Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications

S94 July-Aug 2013 with NZ Aquaculture

The only specialised marine publication in Oceania that focuses on the maritime industry, from super yachts to small craft to large commercial ships, including coastal shipping, tugs, tow boats, barges, ferries, tourist, sport-fishing craft

Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaleditions.com/i/142553

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 8 of 100

letters grow on it, even though that point is surrounded by up to 10 square meters of antifouled hull. Finally, there are species that are very sensitive to metal pollutants, mostly filter feeders, and in particular the fanworms. The marina environment must have a higher concentration of copper than the open ocean or harbour, and yet the marina piles demonstrate a fantastic showing of magnificent fanworms! Thus, the evidence for damage actually caused by copper antifoulings is not actually present in the environment. Hope these points may be of interest. Bob Jenner B.Sc. Yacht METRO LIFE JACKETS & LIFE-RINGS Dear Sir My background is in Marine Engineering and as an apprentice at Mason Bros. Limited on Pakenham Street, Freemans Bay, I was in the late 1950s occasionally asked to assist marine surveyors doing stability tests on such passenger launches as ran to Rangitoto (Tarawai) and many Blue Boats; Marie, Ionero, Olive Rose, etc. We used borrowed blocks of solid bitumen from the Neuchâtel Asphalt Company just across the road and loaded them onto the side decks. A straight edge across a bucket of water, a plumb bob along with lots of readings and calculations then occurred as more blocks were loaded and the list increased. The deck was eventually well under water. We also checked on deck floatation devices (Carley Floats), life jackets and life rings. On Sunday May 12 on a calm sunny day I took the 6.5m Wellington Dominion Post Ferry Cobar Cat to Matiu, Somes Island in the centre of Wellington Harbour. I believe her passenger capacity was 100 (google checked). We were counted on board and my return ticket was timed for 4.20pm – the last trip. I walked through the downstairs cabin to the very narrow aft deck, which gave access to the upper open deck – it would take very few passengers standing on the aft deck to block access to the stairs. The open upper deck had lots of rows of seats open underneath. There was no evidence of any life jackets, Carley type floats or life rings. One usually expects to see one on each aft quarter along with light and rope. Downstairs in the cabin there were some life jacket instructions on posters but not obviously clear amongst the other posters. There was no evidence of any life rings (I attach a googled photo which I now see had two life rings on the Transom and below the stern rail but they were not obviously visible to passengers). Before departure the masters safety instructions were given with the information that life jackets were under the seats in the cabin. I am sure that the vessel is well equipped under the act with life jackets but my concern is that in an emergency it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to get everyone safely into the water and with a life jacket. A collision, fire or whatever would find those in the cabin trying to get out and those on the upper deck unable and certainly unwilling to venture into the cabin. Should there be a man/child overboard incident the ferry would travel a long distance before the master could be made aware. As I noted there are no life rings on the upper deck and the two on the main deck are out of sight. Again, I reiterate that the vessel no doubt meets the requirements as written but I think more consideration should be be given as to how people could cope safely in an emergency. I remain a passenger thinking outside the square. Sorry East by West Ferry Company but just in case, please see it from my view. Eddie Vowles, Whakatane 6 Professional Skipper July/August 2013 ASHORE & AFLOAT Dear Sir Ashore and afloat, we all enjoy reading your fine magazine here at Strait Shipping. Keep up the good work. Many thanks. Captain Steve Blom, Wellington CONTRAPEL CONGRATULATIONS Dear Sir Barry arrived back in Christchurch last night from the Boat Show. He's asked me to say: "The article in Professional Skipper is great; it is well written and you hit the main points squarely on the head, when we were in Auckland someone said they'd just read about us in Skipper magazine! The boat and propulsor had a great reception in Auckland which has also helped raise our profile. The level of interest in purchasing future propulsors was extremely high. Thank you for helping us by profiling us in your magazine. We are very grateful. Thanks again Keith for a wonderful article. Stephanie Davies, Administration, Contrapel, Christchurch PORT HUTT SHELTER Dear Sir I have read with interest many articles in the "Skipper" dealing with the pros and cons of various shipping links to the Chatham Islands. It would appear that this magazine has become the forum within which Chatham Island shipping issues are openly discussed, vilified or vindicated. The question I would like to put to those who over the years have become familiar with the Chatham Islands shipping route is – if Port Hutt were to be developed as the main Chathams shipping terminal what would happen? Would the trading link benefit? It seems to be a bit of a conundrum when the vessels currently servicing the Chathams appear to spend much more time sheltering in Port Hutt than they do tied up to the wharf at Waitangi. To the uninformed, Port Hutt is a deep, sheltered fiord-like inlet in north Petrie Bay. It has a SE aspect of limited fetch and lies 32km by road north west of Waitangi, the main port, in south Petrie Bay. Waitangi is virtually an open roadstead of westerly aspect and so exposed to all predominant weather patters affecting the Chathams – the nearest safe anchorage being, you guessed it, Port Hutt 15 miles, one and a half hours steaming away. It appears to me that one scenario as to why the present shipping factions have not put their weight behind a development at Port Hutt is – at present only small vessels can operate alongside the Waitangi wharf without grounding or damaging the wharf, also small vessels with their related running cost can effectively absorb the downtime which is now built into their present operating cost. Any development at Port Hutt would open the competition to larger more efficient vessels would help rather than hinder the development of the Islands. With talk of millions being spent on development at Waitangi some commonsense should prevail. A simple reclamation and breastwork at Port Hutt would give efficiency to the shipping link whomever it may be, without excessive downtime due to adverse weather conditions then "sheltering at Port Hutt" would become "working at Port Hutt." Digby Tuck, Chatham Islands www.skipper.co.nz

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Professional Skipper Magazine from VIP Publications - S94 July-Aug 2013 with NZ Aquaculture