Container Ship Sinks Yacht

[Robin]

BBC South is reporting 5 people rescued mid Channel from liferaft by Condor Express fast ferry from Poole. Apparently their yacht was hit and sunk by a container ship 'which the CG are trying to trace' whilst on passage from Cherbourg to Hamble. The collision apparently happened in fog.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

Re: Horrific

"They communicated with the captain, who admitted that he had had a radar hit 2 cables off his starboard quarter at the time of the incident. The ship is on passage to Singapore and is continuing her voyage"

They didn't even stop to check. That guy should be prosecuted

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Cutter]

Do we know the Ships name and company - would a well concerted outcry be in order?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Foolhardy .. what do you think?

Ignoring the rights and wrongs of the coduct of the container ship, I personally would not be happy crossing the shipping lanes in the channel with only 200yds visibility unless I had operational radar. Is it known if the yacht had radar?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

Don't know, the story varies from BBC to YBW slightly but the size of the yacht would suggest probably did have radar. If the conditions were as calm as I think they were though the yacht should have been visible to the containership radar - if anyone was looking at it and it was set right. YBW's comment about possibility it was sunk by the bow wave is surely ridiculous! In my view this ship should NOT have been allowed to continue it's voyage. At least Condor picked up the liferaft on radar, reassuring since I doubt she was going any slower than the usual 42kts despite the fog.

In the 'old' days, pre-radar, pre-GPS, even pre-Decca I have been in thick fog in the channel returning Cherbourg to Poole. At least in those days you heard fog horns from ships, remember them? Nowadays I think if they sound a fog horn it is an admission of visibility poor enough to have to slow down, which they will not want to do. I haven't heard a ships fog horn for years, despite being caught in fog in the lanes (with radar).

Really need to wait and hear all the facts on this one, even more reason why that ship should have been diverted to port for an investigation.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[milltech]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

It has for many years been my view that radar is the primary navigation aid after which everything else follows. Fog really is the most frightening situation in a shipping lane, (or anywhere else), and I don't think you can anticipate it.

<hr width=100% size=1>John
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.allgadgets.co.uk>http://www.allgadgets.co.uk</A>

 

[bedouin]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

"They saw the ship on their radar, as visibility was very poor, and moved to avoid it, but they think it might have changed course.

"It loomed out of the fog, they took avoiding action, but it took 10 feet off their bow and they sank."

So according to the BBC they had, and were using radar, and they were most definitely hit!

Makes you wonder what avoiding action they took - surely correct action would be to turn to the same course as the container ship


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Ooooh ... so they had it!

So they had radar and were using it, had spotted that they were on a collision course and it looks as if the container ship was aware of their presence. I'd also be interested in what their avoiding action was ... I'm going to brush up on my radar collision avoidance, do'nt want to be another statistic ..

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

I really don't agree that radar is a 'primary navigation aid' for a yacht. Possibly on yachts over 40ft, but on smaller yachts the cost, tophamper, power consumption and lack of instrument space are major considerations.

I think that setting off into the shipping lanes in fog without radar might be foolhardy, but being caught out is just bad luck and the answer is to get out of the shipping lanes ASAP.

A good radar reflector or possibly one of these active signal enhancers is all that should be required - even to cross the channel. It is ideas like this - ie that radar is an essential - that threaten to make our sport unaffordable for the thousands of yachtsmen who have for many years sailed safely in small yachts with minimum instrumentation.

Propogation of these sentiments will undoubtably lead to a call for more legislation and the compulsory fitting of unsuitable, unnecessary and unaffordable equipment to small yachts.

Improving ship radar, enforcing constant watchkeeping and perhaps even training ship radar operators as to the elusive nature of yacht echoes - with swingeing penalties for careless collisions - would be more appropriate in my view.

- Nick


<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[Evadne]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

I don' t know, the correct action is to turn to starboard ... I still shudder to recall the near miss I had when I thought turning to port was the most sensible course change to avoid a collision. (Clear vis, no excuses except I had right of way.) The give-way vessel should always assume you are turning to starboard.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Tiger Rag]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

Regarding fog horns, it is still the case, according to the MCA that all commercial vessels (not sure about non-commercial) must sound their horns and you are correct in saying that if a ship hears another ships fog horn they must slow down. This is the reason most ships stay well away from each other in fog, not to be safe but to aviod having to slow down. Then again they are supposed to keep a dillegent lookout and radar watch but don't.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Boathook]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2946260.stm

Neve to sure on how to create a link but this is on the BBC web site.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[WS175]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

if in retricted visability there is no stand on or give way vessel you are all required to navigate with caution!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

Foggy comment

Coast Guard reported in today's Telegraph:
"They said they were showing fog signals so the container ship should have seen them...." Eh?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Conclusion jumping

Interesting that people are tending to assume that the ship was at fault! In my experience most ships alter course to avoid collision when a collision course is seen. In common with another poster my most scary moment was coming up the companion way to find the helm altering to port to go behind a ship ... as I looked I saw the ships aspect changing as it altered to starboard ... shi....it!

Fog or no fog, I imagine that the Container ship's lookout procedures are the same. Ie radar and automatic tracking of possible targets.
Foghorns do'nt really help, Its impossible to judge distance or even bearing from them.
I wonder where the yacht's radar display was, was it at the helm? Was it being constantly monitored. What action was taken to avoid collision?

Without radar it really is Russian Roulette and I guess the best thing to do is maintain a contant course and speed, then just pray!




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

Don't forget that in fog there is no give way vessel!

However it is true - the correct action is not to turn to port. This always strikes me as a bit odd in near-crossing situations

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: Foolhardy .. what do you think?

Presumably you mean there is no Stand On Vessel?

also you say
"the correct action is not to turn to port. This always strikes me as a bit odd in near-crossing situations "

I'd be interested in why you think its a bit odd?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[snooks]

Same course? I think not.

"Makes you wonder what avoiding action they took - surely correct action would be to turn to the same course as the container ship"

Unless the yacht is capable of OVER 25 knots, trying to out run the thing is NOT an option...they have a max speed 25 knots, manouvering speed for Southampton water is around 17 knots

In perfect conditions I've seen yachtsmen unaware of the 66,000 ton containership catching them up with a closing speed of 12+ knots, and only realised after 5 blasts of the horn.

Container ships are fast, quite and restricted in their ability to manouver compared to a yacht which can spin on a six pence.

If the container ship was aware of the incident it should have stopped I think we all agree. But there is a possibility that the ship wouldn't have known, being that the bridge could have been over 200 yards from the bow, let alone their restrictions in visibility caused by the load. In fog I've lost sight of the bow of our boat that was less than 20 foot away, if it wasn't for radar, we could have hit a wall (Dover breakwater!!

With 200 metres vis and a container ship traveling at 25 knots, you'd have just 15 seconds from seeing the ship to it hitting you. It seems both parties had radar, so why did this happen?

I'll leave you with the thoughs of my driving instructor:
"When in doubt, bottle out"




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

Re: Conclusion jumping

Of course the ship is at fault - for a start the way IRPCS is written by the time collision occurs both parties are at fault (almost always). But the fact that the ship didn't see them, and didn't stop means at least that she was not keeping a proper lookout, or going at a safe speed.

It seems likely that the yacht was also at fault - but it is impossible to say more than that at this stage

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mirelle]

No it would not

Here is the tail end of the BBC report:

"They saw the ship on their radar, as visibility was very poor, and moved to avoid it, but they think it might have changed course.

"It loomed out of the fog, they took avoiding action, but it took 10 feet off their bow and they sank."

The Maritime Accident Investigation Board has launched an inquiry into how the accident happened and why the ship, believed to be Liberian registered, failed to stop.

The yacht's skipper, retired solicitor Michael Dresden, said he and his crew were lucky to be alive.

He said they only spotted the freighter 15 seconds before being hit because of the thick fog."

This yacht had radar, yet they only saw the ship 15 seconds before impact?

If this report is correct, there is not really much doubt about liability, is there?




<hr width=100% size=1>