Hull Cleaning for New Zealand Waters

[Ride-The-Waves]

The real issue is the critical comment demeaning the character and professionalism of the master/captain.  This type of insinuation should not be permitted on CC.  These people are professionals.  They know what they are doing.  They don't need obtuse comments by those who have little to no experience in ship handling.  Speak from 30 years service in the US Navy.

[Mary229]

4 minutes ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

The real issue is the critical comment demeaning the character and professionalism of the master/captain.  This type of insinuation should not be permitted on CC.  These people are professionals.  They know what they are doing.  They don't need obtuse comments by those who have little to no experience in ship handling.  Speak from 30 years service in the US Navy.

You can report posts if you would like, click the ellipsis and report. 
 

i, however, disagree with your assessment but I am not a moderator.

[chengkp75]

25 minutes ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

The real issue is the critical comment demeaning the character and professionalism of the master/captain.  This type of insinuation should not be permitted on CC.  These people are professionals.  They know what they are doing.  They don't need obtuse comments by those who have little to no experience in ship handling.  Speak from 30 years service in the US Navy.

Not sure what "critical comment" "demeaning the character and professionalism of the master/captain" you are referring to.  I hope you are not referring to the post above yours from Heidi13, who has been a ship's Master for decades, and who knows of what he speaks.  I, as another professional mariner, with 46 years as a licensed officer, agree with him that in many cases the Master is instructed by corporate to "not worry" about certain regulations.  Also, if you knew the number of Captains/Chief Engineers who have been convicted of environmental violations over the years, you would not be so quick to assume that they are completely altruistic.  I take exception when non-mariners question the actions and motives of Captains here on CC, but when an experienced mariner does so, as I have done as well, then it's something to listen to.

[Ride-The-Waves]

Appreciate your perspective.  The original post was directed at the professionalism of the master by someone who has little to no experience, except as a cruise passenger.  That is unconscionable and similar to criticizing the pilot of a commercial aircraft for not being able to land his/her aircraft prior to boarding.  Are there people who should not be masters?  Of course.  Same as there are people who should not be pilots, school teachers, policemen, etc.  To suggest that a master is incompetent based on innuendo and hearsay is just wrong.

[chengkp75]

31 minutes ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

The original post was directed at the professionalism of the master by someone who has little to no experience, except as a cruise passenger.

I don't read anything in the OP's post that questions the professionalism of the Master.  As Andy (Heidi13) has said, these same Masters were caught short last season, when the regulations had been in force for a couple of years before, so I feel it is a valid question by a member of the cruising public, which is why I answered it with my professional opinion and knowledge.

[Heidi13]

 

2 hours ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

Appreciate your perspective.  The original post was directed at the professionalism of the master by someone who has little to no experience, except as a cruise passenger.  That is unconscionable and similar to criticizing the pilot of a commercial aircraft for not being able to land his/her aircraft prior to boarding.  Are there people who should not be masters?  Of course.  Same as there are people who should not be pilots, school teachers, policemen, etc.  To suggest that a master is incompetent based on innuendo and hearsay is just wrong.

 

As the Chief mentioned, I have almost 30 year experience in command of pax vessels and am one of the first to question anybody that calls into question the competency of a Master or Officer.

 

With respect to the OP, I took no exception to this very relevant post, as having just a little command experience, it most certainly did NOT question the professionalism and/or competency of the ship's Master. You may have spent 30 years in the US Navy, but I'll suggest you may not have a clear picture of the Master's scope of authority on a commercial vessel and the associated reporting arrangements to the Corporate Office.

 

The Master must operate in accordance with the company's policies and procedures, as outlined in the Safety Management System. While I am not privy to the HAL SMS, I highly doubt there is anything that provides the Master the authority to call in divers for a hull inspection/cleaning. Knowing the vessel is heading to NZ and being aware of the requirements, the Master should have submitted a request for assistance in ensuring compliance. However, these decisions are generally made by Operations and Engineering in the Corporate Office.

 

The ISM Code Section 5.2 provides the Master with overriding authority AND responsibility to make decisions with respect to safety and pollution prevention. Therefore, when dealing with the safety of the vessel, her pax or crew, and preventing pollution, the Master must act in accordance with their professional experience, which can contrave the policies and procedures outlined in the SMS. However, in the situation posted by the OP, this is not relevant, so the Master is limited in his/her scope of authority by the SMS.

[Ride-The-Waves]

Time to stop.  Just an added comment relative to the difference between the authorities of a USN captain and a commercial master...  Please do not denigrate the responsibilities of a USN captain...

[Heidi13]

8 minutes ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

Time to stop.  Just an added comment relative to the difference between the authorities of a USN captain and a commercial master...  Please do not denigrate the responsibilities of a USN captain...

 

I'm not aware of anyone on this thread has even mentioned a USN Captain, never mind having the audacity to denigrate the responsibilities.

[kansas2018]

Thank you Heidi13 and chengkp75 again for your helpful information.

 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Ride-The-Waves said:

Time to stop.  Just an added comment relative to the difference between the authorities of a USN captain and a commercial master...  Please do not denigrate the responsibilities of a USN captain...

Someone seems to be quite sensitive, and reads a lot into posts that aren't there.  Andy in no way denigrated the responsibilities of a USN Captain, he merely pointed out the well known differences in authorities and responsibilities between naval and merchant ship's officers.  Having sailed on both the "Gray Funnel Line" and as a commercial merchant mariner, I know these differences well.  One is not "better" or "lacking in authority", they are merely different, due to the different missions, and legal constraints.

 

As Andy said, a cruise ship's Captain would not be allowed to hire divers to do an inspection or cleaning, without corporate permission.  As he also mentioned, the ISM requires that the Captain have overriding authority in concerns for the environment, but that is for decisions made at the moment that an incident was happening, without waiting for corporate approval.  The only place this could happen in this scenario, would be for the Captain to refuse to enter NZ waters, if he/she knew the ship would be in violation, and the company could not reprimand him/her for that decision.

 

Now, planning on having a ship enter NZ waters, when it has not met the requirements of the NZ biofouling management requirements, is a corporate decision that should be in contravention of the corporate SMS policies, but then again, cruise line executives are not professionals, and don't always "follow the rules" the way a professional mariner would.