MAIB report on Emsstrom and tug Christos XXll

Emsstrom, a former German fisheries protection vessel had developed a list while being towed by the Christos XXII from Emden, Germany, to Aliaga, Turkey. The tug master was anchoring off Hope’s Nose, Torbay, to enable him to investigate the cause of the list when Christos XXll was struck by the Emsstrom.

The master was unfamiliar with operating in tidal waters and had not taken account of the tidal conditions when anchoring. He anchored Christos XXII downtide of Emsstrom, leading to it being carried by the tide into the stationary tug. Christos XXII was holed below the waterline in way of its engine room and required significant assistance to control the subsequent flooding.

The tug was owned by Christos XXII Spanopoulos Tugs and was registered under the Greek flag in April 2012. Predominantly used for international tows, Christos XXII was well maintained and was operated under a voluntary ISM1compliant safety management system.

Emsstrom sank at 1326 the following day, and its loss was under criminal investigation by European authorities. Following the accident, it was found that the authorities in Harlingen had not been consulted regarding the tow and no arrangements had been made to receive Emsstrom in that port. The vessel’s loss was investigated by European authorities for suspected waste disposal fraud. Questions remain regarding the cause of the loss of Emsstrom and the late change in destination to Turkey, from Harlingen, where it had never been expected. These areas were under criminal investigation by European authorities and are not covered in the report.

The master had not assessed the tidal conditions when making his anchoring plan. The majority of his experience had been gained in the non-tidal waters of the Mediterranean and in planning how best to achieve his goal of investigating the list on Emsstrom, he forgot to take account of the tidal conditions and the effect they would have on the towed vessel. Had the master taken a pilot and entered Torbay to investigate the list on Emsstrom, the subsequent anchoring would have been better prepared and therefore not have resulted in a collision. However, to avoid the expense of taking a pilot he decided to investigate Emsstrom’s condition without entering the bay.

The report concluded that: “The accident was a result of the master’s lack of appreciation of the dangers resulting from tidal effects on the tow when anchoring. This was probably due to his inexperience in anchoring in tidal waters and his focus on establishing the cause of the list on Emsstrom. Had he developed a plan in conjunction with senior, experienced staff from the company, it is likely that the tidal conditions would have been taken into account.” Note, the full illustrated report is available on the MAIB web site.

By Jack Gaston