Premium
This is an archive article published on August 11, 2011

Coast Guard withdrew Pavit alert after dodgy web report

Coast Guard claims,had been verified with the UKMTO which confirmed that Pavit had sunk.

The Indian Coast Guard seems to have based its decision to remove a maritime alert warning about an unmanned oil tanker floating in the Arabian Sea off Oman on inconclusive,and possibly dodgy,reports which said the ship,M T Pavit,had sunk in a storm. One month after its crew abandoned Pavit and gave it up as sunk,the ghost ship quietly sailed into Mumbai’s waters and got stuck on the Juhu beach on the night of July 30,exposing a gaping hole in coastal security and sparking outrage.

The Coast Guard’s Mumbai-based Western Command had issued the alert after Pavit’s captain had sent a distress call on June 29 and security agencies were alerted about the 78-m Panama-flagged tanker floating adrift after the crew was rescued. The alert was removed in mid-July after the owners of Pavit faxed the Coast Guard a copy of a British news website report and information from the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) which said the ship had sunk.

Investigation by The Indian Express has,however,found that the information on which these reports were based had not conclusively established that Pavit had sunk.

Story continues below this ad

One of the two reports faxed by the Dubai-based owners of Pavit was a news report on British news website The News (www.portsmouth.co.uk) titled “Hero sailor saves crew as tanker sinks in storm”,written by Michael Powell. This report was about how sailors from a British navy ship in the region had responded to the distress call of Pavit and rescued its sailors.

Last week,in a letter to the Ministry of Defence justifying its removing the alert for Pavit,the Coast Guard had highlighted the headline of the report as well as a sentence in it which talked about the rescue “just before the vessel sank to the bottom of the sea bed”. This information,the Coast Guard claimed,had been subsequently verified with the UKMTO which confirmed that Pavit had sunk.

Powell,who is the defence correspondent of the website,told The Indian Express that he had concluded that the ship had sunk based on photographs of the incident circulated by the British navy to the media as well as interviews with sailors on board the HMS St Albans which went to rescue Pavit. He said the photograph “shows the tanker to be sinking” and also supports why sailors he spoke to on July 1 “thought it was sinking”.

The version of the sinking vessel was based on “eye-witness account as given to the crew members of the warship. It came to me straight from the horse’s mouth. I can best say it was the situation then,” Powell said.

Story continues below this ad

The Royal Navy’s media office,however,contradicted Powell. A statement issued by the office after the incident only said “the vessel was stricken,defined as ‘affected by something overwhelming’,” according to a spokesman. He said the Commanding Officer and two members of the aircrew from HMS St Albans gave media interviews on July 1 and “none of them quoted that the ship had sunk”.

“The Portsmouth News reported that the MT Pavit had sunk. The (St Albans) ship’s air crew,the personnel who operate the ship’s Merlin helicopter,gave eye-witness accounts that the ship ‘appeared to be sinking’ in so far as it was low in the water and taking on water,” the spokesman said in an e-mail to The Indian Express.

The media office had also spoken to Powell since and he had confirmed to them that he had not quoted anyone from St Albans “directly or indirectly as saying that the ship had sunk”,the e-mail added. “He (Powell) understood that to be the situation,based upon the description of water being taken on,on the images of the ship low in the water,and the fact that the crew had abandoned ship,” the spokesman added.

Subsequently,the Royal Navy on the same day updated the Falmouth Coastguard Marine Rescue Co-ordination Centre,which had co-ordinated the rescue,that the crew was rescued and that the vessel stands abandoned. Ian Guy,Watch Manager,Falmouth Coastguard,said that his office was in touch with the owners of Pavit “but they were not very helpful”.

Story continues below this ad

“We informed the company that the vessel was still abandoned and drifting and that the sailors were rescued. On July 2,a phone call from UKMTO reached us and informed us that the vessel was still drifting,” Guy said. “Finally on July 5,we again got an e-mail from towage agents that the vessel was ‘still adrift” and that they can make arrangement for a salvage operation only once they get the decision from the owners. We did not track the matter further as it was not our responsibility.”

The UKMTO,which is the primary point of contact for merchant vessels and liaison with military forces in the region,confirmed the information on the news website on July 2,according to the Coast Guard. However,when reached by The Indian Express,a UKMTO duty officer in Dubai said he was aware of the news reports surrounding Pavit sinking but added that it had not confirmed any such thing to the Coast Guard. “Your information is negative,” the duty officer said.

Lastly,it is now learnt,that the owners of Pavit had also informed Coast Guard that their tanker had sunk and that they had started the insurance process for the same. But despite repeated attempts and messages left at the Dubai office of Pavit’s owners,there was no comment.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement