Vestas missar två ben?

Here we go again.

För er som varit offline senaste veckan, så har Vestas kolliderat med en fiskebåt på väg in till Hong Kong. Fiskebåten sjönk och en av besättningsmännen avled. Inte bra. Vi får säkert en ordentlig rapport från detta (precis som förra gången). Just nu debatteras vems fel det var… 20 knop i kolmörker eller kassa lanternor på fiskebåten.

Enligt källor på plats, ser det mörkt ut inför ”the coming two legs” (antar att det är T&R Guangzhou som startar 1/2 man menar, och att man hinner till Auckland-starten 7/2?

Dags att slå E3:s reparationsrekord?

Och som vanligt så tappar både VOR och Vestas bollen när det gäller kommunikation. Vad händer? Vad är planen? Att sända 7*24 när båtarna ligger i doldrums, men gå i steath-mode nu känns sådär. Teamet har varit knäpp tysta i 3 dygn.

Det är inte så här man hanterar en kris 2018.

18 Comments

  1. Micke Holmström Jan 23, 2018 Reply

    Ja, vems är felet?
    Tittar man på en AIS-karta över området och blandar in den kunskap man sugit i sig om fiskeverksamhet mm i regionen så räknar man snabbt ut att det är rena minfältet för racingsegelbåtar, på natten, i 20 knop.
    Kanske vore en idé att inte tävla här alls?

  2. Author
    Peter Gustafsson Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Låter som att man skeppar både Vestas & en ny försektion från Persico till Auckland. Där sätter man ihop båten för att vara redo för benet från NZ till Brasilien som startar 18 mars.

  3. Anders F Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Det gäller ju att ha utkik! De andra VOR båtarna klarar sig. Samma på alla andra tävlingar, ÅF , etc att man skall segla (tävla) utan att krocka…Det är krav med en kraftig strålkastare ombord (CAT1/2/3) för att kunna se/söka i mörker.

    Den som seglar på någon är i princip alltid skyldig…Det är väl därför det är knäpptyst, vilket är dåligt

    • Author
      Peter Gustafsson Jan 24, 2018 Reply

      Så är det så klart, men hur ofta lyser man rakt ut i kolmörkret på jakt efter båtar utan ljus?

      “Den som seglar på någon är i princip alltid skyldig” är väl en sanning med modifikation. Man kan ju vara en babordsbåt som möter en styrbordsbåt? Eller en motorbåt, som sist jag kollade var väjningsskyldiga.

      I det här fallet skulle jag inte alls bli förvånad om bägge parter brustit. Rätt instans lär komma fram till hur.

      • Peter Jan 24, 2018 Reply

        sist jag kollade så har alla plikten att undvika en kollision oberoende väjningsregler.
        Man ska även anpassa hastigheter till rådande förhållande.
        Visst blir det spännande att följer händelserna.
        Det kan aldrig vara bra reklam för tävlingen när folk dör.

  4. Anders F Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Jo så är det ju, om jag kommer ihåg rätt så gick fältet för styrbord hals (stämmer väl också med skadan). Det är nog så att båda brustit (en person dog faktiskt!), men…. är det mycket trafik (dock 30 nm utan för kusten) av mindre båtar med mer eller mindre positionsljus, så kan man ju fundera om man skall segla i 20 knop rätt in i mörkret….

  5. Fabian Lyman Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Försumlighet i att hålla koll på radarn känns nära till hands. Utkik med alla till medels stående verktyg är ju en strikt skyldighet.

  6. Hans Helgesson Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Tanken slår ju en också varför det är samma team (även om de flesta teammedlemmarna troligen inte är de samma) som råkar ut för en sån här allvarlig incident igen.
    Gick ju illa för Vestas även i förra upplagan av VOR.

    • Jonas P Jan 24, 2018 Reply

      Det är väl inte samma team? Det är ju de som körde Alvimedica förra gången som kör Vestas. Samma sponsor dock.
      Så det är nog ren slump…

  7. Anders F Jan 24, 2018 Reply
  8. Claes Nettelbladt Jan 24, 2018 Reply

    Min hustrus kommentar, när hon såg detta. ”Tur att jag har slängt Vestaskepsen!” Vi hade för en tid sedan en kvinnlig tysk ingenjör med ombord. Hon jobbade på Vestas och satt i vår båt och höll via datorn koll på växellådor på alla Vestasvindkraftverk i hela världen. När vi låg i Allinge på Bornholm, satt hon vid navbordet och nödstängde en vindsnurra på Nya Zeeland. Hennes dator hade indikerat ett snart växellådshaveri.
    Hon försåg oss med gråa Vestaskepsar…

  9. Author
    Peter Gustafsson Jan 30, 2018 Reply

    Mer på samma tema. Kanske Race Contro, skulle sköta nav & övervakning på alla båtar?

    http://sailinganarchy.com/2018/01/30/the-luckiest-boat-in-the-world/

    • Anders Dahlsjö Jan 31, 2018 Reply

      Tur att race control reagerade och agerade, kanske rädda de liv.

  10. Anders Jan 31, 2018 Reply

    Hmmm.

  11. Claus Feb 2, 2018 Reply

    Det verkar ju vara någon form av trålarutrustning som har häktat tag i vestas, och därefter dragit runt dfiskebåten? Kan det möjligtvis vara frågan om upphinnande båt? Inte bra med denna mörkning.

  12. Author
    Peter Gustafsson Feb 6, 2018 Reply

    Time for Transparency is Now

    However, there are many more questions for which answers are needed. For an event that positions itself as one of the sport’s ‘Big Three’ events, alongside the Olympics and America’s Cup, silence is not golden. To embrace the sports fan, you cannot choose what you share. If the race wants to stay relevant, the time for transparency is now.

    http://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2018/02/05/time-transparency-now/#.WnjYdSRxoZ0.facebook

  13. Author
    Peter Gustafsson Mar 4, 2018 Reply

    Vestas 11th Hour Racing co-founder, Mark Towill, spent time at home with family and friends after departing the Volvo Ocean Race Hong Kong stopover where the team’s VO65 was involved in a tragic accident with a fishing vessel. Towill has now regrouped with the team and their VO65 yacht in Auckland, New Zealand, ahead of the next leg of the race. The team has now been informed that investigations by the Hong Kong and mainland China authorities will be closed shortly with no further action to be taken. As a result, Towill gives us his account on what happened in the early hours of January 20 in the approach to Hong Kong.

    What happened as you approached the finish line of Leg 4?
    We were about 30 nautical miles from the finish, and I was at the navigation station monitoring the radar and AIS (Automatic Identification System), and communicating with the crew on-deck through the intercom. I was watching three vessels on AIS: a cable layer, which we had just passed, a vessel farther ahead moving across our bow and away, and a third vessel identified as a fishing vessel. There were a number of additional boats on AIS, many of them fishing vessels, but these three were the only ones identified in our vicinity.

    What were the conditions like? What could you see?
    It was a dark and cloudy night, with a breeze of around 20 knots and a moderate sea state. As we approached the fishing vessel that we had identified on AIS, the on-deck crew confirmed visual contact – the fishing vessel was well lit – and we headed up to starboard to keep clear. I was watching AIS and communicating the range and bearing to the crew. The crew confirmed we were crossing the fishing vessel when, before the anticipated cross, there was an unexpected collision.

    What happened immediately after the collision?
    So much happened so fast. The impact from the collision spun us into a tack to port that we weren’t prepared for. Everyone who was off watch came on deck. Everyone on our boat was safe and accounted for. We checked the bow, saw the hole in the port side and went below to assess the damage. Water was flowing into our boat through the hole, and there was concern over the structural integrity of the bow.

    How did you control the ingress of water?
    We heeled the boat to starboard to keep the port bow out of the water. The sail stack was already to starboard and the starboard water ballast tank was full. We also kept the keel canted to starboard. We placed our emergency pump in the bow to pump water overboard. We were able to minimize the ingress, but the boat was difficult to maneuver because it was heeled over so much.

    What actions did you take immediately after getting your boat under control?
    It took roughly 20 minutes to get our boat under control, and then we headed back towards the location of the collision. Upon arrival, several people on a fishing vessel nearby were shining lights to a point on the water. Our first thought was that they could be looking for someone, so we immediately started a search and rescue. After some time searching, we eventually spotted a person in the water.

    Who were you in communication with? Did anyone offer assistance?
    We tried to contact the other vessel involved in the collision, and alerted race control straight away. When we initiated the search and rescue, our navigator immediately issued a Mayday distress call over VHF channel 16 on behalf of the fishing vessel. There were many vessels in the area, including a cruise ship with a hospital bay, but they were all standing by.

    Communication was difficult. The sheer volume of traffic on the radio meant it was hard to communicate to the people we needed to. Not many people on the VHF were speaking English, but we found a way to relay messages through a cable laying vessel, and they were able to send their guard boat to aid in the search and rescue.

    How was the casualty retrieved?
    Difficult conditions and limited maneuverability hampered our initial efforts to retrieve the casualty. The guard boat from the cable layer provided assistance and every effort was made from all parties involved in the search and rescue. We were finally able to successfully recover the casualty after several attempts. When we got him aboard, our medics started CPR. We alerted Hong Kong Marine Rescue Coordination Centre that we had the casualty aboard and they confirmed air support was on its way. He was transferred to a helicopter and taken to a Hong Kong hospital where medical staff where unable to revive him.

    Did any of your competitors offer assistance?
    Dongfeng Race Team offered assistance. At the time, we were coordinating the search and rescue with multiple vessels, including the cable layer that had a crewman who spoke Chinese and English and was relaying our communication. We advised Dongfeng that they were not needed as there were a number of vessels in the area that were closer.

    Team AkzoNobel arrived while the air transfer was in effect. Race control requested that they stand by and they did, and we later released them once the helicopter transfer was complete.

    What happened after the search and rescue procedure was completed?
    Once we knew there was nothing more we could do at the scene of the accident, we ensured our boat was still secure, and informed Volvo Ocean Race that we would retire from the leg and motor to shore. We arrived at the technical area nearby the race village and met with race officials and local authorities to give our account of what happened.

  14. Author
    Peter Gustafsson Apr 15, 2018 Reply

    Senaste eftermälet. Vestas ville ha redrees efter sin kollision, vilket många (inklusive juryn) inte tyckte var någon bra idé.

    Bra sammanfattning av Morten Brandt: https://www.baadmagasinet.dk/volvo-ocean-race/nyheder/26756-volvo-ocean-race-fortryder-lukkethed

    Volvo Ocean Race – Case 02
    Request for Redress from Vestas
    Hearing on March 12

    Party representatives:
    • Mark Towill
    • Charlie Enright
    • Anderson Reggio

    Witnesses:
    • Phil Harmer
    • Stacey Jackson
    • Simon Fisher

    Facts:
    • The conditions were 20-23 knots of wind and 1 meter waves. It was at night, cloudy and dark with at least 2 miles of visibility.
    • Vestas was sailing on starboard tack with a speed of about 20 knots, with full mainsail, fractional code zero and J3 staysail.
    • About 1 minute before the incident, Vestas luffed 10-12 degrees to pass in front of a vessel.
    • Another vessel with some light appeared approximately 20 meters in front of Vestas on the leeward side of her bow and they collided about 2 seconds later with serious damage to Vestas.
    • The other vessel ‘s type, activity, course and speed have not been identified.
    • The sequence and the precise points of impact between the two vessels have not been identified.

    Conclusion:
    On the evidence presented, the jury cannot be satisfied which IRPCAS rule applied and therefore which vessel was required to keep out of the way. Therefore, the conditions of RRS 62.1(b) are not met.

    Decision:
    Redress not given.

    Decision given on March 12, 2018 at 17:55 (local time).

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*