USCG Buoy Tender collides with Block Island Ferry

Wow, this is not the kind of news we expect to be hearing during this age of modern electronics - radar, AIS, GPS....

Earlier this afternoon, in dense fog, the passenger ferry BLOCK ISLAND (first photo) collided with the 140' USCG cutter MORRO BAY. (second photo) Preliminary reports are that there were no injuries, and minimal damage. [See new story here].

I spoke with one eye witness who saw the ferry after it arrived at Block Island, and he described a large, 3' dent/gash/gouge in the bow of the ferry.

Initial information indicates that the MORRO BAY was heading west, and the BLOCK ISLAND was southbound. My mental chart says that these boats were in a classic "crossing" situation, and once in visual sight of each other, rules 15, 16 & 17 would apply, with the MORRO BAY as the "give way" vessel. The waters this incident occurred in are international, so the COLREGS apply.

Complicating all that is the fog, which I can tell you gets as thick as pudding out here. So, until the final few moments, neither vessel had any "right of way", because they were not in visual contact.

But wait a minute. Where are the radar observers? The AIS, and ARPA? I know the captains on the ferries have 16oo ton licenses. I can't speak to what the qualifications of the operator on the buoy tender are; but one would assume he's not a junior coxswain. These are not amateurs out there; these guys are some of the most professionals that stand a wheel watch, and somehow, they managed to completely mangle a foggy crossing situation.

The ferry travels at about 16kts, and I would guess the buoy tender at 12-15kts. They should have had plenty of time to sort out some passing arrangements and avoid a collision.

The investigation into this incident will drag on, but the results should be fascinating. Stay tuned.

Rule change for Master of Towing proposed

A friend in California sent me this newspaper story about the proposed changes in the seatime for a Master of Towing License. If you are interested, here is the text from the Federal Register [click here to read it all]

(3) Alternate progression: This proposed rule would add a new paragraph to 46 CFR 10.465 that would allow a master of steam or motor vessels of not more than 200 GRT to become a mate (pilot) of towing vessels under certain conditions. The paragraph would provide that the master of steam or motor vessels of not more than 200 GRT would need three years of service as Master of steam or motor vessels less than 200 GRT, completion of a Towing Officer Assessment Record, completion of the towing vessel license (apprentice mate) exam, and 30 days of training and observation on a towing vessel on the route being sought. In addition, the current regulatory language in 10.464(f) and 10.465(d) tries to describe a certain type of license, rather than using the actual endorsement title, which is unnecessarily confusing. This proposedrule would replace the descriptive terms ‘‘inspected, self-propelled vessels’’ with the actual endorsement title ‘‘master of steam or motor
vessels’’.

As far as I can tell, this would mean many of use could get a Mate of Towing, not a Master of Towing, with as little as 30 days in the wheelhouse. Did I read it wrong? I guess I don't see what all the fuss is about. I suppose that this change would mean that a guy with only 30 days in the wheelhouse would be eligable to stand a wheel watch, all by himself. But, in my opinion, the real change that occured after the Amtrack accident was the radar endorsement requirement, not the days behind the wheel of a tug boat. Nothing in the proposed change would alter that, or any of the other training requirements put in place since that railroad accident.