[70521]
Well-Known Member
An interesting report. Looks like once again all the holes in the Swiss cheese lined up.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Hoegh Osaka!
- Thread starter prv
- Start date
Daedelus
Well-Known Member
This is also a problem of 'passing certificates' - it is all too easy to do so without having a real understanding.
The exposure of sticking to the 'original' loading plan even though the itinerary made a nonsense of it showed the complete lack of understanding of ship stability by:
A. The Port Captain.
B. The loading contractor (forget the name).
C. The Chief Officer.
D. The Captain.
The Chief Officer was probably the most culpable and ineffectual by failing to stamp his authority over the Port Captain (whose behaviour was both outrageous and discourteous). However the Captain.......carries the responsibility for the safety of his vessel.
Don't blame the Chief Officer (too much at any rate) if you read the report it says that Wallem's instructions are for the Port Officer to be in charge of the loading and the chief officer has no real role in it, although he should be consulted, it goes on that consultation is largely to ensure that everyone has a copy of the loading plan. The report then says that you can see how much importance the Port Officer placed on the Chief Officer by holding a liaison meeting without him.
Seems to me that head office too have much to consider with their instruction manual. No doubt the Captain, chief officer and Port Officer will be sacrificed and then everyone will feel much better.
NormanB
Well-Known Member
Don't blame the Chief Officer (too much at any rate) if you read the report it says that Wallem's instructions are for the Port Officer to be in charge of the loading and the chief officer has no real role in it, although he should be consulted, it goes on that consultation is largely to ensure that everyone has a copy of the loading plan. The report then says that you can see how much importance the Port Officer placed on the Chief Officer by holding a liaison meeting without him.
Seems to me that head office too have much to consider with their instruction manual. No doubt the Captain, chief officer and Port Officer will be sacrificed and then everyone will feel much better.
Good point and clear evidence that Wallem have got it totally wrong in a functional organisational sense. The logical outcome of this arrangement is that Choffs will become more and more detached from understanding ship stability and move on to be the next generation of Masters and the worm turns.
Seems to me that Head Office and merchant marine pro's colluded in the creation of a scheme where everyone got performance brownie points but no one was reponsible when it all went wrong.Seems to me that head office too have much to consider with their instruction manual. No doubt the Captain, chief officer and Port Officer will be sacrificed and then everyone will feel much better.