Wreck report for 'Skylark 6', 1946

Crown Copyright Reserved

No. 7942

M/L "SKYLARK 6"

THE MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894

REPORT OF COURT

In the matter of a Formal Investigation held at the Town Hall, Bournemouth, on the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th days of August, 1946, before Owen Latham Bateson, Esq., K.C., assisted by Captain Piers de Legh and R. A. Parker, Esq., into the circumstances attending the loss of the motor passenger launch "Skylark 6" on the 21st April, 1946, in Poole Bay.

The Court having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-mentioned shipping casualty, finds for the reasons stated in the Annex hereto, that the loss of the "Skylark 6" was occasioned by the incursion of water from some unexplained cause which may have been produced by fracture of or other failure in the propeller shafting.

Dated this 10th day of August, 1946.

OWEN L. BATESON, Judge.

We concur in the above Report.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.

The Court's answers to the Questions submitted by the Ministry of Transport are as follows:-

Q. 1. By whom was the British Motor Passenger Launch "Skylark 6" owned at the time of her loss and for how long had she been so owned?

A. J.Bolson and Son, Limited. Since 6th January, 1931.

Q. 2. Were the hull and machinery of the "Skylark 6" in good and satisfactory condition when she left Bournemouth on her last cruise?

A. The Court is not satisfied on the evidence about her condition.

Q. 3. Was the "Skylark 6" properly supplied with life-saving appliances?

A. Yes.

Q. 4. Did the "Skylark 6" carry signalling apparatus and, if she did, of what type and range?

A. The only signalling apparatus was a Klaxon horn, type "O." This type had been tested and approved for a range of two miles.

Q. 5. With what compass was the "Skylark 6" fitted, and where was it situated?

A. One spirit compass of 4-in. diameter, carried forward in a locker on the starboard side in the steering space.

Q. 6. On what day and at what time did the "Skylark 6" leave Bournemouth Pier, and what was the nature of her intended cruise?

A. On Sunday, April 21st, 1946, about 1.45 p.m. for a trip lasting about half an hour from the Pier and back again, to a distance of about a mile off-shore.

Q. 7. Was the "Skylark 6" well found and seaworthy, for her intended cruise when she left Bournemouth Pier on Sunday the 21st day of April, 1946?

A. The "Skylark 6" was well found, but the Court is not satisfied about her seaworthiness.

Q. 8. What was the state of (a) the weather, (b) the wind, and (c) the sea, when the "Skylark 6" left on her last intended cruise?

A. (a) Fine and clear; (b) light off-shore wind about N.W.N.; (c) calm sea.

Q. 9. What number of passengers was the "Skylark 6" licensed to carry?

A. 82.

Q. 10. What number of passengers did the "Skylark 6" carry when she left Bournemouth Pier on Sunday the 21st day of April, 1946?

A. The exact number of passengers is unknown, but it was not in excess of 82.

Q. 11. What crew did the "Skylark 6" carry on her last cruise?

A. Two men.

Q. 12. Did any member of the crew lose his life as the result of the casualty?

A. Yes. Reginald Sidney Kent jumped overboard and subsequently collapsed and was drowned.

Q. 13. Did the "Skylark 6" carry ballast on her last cruise; if so, in what form, and of what weight and where was it placed on board?

A. Yes. Pieces of iron of about 40 Ibs. weight each and 3 bars of about 1 hundredweight each. The total weight was not more than 2 tons. It was placed right aft.

Q. 14. What signals, if any, were. given from "Skylark 6" to indicate she was in danger?

A. The Klaxon horn was sounded, but how often is not certain. Some form of improvised flag was waved from the end of an oar. There was shouting and waving of arms.

Q. 15. Were such signals (if any) effective?

A. No.

Q.16. When the Master of the "Skylark 6" found the launch could not be propelled by the oars after the mechanical failure and the inrush of water, was it an error of judgment not to drop anchor?

A. In view of the fact that the wind and tide were carrying the vessel away from the land, it would have been advisable to let go the anchor, and the Court is of the opinion that it was an error of judgment not to have done so.

Q. 17. When the Master found it was not possible to cope with the inrush of water, by aid of the pumps and baling, was it an error of judgment not to put the ballast overboard?

A. If the ballast could have been got out and put overboard, it would have enabled the vessel to retain more buoyancy for a longer period, but the Court does not consider that in the circumstances the Master was guilty of any error of judgment.

Q. 18. Was any attempt made to find the hole in the hull of the "Skylark 6" and plug the same?

A. No.

Q. 19. Did the "Skylark 6" meet with a mishap to her machinery on Saturday the 20th April, 1946, off Bournemouth Pier? If so, what was the nature of the mishap?

A. Yes. The after half of the after coupling of the propeller shafting and the forward half of the forward coupling were broken.

Q. 20. Did the mishap on the 20th April, 1946 (if any), require the attention and service of engineers to make the "Skylark 6" serviceable and seaworthy for her trip on the 21st April, 1946, when she was lost?

A. Yes.

Q. 21. Was the work of repair properly carried out?

A. The renewal of the broken couplings and the repair of the gear-box were properly carried out, but there was inadequate stripping and examination of the transmission generally.

Q. 22. Was the work of repair properly and adequately tested after completion?

A. Yes, but there had not been adequate stripping or examination of the transmission generally.

Q. 23. What was the cause of the loss of the "Skylark 6"?

A. The incursion of water from some unexplained cause which may have been produced by a fracture of or other failure in the propeller shafting.

Q. 24. Was the loss of the "Skylark 6" caused or contributed to by the wrongful act or default of her owners, her Master or any other person; if so, by whom?

A. No.

Annex to the Report.

The "Skylark 6" was an open passenger launch owned by Messrs. J. Bolson and Son, Limited, of Hamworthy, Poole. She was built by R. A. Newman and Sons, of Hamworthy, in 1922. She was a wooden craft with a skin of 1½ inches pitch pine planking and timbers spaced 6 inches apart, centre to centre, with floors spaced 3 feet, the inside being stiffened by fore and aft stringers. She was about 45 feet 5 inches long and about 12 feet 6 inches beam, fitted with a Parsons motor engine, petrol started and driven on paraffin, fitted to a singlescrew bronze propeller. The engine was of 28 horsepower, situated at the forward end of the ship and connected to the shafting through a Langdon gearbox. The steering-wheel was forward in a separate compartment on the starboard side. A Klaxon horn type "O" was carried, and two pumps were fitted, a plunger pump amidships on the port side, the top of which was open and about level with the thwarts, and a semi-rotary pump situated forward in the steering space.

She was surveyed on the 15th April, 1946, for the purpose of obtaining a Passenger Certificate, which was granted on the 18th April, 1946. She carried the full life-saving equipment required for a vessel of her class, and was licensed to carry 82 passengers and two crew from Bournemouth within a line from Milford-on-Sea to Swanage, keeping within three miles of the shore. Her actual seating capacity was about 86.

The history of the vessel, as detailed at this Inquiry, began with her service at Dunkirk, during which she was put out of action by a near-miss from a bomb, and subsequently drifted about in the Channel, partially water-logged, for three or four days. She was picked up and taken to Dover, and was later towed back to the owners' yard at Hamworthy. She was then overhauled and again requisitioned by the Admiralty, and was thereafter used in Poole Harbour until she was returned to the owners in the early part of 1946.

While the vessel was in the hands of the Admiralty, the Langdon gear-box was fitted.

When the "Skylark 6" was returned to the owners, she was put on the slip and reconditioned, and, among other things, new intermediate shafts were fitted, the old ones being condemned by a Ministry of Transport Surveyor. She again began her work for the owners on Saturday, April 20th, 1946, when she was in charge of Frederick William Vincent, assisted by Reginald Sidney Kent. Both these men had had experience of similar craft with the same owners and elsewhere.

The "Skylark 6" left the Pier for the first cruise about 10.45 a.m. on the Saturday, and made three trips without incident, except that the engine would not run satisfactorily at a sufficiently low speed, due probably to the choking of the slow-running jet in the carburettor. As she approached the Pier at the conclusion of her fourth trip, Vincent endeavoured to put the engine in reverse, in order to take off her way. While doing this, the lever jammed, Vincent applied more pressure, with the result that the gear went through reverse and into the ahead position again; the engine stalled almost at once, and there was a noise from the shafting. An immediate inspection showed that the forward half of the forward coupling was fractured and part of it had fallen down into the grease-tray.

The "Skylark 6" was pulled into the Pier by ropes, the passengers were disembarked, and the vessel was towed back to the owners' yard by another of the owners' vessels. She reached the yard about half past four in the afternoon, and repairs were immediately put in hand.

One of the owners' foremen, Mr. Chisman, with a fitter-mechanic, Mr. Blake, undertook the work and began by removing the gear-box. In order to do this, it was necessary for the shafting to be moved towards aft, but it was found impossible to do this. A further inspection showed that the after half of the after coupling was broken and was jammed between the shaft and the hog-piece.

The two men, with some assistance from two others, worked on through the night, and finally completed the repairs on the Sunday morning, April 21st. The gear-box was dismantled and was found in order, except that the three actuating pins were burred over at one end. These were trued up and re-tempered, and a stop was fitted on the brake spindle arm. A new pair of couplings was fitted at the forward end of the shafting, and a new after half was put in position at the after coupling. The forward half of the after coupling was cleaned with petrol and examined in place, but the Hardy disc was not removed. The shafting was turned by hand in order to test its truth, and no distortion was found. The tail shaft was turned by hand with similar results. There is no very clear evidence of anything more than a visual inspection of the bearings and of the centre coupling. The adjustment of the two halves of the forward coupling was tested with a feeler. When the whole of the repairs was complete and the shafting coupled up, the gear was tested while the "Skylark 6" was tied up alongside another vessel, by running the engine at her normal full speed of about 900 revolutions and putting the gear from ahead to astern and vice versa several times. While the engine was running the shaft was inspected, the bearings were said not to have heated unduly, and no distortion or uneven working of the' shaft was observed. The floorboards were then replaced and the vessel was taken for a short run under the charge of Vincent, who found everything satisfactory. This lasted about three-quarters of an hour in all, and the "Skylark 6" proceeded direct to Bournemouth Pier where she arrived about 1.15 in the afternoon.

Some 70 passengers were taken on board, and the vessel moved away from the Pier in the ordinary way, first astern and then ahead, and proceeded out on her normal course without incident. Somewhere off the end of the Pier, however, a heavy knocking was heard which at first was thought to come from the gear-box. Vincent lifted the floorboards to examine it, but at once came to the conclusion that the knock came from further aft, and Kent was sent aft to make a further inspection. He came back and asked for a spanner with which he tightened up the bolts on the forward plummer block. In so far as the evidence went, no inspection at that time of the shafting further aft was made. The engine which had been put into neutral while the gear was being inspected was again put ahead, the knocking was again heard, followed very shortly by the engine racing. Vincent at once put the gear into neutral and switched off the fuel supply. At the same time Kent was sent aft again to find out what was the matter. Here again the evidence is conflicting. At one time it was suggested that no water was seen until after Kent had gone aft and raised the floorboards, but there was also evidence that the water was seen above the floorboards in the centre of the ship aft of the aftermost life raft before Kent came aft at all. We think it improbable that the water had risen over the floorboards before Kent went aft, as this would presuppose a leak in the hull before any trouble was experienced with the shaft. No attempt seems to have been made to find the leak or its cause. There was undoubtedly a good deal of alarm among the passerigers, if not of actual panic. Vincent's first idea was to try to row the vessel to shore, but although the oars were got out and used, two of them broke and it soon became apparent that nothing could be done in this way. The two pumps were put into action and both worked efficiently. The Klaxon was sounded and some kind of improvised flag was waved from the end of an oar. Passengers standing on the forward deck were waving their arms and shouting, but the plight of the "Skylark 6" was not observed until a fairly late stage, although Mr. Bolson, Senior, was on the beach and more or less keeping his eye upon her. It was only when a member of the public who had field glasses informed him that people were jumping overboard that he became aware of the fact that something was seriously wrong. In the meantime the life rafts had been put overboard. Some of the younger children had been put on to them and other passengers were using them for support. The thirteen lifebuoys had been put into use, although it would appear that the passengers did not appreciate that each of them was capable of supporting two persons. Efforts were made with a bucket, a baler, a wooden box and one or more ventilator cowlings, to bale the water out, but not much effect was produced and the water rose steadily. Mr. Bolson, Senior, as soon as he became aware of the position, collected a number of buckets and went off in a boat to do what he could, at the same time giving instructions to his son to send out all the boats he could, and as a result a number of boats of various kinds went out to the "Skylark 6." By the time the first boats arrived the "Skylark 6" was fairly full of water, the level of the water being about up to the thwarts. The buckets were put into action and produced some effect, but eventually the effort was abandoned, as the people using the buckets became exhausted. Shortly afterwards a British Overseas Airways Corporation launch arrived from Poole and took off the whole of the remaining passengers, the others having been taken ashore in a variety of boats. The Poole lifeboat was also launched and picked up one survivor, and every credit is due to the police and others concerned in organising and dispatching rescuing craft. We particularly desire to mention the very gallant efforts made by two schoolboys, Tony Dryanski and Jim Salisbury, who not only took a number of passengers into their boats and towed others, but also made very splendid efforts to rescue Kent who had jumped overboard at a fairly early stage in the proceedings, and unfortunately was drowned before he could be brought ashore. Later on, the "Skylark 9," another of the owners' vessels, came out in order to tow the "Skylark 6" back to the yard. When she arrived, the water was almost filling the "Skylark 6" and only a few inches of her gunwhale were above water. While the "Skylark 9" was manoeuvring alongside in order to make fast, the forward starboard bollard of the "Skylark 6" caught under the rubbing band of the "Skylark 9" and, as she lifted on the swell, her head was pinned down and she took a sudden plunge and went head first to the bottom.

Before dealing with the possible causes of the sinking, we should explain what is known of Mr. Kent. It does not appear that he did anything very effective after the water had once been discovered, although no doubt he bore his part in keeping the passengers quiet and assisting to get the life-rafts overboard. But, for some unexplained reason, having equipped himself with a lifebuoy, he jumped overboard from the after end of the vessel and began to swim towards the shore. He was met by the boat rowed by Dryanski, who continued on towards the "Skylark 6" and, after picking up some of thepassengers, began to return towards the shore. On his way back to the shore, Dryanski picked up Kent who hung on to the stern of the boat. After continuing in this way for about half an hour, however, without warning, Kent let go his hold and was seen drifting away from the boat with his head collapsed forward on to his lifebuoy. Salisbury dived overboard in an attempt to reach him, but had to abandon the attempt, owing to being fully clothed, but succeeded in getting Kent into his boat, where artificial respiration was tried on the way to the shore. This was continued when Kent was brought ashore by a beach inspector and some American officers. Unfortunately, it proved unavailing. This was the only casualty.

We have found it quite impossible to come to any definite conclusion as to the cause of the water getting into the "Skylark 6." Various theories were put forward, both by Mr. Eaton, one of the Ministry of Transport Surveyors, and by Mr. Bolson and Mr. Campbell, on behalf of the owners. Mr. Bolson gave his evidence in a most straightforward and convincing way, and the Court is particularly indebted to him, both for the frank way in which he gave his evidence and for his assistance in dealing with the matters in issue, but every theory that was put forward was susceptible of destructive criticism.

The salient fact seems to us to be that, shortly before water was discovered in the vessel, a heavy knocking as of something striking on wood was heard and felt on board. This knocking ceased when the engine was put into neutral, but recommenced almost as soon as the engine was put ahead again. It is, in our view, impossible to suppose that this knocking was caused by anything other than some part of the shafting striking against the structure of the ship. The difficulty in the case is that there is no evidence which conclusively shows that this knocking was against the skin of the ship, or that, in fact, it punctured in any way the skin of the ship, and it is for that reason that we are unable to come to any conclusion as to the cause of the water getting into the vessel. We are, however, of the opinion that most probably there was some fracture of, or failure in, the propeller shafting which resulted in some part of the propelling gear striking the skin of the ship and causing it to leak. We are of the opinion that this is more likely than that there was some damage caused to the stern tube or the stern tube gland. Even if the tail shaft had been completely removed from the stern tube, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for the quantity of water which, in fact, found its way into the vessel to have entered through the stern tube in the time available. It may well be, however, that more than one cause was operating and that the failure in the transmission gear not only caused damage to the skin of the ship but also allowed water to enter through the stern tube. Moreover, one cannot rule out altogether the possibility of the vessel having struck wreckage or some under-water obstruction, although there was no direct evidence to support such a view.

The Court was disturbed almost from the outset by the fact that the repairs and renewals were effected and the "Skylark 6" was put back into service without reference to the Ministry of Transport. The note on the Passenger Certificate requiring written reports to be made to the Ministry is based on Section 425 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and leaves the owner entirely free to make such repairs as he thinks fit and to continue his vessel in service. So far as the Act is concerned, the only difficulty in which an owner might find himself is that he might risk a prosecution under Section 457 for sending his ship to sea in an unseaworthy condition. The Court was referred to the'" Instructions as to the Survey of Passenger Steam-Ships," paragraphs 38 and 48, and Mr. Bolson, the Works Manager for the owners, stated that he was familiar with those Instructions. It was, however, stated on behalf of the Minister that those Instructions were not intended to be binding upon owners and, moreover, that there was no reason why any owner should be aware of them. We are of the opinion that the accident to the "Skylark 6" indicates very clearly the desirability of having clear instructions to owners of the necessity of having surveys by Ministry of. Transport Surveyors of all damages or repairs of damages affecting the seaworthiness or efficiency of a passenger vessel. We do not say that, if such a survey had been made in this case, the accident would, in fact, have been averted, but we are satisfied that the propeller shafting of the "Skylark 6" after the mishap on Saturday, 20th April, 1946, was not sufficiently inspected or tested. In our view, the intermediate shaft should have been taken out, all the bearings and couplings should have been dismantled, the shafting should have been tested in the lathe, and the couplings and bearings carefully surveyed. Mr. Bolson frankly admitted that he had overlooked both the note to the Certificate and the provisions of paragraph 48 of the Instructions, but we feel that the reason for his so overlooking the note and paragraph 48 was because it is not laid down sufficiently clearly that repairs of damages such as these should be carried out under the supervision of and to the satisfaction of a Surveyor of the Ministry of Transport. We, therefore, recommend that regulations should be framed to secure that damage and repairs of damage to passenger vessels, at all events of this class, are dealt with under the authority of a Ministry of Transport Surveyor and that until this has been done the Passenger Certificate is in suspense.

The only signalling apparatus with which the "Skylark 6" was equipped was a Klaxon horn; type "O." It was supposed to have a range of at least two miles, but, in fact, although the vessel was never as much as two miles from the shore, the Klaxon horn was not heard. The. Court is of the opinion that some more effective means of sending out distress signals should be provided to passenger vessels of this class, in order that assistance may be forthcoming at the earliest possible moment.

OWEN L. BATESON. Judge

(Issued by the Minister of Transport in

London on 18th day of October, 1946.)

LONDON

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE

To be purchased directly from H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE at the following addresses:

York House, Kingsway, London, W.C.2; 13a Castle Street, Edinburgh 2;

39-41 King Street, Manchester 2; 1 St. Andrew's Crescent, Cardiff;

80 Chichester Street, Belfast;

or through any bookseller.

1946

Price 2d. net