DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! gCaptain is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

gCaptain

A blog about ships!
Jump to original thread »
Author

San francisco Oil Spill Hearings - A Response to Admiral Bone, USCG

Started by gcaptain · 11 months ago

Yesterday my comments were published on the front page of The San Francisco Chronicle in an article titled; “Hearing today at Presidio - tough queries for spill captain.”
Prior to being asked to comment the Chronicle’s lead maritime reporter contacted our frie ... Continue reading »

3 comments

  • Jay

    1 year ago

    John, why aren't you at these hearing testifying? You seem to know more about it than this ADM BONE guy!
    reply
  • Richard Rodriguez

    1 year ago

    Great Post! Back on 11/10/07 I wrote:

    (Ed. note: What was originally reported a bump in the fog has turned out be to a major incident. I've seen posts blaming the VTS system, CG oversight of SF pilots, and the like. one thing is for sure - there will be lots of finger pointing. I believe when all is said and done the Master will bare the brunt of the blame.

    Bottom line - Rule #2, Responsibility states: Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master, or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case.

    Rule #19, Conduct of Vessels in Restricted Visibility states: Every vessel shall proceed at a safe speed adapted to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility. A power-driven vessel shall have her engines ready for immediate maneuver.)
    reply
  • David Hindin

    1 year ago

    In your posting of November 20, you selectively quoted Captain Kelly Sweeney: "Sweeney said the AIS is "occasionally unreliable," has blind spots such
    as when a ship is behind islands or structures, and is "antiquated" when compared with modern electronics."

    Please note that the preface to the quoted segment was:
    "Sweeney thinks there is plenty of blame to go around - including a failure to use the most modern electronics, which might have allowed the Coast Guard to prevent the accident. The Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service, he says, uses an Automatic Identification System - called AIS - as the principal way to identify ships and track their
    courses. This system, Sweeney said, is based on radio transmissions, while a tracking operation with a Global Positioning System uses satellites."

    Then your quoted segment:

    "Sweeney said the AIS is "occasionally unreliable," has blind spots
    such as when a ship is behind islands or structures, and is
    "antiquated" when compared with modern electronics..."

    I can't let the following outrageous portion go un-noticed

    "This system, Sweeney said, is based on radio transmissions, while a tracking operation with a Global Positioning System uses satellites."

    The position reported by AIS generally provided by the ships onboard GPS system, which determines the ships position by making measurements on signals transmitted from a constellation of satellites. The GPS satellites have no inherent tracking capability. One may eventually see
    an enhanced AIS like system that reports ships positions in real time using radio transmissions through satellites, but that is in the future. As you yourself have noted, AIS is a very capable system when deployed at its full functionality.

    David Hindin
    Sunnyvale, CA
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login