Mirelle
N/A
The International Transport Federation needs YOU!
Ken, you have missed your true vocation. If every container ship is going to post a bridge wing lookout and a forecastle head lookout whenever she is in confined waters (remember the bridge watch cannot see over the side or ahead in good visibility, not just in fog) the Safe Manning Certificate for these ships is going to have to be revised, to allow for another 6 AB's, two for each watch.
Come to think of it, should that not be two bridge wing lookouts? Make that another 9, not 6. Which, means we will need another steward, too - call it ten.
We will of course have the ship on had steering, so we need three more quartermasters, as well. Make that thirteen.
If these ships are to feel their way down the North Sea and the Channel at bare steerage way (which incidentally is also quite fast - the windage on the deck stack has to be thought about) then their schedules are going to look very different and we will need a tenth ship in each string to retain a weekly fixed day service between Europe and Asia, rather than the 9 at say US$ 65M each that we now have.
So that's ten ships, per company, employing an extra 130 men, on ITF rates of US$1,100 per month, plus overlaps and travel, with a capital investment of an extra US$65M per string, multiplied by the number of fixed day weekly services on the route, say another 12, so we have employed 1,460 mariners, plus overlaps say another 200, and spent another US$750M in the shipyards, in the Far East container trade alone, so that you can cross the Channel in greater security than you do now.
You may wish to extend this principle to the Atlantic trades, and the African trades, of course....and they there are all those tankers and bulk carriers....
I wholeheartedly agree with you and so will everyone in the shipping industry. Now tell the good Ms Loyola de Palacio at the EU Commission so that she enforces it and we will be delighted to oblige. Otherwise this is a recipe for commericial suicide.
<hr width=100% size=1>
Ken, you have missed your true vocation. If every container ship is going to post a bridge wing lookout and a forecastle head lookout whenever she is in confined waters (remember the bridge watch cannot see over the side or ahead in good visibility, not just in fog) the Safe Manning Certificate for these ships is going to have to be revised, to allow for another 6 AB's, two for each watch.
Come to think of it, should that not be two bridge wing lookouts? Make that another 9, not 6. Which, means we will need another steward, too - call it ten.
We will of course have the ship on had steering, so we need three more quartermasters, as well. Make that thirteen.
If these ships are to feel their way down the North Sea and the Channel at bare steerage way (which incidentally is also quite fast - the windage on the deck stack has to be thought about) then their schedules are going to look very different and we will need a tenth ship in each string to retain a weekly fixed day service between Europe and Asia, rather than the 9 at say US$ 65M each that we now have.
So that's ten ships, per company, employing an extra 130 men, on ITF rates of US$1,100 per month, plus overlaps and travel, with a capital investment of an extra US$65M per string, multiplied by the number of fixed day weekly services on the route, say another 12, so we have employed 1,460 mariners, plus overlaps say another 200, and spent another US$750M in the shipyards, in the Far East container trade alone, so that you can cross the Channel in greater security than you do now.
You may wish to extend this principle to the Atlantic trades, and the African trades, of course....and they there are all those tankers and bulk carriers....
I wholeheartedly agree with you and so will everyone in the shipping industry. Now tell the good Ms Loyola de Palacio at the EU Commission so that she enforces it and we will be delighted to oblige. Otherwise this is a recipe for commericial suicide.
<hr width=100% size=1>
