GREYCLIFFE DISASTER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19833, 31 December 1927, Page 9

GREYCLIFFE DISASTER.

MARINE COURT INQUIRY.

EVIDENCE OF EXPERT, SPEEDS OF TWO VESSELS. ENGINEERS OE TAHITI. CRITICISM BY WITNESS. (Received December 30, 11.25 p.m.) By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyright. A. and N.Z. SYDNEY. Dec. 30. At "the inquiry by the Marin© Court into the disaster to the ferry steamer Greycliffe, John Thompson, a member oi the Institutes of Naval Architects, of Marino Engineers and of Mechanical Engineers, London, said ho had given particular attention to the forces exerted by moving vessels. He then illustrated to the Court, by the aid of diagrams, the premises upon which he proposed to base his technical evidence. The witness then produced a diagram showing certain patches of painting on the bows of the Tahiti. He said the marks indicated that they had been caused by the belting iron of the Greycliffe, and the wood of the sponson. Witness, by the aid of diagrams, then sought to reconstruct the disaster and the relative circumstances immediately prior to it. By a process of deduction he showed that ,asuming the Tahiti commenced her voyage at 4.10 p.m., the average speed from the time she left the wharf was 8.4 knots. By the same process < f (Induction, the" witness showed that in his opinion, at 4.27 p.m. the Greycliffe was travelling about nine knots. Taking that speed, and the relative positions of the ships at 4.27, he was of the opinion thf,t, assuming the Tahiti was doing only eight knots, the bow of the Tahiti must have been from 200 to 300 feet ahead of the Greycliffe, and the latter, instead of being an overtaken ship, was an overtaking shin. Sped of the Tahiti. Having regard to the actual positions of the vessels at the time of the impact, he was compelled to conclude that the speed of the Tahiti at that moment was 13£ knots. Mr. Thompson, in another series of calculations, made deductions based primarily on the assumption that the Tahiti at 4.20 p.m. was doing six knots, and at or about 4.23£ p.m., eight knots. This, he said, would bring the point of impact 1470 ft. west from where it actually happened. Taking the statements of the two captains, ho could not correlate the position of the two vessels, nor could he reconcile the statements with the position of the wreck. To do so, the Tahiti would have been travelling not more than four knots. From the indents on the bow of the Tahiti, he did not think the first blow had been struck at an angle exceeding 10 degrees. Had the blow been a direct one, the iron band round the ferry's sponson would have been cut through. Instead, it had been forced down by the first glancing blow, and then the second blow cut into the sponson. Pressure on Greycliffe's Helm. The oncoming Tahiti, in the shallow water, would exert a hydraulic pressure ahead. In deep-sea water, an oncoming vessel exerts pressure outward, downward and forward. In shallow water, I the pressure is outward and forward only. It is, therefore, more marked in shallow water, because pressure which is lost in the depths in deep water is exerted more fully in shallow water. Forward pressure would have the effect of paralysing the helm action of the vessel being overtaken by an oncoming ship, especially a large one. The effect' of this forward pressure would be felt first at the stern of the overtaken vessel. Mr. Thompson said ho had been listening carefully to see if there were any evidence that the Greycliffe had turned to starboard, but there was no evidence that she did do so. In reply to a suggestion by Mr. Justice Campbell that all the observers were otherwise occupied, the witness said he supposed that the Greycliffo would ultimately have, turned to starboard. In reply to a further question by counsel, Mr. Thompson said that in hta opinion the forces both of suction and of repulsion operated when the Tahiti and the Greycliffo came together. Then, under cross-examination, witness said his deductions regarding the operation of interaction did not necessarily fail if the speeds he estimated wero found to be incorrect. He added that there was no doubt that the two vessels had been steering practically parallel courses just before the collision. He was of the opinion that the angle of the vessels to each other at the point of contact was very slight. Criticism of Engineers. Replying to a question regarding the evidence of the Tahiti's engineers as to the engines nob being properly warmed up at the time of the collision, Mr. Thompson said that if the engines of the Tahiti took from 10 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. to warm up, they should be thrown overboard, and the engineers with them. He then criticised the engineers. He said he had listened to their evidence, "and if they cannot, as they said, say what number of revolutions their engines were doing when tho Tahiti was going out of harbour that afternoon, they do not know their jobs and are not fit to be engineers on a liner like the Tahiti." In reply to a further question, tho witness said that with the larger type vessels now coming into Sydney Harbour, interaction could take place in almost any part of the harbour. It was quite possible that tho many mishaps which had occurred opposite Bradley's Head had been due to interaction, although they had been attributed to other causes. James Kidd, engineer and works manager for Sydney Ferries, Limited, said he had no record of any repairs having been made to the steering-gear of the Greycliffe during the month of October. Captain Barnes, who was in charge of the Greycliffe on the day of the disaster, was recalled. He said he felt a wave strike his vessel before the collision, but in a statement previously made to tho police ho made no reference to the wave. Robert Kaye, a naval employee, said that two or three weeks before the disaster he went to Circular Quay Wharf to travel to Garden Island by a Watson's Bay Ferry. That day he travelled by the Greycliffe. After the vessel had gone 200 to 300 yards from the wharf she came back to the wharf and remained | there about 20 minutes.

. Hs saw the master of the Greycliffe stand on the wharf for a few seconds looking at' the stern of the vessel and then go toward the Ferry Office. The master returned in about- 20 minutes with another man. The two conversed while looking at the stern.: He overheard part of their conversation. The ferry boat left the wharf and went backwards and forwards to swing round, and finally left the wharf with the other end ahead.

Francis Ludeck, superintendent of the Watson's Bay ferry service, said the master of the Greycliffe had informed him on August 5 that he thought the rudder pin was broken, and that 110 had gone out from the wharf and found the rudder would not answer. The ferry boat was then docked and a new rudder pin fitted, when ifc was found that the old one was broken.

Frank Baker, ships' draughtsman at Garden Island, gave evidence as to speed calculations. He said he had worked out the speed which the Tahiti would have reached at the point of impact as 13.1 knots. The Court was then adjourned until Tuesday.

The coroner's inquiry was adjourned to-day until January 9. ' !