Latest 'stable door bolting' from MAIB

[Deleted member 36384]

Cruising passage planning just involves planning where you want to go. Race nav planning means planning where you can safely go if the situation warrants it. Exactly the sort of thing that happened here - can you go into that bay gybe and get out safely or are there rocks that will catch you on the way out. It takes a lot of time to do decent planning and naturally much of it is wasted if the wind and tide means you can get the best advantage by reaching along two miles away from any hazard.

I don't really blame the skipper for this one. He was trying to muddle through best he could with a situation he inherited. It was the failure to appoint a suitable person to navigate and give them the time to prepare properly ..

I think you underestimate cruising navigation by a massive margin. What you describe as racing navigation is cruising navigation as well. The skipper is to blame, 100%, even more so if he was muddling through.

 

[lpdsn]

I think you underestimate cruising navigation by a massive margin. What you describe as racing navigation is cruising navigation as well. The skipper is to blame, 100%, even more so if he was muddling through.

Not at all. I've done a lot of both and there is a world of difference especially in the level of planning for possible scenarios sailing close to hazards to gain an advantage which when cruising you would simply ensure you kept clear.

It's very old fashioned to heap 100% of the blame on the bloke on the ground when there were organisational level failings. I thought you worked in H&S.

 

[Blue Sunray]

It's very old fashioned to heap 100% of the blame on the bloke on the ground when there were organisational level failings.

:encouragement:

 

[BelleSerene]

Not at all. I've done a lot of both and there is a world of difference especially in the level of planning for possible scenarios sailing close to hazards to gain an advantage which when cruising you would simply ensure you kept clear.

It's very old fashioned to heap 100% of the blame on the bloke on the ground when there were organisational level failings. I thought you worked in H&S.

That smacks to me of an excuse culture. The fact that the organisation is also responsible for what they do doesn’t excuse the skipper of responsibility for poor skippership. If you don’t know what bit of water you’re sailing in and haven’t coached, tasked and monitored someone with knowing it, despite having over 15 people on board, you’re not much of a skipper. This wasn’t a matter of fine timing judgment - a technical problem causing a late gybe for example (not that that would be an excuse with all that water to play I anyway). It was just a failure to navigate.

 

[lpdsn]

That smacks to me of an excuse culture. The fact that the organisation is also responsible for what they do doesn’t excuse the skipper of responsibility for poor skippership. If you don’t know what bit of water you’re sailing in and haven’t coached, tasked and monitored someone with knowing it, despite having over 15 people on board, you’re not much of a skipper. This wasn’t a matter of fine timing judgment - a technical problem causing a late gybe for example (not that that would be an excuse with all that water to play I anyway). It was just a failure to navigate.

Have you ever done much serious racing? I don't know a good boat anywhere that doesn't have a dedicated naviguesser tactician. Of course when cruising the skipper sometimes does it all, or most of it, with just one or two inexperienced crew, we've all had to do that at some stage, and we sail cautiously accordingly. I'd consider the Clipper arrangement with all the tasks falling on one guy with no significant delegation seriously lacking in a race boat half that size. You have to do more and push harder when racing compared to cruising and you achieve that by delegating with the skipper just keeping an overview to manage things. This bloke was put in a position where he had to do too much and wasn't able to focus on managing the boat.

 

[Uricanejack]

There is a chance for all the negatistas to do something about it.

Get a job as. Training Skipper. If you are good enough, you can show them how they should be doing it.

https://www.clipperroundtheworld.com/jobs/view/training-skipper

:encouragement:

I am. Not going to apply.

The problem is not certification.
Its their safety management system.
Its fixable but to fix it will require a long hard look at itself by itself and a major change in how it conducts its operation top to bottom and bottom to top.
They will most likely need some outside help. Not necessarily from sailors. Not from the RYA or Even the MCA. Actual experts on corporate safety.
H&S, Britain is actually a world leader. Particularly maritime H&S experts.

Or they can continue to operate the same way. A crystal ball is not required to predict further incidents at a similar frequency or even worse.
Up to the company and the people who run it.

 

[Uricanejack]

That's it though, there are just not many incidents in a high risk venture. If you are Solent area, why not try seeing if you can get a looky round with their training guys? I did that in Cowes last year. They are exceedingly good......but nothing is sailor proof.

No.
They have to many incidents. Its not rocket science. Just some very simple math and probability.
What you notice is the No of major incidents. ie death or serious injury. or in this particular one just the loss of a vessel without loss of life.
They have been having to many small incidents and near misses. They need to reduce those significantly. If they do the likely hood of a serious incident will drop dramatically.
High Risk does not have to be dangerous it can be safe. If the risks are properly assessed and managed.

 

[capnsensible]

No.
They have to many incidents. Its not rocket science. Just some very simple math and probability.
What you notice is the No of major incidents. ie death or serious injury. or in this particular one just the loss of a vessel without loss of life.
They have been having to many small incidents and near misses. They need to reduce those significantly. If they do the likely hood of a serious incident will drop dramatically.
High Risk does not have to be dangerous it can be safe. If the risks are properly assessed and managed.

Ten races, five thousand people. 3 fatalities and two groundings.

I happen to have some idea of how hard they train. It's very risky. They are all volunteers and know what they are getting into. It's why they do it.

What I don't get is why people who have no intention of ever going near the challenge want to complain about it. Even more so why people who want to complain don't write to the Challenge Venture people and complain. And to the head of RYA Training who has also been a race skipper.

Especially people on a sailing forum who clearly accept a level of risk every time they go out on a boat. And even more so those who have or do race that know that pushing things is normal. And exciting.

Be interesting to see how many Merchant and Fishing vessels are lost every year in comparison.

Or how many deaths are caused by falling coconuts..........

 

[Uricanejack]

Ten races, five thousand people. 3 fatalities and two groundings.

I happen to have some idea of how hard they train. It's very risky. They are all volunteers and know what they are getting into. It's why they do it.

What I don't get is why people who have no intention of ever going near the challenge want to complain about it. Even more so why people who want to complain don't write to the Challenge Venture people and complain. And to the head of RYA Training who has also been a race skipper.

Especially people on a sailing forum who clearly accept a level of risk every time they go out on a boat. And even more so those who have or do race that know that pushing things is normal. And exciting.

Be interesting to see how many Merchant and Fishing vessels are lost every year in comparison.

Or how many deaths are caused by falling coconuts..........

I suppose I could write to who ever, why would they care?
No idea exactly how the No would stack up. Planes Trains Automobiles or Ships or Fishing Vessels.
My guess would be. Incident per paying customer or miles traveled. Most companies providing Plane's Train's Automobile's or Ship's would have a better ratio. Fishing? I better not comment.
My answer isn't really as a sailor. Or about sailing. Just a little bit of experience with H&S in other aspects of life. Some of the experience came about the hard way.
Some random internet guy telling them what they should do wont help.

Clipper have to figure it out for them selves. Also something I have learned through experience.

 

[BelleSerene]

This bloke was put in a position where he had to do too much and wasn't able to focus on managing the boat.

Seems to me, if he claimed that (and I’ve no reason to suppose he did) it would be a pretty weak excuse for a leader with 18 people on board. Hell, even if they’re all numpties and have barely seen a chart before, get a team of 2 or 3 on each watch to work out what they think your current position is, your expected course for the next hour or three, any likely hazards (Africa, for example), how that might affect tactics, and come and brief you every hour or two. You can still have the luxury of never looking at a chart, a GPS, a plotter or a depth sounder if that’s how you prefer to skipper a race boat.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

Not at all. I've done a lot of both and there is a world of difference especially in the level of planning for possible scenarios sailing close to hazards to gain an advantage which when cruising you would simply ensure you kept clear.

It's very old fashioned to heap 100% of the blame on the bloke on the ground when there were organisational level failings. I thought you worked in H&S.

Not old fashioned at all. The skipper has all the tools at his disposal to navigate safely. He did not, others with the same tools have not failed.

 

[Mark-1]

Not old fashioned at all. The skipper has all the tools at his disposal to navigate safely. He did not, others with the same tools have not failed.

Yet the other boat went aground as well. Which suggests there's something inherent in what they're doing or how they work that can lead to this kind of navigational problem.

Not sure what it would be, mind you.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

........ What I don't get is why people who have no intention of ever going near the challenge want to complain about it. Even more so why people who want to complain don't write to the Challenge Venture people and complain. And to the head of RYA Training who has also been a race skipper.
..........

It’s a sailing forum, it’s not a hard concept to understand that sailors have an interest in this matter and discuss it. Your proposition suggests expressing an opinion is only worthwhile if supported by an application or pleading to an official body is odd. Surely, in this forum, we can discuss opinions, facts and make conclusions, the sole purpose of which is to only benefit ourselves? At the end of the day most folks probably don’t give a fig how the race is organised but are interested in the whys and wherefores. I think that is a good enough reason to discuss.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

Yet the other boat went aground as well. Which suggests there's something inherent in what they're doing or how they work that can lead to this kind of navigational problem.

Not sure what it would be, mind you.

There should be two responsible people on the yacht, a first mate as well as the skipper. If no first mate the race committee should put a waypoint in to keep vessels away from dangers. The latter point point recognises the limitations of having only one professional on the yacht responsible for navigating by eliminating close to shore navigation. That’s very simplistic because there will be more to consider than just a waypoint.

 

[capnsensible]

It’s a sailing forum, it’s not a hard concept to understand that sailors have an interest in this matter and discuss it. Your proposition suggests expressing an opinion is only worthwhile if supported by an application or pleading to an official body is odd. Surely, in this forum, we can discuss opinions, facts and make conclusions, the sole purpose of which is to only benefit ourselves? At the end of the day most folks probably don’t give a fig how the race is organised but are interested in the whys and wherefores. I think that is a good enough reason to discuss.

See what I mean? It's mostly forum points scoring. No one is actually addressing the issue and finding out the other side to their opinion. Challenge the challengers! And discuss the results.

 

[flaming]

Not old fashioned at all. The skipper has all the tools at his disposal to navigate safely. He did not, others with the same tools have not failed.

The problem was that the skipper neither delegated the navigation, nor felt he could leave the crew on deck to sail safely in a rising breeze with the kite up. And he seems to have been right in that respect, as they broached. He clearly needed to do one of those things, he did neither, and as a result the navigation was not being done. And even so he probably would have got away with it but for the broach that delayed his gybe.

But the wind was clocking right and showed no sign of stopping doing so. Tactically the correct thing to do would be to sail on port until it stops lifting or you can lay the mark. Or you need to gybe to avoid Africa... As a race navigatior the skipper was quite correct to want to close the coast. The issue was that he wasn't sailing as if he was a race navigator. He was sailing as if he's the only competent person on the boat, and he pushed inshore with a crew he knew might broach...

 

[capnsensible]

There should be two responsible people on the yacht, a first mate as well as the skipper. If no first mate the race committee should put a waypoint in to keep vessels away from dangers. The latter point point recognises the limitations of having only one professional on the yacht responsible for navigating by eliminating close to shore navigation. That’s very simplistic because there will be more to consider than just a waypoint.

There are. Once again showing the problem of people who opine without bothering to spend a few seconds on Google.

https://www.clipperroundtheworld.co...egin-clipper-race-coxswain-certificate-course

 

[capnsensible]

The problem was that the skipper neither delegated the navigation, nor felt he could leave the crew on deck to sail safely in a rising breeze with the kite up. And he seems to have been right in that respect, as they broached. He clearly needed to do one of those things, he did neither, and as a result the navigation was not being done. And even so he probably would have got away with it but for the broach that delayed his gybe.

But the wind was clocking right and showed no sign of stopping doing so. Tactically the correct thing to do would be to sail on port until it stops lifting or you can lay the mark. Or you need to gybe to avoid Africa... As a race navigatior the skipper was quite correct to want to close the coast. The issue was that he wasn't sailing as if he was a race navigator. He was sailing as if he's the only competent person on the boat, and he pushed inshore with a crew he knew might broach...

As far as I can see, the Coxn was off watch. None of us has any idea why he was not involved. Or what exactly happened. But the continuing theme of 'only one who can do anything' is surely false.

 

[lw395]

The problem was that the skipper neither delegated the navigation, nor felt he could leave the crew on deck to sail safely in a rising breeze with the kite up. And he seems to have been right in that respect, as they broached. He clearly needed to do one of those things, he did neither, and as a result the navigation was not being done. And even so he probably would have got away with it but for the broach that delayed his gybe.

But the wind was clocking right and showed no sign of stopping doing so. Tactically the correct thing to do would be to sail on port until it stops lifting or you can lay the mark. Or you need to gybe to avoid Africa... As a race navigatior the skipper was quite correct to want to close the coast. The issue was that he wasn't sailing as if he was a race navigator. He was sailing as if he's the only competent person on the boat, and he pushed inshore with a crew he knew might broach...

Agreed.
Except it seems to me there were no competent people on board. The 'skipper' may have been competent at steering with the kite up and navigation, but that does not make him a competent skipper. The skipper's job is to manage the boat. If he hasn't trained the crew to be able to steer with full sail up, then he needs to reduce sail in line with their abilities. If he cannot trust any of them to navigate tactically close to shore, then he should stay safely out to sea.

I regularly see 12 year old Mirror sailors demonstrating a better understanding of the responsibilities of command.

 

[flaming]

I think you underestimate cruising navigation by a massive margin. What you describe as racing navigation is cruising navigation as well. The skipper is to blame, 100%, even more so if he was muddling through.

Cruising Nav is a different world to race Nav.

If was planning a cruising trip round the island I would plan a few waypoints, a good clearance on the needles and some "don't go less than/more than XXX bearing" on the approach to my waypoints. Would then look at the tide and plan my departure, and when it will be with me. Might take me 15 minutes.

For the last couple of years (and this year) the owner, our normal Nav, hasn't done the RTI. So I've been doing the Nav planning together with a stand in Nav. It takes us at least 2 hours, and would certainly take us more but for the fact that we've done countless laps of that island...
And that is planning based on the fact that one person has no role on the boat other than navigating. He doesn't pull any ropes, steer, make coffee or anything. He is purely monitoring where we are, and where we are going.
Planning for a doublehanded RTI where we knew we might be less able to navigate constantly took about 4 hours.