2 comments

• 

  John G.Denham

  1 year ago

  During the investigations at APL preceeding the SAS program, we discovered that most at sea incidents between vessels occurred at watch changing time. A survey on gCaptain.com confirmed that. On naval vssels this is managed by bridge personnel verifying reports and exchanging and verifyhing data ( what we see) between CIC and bridge lookouts, OOD and JOOD and JOOW and POOW. Something like the change of sentries passing on orders. But it has to practiced and enforced, and that is not easy! In some of the better ships, lookout training is mandatory. At one time in the US Navy there was a special rating badge. In merchant ships, the only procedure I can suggest, and this is from experience, is the Master talks to all topside watch standers and reminds them of the importance of communication, and enforces the role lookouts play; they are a major member of the ship security and safety team, not just some one standing a boring watch. It' s helpful if one knows the laws about lookouts and the key role they play in trials. In an admiralty case some years ago, an involved captain , said, "That G.D. loookout has my license in his hands."
  reply
• 

  CaptainJack63

  1 year ago

  Standing watch on the USS Missouri BB-63 back in the mid 80s, I too found the lookout watch very boring. To pass the time we would report all satellites we saw. This kept the communications moving along and to let the bridge know we where in fact doing our jobs. I remember always being thanked for reporting Satellites. During our watch changes we always tried to relive the watch 15 minutes early to get all the pass down information of current contacts, changes in standing orders or night orders. Also it was a time to get warmed up and our minds clear and ready for watch standing. I alway knew the shift change was kind of dangerous because of taking time to do the pass down information.
  
  As we stood watch would get yelled at if the OOD or JOOD would spot a target before we did. We where trained in to identify ships that might not have lights on but we could identify just by the silhouette they made. We even had flash cards to practice identifying ships (friend or foe). We where constantly reminded of the importance of our job as if we where driving the vessel and had command. We where responsible of 1,500 lives and a 58,000 ton historic war ship that is imposable to stop on a dime. When a target was getting close we would get excited and report all kind of information. We would report the size, type, stats, what we see the crew doing on the back deck, etc. It annoyed the OOD sometimes but they where mostly thankful for the weird reports. We might have gone a bit overboard but we kept very vigilant on our duties.
  
  So to hear that the lookout failed to report the target makes me wonder if he was properly trained ( and experienced enough ) to do the duties of lookout. Also what was his back up? The Might Mo always had 3 flybridge lookouts, one stern watch. In fog we would post a bow watch. If we ever had a problem with a watch stander not doing their job then we would suggest to our department head they be put on some other duty.
  Standing watch was more interesting than scrubbing the decks. At 4 in the morning there is very little distractions from daily maneuvers. Also there is usually double watch standers during a shift change so. It amazes me that something like this happened. I have never served on a Japanese ship so I wouldn't know how thing are done correctly or not. I just know heads will roll on this one, hopefully for the good of the Japanese Navy and Merchant sailors.
  reply