New details in Vancouver float plane collision
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- New audio between the pilot and control tower has emerged from the float plane collision in Coal Harbour over the weekend.
Subscribe to CTV News to watch more videos: / ctvnews
Connect with CTV News:
For live updates and latest headlines visit: www.ctvnews.ca/
For breaking news, fast, download the CTV News App: www.ctvnews.ca...
Must-watch stories and full programs at www.ctvnews.ca/...
CTV News on TikTok: www.tiktok.com...
CTV News on X (formerly Twitter): / ctvnews
CTV News on Reddit: / ctvnews
CTV News on LinkedIn: / ctv-news
---
CTV News is Canada's most-watched news organization both locally and nationally, and has a network of national, international, and local news operations.
The areas are marked on navigation charts that warn boater to stay clear or be aware of planes taking off or landing. The other thing is constant bearing decreasing range, if you don’t know what that means you shouldn’t be navigating a boat.
There are no runways on the water. Therefore, this is a caution or an advisory area and mariners are still entitled to navigate there.
or a plane, both need to see and avoid, it's probably about a 60/40 thing. the aircraft probably had no line of sight at take off angle and right of way if there was any.
@@AndrewBurbo-zw6pf no line of sight with "nose up attitude" on take off run I agree, and if plane is on take off I would grant that itself full right of way
news reporter did fact checking and said boats are allowed to cross the area with caution, controller warned the pilot of the boat. why didn't he take heed to the warning?
@@AndrewBurbo-zw6pfCOLREGS Rule 18 addresses seaplane. Basically, seaplanes operating on the water shall, in general, keep well clear of all vessels and avoid impeding their navigation.
Careless boater, it's not a small fast rocket but a loud and big enough airplane . Unlike the pilot's limited view, the boater had plenty view to avoid collision,
you'd hear it coming he haf time to get outta the way :-\
@@barfbaby Racist troll.
@@HarmonRAB-hp4nkif If that had been two boats in an uncontrolled area, that collided boat actually had right of way. But if that was a designated sea plane runway, as it does appear; boat driver is in big trouble.
@@Mightiflier This is actually not true. When on the water both are treated as watercraft and the more maneuverable "vessel" is responsible for avoiding the collision. So either way it's the boats fault for not keeping an eye out because that planed could have easily been another boat that he didn't see.
@@ImpendingJoker I appreciate your opinion. But here is the rule for two sea going vessels approaching at a perpendicular path: “Crossing. Here both vessels are approaching each other at perpendicular or oblique angles and expect to pass close to one another. The rules specify that the vessel which has the other on its starboard side must keep out of the way.” I didn’t make that rule up.
Never assume a boater knows what he is doing as most have no clue.
Sad but true.
Yea! Vary few have a clue.
That's the real problem
Starboard on the right, port is in the cupboard.
That only applies to North America. The land of the moron.
Alcohol is a factor in boating.
So I live on Salt Spring Island and there is a dedicated seaplane lane for takeoff and landings, however boaters not familiar with Ganges Harbour often cross it at the wrong place. It’s not uncommon to have a plane lane or takeoff next to you and so long as both are in the correct area there is no problem
What I recall, is that in Victoria harbor the takeoff lane is marked with buoys which have lights that go off when plane is about to takeoff.
We entered Ganges once to see a boat drop his anchor in the seaplane lane!
@@dennislandstrom6904 not really surprised tbh!
My issue with this is the following: it seems that the boat driver had sufficient time to go into reverse and get out of the way (fairly easily). Was he distracted? Couldn't he hear the loud plane coming? Something is just not adding up.
one million,350,000 on average die in car crashes world wide every year,millions more badly injured---> what's the big deal
@mtsky-tc6uw
Please remain calm.
He might’ve just had bad judgement in regards to time, speed and distance
@@michynature the plane might have, as well. those float planes are in the air real fast. windy day, other usual direction, ooops.
Go into reverse ? Last thing you do on the boat to get out of the way. Or should he sped up ?
Was the owner of the boat a member of the Royal Vancouver Yacht club?
Could have been a tourist who rented the boat to go for a joyride.
@@jimmyzhao2673 or a boater from Coal Harbour marina. Did not look like a rental we see around here.
ive rented one of those hourly boats there with my credit card, , cruised around that whole area watched those float planes takeoff. Pretty cool, however, even as a tourist I have respect for what I don't know and I'm cautious of it. They (the rental company) give specific directions and warnings and track you via sat....., but, There is no cure for the lack of common sense.
I'm willing to bet that the "runway" is marked on nautical charts, IMHO, the boater should not have been there. Not like the float plane facility was erected last month, boaters in there area know about the float plane operations. The results of the investigation will probably recommend the float plane facility be moved. Wonder when something like this will make the news out of Victoria??
Yeah, from the original camera angle it looks like the boat is within the restricted area for seaplanes only that is bounded by the buoy/beacon. If so, boater is in deep doodoo.
As a boater in. Vancouver it is marked on charts.
It's marked on the charts, and it's generally unavoidable to pass through the area if you're heading to the floating Chevron or to the coal harbour or western marinas, your options are cut through the seaplane area, or deal with the just as deadly tidal flow around Stanley park. This time of year there were likely multiple boats in the area and with takeoffs and landings every 30 seconds to a minute (between the seaplane terminal and helicopter pad) atc may not have the workload to point out every boat, but just the relevant ones and the pilot noticed another boat and noted it being clear
Small boat users almost never have or see a nautical chart
@@LewisTheFly888 Maybe that should be changed then, no?
The insurance be like: YOU HIT A WHAT!?!
Everyone is blaming the boater, I’m on the other side that pilot was warned about traffic, as well he must power down and give way if he is unable to complete take off. There was time to make the right decision. This is about maritime rules vs aviation rules. That exclusion area is a warning area not a restricted area. This is why we have airports
Yes the pilot was informed about the boater and should have exercised way more caution. They are both to blame but the pilot more since he was warned and is responsible for his passengers
I got my pleasure craft license a few years ago, and have piloted small watercraft. I have also flown on Harbour Air floatplanes. The boaters are 100% to blame for this incident, and I truly hope that Harbour Air sues them for everything they can, including the loss of their reputation due to this incident. I'm so glad everyone survived, but boy oh boy this could have been way worse and was 100% avoidable. I also wonder, were the boaters intoxicated? That is the only thing I can think of that could be an excuse... a crappy one, but an excuse nonetheless.
It is absolutely the fault of the harbor authority. If there is a restricted area, it must be clearly defined. It is open water. How in the world do you know you are in a restricted area?? They are just not smart enough to have the "runway" lined with buoys. A single buoy at the end means nothing.
They should have marked floaters to indicate where the plane lands and restrick cross traffic. The issue is cities are being more populated and more planes more boats eventually you have this issue. Boaters should know better and be watching.
Exactly how much power do these planes produce? A Cessna 172 produces 180 horsepower. Takeoff proceedures requiring too much runway, especially in a high traffic area should be investigated.
Typical incomplete reporting - Nothing about all the marinas to the West, or the fuel docks in the back ground. All in the direction the boat was heading. Nothing about boating regulations. His answer - no go zones and fines.
Language clipped in both instances. No specific acknowledgement as to the warning , nor a repeat.
I wouldn't be surprised if the pilot thought ATC was referring to some other boat... meanwhile the boaters simply froze.
I hear HARD DRUGS are legal in VANCOUVER 🧐🧐🧐
I hear you never graduated from high school.
All hard drugs: heroin, LSD, cocaine, fentanyl etc are legal in BC in small quantities and as long as you are not making or selling them.
yes, it's true.
It's usually alcohol which contributes to boneheaded decisions from boat captains. Usually one too many beers
I'm quite sure the boater will never make that mistake again.
Why has there been no info about the boaters and charges laid against them???
On the water boats have the right a way. In the sky boats give the right a way to the planes. Simple!
Tower Control saw the boat "crossing the runway", so to speak, but gave the "clear for takeoff" at pilots' discretion. That may have been a bad call by Tower Control... should have held the seaplane. The pilot cannot see the boat, look at the angle. Does tower control know pilots can't see downward during takeoff?
Listen again, the words “clear for takeoff” were not used. The controller here is not providing control services but only advisory services. The pilot was advised of the position and direction of movement of the boat and reminded takeoff is at pilot’s discretion. The pilot of the aircraft failed to yield to traffic crossing in front of him from his right which is maritime standard, as well as aviation standard.
@@dflyind Well described. Bear in mind that we are assuming that the boat did not change heading or speed between the advisory and the collision. Regardless of right-of-way rules, operators are expected to make all efforts to avoid collision, and if the boat changed to a collision course after the seaplane was "on the step", it's all on the boat operator: once a seaplane is hydroplaning, it can't turn or stop worth a darn.
@@dflyind The words "Takeoff Northwest at your discretion" cleared the pilot for takeoff. How would you misinterpret this? The tower should have held the airplane.
@thePersonGuise wrong. A take off your discretion puts the power in the pilots hand. It allows them to go, or wait (which he should have) then take off once clear.
It's fine that you have no idea what advisory vs control is or clearances vs supplemental info, but stop talking on a subject you are clearly completely uninformed about lol. Anyone who works aviation knows this. It's the absolute basic level. Pre school stuff.
"it's amazing they sink so quickly"..... jeeze, it's almost like they're, i dunno, _made of a couple thousand pounds of metal_.... SMH
Capt Larson …. Hmmm. Just wondering
looks like a cushy union job, 6 figures plus benefits & a pension for life. No wonder translink is losing money like crazy.
@@jimmyzhao2673let’s see you go for your ticket and spend 10 years writing exams and passing transport Canada regulations. Lots of responsibility being a master of a vessel. Perhaps you should apply for a bus job.
Barriers and fines for sure. There should be no boats permitted on a required flight path during the float plane’s operating times. Plastic surface flotation type boundaries marking an active water runway zone would suffice. I can’t believe it’s not already in practice.
New, surprising details show that a pet hamster 🐹riding under 24 helium balloons in a wicker basket had the right of way over the Harbor float plane. Where it originated from is still unknown, possibly from an SRO.
No excuse for the boater!
LOOKED LIKE THE SPEED BOAT HIT THE PLANE,MAYBE NEED TO FIND BETTER CONTROLLED AREAS FOR THE PLANES NOT IN A BUSY HARBOR!!!!!!
When it comes to egomania on the waterways there is an embarrassment of riches and the airways too. Pilot and sailboat skipper.
What do Canadian rule say about right of way
THAT Woman is a CAPTAIN? “Floundering”🙉🙈😦
"The vessel that is least maneuverable is the one that has the right of way," "When a floatplane is either landing or taking off, it cannot change its course. "So any other objects on the water have the responsibility to give way and to stay well clear."
COLRES 18(e) A seaplane on the water shall, in general, keep well clear of all vessels and avoid impeding their navigation. In circumstances, however, where risk of collision exists, she shall comply with the Rules of this part.
@@brianokeefe7781 Gotta love all these rules and regulations. "on water" as opposed to takeoff/landing. And the catchall phrase "in general". Seems a lot of regulations cross into each other. Need to come directly to the point. Did a quick look up on right of way and there is power boat vs. power boat, power boat vs. sail, sail vs. sail. Then there is the shipping lanes. I wonder how big the Canada boating regulations book is. Insurance companies will be fighting each other on this. They may deem both sides at fault. Perhaps dedicated "runways on water". Wonder how long this incident will be a news story. Cheers.
@@garfieldsmith332 Exactly. Key words "in general." There's a difference between a sea plane transiting the water from A to B and one that is taking off or landing. Same as WIG vessels.
2004]
§ 91.115Right-of-way rules: Water operations.
(a) General. Each person operating an aircraft on the water shall, insofar as possible, keep clear of all vessels and avoid impeding their navigation, and shall give way to any vessel or other aircraft that is given the right-of-way by any rule of this section.
(b) Crossing. When aircraft, or an aircraft and a vessel, are on crossing courses, the aircraft or vessel to the other's right has the right-of-way.
@@JH-wd6dp 2004]
§ 91.115Right-of-way rules: Water operations.
(a) General. Each person operating an aircraft on the water shall, insofar as possible, keep clear of all vessels and avoid impeding their navigation, and shall give way to any vessel or other aircraft that is given the right-of-way by any rule of this section.
(b) Crossing. When aircraft, or an aircraft and a vessel, are on crossing courses, the aircraft or vessel to the other's right has the right-of-way.
"One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.” - was possibly the boat captian's official statement. lol
I checked the charts and it’s clearly marked as a seaplane area. The powerboat had time and power to avoid but did not make any changes.
but cant blame just the boat.. the seaplane has enough time also to abort the take off and just perform a high speed taxi at that speed the plane is fairly agile to avoid that boat but both of them didnt do anything to avoid a collision
And is far more manueverable!
@@TheRick2130 Seapanes are not maneuverable when they are in take-off orientation they can not make turns because they have a possibility of flipping, also with the nose up attitude the pilot is effectively blind especially with a radial powered aircraft like this one.
@@TheRick2130 A Seaplane in general, and a radial-engined plane in particular, has no forward visibility once it starts its takeoff run. The nose high attitude blocks the view completely.
That boat was directly ahead of the plane - while the pilot may have been advised that there was a boat in the area, it was in the one spot that he couldn't see it.
@@TheRick2130 Boat must give way to Floatplane. Pilot was given clearance with discretion - prior to takeoff roll, pilot would have [almost certainly] seen the boat, and it was not on takeoff zone 'runway' although was in Alpha. When pilot began takeoff, boat may have turned into take off zone. At which point pilot would not be able to see it.
I used to live in RedLake Ontario. I'd take my boat on the lake to go to IGA for groceries . It was a big float plane area, no traffic control. Always had to keep your eyes open.
Exactly, because locals know better. I noticed this boat driver was not trying very hard to get out of the way, so my only conclusion is that they were not local.
They actually do have ATC there and have had it since 1973. It's actually a record I think for the tallest control tower in the world still.
Geez, I hope you got a lot of groceries to make it cost-effective.
@@Lithonion1 tallest what now?
King Abdulaziz International Airport (JED), Saudi Arabia: 136m (446 feet)
Appreciate the response from surrounding watercraft including the Seabus. Harks back to when Sully landed his plane in the Hudson. Surrounded by ferries and other craft within minutes.
The Seabus captain saw it coming but didn't radio because he wanted to 'grab some glory' from his otherwise mundane life
a boat is maneuverable on water; a seaplane is not.
That doesn't mean a plane can take off and ram into the side of a boat. The plane fucked up
@@ManiacalMasterSpeculate much?
The boat had the right of way by maritime rules. The pilot especially a commercial pilot is held to a higher standard for following the rules. He was warned but chose not to listen, likely figuring he has right of way because he’s less maneuverable. This will be very interesting to see who’s going to be held accountable
(i) A WIG craft shall, when taking off, landing and in flight near the surface, keep well clear of all other vessels and avoid impeding their navigation;
(ii) a WIG craft operating on the water surface shall comply with the Rules of this Part as a power-driven vessel.
same requirement, but a WIG and seaplane are 2 different things.
I don't know the logistics of the harbour, but it seem silly to have boats operating in the area where planes are landing. We don't allow the public to drive across runways at airports.
Pilot at fault, when on the water it’s a boat not a plane and the one to the right has the right of way. Which was the boat.
Except at Gibraltar!
@@toddw6716 riiight the boat that was clearly speeding and clearly paying next to no attention in the middle of a high risk area definately isnt at fault. news flash those planes have very very little forward visability on a takeoff run and that boat was supposed to be restricted to 5kt cause its a no wake zone. also as the port officials have said themselves in interviews. right of way is the same towards the planes as it is a large commercial ship. meaning reguardless of who should have right of way its the rec crafts duty/responsibility to gtfo the planes way cause they can handle alot better.
also just my personal opinion. if you see a plane coming your way and choose the "lets get in the path of the spinning death blade" option you should automatically lose your boating liscense on gounds of being the dumbest person somehow still alive
@@Rocker-1234 pilot was aware and still took off. What kind of pilot would do that
How would you suggest boats transit to and from Coal Harbour? Also for commercial and pleasure traffic to get to and from the only floating gas station? Crappy reporter he obviously is not a boater or has not done his homework. Restrict the area from boat traffic ..... not possible.
Not "Thank you, Mark", that's "check remarks" - it's an acknowledgment that he understood the remarks, specifically the call out for the boat.
Investigators will obviously question him - not only did he acknowledge - he then took off which confirms he heard it - had he read back ATC remarks - there would be no confusion on whether he heard or paid attention to the boat part of the remark - he certainly wasn't aware of where the boat was.
@@bizjets9128 I hope Captain Hazelwood is ok in the boat!
@@bizjets9128 investigators can figure out who was at fault, but the boat should not have been crossing the takeoff path of a seaplane in nose up attitude. I'm sure the pilot didn't see the boat until after the collision.
@@bizjets9128This is NOT an ATC person. It is a harbour information service. The aircraft, whilst on the water is no more than, albeit somewhat quick, a power driven vessel. The fact it has wings is of no consequence.
@@DB-thats-meFormer Papua New Guinea commercial pilot here - that's what I thought. It didn't sound like ATC and I've operated out of fields with many more aircraft than that without a tower but just air service advisory.
You can see by the boats wake he was traveling straight ahead and turned right directly in front of the plane! Maybe he was blinded by the sun but he was definately at fault!
True - he saw the plane late. Turned intuitively to the right, which took him directly into plane path. The correct avoidance action was to turn towards the plane direction and pass just behind it. That takes brains and awareness. Two things that the boat skipper was bereft of
The boaters are going to get sued for a plane now
Boat captian should be fined, they could of took the shore around a busy sea plane takeoff and landing sight.
Boats are NOT supposed to be crossing that area where seaplanes are taking off. It’s clearly laid out in maritime charts which all boats are required to adhere to in this port area, no exceptions. Boater and/or his insurance company is going to fork out a lot of money in damages including hospital bills and more. How a boater can be so ignorant is beyond me … maybe he/she was from Florida and got confused ;)
You are wrong boats can transit thru the area. Hope you are not a boater.
"Captain Haulover"!
Boats are not required to have radios but in this area you should.
None radio boats usually huddle with boats that contact the tower for clearance to proceed under the lions gate bridge in this area.
The way I understand it, an airplane in the water follows same laws as boats; therefore, the boat being to the right actually had right-of-way.
@@dflyind Try taking that point between a BC Ferry and a pleasure boat. The LEAST maneuverable vessel has the right of way. And believe me, a float plane taking off has far less maneuverability, unless you like planes flipping over. Only with vessels of similar maneuverability does the vessel; to the right have "right-of-way".
The boat is in the wrong, and if it doesn’t know the rules of boating, then they should take a course, but there should be fines concerning this accident to the boaters.
Aren't you supposed to take a course and obtain a licence for boating now?
How dumb does a boat skipper have to be.
Not as dumb as the pilot who drove right into him.
As dumb as the pilot, he was in the wrong.
@@drumswest5035 Unfortunately, the boat driver should be at fault. My understanding of Canadian water right of way rules necessitates the craft that is most maneuverable to yield to the other vessels. Seaplanes are not very maneuverable on water, thus the boat should have given way. In addition, the boat should have been aware of the area they were entering, and should have been prepared for aircraft operating in the area.
Pilot was dumber.
@@landonturley1582 and it was in a no boating area the boat wasnt supposed to be there and the pilot was warned also
Keep boats off the water airport operations area. Vary simple. It would be like allowing general public cars on airport runways.
You can turn a boat, faster then you can turn a plane, especially one that's attempting to take off
I bet you you can pull back throttles on both just as fast.
Pilot at fault
Boat has more drag and can turn much sharper.
@@toddw6716 Unfortunately, the boat driver should be at fault. My understanding of Canadian water right of way rules necessitates the craft that is most maneuverable to yield to the other vessels. Seaplanes are not very maneuverable on water, thus the boat should have given way. In addition, the boat should have been aware of the area they were entering, and should have been prepared for aircraft operating in the area.
@@wally7856This is true. However, a boat has much more drag in water compared to an aircraft. As such, the plane would have continued on for much longer than the boat.
Were those driving the boat local? It seems like they weren't trying to move out of the way of the plane. Hope everyone is okay.
Some just ignore the rules.
You can ignore the rules, but you can't ignore a huge plane coming at you on an intercept course.
Mayday TV producers: *WRITE THAT DOWN WRITE THAT DOWN!*
Probably a credit card captain in the boat
I just did the TC boat course/test through an online third party for like $28, it's not hard at all and I knew nothing about boating. I got one question wrong in the whole thing
FYI ALL pilots have credit cards and friends and they even have their own cars!
The pilot was informed about the boat, but did he see the RIGHT one if there are others in the general area? Boats have far more maneuverability than sea planes therefore the boater should have veered away. Of course that's only IF he was paying attention and saw the plane. Guess the best way to ensure safer operations in area Alpha is to put ropes with buoy's around it. Maybe have one or two openings on each side for boats to pass through when no aircraft are taking off or landing. Each opening for boats can have signs posted that boaters must ensure they remain alert for aircraft. The buoy's will then be a physical "snap out of your boating daydream" attention getter for them.
Victoria's inner harbour has police boats that chase pleasure boaters away from where seaplanes land. Many boaters don't realize the danger they're in when crossing the inner harbour.
I think a crucial detail is that when float planes are taking off they can't actually see in front of them because they're pointed up at like a 30 degree angle right before they're about to take off
What was the speed of the boat and was the speed and directions of the boat changing a lot?
The float plane has no brakes and from the moment the engine starts the plane moves. Then a pilot needs to check all the systems very fast while taxing and starts accelerating, at this time the plane looks up and the pilot doesn’t not see a lot from below, after gaining the necessary speed for a takeoff, the plane jumps out and only then the pilot can see what is in front of the plane.
The pilot was cleared for a takeoff.
The workload on the pilot is huge during a takeoff and visibility is very limited so if you see a float plane in a restricted area during takeoff or landing -GIVE IT A WAY.
I am not trying to say who is guilty just trying to see the situation from pilot perspective
There is the tower which you should contact 118.4 even if you want to fly through their control zone and they ALWAYS clear a plane for a takoff.Vancouver Harbor Tower control zone is from SFC to 2500 feet and you need a permission to get there if you fly a plane.The tower can not control their control zone because the boats has no transponder and not all of them have the radio.
Now please do your own conclusions.
Totally agree. (Former float plane driver.)
From the video of the crash, it looks like the boat turned to starboard and became crossing traffic.
Although I agree the boat captain seems likely inept, at the end of the day, the float plane take-off should have been delayed if there was any risk of collision, and rather, perhaps the boat is reported and the police issue a ticket.
Stuff can happen, the boat could be out of control, the captain could be having a heart attack.. who the heck knows, we can't just assume that the path is always going to be clear and plow through.
This is a joke: (i) A WIG craft shall, when taking off, landing and in flight near the surface, keep well clear of all other vessels and avoid impeding their navigation;
(ii) a WIG craft operating on the water surface shall comply with the Rules of this Part as a power-driven vessel.
This is a plane not a WIG craft (same rules apply though). A WIG craft is a ground effect vehicle. Like a plane but can only go 1/3 of his wingspan high - 10 feet or so.
Can't trust pleasure boat operators. Think of them as regular Vancouver drivers, but in the water.
Should they close off the area? I don't know. Do they allow go karts to screw around on runways in between take offs?
Pilots have the right of way in these circumstances. Boats are much more maneuverable on water that float planes..
Strange report; The reporter stated almost immediately that no one on the plane was injured, yet waited until the report was essentially over before any mention of the health of the boat passengers.
Did that hurt your feelings. 😢
@@alelectric2767 I thought it was an odd bit of reporting too, nothing to do with feelings. Especially considering the way the plane impacted the boat. You didn't find it odd?
@@alelectric2767 the feck do feelings have to do about it
I noticed that right away. Especially since I feel it was the planes fault. He knew about the boat but the boat didn't know about the plane.
The boat owers insurance company is cringing. It's amazing though, even in the wide open ocean boaters still manage to get in each others way. The boat captain obviously was not paying any attention.
The fact that the boat made no discernible attempt to alter course might indicate a lack of proper lookout and situational awareness.
Never saw it coming! 😳
As if pilot was fully aware, especially having been warned by the tower
SNAFU
You've never heard a seaplane takeoff before because the noise can wake the dead if you think the boat wasn't aware of an oncoming collision.
@@hotprop92 The rules say that the boat should not alter its speed or course. If it does, the pilot may not be able to react in time to accommodate the change. The boat had the right of way. The pilot wasn't looking out the window (or quite possibly didn't know his airplane that well by thinking he'd be able to lift off and go over top of it). Either way, the airline is going to have to fork out some lawsuit money.
In the audio clip (which may have been trimmed) it seems the pilot did not read back the alert about the boat in the area - to acknowledge he heard the warning and wasn't momentarily distracted. I'm not blaming the controller - but I'm betting he will be reminded that in the future he should ask for readback of such traffic alerts.
And the alert itself did not sound . . . alerting? It was not a very clear warning.
Pilots rarely read back these sorts of things. It would take up too much time on frequency. No controller would every chase a pilot for a read back on something like this.
@@bronze5420 All I can say is they do in the Chicago / SE WI area that I mainly operate in. If you don't aknowledge a detail the controller reads to you as part of a movement operation - most will query you again. A few seconds of radio time can save lives.
You read back a clearance.
I'd like to take a moment to tell a story about myself and offer a completely uninformed yet hardline opinion on the story. Internet commenting 101.
I've been around this downtown area for decades. Most of the seaplanes are in the air real fast. Wondering if the pilot thought he'd be clear and above the boat by then: ALMOST. OOps.
There were two boats. It's possible the pilot only spotted the one further to the right and acted accordingly.
I only see one boat in field. The other boat I see is close to docks well away and no where near the take off / landing zone?
@@LewisTheFly888 Further to my other reply, the controller cautions the pilot about the "westbound" boat. The eastbound boat was not a factor. It is possible that the pilot only saw the eastbound one and surmised there was no conflict with it.
@@canofanger Thanks. I did not see that one.
@@LewisTheFly888 I could be totally wrong - would be interesting to see some other opinions on this.
The boat skipper is at fault the plane was to his right and he did not give way to the plane as per the laws in the harbour.
It's a designated plane zone. The boater should be sent to jail. That was %^%$ing dangerous.
Ostoba lények! Forgalmas vizírepülőtérnek nevezik és a kifutópálya nincs bójákkal jelezve!
100% Harbour Air pilot fault. You can never just assume your take off area is clear and fly blind. He should have seen that pleasure boat in the general area and waited. He likely assumed the boat would yield.
With reason, as the rule is who is coming from the right has priority unless the plane is in take off or landing phase - at the speed the plane was, it pushed it way before being able to see the boat, not to mention that in the take off phase the plane dashboard zaps everything that isn't high enough to be seen above (hence the priority reversal).
Both pilots, from the plane and the boat need to be brain scanned. Which ever one they conclude was at fault they both need to be tested for lack of common sense.
I think one solitary buoy marking the seaplane operating area is insufficient, multiple buoys and maybe a restricted area need to be employed. Hope everyone is safe, and future operations are safer.
Maritime laws and regulations put the responsibility on the boat owner to know what hazards are in a area via sea charts or gps and or off limit areas
That's sad for everyone! Wow
Uummm
They don't let me drive my truck across the runway.
But I am sure some cyclist thinks he can ride his bicycle where your truck can not go😀
qualicumwilson5168
Cyclists are special!
IF boats are there and using anything more then a 12ft aluminum fishing vessel for your back pond, highly encourage use of radios AND situational awareness. I have flown small aircraft (not that exact type) and situational awareness, even with a control tower, is of upmost importance. As unfortunate at this was, I'm on the plane/pilots side, on take off the nose to tilted high enough he could not fully see, and the boat operator seemed oblivious.
The boat appeared to be inside the float plane zone !!!
So ? This by itself is not disallowed
I’m not sure how the heck they’d put up legal or physical barriers when there’s a hell of a lot of dock space and a floating fuel barge that can only be accessed by transiting the area
Relocating the float plane ops would make more sense though that has its own challenges
It would make more sense to have a dedicated boat channel marked with buoys, so boaters can have access to Coal Harbour and the fuel barge without cutting straight across what's really an active seaplane runway.
@@chiy828 doubt there was a chart aboard that boat.
With thousands of take offs and landings in that area how many incidents like this have happened? I know that on Lake Union in Seattle there is a similar blending of float planes and boats that averages 5 incidents a year.
one million,350,000 on average die in car crashes world wide every year,millions more badly injured---> what's the big deal
SIMPLE COMMUNICATION its not that Hard. That is the WORLD. We have to deal with everyday. SCARY
Been going through there for 20 years, no one ever told me boats can’t go there, thats a load of 💩 you just have to be aware of you’re surroundings, boat guy was completely at fault, those planes on takeoff are so noisy there’s no way he didn’t know it was coming. But guys in those types of boats are colossal pricks anyways, it will never change.
Simple question: why didn’t the tower (which has excellent and full visibility) advise pilot to HOLD until the boat had passed?
Barriers are you kidding? How about upping the penalties for negligent boaters? Maybe they will pay attention next time. What would work would be a system to sound a fog horn before the airplane "rolls"
lol
How it happened; Poor Seamanship.
How can it be prevented; Better Seamanship. 8/
There is no requirement or certification needed to operate a boat in that area :-(
@@tjm3900 And..? There is no requirement for having a kid either but...Ignorance is breeding. What is your point?
I dunno, maybe they should change the right of way laws to give seaplanes the right of way, you know since they can't see the boat just wandering about while on a take off run, and can't exactly do much about it other than abort and hope the plane stops before hitting the boat without flipping over and drowning everyone aboard because some dipshit can't see a big noisy ass plane coming their way or is unwilling to do anything about it because "they have the right of way"...
It could've been a lot worse and glad it wasn't. But one captain owes the other a plane.
I'm leaning towards this being the pilots fault. He was warned about the boat. He should be looking ahead for obstacles. It appears the boat had no idea the plane was coming because it was to their side and their most likely watching where they're going (in front of them).
The boat has permission to be there also.
Obviously more needs to be done to deconflict traffic. Perhaps the boats should contact tower for permission to cross the area.
Do you know who has the right away on the water the sailboat get out of my way airplane 😂
All the driver of the boats fault.
If you can't see a plane you shouldn't be driving a boat.
THE BOAT HAD THE RIGHT OF WAY PLANES FAULT RULES OF THE ROAD
@@FrankSmith-kg3dhnope. Float plane in process of landing or taking off has the right of way.
Let alone hear the airplane's engines. Crazy. You can hear a harbour air float planes take off from a mile away.
Pilot was warned about the boat and took off anyway. Pilot error.
@@svenjohnson2389you want to point that out in the Rules?
The tower gave the pilot the information regarding the presence of the boat and discretion to continue his takeoff. This should likely have been an aborted takeoff. However, we cannot judge based on the video since we do not know when the pilot was told about the boat, the speed at which the plane was traveling, and whether he could even see the boat, or not. Most float planes are in a nose-up attitude when accelerating to takeoff speed, and visibility over the nose is virtually non-existent. I believe this area should be off-limits to boat traffic when flight operations are taking place, or, at least, have a very well-defined area in which they can operate.
The design of the harbor and the "policies" in place seem to be logically inconsistent with aviation safety principles. Even a superficial perusal of boating accidents strongly suggests that too many boaters are careless or reckless. The training and vetting of pilots is of far higher standards. Telling boaters they can cross takeoff and landing routes, but that they must be cautious, is courting disaster.
It was a simple accident as usual and very obvious neither pilot or boater to any action to avoid one another. The pilot was very clearly warned of the danger but given permission at his or her discretion! Perhaps the port authority should have instructed pilot to not proceed until boater or any other noticed danger is clear for take off. Please just use common sense and stop this involvement in suing everything and everyone.Try sitting around a table with a coffee without lawyers and resolve this issue like true men n women should,Fek the money side of things and for once truly help each other ❤
I'd love to hear the opinion from an expert on maritime law about who is at fault here. This might be a more complex legal issue than it appears on the surface. I'm guessing the boat is at fault, but the pilot in command of that airplane has legal responsibilities too. Bad situation any way you go. I hate seeing that aircraft destroyed. Best wishes to all involved.
pilots fault. He ignored the warning about the boat
The pilot should have took a visual of the boat and waited until it passed clear of his assumed trajectory path.
Thats being safe , but commercial pilots are put under pressure due to time schedules. There was another boat going east bound that the piloit might of thought that was the boat that the tower was identifying and he just got confused during taking off ??? Its the pilot's responsibility to make sure the path they are going to use is clear of any obstructions ie. boats stationary or moving are not on the trajectory path for take off. 😳
boat wasnt supposed to be there and the pilot was warned
No reason either captain couldn't see the other, both at fault IMHO.
All the Technology at our Finger Tips . Self Driving Cars , A I , Self Check Out , Paperless Billing , Amazon , Grub Hub ! A Boat and A Sea Plain on a Big Lake With Two Humans in Control Collide ??????
Technology doesn't replace vigilance…
The boat must avoid it is the drivers fault of the boat over this incident do not blame the pilot just the other day I was out with my grandfather on his boat to go fuel up right at coal Harbour floating Gas station and we avoided the planes taking off
Perhaps B.C. could put a patrol boat out there. Maybe Canadians could get something for their massive taxes.
A float plane base that nice, used that much, and which has a control tower should have LOUD speakers posted around the perimeter of the lagoon. "Boaters: airplane taking off/landing. See and avoid. Aircraft have right-of-way."
The "Swiss Cheese Model' was at work here in this incident: all the individual mistakes and systemic problems (i.e. the holes in the Swiss Cheese) line up to make for an inevitable tragedy. Fault can be assigned pretty much everywhere, including the laws and rules governing this waterway. Likely big changes are coming and they will be enforced.