It was not just Chouest, many others did the same. They had to be legal then or build later and incur more cost both from a construction and manning standpoint It was legal. Safe or ethical? They are in business to make money, end of story.
1 Like
My last comment was not really about Chouest. I totally get why they made that move.
What I don’t get is why tonnage doors and all of the ABS swiss cheese loopholes remain legal. No other countries can build ships like this.
The shipbuilders buy the government and write the rules, easy.
As far as I can tell the Master and Mate of Towing are Officers Competency Convention compliant. The 300 ton limit is when a tug becomes Subchapter I so it’s still a big threshold.
1 Like
Different nations have had different gross/net tonnage admeasurement schemes. Remember, Gross/net tonnage is a method of measuring space and not weight, and space that can carry cargo; supposedly. The ITC came about as a way to set an international standard for tonnage admeasurement. Wiki has a quick guide to tonnage, here. Tonnage - Wikipedia Background on the ITC can be found here: What is International Tonnage Convention? | MarineGyaan
I was once told that the largest house in any port was where the tonnage admeasurement surveyor lived. . . .
4 Likes
All the loopholes in the national tonnage scheme that you mention are directly from the USCG. ABS doesn’t create tonnage rules. They only enforce what the USCG allows.
You go by the rules provided at the time.
Just remember, don’t try and seal the seams with silicone or place any gaskets on tonnage opening joints. I always loved seeing a watertight door in the middle of a tonnage door. The purpose is to make the space “non-weathertight”; the idea being to prevent the carriage of cargo. That is why you see a watertight door on the access to the tunnel in the forward house of supply boats. THAT is the door that prevents downflooding. I can say, that in my ABS surveyor days, I never really “enforced” tonnage regulations; although I did see a lot of silicone around tonnage doors and such.
4 Likes
Cmakin, You know your shit sir, especially in this particular business.
I hadn’t kept up with the regs since I retired. The old rule of thumb for tugs was anything over 300gt was inspected and required a licensed engineer. Tugs over 200gt required a licensed engineer past the demarcation line.
I’m not sure how the manning came into being on those Moran ATBs. I heard they require a Chief and 2 asst engineers.
1 Like
I can’t speak for the moran units, but even the smaller <500 GT/80k bbl units that centerline and vane have require a chief and licensed assistant now. Transit greater than 600 miles, two licensed assistants. Makes for a crowded boat in most cases.
1 Like