Yet another vessel takes the crown:
Will ships like this ever be Autonomous? What is the manning for such a vessel?
Safe Manning Certificate is what the Shipowner likes. They never consider the practical manning level to operate ships. Imagine a Safe Manning Certificate for this vessel at say five people! Don’t hold your breath.
It is actually “MINIMUM Safe Manning Certificate” for safe operation of the ship at sea and in port:
Nothing stops a shipowner from having more seafarers on board, at sea or in port, for maintenance or special operations (Limited by LSA while at sea)
NOTE: It is the Owner/Manager that propose and apply for a MSMC, but the Flag State Authorities that approve the level and issue the certificate:
Boggles my mind the manning levels of these giant ships and the “Authorities” that deem them safe to operate. A very large one came to the port recently, the local media made a big deal out of it. Little do they know (Nor care) about the skeleton crew working their ass off to get there and load/discharge.
Of course there is, having more seafarers is a larger expense and results in lower profits. As long as PSC inspectors and the like continue to accept dummied up work/rest hour records there’s little incentive to change.
5 on the bridge, 5 in the engine room, 5 on deck and 5 in the galley+.
Probably more like 3 on the bridge with the captain hiding in his cabin.
OK Heiwa, I will bite on that. My son works in that industry at a large port. Those crews are under a heavy load. As a logistics major, he gets it regarding volume/profit. As a prior mate on those type ships, he also gets it regarding crew levels… These large vessels are a handful, the undermanning of them is beyond comprehension. Same goes for the ATB’s that reduced crew by almost 30 percent. Vessels get larger, crews get smaller. Don’t miss that at all.
Will it get stuck in the Suez Canal too?
Why would you think so? Oh yes I remember, your not a mariner and have no maritime experience.
Well, no but can it cross the Suez without getting stuck like the last one?
Seadog, you are correct.
It is a question of weighing crew cost against cost of using riding crews and/or shore based service and maintenance personnel.
Any serious ship Owner/Manager know that the cost of letting a ship get run down and going off-hire,(or to have an accident causing same) is too expensive to risk.
I have never done PSC inspections. but numerous inspections which involve checking work/rest hour records. (OVID, IMCA, P&I etc.)
Mainly on offshore vessels of all kinds, incl. FPSO, Drillships and Semisubs preparing for long transits under own power.
I have come across monthly records that was completed a week before the end of the month, or that did not reflect the operations recorded in the logbook. (Yes I checked and interviewed those who’s record look “suspicious”) )
No, it did not happen only on FOC vessels, or only with “3rd World” crews.
PS> Most OSVs had a MSMC stating 8-10 crew, but usually a marine crew of 12-15, with additional crews during special operations. (Anchor handing etc.)
There are some ships that are under crewed, but many ships have enough crew but the crew members in management positions on vessels are sometimes lazy and don’t want to work, so they complain that there are not enough crew because they want someone to be on board to do their job for them.
There are lots of Captains and Chief Engineers who want to be paid to sit in their cabin all day ‘doing work’ which mostly involves watching TV and Skyping their family back home, so they complain the ships are short crewed because they don’t have enough people to do their job.
Well, I just assist shipowners keeping their ships going. They need shore staff experts to this effect According our ISM system anyone aboard can call us any time, if there is a problem. .
A question? How do you sail away without crew?
I’m curious, when was the last maritime accident caused because of under crewed and not because of human error (minus the reason for lack of rest).
Is the question was under crewing listed as an cause in an accident report or is the question was under-crewing in fact a factor?
Most big incidents I know about is with plenty crew on the bridge, eg Exxon Valdez 1989, Estonia 1994 and Costa Concordia 2011. Regardless, it was 100% all the fault of the Master.
Don’t recall most of the vessels I sailed on in my career being “Over crewed”. Not a ship guy, but moved a lot of deep draft cargo. Going from 12-13 crew to eight was quite an adjustment.This captain and crew never had time to “Sit on their ass” and hang out in their alleged stateroom.
The Union should be doing a better job. They should use their lobbyists to include funding for extra crew members in MSP. Especially seeing how .Gov is about to spend $4.5 trillion.