Loss of the Tahiti

Horowhenua Chronicle, 13 September 1930, Page 2

Loss of the Tahiti

INQUIRY CONCLUDES WELLINGTON, Sept. 12. The inquiry into the loss of the Tahiti was continued to-day, when second engineer Thomson, gave further evidence. To Mr. Hay (for the engineers) he said that when he rushed into the tunnel he did not contemplate closing the intermediate door. It was humanly impossible to close it owing to the amount of water flowing in. It would have meant exerting his own personal strength against the water. The flow of the water was indicated by the fact that when he got back to the main bulkhead it had overtaken him. After the bulkhead door was closed by the use of the gear he gave it a few knocks with a hammer to ensure that it was closed. The door was kept open for the reason that the bearings of the shafting in the tunnel had to be inspected every half hour. The door was tested every Sunday under normal conditions and the Sunday before they arrived in Wellington the door was closed and opened. It appeared to be in perfect working order and there was no indication of any apertures at the sides. To Mr. White (for the Union Company): The engineers and , greasers went along the tunnel every half hour in the ordinary course of their work. To Captain Worrall (nautical assessor): The fact that thp water when he first saw it was shooting across from starboard to port showed that the vessel’s skin was punctured on the starboard side. That was what he reported. Captain Worrall put a number of questions relating to the quick sinking of the ship after she was abandoned, and pressed a question to witness as to whether the doors were shut. Witness was positive that the doors were shut. To Mr. Parker (engineer assessor): The shaft was- last inspected on June 6. The gland had never run- hot to witness’s knowledge. By the time the bulkhead door was closed, he thought, the water was above the plates at the after end of the engine-room. To Mr. Huntley (naval architect*): If there was only a rent in the side of the ship at the stern that would not account for the water coming into the ship after the bulkhead door was closed. There* must ■ have been rents in Nos. 3 and 4 holds. Six months ago he had the bulkhead door chipped and painted and it was in good order then. ' To Mr, Kirkcaldie (for Captain Tote*l) witness agreed that the dancing of the broken shaft, being sufficient to shake the boilers, might also be sufficient to damage or crack the bulkhead. There was a only a shaft clearance through the bulkhead; no gland or bearing. / To Mr. Page, S.M.: Jt was his opinion that the bulkhead was injured by the mishap. * As he had said, six months earlier he had it chipped and painted and so personally he had seen it was in good order' and condition. X When the Tahiti enquiry was resumed this afternoon D. A. Gibb, fifth engineer, said between 4 ajn. and 4.20 a.m. he was in the tunnel when everything was all right. He detailed turning the power off and stopping the engines. He saw water coming through the door as the second engineer came out of the tunnel. It was about a minute between the time the engines raced and the time the door was shut. He took a quick glance and saw water coming from the bottom and sides of the door. The watertight door seemed to close perfectly and worked quickly. Other evidence of a technical nature was given, Mr Kirkcaldie for the master and deck officers, said the inquiry was unique through the Complete absence of any suggestion of dereliction of duty which he thought the Court should place on record together with the fact that all the members of the crew worthily upheld the traditions of the service. Mr White, on behalf of the Union Company, supported Mr Kirkcaldie’s remarks and said thanks should be accorded the captain, officers and crew of the Penybryn. The assistance of the Ventura had already been recognised. Mr Page said the Court would take time to consider the evidence and its decision would probably be delivered next week.