Editorial SQUAT - Part 2 Mud navigation and negative under

Editorial

Editorial: John Clandillon-BakerSquat - Part 2 JCBSquat (Part 1) Revisited JCBTyne Pilots - End of an Era JD MarshallTechnical & Training Gareth Rees

• UNIT

ED KINGDOM•M

AR

ITIM

EPILOTS ASSO

CIA

TIO

N

APRIL 2008 No.293The official organ of the United Kingdom Maritime Pilots’Association

DIVIDE D W E FALL

UNITE

DWESTAND

In This Issue

The last year has seen several inves-tigations into incidents involving pilots andone factor emerging is that frequently therehas not been a clear communicationbetween the Pilot and Master as to theintended passage / manoeuvre. In mostcases the paperwork exchange has beencorrectly undertaken but the arrival ofVoyage Data Recorders (VDR) means thatconversations between the Master and pilotprior to an incident can be replayed andexamined and these are revealing thatfrequently the exchange is limited to tickingboxes with little or no elaboration ondetail. If the Master doesn’t ask for detailsand the bridge team takes little interest inthe passage then the scene is set for anincident resulting from “single personerror”. The increasing fitting of VDRsmeans that pilots must adopt a professionalattitude and, in addition to ticking boxeson forms, should explain to the Captain allrelevant information for a passage andencourage dialogue. In turn the Captain hasa duty to expand upon the informationcontained on the pilot card. When it comesto manoeuvring on or off a berth it must beclear who is undertaking the manoeuvreand even if the Master is handling the shipthe pilot has a duty to fully apprise him ofhis local knowledge regarding tidal effects,other traffic movements etc and monitorthe manoeuvre. Regardless of who ishandling the ship both the master and pilotshould be clear as to how the manoeuvrewill be undertaken to ensure the safestoutcome.

Following the Cosco Busan allision withthe Bay Bridge in San Francisco the conductof pilots is being examined in detail and atimely article by Rotterdam pilot, MargrietTorpstra, on page 11 expands on this topicand its content should be noted by allpilots.

In addition to this article, MargrietTorpstra, has also produced two trainingDVDs on the Master/Pilot relationship inassociation with the Dutch shipping groupVroon BV (see review on page 14).

John Clandillon-Baker FNIEmail: [email protected]

Canterbury Gate House, Ash RoadSandwich, Kent CT13 9HZ

SQUAT - Part 2Mud navigation and negative under keel clearance

Navigable mud can open the operational window for port operations. Photo JCB

Pension News Debbie MartenTo be a Pilot David RaddingsCivil & Criminal Liabilities Barrie YoudeMaster/Pilot Relationship Magriet TorpstraObituariesLetter to the Editor Mike BarrattDVD Review JCB

Whilst wading through the various documents to produce the article on squat in theJanuary issue, I came across several references to the linked topic of muddy waternavigation and the concept of negative under keel clearance (UKC).

I must admit that until I read the research I had no understanding of this form ofnavigation and felt that it must be another theoretical area of research with no feasiblepractical application because we have enough trouble presenting masters with passageplans using minimum UKC and would therefore have no chance trying to explain toa stressed out Captain that the passage plan would involve navigating through areaswhere the draft would be greater than the charted depth!! However, there are severalports where the liquid mud in suspension is sufficiently fluid to be navigable and thedifference between the echo sounder depth and the solid mud depth can beconsiderable and there is therefore a commercial advantage to be gained by accuratelymeasuring the navigable mud layer. The depth where the navigable mud becomes nonnavigable is called the “Nautical Bottom”. One major port where this phenomena ispresent is Zeebrugge and it is therefore in Belgium where most research has beenundertaken. As with squat, the maths and physics are complex and the following istherefore an attempt to de-mystify the concept.

April 2008 2 The Pilot

To asses the feasibility of navigation inmuddy navigation areas the “nauticalbottom” concept was introduced and in1997 the Permanent International Assoc-iation of Navigation Congresses (PIANC)formalised the following definition:

The nautical bottom is the level wherephysical characteristics of the bottom reacha critical limit beyond which contact with aship’s keel causes either damage orunacceptable effects on controllability andmanoeuvrability.

This definition is somewhat vague in thatthere are so many different ship types thatwhat may be a critical limit for a laden bulkcarrier might have no adverse effect on afine lined containership. Fortunately theresearchers have examined different shiptypes in detail and have concluded thatthe important factor is the density of themud in suspension and have establishedthat a density of 1,200kg/m3 can safely benavigated by all vessels. However, althoughthe nautical bottom can be established bydensity its effectiveness as a safe criticalparameter is dependent upon the ability tocontinuously monitor the density of a mudlayer and establish a detailed knowledge ofship behaviour in muddy areas. This hasbeen undertaken by physical tank testing,mathematical modelling, simulation andlive trials mainly involving the pilots inZeebrugge. The following informationcontains extracts from papers publishedon the internet by many differentestablishments but in particular:

Marc Vantorre: Ghent University, IR04 –Division of Maritime Technology

Michael J Briggs: Coastal and HydraulicsLaboratory, U.S. Army EngineerResearch and Development Center

Klemens Uliczka: Federal WaterwaysEngineering and Research Institute,Hamburg

Pierre Debaillon: Centre d’EtudesTechniques Maritimes Et Fluviales

DEFINITION OF DEPTHS INMUDDY AREASHYDRODYNAMIC DEPTH:

The exact level of the interface betweenmoving muddy water and stationary mud.

PARAMETRIC DEPTHThe bed level determined by some

material parameters e.g. target strength,shear strength etc.

OPERATIONAL DEPTHThe depth of a particular parameter

relevant to some specific operation e.g.navigation.

In areas where the mud bed is firm these3 definitions will coincide.

COMPARISON OF NORMALSOUNDING DEPTH ANDNAUTICAL BOTTOMAs an example of the difference that usingthe nautical bottom as opposed to normalsounding bottom can make, the diagramabove shows real data from surveys on theEMS using different sounding frequencies,with the 210 khz being the standard for seawater and the 15khz to penetrate throughto the 1200 interface. The results reveal anadditional navigable depth of over twometres in places.

Muddy Navigation AreasThe presence of a fluid mud layer on the

bottom of a channel has a significantinfluence on ship behaviour in general, andsinkage and trim in particular. Two effectsplay a dominant role:• The pressure field around the moving

hull causes undulations of the water mudinterface that modify the distribution ofvertical forces over the length of the shipand, therefore, sinkage and trim.

• If the ship’s keel penetrates into the mudlayer, the hydrostatic (buoyancy) forceacting on the submerged hull increasesdue to the higher density of the mud.

The interface deformation is a functionof many parameters, such as ship speed,layer thickness, mud density and rheology,and the initial UKC with respect to themud-water interface.

Contact between the ship’s keel and themud layer depends mainly on the UKC, butis also influenced by the interfaceundulations and the ship’s sinkage. As aresult, both effects are interrelated. Most ofthe information available on this subject isbased on experimental research usingmodels.

Experimental researchOne of the major problems for reseach

into mud layer navigation is producing anaccurate model for the mud behaviour.Mud behaves in a complex manner and itscharacteristics vary with the depth. Themodel tests that have been carried out

mostly use an artificial mud layer because itis difficult or even impossible to repeatseveral tests under the same natural mudconditions.

Additional problems with model tests arethe scaling effects of the simulated mudwith respect to the model and consequentlyfor the port of Zeebrugge a new researchprogram was initiated, consisting of captivemanoeuvring tests in Flanders HydraulicsResearch shallow water tank using bothfast- and real-time simulation runs. Themud layer was simulated by means of amixture of chlorinated paraffins andpetroleum. Most runs were carried out witha model of a 6000 TEU container as thisone was the standard type of vessel for theharbour of Zeebrugge at that time. Mudlayer thicknesses were varied from 0.75mto 3.00m and the UKC references to thewater-mud interface were varied between-12.2% and +21% of draught.

Mud-water Interface UndulationsA ship navigating above fluid mud layers

will cause vertical interface motions(internal waves and undulations) that areinfluenced by the ship’s forward speed asrevealed in the diagram below right:a) At very low speed the interface remains

practically undisturbed.b) At intermediate speed an interface

sinkage is observed under the ship’sbow if the fluid mud layer is relativelythick. At a certain time, an internalhydraulic jump, perpendicular to theship’s longitudinal axis, is observed.The front of this internal jump movesaft with increasing speed.

c) At higher speeds, the internal orinterface jump occurs behind the stern

The sinkage for a ship sailing in a muddybottom condition is decreased relative tothe condition in which the mud layer isreplaced by a solid bottom. This is becausethe ship can “feel” the hard bottom morethan the softer, less dense, mud layer. If themud layer is replaced by water (normalconditions without a mud layer) however,the sinkage would decrease relative to thecondition with the mud layer. However, thisdoes not take into account the effect of

The Pilot 3 April 2008

extra buoyancy (i.e., mud is denser thanwater), but this is only important in verydense mud layers and/or importantpenetration. In general, the influence ontrim is more important than sinkage sincethe mud layer causes the ship to bedynamically trimmed by the stern over itscomplete speed range. Thus, the effect ofmud layers on average sinkage is onlymarginal as trim is much more important.

Mathematical modellingObviously the results of model tank tests

could not be immediately transferred toreal ships for trials so the results needed tobe transferred for use in a simulator whichmeant that mathematical models needed tobe created. There were many complexitiesinvolved in this process and for those ofyou interested in this aspect of mudnavigation full details can be found in thepapers within the links at the end of thisfeature.

ZEEBRUGGE: REAL-TIMESIMULATION RUNSThe final purpose of the research programinvolved ascertaining the actual operationallimits for mud navigation by means of livetrials. As the pilots play a central role in thenavigation to and from Zeebrugge, theinput of their experience and assessment inthis project was required. For a selection ofbottom conditions, a real-time simulationprogramme was organised with Zeebruggepilots at the full mission bridge simulator ofFlanders Hydraulics Research, Antwerp.All runs were carried out with a containership (length over all: 300m; beam: 40.24m;draft: 13.5m) calling at and departing fromthe harbour of Zeebrugge.

The simulation programme wascomposed paying attention to severalaspects:

• Validation of the mathematical models:Would the behaviour of the ship assessedbe realistic during the simulation runs? Inorder to evaluate this aspect, simulationswere carried out above a solid bottomand above muddy bottoms with reducedunder keel clearance, according toexisting or realistic situations.

• Determination of the limits of thecontrollability: According to the PIANCdefinition, contact between the nauticalbottom and the ship’s keel causesunacceptable effects on controllabilityand manoeuvrability. In order to makean assessment in these matters, a series ofsimulation runs was carried out duringwhich contact occurred between theship’s keel and mud layers with higherdensity and viscosity.

• Evaluation of the navigability of mudlayers: If it is decided to determine thenautical bottom by means of a densitylevel higher than the present 1.15 t/m, theship’s keel will possibly penetrate intomud layers with reduced density andviscosity. The ship’s behaviour in suchconditions was assessed by a series ofsimulation runs.

In total, 63 runs were carried out by 15pilots during 8 days.

These manoeuvres are typical for largecontainer ships calling at Zeebrugge, sothat a feedback to the pilots’ experiencewas guaranteed; moreover, a broad rangeof hydrodynamic conditions (speedsahead/astern, propeller rpm ahead/astern,drift angles, yaw rates …) was coveredduring the simulation runs. During eachsingle run, the bottom characteristics wereassumed to be constant over the entireharbour area.

The access channel to the harbour, thePas van het Zand, is characterised by strongcross tides beyond the breakwaters and atlow water the rate can be up to 2.5 knots.

As these currents greatly affect the shippingtraffic arriving and departing fromZeebrugge, realistic current patterns wereintroduced into the simulation environ-ment.

All manoeuvres were carried out infrequently occurring, moderate windconditions (SW 4). During some runs, moresevere winds were applied. Tug assistancewas provided by two tugs of 45 ton bollardpull each; during some runs the availabletug power was increased.

Qualitative evaluation of the simulationruns

All pilots were requested to complete aquestionnaire just after the simulation run;this resulted in very important assessmentof the manoeuvres. The majority of thepilots considered the simulation of theship’s behaviour and tug assistance to be“good” to “very good”.

After each run, the pilot was askedwhether it would be advisable to carry outthe manoeuvre in reality. Based on thisassessment, the conditions were classifiedas “acceptable”, “marginal” and“unacceptable”

Analysis based evaluation of thesimulation runs

Taking account of the comments of thepilots on the simulated manoeuvres, it wasclear that following criteria should beconsidered for assessing the feasibility ofthe concept:• Speed: Is a departing ship able to reach a

speed that is sufficient to compensate forthe cross current acting beyond thebreakwaters?

• Controllability by own means: Can adeparting ship obtain a straight coursewithout extreme use of rudder andpropeller?

• Manoeuvrability with tug assistance:Are the ship’s rudder, propeller and thetug assistance sufficient to perform themanoeuvres safely within acceptable timelimits?

Based on the pilots’ qualitative assessment,limits were determined to quantify thesecriteria:• Speed: in order to keep within the

fairway, a departing ship’s speed shouldbe at least 8 knots, and preferably 10knots. These values were selected aslimits for unacceptable, marginal andacceptable conditions.

• For a departing ship’s controllability byown devices, the standard deviation ofthe rate of turn was considered to be thebest indicator. For the different bottomconditions, this value is displayed as afunction of the water depth to draft ratio.Taking account of the pilots’ evaluation,values of 5 and 6 deg/min were selectedas critical limits.Model tests showing conditions b) & c)


• In order to evaluate the ship’smanoeuvrability with tug assistance ina quantitative way, the impulse ofsteering force was introduced, being thetime integral of the sum of the lateralrudder and tug induced forces. Thevalues of these impulses were calculatedfor each sub trajectory and compared tothe pilots’ evaluation of the adequacy oftug assistance. In this way, it was notonly possible to quantify the thirdcriterion but extrapolations to assistanceby more or less powerful tugs could bemade as well.

CONCLUSIONSAs a result of the analysis of the real-timesimulation runs with a small negative underkeel clearance it can be concluded thatcontact with mud layers of a density of1,200kg/m3 or more should be avoided,even if sufficient tug assistance is available.

However using a limit of 1,200kg/m3

was considered safe for navigation prov-ided that tugs were available as per thefollowing table:❋ 0% under keel clearance using 2 tugs of

up to 30 ton bollard pull;❋ -7% under keel clearance if 2 x 45 ton

bollard pull tugs were available;❋ -12% under keel clearance if 2 x 60 ton

bollard pull tugs were available.

These conclusions are only valid inmoderate wind conditions for 6000 TEUcontainer ships. However the methodologycan be applied to any vessel or harbour.The new critical limit led to the admittanceof deeper drafted vessels and anoptimization of the maintenance dredgingworks in the harbour Zeebrugge, withoutjeopardizing the safety of navigation.

However, a warning was made that pilotsshould always be aware of the level of thewater-mud interface, which should beindicated on the nautical charts as well, forseveral reasons:• If the ship’s keel penetrates by more than

10% of her draft into low density mudlayers, this may result in unpredictableeffects.

• Small positive under keel clearancesrelative to the mud-water interface mayresult into a modification of the ship’sbehaviour and controllability.

• A major conclusion of the simulationtrials was the availability of tugassistance since if insufficient tug poweris available, contact with the mud layershould be avoided and the mud / waterinterface should be used as the nauticalbottom. Conversely, if more powerfultugs are available then a larger negative

UKC could be considered feasible. In thenear future, the tracks, controls and tugassistance of deep-drafted containersships arriving at and departing fromZeebrugge at low tide will be recorded bythe pilots in order to provide a feedbackto the simulation study. After anevaluation phase, it will be decidedwhether the new criteria for thedetermination of the nautical bottom willbe applied in practice.

Other considerationsAlthough the above analysis reveals that

mud navigation is feasible, such navigationcan result in other physical effects on theship. Some of my colleagues who served onfreight ferries running regularly toZeebrugge have informed me thatnavigating the mud layer doesn’t just keepthe hull clear of growth but also removesthe paint and dry docking reveals a cleanmetal hull and the propellers also becomehighly polished. The other obvious problemis with engine cooling systems which arenot designed for cooling by muddy water.

Full details of the research project can befound via the following weblink:

http:/watlab.lin.vlaanderen.be/nautische/index.htm

JCB

Another definition of “Nautical Bottom”!At last the chance to add some glamour

to the magazine! One of the wonders of theInternet is the ability to find papers onspecialist topics using search engines. Inaddition to the serious papers used for thisarticle my search for “nautical bottom”returned the following delightful picture

which I felt was worth sharing. Enjoy!

If you are interested this “nautical Bottom”bikini is available from Bubbles Boutique,

Take the guesswork out of under-keel clearance

Safer Shipping Smarter Ports

Dynamic Under-keel Clearance (DUKC®) technology can ensure every vessel safely transitsthrough your port whilst maximising draft and tidal windows.

DUKC® provides a consistent scientific approach to UKC management by integratingreal-time waves, tides and currents directly into your UKC decision making. For every transitfor every vessel, shore based and carry on board DUKC® systems can be used to ensure yourport is always operating safely and efficiently.

Safety should never come about by accident. DUKC®

has an impeccable record, spanning more than 15 yearsand over 33,000 sailings in Australia and New Zealand without an incident. DUKC® systems are now also operational in Europe.

DUKC ® from OMC International: This is next generation engineering at its best.

www.omc-international.com


SQUAT UPDATE;WHAT SQUAT?Following my feature on squat in the lastissue I recently piloted a dredger which wasfitted with extremely accurate draft metersand I was therefore able to monitor the fore,aft and mean drafts throughout the passage.With a speed of 13.5 kts the master advisedme that the vessel trimmed by the head atspeed and the deep water draft would be8.5m forward. The passage involvedpassing over a bank which would give aminimum under keel clearance (UKC) ofaround 2.5m at that draft. As a regular

trader to the port the Captain advised methat the speed would only need to bereduced to around 12 kts over the shoal toprevent the pitch overload alarm fromtriggering. This passage therefore providedan ideal opportunity to monitor the squatpassing over the shoal. As predicted once upto full speed the draft was recorded as 8.5mfwd and 7.9 aft and the mean draftdisplayed as 8.2m thus confirming theaccuracy of the F&A sensors. Approachingthe shallows the speed was reduced to 12kts (through the water) and once passingover the shoal with the depth registering at2.4m it was interesting to note that theforward draft had increased to 8.9m thus

indicating a 0.4m squat. However, the aftdraft had decreased to 7.5 and thus themean draft was still recording at 8.2m. Thevessel had trimmed by the head but no squatwas present. This class of vessel only has afreeboard of about 60cm at this loadeddraft and the deck was still above water (seephoto) so the theoretical squat of around1.5m at 12 kts is evidently incorrect. Havingrecently been dredged, the sea bottom isknown to be solid so there is no mud layereffect and therefore, although totallyunscientific, this passage once again tends toconfirm that the existing squat tables aretotally inaccurate and urgently need to bereviewed. JCB

Ship speed 10kts. According to squat tables the deck should be submerged! Photo JCB


On 31st March 2008, an era in the historyof the river Tyne ended with the retirementof John Marshall and Alan Purvis, the lasttraditional Tyne Pilot family pilots.

Tyne Pilots Limited also ceased to existwith pilotage being transferred to the pilotsof the Port of Tyne Authority.

It is impossible to determine whenpilotage on the Tyne began but it was astrategic port in Roman times and it isrecorded that they engaged Tigris watermento work their ships on the river – in essence,pilots!

The formal establishment of organizedpilotage however is generally credited toTrinity House and it was incorporated in aRoyal Charter granted by Henry VIII on 5thOctober 1536. Initially, the profession wasexclusive to Brethren of Trinity House, butin the mid-1600’s this was amended and thepilots were recruited from the local seagoingcommunity.

The custom of taking only pilots’ sons andrelatives as apprentices was recognised byTrinity House, who by Resolution actuallyrequired it as a condition of being licensed asa pilot, thus establishing a tradition thatwould serve for hundreds of years. In 1865,government legislation transferred thelicensing and administration of the pilotsfrom Trinity House to the Tyne PilotageCommission, but the tradition of pilotfamilies continued.

In 1789, the first purpose-built lifeboatwas built and for the next one hundred and

fifty years, the pilots crewed these lifeboatsand saved many hundreds of lives. This wasnot without sacrifice however, as in 1849twenty pilots were tragically lost when thelifeboat Providence capsized during a rescue.The sea was not the only enemy, as on thelast day of 1916, the pilot cutter Protectorwas mined and sunk with the loss of allnineteen on board

It was into this heritage that JohnMarshall was born on 31st December 1946,and Alan Purvis on 16th March 1948. Bothfamilies lived in Trajan Street in SouthShields and when aged 16 both began four-year Apprenticeships with Tyne PilotageAuthority. At that time, there were someninety pilots on the Tyne, and the river wasstill a world centre for shipbuilding andrepairing and the export of coal. Thisapprenticeship was followed by service inthe Merchant Navy; John with Silver Line,and Alan with Common Brothers to gaintheir Master’s Certificates and thus qualifyfor entry into the Pilot Service.

Returning to the Tyne, John was licensedon 7th May 1976 and Alan on 6th May1977 and they served for three years asjunior pilots before being licensed as FirstClass.

The national miners’ strike of 1984 had aprofound effect on trade in the Port and itsself-employed pilots and John and Alan tookoverseas pilotage appointments in theArabian Gulf.

In 1988, government legislation

transferred responsibility for pilotage fromthe Tyne Pilotage Authority to the Port ofTyne Authority. Twelve of the existing pilotsformed the co-operative of Tyne PilotsLimited contracted with the Authority toprovide the pilotage service.

The Pilot Apprenticeship scheme wasabolished in 1968 and pilots weresubsequently recruited from the ranks ofseagoing officers. In 2001 the Port of TyneAuthority embarked upon a regime todirectly employ its future pilots, and TynePilots Limited were contracted to train andexamine new pilots for the Authority,passing on the wealth of knowledge andexperience acquired over many generations.

The end of Tyne Pilots Limited also seesthe retirement of Pilot Master and formerpilot Edward Cowell. Eddie was born on11th March 1941, also into a pilot family,and upon completion of his pilotapprenticeship, embarked upon a seagoingcareer with Common Brothers, StephensonClarke, North Thames Gas Board, andGibson’s of Leith to gain his Certificates ofCompetency prior to becoming a licensedpilot in 1970. Eddie retired as a pilot in1998, having served as Chairman of TynePilots Limited from its creation in 1988 untilhis retirement but in 1999 he was engaged inan administrative role within the port andhis knowledge and advice has been greatlyvalued by Agents, Port staff and junior pilotsalike.

During their careers John and Alanwitnessed dramatic changes to the Tyne andits trade. Cars, passengers, and the importof coal have replaced shipbuilding, ship-repair and the export of coal! Ships arelarger; tugs are fewer but more powerful.Technology and commercial pressures havecombined to expand operational para-meters, but it is experience that ultimatelydictates the limits. They have had thepleasure of piloting, “almost anything thatfloats”; from fishing boats to super-tankers,car-carriers, bulk carriers, cruise ships,aircraft carriers, oil rigs, barges, floating dry-docks, sailing ships, Royal Yachts, andCrane barges carrying Millennium Bridges!

Together with their former colleagues,John and Alan consider themselvesprivileged to have followed a career that theyenjoyed and to have been part of anhistorical era. Even today, pilotage is still asmuch an art as a science and although allpilots occasionally doubt their sanity whenclimbing up the side of a bulk carrier in anortherly gale, “parking ships” is bothchallenging and immensely satisfying.

To generations of Tyne Pilots, pilotage hasnot just been a profession it has been morecomplex than that! It’s been their heritage,their psyche – it’s what they were!

JD Marshall

TYNE PILOTS – THE END OF AN ERA

TECHNICAL& TRAINING Since our last report to The Pilot we havelearnt that the bid for funding for theAzipilot Project has been accepted by theEU and the ‘i’s are now being dotted andthe ‘t’s crossed before work on the projectgets under weigh. Ian Simpson fromHarwich has volunteered to join me inmanaging the UKMPA’s contribution. Ianbrings his experience as Simulator Pilot andMarine Advisor at HR Wallingford to theproject. The work on POADSS continueswith Lisbon Pilots, who have attendedapproved AIS and ECDIS courses,undergoing two days training withRotterdam Pilots in the use of PortablePilotage Units on the 4th/5th March. Thiswas then followed by the first trial of thePOADDS equipment in Lisbon on the 17thMarch ahead of the full scale trials now setfor Lisbon in October.

The issue of National OccupationalStandards and a National Qualification forPilots continues and at the last meeting ofthe MCA Working Group in December, in

the absence of any progress on this issuerelevant to Pilots, we put forward the ETCSdocument as being the training model thatshould be adopted. As this Working Groupmeets twice a year perhaps it is easy to seewhy progress is so slow. Peter Aylott fromthe Nautical Institute (NI) was invited toour meeting in November and talkedthrough with us some ideas for the NIPilotage Diploma while seeking the supportof the UKMPA in achieving industryrecognition. It is hoped to have a draftsyllabus to review in the near future.

Since our last meeting a Pilot has contactedus about the use of cable ties to secure thewedge either side of a pilot ladder rung.The ISO require the wedge to be held inplace by rope seizing, although alternativescan be used. It is perhaps doubtful that acable tie constitutes a suitable alternative.IMPA have agreed to take the matter upwith ship owners but suggest that it may bean issue for Port State Control.

The minutes of the T&T Meetings areavailable on the UKMPA web site.

Chairman T&T CommitteeGareth Rees [[email protected]]


PENSION NEWSTHE SECRETARIATThe month of March saw changes in theSecretariat’s staff with Thursday the 20thbeing Richard Wiscombe’s last day withthe PNPF before staring his new job up inLondon. On Monday the 10th LorettaEccleston joined the Secretariat asRichard’s replacement. Loretta joins usfrom the Virgin Atlantic Pension Schemewhere she was the Senior AdministrativeOfficer.

Accounts 2007The 2007 annual accounts are currently

being audited and should be finalised bythe Trustees at their May quarterlymeeting. It is hoped that printed copies ofthese accounts will be sent out to pilotsand pensioners by the end of June.

Member Nomination FormsIt has recently been reported in the

pensions press that it is a common problemthat nomination forms are not updated totake account of changes in a member’scircumstances. This can delay the paymentof lump sum death benefits. So now mightbe an opportune time for me to remindmembers to ensure that their nominationforms, aka “Expression of Wish” formsare up-to-date.

2007 Triennial ValuationThe 2007 triennial valuation is well and

truly underway, with the first meeting todiscuss the data in April. This valuationsees the Trustees setting the economic andmortality assumptions.

Expectation of life is now one of themost important assumptions in thevaluation of pension liabilities. It will becrucial for the trustees to get it right asover recent years there has been evidenceof a rapid increase in longevity in the UKpopulation.

The Regulator recommends that good

practice requires assumptions to beevidence based and there has been muchtalk in the press about the “cohort effect”(ie an effect related to the year of birth).Trustees beware, where valuations usemortality assumptions that appear to thePensions Regulator to be weaker than thelong cohort (ie assumes additional imp-rovements in longevity until 2040) thesewill attract further scrutiny from his office.

Longevity and mortality assumptionshave all made the job of the trusteesincreasingly difficult and should make forsome interesting discussions around thetable.

BUDGET 12 MARCH 2008The 2008/09 tax year will see significantchanges to the way in which income taxand National Insurance (NI) is calculated.The upper limit for NI will jump from£34,840 to £40,040; the 10% income taxband will be abolished and the basic rate ofincome tax falls from 22% to 20%. Mostemployees will save on their combined taxand NI bill in the new tax year, but anyoneearning less than £15,400 is going to paymore in tax and NI during 08/09. Taxcredits may be available to offset the effectof this.

The biggest winners are those earningaround the £35,000 mark, they will see acombined saving of about £375. Anyoneearning more than £35,100 will pay moreNI but this should be offset by savings inincome tax.

Personal AllowancesThe changes in personal allowances

include:

The measures in the budget impacting onpensions include:

• Changes to the Lifetime and annualallowances

• Changes to authorised payments• Easements to the trivial commutation

rules.

ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERINGREQUIREMENTSAs if being a trustee was not complexenough, the Government is bringing in newanti-money laundering requirements thatcould well apply to trustees who are paidfor acting in that role. As the requirementsare at best opaque, clarification is beingsought by legal firms, but it seems clearthat unpaid trustees will not be affected.

NEWS IN BRIEF1908 to 2008

2008 sees 100 years of the State Pensionwhich all started with Lloyd George’s 1908Old Age Pensions Act. In 1901 lifeexpectancy for men and women was 45and 49 years respectively but a StatePension Age of 65 was still proposed, buteventually set at 70 to reduce costs. Manyquestions raised by the 1908 Act remainunchanged, however life expectancy haschanged dramatically.

National Money Advice ServiceIn his final report on generic financial

advice Otto Thoresen calls for a nationalmoney guidance service. This servicewould provide information on budgeting,saving, borrowing, protection, retirementplanning, tax and welfare benefits andjargon busting, but would stop short ofrecommending specific products.

Gurkhas ProtestHundreds of retired Gurkhas protested

outside Parliament to demand pensionsequality with British soldiers. At presentGurkhas who retire after 1997 receive apension equivalent to the rest of the BritishArmy. However those that retired prior tothat date receive one-sixth of the amountreceived by a UK soldier, which theybelieve is discrimination.

Debbie [email protected]

£5225

£7550

£7690

£6365

£6285

£2440

£1730

2008/09 2007/08

Aged 65 or under

Aged 65-74

Aged 75 or over

Married couples(age 75 and over)

Married couples(aged less than 75 andborn before 06.04.35)

Married couples -minimum

Blind person’sallowance

Inheritance Tax

£5435

£9030

£9180

£6625

£6535

£2540

£1800

£321,000

Pensioners Deceased–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

November 2007 toJanuary 2007

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––B Foreman Kings Lynn

K Grant Southampton

PG Henneker Cinque Ports

JP Muir Dover

R Oliver Harwich

GS Perry Liverpool

AH Thurgood London West

RetirementsNovember 2007 to

January 2008

DJ Chamberlain Tees Nov

S Gilbert SE Wales Dec

CI Grant Whitehaven May

A Lindfield Liverpool Dec

BP Littler Liverpool Dec

JA Pauling Liverpool Dec

DI Shennan Portsmouth Jan

MR Talbot SE Wales Dec


Many pilots are descended from shippingfamilies but all too often the records are lostover even a couple of generations. RetiredHumber pilot David Raddings came acrossthe following record of his family’s shipowning past and tragedy whilst sorting outthe possessions of his father (also a Humberpilot) who died in 2000.

At an early age I knew I had a maritimeheritage, a Chappell painting of the ketchCharlotte Kilner surging through roughgreen seas and white surf off the EddystoneLighthouse had hung in our lounge as longas I can remember. The scene is set by afigure stood at the helm, an Ensign flyinghigh and signal flags WKSQ beneath withsails shortened in, ready to make the mostof what seems to be of an impending squall,the man is pushing the ship hard in an effortto make a tide at a nearby port or haven.That impression is obviously designed togive any Captain or Owner that extra senseof pride at a time in history whenphotography could not produce anything ofthe like. The name on this particularpainting, Capt. John William Raddings, hasa very special significance.

Many years later my Grandmother wouldnostalgically tell us of the days when sheused to take her children and join herhusband (Jack) to sail to the ChannelIslands or other places around the coast.The affection she held for those memorieswere never far from her mind.

Her son, John, would have been six yearsold in the summer of 1916 and was alreadybeing groomed for his future standingbetween his father and the huge mahoganywheel, to keep the ship on course, with theseasoned eye of his father looking aloft,making sure the wind was kept taut in thesails for best results.

Nearly 40 years later I would have asimilar experience when occasionally I hadthe privilege to be with my father (1910-2000) as he took ships in and out of thedocks in Hull.

Learning the feel for rope, knots andsplices, the Turks head, rope mats and

eventually bell lanyards by the time Ibecame a teenager, was also part of thatgrooming. Ships, his life’s work continueduntil he was well over seventy.

Until one day when it was his time to sayfarewell and those with the experience ofemptying the family home know full wellhow hard it is. Whilst undertaking thedifficult sorting through my father’sbelongings I came across a rather innocuousgrubby old cardboard box which containeda rather tattered brown old school exercisebook where my father had written in hispractically indecipherable writing thedescription and workings of a ketch namedJohn owned or chartered by The Kilners.

The Kilners were a glass bottle makingcompany in the 1800s that needed suppliesof silver sand which was brought to thefactory near Doncaster from Holland in theketch, Captained by my great grandfather,Benjamin Lake Raddings.

However this was not all and unfolding alarge well creased parchment document Irealised this was the Official Registrationdocument for the Charlotte Kilner and Ithen realised that the precious contents offamily history had come to me as aninheritance, a story that had to be recordedand stored.

In 1882 the John was replaced when theKilner family decided to have a vessel builtby a Mr Outwin of Goole, the ship beingnamed Charlotte Kilner, a 75 ft woodenbuilt vessel of 79.1ton. Records reveal thatmy Great Grandfather owned 8 of the 64shares and the Kilner family owned the rest.

My Grandfather (John W) had served asdeck hand and able seaman with his fathersince the age of 14 and by this time wasaged 21 and had become the mate.

Sailing and making a living was a hardbusiness and in 1907, at the age of 53, myGreat Grandfather was ready to retire andsold the business to my Grandfather JohnWilliam (known as Jack to his family) forthe price of £450.

My father (also John) wrote the followingaccount:

When the Hull Fishing Industrydeveloped to the extent of surplus, cod fromthe market was bought and salted by a firmcalled Waltons on the west end of the dock(St Andrews Dock, Hull), known as the“Cod Farm”. The Charlotte Kilner was thefirst ship loaded with a cargo of Salt WetCod and was chartered by Charles HLowery to take it from Hull to Exeter. Idon’t know many subsequent salt fishcargoes she carried but the many and variedcargoes she did carry included: Scottish seedpotatoes, grain, stone, cement, coal, chinaclay, scrap iron, and of course silver sand.

Trading on board Charlotte Kilnercontinued through The Great War, WW1,and in December 1916 having loaded stonefrom Alderney to Grimsby, my grandfatherwrote a card dated 13/12/1916:

Six days later, 19th December, they hadcompleted what must have been a quickpassage to the Humber where they

To be a Pilot: Career or Destiny - The Story Behind The Painting

Charlotte Kilner

JW Raddings (leaning on the rail to theright) on board the Charlotte Kilner

Dear Wife I expect we shall be sailing about3 o’clock this afternoon as the wind has just

come SW so hope we shall not be long beforewe are home well no more this time best love

to all from your loving husband Jackxxxxxxxxxxxx

wind now NW again


anchored off Grimsby awaiting a tug to towher up river.

As it was the First World War theAdmiralty would not allow a Captain to sailthrough The Boom and up river alone. Thenext day she had a tug alongside waiting forher to get under way but no anchor lightwas allowed under the Admiralty Wartimeblackout regulations. In the dark, theminesweeper Valmont steamed in andcollided with the Charlotte Kilner. Thestone cargo she was carrying resulted in theship sinking in an instant. Fortunately the 4-man crew were saved by the tug.

Following this accident the Admiraltyreviewed lighting arrangements for craft theresult being that the displaying of ridinglights for vessels at anchor was reinstated.With the Charlotte Kilner declared a “totalloss” a decision was made to continuetrading and so in the New Year the hunt foranother vessel was on.

The ketch Princess owned byRowbothams, who at the time had its shipschartered by Appointment to the War Officewas available for a cost of around £1000and upon her return from Guernsey, wouldbe available immediately.

By the end of January 1917, not able towait for the salvage insurance on the Kilnermy Grandfather purchased the vessel whichhe had been assured was on passage toGrimsby.

When Princess still hadn’t arrived in Hullfor hand-over by the middle of February hisletters began to show signs of agitation andstress, because he had already begun fixingcargoes.

More unwelcome news arrived at thistime in a letter from his solicitor informinghim the Admiralty had “repudiatedliability” in the matter of the sinking of theCharlotte Kilner vs. Valmont.

By the end of February the Princess wasstill below the horizon as it were, andhaving fixed a cargo with the Alderney GasCo. he gave this rather embarrassed reply toa letter of: enquiry from them

Feb 27th 1917The Alderney Gas CoDear Sirs

Yours of the 24th to hand this morningand you can rely on me to push matters allI can at this end on arrival of Princess butshe hasn’t got here up to writing this letter.I can understand The Position you are inand I am in another mans hands at presentuntil he gets here, then it will be different Idon’t think I should have been all this timebut hope soon to be able to wire youKindest Regards

Yours Faithfully JW Raddings PS The Freight ought to be a little more

The way things are The ins (insurance?) isso High but will see about that later

On 28th February Rowbothams inform-ed him Princess had passed Yarmouth but

the Princess did not arrive on the berth todischarge until 10th March, where he thendiscovered to his dismay that the Captainaboard had made a prior cargo charter tosomeone in Guernsey and he was thereforebound by agreement to complete. With thisknowledge on 11th March he wrote toAlderney Gas informing them of yet anotherunfortunate delay.

If that was not enough, other problemsarose in that changing over insurance fromRowbothams insurers proved difficult and aminor collision that had occurred whilstunder the ownership of Rowbothamsbetween Princess and another vessel MaryAnnie added to the complications andfrustration.

Confirmation of insurance finally arrivedon 21st March and he set sail on Thursday22nd March 1917 for Guernsey knowingthat on arrival he would be able to find timeto visit Alderney Gas Co. to express hissincere apologies for the unforeseenproblems and trouble.

At the beginning of April myGrandmother received the followingdevastating news:

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.MEMORANDOM

Goole 1st April 1917

From ToReceiver of Wreck Mr J W Raddings

Sir. “Princess”A small boat has been picked up near the

Cockle Light Ship, which apparentlybelongs to the above.

Application for its delivery should bemade to the Receiver of Wreck atYarmouth.

F. Mon…. (illegible).

Of course the Memorandum was writtento the Owner, but with Jack aboard,Elizabeth, obviously shocked with disbeliefand confusion, wrote to inform and confirmthe news with their solicitors:

April 3rd 1917 L C Sage Secretary Dear Sir

I received a letter from the “Receiver ofWreck” Custom House Great Yarmouth”yesterday the 2nd inst saying that a boatmarked “Princess of Goole” had beenpicked up at sea near the Cockle Lightshipon the 27th March and taken intoYarmouth. I am naturally very anxious as tothe whereabouts of the Princess as I haveheard nothing from my husband since hesailed, which was the 22nd March, Ithought it best to advise you in thesematters.

Yours truly Mrs E Raddings

Sailing was very precarious in those days;the ‘jolly boat’ was the only thing foundfrom the Princess, all aboard had perished.Whether lightning had struck a second time,in the form of a minesweeper or other vessel

colliding with her in fog etc., or blown upby a mine, no trace was ever found. Theweather does not seem to have been a factorsince thanks to the Met Office archives, in2001 I was able to ascertain the conditions.It was cold with light easterlies at firstbacking northerly force 5 by the 29thMarch 1917.

Even after all these troubles my father stillhad a keen interest in going to sea. Hismother however, more cautiously, steeredhim into the Humber Pilot Service thinkingher son would be nearer home and shepossibly had a naive notion that Pilotagewas likely to be a less dangerousoccupation. After completing his app-renticeship (6yrs) at the age of 21 he stillhad to serve time as a midshipman in asailing vessel and so in 1931 served in one ofthe very last merchant sailing vesselsavailable, a topsail schooner named JaneBanks of Fowey. At this time, contrary tothe Rule of the Road Shipping Regulations,“Sail was giving way to Steam”!

It may be thought that by 1931circumstances had improved aboard SailingVessels? A vivid memory of my father’s wasof a ferocious night with all hands on deck(probably only 4 men) desperatelyshortening sail to save them and the shipfrom destruction. This task completed, thedesperation was then focused upon savingthemselves. No radio, no generator, no lifepreservation equipment, only the ships handbilge pump and a ‘jolly boat’.

“All hands to the pumps” is a well-known phrase and until the storm abated itwas the only thing left for them to do as theship floundered head to wind in the hugeseas. God was on their side that night as theship eventually made for a safe haven andport. The reward for saving themselvesfrom oblivion though would be nothingother than the usual, discharging the vesselby hand, with pickaxe, shovel and brush.Certainly not the popping of champagnebottles on arrival as is the case for thecelebrating yachtsmen today!

We all accept sailing has a certainmystique about it and still remains theperception for the romantic no matterwhich era, but like most hard manual-workof those times, it was also tough if notrather grim.

It is ironic however that in 1917 therewere two parties in Guernsey and Alderneyboth desperate for a delivery of coal whocould not wait, but in the end there was noalternative.

The postcard from Alderney that Jackwrote on the 13th December 1916 was verysignificant, in that it was the last declarationof love and affection he ever wrote to hisfamily. Certainly for Elizabeth it must havebeen a most cherished possession, so muchso, chafed and ragged at the edges by somuch handling, it has endured over 90yrs.

David Raddings


Civil liability may be described as theliability of a civil wrongdoer (or tortfeasor)to pay a sum of money to any person whohas suffered loss or damage in consequenceof the civil wrong or tort which has beendone. Criminal liability is the liability of acriminal wrongdoer to pay a penalty to thepublic purse (a fine) or to serve a term ofimprisonment in consequence of his crime.Save for the removal of a pilot’s professionalqualification (ie his authorisation or licence)there are no other penalties which apply inpilotage. The law of pilotage in the UnitedKingdom is governed almost entirely bystatute law, namely the Pilotage Act of 1987– and by its interpretation in the Courts.

CIVIL LIABILITYThe leading modern case in pilotage is EssoPetroleum v Hall Russell (The Esso Bernicia,1989). The case was heard in the House ofLords and arose during the currency of the1913 Pilotage Act. A vessel under pilotagecaused damage to a berth when the head-tuglost all power. The pilot of the vessel wasunique in that he was directly employed byhis Competent Harbour Authority (CHA) ata time when all other UK pilots were self-employed. The owner of the damaged berthclaimed against the shipowner; and theshipowner in turn claimed liabilityvicariously against the CHA (in its capacityas the employer of the pilot) for the allegednegligence of the pilot, in appreciation of theobvious fact that the recovery of substantialdamages against the (relatively wealthy)CHA was far more likely than the recoveryof financial damages against the (relativelyimpecunious) pilot. The House of Lordsconducted an extensive review of relevantpilotage law and found no liability againstthe Harbour Authority on the grounds thata pilot “is an independent professional manwho navigates the ship as a principal and notas a servant of his general employer.”

Following the introduction of the 1987Pilotage Act, another challenge was made bya shipowner against a CHA in 1993 inrespect of the negligence of an employedpilot. When under pilotage, the gas tankerCavendish was in allision with a structureand suffered damage. The legal challengewas made in the Admiralty Court but wasdismissed when the Court ruled that theprovisions of the 1987 Act had not alteredthe relevant position as stated under theterms of the 1913 Act. Referring to the EssoBernicia case, the Cavendish Judge observed(i) “No man can serve two masters”; and (ii)“the purport and effect of Section 2 [of the1987 Act] was not to impose duties on

CHAs to pilot ships but to require them tosupply properly authorised pilots for ships.”

It has therefore been established that when apilot is navigating a ship, even if he isengaged by a contract of employment to hisCHA, the CHA is not liable for anynegligence of the pilot; for the simple reasonthat a pilot when navigating, “is anindependent professional” who cannot servetwo masters at the same time. The law whichgoverns this is Section 16 of the 1987 Actwhich provides that:-

“The fact that a ship is being navigated inan area and in circumstances in whichpilotage is compulsory for it shall not affectany liability of the owner or master of theship for any loss or damage caused by theship or by the manner in which it isnavigated.”

This establishes that, for all purposesconnected with navigation, the pilot is theservant of the ship-owner and not theservant of the CHA and it is thereforeextremely difficult to establish civil liabilityagainst a pilot in matters of civil negligence.A further particular difficulty for those whomight wish to seek to recover civil damagesfrom a pilot is Section 22(1) of the 1987 Actwhich provides that:

“The liability of an authorised pilot forany loss or damage caused by any act oromission of his while acting as such a pilotshall not exceed £1,000 and the amount ofthe pilotage charges in respect of the voyageduring which the liability arose.”

In commercial terms, £1,000 is not a sumwhich would be worth a legal fight.

The combined effect of Section 16 of the1987 Act and the two leading cases producethe result that, for a professional pilot, acontract of employment with a CHA issuperfluous and creates nothing other than arod for his own back.

CRIMINAL LIABILITYFortunately it is rare for criminal liability tobe established against a UK pilot.

Liability does, however arise underSection 21 of the Act which provides:-21(1) If the pilot of a ship-(a) does any act which causes or is likely tocause the loss or destruction of, or seriousdamage to, the ship or its machinery,navigational or safety equipment, or thedeath of, or serious injury to a person onboard the ship; or(b) Omits to do anything required topreserve the ship or its machinery,navigational equipment or safety equipmentfrom loss, destruction or serious damage or

to preserve any person on board the shipfrom death or serious injury

And the act or omission is deliberate oramounts to a breach or neglect of duty or heis under the influence of drink or a drug atthe time of the act or omission, he shall beguilty of an offence.

Section 21(2) provides for a maximumpenalty of two years imprisonment or anunlimited fine.

In a recent case the prosecuting authoritiesgave notice that they had it in mind toprosecute the pilot of a ship which had beenin collision with a ferry under the commandof a PEC holder. The ferry had sufferedmuch damage, fortunately without loss oflife. It was then pointed out to theprosecuting authorities that although theferry had suffered substantial damage, (a) The pilot had caused no loss or damageto his own ship and (b) Was not under the influence of drink ordrugs.

No prosecution was started. The incidentdid, however, identify the fact that Section21 applies only to a case where a pilot causesdamage to his own ship, either deliberatelyor by drink or drugs. The Section does notapply to a pilot when a ship other than hisown suffers damage; and, rather moresignificantly, it does not apply to a PEC-holder at all. Shipmasters (includingshipmaster-PEC holders) are of coursesubject to other legislation.

An interesting criminal prosecution of apilot did occur in 2002 under Section 15(2)of the Act. The pilot (who at the time was onstrike!) had been appointed to the commandof a vessel which was about to transit hisown compulsory pilotage area. Thepilot/shipmaster reported to the CHA thathe did not wish to engage another pilot, forthe fairly obvious reason that his ownpilotage qualification remained fully validand he duly put to sea, performing his ownpilotage. The CHA took a strict line andprosecuted the pilot/shipmaster for failing totake a pilot when he was obliged to do so.

At Court, on taking legal advice, thepilot/shipmaster pleaded guilty to theoffence in the light of the statutory definitionof a pilot which provides that “Pilot” means“any person not belonging to ship who hasthe conduct thereof” and “pilotage” shall beconstrued accordingly.

Because a master plainly “belongs” to hisship, this provision means that no man canbe both master and pilot of the ship at thesame time. The penalty imposed by theCourt was nominal and the CHA wasobliged to pay an overwhelming portion ofthe costs of the prosecution.

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITIES IN UK PILOTAGESince I joined the pilotage service I have been in possession of a copy of the 1987 Pilotage Act and have occasionally

attempted to examine the relevance of the clauses to a certain situation but not having a legal mind I fail to comprehendthe “legalese”! The following is an edited version of an opinion on liabilities written by Barrie Youde for EMPA which

provides important clarifications of civil and criminal liabilities of UK pilots. Ed.


After the collision of the Cosco Busan inSan Francisco Bay communication in themaster/pilot relationship has become a hotitem again. Masters and pilots arebecoming more aware of the importance ofclear and unambiguous communicationand the world around them is pressuringthem to work and communicate together asa team.

Last month I flew from Amsterdam toStockholm and saw the cabin and thecockpit crew of my flight meeting for thefirst time. It was clear that they did notknow each other.

The pilots were laughing, making jokesand shaking hands while the cabin crewwas just a step away. There was a politenod to them but they were not directlyaddressed. However during the flight Ioverheard their communication and the

cabin crew used terms you can hear duringany flight. This is the result of extensivetraining. They are unambiguously informedand know exactly what to do and what toexpect from each other. They love workingthis way and love their jobs. I realised thatin the past this was not normal at all.Power distance, lack of assertiveness andno delegation were the basis of day to daybehaviour. The consequences of that inflying were disastrous.

Standard communication was introducedand clear standard operational procedureswere stated. Now every crewmember isaware of his or her duties. Extensivetraining on simple and clear behaviourmakes all the difference.

As a BRM workshop leader I have oftenbeen told that my workshop is good forawareness but not really good at providing

workable solutions. As a maritime pilot Iunderstand these remarks.

Maybe the time has come to give adifferent solution for the co-operationbetween pilots, masters and crew: Bridgecommunication and terminology can bestandardised.

VTS, the airline industry and industrialplants do it. Even hospital crews do it. Tobe honest when I have to be hospitalized, Isurely hope doctors and nurses arecommunicating as a team and understandeach other clearly. Masters, watch officersand pilots, can work on improvement.

Briefings can be clear and checklists usedby all. Standard operational procedures canbe used by all professionals in shipping inthe same manner as other industries.

State clearly and unambiguously whatyou want to know and do not assumeanything about the intentions of the otherparty. Much of this has already beendeveloped. Pilotage lacks simple and clearmodules for training to put this inpractice.

The question is: Do we realise that wefunction better as part of the bridge team ordo we still believe that sharing professionaldoubts weakens our status? A single personerror can easily happen when informationis not shared.

In a challenge and response environmentthe master brings in his responsibility forhis vessel and the pilot his local knowledge.That means teamwork with clear andsimple ways to communicate. We candevelop a Bridge Team Terminology fornormal and everyday piloting. The pilotcan ask who of the bridge team isresponsible for the navigation and a matereporting vessels nearby is not weakeninghis position. A pilot may expect to bewarned when anything comes within acertain range and when communicatingwith VTS should be standard practice toexplain all information to the bridge team.The helmsman should be given specialattention and and the correct execution ofhelm orders checked by a third person. Thepilot should never be working alone.

The pilot then becomes a truly skilledand appreciated professional instead ofjust another stranger on the bridge.

Bridge Team Terminology in the Master/Pilot relationshipby Mrs Margriet Torpstra, pilot in Rotterdam

REMEMBERIt is in your interest, if involved in anyaccident or injury, however trivial it

may seem at the time, to inform:

Circle Insurances ServicesWITHIN 30 DAYS


OBITUARIESCaptain Daniel Ivor McMillan

(1927 - 2008)

Retired River Thames Pilot Dan McMillandied on 31st March 2008.

Born in Portsmouth 24/9/1927, he wastaken back to the Gravesend area by hisMother in 1928, after the unfortunate deathof his Father, and brought up in that same

district. With its long history of shippingand the River Thames, it would seem to bea natural follow on that he chose a career atsea. Dan joined Messrs Watts Watts, an oldestablished company of Tramp ShipOwners, in 1944 as an Apprentice, his firstship being the ss Beckenham, and spent 4years with them putting in his time towardshis first professional qualification, his 2ndMates Certificate. During the time he spentat sea in the latter part of World War 2, heserved in Atlantic Convoys, in theMediterranean, and in the Far East. For thisservice he earned 4 Medals, Atlantic Star,Italy Star, Burma Star and India ServiceMedal.

Thereafter, he worked his way up throughthe various Officer ranks, gaining his FirstMates Certificate, and then Master Foreign-Going in 1953, first of all with McAndrewsand then with Comben Longstaff, where hewas promoted Master, and held thisposition in several of their vessels until1955, when he was appointed as a TrinityHouse River Thames Pilot.

During his time as a Pilot, Dan became amember of the River Pilots’ Committee, andeventually became Chairman. He was also amember of The London Pilotage Committee

at Trinity House, and was known tostrongly defend the position of all LondonPilots in general. During this time, he wasan examiner of Masters & Mates whowished to acquire Pilotage ExemptionCertificates. He was always a staunchsupporter of the UKPA (now UKMPA),attended many conferences as a delegate,then became a member of the executivecommittee in 1970, elected Junior Vice-Chairman in 1973, and this culminated inhim becoming Chairman of the UKPA in1978, which office he held until 1983.Afterwards, he was made an HonoraryVice-President of the UKMPA.

During the late seventies and earlyeighties, Dan was appointed as a member ofthe Steering Committee on Pilotage (SCOP)and then later as a member of the AdvisoryCommittee on Pilotage (ACOP). Both ofthose committees were set up by theGovernment to look into the various aspectsof pilotage, with a view towards the massivechanges which resulted in the Pilotage Act1987 and the change over to portauthorities in 1988. At this stage, he had toretire owing to ill-health, but in typicalfashion, was involved in the negotiationswith the port right up to the final day underTrinity House. In 1993 he became amember of the Pilots’ National Committeefor Pensions (PNCP) and was well knownfor his views and protection of the rights ofPensioner Members. This committee waseventually thought to be unnecessary by theSection Committee approximately twoyears ago, and disbanded.

Apart from his sea-going and pilotageduties, Dan became a council member ofGravesend Borough Council in 1959, thenan Alderman in 1964, then as DeputyMayor in 1966/67 when his stepfather wasMayor, and finally as Mayor of the Boroughin 1972. After his term in office as Mayor,he reverted to being a Councillor, and wasvery well respected in this office. Theelectorate in Gravesend, from his own wardin particular, but also from other parts ofthe town, knew that if they had a problemwith any officials or office personnel fromthe Council, a consultation with Danusually resulted in a satisfactory conclusion.In recognition of his services to local people,and to the Churches’ Housing Association,he had a road named after him in theSinglewell Ward of Gravesend.

In 1991 the former Trinity House RiverPilots formed a Society, which still functionstoday, albeit with very much reducednumbers, and Dan was appointed asChairman at the inaugural meeting, aposition he held until his untimely death.

Dan was always a supporter of charities,and did a lot of work for the local branch of

FOR VOCATIONAL

TRAINING

RESEARCH AND

CONSULTANCY

REG. NO. 926387

WARSASHMARITIME CENTRE

Professional Development for Pilots

over 50 years serving the maritime industryWARSASH MARITIME CENTRE

Please e-mail us on [email protected] or visit our website:

www.solent.ac.uk/wmc

Warsash Maritime CentreNewtown Road, Warsash,Southampton, SO31 9ZL

Tel: +44 (0)1489 556215 Fax: +44 (0)1489 573988

SHIP HANDLING COURSES

Utilising the 7 scaled mannedmodels, we offer specialisedcourses designed to develop theskills and understanding of shiphandling techniques.

• Scaled models of up to300,000Dwt

• Radio controlled model tug

• 10 acre lake with many miles ofchannels and 30 berths

SIMULATOR COURSES

Extensive use is made of thebridge simulator by pilots bothfor area knowledge andProfessional DevelopmentCourses. The wind, current andvisibility conditions are set tooperational requirements.

COMBINED COURSESUsing a distinctive combinationof the manned models andbridge simulator.

ADVANCED SHIPHANDLING

A customised course utilising themanned models to further enhanceexisting knowledge and skills.

Warsash Maritime Centre alsooffers further courses includingARPA updating and VTS training.Please visit our website for moredetails.

the Leukemia Research Fund in particular,where he was Chairman from its foundationin 1972 right up until his death. During histime in office, he helped raise over £1m forthe fund. He kept this side of his life verylow profile, but his valuable assistance wasappreciated by many. One of his lastpositions with a charity was as Chairman ofthe Gravesend Churches’ HousingCommittee, but failing health caused him toresign from this post about 2 years ago.

Dan was very proud of his Scottishheritage, and traced his roots back toScotland, the Isle of Arran in particular,which is the traditional home of theMcMillan Clan. For many years, Dan,Mildred, four children, and the dog ,went toArran for their Summer holidays and hadmany friends on that island. Their last visitthere was in 2005 and I was pleased tomake the short journey from Edinburgh andmeet them.

There are many accolades which one canpay to former colleagues, and in this case,not enough, all I can say is that he was agreat person to work with, always with thebest interests of Pilots at heart, and I amvery privileged that he was a personal friendtoo!

The funeral service was held at ChristChurch, Gravesend, on 15th April, and

many friends from all the various aspects ofDan’s life were there to pay their lastrespects.

Afterwards, there was a private familycommittal at Medway Crematorium.

Dan will be sadly missed by us all, andespecially by his wife Mildred, sons Davidand Andrew, daughters Sally and Susan,and by the ten grandchildren.

Eric EagleRetired River Thames Pilot

Anthony Harold MacKenzie Thurgood(1930-2008)

Tony Thurgood was born in Forest Hill,London. He joined HMS Conway in April1947, and left in April 1949 to join theUnion Castle Mail Steamship CompanyLtd. He left the company in 1960 with therank of Chief Officer.

Tony was then living in Teignmouth,Devon and was appointed a Trinity Housepilot there. After a short period the LondonList opened and he applied for theGravesend Sea Pilots. He was told that hemust hand in his Teignmouth licence andwait two years for appointment, and so hereturned to sea in HMS cable ships. Hisvoyage in HMTS Monarch was round the

world, stopping to lay the first telephonecable between Australia and New Zealand,and then on to Vancouver Island buoyingoff ‘en route’ in Hawaii.

Tony was appointed to the GravesendChannel Pilots in 1963 and alwaysdescribed his twenty-five years at Gravesendas the happiest in his life.

He was retired on the sick list in 1988.


LETTERI am a retired Humber pilot and wasinterested to read the two articles in theJanuary issue on Bridge Visibility and Squat.On Bridge Visibility I do understand theSouthampton Pilots’ problem I was amember of the UKPA technical committeesome years ago and was invited to write achapter on Bridge design for inclusion in theNautical Institute’s Pilotage and shiphandling book (1990). In the first paragraphof my piece I made the point that the primaryreason for having a bridge is so that alookout can be kept. What a pity no oneseems to have read it, or if they did what apity they took no notice. My co writer LJHarrison made the same point in hissubmission as it relates to off shore supplyvessels.

On the subject of squat I would offer thefollowing thoughts, Dr Barrass and most ofthe other writers on the subject use towedtank models. This may well reveal someaspects of squat and verify Bernoulli’sequations but a towed model has nopropeller and I (simple sailor boy that I am)think that the propeller draws water fromnot only the sides of the ship in way of thestern run in but also from underneath thevessel and I think that drawing water fromunder a ship which is in shallow water willtend to make the after draft increase a bit.The tank towed model does not usually haveany ballast water, cargo etc either. When a

vessel suddenly runs into shallows, the firstthing that usually happens is that the vesseldrops by the head. I think that when thathappens any water in slack ballast tank tosay nothing of a tanker cargo with areasonable ullage will tend to surge forwardadding to the trim by the head effect and alsoI seem to dimly remember some ship stabilitywhich says something about the centre offloatation moving aft under these sort ofconditions which would also add to theeffect. However the fact that the forefootmay not touch bottom may be because thewater cannot get away from under the bowfast enough in a very restricted dredgedchannel for example and because liquidscannot be compressed it may be that the bowis riding a water cushion. The last vessel ofwhich I was Master before joining the pilotservice was fitted with a bulbous bow andeven in very deep water (Norwegian fjords)when bottom proximity was clearly not afactor my observations seemed to suggestthat as soon as we had a reasonable bit ofway on, the bow dropped about 18” or so.On a sea passage as stores and water andbunkers were consumed from aft the effectwas very noticeable at an arrival port and Ithink bulbous bows have a downward thrustwhen the vessel is loaded. For hundreds ofyears sailors told of experiencing huge wavesyet no one believed them because the mathspeople said the equations proved it was notpossible. Then when waves were measuredand observed by satellite and radar it was

found that they did indeed exist. WASTHERE AN APOLOGY FROM THEDOUBTERS? NO! And I do not think thegood Doctor will be saying sorry to theHouston and other pilots either.

Mike Barratt

PS Just to make my point about the propellertaking water from under the vessel I can tellyou that some time ago the regular linerunning to Grimsby built a ship called DanaMaxima so named because she was built toJUST fit Grimsby Lock and the vessel alwayssailed through the open lock when the riverand dock were level. One day the vesselarrived a bit deeper than usual but still withinlimits. However, as she got to a position headand shoulders in the lock she squatted downand sat on the lock sill. At this juncture theassistant dock master threw his hat on thedock side and began to dance on it. The pilotordered the main engines stopped, ran someheadlines out and hove the vessel ahead, shehaving refloated when the engines stopped.The bystanders may have missed this stage ofthe proceedings as they were enthralled bythe dance of the demented dock master!Once the stern of the vessel was clear of theouter gates they were closed and the ship’sengines were restarted and the vessel dulyproceeded to her berth.

Associated British Ports now make thedock masters wear hard hats to discouragehat dancing as it is considered unseemly!


Shop & Factory: Mariner’s House, Mariner’s Way, Somerton Business Park, Newport Road, Cowes, Isle of Wight PO31 8PBTel: +44 (0)1983 282388 • Fax: +44 (0)1983 282399 • Email: [email protected] • Website: www.seasafe.co.uk

Documents

Editorial SQUAT - Part 2 Mud navigation and negative under