# Lorry found hanging out of ferry



## MichaelRathlin (Jan 31, 2008)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7857643.stm

(Ouch)


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

I like the comment_ "Because of the lorry still hanging from the stern of the vessel it was unable to hook up to the links man at the harbour.."_ - This 'links man' is clearly an import chap if he alone can hold the ship up. (Jester)


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

Told em about that handbrake...LOL


----------



## CAPT.BOB (Jun 26, 2008)

Tonga,where have you been this should have read "Link Span" and is the means of access to the HSS Vessel.


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

It will be comforting at the next news broadcast to be reassured by the company spokesperson that "there was no danger to passengers. Heavy cargo unsecured adequately. Not exactly the practice of competent seamen.


----------



## andysk (Jun 16, 2005)

Some acceleration on that ferry, I didn't know they were using Saturn V engines and fuel in the maritime environment !


----------



## Peter Fielding (Jul 20, 2005)

Lorry falling off the back of a ship - makes a change from things falling off the back of a lorry!


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

CAPT.BOB said:


> Tonga, where have you been this should have read "Link Span" and is the means of access to the HSS Vessel.


CAPT.BOB,

Thank you for your clarification on this point that I misunderstood. - I am not too familiar with HSS names, but I think maybe her ex-name was either *Amphiboly* or *Pathos*, but the BBC should know, as they are infallible when it comes to reporting names of people and ships involved in accidents.

(Thumb) 
Mark


----------



## NINJA (May 8, 2006)

Is this a repeat of the incident at Felixstowe/Harwich a couple of years ago when the lorry actually cleared the stern and ended up as a harzard to shipping on the approaches to Harwich?


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

*tipped*

driver to office ,well you did tell me to get tipped as soon as possible.[tipped meaning in transport terms unloaded].(Jester)


----------



## norman.r (Apr 25, 2006)

This is an extremely serious incident and should never have happened. It seems that something that should have been done was not done and could have lead to in other cir***stances to a disaster. No doubt it will all come out in the subsequent enquiry.
Norman


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

Everybody seems to be joking about the driver leaving the handbrake off. Thing is the crew should have made sure the ship was made ready for sea with the cargo properly secured. Familiarity breeds etc etc 


Mike


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

Regardless of any maritime safety certificate held by the vessel, the Stranraer Firemaster's report on the existing safety exit arrangements will make disturbing reading. It would appear that only one exit is available to disembarking passengers and crew in port. According to radio news reports it took ten minutes to lift each passenger ashore via the Fire Service lifting platform. Those responsible for ship safety will have to take a long hard look at existing design arrangements before certificate renewal. If that vehicle had taken fire a real tragedy could have unfolded. IMHO any company spokesperson stating that "there was no danger to passengers" in such cir***stances, if the holder of a certificate of competency, should have it revoked.


----------



## Tony D (May 2, 2004)

Watching it on the news I thought that lifting passengers off one at a time via a large cherry picker was a bit on the Fred Carno side,but to be fair they did have to have a safety officer in the bucket with each lift.


----------



## andysk (Jun 16, 2005)

Tony D said:


> .... they did have to have a safety officer in the bucket with each lift.


Which must surely have doubled the time taken to evacuate, or certainly increased it, without him in the bucket another passenger could have been lifted off ?


----------



## japottinger (Jun 16, 2004)

My sentiments exactly Binnacle, I find it incredible that the only exit was via the stern door. This is hard to belive, does that mean that all the comings and goings of crew, passengers etc has to be by means of a gaping stern door? Many ferries expressly forbid walking passengers to enter or leave in this manner.


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

Binnacle said:


> Regardless of any maritime safety certificate held by the vessel, the Stranraer Firemaster's report on the existing safety exit arrangements will make disturbing reading. It would appear that only one exit is available to disembarking passengers and crew in port. According to radio news reports it took ten minutes to lift each passenger ashore via the Fire Service lifting platform. Those responsible for ship safety will have to take a long hard look at existing design arrangements before certificate renewal. If that vehicle had taken fire a real tragedy could have unfolded. IMHO any company spokesperson stating that "there was no danger to passengers" in such cir***stances, if the holder of a certificate of competency, should have it revoked.


Apart from the remarks posted by Binnacle, I understand from news reports that the lorry that obviously was not secured properly was a chemical tanker, I would have thought that any chemicals could pose a danger to passengers and crew.

Regards Robert


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

*lorry*

it was not a chemical tanker.it was carrying a non hazardous load of powdered sulphate.panic over.


----------



## CAPT.BOB (Jun 26, 2008)

I think it's intresting to note that none of the "Old Ferrymen" or "Railway Children" like myself have jumped in to be judgemental.Remember "there but for the grace of God go I."


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

CAPT.BOB said:


> I think it's intresting to note that none of the "Old Ferrymen" or "Railway Children" like myself have jumped in to be judgemental.Remember "there but for the grace of God go I."


Not quite ! I spent the last decade or so as Harry Tate on a Baltic Ro Ro and literally digging the cargo out after a good bashing in the Baltic and /or North Sea was nothing new, but before we sailed all lashings were checked as a matter of course and was then reported verbally to the Old Man. Doesn't look as this was the case on this occasion /

Mike


----------



## doug rowland (Jun 30, 2005)

I agree with Capt Bob, there are many issues here. Not least vehicle lashings,stern door security, lorry stability(C of G), weather, ship motion and stability,design of vessel etc etc. I doubt if one single factor is to blame. I have seen all sorts of incidents with well secured ro-ro cargo,all occurring in extreme weather.
Let the "experts" deliberate before making judgement on competence of seafarers.

Doug


----------



## NZSCOTTY (May 20, 2006)

Good on you Capt Bob, I see all the armchair experts have started forming their opinions without any facts. I have been fortunate enough not to have had any damage crossing Cook Strait NZ in a typical southerly but many others have.


----------



## Brian Campbell (Feb 3, 2008)

Most of these lorrys and trailors are on air suspencion.
if the ship is doing abit of rolling ive seen the chains slack .
by right the drivers should dump the air after boarding . but the companys.
greed again dont want to wait in the morning for the trucks to build up there air tanks causing a lot of smoke in the car deck
cheers Brian


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

In case I am being lumped into the 'armchair expert' category, the one thing for sure is that the bloody thing didn't jump off the back by itself and its a safe bet that human error was involved somewhere. Here endeth any further pontifications by yours truly. Let's wait for the enquiry (Smoke) 

Mike


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

MikeK said:


> ...and its a safe bet that human error was involved somewhere. Here endeth any further pontifications by yours truly. Let's wait for the enquiry (Smoke)
> 
> Mike



Frankly I blame it on the _Links Man_ (Jester)


----------



## NZSCOTTY (May 20, 2006)

Tonga said:


> Frankly I blame it on the _Links Man_ (Jester)


You could be right Tonga but I am sure it will be the Captain who gets it in the chin whilst every one else (in Hindsight) says what should have happened!!

PS is a linksman the weak link in a chain?


----------



## K urgess (Aug 14, 2006)

It appears the comment has been corrected to "link span", Mark. (Sad)


----------



## NZSCOTTY (May 20, 2006)

Marconi Sahib said:


> It appears the comment has been corrected to "link span", Mark. (Sad)


So that makes it the weak link in a spanner!!


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

NZSCOTTY said:


> So that makes it the weak link in a spanner!!


I think that may well be correct; it now seems that the 'links man' was from Pathos... frankly this may explain everything, and he may have to _bob_, to miss the fallout. (POP)


----------



## Gulpers (Sep 8, 2005)

Binnacle said:


> Regardless of any maritime safety certificate held by the vessel, the Stranraer Firemaster's report on the existing safety exit arrangements will make disturbing reading. It would appear that only one exit is available to disembarking passengers and crew in port. According to radio news reports it took ten minutes to lift each passenger ashore via the Fire Service lifting platform. Those responsible for ship safety will have to take a long hard look at existing design arrangements before certificate renewal. If that vehicle had taken fire a real tragedy could have unfolded. IMHO any company spokesperson stating that "there was no danger to passengers" in such cir***stances, if the holder of a certificate of competency, should have it revoked.


Hi Binnacle,

Maybe not as bleak a picture as you envisage.
Don't forget that in a "real" emergency situation the HSS has two MES installations available on each side of the vessel.
We witness test deployments of these systems every two years here in Holyhead and hundreds of "volunteer passengers" are swiftly evacuated from the vessel whilst she is alongside. (Thumb)


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

Gulpers said:


> Hi Binnacle,
> 
> Maybe not as bleak a picture as you envisage.
> Don't forget that in a "real" emergency situation the HSS has two MES installations available on each side of the vessel.
> We witness test deployments of these systems every two years here in Holyhead and hundreds of "volunteer passengers" are swiftly evacuated from the vessel whilst she is alongside. (Thumb)


Your post leaves me wondering if the vessel involved was of a slightly different design, otherwise I have this vision of all the headless Stena chickens running round the quay when a quick call to Holyhead would have solved the problem. If after an incident one questions possible design flaws and possible unsafe working practices it's amazing how those that perhaps should know better, attempt to stifle discussion on safety, so you're enlightning contribution is much appreciated.


----------



## Gulpers (Sep 8, 2005)

Hello again Binnacle,

No, *Stena Explorer, Stena Discovery* and *Stena Voyager* are sister vessels, give or take a few minor details.
I doubt whether the company would have been keen to deploy the MES since it is obviously designed for speedy emergency evacuation e.g. as you mentioned earlier, from a fire on board the vessel.
Whilst sliding down a chute (similar to those used on aircraft) might be seen as a bit of fun, it would not be an option in this case. Even during the exercise deployments, which I mentioned previously, there are occasionally minor injuries sustained by the "passengers". (EEK) 
So, not an experience you would wish to force upon paying passengers when there was no threat to life whatsoever. (Thumb)


----------



## Binnacle (Jul 22, 2005)

MikeK said:


> Not quite ! I spent the last decade or so as Harry Tate on a Baltic Ro Ro and literally digging the cargo out after a good bashing in the Baltic and /or North Sea was nothing new, but before we sailed all lashings were checked as a matter of course and was then reported verbally to the Old Man. Doesn't look as this was the case on this occasion /
> 
> Mike


Exactly Mike, I considered he was being rather presumptious in his assumption, however I didn't feel inclined to enlighten him that some of who had expressed concern about safety standards had served on a ferry.


----------



## duquesa (Aug 31, 2006)

*Lorry found hanging off*

MikeK, Last time I was on one of those HSS things going to Holyhead, the entire car deck staff were pretty little Eastern European gilrs in fancy uniforms. Not dsigned for ensuring lorries were secured!! When I worked on train ferries years ago, I did a lot of the chain stopping myself. Of course it was human error.


----------



## deckboypeggy (May 19, 2008)

After spending time at sea as a A.B. then i progressed to a HGV driver using RO.RO ferrys since 1982 =2005.i susspect the tanker was last on,the doors closed has he switched off his engine, grabbed hiswallet to dash up for some food,forgot the handbrake never left it in gear[reason] as you will not start the engine if the AIRruns out of the system, and it is gear.no "clutch" ,the crew never put the chains on because that is only done if heavy weather is forcast or a overnight crossing belive me i have done it.and been lucky nothing happend.however leaving the handbrake OFF is not hard to do ,,my money is on the driver,and no chains .


----------



## deckboypeggy (May 19, 2008)

*handbake lorry hanging,*



deckboypeggy said:


> After spending time at sea as a A.B. then i progressed to a HGV driver using RO.RO ferrys since 1982 =2005.i susspect the tanker was last on,the doors closed has he switched off his engine, grabbed hiswallet to dash up for some food,forgot the handbrake never left it in gear[reason] as you will not start the engine if the AIRruns out of the system, and it is gear.no "clutch" ,the crew never put the chains on because that is only done if heavy weather is forcast or a overnight crossing belive me i have done it.and been lucky nothing happend.however leaving the handbrake OFF is not hard to do ,,my money is on the driver,and no chains .


i am now away from anything that will cause danger to the public.ie lorries


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

duquesa said:


> MikeK, Last time I was on one of those HSS things going to Holyhead, the entire car deck staff were pretty little Eastern European gilrs in fancy uniforms. Not dsigned for ensuring lorries were secured!! When I worked on train ferries years ago, I did a lot of the chain stopping myself. Of course it was human error.


Now you tell me !! Given the choice of pretty little uniformed Eastern European girls or a bunch of hairy a--ed seamen - no contest ! - Why do I always miss the best bits (Cloud) 

Mike


----------



## Tmac1720 (Jun 24, 2005)

It was all a dastardly plot by H&W to generate a bit of repair work and anyway they had a spare stern door going begging (Jester)


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

Ah, So, it had nothing to do with Ice or leaky sluice valves then Oul Hand


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

*Links Man holds the key*



billyboy said:


> Ah, So, it had nothing to do with Ice or leaky sluice valves then Oul Hand


There was no sluice valve involved, as we already found out from the erudite BBC, that the person in charge was the “Links Man” and in keeping with his profession, he would have been carrying a ‘driver’, so clearly it all comes back to him. Although H&W have been working on a security device for these ferries and Tmac may well be able to tell us more, for all I know about it is the name _*“Chip and Pin”*_ – and it apparently it involves securing devices made from potatoes and they are registered with a card carrying Links Man…..


----------



## trucker (Oct 6, 2008)

deckboypeggy said:


> After spending time at sea as a A.B. then i progressed to a HGV driver using RO.RO ferrys since 1982 =2005.i susspect the tanker was last on,the doors closed has he switched off his engine, grabbed hiswallet to dash up for some food,forgot the handbrake never left it in gear[reason] as you will not start the engine if the AIRruns out of the system, and it is gear.no "clutch" ,the crew never put the chains on because that is only done if heavy weather is forcast or a overnight crossing belive me i have done it.and been lucky nothing happend.however leaving the handbrake OFF is not hard to do ,,my money is on the driver,and no chains .


remember picking up trailer,pulling foreward to make sure the slide had connected with the king pin.no trailer parking brake on.jump out of cab to connect sussies [for got unit handbrake].every thing rolls foreward.quick sprint to dive into cab and apply handbrake.quick change of underpants.(Thumb)some of the legs were stiff to wind up.


----------



## R831814 (Jun 9, 2006)

Tmac1720 said:


> It was all a dastardly plot by H&W to generate a bit of repair work and anyway they had a spare stern door going begging (Jester)


Post number 89 shows that the spare stern door was not quite what you might have been thinking of.(Jester) 
http://forum.shipais.com/index.php?showtopic=2345&pid=16379&st=80&#entry16379


----------



## Chief Engineer's Daughter (Sep 17, 2005)

Gulpers said:


> I doubt whether the company would have been keen to deploy the MES since it is obviously designed for speedy emergency evacuation e.g. as you mentioned earlier, from a fire on board the vessel.
> Whilst sliding down a chute (similar to those used on aircraft) might be seen as a bit of fun, it would not be an option in this case. Even during the exercise deployments, which I mentioned previously, there are occasionally minor injuries sustained by the "passengers".


Exactly Gulpers! I have been a "passenger" on one of these exercise deployments and it isn't a game. Injuries can easily happen. 
Mr CED asked why they hadn't deployed the chutes and I gave him the same explaination as Gulpers. (Well, us Coastguards must stick together. (LOL)) (Thumb)


----------



## sean (Dec 30, 2005)

*Hss*

Would seem the driver took the order to dip his lights a bit too literally!


----------

