Let me in my naieve ignorance introduce the 900 lb gorilla in the room. 10 years working on MSC contract MSP/ Pre-position ships which are embarrassingly frequently at anchor for extended periods of time, frequently in high traffic anchorages in Asia, the Med and Atlantic coasts, w/ standard 1-3M/ 1-2M/ 1-CM watchstanders. If the CM is not in the watch rotation, another 3M is on board. Deck gang is Bosun and 3 watch AB’s and 2 day worker AB’s. Reality is at anchor, carrying shall we politely call sensitive cargo that may go sideways, there was only one mate and one A/Eng on watch. You see, busting rust and slapping expensive epoxy coatings on everything that doesn’t move is far more important than even having a roving AB on watch at night let alone after 1900 along with the mate. Oh no, we can’t spare a frigging AB to do fire/ flooding and safety rounds. No the solution was simple. The mate would do the rounds and check the bridge intermittantly monitoring radar/s, radios and the fire control panel. One captain proposed not even having the radar on, wears the mag out too fast fellas! The master expected at least one round per 90 min. preferably 60 min. To do a proper round that meant leaving the bridge for 30-40 min minimum. When it rained, some ships had serious water intrusion in the holds and even though I begged, pleaded to get the engineers to call when the hold bilges pumped, they frequently would not and I would confirm the hold status. I went a bit above and beyond to check spaces but considering one quiet night I discovered the E-pump room flooded nearly waist deep, and another time that 2 fire pumps were on and the engineers were not aware, I think I had the correct instincts. Having only one engineer and no Q/ oiler in the Eng rm was equally dangerous, eventually oilers were added. If an engineer gets caught in any rotating or other machinery and the mate does not make a round in the machinery spaces, he may bleed out before daybreak. I did rounds in the machinery spaces for that precise reason. Point is, many of the other vessels in the anchorages would have the mates on the bridge the entire watch, as their radio comms confirmed this. But some company priorities involve not sparing any AB to do rounds and besides the allision we are discussing, is the problem that if a fire broke out, and the panel was not answered w/in 3 min the GA should go off, should go off but may not. However On deck or in the holds the mate likely would not hear the GA until the point of no return. The intent was, the captain would rush to the bridge and crew would be mustered and suiting up to respond. If a real watch is kept, fire panel is attended, targets can be monitored, at least periodically and a watch circle w/ intrusion parameters set on radars, even a slightly oblivious 2M doing chart corrections should catch it. Hailing the vessel, shining searchlights and mag beams yes into their bridges to alert them, a continuous whistle for the love of god, employ own ship PA and GA to alert the crew, you would have a fighting chance. Ships with stern thrusters could have them at the ready and should be able to bring them on faster than a main and use them to at least pivot the hull around a little? Gee think that perhaps the MAIB or USCG/ NTSB, if/when they do a follow-on investigation will perhaps identify the 900lb gorilla in the room? Why was the mate off the bridge?
3 Likes