Felixstowe yacht collision: Seaman on dredger sentenced

I have read the MIAB report, ( all of it) and the up-shot is that the man was down below and had a manual LJ on and made an escape from the full of water boat via the front hatch from an estimated depth of some metres. The woman however had an auto LJ and when the boat was struck at significant speed, head on, it was pushed stern-wards and the water inrush pushed her through the companion way into the cabin, her LJ auto inflated and she could not get out. Boat sank taking her along.

Very sad that it was such a coincidence of many factors, course adjustment, poor forward visibility on the dredger, timing of going below etc etc.

Unc
 
sailorman said:
I doubt. that anybody who has been involved in boating for many yrs is mealy a passenger.
Your assumption is also incorrect Bru
Click to expand...

How so? You may doubt it but the fact is that there are wives and partners who go along for the ride and don't get involved in the sailing
 
I have to say - I wondered about the length of time he was below. If I'm solo or on the helm and I need to answer nature's call - it's a quick 45 second dash - back on deck quick as. He was down below for 5-6 mins according to the report wasn't he? That's actually quite a long time...
 
Marmalade said:
I have to say - I wondered about the length of time he was below. If I'm solo or on the helm and I need to answer nature's call - it's a quick 45 second dash - back on deck quick as. He was down below for 5-6 mins according to the report wasn't he? That's actually quite a long time...
Click to expand...

Humm, I do not want to dwell on this poor man and (deceased) woman's plight, but it would appear that the Skipper went below for a pee (or something) knowing that another vessel was in sight of their vessel, and closing at quite a speed (15 knots I understand).
Re the deceased woman, all I would have expected is that she was made aware of Skipper intention to 'go below' and just asked (instructed) to call out if the other vessel appeared to get close, which it certainly did. No experience of Navigation, Sailing theory, International Buoyage, Rules of the Road etc etc was really required of her, just a good look out and a clear voice, along the lines of 'oh sh...t' or something similar. So any suggestion that she was not capable of such awareness seems to me to be a bit 'silly'.
 
Capt Popeye said:
So any suggestion that she was not capable of such awareness seems to me to be a bit 'silly'.
Click to expand...

I've been sailing with a few inexperienced crew who had no appreciation of impending collisions, and certainly did not appreciate how fast situations change. So I would certainly not expect them to keep a satisfactory watch, and as has been said before I would assume I was single handed, as I don't believe it fair to impose such responsibility onto someone who has no pretensions to be a watch keeper.

In the distance past when I frequently sailed single handed I also sailed without an autopilot (having no electrics on board), therefore I had the habit of never leaving the cockpit unless hove to well clear of shipping - a bucket fulfilled immediate personal needs. Autopilots are wonderful things but sometimes I wonder if they lead us to be complacent.
 
We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one I think Rog

One thing I can state categorically is that the sad death of Mrs Ingram has definitely had an influence on my good lady cos she is now much much more proactive on deck especially when it comes to keeping a lookout
 
Erbas said:
We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one I think Rog

One thing I can state categorically is that the sad death of Mrs Ingram has definitely had an influence on my good lady cos she is now much much more proactive on deck especially when it comes to keeping a lookout
Click to expand...

Humm, well stated, but he main person to recognise the 'more proactive' stance is required from any 'passengers' the is the Skipper
 
To be fair, when he went below it wasn't on a collision course - it was navigating in the deep water channel. It left the channel and turned towards him whilst he was below. There's no question that the dredger bears the primary responsibility, but like many others I found myself grasping for any shred of understanding simply because it's so close to home; both literally and metaphorically.

Often when we're in the "home straight " approaching Harwich Susanna will go below to start sorting the boat - leaving me on deck alone. I'll be similarly busy sorting things and will often nip below to stow something. There but for the grace of God...
 
SWMBO is very good sighting stuff that is nowhere near collision distance, but was amazed first time crossing the Thames en route to the Medway, I told her to watch the dot on the horizon, which turned into a freighter which we had to turn behind... I know this will stir a different discussion, but surely an incentive to install an AIS receiver...
 
Marmalade said:
Often when we're in the "home straight " approaching Harwich Susanna will go below to start sorting the boat - leaving me on deck alone. I'll be similarly busy sorting things and will often nip below to stow something. There but for the grace of God...
Click to expand...

+1. Complacency, familiarity etc. Both men have to live with this for the rest of their lives but having once been a professional seaman I do feel the dredger watch officer has got away very lightly.
 
Erbas said:
How so? You may doubt it but the fact is that there are wives and partners who go along for the ride and don't get involved in the sailing
Click to expand...

The point what made extensively in the MAIB report that the wife was just a passenger.
But still, ... you don't have to be a sailor or know anything about the Rules of the Road to know that a big dredger heading straight for you is not a good thing. Common sense is not limited to sailors.

On Guapa, the wife/kids don't really get involved in the navigation side of the boat at all, but they do lend a hand helming when I am hoisting sails or picking up the mooring. And whilst none of them have had any formal training I am confident that they will realise/take avoiding action when we're running into danger.
I also make a point of telling them when I'm going to below of what they have to look out for - where are the shallow bits and where traffic is likely to come from.
 
Last edited:
Gladys said:
Bit of selective quoting from the MAIB report, the dredger HAD passed Orca and was heading out to sea when skipper went below, dredger then did a 180...

Doesn't mean the rest of the points aren't valid though.
Click to expand...

I must have entirely misread the report, I don't recall any mention of such a major course alteration.
 
Usually disasters like this loss of life occur because of a number of poor decisions that have cumulative effect; the wife not knowing what's to do, the husband going for a pee at the wrong time, the dredger watch officer not keeping the yacht in sight, the seaman not maintaining a good enough lookout, the wife's lifejacket trapping her, etc etc. It's human nature to search for the single 'bad' factor but in reality thousands of sailors each week experience one or even a number of those poor decisions but nothing happens as a result; life is a bastard and sometimes rolls the dice so that all the bad stuff happens on the same day to the same people. We try and make sense of it by finding the one bad thing that made it happen, when in reality it was just bad luck that all those factors happened to a decent pair of human beings out for a sail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top