

Rule 2 Responsibility

(b) In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.



Rule 5 requires that "every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

and....

Section II - Conduct of vessels in sight of one another (Rules 11-18)

Rule 17 deals with the action of the stand-on vessel, including the provision that the stand-on vessel may "take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action.

In this situation, it appears the whaler is supposed to give way however...rule 17 states the Sea Shephard should take action to avoid collision and as the sea shephard is capable of 40 kts...

In the one photo you can see nets on the side of the Jap boat which leads to another thought, was the Jap boat involved in some "Token" trawling, and although I cannot see any, she wouldthen be required to display two black cones from her rigging indicating she was "restricted in her ability to manouver" telling all other vessels to keep clear.

....Twas deliberate attempted suicide in anyones books

[McDuck]

I think they expected the andy gil to bounce off un damaged. Lolz

[LBD]

notice they are flying the scull n crossbones, that makes them pirates dont it ........arrr

The Shepherd's crook signifies that we are shepherds of the sea and the trident signifies that we fight for life in the sea. The skull represents the enemy of the sea (i.e. mankind) and the yin and yang with the dolphin and the whales means we must learn from the whales and dolphins how to live in harmony with the sea.

Bit pretentious IMO....

[McJim]

The Shepherd's crook signifies that we are shepherds of the sea and the trident signifies that we fight for life in the sea. The skull represents the enemy of the sea (i.e. mankind) and the yin and yang with the dolphin and the whales means we must learn from the whales and dolphins how to live in harmony with the sea.

Bit pretentious IMO....

Their are simply a bunch of small dicked violent fuckers looking for an outlet. They have to pander to the tree huggers for money so they can go and play pirates where no one can stop them. Mind you I'm pretty certain there are kickbacks to Sea Shepherd from the Jap Whaling industry since this kind of publicity only serves to increase demand for their product. It's kind of like King Crabs, Crayfish, lobsters and Caviar. The harder it is to get the more they can charge for the products. If there is an added public awareness of risk (such as being rammed so far from land that there will be potential loss of life) then the price is gonna go up and the act of hunting will be perpetuated.

[Pixie]

Stupid hippies and their whale worship.
The stupid animals will try to kill themselves if we aren't there to do it for them.

[Flatcap]

Mind you I'm pretty certain there are kickbacks to Sea Shepherd from the Jap Whaling industry since this kind of publicity only serves to increase demand for their product.

There is a school of thought that Sea Shepherd et.al. are only prolonging Jap whaling. Jap culture is all about saving face, and they are less likely to stop with a bunch of Western Devils telling them to.

[pritch]

Some interesting points of view. I have some sympathy the aims of Greenpeace if rather less for the actual GreenPeace activists.

Who had right of way is irrelevant, for these turkeys to allow themselves to be in a position where they were vulnerable given their recent activities was just plain stupid.

[McJim]

I've noticed in the NZPA feed this morning that they suggest the Earthrace was rammed by the Japs. So have the Japs perfected a new propulsion method that moves them 2 knots sideways? Could see plumes from the Earthrace engines at the last minute as they tried to get under the bow.

[CookMySock]

Stupid hippies and their whale worship.LOL shades of homer simpson there..

Steve

[Genie]

Dont know if there has been a thread on it yet..... but here is the vid.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YskxrX0bNKQ&feature=player_embedded

Dont think they can blame the whaler for that one...

can;t even watch...link has been removed as it violated code of ethics....interesting

[Skyryder]

Generally speaking my politics are diametrically opposed to the sort of people you'd expect to see crewing a sea sheppard boat, but honestly we need to send the navy out and fucking sink those whalers.

I hand on heart want John Key and Kevin Rudd to send in the frigates and sink the jap whalers, with all hands on boards, and no warning shots fired.

It's not that I'm all that attached to whales, but I have major issues with the japanese fleets coming down to OUR part of the world to steal natural resources. If they want to go whaling, let them do it in their waters, not ours.

We agree again. I see the Japs have lodged a complaint and McCully has referred it to Maritime New Zealand. 'Hoseing the crew after they had been rammed pretty well says it all.

Skyryder

[McJim]

New Linky http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Suy7cFjvY&feature=email
Clearly shows no collision would have occurred if Earthrace hadn't powered up at the last minute to tuck in under the bow.

[CookMySock]

Clearly shows no collision would have occurred if Earthrace hadn't powered up at the last minute to tuck in under the bow.I wonder if that was more the "plan A" power-up before the hard-to-starboard. Looks like they abandoned plan A and went for Plan B "HARRRRRRRD ASTERN!"

It's hard to tell but it seems to me the camera platform was in a slow sweeping right turn and slowly collected Earthrace.

edit: in the last few seconds of the video clip, notice the white water trail from the larger vessel. This vessel was in a turn to the left?

Steve (not a big-boat person)

[saxet]

Saw another vid on a site called TMZ.co , seemed to show the whaler turning into the Ali G boat. Probably both sides playing silly buggers.
It's hard to tell which side is the most dangerous.

[Jantar]

The video I saw appeared to show the japanese vessel turning into Earth Race instead of turning away. The water hoses playing onto the smaller vessel would have hidden this manouver from those on board.

[Tank]

Regardless of all the arguments - the upshot is that a small boat like that deliberatley getting so close to a bigger boat to cause it to have to take avasive action really isnt 'in the right - despite what rules of the sea say (give way to .... etc)

The seas are rough, there are water cannons, and that terrible sound that they are pumping out - they are forcing a situation that can cause an accident and trying to do it from a position that 'gives them right of way

Its like a biker going on green despite seeing a car running a red light - Just beacuse they have right of way - its all gonna end in tears.

Personally I think they got what they deserved. Glad nobody was hurt. Glad its fucked their boat.

[McJim]

Regardless of all the arguments - the upshot is that a small boat like that deliberatley getting so close to a bigger boat to cause it to have to take avasive action really isnt 'in the right - despite what rules of the sea say (give way to .... etc)

The seas are rough, there are water cannons, and that terrible sound that they are pumping out - they are forcing a situation that can cause an accident and trying to do it from a position that 'gives them right of way

Its like a biker going on green despite seeing a car running a red light - Just beacuse they have right of way - its all gonna end in tears.

Personally I think they got what they deserved. Glad nobody was hurt. Glad its fucked their boat.

Hippie cameraman got broken ribs...small price to pay for taking a daft risk - should be having words with his skipper for driving into a steel ship instead of a 3 man skiff like they are used to :rofl: by the way - my 4 and 5 year old sons think your avatar rocks :2thumbsup:

[R6_kid]

I'm just fucked off that they wrecked a cool boat. What a waste of kiwi ingenuity and technology!

[Mikkel]

Generally speaking my politics are diametrically opposed to the sort of people you'd expect to see crewing a sea sheppard boat, but honestly we need to send the navy out and fucking sink those whalers.

I hand on heart want John Key and Kevin Rudd to send in the frigates and sink the jap whalers, with all hands on boards, and no warning shots fired.

It's not that I'm all that attached to whales, but I have major issues with the japanese fleets coming down to OUR part of the world to steal natural resources. If they want to go whaling, let them do it in their waters, not ours.

Our waters? Get your facts straight. The whaling takes place in international waters, NZ has no more right to exploitation of those waters than the Japanese. Most likely the majority of the NZ fishing takes in international waters as well. Sending in the navy to sink the whalers would be not dissimilar to Pearl Harbour (albeit using exclusively civilian targets) - an open act of war.


The Shepherd's crook signifies that we are shepherds of the sea and the trident signifies that we fight for life in the sea. The skull represents the enemy of the sea (i.e. mankind) and the yin and yang with the dolphin and the whales means we must learn from the whales and dolphins how to live in harmony with the sea.

Bit pretentious IMO....

Yep, BULLSHIT! Shepherds of the sea... I'm Jesus, I'll save the whales. What a load of rubbish. It's a pirate flag no matter what symbolism they claim.


can;t even watch...link has been removed as it violated code of ethics....interesting

Another link to the same video, in case it gets taken down as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9l_L1MVtcI


I'm just fucked off that they wrecked a cool boat. What a waste of kiwi ingenuity and technology!

No, the waste of the boat happened when it went to Sea Shepherd. If you can even call it a waste, I mean, after all it was designed to set a record, it set the record - as such it served its purpose.

[JimO]

looked to me like they intended to be run down, why were the crew up top?? if that was a container ship and the small boat were somaliam pirates EVERYBODY would be saying serves the cnuts right they should have machinegunned them as well but because its grennies its the big boats fault. Same as these cunts that go up buildings with signs, they should shoot a few that will discourage the rest

[sAsLEX]

looked to me like they intended to be run down, why were the crew up top?? if that was a container ship and the small boat were somaliam pirates EVERYBODY would be saying serves the cnuts right they should have machinegunned them as well but because its grennies its the big boats fault. Same as these cunts that go up buildings with signs, they should shoot a few that will discourage the rest

Most people are morally against whaling, a little different to piracy off the Somali coast.


ps my spellcheck within Firefox does not work in the new VB?

[JimO]

Most people are morally against whaling, a little different to piracy off the Somali coast.


?

why, whats the difference to whaling and taking any other edible life out of the sea whales are just big dumb fish aint they

[nudemetalz]

Well I don't think they did it on "porpoise"...... ;)

[SPman]

Ahhhh....once again a tirade of hate and vitriol against people who put their bodies where their mouths are and actually DO something, however misguided it may seem to be to others......

such ineffectual lives people have.....are they embarrassed by it, so they have to pour out this vitriol?

[sAsLEX]

why, whats the difference to whaling and taking any other edible life out of the sea whales are just big dumb fish aint they

As much a fish as you are.

They are mammals not fish.

There are smaller numbers of them in the oceans since they are at the top of the food chain, for the most part we are their only predators unlike most of the fish we eat.

[JimO]

As much a fish as you are.

They are mammals not fish.

There are smaller numbers of them in the oceans since they are at the top of the food chain, for the most part we are their only predators unlike most of the fish we eat.

i dont care about most humans so why give a shit about whales

[Mikkel]

The rules: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Regulations_for_Preventing_Collision s_at_Sea#Section_II_.28for_vessels_in_sight_of_one _another.29

I can't find the clause, but there should be one which goes along the lines of "Pleasure gives way to commerce". But that's probably not included in the rules for commercial shipping.

If you consider the last bit of the video taken from the Japanese ship you'll find it difficult to see the wake from the larger ship. This would suggest that they have been turning to port, i.e. away from the Ady Gil. As such it would appear that the Ady Gil, as would be expected considering the relative manoeuvrability of the vessels, was the instigator of the collision.

[pzkpfw]

I hear that next, Greenpeace will be protesting the contribution of motor sports to Global warming, by standing with placards at the sides of race tracks (and occasionally running out (or pretending to) in front of the vehicles).

[Tank]

I hear that next, Greenpeace will be protesting the contribution of motor sports to Global warming, by standing with placards at the sides of race tracks (and occasionally running out (or pretending to) in front of the vehicles).

or shit like this: http://www.watoday.com.au/sport/frozen-koalas-may-be-thrown-at-rally-cars-20090902-f7dq.html

Grennies and lefties - fuck 'em all I say.

[davereid]

The Sea Shepherd organisation rammed and sunk some Scandinavian Whalers a few years back, this is an old game for them. I heard that Norway responded by declaring them a terrorist organisation, and allowing the Norwegian Navy to sink them on sight, although I have googled it and cant find a reference...

This may well explain why they are now inactive against Norweigian Whalers, and target only the japanese.

[CookMySock]

The bottom line is, they were there to pick a fight and they got one. Boo hoo hoo.

Steve

[captain_andrey]

Hate these pricks for making the price of whale meat go up.

[Flip]

Good on the protesters for getting out there ans doing some thing positive.

I do question what the Capitan of earth race was doing putting his boat and crew at risk by parking his launch in front of a ship. Seems like attempted motor launch suicide to me.

I do believe after seeing the video the launch was playing chicken with the boat and made a miscalculation and got too close.

[Maki]

Looking at the wake from the wailng ship, seen at the end of the video it is clear that the Japanese were turning left, away from the pirates. The pirates rammed them anyway, proving they did so on porpoise. My congratulations to the Japanese for destroying another piratical anti wailing worship! Now, where can I get some juicy wail steaks!?

[CookMySock]

Looking at the wake from the wailng ship, seen at the end of the video it is clear that the Japanese were turning left, away from the pirates. The pirates rammed them anyway, proving they did so on porpoise. Yup, but going by the hardcord dash for the helm, I'd say they didn't realise until the last second that there would be contact, and I'd also venture a guess they couldn't see a damn thing with the water cannon in their faces - imagine the surprise when they discovered they were a lot closer than they thought. Ooops. Add to that, the rough sea swinging their bow over unannounced.

Steve

[sAsLEX]

Hate these pricks for making the price of whale meat go up.

Ummm the Japanese are not whaling for meat but Cetacean Research.............

[Jantar]

Ummm the Japanese are not whaling for meat but Cetacean Research............. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Hitcher]

I have some sympathy the aims of Greenpeace if rather less for the actual GreenPeace activists.

I, on the other hand, have little time for faceless multinational NGOs that I, as a citizen of New Zealand, have no ability to influence. Greenpeace, WWF and others are not membership-driven organisations. They are franchises controlled by the same big businesses that hippies love to hate. I give them full marks for irony. What do Keisha Castle-Hughes and Lucy Lawless know about climate change or the sustainable management of ocean-dwelling mammals?

[Skyryder]

Ummm the Japanese are not whaling for meat but Cetacean Research.............

and the effect upon the tast buds.:shit:


Skyryder

[LBD]

The rules: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Regulations_for_Preventing_Collision s_at_Sea#Section_II_.28for_vessels_in_sight_of_one _another.29

I can't find the clause, but there should be one which goes along the lines of "Pleasure gives way to commerce". But that's probably not included in the rules for commercial shipping.



If you consider the last bit of the video taken from the Japanese ship you'll find it difficult to see the wake from the larger ship. This would suggest that they have been turning to port, i.e. away from the Ady Gil. As such it would appear that the Ady Gil, as would be expected considering the relative manoeuvrability of the vessels, was the instigator of the collision.

There is only one set of rules all things that float must comply with........International Maritine Organisation (IMO)...Collision Regulations or Colregs as they are known...There are no exceptions to the rules therein Even if you are the stand on vessel ie the "Andy Gil" You must still take action to avoid collision....and the Andy Gil can do 40 kts.

[Ronin]

It looks to me as if the Jap ship was turning to starboard and caused the crash. The Biofuel hippys put their boat into gear and although it is hard to tell were also tuning to starboard to try an minimise the impact.

Mind you, if I was the skipper of the jap boat and some twat was firing projectiles at and attempting to foul my prop, I would have been starboard down before that and taken him amidships.

The ocean is one place where you don't screw around. Wouldn't shed a tear if the ecomentalists all went under.

[Maha]

It looks to me as if the Jap ship was turning to starboard and caused the crash. The Biofuel hippys put their boat into gear and although it is hard to tell were also tuning to starboard to try an minimise the impact.

Mind you, if I was the skipper of the jap boat and some twat was firing projectiles at and attempting to foul my prop, I would have been starboard down before that and taken him amidships.

The ocean is one place where you don't screw around. Wouldn't shed a tear if the ecomentalists all went under.

It certainly looks that way from one angle but heres a thought, if you see a much larger ship/boat heading your way and an impact looks likely, wouldn't you do all you could to avoid it?
Those idiots (though they are doing what they think is right, and it probably is) have collided before with Whaling ships, what they affectively done here is, fuck a perfectly good and unique ocean going craft.
Its my view that, both have wronged in this case.

[Flip]

Just found this.

The japs ran them down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LAl9T75DVw&feature=related

[AllanB]

The problem with GreenPeace is they are rather thick. FFS they have been protesting like this for decades and have still not thought to buy a really really big protest boat ...........

[JimO]

Just found this.

The japs ran them down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LAl9T75DVw&feature=related


pity they didnt do a proper job

[Hitcher]

The problem with GreenPeace is they are rather thick. FFS they have been protesting like this for decades and have still not thought to buy a really really big protest boat

Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace are not the same organisation.

[saxet]

Quick note... The organisation involved is Sea Shepard not Greenpeace, Greenpeace has tried, obviously not that well ,to distance themselves from Sea Shepard due to their tatics.....wonder why?

[Kickaha]

The seas are rough, there are water cannons,.

There should be real cannons


l they should have machinegunned them as well

They could mix the bodies in with the whale meat, no survivors, no evidnece

[erik]

That second vid shows much more clearly what happened. I think good on the Sea Shepherd people for trying to stop whaling. I'm surprised and disturbed how many people on here are pro-whaling.

[McJim]

That second vid shows much more clearly what happened. I think good on the Sea Shepherd people for trying to stop whaling. I'm surprised and disturbed how many people on here are pro-whaling.

I was anti whaling until I heard of Sea Shepherd some years ago. I have been forced by their tactics and my distaste for their leader to change my stance. This is the effect they have had on many.

[Virago]

That second vid shows much more clearly what happened. I think good on the Sea Shepherd people for trying to stop whaling. I'm surprised and disturbed how many people on here are pro-whaling.

Being anti-terrorism doesn't make people pro-whaling.

[sAsLEX]

I was anti whaling until I heard of Sea Shepherd some years ago. I have been forced by their tactics and my distaste for their leader to change my stance. This is the effect they have had on many.


Being anti-terrorism doesn't make people pro-whaling.

Seems to have.

[Flip]

I was anti whaling until I heard of Sea Shepherd some years ago. I have been forced by their tactics and my distaste for their leader to change my stance. This is the effect they have had on many.

Well I am anti whaling and I am also very anti jap. I support the Sea Shepard whole heartedly because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

You can call me a leather clad tinker bell just don't call me a tree hugger.

[Ronin]

It certainly looks that way from one angle but heres a thought, if you see a much larger ship/boat heading your way and an impact looks likely, wouldn't you do all you could to avoid it?
Those idiots (though they are doing what they think is right, and it probably is) have collided before with Whaling ships, what they affectively done here is, fuck a perfectly good and unique ocean going craft.
Its my view that, both have wronged in this case.

Ahhh but if you get out of the way then where is the media coverage?

Don't get me wrong, the Whales should IMO be left to frolic with the plankton and the hippies back to chaining themselves to power stations.

[Genie]

I think the japs should piss off back home.
They've raped their own fishing waters and have been raping these waters for almost 20 years.
I don't agree with how the sea shepard lot work but at least they doing something. For them it is war. I do admire them for getting off the couchs and working at making a difference. They obvisiously feel very passionately aobut what they are doing if they are willing to lay down their lives.
One must also remember what dirty little fighters the Japanese can be.

So many species have been mad extinct due to man's greed, I'd really hate to see whales disappear forever.

[Ronin]

I'm not pro whaling. I am anti she shepherd though.

I was a commercial fisherman for a few years and with all the agro that went with who fished what areas, no one fucked with anyone elses boat. Tractor yes, gear yes, boat no.

[motor_mayhem]

I thought everyone one would be raving about how great the sea shepard was.....

Considering everyone seems to be anti whaling -
(and no you cannot compare it to killing sheep/cattle or even you average fish trawling because sheep and cattle are breed to replace their numbers and trawling has a limited amount so the numbers will naturally replace, the whale will probably turn out to be like the moa if the japs have their way)
and from the way the phrases "PC" and "nanny state" are thrown around(usually completely out of context) by people who want us to think they don't like pissing around, I thought to go out and make life difficult for the whaling offenders would be right up Joe Public's alley.

But hey feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

[sAsLEX]

I think the japs should piss off back home.
They've raped their own fishing waters and have been raping these waters for almost 20 years.
I don't agree with how the sea shepard lot work but at least they doing something. For them it is war. I do admire them for getting off the couchs and working at making a difference. They obvisiously feel very passionately aobut what they are doing if they are willing to lay down their lives.
One must also remember what dirty little fighters the Japanese can be.

So many species have been mad extinct due to man's greed, I'd really hate to see whales disappear forever.

I do love it how some of the only Nations that support Japanese scientific whaling are Nations that hold the Whale as sacred, just seems the need for money outweighs the need for generations of culture and belief.

[peasea]

I think the japs should piss off back home.
They've raped their own fishing waters and have been raping these waters for almost 20 years.
I don't agree with how the sea shepard lot work but at least they doing something. For them it is war. I do admire them for getting off the couchs and working at making a difference. They obvisiously feel very passionately aobut what they are doing if they are willing to lay down their lives.
One must also remember what dirty little fighters the Japanese can be.

So many species have been mad extinct due to man's greed, I'd really hate to see whales disappear forever.
I can recall jap fishing boats tying up at Miramar Wharf in the early seventies so they've been hanging around our waters for a damn sight longer than 20 years.

[peasea]

Well I am anti whaling and I am also very anti jap. I support the Sea Shepard whole heartedly because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

You can call me a leather clad tinker bell just don't call me a tree hugger.

Just curious; what makes you so anti-jap?

[Foxzee]

I can recall jap fishing boats tying up at Miramar Wharf in the early seventies so they've been hanging around our waters for a damn sight longer than 20 years.

Now that comments got to show ya age....LOL:bleh::bleh::bleh:

[Genie]

was just thinking the same thing. I only quoted 20 years as that was about the time my ex started in the fishing game and way back then the japs were smelly little vermin raping the sea. Now Sir Peasea informs me it's longer than that. Bloody tragic....shame we have had such a crap government for so long that they can still come here. no wonder the price of fish is sooooo expensive.

[peasea]

Now that comments got to show ya age....LOL:bleh::bleh::bleh:

I'm not ashamed of my age, I think it's funny. I can still act like an 18y/o at times though.

[Genie]

wonderful......i have an 87 year old Great Aunt who wil never grow old....most amazing women I have ever met. Young at heart is ever so healthy.

[Mikkel]

Just found this.

The japs ran them down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LAl9T75DVw&feature=related

Yeah, that settles it. Still think they had what was coming though. It wasn't the Japanese that started that particular war.


That second vid shows much more clearly what happened. I think good on the Sea Shepherd people for trying to stop whaling. I'm surprised and disturbed how many people on here are pro-whaling.

There's a big difference between being pro-whaling and then condoning what Sea Shepherd are doing. Hey, don't get me wrong I am all in favour of civil disobedience given a worthy case. And I might just even be willing to consider protesting whaling a worthy cause. (If nothing else because of the blatant bullshit that is going on in that regard - you know the "scientific research" versus commercial whaling bullshit. I'd have more respect for the Japanese whalers if they had just told the establishment to go fuck themselves, we'll keep on whalin'!)

However, there's a huge difference between civil disobedience and then going off to the antarctic sea to play righteous hippie pirates! It's not exactly a playground or the town square.

The Japanese didn't do anything in this case that Sea Shepherd hasn't been doing themselves in the past. Sea Shepherd just brought the wrong boat for the fight. Karma is a bitch!

[Toaster]

Looked like a maritime version of the old sword over the back of the neck.

Sushi anyone?

[Foxzee]

I'm not ashamed of my age, I think it's funny. I can still act like an 18y/o at times though.

Pic's or we won't believe you??????:yes::yes:

[Forest]

Yeah, that settles it. Still think they had what was coming though. It wasn't the Japanese that started that particular war.


It all depends on where you shoot the video.

Compare that video to this one.

tEmzp054cOA

[Jantar]

It all depends on where you shoot the video.

Compare that video to this one.

That video also shows the whaling vessel in the wrong. Check out the Sea Shepherd vessel at the start of the video and it clearly shows that it has the right of way and is travelling slowly (compare it to the vessel in the back ground). The whaling ship turns into it and the Sea Shepherd Vessel increases power (the increase in the wake). Power is needed for a tight turn, but its too late and the collission occurs. Again it looks like the water cannon obscured the Sea Shepherd's view of the whaling ship turning towards it.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of whaling this encounter did exactly what the Sea Shepherd organisation wanted. ie they have video evidence of the Japanese intentionally damaging their vessel. That could only happen if the skipper of the Sea Sheppherd vessel put his vessel in danger to begin with.

[peasea]

Pic's or we won't believe you??????:yes::yes:

You only have to look at my profile to know that I'm capable of goofing off. How many grown-ups would jam a Moro bar into two mounds of pizza dough?

[Skyryder]

The Japanese have been plundering our fisheries for years. They would still be doing this if they thought they could get away with it. Most of the world's government have condemned the Japanese whaling practices, but on here they are the good guys. Imagine the furor if some cage deliberately drove into a group of bikers while on an ACC protest ride on the basis that the driver did not agree with our stand.

Some of you guys need to differentiate between the act of deliberately ramming a NZ registered ship, and the politics of whaling. It’s pretty clear to me after watching the vid who is in the wrong. That interpretation aside you do not deliberatly hose down the crew on a boat that you have accidently rammed.

Like I said, the same act against us by a cage driver who disagrees with our ACC stance……………….and this would be acceptable?? I don’t think so.

Skyryder

[awayatc]

The average Jap may be a friendly enough sort of bloke.....,
But their complete disrespect for anything on this planet that is not Japanese is appalling......
Their whole fishing attitude is one off rape and pillage
The old guard is extremely racist, arrogant and have an enormous superiority complex
(still today plenty of places in Japan "for Japanese only")
they also control the sort of news the Japanese public has access to, and therefor it is impossible for anybody else to sway "public opinion" there.......

The Japanese have got no business in the Antarctic waters whaling........
Sea shepperd en consorts are making it harder for them......Good on them!!!!!!
F**k the Arrogant little c**ts.............

Talk to any kiwi fishermen that had the "pleasure" of working on Japanese joint venture ships in NZ waters about attitudes...........

Enola wasn't all that gay.......

[Owl]

Some of you guys need to differentiate between the act of deliberately ramming a NZ registered ship, and the politics of whaling. It’s pretty clear to me after watching the vid who is in the wrong. That interpretation aside you do not deliberatly hose down the crew on a boat that you have accidently rammed.Skyryder

Bloody hell Skyryder, next you'll be suggesting you shouldn't bash somebody while they're lying on the ground.:rolleyes:

Anyway back on topic.

"Who kilied Opo?:eek5:

[JimO]

The Japanese have been plundering our fisheries for years. They would still be doing this if they thought they could get away with it. Most of the world's government have condemned the Japanese whaling practices, but on here they are the good guys. Imagine the furor if some cage deliberately drove into a group of bikers while on an ACC protest ride on the basis that the driver did not agree with our stand.

Some of you guys need to differentiate between the act of deliberately ramming a NZ registered ship, and the politics of whaling. It’s pretty clear to me after watching the vid who is in the wrong. That interpretation aside you do not deliberatly hose down the crew on a boat that you have accidently rammed.

Like I said, the same act against us by a cage driver who disagrees with our ACC stance……………….and this would be acceptable?? I don’t think so.

Skyryder

so if a protesting biker rode his bike in front of a moving bus and got rundown thats the busses fault.....yea rite

[Jantar]

so if a protesting biker rode his bike in front of a moving bus and got rundown thats the busses fault.....yea rite
It is if the bus turned into the rider, or if the bus was supposed to give and purposely failed to do so.

[McJim]

It is if the bus turned into the rider, or if the bus was supposed to give and purposely failed to do so.

Which is not the case in this instance according to collision regulations.

[Mikkel]

It all depends on where you shoot the video.

Compare that video to this one.

Come on mate. Get with the programme. That particular video has been linked twice earlier in the thread and doesn't really show a clear perspective - all you can see is that the distance between the two boats quite quickly gets smaller and then the collision occurs. The video taken from the 3rd ship clearly shows the Japanese vessel undertaking a sharp turn to starboard just before ramming the Ady Gil and then a sharp turn to port to clear it again. Whether the Japanese captain intended to ram or just to intimidate the Ady Gil I can not say - nonetheless that's where the fault lies.

Considering that the Ady Gil has been antagonising the Japanese vessels prior to this, it doesn't make much sense for it to sit still on the water like that. It's a bit like tipping your drink into the lap of that big mean angry guy with the tattoos in the pub and then just sitting down at your seat with your back turned towards him. If he goes to hit you, yes he's in the wrong - legally, but you sure had it coming.

I must say, I do like how the Japanese keep on blasting them with the water cannons even after their boat has been wrecked. Top marks for callousness.

[Tank]

Dont bring a knife to a gun fight.

Piss off a big boat enough and they are going to smack ya. I hope that in the investigations that ALL the tapes are released and the public gets to see just how many times the Ady Gil put them and the japs in danger out there.

I think public sympathy (what there is of it) will dry up somewhat.

[davereid]

I think public sympathy (what there is of it) will dry up somewhat.

They are terrorists. The Japanese should simply declare them as such, and sink them on sight.

1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaling vessel “Sierra”, causing considerable damage.
“Sierra” survives attack.
1980: The IWC at its meeting in Brighton, United Kingdom, assigns high-level protection to two
Canadian Government delegates after Watson threatened to kill them for voting against a
moratorium on sperm whales. Delegates given Royal Canadian Mounted Police protection until
their return home to Canada.
1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility. Investigation
shows limpet mines used to blow up the vessel.
1981: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and
Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga.
1986: Sea Shepherd attempts to stop Faroe Islands pilot whale harvest. Using rifles, Sea
Shepherd activists shoot at Faroe Islands police in an attempt to sink their rubber dinghies. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used “toads”
(rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends) against the rubber dinghies … petrol was
poured over the side of the ship and signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in an
attempt to set the petrol on fire.”
1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik,
Iceland, and for malicious damage to a whaling station. (This act of violence was carried out after
Iceland stopped whaling in line with the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling.) Attack
carried out by Sea Shepherd members Rodney A. Coronado and David Howitt. (Coronado linked
to Animal Liberation Front and arrested eight years later by United States FBI for his part in an
ALF attack on Michigan State University research laboratory.
Charges included use of an
explosive device, theft and arson.)

Only the un-informed would support them.
If whaling is to be ended it can only be justified on the basis of extinction.
Pointing out they are intelligent, pretty, mammals, and that we like them, is completely irrelevant.

Many in india would condem our treatment of cows, an animal they hold sacred.

Survival of the cutest is not going to change the japanese at all.

[Mikkel]

Indeed, they've been doing silly shit for ages.

Anyway, I still think that the term "militant activists" is much more fitting than "terrorist". They are fighting for a cause they believe in - and, unlike terrorists, not by trying induce fear into the heart of the common man by seemingly pointless acts of violence and mass-destruction.

[avgas]

been said here before......but its pretty obvious to me that regardless of who is right and wrong.....1 boat got fucked the other didn't.

While I agree with Sea Sheppard plight - they have just recently proved how stupid they are.
Did they really expect a ship with a few hundred tons of momentum........to avoid them in a game of chicken?

Thanks Sea Sheppard for doing nothing except sink a piece of NZ history. Anyone want to sell them Endevour?

Clearly they were not using Earthrace as they originally intended.........to block harpoons. Also turns out is a really crappy speed bump. People learn new things every day

[avgas]

unlike terrorists, not by trying induce fear into the heart of the common man by seemingly pointless acts of violence and mass-destruction.
errrr what?
your kidding right - The head of sea sheppard has been quoted for saying "We hope they get scared and go home refusing to come back again"

[dogsnbikes]

I hear its 1-0 to the whalers now one plastic tub has sunk

[RantyDave]

then a sharp turn to port to clear it again.
A sharp turn to port???? It was clonked on the starboard bow by an offshore powerboat at full tilt. It's gonna turn to port regardless of what's done with the helm.

Whether the Japanese captain intended to ram or just to intimidate the Ady Gil I can not say - nonetheless that's where the fault lies.
Bullshit. The Ady Gil engaged it's engines and powered into the side of the Japanese ship.

Regardless of how you feel about whaling, they're dickheads risking lives to try to prevent an entirely lawful activity. It's exactly the same as vegans taking pot shots at dairy farmers.

Dave

[White trash]

A sharp turn to port???? It was clonked on the starboard bow by an offshore powerboat at full tilt. It's gonna turn to port regardless of what's done with the helm.

Bullshit. The Ady Gil engaged it's engines and powered into the side of the Japanese ship.

Regardless of how you feel about whaling, they're dickheads risking lives to try to prevent an entirely lawful activity. It's exactly the same as vegans taking pot shots at dairy farmers.

Dave

Agree. Had the Ady Gil remained idling alongside, it may have bumped the side of the japanese vessel a few times, possibly minor damage. Not lying at the bootom of the southern ocean.

[Tank]

Lefties and Greenies together - Labour actually think that the G'ment should step in and step up for the assholes.

http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2010/01/08/pete-bethune-and-the-whale-killers/#comments


On the bright side it has now sunk:

A high-speed protest vessel has sunk after colliding with a ship with the Japanese whaling fleet in Antarctic waters on Wednesday.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society says the Ady Gil, formerly known as Earthrace, was being towed to a French research station when it sank at 5am (NZT) on Friday.

It was about 10 hours from the base.

Sea Shepherd says the vessel began taking on more and more water and nothing could be done to save it.

Captain Paul Watson says diesel and oil had already been removed to avoid any pollution.

Both Sea Shepherd and the Japanese blame each other for the incident.

Captain Watson says the Japanese will treat the incident as a green light to become more violent if there is no diplomatic action by officials in Australia and New Zealand.

[Skyryder]

Which is not the case in this instance according to collision regulations.

There's going to be an enquery into this as to who is at fault. I'm not going to pick a wnner................problaby be a draw. Bets anyone??


Skyryder

[McJim]

There's going to be an enquery into this as to who is at fault. I'm not going to pick a wnner................problaby be a draw. Bets anyone??


Skyryder

No whaling vessel can move 2 knots directly sideways. The Earthrace powered up on purpose to get under their prow. you can clearly see the increase of plumes from the smaller boats engines propelling it into the path. I hope the inquest finds in favour of the Japanese. I see Watson has been bleating on about a New Zealander being allegedly employed by the Japanese to monitor Sea Shithard ships. And why the fuck shouldn't they. Does the twat really believe the western world is 100% behind him? I would like to see Sea shepherd sunk as much as the Japs. Especially as I suspect they framed the French with the Rainbow Warrior incident. Limpet mines are more their modus operandi.

[Tank]

http://rlv.zcache.com/save_a_whale_harpoon_your_mom_tshirt-p235573063571258899qw9u_400.jpg


10 chars etc etc etc

[Mikkel]

errrr what?
your kidding right - The head of sea sheppard has been quoted for saying "We hope they get scared and go home refusing to come back again"

The whalers maybe - not the general population. Big difference! I am pretty sure that the man on the street has got no fear that they will get into trouble with Sea Shepherd...


A sharp turn to port???? It was clonked on the starboard bow by an offshore powerboat at full tilt. It's gonna turn to port regardless of what's done with the helm.

Your grasp of physics is lacking. Care to hazard a guess of the weights of those two vessels? And for your information, the Ady Gill is most definitely doing "somewhat" less than 40 knots at the time of impact - i.e. not full tilt.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LAl9T75DVw&feature=related


Regardless of how you feel about whaling, they're dickheads risking lives to try to prevent an entirely lawful activity. It's exactly the same as vegans taking pot shots at dairy farmers.

Regardless of how you feel about the dickheads - they didn't cause the collision. And if you care to scroll up a little bit you'll see that I most certainly do not sympathise with the Sea Shepherd crowd. I am merely saying that "terrorists" isn't the appropriate label and that they are not - solely - responsible for the collision.

Objectivity - try it before your neighbour.


There's going to be an enquery into this as to who is at fault. I'm not going to pick a wnner................problaby be a draw. Bets anyone??

Shared blame - otherwise the Japanese will take full blame. Shared is appropriate.


No whaling vessel can move 2 knots directly sideways. The Earthrace powered up on purpose to get under their prow. you can clearly see the increase of plumes from the smaller boats engines propelling it into the path. I hope the inquest finds in favour of the Japanese. I see Watson has been bleating on about a New Zealander being allegedly employed by the Japanese to monitor Sea Shithard ships. And why the fuck shouldn't they. Does the twat really believe the western world is 100% behind him? I would like to see Sea shepherd sunk as much as the Japs. Especially as I suspect they framed the French with the Rainbow Warrior incident. Limpet mines are more their modus operandi.

Seen the video taken from the 3rd vessel? The Ady Gil is effectively sitting still on the water. You have to be under power to steer, you have to steer to get out of the way - too little too late. But it would explain why you can see exhaust plumes from the in the last seconds - but at that point the collision is already inevitable.

The big question here is, did Sea Shepherd actually want to have the Japanese run them down? I think they just might have wanted exactly this to happen - yes, the boat is lost but just look at the publicity they are getting right now. You couldn't buy this kind of coverage for $1.5M! And the spin in the media, here in NZ anyway, is wholly in favour of Sea Shepherd.

[jafar]

Sea Shepard is an Eco terrorist organisation & have videoed the destruction of their own boat to try & gain public sympathy for their cause. It has zero to do with the rules of the sea & everything to do with free publicity. :angry2:
The Japanese may be better off to declare the Sea Shepard organisation a terrorist group & send their own navy out with their whaling ships, as someone said previously the Norweigian government had done this & their navy could now shoot them on sight. I'll bet the Japanese navy can shoot straight too :whistle:

[Mikkel]

Oh yeah, Dave Angel - Eco Warrior:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLPOC9vDjLg&videos=IHoufRakhLs&playnext_from=TL&playnext=1

More... (http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=9ED15941CBA96368)

[SPman]

No whaling vessel can move 2 knots directly sideways. The Earthrace powered up on purpose to get under their prow. What a load of twaddle
you can clearly see the increase of plumes from the smaller boats engines propelling it into the path.The AG was sitting stationary - they had used their main fuel supply, were disengaging and about to return to refuel. The japs saw a chance to run down a stationary vehicle and took it. The watch on the AG was not quick enough to realise what was going on - the skipper was below decks - by the time he got to the helm it was basically far to late to do anything - to steer a boat, you need power - what's the bet the rudders were hard to starboard when the AG powered up! - far to late - some straight forward momentum is inevitable before rudders can bite. The jap ship may have misjudged, but, the chaser ships are pretty manouverable - if it didn't intend to ram it could have turned to port earlier!

No skipper or organisation wants to see their ship sunk on purpose - but - now that it's happened, of course SS will milk it for all it's worth.


I would like to see Sea shepherd sunk as much as the Japs. Especially as I suspect they framed the French with the Rainbow Warrior incident. Limpet mines are more their modus operandi. If you believe that, you're a bigger fuckwit than I thought

[Genie]

This has been a rather educational read..thank you all.
I really had no idea just how violent this Save The Whales lot were. Pretty grim.
I'm all for protecting those that cannot protect themsevles whether they be human, animal or mammal, but some things that Sea Shepard have been alledgedly been involved in are a little bad taste.

[ManDownUnder]

[COLOR=Black]it could have turned to port earlier!

I would suggest a LOT earlier. It seems to be an ongoing game of cat and mouse one small manoeuvrable craft able to maintain right of way by laws of the sea, one big craft able to claim it by the laws of physics.

I still reckon if they don't want whale meat to be eaten, shoot a fucken great syringe full of arsenic or simthing into the whale as it gets pulled from the sea. It's going to dier anyway, it's not going to be eaten (*cough b'shit cought*)... so what different would it make?

[Tank]

Sea terrorist:

Look at the history of this group - Fuck when reading about it Im suprised NZ even allows them to dock here - they are fucken terrorist:

# 1977: Paul Watson, one of the founder members of Greenpeace, was expelled from the organisation after a campaign against sealing during which he threw the sealers’ clubs and skins into the sea. His actions temporarily cost Greenpeace their tax-exemption status in the US.

# 1977: Paul Watson establishes the “Sea Shepherd” organisation.

# 1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaler “Sierra”.

# 1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour with the help of limpet mines. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility.

# 1981: Sea Shepherd sinks the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga (Sole source Sea Shepherd. This has not been confirmed by any other source)
.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroese police with a line rifle and try to sink their rubber dinghies.

The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters after attempting to obstruct the Faroese pilot whale harvest. The vessel ignored the order, and Faroese police tried unsuccessfully to board the ship. In the police report of Oct. 7,1986, it says: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a so called “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack is considered to have endangered the lives of the police crew members seriously ... also, signal flares containing phosphorous (a substance which both burns and cauterizes) was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used so called “toads” (i.e. rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends), against the rubber dinghies .. petrol was poured over the side of the ship ... whereupon signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in a miscarried attempt to set the petrol on fire.” Sea Shepherd accused the Faroese police of having shot at them with rifles. The police emphasize in their report that they only used tear gas and gas cartridges from shotguns.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to the whaling station not far from the town. The act was carried out by two US citizens, one of them, Rodney Corronado, is now wanted in the US for several incidents of serious animal rights terrorism.

# 1988: Paul Watson arrives in Iceland demanding to be held responsible for the sinking of the whaling vessels in Reykjavik in 1986. He is arrested and held for questioning. He realizes that he can risk facing several years imprisonment. In a press release from the Icelandic Ministry of Justice it says: “At questioning Paul Watson has admitted that he has given some remarks that connect him with the sabotage, but in spite of this he now claims that he neither took part in the planning nor the execution of the sabotage.” There was no evidence incriminating Watson. He was ordered to leave the country and declared persona non grata in Iceland

# 1991: Mr A. Ferreira, A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports to his senator that Sea Shepherd rammed his vessel causing considerable damage. Some of Sea Shepherd’s crew were armed with rifles. Senator John Seymour replies: “Your situation does not fall under my jurisdiction. I have therefore forwarded your letter to the American Tunaboat Association.”

# 1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing,” he said to “Outside” magazine (Sept. 1991).

Paul Watson admits that there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” said Watson to the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

Seattle Times columnist Alston Chase comments thus on Sea Shepherds relationship to weapons: “The business of Sea Shepherd is confrontation, whereby these sailor activists try to provoke others to attack. Crying self-defence in these circumstances is like the gunfighter who starts a quarrel to justify duelling his enemy.” (The Seattle Times, July 1, 1991).

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempts at ramming three Costa Rican fishing vessels. In a written complaint to the local authorities the fishermen report that the Sea Shepherd crew shot at them with bullets containing a red substance, hitting two of them and causing them great pain.

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Nybræna" at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused considerable damage.

# 1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel.

The following transcript stems from the 1993 Yorkshire Television documentary “Defenders of the Wild - Ocean Rider”

Paul Watson (over the radio): We are going to ram you!
Stand clear!

A Taiwanese drift-netter (over the radio): “Why are you
crushing our ship?”

Paul Watson: “You are killing too many dolphins ..
and you insulted us by calling us creeps.”

From another confrontation with a Japanese fishing vessel:

Narrator: Sea Shepherd is ready to ram again.
Now Paul Watson wants the Edward Abbey to fire directly
at the drift-netters.

Watson: “Fire a couple in the stern right at the water line.
Nobody’s there.”

Narrator: “To the relief of many of the crew members the
order is not carried out. The Edward Abbey fires a cannon
shot across its bow. Still the Japanese ship does not stop."

# 1993: Sea Shepherd makes an unsuccesful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Senet" at her moorings in Gressvik. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused some damage.

# 1993: Sea Shepherd concludes that the organisation has sunk 8 ships and rammed and damaged a further 6.

Dismissed from the IWC
After the sinking of the Icelandic whaling vessels in 1986, Sea Shepherd lost its status as observer at the IWC. The organisation claims that it is merely enforcing IWC rules. In February 1994, IWC Secretary, Ray Gambell, declared to NTB (the Norwegian Telegram Agency) that the IWC and all its member states ardently condemn Sea Shepherd’s acts of terrorism.

[SPman]

Precisely - after all - it's just "scientific research".......

From looking at another video from the Bob Barker

Japs were maintaining a course that would see them sail straight past the AG with plenty of room to spare. Clearly visible from the Barker.

AG was 'dead in the water' and out of harms way.

Japs used the front water canon to 'blind' the SS and conceal the attack (the whole boat (AG) doesn't have to be covered, just that snazzy little cockpit - Had a big puddle splashed onto your car windscreen? You can't see shit.) - taking a hard right into them. You can see from the Jap footage that the pilot of the AG wouldn't have seen it coming.

Why did the AG suddenly thrust?
It appears the water canons are not effective within a certain range because they can't shoot down any lower. So, the Japs got close enough to the AG that the canons could not shoot low enough to continue to conceal their change of direction. It was at this point that the SS provided the late burst of thrust to try and avoid a collision.

Probably the skipper of the AG went "Holy shit we're going to get nailed" and gunned it to get away just before the crunch.

As for why the Japs continued to shoot water at them after the collision, I've watched that footage over and over from both angles and the rear canons seem to be fixed at the time. At no point did they shoot forward or back to track the AG. Only the front canon, prior to impact.

The SS just happened to get caught out with the roll of the Japs' boat after the collision.

[pzkpfw]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/3215007/Crushed-anti-whaling-ship-Ady-Gil-sinks


...Asked if they should have provided assistance, he said: "Well, they were responsible, they destroyed the vessel and the effort to try and keep it from polluting the ocean, I think, they should have offered some sort of assistance but they didn't.

"They refused to acknowledge any distress signal."

One of the Ady Gil's crew members broke two ribs in the collision.

Another of the group's vessels, the Steve Irwin, deliberately stayed away to avoid being tailed by the Japanese whalers, Captain Watson said.

He said the Steve Irwin was in pursuit of another Japanese harpoon vessel, the Yushin Maru, and the crew didn't want the whaling fleet finding out their location. ...

So after deliberately getting this boat in the way of the whalers, their own boat stays away when they need help. While at the same time they complain that the whalers didn't help.

Seems a bit have-cake-and-eat-it-too.

[Skyryder]

If the Jap whaler had stayed on course it would not have collided with the Sea Shepherd. The whaler made a deliberat starbord course and concealed this by applying a water screen/mist to hide its intentions. If this sort of thing was done to a biker by a cage all hell would break lose on here. If I was sitting on jury and saw that footage I would have no hesitationin finding the Master guilty of attempted murder as I would for any of you that had been rammed in like manner.

Skyryder

[Tank]

If the Jap whaler had stayed on course it would not have collided with the Sea Shepherd. The whaler made a deliberat starbord course and concealed this by applying a water screen/mist to hide its intentions. If this sort of thing was done to a biker by a cage all hell would break lose on here. If I was sitting on jury and saw that footage I would have no hesitationin finding the Master guilty of attempted murder as I would for any of you that had been rammed in like manner.

Skyryder

I have read (will look for it now) that maratime lawyers have said the most likly charges will be against SS for terrorism at sea charges - similar as to what they have been charged with previousley.

[Skyryder]

Sea terrorist:

Look at the history of this group - Fuck when reading about it Im suprised NZ even allows them to dock here - they are fucken terrorist:

# 1977: Paul Watson, one of the founder members of Greenpeace, was expelled from the organisation after a campaign against sealing during which he threw the sealers’ clubs and skins into the sea. His actions temporarily cost Greenpeace their tax-exemption status in the US.

# 1977: Paul Watson establishes the “Sea Shepherd” organisation.

# 1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaler “Sierra”.

# 1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour with the help of limpet mines. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility.

# 1981: Sea Shepherd sinks the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga (Sole source Sea Shepherd. This has not been confirmed by any other source)
.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroese police with a line rifle and try to sink their rubber dinghies.

The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters after attempting to obstruct the Faroese pilot whale harvest. The vessel ignored the order, and Faroese police tried unsuccessfully to board the ship. In the police report of Oct. 7,1986, it says: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a so called “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack is considered to have endangered the lives of the police crew members seriously ... also, signal flares containing phosphorous (a substance which both burns and cauterizes) was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used so called “toads” (i.e. rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends), against the rubber dinghies .. petrol was poured over the side of the ship ... whereupon signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in a miscarried attempt to set the petrol on fire.” Sea Shepherd accused the Faroese police of having shot at them with rifles. The police emphasize in their report that they only used tear gas and gas cartridges from shotguns.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to the whaling station not far from the town. The act was carried out by two US citizens, one of them, Rodney Corronado, is now wanted in the US for several incidents of serious animal rights terrorism.

# 1988: Paul Watson arrives in Iceland demanding to be held responsible for the sinking of the whaling vessels in Reykjavik in 1986. He is arrested and held for questioning. He realizes that he can risk facing several years imprisonment. In a press release from the Icelandic Ministry of Justice it says: “At questioning Paul Watson has admitted that he has given some remarks that connect him with the sabotage, but in spite of this he now claims that he neither took part in the planning nor the execution of the sabotage.” There was no evidence incriminating Watson. He was ordered to leave the country and declared persona non grata in Iceland

# 1991: Mr A. Ferreira, A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports to his senator that Sea Shepherd rammed his vessel causing considerable damage. Some of Sea Shepherd’s crew were armed with rifles. Senator John Seymour replies: “Your situation does not fall under my jurisdiction. I have therefore forwarded your letter to the American Tunaboat Association.”

# 1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing,” he said to “Outside” magazine (Sept. 1991).

Paul Watson admits that there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” said Watson to the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

Seattle Times columnist Alston Chase comments thus on Sea Shepherds relationship to weapons: “The business of Sea Shepherd is confrontation, whereby these sailor activists try to provoke others to attack. Crying self-defence in these circumstances is like the gunfighter who starts a quarrel to justify duelling his enemy.” (The Seattle Times, July 1, 1991).

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempts at ramming three Costa Rican fishing vessels. In a written complaint to the local authorities the fishermen report that the Sea Shepherd crew shot at them with bullets containing a red substance, hitting two of them and causing them great pain.

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Nybræna" at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused considerable damage.

# 1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel.

The following transcript stems from the 1993 Yorkshire Television documentary “Defenders of the Wild - Ocean Rider”

Paul Watson (over the radio): We are going to ram you!
Stand clear!

A Taiwanese drift-netter (over the radio): “Why are you
crushing our ship?”

Paul Watson: “You are killing too many dolphins ..
and you insulted us by calling us creeps.”

From another confrontation with a Japanese fishing vessel:

Narrator: Sea Shepherd is ready to ram again.
Now Paul Watson wants the Edward Abbey to fire directly
at the drift-netters.

Watson: “Fire a couple in the stern right at the water line.
Nobody’s there.”

Narrator: “To the relief of many of the crew members the
order is not carried out. The Edward Abbey fires a cannon
shot across its bow. Still the Japanese ship does not stop."

# 1993: Sea Shepherd makes an unsuccesful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Senet" at her moorings in Gressvik. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused some damage.

# 1993: Sea Shepherd concludes that the organisation has sunk 8 ships and rammed and damaged a further 6.

Dismissed from the IWC
After the sinking of the Icelandic whaling vessels in 1986, Sea Shepherd lost its status as observer at the IWC. The organisation claims that it is merely enforcing IWC rules. In February 1994, IWC Secretary, Ray Gambell, declared to NTB (the Norwegian Telegram Agency) that the IWC and all its member states ardently condemn Sea Shepherd’s acts of terrorism.

About the High North Alliance. from where the above comes from.

Why not post the link Tank. Too ashamed to use a Union source
________________________________________
The High North Alliance was founded in 1991 as a result of cooperation by the Lofoten Regional Council and the Norwegian Whalers’ Union. The organisation was established in response to the campaigns calling for a total ban on all commercial whaling and sealing; and the even more radical ones calling for a total ban on the killing of marine mammals for any reason whatsoever. The High North Alliance’ task is to provide alternative information to these campaigns. The organisation's objective is to protect the rights of whalers, sealers and fishermen to harvest renewable resources in accordance with the principle of sustainable management. The High North Alliance also works towards consolidating the knowledge and skills necessary for the ecologically sound management of marine mammal resources.


From http://www.highnorth.no/about-us.htm

Membership.

The High North Alliance includes the following member organisations:
The Pilot Whaler's Association, Faroe Islands;
KNAPK (The organisation of Fishermen and Hunters in Greenland), Greenland;
LÍÚ, (the Fishing Boat Owner's Association), Iceland;
Vélstjórafélag Íslands, (the Engineer Officers' Association), Iceland;
The Norwegian Whalers' Union), Norway; The Norwegian Fishermen's Union, Norway;
The Lofoten Regional Council, Norway;
The Fishing Boat Owners' Association, Norway;
The Inuvialuit Game Council, Canada;
The Icelandic Seamen's Federation, Iceland;
The Icelandic Minke Whaler's Association, Iceland; and
Sjávarnytjar, Iceland.


Yep all with a vested interest in whaling.


Skyryder

[LBD]

The Jap boat was under attack by the sea shepherd deliberatly trailing ropes trying to entangle the ships propeller gear.. left to drift in the southern ocean is not a desireable situation to be in. Self defence anyone?

The jap boat is supposed to turn to stbd to pass behind the stand on vessel the sea shepherd.....and the sea shepherd to to maintain a constant speed and constant heading to let the give way vessel decide and take avoidence action.

[Tank]

About the High North Alliance. from where the above comes from.

Why not post the link Tank. Too ashamed to use a Union source
________________________________________
The High North Alliance was founded in 1991 as a result of cooperation by the Lofoten Regional Council and the Norwegian Whalers’ Union. The organisation was established in response to the campaigns calling for a total ban on all commercial whaling and sealing; and the even more radical ones calling for a total ban on the killing of marine mammals for any reason whatsoever. The High North Alliance’ task is to provide alternative information to these campaigns. The organisation's objective is to protect the rights of whalers, sealers and fishermen to harvest renewable resources in accordance with the principle of sustainable management. The High North Alliance also works towards consolidating the knowledge and skills necessary for the ecologically sound management of marine mammal resources.


From http://www.highnorth.no/about-us.htm

Membership.

The High North Alliance includes the following member organisations:
The Pilot Whaler's Association, Faroe Islands;
KNAPK (The organisation of Fishermen and Hunters in Greenland), Greenland;
LÍÚ, (the Fishing Boat Owner's Association), Iceland;
Vélstjórafélag Íslands, (the Engineer Officers' Association), Iceland;
The Norwegian Whalers' Union), Norway; The Norwegian Fishermen's Union, Norway;
The Lofoten Regional Council, Norway;
The Fishing Boat Owners' Association, Norway;
The Inuvialuit Game Council, Canada;
The Icelandic Seamen's Federation, Iceland;
The Icelandic Minke Whaler's Association, Iceland; and
Sjávarnytjar, Iceland.


Yep all with a vested interest in whaling.


Skyryder

Not ashamed at all. Google yourself and you will find many pages about them being charged for their acts.

The arrest warrents that are out for members are not debatable however and if you search you will find a lot of the info posted is agreed with by the SS arseholes.

So if they agree with the comments and quotes who gives a fuck where it came from - the fact remains its accurate.

[Skyryder]

The Jap boat was under attack by the sea shepherd deliberatly trailing ropes trying to entangle the ships propeller gear.. left to drift in the southern ocean is not a desireable situation to be in. Self defence anyone?

The jap boat is supposed to turn to stbd to pass behind the stand on vessel the sea shepherd.....and the sea shepherd to to maintain a constant speed and constant heading to let the give way vessel decide and take avoidence action.

And what marime law autherises the use of water cannon to effect a manouvre??


Skyryder

[Tank]

And what marime law autherises the use of water cannon to effect a manouvre??


Skyryder

1979
Paul Watson decided to hunt the Sierra down and put an end to her career. In June of 1979, he departed from Boston, Massachusetts, to do just that.

On July 16th, 1979, the Sea Shepherd found the Sierra and chased it into the port of Leixoes. Captain Watson rammed the Sierra twice in harbor, tearing the hull open to the waterline and forcing the ship into port for repairs. After a million dollars of uninsured repairs, the Sierra was sunk by Sea Shepherd operatives in Lisbon harbor in Portugal on February 6, 1980

I guess you celebrate the French bombing the Rainbow Warrior as well huh? Supporting a group that goes into a country and bombs boats.

Oh the sourse for this one is their own website.

[JimO]

the water cannon was just icing on the cake

[Skyryder]

Not ashamed at all. Google yourself and you will find many pages about them being charged for their acts.

The arrest warrents that are out for members are not debatable however and if you search you will find a lot of the info posted is agreed with by the SS arseholes.

So if they agree with the comments and quotes who gives a fuck where it came from - the fact remains its accurate.

Nope I'll take your word for it. But that still does not give The Jap Master the right to take the law into his own hands. And that is what has happened here. The Jap boat with water cannon at full blast to hide their intentions deliberatly rammed another vessel on the high sea.

That in my book is attempted murder. Do the same thing to a pedeatrian or a cage to biker and that's the charge, provocation thanks to Key and his cronies against legal advice is now no longer a defence. This is a NZ registered vessel and as such comes under NZ jurisdiction.

Skyryder

[davereid]

The Jap boat was under attack by the sea shepherd deliberatly trailing ropes trying to entangle the ships propeller gear.. left to drift in the southern ocean is not a desireable situation to be in. Self defence anyone?

The jap boat is supposed to turn to stbd to pass behind the stand on vessel the sea shepherd.....and the sea shepherd to to maintain a constant speed and constant heading to let the give way vessel decide and take avoidence action.

I agree pretty much.

Although the Jap boat was not obliged to turn to Starboard, it can also turn to Port if the Captain determines that has the better chance of collision avoidance.

When I look at the video, I can't hand-on-heart say I can be sure the Jap Ship tried to do anything - possibly it turned to starboard, but then got knocked to port by the collision.

The Ady Gil is also obligated to yield to vessels constrained by draught or restricted in their ability to maneuver, both of which could be argured to be the case when a 50-knot 10 tonne vessel is steaming in open water towards a 500 tonne 7 knot vessel.

[R6_kid]

In the video that Mikkel posted it almost looks like the Shonan Maru is trying to turn behind the Ady Gil before realising that they can't make the turn in time and then changing course back to avoid a more serious collision. At the end of the day it's a stupid idea to be in a 'small' boat harassing a large and not overly maneuverable ship and then crossing their path at low speed. Politics and rules aside, the crew of the Ady Gil have chosen to deliberately put themselves at risk so they don't really have much to stand on when the shit hits the fan.

Can you imagine being the captain of one of the Japanese whaling boats and having to put up with their shenanigans and bullshit all the time? How long would you let the kid next door throw stones at your house before you go over and teach him a lesson?

[davereid]

And what marime law autherises the use of water cannon to effect a manouvre?? Skyryder
The same one that allows lasers, trailing lines, sonic blasters I should imagine !

[Tank]

The same one that allows lasers, trailing lines, sonic blasters I should imagine !

Which is a fair point - they committed illegal acts trying to disable a ship at sea in the first instance. Fuckers got what they deserved. Glad the boat sunk and I hope Key and co stand up and ban the fuckers from coming to NZ ports.

[Skyryder]

1979
Paul Watson decided to hunt the Sierra down and put an end to her career. In June of 1979, he departed from Boston, Massachusetts, to do just that.

On July 16th, 1979, the Sea Shepherd found the Sierra and chased it into the port of Leixoes. Captain Watson rammed the Sierra twice in harbor, tearing the hull open to the waterline and forcing the ship into port for repairs. After a million dollars of uninsured repairs, the Sierra was sunk by Sea Shepherd operatives in Lisbon harbor in Portugal on February 6, 1980

I guess you celebrate the French bombing the Rainbow Warrior as well huh? Supporting a group that goes into a country and bombs boats.

Oh the sourse for this one is their own website.


Don’t see any law here authorizing the use of water cannon. An in defence of the Japs you still bring up an act that is equally wrong.

As for my alleged celebration of the French bombing you really do have to stoop to the low blows.

When the French were putting pressure on Lange to release the bombers to Hao, a French military base it was Bolger and your National party who supported this.

Prier and Marfat were given sentences of 10 and seven years to be served concurrently. Prier and Marfat served two years on Hao and then the French released them and gave them medals to boot. And you have the gall to suggest that I have given them support. Look to your own party for that.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

Which is a fair point - they committed illegal acts trying to disable a ship at sea in the first instance. Fuckers got what they deserved. Glad the boat sunk and I hope Key and co stand up and ban the fuckers from coming to NZ ports.

They can't. It's a NZ registered vessel.


Skyryder

[Ixion]

They can't. It's a NZ registered vessel.


Skyryder

Um, given that it's at the bottom of the sea now (I understand, correction welcome), coming into ANY port might be a TAD challenging.

[Skyryder]

Um, given that it's at the bottom of the sea now (I understand, correction welcome), coming into ANY port might be a TAD challenging.

I thought it was under tow. Mind you I have not read all posts on here so it has sunk?? There will be court shit over this one way or the other.





Skyyrder

[Ixion]

I thought it had. But I've not been following the drama closely. I may be wrong.

[Mikkel]

possibly it turned to starboard, but then got knocked to port by the collision.

Let's get this silly notion of the Shonan Maru 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shonan_Maru_2) being deflected by the Ady Gil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthrace) dispelled - it is an affront to reason.

The Ady Gil weighed 13 tons, the Shonan Maru 2 has a rated tonnage of 491 DWT.

Anyone who, considering these figures, still entertain the idea of the collision deflecting the Japanese vessel is beyond reason.


In the video that Mikkel posted it almost looks like the Shonan Maru is trying to turn behind the Ady Gil before realising that they can't make the turn in time and then changing course back to avoid a more serious collision. At the end of the day it's a stupid idea to be in a 'small' boat harassing a large and not overly maneuverable ship and then crossing their path at low speed. Politics and rules aside, the crew of the Ady Gil have chosen to deliberately put themselves at risk so they don't really have much to stand on when the shit hits the fan.

Indeed. I would really wish that there was a longer version of the video taken from the 3rd vessel. For all we know the Ady Gil could have been doing 40 knots up until just before the video was taken. In that case the Japanese helm's decision to go hard to starboard would have been the appropriate way to avoid a collision. A larger vessel like the Shonan Maru 2 does not just stop and turn in a jiffy. And the obscuring effect of the watercannons go both ways - besides the two vessels shouldn't even have been that close to each other in the first place.

I know, that is not the story that SS are putting forward and it's not the story being showed by the video. However, you can decide how much credibility you'll give the SS and their video only show the bits that they want to show.

[LBD]

Don’t see any law here authorizing the use of water cannon.
Skyryder

Do not mistake me ...I am very anti whaling....

At 100 m at a guess a water cannon would wee a rain shower...Getting under the bow of the jap ship is deliberate provication irrespective of maritime law. The Andy Gil was deliberatly trying disrupt a lawful passage....(not a legality of whaling statement)....Self defence again.

You would not begrudge a ships captain using a water cannon to repel Somali Pirates.... see little difference

[Skyryder]

Do not mistake me ...I am very anti whaling....

At 100 m at a guess a water cannon would wee a rain shower...Getting under the bow of the jap ship is deliberate provication irrespective of maritime law. The Andy Gil was deliberatly trying disrupt a lawful passage....(not a legality of whaling statement)....Self defence again.

You would not begrudge a ships captain using a water cannon to repel Somali Pirates.... see little difference

Didn't look much like a we rain shower to me. More like a fog with mist etc. Reguadless of the actions of Sea Shephard, and many on here see this as a justifiable provication for the ramming the master of the whaler had no right to deliberalty ram another vessel.

As for the Somali analogy, in this instance, as there was no boarding in progress the analogy is not relevent.

Skyryder

[davereid]

Let's get this silly notion of the Shonan Maru 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shonan_Maru_2) being deflected by the Ady Gil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthrace) dispelled - it is an affront to reason. The Ady Gil weighed 13 tons, the Shonan Maru 2 has a rated tonnage of 491 DWT.
Anyone who, considering these figures, still entertain the idea of the collision deflecting the Japanese vessel is beyond reason..

Haha my 8 year old grandaughter can easily push my 48ft boat off the jetty. In fact, she can do it with one hand, and often does when grandad is trying to board.

Its not like a 13g pool ball deflecting a 500g pool ball.

Merely changing the angle of approach into a wave - or the wake of another much smaller boat will substantially cause a boat to move.

[sidecar bob]

That in my book is attempted murder. Do the same thing to a pedeatrian or a cage to biker and that's the charge, provocation thanks to Key and his cronies against legal advice is now no longer a defence. This is a NZ registered vessel and as such comes under NZ jurisdiction.

Skyryder

Id never do it to a Pedeatrian. We need them to keep our children healthy!!

[Ronin]

Let's get this silly notion of the Shonan Maru 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shonan_Maru_2) being deflected by the Ady Gil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthrace) dispelled - it is an affront to reason.

The Ady Gil weighed 13 tons, the Shonan Maru 2 has a rated tonnage of 491 DWT.

Anyone who, considering these figures, still entertain the idea of the collision deflecting the Japanese vessel is beyond reason.



The impact, even on the larger vessel is substantial. The video from the 3rd vessel clearly shows the bow of the Shonan Maru being deflected to port by the impact. The Ady Gill was moving at what I would guess was about 5 to 10 knots. The impact is lateral to the direction of travel and would easily cause the observed deflection. There is no way that the helmsman of the Shonan Maru could go from slightly to starboard to hard a'port in the time the video shows.

[FJRider]

Legalitys or not ... You should not park a (small) vessel in front of a (moving) BIG vessel ... :no:

[PrincessBandit]

I thought it was under tow. Mind you I have not read all posts on here so it has sunk?? There will be court shit over this one way or the other.

Skyyrder

According to the intermanet it sunk while under tow.

[SixPackBack]

Arguements of whale numbers aside, why get pissy 'cause the Japanese like whale meat?

[Hinny]

The impact, even on the larger vessel is substantial. The video from the 3rd vessel clearly shows the bow of the Shonan Maru being deflected to port by the impact. The Ady Gill was moving at what I would guess was about 5 to 10 knots. The impact is lateral to the direction of travel and would easily cause the observed deflection. There is no way that the helmsman of the Shonan Maru could go from slightly to starboard to hard a'port in the time the video shows.

I suggest you watch the video again.
At the start the Shonan Maru is not on a collision course. A substantial amount of the starboard side is visible. Ady Gil is dead in the water. Separation is the range limit of the water cannon. All sweet at this point.

At 0.07 there is a considerable turn to starboard. The boat heels substantially. This elicits the "Fuck" comment as the intention of this manoeuvre is apparent. The manoeuvreability of the Shonan Maru is impressive.
Four seconds later she is heeling to Starboard.
Two seconds later Ady Gil is crossing her bow.
At 0.17 the collision occurs.

The Ady Gil did not run into the side of Shonan Maru. There is a video showing what happened.

The heeling of the Shonan Maru is not simple rock and rolling as evidenced by the other video footage when she was on a straight course. The sea had little effect upon her.

One posted video shows a synchronised rendition of the videos from both protagonists.
This is illuminating to those with open minds, I would suggest.
I might make the observation, at this point, there are not a lot of posters to this thread that could be accorded that accolade.
Some learned observers might describe the majority as a bunch of fucktards and I would have to agree with them.

[tri boy]

Fookin whales swim round in OUR oceans, eating OUR plankton,singing their god awful songs, and generally acting like the fat lazy coonts they are, and yet the Greenies whine n moan about a few hundred getting harpooned by a explosive, and bleeding a bit.
Ask yourselfs "what has a whale done for me lately?"
Order me 1/2 kilo of whale meat, served on mashed greenie:-)

[Ronin]

I suggest you watch the video again.
At the start the Shonan Maru is not on a collision course. A substantial amount of the starboard side is visible. Ady Gil is dead in the water. Separation is the range limit of the water cannon. All sweet at this point.

At 0.07 there is a considerable turn to starboard. The boat heels substantially. This elicits the "Fuck" comment as the intention of this manoeuvre is apparent. The manoeuvreability of the Shonan Maru is impressive.
Four seconds later she is heeling to Starboard.
Two seconds later Ady Gil is crossing her bow.
At 0.17 the collision occurs.

The Ady Gil did not run into the side of Shonan Maru. There is a video showing what happened.

EDIT: It would appear that there is not as much of a deflection as I thought but it is there.

The heeling of the Shonan Maru is not simple rock and rolling as evidenced by the other video footage when she was on a straight course. The sea had little effect upon her.

One posted video shows a synchronised rendition of the videos from both protagonists.
This is illuminating to those with open minds, I would suggest.
I might make the observation, at this point, there are not a lot of posters to this thread that could be accorded that accolade.
Some learned observers might describe the majority as a bunch of fucktards and I would have to agree with them.

Perhaps you could re read my post. It seems that you think I am suggesting that the seafairing whale hippies rammed the shonan maru on purpose. Far from it. The Maru went out of her way to hit said sea fairing whale hippies. However the Ady Gil did throttle up at the last moment. I believe they did this to avoid the collision. So yes they did drive into the side of the maru. They were fucked anyway.

My post was pointing out that yes there was a deflection.

[mstriumph]

*sigh* last time we had to nuke them to divert their attention and make them cease and desist ...

[mstriumph]

... now THAT could be fun? :)

[terbang]

Holy shit, never though I'd see myself agreeing with ya Lias. But I am.
I'm an ex maritime patrol pilot and have seen those bloody Japs ad others raping and pillaging NZ and Australian resources with impudence and relatively unchecked. I have flown flights in the Southern ocean and seen the activities for myself. Its definitely not right. Send em to the bottom...


Generally speaking my politics are diametrically opposed to the sort of people you'd expect to see crewing a sea sheppard boat, but honestly we need to send the navy out and fucking sink those whalers.

I hand on heart want John Key and Kevin Rudd to send in the frigates and sink the jap whalers, with all hands on boards, and no warning shots fired.

It's not that I'm all that attached to whales, but I have major issues with the japanese fleets coming down to OUR part of the world to steal natural resources. If they want to go whaling, let them do it in their waters, not ours.

[McJim]

*sigh* last time we had to nuke them to divert their attention and make them cease and desist ...

I agree - we should Nuke Sea Shepherd - hear hear!

They are doing it for reality TV - after that taboo we will be watching American, British and New Zealand troops being killed by Al Quaeda I expect.

Much of New Zealand's history is based on whaling - why have we now become so socially conditioned against it? The are mammals - yet so are pigs, sheep and cattle. They are near the top of their food chain in the ocean yet so are sharks, squid and tuna. I cannot see the harm with quota based, controlled harvesting.

Did you hear Wank Stain Watson declaring he had never killed anyone? He has threatened to and attempted to on many occasions - why he should choose to suddenly flaunt his failures is beyond me.

[terbang]

Of course I forgot, we farm whales and manage them as a sustainable resource. Stupid greenies.
Until you've been over the horizon as only a few of us actually do, until you seen the "wall of death" pair trawlers, seen the illegal fishing in our waters and seen the slaughtering of whales right under out noses, your grasp on the reality of the Japanese fishing industry can only be scant. And yet you talk about nuking those that, for what ever reason got out there and saw for themselves and oppose it...


I agree - we should Nuke Sea Shepherd - hear hear!

They are doing it for reality TV - after that taboo we will be watching American, British and New Zealand troops being killed by Al Quaeda I expect.

Much of New Zealand's history is based on whaling - why have we now become so socially conditioned against it? The are mammals - yet so are pigs, sheep and cattle. They are near the top of their food chain in the ocean yet so are sharks, squid and tuna. I cannot see the harm with quota based, controlled harvesting.

Did you hear Wank Stain Watson declaring he had never killed anyone? He has threatened to and attempted to on many occasions - why he should choose to suddenly flaunt his failures is beyond me.

[Hinny]

They are doing it for reality TV - after that taboo we will be watching American, British and New Zealand troops being killed by Al Quaeda I expect.

.

Brainwashed Brit. Yeah get over it - you Scots are Brits.
We have a Govt. that is similarly brainwashed so that hypothesis is not beyond the realms of possibility.
The last Nat govt. sent troops to fight an illegal war.
This one may commit the same insanity.

[Lias]

Holy shit, never though I'd see myself agreeing with ya Lias. But I am.
I'm an ex maritime patrol pilot and have seen those bloody Japs ad others raping and pillaging NZ and Australian resources with impudence and relatively unchecked. I have flown flights in the Southern ocean and seen the activities for myself. Its definitely not right. Send em to the bottom...


You think thats bad.. Skyryder and me foudn ourselves agreeing on a few things recently.. I shat bricks lol

[Mikkel]

Haha my 8 year old grandaughter can easily push my 48ft boat off the jetty. In fact, she can do it with one hand, and often does when grandad is trying to board.

Its not like a 13g pool ball deflecting a 500g pool ball.

Merely changing the angle of approach into a wave - or the wake of another much smaller boat will substantially cause a boat to move.


The impact, even on the larger vessel is substantial. The video from the 3rd vessel clearly shows the bow of the Shonan Maru being deflected to port by the impact. The Ady Gill was moving at what I would guess was about 5 to 10 knots. The impact is lateral to the direction of travel and would easily cause the observed deflection. There is no way that the helmsman of the Shonan Maru could go from slightly to starboard to hard a'port in the time the video shows.

You guys should really consider going back to school. In this particular case you are both very much incorrect. This is not an invitation for debate either. You can keep on disagreeing as much as you want, but you'll still be wrong. We are talking about a weight ration of about 38:1 - how much do you expect to be able to change the direction of a 38 ton truck in a 1 ton car? How much would you expect to be able to change the direction of a 10 ton truck by hitting it on your motorcycle? Please, grow a perspective.

The fact that the Ady Gil didn't just shatter into a million pieces is clear evidence that the forward momentum of the Ady Gil relative to the hull of the Shonan Maru 2 was negligible.

If you don't believe me, by all means do try and go out and see if you can deflect a Bayliner idling along using a sea kayak.


Holy shit, never though I'd see myself agreeing with ya Lias. But I am.
I'm an ex maritime patrol pilot and have seen those bloody Japs ad others raping and pillaging NZ and Australian resources with impudence and relatively unchecked. I have flown flights in the Southern ocean and seen the activities for myself. Its definitely not right. Send em to the bottom...

Unless you raised the specific animal you do not own it. Plenty of NZ fishing boats operating in Tongan, Fijian and Samoan waters too. Most tuna eaten in NZ is flown in from Fiji. Most Marlins and Swordfish caught in NZ waters are flown off to Japan or the States - it's just how the market works.

[SPman]

Sea terrorist:

Look at the history of this group

# 1977: Paul Watson, one of the founder members of Greenpeace, was expelled from the organisation after a campaign against sealing during which he threw the sealers’ clubs and skins into the sea. His actions temporarily cost Greenpeace their tax-exemption status in the US.

# 1977: Paul Watson establishes the “Sea Shepherd” organisation.

# 1979: A Sea Shepherd vessel rams the whaler “Sierra”.

# 1980: The “Sierra” is sunk in Lisbon harbour with the help of limpet mines. Sea Shepherd claims responsibility.

# 1981: Sea Shepherd sinks the two whaling vessels, Ibsa I and Ibsa II, in the Spanish harbour of Viga (Sole source Sea Shepherd. This has not been confirmed by any other source)
.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd activists shoot at Faroese police with a line rifle and try to sink their rubber dinghies.

The vessel “Sea Shepherd” was ordered to leave Faroese territorial waters after attempting to obstruct the Faroese pilot whale harvest. The vessel ignored the order, and Faroese police tried unsuccessfully to board the ship. In the police report of Oct. 7,1986, it says: “One of the rubber dinghies was attacked directly by a so called “Speed Line” line rifle. The attack is considered to have endangered the lives of the police crew members seriously ... also, signal flares containing phosphorous (a substance which both burns and cauterizes) was thrown at the police. At a later stage the Sea Shepherd used so called “toads” (i.e. rotating iron spikes, pointed and sharp at both ends), against the rubber dinghies .. petrol was poured over the side of the ship ... whereupon signal flares were thrown from the “Sea Shepherd” in a miscarried attempt to set the petrol on fire.” Sea Shepherd accused the Faroese police of having shot at them with rifles. The police emphasize in their report that they only used tear gas and gas cartridges from shotguns.

# 1986: Sea Shepherd claims responsibility for the sinking of two whaling vessels in Reykjavik, Iceland, and for malicious damage to the whaling station not far from the town. The act was carried out by two US citizens, one of them, Rodney Corronado, is now wanted in the US for several incidents of serious animal rights terrorism.

# 1988: Paul Watson arrives in Iceland demanding to be held responsible for the sinking of the whaling vessels in Reykjavik in 1986. He is arrested and held for questioning. He realizes that he can risk facing several years imprisonment. In a press release from the Icelandic Ministry of Justice it says: “At questioning Paul Watson has admitted that he has given some remarks that connect him with the sabotage, but in spite of this he now claims that he neither took part in the planning nor the execution of the sabotage.” There was no evidence incriminating Watson. He was ordered to leave the country and declared persona non grata in Iceland

# 1991: Mr A. Ferreira, A US crew member on a Mexican fishing vessel, reports to his senator that Sea Shepherd rammed his vessel causing considerable damage. Some of Sea Shepherd’s crew were armed with rifles. Senator John Seymour replies: “Your situation does not fall under my jurisdiction. I have therefore forwarded your letter to the American Tunaboat Association.”

# 1991: Scott Trimmingham, president of Sea Shepherd quits in protest. “We had rules about not hurting anyone, about not using weapons. I left because those rules and that philosophy seems to be changing,” he said to “Outside” magazine (Sept. 1991).

Paul Watson admits that there are arms on board “Sea Shepherd”. “We confront dangerous people. As the captain, it is my responsibility to protect the lives of my crew ... Therefore, I have prepared myself for the possibility of defending my crew in a situation that could go never occur, but if it does I will use firearms to first intimidate and then to defend,” said Watson to the Los Angeles Free Weekly (April 24, 1992).

Seattle Times columnist Alston Chase comments thus on Sea Shepherds relationship to weapons: “The business of Sea Shepherd is confrontation, whereby these sailor activists try to provoke others to attack. Crying self-defence in these circumstances is like the gunfighter who starts a quarrel to justify duelling his enemy.” (The Seattle Times, July 1, 1991).

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempts at ramming three Costa Rican fishing vessels. In a written complaint to the local authorities the fishermen report that the Sea Shepherd crew shot at them with bullets containing a red substance, hitting two of them and causing them great pain.

# 1992: Sea Shepherd makes unsuccessful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Nybræna" at her moorings in the Lofoten Islands. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused considerable damage.

# 1993: Paul Watson orders the crew on board the Sea Shepherd vessel “Edward Abbey” (formerly US Navy) to open cannon fire at a Japanese fishing vessel.

The following transcript stems from the 1993 Yorkshire Television documentary “Defenders of the Wild - Ocean Rider”

Paul Watson (over the radio): We are going to ram you!
Stand clear!

A Taiwanese drift-netter (over the radio): “Why are you
crushing our ship?”

Paul Watson: “You are killing too many dolphins ..
and you insulted us by calling us creeps.”

From another confrontation with a Japanese fishing vessel:

Narrator: Sea Shepherd is ready to ram again.
Now Paul Watson wants the Edward Abbey to fire directly
at the drift-netters.

Watson: “Fire a couple in the stern right at the water line.
Nobody’s there.”

Narrator: “To the relief of many of the crew members the
order is not carried out. The Edward Abbey fires a cannon
shot across its bow. Still the Japanese ship does not stop."

# 1993: Sea Shepherd makes an unsuccesful attempt at scuttling the combined minke whaling and fishing vessel "Senet" at her moorings in Gressvik. The vessel was salvaged, but the water had caused some damage.

# 1993: Sea Shepherd concludes that the organisation has sunk 8 ships and rammed and damaged a further 6.

Dismissed from the IWC
After the sinking of the Icelandic whaling vessels in 1986, Sea Shepherd lost its status as observer at the IWC. The organisation claims that it is merely enforcing IWC rules. In February 1994, IWC Secretary, Ray Gambell, declared to NTB (the Norwegian Telegram Agency) that the IWC and all its member states ardently condemn Sea Shepherd’s acts of terrorism.
Fucking great , eh....good on them. Use American tactics!
Let's hope they have an even more productive next 30 years!
All these useless talking wankers going to conferences and having a great time.
Action is where it's at - it's the only language most people understand!
Maybe we should get Sea Shepherd some Harpoons - US missile style!

[LBD]

no right to deliberalty ram another vessel.

As for the Somali analogy, in this instance, as there was no boarding in progress the analogy is not relevent.

Skyryder

At first I was hoping you are playing the devils advicate...but maybe not....

I think the Somali analogy is fitting, the intent of the pirates and the protesters is harm to the ships and a threat to the well being of the crews

I have not seen the film clips, we cannot live stream here at site....but I doubt the jap master would attempt to deliberatly ram the Gil...especially with all the cameras rolling... Every captain instictivly avoids collision. Any collision, unintentional can be a career stopper...any collision intentional is criminal...and in international waters, it will not be a trial in Japan.


The impact, even on the larger vessel is substantial. The video from the 3rd vessel clearly shows the bow of the Shonan Maru being deflected to port by the impact. The Ady Gill was moving at what I would guess was about 5 to 10 knots. The impact is lateral to the direction of travel and would easily cause the observed deflection. There is no way that the helmsman of the Shonan Maru could go from slightly to starboard to hard a'port in the time the video shows.

Something that needs to be kept in mind is that the filming from the third vessel, is not filming from a fixed point on land, the third vessel is moving and if the third vessel is travelling accross the bow of the jap boat from starboard to port (On the Jap Boat) the jap boat will look to be turning to stbd.



At 0.07 there is a considerable turn to starboard. The boat heels substantially. This elicits the "Fuck" comment as the intention of this manoeuvre is apparent. The manoeuvreability of the Shonan Maru is impressive.
Four seconds later she is heeling to Starboard.
Two seconds later Ady Gil is crossing her bow. .

A heel to Stbd is a turn to port...were you saying the Jap turned to stbd initially then to Port?

From the bridge of the whaler, the master cannot see what is happening under his bow, any action decisions made at very close quarters would be based on the last actions observed of the Andy Gill

Can some one tell me if there is any visible change in exhaust colour at any time from the whaler?

In my books...irrespective of what may or may not be the actions of the Jap Master, The Japs were not hunting down the protesters with the intention of disabling the protest fleet, it was the other way around and the actions of the Andy Gill were mallicious....shame she went down but no one to blame but the Skipper / Helmsman on the Andy Gill

Maybe they should have used a harpoon with big barbs through the Andy Gill....then they could have skull dragged her up on the deck of the whaler....Patched up the two holes and sold her back to the owner for a good profit...and given the Andy Gill crew a Jolly Good Rodgering in the mean time.....

[MisterD]

If the Jap whaler had stayed on course it would not have collided with the Sea Shepherd.

Skyryder

The trouble with that statement, is that you're basing it on video taken from another ship - a moving POV. Unless we get a GPS track for both vessels it's bloody difficult to prove anything.

Happy New Year btw.

[Genie]

The trouble with that statement, is that you're basing it on video taken from another ship - a moving POV. Unless we get a GPS track for both vessels it's bloody difficult to prove anything.

Happy New Year btw.

at last..some common sense pervails....GPS tracking will prove beyond a doubt who was where and when. Wise man **

[Skyryder]

At first I was hoping you are playing the devils advicate...but maybe not....

I think the Somali analogy is fitting, the intent of the pirates and the protesters is harm to the ships and a threat to the well being of the crews

I have not seen the film clips, we cannot live stream here at site....but I doubt the jap master would attempt to deliberatly ram the Gil...especially with all the cameras rolling... Every captain instictivly avoids collision. Any collision, unintentional can be a career stopper...any collision intentional is criminal...and in international waters, it will not be a trial in Japan.



Something that needs to be kept in mind is that the filming from the third vessel, is not filming from a fixed point on land, the third vessel is moving and if the third vessel is travelling accross the bow of the jap boat from starboard to port (On the Jap Boat) the jap boat will look to be turning to stbd..



The purpose of the somali piratres is to capture the ship...................not sink it. Crew safety is conditional on handing over the boat. No evidence has emerged that the Jap master gave the Sea Shepherd people that option. In fact SS have claimed that the Jap boat ignored their distress calls after the ramming. So how on earth you can claim that the Somali analogy is fitting to what happened in the southern ocean is beyond me.

For someone who has not seen the clip you make excuses based on assumptions. You state that (in part)......................"the third vessel is moving and 'if' the third vessel is moving................................." Well yes 'if' the filming boat was travelling from port to starboard, you conjecture is a possibility. But what 'if' the filming boat was travelling in the eopposite direction..................or what 'if' the filming boat was stationary.

No' ifs' in the vid clip. The Sea Shepherd stays in a relitive position. If what you say is correct then both vessels would appear to move, from the pespective of the filming boat. That is not apparent. In fact SS people say they were stationary.

Pretty plain for all to see and not even the hardcore apologists have come up with your excuse. But no doubt they wlil expand on it.


Skyryder

[CookMySock]

Unless we get a GPS track for both vessels it's bloody difficult to prove anything.It's fairly clear from the wake of the whaler that it was in a constant rate turn to the left - away from the andy gil.

Steve

[Owl]

It's fairly clear from the wake of the whaler that it was in a constant rate turn to the left - away from the andy gil.

Steve

You obviously haven't seen the second video then!:no:

[Skyryder]

The trouble with that statement, is that you're basing it on video taken from another ship - a moving POV. Unless we get a GPS track for both vessels it's bloody difficult to prove anything.

Happy New Year btw.

Yes it will but its difficult to accept that the intentions of the Jap master were benign with his water cannon on. Even if he uses the excuse of de-icing (you apoligists never thought of that one) his radar would have informed him of the close proximity of another vessel. At best he is guilty of negligence and endangering the lives of those on board the rammed vessel. As for GPS records yes they will give a clearer picture of vellel movemnet , so to will the radio traffic on the alegations of the SS that the Jap whaler ignored their distress call.

Skyryder

[CookMySock]

You obviously haven't seen the second video then!:no:Oops. My apologise!

Steve

[Skyryder]

The trouble with that statement, is that you're basing it on video taken from another ship - a moving POV. Unless we get a GPS track for both vessels it's bloody difficult to prove anything.

Happy New Year btw.

Yes it will but its difficult to accept that the intentions of the Jap master were benign with his water cannon on. Even if he uses the excuse of de-icing (you apologists never thought of that one) his radar would have informed him of the close proximity of another vessel. At best he is guilty of negligence and endangering the lives of those on board the rammed vessel. As for GPS records yes they will give a clearer picture of vessel movement , so too will the radio traffic on the allegations of the SS that the Jap whaler ignored their distress call.

Skyryder

PS Same on the New Year too.

[davereid]

In this particular case you are both very much incorrect. This is not an invitation for debate either. You can keep on disagreeing as much as you want, but you'll still be wrong. We are talking about a weight ration of about 38:1 - how much do you expect to be able to change the direction of a 38 ton truck in a 1 ton car? How much would you expect to be able to change the direction of a 10 ton truck by hitting it on your motorcycle? Please, grow a perspective.

As I said in my original post, I couldn't hand - on - heart say I could see what happened.

But your claim thats its not an invitation for debate makes you sound like a climate scientist and makes it therefore essential that I debate !

I pointed out earlier, its not a simple equation like two pool balls hitting on a table, there is a lot more happening than a simple collision. The relationship between vessels is much more complicated.

Even a 400kg Jetski can create a wake that will disrupt and rock a 2000 ton fishing boat.

And the video appears to show that the Ady Gill had power on when it hit the Jap, so not only do you have to consider the relative weights, you have to consider the thrust of the boats as well.

The bow thruster in the Arahura weighs only 1100 kg, and it can easily move the 9000 tons of the Arahura.

Thats 1 : 8200.

Now I guess you will say you can "see" that the Ady Gil had no power on.

But it did have. And thats not up for debate really.

[davereid]

Yes it will but its difficult to accept that the intentions of the Jap master were benign with his water cannon on. Even if he uses the excuse of de-icing (you apologists never thought of that one) his radar would have informed him of the close proximity of another vessel. At best he is guilty of negligence and endangering the lives of those on board the rammed vessel. As for GPS records yes they will give a clearer picture of vessel movement , so too will the radio traffic on the allegations of the SS that the Jap whaler ignored their distress call.

Skyryder

PS Same on the New Year too.

Both boats were very clearly aware of one another. Radar was completely un-necessary, this incident did not occur in crowded shipping lanes, it occured in the middle of a bloody great empty ocean.

All the posturing ignores the fact that the Ady Gill was deliberately approaching the Jap boat from starboard to force the Jap boat to turn. And what an effective way of using the rules of the Sea to disrupt the Whaler, which is much larger and slower. By the time it is back on course, the Ady Gill is ready for a new approach and can repeat this ad-nauseum.

What happened here was a game of Chicken.

This time BOTH skippers misjudged.

The Japs made little effort to avoid the Ady Gill, underestimating the resolve of the Ady Gil to get under the bows of the Jap boat.

The Ady Gill had overestimated the Jab skippers adherence to the right-hand-rule.

[CookMySock]

This time BOTH skippers misjudged. I think the andy gils' skipper was a little taken-aback when he was so suddenly sucked under the bow of the whaler, and a little shocked even when the big burst of power and rapid application of starboard helm did little or nothing to resolve what was usually a perfectly predictable manoevre.

I suggest the person with the high-pressure hose probably should not have intentionally blinded the andy gils' crew too - the suprise on their face was palpable when they realised what was afoot.

As bikers are fully aware, accidents happen when boys are doing stupid shit and not thinking. Oops.

Steve

[Ronin]

You guys should really consider going back to school. In this particular case you are both very much incorrect. This is not an invitation for debate either. You can keep on disagreeing as much as you want, but you'll still be wrong. We are talking about a weight ration of about 38:1 - how much do you expect to be able to change the direction of a 38 ton truck in a 1 ton car? How much would you expect to be able to change the direction of a 10 ton truck by hitting it on your motorcycle? Please, grow a perspective.

The fact that the Ady Gil didn't just shatter into a million pieces is clear evidence that the forward momentum of the Ady Gil relative to the hull of the Shonan Maru 2 was negligible.

If you don't believe me, by all means do try and go out and see if you can deflect a Bayliner idling along using a sea kayak.
<SNIP>

Attention world: The laws of physics have now been re written to allow the above post to be correct. As you can see, this is obviously not open to debate.

Lets see, I put my time and experience working on boats up against your view of events. It is impossible for the collision to have no effect on the larger vessel. Sure, if it was an oil tanker then that effect would be difficult to measure but it would still be there.

You can argue your point to try not to be wrong all you want. It doesn't change the facts.

Both skippers were in the wrong for a variety of reasons.

[Skyryder]

All the posturing ignores the fact that the Ady Gill was deliberately approaching the Jap boat from starboard to force the Jap boat to turn. And what an effective way of using the rules of the Sea to disrupt the Whaler, which is much larger and slower. By the time it is back on course, the Ady Gill is ready for a new approach and can repeat this ad-nauseum.

What happened here was a game of Chicken.

This time BOTH skippers misjudged.

The Japs made little effort to avoid the Ady Gill, underestimating the resolve of the Ady Gil to get under the bows of the Jap boat.

The Ady Gill had overestimated the Jab skippers adherence to the right-hand-rule.




I have no doubt that the Sea Shepherd was being provocative and that their intention was to disrupt whaling activities. On the rights an wrongs of this I have not commented. This still does not excuse the Jap master from deliberately ramming another vessel. And that is what the vid clip shows. Some have claimed that this maneuver from the whaler was to avoid the tangling of their propellers by the activities of the Sea Shepherd.

If this is true and the whaler had to take evasive action by turning to starboard then there will be doubt as to the deliberate intention of ramming.

On this instance this appears not to be the case. The whaler had it's water cannon on. This would have obstructed the whalers view of objects in the water that the sea Shepherd may have cast adrift. Odd don’t you think for the Jap master to order his water cannon on, resticting his view, knowing there are objects in the water that may endanger his vessel.

Skyryder

[Hinny]

All the posturing ignores the fact that the Ady Gill was deliberately approaching the Jap boat from starboard to force the Jap boat to turn.

You need to look at the video shot from the Bob Barker.
This boat and the Ady Gil are stationary - dead in the water. Not, as you state, 'approaching the jap boat from starboard'.

[jonbuoy]

You guys should really consider going back to school. In this particular case you are both very much incorrect. This is not an invitation for debate either. You can keep on disagreeing as much as you want, but you'll still be wrong. We are talking about a weight ration of about 38:1 - how much do you expect to be able to change the direction of a 38 ton truck in a 1 ton car? How much would you expect to be able to change the direction of a 10 ton truck by hitting it on your motorcycle? Please, grow a perspective.

The fact that the Ady Gil didn't just shatter into a million pieces is clear evidence that the forward momentum of the Ady Gil relative to the hull of the Shonan Maru 2 was negligible.

If you don't believe me, by all means do try and go out and see if you can deflect a Bayliner idling along using a sea kayak.



Unless you raised the specific animal you do not own it. Plenty of NZ fishing boats operating in Tongan, Fijian and Samoan waters too. Most tuna eaten in NZ is flown in from Fiji. Most Marlins and Swordfish caught in NZ waters are flown off to Japan or the States - it's just how the market works.

Go to Marsden point a watch a wee little tug nudge a supertanker alongside, Pull on a mooring line of a 500T fishing boat, watch a container ship trying to berth in windy weather you'd be surprised what a little force can do to a floating object.

[Mikkel]

I pointed out earlier, its not a simple equation like two pool balls hitting on a table, there is a lot more happening than a simple collision. The relationship between vessels is much more complicated.

Indeed it is much more complicated. But if anything weight will count for even more than just the directly associated inertia, considering that the weight of the vessel is directly proportional to the volume of water displaced by the hull - and it there by follows that the cross-section in the water would be larger as well.

Add then the fact that what you are proposing is a deflection of the Shonan Maru 2 around the vertical axis - i.e. twisting a rotation of the longitudinal axis of the boat - due to the impact.


Even a 400kg Jetski can create a wake that will disrupt and rock a 2000 ton fishing boat.

Indeed, there will of course be an effect, that is true. However, that effect is could never, in this case, result in a significant change of course for the larger boat. The waves surrounding the vessels are orders of magnitude larger than the wake that the Ady Gil is stirring up.

So while your example here is valid - it is also completely irrelevant to the case at hand.


And the video appears to show that the Ady Gill had power on when it hit the Jap, so not only do you have to consider the relative weights, you have to consider the thrust of the boats as well.

The bow thruster in the Arahura weighs only 1100 kg, and it can easily move the 9000 tons of the Arahura.

Thats 1 : 8200.

That's an entirely different situation - sustained thrust versus a non-elastic impact. In order for the Ady Gil to impart any change of momentum, due to thrust, onto the Shanon Maru 2 the duration of the contact would have to be significant. Instead, what we see is an almost immediate separation of the two vessels following the impact. If the Ady Gil was imparting any momentum into the Shanon Maru 2 it would have remained in contact following the collision.

Another thing to note - as the collision occurs the people on the Ady Gil are propelled backwards this is obvious evidence that the Ady Gil is actually accelerated forward during the collision. What can we take from this? We can conclude that the Shonan Maru 2 is moving faster than the Ady Gil at the time of the impact and that the forces of the impact, on the Ady Gil, happens as much along the longitudinal axis as it does along the lateral axis.

Finally, if the Ady Gil is accelerated forward by the impact and it's direction of travel - relative to the Shonan Maru 2 - is going from Starboard to Port there is no way that the impact could have imparted any transverse momentum driving the Shonan Maru 2 towards its port side. And then it becomes rather irrelevant whether it was under power or not.

What do you think would happen if you just threw the bow thruster of the Arahura at the boat instead of bolting it to the hull?


Attention world: The laws of physics have now been re written to allow the above post to be correct. As you can see, this is obviously not open to debate.

Which is more likely, that the laws have to be rewritten or that you just have not got a good grasp of them?


Lets see, I put my time and experience working on boats up against your view of events. It is impossible for the collision to have no effect on the larger vessel. Sure, if it was an oil tanker then that effect would be difficult to measure but it would still be there.

Let's see, I will put my time and experience working with the laws of physics up against your view of the events. It is impossible for the collision to have no effect upon the larger vessel, Newton's 3rd law - action equals reaction - dictates this. However, if the ratio of inertia, between the two objects, is 38:1 then the effect upon the larger object, considering the velocities involved, would be insignificant, even though it would still be there.


You can argue your point to try not to be wrong all you want. It doesn't change the facts.

Both skippers were in the wrong for a variety of reasons.

I am merely pointing out the facts to you. I hope you don't mind.

But yes, both skippers were in the wrong - on that we agree.

[Mikkel]

Go to Marsden point a watch a wee little tug nudge a supertanker alongside, Pull on a mooring line of a 500T fishing boat, watch a container ship trying to berth in windy weather you'd be surprised what a little force can do to a floating object.

Sustained thrust versus impact. The situations are not comparable.

An ant could move Jupiter given enough time...

And just for the record - tugs may be small, but they do not constitute a small force. They are the tractors of the sea. Have a look at these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tug#Tugboat_propulsion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollard_pull

[McJim]

Brainwashed Brit. Yeah get over it - you Scots are Brits.
We have a Govt. that is similarly brainwashed so that hypothesis is not beyond the realms of possibility.
The last Nat govt. sent troops to fight an illegal war.
This one may commit the same insanity.

I used to be brainwashed - I thought there was something wrong with Whaling. Watson has opened my eyes and made me question the indoctrinated opinion of the greenies - I looked into it further and realised that the Japanese are merely harvesting a natural resource. Sea Shepherd are law breakers and as such need to be brought to justice. I agree that military and cosatguard vessels from New Zealand and Australia be deployed to attack the criminals - in this case Sea Shit-head. My family name actually originates from Belgian mercenaries who assisted Scotland circa 1170 so I'm probably not even a Brit. Nothing wrong with being a national of a country that achieved so much in history so I thank you for your kind words.

I see you ride a Honda...:rofl:

[gatch]

*sigh* last time we had to nuke them to divert their attention and make them cease and desist ...


... now THAT could be fun? :)

The whales..

[Pixie]

As much a fish as you are.

They are mammals not fish.

There are smaller numbers of them in the oceans since they are at the top of the food chain, for the most part we are their only predators unlike most of the fish we eat.

"Did you know the whale is not really a fish? It’s an insect... and it lives on bananas and it goes hop hop hop across arable land.That is land tilled by Arabs...." -Peter Cook

[Pixie]

I, on the other hand, have little time for faceless multinational NGOs that I, as a citizen of New Zealand, have no ability to influence. Greenpeace, WWF and others are not membership-driven organisations. They are franchises controlled by the same big businesses that hippies love to hate. I give them full marks for irony. What do Keisha Castle-Hughes and Lucy Lawless know about climate change or the sustainable management of ocean-dwelling mammals?

GreenPeace International Corporation "making profit from suckers"

[Flip]

Sustained thrust versus impact. The situations are not comparable.

An ant could move Jupiter given enough time...

And just for the record - tugs may be small, but they do not constitute a small force. They are the tractors of the sea. Have a look at these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tug#Tugboat_propulsion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollard_pull

Well it looks to me like the Earth Race boat was run down by the bigger boat. But WTF would I know about ships and engineering.

[newbould]

I used to be brainwashed - I thought there was something wrong with Whaling. Watson has opened my eyes and made me question the indoctrinated opinion of the greenies - I looked into it further and realised that the Japanese are merely harvesting a natural resource. Sea Shepherd are law breakers and as such need to be brought to justice. I agree that military and cosatguard vessels from New Zealand and Australia be deployed to attack the criminals - in this case Sea Shit-head. My family name actually originates from Belgian mercenaries who assisted Scotland circa 1170 so I'm probably not even a Brit. Nothing wrong with being a national of a country that achieved so much in history so I thank you for your kind words.

I see you ride a Honda...:rofl:
The problem with whaling in my mind is the method of slaughter - which is barbaric. In earlier posts you likened whaling to killing pigs, cows etc. If we were able to humanely slaughter whales then I would agree with your comparing their hunting to the hunting of deer - an accurate bullet to the brain is a quick and humane death. A harpoon is not. Electrified harpoons were tried and when researched were found to be even more cruel. The question of sustainable management should come after the question of humane slaughter. The question of how to prevent intelligent mamals from being killed in such a fashion is most legitimate also. Sea shepards tactics have gone (IMO) too far. Green peace used to disrupt with much less risk to human life but perhaps these days less effect. The change of attitude in NZ from a country with considerable economic benefit from whaling to one who recognises the immmorality of the slaughter technique and and shortsightedness of the mass destruction of any resource is to be applauded and one reason why this Scotsman of English descent chooses to remain in the country.

[newbould]

When I first saw the footage on TV I thought the wee boat was trying to get some more biodeisel:innocent:

[davereid]

This still does not excuse the Jap master from deliberately ramming another vessel. And that is what the vid clip shows.

Sort of like this clip - it gives a better view of deliberate ramming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8

[Pixie]

When I first saw the footage on TV I thought the wee boat was trying to get some more biodeisel:innocent:

:psst: Don't tell anyone, the "Biodiesel" is whale oil

[Fatjim]

I hope the fuckers get done for littering.

[terbang]

Stick to ya physics Mikkel. If someone took something, something that you were harvesting for yourself (legally making money from it) from your own back yard without your permission and sold it in the next town you would call them a thief, right? Whether it grew wild or you planted it, its still your back yard. New Zealand has territorial waters, like any other country that has a coastline and like many it also specifies an economic zone. In simple terms, if you want to make money (like fishing) inside the economic zone, then you have to have the permission of the owners. In the case of NZ some do have permission and others don't.

Though I flew for Australian customs on fisheries, drug, piracy and immigration issues mainly related to the Australian AEEZ and mainly up north in the Timor and Arafura, we also did work around NZ because the Kiwis have no money and can't properly do it for themselves. Making them a weak drug entry point into Australia. So we not only had to be versed in Australian, but also know some NZ fisheries protection laws as well. We got to see it all from a birds eye view through some very expensive and sophisticated surveillance equipment. Stuff Kiwis are yet to get. I personally, though based in Darwin, got to do a lot of the NZ flights because I knew the lay of the land.

When we found some bad guys in Australian waters, they were caught and sometimes sent to the bottom. Mainly they went to jail. This is because the aussies have an excellent fleet of customs and maritime patrol vessels. They do it pretty well right, with laws that have teeth. We found em, gathered the evidence and they (people in military or customs boats) arrested them with the necessary force .

When making strategic patrols in NZ waters, including those portions of the southern ocean, we had scant naval support. We found them (large jap and other fishing vessels, not approved) in their droves in NZ waters. Sometimes very close in and in the sovereign territory as well. Especially by night. We had Kiwi fisheries guys on board who were generally beside themselves with rage at the impunity of these people taking a resource for NZers, from the NZers (legal) back yard and yet helpless to do anything about it. Yeah even the Aussie crews were shocked at what they saw.

Most Kiwis have found the odd bit of flotsam on a beach with asian characters inscribed on it, some have a fisherman mate who tells a few stories as well, or some of the Airline pilots who ply the main trunk see a bit too, but generally that is about the only indication that they will ever get as to what is really happening over the horizon. Its big business to them, they donate shit loads of charity to Tonga, stroke the stupid Kings ego and a blind eye is taken to their activities in Tongan waters. Waters that NZ and Australia give money to help protect.
They also know we (NZ) are helpless to police our own back yard. So its basically open season all year around.
They have fished their own backyards out long ago and now they are doing it to ours and the tragic thing is that we can't even afford to stop them.

I'm not about saving whales and that at all and don't really have much of an opinion on who really rammed who. Though I do admire their conviction in putting their "money where their mouths are".
However I do care about the impact that illegal fishing (and its happening wholesale, Ive seen it) in NZ waters has on our commercial and recreational fisheries. We don't need a slide rule and a physicist to figure that one out.

Narp, fuck em, just send them to the bottom (if we can afford to).

[puddytat]

Hey, I've an idea....lets go & do some scientific research in their territorial waters or thier fuckin' sanctuaries.....
The Japs arrogance astounds me & the people on here who slag every fucker who tries to go out & fight "them" or "whoever' saddens me.
Do you remember the Rainbow warrior? I think most kiwis were affronted mostly by that act of Frances arrogance & disregard for our rights & counrty.But those little boats made a big fucking differance .And still are.
So some greenies go & chain themselves to a cargo ship full of palm kernel shit...& I read of the sentiment expressed on that subject supporting what the French did ,& suggesting that they should sort the Greenies out again.....
Now we haqve Kiwis down there standing up for what they believe in, who on an awesome Kiwi boat that was a world record holding machine, crewed by Kiwis, gets rammed by fuckin Nips who are giving not just us but all other countries who are part of Sanctuary area the finger & continue to hunt & fish illegally in other countries territory.
And you fuckers slag them off for trying to stop that? Dont you have any morals? Or did "you " already sell out to the man long ago?
Im so tired of the self centered selfishness of so many.

[Skyryder]

Sort of like this clip - it gives a better view of deliberate ramming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDsZcLVXyn8


Clip showed a collision between two vessels. There was no evidence that I could see that the Sea Shepherd 'deliberatly rammed the other vessel. I'm not saying they did not but i saw no evidence that they did. Perhaps if the camera had filmed the wake of Sea Shepherd that might have shown a deliberate intent to ram but from the clip it did not. Not proof for me..................but possible that's the best you'll get from me and I'm being generouse here.


Skyryder

[LBD]

Go to Marsden point a watch a wee little tug nudge a supertanker alongside, Pull on a mooring line of a 500T fishing boat, watch a container ship trying to berth in windy weather you'd be surprised what a little force can do to a floating object.

There are several posts that compare a small tug boat assisting a large ship to manouvre, with the force of an impact....lets dispell any similarity now.

In an collision there is a momentarily transfer of energy from one vessel to the other at the moment of impact and then thats it....no more forces.

A harbour tug on the other hand comes alongside the ship gently as possible, squares up on and on the pilots request applies a constant force to the side of the ship, the tug will move the ship side ways.... after a time of constantly applying what ever portion of the tugs bollard pull the pilot has requested. ( usually described as Bare weight, 1/4, 1/2 and full with a "push" or "pull" prefix)

The "wee little tug" I drove for 6 years was only 24.5 m long had 2 x 3512 Cats with twin 360 degree Ulstein Drives and had a 36.5 tonne Bollard pull....quite some wee toy, that happily pushed 40 000 ton ships around.

Someone mentioned bow thrusters? In the 70's the container ship Nedloyd Houtman came into Lyttleton after a record 21 days from Europe. The Lyttleton harbour tug Godley was square on the shoulder pushing full, and the ships bow thruster pushed the Godley astern....That was one serious thruster.

And I go home on Tuesday so will get to see the videos then and if this thread is still active....I vow to take on Skyrider...both barrels blazing......(Unless I end up agreeing with him after seeing the evidence)

[jonbuoy]

Sustained thrust versus impact. The situations are not comparable.

An ant could move Jupiter given enough time...

And just for the record - tugs may be small, but they do not constitute a small force. They are the tractors of the sea. Have a look at these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tug#Tugboat_propulsion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollard_pull

I know check my signature :whistle:

[Pixie]

Every tosser's talking about "our territorial waters".It was in Antarctic waters ffs

[terbang]

I subscribe to the theory that it's a lot easier for a big boat to run over a little boat, causing it grave damage, than the other way around.

[terbang]

Every tosser's talking about "our territorial waters".It was in Antarctic waters ffs

Every tosser, hmm, yeah right, OK... You need to do some more home work there my friend. Do a search on the CCAMLAR.

[cs363]

Every tosser, hmm, yeah right... You need to do some more home work there my friend. Do a search on the CCAMLAR. ffs

One A too many there, it's CCAMLR :)
Here's a quick link to the Wikipedia page showing the signatories (which I believe was the point terbang was making): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Conservation_of_Antarctic_Marin e_Living_Resources

[RantyDave]

Let's get this silly notion of the Shonan Maru 2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shonan_Maru_2) being deflected by the Ady Gil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthrace) dispelled - it is an affront to reason.
I wasn't going to reply to this ill educated claptrap but then someone called it an affront to reason and I more or less had do.

The Ady Gil weighed 13 tons, the Shonan Maru 2 has a rated tonnage of 491 DWT.

Anyone who, considering these figures, still entertain the idea of the collision deflecting the Japanese vessel is beyond reason.
Or educated. We're not talking about two ball bearings hitting each other in a schoolboy's textbook here and neither is anyone claiming the Shonan Maru was deflected sideways by any reasonable amount. What happened was the Ady Gil (carrying, let's say, 15-20 knots) hit the Shonan Maru on the starboard bow. That means the front, and on the right hand side 'kay? The force of the collision was expressed on the Shonan Maru as a torque, being the product of force (lots, we can tell from what it did to the bow of the Ady Gil and what happened to the water around the Ady Gil when the collision happened) and distance from the centre of gravity (which, given that the Shonan Maru is kinda long is also lots). The Shonan Maru would then experience an angular acceleration inversely proportional to it's second moment of inertia and obviously, once actually yawing, resisted by various hydrodynamic phenomena or, in English, slowed down by the water.

The point is that something very heavy hit a long way from the centre of gravity so it would twist. It won't move sideways much because of the relative weights of the two vessels, but it sure as shit will yaw to port. Had it hit midships (or wherever the CoG actually is) then your ill educated yet curiously elitist argument would hold up.

Dave

[RantyDave]

We are talking about a weight ration of about 38:1 - how much do you expect to be able to change the direction of a 38 ton truck in a 1 ton car?
Is the truck pivoted in the middle?

The fact that the Ady Gil didn't just shatter into a million pieces is clear evidence that the forward momentum of the Ady Gil relative to the hull of the Shonan Maru 2 was negligible.
Why would it shatter? It's made of Kevlar - a material designed to absorb loads from collisions. Go find out what bullet proof vests are made of. The Ady Gil, in it's "Earthrace" guise would have been designed to survive (or mostly survive) a full speed collision with a semi-submerged object. A lost shipping container or (ironically) a whale. That it remained on the surface long enough for the hippies to bail is a testament to this fact.

The Ady Gil didn't shatter because someone (A Naval Architect) did their job.

Dave

[RantyDave]

In fact SS have claimed that the Jap boat ignored their distress calls after the ramming.
Sea Shepherd had a "proper" ship close enough to film what happened. Why would the Japanese need to fish them out the water?

[RantyDave]

his radar would have informed him of the close proximity of another vessel.
No, the radar is mounted high on the ship to move the horizon further out. Because radar is a narrow beam this leads to a blind spot around the ship. Ever heard the expression "flying under the radar"? That's exactly what it means. The Ady Gil would not have been visible on the radar. That being said they clearly knew *exactly* where it was.

[RantyDave]

Lets see, I put my time and experience working on boats up against your view of events.
You can borrow my degree in Naval Architecture as well.

[RantyDave]

what we see is an almost immediate separation of the two vessels following the impact.
No, the Ady Gil remained in contact long enough to go sideways through the next wave - the one that broke over the entire boat and drenched the cockpit. There was a lot of force involved in that collision and had the Ady Gil been a monohull it would have been rolled and quite probably physically run over by the Shonan Maru (see "Marchioness Disaster").

Another thing to note - as the collision occurs the people on the Ady Gil are propelled backwards
No. Before the collision occurs the crew, scattered liberally around the deck of the boat (what little deck there is) see it coming and fucking leg it back to the cockpit to give themselves at least an even chance of survival. That nobody was thrown into the water is a direct result of this and probably the only genuinely smart thing they did all day.

this is obvious evidence that the Ady Gil is actually accelerated forward during the collision.
If a collision accelerates a vessel forwards, it was clonked up the arse wasn't it? For god's sake, even your teenage boy physics must get that...

What do you think would happen if you just threw the bow thruster of the Arahura at the boat instead of bolting it to the hull?
That depends on how much it weighs, what it's made out of, how hard you throw it and the second moment of inertia of the Arahura.

Let's see, I will put my time and experience working with the laws of physics up against your view of the events.
Really? There isn't an engineering school on the planet that would even let you in with the claptrap you've been spewing over the last day or so and certainly not graduate. What "working with the laws of physics" are we referring to here?

Dave

[davereid]

Every tosser's talking about "our territorial waters".It was in Antarctic waters ffs

Yep, the waters in question are only covered by the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. They are not part of our, or Australias EEZ, although Australia has primary responsibility for search and rescure in the area.

EEZs are not accepted by many countries. They were unilaterally claimed by individual Nations, who under international law had only a 12 mile limit. Countries like NZ that could claim a 200 mile limit without a border conflict did so.

In 1977 the UN tried to clear the matter up with the "rules of the sea", which became law in about 1982.

But lots of countries dont accept the 200 mile limit or accept only part of it.

Japan and China for example, claim it when it suits, but fish "disputed" waters as they wish.

IMHO many countries accept 200 mile EEZs as long as it is cheap to do so. If you can just pay the claim holder, and fish these at modest cost, then that is the pragmatic solution. In fact, thats how they started, with the USAs calculation it was cheaper to pay Ecuador for the right to fish than it was to send the navy to enforce the US right to fish.

And thats how it will end. As fish stocks become more valuable, countries will try and increase the effective size of their EEZ. And at some point, it will be cheaper to dispute another countries claim than to pay the fees.

[Ronin]

You can borrow my degree in Naval Architecture as well.

And such a shiny one as well. I shall use it with pride sir.

[Mikkel]

If a collision accelerates a vessel forwards, it was clonked up the arse wasn't it? For god's sake, even your teenage boy physics must get that...

One word: Vectors. I'd have imagined you learned all about them in high school - that's teenage boy physics if anything. (And yes, vectors are purely mathematical, but we do utilise them extensively in physics...)

Look again and you will see that the boat is torn forwards underneath their feet. Upon reviewing that video you will also, I should hope, grant that the Ady Gil is not travelling at anything remotely close to 15-20 knots. I should also hope that you would be willing to admit that the Ady Gil is clearly accelerated both forwards and towards its starboard side at the impact.
I have to grant you that I was wrong, the two boats do not separate immediately - rather the Ady Gil is dragged along for as long as it takes its bow to break off.

At one point you consider the Ady Gil "very heavy" - and while I'd have to agree that bench-pressing 13 ton is quite a lot - it's the relative weights that are of interest. Would you also consider a 250 kg motorcycle "very heavy" compared to a 10 ton truck?

You use a lot of fancy words: "starboard bow" (that's where the klingons are btw :rolleyes:), "second moment of inertia". "centre of gravity" (should be center of mass, but we've been over that plenty of times), "hydrodynamic phenomena", "angular acceleration", etc. Fancy words intended to impress the audience and make yourself look knowledgeable while mystifying the whole deal. So thank you for your "ill educated yet curiously elitist" post. Good work on trying to turn this into a spooky-science debate!

As for the rest: nice troll. You obviously have an idea about what you are talking about (or you are very handy with a spooky-science dictionary) - but fail to use your reason and fail to recognise what facts you do have at hand what facts you do not. Oh, and thanks for the ad hominem bit - that was very entertaining. I hope you are having a better day than it could appear.

P.s. Please (re-)learn how to multi-quote. I understand that the button looks a bit different now that the forum has had an overhaul, but a man with your clearly impressive intellectual abilities should be able to figure it out.

[LBD]

I subscribe to the theory that it's a lot easier for a big boat to run over a little boat, causing it grave damage, than the other way around.

I subscribe to the reality that a small manouverable and capable of 40kts bot is a lot more nimble and able to avoid an impending collision that a large cumbersome vessel...and that in an impact, a large steel vessel is going to susteain far less damage the a small coposite vessel...

[Flip]

I subscribe to the reality that a small manouverable and capable of 40kts bot is a lot more nimble and able to avoid an impending collision that a large cumbersome vessel...and that in an impact, a large steel vessel is going to susteain far less damage the a small coposite vessel...

What would the courts say if a car driver ever used this stupid excuse in court as d defense for T boning a bike?

The AG was run over.

[Kickaha]

The AG was run over.

Only because they were acting like fuckwits

[Virago]

What would the courts say if a car driver ever used this stupid excuse in court as d defense for T boning a bike?

The AG was run over.

What would the courts say if the bike rider was deliberately swerving in front of the car, to force it to change direction?

The AG got what it deserved.

[Skyryder]

What would the courts say if the bike rider was deliberately swerving in front of the car, to force it to change direction?

The AG got what it deserved.


The only boat in the vid changing direction is the Jap whaler. And if a cage did that to a biker
what would 'you' say?'


Skyryder

[Virago]

The only boat in the vid changing direction is the Jap whaler. And if a cage did that to a biker
what would 'you' say?'

Skyryder

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the AG powered on at the last moment, driving itself under the bow.

[RantyDave]

"second moment of inertia"
Until you learn what one is there's no point in discussing it. When you know what it is, you'll know why. Adios.

[Hinny]

I subscribe to the reality that a small manouverable and capable of 40kts bot is a lot more nimble and able to avoid an impending collision that a large cumbersome vessel...and that in an impact, a large steel vessel is going to susteain far less damage the a small coposite vessel...

The Ady Gil was clearly not as manoeuverable as the Shonan Maru as it was dead in the water, without steerage, until very shortly before impact.
It appears evident to me the Shonan Maru powered up and turned to a Starboard collision course.
Having read the ebtire thread I must say been very impressed with the quality of some posts.
The paucity of reason in many is disturbing.
I was shockrd to see the illustration of a lawyer friends comment that eye witness accounts carry little weight at court.
How people could look at two videos and see such widely divergent events is quite shocking.
No wonder so many motorcyclists get hit by cars, if the inability to see, of so many posters to this thread, is indicative of the occular abilties of the motorcycling population at large.

If I was on the jury of the trial of the Japanese master I would vote to convict.

[Kickaha]

If I was on the jury of the trial of the Japanese master I would vote to convict.

I'd give him a medal and a great big whale steak

[Hinny]

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the AG powered on at the last moment, driving itself under the bow.

Had the Shonan Maru not turned to port at the last moment would there have been a collision or would the Ady Gil have got out of its way?
There seemed to be considerable overlap and the Shonan Maru did show impressive manoeuverability for such a large vessel. Had it stayed on Starboard tack would its turning circle have been small enough to cross the stern of the Ady Gil?

[Skyryder]

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the AG powered on at the last moment, driving itself under the bow.

So let me understand this. You are saying that the skipper delibatley put his million dollar + boat, his own life and the lives of his crew in danger in one of the most hostile ocean environments in the world. And you make this without taking into the account the starboard turn tof the Sea Shepherd that clearly shows it's intentions to ram.

There's some pretty poor excuses on here for the Jap whaler but this has got to take the cake.

Skyyrder

[325rocket]

i havent read most of this and im probably not going to.
i dont care who was in the wrong as far as im concerned the japs should just fuck off and leave the whales alone.
next time ram them with something harder!

[FJRider]

The Ady Gil was clearly not as manoeuverable as the Shonan Maru as it was dead in the water, without steerage, until very shortly before impact.
It appears evident to me the Shonan Maru powered up and turned to a Starboard collision course.
Having read the ebtire thread I must say been very impressed with the quality of some posts.
The paucity of reason in many is disturbing.
I was shockrd to see the illustration of a lawyer friends comment that eye witness accounts carry little weight at court.
How people could look at two videos and see such widely divergent events is quite shocking.
No wonder so many motorcyclists get hit by cars, if the inability to see, of so many posters to this thread, is indicative of the occular abilties of the motorcycling population at large.

If I was on the jury of the trial of the Japanese master I would vote to convict.

The Ady Gil was dead in the water ... on the assumption that the Shonan Maru could not run into them because it was illegal to do so. What is important is not what eye witnesses saw, but what the respective skippers could see.

[Virago]

So let me understand this. You are saying that the skipper delibatley put his million dollar + boat, his own life and the lives of his crew in danger in one of the most hostile ocean environments in the world. And you make this without taking into the account the starboard turn tof the Sea Shepherd that clearly shows it's intentions to ram...

Congratulations on your flawed ability to put words into other people's mouths...

It is highly unlikely that the skipper of the AG would "delibatley" put his vessel and crew in mortal danger.

However, the fact remains that the burst of power from the AG, whether a misguided attempt at avoidance, sealed its own fate.

[Kickaha]

So let me understand this. You are saying that the skipper delibatley put his million dollar + boat, his own life and the lives of his crew in danger in one of the most hostile ocean environments in the world

It's pretty obvious thats exactly what the skipper did or he wouldn't have put the Ady Gil in such close proximity to the Whaler, the only way the Sea Shepherd tossers would have a got a better result for international publicity would be if a crew member had been killed

How many on here were following any of this before the collision?

[FJRider]

Then bitched that the japs ignored their distress calls ... after the hassle they GAVE the japs ... I'm not sure I'd want to be rescued by them ...if it were me.

[Swoop]

It's not that I'm all that attached to whales, but I have major issues with the japanese fleets coming down to OUR part of the world to steal natural resources. If they want to go whaling, let them do it in their waters, not ours.
Their waters are so full of sealife that hunting dolphins is perfectly alright as well.

Cunts.


Ummm the Japanese are not whaling for meat but Cetacean Research...
1000 whales certainly add to that research... and the restaurant supply which simply disposes of the waste product of that "research"...

Cunts.

[LBD]

A turn to stbd is the recognised collision avoidence rule at sea.

Rules aside, it was the Andy Gils intention to disrupt the passage of the Jap ship and intentionally using the stbd rule to do so...and ask your self, why were the protestors filming everything unless they were attempting to concoct a situation....look at all the media coverage they are getting, the purchase cost of the Andi Gil is money well spent in that regard

And what assistance could the whaler give to the Andy Gill when the Andy Gills friends were along side in a smaller boat and were more capable of rendering assistance? Any offers would have been met with open hostility.

I do think however that the NZ Govt should go beyond making whaling illegal in NZ waters, and make it illegal for any NZ company to provide any support in any form to companys activly involved with whaling...

[FJRider]

A turn to stbd is the recognised collision avoidence rule at sea.

I do think however that the NZ Govt should go beyond making whaling illegal in NZ waters, and make it illegal for any NZ company to provide any support in any form to companys activly involved with whaling...

And moving in the opposite direction of a collision is usual anywhere else ... I guess reverse for the Andy Gill was hard to find.

[terbang]

Any reasoning there, or just blathering for the sake of it..?


I'd give him a medal and a great big whale steak

[LBD]

And moving in the opposite direction of a collision is usual anywhere else ... I guess reverse for the Andy Gill was hard to find.

Walk into your local marine branch and ask the proffesionals....you will get the same statement.

If, for argument sake, the Jap boat turned to port, and powered on as you do to increase water speed (Prop wash) over the rudder to speed the turn, then the Andy Gil may well have been swamped under the stern of the vessel with the likely loss of life....A ship steers at the stern which means a turn to port involes the rear of the vessel swinging to stbd.

For those that get their Port and Stbd confused....Facing the bow, there is no RED....PORT....LEFT in the bottle.....Not that I drink the stuff.

[caseye]

I watched the initial footage here on the interwobble. What I saw told me that the Japanese Security ship had attempted to ram the Ady gil.In the footage i saw the first time there was no visible attempt by them to get out of the way or Under Way.
I was a bit miffed at the jap whalers.
I watched the next lot(apparently the only one being shown now) of footage also on the interwobble some 3 hours later and shot from a different location.The Ady Gil in this footage was deliberately positioned where the Security ship could not possiibly avoid collision, no matter whether they turned to Starboard(as per the high seas rules) or Port which would of course have put the stern of the ship right over the top of the Ady Gil.
This footage also shows quite clearly that the Ady Gil was under powered control and in the last seconds was PUT (accelerated into) directly under the bow of the oncoming ship.
While I have an absolute abhorance of anyone killing Whales or Dolphins for meat, I also have no tolerance for those who deliberately put the lives of others in danger for no good reason.
Green Peace have done nothing to further their cause here! Quite the opposite I believe.

[PrincessBandit]

Can't be fagged reading through pages and pages of physics.

My take on the bigger picture: The whole world knows you do not need to slaughter whales in order for "research"; the whole world knows whale meat is a delicacy in Japan; yes, countries have "territorial waters" but sadly whales do not stick to those "protected" waters. I use speech marks there as the whole world also knows the Japanese are not above poaching from territorial waters that are not their own.

Sea creatures have little or no understanding (I'm sure it's the latter) of what protected waters should mean for them. All they know is that they are in THEIR environment and are free to go wherever their natures take them.

Mankind is convinced that the planet is here for his benefit and gratification only and so it reasonable to assume that we will continue to pillage every last thing as if it's a commodity there purely for us until it's depleted/annihilated. Look at the deforestation in countless countries where there's filthy lucre to be made with no conscience.

"Waterworld" anyone? "The Day after Tomorrow" anyone? Hell, even "Star Trek: The Journey Home" anyone? We might laugh at it in our lifetime, but it will no doubt come eventually. It's just a pity that those responsible will most likely be long gone and so won't be around to care or deal with their consequences. There will, no doubt, be those whose hearts and consciences want to alter the course of these things, and will continue to attempt this no matter what by what method - good or poor.

[Genie]

Dear Princess Bandit.....

I have to say that you're words are beautiful. You speak from a pure heart and if the world was blessed with more like you we wouldn't need sea shepard, panda watch, spca, and all the other wonderful organisations who are fighting for those that can't fight.
Then, maybe, organisations that wish to stop family voillence, poverty and famine would have more of a chance of succeding.
There is just far too much wrong in this world....but very nice to see someone out there has it right.

Blessings
Genie

[rok-the-boat]

But the rules also stait when one is over 500 ton the 500 ton ship has right of way...

I thought that and checked - but in my little book it says this rule is true only when in the vicinity of a harbour.

[rok-the-boat]

Couldn't read all the posts. Some interesting arguments here but you are all missing the point. If NZ wants to get serious about whaling it needs to claim some of the Pacific and the southern Ocean (along with Australia - gotta compromise sometimes), stick a Greenpeace sticker on a navy ship or two (are there two?), and go hunting whalers. Blow them out of the bloody water - sink 'em. It's all about saving the whales. And that is even good for the Whalers because you can't eat them if there aren't any. World War III has already started - it's economic. Just accept and get on with it.

[pzkpfw]

It's all about saving the whales.

Which whales?
Is the sub species they are hunting endangered?

[pritch]

Only because they were acting like fuckwits

I'm not convinced it was an act. :sherlock:

[Hinny]

A turn to stbd is the recognised collision avoidence rule at sea.
/QUOTE]

Bow to bow.

[QUOTE=Virago;1129604929]

However, the fact remains that the burst of power from the AG, whether a misguided attempt at avoidance, sealed its own fate.

Had the Ady Gil not powered forward would the Shonan Maru still have turned to Port? Were they simply chasing the small boat down like they chase down whales? This is a highly manoeuverable vessell.


The Ady Gil in this footage was deliberately positioned where the Security ship could not possiibly avoid collision, no matter whether they turned to Starboard(as per the high seas rules) or Port which would of course have put the stern of the ship right over the top of the Ady Gil.
This footage also shows quite clearly that the Ady Gil was under powered control and in the last seconds was PUT (accelerated into) directly under the bow of the oncoming ship.

The direction of travel of the Shonan Maru at the start of the BB video and subsequent released footage shows the two vessels were not on a collision path. It was the sharp turn to starboard of the SM that precipitated that prospect.
The S manoeuvre of the Shonan Maru; hard to s'bord then hard a'port, surely indicates one of two scenarios.

1/ They were trying to intimidate the crew of the Ady Gil by running at them and turning away at the last moment.
or,
2/ They turned to Port to ensure the AG didn't get away.

[Mikkel]

Until you learn what one is there's no point in discussing it. When you know what it is, you'll know why. Adios.

You assume quite a lot of things, do you not? (That's a rhetorical question by the way.)

Now, suppose I was quite familiar with the term in question but merely disagreed with you on whether such considerations were at all appropriate for the present discussion. You'd most likely agree that if I started to rant on about quantum mechanics in regards to this incident, that it would be a wasted exercise - a technical wank-fest might be an appropriate term - and while quantum mechanics are indeed further removed from the discussion than anything to do with "the second moment of inertia" neither are at all relevant for a first order approach.

Indeed, it would appear that you have misunderstood what the second moment of inertia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area) actually is, considering you use in the relation to angular acceleration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_acceleration):


Or educated. We're not talking about two ball bearings hitting each other in a schoolboy's textbook here and neither is anyone claiming the Shonan Maru was deflected sideways by any reasonable amount. What happened was the Ady Gil (carrying, let's say, 15-20 knots) hit the Shonan Maru on the starboard bow. That means the front, and on the right hand side 'kay? The force of the collision was expressed on the Shonan Maru as a torque, being the product of force (lots, we can tell from what it did to the bow of the Ady Gil and what happened to the water around the Ady Gil when the collision happened) and distance from the centre of gravity (which, given that the Shonan Maru is kinda long is also lots). The Shonan Maru would then experience an angular acceleration inversely proportional to it's second moment of inertia and obviously, once actually yawing, resisted by various hydrodynamic phenomena or, in English, slowed down by the water.

Pretty embarrassing using the word obviously when you make an obvious mistake.


The second moment of area is not the same thing as the moment of inertia, which is used to calculate angular acceleration, although the calculations are similar. Many engineers refer to the second moment of area as the moment of inertia and use the same symbol I for both, which may be confusing. Which inertia is meant (accelerational or bending) is usually clear from the context and obvious from the units: second moment of area has units of length to the fourth power whereas moment of inertia has units of mass times length squared.

Now, either you are a very crafty troll introducing subtle mistakes to bait me along or you are an arrogant arse who've been so busy throwing ad hominem arguments into the debate that you've forgot to get your facts right. Personally I think you merely managed to confuse "the moment of inertia around the z-axis" (z being vertical) with "the second moment of inertia" which has to do with the deflection of beams depending upon their cross-section. Or do "naval architects" use a different terminology from engineers? (Hey, at least you have wikipedia's word for this being confusing...)

Unlike you though, I will reserve the right to be mistaken on this particular subject. Your turn ol' chum. (And a humorous reply would of course be to tell me to get bent... ;) )

[avgas]

Surely the solution is simple ain't it.
Sink all ships in Antarctic. Regardless of intention. If you go to Antarctic.....your ship will be sunk.
Japan wont go there.
SS wont go there.
Whales win provided they like the cold. If anyone steps out of line - they book their ticket to the bottom of the Antarctic.

Oh and arguing about the physics of the whole thing is a bit silly don't you think. Its pretty obvious that A.G. didn't pull its fingers out of its arse, and the S.M. who was out to "get em" did just that. The physics is kind of irrelevant when you forget human nature.
Contrary to what Newton thinks - 90% of action is motivation. S.M. had a shit load of motivation, a shit load of momentum......it only had to be pointed in the right direction.

[avgas]

tell me to get bent... ;)

Rather obtuse of you aint it.

[Mikkel]

Rather obtuse of you aint it.

Pardon, I don't get the point.

[avgas]

Pardon, I don't get the point.

It must be an discrete value away

[Mikkel]

It must be an discrete value away

In that case I shall pray for continuity.

[Daffyd]

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit!

Just listened to the National news. I wish these bloody announcers would call them 'whalers' and not 'wailers'.

[Mikkel]

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit!

Just listened to the National news. I wish these bloody announcers would call them 'whalers' and not 'wailers'.

Well, you could give the a tip.

[Tank]

Eco Liars:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S20zp2iXye0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S20zp2iXye0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[avgas]

No offence tank. But pretty much every ship outside Kiwi waters has a weaponry of some type. I'm am supprised it wasn't a big bloody rifle....oh wait those sink and don't make good evidence.

[Mikkel]

No offence tank. But pretty much every ship outside Kiwi waters has a weaponry of some type. I'm am supprised it wasn't a big bloody rifle....oh wait those sink and don't make good evidence.

Besides, arrows without a bow are only good for giving directions. Maybe they should have gotten some bigger ones and the Shonan Maru 2 would have been able to navigate around them.

Best defense ever, the captain of Shonan Maru 2: "Sorry, didn't see ya." That's stealth technology for you - it comes with an inherent risk.

[Jantar]

.... I wish these bloody announcers would call them 'whalers' and not 'wailers'. In this case is there a difference?

[pzkpfw]

In this case is there a difference?

Yeah, the wailers are the ones that sunk.

[awayatc]

that is preserving the whales.........


what do you get when you saved up and got lets say a dozen or so...?

[Pussy]

Just as a matter of interest.... what is the "research" about. How the whales taste this year?

[cs363]

what do you get when you saved up and got lets say a dozen or so...?

A new fuel source?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_L5PLtAoOfhU/SUJE2ChOXmI/AAAAAAAAB3Q/lGMoRWPqASc/s400/whale+oil.jpg

[kwaka_crasher]

Nope I'll take your word for it. But that still does not give The Jap Master the right to take the law into his own hands.Yet somehow you think the Sea Cocksmokers should be allowed to do what they like, which is outside the law, in order to interfere with the lawful whale harvesting activities of the Japanese? Double standards, anyone?

If I was the Japanese Captain, I'd not only have run the fuckers down on purpose if I could get close enough but I'd have taken a piss over the side onto them just for the dragging of lines intended to foul the propellors of my vessel. Fuck the sea terrorists.

[Skyryder]

Yet somehow you think the Sea Cocksmokers should be allowed to do what they like, which is outside the law, in order to interfere with the lawful whale harvesting activities of the Japanese? Double standards, anyone?

Show me where I have stated the above in this thread.

Skyryder


Skyryder

[kwaka_crasher]

Show me where I have stated the above in this thread.

I would but the search function for finding a particular persons posts in a thread just doesn't work anymore and I'm not going through 9 pages because the site is fucked in the name of 'progress'.

So let's assume for a moment you didn't. Your ongoing silence on the illegal activities of the Sea Sherpard fuckwits is all that is needed.

[Skyryder]

I would but the search function for finding a particular persons posts in a thread just doesn't work anymore and I'm not going through 9 pages because the site is fucked in the name of 'progress'.

So let's assume for a moment you didn't. Your ongoing silence on the illegal activities of the Sea Sherpard fuckwits is all that is needed.


Well that's new slant on comprehension.....................I've said something without actually saying it.


Skyryder

[kwaka_crasher]

Well that's new slant on comprehension.....................I've said something without actually saying it.

State your position then and prove me wrong. The pailings from that fence you're sitting on must be hurting your arse... but perhaps you like that.