[QUOTE=commtuna;181301]Great, more GOM “experience” coming to Alaskan waters.
If ECO was smart they would hire all those Crowley guys that are already familiar with PWS and have been doing it the last 20 years…[/QUOTE]
of course there was that Crowley master who piled the PATHFINDER up on a reef in 2009
he’d be perfect for ECO…put him on 12 and 12 with tow captain Bobby Boy from the AIVIQ
[QUOTE=z-drive;181299]Bars. Unless you have rats aboard… Unfortunately nobody is immune from rats these days.[/QUOTE]
Bars. One of the reasons I used to go ashore. . . I am guessing the other reason isn’t a very plentiful item. Oddly enough, these days I wouldn’t mind it too much, then. My interest in drinking has really shrunk in the past few years. . . The person I was 30 years ago wouldn’t hang out with the person I am now. . . way to boring. . .
yes and ECO will be sending their GOM rejects without towing licenses or experience who are laid off, most likely!
The whole Valdez operation is pretty rigid and sterile as compared to shipping even in other parts of the US. And I think there would quickly be issues with anyone being too leisurely on shore. As it stands now I think the only place those tugs dock is inside a Servs gated facility and they are not allowed to leave other than for crew change or groceries. If you do get off and it isn’t too cold for a hike or something like that then you need to have a plan to deal with the bears you could encounter.
Sounds just like Fourchon, except instead of bears it’s the local women.
[QUOTE=z-drive;181329]yes and ECO will be sending their GOM rejects without towing licenses or experience who are laid off, most likely![/QUOTE]
I agree that could happen. I think that the company itself is a big factor in this. A crew can get away with lower standards than the company if the crew has a good line of BS. However the crew maintaining higher standard than the company would not be sustainable.
The fact that ECO attempted a winter tow across the Gulf of Alaska with a boat with known issues with sea water entry into the fuel system in rough seas and evidently now believes that it wasn’t their fault, I would say clearly demonstates that they have absolutely no business in Alaska.
Where’s tugsailor?
there’s wimmen in da foosh???
[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;181336]I agree that could happen. I think that the company itself is a big factor in this. A crew can get away with lower standards than the company if the crew has a good line of BS. However the crew maintaining higher standard than the company would not be sustainable.
The fact that ECO attempted a winter tow across the Gulf of Alaska with a boat with known issues with sea water entry into the fuel system in rough seas and evidently now believes that it wasn’t their fault, I would say clearly demonstates that they have absolutely no business in Alaska.
Where’s tugsailor?[/QUOTE]
Working in the tug/barge world and knowing about Aleyeska some from people who have worked up there both directly and indirectly, I’m curious if ECO will be able to pull the BS curtains over them when push comes to shove. Its not easy to do just moving product. They like to know who’s working on the boats moving their product and if they are qualified. notr neccesarily reviewing resumes and checking references, but specifying experience levels in the contracts and interviews during audits. Obviously they have the contract, but i can’t imagine they have discussed and approved their strategy to crew the boats. I can see the pilots having concerns as well.
[QUOTE=z-drive;181340]Working in the tug/barge world and knowing about Aleyeska some from people who have worked up there both directly and indirectly, I’m curious if ECO will be able to pull the BS curtains over them when push comes to shove. Its not easy to do just moving product. They like to know who’s working on the boats moving their product and if they are qualified. notr neccesarily reviewing resumes and checking references, but specifying experience levels in the contracts and interviews during audits. Obviously they have the contract, but i can’t imagine they have discussed and approved their strategy to crew the boats. I can see the pilots having concerns as well.[/QUOTE]
The Aiviq/Kulluk incident was an unscheduled audit. I don’t know if people really appreciate what the Alert and the other boats did but it takes a lot to respond to an unexpected phone call and be able to pull off what they did. Crowley would have had to be maintaining high standards all along including highly qualified crew.
[QUOTE=z-drive;181340]Working in the tug/barge world and knowing about Aleyeska some from people who have worked up there both directly and indirectly, I’m curious if ECO will be able to pull the BS curtains over them when push comes to shove. Its not easy to do just moving product. They like to know who’s working on the boats moving their product and if they are qualified. notr neccesarily reviewing resumes and checking references, but specifying experience levels in the contracts and interviews during audits. Obviously they have the contract, but i can’t imagine they have discussed and approved their strategy to crew the boats. I can see the pilots having concerns as well.[/QUOTE]
Knowing Alyeska and their standards makes me wonder why they would accept Chouest at all after the Aiviq debacle.
seeing that in theory they bailed ECO out. If the alert didn’t get a line on that thing for a while it would have gone down in history as a bigger fuck up for ECO. IIRC they slipped the wire, rather than parted it, it was all about the laws of physics at that point. Surprised they would compete after that.
[QUOTE=z-drive;181365]IIRC they slipped the wire, rather than parted it, it was all about the laws of physics at that point. Surprised they would compete after that.[/QUOTE]
If the Alert was the one I’m thinking of (the last one before it grounded) they intentionally dumped the wire, under orders from the USCG.
Well all the stick pointing aside I guess we will see how it goes in 2018. I think ECO will be just fine it’s not like they don’t operate ship assist tugs all over the place. The work in Valdez is a little different than normal ship work but not rocket science for an expirenced tug captain…
[QUOTE=rshrew;181428] … but not rocket science for an expirenced tug captain…[/QUOTE]
Neither was operating the Aiviq or towing the Kulluk.
Both were far enough out of the coonass orbit that they burned up on reentry.
[QUOTE=Steamer;181432]Neither was operating the Aiviq or towing the Kulluk.
Both were far enough out of the coonass orbit that they burned up on reentry.[/QUOTE]
The operative word in his statement was “EXPERIENCED” tug captain.
I think their naval and LNG work is far more sterile though. Good weather, only daylight, etc. I’ve seen just how inexperienced some of those guys are both first hand and second hand. Yes there’s far less to mess up doing assist work than toeing a rig but their biggest hurdle will be crewing the boats properly, like you said it will be ok with experienced crews, vs what the boss in Louisiana thinks.
In their conquests to crew their LNG tugs they didn’t care if you had experience, just the license and ability to run the tug, sort of.
We’ll never worked around them or know much about the tug side of them. I would imagine they will offer jobs to some of the Crowley folk? Or maybe not as they didn’t seem to have a comparable tow master on the Aiviq. Should be interesting to see what transpires in the future.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;181434]The operative word in his statement was “EXPERIENCED” tug captain.[/QUOTE]
The point is ECO evidently didn’t see any need for an experienced tug captain.
[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;181451]The point is ECO evidently didn’t see any need for an experienced tug captain.[/QUOTE]
That was the point of my statement too.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;181434]The operative word in his statement was “EXPERIENCED” tug captain.[/QUOTE]
What is the background of this particular Captain or what is the assumed background?
