Click on the link below to view the latest edition of our magazine.
Keeping Navigators Awake
We are not doing enough to keep the navigator sufficiently involved in the job of ship operating. The results have been accidents caused by complacency. A recent article from Lloyds List by Michael Grey.
I HAD swallowed the anchor a long time before any great mechanical mind came up with the Bridge Navigational Watch Alarm System, the marine equivalent of the ‘dead man’s handle’ that facilitated the reduction of the operating crew in a railway train to a single driver.
In its most elementary form, it is an alarm that the wretched lone officer of the watch must reset at a predetermined interval to demonstrate that he or she has not dropped off in the posture-perfect chair with which most navigational bridges are now generously equipped.
It would have driven me barmy, possibly because it would have gone “ping” just as I was altering course, or taking a bearing, or I would have forgotten it completely as my mind wandered, setting off alarms all over the ship.
Of course, when even taking a seat on the hard wooden pilot chair was regarded as absolutely forbidden by night or day, its installation would have been a bit of a waste of time in our more than adequately crewed ships.
That was then and this is now, and next month sees watch alarms becoming mandatory for new cargo ships and passenger vessels. Perhaps one should not be surprised, after umpteen casualties contributed to by the incapacity of exhausted watchkeepers, although many of them had simply turned the irritating alarm off.
There are also better systems around, which employ motion alarms and which ought to detect the inactivity of a sleeping watchkeeper — or one who has fallen dead or unconscious. They are arguably less of a nuisance to the alert watchkeeper, who might have a sort of aversion to being treated like a sort of Pavlovian dog, hitting the button on demand.
There has also been more than one case of a ship being wrecked with the OOW cancelling the alarm without properly waking up from the catatonic trance in which he was conducting his lonely vigil.
It was Dr Martin Dyer-Smith, an eminent industrial psychologist and former ship’s officer, who, after conducting numerous “ship-riding” missions on behalf of an earlier Maritime and Coastguard Study into lone watchkeeping, concluded that it was boredom, almost as much as interrupted sleep patterns and fatigue, which reduced the effectiveness of the officer of the watch.
It can be extremely boring, and not just on an 18-day transpacific passage, but anywhere these days, thanks to the splendid integrated navigational systems that reduce the OOW from an active participant in navigation and actually ‘driving’ the ship to that of a monitor of the electronic systems.
Sure, you are supposed to be constantly checking the equipment, but if it seldom goes wrong, and it undertakes all the activity, like establishing the ship’s position, shaping the computerised course and calculating what to do about other ships, there cannot be a great sense of achievement at the end of a watch.
I can recall having terrible arguments with friends in the navigational equipment business about what I saw as their gradual erosion of the role of the human being in the navigation of ships.
They believed they were answering a demand, raising the standards of safety with equipment that brought to the worst navigator the capability of the best.
There were even integrated navigational consoles which, their salesmen proudly told me, would give the operators little tasks to do, to maintain their interest and provide them with a sense of involvement.
I accused the salesmen of taking all the fun and sense of accomplishment out of the art of the navigator, so that only a person with a very limited imagination would wish to do this mind-numbing job.
I can remember getting particularly angry with watch alarms. If you are going to treat sentient human beings like animals, or robots, I suggested, the next stage will be giving watchkeepers periodic electric shocks, or loudspeakers bawling insulting imprecations at them, should some device detect that their eyelashes are moving insufficiently. That correspondence became really quite heated.
I still think we are not doing enough to keep the navigator (or marine engineer, for that matter) sufficiently involved in the job of ship operating. The results, as we have seen, have been accidents caused by complacency, or the human letting the computer get on with the job, and the computer carrying out its task to the letter, even though the human being had forgotten to load the right program.
And if you are sitting there all alone in your darkened wheelhouse, watching a little light moving up an electronic chart, and noting the course alterations being accomplished perfectly, what motion is actually necessary, other than that required to reassure the motion sensors? Yawning or scratching your armpits should do the trick.
Perhaps with each successful course alteration, or anti-collision manoeuvre accomplished, you can applaud wildly, whooping like they do on one of those dreadful television game shows.
No wonder we have been having these dire warnings about the use of mobile phones or the use of social networking sites when watchkeeping. But I suppose it would introduce a bit of the necessary motion as you tapped the keys, or exercised your thumb, showing that you are in the land of the living.
Posted in General
Leave a comment
Captain E G Boyack
The death occurred at Lower Hutt on 20 April 2011 of life member, Captain Edgar Gerald Boyack.
Edgar was educated at Wanganui after his family emigrated from North East England. In 1936 he paid his passage to the UK and was apprenticed to Elder Demptser Company. He continued with that company after gaining his second mates certificate and was mainly employed on the North Atlantic during the war. He returned to New Zealand after the war serving with Holm and Company and the Union Steam Ship Company. During this time he obtained his Master’s and Extra Master’s Certificates. In 1952 he joined the New Zealand Marine Department as a surveyor and 4 years later was appointed an Examiner of Masters and Mates. In the next 10 years he was also involved with a number of marine inquiries. Under the Colombo Plan he was seconded to the Singapore Marine Department before returning to New Zealand in 1971 as Nautical Advisor to the Marine Department. He retired in 1985.
Posted in Wellington Branch
Leave a comment
Qualifications Review
These are the comments submitted by the Company on the Qualifications and Operational Limits proposals recently published by Maritime New Zealand
Operational Limits
Extended – good. The old limits were based on:-
1. Navigational capability when GPS was not widely available
2. Time taken to reach shore for help when speeds were typically barely more than 12 knots. (Now much faster).
3. The history of accidents as a result of a ship being outside its designated limit. (very few).
4. Communication problems. (largely solved by extensive VHF coverage and cell phone capability).
Qualifications
Closer monitoring – good
1. On the job tasks to be supervised and recorded for inspection to ensure training continues at sea.
2.MNZ to conduct examinations. This obviates the temptation that schools will engineer high pass rates in order to exemplify their teaching standards as being of a high quality.
3. MNZ issues the certificates and it is they who should therefore conduct the scrutiny of the candidates to replace a poorly managed audit system.
4. Naval and recreational boating experience to be recognized for commercial certificate eligibility. This includes good seafarers who might otherwise be excluded and confined to their specialist branch of the maritime community.
Concerns
1. Administrative difficulties may arise if current certificate holders are not allowed to continue with the privileges already granted. It may even be legally indefensible to prevent them from carrying on the activities for which they were found competent to perform when their certificates were issued to them originally.
2. MNZ will need to devote considerable financial resources to employing competent examiners with the qualifications and experience to satisfy the industry.
3. The naval and recreational sea time must be carefully analysed to make sure that it is relevant to commercial shipping/boating. For example, naval officers are trained to kill while MNZ qualifications are concerned with the preservation of life at sea. Recreational boating does not carry with it the responsibility for looking after paying passengers and the recording of boating experience for formal application will be largely hearsay.
4. Considerable administrative skill will be required to secure parliamentary approval to give preference to legislative change especially as STCW will also be competing for priority.
The following reply was received recently.
This is the submission by the New Zealand Nautical School on the same subject.
1. The 12 mile non-STCW Area
The consultation currently proposes that the entire New Zealand coast out to the 12 mile territorial limit will be deemed ‘closely adjacent to sheltered waters’ with the sole objective of excluding these waters from the application of STCW. This proposal is troubling on two key fronts.
The proposed qualification requirement for vessels operating in the Inshore Limit up to 500 tons is effectively the replacement qualification for the LLO/ILM with an unspecified additional learning component. The proposed requirement to operate vessels over 500 t within this limit is a non-specified higher qualification to be determined by the Director on a case by case basis. Neither requirement has the safety net of having to meet STCW minimum requirements nor the integrity of predefined requirements. At its ludicrous extreme, there is therefore no regulatory safeguard within the proposal that would preclude the Director from approving someone with an ILM level certificate from taking command of a coastal tanker or Cook Strait passenger ferry.
Whilst this outcome is unlikely, the possibility that it could occur is concerning. It is also our view that the internal expertise required to advise the Director increases significantly with the level of discretion available in decision making. Maritime New Zealand’s challenges in attracting and retaining adequate credible maritime expertise and capability to appropriately advise the Director are therefore problematic in this regard. This is not a criticism of the organisation but simply recognition of the worldwide scarcity of such people and the relative competiveness of MNZ as an employer. It is therefore our belief that this proposal therefore has very significant safety implications and also confers excessive discretion to the Director without adequate regulatory safeguards such as a defined and transparent process or the opportunity for all stakeholders to have input into decision making.
It should also be noted that the IMO Conventions including STCW also limit the ability of coastal states to apply less favourable regulatory and control requirements to vessels carrying overseas flags. This raises significant potential issues in terms of applying the certification, hours of rest and alcohol requirements of STCW and national legislation to visiting ships moving around the coast within the 12 mile limit when local vessels completing the same passage are intended under the proposal to be exempt from these requirements.
Secondly, we believe that the proposal contravenes the STCW Convention and Code and therefore places the future employment of a significant number of New Zealand seafarers, the New Zealand maritime training industry and ultimately the wider industry at risk.
The STCW Convention and Code (including amendments) apply to all seagoing vessels. Article 2 of the Convention defines such vessels as all ship’s other than those that ‘navigate exclusively in inland waters or in waters within, or closely adjacent to sheltered waters or in areas where port regulations apply’. The operational requirements of the Convention and Code then apply to all ‘seagoing ships’ which then operate either in ‘near coastal’ or ‘unlimited’ operating areas. There is no provision in the Convention or Code that allows a ‘seagoing ship’ to operate in a restricted limit set inside the near coastal limit. The ‘within or closely adjacent to sheltered waters provision’ is therefore intended to clarify what is meant by a ‘seagoing ship’ and was included in the ’95 amendment to cater for vessels operating out of and returning to a single port, bay or harbour without proceeding to ‘sea’. It is simply not possible under any reasonable interpretation of the wording of Article 2 to consider New Zealand’s entire territorial sea to be ‘closely adjacent to sheltered waters’, particularly when this is also proposed to be ‘smoothed out’ to allow coastal passages and corridors to the Three Kings etc. After all, few experienced mariners asked to mark on a chart those areas where they considered themselves to be ‘closely adjacent to sheltered waters’ would identify the entire territorial sea. In our view, this proposal is therefore absolutely in contravention of the intent and spirit of the STCW convention and also with the specific wording of the Article 2 definition which allows only vessel operations that occur exclusively in waters ‘closely adjacent to sheltered waters’ to occur outside STCW minimum requirements.
We have stated and justified this view at initial consultation with the New Zealand Maritime School, at each of the Design Advisor workshops and at the recent sector advisory workshops with the general support of those present. These views having to date not apparently influenced the proposal. It is therefore important to advise that our view is supported by each of the international competent persons and STCW experts we have been in contact with in recent days since the release of the consultation draft and that we are currently collating such statements from throughout the international STCW community and will include these in our final submission on this proposal.
It is important to note that unlike other IMO conventions, STCW contains a control mechanism whereby full compliance is initially evaluated by a panel of competent persons and continuing compliance through five yearly external independent verification audits. States deemed to be fully compliant are named on a ‘white list’ approved by the Maritime Safety Committee after evaluation of independent verification reports by competent persons and facilitated by the IMO Secretariat. Seafarer certification from ‘white listed’ issuers can then be recognised in port state inspections and may be recognised by other flag states either as the basis for being permitted to serve on board vessels of that flag directly or for a certificate of recognition (equivalency). Seafarers with certification from a country not on the current white list would therefore immediately find that their certification could not be accepted during a port state inspection in an overseas port nor on board a vessel of any other flag.
In our view, the consultation process to date does not appear to have balanced the economic benefit of seafarer employment in the international industry against that of local commercial vessel operations. We believe that there are currently approximately 430 New Zealand certificated officers and ‘traditional’ ratings working on overseas flag vessels or on New Zealand flag vessels that visit international ports. In addition, there are an estimated 1500 New Zealand residents working on cruise ships and superyachts in rating, service and entertainment postings where flag states or employers require STCW Basic Training certification for employment. We therefore estimate that direct seafarer employment of NZ$60 – $100 million p.a. is dependent on New Zealand maintaining STCW white list status. This is before standard multiplier effects are applied to determine the value to the economy and before the approximate NZ$15 million p.a. of earnings by the maritime training industry through international certification training. We therefore urge Maritime New Zealand to ensure that the economic interests of all industry stakeholders are carefully considered and balanced in determining the final qualification requirements, particularly where this would compromise our STCW compliance.
Alternative Approaches
It must be noted that a large number of vessels operate within inshore limits and are not ‘seagoing ships’ within the common interpretations of STCW internationally. Warships and fishing vessels are specifically excluded. Small vessels and recreational vessels are also excluded in most jurisdictions. The grey area is therefore in determining the type and size of ‘trading’ vessel that operates in the near coastal or unlimited areas and which is not a ‘seagoing ship’. Certainly, this cut off limit is intended to be well below 500 GRT as there would otherwise not be any certification requirements for such vessels under the Convention. Many jurisdictions have determined this by length, tonnage or type of operation. There is therefore a reasonably high level of flexibility available to the regulator in this regard. In this context, we believe that MNZ has the option of classifying a region of say ‘Kawau to Coromandel’ as sheltered waters and therefore, for example, deeming virtually all of the Fullers operation outside STCW. The albacore tuna vessels are ‘fishing vessels’ and not constrained by STCW. A 20 m charterboat operating out of Auckland could be deemed to be not a ‘ship’ (US/Canadian approach), ‘not seagoing’ (NZ approach to date) if it returns to the same port each day (no matter how far it goes out), or either a ‘fishing vessel’ or ‘non trading’ vessel (UK approach) for STCW purposes. None of these are defined in STCW, all suggested interpretations are consistent with other international precedent and any of these legitimately takes the operation outside STCW requirements. In other words, MNZ has very significant flexibility to achieve the operating pragmatism sought by all but a very few operators within acceptable STCW interpretations without putting the interests of these few above the very significant interests of a very large number of individual stakeholders who rely on New Zealand maintaining STCW white list status.
2. Non Compliant Certificates
a) The proposal is to introduce certification for Master of a Ship of Less than 500 GT Restricted to Near Coastal Voyages, Officer in Charge of a Navigational Watch on Ships between 500 and 3000 t restricted to Near Coastal Limits, Chief Mate on Ships of Between 500 and 3000 GT Restricted to Near Coastal Voyages and Master on Ships of Between 500 and 3000 GT Restricted to Near Coastal Voyages for voyages within Near Coastal Waters.
We wish to make the following points:
i) STCW Regulation II/3 (p3)requires certification also for every officer in charge of a navigational watch on ships below 500 GT on near-coastal voyages. The omission of this qualification will lead to a non compliance.
ii) STCW Regulation II/1 makes no provision for an officer in charge of a navigational watch between 500 and 3000GT. Such officers must meet all of the requirements for certification as an officer in charge of a navigational watch on ships of 500 gross tons or more. The proposed certificate is therefore non compliant.
Section A-II/1 (p7) does allow the issue of an officer in charge on ships of 500 gross tons or more to be endorsed for near coastal voyages only with the only effective difference being the omission of the requirement for competency in celestial navigation.
iii) There is no differentiation in STCW Regulation II/2 of the requirements for Chief Mate and Masters on vessels of between 500 and 3000 GT between unlimited and near coastal waters. The proposed certification must therefore be fully compliant with Regulation II/2 in terms of the requirements for issue. Section A-II/2 (p8) allows the issue of a Chapter II/2 Chief Mate or Master 3000t certificate to be endorsed for near coastal voyages and the competencies not applicable on a near coastal voyage to be omitted. In effect, it is important to note that the only significant difference between a Chief Mate or Master 3000 t unlimited and one endorsed for near coastal voyages only is the requirement for competency in celestial navigation.
b) A sailing vessel less than 24 m operating commercially in the coastal or offshore limit is a vessel of less than 500 GT operating within the coverage of STCW unless a methodology is applied to take this outside the ‘seagoing ship’ application. As explained earlier, there are such mechanisms available. As the proposal currently stands, however, the requirements for this certificate would have to be STCW compliant and in effect would become a sailing endorsement on top of the STCW requirements.
c) It is proposed that a Qualified Deck Crew holder can operate as a rating in the coastal area with STCW Basic and in the offshore with STCW Advanced. If the vessel is operating as a ‘seagoing ship’ in these limits (and also in the inshore under the arguments put forward earlier), these personnel must meet the STCW requirements for a Deck Watch Rating if they are to be engaged in supporting watchkeeping activity. The STCW Basic suite of programmes comprises Basic Firefighting, First Aid, Personal Survival, Personal Safety and Social Responsibilities and now Ship Security Familiarisation training[2] (under the Manila Amendments) and is a prerequisite for Deck Watch Rating. On this basis, the requirement for STCW Basic is reasonable. Advanced training is normally taken to mean Proficiency in Survival Craft and Rescue Boats, Advanced Fire and Medical First Aid. These requirements are excessive for the type of vessel envisaged and are not STCW requirements for deck watch ratings under STCW.
3. Revalidation Requirements
The proposal is silent on the STCW requirements for demonstrations of continuing practical competence in the safety competencies of STCW Basic Training, Proficiency in Survival Craft and Rescue Boats, Advanced Fire etc. These are now required to be physically demonstrated every five years with subsequent Maritime Safety Committee resolutions significantly restricting which of these can be done in service or on board a ship. This potentially has the most detrimental impact of all of the STCW Manila amendments on industry and seafarers and we believe this needs to be flagged at this time when we are considering what is inside and what is outside the convention.
Posted in General
Leave a comment
Tauranga Newsletter
Some items from the March 2011 Tauranga Branch Newsletter
Branch Notes
Our last annual barbecue at Ted and Rochelle’s proved another success and all hands enjoying excellent weather and a delightful meal. The event was tinged with a moment sadness as our Warden presented Ted and Rochelle with a farewell gift and thanked them for their many years of hosting our annual barbecue. Finding another venue of such homeliness and quality will be a very difficult task. Bob and Rae Wyld have successfully moved into their new home and are still having great fun cutting down the amount of gear and furniture, they didn’t realise they had.Our best wishes go to them for a happy and peaceful sojourn in Hodgson House villas in Botanical Road.
Princess Ashika
The families of those killed in the sinking of ferry Princess Ashika have been offered government compensation, provided they drop all civil claims. The vessel sank on Aug 5 last year, killing 74 people. The vessel’s owners, Shipping Corp of Polynesia, and four individuals are facing trial on more than 40 charges, including manslaughter by negligence. The government said it had always intended to offer compensation because it owns SCP. This has now been set at $80,000 per affected family, but it will only be made available if 30 claims already made in the Tongan Supreme Court are dropped.
Marine Star 11
A Hamilton fishing company and its skipper have been busted by Maritime New Zealand after its boat was spotted fishing more than 200 nautical miles, or 370 kilometres, further off the coast than it should have. W C Seafoods, which is in liquidation, was convicted and discharged in Hamilton District Court after admitting two charges of allowing a skipper, who did not hold the appropriate maritime qualification, to operate its commercial fishing vessel, Marine Star Il, in October 2009. Marine Star 11 was photographed more than 300 nautical miles, or 555 kilometres, out to sea by the Royal New Zealand Air Force during a joint investigation into non-compliant operators. It was permitted only to operate out to 100 nautical miles. It was then discovered the skipper, David James Abbott, held only an inshore launch master’s certificate, which allowed him to operate vessels up to 20 metres in length within 22 kilometres of the coast. Abbott was convicted and fined $2000 after admitting charges of operating the ship without holding an appropriate qualification and outside the specified safety limits.
NZ Shipping Gazette
It is with much regret that we report the death of Captain George Carter who died at Mercy Hospice on Saturday 12 February
2011, Born in the Orkney Islands in 1933 George retired from the Union Steam Ship Company in 1992. I rang him soon after to find out a little about him and it soon became apparent that. his career was less strait forward than most. The following account was printed in our newsletter at the time. George’s seagoing career was delayed somewhat by a call up for compulsory Military training in the. UK. and was followed by a stint in the Korean War. He was 20 years old when he obtained his first job at sea as deck hand on a seine fishing boat in the Orkney Isles. He gave this up to come ashore soon after getting married to Violet and took the opportunity to emigrate’ to New Zealand as a farm worker in 1956, working on two farms in the Ngatea area and at various other shore jobs in Auckland before resuming seafaring as a trawler deck hand in the Auckland fishing fleet. In the early sixties. George got a launch master’s ticket and then a job as skipper of a small Auckland tow boat for about three years, and during that time he passed for a Masters. Small Home Trade Certificate. A last fling at fishing -down at the Chathams during the crayfish boom of the late sixties followed and on his return he joined the Anchor Companies ship “Puriri” as AB. After completing a correspondence course for Home Trade Mate he rejoined the same vessel as 2nd mate in 1970 and was promised mate at the end of the year. While serving with the Anchor Company he was seconded to the Golden Bay Cement Company to serve as Second Mate in the MV Golden Bay and also to New Zealand Cement Holdings of Westport as Mate of MV Guardian Carrier. He got Home Trade Master in 1972 and served as Mate on various Anchor Company vessels thereafter. In 1977 George decided to try for a Foreign Going certificate. He got Part A Second Mate that year with Part B to follow in 1978, and none too soon as it turned out. “The small coasters,” he said, were being gradually phased out and the Titoki was the last of the old Anchor Company ships. “I was transferred or evicted, was the term used by some of us to the parent Union Steam Ship Company in 1978 along with several other Anchor Company employees.
George served as Third Mate on the Union Co. paper ships until 1981 when he got Mates F.G and then as second mate , mostly on
tankers, but also on the other company vessels as the need arose. He passed for Masters F.G. in 1988. In October this year; he accepted voluntary redundancy after 22½ years with the Company. Surely a case for the Guinness Book of records. I can’t help thinking there must be a few more stories amongst that lot. At 59, George considers himself only semi retired and will still accept short term, part time. relieving at temporary appointments. He admits to being a man of many hats and says he doesn’t mind putting his hand to a bit of carpentry. We offer our very sincere sympathy to Violet and her family
(MBD)
Auckland Newsletter
New Zealands Merchant Fleet. NOT
The second Christchurch earthquake has again highlighted our terrible lack of coastal shipping. The naval supply ship Canterbury was the only available means for the carriage of heavy equipment, which she is not really suited for. Had she been overseas we would
have had nothing for the job. There can be little doubt, that without a viable merchant fleet
New Zealand is placed at great risk from natural and man made disasters.
One of our ports at least is improving its handling capacity to handle larger container vessels
up to 5,000 TEU. While this is commendable, the overseas container giants are becoming more unwilling to call at countries which cannot handle their larger capacity vessels and in NZ they are hoping to introduce only two hub ports at present, one in the NI and one in the SI as an interim solution. It is rumoured that NZ will eventually become spoke of a larger hub operating out of Melbourne or Sydney, where 10,000+ TEU vessels can be handled. If this becomes a reality we will need to ship our cargo to the regional hub, which, at present, can only be carried by overseas interests, who will no doubt demand top dollar for their service, if they are going to provide such a service at all. They will only require a port in the North Island and one in the South Island, even for such a local service.
This will mean that all cargo will be shipped by road at an ever increasing and enormous cost and our atmosphere will suffer as a consequence. Maersk have ordered their first 10 Triple E Class carrying 18,000 TEU. We could never service vessels of this size. No doubt the powers that be will cry—shipping is too costly, despite having been proven to be the cheapest form of transport by a long way, we will be held to ransom by the unions and their demands.
Wallowing in the past failures of the maritime industry will not provide this country with a shipping arm that it desperately needs.
Is this not an opportunity to create a modern built and crewed entity that could rival the best in the world and would enter NZ into a new era. The crewing of these modern vessels, would require a smaller work force which would be fully trained as a well paid multipurpose unit equipped to handle, run and service modern hi-tech equipment. No longer could we envision a shipping service run on outdated and outmoded traditions. Are we really prepared to move into the exciting future of our maritime history. Labour conditions at present would indicate an abundant pool of young people ready to train for employment in a modern seagoing work force.
New Zealand used to have the biggest shipping company in the Southern Hemisphere and had some of the most modern vessels of the times, what has happened?, you may well ask, to put an island nation in such a vulnerable position. The Company of Master Mariners exists to promote the following objects:-
3.1
To form a body of master mariners in New Zealand for the promotion of professional, technical and social activities and to further the interests of master mariners.
3.2
To promote the professionalism of all holders of master mariner qualifications.
3.3
To afford advice and assistance to master mariners visiting New Zealand.
3.4
To foster and maintain full and fraternal co-operation between members and the Merchant Navy.
3.5
To hold experienced master mariners available to act as members of, or appear before Royal Commissions, Courts of E n q u i r y ,
Committees or boards of all descriptions, and to encourage master mariners to act as advisers and consultants on all matters affecting the Merchant Navy, and generally to give expression to the reasoned view and considered opinions of practical seamen on any matters concerning the Merchant Navy or in any way concerning the sea.
3.6
To ensure that the Government of the day recognises the input that is available from the Company and to assert its expertise in matters concerning any changes to maritime law and to operational standards. In this regard all directions and communications
Shall be issued only through the office of the Master.
With hardly any NZ Merchant Navy left, who are we supporting and— Why are we still here!!
Guy Ed.
‘A Very Fishy Business’ By Ian Clarke
As a ship surveyor, Ralph travels to the Coromandel Peninsula to assist Captain Rothfall, a marine inspector, with an investigation into a local fishing vessel that is feared lost. The inspector’s abrasive manner makes him unpopular with the townsfolk, and when his frozen body is found in the fishing company’s refrigerated chamber, suspicion falls on Ralph….
A Very Fishy Business is published by National Pacific Press @ $30.
A Bay of Plenty fishing boat is long overdue, as is this psychological page-turner.
A Very Fishy Business, a debut novel from Tauranga writer Ian Clarke, is a gentleman’s John Grisham, a keenly observed suspense drama set in a small Coromandel township. It’s the story of naive bachelor Ralph Sinclair, newly ashore and recently-appointed as a ship surveyor, he’s the ‘Ministry Man ’ on the spot when a commercial fishing boat is reported
overdue.
Sinclair is enlisted to assist Marine Inspector Rothfall investigate the boat’s disappearance, but the inspector’s prickly methods meet with resistance. Seduced by the town’s charms, and falling in love with the missing skipper’s daughter, Sinclair is drawn inexorably into a net of small-town secrets and insecurities. When the disagreeable Captain Rothfall is found
dead, Sinclair, the outsider, finds himself accused of murder.
In writing circles, it’s commonly agreed you should write what you know, and author Ian Clarke has done just that.
Going to sea at sixteen, the Master Mariner has served as a systems engineer, a lecturer in nautical studies, a surveyor of ships, and a maritime safety inspector. The cumulative knowledge from these experiences slip seamlessly into A Very Fishy Business. What’s more, Clarke was once employed by a “shadowy firm that provided intellectual services to the British military.” This could explain both his talent for intrigue, and his discreet and unassuming manner.
Likewise, Clarke’s writing style is understated, almost restrained. Steering clear of grisly crime scenes, he chooses instead to build suspense though clever plotting and realistic, pithy dialogue. His small-town characters are so well observed, one wonders if the author has spent more than the odd weekend people-watching at seaside establishments like
the Landing Hotel.
But it’s not all scholarly analysis. The story is salted with humour; an unfortunate incident with a pair of binoculars, a comical end to a romantic tryst, and, amongst the cast of characters are Fin Bass, Miss Spratt, Foggerty, the ethereal inspector preferred by the townsfolk, and the Phillett Fishing Company, the subject of the inquiry.
Posted in Tauranga Branch
Leave a comment
Warden’s Annual Report
The year under review has seen a continuation of regular monthly luncheon meetings held on the second Wednesday of each month from March to October. November is reserved for the annual cocktail function that is attended by wives and partners of members. The luncheon meeting and the cocktail function are held at the Bay Plaza Hotel Oriental Bay, which remains a popular venue for members.
The Honorable Secretary of the Branch, Captain Graham Williams continues with the unenviable task of securing entertaining and interesting speakers for the luncheon meetings, which averages twenty-three members a meeting. Those members who are able to attend and do not are missing out on a generally informative occasion often with very good debate during the question time at the conclusion of the speaker’s dissertation, especially when the topic has been on maritime matters. Also the social get together over lunch prior to the speaker gives a good opportunity to catch up on maritime gossip.
The cocktail function is subsidised by the branch and those who attend appreciate this. The dinner that is organised by Captain Williams with the Bay Plaza and attended by those who wish to continue with the very pleasant mixed company is steadily growing in numbers each year.
Membership of the Wellington Branch currently stands at 69 members. This comprises of 26 Full members, 23 Retired, 9 Country, 6 Associates, 2 Life and 3 Honorary.
A minute silence was observed at the March meeting for Captain Derek Grimmer and Captain Bob Fozard who had recently passed away. Captain Alistair Fleming was a short-term member as he was posted overseas shortly after joining. However we did gain Captain Bill Mouat from Christchurch and Mr. Bob Stott from Pauatahanui. The Rev. Bob Peters replaced the Rev. Jim Pethers who had been the Chaplain at the Wellington Mission to Seafarers for many years.
Last years annual report made mention of a Wellington member, Captain Nic Campbell volunteering to undertake the editors role of “On Deck”, the Official Journal of the NZ Company of Master Mariners. The first edition of the re-vamped journal was circulated in September 2010 and was exceptionally well received by the NZ membership and also many NZ and overseas organisations that receive copies of our national journal.
Captain Nic Campbell with the help of Mr.Bob Stott, an Associate Member of the Wellington Branch, produced a very informative and professional publication that did credit to the NZ Company of Master Mariners. At the Executive Council meeting held on August 11 2010 it was agreed to publish two editions per year providing finance was available. It was also proposed to canvass for advertising to obtain funds for “On Deck”. This obviously created additional work and a small editorial committee was formed consisting of Captains Cor Van Kesteran, Ken Watt, Nic Campbell, Mr. Bob Stott and the writer, Ron Palmer.
A significant number of appropriately selected business were canvassed but only one business showed an interest and as a result insufficient funds were available for the next edition of “On Deck” that was prepared for publication in March 2011. The reluctance of business houses to accept advertising at this time is possibly a result of the persistent world financial recession. It is believed that with reliable publication of future editions of “On Deck” in its present informative and quality format, with an improving economy, funds from advertising are a real possibility. However, in the meantime all Branches of the Company are being asked to increase membership fees, either by levy or membership subscription to provide sufficient funds for future editions of the journal.
The journal is an important organ for the NZ Company of Master Mariners. It is a medium where members can express their wealth of knowledge and be heard on overall maritime matters. Many of the members of Master Mariners have lived through times of exceptional change in the maritime industry.
Change can be good it takes one out of their comfort zone and helps to keeps their brain active and agile. However, in the march of progress often the good is left behind and there is undeniable evidence that some changes have resulted in a backward step or perhaps, with the benefit of hindsight, simply need adjusting.
Some major changes to the industry are not working to the advantage of New Zealand’s economy. The Harbours industry and also Maritime NZ, is much to the fore in this regard.
HARBOURS INDUSTRY
The NZ Minister of Transport, Steven Joyce addressed the recent conference of the International Association of Ports & Harbors Asia/Oceania. He made it clear that it’s not the Governments role to decide the port’s structures. He has the misguided opinion that there is healthy competition between ports. It would be fair comment to suggest that there be as much competition between ports as there is between oil companies in NZ. But unlike the quest of oil companies that jointly satisfies their insatiable appetite for huge profits there is senseless parochialism in the port industry. There is some evidence that the Ports of Auckland and perhaps Lyttelton has provided international shipping lines with a level of service that do not make economic returns. With the backing of the newly formed super city how far will this uneconomic practice extend to satisfy senseless parochialism and the super city ego of Auckland.
NZ has fourteen commercial ports and five have an element of private ownership. The Port of Wellington, Ports of Auckland and Port of Otago are owned by the local regional councils and the Christchurch City Council owns in excess of 78% of the Port of Lyttelton.
Ownership is not debated in this report but the number of container ports in NZ and the capital expenditure for the five, or perhaps seven when Napier and New Plymouth are included is of concern. One good deepwater container port would be sufficient for the foreseeable future for a country with the expected population growth of New Zealand. With the inevitable introduction of larger container ships that have a draft of 50 feet senseless parochialism will see expensive dredging of harbours to accommodate these vessels. The alternative is a feeder service to Australia at a huge disadvantage in shipping time and costs for NZ exporters. The expenditure for the dredging and associated capital out lay is ultimately borne by the selected
group of ratepayers of the regions.
Before the port reforms in the late 80’s it was acknowledged that NZ only required two container ports, one at each Island. In those days there was a statutory organisation called the NZ Ports Authority (NZPA). Its primary function was to prevent ports from spending capital on container cranes, tugs, extensive dredging etc. There was a limit in the amount of dollars that a port could spend without getting approval from the NZPA. This was considered a major hindrance to competition between ports, which were governed by elected harbour boards. In hindsight perhaps the NZPA was one of the good things left behind in the march for progress.
Central Government should not take the attitude that it is not the role of Government to decide port structures. Neither should the costs of wasteful duplication be borne by groups of ratepayers throughout NZ. 99% of NZ exports go by sea and a sensible well planned infrastructure for ports should not be left to regional councils governed by local body politicians better suited for planing kindergartens and knitting forums. One deepwater container port at Marsden Point with feeder services by coastal container vessels, railways and road transport should be seriously considered for the future. Market forces will prevail over the survival of the three modes of transport for the feeder service.
The change from the NZ Marine Department to Maritime NZ should have been an improvement for the maritime industry but in latter years it is obvious that it is not returning good value for the tax payers dollar. The principle reason must fall back to the employment of senior staff.
There is obviously resistance to employ staff who have a knowledge of maritime affairs and an understanding of the industry overall. Little research is needed to know that professional practitioners in the industry hold very little respect for Maritime NZ.
It employs an army of staff who is obviously short on maritime knowledge and would be better suited to some other industry. The staff numbers are greater than what the NZ Marine Department employed. That body was responsible for surveying of ships, surveying of building elevators, inspection of lifting gear, waterfront and ship safety, administering shipping offices at various ports, navigation schools and examiners and tutors, administration, maintenance and manning of light houses etc.
On reflection the NZ Marine Department did employ staff with maritime backgrounds such as master mariners and marine engineers who knew the industry and more importantly, with the odd exception, knew what they were talking about.
There is something wrong with Maritime NZ when it takes almost 12 months for it to answer a simple question on it’s own rules. The question may never have been answered without perseverance and the threat of court action. This is not an isolated complaint as letters and emails from shipping company executives are also ignored. Obviously the problem is at the top starting with the Director and Board of Directors. The appointment of a new chairman, David Ledson, is hopefully a step in the right direction but one man can do little with a Board of accountants, an ex trade unionist and a management consultant. The same Minister of Transport who considers that port structures are not the business of government appoints these people. It is time he took a hard look at his worthless advisers on ports and harbours and maritime matters.
In conclusion much appreciation is extended to the committee who has been of grateful assistance in assisting with Branch business. Special mention of Captain Legge for his submission on behalf of the Branch to Maritime NZ on the Qualification Review that it has been undertaking over the last 12 months. Also my appreciation to the editorial committee for the official journal of the NZ Company and it’s Editor Captain Nic Campbell and his very able assistant Mr. Bob Stott. Last but not least a special thanks to our Hon. Treasurer Captain Cor Van.Kesteren and Hon. Secretary Captain Graham Williams who both ensure that the Branch runs smoothly at all times.
R.A.J. Palmer
Posted in Wellington Branch
Leave a comment
Wellington Branch Annual General Meeting
Wellington Branch held their AGM on 13 April 2011.
Warden Ron Palmer and Secretary Graham Williams
Wellington members at the Annual General Meeting
Posted in Wellington Branch
Leave a comment
Annual Dinner August 1937
Rollicking sea chanties sung as only men of thc sea can sing them provided a happy atmosphere for the ninth annual dinner of the New Zealand Company of Master Mariners held at the St. George Hotel on Saturday night. The guests of honour included the patron of the company, the Governor-General (Viscount Galway), and the Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. W. L. Martin), who deputised for the Minister of Marine (the Hon. P. Fraser). Mr. Fraser intended to be present until the last moment, when a severe cold forced him to cancel the engagement.
After the loyal toast, the chairman (Captain S. Holm) proposed a toast “The Governor-General”. The company, he said, had been exceedingly fortunate in the three patrons it had had since its inception, and Lord Galway was not the least of them. His Excellency had always shown a very keen interest in the company’s work.
His Excellency expressed his pleassure at being invited to attend the function. Captain Burgess of the Matai knows better than anyone else “my limitations at sea,” he remarked amidst laughter, “but all the same those trips round the coast with him have been some of the most pleasurable of our experiences in New Zealand. Captain Burgess has taken us to some of the most beautiful parts of New Zealand.” The Company of Master Mariners, said Lord Galway, was the youngest of the companies of the city of London, and just before he left for New Zealand he was a guest at the annual dinner at the Mansion House. The company had been founded after the war largely-to commemorate deeds of daring by members of the Mercantile Marine, whose stout hearts and ships had been largely instrumental in guarding the Empire from the danger that faced it. The then Prince of Wales had taken the greatest interest in the company. It was his hope that as time went on the company in New Zealand would move from strength to strength, and that its members would enjoy many another happy gathering.
The toast of “Parliament” was proposed by Captain W. H. Hartman. To those who followed the sea, he said, Parliament was a most important institution. Since they last met a year ago master mariners had been most fortunate in their Parliament, and many things had been accomplished for which they had been pressing for a long time. The present Minister of Marine had taken a very keen interest in steps to make the coasts of New Zealand safer for those who went down to the sea in ships. The Minister of Agriculture, after confessing that he was one of the world’s worst sailors, expressed regret that Mr. Fraser had not been able to attend. All those who knew Mr. Fraser must recognise his interest in the comfort and safety of the Mercantile Marine. They could rest assured that anything Mr Fraser and the Government could do to make the coast safer and the lot of members of the Mercantile Marine easier would be done. It had been said on many occasions that the farmer was the backbone of the country and while he believed that to be true he also believed that it was true that an efficient Mercantile Marine was the spinal chord of the backbone. If it were not for the Mercantile Marine, New Zealand would not be able to play the part it was playing in the trade of the Empire. He extended the best wishes of the Government and the Minister of Marine to the company.
The toast of “The Navy” was proposed by Captain Dalgleish and responded to by Captain R. D. Oliver, R.N. their speeches being reported* under separate headings.
In proposing the toast of “The Merchant” Service” Dr. E. Kidson said that the development of New Zealand had been made possible by an efficient Mercantile Marine. It was a vital service and one of which they might well be proud. He referred to the efforts that had been made in recent years tc improve the living conditions of the men whose livelihood was won at sea.
Captain Colin McDonald, in replying, said that he was one of the original three men responsible for the formation of the company, and he recalled the sympathetic assistance that had been forthcoming from Sir James Mills. During his long experience he had formed the opinion that the Royal Navy and the Merchant Service were as far apart as the Poles. That would have to be altered. Captain J Mawson acknowledged the toast.
During the evening several other toasts were honoured and opportunity was taken to farewell Captain Hartman and Captain J Keane, who are leaving Wellington in the near future.
Posted in Pages from the Past
Leave a comment
New technology raises questions over role of bridge teams
Recommendations that shipping should learn from the aviation industry for bridge layout and navigator training
Craig Eason writing in Lloyds List Tuesday 8 February 2011
THERE are training and operational issues that have to be addressed as e-navigation continues to develop. Last month’s meeting of the International Maritime Organization sub-committee on training and watchkeeping expressed clear concern about a perceived lack of basic seamanship on board today’s vessels, and the subsequent decline in navigation skills across the world’s fleet.
That was mirrored by concern at the e-navigation conference on the CROWN of SCANDINAVIA last week over the role of bridge teams, whether they are monitors of equipment and situations, or whether they will remain as navigators in a more traditional sense.
Reference was made, both at the STCW meeting and in the e-navigation conference, to the aviation industry and its experiences. Aviation was also a point of reference with regard to bridge designs, with a desire for seamanship skills without an over-reliance on technology. As bridge systems have become more integrated and complex, there have been discussions over standardisation of bridge designs, although it remains unclear how this could be achieved.
Also, equipment makers would be reluctant to have too much prescription, as this could hinder technological development. Participants at the STCW meeting agreed that there ought to be some level of standardisation, but it is not clear how this could be achieved.
There has been a focus on the development of electronic chart display and information systems, but there is a growing perception that other displays may have to be developed as e-navigation leads to other information becoming available on the bridge.
This is one of the areas that the discussions and development of e-navigation test beds will reveal in the coming years. A further issue that also needs to be addressed is that of the training schools. As the concept of enhanced, or electronic, navigation develops, there will be a need to ensure bridge teams have the relevant competence on board, and this can only be done through proper training and education.
There have already been concerns raised over some of the training courses that have appeared on the market to help shipowners meet their stipulated requirements for Ecdis training, and the fear is that without proper controls, the training providers may seriously lag behind these technological developments.
Posted in General
Leave a comment
Beaufort Scale and Weather Forecasts
Why has New Zealand dropped the use of the Beaufort scale numbers in marine weather forecasts. Most of us will remember learning and recognise this scale which links wind speed to sea state and which also gives the limits when gale and storm warnings are issued.
New Zealand MetService forecasts wind in 5 knot bands. A “force 7” is forecast as “winds 25 to 30, gusting to 35 knots with rough seas”. It would also require a gale warning the wind speed is over 34 knots. Many more words to listen to, comprehend or copy down.
Another new term frequently used is a “wind advisory”. I do not know what this means or what the limits are.
All this is probably connected to global warming or la nina.
Posted in General
Leave a comment