MAIB Report Achieve - Talis

[chrishscorp]

Having just looked at the chartlet again at the entrance to Tynemouth Harbour there is a lighthouse with a fog horn which gives 1 signal every 10 seconds I wonder if the Fishing skipper heard the horn blast from the freighter and subconcously put it down to the harbour foghorn, just a thought.

 

[Skylark]

The freighter was stand on

It was restricted viz so there was no stand-on vessel.

Edit- beaten to it twice.

It's interesting that the radar only picked up the FB at 1NM…..

I also read that comment as key and that the fisher appeared to not have his reflector hoisted.

The report shows a radar plot recreated from 3rd party VDR but, sadly, we shall never know if a reflector would have made a difference.

 

[jdc]

... a swift left hand down a bit (a lot) would seem sensible, but that's a no-no under colregs.

No it isn't. the action for the coater was a turn to stbd (he can't turn to port): rule 19:

(d) A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a close- quarters situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time, provided that when such action consists of an alteration of course, so far as possible the following shall be avoided:
(i) an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel being overtaken;
(ii) an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.

I can't see why you feel a turn to port would have been better for a target 30 degree on the port bow?

 

[DFL1010]

No it isn't. the mandatory action for the coater was a turn to stbd (he can't turn to port): rule 19:

(d) A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a close- quarters situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time, provided that when such action consists of an alteration of course, so far as possible the following shall be avoided:
(i) an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel being overtaken;
(ii) an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.

Not sure I'd agree with that interpretation. An alteration to port is permissible, but should be avoided so far as is possible. Given the presence of the shore (and the SSE wind, albeit only F2), and I can see why an alteration to stbd might not be the indicated option.

 

[doug748]

Radar story looks a bit of a lottery. AIS on the fishing boat would have sorted it, perhaps it's time for it to be mandatory?

 

[Wing Mark]

No it isn't. the action for the coater was a turn to stbd (he can't turn to port): rule 19:

(d) A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a close- quarters situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time, provided that when such action consists of an alteration of course, so far as possible the following shall be avoided:
(i) an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel being overtaken;
(ii) an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.

I can't see why you feel a turn to port would have been better for a target 30 degree on the port bow?

You have to decide to pass one side of the FB or other.
If you reduce speed, the FB will go across your bow
If you turn to port the FB will go across your bow
If you increase speed you will pass ahead.
If you turn to starboard you will pass ahead of the FB.
There is a point where turning to starboard cancels out the effect of reducing speed

 

[Wing Mark]

Radar story looks a bit of a lottery. AIS on the fishing boat would have sorted it, perhaps it's time for it to be mandatory?

Looking out the window would have sorted it, perhaps that should be mandatory?

 

[Skylark]

With the FB in the quadrant shown on the radar plot a turn to starboard would be pretty normal. However, if he only popped onto the screen at 1M range. Radar (ARPA, manual and AIS) all require time and distance to pass to figure out risk of collision. The accident was pretty much inevitable. The less manoeuvrable vessel stood no chance of avoiding it in the time and the more manoeuvrable vessel was blissfully unaware, sadly.

 

[jamie N]

Amongst the collision details themselves, I saw this:
"He (the deckhand), considered starting the engine-driven bilge pump, but decided not to because its
control was at the aft end of the space and he feared being trapped by the flood."
Now, why would anyone consider that as a good place to fit the control for a pump; or for a fire alarm say, or any piece of emergency kit in fact where you have to enter the confined space that;s got the problem?
Truly negligent.

 

[Wing Mark]

There is no stand-on in fog! That's an absolutely fundamental point which, sadly, few seem to grasp.

Edit - beaten to it

Mea Culpa.
In the limit, once these vessels were aware of each other, there's no stand on vessel at all, I should have said the Fishing boat was the give way vessel.

 

[Skylark]

Mea Culpa.
In the limit, once these vessels were aware of each other, there's no stand on vessel at all, I should have said the Fishing boat was the give way vessel.

In restricted viz, both vessels have a duty to avoid collision.

 

[DFL1010]

Mea Culpa.
In the limit, once these vessels were aware of each other, there's no stand on vessel at all, I should have said the Fishing boat was the give way vessel.

Technically yes, but the Coaster was also give way.

 

[Pye_End]

Having just looked at the chartlet again at the entrance to Tynemouth Harbour there is a lighthouse with a fog horn which gives 1 signal every 10 seconds I wonder if the Fishing skipper heard the horn blast from the freighter and subconcously put it down to the harbour foghorn, just a thought.

Neither vessel were making fog signals.

Such a rare event to hear fog signals from other vessels these days, in my experience.

 

[pandos]

I am curious as to why the radar on tali was set to such a short range? Does this reduce the power and thus the likelihood of spotting weak targets.?

Also their course took them directly across the fairway into tynmouth, they see a boat coming in from their portside...towards tynmouth and they are unsure of what the intentions of that boat were.?

I would have thought that any contact appearing in that quadrant should be presumed to be heading into the harbour and should have been avoided by altering course to port....

I have encountered fishing boats in fog and at a few hundred yards I couldn't say if the wheelhouse was empty or not.

But until I get a wave from a fisherman I am on tender hooks and if I see a boat headed towards a port I presume it is going to the port....

I have great sympathy for the fishermen, they were really unlucky...

 

[Pye_End]

Both vessels failed in their duties. Poor watch seamanship all round.

Actually, I think the fishing vessel was lucky - a few yards further on it would have been T bones instead - probably looking at fatalities.

 

[doug748]

No it wasn't. R19 applied, and there is no stand on vessel under that rule. R19(d): "A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a closequarters situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time ..."

Indeed. The ship may have been inefficient but the skipper of the fishing boat seems to have had a death wish.

"Assumptions based on scanty information and all that."

Yes. AIS transmitting on the fishing boat would have put things beyond all question and the ship would had unequivocal information at greater range. The radar alert gave a 3 min warning, close enough for an accident whatever the action of a single party, esp the ship

.

 

[Wing Mark]

I am curious as to why the radar on tali was set to such a short range? Does this reduce the power and thus the likelihood of spotting weak targets.?

Also their course took them directly across the fairway into tynmouth, they see a boat coming in from their portside...towards tynmouth and they are unsure of what the intentions of that boat were.?

I would have thought that any contact appearing in that quadrant should be presumed to be heading into the harbour and should have been avoided by altering course to port....

I have encountered fishing boats in fog and at a few hundred yards I couldn't say if the wheelhouse was empty or not.

But until I get a wave from a fisherman I am on tender hooks and if I see a boat headed towards a port I presume it is going to the port....

I have great sympathy for the fishermen, they were really unlucky...

The coaster was doing 8 knots, the FV 4.
The radar was initially set to 6NM range.

You see a small FV a few miles outside a port and you assume it's always going to head straight towards that port?
I'd assume it might go anywhere. Around here, they can rarely be relied on to go in a straight line .

 

[pandos]

The coaster was doing 8 knots, the FV 4.
The radar was initially set to 6NM range.

You see a small FV a few miles outside a port and you assume it's always going to head straight towards that port?
I'd assume it might go anywhere. Around here, they can rarely be relied on to go in a straight line .

Obviously the FB may have been going anywhere, but the radar plot showed they were on a straight course into the harbour.

I assume that every boat is trying to kill me until I have evidence to the contrary.

 

[Wing Mark]

Obviously the FB may have been going anywhere, but the radar plot showed they were on a straight course into the harbour.

I assume that every boat is trying to kill me until I have evidence to the contrary.

Since the ship's radar is centred on the ship and moving with the ships frame of reference, and the harbour was off the screen, the radar would not actually have directly told the OOW that the FV was headed there.

 

[fisherman]

It's interesting that the radar only picked up the FB at 1NM, it's not exactly a stealth bomber.

Cut/paste:
Achieve was detected by the radar on board the bulk carrier at anchor off Tynemouth at a range of
2nm at that time when the fishing vessel’s aspect provided for the weakest radar signal echo reception.

I used to spend more time on deck than in the wheelhouse, but not in fog, I would be glued to the radar, even in the sparsely populated areas in Mts Bay. I had engine and steering controls out on deck, so on deck watch would be adequate in good vis.
I had one serious within 20ft close quarters with a ship, evidently manned bridge, and one 30mts with a 50ft yacht, no one on deck. In the first I was on deck at the forward controls, in the second in the wheelhouse ready to deal with it.