# Channel 5 - Bowbelle



## Rob Pithers (Dec 1, 2012)

I watched the 'Minute by Minute - Pleasure Boat Disaster' on Channel 5 (UK) last night and thought it a waste of time and totally biased against the Bowbelle.
I watched because I was Mate on her from 1985-7 and thought I might at least see some footage of her on the Thames. All I got were stories about what people on the Marchioness had been doing earlier in the day.
Whilst I obviously agree it was a disaster, and have every sympathy for the people lost and their families, I think a balanced view should have been given. No-one from the Bowbelle or East Coast Aggregates, her owners was interviewed. It was stated clearly that the 'Belle should not have been in the centre of the River, with no thought or mention that her air draught meant she needed to use the centre bridge arches She also used to report to Woolwich Radio at each bridge, though I doubt this would have been heard over the music on the Marchioness.
The preparation for the programme was lacking in that the Bowbelle was referred to as 'dredging the river', when she was an aggregate dredger, and at another time as a 'tanker.
All in all, I thought it a very poor programme.
Rob


----------



## norman.r (Apr 25, 2006)

I was interested to see your comments on the tv reporting of the incident and fully agree that the background from the "Bowbelle" perspective was never reported. I was Mate on her from 1983 to 1985 so you must have followed on shortly after me.
Norman


----------



## alan ward (Jul 20, 2009)

No doubt both of you can inform me why, knowing how congested those reaches can be with pleasure craft at all times,there wasn`t a lookout on the Bowbelles foc`sl,or a someone on the Marchioness watching her stern.
Last year I attended a nightime party on the Thames and it was like Piccadilly Circus crossed with the M6.


----------



## AlbieR (May 18, 2007)

alan ward said:


> No doubt both of you can inform me why, knowing how congested those reaches can be with pleasure craft at all times,there wasn`t a lookout on the Bowbelles foc`sl,or a someone on the Marchioness watching her stern.
> Last year I attended a nightime party on the Thames and it was like Piccadilly Circus crossed with the M6.


There were two seamen for'd on Bowbelle one acting as lookout and the other standing by to raise the mast after passage through the bridge, all noted in the Report of the Chief Inspector of Marine Accidents 

http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/marchioness and bowbelle part 1 and summary.pdf


----------



## norman.r (Apr 25, 2006)

When I was on "Bowbelle" during the passage through the bridges on the Thames the Second mate and two seamen were on lookout duty in the bow. There was always a problem particularly at night as the pleasure cruisers always operated as if there was no one else on the river and did not have a proper lookout or observe the rules regarding VHF traffic between other vessels and Woolwich Radio.
Norman


----------



## Rob Pithers (Dec 1, 2012)

I agree with Norman. we always had the off watch Mate on the bow with 2 seamen. The on watch Mate was on the helm. I always wondered how anyone on the partyboats could hear or see anything over the horrendously loud music and bright flashing lights. 
Rob


----------



## alan ward (Jul 20, 2009)

AlbieR said:


> There were two seamen for'd on Bowbelle one acting as lookout and the other standing by to raise the mast after passage through the bridge, all noted in the Report of the Chief Inspector of Marine Accidents
> 
> http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/marchioness and bowbelle part 1 and summary.pdf


How did they then not see the Marchioness?


----------



## AlbieR (May 18, 2007)

alan ward said:


> How did they then not see the Marchioness?


If you read the report that I attached, on page 7 paragraph 3.6 it states "In BOWBELLE. the two seamen on the fo'c'sle had first noticed MARCHIONESS at about the time of passage through Southwark Bridge, that is less than a minute before impact." So they saw her as soon as she was in view after passing through Southwark Bridge.


----------



## Hugh Ferguson (Sep 4, 2006)

It was the loss of life, in particular young life, that gave this event such publicity but in THIS earlier disaster, had the point of impact occurred a mere 15 ft further aft there would indeed have been serious loss of young life.
It was again another accident involving a holder of a pilotage exemption certificate.


----------



## Rob Pithers (Dec 1, 2012)

What has a Pilotage Exemption Certificate got to do with it? You are in the arch of a bridge when you see another vessel that HASN'T been reporting his position, but should have been aware of you as you have been reporting. What are you going to do? Turn around? Put the brakes on? Maybe drop your anchor and take out the bridge as well? I don't see what difference a pilot would have made.


----------

