I was not aware of that. I remember after the duck boat got run over in philly last summer that the USCG couldn’t verify whether the duck boat made a security call because they don’t record 13, only 16. I figured that was a nation wide policy.
I just love reading about your fuck ups and blaming everyone else and there mother for them. Grow up baby bitch.
[QUOTE=Capt. Schmitt;56198]I was not aware of that. I remember after the duck boat got run over in philly last summer that the USCG can’t verify whether the duck body made a security call because they don’t record 13, only 16. I figured that was a nation wide policy.[/QUOTE]
Not true in Philly either. The Maritime exchange records 13. almost everywhere there is SOMEONE who records 13. You just have to find it. Not easy to find, but almost every where is one organization with big brother capabilities.
I was surprised when I read that there were no recordings. I figured 13 would be a high priority to record since vessels make passing arrangements on it.
[B]Yes, Cappy is right, it depends on the port.[/B]
[QUOTE=Capt. Schmitt;56202]I was surprised when I read that there were no recordings. I figured 13 would be a high priority to record since vessels make passing arrangements on it.[/QUOTE]
Then they didnt look hard enough. the airport records 13 too. They talk to ships approaching with air drafts over 125’ I can’t believe ANY airport doesn’t record EVERYTHING. The Philly airport is only about 3 miles from the crash site. Maritime exchange is well within the port for calls too.
Upon second thought, I believe the issue may be the ‘legal’ basis of the recording. I would bet that the NTSB would only want a verifiable “official” recording to use as evidence. Sort of BS, but they probably don’t want ‘evidence’ that could have been tampered or ‘adjusted’ introduced as absolute fact.
Well, it was also the uscg saying they didn’t have recordings and it was one of the earlier news articles about it. I don’t know what surfaced for use in the investigation.
[QUOTE=cappy208;56193]
Although this is a crude example: A ship overtaking (inland) calls a tow. the tow does NOT agree to being overtaken. The ship overtakes anyway. The tow is in NO way required to oblige, move over, or assist the overtaking vessel. When ‘extremis’ occurs, it is another ball of wax. But until / if extremis occurs when in Inland, there needs to be nothing done by a stand on vessel when being overtaken. (unless the stand on vessel agrees to make accommodation in the first place) [/QUOTE]
This doesn’t seem right to me. From Rule 17 “As soon as it becomes apparent that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate action, the stand-on vessel is free to act to avoid a collision. Rule 17(a)(ii) says that the stand-on vessel [I]may[/I] maneuver at this stage”.
There are not two versions of this rule, one for with permission in which I can maneuver when I see the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate action and one without where I can wait till an in extremis . The same rule applies in both cases.
If a pedestrian steps out in front of my moving car I don’t first check to see if they have a walk sign and a legal crosswalk before deciding what action I am going to take to avoid hitting them.
K.C.
I am trying to give reasons WHY the pilot MAY have acted this way. It IS a common occurrence all over the country.
It is MY opinion that the Pilots assume they can ‘force’ someone else to comply and ‘take steps to permit safe passing’ This is NOT the case in inland rules. To give another crude example: If I am going up river in my poor POS tugboat and pushing a large crane, a ship wants to overtake me. I state it is unsafe. He decides to overtake me anyway. The overtaking vessel cannot ‘tell me’ to move over, and make more room, or to slow down so we are not meeting on the turn, or at a narrow spot. IT is NOT authorized in Inland rules that I HAVE to ‘take steps’ to help the situation. In International it IS required that I take steps. However. as you correctly state, at some point when I see potential for an incident, it is mandatory that I do something. It seems that this question is over WHEN. and can I be ‘forced’ to have to evade, just to allow a pilot to overtake. The only thing in Oicur12s post that really makes me mad is the part when he says when they did meet it was 3 wide. THAT is inexcusable, especially in the HSC, especially if the scenario was anything closely resembling what Oicur12 described.
A local knowledge example would be, in the Delaware river the pilots routinely follow the centerline of the channel. Absolutely on the centerline. One night I was on my way down, loaded to 28’. I was meeting an inbound empty ship. he was drawing 26’. He gave me a ration of shit for not giving him the channel. I gave it back, reminded him of his draft (ain’t AIS great) and that I would be on MY side of the channel, and if he was having trouble keeping on HIS side of the channel, I would be glad to come over and hold the helm for him. Needless to say, he miraculously shifted to his side of the channel, and no problem.
Last month I met a Maryland pilot just outside the C&D canal. We agreed on one whistle at about 2 miles distance. At 3/4 mile he calls up and asks if i was going to go outside the channel to ‘give him some more room.’ I had to remind him of his draft (21’) That mine was 3’ greater than his, and there was a defined channel edge of 21’ on both sides of the channel, all around both of us. (again I am watching him on the chart plotter come right down the centerline, right on the ranges.) Yeah, he moved!!
I was wondering if he had met a less experienced mariner, who could be ‘bullied’ outside the channel, who would have been at fault? The asshole pilot for being pushy, or the ignorant towboater? I bet you can figure that one out!
Maybe this is a lesson for all, about being more assertive when talking to assholes!!?? I describe it as giving a little ‘New York attitude’ when necessary. Of course you don’t want to overdo it, but used judiciously it is quite beneficial.
Not that this excuses the pilots cappy but I think a lot of maryland and delaware pilots are not used to tugs drawing as much as you were. Probably close to 95% of the tug traffic they meet draws 15 ft or less. In that case they need the education…
This sound like a lot of hate! Hate is not good for the heart!!!
[QUOTE=PR-9;56249]This sound like a lot of hate! Hate is not good for the heart!!![/QUOTE]three posts and he’s here flaming on people.
I know that’s crazy!! He should stay offline!
I know that’s crazy!! He should stay offline! We don’t need anymore hate around here!!
[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;56236] From Rule 17 “As soon as it becomes apparent that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate action, the stand-on vessel is free to act to avoid a collision. Rule 17(a)(ii) says that the stand-on vessel [I]may[/I] maneuver at this stage”.
K.C.[/QUOTE]
If Oicur12s’ description is correct and accurate (or even close) then what else was he supposed to do in the HSC? he almost ran over a dayboard, he already was going slow (in tug speak, 7 or 8 knots) and he was “Sort of in the mud” outside the channel. Not sure what else he could have done, other than found a tree to tie to.
To me the issue is the Pilots expectations, and the legal ramifications of what the pilots push on others (that is NOT really professional or legal.)