MAIB report

Have not read the report but watched an item on South Today. It said the watch officer had seen the boat about 300m away but the report was critical that the P+O ship did not stop to ensure the yacht was safe!!

Still at least P+O timetable did not get delayed.
 
And per MAIB, your octahedral reflector is rubbish. I await their report on 1/5 with interest. Rubbishing a cheap solution that works better than nowt and can be fitted (and thus probebly will) by every budget seems counterintuitive to me.
 
Am I right in my understanding?

With the loss of Ouzo and the finding of the bodies the investigation team were at a complete loss as to the circumstances. The timing/location of the body finding gave the team an indication of the likely area in which the incident occured and Pride of Bilbao, and other vessels in the vicinity at the time, were looked at.
From what I saw on the news some 10 days to 2 weeks later suspicion was focussed on the PofB because the investigation team had identified marks on the hull consistent with a rundown and the location/timing was right.

So to me, and I say alledgedy, it would appear that Pride of Bilbao may not have reported the incident and it took investigative powers to uncover the facts.
 
Although a relatively minor point - as it would not have changed the outcome of this tragedy, I certainly hope that their recommendation on lifejackets & crotch straps is acted upon by the British Standards Institute.

Marc.
 
I think the main point is that octahedral reflectors tend to be mounted "point up", which dramatically reduces their effectiveness as opposed to the "catch rain" position which much better reflects a radar beam back to its source. (Page 29 of the MAIB report)

Perhaps they should be sold with a three point mounting kit which encourages them to be hoisted in that position.
 
So many lessons to be learn't here

Nav lights maintenance and test,
Visibility when heeled Radar and Lights
Lookout and warning flares, flashlight, VHF etc
Vessel altering course towards standon vessel

The major point for me is that the lookout should have considered the possibility of impact and instead chose to "assume"/"deny" and because of that did not raise the alarm to verify safety after the apparent collision. This is the real crime!

I certainly will review the points here and check the safety kit onboard

Lets hope lessons will be learned
 
[ QUOTE ]
Further investigation on this subject has also revealed that, to all intents and purposes, as soon as a person’s eyes are subjected to white light, their dark adaptation time starts again from zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought there was a thread on here recently with some pointers to research which said that red light made no difference to night vision? I must admit, I've always used dim red lights at night when using the telescope or at the helm, so that thread suprised me. Do I remember it incorrectly?

Rick
 
The report made chilling reading, particulary the speculation as to the view from Ouzo's cockpit. To see the ferry's lights alter as she made her turn at the waypoint would have given the yacht crew a great deal of comfort and probably "stood them down" a notch or two in their state of alert. MARPA, AIS, radar and all the kit in the world would only confirm the impression that they had been sighted and the ferry was giving sea room, by the time it became clear that she had no such intention it would all be too late.

My reaction to this will be:

Lights on all life jackets
I will look at fitting the EPIRB in a hydrostatic release shell
I will look at moving our valise liferaft on deck whilst on passage and consider swapping for a cannister and hydro release at a later date.

I need to check the lamp glass on our tri-colour, but it is only 5yrs old and if the side/stern light lenses, which have far more use, are any indication of condition I don't think there is too much of an obscuration problem.

Despite some implied deficiencies PofB would appear to have been keeping a good look out, which isn't particularly reassuring, and the main point of concern is the lack of follow up to ascertain the situation of the yacht and its crew.
 
I must admit I was left with a feeling that the actions that could have avoided this tragedy only became obvious with hindsight. It also re-inforces what I've been told that many bridge officers give more attention to the radar than to the Mk 1 eyeball lookout, 'though at least P&O insist on maintaining it.

This year I fitted a fixed reflector, because our flat pack 18" octahedral tends to be hoisted only in reduced visibility, and is not easy to control in any amount of wind so isn't always used when sailing at night.
Also I've finally got round to re-instating the spreader lights, which could be switched on to illuminate the sail, although at the cost of destroying my own night vision.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Also I've finally got round to re-instating the spreader lights, which could be switched on to illuminate the sail, although at the cost of destroying my own night vision.

[/ QUOTE ] Good point. My deck flood light has failed, possibly only needs a bulb replacing, but I haven't bothered because we tend to use led headlamps now.
 
AIS and the MAIB report

Given the generally increased level of interest in AIS, this paragraph might be of concern;

<ul type="square"> 2.6.6 AIS
AIS is being carried by an increasing number of yachts, partly to assist in their being more “visible”. Had Ouzo carried AIS it would have made no difference to the outcome as AIS information was not displayed on the radar of Pride of Bilbao. This situation should improve as AIS is being integrated into more ships’ systems in the future. [/list]
 
not sure about your memory but if the procedures are in place for documented reasons - red instrument settings at night / watch timings to permit aclimitisation etc and then overridden individually (watch officer resetting instruments white) and corporately (lookout required to undertake other duties that will involve exposure to significant white light regularily) - then somethings very wrong!

use of reacolite glasses at night is also clearly a huge issue - but you can see the issues because in times of high intensity light they will be a significant advantage. Requireing everyone to have both realistic?
 
I having recently bought a pair of glasses with photochromic lenses I was particularly interested in the findings in 2.5.3
My new lenses at least appear clear in poor to average light but I will now be watching to see if that clarity degrades over time.
 
Re: AIS and the MAIB report

I *think* they are referring to yachts broadcasting AIS. I do not think anyone would mistakenly think having a AIS receiver makes you more visible.

Aside from that, the comment is confusing. Had Ouso had an AIS receiver, could they have done more to keep out of the way?
 
Thanks for the link.

A sobering read. Once again I am impressed by the clarity and well reasoned report from the MAIB.

I will certainly be more thorough in not allowing saloon lights to be used in the nightime and ensuring one person on deck preserves their night vision if another plots position.

Interesting that they could triangulate the mobile phone position so long after the event. Waterproof mobile case seems to be a good investment for coastal cruising. We have a handheld VHF on board but as a charter boat it can suffer misuse. I will ensure I always test it in future. Personal one may be next investment.

While boat has 12 lifejackets to required standard SWMBO and I have our own personal ones with crutch straps , auto inflate, stobe lights and spray hoods but the report is a good reminder that I must check the gas bottles!!

After carrying a mini flares pack in our wayfarer I insist that we each have a packet of mini flares in our salopettes pocket. I also ask/recommend friends to buy their own pack if we do a X channel. With the perfect wisdom of hindsight would the £30 investment in min flares be the best insurance we could all make.

As always from these sad events we can all learn something or improve something. Initially after the event I made a big point of emphasising the need for a regular stern lookout - hadn't considered the senerio of a ship changing course not having seen us.

I always use Radar for X channel runs but will now reflect on whether to always use it in darkness. I know the PC answer but in the end we go out to sail to enjoy ourselves, certainly risk anaysis needs to be part of it but would not like to get to the stage where I must always monitor radar when pleasure sailing in good visibility.

I will have to reflect on whether my safety briefing changes but would hate to get to the stage where I cover so many what ifs when the biggest risk on our boat in reality is a bad scald as the tap water is really boiling if the engine has been running!

EDIT - extra thought - we have an EPIRB held in a bracket by the companionway stairs - would it be better to remove it and place it in the cockpit table locker before each night time Xing so it is more readily available for deployment in the event of a catastrophic event. The though of trying to go down to get it when others are trying to evacuate may not be the best idea!
 
A sobering read, but, as others have commented, very well reasoned with good learning points.

It's reinforced my aversion to night time sailing tho'...
 
Re: AIS and the MAIB report

The quote is not about Ouzo having an AIS receiver but that "AIS information was not displayed on the radar of Pride of Bilbao".

In other words, having an AIS transponder on a yacht seems to be pointless if vessels such as the Pride of Bilbao do not integrate AIS moinitoring into their lookout procedures.

EDIT: The concern must surely be that Class B AIS is designed to make yachts more "visible" to ships and vessels for whom Class A AIS is mandatory.

I find it disturbing that an authoritative body sich as MAIB can report (without further comment) that a yacht AIS transponder would not have been integrated into the radar of a large fast-moving ferry.

This raises a serious question as to what is the purpose of AIS? And, is it actually effective? If not, why has it been the subject of endless article in the sailing press, the RYA, the MCA etc etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top