Penlee lifeboat disaster

[57xx]

11 hours ago, peach james said:

I won't say what I think of the Rt Honorable Nigel Farage.  Mostly because Andy Y. would probably have to punt me for it...

 

Spookily my thoughts about him rhymed with "punt" and I think most would people agree.

 

I remember when we used to holiday in Gower, the hotel manager was one of the local lifeboat crew and we often saw him racing out to a rescue.

Edited December 23, 2021 by 57xx

[Allegheny1600]

I come from a maritime family (I’m the odd one out, liking railways!) and when I became executor of my father’s estate, I was surprised to learn that I had to make the RNLI a decent donation.

Apparently, my young father and mother were saved by them.

That means that without their help, I would probably never have been brought into being.

 

To learn that someone is criticising the same organisation for saving human lives is literally unspeakable. And yet in every other realm of our existence, we are taught how precious human life is.

 

 I can say no more except RIP those and other brave crews.

 

[ejstubbs]

12 hours ago, peach james said:

I won't say what I think of the Rt Honorable Nigel Farage

 

He's not a "Right Honourable" - that's reserved for members of Privy Council, peers below the rank of marquess, and certain lord mayors (provosts in Scotland) and the Lord Lyon King of Arms.  Since he never actually made it in to the House of Commons he was never in a position to insist on being referred to as plain "honourable" (and anyway, in the case of MPs in the House the use of that term is solely a convention of address, not an actual title).

 

I think the best description of him these days, given his affiliations on the other side of the Atlantic, would be "the member for Trumpton".

Edited December 23, 2021 by ejstubbs

[Cowley 47521]

On 20/12/2021 at 17:09, Goldhawk said:

Quite by chance this afternoon  I happened to hear Solomon Browne, descibed as a poetic drama-documentary, on BBC Radio Four.

It was one of the most moving programmes I have listened to in a long while, for 45 minutes I just sat transfixed, hoping that my listening would not be disturbed. I would definitely say this was radio at its best.

Just listened to that and I wouldn’t have known about it if you hadn’t mentioned it so thanks for that.

 

We’d not long moved to Devon from Cornwall when this happened and although I was only about eight years old for some reason I’ve never forgotten it and if I’m ever in the area I always stop by and sit in the memorial garden for a few minutes (August this year was the most recent time).

Deeply moving.

[Bon Accord]

3 hours ago, Penlan said:

I live in Mousehole, so as true as the above is, the owners can sell a Terraced Cottage (which probably needs money spending on it anyway) and buy a detached Cottage in Newlyn or Penzance etc., with plenty of garden, a drive and garage etc.,
There are other aspects to this as well, but that's down to the locals.
The main thing that came out of the disaster was a change in Maritime Law, in that a Lifeboat can now take in tow a Ship that is basically in trouble - The Coxswain can now over rule the Captain for the safety of the Ship..  The disaster basically happened (apart from the SE force 12 Gales, 50ft high waves etc.,) because the Captain of the 'Union Star' couldn't contact the Owner - who was at a Christmas Party - to get permission for the Lifeboat to tow the Ship to a safer place - All to do with Salvage rights.
Obviously there's a lot more to this, than stated above, but that's it basically.
All E.& O.E.

 

The Coxswain of the lifeboat doesn't have that authority, however the Coastguard themselves now do.

That change went in hand in hand with the Braer wreck/oil spill in Shetland and the subsequent establishment of Coastguard rescue tugs, stationed at strategic points around the UK coast. This was copied in many other countries with a high density of high risk shipping around their coasts e.g. France, Spain, Norway etc.

As well as emergency towing, these vessels were also fitted out for anti pollution work, seabed surveying and basic maritime patrolling.

Unfortunately in 2010 the incoming government of the day decided that those rescue tugs weren't needed because in their view commercial towage would be available if required, totally ignoring the point that the commercial aspect of it and the complications caused thereby was exactly what led to having the state operated tugs in the first place.

That was all to save a paltry £30 million.

As an example of the costs incurred due to a major oil spill, the most recent large scale event in the UK was the Sea Empress spill in Milford Haven in 1996 and that is estimated to have cost £120 million in both cleanup costs and damage to the local economy.

The French etc still maintain their tugs and they've since come to the rescue of vessels in the Channel when no towing vessels were available from the UK side.

The Scottish Government made the point that the NW of Scotland should be a special case in view of it's remoteness and that it should retain a tug. After much lobbying agreement was reached and funding made to MCA to continue to provide such a vessel, however it's on a series of short term contracts at the end of which is a review as to whether it should carry on, there is then usually another spat between London/Edinburgh. The result is that the current tug is Italian owned/flagged with Eastern European crew, whereas the previous incarnations were British owned/flagged/crewed.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Bon Accord

[AY Mod]

3 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

On this subject……probably not 

 

No pictures please, I've punched too many screens due to reflex actions.

[phil-b259]

27 minutes ago, Bon Accord said:

 

The Coxswain of the lifeboat doesn't have that authority, however the Coastguard themselves now do.

That change went in hand in hand with the Braer wreck/oil spill in Shetland and the subsequent establishment of Coastguard rescue tugs, stationed at strategic points around the UK coast. This was copied in many other countries with a high density of high risk shipping around their coasts e.g. France, Spain, Norway etc.

As well as emergency towing, these vessels were also fitted out for anti pollution work, seabed surveying and basic maritime patrolling.

Unfortunately in 2010 the incoming government of the day decided that those rescue tugs weren't needed because in their view commercial towage would be available if required, totally ignoring the point that the commercial aspect of it and the complications caused thereby was exactly what led to having the state operated tugs in the first place.

That was all to save a paltry £30 million.

As an example of the costs incurred due to a major oil spill, the most recent large scale event in the UK was the Sea Empress spill in Milford Haven in 1996 and that is estimated to have cost £120 million in both cleanup costs and damage to the local economy.

The French etc still maintain their tugs and they've since come to the rescue of vessels in the Channel when no towing vessels were available from the UK side.

The Scottish Government made the point that the NW of Scotland should be a special case in view of it's remoteness and that it should retain a tug. After much lobbying agreement was reached and funding made to MCA to continue to provide such a vessel, however it's on a series of short term contracts at the end of which is a review as to whether it should carry on, there is then usually another spat between London/Edinburgh. The result is that the current tug is Italian owned/flagged with Eastern European crew, whereas the previous incarnations were British owned/flagged/crewed.

 

Once again a fixation / ideology based on outsourcing / relying on the commercial sector to do the Governments work by a certain party  is shown to be found wanting - just so they can claim to have shrunk Government and kept taxes low.

Edited December 23, 2021 by phil-b259

[Northmoor]

29 minutes ago, Bon Accord said:

 

The Coxswain of the lifeboat doesn't have that authority, however the Coastguard themselves now do.

That change went in hand in hand with the Braer wreck/oil spill in Shetland and the subsequent establishment of Coastguard rescue tugs, stationed at strategic points around the UK coast. This was copied in many other countries with a high density of high risk shipping around their coasts e.g. France, Spain, Norway etc.

As well as emergency towing, these vessels were also fitted out for anti pollution work, seabed surveying and basic maritime patrolling.

Unfortunately in 2010 the incoming government of the day decided that those rescue tugs weren't needed because in their view commercial towage would be available if required, totally ignoring the point that the commercial aspect of it and the complications caused thereby was exactly what led to having the state operated tugs in the first place.

That was all to save a paltry £30 million.

As an example of the costs incurred due to a major oil spill, the most recent large scale event in the UK was the Sea Empress spill in Milford Haven in 1996 and that is estimated to have cost £120 million in both cleanup costs and damage to the local economy.

The French etc still maintain their tugs and they've since come to the rescue of vessels in the Channel when no towing vessels were available from the UK side.

The Scottish Government made the point that the NW of Scotland should be a special case in view of it's remoteness and that it should retain a tug. After much lobbying agreement was reached and funding made to MCA to continue to provide such a vessel, however it's on a series of short term contracts at the end of which is a review as to whether it should carry on, there is then usually another spat between London/Edinburgh. The result is that the current tug is Italian owned/flagged with Eastern European crew, whereas the previous incarnations were British owned/flagged/crewed.

It's the difficulty the Treasury (or indeed the accountancy profession in general) has assessing the value of something it appears to not be used.  If it weren't for a legal obligation (building regulations), no-one would ever install a fire-extinguisher in a building.

 

This reminds me of the Homer Simpson quote: "Marge, why do we keep paying for all these vaccinations for Maggie, for diseases she never seems to get?".

[Penlan]

Until about 6 - 7 years ago (it may be longer), there was a deep sea tug moored in Mounts Bay throughout the winter months, but long gone now, though it may be round near Plymouth, but a long way from the Lands End area if needed quickly.
Bon Accord, thank you clarifying the Coxswain etc., bit.
I suspect the following poster is National, but it's been posted around the Penwith area.
.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Penlan

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, AY Mod said:

 

No pictures please, I've punched too many screens due to reflex actions.

And………breath………..Christmas soon Andy 

[Penlan]

"No pictures please",
Ah, my apologies AY, uhmn, but thought it relevant.
The current 'Penlee Lifeboat' is now based in Newlyn Harbour.
The Lifeboat Station at Penlee Point from which the 'Solomon Browne' was launched,  is a Memorial site.
We still have some current RNLI crew members in the Village and of course many retired members too.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Penlan

[phil-b259]

47 minutes ago, Penlan said:

"No pictures please",
Ah, my apologies AY, uhmn, but thought it relevant.
The current 'Penlee Lifeboat' is now based in Newlyn Harbour.
The Lifeboat Station at Penlee Point from which the 'Solomon Browne' was launched,  is a Memorial site.
We still have some current RNLI crew members in the Village and of course many retired members too.

 

I think Andy was referring to pictures of a certain s*** stirring wannabe politician rather than the act of remembering the sacrifice of the crew of the Solomon Browne all those years ago.

 

As the pic of the RNLI poster posted by Penlan says, the RNLIs noble mission to  save lives at sea will continue throughout Christmas.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2021 by phil-b259

[62613]

8 hours ago, Penlan said:

I live in Mousehole, so as true as the above is, the owners can sell a Terraced Cottage (which probably needs money spending on it anyway) and buy a detached Cottage in Newlyn or Penzance etc., with plenty of garden, a drive and garage etc.,
There are other aspects to this as well, but that's down to the locals.
The main thing that came out of the disaster was a change in Maritime Law, in that a Lifeboat can now take in tow a Ship that is basically in trouble - The Coxswain can now over rule the Captain for the safety of the Ship..  The disaster basically happened (apart from the SE force 12 Gales, 50ft high waves etc.,) because the Captain of the 'Union Star' couldn't contact the Owner - who was at a Christmas Party - to get permission for the Lifeboat to tow the Ship to a safer place - All to do with Salvage rights.
Obviously there's a lot more to this, than stated above, but that's it basically.
All E.& O.E.

I thought that before things became critical there was a salvage tug nearby who offered to take him in tow, but he refused; again because of salvage rules.

[Bon Accord]

27 minutes ago, 62613 said:

I thought that before things became critical there was a salvage tug nearby who offered to take him in tow, but he refused; again because of salvage rules.

 

I believe the Master of the Tug initially offered Lloyds Open Form (as is standard) which unsurprisingly the Master of the Union Star refused as was his right, pending instructions/developments from ashore as he didn't believe he was in imminent danger; LOF can of course prove expensive depending on how much effort is adjudged to have been undertaken on the part of the salvor.

At that time the situation was not a "distress" incident, merely an "urgency" and it was up to the Union Star to escalate the situation.

The Coastguard now have the power to do that themselves.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Bon Accord

[johnofwessex]

It was suggested to me by Merchant Navy Officers at the time that 

 

1. Because of the position of the fuel tank vents water may have got into the Union Stars fuel, hence the breakdown and

2. It was a maiden voyage, the master had called at Brightlingsea to pick up his wife and step daughters which he wasnt supposed to have done and the crew may have been 'partying' so they didnt want the company to know what was going on and theit ability to deal with the situation was impaired

[The Johnster]

1 sounds quite possible, loss of engine power in heavy seas in frequently the result of sea water getting in to the fuel, either though vents or just because of the amount of it that is sloshing about in the engine room.

 

I wonder sometimes if there is a phsychological factor at work here as well, that the sheer force of very heavy seas and the violent motion of the ship might not terrorise her officers and crew into a sort of denial stupor that affects their responses and reactions at the very time when they need to be on top of the job.  I've been reading up on the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking, another case where the main cause was the weather, and it is known that she had taken on water, sustained damage to a ventilator and deck railings, lost her radars (she was being 'piloted' by another ship that was tracking her by radar and advising her captain by radio.  She sounds to me as if she was already in trouble, but her captain's last contact  was that they were 'holding our own'.  There is perhaps sometimes a reluctance to admit that you need help or to expose rescue services to the risk of extreme weather.  The other ship reported huge waves and green water on the bridge, 35 feet above the waterline (!) shortly before the Edmund Fitzgerald disappeared from her radar; her lights had been visible before this very violent squall struck but not afterwards.  Whatever happened must have been too fast to get a Mayday out.

 

She wasn't, but I can see how, in a situation like that, the instinct might be that the ship, which has never let you down before, is going to come through it as she always has, a thought that is seductively comforting but might make the distress call a bit too late to make a difference. 

 

 

[Northmoor]

 

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

1 sounds quite possible, loss of engine power in heavy seas in frequently the result of sea water getting in to the fuel, either though vents or just because of the amount of it that is sloshing about in the engine room.

 

I wonder sometimes if there is a phsychological factor at work here as well, that the sheer force of very heavy seas and the violent motion of the ship might not terrorise her officers and crew into a sort of denial stupor that affects their responses and reactions at the very time when they need to be on top of the job.  I've been reading up on the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking, another case where the main cause was the weather, and it is known that she had taken on water, sustained damage to a ventilator and deck railings, lost her radars (she was being 'piloted' by another ship that was tracking her by radar and advising her captain by radio.  She sounds to me as if she was already in trouble, but her captain's last contact  was that they were 'holding our own'.  There is perhaps sometimes a reluctance to admit that you need help or to expose rescue services to the risk of extreme weather.  The other ship reported huge waves and green water on the bridge, 35 feet above the waterline (!) shortly before the Edmund Fitzgerald disappeared from her radar; her lights had been visible before this very violent squall struck but not afterwards.  Whatever happened must have been too fast to get a Mayday out.

 

She wasn't, but I can see how, in a situation like that, the instinct might be that the ship, which has never let you down before, is going to come through it as she always has, a thought that is seductively comforting but might make the distress call a bit too late to make a difference. 

This is all too often the case in ship losses; with every big wave breaking over a ship, the captain remains confident that just like the last time, they will emerge safely from the other side.  Unfortunately it only takes the one wave that causes an unexpected, catastrophic structural failure and the ship's loss of buoyancy can be very sudden; heavily-laden large ships tend not to move much in a swell, the waves tend to break over them, so their change in behaviour when in trouble can be imperceptible except to a skilled master.

 

IIRC this was the inquiry's conclusion into the loss of the MV Derbyshire; a faulty hold hatch meant that the for'ard hold section was progressively flooding leading to a loss of bow buoyancy, eventually this section failed as the ship rode through a wave and the ship would have then descended the wave and basically kept going, so the bridge may have had much less than five seconds warning that they were definitely sinking.  Whatever, in any ship, even potential loss of propulsion is serious, you have no steering without power and a drifting boat will naturally turn side on to waves, leading to a greater risk of broaching and load shifting (which just makes stability worse.  For those onboard the Union Star, their last hours must have been utterly terrifying.