OCTOBER 6, 2016 — The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), took yesterday’s opening of the Singapore International Bunkering Conference and Exhibition (SIBCON) as the opportunity to unveil several new initiatives
OCTOBER 6, 2016 — The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), took yesterday’s opening of the Singapore International Bunkering Conference and Exhibition (SIBCON) as the opportunity to unveil several new initiatives
SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 — Hy-Line Cruises, a division of Hyannis Harbor Tours, Inc., Hyannis, MA, has taken delivery of a new 493-passenger, high-speed catamaran from Gladding-Hearn Shipbuilding, the Duclos Corporation. It will
When it came time to upgrade the autopilot system in four Victoria-Class long-range patrol submarines, Canada’s Department of National Defence (DND) assembled a consortium including three federal government departments—National Research Council of Canada (NRC), DND, and Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC)—and L-3 MAPPS of Montreal, the contractor that is supplying the control and simulation solutions for the new system. The builds of HMCS Victoria, Windsor, Chicoutimi, and Corner Brook began in the mid-1980s, so the original autopilot system has become obsolescent. The submarines are transitioning from point-to-point wiring to modern digital data bus communications.
The system includes an operator console, computers, and electronic enclosures. The computers receive data on depth, course, speed, pitch, roll, and heading from transducers, calculate, and send values to the rudder and hydroplanes’ control surfaces. When engaged, the new autopilot system will automatically adjust and compensate for any disturbance that could affect the submarine’s set course through the water, advises DND, either on the surface or when submerged. The autopilot system is independent from the ballast control system.
Built in the UK for the Royal Navy, the diesel-electric-driven submarines were bought by the Canadian government in 1998, after the Royal Navy decided to convert to an all-nuclear fleet. The first vessel slated for conversion to the new autopilot system is HMCS Windsor. She measures 70.3 meters long by 7.6 meters across the beam, and has a maximum operational depth greater than 200 meters. Displacement is 2,220 tons surfaced and 2,439 tons submerged, and maximum submerged speed is 20 knots.
David Millan, Senior Research Council Officer at the National Research Council of Canada in St. John’s, Newfoundland, has worked on the autopilot replacement project since 2012. The first order of business was to help develop the specifications for the autopilot control system. Then, on behalf of DND, he and his team evaluated three proposals for providing the simulation and control solutions. L-3 MAPPS was awarded the contract. Millan was aboard HMCS Victoria for 10 days off Halifax to collect full-scale baseline data on the existing autopilot system. When the new system is installed, the baseline data will be used to gauge its performance. Next, DRDC provided a numerical model which Millan and his team modernized, added an external interface, and used to provide an independent evaluation of L-3 MAPPS’ autopilot algorithm software. They then simulated the interaction between the numerical submarine and the numerical autopilot to commands such as “Do a turning circle”, “Hold a straight line”, and “Change depth”, and observed the movements of the simulated submarine. There were criteria for each maneuver such as accuracy in meeting the set point and course keeping. They also combined maneuvers, such as both changing depth and turning. They recommended improvements, which were quickly addressed by L-3 MAPPS. Millan notes that the new autopilot system has “a very snazzy interface” which emulates the old one, even though the technology has changed from push buttons to touch screens.
NRC’s tow tank which is 200 meters long by 12 meters wide by 7 meters deep—the largest in Canada—is used to test ships, marine components, assemblies, and software in varying current, wave, wind, and water conditions. Millan and his fabrication team spent five months building a model submarine for testing. It is 4.5 meters long by 6 meters, 1.1 meter from keel to top of sail, and weighs 670 kilograms. The model is comprised of: the nose assembly, containing the forward hydroplane system; the mid-body assembly, an aluminum pressure housing for the control and communication systems, support electronics, batteries, and sensors; the aft water-tight housing for the propulsion, rudder and aft hydroplane systems; the sail section for antennas and positioning systems; and a ballasted keel.
Dr. Jim Millan, NRC Director of Research and Development, explains that according to Froude scaling laws, the 1-to-15-scale model submarine they built measures 1/15th of the real submarine in each dimension. The model’s weight and propulsion power are 1/3375th of the actual submarine; the speed is one-quarter of the actual vessel, and events in model-scale time happen four times faster than at full scale (e.g., it can turn around in ¼ of the time). The model’s maximum submerged speed is 2.6 meters per second, and maximum power is 11 kilowatts.
In 2014, one week was spent in initial testing and commissioning, and a second week was spent conducting 14 operational tank tests in calm water, and also with seas coming from the bow and stern, with various wave heights, and with three different boat speeds. The tests included surfacing, diving, maintaining depth, and snorkel depth in various wave fields. The data from the physical model was used to improve the numerical model, which will be used in submariner training and also to generate data to assist operators.
Dr. Francois Belanger, Project Engineer for L-3 MAPPS, and DND project manager Hans Pall were involved in the model testing. The model submarine was operated wirelessly. The autopilot algorithm running on a PC on the shore controlled the hydroplanes on the model submarine. “For a PhD, Dr. Belanger is an immensely practical fellow,” observes David Millan. “He was able to change the autopilot on the fly to reflect the analysis of each run. I haven’t seen that done before: improving the algorithm while running the model.” He added that the DND project manager saw the model testing as an opportunity to advance the autopilot’s capabilities as much as possible before testing at full scale. Model testing also enabled them to acquire data on boat maneuverability and hydrodynamic characterization, information that was not transferred to DND when the submarines were acquired.
The old autopilot system’s use was captain-dependent, notes David Millan. The autopilot controlled the hydroplanes, but operational preferences determined whether or not the captain adjusted them manually. “Submarines around a certain speed, enter a transition zone going from maintaining depth in one mode to another mode,” explains Millan. “As you go faster, the hydroplanes move in opposite directions” (compared to moving in the same direction when moving slower), which is why the helmsman may choose to manually take control. The intelligent algorithm in the new autopilot system allows for adaptability, depending on the speed and performance of the vessel. It should be able to feel the boat and how it’s performing—to the extent that a machine can—says Millan, and change control modes as required. “It’s hard to do that with the old-fashioned hard-wired system,” he adds. “I hope it will be used in all of the cases where it’s operationally applicable. It will reduce the load on the helmsman.”
Reflecting on the importance of ensuring the numerical model is accurate, Dr. Jim Millan says, “That data potentially becomes a life and death decision-making tool. Knowing the capabilities of your submarine and being informed of its maneuverability and ability to escape or avoid harm, that’s what it’s all about. That’s what we do for the Navy. It’s safety and performance.”
Factory acceptance testing of the new autopilot equipment sets is complete. Ten days of sea trials are planned for October 2016 to complete characterization of the Windsor before the new equipment set is installed in early 2017. Sea acceptance tests are planned for spring 2017.
“Orders are drying up. We are faced with an unimaginable situation at which our dock may soon be empty,” wrote Choi Kil Seon, Chairman of the world’s largest shipbuilder, Hyundai Heavy Industries, in a letter to employees this past March. Complacency had set in during the boom years of the 2000’s, he said, despite strenuous efforts to compete with Chinese shipbuilders.
His stark warning has been echoed around shipbuilding halls across Asia. Chinese shipbuilding is undergoing massive retrenchment with the closure of many second-tier shipyards and massive state aid for those still in business. Meanwhile, Japanese shipyards fear a slump that could prove worse than the crash that followed the 2008 financial crisis. Shipyard executives fear the worst as current projects come to an end and have no pipeline of business to speak of.
About 5,000 miles away, workers in the high-tech Kleven Shipyard just outside Ulsteinvik on Norway’s west coast may or may not be aware that their counterparts in Asia are staring into the abyss. And they would certainly not recognize the term complacency in any aspect of shipyard operation.
A combination of effective marketing, chunky investment in automation and robotics, clever use of the country’s export credit arrangements, and close cooperation with Rolls-Royce ship designers who work just across the fjord, has enabled the family-owned shipyard to build up an order book now potentially worth more than $1.8 billion.
Early in July, the yard announced its latest contract for the construction of two—with an option for an additional two—ice-strengthened expedition ships designed by Rolls-Royce (rendering pictured at right) for Norway’s Hurdigruten. Hurdigruten operates a fleet of cargo and passenger vessels around the country’s 15,700-mile coast. The order, worth billions of Norwegian krone, is the largest in Hurdigruten’s history and is a major coup for the shipyard and Rolls-Royce which, in addition to vessel design, will supply about $15 million of equipment for each ship.
Together with the yard’s existing 16-ship order book, Kleven now has work for the rest of this decade. Ships under construction include six anchor handlers for Maersk Offshore, four high-tech stern trawlers of Rolls-Royce design for German, French and Spanish owners, the world’s most advanced cable layer with the highest DP3 position-keeping for ABB, two Rolls-Royce design live fish carriers, a deep-sea mining vessel for de Beers, and two luxury megayachts for a New Zealand entrepreneur. Talk about a diverse order book.
How has the yard been able to buck the global trend, particularly in one of the most expensive parts of the world? Certainly the Norwegian Export Credit Guarantee Agency has played an important role by making attractive financing terms available for foreign owners and vessels to be deployed overseas. But the yard’s management has spent almost $60 million on upgrading yard facilities over the past five years.
The robotic welding process, using lasers, continues to evolve, with a vision control system recently installed and developed by the University of Trondheim. The automated process allows welding rates of more than 300 feet per hour transforming manual rates of a typical eight feet per hour. “This is how we believe we can stay ahead of our competition and be competitive on price,” said a yard representative recently.
However, while the Kleven story may be exceptional—other yards in Norway’s usually bustling Sunmøre region are wrestling the challenge of an unprecedented offshore downturn—the design and shipbuilding innovation evident in northern Europe still facilitates construction of some of the world’s most sophisticated vessels.
In a radius of just a few miles from Kleven, there are several Vard yards, now owned by Fincantieri, the Havyard and across the fjord, next door to Rolls-Royce is Ulstein. Between them, these shipbuilders have completed some of the most sophisticated vessels ever built. They include the latest generation seismic survey ships, light well intervention vessels, offshore construction vessels and ultra-sophisticated cable layers.
Norway is not alone, however, in blazing a shipbuilding innovation trail. Finnish ship designers have unmatched expertise in ice-class design and construction, likely to be in heavy demand as warming seas enable navigation through the Northern Sea Route. Presumably with this in mind, Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation completed the acquisition of what is now called Arctech Helsinki Shipyards at the end of 2014.
Sited adjacent to the ice model test basin now known as Aker Arctic Technology Inc, the Helsinki shipyard has undergone various changes in ownership over the years, but has always focused primarily on ice-class design and construction. More than 500 ships have been built since it was established 151 years ago and more than 60% of the icebreakers now in operation around the world were built there.
The Helsinki yard has pioneered a range of ice-class innovations over the years, often with others. These include ‘double-acting’ vessels, which can break ice by bow or stern, azimuthing propulsion for ice operation, heeling and air-bubbling systems, shallow-draft icebreaker designs for inland waterways and coastal seas, and nuclear-powered icebreakers.
The shipyard continues to innovate. In 2014, the shipyard delivered the first “oblique icebreaker” to Russia’s Federal Agency of Sea and River Transport. The Baltika has an asymmetric hull and three azimuthing thrusters with a total installed power of 9 MW. She can break ice ahead, astern or sideways and can open up a 160-foot channel in two-foot thick ice.
The shipyard’s most recent delivery is the first dual-fuelled icebreaker to be powered by LNG and diesel. The Polaris, with a bollard pull of 200 tonnes, is powered by two 6.5 MW stern Azipods and one 6 MW unit, all supplied by power and automation company ABB. She is the Finnish Transportation Agency’s eighth icebreaker.
Polaris will be powered by Wärtsilä’s dual-fuel engines capable of operating on both liquefied natural gas (LNG) and low sulfur diesel fuel. Wärtsilä’s scope of supply consists of one 8-cylinder Wärtsilä 20DF, two 9-cylinder Wärtsilä 34DF, and two 12-cylinder Wärtsilä 34DF engine. Additionally, Wärtsilä secured a five years maintenance agreement for all engines and generators including spare parts, remote online support, CBM monitoring and training services.
The EURO 123 million ($136 million) vessel, classed by Lloyd’s Register, also has an emergency response and oil spill recovery capability and completed sea trials successfully in June. Her 800 m3 of LNG storage will provide an endurance of up to 30 days when operating in the Gulf of Bothnia.
Norway has led the way in the development of gas-powered ships and Rolls-Royce has been one of the pioneers. Designed by NSK Ship Design, the gas-powered cargo ship M/S Høydal features a Bergen gas engine, Promas combined rudder and propeller, and a hybrid shaft generator from Rolls-Royce. The ship was built at Tersan Shipyard in Turkey and delivered to NSK Shipping. The DNV GL class Høydal transport fish feed manufactured by BioMar to the numerous salmon and trout farms of northern Norway.
Boaty McBoatface lives on
Rolls-Royce engineers are also designing the 128m polar research vessel RRS Sir David Attenborough, which will be built at Cammell Laird’s site in Birkenhead on Merseyside, England. As you might recall, the project drew worldwide attention and almost blew up the internet when the public overwhelmingly chose the name “Boaty McBoatface” for the £200 million vessel during a “Name Our Ship” campaign held by Britain’s Natural Environmental Research Council. The council saved face—pun somewhat intended—by choosing the fourth most popular name submitted, “Sir David Attenborough,” after the famous British naturalist.
NERC says a remotely operated vehicle used by the Sir David Attenborough in its research will be named Boaty McBoatface instead.
The project is the biggest commercial shipbuilding contract in Britain and one of the biggest for more than a generation. When delivered in 2019, the Sir David Attenborough will carry out oceanographic and other scientific work in both the Antarctic and Arctic as well as transporting supplies to Antarctic research stations.
The research vessel will be Polar Code 4 ice class, with an endurance for voyages up to 19,000 nautical miles, space for a total of 90 people and a large cargo capacity. The vessel is also designed to generate very low levels of underwater radiated noise and minimize the risk of pollution. Onboard laboratories will allow the prompt analysis of samples.
As part of its £30 million contract, Rolls-Royce will supply the diesel electric propulsion system which will include new Bergen B33:45 engines, two nine-cylinder and two six-cylinder engines, and two 4.5m diameter Rolls-Royce Controllable Pitch Propellers (CPP). The powerful, efficient and compact engines and strong propellers will be able to push the vessel through approximately one meter thick level ice with extremely low underwater radiated noise, avoiding interference with survey equipment or disturbing marine mammals and fish shoals.
According to Jørn Heltne, Rolls-Royce, Senior Vice President for Sales in Ship Design & Systems, Rolls-Royce will also deliver automation and control systems, including its Dynamic Positioning system and Unified Bridge.
Also, Rolls-Royce deck handling systems will support a wide range of tasks, such as towing scientific equipment for subsea acoustic survey equipment using up to 12,000m of wire, or deploying equipment over the side or through a moonpool to collect seawater and seabed samples at depths of up to 9,000m.
OEMs capitalize on new era of ‘smart shipping’
Rapid advances in satcom technology is finally enabling shipping to go digital and make the most of ship-shore connections. While a handful of companies have wired up their ships over the last few years—notably the world’s largest container line, Maersk, high-throughput broadband now facilitates 24/7 connectivity and introduces a new era of remote monitoring, diagnostics, predictive maintenance and shore-side support.
Other transport modes have been using these technologies for some time, but satellite coverage across the world’s oceans has remained a challenge. Many thousands of unconnected ships still provide manually prepared noon reports for managers ashore, an asset monitoring procedure which some from outside shipping can scarcely believe.
Rolls-Royce, through its TotalCare service, has been monitoring the performance of thousands of jet engines for years. Instead of signing service agreements and charging customers for call-outs, spare parts and attendance at unexpected breakdowns, the company’s “power-by-the-hour” concept is aimed at keeping planes in the air and avoiding any downtime.
Earlier this year, London-listed Inmarsat launched Fleet Xpress, a high-throughput broadband service available through its Global Xpress network on its latest satellite constellation. As well as enabling a completely new range of ship-shore connections including internet, email, social media and video conferencing, third party app providers can procure bandwidth on Fleet Xpress to provide their own “smart” services (see accompanying feature, “Fleet Xpress brings ‘smart’ ship tipping point,” for more details).
Systems similar to the Rolls-Royce TotalCare service are now being introduced in shipping. Wärtsilä recently paid EURO 43 million ($47.5 million) for Finnish energy management and analytics firm Eniram which has sensor and analytics equipment installed on about 270 vessels and a turnover of EURO 10 million ($11 million) in 2015. The Helsinki-based firm has established a sound track record in raising vessel efficiency by optimizing trim, engine load and speed, thereby saving fuel and cutting emissions.
The acquisition will strengthen the company’s recently launched Wärtsilä Genius service in which key components are monitored in real time, exceptions noted, and maintenance procedures optimized. A virtual service engineer will also be available as part of the service and the company plans to make more details available at this year’s SMM in September.
Competitor ABB is preparing to open its fourth “Integrated Operations Center” in the United States later this year, probably in Houston. The company has already opened a facility for its offshore clients in Billingstad, Norway, and two similar centers for shipping customers in Helsinki and Singapore.
A fifth center is also likely to be set up in China. By mid-year, ABB had established real-time connections between the centers and clients’ ships, enabling ABB personnel to track performance and provide shore-side support if necessary. Meanwhile Rolls-Royce Marine is also in the process of setting up connections to monitor its equipment in operation at sea.
Following a successful remote monitoring pilot project, Radio Holland recently struck a deal with China Navigation Company for the maintenance of its navcom equipment onboard the owner’s newbuild, multipurpose vessels and bulk carriers.
“The maintenance agreement with Radio Holland has been designed to dovetail with the end of the warranty period for our newbuildings,” says Martin Cresswell, Fleet Director, China Navigation Co. Pte., “and is a continuation of the excellent cooperation that we have built over the last few years. The agreement incorporates remote monitoring, which we believe will significantly reduce out of service periods, increasing operational safety.”
MAN Diesel’s largest two-stroke engine yet
Just this past June, China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) acquired Wärtsilä’s 30% shareholding in Winterthur Gas & Diesel Ltd. (WinGD). WinGD, Winterthur, Switzerland, will continue as an independent, international company to develop and innovate its two-stroke low-speed marine engine portfolio serving all merchant markets and customers worldwide.
WinGD was one of the earliest exponents of diesel technology. It started the development of large internal combustion engines in 1898 under the “Sulzer” name.
“With the transfer of the shares in WinGD from Wärtsilä Cooperation to CSSC, we will be able to establish even closer cooperation with one of the leading global shipbuilding conglomerate CSSC enabling us to accelerate the development of reliable, efficient and innovative two-stroke low-speed engines meeting the market demands of merchant shipping of the future. WinGD will continue to work with the Wärtsilä Corporation Service Network to serve our customers for after-sales support,” says Martin Wernli, CEO of WinGD.
In other news in the two-stroke diesels, this past May, the 19,437-TEU MSC Jade was delivered by Korea’s Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME) with what is the largest and most powerful engine yet from MAN Diesel & Turbo. Built by Doosan Engine in Korea under license from MAN Diesel & Turbo, the MAN B&W 11G95ME-C9.5 two-stroke engine is rated at an impressive 75,570 kW (103,000 hp).
The G95 is a popular choice in the large containerships (9,000 to 21,000 TEU), with 68 sold in the segment since August 2013.
“We attribute the G95’s popularity in this segment to its ability to provide sufficient power for such vessels to reliably achieve their desired operating speed,” says Ole Grøne, Senior Vice President Low-Speed Sales and Promotions, MAN Diesel & Turbo. “Here, the G95’s rpm ensures that a propeller of optimal size can be employed, in turn delivering a low fuel-oil consumption for an optimal fuel economy.
Japan’s Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding, another MAN Diesel licensee, completed the world’s first ME-GIE ethane-operated two-stroke diesel engine. The Mitsui-MAN B&W 7G50ME-C9.5-GIE will be installed in the first of three 36,000 m3 liquefied ethane gas carriers being built by Sinopacific Offshore Engineering in China.
MAN Diesel & Turbo reports that ethane was chosen as fuel over HFO because of its competitive pricing as well as the significantly shorter bunkering time it entails. As a fuel, its emissions profile is also better than HFO, as it contains a small amount of sulphur, 15-20 lower CO2 and emits signficantly fewer particles during combustion. The ME-GI engine can also easily be converted to run on methane, if the operator desires.
Obligation, vigilance, and perseverance are among the professional qualities of the merchant mariner. Whether one attends a maritime academy, as I did, or comes up through the hawsepipe, in seagoing service mariners learn and practice the ethos of care to crew, ship, and the environment. Mariners are supposed to display those qualities in spite of cold, or rain, or discomfort–one of my strongest memories of the academy is being on lookout, freezing, wearing all my jackets. Mariners are supposed to be ready, to be watchful, to put together skills and equipment and to balance paradox and contradiction to make a successful voyage.
The New York Harbor community combined all these unique attributes on 9/11, evacuating hundreds of thousands of commuters and residents of Lower Manhattan to Staten Island, to New Jersey, and elsewhere in New York City in an improvised fleet of boats: tugs, dinner boats, tour boats, private vessels. Over the course of those hours, boats made trip after trip across the harbor. Then, as the number of evacuees from Manhattan tapered off, the boatlift shifted to transporting responders and supplies to the island, an operation that continued for several days. They accomplished the largest water evacuation in history without planning, without practice—and without accidents.
What made this possible? To find out, my coauthor Tricia Wachtendorf and I talked with boat operators and waterfront workers, piecing together their stories for our book American Dunkirk: The Waterborne Evacuation of Manhattan on 9/11. Foremost was a spirit of service and a duty to rescue that is characteristic of the maritime community. Law and tradition require a mariner to come to the aid of a person at sea in danger of being lost. On 9/11 mariners widened the compass of their obligation to include the people who were queuing up at the shoreline.
The participants in this evacuation saw themselves as part of an active maritime community. Everyone knew everyone else, they said. They knew each others’ boats, and personnel were always moving from company to company, creating a strong network of acquaintance. Even though the commercial setting could sometimes be highly competitive, there were also habits of cooperation: any company might need help from any other in an emergency. It’s almost a rule in the disaster field that the planning process is more important than the plan itself. Responders have to become familiar with each others’ capacities, resources, and limitations. The years of interaction and familiarity were actually a planning process for urban disaster management, though they didn’t know it.
Mariners lead lives of paradox. GPS provides fabulous accuracy, but the prudent mariner is still reminded to check it by other means. Some mariners have attended disciplined and hierarchical academies where they live a regimented lifestyle while also learning Bridge Team Management, to adopt proper communications skills that short-circuit the intimidation of hierarchy. They operate in a complex web of maneuvering rules, which also contain a rule that prescribes that the rules should be broken when they’re not working. Often their information is ambiguous, as with weather, so they are sensitive to margins of error. In this complex milieu, mariners are always making judgments about safety, speed, and efficiency. These judgments abounded on 9/11.
They carried passengers on boats not certified for that. In some cases, they exceeded boats’ passenger capacity. Boat operators said they didn’t do this recklessly, but looked at the boat’s performance, the distribution of additional weight, and the demands of the immediate crisis. Certainly the usual margin of safety was narrowed in this event both with respect to capacity and to navigation. In some areas around the harbor the dust was so thick that visibility was zero, but they continued on. “Radar, don’t fail me now!” recalled one captain thinking as he approached the entrance to North Cove. Sometimes, boat captains took on bystanders to assist in embarking evacuees or in handling lines. Boats used piers they were unaccustomed to, or that weren’t designed for passengers, and had to jury-rig gangways because of the different heights. The captains were careful, using their experience and judgment to know how much they could push the boundary of risk. Other rules were slackened. A Coast Guard officer authorized fueling without permits. Two harbor pilots took golf carts to move supplies. The main thing was that when they pushed the limits, they were thoughtful, weighing the risk as experience has taught them.
Sometimes older technologies are more adaptable than modern ones. A break-bulk ship can work cargo anywhere, but a container ship, not so much. Efficiency sometimes erases adaptability, but disasters remind us of the importance of older tools and technologies, such as radio. Certainly there are tools to help the modern disaster manager: satellite photography, robotics, drones. But a lot of disaster management is old-fashioned work: moving things and people, staging equipment, organizing activities, talking on the phone. Probably the exemplar of this principle during 9/11 was the John J. Harvey, a retired fireboat that had been bought and restored by a group of enthusiasts. On the morning of September 11, the group boarded the Harvey and got underway first just to see what was happening, then they moved some evacuees, but then the Harvey’s real talent became obvious: the capacity to pump a lot of water. That capacity, left over from now-ancient days of wooden piers and warehouses and stacked-up flammable cargoes, was just what was needed to charge the fire hoses now substituting for the destroyed infrastructure at Ground Zero. Even in normal times, the Harvey demonstrated the qualities of prudence and vigilance. One of her owners, a retired fireboat captain, insisted they always have some usable firehose on hand, just in case.
Of course, there were challenges. The era of deep-draft commercial maritime use of much of Lower Manhattan has long since past. The waterfront had few good locations for the boats to embark passengers and lacked critical shoreside infrastructure, such as bollards or cleats, to tie boats to. Meanwhile, the smooth stone surface of the Battery Park seawall threatened to damage boats that were coming alongside. The sailboat Ventura, for example, could not tie up there because of being buffeted against the wall. “We’re going to have a boat that’s full of matchsticks and it’s going to sink,” said the captain. Even the durable Harvey got “quite a battering.” Some boats tied up to trees to hold steady for taking on evacuees. In other instances there was too much infrastructure, some of it in the form of fences and ornamental ironwork. Several participants in the evacuation reported simply cutting down the fences to clear a path for the evacuees.
The boat operations demonstrate what we have seen in many disasters: the importance of improvised, unscripted activities, and the importance of new groups, organizations, and networks. In spite of a widespread desire to “command and control,” that is not possible in an unfolding community-wide disaster. Most people are rescued by bystanders, for example, often well before formal responders arrive, which shows that there is always a grassroots dimension to disaster management. 9/11 maritime activities took place all around New York Harbor. No one could have full “command” of these activities, where needs were being identified and handled in an organic way through a growing network. The Coast Guard took a coordinating but not a commanding role. They wisely made no effort to take over the entire operation, recognizing that they needed to let it unfold. And there would be no way to command activities that were happening at Liberty Landing, or at Weehawken, or at Highlands, a 17-mile transit from Manhattan, where they were all dealing with their own needs of sorting passengers, decontaminating people, and offering comfort and bottles of water.
The 9/11 boat operations offer some insights for urban disaster management and resilience, organizations, and communities. Key features of resilience are redundancy, substitutability, and mobility. Some vessels can operate even if others are out of service. Boats are a mobile resource, easily moved around as needed. If some facilities are damaged, others may be available or can be improvised on short notice. Some vessels of more rugged construction served as floating piers, so that other vessels of lighter design would not be damaged against the seawall. Vessels are connected by VHF radio—nearly always available– and vessel movements are organized not by a flowchart or a rigid command structure but rather by a nautical chart and the mariners’ operational knowledge of that area: its laws, regulations, and customs. Public officials in waterfront cities should look closely at the different transport modes available. In particular, emergency managers and urban planners and engineers should work much more closely together to identify needs and resources.
That’s the key. People, groups, and communities share what they know; identify what they need; and connect to others. The maritime operations on 9/11 are an example of principles that extend to other settings. In situations as diverse as U.S. wildfires to the Fukushima tsunami and nuclear plant catastrophe, people have built new networks and improvised with whatever is available. A resilient disaster response depends on deep knowledge of a place, memory, gathering resources, and finding substitutes. These are the pieces that people can assemble creatively and strategically to manage a disaster.
You can view a list of the vessels and operators that lent their support on 9/11 at www.fireboat.org/911_rescue_boats.php
James Kendra is a graduate of Massachusetts Maritime Academy and a former merchant marine officer. He is Director of the Disaster Research Center at the University of Delaware.
AUGUST 2, 2016 — Swiftships, LLC, Morgan City, LA , has partnered with ICS Nett Inc. (ICS), a Virginia-based technology solutions company, to continue research and development efforts that will transform a
JULY 27, 2016 — The SAR 60, an 18 m high-speed search and rescue vessel prototype, set a new “Round Italy” record, July 12, completing the nearly 1,120 nautical mile voyage from
JULY 14, 2016 — Incat Crowther America, Lafayette, LA, reports that the Veecraft Marine shipyard in in Cape Town, South Africa, has completed two 35 m offshore security patrol vessels — M/V
One of the biggest concerns in shipping is finding and retaining qualified mariners. This is further exacerbated by the downturns in the oil and bulker markets, where vessels are being laid up or sold for scrap, leaving crews to find work where they can, possibly outside of the industry. Even before these mariners actually get their jobs, there is a plethora of regulatory barriers to obtain the original Certificate of Competency for officers, and even numerous hoops to jump through for the unlicensed as well. The 2010 Manilla Amendments to the STCW and the Maritime Labor Convention of 2006 have created further requirements than seen previously.
First and foremost a mariner must obtain a Transportation Worker Identity Credential (TWIC). In the past, mariners background checks were conducted by the USCG. Now the TWIC card reduces the Coast Guard need to conduct said checks, since the TSA is doing so. An original TWIC costs $128.00 out of the prospective mariner’s pocket, before they even have credentials or a job. At this point we are going to focus solely on the U.S. Mariner. Although STCW has standardized much of the training, the implementation in different countries can be vast.
The second step, and sometimes the most difficult to complete is the mariner physical. One would think that it is as easy as walking in to your family doctor’s office, handing them the form, and doing the physical. Unfortunately many doctors are not equipped to deal with the more specific items such as the color vision test. If your doctor cannot do this, then going to the eye doctor may suffice, but call ahead. Yours truly has found that not all eye doctors’ offices have the requisite tests that the Coast Guard wants. It is best to go to an OSHA clinic or a doctor who conducts FAA pilot physicals. The entire medical requirements can be found in NVIC 01-14.
The next step is to have a drug screening. Not any drug screening is acceptable. This must be done in accordance with 46 CFR 16.220, filled out on the appropriate DOT form and submitted to a USCG approved testing facility. This can range from $50 to $150 depending on your location. Many civil service drug tests do not count for the USCG requirements.
With the addition of an entry level rating application and the fees totaling $140 for MMC issuance and evaluation, a mariner is ready to begin looking domestically for a job. At this point the prospective mariner has possibly spent well over $400 of their own money, just to get a credential to work on board. What can an Able Seafarer expect to make? The monthly minimum according to the ILO is $614.00. Now on a U.S.-flag vessel, this low of a wage likely will not be seen. But U.S. seafarers working on foreign-flag vessels may see this.
This, however, is only the beginning. Gone are the days where an Ordinary, or even a Mess man could work their way up the hawse pipe all the way to Captain, without having to take an inordinate amount of classes and jump through bureaucratic hoops.
The next rung on the ladder to advancement is the Rating Forming Part of a Navigational or Engineering Watch. In order to accomplish this the candidate must either have a Qualified Assessor sign off on certain competencies. This is in addition to the required six-month sea time. Another option for the seafarer is to complete a training program approved by the USCG that includes two months of sea time. The price of this course? Anywhere upwards of $1,000.00.
After that, one can either go to a Maritime University, Union Training Center, local Captains School or acquire the requisite sea time and have the competencies signed off on in order to become a vessel officer. Either way the process takes several years of hard work, study, and dedication. In the end it is all worth it. But once you reach officer level, the workload to upgrade that license increases substantially. We will also touch on customer specific requirements for the training of crew and officers.
When I graduated SUNY Maritime in 1997, the school had not fully implemented STCW 95 in to the curriculum yet. Therefore, after graduation, myself and many of my classmates stuck around for a few weeks to complete these requirements. Nowadays the STCW requirements are included in to the curriculum and the cadets graduate ready to sail. From there however, the price of ambition can be high as we will see. Once upon a time officers would sit for each and every upgrade to their license. Now, at least on the deck side, a Third Mate only needs sea time to upgrade to Second Mate. Engineers are far more complicated as the type of plant must be taken into consideration. Plus, I am a deck officer, so I’m a little biased on the subject.
Upon upgrading to Second Mate, this officer must now go through a large amount of training to upgrade to Chief Officer. If the prospective Chief Officer has someone willing to sign off on their Celestial Navigation and Advanced Navigation competency sheets, they have just shaved 80 hours off of their training. If not, then the prospect may be taking close to 450 hours of training. This can be up to 12 weeks of classroom time. The cost? Upwards of $10,000.00. This is before paying the Coast Guard their fees for examination, evaluation, and license issuance. If the mariner is lucky their employer or union sponsors them for this training. As a former union sailor, I had no out of pocket costs for this training. If the mariner does not have a sponsor for this training, the price tag is quite substantial, especially in a market such as this, where jobs are becoming more and more scarce.
One would be led to believe that there could not possibly be any more training required after this. This is not necessarily the case. Management officers are often required to have undergone the Medical Person in Charge training and Fast Rescue Boat. Of course there is also the specialty training that needs to be taken in certain trades such as Person in Charge for Tankers, or Liquid Carriers, Crowd control and Crisis Management for those working passenger vessels. Those officers working for Military Sealift Command may be required to take Small Arms, Chemical, Biological, Radiological Defense Officer (CBR-D), and a manner of other courses dependent on the vessel the mariner will sail upon. These extra courses can total another month or two of the mariner’s off time.
There is a fair proportion of the maritime industry with personnel who have never spent any significant time at sea. That in it of itself is not a problem; not all jobs require seagoing experience. For many however, the mariner is viewed as a tool and not a person who has hopes, dreams, and aspirations. These mariners spend on average six months a year on the ship. Some may trade coastwise, some international
If six months is spent on the ship and then contract requirements or career ambitions require further training, a mariner can only have a total of a few weeks off each vacation to spend with family, friends, and loved ones. I am not proposing that we reduce the educational requirements. I believe that we will see a downward trend in accidents across the board in the coming years due to increased training. But other measures need be considered by ship owners and managers in order to allow the mariners to have a fair amount of time off to do the things that life may require of them and get that much needed rest in order to return refreshed and ready for work. If we are to retain the talent that is required to crew the vessels, than we must remember their humanity.
