casualty investigation

An important element in safe vessel design is learning the lessons from previous casualties, effective and accurate casualty investigation is therefore essential to the design process

In this respect members may be interested in visiting the following site:

www.freewebs.com/inconvenientcitizen

 

website

Apologies

It would appear that someone has now posted a lot of pop-ups on this site but I believe it is still possible to get through in the second or third attempt!!

 

good site! Cheers!

 

Gaul tragedy

See also:

http://the-trawler-gaul.blogspot.com/

within the next few weeks this site will become hot

Although this tragedy happened 34 years ago now, the issues that surround this vessel are not a matter for history.

regards

Ronda

 

Well you believe what you want to believe! either the official version or many others! Just remember there ain't no smoke without fire!

I know what I believe - but that's for me, nuff said before the bogey man comes knocking!

 

In the UK, the Government has advised us that there are no longer any bogey men.

Ronda

 

Without being to political Ronda the bogeymen ARE the government -if you believe otherwise you've lead a very sheltered life, you lucky thing!

 

Safewalrus

If you are interested in what these bogeymen are currently up to, why not pay another visit to:

http://the-trawler-gaul.blogspot.com/

Best regards

Ronda

 

The Gaul was most probably lost due to a basic design fault in one of the closing arrangements that were fitted to its outer hull.

A video representation of this design fault may be viewed on youtube at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FppSXO2kqbc

Comments on the ongoing events associated with this matter can be viewed at:

http://the-trawler-gaul.blogspot.com/

Any comments on this issue will be appreciated.

kind regards,

ronda

 

There were three main fears (bogeymen) during my days in trawling. Icing up (common in the far north); being snagged by US/UK and USSR submarines - especially at the mouth of the Clyde (outlet for the Holy Loch NATO's nuclear sub' base) - and being towed rapidly backwards; and snagging an underwater obstacle (reef - unmarked wreck) whilst performing a sharp turn.
I notice the 'blog' referred to seems to dismiss the submarine danger as 'cafe talk'. Not so. I've witnessed it. Trouble is that neither the US, UK or USSR would admit they had such a vessel in the area at the time - hence no reimbursement for the skipper who lost his ship. The insurance company also refused his claim in the absence of an 'alternative' explanation for his ship suddenly deciding to travel at 20 knots in reverse an consequently submerging stern first.
Design fault fears were only a secondary consideration because most skippers - if a new boat - had a heavy hand in their design. If an older boat the wise skipper would have crawled over every inch and kicked every item before making the purchase. The good skipper, bearing his own and crew's safety in mind, often had a more intimate knowledge of his boat than he did of his wife or girlfriend's peculiarities.

 

Bergalia, that quote went in my book! I'd love to hear all our 'mates' comment on it...

 

I tend to support the idea of an non closed deck opening led to massive flooding and further capsizing of Gaul.
I agree with Berg on the statement that most fishing vessels' skippers have a deep influence on their boats design when new. Also agree about skippers, boats and girls....