Absence of master from Lermontov bridge queried

Press, 13 May 1989, Page 4

Absence of master from Lermontov bridge queried

PA Sydney The absence of the Mikhail Lermontov’s master from the bridge while in the “restricted waters” of Queen Charlotte Sound may have breached the Soviet shipowner’s rules, according to evidence given in the New South Wales Supreme Court.

Captain Georgy Melnik, staff captain of the Mikhail Lermontov on February 16, 1986, when it was holed and sank in Marlborough Sounds, agreed that Queen Charlotte Sound could be classed as restricted waters because of the presence of obstacles or other boats. Under cross-examina-tion, Captain Melnik also agreed that under the rules of the Baltic Shipping Company, which owns the vessel, a master should remain on the bridge while in restricted waters. Mr Peter King, counsel for the Australian passengers suing Baltic and charterer C.T.C. Cruises for damages, asked if the Mikhail Lermontov’s master had failed in his duty to stay on the bridge until the ship had left Queen Charlotte Sound.

“I cannot say for sure,” Captain Melnik replied through an interpreter. “It was the captain’s decision. But we did consider it a spot without any problems.” Captain Melnik had previously denied that the master, Captain Vladislav Vorobyev, acted incorrectly at any stage of the ship’s final voyage. The Court has heard that Captain Vorobyev had been away from the bridge for more than an hour before the ship hit rocks at Cape Jackson at the entrance to Queen Charlotte Sound. Mr King asked Captain Melnik if he recalled two occasions when the ship was sailing down the Sound when Captain Vorobyev told the pilot, Captain Dom Jamison, that the ship should stand further from the shore.

Captain Melnik said he could recall only one such conversation between the master and pilot. In another incident at Shakespeare Bay, in the Sound, Captain Melnik had changed Captain Jamison’s order of “half astern” to “full astern” to stop the ship’s forward movement. But Captain Melnik denied that he had countermanded Captain Jamison’s order,- saying it was his personal opinion that an increase in speed astern was needed. “I didn’t doubt the pilot’s judgment. I just made my own suggestion,” he said. . Expert witnesses called by counsel for the passengers have alleged that the officer of the watch should have countermanded Captain Jamison’s direction which put

the ship on course for submerged rocks by Cape Jackson. The passengers have also claimed that the ship beached at Cockle Bay, in Port Gore, where it could have been anchored and save, before drifting into deep water and sinking. Captain Melnik, who has consistently denied the ship beached before sinking, was questioned at length about a chart used to plot the ship’s course from Picton. The course ends with a circled dot marked at a point Captain Melnik estimated to be 8 cables (about 1460 metres) from shore. But Mr Joe Campbell, Q.C., counsel for the Marlborough Harbour Board, asked him about a faint dot beside a seven fathom (12.8 metre) mark — closer to the beach — on

the chart and if smudginess around the dot was where something had been rubbed out. Captain Melnik said the smudge could have been a dirty finger mark. Pressed whether something could have been rubbed out, he said: “It is quite possible.” He denied the ship reached the position marked by the dot. Asked whether a circled dot was the universal symbol among mariners to show a vessel’s position on a chart, Captain Melnik said it depended on the method being used. After Mr Campbell showed him 17 photographs of the Mikhail Lermontov taken by a fisherman who had followed the ship into Cockle Bay, he refused to accept the ship was any closer to shore than he had already stated.