Stena Immaculate on fire off UK

When did the watch keeper on Stena Immaculate notice there was a vessel on a collision course?

Could they potentially be apportioned some blame if they didn’t notice a vessel proceeding straight towards them?

If they had noticed they could have taken measures to move out of the way, deployed more anchor chain etc.

They could have called the Solong to find out what was going on.

Although the Solong is mostly to blame, some blame could be placed on the Stena Immaculate if they didn’t notice a ship heading straight towards them until it was too late.

As you already pointed out, there are better and worse employers. But at the same time, we have the freedom to choose, and no one is forced to work for the “worse” ones, whatever that even means. In the situations you described, did you file near-miss or non-conformance reports? If so, what was the response?

On board, we have the most basic Motorola DP4401 Ex radios with Remote Speaker PMMN4067B. I know they are supposed to be replaced soon with some “sophisticated” Entel sets, but they certainly won’t be units that integrate with fireman’s helmet.

OK, but do you remember which of our colleague’s comments I was responding to, or do I need to quote him for the third time?

I’m not sure how to “prove my credibility” but I’ve been around long enough to remember the Magnavox MX 1105 receiver, if I recall number correctly.

That being said, the argument of seniority or rank has always irritated me. In my opinion, you should react if even a cadet with just a few days on board points out a valid issue. The strength of an argument should never depend on years of service or the number of stripes. There’s actually a guy on this forum who tried using that kind of argument against me before.

Why do you call this “becoming disturbingly”? A properly conducted One Man Bridge Operation (OMBO), in compliance with regulations and best industry practices, is not unsafe. Personally, I believe that modern shipping is significantly safer than it was in the past, even if we only focus on bridge manning levels.

Could you elaborate on a situation where some of seafarers from traditionally maritime nations had to lie to you?

I’m not sure if this is supposed to be a question, an opinion, or an attempt at a debate. Either way, that’s not how it works.

Do you know the recommended temperature for SCBA use? I never suggested that a handheld radio should replace traditional safety signals. I simply pointed out that a standard Motorola radio can be used by a fireman wearing SCBA, and it provides invaluable convenience.

I noticed that on the picture and videos taken after the fire had burt itself out (no more fuel) that the monitors were pointing overboard.
None were aiming at where the fire had been:


Source: https://gcaptain.com/heroic-stena-crew-praised-for-quick-thinking-after-dramatic-north-sea-collision/

Maybe the monitors were left like that after last test? (or the system was in “Piracy deterrent mode”?)
In any case, not much “boundary cooling” achieved.

1 Like

OK. Instead of if if if, could could could, should should should , etc, etc put yourself in Stena OOW shoes . Lets assume He was 3rd mate rookie with little practical experience but was a top gun at academy/school so He knows theory like the back of his hand.

Scenario: milk shake fog, your vessel filled with 35 k mt of jet gasoline( a ticking bomb) is anchored with 6 shackles- manual brake engaged , currents , E/R notice is 1 hr, anchorage= customary place where ships anchor off port waiting for berth, in UHF reach of VTS, Pilot stn, Harbour office, Pilot stn. UHF at ch 16 and DSC scan

From NP publication /pilot books/guide to port entry and info from agent You know the area is frequently crossed by coastal traffic .

You have S & X Radar arpa fitted on, Ecdis on , AIS on , your crew is busy doing their thing on deck and in the E/R, your fog signals are …lets skip that for now.
X radar is on 3 miles range , S radar is on 6 miles but you switch from time to time to 12 Nm range as you are a curious dude.

Suppose You are doing nothing else but your eyes are glued with heroic dedication to radar screens, ecdis and from time to time glancing at your nautocon screen and your hand held radio is on ships working channel to maintain contact with bosun ,a/b watchman if necessary. With your naked eye you see as far as forecastle.

You have detected a target with v=16 kts at 12 miles showing
CPA abt 0 Nm fluctuating . You do your math quickly in your head and it tells you she covers 1.6 Nm in every 6 minutes.

What would You do ? :slight_smile:

  1. at 8 Nm CPA =0
  2. at 6 Nm CPA =0
  3. at 4 Nm CPA =0
  4. at 2 Nm CPA =0
  5. at 1 Nm CPA=0
  6. at 0.5 Nm CPA=0
  7. at kaboom

When would You call the master??

Geez . You mean that one?:

Then Youre ancient like me :wink: The two of us plus Dr.Bugge and we can compete with the age of piramid of Cheops.

2 Likes

What time is the next pass?

2 Likes

More likely they last went S/S to a terminal. It’s best practices to leave the monitor pointing at the manifold where the connection is.

Spo
You can also count me in on The Ancient Mariner numbers as I also remember being in awe of the new fangled Magnovox thingy.

As a point of order the Stena was carrying aviation kerosene not gasoline. They are very different beasts.

I have to dredge back a very long time to my tanker days but IIMHO if she was carrying avgas there would have been little left to photograph.
Maybe some more current tanker guys can concur.

BTW
What a great name for a new super duper gizmo thingy that was going to solve all our navigation problems… Magnovox

1 Like

Good point, except that they appear to be missing the Manifolds :thinking:

And 8 just think of it 8 programmable waypoints. The first satnav Ii ever used was a rack mounted unit with the programme on a wire cassette. A bootstrap programme had to be loaded using buttons in Octantal code.
It was still on a restricted classification in 1967.

1 Like

Come on man, you know that shit gets stowed before you leave!

Using time rather than distance makes more sense given how time can now be read directly off the ARPA.

If there was a requirement based on TCPA it would be best to have it in written orders to the watchstander.

Why isn’t there a standard amount of radios to be kept on board? Aside from the radios designated for abandoning ship and the fire teams I’ve not seen any sort of requirement that a ship with x crew needs to have y radios on board. It’s a similar thing with turnout gear. We have enough SCBAs to suit up two teams of three with one spare. The plan is to rotate other crew members through should the response go on long enough that the teams need relief. When I asked my port captain and port engineer about getting a couple of extra sets I was told that we “have what is legally required.” They repeated the response when I asked what the plan was if something happened to the team and they didn’t come back. My current ship has the legally required amount of radios for an emergency response. And, because a single four bank charger is cheaper than a pair of two bank chargers, all of those radios are stored on the charger in an office that is decks away from the turnout gear.

Returning to the radio topic, with this company we’ve submitted two near misses and it’s been crickets. Similar to an order for rigging equipment after a survey found significant issues with the condition of the chainfalls, come-alongs, and slings on board. That was over a year ago at this point. I am a bit of a ringer on this ship though, sailing well below my license as a favor to a friend. It does put me into an interesting position where I’m able to spell out to the office, unfiltered and unvarnished, why they’re having such an issue keeping this ship manned and why it’s over the budget compared to the other ships they operate. For me this isn’t a fight worth banging my head against a bulkhead trying to make it right… it isn’t worth it. I’ll finish my contract, making sure to leave things better than I found them, I’ll go home then cash in my favor from my friend at a later date.

We have the same radio but I’ve yet to see a remote speaker on board this ship which likely compounds the problem. It’s difficult to do anything when one hand has to hold the radio in a position of where it can be heard, particularly if there is machinery running nearby. That also touches on the earlier topic of “we have what is required by law”… mic’s aren’t required regardless of how helpful they are. For what it’s worth though, with the DP4401 on here will reach the bridge and aft mooring from the ER but forward of the house is a crapshoot. We can’t hear the gangway or bow, nor can we hear the manifold from the ECR. I haven’t seen any repeaters.

If you re-read my question as I wrote it you’ll see that’s not at all what I was asking.

I asked my question to try and gauge if you might possibly be looking at things through the rosy lenses of the good 'ol days of experiences past. If your rank or seniority was of interest to me then I would have asked for it directly. I am curious about which companies you’ve worked for with such good experience, but I also understand that ,social media policies being what they are, you would be hesitant to share.

3 Likes

The Solong was 15 minutes away from impact, not yet in sight at 4 miles. At that point the Stena Immaculate didn’t have much time to do anything except doing everything in their power to warn the Solong. If the third mate had been a model of efficiency and not concentrating on making a cup of joe and ferreting out the last biscuits in the tin, had started a plot on Solong at 12 miles, it was 45 minutes before impact. Still not much time to analyse the situation, make a command decision, weigh anchor and take avoiding action.
IMHO it was not a collision as the Stena Immaculate was not underway allision.

Are we certain it was the 3M up there?

Issue a near-miss report or non-conformance report is not a “fight”, it’s a standard and expected practice, especially in the tanker industry. During every vetting, inspectors pay close attention to a vessel’s incident reporting policy. A lack of reports does not indicate a safer operation. Maybe under the new SIRE2 regime, this has shifted slightly, but in my opinion, not for the better.

As for the number of SCBA units, I understand your concerns, but remember that mandatory emergency/rescue equipment always results from some compromises. Frankly, on a tanker, you already have more compared to the standard equipment on a dry cargo vessel.

However, I’d like to return to another issue. I haven’t had the chance to listen to the latest update from the vlogger Dr. Sal, linked by our colleague @Spowiednik, but another colleague pointed out that our “expert” is still spouting nonsense. Honestly, I don’t know what to think. I understand that everyone can make mistakes, in fact, in everyday conversations, we often take shortcuts and use terms that aren’t entirely accurate. But in this case, there’s no room for mental shortcuts or simple slips of the tongue. He genuinely doesn’t understand the difference between Heading, Course, and Track Mode. And aside from the fact that he has become a sort of influencer shaping public opinion, the matter is quite serious in another aspect.

Considering the recent discussions about bringing back navigators who have suspended their licenses or even making it easier for those who failed to meet purely theoretical procedures and have already lost their licenses. I must remind you that our friend Sal has been, and likely still is, a vocal advocate for such facilitations.

And let me be clear, I don’t want to make it harder for anyone to return to the profession. But given the lack of proper knowledge and the unbelievable lack of self-criticism among those who think modern shipping is the same as it was decades ago, I wonder if this is just an isolated problem or if it could lead to a systemic issue.

Let me remind you of the incident involving the New Zealand ferry Aratere. I don’t know the exact cause of the grounding, whether it was a bridge team member’s unfamiliarity with the new equipment or most probable a lack of basic knowledge in eNAV and the difference between Course Mode and Track Mode.

I don’t want to offend anyone, and I realize that holding a license doesn’t automatically qualify someone for a specific position. But I wouldn’t want to encounter a saefarer who regained their license through USCG authorization without properly updating their knowledge.

2 Likes

If some of the interlocutors here got familiar with some of the literature written by Dr.Phil Anderson DProf FNI and with " The Mariner’s role in collecting evidence in light of ISM " in PARTICULAR then they would understand or at least stop considering such procedure as a fight. But stay assured that shoreside slackers in various offices treat masters following such path as dangerous individuals with bad attitude who are threathening the peaceful office harmony with such crazy ideas as " nonconformity " issued to the office. Stay assured that in a majority of those from my experience only two managements had official forms allowing such action( master/ship to office) as their mentality and way of thinking precluded such eventuality . Office can not be wrong - NEVER , EVER.

I had hrs of discussions with one of the INERMANAGER gurus and my jaw dropped with a thud , when He declared authoritatively , that by serving nonconformities to office ( technical/procurement dpt ) i asked for trouble and it was a prime reason of the multitude of troubles I had with managements. It was not perceived as my understanding of the process but as gung- ho attitude . They simply could not get it that having such record of nonconformities it can serve as a proof that the system is working.
Summarising : if such is shore side slackers approach which is very discouraging what do you then expect from the ship crew.

During vetting .? It is not only vetting but the available literature indicates that it may play and is playing a pivotal role and make a difference between winning and loosing in courts.

I will handle this and other “aspects” in my answer to @New3M with whom we have some unsettled issues.

It was pure supposition on my part. The ship may of carried 4 mates in which case it could have been the junior or there could have been no one but the ship’s parrot. I hope it was the former for the captain’s sake.
What is important is how little time there was to react in a meaningful way at the realatively pedestrian pace of 16 knots.

There was an earlier incident with a different Cook Strait ferry company where a master reported a near miss with a submerged rock. He was taken to court by the authorities

anybody here with access to NP 251 Admiralty Tidal Stream Atlas

to check the state of the tidal currents prior collision till the moment of collision.

1 Like