741 replies to this topic

[dreaded]

The problem with looking for lessons to be learned from the three recent accidents is that the lessons seem so simple:

Don't sail too close to rocks in the surf
Don't forget to check the course you've set for your autopilot
Don't fall asleep at the wheel
Don't sail from port in a leaky boat/ship into a hurricane
Don't forget to make sure your pumps work if your boat leaks (or even if it doesn't)

that they seem too rudimentary to even be called lessons. That's what also makes them so sad.

fixed

[Kahlessa]

Someone asked me by e-mail if I could post a presentation I gave a couple nights ago (on the Bounty, Low Speed Chase, and Aegean incidents). Here it is, but I would offer four cautions:

1. I don't use written speaker's notes (I found during my McKinsey days that they inhibited my ability to truly engage the audience) so you will only be getting about 25% of the content of the presentation and may not know exactly the point I was making with each slide.

2. This is my personal judgement and opinion and does not represent the 'official' perspective of any of the panels I was on, and in particularly differs quite a bit from the official perspective on Low Speed Chase (although that's less obvious with just the slides and without my comments).

3. Some of the graphs have a bit of complexity behind them, and its possible to misunderstand or mis-use them if you don't understand that complexity.

4. These incidents have a lot of richness to them. They are not as simple as they first appear and neither are the solutions. This presentation was designed for one hour including questions. A few nights ago it actually went over 2 hours because I had an excellent discussion with a very knowledgeable audience, but even so we only really scratched the surface.

But, with those cautions, I hope it's interesting and helpful.

Thank you, Estar. You've provide much thought-provoking analysis about the Bounty's sinking.

[Kahlessa]

Particularly like slide 2

The answer is NOT:

“They were stupid or ignorant”

The issue here is how can we what we learn from this to not make similar mistakes,
I have certainly been in situations where my complacency, improper risk assessment or fatigue could have lead to a much worse outcome.

Bad decisions are not simple and isolated events. They are the products of a particular decision-making process that involve a number of factors and an individual's interpretation of those factors.

[Ajax]

<snip>
.....
There's a lot to learn from the safety management systems used on jets and nuclear subs (Ajax step in here), along with the question of if/what parts are not appropriate for our yachts, or for these tall ships.

<snip>

Well, I can tell you that we used a "risk management" decision process to determine if the outcome was worth the risk. We took time to identify risks and how to mitigate them. Crude example:

"Main bilge pumps not pumping at 100% capacity."
Mitigation: Break out and test crash pumps BEFORE leaving port. Did the crash pumps work? Did the crew know how to use them? Yes=Go. No= No Go.

We also had a rigid system of pre-underway checks. Certain items, if non-functional, were a no-go for leaving the dock.

I do feel that if some of the US Navy's safety culture and thought processes were used in commercial and recreational boating, it could reduce accidents and injuries. *shrug* It's partly how I've avoided killing myself while learning how to sail, singlehanding.

[Estar]

^^
Prior to 1963, the US Navy lost a sub on average every 3 years. Then when they lost the Thresher, they rethought the whole system, and introduced the version one of SubSafe safety management, and I believe no sub has been lost at sea since. There have been 'incidents' both with subs, and much more frequently surface ships, that have looked really dumb after the fact, so this "safety culture" obviously does not make them perfect . . . But it was an enormous improvement from the prior ad hoc marine approach.

In 1955 there were 18 commercial airplane crashes in the US. They started down their current safety path, and reduced the accident rate by several orders of magnitude.

I learned to fly before I learned to sail, and started off using the flying culture in my sailing. For me that meant three particular things - check lists so important stuff was not forgotten or over looked in a rush to depart, perfect maintenance on key equipment, and thorough weather and navigation even for a short flight/sail. I do have admit that after 20 years sailing, and not flying, I am less complete at these three things than I used to be. The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

But I don't know the tall ship or commercial marine environments, and so there may (or may not) be good reasons these approaches don't apply there. Obviously for the bounty there was a money problem, which affected the maintenance and perhaps the decision to sail. Our nuclear subs don't have a money problem, and FCC certified mechanics are regulated in a way that mostly prevents them from making money vs quality trade-offs. In commercial marine, I believe there are intended to be four layers of checks on cheap owners (& captains) the chief engineer, the surveyor, and ABS, and USCG inspection. Those four all failed in this case.

[ropetrick]

USS Scorpion was lost post 1963.

[Estar]

USS Scorpion was lost post 1963.

You are correct, 1968.

However, the refit that Scorpion did just before going down was explicitly not following SubSafe procedures . . . For some reason they were in a big rush to get it back to sea. So it is generally counted as a " pre-SubSafe" incident, even if the date of the sinking is post official SubSafe implementation.

In any case, its been rather an improvement from one every couple years!

[kent_island_sailor]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
I put a very nice navy surplus 4 point harness in a Cessna once. The FAA gave me a grounding notice and made me put the crap-tastic factory 3 point seatbelts back in :angry:/> Do you want THAT for your boat? Do you want to only have an *approved* GPS legal to use in fog that costs 20 times what the one you use now costs? The airplane version of AIS ( ADS-B ) has no "Class B" units for $500. They are all at Class A prices and then some.
The world of over 300 ton commercial shipping DOES have FAA like regulations and world of inspected passenger vessels has a subset of that. The professional mariner forums are full of posts angry at how the Bounty, despite in reality being a *ship*, wormed through, under, and around the regs to be run as a private yacht and escape nearly all oversight.

The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

[ketchme]

I think some insight might be gained for handling historic and replica type boats from the FAA. For example WWI and earlier Biplanes have funky flying characteristics and lower reliability parts than would normally be acceptable to fly as commercial aircraft. But in some cases they, and later historic planes such as B-17 are allowed to carry passengers accepting those risks under relatively controlled conditions. These trips with passengers provide significant funding which keeps a lot of the historical planes flying and getting around to places they may be seen The loophole of calling folks crew that is sometimes used in the boat world is not available in the plane world. But you certainly won't find those planes flying in icing conditions by FAA proscription. The lack of such a classification (Experimental/exhibition) seems to lead marine folks to try to approximate such a thing *and* different people approximating that can lead to very bad results (seam compound on Bounty) . while done correctly things can work out just fine (Constitution and Morgan). Such a classification would have kept Bounty in the harbor, for the same reason the B-17s don't fly in all of the sorts of weather conditions they were flown in during wartime.

[Estar]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.

US nuclear subs and large commercial jets are the only two know large complex systems actaully operating at 6 sigma in the real world (at least the last time I was professionally involved). I believe there is something to be learned from them....

But #1 small private aircraft, and navy surface vesels are signifcantly lower, while using many of the sames systems and processes - there something to be learned from that also.

And #2 I agree with you that we probably don't want to afford 6 sigma safety in our private boats, but that should lead to the question of what sort of risk we (and the uscg) will accept in our little private boats, and in vessels like the bounty, if we are not going to demand the best possible systems/lowest possible risk.

[kent_island_sailor]

Recreational sailors will never get to 6 sigma for exactly the same reason I have no interest in calling a dispatcher and finding a copilot before I fly to Easton for lunch - or for an automotive metaphor - I am not going to install a roll cage, fuel cell, window net, onboard fire extinguisher, and a HANS in my car

[Estar]

^^ well I strongly suspect the "human factor" is an even more important reason (than vessel fit out and equipment) that recreational sailors will never get to 6 sigma (or even perhaps 4)... At least that's what my analysis of prior accidents suggests . . . Pilot error is common.

[Gray Ghost]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.

And #2 I agree with you that we probably don't want to afford 6 sigma safety in our private boats, but that should lead to the question of what sort of risk we (and the uscg) will accept in our little private boats, and in vessels like the bounty, if we are not going to demand the best possible systems/lowest possible risk.

What sort of risk we accept in our private boats should be up to each of us. That is the meaning of "private."

The Bounty was not a "private" boat except in a cheating, rule-dodging sense (crew sometimes paid for the privilege of crewing...how is that not taking passengers for hire....) So let's not use the Bounty as an example of a "private" boat and an excuse to let the Feds intrude into our own decision making and good judgment.

The thing which set US nuclear subs and commercial aircraft apart is MONEY applied to the system in vast amounts, in one case motivated by potential planetary destruction, in the other by potential massive public disapproval, in the event of an accident. With respect to our own private boats, each of us should be the judge of how much is appropriate to spend, versus how much risk we wish to take, beyond the basics of PFDs, fire extinguishers etc.

Nor is the Bounty a good example of how some sort of better regulatory system could prevent accidents, because the initial, primary decision which led to the sinking (to go to sea in a hurricane instead of staying in port) was so obviously, plainly wrong, even at the time it was made. You can't fix stupid (yep there I am using that word again) no matter how many government rules and regulations you throw at it.

[Earl Boebert]

Recreational sailors will never get to 6 sigma for exactly the same reason I have no interest in calling a dispatcher and finding a copilot before I fly to Easton for lunch - or for an automotive metaphor - I am not going to install a roll cage, fuel cell, window net, onboard fire extinguisher, and a HANS in my car

Sure. But you don't have a dozen or so people in the back of your airplane who are willing to accompany you into a line of thunderstorms because you've promoted yourself as the greatest pilot since Lindbergh. It's the imposition of risk on naive others that makes this case difficult, not how many Sigma stickers ISO has slapped on your cowling.

Cheers,

Earl

[ropetrick]

It was stupid that the skipper killed himself.

It was criminal that he killed that trusting girl.

Parse it any way you like; that is the bottom line for me.

[redviking]

It was stupid that the skipper killed himself.

It was criminal that he killed that trusting girl.

Parse it any way you like; that is the bottom line for me.

Yes indeed, but now you will be accused of jumping on the bandwagon... I can't wait to see the Coasties skewers Captain stoopid, and hopefully his mate.

[ropetrick]

It was stupid that the skipper killed himself.

It was criminal that he killed that trusting girl.

Parse it any way you like; that is the bottom line for me.

Yes indeed, but now you will be accused of jumping on the bandwagon... I can't wait to see the Coasties skewers Captain stoopid, and hopefully his mate.

That has been my take from the start of this thread.

[kent_island_sailor]

http://www.atninc.co...equipment.shtml

They really get nailed in this column.

[Ajax]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
<snip>

I apologize if anyone here thinks I was suggesting some sort of formal oversight program similar to subsafe or FAA programs be put into effect for recreational boaters. I am not advocating that at all.

Rather, what I was suggesting, is that perhaps we could instill some "safety culture" power boating and sailing classes, that's all. Just a little education. Teach people to make checklists, get them to think in a "risk vs. gain" manner, that sort of thing.

For me, sailing (private, recreational boating) is freedom and the last thing I want to do, is infringe upon any private citizen's freedom. However, I don't see anything wrong with continuing to improve sailing and powerboating or even commercial instructional cirriculum to teach people to make sound decisions and exercise good judgement.

[kent_island_sailor]

http://mtam.org/safety-at-sea.html

[Ajax]

http://mtam.org/safety-at-sea.html

Obviously this is a great course to take, and it teaches a lot of what I'm talking about, but I'm saying that this stuff should be taught at an even lower level, like ASA 101 and those stupid, online boating courses that states are mandating these days.

Some people think that risk-based decision making is only for off-shore sailors, and doesn't apply to the guy going fishing for a few hours, or the PWC zipping around off the beach.

[blackjenner]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
I put a very nice navy surplus 4 point harness in a Cessna once. The FAA gave me a grounding notice and made me put the crap-tastic factory 3 point seatbelts back in :angry:/> Do you want THAT for your boat? Do you want to only have an *approved* GPS legal to use in fog that costs 20 times what the one you use now costs? The airplane version of AIS ( ADS-B ) has no "Class B" units for $500. They are all at Class A prices and then some.
The world of over 300 ton commercial shipping DOES have FAA like regulations and world of inspected passenger vessels has a subset of that. The professional mariner forums are full of posts angry at how the Bounty, despite in reality being a *ship*, wormed through, under, and around the regs to be run as a private yacht and escape nearly all oversight.

The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

As a boat owner and a certified (not current) pilot (PP-ASEL) I get your point.

The way I see it, the FAA and regulations are completely and utterly necessary. They regulate the operation of machines that can *fall out of the sky* and land on things/people. If failure modes of aircraft (personal) were that they floated *up* and out into space, I think the FAA would mostly regulate commercial passenger aircraft.

That said, I don't think there is a need to heavily regulate personal boating like we do aircraft.

However, maritime operations that carry paying passengers? They are not regulated enough in my opinion. Sure, it will cost money but, running a cruise ship aground, stranding thousands of passengers in unhealthy conditions at sea, or holing a tanker and destroying an environment? All those carry high costs to either people or our environment. They deserve proper oversight and regulation.

I think someone else said that they wished cruise ships were as regulated as aircraft and that any cruise company operating out of US ports should be US flagged and subject to US regulations regarding safety. I can't say I disagree with that opinion.

But, aside from some basic USCG regulations and some basic boater safety requirements for recreational boaters? I think that's enough.

I know some segments of our population see *any* regulation as an infringement on our fundamental rights and interference by the government (that's us, folks). They are wrong in both scope and understanding of the corresponding *responsibility* that comes with freedom. It all comes down to risk to others. We, as a society, have a responsibility to self-regulate (through law if necessary) to ensure we are responsible and are held responsible for our actions. If we engage in an activity that has a significant chance of harming others should we prove incompetent or have poor judgment, then I see no problem with regulations.

[Asymptote]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
I put a very nice navy surplus 4 point harness in a Cessna once. The FAA gave me a grounding notice and made me put the crap-tastic factory 3 point seatbelts back in :angry:/> Do you want THAT for your boat? Do you want to only have an *approved* GPS legal to use in fog that costs 20 times what the one you use now costs? The airplane version of AIS ( ADS-B ) has no "Class B" units for $500. They are all at Class A prices and then some.
The world of over 300 ton commercial shipping DOES have FAA like regulations and world of inspected passenger vessels has a subset of that. The professional mariner forums are full of posts angry at how the Bounty, despite in reality being a *ship*, wormed through, under, and around the regs to be run as a private yacht and escape nearly all oversight.

The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

As a boat owner and a certified (not current) pilot (PP-ASEL) I get your point.

The way I see it, the FAA and regulations are completely and utterly necessary. They regulate the operation of machines that can *fall out of the sky* and land on things/people. If failure modes of aircraft (personal) were that they floated *up* and out into space, I think the FAA would mostly regulate commercial passenger aircraft.

That said, I don't think there is a need to heavily regulate personal boating like we do aircraft.

However, maritime operations that carry paying passengers? They are not regulated enough in my opinion. Sure, it will cost money but, running a cruise ship aground, stranding thousands of passengers in unhealthy conditions at sea, or holing a tanker and destroying an environment? All those carry high costs to either people or our environment. They deserve proper oversight and regulation.

I think someone else said that they wished cruise ships were as regulated as aircraft and that any cruise company operating out of US ports should be US flagged and subject to US regulations regarding safety. I can't say I disagree with that opinion.

But, aside from some basic USCG regulations and some basic boater safety requirements for recreational boaters? I think that's enough.

I know some segments of our population see *any* regulation as an infringement on our fundamental rights and interference by the government (that's us, folks). They are wrong in both scope and understanding of the corresponding *responsibility* that comes with freedom. It all comes down to risk to others. We, as a society, have a responsibility to self-regulate (through law if necessary) to ensure we are responsible and are held responsible for our actions. If we engage in an activity that has a significant chance of harming others should we prove incompetent or have poor judgment, then I see no problem with regulations.

+1 to all of that.

"To live outside the law you must be honest" B. Dylan.

[Estar]

Recreational sailors will never get to 6 sigma for exactly the same reason I have no interest in calling a dispatcher and finding a copilot before I fly to Easton for lunch - or for an automotive metaphor - I am not going to install a roll cage, fuel cell, window net, onboard fire extinguisher, and a HANS in my car

Sure. But you don't have a dozen or so people in the back of your airplane who are willing to accompany you into a line of thunderstorms because you've promoted yourself as the greatest pilot since Lindbergh. It's the imposition of risk on naive others that makes this case difficult, not how many Sigma stickers ISO has slapped on your cowling.

Cheers,

Earl

I agree with pretty much all that's been said about government regulation above . . .

but I also know the USCG SAR view there being a "moral hazard" here. As shown quite directly in the Bounty case, when you push the DSC/EPIRB button they WILL take risks to save your ass. Your foolishness can/will put them at risk. They believe that gives them some say in your decision making - their current tag line is "a partnership between risk takers and responders".

I also agree completely with Ajax, that there is a way to learn and internalize many of the lessons from good safety programs WITHOUT government mandate. Most of this stuff is not rocket science, but it does require a bit of discipline, and it definitely requires a different headset. IMHO we each, and the sport and its leaders, need to take their heads out of the sand and change the culture and education inside the sport. IMHO for far too longs 'safety' has been viewed almost completely by the 'buy some extra safety equipment mindset'.

I have been sailing with Ajax and can testify that he has a 'practical safety headset', that combined with his nuc sub experience, makes him our perfect spokesperson.

[kent_island_sailor]

I strongly recommend anyone with an interest in maritime safety read this book: http://www.amazon.co...shall free them\

We have mainly been looking at this from a yachting perspective, i.e. the owner and the skipper are the SAME person and you won't get fired for not going someplace when told to.
This book tells the story of the Marine Electric. Just like the Bounty, this ship was a floating disaster that should NEVER have been out in any kind of weather. Just like the Bounty, she was sent out into a forecast storm and sank. Unlike the Bounty, most of the crew were not saved. If you have not served in the Merchant Marine, this book may be very eye-opening. I learned that basically from the end of WW II to the mid 1980s the US Merchant Marine fleet consisted of floating junk that was poorly made in a hurry for the war and not all that safe new. The officers were pretty much held in a perfect trap. The ships were fit for scrap at best, but you couldn't just call the USCG and say so. Assuming they even cared, they would prosecute YOU for sailing an unseaworthy ship unless you were brand-new and had yet to go someplace. When the ship's sank, which they did a LOT, the officers were the ones on trial. The owners ALWAYS said they had no idea the ships were in such bad shape. If the officers made a big stink about it, they would just be fired and replaced with more compliant victims. The book details how this ship was the last straw and how these conditions were finally changed for the better.
From the sounds of it, the Bounty was being run just like a pre-1990s POS war surplus rustbucket, i.e. duct-tape repairs and sail or be fired. So.......how the fck did the owner sign off on this suicide mission?. Did he just let the captain do whatever he wanted to? Did he encourage him to go? Did he encourage him a LOT to go? This is what I have not seen detailed at all. Maybe no one still living will tell the tale?

[Estar]

^^

I think you have raised a terrific 'lesson' from this case.

The Captains of these Tall Ships, and by the way many private vessel captains, are exactly in the situation you describe.... relatively powerless compared to the owners.

I understand how airline pilots fixed this problem (essentially by forming a Union), but can you give us the short answer how it was fixed in the 1990's for the commercial ship captains?

[kent_island_sailor]

Short answer:
ABS and the USCG stopped turning a blind eye to massive violations - like using duct tape and epoxy (really!) to fix cargo hatches. They went on a tour of Great Lakes ships and found a lot of *60 year old* ships being sent out in winter storms. They were either restricted to summer or scrapped. The USCG port officers started forwarding records from port to port so ships could not get a fresh start with new officers. In short order pretty much all the war surplus junk was scrapped. Also, for about the first time ever, the Marine Electric survivors were not blamed for the loss. As a side effect, the USCG got their own rescue swimmers instead of trying to get help from the Navy when they needed one. You really need to read the book. Apparently the Navy got all the good steel in WW II and the shipyards building tankers and freighters used shitty brittle steel that would fracture in cold weather. Some of the ships broke apart AT THE DOCK. Some sank more than once too! Apparently whatever half stayed floating would get a new bow or stern welded on and then go sink again

[blackjenner]

I strongly recommend anyone with an interest in maritime safety read this book: http://www.amazon.co...shall free them\

We have mainly been looking at this from a yachting perspective, i.e. the owner and the skipper are the SAME person and you won't get fired for not going someplace when told to.
This book tells the story of the Marine Electric. Just like the Bounty, this ship was a floating disaster that should NEVER have been out in any kind of weather. Just like the Bounty, she was sent out into a forecast storm and sank. Unlike the Bounty, most of the crew were not saved. If you have not served in the Merchant Marine, this book may be very eye-opening. I learned that basically from the end of WW II to the mid 1980s the US Merchant Marine fleet consisted of floating junk that was poorly made in a hurry for the war and not all that safe new. The officers were pretty much held in a perfect trap. The ships were fit for scrap at best, but you couldn't just call the USCG and say so. Assuming they even cared, they would prosecute YOU for sailing an unseaworthy ship unless you were brand-new and had yet to go someplace. When the ship's sank, which they did a LOT, the officers were the ones on trial. The owners ALWAYS said they had no idea the ships were in such bad shape. If the officers made a big stink about it, they would just be fired and replaced with more compliant victims. The book details how this ship was the last straw and how these conditions were finally changed for the better.
From the sounds of it, the Bounty was being run just like a pre-1990s POS war surplus rustbucket, i.e. duct-tape repairs and sail or be fired. So.......how the fck did the owner sign off on this suicide mission?. Did he just let the captain do whatever he wanted to? Did he encourage him to go? Did he encourage him a LOT to go? This is what I have not seen detailed at all. Maybe no one still living will tell the tale?

Maybe we should prosecute the owners for this, holding them responsible for whatever goes on on their ships, ensuring that they cannot claim they "didn't know."

[sailman]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
I put a very nice navy surplus 4 point harness in a Cessna once. The FAA gave me a grounding notice and made me put the crap-tastic factory 3 point seatbelts back in :angry:/> Do you want THAT for your boat? Do you want to only have an *approved* GPS legal to use in fog that costs 20 times what the one you use now costs? The airplane version of AIS ( ADS-B ) has no "Class B" units for $500. They are all at Class A prices and then some.
The world of over 300 ton commercial shipping DOES have FAA like regulations and world of inspected passenger vessels has a subset of that. The professional mariner forums are full of posts angry at how the Bounty, despite in reality being a *ship*, wormed through, under, and around the regs to be run as a private yacht and escape nearly all oversight.

The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

As a boat owner and a certified (not current) pilot (PP-ASEL) I get your point.

The way I see it, the FAA and regulations are completely and utterly necessary. They regulate the operation of machines that can *fall out of the sky* and land on things/people. If failure modes of aircraft (personal) were that they floated *up* and out into space, I think the FAA would mostly regulate commercial passenger aircraft.

That said, I don't think there is a need to heavily regulate personal boating like we do aircraft.

However, maritime operations that carry paying passengers? They are not regulated enough in my opinion. Sure, it will cost money but, running a cruise ship aground, stranding thousands of passengers in unhealthy conditions at sea, or holing a tanker and destroying an environment? All those carry high costs to either people or our environment. They deserve proper oversight and regulation.

I think someone else said that they wished cruise ships were as regulated as aircraft and that any cruise company operating out of US ports should be US flagged and subject to US regulations regarding safety. I can't say I disagree with that opinion.

But, aside from some basic USCG regulations and some basic boater safety requirements for recreational boaters? I think that's enough.

I know some segments of our population see *any* regulation as an infringement on our fundamental rights and interference by the government (that's us, folks). They are wrong in both scope and understanding of the corresponding *responsibility* that comes with freedom. It all comes down to risk to others. We, as a society, have a responsibility to self-regulate (through law if necessary) to ensure we are responsible and are held responsible for our actions. If we engage in an activity that has a significant chance of harming others should we prove incompetent or have poor judgment, then I see no problem with regulations.

Jenner, US Flagged vessels are heavily regulated and I think it shows in those vessels safety records compared to foreign flagged vessels. That comes at a price though which explains the US Merchant Marine's steady decline. Cruise ships fall out of the Jone's Act because they do not operate exclusively between US ports.

[blackjenner]

You do NOT - NOT - REPEAT NOT - even want to THINK about a nightmare like FAA oversight of your boat.
Do you REALLY want West Marine to have to get PMA approval and engineering sign-offs for every part they sell for every boat it might go in? So your old XYZ boat needs a fuel gauge? That will be $500 please. But it just like this $20 one! Sorry...no field approval unless you hire a DER to go down to the FSDO ...no can do.
I put a very nice navy surplus 4 point harness in a Cessna once. The FAA gave me a grounding notice and made me put the crap-tastic factory 3 point seatbelts back in :angry:/> Do you want THAT for your boat? Do you want to only have an *approved* GPS legal to use in fog that costs 20 times what the one you use now costs? The airplane version of AIS ( ADS-B ) has no "Class B" units for $500. They are all at Class A prices and then some.
The world of over 300 ton commercial shipping DOES have FAA like regulations and world of inspected passenger vessels has a subset of that. The professional mariner forums are full of posts angry at how the Bounty, despite in reality being a *ship*, wormed through, under, and around the regs to be run as a private yacht and escape nearly all oversight.

The second is particularly frustrating because the quality of marine work and gear is generally so low....you have to do it yourself if you want 'aircraft' standards (and its not because the marine work is cheap....we all know its not).

As a boat owner and a certified (not current) pilot (PP-ASEL) I get your point.

The way I see it, the FAA and regulations are completely and utterly necessary. They regulate the operation of machines that can *fall out of the sky* and land on things/people. If failure modes of aircraft (personal) were that they floated *up* and out into space, I think the FAA would mostly regulate commercial passenger aircraft.

That said, I don't think there is a need to heavily regulate personal boating like we do aircraft.

However, maritime operations that carry paying passengers? They are not regulated enough in my opinion. Sure, it will cost money but, running a cruise ship aground, stranding thousands of passengers in unhealthy conditions at sea, or holing a tanker and destroying an environment? All those carry high costs to either people or our environment. They deserve proper oversight and regulation.

I think someone else said that they wished cruise ships were as regulated as aircraft and that any cruise company operating out of US ports should be US flagged and subject to US regulations regarding safety. I can't say I disagree with that opinion.

But, aside from some basic USCG regulations and some basic boater safety requirements for recreational boaters? I think that's enough.

I know some segments of our population see *any* regulation as an infringement on our fundamental rights and interference by the government (that's us, folks). They are wrong in both scope and understanding of the corresponding *responsibility* that comes with freedom. It all comes down to risk to others. We, as a society, have a responsibility to self-regulate (through law if necessary) to ensure we are responsible and are held responsible for our actions. If we engage in an activity that has a significant chance of harming others should we prove incompetent or have poor judgment, then I see no problem with regulations.

Jenner, US Flagged vessels are heavily regulated and I think it shows in those vessels safety records compared to foreign flagged vessels. That comes at a price though which explains the US Merchant Marine's steady decline. Cruise ships fall out of the Jone's Act because they do not operate exclusively between US ports.

I totally get that. The only response I have is: What Price Profit?

[Earl Boebert]

Maybe we should prosecute the owners for this, holding them responsible for whatever goes on on their ships, ensuring that they cannot claim they "didn't know."

Already possible. See:

http://www.hilderlaw.com/Publications/WB18-USC-1115.pdf

Cheers,

Earl

[kent_island_sailor]

The owners of the Marine Electric were convicted of a felony. The legal principle is "privity". A shipping company cannot be all over the planet supervising all their ships 24/7/365. So they are in the clear if the captain does not tell them about a problem. Turns out MTS, the owner of Marine Electric, did know all about the issues and thus were busted. Among other things, the ship had been hit by a bulldozer at the dock and holed. The mate used a *coffee can lid and cement* to fix it. By law, this was reportable to the USCG. MTS did not report it. Wonder why not

I strongly recommend anyone with an interest in maritime safety read this book: http://www.amazon.co...shall free them\

We have mainly been looking at this from a yachting perspective, i.e. the owner and the skipper are the SAME person and you won't get fired for not going someplace when told to.
This book tells the story of the Marine Electric. Just like the Bounty, this ship was a floating disaster that should NEVER have been out in any kind of weather. Just like the Bounty, she was sent out into a forecast storm and sank. Unlike the Bounty, most of the crew were not saved. If you have not served in the Merchant Marine, this book may be very eye-opening. I learned that basically from the end of WW II to the mid 1980s the US Merchant Marine fleet consisted of floating junk that was poorly made in a hurry for the war and not all that safe new. The officers were pretty much held in a perfect trap. The ships were fit for scrap at best, but you couldn't just call the USCG and say so. Assuming they even cared, they would prosecute YOU for sailing an unseaworthy ship unless you were brand-new and had yet to go someplace. When the ship's sank, which they did a LOT, the officers were the ones on trial. The owners ALWAYS said they had no idea the ships were in such bad shape. If the officers made a big stink about it, they would just be fired and replaced with more compliant victims. The book details how this ship was the last straw and how these conditions were finally changed for the better.
From the sounds of it, the Bounty was being run just like a pre-1990s POS war surplus rustbucket, i.e. duct-tape repairs and sail or be fired. So.......how the fck did the owner sign off on this suicide mission?. Did he just let the captain do whatever he wanted to? Did he encourage him to go? Did he encourage him a LOT to go? This is what I have not seen detailed at all. Maybe no one still living will tell the tale?

Maybe we should prosecute the owners for this, holding them responsible for whatever goes on on their ships, ensuring that they cannot claim they "didn't know."

[Estar]

^^

Interesting legal challenge re the owners. There would be two points if challenge: the vessel condition, and the pressure to sail.

Re vessel condition they can point to the fact that they spent more than the vessel was worth when they had it entirely replanted and reframed in 2006/2007, and had a survey that rated the vessel condition as excellent. Unless there is a smoking gun e-mail from the rot found in the most recent refit, I think it would be hard to win against them.

We don't know what sort of communication went of between captain and owner re the departure date pressure. If any of it was by e-mail it is perhaps recoverable, but if it was all done by voice (which I suspect) then it's lost.

And regarding kentisland's point . . . I guess the analogous action today would be to review/revoke all vessels with grandfathered tonnages, and other exceptions to the current rules, and make them either conform to current rules or be scrapped (which most would have to be). Even that still does not provide the captains much protection against owners demands to sail in unsafe weather conditions, but the vessels would be sounder.

[redviking]

First blunder a lot of delivery Captains make is trying to get a boat from Charleston to Newport in 5 days because the owner had her cross the stream, crew found out the vessel was to go to Newport to be sold and jumped ship. Delivery captain flown in and has to round Hatteras anyway because she is too tall for the icw, too deep, and can't drive the damn thing at night there anyway. Captain agrees and gets his ass handed to him going around Hatteras unless he was extremely lucky with weather. I've heard the stories. Happens a lot from a number of ports just before the boat show circuit.

I made a poor judgement call as did my wife, who had no go rights and to whom I trusted even better with weather than I. GRIBS are great, even better to have a second pair of eyes. Anyway a schedule put us in the wrong place with a well known storm. We bypassed Charleston because we could only anchor or pick up the mega $ dock and risk being placed outside, because we are too tall to go under the freaking bridge on that side. Anyways, we watched several other boats Jews in and we decided to try and outrun the storm. We wound up diverting into Savannah which is pure hell driving up the channel to find Thunderbolt for a dock, but not before she was locked in down below while I tethered above tried to manage. When the Coasties were hailed, I started yelling that this was not an emergency. They were kind to my wife who simply relayed our position and that conditions were sorta ugly. I could have broke in with the RAM, but I decided she was probably right. Fawk it, let them at least have a heads up that we were out there and while forking about with spreader light on to see the condos rolling at us and thinking about whether to use the drogue, we were ok, no pan pan, no mayday. We were not placed on a radio watch which I was most grateful for.

Yes, I put us there. My bad. A hurricane and the gulf? No thank-you. Walbridge had to have been on a schedule. Owner on the hook. UNLESS he Waldbridge really believed his own BS about making it thru. Even a well found cruising boat abandons ship on the Norfolk Bermuda almost every year. The sea is nasty mistress.

I think that we all can learn something, but Captain Walbridge was just as foolish as the bleach bottle drunko that beached in NC ?, then proceeded to solicit funds after said incident? He too sailed into a hurricane. Bunkies now. Gives us all a bad name and I accept pennance for my bad decisions. Inthis case, even a heads up to the Coasties as we did, would have been admirable. Then I would forgive the surviving crew. At some point, they too, like my wife did, should have let the Coasties know that something was up. Also, note the lack of a real floatplan or if one was filed, they diverted hard.

[redviking]

Fucking autocorrect replaced choosed with Jews... Fawk...

[Torsten]

Fucking autocorrect replaced choosed with Jews... Fawk...

I thought you were talking about boats with Jews in!

[Estar]

http://www.soundings...s-a-haze-of-war

[Asymptote]

Amazing work by the Coast Guard. A situation where the nine most comforting words you could hear are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

[2Newts]

Has anyone read the short book (or super long article) about this by Matthew Shaer? Any good? Want to know if my cheap ass self should pay two bucks to buy it.

[Kahlessa]

Has anyone read the short book (or super long article) about this by Matthew Shaer? Any good? Want to know if my cheap ass self should pay two bucks to buy it.

 

I just got it so I will let you know. Here's the link for anyone else interested:
http://www.matthewsh...-of-the-bounty/

[hawaiifins]

Read it on iPad Kindle.  It has some good information and is certainly interesting.  I would have  love it if  the author had waited until the USCG comes out with their report.  It ends abruptly without tying things up.  Of course, that would have meant the risk of some other writer getting the book out first.

[Kahlessa]

Coast Guard Hearings on You Tube

 

I’m grateful that someone posted the hearings, but I’d be more grateful if he had edited the video before posting. And included Days 1 and 2. Oh well...

 

HMS Bounty Hearings - Day 3

(Audio begins at 0:57:00)

 

Bounty Hearings - Day 3 Part 2

 

 

Bounty Hearings Day 4 - Part 1

 

(Audio begins at 0:19:37)

 

 

Bounty Hearings - Day 4, part 2

(Audio begins at 1:31:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings, Day 5 Part 1

(Audio begins at 0:16:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearing, Day 5 Part 2

(Audio begins at 0:26:30)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings - Day 5, Part 3

(Audio begins at 0:04:00, unfortunately it gets hung up at 1:40:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings, Day 6 Part 1

(Audio begins at 0:17:00, garbled audio problems)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings, Day 6 Part 2

(Audio begins at 0:22:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings - Day 7 Part 1

(Audio begins at 0:03:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings Day 7 Part 2

(This only last 7 minutes…gets hung up after that)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings Day 8 Part 1

(Audio begins at 0:57:00, ends at 1: 36:00, begins again at 1:46:45)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings Day 8 Part 2

(Audio begins at 1:15:00)

 

 

HMS Bounty Hearings Day 8 Part 3

(Audio begins at 0:07:30, ends at 1: 32:00)