I read and reviewed the accident on my website a while ago and really you have to read the whole thing to get the idea. But surely no-one with any sense would have let that tow out of the harbour. At th end of my summary this was my comment:
"Words fail me really, and while I agree with almost everything the DMAIB have said, I find myself wondering about the view that the Maersk Chancellor was not equipped to carry out the “double tow”. According to my website all the C Class which were once OIL ships were equipped with two tow drums, and again according to the information I have, which was gleaned from the Maersk Supply website, the Maersk Battler had two work drums and one tow drum, actually making it slightly less suitable than the Maersk Chancellor. In fact any of the Maersk anchor-handlers could have carried out the double tow, particularly since it is likely that all of them carried a spare tow wire which could have been installed on a work drum. Did no-one realise this?
But, as is often the case, much of the process including the risk assessment was developed to validate what was in fact a flawed process, and let’s face it the whole job was based on doing things as cheaply as possible, and once every person with the appropriate levels of expertise had gone there was nothing to stop the disaster taking place."