Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 17 December 2002, 08:28   #21
Member
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Town: Hilton-of-Cadboll
Length: no boat
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,801
Quote:
(nothing on SIBs either!)
Can't be much good then. Still I'll take a look.

Keith (there you go, a whole post without one mention of Orkney....doh!) Hart
__________________

__________________
Keith Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 08:52   #22
Member
 
Country: Greece
Town: Gloucetsreshire
Boat name: GATO DI MARE
Make: MAR.CO
Length: 9m +
Engine: Yamaha 200Vmax
MMSI: 235027678
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,339
Send a message via MSN to Manos Send a message via Yahoo to Manos Send a message via Skype™ to Manos
Pete7

I think your story sums it all up!!
Toooooooooooo many idiots out there and not only in this country Believe you me!!
So there I go again asking (again) for further tightening of the leisure boat regs. It will be safer for all concerned

__________________

Manos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 08:58   #23
Member
 
Country: Greece
Town: Gloucetsreshire
Boat name: GATO DI MARE
Make: MAR.CO
Length: 9m +
Engine: Yamaha 200Vmax
MMSI: 235027678
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,339
Send a message via MSN to Manos Send a message via Yahoo to Manos Send a message via Skype™ to Manos
Alan

As far as I know commercial cargo vessels have different spec design than those carrying passengers. This is because of lowring building costs. I think is fair. However, I believe that they all have very sofisticated radar and communication systems onboard.
I believe that there is a speed restriction in the Channel. I can't remember but any any case these ships wouldn't do more than 15-17 knots.
Now looking at this accident one can argue that maybe there was no crew on the bridge or if it was they were occupied with something else rather than navigating the vessel.
This is a REDICULOUS ACCIDENT and it was lucky that there were no dead people as well.
Manos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 09:55   #24
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Saltash, Cornwall
Make: Rib less:-(
Length: no boat
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 693
HI Guys
Does the name Andrea Doria ring a bell?
(first of many radar assited collisions) Could this be the latest?
Or where they doing an impression of the Greek Ferry that sank over the summer and all below watching the footy!

Until UK & France agree to take the liablity of runing a mandatory Vessel Traffic Scheme and inforce it you may well still get thing like this.
But can you regulate for people ignoring instructions and turning into overtaking vessels ( if this was the case).
From a deep sea survey point of view some times the only way to the attention of a vessel trying to sail over your sensors is to bounce white flares off the bridge!!!!!!!
Normally gets a responce!!
Not that I'm suggesting we addopt that as a method of getting attention or getting people to answer the VHF in the solent - no matter how tempting it may be!!
__________________
Jelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 10:40   #25
Member
 
Country: Greece
Town: Gloucetsreshire
Boat name: GATO DI MARE
Make: MAR.CO
Length: 9m +
Engine: Yamaha 200Vmax
MMSI: 235027678
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,339
Send a message via MSN to Manos Send a message via Yahoo to Manos Send a message via Skype™ to Manos
Jelly

The Greek ferry in Greece in Paros tragedy was one of the many. Another ferry collided (would you believe it) with Patroklos Island -crew blamed malefunction (the rudder stuck) in the navigation system?? and many more deadly accidents with the smaller high speed (Flying Dolphins) vessels in and around Aegina, Hydra and Poros islands...... and in all those accidents there was nothing wrong with viz!!

Makes one saaaaaad doesn't it??
Manos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 11:33   #26
Member
 
Country: Canada
Town: Newfoundland
Length: no boat
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,100
Quote:
Originally posted by Jelly
Until UK & France agree to take the liablity of runing a mandatory Vessel Traffic Scheme and inforce it you may well still get thing like this.
That was the holy grail of VTS's when I was studying 'em 12 years ago. Its the liability thing thats the killer as you rightly point out. No Govt has been prepared to take the liability claim of telling a ship what course to steer (say to avoid a collision) and then having it run aground, sink, explode etc etc.

Works with air traffic control though and given the publicity and justifiable outrage over the Prestige tanker sinking off spain perhaps the day is near that we will have compulsory VTS control over the Dover Straits.

'Course then we pleasure boaters'll probably be banned from the shipping lanes..................

Alan
__________________
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 13:36   #27
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Cheltenham
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 89
Im not sure that there is a speed limit in the seperation zones.
I was on a P&O ferry bridge and we were doing a steady 21 knts across the lanes, with more left in her.

The OTAL containership should do 20+ knots and the car carrier not much less than that.

As Manos said, ships manage to hit eac other in the middle of the ocean in good vis, Norwegian Dream off of Dover (2000 ?)

Trouble is that with the the hi-tec radar, the ships don't slow down much. The container vessel and the car carrier have a tight schedule, not that saftey should be jeapodised, but they are liners and are well equiped.

However they cant hear anything inside the wheelhouse really and you have to check the radar regularly as you all would think, but there are other things to do on the bridge also. There is a huge pressure on the crew, many who will have been working while alongside earlier.

But how you turn sharp right into a ship that probrably the best radar target you can get is quite something.

Whats worse there is an argument brewing over the French control of the area, or lack of it, as another ship apparenty missed the wreck by some 100 meters yesterday after an MCA aircfaft tried to warn it off, no other vessels in sight, waving it wings at low level!

All in all, this is a really good spot in the channel to cause chaos!

Salvage will take a few weeks depending on the weather, like the Herald of Free Enterprise.

(Did you know the Herald was refurbed and is working now, her sister the Spirit of Free Enterprise works in Europe after having modifications)

Tiger
__________________
Tiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 16:22   #28
RIBnet supporter
 
Brian's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Isle of Man
Town: Peel, IOM
Length: no boat
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,511
RIBase
Question. Surely large commercial vessels have collision warning systems on their RADARs don't they?
__________________
Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 16:27   #29
Member
 
Country: Canada
Town: Newfoundland
Length: no boat
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,100
Yes they do

similar to the MARPA function on your Raymarine Brian. But are they using them thats the question?! Also in a crowded shipping lane it is possible to get target overload I 'spose - so many alarms that you turn them off. In the end I guess this incident will come down to human error with an outside chance that the steering failed on the container ship causing it to do a hard turn to port and skewer the Ro Ro!

I read the article in Lloyds list (www.lloydslist.com) this morning too about near misses. Seems our French cousins are doing a piss poor job in warning traffic away from the area.
__________________
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 16:44   #30
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Portsmouth
Boat name: Not sure
Make: ABC/Priddy
Length: 10m +
Engine: 2 x 500 FPT
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 928
I hate to think what some of these skippers would do if it was realy busy, sat Singapore!! Wall to wall boats even we had to drive in and out of them to avoid collisions. Their idea of standing on is to have a cup of tea and wait for the bang! Alan P
__________________
Alan Priddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 18:13   #31
RIBnet supporter
 
Brian's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Isle of Man
Town: Peel, IOM
Length: no boat
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,511
RIBase
I have read the Lloyds report and I don't get it !!
If the wreck is guarded by 3 ships then 1 arial photo will prove/disprove it (lets face it, there must be enough press chaps up there!), and.....
If they are broadcasting the wrong position for the wreck, one tape recording of the broadcast will prove/disprove it.
Either way a) surely Lloyds have Agents etc. in France? and b) surely one discreet phone call from a Brit to his French working colleage should straighten things out?

This isn't one of those "damned Johny foreigner" things is it?
__________________
Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 18:18   #32
RIBnet supporter
 
Brian's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Isle of Man
Town: Peel, IOM
Length: no boat
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,511
RIBase
And another thing....
where are all you ribsters arguing for more tests/licences etc. now?
These ships have got ALL the right kit, ALL the highly trained and certificated officers (and possibly crew), ALL the regs. in the world, inspections etc., AND they are watched over on RADAR etc. by the Coastguards, AND they still get it wrong!!!!

"Hands off my RIB, Sir Humphrey!" Thats what I say !!
__________________
Brian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2002, 18:24   #33
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: Aberystwyth
Boat name: Undecided
Make: Undecided
Length: Undecided
Engine: Undecided
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 605
If commercial ship crews didn't have to have all these qualifications and have all the equipment, this sort of thing would happen a lot more often. You need to be licensed to drive a car, doesn't stop accidents happening, but it means that to get a license you have been trained in how to operate the vehicle correctly. I'm not saying any mandatory tests/licenses/regulations should be brought in for RIBs, but it could improve safety.

Think how many wrecked cargo ships there'd be in the English Channel if ship operators didn't have to spend all this money on complying with regulations. You'd still have some of the operators making sure that they're crews are properly trained and the boats are kitted out properly, but I reckon you'd get a lot of companies trying to cut costs and not bother with it.

As I've said in the past, I'm not saying more regulations should be brought in, I know that they would be nigh on impossible to police FULLY, but if they could be policed properly they would surely have a positive impact upon safety at sea in small craft.

Matt
__________________

__________________
narked is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT. The time now is 16:09.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.