نیا
MONDAY, JANUARY 9, 1978
THE +MAN TACK+ IS CRITICISED FOR NOT SLOWING DOWN OR STOPPING ENGINES OR NAVIGATING WITH CAUTION WHEN A FOG SIGNAL FROM
ANOTHER VESSEL, THE +MAN TO, WAS HEARD FOR NOT MAKING SUFFICIENT FOG SIGNALS EARLY ENOUGH AND FOR NOT MAKING ANY REDUCTION OF SPEED AFTER AVOIDING +MAN TO+.
THE MASTER OF THE FLYING ALBATROSS+ IS CRITICISED FOR HIS +LACK OF DECISION IN THE FACE OF A RAPIDLY DEVELOPING CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION. +DESPITE THE INFORMATION THAT HIS DECK OFFICER RELAYED TO HIM HE STOOD ON AT AN UNREASONABLE SPEED INTO WHAT SHOULD HAVE SEEMED TO HIM A RISKY SITUATION, THE REPORT STATES.
+HE WAS CONTENT TO RELY ON HIS SUPPOSED ABILITY TO STOP HIS VESSEL IN HALF THE RANGE OF VISIBILITY, EVEN THOUGH THE ACTUAL RANGE OF VISIBILITY HAD NEVER BEEN ACCURATELY ESTABLISHED.+
THE REPORT SAYS: THE COLLISION WAS CAUSED OR CONTRIBUTED TO BY EXCESSIVE SPEED OF 'MAN TACK' IN FOG AND EXCESSIVE SPEED OF 'FLYING ALBATROSS' IN FOG UNTIL OR SHORTLY BEFORE THE MOMENT OF SIGHTING 'MAN TACK'.+
IN CONCLUSION, THE REPORT SAYS THAT THE COURT WAS NOT ASKED TO DEAL WITH THE CERTIFICATES OF COMPETENCY OF THE MASTERS OF EITHER VESSEL AND THE COURT +SEES NO REASON TO DO SO.+
IT GOES ON TO STATE: +HOWEVER, BOTH MASTERS SHOULD BE CENSURED FOR PROCEEDING AT EXCESSIVE SPEED IN FOG, THE WORD 'EXCESSIVE' BEING RELATIVE TO THE EQUIPMENT CARRIED ON EACH VESSEL.+
-
/4......