duncan99210
Well-Known Member
The MAIB report on the sinking of the "Orca" last year has been published. Available from their website via a news release.
"Orca" MAIB report
- Thread starter duncan99210
- Start date
sailorman
Well-Known Member
jordanbasset
Well-Known Member
Report here
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ent_data/file/428429/MAIBInvReport10_2015.pdf
Very sad
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ent_data/file/428429/MAIBInvReport10_2015.pdf
Very sad
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
They seem to have stuffed up their website - that link (which google finds as well) gives a 404. The report can be found at
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/555b29fde5274a74ca000007/MAIBInvReport10_2015.pdf
sailorman
Well-Known Member
It opened for me
jordanbasset
Well-Known Member
Still opening for me
colingr
Well-Known Member
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...ort10_2015.pdf gives a page not found for me but
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/555b29fde5274a74ca000007/MAIBInvReport10_2015.pdf works OK
Very sobering reading
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/555b29fde5274a74ca000007/MAIBInvReport10_2015.pdf works OK
Very sobering reading
Sailfree
Well-Known Member
Ironic that while both were wearing LJs the person wearing the one that failed to inflate survived and the person wearing the LJ that functioned correctly died either unconscious in the cabin or trapped by the inflated LJ.
Raises the question of whether a self inflating LJ or manual inflating LJ is preferred.
After careful consideration I decided that the risk of falling overboard or being knocked overboard unconscious was a bigger risk than being trapped in a flooded cabin so have opted for self inflation LJs but there is no 100% correct decision. I am sure that any functioning LJ is better than none.
Condolences to those involved.
Lesson learnt for me is don't assume the commercial vessel has seen you or that it wont change its course! I can empathise with the Orcas skippers position as we often sail with my wife sleeping through the early part of any cruise. I have got into the habit when on my own in the cockpit of peeing astern from the cockpit but my cockpit has a drop-able stern seat and the guard rails can stay in place.
Raises the question of whether a self inflating LJ or manual inflating LJ is preferred.
After careful consideration I decided that the risk of falling overboard or being knocked overboard unconscious was a bigger risk than being trapped in a flooded cabin so have opted for self inflation LJs but there is no 100% correct decision. I am sure that any functioning LJ is better than none.
Condolences to those involved.
Lesson learnt for me is don't assume the commercial vessel has seen you or that it wont change its course! I can empathise with the Orcas skippers position as we often sail with my wife sleeping through the early part of any cruise. I have got into the habit when on my own in the cockpit of peeing astern from the cockpit but my cockpit has a drop-able stern seat and the guard rails can stay in place.
bedouin
Well-Known Member
Sounds as if the LJ failing saved his life. His wife must have been desperately unlucky.
jordanbasset
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
colingr
Well-Known Member
The poor young girl who died recently in the speedboat accident at Poole also got trapped by a auto lifejacket trapping her under the boat if I recall correctly?
I must admit mine is self inflating, makes me wonder if that is the best choice.
Then again, like everything, it's an odds game. Are you more likely to be knocked out when going over board, in which case the auto option would be best or are you more likely to be blow decks, in which case removing the jacket or going for a manual one would be best. In our case with a small cuddy I'll stick with auto.
I must admit mine is self inflating, makes me wonder if that is the best choice.
Then again, like everything, it's an odds game. Are you more likely to be knocked out when going over board, in which case the auto option would be best or are you more likely to be blow decks, in which case removing the jacket or going for a manual one would be best. In our case with a small cuddy I'll stick with auto.
JumbleDuck
Well-Known Member
Particularly because she was outside when the collision happened and ended up inside the cabin. Jolted down the companionway by the shock of impact, I guess.
sailorman
Well-Known Member
Inrush of water was stated
we have just purchased Hammer Spinlock Deckvests. Life is a lottery & being trapped by the thing bought to save you is somewhat ironic.
To date we have rarely worn LJs & used a harness in rough conditions. Now older & less agile i went for the spinlock deckvest, who knows what is for the best, its a lottery.
I thought that the mention of not professionally tested comment was somewhat toeing a line, having said that the skippers did malfunction & aided him, he did have the strength & ability to open the forehatch, my wife certainly wouldnt have been able to
Last edited:
bitbaltic
Well-Known Member
Ours are Secumars, auto but with a seatbelt-style buckle which makes them quick and easy to take off (and put on again). I may consider a 'no jacket required' policy when going below after reading this.
All LJs should be de-flateable in an emergency by pushing in on the oral tube. However they are pretty cumbersome when inflated and I haven't tried to do this or see how effective it is. If you have jackets where this is at all possible it could be a reminder inserted into a crew briefing?
Capt Popeye
Well-Known Member
A very sobering report into this tragic incident, lots to learn from it, suggest that the most sobering observation is that everyone on board should be involved in crewing the boat except when they are 'off watch' probably below and at least one person 'on watch' at all times when there are other craft in view.
Anticipating movements of other craft, especially commercial craft, should never be assumed, I remember the old East Coast skipper adage 'never follow a Barge they just might be heading to load sand' so are running aground.
prv
Well-Known Member
It says he was below for at least five minutes, so I don't think it was just a pee. Don't want to sound wise after the facts, but I wouldn't be comfortable going below for that long singlehanded in coastal waters. Some question I suppose over whether he was in fact expecting the missus to keep an eye out, despite what the report says.
Pete
Talulah
Well-Known Member
I went below for a pee whilst single handed at night.
Pitch black. No sign of anything around. Came up a few minutes later to see a boat load of fisherman with lots of head torches shining my way. They had no illumination at all whilst fishing. Had I been down below for an extra 30 seconds it could have made for an interesting moment.
On the subject of lifejackets: I would suggest auto's are best for cruising. You can always unscrew the firing mechanism to revert to manual only.
Pitch black. No sign of anything around. Came up a few minutes later to see a boat load of fisherman with lots of head torches shining my way. They had no illumination at all whilst fishing. Had I been down below for an extra 30 seconds it could have made for an interesting moment.
On the subject of lifejackets: I would suggest auto's are best for cruising. You can always unscrew the firing mechanism to revert to manual only.
RichardS
N/A
at least one person 'on watch' at all times when there are other craft in view.
Very sad. As you imply, time seems to pass much more quickly than you expect when you are sailing with large vessels around. Perhaps it's too easy to unconsciously assume that eveything is moving at a similar speed to you. I have been surprised when I've spent a few "seconds" reading that next page in my book only to look up and see that large ship is now suddenly much closer than I expected.
There but for the grace of God.
Richard
prv
Well-Known Member
I'm not quite sure what to make of that. It doesn't actually say "professionally tested", just "serviced" (page 14). I'm quite comfortable with my annual service regime, so if they were telling me I ought to pay someone to do it then I would disagree. However, you do have to actually do the job properly - the fact that the skipper's bottle was unscrewed with corrosion on the threads, and an already-fired auto cap, relatively early in the season, shows that whatever he did it clearly didn't amount to a proper service. He claims to have "inspected" the jackets - does that just mean a look over the outside?
Pete
RichardS
N/A
I wondered that earlier on in the report but I then understood that they actually asked the skipper whether he was expecting his wife to keep a look out and he said not. That has to be conclusive.
Richard
