Don’t doubt we’ve all done maneuvers like that, but you don’t do them in a windy vessel with strong winds when there is an easier, safer way to get the results.
Port Hueneme is unique in many respects. It’s a Navy controlled harbor with a commercial side.
The commercial side requires anything over 300GT to have a pilot aboard, so if a military vessel is shifting to the commercial side, ( and vice versa) it requires a pilot.
BTW, the commercial pilots are also the Navy pilots
The Navy in PH has similar tonnage requirements as the commercial side, but can waive those requirements at their discretion.
In this case, the Navy allows them to come and go without a pilot, when on the Navy side.
Shit happens. The pilot should have acted a little more professionally or tactful.
Just to be clear on this original post. As someone who spent 20 years as a pilot in this port, I was directed by a friend in England, to read it.
This occurred after my retirement a number of years ago, but you can understand it raised my hackles to a high degree.
IMHO the writer could have and should have left the port un-named, but having not done so, should have given a detailed description of the events and actions which led up to the pilot’s comments ( the tone, actions and sense of potentially serious consequences during the maneuver, vary greatly in the telling).
In my opinion, this was a poorly written “fluff” piece, written to assuage the bruised ego of someone who had screwed up big time and was lucky to have come away from it (mostly) in one piece.
As for the pilots comment…I always remember a Capt. who was handling his own vessel in the port, that pulled a bonehead maneuver. When tied up, I looked at him and simply said " I was not impressed". Should I have said it? Probably not. Did I regret saying it? Nope!
We’re reading one side of the story, pilot’s side is definitely going to be different, and then what actually happened is probably somewhere between the two.
Captain could to spend a little less time in his head worrying about the pilot’s impression of his shiphandling (he’s got enough on his plate during the maneuver) and the pilot could’ve waited to share his unconstructive comments until the maneuver was completed or kept them to himself.
But you waited until he was tied up. That’s the difference. You had the good tact to not make an unnecessary scene before the boat was fast to the pier.
It’s one thing if the Master is grossly incompetent and needs to be pulled immediately, but the way the pilot comes across from the admittedly one-sided account is just petty and being a jerk.
I’ve been to Port Hueneme many times.
The post doesn’t strike me as someone trying to protect their ego at all. The author says it was his fault.
With regards to stories, I’ve made some comments I would not want to see repeated in writing. This would be one of them.
Makes it sound like the point of ship handling during mooring operations is to impress each other.
(Grinning) You and I will have to agree to disagree.
In essence, your last sentence highlights the point I’m trying to make.
If you read the original post without knowing what led up to the pilot’s comment, you could be correct in assuming the pilot was a petty jerk.
However, if you (in this case) are able to hear the pilots perspective as to what led up to this comment,
realizing the mutual stress on the bridge due to the Captains (IMHO) poor choice in maneuvers, and the potential for some serious consequences, then you realize there is more to the original post than is contained in his telling.
Do I applaud the pilot’s comment? No. Do I condemn it? LOL When I heard his description and got to his comment, he got a negative head shake and a big grin, cause although it could have been handled differently, at my age I’ve learned that being PC is not always the best response, and some times a good PC incorrect kick in the butt gets the results we may need, and that may be the case in this incident.
My opinion of the original post and poster remains the same…negative…other’s opinions may and can vary.