The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

8 STRANDING AND COLLISION UNDER OFFICIAL GUIDANCE. . In spite of the rules and regulations framed by the In- ternational Marine Conference of .1889, to secure greater safety for life and property as sea, strandings and collisions prevail to a fearful extent. According to the report of the Liverpool Underwriters’ Association, the casualties to ves- sels of 500 tons register and upwards during the month of August, 1901, numbered 348 as against 349 during the same month of the previous year. Classified they were: Weath- er damage 33; founderings and abandonment 3; strandings 113; collisions 113; fires and explosions 21; missing 2; and others 63. From which it appears, that ‘the number of strandings was as large as the number of collisions, and both together represent nearly two-thirds of all disas- ters. “The International Marine Conference met at Washington in 1880, at the invitation of the United States Government, according to an act of Congress approved July 9, 1888, “Pro- viding for an International Marine Conference to secure greater safety for life and property at sea,” said Marine Conference “to revise and amend the rules, regulations, and practice concerning vessels at sea, and navigation generally, * * * for the prevention of collision and other avoidable marine disasters.” ‘I‘wenty-eight governments were repre- sented in the conferencé by 61 delegates, whose stations in life were as follows: 26 officers of the navy, of whom 8 were admirals: 25 diplomats and kindred occupations; 6 captains of the merchant marine; and 4 lawyers. The merchant ‘marine of the world comprising a fleet of 32,208 vessels at ik time, had all in.all 6 representatives, the rest being out- siders. Red tape prevailed, and whenever any of the sailors opened his mouth there was always somebedy with a silvery tongue who made him shut up. : Strandings have always been the bane of navigation, and therefore should have been one of the principal subjects of discussion. From the protocol of proceedings, however, it appears, that strandings were not discussed at all, the only ‘allusion to them being’ found in the adopted report of the committee on life-saving svstems and devices, where it reads: “For countries which have not already provided by legislative enactments for official inquiries into the causes and circumstances of shipwrecks.or other accidents to ves- sels that are of a serious importance, the adoption of such laws is recommended, as it is believed, that they are,the most effective means by which masters and officers of vessels can be impressed with a proper sense of the serious responsibil- ity that rests upon them, and that they therefore constitute one of the most important safeguards for life and property ‘afloat, that it is possible to devise * * * ‘They would, moreover, give information which might be of great value in showing the general causes and distribu- tion of wrecks, and indirectly indicate the methods by which casualties might be averted or lessened.” Official inquiries into the causes and circumstances of shipwreck being all the conference was able to suggest; such inquiries having been made previously for many years in several countries, without ever resulting in the discovery of the general causes of stranding, and never will, because of inquiries being conducted on wrong principles. Stress of weather excepted, the causes of stranding are errors in position, due to the use aboardship of faulty logs, faulty, and limited astronomical methods, an incorrect basis and theory: for soundings and sometimes incorrect charts, [see the Martne Recorp of Noy. 21, and Dec. 19, t9o1.] In short, the principal cause of stranding is the rottenness of the methods in use for finding the position of a vessel at sea ; and as these methods are officially approved, officials are not prone to denounce them. The conference unable to cor- rect and improve the methods in use, sagely let prevention of stranding alone. For this reason the increased danger of stranding, on account of compelling vessels in fog and thick weather to go at a moderate speed, was also ignored ; ‘and the necessary qualifications of officers were left at the discretion of every government, as ignorant of the principal causes of stranding as the conference. : Prevention of collision has not fared any better than pre- ~ vention of stranding at the hands of the conference. The danger of collision is in the inverse ratio of the distances between vessels; the less the distance, the greater the danger; and the greater the distance, the less the danger. ‘Therefore, preventing collision depends partly on the knowledge of the distance between vessels. Besides, _ for two vessels meeting or crossing there are two ways to avoid collision; when meeting, to pass either to the right of the other vessel or to the left of her; and when crossing, either of the two vessels may cross first or ahead of the other vessel. © es = - The international rules take only one of the two ways into consideration and leave the other undefined. They are, therfore, only one-sided rules, and as such do not prevent - collision, but cause collisions, as soon as vesels are com- _ pelled to depart from the rules. - Condensed they read: - “When two steam vessels are meeting end on, or nearly end on, so as ‘to involve risk of collision, each shall alter her urse to starboard, so that each may pass on the port side of the other. ; When two steam vessels are crossing so as to involve risk collision, the vessel which has the.other on her starboard de shall keep out of the way of the other; and shall, if the ‘circumstances of the case admit, aviod crossing ahead of he other, and if necessary, slacken her speed or stop or THE MARINE RECORD. reyerse; and the other vessel shall keep her course and speed. Due regard shall-be had to all dangers of naviga- tion and to any special circumstances which may render a departure from the above rules necessary in order to avoid immediate danger. A’steam vessel under way, in taking any course author- ized or required by the rules, shall indicate that course by the following signals on her whistle or siren, viz.: One short blast to mean “I am directing my course to starboard.” Two short blasts to mean “I am directing my course to port.” According to the above rules the only course authorized is to starboard, and therefore no two blast signal is required under the rules. And to indicate a single authorized course by whistle is superfluous, the more so as of two vessels crossing, the vessel which has to keep her course and speed has to be silent, because a repetition of the signal by her would indicate that she was going to alter her course to starboard which she is not permitted to do. Under the rules both the one blast and the two blast signal, are super- flous, because the rules, as they are; can be carried into effect without any signals whatever. From which it is evident that helm signals as defined by the international rules are of no use. As long as the rules are followed there is safety; but as soon as one of the vessels is com- pelled to depart from the rules, there is collision, for the rules do not.say what shall be done in such a case. ‘The mere blowing of whistles does not prevent collision. Leading vessels into “immediate danger” the rules leave it to the sailors to get out of it as best they can. The follow- ing final declaration of one of the principal framers and ex- pounders of the rules is characteristic of the sense of the Conference! (See protocol of proceedings page 1287.) “The meaning (of art. 27) is this: The law says to the sailors we give you certain rules. We (the Conference) have given you these certain rules, but of course there may arise circumstances where these rules are not applicable, as unforeseen dangers of navigation or other circumstances. and in case of such circumstances you are to depart. from the rule. You must not stick to the rule. Your principal object is always to avoid immediate danger, and of course, that means immediate danger of collision.” _ Here we have an official acknowledgement not only of the imperfection of the international rules, but of their utter worthlessness, because of being not applicable in all cases. — In general, for any two parties meeting or crossing there are two ways to prevent collision; in meeting, either to pass to the right or left of one another; in crosssing, either party may cross first or ahead of the other party. ‘The same is true of two vessels meeting or crossing, and in order to pre- vent collision it is necessary for them to agree in their choice; and, that sufficient time and space be left to carry out the agreement. According to Admiral Bowden-Smith (see protocol of proceeding page 540,) “Steamers going at full speed, re- quire two ships’ length to get off of their own line of ad- vance. Taking the length of the great liners as standard about 700 feet, twice 700 equals 1,400 and for two vessels on ppb eshte courses twice 1,400 equals 2,800 feet, or a distance eee eae aug Demwren the two vessels is required to get } -line of advance. In order to prevent colli- sion a safety margin of 50 per cent. is certainly not too much, so that the required distance at which vessels have to come to an agreement is three-quarter mile, which may oo as standard in all cases of vessels meeting or cross- To make the agreement one blast, or two blasts of the whistle are required. In meeting, one blast means “I am directing my course to starboard. Two blasts mean “I am directing my course to port.” In crossing,, one blast means “The vessel to starboard crosses first or ahead of you.” Two blasts mean ‘“T’he vessel to port crosses first or ahead of you.” To prevent mistakes, the signal given by one of the ves- sels is to be repeated by the other vessel if she is agreed; and in case of non agreement she has to give the danger signal, several short blasts in quick succession, whereupon both vessels have to slow down to bare steerage way until they are agreed and past one another. At a distance of three-quarter mile apart it is imperative, for both vessels to be agreed as to the manner of getting past one another, or to slow down to bare steerage way, which provision prevents collision under all circumstances. The simplicity of this provision is its perfection. Wherever under this rule helm signals are used, the number of collisions is comparatively small and nearly zero, as has been proven by long experience on inland waters. In their extended application helm signals insure not only safety but also do away with the silly requirement under the international rules, to know, in the daytime, whether yours is an overtaking or a crossing vessel; in other words, to know whether you are more than two points abaft the beam of the other vessel or less than two points, in order, to determine whether you have to cross astern of the other vessel or have the privilege of crossing ahead of her, as a mistake in this respect may cause collision under the in- ternational. rules. When vessels meeting or crossing are compelled to de- part from the international rules collision is certain, because the provision to be agreed in time, or slow down to bare steerage way, on which their safety depends is wanting. “provement is going on steadily. It has been clarified by FEBRUARY: 27, 1902, And as with this provision helm signals prevent collision under all circumstances, it seems but rational to adopt — them in all cases of vessels meeting or crossing, and throw the international. rules of the road overboard. : The protocol of. proceedings bears ample evidence, that the international rules of the road were not made to suit. sailors, but to suit courts and lawyers. . The lives of the men who framed the rules were not at stake, it was only the life of poor Jack Tar, having no voice in the matter; not — to mention the lives of thousands of passengers sometimes under his care. bas Joun MAvricr. Civil Engineer and Nautical Expert. Chicago, January, 1902. : = oe €3; SOME OF MARCONI’S CONCLUSIONS. P. T. McGrath; editor of the Evennig Herald, St. John’s, Newfoundland, contributes to the March Century, an ar- ticle'on Marconi’s work which the inventor authenticates in a prefatory note. The writer says: Spee In one of our many talks at the St. John’s station, Mr. Marconi gave me this digest of his conclusions : me The wireless agency is most effective over marine areas, The unbroken surface of the ocean enables distances to be obtained and results achieved which cannot be approach- ed on land. Over low-lying country two thirds of the dis- tance can be reached, but over tracts where the usual di- versified topographical features are found the potency of the vibrations is reduced to one-half what it is at sea. High hills do not constitute an obstacle, but the ground itself. retards the signals. The vibrations seem to reach slightly farther in fog than in fine weather; atmospheric conditions do not seriously affect them; electrical disturb- ances are their only foe. Mr. Marconi’s later experiments appear to indicate that a pole two hundred feet high gives the best results, as the wire suspended from it comes into contact with sufficiently varied atmosphere strata, while at the same time it can be made thick enough to receive a substantial electrical influence from the radiating ether waves which are caught by it. With a balloon or kite ele- vated to an altitude of four hundred feet or so, the wire must be very slight, and the ceaseless swaying of the up- holder also interferes with the reception of definite sig- nals. Strangely enough, a horizontal aetial wire is of no value, gives out no energy for his purposes, and was long ago discarded. Nor is it an advantage, in marine sig- naling, to set up the pole or kite on a high hill. tS Proximity to the sea is desirable, and a low-lying spit near the ocean-is best. Another less interesting circtim- stance is that every piece of ground will not serve for the locating of a station. Some geological formations are perverse; others are responsive. Signaling from one headland, a distance of two hundred miles may be reached ; from another the range may be only half that. On ships the aerial wire is suspended from the top of the mast, hang- ing loosely down among the stays and rigging. It is com- posed of copper and steel and will stand. considerable strain. It enters the operator’s room at the deck, and the mechanical features are similar to those of an ordinary telegraph-office. a CHICAGO’S CINDERELLA. Elliott Flower, author of “Policeman Flynn’s Adven- tures,” in an article on “Chicago’s Great River-Harbor,” in the February Century, writes thus of the transformation that has come over the Chicago river: “The Cinderella of Navigable Streams,” is a title that may well be given to the Chicago river. Doubtless to those who never heard anything good of it, including many who live in Chicago, this will seem humorous, but for that very rea- son it fits. The Chicago river has been maligned, neg- lected, in fact, shamefully treated in every possible way. For fifty years it was a drudge, receiving the most contemp- tuous treatment from those it served. They made it a dumping-ground for their refuse; they stole from it; they disputed its right of way; they blocked it with center-pier bridges; they limited its depth by putting tunnels under it; they created sharp angles in building their docks, and then they complained of the annoyances for which they-them- : selves were responsible, and insisted that there ought to be no river. Yet, in spite of all these discouragements, the stream did its work as faithfully as circumstances would permit, and awaited the coming of the fairy prince. He has come in the person of Uncle Sam, who proposes to see that justice is done, and that, as soon as may be possible, this neglected: and hard-working river shall appear in rai- eee its rank as one of the greatest harbors in the _ world. : In truth, the Chicago river has a fine future before it, not alone in the way of commercial importance, but also in the way of beautv. It is not an attractive stream now, but it is destined to be one. It has improved greatly since the United States Government took charge of it, and the im- the opening of the drainage canal. It has lost many of its kinks; it is being widened, and its most unsightly features are slowly disappearing. Old buildings are being replaced — by better structures, the docks are neater and more sub- stantial, the factories and warehouses are becoming more presentable—in brief, the Chicago river (both as to its water and its banks, is being cleaned up.