Yes, never say “I screwed up”. Instead say something about the responsibility of the captain in general and acknowledge that the operation did not go as planned. No point in trying to deny it.
Once that’s established explain that, in context, all the decisions were ones that a “reasonable person” would have made.
Then do a rhetorical pivot “going forward” with a lessons learned. For example how better to deal with an incompetent crew, 
I tend to suffer from ‘awake inertia’, especially after Sunday lunch when I quite often go completely inert.
The choice was whether the captain should let the pilot take the tow through the locks or do it himself.
The report doesn’t say the captain should have let the pilot take the tow, but that mariners should take into account the risk related to sleep inertia (grogginess) upon waking, and, in this case taking over was also contrary to company policy.
Even if they’ve never heard of the term most mariners are aware that caffeine is used to combat it.
Another factor being the backing power of the boat being less then what the captain was used to (2000 hp vs 2600 hp).
Also a good approach. Corrective actions to avoid a recurrence are inadmissible as evidence that the prior conduct was negligent. The classic example is a utility moving a telephone pole after a car hit it. The moving of the pole cannot be used as evidence that the original placement was negligent.
The 30 minute call-out is standard practice and in fact it’s written into union contracts.
Here’s what the report actual says:
Sleep inertia is the temporary feeling of grogginess felt immediately upon awakening. Studies have shown that the effects of sleep inertia include reduced alertness, slower reaction time, less accuracy, degraded memory, and impaired decision-making ability. Sleep inertia generally lasts for about 30 minutes after waking but may last longer if a person is sleep deprived. Mariners should allow time to fully recover from sleep inertia before taking a watch and performing critical duties.
From the report wrt company policy:
I will have the fire alarm settings adjusted to go off 30 minutes before the fire starts so as not impinge on carrying out critical duties.
Adrenaline instead of caffeine.
Is that supposed to be a “news flash” for readers of this forum?
The NTSB’s point was that regardless of existing rules and practice, there appears to be a problem related to the effects of sleep deficit which they believe can be negated by getting up a half hour earlier.
Where does it say that?
This was at around 0515, about half an hour or more before the captain was scheduled for watch.
From the report:
In the NTSB report: “Studies have shown that the effects of sleep inertia include reduced alertness, slower reaction time, less accuracy, degraded memory, and impaired decision-making ability. Sleep inertia generally lasts for about 30 minutes after waking but may last longer if a person is sleep deprived. Mariners should allow time to fully recover from sleep inertia before taking a watch and performing critical duties.”
The prudent mariner might take from this finding that for some individuals, the typical time between call out and taking the watch may be inadequate and an additional 30 minutes is suggested by inference.
There are all these strict safety rules for the working hours of people who pilot airplanes and people on land such as who drive big trucks, but all these rules don’t apply to people who drive ships when it can be almost as dangerous.
It just shows how little regard there is for seafarer safety, that they somehow think seafarers are superhuman and can work hours that would be illegal in almost every other industry.
But seafarer hours of rest will probably never be brought to a safe limit because of industry pressure on regulators. The company owners can sit in their mansions enjoying the fruits of the work of seafarers who are putting themselves into an early grave working unsafe hours.
Not quite accurate. There is no lack of rules but there are so many exceptions and loopholes that the spirit of the rules has been buried with those they were intended to protect.
There is no mention anywhere in the MLC of hours of sleep, only rest.
…all of which corroborates what I said earlier:
Whenever I come across a report about the causes of groundings, allisions, etc. I take it with a grain if salt. For a conclusion to be accurate it must rest upon facts. But look at the expert advice given in this thread:
And the lawyer is always going to cry, “Fatigue! Lack of rest!”, because it makes the officer seem virtuous.
The knock-on effect is that fatigue/rest take on an outsize importance as a contributor to accidents. When most officers are likely to shut-up/bullshit/cry “Fatigue/Rest!” after an accident, then the percentage of accidents blamed on fatigue are going to be artificially high, and all other causes will be under-reported.
Moreover, every officer has a vested interest in crying “Fatigue/Rest!” after an incident, because it perpetuates the perception of this as a major problem, providing a handy excuse for any officer to make use of in the future. Add now to the list: “Sleep inertia.”
I’m not saying fatigue/lack of rest are not a cause of accidents. I’m saying the cause is invoked out of proportion to reality. The reality is that incidents are equally likely to occur from boneheaded-ness than fatigue, but few captains will say it.
No queston, I too resent people looking to excuse poor performance or bad behavior. But any one or combination of statements above point to possible causality. The truth is, if regulatory and management wish to delude themselves into thinking masters and Chief Engineers (and senior shipboard management) are shift workers and comply with OPA/STCW, there’s a bridge for sale…
Until several judges apply the T.J. Hooper case, saying that the owner should have provided enough competent crew for three watches, nothing will change.
Is that the NTSB from the USA? lol
Part of the same gov that wouldnt sign the MLC convention?
https://www.edumaritime.net/mlc-2006/mlc-regulation-2-3-work-rest-requirements
I agree, it only hurts the case they are trying to make, same with someone trying to bs their way out. It’s unprofessional.
Do you mean someone using poor judgement?
What’s the difference between being boneheaded and being incompetent?
I’m aware that there are rules for people who are on ships but they are not strict enough to ensure the people who drive the boats are well rested enough.
The people who do the actual driving of the boats should be the ones who are fully rested, but things are back to front on a lot of boats, the people who drive the boat often have to work the most hours and the day workers who don’t drive the boat get the best hours of rest.
People who keep a bridge watch should have similar hours of rest requirements to airline pilots, they should not be allowed to keep a bridge watch for more than 60 hours in a week (8.6 hours per day) and should get rest breaks that are at least 10 hours.
Airline pilots have these kind of rest hours for a reason, if people who drive planes have them there is no reason people who drive ships shouldn’t have them too.
But they will never bring in those kind of rest hours for people who drive ships because of industry pressure on regulators, and some ships just might not have enough cabin space to man the ship with sufficient bridge watchkeepers.