Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NO CLEAR ANSWER

In his report, Mr Justice Spicer plainly admits the real reason for Australia’s greatest peace-time naval disaster will remain a mystery. He could not identify the individual or individuals on the Voyager resonsible for the collision. He exonerated the commander of the Melbourne, Captain R. J. Robertson. Of Captain D. H. Stevens, he said: “On the proper construction of the Naval Regulations, responsibility for the safety of the vessel (Voyager) must ultimately rest with the captain.” Sir John Spicer found: Voyager was on the wrong course two minutes before the collision, but Melbourne had . maintained correct course. The collision could not have occurred had Voyager maintained an effective look-out and taken evasive action. Captain Robertson had Voyager under almost continuous observation from

the time she took her starboard turn until the collision. The navigation officer of Melbourne, Commander J. Kelly, should have paid more regard to Voyager’s movement than he did. He could not understand why three short warning blasts were not given by Melbourne before the collision.

This suggested undue readiness by Melbourne to rely solely on its right of way. The short range radar on Voyager had a possible defect but this did not contribute to the collision.

Attention Diverted The Melbourne and ■ Voyager were turning together at speeds of more than 20 knots at a distance from one another of 1000 to 1500 yards. At that speed, the distance would be covered in less than three minutes. , Sir John Spicer said in his report: “Shortly before the collision, at the time when the last signal was received from Melbourne, Captain Stevens’ attention was diverted by something which caused him to look at a chart or a signal book.

“It might be Captain Stevens was puzzled by a signal indicating a flying course of 020 degrees and that he was engaged in making some sort of a check.

■“Or there may have been some difference of opinion on Voyager whether the flying course signal required her to take up her plane guard station relative to the new flying course and he was consulting the signal book to settle the matter.”

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19640827.2.129

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30530, 27 August 1964, Page 13

Word Count
355

NO CLEAR ANSWER Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30530, 27 August 1964, Page 13

NO CLEAR ANSWER Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30530, 27 August 1964, Page 13