Submarine 'caused' sinking of French trawler

Seadog

War Hero
Moderator
#6
most likely caused by a submarine - perhaps a British one.
my italics

ruling out the results of an earlier probe by France's Sea Accident Investigation Office
Did they rule it out or do they just have a different opinion? I smell lazy journo.

Last year, one of the judges, Richard Foltzer, appeared to dismiss the idea that the boat was sunk by one of three British submarines or a Dutch vessel during a joint Nato and British Navy exercise, but suggested an unknown spy submarine could have been involved
But now

Documents submitted by the British authorities say that HMS Turbulent was tied up in Devonport while HMS Torbay was 100 miles away. The Dutch authorities said their vessel, Dolfinj, was nine miles away.

However, the judges now believe the trawler could have been hit by any of the British submarines, and that the third, HMS Triumph, was definitely in the vicinity at the time - although its precise location is unknown.
So although Turbulent was tied up alongside at the time, French judges believe it may have been responsible. Right.

However, the local prosecutor in Quimper said that there was "also very solid material" suggesting it could have been a simple fishing accident.
A submarine may have been responsible but there appears to be much contradiction, hedging and fantasy (assuming Turbulent's location is genuine) in the judges' train of thought. Trawlers don't tend to get out the way when warships are in the area. The ideal result for some fishermen is damage to nets, claim, compensation, happy days.

Keep postings on this topic non specific.
 

Allnightin

Lantern Swinger
#9
PESCADO / COVER UP - Manacles


I would like to know what makes you think that PESCADO was a cover up. I followed this in the local media over the years that it ran and everything pointed firmly to the fact that the boat had been modified in a way that affected her stability and was unfit to go to sea. Most of the noise about a submarine being involved was from on owner responsible for sending her out in an unfit state. In the end she was raised by Devon & Cornwall police and they decided along with MAIB that it was definitely a case of inadequate stability. Rate payers like myself funded that extravaganza - shades of Diana inquest!
 

ctfairway

Lantern Swinger
#10
Allnightin said:
PESCADO / COVER UP - Manacles


I would like to know what makes you think that PESCADO was a cover up. I followed this in the local media over the years that it ran and everything pointed firmly to the fact that the boat had been modified in a way that affected her stability and was unfit to go to sea. Most of the noise about a submarine being involved was from on owner responsible for sending her out in an unfit state. In the end she was raised by Devon & Cornwall police and they decided along with MAIB that it was definitely a case of inadequate stability. Rate payers like myself funded that extravaganza - shades of Diana inquest!
I'm afraid that we live in a world of internet generated "counter knowledge" ie no matter how much irrefutable evidence is produced by those in a position of authority, there will always be beligerent pervaders of the "counter knowledge" who "know better", and who refuse to accept the obvious truth and cry "cover up". As you say the Diana Inquest is a classic case but there are many others such as David Kelly's suicide and the Pescado sinking.
 
#11
Blame it on the Septics...they always pay up and will say it was part of the 'War On Terror', they in turn will blame Al Thingy. Al Thingy will say it was the West and that it was our fault that innocent people died and the Frogs will just blockade all their sea and air ports just because they can.


We'll probably find out, when all is said and done, that 'yet' another
f/v was trawling whilst turning beam to sea and found out that watertight hatches are only water tight if shut and clipped correctly.

If it turns out that one of the denizens of the deep got the f/v then oops...apols all round!
 
U

uncle_ho

Guest
#13
ctfairway said:
Allnightin said:
PESCADO / COVER UP - Manacles


I would like to know what makes you think that PESCADO was a cover up. I followed this in the local media over the years that it ran and everything pointed firmly to the fact that the boat had been modified in a way that affected her stability and was unfit to go to sea. Most of the noise about a submarine being involved was from on owner responsible for sending her out in an unfit state. In the end she was raised by Devon & Cornwall police and they decided along with MAIB that it was definitely a case of inadequate stability. Rate payers like myself funded that extravaganza - shades of Diana inquest!
I'm afraid that we live in a world of internet generated "counter knowledge" ie no matter how much irrefutable evidence is produced by those in a position of authority, there will always be beligerent pervaders of the "counter knowledge" who "know better", and who refuse to accept the obvious truth and cry "cover up". As you say the Diana Inquest is a classic case but there are many others such as David Kelly's suicide and the Pescado sinking.
I have worked on three differnet Plymouth beamers in the aftermath of the Pescado tradgedy.I didn't meet one person on the quay who believed she was pulled down/rammed by a submarine. The considered opinion was that she was equipped with deck operated winches that were being operated by inexperienced deckies.The winches haul two sets of gear port and starboard by bringing in the warp via the derreck ends. The Pescado's deck winches were to powerful for the size of the boat and when one of the trawls got made fast on the bottom she carried on winching herself downwards.Had the winch been operated from the wheelhouse by an experienced skipper he would have disconnected the gear and taken action by either going slow astern to free the snag or let the warp in and out until it freed itslef. Anyway they didn't so she wrapped herself around her warp and was pulled under. I believe the fishroom hatch was open and she flooded and sank pretty rapido.
The only folk who still think it was a submarine are some of the families who probably don't want to accpet it was an avoidable balls up.
 
#15
The Powers that Rule the Waves ORDER every s/m to anotate
their Control Room Log as to their Lat/Long when any of this
kind of incident occurs...so unless someone's telling porkies,
their arses are sufficiently covered. Unless SINS is out of
whack that is.
 
#16
IIRC, both boats and skimmers are required to keep a FISHING BOAT LOG. giving dtails of the position, identity where possible and type of fishing being carried out when encountered. There were a lot of enquiries of these encounters when I worked for MoD - mainly wanting verification for insurance claims.
 
#17
I remember when all this pink and fluffy, touchy feely first came in with regards to operating in the vicinity with f/v's. Operating in the CXA's was busy and annoying enough and then came along this directive to call them up on channel whatever (if they were guarding it that is) and to establish identity and intentions.
We spent more time faffing around doing this than actually achieving the aim of the op order!

I wonder how many hours are lost at Rona because the range is fouled by intruders by the way!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
skyvet Nautical Jokes 18
TonyN Nautical Jokes 2
M Submariners 83

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top