Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,841
    Thanks (Given)
    8258
    Thanks (Received)
    8490
    Likes (Given)
    11694
    Likes (Received)
    38702

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    John out here in Australia offshore it was only occasional I ever sailed with a cook or catering staff. They weren’t obligatory here unless you had more than 13 of a crew. The likes of survey vessels and seismic where you carried about 50 at times you then carried 2 proper cooks and one steward with the grand title of chief steward .It was all communal messing on the cafeteria system. You even carried a doctor at times or if not a proper medic. It was always necessary to carry a certificated cook at least on UK ships , is this still in vogue ? I don’t know maybe someone else will . Cheers JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 1st June 2020 at 09:01 AM.
    R575129

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Shields
    Posts
    4,551
    Thanks (Given)
    437
    Thanks (Received)
    4871
    Likes (Given)
    2526
    Likes (Received)
    10790

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    J S
    All personnel on board a ship that are part of the deck or engine departments will be certified and there numbers will be as per the ships safe Manning certificate. All navigation officers will in addition to their STCW certificate hold a GMDSS certificate and endorsements to their certificate for particular types of vessels, oil tankers, chemical tankers .
    The A.B' s will be certified as "Ratings forming part of a navigational watch".
    Engineers and engine room ratings follow a similar process.
    As for ships cooks, for vessels over 500grt with 10 or more on board, IMO maritime labour convention requires the carriage of a certified ships cook.
    The safe Manning certificate states the number and ranks of the minimum number of personnel required to safely operate the vessel (basically to just get it from A to B), the hours of work/rest legislation can make a mockery of the safe Manning certificate unless the owners are prepared to increase crew size over and above that of the Manning certificate or the master is prepared to halt the vessel when the workload is such that given the number of crew, it is impossible to comply with work/rest hours legislation.
    Rgds
    J.A.

  3. Thanks j.sabourn, Doc Vernon, Des Taff Jenkins thanked for this post
    Likes happy daze john in oz liked this post
  4. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,841
    Thanks (Given)
    8258
    Thanks (Received)
    8490
    Likes (Given)
    11694
    Likes (Received)
    38702

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    Is that on British registered ships. On Australian offshore vessels they haven’t carried a cert. cook for years .the I.R. System was not a cause for this as was out before the I R system came into being. The biggest catering crew i have seen on such vessels was 2 cooks and one steward and that is with about 50 of a crew. The cook was given away by agreements with the union before my time out here for the cooking was done by the crew themselves on a rotation system if required. this was for extra money on salary apparently and that may not be in line with your paperwork but is actual facts as was and probably still is here. Will have a look for an old crew list for a seismic ship I was on , with the bodies on board and the marine manning of such . Cheers JWS.
    PS if can find will start a new post on manning to prevent any going off course which may upset some. JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 1st June 2020 at 12:24 PM.
    R575129

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,841
    Thanks (Given)
    8258
    Thanks (Received)
    8490
    Likes (Given)
    11694
    Likes (Received)
    38702

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    Back to originsl subject covering various incidents relating sometimes to mutiny.. some may remember an enquirer on site looking for clarification on the likes of the incidents at sea relating to misdemeanours , such as the Rosewood and he gave out valuable information that I certainly didnt know and suspect others didn’t either.. Scotland Yard had a maritime department devoted to trouble on British Registered merchant vessels and they flew out to various parts of the world as required. He was a retired Police Inspector from such Dept. I remember 2 police officers flew out to Dakar after we had left to bring the miscreant back to the IK , he being of foreign descent wanted to be repatriated to his country of Birth , no way Hosea the crime was committed on a British ship and his trial took place in the Old Bailey. Within not too long a period the murder and two attempted murders the miscreant was also sent home from Chile his birthplace being somewhere in Africa. The Old Bailey was kept busy that year. But shows once again one never stops learning , I would never have thought about a dept. at Scotland Yard being dedicated to the British Merchant Navy. Speaking to another police officer at another time I was informed that the Rosewoods forecastle head Bell had pride of place in their Murder room. JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 2nd June 2020 at 12:29 AM.
    R575129

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sunbury Victoria Australia
    Posts
    18,285
    Thanks (Given)
    5637
    Thanks (Received)
    6798
    Likes (Given)
    68639
    Likes (Received)
    27765

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    John, under the rules set out in UK at the time we were all at sea it was stated that a ship could sail without a skipper, chief officer could fill in for him, but you could not sail with out a ships cook.
    Even on the big liners where you had a galley for first and second class bloods there still had to be a ships cook with a galley just for deck and engine crew.
    Catering crew could eat in there if they wished but the food from the dinning rooms was always better.
    Happy daze John in Oz.

    Life is too short to blend in.

    John Strange R737787
    World Traveller

  7. Thanks Doc Vernon thanked for this post
  8. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    19,122
    Thanks (Given)
    5691
    Thanks (Received)
    8839
    Likes (Given)
    6254
    Likes (Received)
    13851

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    Possibly earlier posts on similar are worth another look at:

    K.

    https://www.merchant-navy.net/forum/...52-mutiny.html
    "Our veterans did not forget about us .... Let's not forget about them." From Michael Levesque

  9. Thanks j.sabourn, Des Taff Jenkins thanked for this post
  10. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    10
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    14
    Likes (Received)
    26

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant Ships

    thanks found it very interesting .

  11. Likes happy daze john in oz liked this post
  12. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,841
    Thanks (Given)
    8258
    Thanks (Received)
    8490
    Likes (Given)
    11694
    Likes (Received)
    38702

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant Ships

    #15 ... Still trying to clarify the water situation as mentioned. The only possible answer I can come up with is that as loading commenced In Bahia Blanca the Charter Party would have stipulated the tonnage to come out of this port. Topping off in B.A. would have had draft restrictions for that North channel which was dredged to 27 feet. As I was 2 Mate I had no input to this . As was the mates job stability and cargo and also the masters, there was a distinct dislike between the two of them and interference of the wrong type may have been in place over the Loading. Loading grain is no easy job on a conventiional ship . The TPI was about 45, so 45 tons of water in the wrong place could have tipped her wrongly and this could have been the cause of the shortage , or that it just wasn’t loaded. I found when I went Mate a year or so later that were many things about the mates job that others don’t know. This also could have been the cause of the bad handling of the ship prior to the collision as she was definetley touching the bottom , also bad dredging of the channel could have been another factor. This is all supposition and is too long back to make any true judgements , but I hate mystery’s without answers.
    Cheers John S.

    PS Also going on those assumptions , in addition to the 27 feet you would have the height of tide on top of this , and this is where as per another post the pilots knowledge comes into effect and what he is paid for , local knowledge. He should or would have checked the draft on coming on board to see if it was the same as the one given to him by the ship. The master kept me out of the enquiry in BA maybe he was scared on what I might say. However at 0200 in the morning after landing on the chocks in D/D in Smiths North Shields , the company solicitor came on board to see me, and asked unofficially what happened , and I said simply she was sniffing the bottom. Thank you he said , no one will admit to it. The case was settled by the P&I club. And was a 3 to 2 liability , who paid what I have no idea. JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 3rd June 2020 at 01:28 AM.
    R575129

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •