Cruise Ship Smashes Dock in Ketchikan

CPseudonym said:

My guess: If you where the captain that overruled the pilot your career would be in serious jeopardy. Someone mentioned up thread corporate likely told that captain to put that ship on the dock on schedule. Had he not he'd be packing his crap and finding another job. Captains being "in charge" is a romantic notion but the ships owners are much more involved in these days of sat phones.

Love to read Sailor of Fortune's take.

Click to expand...

Not at all. As others have said, the pilot is merely an advisor. The captain is in command, and has every right to overrule the pilot if he thinks he needs to. The pilot may be at the controls or shouting commands, but the captain is ultimately responsible for the vessel.

As far as management's control, I have no doubt that there are more armchair captains sitting in warm, dry offices now than ever before, but again, it's ultimately the master's discretion. The office can apply pressure, but the captain should know that it's his license, and his ass that's on the chopping block if something goes wrong.

That's going to be a lot of paperwork.

I'm not an engineer, but I spend the occasional night in a Holiday Inn Express.... so to me it looks like those pilings are not designed to stop that.

San Francisco pilots earn on the order of half-million dollars a year and work every other week.

Oscar-I kind of thought that also, even though I haven't ever been in a Holiday Inn Express. When I saw them in the video, I kind of compared them to the pilings around the ferry terminals here in the PNW. The pilings there are backed with angled pilings to the rear and also have kind of a hydraulic "bumper" for the ferries to bump into. But then, the ferries are kind of expected to "bump" their way into the ferry landing dock.

An hour or so after the "event" they had 2 tugs assist in moving the Celebrity Infinity from berth 3 to berth 2. The line to the tug on the bow broke..sounded like a gunshot.
Was a little more excitement and running around while they tried to get a larger line hooked up.
Eventually they got it moved.
They were welding the hole closed about an hour after it hit.

Ken

Ships colliding with docks in windy conditions on our coast is nothing uncommon and usually the dock takes the worst of it. The Celebrity Infinity was quickly patched up and returned to scheduled, same day service.

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/damaged-cruise-ship-returns-to-vancouver-1.2932086

"Conduct" in this sense is a difficult term to define and might even bring different meanings in different areas. I can only speak to the Canadian version which "generally" means the pilot is the top level navigator/advisor, whose directions, in mandatory pilotage areas, must be followed. Canadian pilots do not take the helm and the ships master is in command of ship and crew at all times. In fact, to my knowledge, which is limited and perhaps out of date in some instances, the only area where the pilot has full command of a vessel is in the Panama Canal.

In Canada, the master cannot relieve the pilot of his duties and if the master has issue with a pilot's direction, the only recourse is to safely weigh anchor, contact the authorities and request another pilot.

Pilotage itself, like so many other marine topics is fascinating, complex and becoming more so at a rapid pace. E navigation, language and vessel size are but three of the most emerging concerns of pilots and pilot authorities.

The US and Canadian west coast pose some of the most rigorous challenges anywhere; San Francisco Bar Pilots, Columbia River Pilots and Puget Sound Pilots all have very unique conditions and circumstances to deal with. Especially with the ever increasing length, width, air and water draft in areas not designed for or compatible with those changes.

Canada has 4 distinct areas; Atlantic, St Laurence, Great Lakes and Pacific, all with differing regulations and sub sections. All of which ads to interpretation confusion and difficulty of application. As regulations increase, so do interpretations and challenges to them. As commercial traffic increases, it becomes more difficult to find qualified pilots.

The Pacific Region (BC) with its 15,000 mile coastline is very unique. Pilots shifts are limited to 8 hours and 105 nautical miles so, with today's cruise ships having speeds of 20+ knots, we get into waivers and regulation grey areas. In BC, tankers transiting Second Narrows, Boundary Pass and Haro Strait, are required to have two pilots. The only time a pilot is permitted to leave the vessel is to pilot a vessel towing his assigned vessel. There are few instances where a pilotless vessel can enter BC waters.

BC pilots are required to know every detail of our coast by memory, including many uncharted hazards. They are also required, but not mandated, to know operational specifics such as rudder response, prior to boarding any vessel.

Also, BC has pioneered the use of helicopters for pilot transfers. This has greatly reduced pilot injuries and extended retirement age.

https://youtu.be/JAvjuhSmtsk

It is my reflection during my career of cargo ship loading superintendent in the presents of a boarding pilot. (Alaska) Upon boarding the first act the pilot takes is the formality of having the Master sign the waiver relieving the pilot of any and all liability. The Master is in control even when the pilot is given to dock the vessel.

Al-Ketchikan 27' Marben Pocket CRUISER

Here are the Panama Canal Regulations

http://www.pancanal.com/eng/legal/reglamentos/acuerdo13-eng.pdf

Boats under 65' are not required to use a pilot.

Also many other rules but one in particular is that the Master must be on the bridge.

On larger boats, there are multiple pilots. I don't know exactly what they do on large commercial vessels. On our boat, when we passed through, he basically stood with the Master and directed her actions. He did not take the helm.

There are currently over 250 Pilots for the Panama Canal. Feed them well and you'll enjoy their company (Don't feed them right and you'll be paying for a boat to deliver food to them and that's very expensive). Our pilot seemed to enjoy sharing information on the canal and exactly what was going on all along the way. We had an easy and pleasant time. However, boats do sometimes get damaged during the process. The Canal will assume responsibility, and compensate, if it's not your operator error.

Hawgwash said:

...

BC pilots are required to know every detail of our coast by memory, including many uncharted hazards. They are also required, but not mandated, to know operational specifics such as rudder response, prior to boarding any vessel.

Also, BC has pioneered the use of helicopters for pilot transfers. This has greatly reduced pilot injuries and extended retirement age.
...

Click to expand...

BC pilot boat bringing pilot to board for inland passage:



Seems like all pilot boats approach a ship's port side.

after the 2005 Queen of Oak Bay accident in Horseshoe Bay, where instead of destroying the ferry terminal when she couldn't stop, she plowed through the adjacent marina, there was a lot of talk about the ability of the ferry docks to absorb excess energy. From one of the engineers involved, I learned that the ferry terminal structures are designed to stop the ships in their fleet from speeds of up to 3 knots, without damage. Those vessels weigh in the neighbourhood of 10,000 tons. To stop the cruise ships weighing 91000 tons (Wikipedia says so for the Celebrity Infinity) a whole lot more engineering has to go into construction of the docking structures. Otherwise, damage will certainly occur at far lower collision speeds, as is apparent from the video.

markpierce said:

BC pilot boat bringing pilot to board for inland passage:



Seems like all pilot boats approach a ship's port side.

Click to expand...

Nice shot Mark.

Wayfarer said:

Not at all. As others have said, the pilot is merely an advisor. The captain is in command, and has every right to overrule the pilot if he thinks he needs to. The pilot may be at the controls or shouting commands, but the captain is ultimately responsible for the vessel.

Click to expand...

This discussion brought to mind a certain rather controversial happening in NZ waters when I still lived there, added to by the fact it was also highlighted again in a recent TV doco called Coast New Zealand, commentated by that long-haired Scotsman called Neill Oliver, who has done other 'Coasts' all round the world. (The link at the bottom is more factual, and loads faster. This top one is more about the liner and the people)

https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/destination-disaster-2008

The issue of who was really in charge, and who carried the ultimate responsibility was one of great interest at the time, because in the enquiry, the pilot took the blame, as the captain was not even on the bridge at the time, or so it was claimed. But we were expected to believe that a pilot who had been guiding ships in and out of one of the trickiest maritime areas you could find, all his working life, knowingly took a ship of that size inside the Cape Jackson lighthouse, hitting the submerged reef the lighthouse was there to warn of. He knew it was only a small boat channel. Why would you do that..?

It finally sank in a nearby bay, where they ran her aground, essentially, while a local armada of small boats (bit like Dunkirk it was),came and took the passengers and crew off, and with just one life lost, and it is now one of the world's best dive wrecks, incidentally. Where else would you get an intact cruise liner on her side in just 15 metres down..?

The word on the street was that the pilot took the blame because the captain would have been possibly executed, (it was during the cold war still), whereas the pilot at most lost rank and reputation, and there was (thought to be) surveillance equipment inside as well. The suspected reason why one 'engineer' died - going back down to destroy this before she went down it was claimed.

As it happened if you feel motivated to follow the link, the captain could not then be charged because "due to an 'oversight", NZ piloting foreign vessels could not be charged for negligence - since changed - but kinda convenient..? He remained a working captain & pilot until his retirement????

It is a very interesting incident whichever way you look at it, conspiracy theories or not. It is however hard to believe the pilot would do what it was alleged he did. When I was doing my boatmaster course in about 1983, the Napier harbour pilot who was our instructor, used to use that exact stretch of Cook Strait as the chart we did most of our exercises from, precisely because it packed so many navigation dangers into one chart. Even WE amateurs knew you did not take a large vessel inside the Cape Jackson lighthouse for heaven's sake.
Take a look...

Lermontov sinking still lures conspiracy buffs - National - NZ Herald News

I've got a birds eye view of the damage pier, and repair work has commenced as of this AM. Other than the cat walk being knocked down, it visually all looks fine. But my wife says she read that the whole structure moved some distance.

By the way, these piers are NOT delicate. I think someone said they looked small in the video, and they do. But the pilings are at least 3' diameter steel pipes, and possible even 4'. And there are either 4 or 5 angled pilings making up each pier.

5 pilings doesn't sound like much to me...often the bump and go dolphins around bridges and ferry terminals will have 15-20 or more.

Sure, most of the time around here they are wood...but I am guessing it's not the strength of the pilings but the footprint to absorb the bang.

For a huge cruising ship, laying alongside is one thing, banging into a dolphin or two mostly with just 5 pilings....gotta say I could see the whole dolphin laying at an angle afterwards.

Maybe I'll wonder over and ask the guys working on it. But from what I've read and am seeing, I think the gangway may be the largest casualty. They just craned that out of the water a couple of hours ago. It looked straight and intact, though maybe 10-20% of the decking was missing, presumably having popped off with the impact.

BTW, the repair contract calls for completion by July 7th.

I talked to the Harbor Master. They are commandeering the float that I was on for lightering in from anchored cruise ships. They lost over 400' of dock space due to the accident, and now need more for lightering, so there is quite the scramble afoot here and I was asked to move.

While I had him on the phone, I asked about the details of the damage. The pilings themselves are all OK. They are 4' in diameter, 1" think steel pipes, so pretty strong. They flexed, but the platforms on top that tie them all together suffered significant weld joint failure. So they all need to be x-rayed and re-welded as needed. And of course the cat walk needs to be fixed and reattached. There happened to be a large marine construction crew anchored nearby waiting for a job that starts next month, so they were able to start right away which was very fortunate.

He said the pilings are 200' feet long, with a water depth of 100' and 50' sunk into the bedrock. So I gather 50' above the water line, which looks about right. I suspect there long length was an aiding factor in their ability to flex and spring back without permanent damage. He said there had been 18" of deflection at the mud line.

This report live, from your correspondent on scene.....

twistedtree said:

I talked to the Harbor Master. They are commandeering the float that I was on for lightering in from anchored cruise ships. They lost over 400' of dock space due to the accident, and now need more for lightering, so there is quite the scramble afoot here and I was asked to move.?..............

cut for space............

water depth of 100' and 50' sunk into the bedrock. So I gather 50' above the water line, which looks about right. I suspect there long length was an aiding factor in their ability to flex and spring back without permanent damage. He said there had been 18" of deflection at the mud line.

This report live, from your correspondent on scene.....

Click to expand...

Thanks...always cool to hear the story fresh from on scene

The water being so much deeper than what I am used to obviously requires significantly different engineering...just wondering what they are really designed to take. A pretty good shot as it sounds...

I was reading an owner's manual for a MAN 1100 HP V-12 diesel and one of the suggested uses for that engine was "BOW THRUSTER". They might have needed the 1850 hp engines instead for that thruster.

Another View of the Incident from City Floats (with lots of photos)

We were docked here at city floats directly facing Berth 3 when it happened, and we took a bunch of photos during the mayhem: Brace Yourself! – Riveted

(Hi to Tanglewood...we're on the next dock over from you! -- And thanks for the more info!)

Laura - M/V Airship

In my experience, it's not unusual for the captain to avoid a destination when conditions are unsuitable for docking or tendering, or to avoid a storm. This has happened to us at least four times during 30 cruises. The Falkland Islands is a notorious example. Met a couple whose five cruse-ship attempts to visit the islands were all vetoed by the captain due to sea conditions.

markpierce said:

In my experience, it's not unusual for the captain to avoid a destination when conditions are unsuitable for docking or tendering, or to avoid a storm. This has happened to us at least four times during 30 cruises. The Falkland Islands is a notorious example. Met a couple whose five cruse-ship attempts to visit the islands were all vetoed by the captain due to sea conditions.

Click to expand...

It reminds us all that there are conditions and situations that are risky and we're better off to try Plan B.

It will be interesting to hear more about exactly what went wrong. The thrusters were working. That part is clear. But why was the ship going so fast? I don't understand that, and know that at least on my boat, the faster you are going, the more ineffective the thrusters become. The water wants to flow by the hull rather than go through the thruster tube.