N. Sea Collision

Did I hear right on the news last night that the United States have said THEY will hold the inquiry into the collision withe the Stena Immaculate and the Box boat Solong? I would have thought that inquiry would fall under British law as the collision happened in British waters? Surely the USA would at best sit in on the inquiry not hold the inquiry?

There are plenty of Maderia flagged ships sailing in and around UK & Europe , nothing new about this FOC. I was on a Chemical Tanker Alcoha Chemist think it was about 18 hears ago. She was German owned German Captain , German mate, Filipinos. Myself as Chief and a Filipino 2nd eng. Good money but had work. Not the ship as it was tip top, just the schedule as you could be in and out of port sometimes as much as 2 or 3 days over a 24 hour period. The poor old mate was dead on his feet half the time.

Just qver 50 years, and in march there was a very similar collision involving a british tanker and a cargo ship.The cargo ship steamed straight into the side of the tanker and ruptured no 1 tank which was full of avation spirit .there was an explosian and the tanker was soon engulfed in flames.The crew managed to launch 2 lifeboats, however in the process three crew members lost their lives and 27 were injured.

#30 It’s not a a husky is it ? JS.

My experience of the North Sea was that there was an exclusion zone around every offshore installation . Semi submersibles was usually about 2 miles , one of the reasons was that in earlier times the normal layout of the average rig was 8 anchors and attached for recovery of these anchors were 8 large steel barrel buoys quite capable of being a real hazard to sinking a small vessel and even supply vessels had to have permission to enter this buoy buoy pattern from the IOM or the stand by safety vessel whose duty it was among many others to warn off vessels. It is rare these days to see such a method with buoys , instead the anchors are recovered with wire and chain chasers. However there was also a no go zone around jack ups of a smaller area depending on the work she was doing. One would think there were enough safeguards to prevent such collisions , apparently not , and agree the intelligence of some is sadly lacking. As for vessel fixing positions I was always brought up to get a coastal fix every 20 minutes if possible. JS.

#32, Are your thinking of the British Trent / Korean Container collision that happnen 20 + years ?

When I was on one of Cory's on he coal run, East coast ports to London, a flattop went missing coming out of the Thames, there where a few sea cadets on board for experience, the was no report of a collision by any ship, then one of Everads had to go into dry dock for some minor problem and they found that she had a huge rake under her Hull, it was later found that she had hit the Flattop without seeing her in the weather.
Des

According to one crew member, interview on net today, he said the container ship just came out of nowhere and doing a fair few knots.
Just had time to shout out to others, it just hit us and that was it.

Media outlets here in the u.k are running around having experts expounding their views on the causes of the collision. Last night ITV had the collision caused by dense fog at the time, implying that the container ship couldn't have seen the tanker until it was too late.!!!!FFS. This despite the fact that immediately after the collision live feeds showed that visibility was o.k
They then went to the simulator at shields college where they ran a real time simulation of the collision. Asked for the reason behind the collision the head of the marine college, said "simple, no one was watching".
Rgds
J.A

#32 James that was the collison between the British Trent and the Western Winner (Bulker), the below is a summary of the investigation, there were nine lives lost all from the Trent 3/6/93. I sailed on the Trent a few years before she was a great ship with good crew.

1. SUMMARY
At 0535 hrs (UTC+2) on 3 June 1993 the Bermuda registered tanker BRITISH TRENT,
25,174 deadweight tonnes, loaded with a full cargo of gasoline, disembarked her pilot at
the Pilot Station at the beginning of her voyage from Antwerp to Fiumicino in Italy.


At the same time the Panama registered bulk carrier WESTERN WINNER,
30,396 deadweight tonnes, part loaded with copper dross, was approaching the
Wandelaar Pilot Station inbound on a voyage from London to Vlissingen (Flushing).
The weather at the time was a north westerly wind force 3 with the visibility reduced by
fog to between 50 and 200 metres. WESTERN WINNER was proceeding at a speed
of 11.5 knots. BRITISH TRENT'S speed increased after disembarking the pilot until it
was 4 knots at 0542 hrs.


Both vessels were in the vicinity of the SW Akkaert Buoy which marks the south west
end of Akkaert Bank. BRITISH TRENT was deemed to be of such a draught that she
was not able to cross the bank and had to pass to the south of the buoy in order to
proceed to the westbound traffic lane. WESTERN WINNER was proceeding along the
eastbound traffic lane and also had to pass to the south of the buoy.


At 0543 hrs the vessels were in collision in a position 1.22 miles east of the SW Akkaert
Buoy. Both vessels' hulls were opened up at their port fore-ends and the cargo which
spilled from BRITISH TRENT immediately caught fire.


The result of the fire was that BRITISH TRENT had to be abandoned. Seven of the
crew were taken off by pilot launches and the remainder of the crew expected to leave
the vessel using the starboard lifeboat. This was frustrated when that side of the vessel
became enveloped in smoke and flame forcing the crew to jump into the sea amongst
patches of burning cargo. Twenty crew were rescued from the sea by the pilot launches
but nine died as a result of smoke inhalation.


The fire on BRITISH TRENT was extinguished after she had lost about 3,600 tonnes
of cargo, though there was no oil pollution. The remainder of the cargo was salvaged
but the vessel was declared a constructive total loss and scrapped.


The crew of WESTERN WINNER suffered no fatalities or injuries.


The immediate cause of the collision was the failure of both vessels to comply with the
International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea in conditions of
restricted visibility. Also the Master of WESTERN WINNER was unfamiliar with the
area. A number of recommendations are made which, if implemented, should help to
prevent recurrence of such an accident in the future

Talking about collisions does anyone have the story of the one between the Sunprincess and one of Harrison’s of Liverpool in the Little Bocas off Trinidad. I was mate on the Sunprincess in 1967 for the best part of a year and heard different versions of the causes . The most startling one was the mate who was British was not on the bridge during his watch but in the Stewardesses cabin.So I take all innuendos and fanciful stories with a pinch of salt and rely on the enquiry findings which is as close to the truth as one is going to get. There were a number of deaths mostly Trinidadians and although it was a number of years after this calamity the people of Port Of Spain still looked upon the Sunprincess as a death ship where a lot of their people lost their life’s. I did hear that the mate at the centre of the controversy carried on for a few years before they realised that his Liberian certificate which had been cancelled , someone had overlooked he still had his British master F.G.and this was then also cancelled . However this also was only hearsay. There used to be other people on site who worked for Saguenay Terminals of Montreal , maybe they could have more knowledge of the true facts , and if the rumours I heard were factual or not. Cheers JS