Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Safety Recommendation Details

Safety Recommendation M-92-061
Details
Synopsis: ABOUT 0205 ON APRIL 21, 1991, IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY, OFF COVE POINT, MARYLAND, THE U.S. NAVAL ACADEMY SAILING VESSEL AMERICAN PROMISE AND BARGE E-2, WHICH WAS BEING PUSHED AHEAD OF THE TUG SUN COAST, COLLIDED. THE SAILING VESSEL HAD 12 CREWMEMBERS ON BOARD, THE TUG HAD 5 CREWMEMBERS, AND THE BARGE WAS UNMANNED. NO SERIOUS INJURIES RESULTED FROM THIS ACCIDENT. THE SAILING VESSEL SANK, BUT WAS SALVAGED. THE AMERICAN PROMISE SUSTAINED MORE THAN $800,000 DAMAGE AND THE BARGE E-2 SUSTAINED ABOUT $10,000 DAMAGE. THE SUN COAST WAS NOT DAMAGED.
Recommendation: THE NTSB RECOMMENDS THAT THE U.S. NAVAL ACADEMY: CONDUCT TESTS TO EVALUATE THE ADEQUACY OF THE RADAR REFLECTORS BEING USED ABOARD NAVAL ACADEMY VESSELS AND REPLACE THEM IF THEY ARE FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE.
Original recommendation transmittal letter: PDF
Overall Status: Closed - Unacceptable Action - No Response Received
Mode: Marine
Location: Bays and Sounds, United States
Is Reiterated: No
Is Hazmat: No
Is NPRM: No
Accident #: DCA91MM029
Accident Reports: ​Collision of the U.S. sailing vessel American Promise and the U.S. freight Barge E-2, being pushed ahead of the U.S. Tug M/V Sun Coast
Report #: MAR-92-01-SUM
Accident Date: 4/21/1991
Issue Date: 12/21/1992
Date Closed: 11/29/1993
Addressee(s) and Addressee Status: United States Naval Academy (Closed - Unacceptable Action - No Response Received)
Keyword(s):

Safety Recommendation History
From: NTSB
To: United States Naval Academy
Date: 11/23/1994
Response: IN A LETTER 2/1/93, THE ACADEMY DID NOT CONCUR THE RECOMMENDATION SAYING THAT IT LACKED THE RESOURCES REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT IT. ON 4/16/93, THE BOARD WROTE TO CLARIFY THE INTENT OF THE RECOMMENDATION, ADVISING THAT THE BOARD AGREED THAT THE ACADEMY SHOULD NOT BE TASKED TO DO SOPHISTICATED TESTING ON COMMERCIAL EQUIPMENT & THAT THE INTENT WAS THAT THE ACADEMY SHOULD DETERMINE WHETHER THE RADAR REFLECTORS (FIRDEL BLIP ENHANCES) ON ITS SAIL TRAINING VESSELS ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE SERVICE INTENDED. FURTHER, BOARD STAFF DISCUSSED THIS RECOMMENDATION WITH CAPTAIN W.D.KEY, USN OF THE ACADEMY STAFF. CAPT. KEY STATED THAT HE PLANNED TO EVALUATE THAT RADAR REFLECTORS IN THE SPRING 1993 & WOULD INFORM BOARD OF THE RESULTS. THE BOARD WAS SUBSEQUENTLY INFORMED THAT CAPTAIN KEY HAD RETIRED & THAT CAPTAIN ROBERT ROSSI OF THE U.S. NAVY JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL STAFF, WAS THE POINT OF CONTACT FOR INFO ON THE ACTION TAKEN OR PLANNED TO BE TAKEN M-92-61 ON 5/31/94 THE BOARD STAFF DISCUSSED THE RECOMMENDATION WITH CAPT. ROSSI & ASKED TO BE INFORMED ABOUT THE EFFORT THAT HAVE BEEN OR ARE BEING MADE TO IMPLEMENT IT. OUR RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE BOARD HAS RECIEVED NO FURTHER INFO. THEREFORE, M-92-61 HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED "CLOSED--UNACCEPTABLE ACTION-NO RESPONSE RECEIVED." SHOULD THE BOARD RECEIVE ANY INFO FROM THE ACADEMY CONCERNING THIS RECOMMENDATION, WE WILL GIVE FULL CONSIDERATION TO AMENDING ITS STATUS.

From: United States Naval Academy
To: NTSB
Date: 11/29/1993
Response: BECAUSE OF THE RESULTS OF OUR TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE USNA SAIL CENTER & CAPT ROSSI, & NO RESULTS FORM 2 LETTERS 11/29/93 & 4/16/93, I RECOMMEND THAT M-82-61 BE CLASSIFIED "CLOSED--UNACCEPTABLE ACTION-NO RESPONSE RECEIVED."

From: NTSB
To: United States Naval Academy
Date: 4/16/1993
Response: THE BOARD AGREES THAT THE NAVAL ACADEMY SHOULD NOT BE TASKED TO DO A "FULL ANALYSIS" OF OR SOPHISTICATED TESTING ON COMMERICAL EQUIPMENT TO DETERMILNE WHETHER REQUIREMENTS ARE SATISFIED. SUCH ACTION IS NOT THE INTENT OF THE RECOMMENDATION. THE INTENT IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RADAR REFLECTORS (FIRDEL BLIP ENHANCER) USED ABOARD ITS SAIL TRAINING VESSELS ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE SERVICE INTENDED. MY STAFF DISCUSSED THIS RECOMMENDATION WITH CAPTAIN W. D. KEY, USN, OF THE NAVAL ACADEMY STAFF. CAPTAIN KEY PLANS TO EVALUATE THE RADAR REFLECTORS IN THE SPRING AND WILL INFORM THE BOARD OF THE RESULTS. THEREFORE, PENDING THAT EVALUATION AND FOLLOWUP RESPONSE, RECOMMENDATION M-92-61 WILL REMAIN CLASSIFIED "OPEN--AWAIT RESPONSE."

From: United States Naval Academy
To: NTSB
Date: 2/1/1993
Response: DO NOT CONCUR. THE ACADEMY HAS ONLY A TINY FRACTION OF THE VESSELS USING THE FIRDELL BLIP ENHANCER. IF THE NTSB SUSPECTS A FUNDAMENTAL SHORTCOMING IN THIS AND SIMILAR DEVICES, AN ORGANIZATION WITH BROADER EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES SHOULD BE TASKED TO CONDUCT TESTS ON ALL COMMERICALLY AVAILABLE EQUIPMENT AND CERTIFY OR RECOMMEND EQUIPMENT THAT SATISFIES REQUIREMENTS.