Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    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
    5,189
    Thanks (Given)
    480
    Thanks (Received)
    6060
    Likes (Given)
    4073
    Likes (Received)
    14730

    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, N/A liked this post
  4. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    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
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    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
    24,946
    Thanks (Given)
    8262
    Thanks (Received)
    10108
    Likes (Given)
    106318
    Likes (Received)
    45551

    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
    Keith at Tregenna's Avatar
    Keith at Tregenna Guest

    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

  9. Thanks j.sabourn, Des Taff Jenkins thanked for this post
  10. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    10
    Thanks (Given)
    22
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    116
    Likes (Received)
    29

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant Ships

    thanks found it very interesting .

  11. Likes happy daze john in oz, N/A liked this post
  12. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    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

  13. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant Ships

    Re Collission of Exmoor / Rhuys 1962 in the River Plate.
    There is picture on site somewhere.
    Just found rough copy of statement had ready to make, it was never called for.
    I have held a Ch.Officers cert. since March !960. And I have been 2/O of the Exmoor since Feb. 1962. I have had about 9 years sea going experience.
    I came on watch about 1220 hrs. on the 22 August while the Exmoor was proceeding up the River Plate in the course of a passage from Bahia Blanca to Buenos Aires with a part cargo of wheat . We were to complete loading at B.A. New Port for the U.K. We had a River Pilot on board , he was on the Bridge with the master. I was also on the Bridge, there was a man on the wheel and he was steering by gyro compass. The Exmoor has telemotor steering gear.The wheel is enclosed on the Bridge . There are windows at the front and sides of the wheelhouse. the windows were shut there is a door on each side of the wheelhouse and these were open. A port pilot embarked at 1253 hrs. when we reached Recalado Intersection and he took over from the River Pilot , who remained on board but took no further part in the navigation of the vessel.The port pilot gave the helm orders to the helmsman in English, we proceeded at various speeds keeping about mid channel.The helmsman was changed at 1400 hrs.and we entered the North Channel entrance about 1405 hrs. Just after the pilot made some comment about the ship not keeping steady and told the helmsman to keep her more so or words to that effect. I looked at the compass to see how we were heading and we were not more than a degree off course. The Channel was 281 degrees. The pilot did not make any further comment in my hearing.Between 1358 and 1403 hrs we were passing an outward bound tanker the 13th. December. As the ships approached each other in about mid channel the pilot reduced speed from F. Ahd. to Half Ahd. and went hard a starboard , thee other ship appeared to do the same, as theships drew abeam engines were put full ahd again and helm to port to get back back on the right course heading and channel positioning.I was working the telegraph in accordance with the Pilots advice. These manouvers went on with other traffic. I was relieved from the bridge by the 3/mate when the harbour tugs were sighted about 2 miles away, and told to call the mate to stand by forward and self to go aft to take the after tugs line. I went back to the Bridge to get the pilots instruction on how he wanted the tug tied up. On going back there was a bit of fluster going on the steam whistle lanyard had broken , and the master shouted at me to get up forward and drop the anchor i was on my way, an apprentice and the chippy running forward up the deck on the other side , We arrived all at the same time and the starboard anchor was let go, The Dutch Passenger vessel port bow was looming over the Exmoors port bow, and after the anchor was let go we left the focsle head and managed to get 50 ft. down the foredeck before the collission occurred.
    There are about another 2 pages of assorted this and that but too long to print out. I fully expected to appear at the court of enquiry hence my putting down all the particulars down at the time . However was never called upon officially. But was another period of nightmares for a few years. How there was no loss of life will always be a mystery to me. i would of thought i would of been the prime witness leading up to this collission as was the only one who was there throughout the whole period. the same as the stabbing of the master on the rosewood. the trial at the old bailey was never called on, even the PA was there the full course of events and yet only appeared at the Enquiry for about 6 minutes.and this was close to the closing down stages. Im not complainiing by any means , but shows that enquiries are only as thorough as those who make them want to be. JS

    PS As regards draft amongst the information I have unearthed re statement if had been required the after draft arriving BA was only 21 ft. 2 " so if I have made other statements adverse to this one of them is wrong , and the only way to find out now is to borrow Louis"s time machine and go back 59 years. JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 5th March 2021 at 04:10 AM.
    R575129

  14. Thanks Ivan Cloherty thanked for this post
  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    23,595
    Thanks (Given)
    12827
    Thanks (Received)
    13698
    Likes (Given)
    19061
    Likes (Received)
    76633

    Default Re: Mutiny on Merchant ships.

    John in Oz. Most British seafarers on this site refer back to what they sailed with and not a lot of paperwork made up by civil servants as new legislation is brought out for someone somewhere to prove he exists.
    In 1960 which most on site can refer back to and this will refer to British ships only at that period of time..
    Every FOREIGN going vessel 1000 tons gross and over shall carry a certificated ships cook who is able to prove 1 months sea service in some capacity.
    To put more on the page an Emigrant Ship was any vessel leaving the UK carrying more than 50 steerage passengers or any steam vessel which carries more than 1 steerage passenger for every 20 tons of her registered
    ( 33 tons for a sailing vessel)
    Passenger vessel .. Those carrying more than 12 passengers on International or H.T. Voyages.
    You can see how old these regulations are by the mention of steam and sail. It was still there to the latter decades of the 20 th century . Most certificated mates and masters on here will also have what was called steam certificates. Which was the general word for power driven. But these regulations were for British registered ships . Other countries over the years have decided for themselves , its all right saying everyone today stays to the same regulations , would be great if they did. Cheers JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 5th March 2021 at 06:45 AM.
    R575129

  16. Thanks happy daze john in oz thanked for this post
    Likes N/A, Denis O'Shea liked this post
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

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
  •