THE RONA MISHAP

Otago Witness, Issue 3566, 18 July 1922, Page 47

THE RONA MISHAP

NAUTICAL INQUIRY. AUCKLAND, July 12. The nautical court of inquiry into the stranding of the Rona on Flat Rock began this morning. THE CHIEF OFFICER’S EVIDENCE. DELUDED BY TRAWLER’S LIGHT. AUCKLAND, July 12. In opening the case for the Marine Department at the Rona inquiry, Mr Selwyn Mays said that though at the preliminary inquiry the chief officer took all the blame, counsel considered that there was some responsibility on the captain. It would have been a simple matter for Wallis to have fixed the course to take the ship in perfect safety between the Hat Rock and Kawau. There was no reason indicated why W T allis departed from the ordinary practice that in leaving and entering the port the captain shall be on the bridge and shall fix the course. Mr V. R. Meredith, for Captain Wallis: Does my friend suggest that iie was enetring the port? Mr Mays proceeded to state that the port of Auckland was not confined t,o the channel between the mainland and Rangitoto In the ordinary course the ship’s navigation was always the captain’s responsibility. It seemed to him that the captain was called upon to justify his not giving the course and leaving the bridge when they were going into narrow waters. Even though the officer left in charge was an experienced man in this port and held the harbour pilotage exemption certificate it was an axiom of the sea that the master was responsible for the navigation of the ship, especially when entering and leaving a port, and that to his mind it was a most serious element for consideration in this case. Janies Alan B 7 allis, master of the Rona, stated in evidence that at 10 a.m. on June 28 he sighted the Poor Knights Islands, and passed four miles west of the Little Barrier. The weather conditions were good. The Flat Rock was sighted by the third officer about 6 p.m. Witness went on the bridge, and saw the light a quarter of a point on the starboard bow, bearing south three-quarter east. The Rona was doing about 10 knots, and was about seven or eight miles off the light. B T itness then brought the red light ahead. The chief officer was on the bridge with him. About 6.15 p.m. lie gave the men at the wheel an order to bring the light right ahead. The custom was to steer straight for Flat Rock till about a mile or a mile and a-half off; then to edge the ship inside. That night the land was about discernible, but there was no outlined point to take bearings from to westward. It was largely a matter of guesswork to arrive at the moment of turning. .Witness told the mate to steer for the light, and left the bridge. Cross-examined: Witness said that when he left the bridge he left an experienced officer. There seemed absolutely nothing to worry about, He was changing to warmer clothing in his room, when the mate called out asking whether he should pass inside or outside of the light. He replied “Inside,” as usual, and was putting on an overcoat to go on the bridge when the vessel struck. Captain Wallis continued his evidence, stated that he said to the mate: “My God, what have you done?” The mate replied: “We have hit Flat Rock. You put your trust in me, and I have let you down,” or words to that effect. Witness then ordered boats to be swung out, and took other measures to safeguard the lives of the crew. Air Selwyn Mays (counsel for the department) : The mate says he called to you when he thought he was about a mile from the light. Can you account for him being a mile ahead of where he thought he was? Witness: He miscalculated his distance, I suppose. Witness added that he considered he was perfectly justified in leaving the bridge when he did. Asked “How did the mate come to run on the rock?” witness replied: “It is incomprehensible.” Would the lighting of the trawler deceive him?—Certainly not,; he could not have mistaken his two lights. In reply to a further question, witness said that the look-out man on the forecastle lead told him he called out before the Rona struck, and asked “was there anybody on the bridge.” The man added that he called out a warning when they were pretty close up. Cyril Talbot Grindley. chief officer of the Rona, stated in his evidence that at about 6 p.m. he relieved the third officer on the bridge. Captain Wallis followed him on the bridge. The third officer passed the word “Same course.” He said he had raised the Flat Rock light slightly on the starboard bow before the captain went below. He told witness to head for the light. B itness steadied the ship on her course. Witness entered the chart room on the bridge for a couple of minutes at half-past 6 to enter the order in the log book. The ship struck at 6.47. He had called down to the master a couple of minutes before that, asking: “Are you going inside?” The master replied: “Yes; same as usual.” He was more than ordinarily careful, but that was not owing to the weather conditions. Air I» rant icy, the chief officer continuing his evidence, said that he had had his mind made up to turn about a mile from the light, certainly not under a mile. He saw the lights of a vessel he took to be a trawler. B T hen the course was altered to the light ahead he saw two white lights, and lie thought sometimes a red light’ about two points on his star-board bow! H e put his glasses on these lights, and concluded that it was a steam tr-awler going about south-east. He was correct in his assumption that, it was a trawler. While he was watching the trawler he remained to westward of Fiat Rook. ll e thought that the trawler was coming between the Rona and her course around Flat Rock. Mindful of porting his helm when he arrived at the turning point, he was carefully observing the movements of this vessel. i The Flat Rock light at this time was about on a level with his eye as he stood on the bridge about 35 feet above the water level. While he was standing on the bridge, the light seemed very much further away than the trawler's light, which he appeared to be approaching more quickly than the Flat Rock light. The trawler’s lights appeared to he distinctly between him and his course. Ho intended to make around Flat, Rock. He would not take the risk of going between the trawler and the rock. Having made up his mind to go behind the trawler, he did

not change his course to starboard. He was at a much higher angle above the trawler’s light than Flat Rock light, and he thought he was approaching the trawler very rapidly. lie had the impression that he was much further off the Flat Rock light than off the trawler. He did not alter his course /to starboard to pass behind the trawler because he thought he was at a safe distance from her. The trawler’s light seemed to keep closing in until the Rona struck on Flat Rock, and it was then that he realised that the trawler was on the other side of the rock. He would solemnly swear that when he thought he was about a mile off Flat Rock and got instructions to pass inside, he gave the order “Hard aft,” His reason was to get rid of the trawler by coming around promptly and rounding the light. He thought it was a time to act promptly. There would have been no difficulty in altering his course a mile further hack. “With in a minute or two after asking the captain whether he would pass inside, the Rona struck the rock. I was utterly deceived by the light, ” said Air Gantley, referring to the lights of the trawler, which he said he had judged to be much nearer than was the case. He honestly thought the trawler was between him and the Flat Rock light Mr Grantley, continuing, said that any bright white light was deceiving, and every man at sea would back him up. It was an exceedingly difficult, thing to gauge one’s distance from a light, especially a bright white light. He tried to estimate his distance from the light, and made an error of judgment. He still maintained that he thought he was a mile off the light at the time he made the turn. He had taken the ship round the light many times, and had used his judgment whether he was a mile or a mile and a-half away when he turned, but this time he misjudged his distance. When about, to pass a light there should be a margin of safety, and in this case he was in error. Mr Meredith : Putting it broadly you, as you have already said, made an error of judgment in estimating jour distance from the light ? Air Grantley: Yes; that is so. Air Aleredith: You do not suggest that, any fcla.me for the unfortunate accident tan be attached to B’allis ? Mr Grantley: Absolutely none. Air Outten: How close were yon to the light when you struck the rock ? B 7 itness: About 200 feet. Even then it seemed much further away. Hoiv could you make a mistake between 200 feet and a mile 7 —lt, sounds almost impossible, but, it happened, and the only explanation I can give is that the bright white light deceived me. Further questioned by Air Outten, witness said the look-out called out just prior to the altering of the course. The report did not worry him in the least, as he considered it superfluous at the time. The look-out had reported the trawler about 15 minutes before the Rona struck. Air CLitton : And that trawler took up a good deal of your interest ? A certain amount. Were you looking at it with your glasses? Yos. What was the last time? Just prior to calling to the captain. You have already told us you got the report from the look-out just before you spoke to the captain. Yes. And were you looking at the trawler at the time you got a report from the lookout. ? Very probably I was. You were, worrying more about the trawler than the light? I was more concerned about the trawler. At the time you had just got a report, from the look-out you were interested in the trawler? Why did you want to obtain advice from the captain? I cannot say unless it was that I was being more than ordinarily careful. It does not look like being more than ordinarily careful, as far as results are concerned; that is the tragedy of it. B’itness said it was an incomprehensible fact, and he had made a grievous error of judgment. He was on the bridge, attentive to his duties, and for such an error of judgment to happen seemed almost impossible. Air Meredith contended that the captain could not be held responsible for the mishap, as he had with him a chief officer he had known for 10 years; a man who had been familiar with the locality for 13 years, and had been in the habit of taking vessels through there day and night. He held the same certificates as the captain with a pilotage exemption for this port, and probably was marked out for next promotion to the command of a, ship. Evidence to the effect that in the conditions then prevailing it was unnecessary for the captain to take charge of the vcs.sc 1 on passing Flat Rock, or to set the compass hearing was given by W. F. Nor bury, master of the Alanaia ; E. Darling, of the Clansman; T. M. Haultain, of the Ngapuhi; and Captain O. E. Hood, marine survej-or. The inquiry was then adjourned. July 14. Air E. C. Cutten, S.AI., said that from remarks made by the chief officer (Air Grantly) as to what occur fed after Captain B’allis left the bridge, the chief officer never seriously took responsibility. He had no specific instructions, and was looking for the return of the captain. Of course, the chief officer was quite wrong, because when he was on the bridge he was in charge and responsible. The chief officer requested permission to speak. He said lie had from the first taken full share of the blame, and appealed to the court for whatever leniency it could make. He was at no time neglectful —he was keenly attentive to his duty, but was deceived by the close approach of the light, which, he thought, was further off. Replying to the chairman, Mr Grantly said he fully understood at the time the master went off the bridge that he (Air Grantly) was in charge. The court adjourned for two hours to frame its findings. Later the court an nounced that it had been unable to c-oine to a decision, and would give its findings at 11.30 a.m. on Monday.