A large B.C. Ferry sank very early Wednesday morning in the waters of the inside passage between Prince Rupert and Port Hardy (please see attached link for story). The ferry hit a rock and sank within an hour. In days of electonic charts, GPS, redundant systems, etc. etc. I don't understand how this happens other than by the crew not paying attention. Any thoughts? Gary Wyngarden S/V Wanderlust h37.5
- Status
Cabin-Boy at Helm
Gary, A report in this morning's Calgary Herald suggests that there may have been a low-ranking sailor at the helm at the time of impact. You would think those ships would have totally bullet-proof, duplicated GPS/Autohelm systems that would eliminate this type of accident. Wonder where the skipper was at the time? Maybe in the head. Sitting there and feeling the big crunch would be enough to seize you up for months.
Gary, A report in this morning's Calgary Herald suggests that there may have been a low-ranking sailor at the helm at the time of impact. You would think those ships would have totally bullet-proof, duplicated GPS/Autohelm systems that would eliminate this type of accident. Wonder where the skipper was at the time? Maybe in the head. Sitting there and feeling the big crunch would be enough to seize you up for months.
Dunno it might have the opposite effect
If I was captain and in the head at crunch time I think it might be a very"loosening"experience!
If I was captain and in the head at crunch time I think it might be a very"loosening"experience!
Deep!
I heard this morning that the boat sunk in over 600ft of water. They said that there was little chance of re-floating her. I'm not sure that makes sense given that they hit a rock but that was the report. Also, the reporter said that they're worried a tanker truck of fuel was on board too. Ugh!
I heard this morning that the boat sunk in over 600ft of water. They said that there was little chance of re-floating her. I'm not sure that makes sense given that they hit a rock but that was the report. Also, the reporter said that they're worried a tanker truck of fuel was on board too. Ugh!
Amazing
that there were not more casualties. In Washington state, the ferrys make separate trips for hazardous cargo like fuel trucks.
that there were not more casualties. In Washington state, the ferrys make separate trips for hazardous cargo like fuel trucks.
Twice dumb
So you hit a rock then motor to 600' deep water to hide all the evidence. Nice insurance scam. The rule is if you are sinking due to a grounding, stay there. It will make recovery easier, and you will not even get your feet wet.
So you hit a rock then motor to 600' deep water to hide all the evidence. Nice insurance scam. The rule is if you are sinking due to a grounding, stay there. It will make recovery easier, and you will not even get your feet wet.
600 foot rock was a mountain top
OK I didn't actually find the chart, but we have these underwater peaks around here, so you can have a rock 10 feet below the surface and 200 yards away have a 200 to 600 foot depth, so ship hits the top of the peak, sinks and slides down the hill to the valley. Seattle newpaper reported great response from skiffs from nearest village, in crappy conditions in the middle of the night.
OK I didn't actually find the chart, but we have these underwater peaks around here, so you can have a rock 10 feet below the surface and 200 yards away have a 200 to 600 foot depth, so ship hits the top of the peak, sinks and slides down the hill to the valley. Seattle newpaper reported great response from skiffs from nearest village, in crappy conditions in the middle of the night.
More Speculation
My not so detailed chart does not show any rocks in Wright Sound off Gil Island. Just 600 feet of water. A meteorologist has reported that there was a gale warning in effect at the time of the accident and that the waters in Wright Sound can be quite treacherous in the Sound when there are strong north winds exiting Devastation Channel. Perhaps what happened is when the ferry entered Wright Sound from the sheltered passage, the wind and waves overwhelmed it forcing it off course and before the crew realized it the boat struck Gil Island near Juan Point. See link to Google site. BC Ferries is denying the story that the cook was at the wheel at the time of the accident. Peter Milne S/V Blue Heron
My not so detailed chart does not show any rocks in Wright Sound off Gil Island. Just 600 feet of water. A meteorologist has reported that there was a gale warning in effect at the time of the accident and that the waters in Wright Sound can be quite treacherous in the Sound when there are strong north winds exiting Devastation Channel. Perhaps what happened is when the ferry entered Wright Sound from the sheltered passage, the wind and waves overwhelmed it forcing it off course and before the crew realized it the boat struck Gil Island near Juan Point. See link to Google site. BC Ferries is denying the story that the cook was at the wheel at the time of the accident. Peter Milne S/V Blue Heron
Bill, Scott is right. There is no conspiracy.
Don't think the seabed is flat like a desert with a layer of salt water on top. Think of the bottom as the Cascade mountain range or some other high peaked mountains, maybe even Mt Everest, with a very thick layer of salt water all the way to the top with just the tiny tip showing above water. Or the tiny tip is 5 feet below the surface. There are many places in Canada, both inside or outside of Vancouver Island, where you can be 20-30 feet from shore, and the bottom is 200-400 feet deep or more. The high rocky cliffs you see that drops from way up high, down to the water level, doesn't just stop at the water. They keep on going straight down, way down. This is why sometimes when we are sailing up north, we can't find any place to anchor. We have to stern tie, or hang on to a few trees on shore.
Don't think the seabed is flat like a desert with a layer of salt water on top. Think of the bottom as the Cascade mountain range or some other high peaked mountains, maybe even Mt Everest, with a very thick layer of salt water all the way to the top with just the tiny tip showing above water. Or the tiny tip is 5 feet below the surface. There are many places in Canada, both inside or outside of Vancouver Island, where you can be 20-30 feet from shore, and the bottom is 200-400 feet deep or more. The high rocky cliffs you see that drops from way up high, down to the water level, doesn't just stop at the water. They keep on going straight down, way down. This is why sometimes when we are sailing up north, we can't find any place to anchor. We have to stern tie, or hang on to a few trees on shore.
Don't Count on GPS!
GPS is not the answer to everything navigation and shouldn't be counted on. There are several things that can ruin a GPS signal. Obscured satellites for one. There are places along the Inside Passage where the mountains are several thousands of feet high and within a very short distance. A satellite that is low on the horizon will not be visible if it is blocked by a mountain. Water weakens the received signal. The story said they were in a downpour so a deluge of rain could hamper reception. GPS signals are very weak and can be easily spoofed. Then there is the cumulative effect of everything. Put someone in charge that isn't paying attention to what the electronic information is saying, or doesn't fully understand what the information could be telling them and having an accident like this is not unreasonable. I've had personal experience in being in hourglass mode for extended periods while traveling the inside passage. In these cases one can use radar to good advantage but then this requires skills that a junior person on the bridge may not be adept at. Certainly another factor can be that "trouble comes in bunches" - take an inexperienced person who may have had help but the help had to go use the head at the same time the 'GPS goes into hourglass mode and maybe the radar isn't working that well with sea clutter and heavy rain... and which reminds me - if it was high tide the radar return on heavily treed hillsides may not be that good either! It'll be interesting to see what else comes out about what was happening on the bridge before she hit. The bottom depths can vary greatly and 600 ft or 1200 ft is not uncommon and in only a relatively short distance. There are places where the bottom can be 300 to 600 feet deep and only a few boat lengths from shore! One more thing, about the Times/Vancouver Sun article, the way they mentioned that this ferry met it's demise was not unlike another ferry that came out of a German shipyard... kinda like, the way they said it, inferring that the German yard may have been producing poor quality ferries. It would have been nice if the authors would have mentioned who was responsible for the design and approval which is really the key item and this was probably not the German shipyard. It was very fortunate that the accident didn't occur during the peak summer tourist season! I hope the two "unaccounted for" persons turn out to be a math error. Thanks for the good article Gary.
GPS is not the answer to everything navigation and shouldn't be counted on. There are several things that can ruin a GPS signal. Obscured satellites for one. There are places along the Inside Passage where the mountains are several thousands of feet high and within a very short distance. A satellite that is low on the horizon will not be visible if it is blocked by a mountain. Water weakens the received signal. The story said they were in a downpour so a deluge of rain could hamper reception. GPS signals are very weak and can be easily spoofed. Then there is the cumulative effect of everything. Put someone in charge that isn't paying attention to what the electronic information is saying, or doesn't fully understand what the information could be telling them and having an accident like this is not unreasonable. I've had personal experience in being in hourglass mode for extended periods while traveling the inside passage. In these cases one can use radar to good advantage but then this requires skills that a junior person on the bridge may not be adept at. Certainly another factor can be that "trouble comes in bunches" - take an inexperienced person who may have had help but the help had to go use the head at the same time the 'GPS goes into hourglass mode and maybe the radar isn't working that well with sea clutter and heavy rain... and which reminds me - if it was high tide the radar return on heavily treed hillsides may not be that good either! It'll be interesting to see what else comes out about what was happening on the bridge before she hit. The bottom depths can vary greatly and 600 ft or 1200 ft is not uncommon and in only a relatively short distance. There are places where the bottom can be 300 to 600 feet deep and only a few boat lengths from shore! One more thing, about the Times/Vancouver Sun article, the way they mentioned that this ferry met it's demise was not unlike another ferry that came out of a German shipyard... kinda like, the way they said it, inferring that the German yard may have been producing poor quality ferries. It would have been nice if the authors would have mentioned who was responsible for the design and approval which is really the key item and this was probably not the German shipyard. It was very fortunate that the accident didn't occur during the peak summer tourist season! I hope the two "unaccounted for" persons turn out to be a math error. Thanks for the good article Gary.
- Status