Breaking News: Antarctica Tourist Ship’s Sinking Blamed on “Inexperienced” Captain
Eighteen months ago, standing on the bow of the National Geographic Endeavor watching survivors of Antarctica’s first tourist-boat sinking be plucked from lifeboats, the hushed conversations on deck were all asking the same question: What happened?
Now we know. Or know more. According to the official report on the sinking, undertaken by the Liberian Maritime Bureau, the country where the vaunted tourist ship Explorer was registered, an “inexperienced and overconfident” captain caused the accident.
Swedish captain Bengt Wiman had been to the Antarctic many times, as first mate. That November 2007 trip aboard the Explorer was his first in charge; the report says succinctly that he misread the ice – which was not new ice, but harder, older ice – and ran the ship too fast into it. The report criticizes him for entering the ice field in darkness and for failing to slow the ship as it approached and then hit a “wall of ice”.
The 91-page report reads like a true adventure novel. The U.K’s Independent broke the story and highlights “a litany of errors that might have led to the biggest shipping disaster in Antarctica.” The report describes how the ship was fatally holed by ice – not the “fist-sized hole” first reported by the ship’s crew, but more like a ten-foot-long slice in the hull – and began to flood rapidly as it attempted to sail through an ice field at night. As water poured into the ship, passengers described how they had to wade shoeless through freezing water in the pitch black to get to safety while crewmen fought to stem the rushing water with pillows and wood. The crew’s fight to save the ship was undermined after it lost all power: water flooded emergency generators when a watertight seal failed. The ship’s main engine room was swamped after other watertight doors were not closed.
The report goes on to describe how chaos reigned on board when orders to take to the lifeboats were given. Georgie Hale, a passenger from the U.K, said that pandemonium ensued: “It was absolute chaos at that point. People just went where they wanted to. The lifeboats were deplorable – there was no organization at all. The thermal blankets were like nylon body bags and the zip was corroded on all of them.” Investigators said some lifeboats were so crowded people had to stand. One of the most damning revelations was that three of the four engines on the lifeboats did not work.
“Once we were in the water, the lifeboats drifted up against the side of the ship,” said Eli Charne, an American passenger. “The lifeboats were packed nearly to capacity and because they were open, it felt like you were in a big rowboat.
“The crew tried to push away with the oars, and when that failed they attached a metal object to the end of the oars. I later found out that the metal object was a piece of equipment that was meant to identify us on the radar.”
For me, perhaps the scariest part of the report are in the words of passengers whose cabins were the first to flood, describing reaching over from bed and finding a foot of water already on the floor and within minutes it rising to knee-level.
Last night I asked a friend, a ship’s officer who has sailed many times along the Antarctic Peninsula if he’d read the report. He had not, but when heard its conclusion was not surprised. “Of course, it’s easy to blame the captain.”
There are many details in the report regarding the ship’s age and lack of fitness. It was 40-years-old, its hull corroded in spots and had been patched a variety of times. It had failed recent inspections. G.A.P. Adventures, the Toronto-based company that owned the ship at the time of its sinking, has so far not commented on the report. But many passengers complained in it about the treatment they received after the fact from the company.
One curiosity in the report is that the captain failed to grab the ship’s Voice Data Recorder, which could have helped explain the accident. He said he simply forgot in the rush to safeguard the passengers. The box, now at 4,300 feet below the surface of the Southern Ocean, has a life of two years, which means the real and final details of what happened on November 22, 2007, will remain locked up for good.
The engine crew on the sinking ship gets high marks for kick-starting the ship’s power, which went down during the flooding. Without power it would have been impossible to lower Zodiac’s, which ended up pulling the lifeboats with dead engines out of harms’ way. No generator, no Zodiacs, everyone goes down with the ship.
As for the captain, in an emailed response included in the report, he maintains he acted as experience had taught him. He wonders why the bilge pumps were not able to keep up with the hole in the ship’s hull. But the report is implicit in describing the penetration not as the size of a fist but as a tear running through at least three cabins.
Tags: Bengt Wilman, Liberian Maritime Bureau, National Geographic Endeavor, Sinking Ship, U.K. Independent










Dear Jon,
I read the Explorer report a few days back. The day after it was released, actually.
As you can imagine, in our circles, this spreads like wildfire and the downloads must have beaten all records.
It does indeed make for interesting reading (for various reasons, maybe also related to grammar) and there are of course some lessons to be learned from this sad event.
What does strike me though is how hard people are intent on pointing fingers where some evidence is so completely unsubstantiated and/or clearly related by persons that were in a state of shock at the time and/or incompetent in the field.
That the Captain was responsible is neither for me to decide nor comment on, but I can only say that one can never know what one’s reactions would be unless one has been in a similar situation.
I sank on a sailboat once a long time ago. Everybody pointed the finger at me and questioned my actions. It took me a while to analyse my decisions. Why? Just simply because at that particular moment in time, you are trying to make the right decisions – lots of them – whilst your brain is dealing with lots of information. You are dealing with what seems most important in your good judgement at that precise moment. This may differ somewhat from the thoughts of anybody else, even other Officers on board.
An example: The Captain forgot the VDR. I guess some people see that as a sign of guilt… If I take my ship, the VDR is 3 decks up from the bridge and where I have no need to be (or any other crew) in a crisis situation. I have raised this issue of VDRs on hydrostatic releases several times, but I have no weight to make things move. Maybe now they will for the benefit of us all.
I will pass on commenting on the usage of radar reflectors as boathooks… big rowboats… and other wading shoeless in freezing water stories… or maybe I already have a few paragraphs above.
In the end, one should look at the outcome. Everyone is so intent on placing the blame on the Captain for the mistake he may or may not have committed (as I said previously, it is not for me to decide), that everyone forgets the comment in item 14 of the conclusions stating that his decision to evacuate the passengers as a precautionary measure had in all likelihood saved lives.
All souls were saved on that particular day, and I believe that everyone involved in achieving this should be commended.
All the best, and hoping that our paths cross again soon,
Fabien.
[...] Breaking News Antarctica Tourist Ship Sinking Blamed on Posted by root 23 hours ago (http://jonbowermaster.com) That the captain was responsible is neither for me to decide nor comment on but i can only say that one 2008 notes from sea level is powered by wordpress Discuss | Bury | News | breaking news antarctica tourist ship sinking blamed on [...]
I think the captain should be questioned in court because he was risking everybodys life but luckily the passengers survived.
Great information thanks for sharing this with us.In fact in all posts of this blog their is something to learn.I wish I had found it sooner. Keep up the good work.