Penlee RNLI Rescue Last Night

Capt Popeye

Well-known member
Joined
30 Sep 2011
Messages
18,830
Location
Dawlish South Devon
Visit site
if you had done even some basic research you would know that there was a helo there and it could not winch due to the conditions. Of course there is an argument that aborting the rescue when they had 4 casualties on board might have saved 12 lives and sacrificed 4. It's a hell of a bit of 20-20 hindsight though and requires you to believe you are better at decision-making than the people involved. I can make every decision easily when I know the outcome of the other options with certainty. The cox also knew with pretty much certainty what would happen if they didn't try.

they don't have lookouts - they have Maritime Rescue Coordination Centres. Your local station may well be managing a rescue at the other end of the country if the nearest facility is busy. Of course sometimes they look out the window - but if you do get a warm reception to your visit, ask them how often they discover situations by looking out the window and how often on VHF, Phone, Fax (AFAIK that's still how EPIRBs are forwarded on!)...

Yes well its all a mater of priorities ,consider what was possible at the time , lots of points (possibily lives) to consider , thats why I consider that the central decision making should not be left to a Cox who is up to His /Her neck in a dramatic constanly changing sittuation

Might suggest that sharing the lifesaving decisions is the best modern course of action

This sharing main considerations should have meant that the Ship was instructed to be taken in tow a long time before the sittuation became far more dangerous then not possible

Dunno if its the law now , but it b/well ought to be
 

penberth3

Well-known member
Joined
9 Jun 2017
Messages
3,685
Visit site
Yes well its all a mater of priorities ,consider what was possible at the time , lots of points (possibily lives) to consider , thats why I consider that the central decision making should not be left to a Cox who is up to His /Her neck in a dramatic constanly changing sittuation

Might suggest that sharing the lifesaving decisions is the best modern course of action

This sharing main considerations should have meant that the Ship was instructed to be taken in tow a long time before the sittuation became far more dangerous then not possible

Dunno if its the law now , but it b/well ought to be

Is there no end to this nonsense, Captain? IMHO you need to do a bit of private study.
 

zoidberg

Well-known member
Joined
12 Nov 2016
Messages
6,352
Visit site
I got into trouble crewing, some 25 years ago, on a friend's catamaran some 19nm south of The Lizard when a 'mad March' Easterly gale we'd dodged suddenly regenerated. Both engines stopped; the storm jib he'd borrowed couldn't be fitted. Night came on, the breaking seas got larger.... we were unmanageable and beam-on, at risk of being rolled over.

Well aware of the 'Slippery Slope' concept, at that 'marginal' VHF range and with 'questionable' battery power, I thought it prudent to tell Falmouth CG/Pendennis that we were there and that we were in some growing difficulty. They arranged the launch of the Kilcobben Cove boat - which had its wheelhouse windows smashed in by the seas as it launched straight into them.

They towed us to Newlyn. Why....? "Because we haven't been in there for a while - and we can get a good breakfast at the Seaman's Mission on the quay."

:cool:
 

jdc

Well-known member
Joined
1 Dec 2007
Messages
2,020
Location
Falmouth
Visit site
CP seems to believe that lifeboat crews are employees and semi-automatons. They aren't: they are volunteers, and as such their motives and feelings count (actually, this is true of a good employer also); if I was a lifeboat cox it would thoroughly demotivate me were I to have cow-tow to a civil servant the other end of the country when I was (i) on-site and (ii) and knew my patch.

It must be an essential part of the RNLI ethos that the crew take the decisions when it's they who are risking their lives.
 

Juan Twothree

Well-known member
Joined
24 Aug 2010
Messages
816
Visit site
CP seems to believe that lifeboat crews are employees and semi-automatons. They aren't: they are volunteers, and as such their motives and feelings count (actually, this is true of a good employer also); if I was a lifeboat cox it would thoroughly demotivate me were I to have cow-tow to a civil servant the other end of the country when I was (i) on-site and (ii) and knew my patch.

It must be an essential part of the RNLI ethos that the crew take the decisions when it's they who are risking their lives.

Also, much of the training the RNLI now delivers to its crew, and especially coxswains/helms, is to do with decision making and human factors.

They realised many years ago that there's no point in continually improving the boats and equipment if the weak link in the chain is the people who crew them.

Whilst technical and seamanship skills are still vitally important, they're also investing a lot of time and effort in non-technical stuff, CRM, that sort of thing.
 

zoidberg

Well-known member
Joined
12 Nov 2016
Messages
6,352
Visit site
Whilst technical and seamanship skills are still vitally important, they're also investing a lot of time and effort in non-technical stuff, CRM, that sort of thing.

I happen to know that Penlee boat cox'n Patch Harvey 'invests a lot of time and effort in non-technical stuff, Crew Resource Management, that sort of thing' with his crew and local supporters, down the local pub - they way they always have in that neck of the woods.

And rightly....
 

Tranona

Well-known member
Joined
10 Nov 2007
Messages
42,506
Visit site
Dunno if its the law now , but it b/well ought to be

What makes you think that the "law" has anything to do with how our rescue services are organised and operated? Although the government financed services have statutory obligations they say nothing about how the service is organised and how operational decisions are made. Such things are developed by the organisations themselves and are constantly reviewed and revised in response to experience, the operational environment and technical developments.
 

ylop

Well-known member
Joined
10 Oct 2016
Messages
2,545
Visit site
Yes well its all a mater of priorities ,consider what was possible at the time , lots of points (possibily lives) to consider , thats why I consider that the central decision making should not be left to a Cox who is up to His /Her neck in a dramatic constanly changing sittuation
if you have a fire in your house tonight do you want the guy in the white helmet to take charge of that situation or do you want someone in an office 50 miles away to decide which order to search the rooms in your house or whether to spend time getting water supplies in place or get in to find you first?

if you break your leg on a Scottish mountainside do you want the leader of the local mountain rescue team to plan and execute your evacuation or do you want a police officer in a call centre on the outskirts of Edinburgh to decide how you get down the mountain?

if you crash your car tonight and need an air ambulance do you want the HEMS doctor to take charge of your care and decision about how to treat, extract and evacuate you or would your own GP have a more detached view of all the circumstances?

If there is an armed maniac running around the streets of your neighbourhood do you want the first officers on scene to be able to take courageous but possibly dangerous action to stop him? Or the first armed response team to be able to decide how to contain the situation? Or would the best strategic action be achieved by convening a military special ops strategy group to advise the officers how to do their jobs?

Might suggest that sharing the lifesaving decisions is the best modern course of action
no professional rescue leader makes these decisions without taking into account information from as many sources as possible - you seem to have a belief that RNLI coxswains are out of their depth and acting blindly on instinct. Possibly because of a rescue which went badly over 40 years ago, but that (despite it being well documented) you seem to have done little research on.

This sharing main considerations should have meant that the Ship was instructed to be taken in tow a long time before the sittuation became far more dangerous then not possible
there was some dithering by the ships captain but nobody at the coastguard seemed to consider it a perilous situation to start with either. If anything that argues against the point you are making - had the CG officials joined the dots of where it was, how the weather was developing etc quicker then potentially both the help and lifeboat would have been called out an hour earlier, with potentially different outcomes. Of course the master may not have agreed to evacuating all the crew so early, it’s a very dodgy situation if people in an office can insist you abandon your boat against your will.

Dunno if its the law now , but it b/well ought to be
the law allows the secretaty of state’s representative to intervene and require vessels are taken in tow etc. he does this several times a year; once again you can find out about this with very easy research - no need to speculate. Ships obviously still end up in trouble despite this power. Either because they left it too late to call for help or the breakdown came too close to shore for a suitable tug to get there and secure a tow in time. This power is primarily used to stop vessels and their cargo causing pollution, rather than to save lives. Don’t forget a tug was offered (and eventually mobilised) for the Union Star. I’m not sure the SOSREP would have been that much quicker at getting a tug on scene - but in the conditions they were unable to get a tow line passed, that will always be a problem in the weather that turns a breakdown into a disaster.
 

Stemar

Well-known member
Joined
12 Sep 2001
Messages
23,908
Location
Home - Southampton, Boat - Gosport
Visit site
it’s a very dodgy situation if people in an office can insist you abandon your boat against your will.
Especially if that ship goes ashore and dumps 100,000 tons of crude across Cornwall's beaches.

Cornwall: That's £25,000,000 for the cleanup. Pay up.
Boat owners: Not our fault. Our engineers would have sorted the issue in another half an hour. RNLI/Coastguard can pay.
 

boomerangben

Well-known member
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Messages
1,233
Location
Isle of Lewis
Visit site
Yes well its all a mater of priorities ,consider what was possible at the time , lots of points (possibily lives) to consider , thats why I consider that the central decision making should not be left to a Cox who is up to His /Her neck in a dramatic constanly changing sittuation

Might suggest that sharing the lifesaving decisions is the best modern course of action

This sharing main considerations should have meant that the Ship was instructed to be taken in tow a long time before the sittuation became far more dangerous then not possible

Dunno if its the law now , but it b/well ought to be
So you are the one sat in the office at 2am, responsible making the big decisions on a rescue based on radio conversations, a weather report but otherwise blind, never having been on a lifeboat or in a helicopter, let alone out in those conditions. Is it fair to ask someone to take that responsibility? It’s not just unfair but in my opinion irresponsible and untenable.
I know from experience how hard it is to convey to someone 100s of miles away what exactly is going on especially when you are busy.
When a multi asset rescue operation occurs the CG can nominate an on scene commander to coordinate the finer details of an operation knowing that that might potentially take that asset out of front line duties. There is also well recognised guidance on how rescue operations are coordinated and carried out.
Ultimately skippers of all vessels and aircraft remain responsible (in law) for their crew and equipment. Only they can make decisions on what they can and can’t do
 

rotrax

Well-known member
Joined
17 Dec 2010
Messages
15,912
Location
South Oxon and Littlehampton.
Visit site
The Captain might want to reflect on this bit of truism that really does work.

"If it aint broke, dont fix it!"

The lifeboats have changed from the early salvage days of sailing vessels and local fishing fleets as technology changed. The exploding rockets for calling the crews and horse drawn trailers for the oar and sail powered lifeboats have changed as technology advanced.

The one thing that has not changed is the LB Skipper having control of the situation at sea.

Which, in my - and it apears most other - views, is the correct one.
 

zoidberg

Well-known member
Joined
12 Nov 2016
Messages
6,352
Visit site
Interesting to compare the answers here which largely support the principle of 'on-scene decisions remain with the on-scene commander' ( as I do ) with the growing reality in both naval and air operations.... that, due to miracles of real-time communications and instant visuals linked halfway around the world, a pyramid of Senior Managers is peering over the shoulder of a fast-jet pilot over Syria or frigate commander in the South China Sea.

There has always been a powerful urge to micro-manage.

I'm just reading a passage in Max Hasting's 'Chastise' about the skipper of one of the Dambuster bombers unplugging his ( new ) VHF headset, thus disconnecting all the distracting voices giving confusing advice, so he could focus on placing his 'Upkeep' Barnes-Wallis bouncing bomb exactly where it was needed.

The (wo)man doing the job is best placed to decide what resources are needed and how to deploy them. If guidance is wanted, it can be requested.
 
Last edited:

boomerangben

Well-known member
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Messages
1,233
Location
Isle of Lewis
Visit site
To add to my previous post, perhaps I should emphasise that I am referring to the actual rescue phase, which I think is generally the jist of the thread so far. The MRCCs play a much greater management role in search operations.
 

boomerangben

Well-known member
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Messages
1,233
Location
Isle of Lewis
Visit site
Interesting to compare the answers here which largely support the principle of 'on-scene decisions remain with the on-scene commander' ( as I do ) with the growing reality in both naval and air operations.... that, due to miracles of real-time communications and instant visuals linked halfway around the world, a pyramid of Senior Managers is peering over the shoulder of a fast-jet pilot over Syria or frigate commander in the South China Sea.

There has always been a powerful urge to micro-manage.
Is that because of corporate structure which is not fit for purpose or personality traits within that structure? And I am in no way suggesting that is the case here,I am talking generally. It is why CRM is so important not just in cockpits and cabins but in offices and boardrooms too.
 

zoidberg

Well-known member
Joined
12 Nov 2016
Messages
6,352
Visit site
There are different styles of management and of command. They are not the same thing, as I'm sure you know. Then there are the myriad complexities of 'personality under stress'.....

I've suffered the attentions of good managers and poor commanders - and vice versa - for many decades. I'm not alone in that experience, and I still have no clear conclusion on which I can pin the fates of myself and companions, on how best to solve the conundrum of 'how to skipper' both when things are going well, and when they're not.

Perhaps that's why I tend nowadays to sail solo..... for I manage to win those arguments, one way or another.

;)

Edit: I'll just include a quotation, verbatim, from a respected source - which has relevance to this discussion:
"....the Russians have retained an almost Soviet-style model of rigid, top-down command. The Ukrainians have adopted a flexible style akin to NATO's 'mission command' whereby the senior officer sets the objective but gives subordinates much greater scope to decide how to achieve it" - Mark Galeotti

Perhaps the best benefit to derive from near realtime communications between on-scene commanders and base 'head shed' is that better guidance can swiftly be provided should the nature of the task suddenly change and revised limits of authority, freedom of action and objectives be delivered.
 
Last edited:
Top