MAIB Report, A Salutary Tale

[Observer]

Originally Posted by Polwart

Section 1.5.2 - "no moon"

Thanks - I missed that. Though it should have been mentioned and, of course, it was.

[spartacus]

Originally Posted by Observer

Don't 'drink and drive' is fine as far as it goes, but the direct cause of the accident, it seems to me, was the fact of navigating in the dark, at speed, without actually being able to see. That's simply dumb regardless of intoxication level.

All valid points. The deck light would have effectively blinded the coxswain. He relied heavily on the GPS as his sole navigation, and opened up the throttle when he thought he was clear of the harbour. Tragic.

Wonder if the relatives of the deceased ever took a private prosecution against the coxswain for manslaughter?

[Observer]

Originally Posted by spartacus

All valid points. The deck light would have effectively blinded the coxswain. He relied heavily on the GPS as his sole navigation, and opened up the throttle when he thought he was clear of the harbour. Tragic.

Wonder if the relatives of the deceased ever took a private prosecution against the coxswain for manslaughter?

I wonder if he even used the GPS, except perhaps to get an approximate heading. They didn't go out the same way as they came in so weren't following the GPS track from their earlier arrival. I'm guessing it was more a case of "let's head in this general direction", which is not good at speed, in darkness.

What is the #1 lesson to be learned from this? Is it "Don't drink and drive" or "Always have a passage plan" or (borrowing from road driving) "Always be able to stop in the distance ahead that you can see to be clear".

I know what my answer is.

[Grasshopper]

I can’t help thinking that this tragic accident may well have happened even if they had not been drinking. At the time of the accident light drizzle had been reported. I can imagine trying to see through the screen with the deck light on, it was probably like trying to drive a car in the rain, with no windscreen wipers and the interior light on, nigh on impossible.

I agree with observer’s analysis, but would like to add that it would be dangerous for any of us to think we could not get into a similar situation because we don’t drink and drive.

The trouble is, as soon as drink is involved you can here the cry’s “are well, there we have it, that’s what caused it” when the reality is humans have the capacity to compete for the Darwin Awards http://www.darwinawards.com/ irrespective of whether drunk or sober.

Although I will concede, that setting off three times over the drink driving limit was unlikely to reduce their chances of having an accident.

[alystra]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

I can’t help thinking that this tragic accident may well have happened even if they had not been drinking. At the time of the accident light drizzle had been reported. I can imagine trying to see through the screen with the deck light on, it was probably like trying to drive a car in the rain, with no windscreen wipers and the interior light on, nigh on impossible.............

Not sure that I agree. These guys were experienced, had done the courses, were well equipped. I bet if you'd asked them the morning of the day before how they would have left a harbour in the conditions described, they'd have said all the right things. They'd have made sure the plotter was working, sorted out an initial course (it only needed to be rough), turned out all the deck lights and waited for their night vision to improve, made sure they were all safely seated, set lookouts and most important of all, gone slowly until they were sure they were well clear of any hazards. Their training would have told them that conditions were poor and the trip potentially hazardous and I'm sure they'd have gone more slowly until well into the Sound of Mull.

Alcohol erodes even strong inhibitions and sense of responsibility quickly. They just didn't think. But they would have done, I'm sure, without the booze.

[chewy]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

I can’t help thinking that this tragic accident may well have happened even if they had not been drinking. At the time of the accident light drizzle had been reported. I can imagine trying to see through the screen with the deck light on, it was probably like trying to drive a car in the rain, with no windscreen wipers and the interior light on, nigh on impossible.

I agree with observer’s analysis, but would like to add that it would be dangerous for any of us to think we could not get into a similar situation because we don’t drink and drive.

The trouble is, as soon as drink is involved you can here the cry’s “are well, there we have it, that’s what caused it” when the reality is humans have the capacity to compete for the Darwin Awards http://www.darwinawards.com/ irrespective of whether drunk or sober.

Bollocks.

[BruceB]

We have carried out some fairly long and remote night passages with no moon. In fact only two weeks ago we ran from Oban to Lochaline at night to get over early morning and meet a dive boat to go diving. The waters are pretty easy to navigate in daylight but can be a bit tricky at night.
You can't see anything much and have to rely on electronic aids to a very large degree. In this part of the world there is little light from habitation or even nav lights to work out where you are. On a calm night without using electronic aids I am afraid it is all too easy to do something like this incident. Without a moon or when overcast it gets very dark up here...........
There was a similiar one a few years ago at Tarbert in much the same circumstances, alcohol, dark night and excessive speed when the exact position was not known and/or being monitored.
Unfortunately it has happened before and will probably happen again and all we can do is be prepared for the conditions to try and make sure it doesn't happen again soon.

[Nos4r2]

Courses don't make people have common sense...

[Mollers]

Originally Posted by John Kennett

Getting some training is a good indicator of having a bit of common sense though

True, but it wont prevent a 'mad moment'. A drunk car driver has passed a driving test.

I don't mind a pint, but operating a boat when hammered is utter madness.

[Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by chewy

Bollocks.

I’m not sure were interested in what’s keeping your ears apart.

[tonymac]

Its a very sad occurrence.

I'm sure they know what is to blame.

They will blame themselves for the rest of their lives.

We all have to learn from it - don't drink and drive anything!

[alystra]

Originally Posted by BruceB

We have carried out some fairly long and remote night passages with no moon. In fact only two weeks ago we ran from Oban to Lochaline at night to get over early morning and meet a dive boat to go diving. The waters are pretty easy to navigate in daylight but can be a bit tricky at night.
You can't see anything much and have to rely on electronic aids to a very large degree. In this part of the world there is little light from habitation or even nav lights to work out where you are. On a calm night without using electronic aids I am afraid it is all too easy to do something like this incident. Without a moon or when overcast it gets very dark up here...........
There was a similiar one a few years ago at Tarbert in much the same circumstances, alcohol, dark night and excessive speed when the exact position was not known and/or being monitored.
Unfortunately it has happened before and will probably happen again and all we can do is be prepared for the conditions to try and make sure it doesn't happen again soon.

You're right Bruce, it gets very dark. I've done the odd night passage round here, sometimes involuntarily in vile conditions. Without electronic aids they would have been very, very difficult - but possible by using local knowledge, going slowly and being very aware of my surroundings, tidal flows etc. A 'touchy feely' (almost) approach. Our dark nights can take visitors by surprise.

The tragedy, to my mind, in this incident was caused by excessive speed. At five or six knots, embarrassment may have been the only consequence. Plenty of police reality programmes on the TV show that drunken drivers, on the whole, drive too fast. They make errors of judgement and crash.

In this case, there may or may not have been an incident had the crew been sober, but I feel the consquences would have been far less likely to be so tragic.

[BruceB]

We did the trip from Millport to Tarbert last year after midnight in September and once we had left Cumbrae we saw nothing bar the odd lighthouse or bouy light almost all the way back, despite it being a clear night.
It was so dark that we stopped off the entrance to Loch Fyne and we could not see each other standing beside each other in the boat other than a vague loonming dark patch. (sometime this could be a good thing!) The phospherence in the water was lovely though and the stars were fantastic which is why we stopped.
On approaching tarbert we could only find the slip by using the searchlight even though we knew we were within 100 ft of it.
It does get dark up here
At night I tend to rely on my electronic aids as they are far more reliable than my eyes. The fact that I knew we would occassionally be out in the dark is the main reason why there are two completely independent systems on the boat......

[westerlystorm]

Quote from report

"The coxswain and his brother were thrown forward into the instrumentation panel and visor. The person standing directly behind was thrown forward, and landed on top of the coxswain and his brother. Gary Henaghan was thrown from the boat and landed on the rocky shoreline above sea level. The engine also stopped."



Based on the above, rather than blacken Redbay's reputation the report implies that the three on board who were in or behind the cabin were those who survived.

Gareth

[cuttlefish]

say it would blacken Redbay's reputation. I said that in the mists of time people might (I say, mighten) remember the accident and the image of the Redbay boat, and forget the exact details of the matter.

[westerlystorm]

Originally Posted by rupert

^ didn't^ say it would blacken Redbay's reputation. I said that in the mists of time people might (I say, mighten) remember the accident and the image of the Redbay boat, and forget the exact details of the matter.

I agree, everyone will take something different out of the report. This is very evident from the replies so far where stated facts in the report have been missed.

Equally Lowrance (chart plotter), Humber and Hella ( battery switch) were mentioned directly or their names and/or logos seen in the pictures.

Similarly the "Antrim Cruise" feature in the current edition of Rib International does little for ASIS or Suzuki (IMO) and if I worked for either of these companies marketing departments I would be none too happy.

In fact, I was in the market for a new rib this month and both Redbay and ASIS are equidistant from my home port and you can see from my profile which I went for.


So I do agree with you that names in reports do stick but lets hope that we learn from the conclusions of the report which the MAIB have done a good job in producing in a fair and rational way.

[cuttlefish]

with your comments, and your hopes for lessons to be learned.

You bought a good rib.

[westerlystorm]

Originally Posted by chewy

Isn't that what accidents are un-planned and un-forseen events.

Have a look at this now old but relevant document on accidents

http://www.osh.net/articles/archive/...001_june27.htm

Yes accidents are unplanned and un forseen with many contributing factors and it is all about minimizing risk.

With hindsight every accident could be avoided and it is reports like this which will hopefully make us add more bullet points to our mental or written checklist before putting to sea.

[Andre]

very interesting report and it is good that these are posted on the forum. One should learn from others mistakes especially when it comes to drink and drive as the same applies whether car or boat

what I find strange is that it says the Humber 630 was certified to carry 17 persons. That has be be a mistake. I would have thought 8 persons max

[alystra]

Originally Posted by Andre

..........................what I find strange is that it says the Humber 630 was certified to carry 17 persons. That has be be a mistake. I would have thought 8 persons max

I think the number of persons the boat is certified for is in the context of it being used in emergency as a rescue platform and is the maximum you can get aboard without the boat sinking or becoming dangerously unstable. While it may be moveable with such numbers aboard, that figure is not intended as a guide to the 'working complement' which, as you say, will be considerably less.