Flying analogy

Scuttlebutt
1

Here is my analogy to limited vs deep-sea mariners.

Pilot Able is experienced Alaskan Bush pilot, a former stunt pilot and sometimes crop-dusting pilot.

Pilot Baker is a ex-air force transport pilot then to regional airlines and then a 20 year commercial four engine jet passenger airline veteran.

What might pilot Baker think about pilot Able argument that modern commercial airlines are flown by computer and controlled from the ground and it is much easier to the large commercial planes then a small plane and Pilot Baker could not possibly understand the challengers of flying a bush plane?

It seems that there is some perception that large ocean going ships are towed in and out of port and the crews only navigate in open ocean from pilot station to pilot station.

I think it is easier to observe and understand how difficult flopping alongside a barge in bad weather is compared to understanding tasks which just lower risk. Shiphandling results can be seen and have a strong feed back loop. Voyage planning, job risk analysis and similar tasks do not yield observable results and have weak feedback loops.

If pilot Able goes on too long about his superior ability to do outside loops or Immelmann turns and so forth, pilot Baker may start to have doubts about his ability to understand the skills required to safely fly a large commercial jet.

2

As a student pilot and limited master, i catch your drift, but maybe the ability to avoid risk is easier in larger craft (water or air) than it is in limited class planes or vessels especially if we’re talking bush type flying or navigating. Bigger craft have more options to mitigate risk, better equipment, using more tugs or different runways to make landings. Smaller craft tend to be on there own and left to calculate the variables by feel, knowledge and ability to operate their craft without the help of a computer or tug. Stick and rudder skills. I sure as hell can’t do any voyage planning, manage a roro ship or fly a 737 but i’ll be able to operate my 100 foot vessel in any conditions you throw at me, safely while avoiding unnecessary risk.

3

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;99324]Here is my analogy to limited vs deep-sea mariners.

Pilot Able is experienced Alaskan Bush pilot, a former stunt pilot and sometimes crop-dusting pilot.

Pilot Baker is a ex-air force transport pilot then to regional airlines and then a 20 year commercial four engine jet passenger airline veteran.

What might pilot Baker think about pilot Able argument that modern commercial airlines are flown by computer and controlled from the ground and it is much easier to the large commercial planes then a small plane and Pilot Baker could not possibly understand the challengers of flying a bush plane?

It seems that there is some perception that large ocean going ships are towed in and out of port and the crews only navigate in open ocean from pilot station to pilot station.

I think it is easier to observe and understand how difficult flopping alongside a barge in bad weather is compared to understanding tasks which just lower risk. Shiphandling results can be seen and have a strong feed back loop. Voyage planning, job risk analysis and similar tasks do not yield observable results and have weak feedback loops.

If pilot Able goes on too long about his superior ability to do outside loops or Immelmann turns and so forth, pilot Baker may start to have doubts about his ability to understand the skills required to safely fly a large commercial jet.[/QUOTE]

You make an excellent point. Neither pilot in your example is ready to step up and do the other pilot’s job properly.

However, both pilots have “seatime,” command experience, and very well developed “seamanship” skills. Both pilots are in a position to learn the other pilot’s job within a reasonable compressed period of time. Neither pilot would benefit much from additional “seatime” sweeping, mopping, chipping, and painting on the other pilot’s craft. But either pilot would benefit greatly from a reasonable amount of “seatime” as a co-pilot while learning on a different craft alongside the other pilot.

Should command seatime as master on a 199 ton tug be totally worthless toward an upgrade toward an unlimited license?

Should command seatime as be master on a 1599 ton vessel be only worth an “unlimited” 3rd mate with a 2000 ton restriction?

How exactly is an experienced limited master supposed to be upgrading his skills and ability while wasting his time sweeping, mopping, chipping, and painting for several years as an OS or AB on a 1601 ton vessel?

How could 40 year old experienced limited master possibly present anymore of a hazard to a large ship while starting out as a new third mate, than a 22 year old 3rd mate that graduated from an academy last week?

4

[QUOTE=C.R_F;99330] but maybe the ability to avoid risk is easier in larger craft (water or air) than it is in limited class planes or vessels especially if we’re talking bush type flying or navigating. Bigger craft have more options to mitigate risk, better equipment, using more tugs …[/QUOTE]

I think that is a common perception and in many, maybe even in most cases it’s true. The problem sometimes with larger vessels is it faces the simple “stick and rudder” errors but it also faces the more complex “normal accidents” type errors.

As resources to trap errors such as crew skills are reduced, and things that force errors, such as higher tempo schedules, increase the ship is more vulnerable. For example the DWH accident, presumably all the resources of BP are available to prevent accidents but in practice the million dollar a day price tag drives things and a unexpected set of circumstances combine to create an accident.

Not all areas are like the U.S. Some places we face inept pilots, poorly handled tugs, lack of accurate weather forecasts, inadequate port facilities, high tempo cargo operations, schedule changes etc etc etc.

Think flying Russian cargo planes in Somalia vs U.S. commercial passenger operations

5

I have a lot of respect for all you deep sea guys or anyone working overseas for that matter. I like my US near coastal bubble just enough not to leave it!

I do like the your aviation analogy in more ways than one. I know that flying has definitely made me a better captain by helping me become more situationally aware overall.

Just one question. As an unlimited master sailing deep sea, do you feel like you lose those stick and rudder skills and do you miss operating a vessel rather than managing it?

6

[QUOTE=C.R_F;99398]Just one question. As an unlimited master sailing deep sea, do you feel like you lose those stick and rudder skills and do you miss operating a vessel rather than managing it?[/QUOTE]

That’s a good question. Ship pilots can maintain proficiency by handling ships more or less constantly. Sailing master on the other hand is a different story. In a 90 day voyage I might, at minimum, only handle the ship a few times slowing down and creating a lee to pick up a pilot and get very little handling time. It’s possible to get a little rusty.

On the other hand on some trips I might have to handle the ship extensively, several times, several days in a row and become more proficient. It’s a lot more enjoyable handling the ship at this point then when rusty.

I watch the pilots closely, Sometimes the pilots drop a hint or two and if there is an apprentice on board I eves drop. I also carry a copy of Shiphandlng for the Mariner with me at sea. It has a good methodical way to teach yourself shiphandling. It would be nice to be able to maintain a high level proficient but it’s not possible. Trick is to maximize what ever opportunity you get and not fall below a minimum level of proficiency