Rethinking Muster Drills

[JRG]

On 5/23/2020 at 7:22 AM, Luckiestmanonearth said:

It just takes a little innovation to achieve the same means (People have sat through the safety briefing and know where to go in case of emergency)

 

You are absolutely correct in your observations and many people agree with you,   the old muster system has to go!

 

The oh henry story here is that technology will eliminate some of the physical inconveniences that accompany the old fashioned muster drill.    I can see a future state where PAX will be required to use a smartphones to facilitate a more efficient and comprehensive safety training experience.     

 

The check-in-at-muster concept seems reasonable me,  as does the use of smart-phone video, virtual reality and 'driving tests' to check for general competency prior to embarkation.   The muster process is essentially a 'knowledge transfer process' and as the Luckiestmanonearth says,   it just takes a little innovation.     

 

p.s.

 

Please if you don't agree with my opinion don't be over-reactive  and think that people who want a better muster experience are doing so at the expense of sacrificing passenger safety,   you are missing the point if that is what you think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dsrdsrdsr]

On 8/22/2020 at 12:29 PM, GrJ Berkshire said:

I have always worried that the muster drill done in dock, does not replicate conditions in an emergency. How many passengers could walk 10 flights of stairs on a pitching ship or at an angle in the dark. Many people are barely mobile and would struggle without the lifts changing decks, loading on tenders, those with walking aids...............mobility scooters..... how will they cope?

I think the simple answer is - they won't.  Fortunately there are very few cruise ship evacuations, and even more fortunately those that have happened tended to be slow-developing and not in really rough seas.  But if a ship is sinking rapidly and the seas are rough, then older folk will die - it's one of the risks of enjoying your last years rather than sitting in a nursing home just breathing for as long as possible!

 

It's a flippant sort of answer, but it's accurate.  The risks of doing anything get greater as we get older.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, JRG said:

 

You are absolutely correct in your observations and many people agree with you,   the old muster system has to go!

 

The oh henry story here is that technology will eliminate some of the physical inconveniences that accompany the old fashioned muster drill.    I can see a future state where PAX will be required to use a smartphones to facilitate a more efficient and comprehensive safety training experience.     

 

The check-in-at-muster concept seems reasonable me,  as does the use of smart-phone video, virtual reality and 'driving tests' to check for general competency prior to embarkation.   The muster process is essentially a 'knowledge transfer process' and as the Luckiestmanonearth says,   it just takes a little innovation.     

 

p.s.

 

Please if you don't agree with my opinion don't be over-reactive  and think that people who want a better muster experience are doing so at the expense of sacrificing passenger safety,   you are missing the point if that is what you think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As our resident engineer has said many times the drill is more for the crew to understand what it takes to herd the passengers. All of you with your smart phone technology posts seem to overlook that fact.

 

Is a small amount of time of possible discomfort too much to provide for a needed safety drill? And again the drill is more for the crew to know how to do their job in a real emergency than it is for you. 

[chengkp75]

Wanting a "better" muster experience, while not affecting safety is one thing, proving that your concept will do so is quite another.  Just because there is technology that would make your life easier, does not prove the second part of the equation, "not sacrificing passenger safety".  Even RCI/NCL's new "e-muster", which has amazed every professional mariner on these boards with its approval, has not been tested to show that it does not degrade passenger safety.  The "testing" was done doing this new procedure as the normal muster drill prior to departure.  There was no follow-up, with an unscheduled drill sometime during the cruise to test passenger response (and this would not have been totally valid, as it would have been announced at the time as a drill, or there would have been lawsuits).  And the only real test is if this procedure is used and then the cruise has an actual emergency, and it may well be too late at that time.  Our responses are not "dismissive" or "vindictive" or some of the other adjectives thrown out there, but based on years and decades of actual training and emergencies on ships, observing what works and what doesn't, and reporting and testing industry best practices, to keep non-professionals safe in the marine environment.

[Aquahound]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Our responses are not "dismissive" or "vindictive" or some of the other adjectives thrown out there, but based on years and decades of actual training and emergencies on ships, observing what works and what doesn't, and reporting and testing industry best practices, to keep non-professionals safe in the marine environment.

 

Bingo.

 

I cannot overstate how important it is for crewman (enter any name here) to go to their station, such as deck 6 forward stairway, to help guide the large flow of passengers, all finding their way to their assembly stations at the same time.  Meanwhile, bar servers are shutting down their stations.  Room attendants are ensuring all staterooms have been vacated.  Entertainers are putting on their reflective vests and helping guide folks at the assembly stations.    The bridge is patiently waiting on a report that all guests are accounted for.  All guests are made to shut up for 5 minutes while important safety announcements are made.  Etc.

 

Meanwhile, a disgruntled guest is whining about the inconvenience and proclaiming the same result could be achieved on their smart phone while downing their 3rd Budweiser.  

[Heidi13]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

And the only real test is if this procedure is used and then the cruise has an actual emergency, and it may well be too late at that time.  Our responses are not "dismissive" or "vindictive" or some of the other adjectives thrown out there, but based on years and decades of actual training and emergencies on ships, observing what works and what doesn't, and reporting and testing industry best practices, to keep non-professionals safe in the marine environment.

 

Recall many pax from Costa Concordia stating they wished they had been given the opportunity to attend a proper muster drill prior to the emergency.

[rkacruiser]

14 hours ago, sanger727 said:

Are there also life jackets in the room? Not sure. 

 

I cannot believe that your post is serious.  Have you never used the closets in your stateroom?  If so, what do your think those objects are on the top shelf of some of your closets?

[sanger727]

12 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I cannot believe that your post is serious.  Have you never used the closets in your stateroom?  If so, what do your think those objects are on the top shelf of some of your closets?

 

If they specifically tell me at muster NOT to return to my stateroom to get a life jacket; then I'm not very concerned with looking for where and if there is a life jacket in my room. If they are in the closet, I"m sure I've seen them. I'm also sure that I would report to the muster station without it, as requested.

 

While I understand that if there is a true muster I will have to have a life jacket because it's required. My personal thinking on the situation is that if I'm in a situation where I truly need a life jacket - as in bobbing in the ocean and unable to swim to life boat; my chances of survival are not great. So, adding a life jacket into the equation will probably buy me hours as opposed to years to my life. So I"m not particularly clingy to a life jacket as something I"m concerned about. The cruise line wants me to have one and I'm sure they will give me one. 

Edited August 24, 2020 by sanger727

[JRG]

22 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Even RCI/NCL's new "e-muster", which has amazed every professional mariner on these boards with its approval, has not been tested to show that it does not degrade passenger safety.

 

Can you tell us more about this app?    

 

And how will your view change when it passes 'sea trials' ?    

 

I'm going to stick with the technological and innovative solution approach on this subject of rethinking muster drills.........

Edited August 24, 2020 by JRG

[chengkp75]

23 minutes ago, JRG said:

 

Can you tell us more about this app?    

 

And how will your view change when it passes 'sea trials' ?    

 

I'm going to stick with the technological and innovative solution approach on this subject of rethinking muster drills.........

What "sea trials" will it have?  It was approved after a few cruises on a couple of Celebrity ships, and with none of the real life testing that I mentioned.  So, unlike the older muster format, there is no data from actual emergencies to study how the crowd reacted in an actual emergency given this new format of "training".

 

Technology and innovation are fine, if they have been tested.  How many innovative software "solutions" have been sold to the public only to find major flaws in their design?  When dealing with safety, there really cannot be too many "recalls" or "oops, we didn't think of that".  Boeing's 737 Max comes to mind right away.

[sanger727]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

What "sea trials" will it have?  It was approved after a few cruises on a couple of Celebrity ships, and with none of the real life testing that I mentioned.  So, unlike the older muster format, there is no data from actual emergencies to study how the crowd reacted in an actual emergency given this new format of "training".

 

Technology and innovation are fine, if they have been tested.  How many innovative software "solutions" have been sold to the public only to find major flaws in their design?  When dealing with safety, there really cannot be too many "recalls" or "oops, we didn't think of that".  Boeing's 737 Max comes to mind right away.

 

Just out of curiosity. Do you have any idea of at what rate real muster's occur? Once sailing is back to normal would this likely be "sea tested" in a matter of weeks, months, or years? Just curious how far and wide this could get spread due to popularity before a real life situation would test it out.

[nosapphire]

Safety on anything (including vessels) gets improved when things have gone wrong - hindsight is used to realise how accidents and disasters could have been lessened or prevented.

Then, because of the improved procedures and checks, less accidents and disasters happen, so people start to think that maybe these tedious procedures are not really necessary....

We forget that the reason we have all these irritating interruptions to our holiday is because before they were in place, other people died because of the absence of these same irritating procedures.

I sincerely hope that neither you or I ever have to experience a real-life muster.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to attend as ordered, no matter how hot, bothered and bored I feel with it all.

 

 

 

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

Just out of curiosity. Do you have any idea of at what rate real muster's occur? Once sailing is back to normal would this likely be "sea tested" in a matter of weeks, months, or years? Just curious how far and wide this could get spread due to popularity before a real life situation would test it out.

I would say that for cruises out of the US alone, there might be one actual muster (emergency requiring passengers to muster) every two to three years, at the most.  How often are actual emergencies, and people standing around at muster stations in the middle of the night do you hear about on CC?  Very few.

[Aquahound]

19 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I cannot believe that your post is serious.  Have you never used the closets in your stateroom?  If so, what do your think those objects are on the top shelf of some of your closets?

 

 RCI's Oasis and Quantum Class ships don't have life jackets in the cabins.  Not sure what other lines/ships have also adopted this practice.  The life jackets are located at assembly stations and at the life boats. 

 

This is a practice I oppose, by the way. 

[rkacruiser]

4 hours ago, Aquahound said:

RCI's Oasis and Quantum Class ships don't have life jackets in the cabins.  Not sure what other lines/ships have also adopted this practice.

 

It seems that the "geniuses" have not all been in residence at the Holland America Line Offices in Seattle.  I am very disturbed to learn of this practice by RCI.  One more example of some cost cutting?

[rkacruiser]

11 hours ago, sanger727 said:

If they specifically tell me at muster NOT to return to my stateroom to get a life jacket; then I'm not very concerned with looking for where and if there is a life jacket in my room. If they are in the closet, I"m sure I've seen them. I'm also sure that I would report to the muster station without it, as requested.

 

It has been several cruises since I was asked to attend Muster Drill with a life jacket.  It's been even longer since I was expected to arrive with the life jacket being worn.  

 

There's good reasons why guests have been asked not to bring their life jackets.  Straps that are allowed to trail along the floor and the stairs have caused both the "owner" of the life jacket as well as innocent guests behind them to fall and injure themselves.

 

Just my opinion, but there ought to be a life jacket for each guest in their stateroom without having the expectation of having a crew member provide one at my Muster Station.  What if the emergency is so severe and I cannot get to my Muster Station?  

 

Honestly, I am surprised--no shocked--that the USCG would approve of such a situation.  

[dsrdsrdsr]

46 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

Just my opinion, but there ought to be a life jacket for each guest in their stateroom without having the expectation of having a crew member provide one at my Muster Station.  What if the emergency is so severe and I cannot get to my Muster Station?  

 

Honestly, I am surprised--no shocked--that the USCG would approve of such a situation.  

I can't imagine an emergency that would stop you getting to your muster station but allow you to get to your cabin.  They have to have a full supply within reach of the lifeboats, I think, even if they also have a full supply in the cabins.

[Aquahound]

2 hours ago, dsrdsrdsr said:

I can't imagine an emergency that would stop you getting to your muster station but allow you to get to your cabin.  They have to have a full supply within reach of the lifeboats, I think, even if they also have a full supply in the cabins.

 

In an emergency, it's a little unreasonable to expect passengers to return to their rooms to get life jackets, just to turn around and go back to the area they were in order to muster.  However, imagine an emergency that occurs in the night that is of a nature that prevents you from going to your muster station. Imagine having to muster at an alternate location where there might only be half the amount of life jackets available.  In those circumstances, it's beneficial to have life jackets in the rooms to grab and go.  In the Star Princess incident, how many assembly stations weren't accessible because of the raging fire above them?  When it comes to safety at sea, I believe in plan for the worst, but pray for the best.  

 

  

[chengkp75]

9 hours ago, dsrdsrdsr said:

I can't imagine an emergency that would stop you getting to your muster station but allow you to get to your cabin.  They have to have a full supply within reach of the lifeboats, I think, even if they also have a full supply in the cabins.

I was going to use the Star Princess as an example, Paul beat me to it.  Using the picture above, there would be a minimum of 4 muster stations that were unusable due to the fire being above, yet we don't know where the cabins are located that use those muster stations, so pax could very easily have gone to their cabins if needed, or as Paul says, if it happened at night, then everyone would be in their cabin to get their lifejacket.  Even with an indoor muster station and a situation like this, where the fire extended at least two vertical fire zones, the muster stations in those zones (and the ones for the boats on the other side of the ship as well) would be unusable, since in a fire, all the ventilation in the affected fire zone is secured (the vertical fire zone is the area between the fire doors you see in the passageways, and runs from the keel to the top of the mast, and from side to side of the ship, and all spaces within those boundaries).

[chengkp75]

10 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

There's good reasons why guests have been asked not to bring their life jackets.  Straps that are allowed to trail along the floor and the stairs have caused both the "owner" of the life jacket as well as innocent guests behind them to fall and injure themselves.

In my opinion, this is just a "lazy" response to the problem, driven by the cruise lines' desire to not antagonize the passengers.  We stow our lifejackets with the straps let all the way out (as all safety equipment should be stowed, since you never know the size of the next person to use it), but with the straps wrapped around the jacket, and buckled, so there are no dangling straps.  In my professional opinion, passengers should be required to bring the jacket to drill, stowed in this manner, put it on during drill, and then properly stow it again, before they get released from drill.  But, then again I'm "disgruntled" and "vindictive".  😉

[MBP&O2/O]

“ I can't imagine an emergency that would stop you getting to your muster station but allow you to get to your cabin.  They have to have a full supply within reach of the lifeboats, I think, even if they also have a full supply in the cabins.”

 

With reference to the emergency I have referred to, there were four lifeboats on the ship. Two ‘midships and two aft. The two aft boats were inaccessible due to the sea breaking not only over the main deck but also the flying bridge,  as shown on the posted photo. That’s two muster stations out of the equation. I appreciate it was not a cruise ship but these things do happen.

 

[dsrdsrdsr]

13 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

In an emergency, it's a little unreasonable to expect passengers to return to their rooms to get life jackets, just to turn around and go back to the area they were in order to muster.  However, imagine an emergency that occurs in the night that is of a nature that prevents you from going to your muster station. Imagine having to muster at an alternate location where there might only be half the amount of life jackets available.  In those circumstances, it's beneficial to have life jackets in the rooms to grab and go.  In the Star Princess incident, how many assembly stations weren't accessible because of the raging fire above them?  When it comes to safety at sea, I believe in plan for the worst, but pray for the best.  

 

  

Good points.  I hadn't thought of nighttime emergencies.

[chengkp75]

17 minutes ago, dsrdsrdsr said:

Good points.  I hadn't thought of nighttime emergencies.

"train for the worst".

[KeepCalmBearOn]

On 5/23/2020 at 7:22 AM, Luckiestmanonearth said:

Other ideas ?

 

Yeah.

 

Don't change a thing. I think the mass drill is important to get people introduced to what it is like when 3-5 thousand people are moving all at one time.

[navybankerteacher]

This discussion reminds me of a great cartoon - a man wearing a ship’s officer’s  uniform was standing on a steeply slanting deck holding a large number of life jackets, while an annoyed-looking passenger was saying:  “What — $75 .... ?  they’re only asking for $20 down on A Deck!”.