gCaptain.com

Our friend Richard Rodriguez of the BitterEnd Blog had an excellent post titled VTS - Working with large vessels, that gives Puget Sound boaters tips on communicating with the numerous large ships transiting to and from port.

The post had me thinking about my frequent dealings with Vessel Traffic Services worldwide like the time we entered the Singapore Straights and our Captain ordered, despite loud protests, the deck crew to finish chipping paint on the Flying Bridge. The result… the mate on watch missed a few critical calls from the local vessel controllers and they basically shut down the port for 20 minutes to give us plenty of sea room…. and a $25,000 fine!

Once my mind was past reminding me of few sea stories to tell at the next CAMM meeting I started to realize that I had no idea what the VTS stations I have been calling look like. So here they are:

United States:

The Volpe Center recently implemented a vessel communications and tracking network for the Saint Lawrence Seaway. The network, based on the automatic identification system, promises improved safety, security, and efficiency throughout the Seaway. Above, the new system in use at the Eisenhower Lock vessel traffic control center in New York. (Photo courtesy of Mr. Kam Chin)

New York, NY - Seaman Operations Specialist Jason Dailey, sector operator at the Vessel Traffic Center at Coast Guard Activities New York, Staten Island, N.Y. monitors vessel traffic in the New York Harbor. USCG photo by PA2 Mike Hvozda. [Continue Reading →]

 

 Vessel Traffic Services Overview: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

gCaptain’s all time favorite TV commercial and worst nightmare.

Funniest video of last year! Thanks, Berlitz

(Is your company blocking access? View the file here: LINK )

Effective January 1, 2008, mariners sailing in the capacity of Ship Security Officer (SSO) will have to show evidence of being “qualified” to hold that position. The SSO training requirement only applies to STCW vessels 500GT or greater operating on international voyages. Evidence of qualification will include the following:

Course completion certificate (in accordance with the Maritime Transportation Security Act [MTSA] and/or in accordance with the International Maritime Organization [IMO] model course for Ship Security Officer).

Company letter or certificate attesting to the qualifications (in accordance with the Maritime Transportation Security Act [MTSA] regulations and the International Ship and Port Facility [ISPS] Code).

The U.S. Coast Guard has determined that any training completed in accordance with 33 CFR, Part 104.215, is substantially equivalent to the STCW requirements. Therefore, no additional training should be required. The Coast Guard has informed Port State Control worldwide of this arrangement.

Before July 1, 2009, the Coast Guard intends to amend 33 CFR, Part 104.215, to create a “Ship Security Officer” endorsement that will be included on the mariners license or documents.

Continue reading for the FAQ. 

Are the SSO laws in you’re country or flag state changing? Let us know in the comments section.

Want to know more about The Protector? Popular Mechanics tells us;

Robots versus pirates—it’s not as stupid, or unlikely, as it sounds. Piracy has exploded in the waters near Somalia, where this past week United States warships have fired on two pirate skiffs, and are currently in pursuit of a hijacked Japanese-owned vessel. At least four other ships in the region remain under pirate control, and the problem appears to be going global: The International Maritime Bureau is tracking a 14-percent increase in worldwide pirate attacks this year.

The Protector, which comes mounted with a 7.62mm machine gun, wasn’t originally intended for anti-piracy operations. But according to BAE Systems spokesperson Stephanie Moncada, the robot could easily fill that role. “Down the line, it could potentially be modified for commercial use as well,” she says. Instead of being deployed by a warship to intercept and possibly fire on an incoming vessel, a non-lethal variant of the Protector could be used to simply investigate a potential threat. Continue Reading…

Also be sure to check out BitterEnd’s video find: Tres Cool - RIB boarding a Chinook

Click Photo For Details

Bloomberg News tells us:

South Korea’s coast guard sent boats to contain the country’s biggest oil spill in more than a decade after a Hong Kong-registered supertanker collided with a barge.

About 81,000 barrels of crude oil was spilt after a crane on the barge crashed into the Hebei Spirit at 7:15 a.m. local time, Jeong Seon Mun, deputy director of the maritime safety information center at South Korea’s Ministry of Maritime Affairs & Fisheries, said. The ship was anchored 5 miles (8 kilometers) northwest of the Taean peninsula at the time.

The leak is almost a third of the 37,000 tons spilled into Prince William Sound, Alaska, by the Exxon Valdez in 1989, according to data on the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation’s Web site. The Taean Coast Guard deployed 12 patrol boats and 3 accident control vessels, Jeong said today.

“Oil is still spilling,” Jeong said by telephone in Seoul. “The police face difficulty in carrying out the operation because high waves make it hard to contain the spill.” Continue Reading…

After one long day of a full-press search for the tall ship Alvei, New Zealand Coast Guard’s P-3 aircraft crew was able to find the overdue ship. The reason for worry? Expected radio check-ins never happened. News.au tells us;

Julia Lang from Maritime New Zealand said authorities would meet The Alvei’s crew when they arrived in Opua, in New Zealand in 8-10 days time.

They would be asked why the ship did not respond to the radio broadcasts, and why the delay was not reported to authorities.

“Relatives have been concerned … had the vessel been making VHF contact we would have been able to allay anyone’s fear relatively quickly,” Lang said.

“All maritime authorities internationally see skippers as responsible for their vessels. Part of that is being responsible by keeping regular and scheduled communications via maritime radio or other means.

“The fact is it has been extremely difficult. It created a lot of anxiety.”

It is unclear whether the crew may be asked to fund the cost of the search. Continue Reading…

Read gCaptain’s full coverage: P

Every wonder what happens if you need to be helicoptered off a cruise ship? The USCG has released this video of a medivac operation off the coast of Mexico. The Press release states;

SAN DIEGO, Calif., (November 16, 2007) Crews from Air Stations San Diego and Sacramento conducted a medevac of a 72 year-old-male from a cruise ship 70 miles east of Isla De Guadalupe, Mexico. The C-130 from Air Sta Sacramento flew overhead coverage as the HH-60 from Air Station San Diego hoisted the man from the ship. The man was taken to Air Station San Diego where he was transferred to local EMS.

(Opens in new window)

Rear Admiral Craig E. Bone is not one to back down from criticism, his comments regarding questions we posed to the San Francisco Chronicle were strong and to the point. Perhaps it’s for this reason Admiral Thad Allen, a straight talker himself, appointed him to the high profile position early this summer. Taking a proactive stance to defense, Admiral Bone today responded to NJ.com’s criticism of the USCG’s response to the San Francisco Oil Spill with the following comments;

Your Nov. 16 editorial about the recent oil spill in San Francisco questioning the U. S. Coast Guard’s readiness did not mention several important facts and contained several misperceptions.

The motor vessel Cosco Busan’s striking of the Bay Bridge in San Francisco Bay and spilling 58,000 gallons of fuel was an avoidable disaster. The Coast Guard and NTSB are working to determine what went so tragically wrong on this modern ship with advanced equipment, and under the guidance and direction of a state licensed pilot and the command of a licensed master.

Ultimately the motor vessel Cosco Busan master is responsible for the safe operation of the vessel. Thousands of commercial oceangoing ships navigate safely in fog worldwide and in much more restricted waterways. The question for our investigators and the National Transportation Safety Board is why didn’t this one?
The response to the oil spill here was anything but weak and slow as your editorial asserted. Within 15 minutes Coast Guard pollution investigators were directed to the scene and they arrived through heavy fog 28 minutes later. Continue Reading—>

Member’s of the San Francisco Pilot Association have also expressed their views. In a release by the Associated Press, SF Pilot Eric Robinson Comments;

“An international standardization of bridge equipment like radars and electronic navigation equipment — to me, that would be the legislation I would like to see come out of this,” Robinson said during an interview as he set a course for Hawaii.

“I’ve seen at least a dozen different electronic charts and dozens of radar displays,” Robinson said. “Bridge markings, buoy markings, depth contour curves, what measurements the depths are in, whether they’re in fathoms, feet or meters — basically every aspect of the chart other than the outlay of the land could be different.”

Some pilots, frustrated by the varying systems, have begun carrying their own laptops loaded with familiar charting software onto the ships, he said. The laptops can be plugged into the ship’s navigation equipment.

This article is a must read for all mariners and can be found here: “Oil Spill Fuels Debate in Ship Industry”

Cosco Busan Reading List:

• Cosco Busan Arrested
• Cosco Busan getting giant steel Band-Aid
  
• Oil Spill Fuels Debate in Ship Industry
• SF ship pilots group reviewing practices
• Ex-San Francisco USCG commander retires
• Crews start work to remove damaged fender on Bay Bridge

Update:

• Oil spill ship pilot temporarily loses license, government threatens to confiscate vessel

Fairplay brings us the most ridiculous item of the day;

Vessels transiting US harbours could come under tight navigational controls in the wake of the Cosco Busan bridge strike and resulting spill in San Francisco Bay. Sources close to the investigation tell Fairplay that federal officials may suggest that vessels transiting US channels may be compelled to follow navigational instructions issued by the US Coast Guard’s Vessel Traffic Service. In the case of the Cosco Busan accident, it has been alleged that VTS duty officers tried to warn the vessel off its impact course with the Bay Bridge, but their advice is just that and not mandatory for vessel operators. Fairplay asked USCG Commandant Thad Allen about the suggestion and he said that, if required to, the Coast Guard is up to the challenge of positively controlling commercial vessel traffic. But he noted that most major US harbors presently don’t have VTS systems and that such a change would require a major financial commitment “and a departure from the current culture regarding vessel navigation responsibility”. The suggested system would be along the lines of air traffic control procedures which Allen says were developed centuries after the traditional rules for vessel captains and pilots.

The problem with maritime incidents is the fix rarely address the true cause and often creates problems that contribute to future incidents. As an example here’s an email from a gCaptain reader who wishes to remain anonymous;

“The new ISPS reporting requirements are sinking us in paperwork. Just yesterday I was on bridge watch in moderate traffic, typing a report out on my laptop. For 15 minutes our captain observed my action from the chart room then came out and said:

5 Years ago if I saw you typing a report on that F$@@’n laptop I would have fired you on the spot. Today, with all these ISM/ISPS requirements, if I come up here and find your not on your laptop typing out reports, I’ll fire you on the spot!

I was paying attention to the traffic but we both knew it didn’t have my full attention… and these reports were suppose to be making us safer!! I don’t feel safer and I don’t feel the paperwork will keep terrorists away from my ship”

Unsafe indeed.

Vessel Traffic in US ports is exceptionally well run and experienced in vessel safety and operations. They do not make the proposal ridiculous, Admiral Allen does. Why? Current technology is simply not capable of delivering real time tracking. Also, final say remains the responsibility of a ship’s captain because he is the one who knows the ship’s capabilities, it’s crew and he is stationed on the bridge. He is also the last one to abandon if the ship finds danger… and he knows it.

If the Coast Guard wants final say then they need to be aboard the vessel and if that happens they will be hard pressed to fill the position with anyone more qualified than the competent and experienced San Francisco Pilots.

UPDATE:

Bob Couttie of Maritime Accident Casebook comments on this post;

VTS-assisted accidents, by action or inaction, aren’t rare, or at least not rare enough. John Clandillon-Baker, editor of The Pilot, journal of the UK Maritime Pilots Association sent us an email reminder about the Sea Express/Alaska Rainbow collision in February, 2007. VTS issues also featured in the grounding of the P&O Nedlloyd Magellan in 2001, and the source or worst oil spill so far in Singapore waters, the collision between the Evoikos and Orapin Global in October 1997. One can arguably include the Exxon Valdez.

USCG Commandant Thad Allen’s assurance to Fairplay that his command is up to the challenge has a Rice-Davies sort of quality to it, he would say that, wouldn’t he.

MAC’s own informal think-tank of veteran master mariners, who aren’t tanked up when they think, finds the proposal less objectionable, the authority of the master will remain in force much as it does now, in their view.

This is only a clip of Bob’s article so be sure to read his full post: “Cosco Busan - Who Needs Pilots?“

__________________________________________________

John Konrad is a USCG licensed Master Mariner of Unlimited Tonnage. Since graduating from SUNY Maritime College he has sailed 4 of the world’s oceans and reports from his ship via satellite.

National news sources are publishing a story about the VTS warning to the Cosco Busan’s pilot Jim Cota. In a story titled “Ship Got No Alert From Coast Guard” the New York Times writes:

The Coast Guard did not warn helmsmen of a cargo ship that spilled 58,000 gallons of oil into San Francisco Bay that the ship was poised to hit the Bay Bridge, investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board said. One board member, Debbie Hersman, said the Vessel Traffic Service of the Coast Guard asked the pilot of the ship, the Cosco Busan, about its course before the accident. “They all recognized and were concerned about the vessel’s position,” Ms. Hersman said. But the traffic workers told investigators they decided to limit communication so as not to distract the pilot from a difficult maneuver.

Now I promised you I wouldn’t correct minor mistakes made by the media so I’ll just offer a gCaptain tshirt to the person who catches the first error made by Carolyn Marshall in the linked article. I will, however, continue to report on major mistakes and I believe the misleading title is just that. Saying “Ship Got No Alert From Coast Guard” contradicts the article’s context which clearly states that VTS warned the pilot of an observed error in the vessel’s course. The San Francisco Chronicle goes in more depth writing;

“As we approached the bridge, I received a radio call from Vessel Traffic Service saying I was on a (southwesterly course that was wrong) and asking what my intentions were,” he said.

He said his instruments showed he was heading roughly northwest, a significant difference from what the Coast Guard was seeing on its instruments. Such a difference could indicate that something was wrong with the ship’s electronic navigating equipment.

Cota said the ship’s radar systems failed him, but the NTSB said Thursday that the ship had two completely independent radar systems, suggesting that it was unlikely that both would stop functioning at the same time. Continue Reading…

So what happened and was VTS’ concern for distracting the pilot valid? It is important to note VTS serves in an advisory role and, despite their physical location on shore, plays an important role in Bridge Resource Management ( BRM ). In a previous post we wrote:

(Bridge Resource Management) is a class all officers must take in both teamwork and processing the large amounts of data (lookout reports, radar, radio comms, gps charting, weather information….) that pours into the bridge.

With the error observed, ship notified and a response received VTS remained silent to give the pilot time to process the information and regain situational awareness. I’m just not sure why the media thinks the decision to “to limit communication so as not to distract the pilot from a difficult maneuver” is newsworthy.