gCaptain.com

The General Slocum was a steamship that set sail in 1891. She caught fire wile traveling down New York’s East River on June 15, 1904. The Captain of the General Slocum, Captain Van Schaick, made a number of critical mistakes that led to the tragic loss of more than 1,000 lives. Up until the events of September 11, 2001 it was the deadliest disaster in New York City’s history.

The events that led to this tragedy were avoidable and fall directly on the worst Captains in Maritime history. The blunders of this (add expletive here) Captain stand as test a guideline of what not to do as a ship Captain.

Failure to address a History of Incidents

The General Slocum had been involved in seven different incidents leading up to the tragic fire of June 15, 1094.

Failure to Prepare
Captain Van Schiack did not respond to the fire until more then ten minutes after the fire had been discovered despite being warned.
Failure to adequately train crew and maintain safety gear

Failure to prepare ship for Fire Emergency
The crew of The Slocum had never had a fire drill. In addition,
Captain Van Schaick he did not demand that hoses and faulty lifejackets be replaced.

Failure to Respond Decision-making
Captain Van Schaick badly mishandled the situation. He decided to continue his course rather than run the ship aground or stop at a nearby landing. By going into headwinds and failing to immediately ground the vessel, he actually fanned the fire.

To make matters worse, when Schaick finally beached the boat at North Brother Island he found he couldn’t get in as close as he wanted. “He caught a rock and people on the stern were actually in water that was substantially over their head,” says O’Donnell. For people who didn’t know how to swim the water might as well have been a thousand feet deep. www.failuremag.com

*Captain Van Schaick was found guilty of criminal negligence, failing to maintain proper fire drills and fire extinguishers. He was sentenced to ten years imprisonment.

Links

www.failuremag.com

Captain William Van Schaick Trial: 1906 — law.jrank.org

1904 Paddleboat Fire: www.ezl.com

Death of Captain Van Schaickhttp: www.time.com

In this week’s edition of The Maritime Executive Newsletter managing editor Joseph Keefe, weighs in on the changing dynamics of the Master, Pilot and Port State relationship in light of the Cosco Busan incident;

At this early stage, just one thing is perfectly clear: the Cosco Busan allision will ultimately help to redefine the role of, and the liabilities facing marine pilots in the United States today. One of the most primary questions asked of any deck cadet at any maritime academy is: What is the role of the pilot? And, the answer, of course, is (c.), “the pilot provides guidance to, but is not in charge of the vessel.” That tenet has been upheld in many venues, for many, many years. In reality, however, the typical marine pilot who guides a vessel in from the sea buoy to the dock is in complete control of that vessel on the inbound leg. He or she better be, because often the captain of a particular vessel may have never transited that restricted waterway.

This is just an excerpt of Keefe’s well written article, you can continue reading HERE.

The ship that made gCaptain famous is back in the headlines. The M/V Pasha Bulker, a 76,741 deadweight ton Panamax bulk carrier launched in 2006, is the subject of a new report from NSW Maritime of Australia. The enormous vessel first made world headlines after running aground on a popular Australian beach in June of this year and since that time rumors to the cause of here dramatic grounding have been circling the media. Today the official report has been issued. Our friend and deputy gCaptain reporter Ian points us to NSW Maritime’s Press Release;

The Pasha Bulker ran aground during the once-in-thirty year storm that struck the Central Coast and Newcastle on June 8.

The same storm took nine lives and caused damage estimated to cost $1.35 billion.

Ports Minister Joe Tripodi said the investigation found the grounding of the Pasha Bulker was caused by a combination of horrendous weather conditions and poor seamanship by the Master of the vessel.

The poor seamanship involved his actions leading up to and on the morning of June 8. Continue Reading…

We will be working with veteran maritime incident reporter Bob Couttie to keep you updated on this important news item. For those new to this site, be sure to look back at the amazing photos and some of our previous posts on this amazing story.

PASHA BULKER INVESTIGATION REPORT – FACT SHEET [Continue Reading →]

In “Refrences to Joseph Keefe”>another excellent article, Maritime Executive’s managing editor Joseph Keefe is dead on with his assessment of salary (find the article HERE) and working condition improvements in this tight labor market. The following comment in response to a discussion with one Captain sums up the discord between shore side managers and shipboard personnel perfectly;

Gathering that he was earning well in excess of $100,000 per year with about six months vacation, I chided him for complaining about a job situation that a lot of people would kill to obtain. My comments were NOT well received.

Well had Keefe called any member of gCaptain’s staff we could have gently clued him in on the likely response. The reason? Well he lays out all the major points but let us add a few minor ones. Mariners currently in top positions aboard ship are loyal to their profession. We have seen tough times and stayed at sea to the protest of loved ones and in doing so have payed the price. From high points to low a mariners life is one of hard misses. Personally I’ve sacrificed being with my family on the day of my father’s death and missed the birth of his namesake, my first child, Jack. Mine is one of the least troubling stories but the hardships are not the primary reason for the discord; it’s the rewards, or lack there of. To show my point I offer some examples;

• Mariners in the first Gulf War bravely supplied the troops in countless runs to the war zone and in return received “all you can eat” overtime pay and handsome bonuses. For my wife’s 30 days in the war zone she received little more than a medal.
• Mariner’s salaries are just recently breaking above the levels (not adjusted for inflation) of those in the same position 30 years ago.
• Sailing 30 years ago was an enjoyable experience that did not entail constant communication with management. Email and “real” phone service didn’t exist.
• Port time is currently non-existent.
• The U.S. mariner has historically come at a premium to their foreign conterparts but the gap is closing fast.
• With the decline in the dollar we are suddenly being recruited be European companies that are offering considerable bonuses. U.S. companies are not following suit.
• Specialists in support roles, mostly from Europe, freely share their salaries which can be considerable higher than an American Captain’s.
• The majority of mariners live in areas (New England, Florida, California) of skyrocketing housing expenses.
• Mariners are now getting arrested for incidents that, as CAMM (The Council of American Master Mariners) put it, “were at one point considered mistakes”.
• Today civilians are more likely to ask you how you can work for an Oil Company than reply with a statement once heard often; “Wow, what an interesting job”.

In addition to these points the personnel shortage in our industry is not only a concern of company, it’s a concern for the shipboard management. The simple fact is positions are being filled by people who five years ago would not be considered ready for the job. In the past twenty years crew levels have been brought down to record low levels but overqualified crews “stuck” in positions they long ago mastered have kept the ships running smooth. Today an alarmingly high number of vessels list 100% of their officers as short-service employees (in the position for less than a year). This is not only a problem for officers but also for those on shore. Ships rely on a foundation of support from town that increasingly comes from managers lacking experience due to the same stratospheric rise in the number of promotions. These two factors equate to rising difficulties for Captains, Chief Mates and their counterparts in the engine room.

A manager recently asked a good friend of mine if he was ready for the big promotion to Captain, his response angered the boss. I can only assume the anger derived from the fact his statement was both accurate and troubling. He replied, “Hell no, I have no business being Captain. Professionally I’m not close to being ready but if I’m not promoted in the next few rounds you’re making a big mistake because I can run circles around my competition!” Not a good sign for those who need to trust the next man in charge of a 500 million dollar asset.

What he did not tell the manager is also reveling, “Why take a promotion for a few extra dollars and have to sit at a desk filling out paperwork, answering phone calls from town and dealing with petty squables. The captain use to have a stateroom twice the size of a seaman’s and fly to work in first class, now he just gets paid more.”

While the article was impressively accurate the following comments are not entirely correct;

His pay had been augmented three or four times in the past 18 months and his employers had confirmed that pay scales had at least doubled during that period.

While it’s conceivable that the payroll has double I’ve witnessed between 10 and 40% increases in senior mariner pay.

Gathering that he was earning well in excess of $100,000 per year with about six months vacation

“But you get Six Months vacation” is the first thing mariners hear during salary negotiations but it’s a misnomer. I don’t personally know a mariner who took less than 4 weeks of training classes last year and know many Chief Mate candidates who took between 12 and 16 weeks of class… that brings us down to 5 months “Vacation”. Subtract travel days, visits to the Coast Guard and days spent at the union hall and your down to less than 4.5 months (139 days).

The average American takes 15 days vacation, 8 personal days and 10 holidays. Add this to the number of weekends and (if my math is correct) shore side personel have 137 days off or only 3 days less than the mariner. Ever leave the office early on Friday or take a long lunch to visit the dentist? Mariners work 12 hours a day, every day which equates to nearly double the number of hours a “40-hour per week” American works during the year. Now I can begin to understand why gCaptain’s email box gets flooded with shore-side job related questions.

The number one reason for the discord is rooted by Keefe’s statement;

It is tempting to dismiss this as seafarer whining, but maritime executives everywhere had better strap on their hearing aids and listen to what their employees have to say. To do otherwise will only exacerbate the current crisis.

On the return trip for a promising shore-side job a prominent divorce attorney joined the discussion on NPR’s Fresh Air and said he often sits at the arbitration table looking at two people in love who share a life others only dream about and asks himself why. The reason is not that argued by either party, the reason is that neither listens to what the other is saying.

Mariners are being marginalized and management isn’t listening. Captains no longer have the power to solve problems aboard ship without approval from managers who frequently ask “Who died and left him in charge?”. This response filters down to the crew who justly assume their boss can not communicate their problems to distant offices ashore. This problem is exacerbated by the increased regulatory pressures, technological requirements, and industry opposition not to mention burdensome levels of training, paperwork and hands-on management from shore.

So while the “24/7 satellite television, e-mail, voice comms, excellent (but SSDD) food and media room” are nice do something that compensates me for the extra work I’ve taken on lately or double salaries instead of payroll.

What are management’s concerns? Not sure, I’m knocking on the divorce attorney’s door and just not listening!

-JD

This post is in response to Maritime Executive’s article:

Long-Term Neglect of Mariners Continues to Haunt Maritime Employers

In a post unusually harsh for gCaptain standards I asked some tough questions about actions taken by the captain of the doomed ship, Pasha Bulker. Here’s a recap;

…did the crew used their satellite comms to discuss the weather patterns with meteorologists or did they simply ignore the port authority’s warnings? Did the captain use his AIS to identify the surrounding ships and call fellow captains via GMDSS to discuss the situation? Did they have access to and use real-time weather data or wait for a 2-dimensional weather fax?

(read the full article HERE)

Today in a leaked version of the incident report the answer is clearly no.

In a candid interview with investigators the vessel’s captain disclosed his actions in the critical moments between weighing anchor and the ship’s grounding. Take a deep breath as you may find this hard to believe. He was eating breakfast! In the galley!!

Here’s a rundown of events as report by The Sydney Morning Herald (full article located HERE)

The trail of mistakes and incompetence began on the evening of June 7 when warnings about an approaching storm were issued to 56 ships anchored off Newcastle. The Pasha Bulker, waiting to load 58,000 tonnes of coal, was one of 10 ships whose captains chose to stay at anchor about 200 metres off Stockton Beach to assess the situation overnight.

At 5.30 the next morning authorities tried again, but the Pasha Bulker stayed at anchor. It was not until 7am, in a sea whipped up by 100kmh winds, that the captain realised he had to move, and move quickly.

46 ships decide to leave port to avoid dragging anchor in an unprotected harbor and the Pasha Bulker stays, while this action is questionable the decision is not necessarily breaking the rule of prudent seamanship. The next morning Port Authorities “try again” to evict the remaining ships. I do not have details on the warning but it’s normal procedure to give the availability of tug boats that could help a ship in danger. Either way rescue tugs never showed and were apparently not requested by the captain.

At this point the captain became a danger to the vessel and crew. A master’s disagreement with port authority suggestions is understandable and the choice to ignore the warnings are his prerogative but one necessary step was not taken; vigilance. This is the time for a captain to ask himself the questions mentioned above, this is the moment to question your own decision, this is your chance to solidify a bridge team management plan and put the crew on high alert.

The story continues;

As the Sea Confidence, a nearby vessel facing the same predicament began moving out to sea with its anchors still dragging, the Pasha Bulker stayed and attempted to weigh anchor before moving. Mariners say it is standard practice for a boat (sic) to be moved forward slowly to help raise the heavy chain from the seabed while it is being hauled in. It meant the ship would have already moved through the surf in the 10 minutes it would have taken to get the anchor aboard.

In an emergency, such as the one brewing by the 30-year storm, the anchors should be cut and left behind.

Instead, the captain ordered the engines to remain idle while the chain, up to 200 metres long with links each weighing 100 kilograms, was winched aboard. As a consequence, the ship was still in the danger zone an hour later when the anchor was finally shipped.

Here I take exception to the article. While the Chief Mate might have been able to release the anchor brake and allow the chain to fully pay out (the more appropriate action), there is no quick and simple way to cut an anchor chain the size of the Pasha Bulker’s. The decision made aboard Sea Confidence would have been more appropriate to the situation. While some shiphadling ability is lost if the anchor is left down (due to a movement of the vessel’s pivot point forward) the Pasha Bulker has plenty of reserve power and steerage to overcome any serious problem.

It was now just after 8am. With the winds and seas continuing to rise and the engine only just beginning to move the ship, the captain called the chief engineer and invited him to breakfast. Both were Korean in a 22-man crew otherwise made up of Filipinos. They met in the dining room while others were left in charge of moving the vessel through the dangerous conditions.

The Pasha Bulker, now in the hands of less experienced crew, was shunted north along the coast toward Port Stephens, unable to make much headway against the waves. It had traveled about three kilometres before the captain reappeared on the bridge and took command of his ship, which was now out of control.

Was the captain called by the mate on watch when his inability to make positive headway was identified? If the mate on watch was exceptional and the answer to the question is no… the captain might not have been reckless in making this bad decision.

At 8.30am the ship had been looped in almost a full circle by the power of 18-metre waves and was now headed toward Nobbys Beach on the outside of the southern entrance to the port.

The captain, in a panic as he told investigators in the offices of a Newcastle law firm, made one last desperate attempt to save his ship, but again made an error. Instead of swinging it hard to starboard, he ordered it go full astern, literally backing up into the pounding waves that were breaking over its decks. The stern was lifted above the waves, its rudder useless and the propeller spinning madly in the air. The 225-metre vessel then virtually surfed to the beach and hit a rock shelf called Big Ben Reef.

Ships are designed for forward motion. For example, the rudder is placed aft of the ship’s screws in order to benefit from the propeller wash pushing against it. When a ship backs down, however, the propeller wash is pushing against nothing and the rudder must rely on the vessel’s motion through the water to grab hold of water and turn the ship. When the ship transitions from froward to “reverse” motion there is a period of time the rudder is totally ineffective. This is why ships need tugboats when departing a dock… until they reach the minimum speed needed for the rudders to be effective (know as bare steerage) the tug must hold the bow on course.

More importantly an unladen ship with forward momentum and an engine working on an order of full ahead can turn quickly. It is important to note this rate of rotation is a critical factor. If a ship turns slowly (as happens during a reverse maneuver) the ship will have difficulty turning through the wind and can get stuck at a heading beam to (perpendicular from) the wind.

The collision broke the back of the ship - hogging, as it is called. It bent the ship into an inverted U-shape that could be seen by onlookers from the beach as ripples in the hull. The captain panicked again and ordered the ship to be abandoned even though there was no chance of it sinking, having already run aground, and needed at least a skeleton crew to minimize damage and monitor the hull to avoid an environmental disaster. They were taken off by helicopter.

Panic is enemy number one in an emergency situation. While some have more difficulty than others avoiding it a captain should never panic. This is a primary reason it takes 10 years of sailing experience and school to obtain a master’s license. I these 10 years you will be exposed to situations at sea that test your panic trigger, if you are unacceptable to panic or indecision at the time if crisis you should not take command of a ship. Many mariners face difficulty getting promoted to second mate for this very reason as this officer position is the highest pay grade obtainable without the need for making life threatening decisions in the face of danger. I have met few captains to which the Peter Principal applies.

For these reasons I find the report nearly unbelievable.

John Konrad is a USCG licensed Master Mariner of Unlimited Tonnage currently working as Chief Mate aboard a 835′ship in the Gulf of Mexico. Since graduating from SUNY Maritime College he has sailed 4 of the world’s oceans and reports from his ship via satellite.

A ferry at the center of much debate (including a record number of comments on this blog) has sailed into a storm that will likely sink her dream. The problem came Tuesday after Maui Judge Joseph Cardoza ruled against Hawaii Superferry resuming service to Maui until an environmental assessment is performed.

While the Department of Transportation took quick action last week in selecting engineering firm Belt Collins to conduct the $1 million dollar plus assessment, it could still take several months to be completed exposing the Superferry to estimated losses of $650,000 per month in the duration. Superferry president and CEO John Garibaldi stated the loss of time and revenue would be too much for the company to survive. Yesterday Garibaldi announced “with a heavy heart” the company would immediately lay off 249 employees; 36 on Maui, 35 on Kauai and 178 on Oahu, keeping just 59 workers on the job to handle administrative and operational duties.

The maritime world was quick to show it’s disappointment in the ruling with Maritime Executive editor Joseph Keefe contributing the most intelligent comments on the topic in an article titled “Profiles in Stupidity: Hawaii Superferry Idled by Courts“. In the paragraph that’s at the heart of the commentary Keefe states;

The situation in Hawaii is not unique, however. It plays itself out all over the fruited plain, every day. There hasn’t been a refinery built in this country for more than three decades despite a clear and present need for more refining capacity. We continue to be held hostage to a trade deficit that hinges largely on energy imports because we don’t have the intestinal fortitude to drill for the domestic oil and gas that we know is available, here and now. The same Congress that considers drilling (in the Arctic or the Gulf of Mexico) a sacrilege, at the same time extends MFN (Most Favored Nation) status to countries that deliver toxic products to our shores. And just across the Rio Grande, our NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) partners spill their bile from factories that would never pass environmental muster in the most lax state in the union.

So what exactly do the anti-ferry activists considerer the problem? In a set of comments posted to our previous supperferry post savekahuluiharbor.com blogger Karen Chun sums up the opposition’s feeling;

I think what you are seeing is a tremendous culture clash between what has been described as “the American Dream” (e.g. work hard and make a lot of money) and the Hawaiian culture which is embodied in our state motto: “Ua mau ka ea o ka ‘aina i ka pono”.

As with all Hawaiian sayings this has meaning on many levels but best translated to: “The life of the land continues (is preserved) by doing the right thing (harmony with correct behavior)”

So we have people who see the land as something that they use (up) to create their dream of monetary prosperity coming to a place where the land is seen as something to be preserved in its natural state and where the measure of success is not monetary but how you live your life in harmony with the virtues of ha’aha’a (humbleness), lokahi (unity) and aloha (a VERY misused word that I won’t even attempt to explain.

(read her full comment HERE)

While I do believe her statement is genuine I suspect the true problem lays with theory stated by Thomas Friedman in his book The World is Flat. Friedman believes that exponential technical advances of the digital revolution that have made it possible to do business, or almost anything else, instantaneously with billions of other people across the planet. This means the loss of jobs for many Americans but also the potential for wealth and geographical freedom for a smaller set of entrepreneurs. Combined with more effective means of transportation, which the ferry hoped to provide, these factors are enabling an increasing number of the second set to relocate west.

I have thought about this topic for some time. Working aboard ships worldwide and blogging online bring me the financial and geographical freedom to move to Hawaii so when a friend visited Maui a few months back her question seemed obvious. She asked “Maui is the most beautiful place I have ever visited. If you can live anywhere and afford the prices why not move?” My answer was simple; “It just takes too much time traveling home to see relatives.” The ferry helps solve this problem and therefore helps more families like ours make the decision to relocate to an island considered by locals as over crowded. If my assessment is right I understand the concern. The weather, natural beauty and opposition to development were the key factors in my family’s decision to move from Manhattan to Morro Bay California.

In addition to Keefe’s article there is one more factor that supports his opinion; history. To make a proper assessment of the situation we need to ask locals who have been though the fight. The following is a reply to Chun’s comment from Canary Islands resident Ricard Sala;

Hello everyone!!

Well I have never written in this blog I would like to add my 5 cents worth…I am not in any way in the merchant marine nor do I live in Hawaii. I am a pilot, live in Switzerland but I spent most of my youth in the Canary Islands and that is were my oipinion comes in.
The canary islands might be the closets geographical thing to the hawaiian islands there are in the world, 7 islands isolated from the mainland and underinvested for many years. We started in late 80’s with our own regional airline and years later the sole ferry company(which undeserved the market) was joined by FRed Olsen and their fast ferries. That alone opened up a whole world of possibilities for many people to travel, and we are talking here about people with no or very little money as well as large groups, students, schools on day trips, the daily crossings from Gran Canaria to Tenerife became part of he local scenery, it not only represented a boost to the local economies (from the opening of restaurants, to the hiring of the catering crew) but eventually it meant investment on the roads as well.
Now, I do not know local politics and as i sais I do not know the in and out, but, it seems to me a case on “not in my backyard” and manipulated people by local interests (probably airlines)…
If you were today to ask any canarian their opinion about the ferry I think it would be hard to find a single anti-ferry person.

Well that is it, just my opinion folks…

Cheers everyone!!

My assessment… Keefe is spot on. Your thoughts?

John Konrad is a USCG licensed Master Mariner of Unlimited Tonnage currently working as Chief Mate aboard a 835′ship in the Gulf of Mexico. Since graduating from SUNY Maritime College he has sailed in 4 of the world’s oceans and reports from his ship via satellite.