lw395
Well-Known Member
I think the RYA looked into that because it was a dinghy incident on a pond, somewhat outside MAIB's remit of ships and the ocean.
Terrible news from Clipper
- Thread starter Gerry
- Start date
I think the RYA looked into that because it was a dinghy incident on a pond, somewhat outside MAIB's remit of ships and the ocean.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
Please remember that the cause of the failure is still uncertain. The Clipper group has since mentioned that it might not have been the cleat, which makes sense, because the damage pattern is wrong for a cleat (Practical Sailor Magazine testing--there's your Ralph Nader).
Second, this is only one incident. What we have discovered is that the Gibb-style hook is flimsy in a number of loading scenarios. We think we can tell how it happened, but it doesn't actually matter which one it was this time. Next time the hook will be twisted in some other way and the same thing will happen. Our time would be better spent thinking through what all of those scenarios are and changing our rigging to avoid them. For example, more dedicated hard points located such that bad loading was impossible would help. My boat has 6 hard points on deck (bow, mast, transom). All evidence suggests this would not have happened on a U-bolt that was properly located. Jacklines are for moving to and from but not very good at protecting the sailor when he is working. I don't see any hard points on a Clipper bow, just a selection of bad alternatives.
Second, this is only one incident. What we have discovered is that the Gibb-style hook is flimsy in a number of loading scenarios. We think we can tell how it happened, but it doesn't actually matter which one it was this time. Next time the hook will be twisted in some other way and the same thing will happen. Our time would be better spent thinking through what all of those scenarios are and changing our rigging to avoid them. For example, more dedicated hard points located such that bad loading was impossible would help. My boat has 6 hard points on deck (bow, mast, transom). All evidence suggests this would not have happened on a U-bolt that was properly located. Jacklines are for moving to and from but not very good at protecting the sailor when he is working. I don't see any hard points on a Clipper bow, just a selection of bad alternatives.
lw395
Well-Known Member
The fact that it's a race does not alter the fact that the boats are UK ships subject to regulation.
The people aboard are paying for a package.
They pay up with little or no prior knowledge of the safety issues.
They are not in a position to make the kind of informed decision you could make if you'd already sailed an ocean or two.
There is an intrinsic danger in being aboard a small vessel miles offshore.
There are other dangers which can be either reduced or amplified by the way the craft is operated.
I've only done a couple of ocean crossings, but in those, and in many miles of other sailing, I've not known anyone seriously fall and only be saved by their tether.
If people are routinely testing their tethers, you're doing it wrong.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
My car seatbelt analogy was not to suggest they were equivalent engineering problems. That is obviously not the case. The point was that the fall restraint system should be a designed part of the boat, not an afterthought. My other point is that the systems should not be removable--they should be installed so as to be available 24/7. You don't need to clip in, but it should be there, always. Like seatbelts, once you start thinking that way, people will get used to seeing the hardware and will expect it.
Another common complain is that it is awkward to use. In fact, that is what made Volvo's invention important. Before that they did not retract and were two-piece. No one used them. So if the system is awkward, start there. Better harnesses that don't hang off oversized PFDs, fitted over baggy foulies. Fix that. For example, a fitted drysuit is a much better bow costume. Design tethers that absorb force. Figure out where the clipping points need to be. Make sure everything works with the running rigging in place. In other words, solve it one piece at a time. The current solutions look like (and were) designed by a committee.
Another common complain is that it is awkward to use. In fact, that is what made Volvo's invention important. Before that they did not retract and were two-piece. No one used them. So if the system is awkward, start there. Better harnesses that don't hang off oversized PFDs, fitted over baggy foulies. Fix that. For example, a fitted drysuit is a much better bow costume. Design tethers that absorb force. Figure out where the clipping points need to be. Make sure everything works with the running rigging in place. In other words, solve it one piece at a time. The current solutions look like (and were) designed by a committee.
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
I'm trying to work out the assumption you're making here.
The assumption I made from what was said was that the cleat formed no part of the jackstay system and was simply in the way as the tether of the casualty was dragged aft along the jackstay once he went in the water.
I'm therefore not sure why you're thinking of replacing the mooring cleat with a U bolt.
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
OK. I don't agree about the not removable though. I leave my jackstays permanently attached, but I also understand that this does lead to UV degradation and I have to replace them every few years.
They are also a bit awkward to use. Wires are much easier to use, but then you have the issue of them being a danger underfoot, so taking it all together webbing jackstays are safer I reckon.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
I was not clear. Yes, he would still have gone in the water, but he would have remained attached to the boat. They had fished one guy out (two went over) and were in the process of getting him when the tether failed.
I did not say to replace the cleat with a U-bolt. I said if he had been clipped to a U-bolt the tether would not have failed. The facts support this, since the clip is very strong when loaded in straight line.
That said, I can see a good case for covering the cleat while sailing. It's just in the way and is a snag problem.
Last edited:
thinwater
Well-Known Member
These are all problems easily resolved in the design phase. They are only negatives if you cannot solve them. I solved them on my boat. The solution will not be the same for every boat. No excuses can be allowed.
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
Ah OK, I understand now. However I'd be concerned that the risk there is increased if he had to move around a lot and transfer the clip back and forth. You'll know yourself that sometimes on the foredeck you have to move quite quickly and at least being on a jackstay gives you some freedom of movement.
Thistle
Well-Known Member
Interesting that while car seatbelts have been mentioned, no-one has suggested a series of inertia reels attached to the boat. Move around by attaching to the next one before releasing the first one. Not that I'm suggesting using the reels currently used in vehicles: they would be unsuitable from a number of points of view. It may, however, be a concept worth considering.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
On Clipper the jackstays are attached to the transom horn cleats, sewn loops on tape lashed with cord to the vertical pole of the cleat. They run clean to the bow. being large decks they have inboard jackstays, jackstays commencing at the hatch/companion way and aligned to each of the 2 helms running down the cockpit. Most of the bow and foredeck is devoid of any attachment points and any hand holds (other than the jackstays). The only real hand holds, forward of the hatch, are the mast, stanchions, shrouds and stays, aft of the hatch there are lots of items, dominant being winches. At the bow there is a pulpit, inner stay, forestay, and a halyard for a code zero etc (out on a bowsprit). There may be flush hard points (the decks were covered with sails in sailbags when I saw the yachts - I was there for other reasons).
There is another issue - Simon died, drowned? in 30 minutes. He might have been injured and or incapacitated when we went over the side. I had 'fondly' imaged that in a MOB in the cold of the Southern Ocean your chances of being recovered in minutes, which is what happened, was minimal - but with the appropriate kit and if you were picked up - you would survive. I had though the safety kit worn (and the life jackets, harnesses and tethers are all stored together before you leave the cabin) would keep you alive (stop you downing). I believe Simon was in the water for just over 30 minutes, which is a fairly swift recovery time - how many of you have done an MOB in rough water and can put hand on heart and say you could equal that timing - your MOB could be dead when you get him on board!
The nets, jackstays appear to have been installed as well as any, or better, I have seen. The harnesses are standard, as are the tethers but the hook appears to have failed due to a sideways force - we don't know how that sideways force developed (and in fact no-one in the crew may actually have seen it - they were busy). But the fact it failed with a sideways force certainly implies to me that it was insufficiently strong - and a sideways force should have been anticipated (its a yacht). The crew I spoke to said he was correctly attached (whatever that means).
Thinwater states there are hooks available off the shelf that are adequate, or are at least better than the ones used, and are stronger (much?) than the ones used. If Thinwater knows about them others should also know. The fact the ones used meet a straight line pull, the standard, is not justification - if there are other hooks doing the same task that are better - and someone, somewhere should have known there are better hooks.
So the tether (hook) was inadequate and the kit he was wearing, and I only assume foul weather gear and lifejacket, was inadequate for the situation in which he found himself.
The marine industry should anticipate a sideways pull - and the equipment should be tested as such. But equally the system, jackstays etc etc, should be such that a sideways pull is minimised.
Whoever sets the standards is one question. But independent testing of equipment, by knowledgable organs, is part of the checking that everyone is on the same page. We are lucky that America's Practical Sailor look to have initiated an investigation - which will produce some sort of guidelines at least 12 months and probably 18 months before we hear anything from the MAIB. There is no reason that PBO/YM could not have a similar investigation with hopefully different inputs (they test anchors more frequently than hooks).
In the past I have asked Clipper about their ground tackle, they use Deltas. I was surprised - it seems an anachronism - every other racing yacht carries alloy (and uses them), Volvo, Vendee Globe. Clipper do not use their large Delta (so I have been told) but do use the small one - because its more manageable. I don't have the precise detail but the main anchor and chain, all stored in the forepeak, must weigh about 100kg. It is daft to have equipment on board that is inconvenient to use (you may as well leave it at home). But other, arguably better, anchors are available.
The industries, marine and publication should be more pro-active.
Jonathan
There is another issue - Simon died, drowned? in 30 minutes. He might have been injured and or incapacitated when we went over the side. I had 'fondly' imaged that in a MOB in the cold of the Southern Ocean your chances of being recovered in minutes, which is what happened, was minimal - but with the appropriate kit and if you were picked up - you would survive. I had though the safety kit worn (and the life jackets, harnesses and tethers are all stored together before you leave the cabin) would keep you alive (stop you downing). I believe Simon was in the water for just over 30 minutes, which is a fairly swift recovery time - how many of you have done an MOB in rough water and can put hand on heart and say you could equal that timing - your MOB could be dead when you get him on board!
The nets, jackstays appear to have been installed as well as any, or better, I have seen. The harnesses are standard, as are the tethers but the hook appears to have failed due to a sideways force - we don't know how that sideways force developed (and in fact no-one in the crew may actually have seen it - they were busy). But the fact it failed with a sideways force certainly implies to me that it was insufficiently strong - and a sideways force should have been anticipated (its a yacht). The crew I spoke to said he was correctly attached (whatever that means).
Thinwater states there are hooks available off the shelf that are adequate, or are at least better than the ones used, and are stronger (much?) than the ones used. If Thinwater knows about them others should also know. The fact the ones used meet a straight line pull, the standard, is not justification - if there are other hooks doing the same task that are better - and someone, somewhere should have known there are better hooks.
So the tether (hook) was inadequate and the kit he was wearing, and I only assume foul weather gear and lifejacket, was inadequate for the situation in which he found himself.
The marine industry should anticipate a sideways pull - and the equipment should be tested as such. But equally the system, jackstays etc etc, should be such that a sideways pull is minimised.
Whoever sets the standards is one question. But independent testing of equipment, by knowledgable organs, is part of the checking that everyone is on the same page. We are lucky that America's Practical Sailor look to have initiated an investigation - which will produce some sort of guidelines at least 12 months and probably 18 months before we hear anything from the MAIB. There is no reason that PBO/YM could not have a similar investigation with hopefully different inputs (they test anchors more frequently than hooks).
In the past I have asked Clipper about their ground tackle, they use Deltas. I was surprised - it seems an anachronism - every other racing yacht carries alloy (and uses them), Volvo, Vendee Globe. Clipper do not use their large Delta (so I have been told) but do use the small one - because its more manageable. I don't have the precise detail but the main anchor and chain, all stored in the forepeak, must weigh about 100kg. It is daft to have equipment on board that is inconvenient to use (you may as well leave it at home). But other, arguably better, anchors are available.
The industries, marine and publication should be more pro-active.
Jonathan
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
That's interesting. If you've come up with jackstays that are immune to UV and have no resulting negative features you should market them.
Or are you still waiting for the patent?
thinwater
Well-Known Member
That's interesting. If you've come up with jackstays that are immune to UV and have no resulting negative features you should market them.
Or are you still waiting for the patent?
Funny. I my case it was a matter of routing them along the cabin chime. In my new boat they run along the edge of the tramps, similarly out of the way. They also terminate considerably before the bow or stern. Thus, they are not underfoot. In both cases, webbing would have been more difficult to work with. As I said, each boat will be different. I find that if you give inventive engineers a performance-based goal they can figure it out. Don't nail down the details too early.
Regarding UV resistance, remember that they can be considered a wear item, replaced on a schedule. If webbing is the only alternative, find one that is reasonably resistant and is strong enough to stay above the design limit for a few years. Totally doable. For example, one common solution here is to run 6mm Dyneema braid inside the webbing. Does not roll, very strong, very UV resistant.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
I think considering they are a safety feature the idea of retiring them, every 12 months - say, does not seem unreasonable. You can chop them up and use them for fenders, sail ties, bird scarers? - the limit is your imagination. The alternative is to instal them every time you go sailing. The Clipper race is an 11 month event, so 12 months seems about right. We used to remove our spinnaker sheets at the end of every race, and instal a week later. On our current yacht we remove lifebuoys and danbuoy when we moor the yacht and reinstall every time we leave the mooring. We place our EPIRB in a locker and take out every time we go offshore. When we raced we would flake our headsails and roll the main at the end of every race and store along the length of the cabin sole. Before every race we would re-pack 2 spinnakers - replacing jackstays is hardly onerous.
Jonathan
Sorry, posts overlapped.
Jonathan
Sorry, posts overlapped.
lpdsn
Well-Known Member
OK, although i guess for the majority of us jackstays on the side decks are underfoot. Not sure about how the Dymeena braid run inside the webbing makes much difference to usability. Clipping on and off a wire is easy. Sometimes getting a clip off a webbing jackstay doesn't work first time and you have to use the second hand, which of course can be awkward or even dangerous, if it was otherwise the one hand for yourself. Dyneema run inside the webbing doesn't sound as if that'll make than any easier.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
a. I said every boat was different.
b. The Amsteel reduces stretch and increases the life span (not as UV vulnerable and stronger to start with).
c. The reason you are snagging on webbing is the clips you are using. Not to sound sarcastic, but you've been using two hands and didn't realize something was very wrong? That should never happen. Do you think they could sell even ONE carabiner into the climbing market that required two hands, ever? Of course they could not. So ditch what I presume is a Gibb, Spinlock or Wichard hook and switch to keylock. Again, this is a solvable design problem. My clips never snag.
D
Deleted member 36384
Guest
Do you have a link to an example, many of us will not be familiar with climbing gear or 'keylock'.
A google suggests that it is a twist lock carabiner, but so many types.
Last edited by a moderator:
dunedin
Well-Known Member
Yes, as thinwater seems to be claiming knowledge of better equipment than Robin Knox Johnston and the Clipper team are aware of he should advise everybody asap so that the better hooks are installed before anybody else is put at risk. RKJ specifically stated that they were not aware of safer clips being available.
Absolutely. I am amazed that none of the manufacturers of the safety tethers seem to have routinely tested side breaking force, following the lessons of the Fastnet and Sydney Hobart races for example. If true, it does seem slightly less than professional approach to key safety gear design and testing pre-sale
penberth3
Well-Known Member
I'd be surprised if there is a test for this - given the number of different ways a side load could be applied. Is any lifting or safety gear tested for side loading?
ShinyShoe
Well-Known Member
Yet - until legislation required they were worn I seem to recall plenty of middle aged men behind the wheel who didn't wear one. I can't comment on the "too cool" kids because I wasn't being driven round by teenagers. Watching an episode of real life police TV usually shows someone pulled over for no seat belt. That is despite technology that isn't usually that tricky to use, often has dashboard lights and warnings to remind you to wear them and now air bags that explode when you bump into something.
So if we haven't cracked it for cars I'm surprised we think we would have on an ocean crossing racing yacht.
And if we did have the option to get out the car, top up the screen wash while running down the motorway (sounds quite useful*!) - I'd bet we'd invent a tether system to make it safer. But I'd guess it might take a few losses before we got it right.
(*why is screenwash under the bonnet? Why do so few cars have a level indicator)
Really? What like buying a ticket to go to London on the train?
I thought there was a selection process - with psychologists and all sorts involved to (a) make sure you would fit in the team (b) be up to the job.... ...do they not discuss risks? I've not seen a Clipper Relative banging the drum saying "How could this possibly have happened?" I think they actually have a pretty reasonable idea that it could all go horribly wrong.
Really? So if I need an operation and am asked to make an informed decision if the risks of death outweigh the benefits for me - I can't actually do that unless I've had the operation a couple of times before?
But until I go on a specific boat I won't know if its well operated or not will I?
Yes I can look at their past incidents etc, but the skipper may be different for this mission etc. I'm not a passive passenger on a 747 who has no control what the pilot and co-pilot are doing or the engineers pre-flight or the Boeing designers etc. I'm a part of a team forcing a boat round the world as quickly as possible. The whole team is responsible for safety.
Were you RACING in the Southern Ocean?
If I sailed across the Atlantic in a boat I was specifying - I'd do everything possible to not need to go out front to change sails. But that wouldn't be the fastest sail. But I would arrive alive. But saying I'd crossed the ocean would be enough for me, not winning a race.
I've driven a car round Silverstone. I didn't crash. The F1 guys must be doing it wrong.