Ive been wanting to say this but not in the usual way we argue about unions. Why haven't the unions ever used their weight on this? It is in their best interest to speak up on behalf of and help protect their membership
The unions are nothing more than employment agencies.
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;171514]
Show of hands who would have wanted to be in a top of the line enclosed lifeboat in 140 mph winds and 40-50 ft seas? [/QUOTE]
If you mean as the ship sinks? As opposed to not being in a top of the line enclosed lifeboat in those conditions? Well duh …
[QUOTE=RichM;171524]The unions are nothing more than employment agencies.[/QUOTE]
I happily work both sides of the fence, but that statement is downright retarded.
This a mariner’s forum. I will only speak on that which I know. I know nothing of the UAW, ILA, etc.
Those same mariner’s unions you speak of, even lowly AMO, have done more to keep American jobs in place from the Great Lakes to the TAPs trade to the MS and its tributaries and to coastal tankers, and on and on than any single company or sector of the US maritime industry.
While cabotage laws of our allies the Canadians and the Aussies are on the precipice of being summarily deleted, ours is solidly in place. The unions also have a hand in fighting for MSP slots.
As soon as we lose it, the airlines will be next.
So much for your one trick pony unions.
Chouest has an opening for you:
Edison Chouest Offshore is now accepting applications for:
Loyalty Pledge Enforcer.
Required: TWIC, Merchant Mariner Credential, STCW, Medical Certificate, extensive polygraph test administration and ananalyzing experience, addiction to dip, knee cap-busting stick, and Dixie tattoo.
Must submit to drug screening, physical, and polygraph.
Please fax resume to 985-601-4237
E.O.E. AA M/F/VET/Disability.
E.O.E. Doesn’t apply if you are presently or formerly a participant or active member of any labor union, ever ate/drove/wore anything that was union made, or ever said the word “union.”
I’m talking about this particular situation. Whereas if they went around the storm the subject of lifeboats would be moot. The type of lifeboats onboard shouldn’t be a deciding factor on how close you cut a hurricane.
After the Bounty incident, at least so I am told, questions on hurricane avoidance started appearing on every management level USCG exam. While that does nothing to detect or cure the type of mental illness that caused the Bounty incident, it forces Mariners to think about avoiding hurricanes. Not to say that this is the only change borough about by Bounty.
We can hope that El Faro will bring about more focus on hurricane avoidance, especially in mariner training, SMS, and voyage plannnng. Although lifeboats had very little to do with this loss, it has pointed out the ridculous inadequacy of still allowing open lifeboats to save companies a few pennies.
We can also hope that it will help to appropriate new building funding and regulatory pressure for the retirement of ancient ships.
[QUOTE=PMC;171303]I’m trying to picture people in an open boat rowing in a hurricane[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t try to row, or even waste fuel. Throw out the sea anchor and hold on for dear life.
Bingo!
Observation, information, analysis, and avoidance (aka Voyage Planning) are the keys to keeping ships and boats (and most importantly their crews) safe.
I’m not down-playing the need for gradual but steady improvement of safety and survival equipment (which in the real world always must be subjected to an unbiased cost-benefit analysis) and the forced retirement of gear which is ineffective or obsolete, but the absolute worst-case scenario for any given vessel is simply not survivable. Blindly pouring always-limited resources into a possible fix is a fool’s errand when we haven’t even started on root causes yet.
Are seat belts, airbags and anti-lock brakes better than what we had? You bet. Did their adoption bankrupt the automakers or drive away their customers like they claimed (lied) it would? Nope.
But what would it cost to build a passenger car that could keep it’s occupants alive and more-or-less unscathed in a 100+ mph head-on collision with another car doing that same speed? Is it even possible, let alone economically feasible?
Going down the road of trying to invent survival equipment for the inside of a Cat.3-5 Hurricane is a dead end that distracts from the real threats that lead to the losses of the El Faro, the Marine Electric, Edmund Fitzgerald and the like.
Mario Vittone is right and has been trying his best to point the painfully obvious way out: we need to change the way we think or it really is mostly all for naught.
What’s that old line from Pogo?
We have met the enemy and he is us.
[QUOTE=c.captain;171413]I made a pitch to them for using the AKIRA CHOUEST but that went nowhere at all…[/QUOTE]
Did you hear that the Akira Chouest has been sold?
Never mind.
[QUOTE=WPM;170477]There are still a number of vessels that use open lifeboats. I’ve worked on ships in the past that had them. Are they ideal? No. Can they meet and exceed current SOLAS requirements? Certainly.
The word “grandfathered” is being thrown around a lot lately due to the age of the vessel and the subject matter. In reality there is no such thing with regards to lifesaving systems. Rules are adopted. Notice of compliance is given. Inspections are made to ensure compliance. A valid certificate proves compliance.
It’s easy to look at a forty-five year old ship and shake your head at a the open boats when you know that there is better equipment out there, but in practice ALL lifeboats are extremely dangerous. I have taught lifeboatmen, sea survival, and a number of other classes pertinent to the topic and this may surprise new readers: Lifeboats have probably killed as many people as they have saved.
Side-launched lifeboats have many, many problems and most can’t be “engineered” away. Free-fall lifeboats have an entirely different set of risks but their operation, for the crew member who is adequately trained, is easier.
With reference to the El Faro, there are a lot of things that will be contributed to any difficulties her crew may have had in surviving. The fact that the boat is open, is, in my opinion, superficial and likely noncontributory.[/QUOTE]
Lifeboats have definitely killed more people (through drill accidents, etc.) than they’ve saved recently, but I’m curious how the numbers would stack up if you compared the injuries and fatalities from gravity davits to those from free-fall boats. Gravity davits can be dangerous in a lot of ways, but I can’t really think of how a free-fall boat can be dangerous in a drill, which is 99.99% of the time most of the crew interacts with them. Gravity davit drills require working close to the side, standing in the vicinity of a large weight that’s difficult to control when lowering, and so on. Free-fall boats? All I can imagine is injuries during the periodic drop-tests if the crew member isn’t properly secured or if something bounces around the inside of the boat.
[QUOTE=Tankerengr;171200]My last ship with open boats was 5 years ago. She had one traditional open boat (not a Fast Rescue Boat) and one enclosed boat. No issues with either boat or davit.[/QUOTE]
It wasn’t that wretched shitheap Noble Star, was it? Only ship I ever got fired from, and boy was it worth it. (To clear up any misunderstanding, I refused to give my passport to a captain I didn’t trust, and he threw a fit like a little boy who couldn’t have a lollipop. Made a fool of himself in front of the Chief and 1AE, too. It was delicious, and I got to take a domestic flight in Yemen!)
In my ABS days, endorsing or renewing a SOLAS Safety Equipment Certificate meant lowering lifeboats and going through the goodies inside. . . . I would review the log and see that they had a drill the week before and lowered one boat. I would still require lowering boats if it did not interfere with cargo. I would always enjoy watching the crew beat the crap out of the sheaves because the boat would not lower. . . “lowered last week?” I would ask. . . . Or my favorite, inspect the port lifeboat before lunch and the starboard after. Yeah, no. I don’t think so. . . . because at lunch, the chief mate would be noticeably absent. . . .
Happened to go by the Matson Lurline currently laid up on the East Waterway in Seattle. I’m sure everybody will be [I]shocked[/I] by my report that she too has open lifeboats.
[QUOTE=cmakin;172002]In my ABS days, endorsing or renewing a SOLAS Safety Equipment Certificate meant lowering lifeboats and going through the goodies inside. . . . I would review the log and see that they had a drill the week before and lowered one boat. I would still require lowering boats if it did not interfere with cargo. I would always enjoy watching the crew beat the crap out of the sheaves because the boat would not lower. . . “lowered last week?” I would ask. . . . Or my favorite, inspect the port lifeboat before lunch and the starboard after. Yeah, no. I don’t think so. . . . because at lunch, the chief mate would be noticeably absent. . . .[/QUOTE]
Oh, and for the record. I notice that I didn’t make it clear that these vessels were NOT US flag. Largely because of the MARINE ELECTRIC, ABS did not take over the function of the Coast Guard with regard to SOLAS at the time I was working for them.
[/QUOTE] A side launch free fall lifeboat probably would not have done them any good either.[/QUOTE]
Why? Can you elaborate. I fail to understand how getting inside a fully enclosed self-righting lifeboat, spending few seconds on a hydraulic lever to release it and wait for help in a dry waterproof capsule with all the comm. equipment needed to call for that help would not have helped them?
Ships with open life boats I’ve been on.
MV Houston
MV seabulk trader
SS horizon trader
SS horizon challenger
SS horizon producer
SS horizon Navigator
SS El yunque
All US flag. All, except for horizon ships, are still sailing. All deep sea.
[QUOTE=electro;172189]Ships with open life boats I’ve been on.
MV Houston
MV seabulk trader
SS horizon trader
SS horizon challenger
SS horizon producer
SS horizon Navigator
SS El yunque
All US flag. All, except for horizon ships, are still sailing. All deep sea.[/QUOTE]
Not quite correct, the Navigator has been given a temporary reprieve and is running West Coast to Hawaii. I also heard Matson was doing something with the Producer. Yes they all have open lifeboats.
[QUOTE=Chief Seadog;172199]Not quite correct, the Navigator has been given a temporary reprieve and is running West Coast to Hawaii. I also heard Matson was doing something with the Producer. Yes they all have open lifeboats.[/QUOTE]
I didn’t know that. I thought all of them got laid up. Last I heard of the Producer is that she was laid up in China, needed major boiler repair
[QUOTE=LI_Domer;170354]Honestly, I thought only the academy training ships had them. I didn’t know there were any left in actual commercial service.[/QUOTE]
I recently finished sailing on a passenger cruise vessel in Western Europe and the Caribbean. Vessel was kitted out with 12 open lifeboats, all for use by passengers (mostly aged over 70).
The sister ship of the vessel I was on is also kitted out in the same compliment of lifeboat and another two vessel in the fleet which I had worked on a number of years ago were/are fully open lifeboats.
one or two of these ships were operating in Iceland, Baltic and crossings of the Atlantic. How can it be permitted that these levels of lifeboats be allowed to be used on commercial and passenger ships?
