# Fatigue at Sea



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

I would be interested to hear any comments on this subject.
Ships have got ever more complex yet now have far less crew than say 20 years ago.. Today schedules are such that most ships are working around the clock with shorter port times and (in many cases )longer seagoing watch hours due to smaller crew numbers. Cardiff University did a study on this some time ago which showed up both the short and longer term damage this has on our health. We now have the hours of work regulations yet for many this has not changed the situation one bit, In fact in this age of paperwork it simply represents just one more bit of paper that needs completing every day. So what's your thoughts, should we be working in an industry that clearly (in many cases) causes us long term harm. Why is it that we can legally work 90 hours a week, yet an aircraft pilot can't!


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

Easily one of the most important and frequently abused subjects of the present day Merchant Navy.

Have an accident the first thing the look at is your work hours. But just try and refuse to do something on account of the fact your over the legal requirement.

For me the biggest change that could be made here is for the flag states to significantly increase the safe manning level - or better still for IMO to introduce a sensible minimum level.


----------



## Dave Woods (Apr 9, 2006)

I spent many hours attending ships safety meetings and the last thing on the agenda was a report on the hours worked. Every month the same thing no excess hours worked which was duly sent into the company for their monthly statistics. We were encouraged to “flog” the hours we put down so that he old man would not have yet more paper work from the office. I know of Captains that refuse to fill in the HOR forms and the ships writer does it for them by merely copying last month, it looks good but generally does not take into account the ships movements.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

My experience was similar. No one is interested in these untill........the Sh** hits the fan.(as said by SM) I have also been in the situation where the practice was for one person to complete a departments worth of these. In that particular case that delegation fell to me. I refused and told everyone that it was their personal responsibility to fill them up. This was difficult in that the system on board was 'electronic' yet some crew members were not computer literate. We did paper copies and sent them in to head office......head office comes back telling me that it must be electronic........ The MCA is now rightly checking the proper filling in of these, yet the underlying problem still exists...too many hours worked to be safe.


----------



## Hawkeye (Dec 7, 2005)

Another problem with the hours worked is the MCA inspections themselves. The problem being presenting the MCA with what they want to inspect, doing the drills, etc, during the time that people should be off work and resting. It's not such a problem on ships with big crews, the drills can be worked into the work periods. But on ships with very small crews, it can be a problem.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

So what are these regulations we are so concerned about?
Well for the life of me I still fail to understand how the system operates.
This is how they are stated in the UK.
The Merchant Shipping (Hours of Work) Regulations 2002 require a Schedule 
of Duties showing the planned working hours for each seafarer on board. 
It must comply with the rest requirements of at least 10 hours rest in any 
24 hour period and 77 hours rest in any 7 day period.

Sounds OK until you realize that that limits your rest to 11 hours per day over a week.............Yet many (most?) still work on ships that are only manned up for a 6 on 6 off watch-keeping schedule, ie Minimum manning. 
Then it starts getting complicated!
EC Regulation 1999/63) means that we start to have caveats to the original wording. 
these state 72 hours in any seven-day period. So that a little word 'or' has been introduced to this ILO Convention 180 article 5 (meaning of course its OK for the 77 hours) 
But we are not finished yet good people .......The legislation then goes on to say that 'register collective agreements' means that you can exceed that limit!
So in practice many UK flag vessels are working an 91 hour week (legally) 
Yet even then there is a problem....... The sleep period must be made up of at least 1 x 6hour rest period................This is clearly impossible if you are on duty for 2 x 6 hour watches. In practice the most you would ever get is a 5 or perhaps 5/1/2 hours period when you are actually resting.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

Hawkeye.

The 2006 Cardiff study on fatigue had this to say (recommendation) 
Review how working hours are recorded. Fatigue is more than 
working hours, but knowing how long seafarers are working for is 
critical in terms of evaluating how safe current operating standards are. 
This study shows the current method for recording and auditing 
working hours is not effective and should therefore be reviewed. 

some of the Conclusions read like this.
Fatigue was consistently associated with poor quality sleep, negative 
environmental factors, high job demands and high stress. Other 
important factors included frequent port turn-arounds, physical work 
hazards, working more than 12 hours a day, low job support and 
finding the switch to port work fatiguing.


and.......
Our research has also shown that the consequences of fatigue are not only 
felt in terms of impaired performance and reduced safety but decreased well- 
being and increased risk of mental health problems, also known to be risk 
factors for future chronic disease.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

To be fair there have been countless studies on the problems of fatigue, and all come out with the same answer - it's dangerous and untenable. Only a few months ago yet another study was announced.
How many more studies will be commissioned and how many more deaths and accidents will occur through fatigue before the MCA/IMO finally recognise the obvious?
Not for many a long year I'd wager - there are far too many powerfully loud and well connected vested interests who have the ear of both the MCA and IMO for the problem to be put to bed (pun intended).


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

This issue has been becoming increasingly important in recent years as ships have become larger and crews have become smaller. I began sailing in the mid 1970s, on ships built in the 1940s. The change in the industry since then has been profound. We've had experts lecture us on the dangers of fatigue (which we already knew better than they did) and how to deal with it. We knew everything they had to say was rubbish. We were already perfectly well aware of what the problem was: too few people trying to do too much in too short a time. Despite what all the experts say, the only way to combat fatigue is rest, and that simply isn't available on ships operated the way they are today.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

That is true Jim! However he original cardiff study was partly responsible for the introduction of the present situation, which must represent a small but powerful improvement over the original situation. A long way to go and as SM said 'Easily one of the most important and frequently abused subjects of the present day Merchant Navy.'


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

Nice one Klaatu83 I just love that....too few people trying to do too much in too short a time.......
I would like to see an office work attempt to work a 91 hour week on a moving 'desk'


----------



## wbeedie (Apr 9, 2007)

look at countless groundings occuring on fishing vessels is that the watchkeeper has fallen asleep due to fatigue , have even done it myself once although never grounded and gave myself a start when I woke due to a stand by boat overtaking us after that I wouldnt sit at the wheel rather I would stand near an open window for a watch so it wouldnt happen again


----------



## RayJordandpo (Feb 23, 2006)

Klaatu83 said:


> This issue has been becoming increasingly important in recent years as ships have become larger and crews have become smaller. I began sailing in the mid 1970s, on ships built in the 1940s. The change in the industry since then has been profound. We've had experts lecture us on the dangers of fatigue (which we already knew better than they did) and how to deal with it. We knew everything they had to say was rubbish. We were already perfectly well aware of what the problem was: too few people trying to do too much in too short a time. Despite what all the experts say, the only way to combat fatigue is rest, and that simply isn't available on ships operated the way they are today.


So very very true but what can we do? As I have stated previously, working offshore I work twelve hour watches seven days a week plus pre watch briefings, long handovers, daily safety meetings, drills, "tool box talks" etc. etc. I have often immediately gone on watch after a long flight, UK to Australia for example. If you voice objections you are simply told if you don't like 'talk with your feet'.
I once read that for every one hour your body clock is out out of normal sync. it takes one day to recover, e.g. eight hours - eight days to get back to normal. After travelling from the UK to the Far East and going straight on nights, the way I felt I could well believe it.


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

RayJordandpo said:


> So very very true but what can we do? As I have stated previously, working offshore I work twelve hour watches seven days a week plus pre watch briefings, long handovers, daily safety meetings, drills, "tool box talks" etc. etc. I have often immediately gone on watch after a long flight, UK to Australia for example. If you voice objections you are simply told if you don't like 'talk with your feet'.
> I once read that for every one hour your body clock is out out of normal sync. it takes one day to recover, e.g. eight hours - eight days to get back to normal. After travelling from the UK to the Far East and going straight on nights, the way I felt I could well believe it.


I understand exactly how you feel. I once literally flew half way round the world and then went on watch immediately upon arrival. On more than one occasion I've worked 33 hours non-stop. It's the nature of the business we follow. I've described the number of hours we typically work on shipboard to friends I know who work ashore, and they simply can't believe it. On land these days they consider 40-hours-a-week a full time job. However, it was not unusual for us to work 80-90 hours a week at sea.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

Ray,
I know precisely what you mean. So the question is have things improved since we all had to start writing down the hours? I do know that in the late 90's that the increased work load on supply vessels saw an additional watch-keeping officer on many north sea operations.
Klaatu... People ashore certainly do not believe any of this! I also find it amazing that its people ashore who made the regulations. The Cardiff study clearly indicates that working an 80-90 hour week damages our long term health. The other thing about all this is that we (as a group) continue to 'break the regulations' This, as it is expressed here really shows that commercial pressure is huge. The onus of improving the situation should be down to the companies, but it is not. In my own experience the little improvement we saw in the offshore game was in the mid 90's when a few Masters put their jobs on the line by 'stopping' work... They turned in after far too many hours and incured the wrath of both the oil majors and the shipping companies..... At the end of the day some 24 hour operations got a much needed 3rd watchkeeper.


----------



## RayJordandpo (Feb 23, 2006)

I recall some years ago on an anchor cranker, we were running anchors for a Brown and Root dredge (jet) barge. All the crew turned out for anchors and we literally didn't stop for days on end and were absolutely knackered. When the skipper told the barge superintendant that we simply must call a halt to the operations so we could grab some sleep he couldn't believe that we were not working shifts and complained to the company. After that extra hands were put on board and we started some sort of shift system. Too be honest I can't really see those conditions being tolerated today.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

No indeed. Actions like that of individuals on the seagoing side of the offshore industry is one reason we saw any change in legislation. Other trades continue to prove far more difficult in overcoming this type of problem. At one time I worked on a few coasters and while the Brits worked till they dropped , I found that continental skippers simply stopped when they had had enough. (Para Handy Style)


----------



## Klaatu83 (Jan 22, 2009)

One aspect that I've noticed in the past twenty years is that, along with the decrease in the number of personnel, there has been an increase in additional work being imposed upon sea-going personnel. For example, when GMDSS was implemented in 1999, the Radio Officers were eliminated, but their duties were transferred to the Licensed Deck Officers, along with all the concomitant additional administrative record-keeping. In addition, they also created all sorts new of garbage logs, oil record books, and the like, all of which have to be kept up to date. Then there are the new required drills that have to be carried out; such as oil-pollution drills and ship's security drills, all of which require time to plan, to carry out, and to record. The industry seems to be constantly coming up with new administrative nonsense of one sort of another, which the companies duly dump on the ships' personnel to implement, without allowing any increase in time or personnel to do so.


----------



## James_C (Feb 17, 2005)

Further to the above, a few years ago I read that the implementation of ISM meant that shipping companies had to employ (on average) an additional 2.3 people in the 'office' to cope with the new legislation.
No prizes for guessing how many extra men were employed at sea for the same!


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

How true! I had to give up in 2009 but was by that time firmly of the opinion that to comply fully with all the proper legislation (even with good delegation) was quite simply impossible. The fact is the legislations paperwork is never completely covered on the average (well run) Merchant ship. There is then the question of what is a 'well run ship' Clearly it is NOT one where the paperwork is all done! Increasing paperwork has been to the detriment of real work. I would say that an MCA Inspection might in fact praise a 'badly' filled in record of hours worked, as it would show that the person concerned had that as a low priority it his/her life. I know for sure that I was always forgetting to fill in my daily record and always had to 'catch up' with it every now and again.


----------



## RayJordandpo (Feb 23, 2006)

You are spot on there Klaatu.
Since the introduction of GMDSS how many of us deck guy's can honestly say we really take an interest in it? I for one certainly don't, yes I fill in the log book do all the daily and weekly checks but that's as far as it goes, to me it is just it's just a pain in the a***
same goes for all the other work that has been offloaded onto us. I'll stop short in saying that a lot of it is "flogged" but not far off on many vessels I have sailed on. Much the same with STCW working hour logs, I know of several instances where they have definitely have been a "certified work of fiction"


----------



## Duncan112 (Dec 28, 2006)

Hawkeye said:


> Another problem with the hours worked is the MCA inspections themselves. The problem being presenting the MCA with what they want to inspect, doing the drills, etc, during the time that people should be off work and resting. It's not such a problem on ships with big crews, the drills can be worked into the work periods. But on ships with very small crews, it can be a problem.
> 
> Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?


Same thing with VOSA checks on lorries and coaches, carried out at service stations they deprive the driver of their 20 minute break


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

GMDSS was a farce from the start. It took so long to implement that the technology was out of date before we started. No deck Officer on the planet likes having to operate a radio station from the Bridge! Its crazy and goes against the basic principles of good watch keeping. It is also in these days of improving technology simply an unnecessary distraction. On the fatigue front I was always amazed that nobody had given any thought to these distractions and alarms, many of which are totally inappropriate. I know that lots of careful study goes into the design of aircraft cockpits with regard to alarm design to avoid the very thing that happens on ships! All of which contribute to stress in the workplace. I already know of one vessel collision which involved around a bridge mobile phone in use while the ship was maneuvering in port.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

Ray, The ISM system is supposed to be flexible and changeable. How many of us have ever put in a 'request for change' The answer from your honest reply is probably 'Not many' Like the Hours of rest forms they and many many other things are simply not user friendly. The IMO requirements on ISM is that tiny little book that lives at the back of the chart table and is periodically checked for its existence among all the other publication requirements. So how come the company ISM is that 10 Volume monster that needed extra bookshelf's to be constructed on board? There lies one problem that gives lots of stress and fatigue! That is self inflicted by many mangers who are simply passing the buck without thought to implementation.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

Nick Balls said:


> So how come the company ISM is that 10 Volume monster that needed extra bookshelf's to be constructed on board? There lies one problem that gives lots of stress and fatigue!


not least in the supporting bulkhead


----------



## david_crosby (Oct 1, 2009)

The hardest time I found was around "rig-move". Last run out carried the 30" casing holes openers etc etc, then you've got 10 'pancakes' to remove, then ten anchors to pull. Often short tow to new site. Then set 10 anchors, wait 'til they get tensions, then go round and fit 10 pancakes. Knackered, but did Esso care ??


----------



## Blue in Bim (Mar 16, 2010)

Every year or two the IMO have a big meeting and ask each other "How can we validate our existence this time ?" and so rather than looking at real problems they create new ones, like GMDSS. I remember receiving a distress call on 12 megs once and when I plotted its position it was the other side of the Atlantic ! Should I alter course (and run out of fuel) for a false alarm ? Then of course you get all the forwarded repeat calls for the rest of the watch.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

In reply to 25...... SM......Well one of the best stories I know like this is that a newly fitted bookcase full of the company ISM fell off a Bulkhead and caused the crew to submit a 'near miss report' including a (tongue in cheek) recommendation that the volumes all be made a lot lighter to avoid another accident.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

Nick Balls said:


> In reply to 25...... SM......Well one of the best stories I know like this is that a newly fitted bookcase full of the company ISM fell off a Bulkhead and caused the crew to submit a 'near miss report' including a (tongue in cheek) recommendation that the volumes all be made a lot lighter to avoid another accident.



Sigh - why do those things never happen when I am on board (Sad) - that sort of thing could keep me amused and up to nonsense for months(==D)


----------



## surfaceblow (Jan 16, 2008)

Nick Balls said:


> In reply to 25...... SM......Well one of the best stories I know like this is that a newly fitted bookcase full of the company ISM fell off a Bulkhead and caused the crew to submit a 'near miss report' including a (tongue in cheek) recommendation that the volumes all be made a lot lighter to avoid another accident.


The last company I worked for had its ISM books on CD's which was also installed on the ships computer network. There was an crew only computer connected to the network with the ISM books available to the crew that otherwise did not have access to the other computers. I had more than a few that could not navigate the computer to find what their duties were so I had printed the pages that they required to perform their jobs with instructions with print screen pictures so that they could get on the computer by themselves. The company did not want printed copies of the ISM onboard. I sent in a request for change but for my trouble I was given a non conformance for having printed sections of the companies ISM onboard the vessel. This was also a dawning to me that I had enough years to retire and did not have to put up with nonsense. 

Joe


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

Yea thats a good one surfaceblow........ I have come across a very good compact company system with CD's ...It was Norwegian and very easy to cross reference. It had also worked hard to minimize all its content. My own experience is that this is very very unusual.


----------



## Archie2009 (Sep 9, 2009)

I am of the firm belief that we will not see the end of fatigue related accidents or near misses unless we increase the safe manning requirements. Owners will require their ships to be manned to the minimum safe manning requirements. The ship's manager (if it is not the owner), will also try and keep to this as he would like to keep the manning costs down on the vessel so as to make a larger buck. In the face this economic reality, I do not think that the vioce of the seafarer is getting heard. The topic of seafarer fatigue is like the wind that blows for a while and then dies down. Every time there is an accident or a near miss the issue of seafarer fatigue is talked about and then dies out. Personally I have tried on board to raise the issue of minimum manning levels, but was told by the superintendent that there was'nt enough qualified man power available and at another time, that the cost was too much. I am sure that the same superintendent will be the first one to turn around and tell the Master when an accident or a near miss occurs that, "Hey Capt, Why didn't you tell us before that you needed extra people ?" And that ball rolls on. Frankly I am getting tired of it. I look forward to the day when I step ashore. And you now know why I want to get away from the life at sea. So that's another seafarer lost, one more to train. Do we want to start another talk on seafarer attrition, retention and reasons for the same .........


----------



## Billieboy (May 18, 2009)

Archie2009 said:


> I am of the firm belief that we will not see the end of fatigue related accidents or near misses unless we increase the safe manning requirements. Owners will require their ships to be manned to the minimum safe manning requirements. The ship's manager (if it is not the owner), will also try and keep to this as he would like to keep the manning costs down on the vessel so as to make a larger buck. In the face this economic reality, I do not think that the vioce of the seafarer is getting heard. The topic of seafarer fatigue is like the wind that blows for a while and then dies down. Every time there is an accident or a near miss the issue of seafarer fatigue is talked about and then dies out. Personally I have tried on board to raise the issue of minimum manning levels, but was told by the superintendent that there was'nt enough qualified man power available and at another time, that the cost was too much. I am sure that the same superintendent will be the first one to turn around and tell the Master when an accident or a near miss occurs that, "Hey Capt, Why didn't you tell us before that you needed extra people ?" And that ball rolls on. Frankly I am getting tired of it. I look forward to the day when I step ashore. And you now know why I want to get away from the life at sea. So that's another seafarer lost, one more to train. Do we want to start another talk on seafarer attrition, retention and reasons for the same .........


Average working time on board for engineers was about 14 hours per day when I was at sea. complement of a 35K steam tanker was 35. So what has changed? : speed, ACR, UMS, nationality of officers and crew, certification of officers and crew, (instead of Master, Mate, Second Mate, C/E, 2/E, R/O, Cook, and five ABs); it seems that everyone on board has to have a ticket. 

Manning scales will only change, when the relevant government and international bodies, write the minimum manning into law.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

Archie2009 said:


> I am of the firm belief that we will not see the end of fatigue related accidents or near misses unless we increase the safe manning requirements. Owners will require their ships to be manned to the minimum safe manning requirements. The ship's manager (if it is not the owner), will also try and keep to this as he would like to keep the manning costs down on the vessel so as to make a larger buck. In the face this economic reality, I do not think that the vioce of the seafarer is getting heard. The topic of seafarer fatigue is like the wind that blows for a while and then dies down. Every time there is an accident or a near miss the issue of seafarer fatigue is talked about and then dies out. Personally I have tried on board to raise the issue of minimum manning levels, but was told by the superintendent that there was'nt enough qualified man power available and at another time, that the cost was too much. I am sure that the same superintendent will be the first one to turn around and tell the Master when an accident or a near miss occurs that, "Hey Capt, Why didn't you tell us before that you needed extra people ?" And that ball rolls on. Frankly I am getting tired of it. I look forward to the day when I step ashore. And you now know why I want to get away from the life at sea. So that's another seafarer lost, one more to train. Do we want to start another talk on seafarer attrition, retention and reasons for the same .........


Couldn't agree more.

And as far retention goes - I left 4 years ago barely able to spend another second at sea such was my disgust with how the job had changed. I would go back tomorrow if the job went back to how it was but as it stands I'll build and repair the ships but I can't see myself ever standing a watch or a duty night again.


----------



## JoK (Nov 12, 2006)

Agree with you 100% on that one SM. I am asked regularly if I will go back to the ships and I always say no. The ships I deal with are built for double the crew they are operated with. I see the impact of the decision to lower the crewing levels every day in my job of keeping the old girls running.


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

I do think we have moved on from the 1980's .....but not far! Having taken part in the formal studies by Cardiff University as an active (overworked) seafarer on this subject I feel that the onus is still on the (very difficult) decision of individuals to say 'No!' This has been done in the past and was one reason that in the offshore industry an additional watch-keeper was added to supply vessels.(NS)
The difference between workload and manning from the 1960's to the 1990's was dramatic and while we saw a huge increase in automation we saw a bigger reduction in work force and perhaps worse still a big reduction in training and 'competence' I don't see any comments saying that this situation is getting any better and am convinced that the present regime of work pattens is extremely damaging to health. Does anyone ashore really understand what it is like to work a 90 hour week on a regular basis ! I doubt it. Like SM I loved my job but was simply unable to keep going.


----------



## lagerstedt (Oct 16, 2005)

Interesting Subject. Some time ago I read a note on the webpage of "The Company Of Master Mariners" UK that someone from one of the UK places of learning was doing a study on this very subject and was asking, through the companies website, for input to the study, from sea going personnel. Maybe they were based in Cardiff. Someone out there may know more.

Regards
Blair
Central Hawkes Bay
NZ


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

lagerstdt try this link if you are interested.
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/psych/resources/ITF FATIGUE REPORT final.pdf


----------



## kewl dude (Jun 1, 2008)

Two things. The era I sailed there was no hiding hours worked since every hour in excess of a daily 8 had to be paid as overtime. No one ever thought about not turning in OT worked since if ya did someone else would turn ya into the Union. Generally everyone in every department worked 12 hour days at sea Monday-Saturday with four hours of OT and of course all hours worked on Saturdays and Sundays was OT. Sundays we all washed clothes during the four hours usually worked OT. The fiddley would be filled all day Sundays with clothes drying on the hand rails.

My third year at sea I was a F/WT and during my watch we experienced a casualty springing a leak in the port boiler economizer. When my watch ended I wanted to stay and watch but since the 1 A/E would not pay me overtime I did stay and watch but could not do anything. Even then I was turned in to the Union and had to defend myself. The engineers, all of whom were working, attested for me agreeing when I was asked to hand one a wrench I refused because I was not being paid. I just stood and watched.

Coming from a seafaring family my ten years younger than me brother never went to sea, except he always has owned his own sail boats. But in his mid twenties he met a young woman in a New York City Times Square drinking establishment who it turned out worked as a barmaid at a fisherman's hangout in a Massachusetts port.

So he went with said young lady and hung out with her at said bar for awhile. So one day a desperate skipper came in looking for help so he could begin his voyage. He had a regular crew all lined up but come sailing time one did not show. Hence his trip to the fisherman's hangout. Well there was no one interested in joining him but my brother seized on it as a way to check out the sea. My brother had no seaman's do***ents but that did not matter to the skipper.

So anyway they are way offshore and after about 40 hours of everyone working without rest the skipper called a break about 2 AM and everyone hit the sack. Except the newest crew member who had to stand wheel watch. 

Yup there stood my brother in the nicely over heated wheelhouse fighting sleep. The Captains cabin was immediately aft of the wheelhouse and he told my brother if anything happened to call him.

So my brother sees a target on the radar coming right towards him bow on. The next sweep of the radar this target was lots closer. My brother gave it another sweep and sure enough this ship was traveling at one hell of speed and aimed right for their bow.

So my brother opens the Captains door and calls for help. The only help he got was a loud snore. So my brother is looking at the radar, looking at the wheel and stepping back and banging the Captains cabin door. Geez this ship was coming on strong and so fast he had never seen anything like it.

Eventually the Captain pulls himself out of his bunk and enters the wheelhouse just as this LOUD THUNDEROUS zoom rattled the wheel house windows when it went right over the top of the wheelhouse. Yup, US Navy 4 engine P3 Orion right down on the deck on US coastal approach picket duty.

That was my brothers first and last trip to sea. The Orion picture attached that I found on the net shows the landing gear down but I do not know if that was common when flying low and slow as coastal approach.

Greg Hayden


----------



## Nick Balls (Apr 5, 2008)

One big hassle with todays legal 'hours of rest' is simply the paperwork! Even when this has been completed to a high standard the Port State inspection process is frequently picking holes in it! This then leads to even more hassle with the result that the seafarers attitude is often 'Why Bother' A completely contradictory position from the original intention of decreasing the amount of hours now worked at sea. Simply crazy! We all know that the answer has to more adequate crewing levels. In this day and age where half the population has no work it is criminal that others are being so overworked.


----------



## Winebuff (Jan 11, 2010)

One of the pressures which went towards my decision to "retire" at 27 years old was the removal of the Junior Engineer from Bank Lines crew list.
I had spent my first years learning to ropes, taking logs and assisting Senior Engineers in their duties, to pass my tickets and be expected carry on as before with the added responsibility of single handed watch keeping. 
I did not like the H&S implications.
The jerry rigged UMS systems never worked as the ships were never designed for it. Much planned maintainance went out the port hole and the number of breakdowns increased.


----------

