[QUOTE=AHTS Master;156516]Thanks for the complement but I think that would describe c.captain better.[/QUOTE]
oh that is witty! bravo for such a stinging retort
Maybe we should all sit around and
"Eat a vegemite sandwich let the woman blow and watch them chunder"
[QUOTE=c.captain;156227]Not at allā¦a company if a company is going to borrow from the workers to build something, they need to pay labor back with interest.
Plus these vessels are butt fugly in typical ECO style[/QUOTE]
C.Captains version of a fine vesselā¦ I hope it has a good vsat for you to get your nonstop blog on, skip.[ATTACH]4185[/ATTACH]
Ahem, not exactly.
The regs at 46 CFR Part 15.705(d) are pretty clear that the vast majority of un-inspected towing vessels can run with a 2-watch system no matter how long or far the voyage is.
It all comes down to how the CG āinterpretsā the law (U.S. Code) written by Congress. They donāt seem to interpret this in a way that would lead a reasonable person to believe that watch-stander fatigue, deck or engine, will ever get more than lip service.
Itās not the way it ought to be, but itās the way it is.
Iām going to go out on a limb on this one and say that the Aiviq is not an uninspected towing vesselā¦ Donāt exactly see how that applies to Aiviq.
Nor is it unlimited to my knowledge.
[QUOTE=jbtam99;156570]Nor is it unlimited to my knowledge.[/QUOTE]
FYI:
Vessel Name: AIVIQ
USCG Doc. No.: 1237683
Vessel Service: OFFSHORE SUPPLY VESSEL
IMO Number: 9579016
Trade Indicator: Coastwise Unrestricted, Registry
Call Sign: WDG2524
Hull Material: STEEL
Hull Number: 247
Ship Builder: NORTH AMERICAN SHIPBUILDING LLC
Year Built: 2012
Length (ft.): 324.5
Hailing Port: GALLIANO LA
Hull Depth (ft.): 34
Owner: OFFSHORE SERVICE VESSELS LLC
16201 EAST MAIN STREET
CUT OFF, LA 70345
Hull Breadth (ft.): 80
Gross Tonnage: 12892
Net Tonnage: 3867
Documentation Issuance Date: April 03, 2014
Documentation Expiration Date: April 30, 2015
Previous Vessel Names: No Vessel Name Changes
Previous Vessel Owners:
No Vessel Owner Changes
[QUOTE=water;156571]Vessel Name: AIVIQ
Vessel Service: OFFSHORE SUPPLY VESSEL
Gross Tonnage: [B][U]12892[/U][/B][/quote]
So I believe this issue is now concluded in my favorā¦even an OSV over 10000grt is an unlimited tonnage subchapter I cargo and miscellaneous vessel requiring a three watch rotation on the bridge. Watchkeeping in the engineroom would be dependent on the automation notation but the vessel would still be required to have at least one chief, one first assistant and one second assistant licensed and quite possibly a third assistant.
SO END OF STORY!
[QUOTE=jbtam99;156570]Nor is it unlimited to my knowledge.[/QUOTE]
As per the aboveā¦YOU ARE WRONG!
[QUOTE=captjacksparrow;156559]The regs at 46 CFR Part 15.705(d) are pretty clear that the vast majority of un-inspected towing vessels can run with a 2-watch system no matter how long or far the voyage is.
It all comes down to how the CG āinterpretsā the law (U.S. Code) written by Congress. They donāt seem to interpret this in a way that would lead a reasonable person to believe that watch-stander fatigue, deck or engine, will ever get more than lip service.[/QUOTE]
rshrew, you are more up on towing regs than I but has the USCG tossed out the 600mi voyage rule for watch manning on uninspected towing vessels?
.
This thread reminds me of a joke my sister in law brought back from the local hospital about the latest cuts/programs and work rule changes.
Our company is engaging in a new program to trim employees from our ranks. It is called the RAPE program (Retire Aged Personnel Early). It will eliminate senior higher paid employees and improve our bottom line. Older employees who are RAPED may apply for a waiver to continue working called the SCREW program (Study for Continued Retraining and Employment of Workers). This is not to be confused with the SHAFT program (Survey for Highly Advanced Forward Thinking) or the SHIT program (Super High Intensity Training). Employees may be RAPED once, SCREWED twice, and get the SHAFT as many times as we deem necessary. After all, we give our employees more SHIT than any other company out there.
Itās a grey area but I do believe you are correct, we use those guidelines with our uninspected tugs.
The AIVIQ is an inspected vessel of over 12,000 gt. It requires three watches.
The CFRs require three watches on a voyage over 600 miles, but that is over ruled by a US statute that allows two watches on an uninspected towing vessel under 300 tons.
Uninspected towing vessels under 200 gross tons can run with a 2 watch system on voyages of 600 miles and over. I was recently transferred to a tug that is 198.9 gross tons, we run a two watch system. After sailing for the last 12 yrs on a 3 watch tug, retirement is looking pretty good.
I think traveling through international waters is the grey area?
But foreign PSC will recognize a 2-watch system?
[QUOTE=tugdriver;156591]Uninspected towing vessels under 200 gross tons can run with a 2 watch system on voyages of 600 miles and over. I was recently transferred to a tug that is 198.9 gross tons, we run a two watch system. After sailing for the last 12 yrs on a 3 watch tug, retirement is looking pretty good.[/QUOTE]
isnāt that nice how the USCG rolls over for Joe Boss yet again forcing more work on the mariners so the owners can make more profits!
what a miserable fucking industry this isā¦
[QUOTE=rshrew;156594]I think traveling through international waters is the grey area?[/QUOTE]
Grey area or not I think it would behoove Shell to demand there be no stone unturned to keep from fouling up this time. I would like to think they demand much more than any flag stateās minimum manning and the best qualified people on board working with plenty of rest. To do less is putting the entire enterprise and possibly shutting down the area for good. I cannot conceive of going up there without people experienced in working in that environment and with equipment not vetted by people that have worked there. Alaska is not the wild west of the Gulf of Mexico where anything goes. The world is watching.
[QUOTE=rshrew;156594]I think traveling through international waters is the grey area?[/QUOTE]
It might be grey to those educated in the gom but its pretty clear to the other 170 maritime nations
How many companies have a substantial number of laid up vessels? Have dayrates fallen much, or are the companies keeping rates and risking risking contracts? Even if the oil prices hadnāt fallen, the amount of new equipment would have washed out the older, smaller, less equipped vessels. Seems like 1991, no where near 1983-1987, which was far worse than the last recession of wash of 2008 or even Deep Water. Are the companies firing or doing diligence layoffs? HOS in the past seemed more diligent at termination than layoffs. Donāt believe ECO ever has laid off personnel.
Its pretty clear if your lucky you get a pay cut, if unlucky you get the push
I know which I prefer knowing in the current market my boss is hurting
Rshrew you are correct if I were to be on a foreign voyage , a 3 watch system would be in place. The thing that really gets my goat is the tug Iām on now is in essence the same as I was transferred from. The same HP, same hull with different tank arrangement. Now what I really get upset about is the fact that we have to carry an extra deckhand on 600 mile or greater voyages. The two things in this case that get all the extra work in this case is the two men in the wheelhouse and the TV remote.