penberth3
Well-known member
The Herald of Free Enterprise was one of these, wasn't it? Directors narrowly escaped prosecution. Corporate Manslaughter legislation was then changed, which hopefully concentrated minds a bit more.
Could similar Lifeboat incidents happen again
- Thread starter Capt Popeye
- Start date
The Herald of Free Enterprise was one of these, wasn't it? Directors narrowly escaped prosecution. Corporate Manslaughter legislation was then changed, which hopefully concentrated minds a bit more.
Kukri
Well-known member
I think that was a different set of circumstances.
Biggles Wader
Well-known member
The corporate manslaughter issue was mainly about failure to address a known issue-----ships could and did get underway with the bow doors open and there was no alarm system to inform the bridge of the doors status. Senior management were well aware and chose to ignore it because sailing thus saved a few minutes turnaround time. When a fairly junior crewman failed to turn to and shut the doors the ship sank. He went to prison but no one else did. He never got over what he had done of course, turned to drink and died a few years ago.
One thing that does surprise me----why dont the insurers insist on better due diligence? They have to pay when it all goes wrong.
Edit-----My memory may be wrong about the assistant bosun going to prison for it-----maybe no one did.
Last edited:
michael_w
Well-known member
Free surface effect must be a very serious problem on the open decks of a Ro-ro ship. Would not a grill and hopper to a bilge near the doors limit this difficulty in the event of difficulty with the doors/visor?
I've never seen such a feature on any ferry I've been in.
I've never seen such a feature on any ferry I've been in.
penberth3
Well-known member
I think your memory is wrong.
penberth3
Well-known member
Different circumstances, but its the same point you made about shoreside shiny-arses thinking they know better.
Kukri
Well-known member
Big subject, and ferries are not my thing, but basically on a post- HoFE ro-ro ferry:
- yes there are scupper arrangements for quick draining of surface water.
- there are longitudinal bulkheads to limit free surface effect
- stability is increased.
Capt Popeye
Well-known member
Re The Herald of Free Enterprise floundering ; I was working in East Kent at the time , many around me knew the principles involved in Manning the Ship , or were regularly Serving in the Season Ferry trade ; I understood at the time that the Ferry sank or lost balance because the Bow Loading Doors were left open l later
year I came accross another account of why the HoFE sank , which was quite new to me ; and throws a different light on the Prosecution and in particulat why it failed ;
The account that I found stated that the HoFE was directed to a Port in Europe that was not its normal port of service ; this New Port required the HoFE to load the balast tanks in order for the loading bay to line up level with the port structure ; this was done , but it meant that the HoFE was very low in the water ; so when loaded the HoFE was lower that its Marks , so should have had the extra balast tanks emptied until the correct load line was achieved ; this was not done ; so the HoFE sailed with its Bow Doors open , which because the HoFE was too low in the water the inflow of water from the Bow opening began to flood the lower cargo deck quickly and as a result the Ship became unstable ; but the Ship had began leaving the Port with this flooding taking place .
I cannot confirm this explanation of the events but , I overheard some talk , inc an Officer talking after the Court Prosecution failure and I understood that the Prosecution failed on Legal issues , poss the legality of trying persons for something that was as yet or had not as yet happened , so an unproven incident ; My thought were that if the case against the Ships Officers was taken on sailng from Port with the Balast tanks not overloaded a different outcome might have been possible ; but I am not in the possition of knowing the legal possition or understanding it
year I came accross another account of why the HoFE sank , which was quite new to me ; and throws a different light on the Prosecution and in particulat why it failed ;
The account that I found stated that the HoFE was directed to a Port in Europe that was not its normal port of service ; this New Port required the HoFE to load the balast tanks in order for the loading bay to line up level with the port structure ; this was done , but it meant that the HoFE was very low in the water ; so when loaded the HoFE was lower that its Marks , so should have had the extra balast tanks emptied until the correct load line was achieved ; this was not done ; so the HoFE sailed with its Bow Doors open , which because the HoFE was too low in the water the inflow of water from the Bow opening began to flood the lower cargo deck quickly and as a result the Ship became unstable ; but the Ship had began leaving the Port with this flooding taking place .
I cannot confirm this explanation of the events but , I overheard some talk , inc an Officer talking after the Court Prosecution failure and I understood that the Prosecution failed on Legal issues , poss the legality of trying persons for something that was as yet or had not as yet happened , so an unproven incident ; My thought were that if the case against the Ships Officers was taken on sailng from Port with the Balast tanks not overloaded a different outcome might have been possible ; but I am not in the possition of knowing the legal possition or understanding it
Juan Twothree
Well-known member
To drift the thread slightly.......
The issue of the ballast tanks at Zeebrugge was much as you described, and was addressed in the very comprehensive MAIB report:
https://assets.digital.cabinet-offi...estigation_HeraldofFreeEnterprise-MSA1894.pdf
The report itself makes pretty grim reading. But what's absolutely jaw-dropping is the attitude of senior management at Townsend Thoresen when ships' masters reported safety concerns, which included overloading, mis-reporting of passenger numbers, and inadvertently sailing with the bow doors open on more than one previous occasion.
Kukri
Well-known member
The Law of Unintended Consequences attached itself to Barry Sheen’s Report, as most of the superintendents in the business told the people on the ships they were responsible for, “Don’t put it in writing!”
Company cultures in shipowning vary very widely and can often change over time as individuals come and go, but Townsend Thoresen in the 1980s seems to have been more than usually toxic.
Company cultures in shipowning vary very widely and can often change over time as individuals come and go, but Townsend Thoresen in the 1980s seems to have been more than usually toxic.
Last edited:
Kukri
Well-known member
I’m not setting out to be picky but that is not an MAIB Report; it is the Report of a Court of Formal Enquiry under the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894.
The MAIB was established in 1989 as a direct consequence of a recommendation made in that very document.
Juan Twothree
Well-known member
Ah, good point. And not picky at all.
westhinder
Well-known member
I spent a lot of time as a boy in the seventies fishing on the harbour wall in Zeebrugge and I have a clear recollection of the Townsend Thoresen ferries leaving port on more than one occasion while the bow doors were being closed.
As an aside, I crossed from Oostende to Dover on that fateful day and only learned of the disaster when I arrived in Southampton late in the evening where I was going to help on a yacht delivery. Everybody in the harbour was in shock. My parents knew I was taking a ferry that day, but not which one. They were quite relieved when I managed to call home from a phone booth.
grumpy_o_g
Well-known member
Regarding Penlee specifically would the vessel now be required to carry a freefall lifeboat and, if she was, would that have helped the crew or would they have just ended up on the rocks in the lifeboat?
penfold
Well-known member
Ships' lifeboats draw very little, it's likely such a lifeboat would have allowed them to abandon without loss of life, although the extreme conditions may have necessitated running downwind onto a beach(assuming there was a suitable one) as clawing to weather may not have been possible. The shallow draft and limited power would make control marginal.
Kukri
Well-known member
The Union Star was a small coaster: liferafts only, I think. But I don’t think that any ship’s lifeboat could survive in the breakers once she was ashore. The helicopter had to give up.
As noted earlier, these things happen slowly, then all at once. At 6pm the Master was refusing a tow on Lloyd’s Form; two hours later the lifeboat was launched, two hours after that sixteen people were dead.
As noted earlier, these things happen slowly, then all at once. At 6pm the Master was refusing a tow on Lloyd’s Form; two hours later the lifeboat was launched, two hours after that sixteen people were dead.
Last edited:
Beelzebub
Well-known member
I was sailing an Ecume de Mer from Jersey to Guernsey that night, arriving in St Peter Port at 20.00 approx. Conditions were boisterous but at no time did we feel any concern for the safety of the boat or the crew.
It would have been a different matter entirely if we were close to a lee shore, as was the case with the Union Star and the lifeboat.
It would have been a different matter entirely if we were close to a lee shore, as was the case with the Union Star and the lifeboat.
Kukri
Well-known member
Water in the fuel.
It’s more common than one might suppose.
It’s more common than one might suppose.
zoidberg
Well-known member
I'm not often labelled as a 'scaredy-cat', but in my thinking and when progressing I consider frequently the 'time to set-and-drift into hazard' and weigh that against the time I think needed to make a call for assistance and that assistance arriving on scene..... and like to keep that margin as 'time in hand'.
In some annals that could be considered a 'good offing'.....
In some annals that could be considered a 'good offing'.....
penfold
Well-known member
That was the proximate cause of the Braer grounding IIRC, albeit very much the largest hole in the cheese rather than the only hole.