Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

tvieno t1_j1mxk87 wrote

That's his story and he's sticking to it.

156

buckykat t1_j1n01wf wrote

Cause of crash: understaffing

90

thisusedyet t1_j1n0hm3 wrote

Nah, even with a full bridge I’m pretty sure there would’ve been too much pointing and laughing to avoid running aground

48

Necrid1998 t1_j1nhcpd wrote

Exactly, there should have been a lookout on that bridge

22

ostapack t1_j1npak2 wrote

If it was German flagged, Lookout is only required after sunset and before sunrise.

What was missing here was a dead man alarm, which would've informed the next officer and/or eventually the captain. Unless he ran aground before the 10 or 15 minute window of the alarm expired.

25

Necrid1998 t1_j1nxtsg wrote

  1. Yes it is correct that a lookout is only required during the night, during the day it's only recommended (depending on the situation)
  2. No it's not German flagged, it was flagged in Antigua and Barbuda, a classic flag of convenience (even though the German secondary register can also be called as such, different story)
  3. It is my personal opinion that a lookout is always nessesary, since the OOW is often times not able to fully concentrate on the watch itself and has additional duties.
  4. It's fairly known that German companies are a bit more stingy in terms of crewing. When I tell my English counterparts that we man a 200m ship with 17 men (of whom only 13 are required by law) I get some funny looks
  5. A BNWAS is always a good system to have, although it can be quite a nuisance in difficult situations
12

Nyghtshayde t1_j1paz7h wrote

I know nothing of the sea: what size crew should such a ship have?

3

Necrid1998 t1_j1phji1 wrote

That depends, but ideally the lookout and officer would be able to concentrate on the watch duties when on watch. But during the daytime the lookout has to clean the mess, help the cook sometimes, do odd-jobs. In my opinion a steward for the cook would be a great addition und just 1 or 2 additional able seaman would be great. With a smaller crew it is possible to work safely, but you don't have much room for error. Like when some people get sick or when an important piece of automation breaks, and these systems now have to be manned

3

buckykat t1_j1p1sz9 wrote

Regardless of the job titles, and regardless of German law, having only one heartbeat between thousands of tons of heavy machinery and disaster is dumb.

9

brock_lee t1_j1n6co3 wrote

*he was drunk

30

Orcwin t1_j1nmfum wrote

The rest could well still be true, but I'd be highly surprised if this wasn't part of the real story, yes. Drunk bridge crew seem to be a frighteningly common issue.

14

Prior-Evening-95 t1_j1oitjp wrote

That's most likely it. You don't go nighty night like in the movies I real life. If you do, then you are probably going to die or brain damaged after. The caveat to this is if you are already shittered and you hit your noggin, it may put you out into an early sleep and concussion.

5

Mattyqu t1_j1n4uf2 wrote

"The ONE day I decide to try out parachute pants"

17

wwtoonlinkfan t1_j1o76d1 wrote

For want of a chair, the ship was lost.

3

Jackcooper t1_j1ofyp8 wrote

So what is the safeguard if a captain is drunk? Shouldn't there be a first second or third mate not too far away?

3

YalsonKSA OP t1_j1opuln wrote

Not sure, to be honest. You'd think there would be some redundancy. But the article says there were only six crew on this vessel, so maybe it was short-handed or the second-in-command was briefly elsewhere on the vessel, in the mistaken belief that they could leave the captain on their own if they were just sitting in a chair without them crashing the ship into Cornwall.

3

4thofeleven t1_j1p1vea wrote

One of those situations where it may actually hurt your reputation less if you just say "Yeah, I was drunk."

3