When is it ok for a cruise captain to abandon ship?

[Elaine5715]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

So, not a myth but poorly understood and executed. 

It is a myth since people believe it is a law.

[sparks1093]

2 minutes ago, Elaine5715 said:

It is a myth since people believe it is a law.

Possibly but you didn't allude to that in your post but I can now see where you're coming from. 

[Heidi13]

11 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Thank you. I would assume taking command away from the master would first be considered a mutiny, but at some point when it became obvious that the necessary procedures were not being done to ensure the safety of the passengers, the crew, and the ship, it would be seen as something that had to be done.

 

With the detailed procedures in the Safety Management System, it is certainly easier to determine that the Master is in non-compliance. Although many decisions are still highly subjective, when 3 compartments are compromised on a 2-compartment vessel, the vessel must be beached or it will sink.

 

Therefore, the Master must take the required actions to ensure pax and crew safety. First and foremost this would be calling all pax to the Assembly Stations, where preparations can commence for abandoning the vessel.

 

The Staff Captain should review the SMS requirements with the Master, and suggest the correct actions. If the Master is unable/unwilling to act, then the Staff Captain should act.

 

Yes, it is a tough situation, especially with Costa, who allegedly had not bought into the Bridge Resource Management procedures used by other Carnival Brands. Back in my days as a Chief Officer, I had 2 issues where the Master was unsure of the waters departing a shipyard. Both Masters accepted my more recent experience and willingly accepted my suggestions.

[Heidi13]

8 hours ago, MBP&O2/O said:

I wish we had that process when I was OOW.  I did it once, as 2/O and it was not appreciated! It sort of puts you off being a responsible officer. In the latter stages however, as Masters became younger and more forward looking things started to change, especially with regard to lifeboat drills.

 

The culture shift into Bridge Resource Management was a process that really interested me, so I bought into it fairly early. Overall, as a Master it made my job easier, as the officers were more alert and motivated.

 

Having been brought up in the P&O system on their cruise ships, in my experience, nobody questioned the Captain. On SS Oriana, I recall one day walking along a pax alleyway and noted the Captain coming the opposite direction. He didn't miss a step, barreled down the middle of the alleyway and never even acknowledged the lowly Cadet, who had to dive into an alcove. On the Bridge, Junior Officers and Cadets were to be seen but not heard.

 

The marine industry Bridge Resource Management (BRM) was taken from the airline industry CRM, which was developed after the Pan-Am/KLM runway disaster in Tenerife. My first knowledge of the marine BRM was from Princess/P&O/Cunard in early 2000's. I still knew a number of the Masters and then our son joined Princess in 2002, as a Deck Cadet. I was provided a copy of their latest Bridge Team Command and Control (BTCC) draft.

 

When I assumed the management of one of the company's largest vessels, I discussed the BTCC with my 3 Masters, and they were all happy to give it a try. I slowly introduced the BTCC program and it worked well. It included closed-loop communications, eliminated the potential for single person errors, encouraged the Master to oversee navigation and dockings and created an environment, where even the ratings could respectfully question the officers or Master.

 

The company then bought into the process and hired a British company, who also worked for P&O/Princess. We received Human Factors and Risk Management training, which confirmed and expanded the knowledge I had received from extensive research.

 

I was then tasked by the VP Ops to develop new Level 2 ISM Deck Operations procedures incorporating the latest BRM standards. I completed this project just before I retired, but note it is still in use, 12 years later.

 

From my first command in 1985 to when I retired in 2012, the culture change was enormous. In 1985 I personally docked the ship 16 times per day. In 2012, when I relieved as Master for a shift, I never did a docking or departure. All ship handling was completed by the Deck Officers, some who needed no mentoring and others that needed considerable mentoring.

 

 

[Heidi13]

On 5/3/2024 at 4:11 AM, K32682 said:

As long I get off the boat safely I could not care less when or if the captain does. 

 

The Costa Concordia incident sadly proves the negative issues with your expectations.

 

Had the incident been effectively managed the vessel would have been safely beached or all pax and crew safely evacuated by survival craft. Due to the incompetence of the person masquerading as the vessel's Master, who departed the vessel early, a number of people sadly lost their lives.

 

If you were aboard that vessel, you may have been one of the lucky pax that got into a survival craft or entered the water. However, you could just as easily have been one of the ones that perished. If the vessel had a competent Master, there should not have been any requirement for any crew or pax to enter the water. They should all have been safely evacuated by survival craft.

 

Personally, when I am aboard a vessel, I prefer a competent Master that will effectively manage any emergency situation. In the unlikely event of an "Abandon Ship" order being required, the pax have a significantly higher chance of being safely evacuated when the Master oversees the operation from the Bridge and is one of the last, if not the last person off the ship.

 

Don't forget, a ship is a hierarchical command structure and when you remove the "Leader" the subordinates may flounder. This is more common in a well drilled emergency situation, where crew perform as they trained in drills. Therefore, every pax should prefer the Master to be aboard until every pax is evacuated.

[Heidi13]

13 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Andy, help me out here.  I can't remember enough about the DPA communication tree as to whether or not it is the Master's responsibility or the DPA's to notify local national maritime authorities of an incident (short of a Mayday, as you say).  I seem to think that it falls to the DPA to notify coast guard, as the Master is busy dealing with the emergency.

 

It may vary by company, especially now with many cruise lines and large ferry operations having  a 24/7 operations centre.

 

Back in my day (pre-Ops Centre) once I Tx a "Mayday" the Coast Radio Station/Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) contacted the vessel directly requesting details of the situation and any assistance required. As Master, I would also call the DPA, who would activate the shore response and liaise with the Coast Guard. 

 

All ship/shore radio communications were with RCC, not the Coast Guard.

 

Once resolved, if it was a reportable incident, as per the Shipping Casualty Reporting Regulations, I had 24 hrs to make a verbal report to a Coast Radio Station and then complete a written report on the prescribed form.

[ontheweb]

11 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

It is a myth since people believe it is a law.

I think many people think it is a custom, not necessarily a law.

[MBP&O2/O]

7 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

Back in my day (pre-Ops Centre) once I Tx a "Mayday" the Coast Radio Station/Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) contacted the vessel directly requesting details of the situation and any assistance required. As Master, I would also call the DPA, who would activate the shore response and liaise with the Coast Guard. 

 

All ship/shore radio communications were with RCC, not the Coast Guard.

Our distress call was picked up by the USCG at Guam and the Japaneses Maritime Safety Command.

Who took overall command I do not know ... we were somewhat incommunicado 😏 but we were 'overflown' by aircraft from both agencies as they monitored our situation. That aspect seems not to have been mentioned in the internal enquiry ... which was as far as any enquiry went, and another of that was not for public consumption😉

 

Our initial  'rescue ship' ... a WW2 T2 tanker named Fort Fetterman updated the authorities accordingly.

[ecs66]

On 4/29/2024 at 9:38 PM, navybankerteacher said:

The sad fact, however, is that in the twenty first century the traditions of our heroic past have been mothballed.

And not just when it comes to sailing.  I'll say no more.

[navybankerteacher]

11 minutes ago, ecs66 said:

And not just when it comes to sailing.  I'll say no more.

So, I am not the only one who has noticed.

[sparks1093]

8 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

So, I am not the only one who has noticed.

By no means.

[K32682]

It's very easy to bemoan the loss of a "tradition" when it's somebody else who does the dying. It's idiotic to expect the captain to commit suicide simply because his ship sinks. 

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, K32682 said:

It's very easy to bemoan the loss of a "tradition" when it's somebody else who does the dying. It's idiotic to expect the captain to commit suicide simply because his ship sinks. 

Staying on the job (which he has been paid to do) as long as possible is hardly committing suicide.

[wcook]

39 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Staying on the job (which he has been paid to do) as long as possible is hardly committing suicide.

Depends on if the “tradition” is captain goes down with the ship, or captain is last to leave the ship. 

[navybankerteacher]

50 minutes ago, wcook said:

Depends on if the “tradition” is captain goes down with the ship, or captain is last to leave the ship. 

The “tradition” is pretty much the same: he stays on board as long as possible to secure the safe exodus of his passengers.  He then is the last, or among the last,  to leave alive - or he over-stays and does not get off safely.

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, K32682 said:

It's very easy to bemoan the loss of a "tradition" when it's somebody else who does the dying. It's idiotic to expect the captain to commit suicide simply because his ship sinks. 

It's never been even a tradition that the Captain must die with the ship.  In the days of sailing ships, the Master was very often a part owner, and so could be sued by the cargo owners for the value of the lost cargo.  Even when not an owner, the Master was personally responsible to the owners for the value of the ship and cargo.  So, when a ship went down, some decided that rather than face debtor's prison, it was better to just die with the ship.  Conscious decision, not a tradition.

 

It was more treated as "the Captain must ensure that all passengers and crew are safely away from the ship, but in doing so, he risks not being able to get away himself".