MAIB Report Liquid Vortex

[iain789]

MAIB report on accident to crew person on Liquid Vortex published. Caught by mainsheet during accidental gybe and fractured bone in neck. Hospitalised for two months.

http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Liquid Vortex_Report.pdf

 

[savageseadog]

Could be summed up by saying that sailing in heavier weather can have risks.

Preventers are OK in lighter conditions but in heavier weather should be avoided in my opinion.

 

[Judders]

The whole incident is a perfect illustration of how stupidly irresponsible the whole trade of selling places on racing yachts in propper races is. Crews without any boat sense whatsoever buy their way in (at what must be said is a ridiculous cost) and go out racing in truly challenging races (this years Myth of Malham was probably the most challenging sailing I've done) and because of the whole client/skipper relationship these incidents will keep happening.

You can't just pay over £3k and go and do this sort of racing, especially not on these over worked and poorly built (for the purpose) boats for a season; they're just this sort of accident waiting to happen.

What is worse is that the poor skippers know it. That is why the brighter ones are leaving the industry in droves and being replaced by less experienced and less capable dreamers, so increasing the danger.

Lord alone knows how many such incidents will have to happen before the tide turns and people learn to sail properly and at their own pace rather than buying their way in to instant top level "racing".

There was a brief moment when we thought we wrere going to have to turn around toward the end of this race and beat back to assist, putting even greater strain on ourselves to help people who should never have been there and only were because someone who wanted to make money out of it had fooled themselves and their clients into thinking it was a reasonable risk.

 

[mcframe]

My take is that if it's necessary to hand over the helm to someone inexperienced when downwind or in shallow water, then the skipper should point P or S and say "*That* way is safe; If things start to go wrong, which way will you turn the wheel (tiller)?" and wait for the new helm to acknowledge before heading forward.

(Cruising not racing, but SWIMBO understood immediately, while me & skipper sorted dowsing the big genoa that had a jammed halyard sheave at 2300)

 

[Norman_E]

Could be summed up by saying that sailing in heavier weather can have risks.

Preventers are OK in lighter conditions but in heavier weather should be avoided in my opinion.

The accident happened when there was no preventer rigged. A preventer would probably have saved the crewmember from injury.

A day later there was a preventer and a gybe was avoided but the yacht broached instead and damaged the mainsail. Far better IMHO than injuring a crew member for lack of a preventer. In the second incident the yacht had full mainsail and No 1 genoa in a wind gusting to 42 knots. A bit less sail, rather than failing to rig a preventer, might have saved some damage.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

The whole incident is a perfect illustration of how stupidly irresponsible the whole trade of selling places on racing yachts in propper races is......

The whole incident is a perfect illustration of how a company is incapable of managing risk to their clients. The skipper failed to manage the boat, failed to ensure crew instruction was understood, failed to manage the collision risk. One big classic failure of a skipper if you ask me - he got involved in the spinnaker untwisting operation on the foredeck, when he should have called the crew back and re-planned the untwisting operation. He failed to manage changing circumstances.

He was also a stupid person. Having determined that the communication between him in the cockpit and the mate unwrapping the spinnaker was impossible, he then proceeded to the foredeck with a developing collision risk where he attempted to communicate from the fore deck with an inexperienced helms woman in the cockpit.

However, is it his fault? The owner of the company failed to have a proper standards of management for this activity and thus exposed his clients to unacceptable risk by having a poor skipper and less qualified first mate on board. This is where the incident commenced, at the hiring stage. The owner or manager of the Company should be penalised in some manner, instead they have been requested to implement what should have been in place.

Sadly this is typical of many incidents where those directly responsible tend to be blamed but the instigators get told to improve some aspect. Still it doesn't surprise me. In the UK today a Company can kill 165 people as a direct result through the lack of a legally required management system and no one within management is held accountable.

 

[dt4134]

This is one of the reasons why I decided not to get my YM commercially endorsed. I feel, like Judders, that the skippers of some of these boats are put into an impossible position.

The organisation of a serious race boat is more like that of a commercial vessel than a cruising boat. He should have been able to call upon a helmsman who could have handled the collision risk without detailed instruction. Just like the master of a container ship can leave a third officer in charge of a watch.

A privately-owned racer may have had inexperienced crew on board, but they are also likely to have a solid core of four or five senior crew.

If a private owner had taken a boat out on that race with only two peple on board who had any appropriate experience they'd have faced severe criticism.

I've nothing against this sort of commercial operation, but if they want to do anything more than cruise around the course behind the racers they should provide more experienced crew to share the workload.

 

[Judders]

My take is that if it's necessary to hand over the helm to someone inexperienced when downwind or in shallow water, then the skipper should point P or S and say "*That* way is safe; If things start to go wrong, which way will you turn the wheel (tiller)?" and wait for the new helm to acknowledge before heading forward.

I genuinely don't think that would have worked on the day Alan. The seas were too large, we watched other 40.7s try that tactic and get repeatedly into a knock down, and they were boats with the owners experienced and successful crews onboard.

On OMG, about three or four miles ahead, we had a crew of eight with bags of experience. We had one person who had less experience than me and she and I were the only ones not to have a couple of Fastnet campaigns in the CV. We'd won more races than not in the previous twelve months and the boat was designed and maintained for just this sort of racing, and yet in those conditions, we failed to successfully gybes the kite seven times out of seven on that Sunday. The seastate was beautiful but it wasn't going to forgive any errors. The night before had been long (this was the night where we were doing four sail changes in a three hour watch). We were all exhausted of course so what it must have been like in a boat that would have slammed for the twenty hours of the beat one can only imagine.

This was simply not a situation that these firms ought to be able to sell places in to anyone willing to pay the cash price. Sadly, at risk of sounding prosaic, we now see all too clearly the other price.

Now I have seen the Liquid Vortex 'training' close up, at least in terms of bringing the boats alongside as I regularly crew on a boat on a berth nearby in the same marina, but I am not going to slag them of specifically because I doubt they are any better or worse than their rivals, but generally, whenever I come across these boats the level of instruction is horrific. I remember a chap being told to tie up to our pulpit in Yarmouth and asking "how much are you paying to be taught how not to sail". Had it been my own boat I would have cut the line away.

 

[Solitaire]

This is one of the reasons why I decided not to get my YM commercially endorsed. I feel, like Judders, that the skippers of some of these boats are put into an impossible position.

The organisation of a serious race boat is more like that of a commercial vessel than a cruising boat. He should have been able to call upon a helmsman who could have handled the collision risk without detailed instruction. Just like the master of a container ship can leave a third officer in charge of a watch.

A privately-owned racer may have had inexperienced crew on board, but they are also likely to have a solid core of four or five senior crew.

If a private owner had taken a boat out on that race with only two peple on board who had any appropriate experience they'd have faced severe criticism.

I've nothing against this sort of commercial operation, but if they want to do anything more than cruise around the course behind the racers they should provide more experienced crew to share the workload.

Interesting timing this post. I attended a very good conference yesterday where this very issue was under discussion in relation to MAIB who gave a talk on their involvement and also an insurance expert who discussed the issues of commercial skipper insurance.

It became clear that issue of insurance for skippers is a very dark art as to when they are insured and when not - particularly freelance. This also had implications for charter companies and RYA Training centres. For example it became clear that when an instructor holds the RYA training insurance while working on an RYA course he would be covered, but would not be while running a Yachtmaster Prep as it is not an RYA course!

From next April all commercially endorsed skippers will now be required to take a new exam which will be available on line. This is a course which will go into more detail regarding legislation and all be required to undertake the course both old and new and commercial endorsements will not be renewed/issued without proof of having done the course.

The implications for all this is going be fairly dramatic and I expect the cost of using skippers will increase as the cost of the insurance implications are going to be fairly major.

There were a lot of faces that showed a degree of shock and I for one will be checking my insurance cover immediately.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

..... There were a lot of faces that showed a degree of shock and I for one will be checking my insurance cover immediately.

The question then is why do you not know what insurance cover you have when working commercially? If you are freelance you should have your own liability insurance. If working for the a Sea School on non RYA courses, then the Sea School's 3rd Party liability insurance should cover you and both parties have a responsibility to make themselves informed.

In my industry I hire a lot of freelance engineers and the first hurdle that they have to pass is demonstration of 3rd Party Liability, which they carry for the services that they provide. However, we also hire directly engineers into the organisation short term and they are covered by our liability insurance.

Its not difficult to manage, just ignorance by those who manage the Sea Schools i.e. not having a contract between a freelance skipper and the Sea School and not managing the legal requirement within the UK to have a minimum 3rd party insurance cover for commercial organisations.

Having had to investigate many incidents over the years, the lack of management accountability is near universal, yet they are responsible for proper governance of the organisation that they are managing.

 

[st599]

For example it became clear that when an instructor holds the RYA training insurance while working on an RYA course he would be covered, but would not be while running a Yachtmaster Prep as it is not an RYA course!

Is that not obvious? Why would a RYA Training Insurance policy cover anything other than RYA Training?

 

[awol]

First, my best wishes and a full recovery to the injured lass. Reading the MAIB report I feel a resonance with my own attempts to train a crew and race with them, though only round the cans. The task of teaching while racing with a crew ratio of 2 experienced to 8 neophytes must have been a hell of a strain. The fact that the minimum "qualification" in the crew was Day Skipper probably didn't make the skipper's task any easier - a week on a school boat may be good preparation for a flotilla holiday but not so good for avoiding unintentional gybes, apparently.

The big question for me is if there are people with a spare £3k wanting the misery of an "assertive" skipper leading them in a race, being sick and uncomfortable without any silly MCA Blue Book constraints, how do I find them? Just a couple would pay off my yearly bills and one more would sort the gear and sail replacement programme. Mile building voyages, a speciality.

 

[BlueSkyNick]

Is that not obvious? Why would a RYA Training Insurance policy cover anything other than RYA Training?

Not that obvious, no. If an RYA qualified instructor is training people to qualify for an RYA certificate, it would seem reasonable to assume he/she is covered by insurance to do so.

 

[DownWest]

I expect quite a few, having done 'a bit of sailing' want to 'do' a big race and have the money. Probably expect tough but 'fun' conditions. But perhaps not the continuous grind of really bad weather. So, tired and wonky, may get things wrong. 2 to 8 on experience to tyros is a lousy ratio.
DW

 

[penfold]

I expect quite a few, having done 'a bit of sailing' want to 'do' a big race and have the money. Probably expect tough but 'fun' conditions. But perhaps not the continuous grind of really bad weather. So, tired and wonky, may get things wrong. 2 to 8 on experience to tyros is a lousy ratio.
DW

It's not lousy, it's criminal. I'm not a fan of the grandstanding that surrounds the debate whenever corporate responsibility comes up for legislation, but the biggest problem is usually proving the management drone is directly responsible(they often are, but proof is usually hard to come by). 1:4 ratio is grossly negligent in those conditions.

 

[dt4134]

It's not lousy, it's criminal. I'm not a fan of the grandstanding that surrounds the debate whenever corporate responsibility comes up for legislation, but the biggest problem is usually proving the management drone is directly responsible(they often are, but proof is usually hard to come by). 1:4 ratio is grossly negligent in those conditions.

It is not just the training ratio. On a serious race boat the skipper would've delegate much of the the responsibility to key crew members. Cruising is different because the sailing is more conservative so all the key tasks can adequately be concentrated in one person. For a race boat to work different jobs have to be farmed out to different people for it to work.
This poor skipper had all those tasks thrown back onto him before he even had to consider the training element.

It all started to go wrong when they hoisted a kite that was too light for the conditions. That decision should have been made by an experienced tactician who had his 'head outside the boat', in other words was able to focus on the strategy and tactics and not the details of sailing the boat. He'd have been able to carefully consider the factors involved. This skipper would have had to do tactics in addition to all his other jobs and clearly had his 'head inside the boat'. He would not have had time to think it through properly, so no wonder he made the mistake.

Then they messed up the peel to a heavier kite. The skipper presumably would've had to double up as crew boss to prepare that. A more experienced crew would've been able to manage that themselves.

Even if the serious crew had messed up, the bowman is in charge up for'd and it would have been his job to sort out the wrap, calling on assistance directly himself, not involving the skipper in managing it.

Liquid Vortex didn't have an experienced bowman. They also seem to have had half their paying passengers sleeping down below whereas a serious boat would have been unlikely to have more than a third of their crew off watch at any time during a race of that length.

The mate seems to have gone forward to play bowman, but my reading is that he had reasonable sailing experience but not necessarily serious racing experience. Doing bow is a highly skilled role.

So the skipper went forward himself. With too many crew down below and with those on deck being pretty inexperienced he had to pick the best helm available.

Contrast that with a serious boat where most of the afterguard could've taken the helm with the worst consequence being the loss of maybe a few tenths of a knot of average speed, if any.

On the serious boat many of the afterguard would be of YM standard and would have had no problem negotiating the collision risk with the fishing vessel.

He just had too many jobs to do.

 

[DaveS]

I thought this snippet interesting:

The only significant previous accident involving a vessel operated by Hot Liquid Sailing occurred on 17 January 2011, when Liquid Fusion, a yacht on a skippered charter, grounded on the Goodwin Sands after passing the wrong side of a lateral mark. The crew were airlifted to safety and the yacht later sank while under tow by the local lifeboat.

Maybe there's a reason for charging 3 grand a skull...

 

[nautical_badger]

I expect quite a few, having done 'a bit of sailing' want to 'do' a big race and have the money. Probably expect tough but 'fun' conditions. But perhaps not the continuous grind of really bad weather. So, tired and wonky, may get things wrong. 2 to 8 on experience to tyros is a lousy ratio.
DW

I haven't noticed anyone criticising the 20+ fleet of double handers for going out without enough experienced people on board. So it seems a little odd that the focus here is so much on the number of people on board that weren't so experienced.

If the minimum experience onboard was day skipper then I really dont see what the issue is. If you have that level of experience then you should really be able to point a boat in a straight line. Yes the conditions were tricky but by no means horrendous.

I think the more interesting point is that the skipper thought a bare headed hoist was a good idea in 30 knots of breeze. I know a fair few good race skippers and cant think of any of them that would go for that, even inshore with a decent crew. I mean how long does it take to put a headsail up first. Stops any possible wraps and that seems to have been where all the trouble started. Without the wrap no skipper on the foredeck and no issue. On the other hand I think its either a fairly poor mate that cant sort out a wrap on the foredeck or a poor skipper that doesn't trust his mate to get on with it.

 

[xyachtdave]

Had the breeze not picked up, this less experienced crew would have gone home having had a great time, the whole point of the 'corporate' (I really hate that word...) sailing days surely? Probably to be overheard bragging loudly about Fastnets etc in city bars, but that's a different topic....

As the experienced skipper and careful novice both know, the passage, sail plan and decision to leave port in the first place must be measured against the weakest crew member, not the most capable.

The hardest decision I ever have sailing is telling the family/friends 'We are not going,'.

Someone once said to me 'Think about what you are going to tell the lifeboat men when they rescue you and ask "What are you doing out here in that!?" when things get difficult,'

Having said that we start off with luck and no experience and hope to get some before the other runs out....

 

[Highland Bear]

Hot Liquid Sailing Ltd...from what I hear first hand from friends who have sailed with them, only a matter of time before a serious accident happened.