Turquoise Yachts 77 meter "GO" doesn't STOP!

Captain was probably trying to solve the problem and as Scott W said inertia won that day. With momentum, killing the engines would not stop that big boat quickly.
Hey, we've discussed electronic controls before, this is a classic example of what can happen, especially on a large yacht which can always cause more damage. Your worst nightmare is if the electronics can take control of the boat! Feel sorry for the Captain, maybe we will hear the whole story.

Unfortunately with today's modern engines, all built to meet EPA regs, electronic engine/transmission controls are all built in, with no easy, if at all override.
In the mid 80's I had a 2000 HP- V12 MTU electronic engine go wild one night. I had to crawl over to top and work on an overevving engine to get it under control, scared to bejesus out of me. Year or two later doing a new build designed for ocean crossings with Cat 3512's I built in manual controls for throttles, shifts and steering so I could get home one way or the other. Today's electronic engines manual throttle usually not possible.

Not any sort of emergency cutoff?

Kind of a "Catch 22" - If you shut it off, will it re-start?
You're out in snotty weather with no fwd speed for steering is not a fun place to be either.
In that instance I soon realized a shipyard worker had improperly reinstalled a battery charger cover, it overheated and tripped out, causing ECU batteries to go flat. With low voltage to ECU's we lost engine control and would probably not restarted. With the engines running, once I pulled the cover on the charger to vent it and was able to re-set it, enough voltage came back that we got control back, within few hours all batteries back up to charge.

No first hand experience on vessels as big as this Turkish thing, but up to 100' or so, I can't remember to have ever seen any boat built from a half decent builder where remote stations don't have BOTH the shut down and the restart buttons.
And I mean ALL remote stations, including the most basic ones only meant for maneuvering, either on the external sides of the p/house or on the cockpit.
If there's any logical reasons for not doing the same in larger vessels, I fail to see what it is.

Good diagnostics. Stressful situation too!

I say well done Captain Johnson. I wonder how the boat actually was overridden or was it simply momentum that the dock structures were able to overcome and propulsion was finally controlled.

Agree, well done Captain Johnson. Electronic engine and gear controls has always been a concern.

I was spinning a motor yacht around and the engines stayed one forward and one reverse even though the hynautic controls were in neutral. I T boned a nice sailboat that just raced to Bermuda and back without a scratch.

My guess is none although could be one in future years, but most likely insurance and owner will step up and end of the story. We'll only hear more if they fail to respond appropriately.

An aerial view captured the event at double-time speed, recording twice the number of impacts...

Flag state will publish a report at some point, there is always 3 sides to the story, and so far we have only heard one.

Can’t imagine it could be anything other than system failure on that yacht.

I don't know how it works in the US, but I did read several British MAIB (Marine Accident Investigation Branch) reports.
And the short answer is yes, the investigators do look for both faults AND mistakes.
And yes, most often than not, there's a number of both of them, albeit obviously with different degrees of relevance.
That's the investigators job, and with good reasons: don't you think it would be much less useful if they would just stop at the primary event behind any accidents, without investigating each and every other occurrences related to it - also with the crucial aim of learning and introduce changes if and when appropriate?
I mean, who would need NTSB if it were just a matter of finding out that there were some gooses flying around, that day...?

That's what I figured and yes reviews are critical aid in preventing future incidents/accidents or exposing poor procedures and practices. The NTSB just reviews and makes recommendations. It is the FAA that adopts suggestions or enforces violations by the aircrew/airlines. In the LGA incident there were about a dozen "expert" pilots who attempted either the return to LGA or the water landing in the simulator but crashed EVERY-TIME and yet the FAA still grilled the crew on the decision not to return or go to EWR. Sounds like it is a similar situation on the water. No pun intended. Thanks for the info!
Again not trying to debate aviation on this forum or thread creep its just there are a lot of similarities between the two.