Matipo Inquiry BOSUN: NOR’-WESTER WORST IN 35 YEARS

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30451, 27 May 1964, Page 3

Matipo Inquiry BOSUN: NOR’-WESTER WORST IN 35 YEARS

(New Zealand Press Association) ■ , WELLINGTON, May 26. “The worst nor’-wester in 35 years sailing out of Wellington” was blowing on the night of January 7-8, the bosun of the Matipo told the marine inquiry this morning concluding its inquiry into the momentary stranding of the ship on Walker’s rock. . . • The Court will give a written decision.

When the hearing resumed this morning, Mr L. G. Rose, appearing for the master and the Merchant Service Guild, said he was not satisfied enough emphasis was placed on the weather on the night of the accident and he called the bosun of the Matipo, Alexander John Macleod.

Mr Macleod' said he had 38 years’ experience on the New Zealand coast, 35 of them with the Anchor company.

He had been sailing Cook Strait for 35 years and had not seen a nor’-wester like it. It was raining, blowing and foggy on the night of the stranding. There was also lightning. The paint was peeled off the mast for 25 feet, he said. The inquiry comprised Mr M. B. Scully, S.M., and two assessors, Captain F. A. Barrett and Captain W. J. Hill. Mr D. P. Neazor appeared for the Marine Department, and Mr R. W. Edgley appeared for the owners, the Anchor Shipping and Foundry Commany. The captain, Louis Robert Geen, was recalled for some questions by Captain Barrett. He said that after striking the rock the Matipo drifted backwards out of Walker’s passage and made a full circle to port. She then went through the passage again. There was better visibility after she turned and they were able to pick up the actual beacon on Jackson’s light. Mr Rose said the fact remained that the captain had completed the journey and that he had made an error of judgment. Unable To Judge He would call evidence that under the conditions of true horizon and the unusual phosphorescence even experienced men who thought they could judge distances would not be able to.

Randal Elliott, a specialist in opthalmology, said Captain Geen had told him he relied on a direction finder bearing to pick up the Brothers light and only saw the light at close quarters. He set a course for Cape Jackson. The captain said soon after the storm began he suffered from glare blindness after the lightning flashes, which were about one a minute. He put on some dark glasses to improve his vision between flashes. Three hours after leaving the Brothers he saw the loom of the Jackson’s light and assessed his distance off by this single point of light. Dr. Elliott said he formed the opinion it would have been impossible for the captain to assess his distance off from this single point of light. Adaption Lost The other method was the brightness of the light. The closer one was the brighter the light would have appeared. However, since the captain had been on deck for six hours he would have been fully dark adapted at the start of the storm. A flash of lightning, which had a strength of several million candlepower, would cause complete loss of dark adaption.

The captain told him he was blinded for about 40 seconds after each flash, but his sight would actually have been affected for up to 40 minutes. The dark glasses improved the glare blindness, but would have disrupted the captain’s night adaption. The captain could not have formed a correct estimate of his distance off the light.

In reply to a question from Mr Rose, Dr. Elliott said there was a common fallacy about judgment of distance from a single point of light. This was discovered during formation flying on dark nights. Some very bad errors of judgment had been made by men flying on the tail-light of the plane ahead and several crashes had been recorded. Mr Edgley told the inquiry Captain Geen had been a capable and efficient officer for the company for many years and the company still had every confidence in him. Early On Bridge Mr Rose suggested it would have been almost dangerous to start working out fixes on charts in the circumstances. The captain was concerned about the safety of his ship and had been on the bridge since 8 p.m. instead of 2.30 a.m. when he would normally have been called. Mr Rose mentioned an earlier decision of another marine court which inquired into an accident to the coaster Turihaua in the same place. In the decision no blame was attached to the master for using the passage against the caution in the “New Zealand Pilot.”

He suggested it would be flying in the face of tradition, custom and actual practice to say it was wrong per se to use Walker’s passage because of cautions against it in the “Pilot.” The captain had no means of knowing when he- entered the passage that the tide had turned against him or that he was not estimating his distance off the light properly. He was out in a storm where he would not have been if the forecast had been correct and he spent the night on the bridge when he would normally have left it to a mate until 2.30 a.m. He suggested that costs could be awarded to the master to show that no blame was attached to him. Caution Mr Neazor submitted that Captain Geen’s evidence alone was sufficient to support the department’s submission that the caution in the “Pilot” could not be compensated for with local knowledge. He said Captain Geen should not have used the passage but should have gone to seaward of Walker’s rock, knowing the tide would set him off the land whether on ebb or flood.

He said the common practise of using Walker’s passage shduld always be in regard to the circumstances. Since it was almost conceded by counsel that the captain had made an error of judgment it was only fair that he should contribute towards the cost of the inquiry.