Alaska Pilots concern about Royal

[Cruise Junky]

https://www.ktoo.org/2019/04/19/southeast-alaska-pilots-raise-concerns-over-royal-princess-megaship/

 

this is was an interesting read. 

[joeyancho]

Wow! Very interesting.  Perhaps they cannot dock in heavy winds.  Disappointing to passengers who are expecting 3 ports 

[Brisbane41]

Looks like the pilots have just gotten used to new technology like the azipods. This technology is still new and was only being used by a few ships decades ago and even them some had problems with breakdowns. I believe Princess picked the tradition propulsion for reliability and has not changed for a while. Unlike the past liners of yesteryear ships with traditional propulsion do have bow and stern thrusters these days which changes things significantly.  When you look at all the older liners that did the Atlantic crossing it was all traditional propulsion. They would have had a much harder time berthing back then and needed tug boats to dock. Azipods have made work a lot easier. All the Alaska pilots are doing is stating the obvious. There is nothing wrong with the propulsion Princess ships use and it does what it is designed to do. Besides that there is more to berthing than the propulsion units the ships have. Even if the ship does have azipods and can manoeuvre with enough high winds facing a large ships profile it could be enough to push it off the wharf as well so it is probably a moot point.  

 

Honestly the article could be a beat up of some stroppy pilots just unhappy they have to work with technology they are not used to or have to use tug boats to assist.

[DDG 41]

There are already 2 threads on this. Why do we need a third?

[Cruise Junky]

23 minutes ago, DDG 41 said:

There are already 2 threads on this. Why do we need a third?

I went back about three pages and found nothing. I did look. 

[bemis12]

6 hours ago, Cruise Junky said:

https://www.ktoo.org/2019/04/19/southeast-alaska-pilots-raise-concerns-over-royal-princess-megaship/

 

this is was an interesting read. 

 

Very interesting.  Thank you for posting it.

[Colo Cruiser]

6 hours ago, Cruise Junky said:

I went back about three pages and found nothing. I did look. 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2656588-royal-princess-alaska-suitability-being-questioned/

[Fat Albert]

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

[1025cruise]

1 hour ago, Fat Albert said:

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

Not true in Alaska. In Alaska, the pilot has full control.

[Coral]

This is worth reading:

 

 

Heidi13 used to work on the Bridge for Princess. He has a unique perspective to this.

[cr8tiv1]

5 hours ago, 1025cruise said:

Not true in Alaska. In Alaska, the pilot has full control.

 

   6 hours ago,  Fat Albert said: 

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

Not true on Panama Canal Transit.  Captain gives up ship to pilot or it doesn't go through the locks.  (disclaimer:  not sure if pilot has hands on controls, but does have complete control of ship.)

[Thrak]

5 hours ago, Coral said:

This is worth reading:

 

 

Heidi13 used to work on the Bridge for Princess. He has a unique perspective to this.

 

Coral: Many thanks for linking that thread and that post in particular. It's always interesting to hear from people who actually know what they are talking about. So often folks post about things they "know" when they don't actually have it right.

[BillB48]

It may just be a matter of semantics and the way the pilot in the interview phrased the response.   Most ports in North America and many other ports as well, the pilot does take the conn issuing the engine and rudder movements.  The master still has the final say if there were a disagreement in the orders.  At the Panama Canal the pilot has the final say as the Canal assumes liability when they are determined at fault by a board of local inspectors.

[kennicott]

6 hours ago, 1025cruise said:

Not true in Alaska. In Alaska, the pilot has full control.

Here is what Heidi 13 has to say about that contention: 

 

"Sorry, but you are incorrect. While SE Alaska waters are compulsory pilotage waters and the pilot normally has conduct (con) of the vessel, the Master remains in command and the Deck Officer in charge of the watch is responsible to the Master for the safe navigation, with advice from the pilot. The correct term we used is courses and speeds to Master's orders & pilot's advice. 

 

When the Captain or Deck Officers, agree with the pilot's orders they are followed without question. When they don't agree, the pilot is challenged and if unable to justify their intended action, the Captain and/or Deck Officer may take any action they believe is required to ensure the safe conduct of the vessel. As a Deck Officer in Alaska, I countered a pilot's orders on a couple of occasions. Mostly with respect to the amount of helm they requested.

 

This is consistent with any compulsory pilotage area I have worked, except the Panama Canal, where the pilots assume complete responsibility for the navigation. It is also noted in the Alaska Marine Pilot Statutes & Regulations."           

[kennicott]

Regarding, Southeast pilots docking the vessels and their views on "pod propulsion":

 

"According to the master, Celebrity Cruises’ company safety management system stated the master or staff captain must perform dockings, and the master confirmed to investigators that a pilot had never docked the vessel while he served as master."

 

"The pilot told investigators that he was not part of the pre-arrival brief but that he did talk to the master about the expected winds at docking. He said the master assured him they could dock within the parameters being reported to them. The pilot stated the master told him they would come in a bit faster and wider than normal due to the wind."

 

"According to the pilot, the thrusters and anchor were able to control the bow but “whatever maneuvers they made with the pods weren’t sufficient to hold the ship and it made a hard landing on the dolphins back there.”

 

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/MAB1736.pdf

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, Fat Albert said:

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

While you are correct that the Captain never surrenders the "authority" or "responsibility" of his ship (except in a couple of instances), he does relinquish control on a very regular basis, when he gives the "conn" (the authority to give course and speed orders) to his bridge officers for the 20 or so hours a day he is not on the bridge.  In the same fashion, the Captain gives the pilot the "conn", as Heidi13 says, until such time as the Captain does not feel confident in the pilot's decisions.  I have been going to sea for 44 years, and know the duties and responsibilities of the Captain and pilot. 

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, cr8tiv1 said:

 

   6 hours ago,  Fat Albert said: 

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

Not true on Panama Canal Transit.  Captain gives up ship to pilot or it doesn't go through the locks.  (disclaimer:  not sure if pilot has hands on controls, but does have complete control of ship.)

The only difference between the Panama Canal pilot and any other harbor or local pilot, is that the Captain relinquishes some of his authority over the vessel, because the Canal Authority assumes full financial liability for the vessel or any damage it does.  This is also true as a ship enters a drydock, as the bow crosses over the "sill" of the dock, financial responsibility for the ship, and the authority to command that ship transfers to the shipyard.

[chengkp75]

16 minutes ago, kennicott said:

Regarding, Southeast pilots docking the vessels and their views on "pod propulsion":

 

"According to the master, Celebrity Cruises’ company safety management system stated the master or staff captain must perform dockings, and the master confirmed to investigators that a pilot had never docked the vessel while he served as master."

 

"The pilot told investigators that he was not part of the pre-arrival brief but that he did talk to the master about the expected winds at docking. He said the master assured him they could dock within the parameters being reported to them. The pilot stated the master told him they would come in a bit faster and wider than normal due to the wind."

 

"According to the pilot, the thrusters and anchor were able to control the bow but “whatever maneuvers they made with the pods weren’t sufficient to hold the ship and it made a hard landing on the dolphins back there.”

 

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/MAB1736.pdf

There is some confusion here on CC with regards to "docking".  The harbor pilot has the "conn" from the point where he boards until generally the ship is close to and parallel to the dock, at which time in most cases the Captain or Staff Captain will take over the controls personally, and move the ship to the dock.  Typically, at this point, the ship has almost no way on (stopped), and they are just scooting it forward or back, and sideways.  In cases where tugs are used, usually the tug company places a "docking pilot" on the ship to coordinate the tug movements with the ship's Captain, and he will frequently take the "conn" for the docking maneuver.

[Coral]

21 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

While you are correct that the Captain never surrenders the "authority" or "responsibility" of his ship (except in a couple of instances), he does relinquish control on a very regular basis, when he gives the "conn" (the authority to give course and speed orders) to his bridge officers for the 20 or so hours a day he is not on the bridge.  In the same fashion, the Captain gives the pilot the "conn", as Heidi13 says, until such time as the Captain does not feel confident in the pilot's decisions.  I have been going to sea for 44 years, and know the duties and responsibilities of the Captain and pilot. 

While I don't say it enough - I appreciate your posts and your vast knowledge of information you provide to us. I also appreciate Heidi's posts (whose name is Andy if you look at his website).

 

Thanks for your contributions!

[kennicott]

56 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

There is some confusion here on CC with regards to "docking". 

Thanks for putting some refinement on established docking procedure. Appreciate you and Heidi 13 taking time to share your observations and experience on these subjects, helps to separate fact from fiction for us lay persons.

 

You indicate:  "Typically, at this point, the ship has almost no way on (stopped), and they are just scooting it forward or back, and sideways."  So, obviously, the Celebrity mishap wasn't normal as the pilot appeared pretty much out of the loop long before then.

 

I.e. "When the vessel was about 4 tenths of a mile from the dock, the conn changed from the pilot to the staff captain." 

 

"The master told investigators he ordered the starboard anchor to be dropped when the vessel was about 450 meters from the dock because he felt that the bow of the vessel was rapidly approaching the dock and the bow thrusters were unable to slow the motion of the bow. According to the VDR and CCTV recordings, the anchor was dropped at 1353. Both the master and the staff captain told investigators that the master took over the conn at this point"

 

 "The master also told investigators the use of tugboats was not discussed during their conversation. The master further stated that he had never heard of tugboats being available in the port of Ketchikan." "The pilot stated the master told him they would come in a bit faster and wider than normal due to the wind. The pilot also stated he told the master that tugboats were available but the master said that “unless the winds were very strong, 30–40 [knots], they would have no problem holding the ship” and that he (the master) had docked the vessel in wind gusts up to 50 knots."

 

At least with the NTSB the public receives an opportunity to get an idea what goes on, around the world most incidents and accidents of this type are proprietary and secret. After one takes time to read the report, the final conclusion makes sense, to me anyway.----- "The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the Celebrity Infinity’s allision with the dock was the master’s failure to plan, monitor, and execute a safe docking evolution."

[Brisbane41]

4 hours ago, cr8tiv1 said:

 

   6 hours ago,  Fat Albert said: 

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

Not true on Panama Canal Transit.  Captain gives up ship to pilot or it doesn't go through the locks.  (disclaimer:  not sure if pilot has hands on controls, but does have complete control of ship.)

Unless of course the Panama Canal pilot decides to simply fall asleep on the Captains chair and leave it to them to take care of for the day as I have heard happens a bit.

[DDG 41]

14 hours ago, cr8tiv1 said:

 

   6 hours ago,  Fat Albert said: 

 The harbor pilot claimed "they take over the ship" No Captain surrenders control and authority of his ship to a harbor pilot. The harbor pilot NEVER touches any controls at all. I have been on the bridge with the Captain in Command and the harbor pilot present and observed the duties.  The harbor pilot is for the harbor traffic, sea and weather conditions and they report to the Captain . 

Not true on Panama Canal Transit.  Captain gives up ship to pilot or it doesn't go through the locks.  (disclaimer:  not sure if pilot has hands on controls, but does have complete control of ship.)

Well That's not a Harbour is it.

[BillB48]

15 hours ago, Brisbane41 said:

Unless of course the Panama Canal pilot decides to simply fall asleep on the Captains chair and leave it to them to take care of for the day as I have heard happens a bit.

 

Think that is more of a sea story and perhaps some exaggeration thrown in to make a more colorful tale.  On a single pilot ship at the Canal there is very little time that the pilot could wander off and turn things over to the old man.  Now on a two pilot ship there is normally time for the second pilot to fall asleep in the captain's chair, but they would normally do that in the cabin that is provided for their comfort... a lot easier to catch some zzzzs without all the chatter on the bridge😉.  Seriously on two pilot ships the second pilot's primary responsibility is assist the control pilot in and around the locks.  Beyond that there is some down time for the second pilot to enjoy the ride.

[tonyweir]

On 4/24/2019 at 7:30 AM, 1025cruise said:

Not true in Alaska. In Alaska, the pilot has full control.

 

I believe the only port where the captain relinquishes control is the Panama canal. 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, tonyweir said:

 

I believe the only port where the captain relinquishes control is the Panama canal. 

Well, semantics, but important ones.  The Captain relinquishes "control" to a pilot in every situation, just as he does to his bridge officers while he is not on the bridge.  The Captain retains "authority" at all times except in the Panama Canal, and when entering a drydock.  The reason for this is that either the Canal Authority, or the shipyard assumes full financial responsibility for the ship and any damages it may cause.