Safety and the Shipowner

[Capt Bill Davies]

Many thanks, I noticed my 'typo' about an hour ago and should have changed the 'know' to a 'no' then. But then again I am sure you all knew what I meant.
Incidentally, Ivan ships inxs of around 280,000 are ULCCs
Brgds

Bill

[Ivan Cloherty]

Thanks Bill, I never was sure of the difference, that's what I like about this site, we never stop learning, whether it be ships, food or miscellaneous Rgds Ivan

[Louis the Amigo]

Hi shipmates, A question
Who controls shipping in british waters?

[Captain Kong]

Hi Louis , I think the answer is , ?
Brian.

[Rick R]

Hi shipmates, A question
Who controls shipping in british waters?

SOSREP

SOSREP when things go wrong, having spoken to a Marine Lawyer about the role of SOSREP he seemed to believe that SOSREP could override the 'Absolute Authority' of the Master............

[Rick R]

Powers of Intervention

Here is the powers of intervention available to SOSREP for ships within 12nm of the UK coast (related to safety) and 200nm (related to pollution).

[Louis the Amigo]

Hi shipmates,We had a international lawyer/legal expert shipping and the sea { from a shipping owners family } who had an office in Cardiff, For many years but he cross the bar, my son was his paperboy , He all ways gave my son a big tip at christmas time a proper gent .He would have been the right person to sort out all the cost cutters and poor owners.who have killed over 800 seamen.

[happy daze john in oz]

Hi Louis , I think the answer is , ?
Brian.

But then again it could be the brother of Mr. Faisal ****!!!!

[j.sabourn]

Shipping in general never was a job for the faint hearted. Accidents have always happened and always will, regardless of how many Safety Manuals and Safety officers are produced. I don't think the British Shipowner was complacent about accidents on his vessels, as regardless they would cost him money and reputation. The manning on the old scales were needed as due to the equipment and design of ships they had to carry the crews to be able to work satisfactory, e.g. how could 3 men batten down a ship of the old type, it would take all day just to spread the tarps, never mind the derricks and all the running gear. After the seamens strike in 66 we had a BOT man at least I assumed he was, asked me to take him around the ship and explain how many men I needed to tie up. The wire springs always used to have a heavy rope tail on and required 3 men to handle, he asked how many men without the rope tail, and I said one. I never realized at the time this was the start of the demanning. At the time questions were asked about maintainance, and reply was it would all be done by shore labour. Depending on the owner I suppose this may have been correct, but I never saw. What I don't agree with is that every ship is supposed to have a manning scale and too many ships are put under one category when in fact they are totally different and are different in their work load. As regards Bridge and Engine room manning, in most cases I have seen they are in older type vessels, definetley undermanned. In previous posts I have brought this up and on some vessels I was, on also brought up and in my own way tried to compensate for. The last time I worked for a conventional British owner was in 78. So their practices I can only go on hearsay. As regards the oil industry time is definitely money and everything revolves around the drilling crew and would have to be an extreme dire situation to suspend. I considered when I retired I was getting out of the rat race. Cheers John Sabourn

[happy daze john in oz]

I am of the opinion that some shipping companies were better than others. But in all jobs, ashore or at sea, there is risk if corners are cut and rules not adhered to. We may at times laugh at 'elf and safety' but the fact is that if it were taken a little more seriously there would be far less accidents and deaths.