K4309

It was a story of soo many contrasts. The latest leading edge technology, but without fundamental basics, like a roof. Then boasting it will have Lear Jet standard interiors, and that you would be able to talk on a phone, or give a presentation. I'm still trying to work out why you'd want to give a presentation on a ferry, but maybe that is me being ignorant. Or that the 300 people Fullers electric ferries are in build and delivery planned, but they haven't sorted out the charging infrastructure. Or that the latest tech electric ferries will be charged off massive diesel shore b

Unlike the big electric ferries on the way next year (which will require $27.5m worth of multi-megawatt chargers) no new infrastructure is needed. While superchargers on piers are still a work-in-progress - and might not appear at CBD ferry terminal until mid to late next year - the hybrid’s diesel generators mean they’ll be able to operate for months, while Fullers waits for superchargers.

Capacity of 10 people. Future upgrades include a cabin top.......

I believe that tanker was outside the environment.

What was the doco on? as in youtube, Netflix, or some strange terrestrially transmitted platform where you have no choice when it starts and stops and have to sit though people trying to sell you stuff in your living room that you didn't invite in, and never knew your wanted or needed?

The govt of the day thought they could change the weather by putting biofuel in the petrol. The last one just been very nearly forced the industry to put 10% biofuel in but backtracked last minute cause it would increase petrol prices too much, coinciding with record high prices due to Russia invading their neighbour. Anyway, biofuel is ethanol effectively, and attracts moisture like a bastard. Petrol with biofuel in it has a very short shelf life for temperamental things like outboards, chainsaws, weed eaters and what not. Consequently, we all need to be very fussy with the age of petro

I still assert that even the report says "as likely as not", meaning 50:50, and for a prosecution you need to be beyond reasonable doubt. Note I've not been saying the capsize occurred where the skipper said, but I've been saying you can't rely on the location being where the modelling said. It could have been fairly much anywhere. But anyway, lets move on. What does it mean for the case if the capsize occurred where the modelling suggests it did? - as opposed to anywhere else other than where the skipper thought he was, which could be anywhere. They were heading in to anchor, in how

"About as likely as not" As in 50:50. Yes, I have read the report. Most of it when it first came out and parts of it in the last few days.

How do you define an expert? I can be an expert in anything if you want to pay me enough. That's how it works isn't it? I do have reasonable knowledge of modelling and I know that sh*t out of a computer / model is only as good as the sh*t in. I have enough knowledge of surf beaches to know rips / strong outgoing currents can be just meters away from incoming waves / strong incoming forces. Whilst sailing I have seen tide lines with measurable currents going in random directions, normally 90 deg to the current I was in. Whilst spearfishing / snorkelling around reefs and head

I was assuming the fully spec'ed auto inflating with 250n of bouyance, auto-deploying sprayhood, light and double crutch straps, as per the ones I have on my boat. It didn't occur to me that the fisho's would be using the old manual variety. But yes, there is a wide range of opinions on LJ's, especially around risk of entrapment in upside down boats. If I were in the sea, I'd want my fully pimped LJ on, if I was inside an upside down boat with it on, well, perhaps I'd be reaching for the inbuilt strap cutter

I pulled mine apart when I feel like a pleasant easy job in the shed, dismantle the carb and soak various bits in CRC carb cleaner, then put it back together how it came apart. Starts second pull cold start and first pull every time, 2hp Yamaha. Doing that addresses things like a sticky float, grease / wax build up in the bowl and sh*t in the jets and what not. If you think you flooded it, it might just be that, but an easy strip down and clean of the carb is probably the first diagnostic step in identifying any other issues that you have mentioned.

C'mon, what else is there to the case? I'm keen to know. Do you mean the other fishing vessel that was called as a key witness that said it was too rough to leave the anchorage, but was found under cross examination to have been fishing all day? In contravention of their own SoP's if the wind was as high as they said, that one? Or the Predict Wind forecast that said 20knts easing, or the observed 10 to 12knts at the time of capsize? What more is there to the case?

Now now, who didn't read what I wrote? If you had read what I wrote, you would see I was referring to the 4 guys that died waiting to be rescued. One was believed / confirmed dead caught in the hull at the time of the role over. Any chance you want to discuss this constructively, or are you just keen on taking potshots now?

This is a good and constructive post, thank you CD. My understanding was that it was confirmed 4 were alive when the helo was full with rescued people, but I do acknowledge I need to go back and confirm that. You points about PLB's are highly relevant. However, I suspect that if everyone were wearing LJ's they all would have drowned due to being trapped in the initial role over (or at least a high number). If all were wearing PLB's then the rescue outcomes would have been entirely different. I understand via FB that now punters on the charters do wear PLB's - I don't know

Solely blaming the skipper is like saying accidents should never happen. It is incredibly overly simplistic. If accidents aren't allowed to happen, why do we go to such great lengths to prepare boats for Cat 1? Offshore first aid kits and liferafts? Avoiding fatallities is about preparedness. My position is, post the capsize, preparedness was lacking at multiple levels. This is highlighted with major shortcommings in the rescue, but also a couple of basic facts no-one has gotten into yet. The liferaft didn't self activate like it was supposed to. The EPIRB didn't self activate l

Have you actually read the TAIC report? Just wanting to know if we are on the same page with the facts before we debate opinions. Delays so long in getting helo A ready they have to ask someone else to do the rescue. 5 hours without operating helos, just because. Those 4 guys were well within range of rescue. MRCC would have known 10 were onboard after phoning the EPIRB contacts, but only sent one helo... Noting the second helo was tasked cause the first helo was having a clusterfuck, the third helo was tasked the following day. MRCC only tasked one helo in the first instan

This is good, and makes me think: Why is a regional charitable trust responsible for provisioning fuel for what I would deem a nationally important service? If I understand correctly, 5 different organisations were directly involved in or tasked with the rescue, NHRT, AHRT, Coast Guard, Air Force and MNZ (assuming MRCC are part of MNZ). The helicopter rescue trusts have sporadic and insecure funding. I understand the bulk of their funding comes from what used to be the DHB's. I assume MNZ fund them somehow, possibly a 'pay per rescue' situation (I don't know, haven't done a deep

The context is that 4 guys died waiting for rescue, many hours after it was established they needed rescuing. One helo came, took some and went. The ones that were left all died. I personally find that a harrowing prospect. I've been banging on about the 17 rescue helos in the North Island to demonstrate there are no shortage of assets. These helos are obviously very expensive to buy, run and maintain, yet we have 17 of them. But somehow these 4 guys were left to die waiting rescue. I haven't reconciled why yet, hence I'm banging on about it. The MRCC phoned the people on the EPIRB l

My apologies, I took your response as sarcasm, "oh yep, you said..." rather than an acknowledgment of your error. In that view, I acknowledge my following post with a "geography lesson" was not warranted. I would say though that I am feeling frustrated that I have been consistently misquoted on key points, or statements attributed to me that I haven't said that materially change the arguement. That includes Aardvark and pysche, hence my push back on it.

You were asserting I said statements I didn't say, twisting the context to mean something different. If you have a problem getting called out on that, that is your issue.

Below is the 'Rescue' section of the TAIC report. In general, it does not come across as particularly well organised of efficient to me. No criticism of volunteers or rescuers involved. There appears to be no shortage of rescue assets in NZ, as I have been banging on about all along, it is the coordination of the assets and scenario planning (lack of fuel) that appears to be the issue, which is Maritime NZ's responsibility. Instead of focusing on this, there is a strong perception they are going after the skipper for PR purposes. Apoligies, the copy and paste format is terrible.

Geography lesson time. Northland is not North Island. Northland is a region of the North Island. If we are going to have any meaningful dialogue it would be handy if you guys didn't keep on saying stuff I didn't say. Psyche, I have said there are 17 rescue helos in the North Island. I haven't made any comment about how many are operationally ready at any one time. Again that is something you are making up. Not me. That gives the perception you have a weak arguement and are having to resort to deflection and confusion. Just saying.

I've never said there are 17 SAR helo's in Northland. Are you guys going to carry on making sh*t up and saying stuff I didn't until I give up and go away? It is interesting that I've been banging on about only 1 rescue helo for a couple of a days now and you are the first to pull me up on that, congratulations. It does reinforce my perception that most people on here think the skipper is guilty regardless of the facts. This is a good little example that no-one here appears to be across the facts of the charges. Anyway, there was only ever one helo actively conducting a rescue. T

You are asserting a lot of things I haven't said. Not even close to haven't said. All the assets already exist. 17 rescue helos in the north island, only one dispatched. Why? Question. Given the circumstances and outcomes of the rescue, do you think an inquiry is warranted? Or should we just carry on Business as Usual?

What, and Westhaven isn't?