Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner.

Concerns remain over safety four years after woman seriously injured in Forth boat collision

The MAIB report provided a detailed account of what happened at the time.
The MAIB report provided a detailed account of what happened at the time.

No formal regulations preventing people from sitting on the inflatable tubes of leisure boats in the Forth have been put in place, four years after a woman suffered serious injuries when two vessels collided.

Marine accident investigators issued a number of recommendations following the incident on July 19, 2016, when two rigid inflatable boats (RIBs) crashed into each other near the Isle of May.

A 45-year-old mother-of-two was crushed between the two dinghies and had to be put into an induced coma after suffering two broken collar bones, five broken ribs, a punctured lung and lacerations and bruising to her back and torso.

The internal injuries she sustained also resulted in permanent damage to her sight in both eyes.

But while relevant Codes of Conduct governing recreational craft have been tweaked in the wake of the incident, The Courier understands there are no plans to specifically change byelaws in the Forth to prevent such an accident happening again.

Isle of May Boat Trips Ltd, which owns and operates Osprey and Osprey II, the two vessels involved in the 2016 accident, immediately took the step of banning passengers and crew from sitting on the inflatable tubes, and has limited passenger numbers to 12 and eight respectively.

It has also issued an instruction that twin RIB operations are not to take place except in an emergency and has reviewed risk assessments.

However, there remains no hard and fast legislation under the current licensing scheme for boat operators, despite calls from the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) to look into the issue, leaving guidance open to interpretation.

The two vessels.

The MAIB recommended the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s (MCA) recreational craft code should include the stipulation that the certified maximum number of passengers carried on commercially-operated passenger-carrying RIBs should be limited to the number of suitable seats designated for passengers.

But it also hinted that port authorities should take the lead of the Port of London Authority in relation to the Thames, where the prohibition of sitting on inflatable tubes is banned via a specific byelaw.

“Given the wide range of vessel characteristics and multiple activities in the small commercial vessel sector, a large number of factors including, but not limited to, vessel speed and weather conditions, would need to be defined to ensure a consistent interpretation by all parties,” it said.

“An alternative and less complicated approach would be to prohibit passenger seating on a RIB’s inflatable tubes unless otherwise authorised and endorsed on the RIB’s Small Commercial Vessel Certificate with specified conditions to be met for a particular activity.

“This approach would follow the implied practice referred to in the Royal Yachting Association’s Passenger Safety on Small Commercial High Speed Craft, and would support the initiative taken by the Port of London Authority to prohibit the sitting or riding on the inflatable tubes of small commercial high speed craft.”

The woman injured in the 2016 incident had been travelling with her husband and two children aboard Osprey II when it collided with Osprey between Anstruther Harbour and the Isle of May, just as it was approaching the May Princess vessel.

A picture of passengers on board the Osprey II, taken by a fellow passenger.

The skipper of each RIB had increased speed and began a power turn away from each other with the intention of passing each other in the course of completing a round turn, the MAIB report found.

However, as the RIBs turned towards each other, it became apparent to both skippers they were in danger of colliding and although they both acted quickly to reduce the speed of their respective vessels, and so lessen the impact, they were unable to prevent the collision.

Almost exactly four years on from the accident, a spokesperson from port authority Forth Ports said: “Safety is and always has been our number one priority and we take safety very seriously in undertaking our duties on the River Forth.”

Already a subscriber? Sign in