200256 Seismic Incident 1

25 Feb 2002 MARS

Seismic Incident 1
Report No. 200256

Position : North Sea ( Danish Sector ) Olga Field - 55 : 20 N 004 : 55 E

Weather : Wind : ENE at 10kts. Visibility 6.5km.

Own vessel, heading was 270 (T) degrees throughout, is fitted with two 3cm radars, both of which were operational and being used at the time of the incident. One set has ARPA which was also operational and being used. Both sets had 6 mile range selected, and both had 6 minute trails selected and on. The speed through the water was estimated to be 2.5 knots and this had been manually fed into the ARPA. We were towing a seismic cable throughout. The total length of the cable was 850 metres. This cable was marked with a tail buoy fitted with a strobe light, radar reflector, and a flag. We were displaying navigation lights, day signals (ball, diamond, ball) plus red white red lights for a vessel restricted in its ability to manoeuvre throughout.

Sequence of events (all times are GMT)
  • 1045 Target observed at about one point forward of the port beam, distance approx 4.5nm. Initial trail showed possible risk of collision, though no action was taken at this time as this would have contravened rule 7(c) at this stage. Manual acquisition of the target was made.
  • 1046 Attempted to pass an advisory message to the other vessel on VHF16. No response.
  • 1047 Attempted to call vessel a second time on VHF 16 to pass an advisory message. No response received. The ARPA at this time had built the plot and showed the other vessel on course 003(T) and speed 13 knots. CPA zero. Visual contact established with the other vessel at this time, therefore Part B section II of COLREGS applies.

Note: The idea of contacting the other vessel was to purely pass advisory messages as to the gear we were towing and not to discuss anti collision. My own standing orders forbid the use of VHF for collision avoidance purposes.

  • 1050 The onboard Danish fishery representative made contact on VHF 16 with the OOW on the other vessel, and requested him to pass to the west of own vessel. This terminology was deliberate so as not to embarrass the other vessel into contravening rule 15 (crossing ahead of another vessel). The OOW acknowledged the call and stated that it would not be a problem to pass ahead (his terminology) of us. The reply from the other vessel was given with a Dutch accent. The CPA at this time remained zero.
  • 1058 The other vessel is identified as beam trawler and her distance was now approximately 200m. CPA remained zero. Own vessel stopped engines under rule 17(b). Own vessel sounded five short and rapid blasts on the whistle. There was still no sign that the trawler intended keeping out of the way.
  • 1059 Own vessel began to lose steerage way.
  • 1059½Trawler passes no more than 50 metres ahead of own vessel.
Master's comments:

This trawler displayed some of the worst and most dangerous acts of seamanship I have ever seen. Both vessels were seriously threatened by his blatant stupidity. In my opinion, whoever was on watch on the trawler should have their Certificate cancelled. She was definitely not engaged in fishing at the time and was therefore considered to be a power-driven vessel. It was noted that the trawler was steaming at 13 knots and that there was at least one person in her wheelhouse.

I may be criticised for not taking action under rule 17(a)(ii) and this would be justifiable under normal circumstances for a power driven vessel. However, given that we were towing a seismic streamer, this becomes somewhat impractical and extremely difficult to judge due to the behaviour of streamers during turns. The streamer needs protecting from other traffic just as the ship does.

Return to listing