SINKING OF TUG TE AWHINA

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22513, 22 September 1938, Page 10

SINKING OF TUG TE AWHINA

NAUTICAL INQUIRY,

OPENS

AUCKLAND HARBOUR

ACCIDENT

EVIDENCE OF MASTER AND PILOT

(PXEES A.SSOCXATIO* TILIOIiU.)

AUCKLAND, September 21.

The nautical inquiry into the sink-, ing of. the Auckland Harbour Board’s tug Te Awhiha on August 11 was opened in the Magistrate’s Court this morning. , •

Mr W. R. McKean, S.M., presided. The nautical assessors were Captain H. R. HUghes, of Devonport, and Captain R. J. Hamilton, Bluff. The engineer assessor was Mr W. H. Parker, of Auckland. A large num- , ber of counsel appeared for various interests.

Members of the Court and counsel first visited the tug.

The first witness, Captain D. Probert, .master of the tug, examined by Dir. N. A. Foden, of Wellington, for the ‘Marine Department, said the tug left Queen’s wharf and proceeded oiit to the motor-ship Essex. On the starboard quarter the tug had a. line from: her bows to the Essex, about 150 feet from the, stern, at the.second bollard. The Essex was coming to . Central wharf slowly under steam, the tug being •at right angles to the ship. The bow of the Essex was. well inside thp -€ntrance to the wharf when witnffSs received an order from the pilot to pull off. Witness sent his starboard engine, which had been going full ahead, to full astern, and kept, on the port' engine, which was going full astern.

He noticed the starboard propeller of the Essex going ahead, and assumed the purpose of it was to keep her stern from the wharf.

“The big ship started to move ahead and my tug started to lose her position at right- angles,” said Captain Probert. “I immediately rang for full ahead on the starboard engine. My helm was hard aport all the time, endeavouring to my previous position. This did not produce the desired effect. I rang for double steam, but was unable to regain my original position.” Witness described how the engines of the Essex stopped. He had given no signal to the Essex to stop her engines. Left the Ship

Captain Probert. in describing his efforts to bring the tug, which had been holed, from the vessel’s side. to the shallow water of Hobson, wharf, declared that the mate, two engineers and the fireman, left , the- tug, ■ going aboard the 'Harbour '-Board -launch Ferro without his orders. • - Witness noticed that the two engineers and the fireman had their ..per- ; sonal effects under their arms. When : witness added that the 7 mate deserted « at- a critical moment, and went-- on»: board the. Ferro as' soon as she - came alongside. Dr. Foden said he thought. ' witness should simply say that the ; " mate went on board. Counsel said! they : r . should be fair to the mate, and his.evidence was not yet heardT Witness continued by saying that the ■

mate went oh board the Ferro without his instructions. The two engineers and the. fireman boarded anpther launch, the Presto, also without orders. Witness gave no orders to leave the ship, because he did hot think the tug was going to sink, • . Witness said that when approaching Queen’s wharf, members of the crew were calling to “tie her up - at Queen’s wharf,” and “she is Sure t 0... blow up.” Further calls were made to ‘ - tie her up at Prince’s wharf. “One member of the crew was em- . phatic that she would capsize,” witness said. When he passed Prince’s wharf, only himself and a deckhand were v aboard.

Referring to the watertight doors, witness said he had asked the chief - engineer, when they were between Queen’s and Prince’s wharves, if the. doors had been closed. The . engineer - said: “I can’t close the doors. They are jammed.” He added: “She is a moral to blow up, and you had better come with us in the launch.” Witness. ' said he had left it to the - engineers ,to close the doors or start the pumps after the vessel was holed. He presumed that it was part of their duty. When the vessel was on the slip he tried the doors, and found . that they could be closed. - Captain Prcbert then described how the tug sank, and how he and the deckhand were picked up out of the water. . : ‘

To the Magistrate, witness said he estimated that about 13 minutes elapsed between the time the tug cast off from the Essex, and when it sank. He assumed that the engineers between them would have shut the doors. The doors were in excellent order .when witness later examined them, when the tug was on the; slip. There was nothing witness could have done to avoid the accident. This-was his first serious accident. v

“Ship Moving Slowly” Captain Kelsey, the pilot, said the Essex was moving very slowly when _ off the wharf. He did not consider?! that any manoeuvre he made was likely to place the Te Awhina in * 5 difficult position. In his opinion, the tug was too close to the propeller. It was thus in broken water, and the disposal of the water by the propeller ; going ahead made an intake of water forward. The use of another head line could have kept the tug clear of the propeller. To Mr Moody, witness said Captain Probert was regarded as a competent - tug master. On that day there was a fairly strong tide coming down from Queen’s wharf. Witness had at that stage not received a report from the second officer of the Essex, stationed aft, that the tug was in a dangerous position.

Mr Moody: The major cause of this trouble was the set of the tide?

Witness: The set of the tide assisted in pushing him on to the propeller. The tendency of the Essex’s propellers would be draw the smaller steamer in.

At this stage, the Court adjourned until to-morrow. .