AsiaDry CargoEnvironmentOperations

Wakashio captain takes aim at his chief officer

There’s a clear spat developing at a court in Mauritius between the captain of the Wakashio bulk carrier and his chief officer.

Proceedings are underway looking into how the giant Mitsui OSK Lines-operated newcastlemax ran aground on a reef off southern Mauritius last July.

Sri Lankan chief officer Hitinamillage Tilakaratna Subodha told the court last week told that the master had diverted the ship’s course to get closer to the Mauritian coastline in search of a wifi internet connection, something he did regularly around the world.

For his part, Sunil Kumar Nandeshwa, the ship’s Indian captain, grilled by prosecutors for the last two days, has heaped the blame for the terrible ecological tragedy that followed in the wake of the grounding on his first officer.

Nandeshwa said today that he had gone near the coastline at Subodha’s request and it was the chief officer who had not followed his instructions when passing by the island. He also admitted that no one had been on lookout at the time the ship grounded.

Yesterday, the Wakashio captain revealed he had sailed close to the Mauritius coastline 10 to 15 times, saying one time in early 2019 when he had come within five miles of the coastline the local coast guard had got in touch to check the ship’s routing.

Also in court yesterday was the chief engineer, Preetam Singh, who recounted the exact moments of the grounding on July 25. He was on the bridge, sitting in the pilot’s chair, checking something on his mobile phone.

“Suddenly there was a big vibration. The captain rushed towards the ECDIS. I went down to the engine room. The order to stop the engine had already been given. I told the oiler to turn on the generator. And when the engine stopped, the captain gave the order to reverse,” Singh told the court.

Singh also revealed that a short circuit had stopped two ballast pumps working.

Operations to remove the stern of the ship have been hampered by poor weather this week.

In a release from December last year announcing measures to prevent another reoccurrence of a Wakashio style disaster, MOL gave the reason the ship had changed its passage plan from leaving a 22 nautical mile gap between it and the island of Mauritius to just two nautical miles. The reason cited, according to the release, was “to enter an area within the communication range of mobile phones”. Moreover, MOL revealed the crew were using a nautical chart without sufficient scale to confirm the accurate distance from the coast and water depth. In addition, MOL said a crewmember neglected appropriate watch-keeping, both visually and by radar.

Sam Chambers

Starting out with the Informa Group in 2000 in Hong Kong, Sam Chambers became editor of Maritime Asia magazine as well as East Asia Editor for the world’s oldest newspaper, Lloyd’s List. In 2005 he pursued a freelance career and wrote for a variety of titles including taking on the role of Asia Editor at Seatrade magazine and China correspondent for Supply Chain Asia. His work has also appeared in The Economist, The New York Times, The Sunday Times and The International Herald Tribune.

Comments

  1. This is obscene. Somehow the two senior deck officers have been turned against each other, probably by opposing counsels. The Master’s lawyer has an uphill, almost impossible task. The buck stops at the Master. It is obvious his management of the ship was laughable. He must know he is ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the ship. The old “Master under God” thinking had a purpose. Master’s took their ‘under God’ designation very seriously. Nowadays it seems anyone can buy or bribe their way into a Master’s certificate. Standards are abysmal. The running of his ship was a shambles. Whatever the C/O says will be a challenge for the Master, since, to say it yet again, the navigation of the ship, the proper continuous manning of the bridge, is his ultimate responsibility 24/7. He has to make sure the C/O is keeping a proper watch. It is damning that there were allegedly so many people on the bridge, and nobody was looking forward or at the radar screen, to see the reef ahead. He also has to answer to his charterers for the countless “illegal” deviations to obtain wifi signals. Since he will never be employed again that is probably a moot point. Surely today a shipowner or charterer can have 24/7 update of the ship’s position by AIS or GPS. This might be prudent, given the standards displayed by my profession today. The business about the chart is a red-herring. He shouldn’t have been close enough to need a large scale chart anyway.

    1. Given the high levels of government corruption in Mauritius at present it’s quite possible that deals have been done behind locked doors, principally, I’d suspect, with a view to gaining increased compensation from the Japanese. This may well be affecting who says what about whom. The country’s most experienced lawyer, Maitre Mohamed, hinted as much some months ago when he spoke of ‘occult practices’ (= underhand manoeuvres) that caused Nandeshwar to drop him as his legal representative.

      It is unwise in the context of this story to state that “anyone can buy or bribe their way into a Master’s certificate” – there’s been no suggestion that Sunil Nandeshwar did anything of the sort.

      Apparently, Nandeshwar was well thought of by crews. Indeed, it seems his coast-hugging transits were brought about commendable concern for crew welfare. Although MOL doesn’t seem to have been aware of his habit of diverting from the course set out per passage plan, it’s hard to see how Nagashiki couldn’t have learnt of it. Either they never paid much attention to what their ships were doing or perhaps they tacitly allowed it in light of crews being stuck on board past their contract-end dates. Purchase of a chart for Mauritius would have made the tactic, whether through deception or collusion, obvious, which is why the ship didn’t have one.

      While not explaining or excusing what happened on the bridge, we should also look closely at what was happening – or NOT happening – on shore. The National Coast Guard ‘Commander’ (if he deserves that title), an Indian national called Capt Manu, put up a lamentable performance in the Court of Investigation. After two days proving how little he knew about anything, he was allowed to fly back to India. Half the coastal monitoring equipment was out of action due to arrears of maintenance. There should have been 2 NCG officers at the Pointe-du-Diable CG Post yet only one was on duty (according to an Opposition party leader), and he wasn’t able to send a simple VHF radio message (lack of training?), unlike his colleague/s at Blue Bay. Manu was responsible for NCG’s command & comms, yet, despite watching impending disaster unfold before his eyes, the oficer at Pte-du-D didn’t have the authority to take any emergency action. A ship with 20 people aboard was about to be wrecked and lives might easily have been lost. Bad enough; but what if it had been a cruise ship with thousands aboard, like Costa Concordia? NCG officers took days to board the grounded ship so weren’t able to breathalyse or test crew for drugs etc. Vital evidence from the NCG post seems to have gone missing, like Manu himself.

      So it was a fine example of Professor Reason’s model of accident causation – multiple small ‘slices’, none of which was disastrous on its own, whose holes lined up at 7.15pm on 25 July to create an accident that, in hindsight, looks almost inevitable. Toleration of poor practices, over-contract crew desperate to call home, lack of wifi on board, poor bridge team management and poor communications between Captain and F/O, a broken and unfit-for-purpose coastguard system, the coincidence of the one time of the week alcohol was allowed with the crew member’s birthday AND with the transit through Mauritian waters AND with (allegedly) an NCG party onshore. And, above all, distraction on the bridge.

      How could a disaster NOT have happened?

    2. He was on the bridge at the time of the incident. Case closed Master 98% at fault. The statement from MOL looks like they run hairdressing saloon not ships. They will escape corporate responsibility and the Master will take the can for this.

    3. I agree with you sir Capt these days behave they are god … This is a lesson to all masters .. I blame ms act and ISM for giving extra judiciary power to master … I believe ce should be given equivalent power to keep d old man in check ….

      1. Obviously you are an engineer.Don’t bring your outdated view points into this.Evidentally you have a chip on your shoulder.

        1. As always, most easiest way to blame seafarers. Of course big tracedy occured because of negligance of duties by officers. But root cause was very humane,. they just Got close to shore for İNTERNET just to communicate by their families. IF There was a İnternet on board, May be this accident would never be happen

    4. Standards are low…the mistakes committed here r unforgivable. But now the industry is going to punish every Master every Sailor with added so called safety measures on an already tired crew.

    5. Please Apply Both to Blame American Clause, may be All three including Chief Engineer, Chief Officer as very often crew demands / request such action to Master

  2. Actions of master are damn stupid. Taking into account risks, this connection searching was hopeless.
    Capt. Maksym.

  3. Both the Mate and the Master are responsible. The Mate should have made a log entry if the master coerced him to make a deviation. Nothing works without the knowledge of the master. Both are culpable.

  4. It’s indeed a shame that Master and C/Officer (2nd in command of the ship) who are well experienced senior deck officers, in their late 50s and 40s respectively, didn’t challenge each other on the consistent unsafe practices being undertaken on board, risking safety of lives, environment, and the ship.

    Why didn’t the C/Officer and the C/Engineer (another senior most officer on board after the Master and in his 60s) challenge the unsafe navigational practices with the Master, C/Officer and report it to their DPA & Technical Manager, Nagashiki Shipping or Charterers, MOL or the crew managers Anglo Eastern Ship Management?

    What was the C/Engineer doing on the bridge on his mobile phone while running aground? Couldn’t he have looked at the radar and raised concern about his personal safety and of his colleagues on board with the Master or the DPA of the Technical Manager?

    Why was the C/Officer not keeping watch? Where was he?

    Where was the Master while his ship was coasting dangerously close to the shore at 2 nautical miles instead of 22 nautical miles? Why wasn’t he glued to the radar and ensure that his officers stringently followed his dangerous routeing and course line which he ordered his officers to follow for getting mobile communication range and not any closer than 2 nautical miles? Why didn’t he and C/Officer get the adequate size of chart, once they had decided to undertake the dangerous route?

    Repeated success from unsafe practices without any adverse repercussions make human beings more and more complacent and overconfident. The conviction that “accidents will not happen to me” gets deep rooted from clean track record from repeated unsafe habits and behaviours.

    Master, C/Officer and C/Engineer and probably every seafarer ex Wakashio might call the Designated Person Ashore (DPA under ISM Code) or a Manager when they see unsafe acts on board on their next ship. The question is – do we really need to wait for such disasters to shed unsafe habits ? Isn’t like quitting smoking, when doctor says that the days are numbered and the end is nog too far?.

    What did they learn from the “Costa Concordia” accident?

    Safety culture of these very experienced top 2 Senior Officers, Master and C/Engineer along with all other seafarers on board is questionable.

    At least the Master and these 2 senior officers should behave like leaders and own up the responsibility for their actions and unsafe behaviours.

    Where is the Panama Flag State with their formal investigation reports ? Why does it take so long? At least it’s encouraging that Charterers MOL published their findings in December 2020.

    1. Agree with all of what you say. Good point about Panama’s report – where is it? But also, where is Mauritius’ accident report that Capt Coopen supposedly completed months ago? Why hasn’t that been published? Even the autopsy report into the dolphins supposedly killed as a result of Wakashio’s oil spill hasn’t been published (it was promised at the end of August). No reports = no lessons learned.

      In the absence of hard facts we’re left with rumours and allegations – not healthy in a country that’s currently deeply distrustful of its leaders. The lack of transparency feeds a view that the inquiry and police cases are being manipulated to avoid exposing ministers and people close to the PM to allegations of incompetence.

      After all, Wakashio was the THIRD grounding on the same east coast in the space of nine years (Angel 1 off Poudre d’Or on 8 Aug 2011 after engine failure; Benita at Le Bouchon on 16 Jun 2016 after engine deliberately disabled). Different causes, it’s true, but nevertheless, Wakashio’s grounding was a foreseeable, and therefore preventable, accident.

      1. He was on the bridge at the time of the incident. Case closed Master 98% at fault. The statement from MOL looks like they run hairdressing saloon not ships. They will escape corporate responsibility and the Master will take the can for this.

  5. It’s a shame that the master had watered down the standards of a marine captain. Everyone has a part to play in this, including ship owners.

  6. Agree with Mr. Spark , whole picture should be seen not just captain’s and chief officer’s role. Got to admit nowdays internet is of atmost importance to be in touch with family, with all this extended contracts and no shore leaves, it takes toll on oneself. It’s very easy to just runaway from sailing and sit in offices and then start blaming ship staff.

  7. Many of the foregoing contributions seek to dilute the Master’s culpability, or even exonerate him.
    I understand the professional impulse to jump to the defence of a colleague, if not two. But surely all the stuff about Mauritius’s politics and corruption, has nothing to do with the grounding. The Master could not have known it at the time. Even if he had, it would have made no difference to his very poor decisions. I’m also still struggling to understand awarding him only 98% of the responsibility, what is the other 2% attributed to? He has claimed no mitigating circumstances. I’m very worried that so few people understand the extent of a Master’s powers and responsibilities ar sea. He is responsible for the Chief Officer’s actions because he did not detect nor correct them. In this instance it appears that the Chief Officer had undue influence upon the Master. At least we have done away with the notion of the “Captain’s break”, which surfaced earlier. As for the market for fraudulent f.o.c certificates, l never suggested this particular Master got his this way. Fraudulent certificates put pressure on the legitimate labour market, bidding down wages. They are as rife today as they were in my day, if not more so.
    Again l have to go back to the directing mind of this venture. It should have been the Master’s, but it appears the C/O was able to influence his decisions. Regardless, that is not a mitigation, but an added condemnation, if he was not in full command of the safety aspects of his ship. It has been cited as mitigation the fact that they had been on the ship a long time, way past their relief dates.
    Everyone must have sympathy for their predicament, but it cannot be allowed to mitigate his responsibility for the incident. He and his officers should have worked to maintain morale while waiting for a relief.l don’t doubt he was a kind man, and cared for his crew, but that concern should not have been allowed to compromise the safe navigation of the ship. So we are where the buck stops, and where it has always been. If we do not demand the highest standards from the world’s serving Masters, we as a profession are on a dangerous course.

    1. Just to clarify: I’m not seeking to exonerate anyone, but (1) the investigation and any future criminal proceedings must take their course first and (2) we need to recognise that accidents are very rarely the result of a single point of failure. Identifying a single person as the cause of this accident is dangerously misleading. Dangerous, because no lessons will be learned and nothing will change. It’s still scapegoating, even if/when there is culpability.

      It’s really easy to say the Master has 100% responsibility, therefore he’s to blame; job done – everyone else can carry on working in the same old shoddy ways until the next accident occurs. Your approach risks absolving the flag state, owner, operator and Mauritian authorities of any responsibility to put their houses in order. Hang-the-Master is exactly the game the NCG, PMO, MPA et al want you to play – luckily, most Mauritians have seen through that ploy. But it’s why Mauritius tried to charge Nandeshwar and the F/O under a piracy/terrorism law – blame it on the outsider, the foreigner, the seafarer and you can sweep the homegrown failings under the carpet. Which is fine until the next Angel 1, Benita or Wakashio happens and there’s no proper response.

      You state: “If we do not demand the highest standards from the world’s serving Masters, we as a profession are on a dangerous course.” I don’t disagree at all. But I think we should ALSO demand the highest standards from flag states, port states, port authorities, coastguards, maritime administrations, shipowners/operators and maritime training colleges. They too must step up to the mark. When they don’t they should be held accountable in exactly the same way.

      When will we see the director of a failing maritime administration facing 60 years in jail for his/her negligence? When will a coastguard commander be told they are 100% responsible for their errors and omissions?

      When it comes to accident investigation, causation and blame, we need to look beyond the bridge.

      1. Stephen, l don’t know if you are a mariner, but l would expect not. The issues you bring forward, such as the corruption ashore in Mauritius, has absolutely nothing to do with the grounding. Are you suggesting he would have acted differently if the government was squeaky clean? That is asinine. Then you introduce the records of flag states, etc, again something that is completely irrelevant. Try to focus your mind on the events that night. There was the ship. There was the Master, who is employed and tasked with primarily supervising the ship’s safe navigation. That is his No.1 responsibility, foremost amongst all other responsibilities. By keeping the ship safe he keeps his crew safe. No matter where he is in the ship, he must be mindful of where the ship is, who is on the bridge, and whether the OOW he delegates his authority to, but never surrenders fully, is competent, alert, and monitoring the ships progress. I can tell you as a retired Master that no matter where l was in the ship, my minds eye was always in the wheelhouse, because that was my job. There was no mechanical defect. The ship was running normally, but neither the Master nor the OOW knew where they were, what was ahead of them. Ergo, they were incompetent, causing massive damage to Mauritius’s pristine reefs, simply because he was drunk and wasn’t doing his job. What else can Panama, or MOL add to the mix? I can guarantee that both reports will be exculpatory of Panama and MOL. That is the way this dirty old world works. And they will figuratively hang the Master, and punish the OOW, and that will be an end to it for them, if they are lucky. If the writs start flying around it could go on for years. Look at poor Captain Mengouris of the loaded tanker “Prestige” whose ship was shedding hull plating, but could not obtain a port of refuge. Same result. Massive pollution. And he was hanging around courthouses for years. What mitigating factor can there be that these reports will uncover? His prior record is irrelevant. We are judged every day we are in command of the ship. Yesterday is irrelevant. There is nothing more to be said. Like Captain Schetttino of the ‘Costa Concordia” he was not doing what he should have been doing, he was not where he should have been, and he arrived late. Result? The ship grounded and 32 people died.
        He goes to jail for 16 years. Bad precedent for these two! I wouldn’t be surprised if the Master got some jail time. In this incident you are utterly wrong. All the information we needed to decide culpability was in that wheelhouse. As an ex-Marine Accident Investigator for the Canadian government l can reassure you we know enough, more than enough , to make a confident attribution of culpability where it should be laid. It serves as a warning to other shipmasters.

  8. I understood from a Forbes report that the shipping company caters for telephone communications aboard such ship’s, through a satellite system. Is the reason put forward by the ship’s crew valid (i.e come near the coast of Mauritius to get a Wi-Fi connection? )

    1. The Forbes magazine ????? Their series of 11 or 12 articles on the topic was written by a hired gun whose only purpose was to dilute Master’s culpability. However their research team did a good job as they have pointed to some other issues. But all these issues were not direct causes of the accident . THERE IS NO VALID REASON IN THE WORLD , THAT JUSTIFIES THE MASTER to put his vessel ( a valuable multi million dollar asset) and lives of the crew in danger. One exception is : life saving in search and rescue operations. Prudent navigators DO NOT PLY uncharted waters nowadays , although in the past it was a common practice , but performed with extreme caution and not in drunken condition. And since when Forbes is an authority in maritime affairs and accident investigations??????

      1. The Forbesian conspiracy theories, written by a Mauritian who’s supposedly an environmental expert of some kind – have been seriously misleading to those without any knowledge of how shipping works. The man knows nothing about the industry, but unfortunately the ‘cachet’ of Forbes has resulted in his fantasies infecting the rest of the world’s media. Even some of the shipping media that ought to have known better reprinted his ramblings.

        It’s a pity because, perhaps inadvertently, that writer did raise some interesting and possibly valid points, but they were lost amidst all the guff. Your multiple question marks are entirely valid!

  9. Dear Commentators.
    I do not comment often on Splash 247, as there are many things , which are not my turf and/or interest.Though there are some things I know like the back of my hand due to training and decades of hands on experience as an old salt and sea dog.

    I am also reluctant to pass judgements on my peers, without knowing all the facts. However, this particular case justifies my entry into discussion and voicing my own subjective opinion, which I hope editors will tolerate and allow.

    I have read all , that has been published on Splash247 regarding Wakashio and downloaded it for future reference including comments. The funny thing abt it, is that all voicing their opinions are more or less RIGHT . RIGHT are those, who voice utter condemnation of said Master and RIGHT are those, who offer some mitigating arguments. I will neither support not confront them . But regret to observe , that none has mentioned so far what is so obvious. And that is the goal of my comment.

    Navigation is not a rocket science ,as if it was , we would not have 100 000 ships plying the oceans but may be a 1000 only. Voyage planning was always done despite some armchair experts claims it has been their idea since the introduction of ISM.

    The preparation of the voyage plan is a simple task and consist of 4 simple steps: collection of data/info for the intended voyage , preparation of the plan , execution and monitoring and other blah blah blah.

    And before ISM, WE THE NAVIGATORS had it in our heads and not on 50+ printed pages, which no one will ever read on the bridge when things get funky. One does not need another Bible then, but a bloke, who will control the funkiness .

    And this bloke is MASTER MARINER.

    I am convinced such plan was done on Wakashio, although i can not asertain it’s quality without eyeballing it. But I am sure Mauritius call was not included in the plan on dep Spore. Simple exercise with trainees on ECDIS sImmulator by imputing initial ship departure data and planned destination can prove beyond doubt , that final resting place of Wakashio was not in this plan. Hence charts of required scale ,while making a landfall there, were also not required and not ordered and/or activated for the intended voyage. Likewise all other publications, which need to be consulted in case of such a call, were not consulted.

    I am not sure if that is true but yesterday i saw and article in Safety4sea and a part of it hit me like a FREIGHT TRAIN:
    QUOTE :
    There was no internet on the ship and I agreed to dock in Mauritius so that the crew members could communicate with their relatives as it helps keep the morale of the crew high,
    END QUOTE.

    Well upon seeing such a dictum from Master Mariner with unlimited STCW licence i dived into my mega disks and fished the following :

    NP 39 South Indian Ocean Pilot,
    LLOYD’S LIST PORTS OF THE WORLD,
    Guide to port entry

    to find, that on page 263 of NP 39, Port Luis vessel limits were : LOA 225 Draft 11mtrs and there is, as in all ports of the world , vessel entry procedure/communications requiring for Port Luis eta: 24 hrs and 2 hrs before arrival and other data as per ALRS( Admiralty List of radio Signals vol 6(3).

    Having said that, it made me wonder, how the said holder of Master Mariner unlimited licence planned to DOCK his vessel there with LOA of 299.95 mtrs, for such a noble purpose , without prior communication and consultation with local pilots, who it appears, were not used and not assisted Him to hit the reef, which happened to be on the opposite side of the Island then said Port.

    Needless to say ,ALL !!!!! a/m publications need to be consulted prior port entry and prior landfall, including List of lights, Tide tables, Tidal streams and all other pertinent stuff .Not to mention communication with some agent.

    On all the bridges of vessels i had the privilege to command, there was a library , which is a statutory requirement with continuously updated list , an item loved by Port State Control Officers to check and complain about.

    Regret to observe, that on almost all occasions of command change, I found the contents not having pages dog eared, but in PRISTINE CONDITION !!!!!! and still smelling with printing factory characteristic smell, that kept me drugged for at least 24 hrs after inspection. Nowadays most of the items are in electronic format , what prevents me effectively from being drugged so often.

    As mentioned before , i am reluctant to pass judgements but in my subjective opinion to hit this spot and cause total constructive loss of the vessel, one must be a complete ignorant or do it deliberately. I can not see any other option.

    I am certain though , after reading thousands of pages of Admiralty cases deliberating nautical accidents , the Honnorable Judges and their Brethren of my peers serving as expeRts and/or advisers , would certainly pass the GUILTY AS CHARGED verdict if seised by the case . From this literature one can conclude , They are not interested in VTS, communications , signal strength or lack of it , actions of some other third parties , they do not give a hoot about all and any of this “mitigating ” nonsense , what the company was doing and what not, but focus solely on Master and crew actions, good seamen-ship and navigational practice.
    And all this MITIGATING nonsense and other factors will NOT WASH!!!! .Simple as pie.

    Even when Master is confused and distressed by lack of visual daily contact with his wife , he surely must remember the maxim from COLREGS: IF YOU ARE IN DOUBT , THAT THE DANGER EXISTS , THEN YOU MUST ASSUME IT EXISTS AND act accordingly and with EXTREME CAUTION.!!!!!!

    I am glad i have finally reached my dessert.

    And i will be brutal, and show no mercy to all those apologists ,who use the ” internet ” issue and keep bemoaning, whining and screaming with their ignorant gobbledygock, laced with utter nonsense regarding lack of communication on board and the alleged negative influence on the crew psyche , that is the major cause of their PTSD and total paralise of their professional functions.

    Rarely have I heard such a gallactic mumbo jumbo.

    It must be a deliberate red herring to divert attention of the real issues, that have transpired during this unfortunate accident.

    Because I can not believe ,that ignorance regarding available on board communication facilities and their business and private use, can reach such unbelievable proportions.

    Made my first radio licence in 1989 for coasters, then GMDSS GOP followed as a statutory requirement and any holder of such licence, must be perfectly aware of what a ship like Wakashio must be fitted with, without even looking at it’s ship station radio licence . Even without this knowledge one can google it and find what AREA 3 MEANS in Global Maritime Distress and Safety System and what equipment is required for ships trading in this AREA.

    Without going into nitty gritty there is a voice/phone, fax, tlx sat capability , supported by doubled satC tlx capability or combination thereof, not to mention VHF , HF/MF voice and radio tlx capability located on the bridge. Sat phones in master office, cheng office , ship office , Engine control room and ship hospital and on one occasion I saw sat ph in the steering gear room.

    From all this places 24/7/365 one can make a business and private communication with any phone number , any network even with the White House and any person knowing ships numbers can reach the vessel at any place covered by AREA 3 .

    Already in 2000 vsls had email capabilities for business and private use and even managements that can be classed as pathological and cover up cultures, offered for crew one email per day for free ,restricted by size in kilobits , what could be translated to 1-2 A4 pages of written texts.

    Registered accounts , kiosks and similar solutions were always available. Emails can be sent from satc units but one needs to READ THE INSTRUJCTION MANUAL HOW TO DO IT and instruct the family how to reach the vessel . Have always received faxes from family with some irritating wishes since 1996 !!!!!!!!!!!!

    But ………………………..they want it all for free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and that is the problem. Well get it on shore first while on leave and tell all readers about such communication socialist paradise .

    There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch and that was said already in 1930. It is about time to accept it and get over it. Is it not. ???

    Last but not least , the LAUDEST apologist promulgating free internet theories and demands , and claiming total lack of communication , it appears ,are coming from those circle/areas, where licences and certificates of competence are obtained via some weird and nefarious practices.

    No wonder , that it was discovered , that engineering and nautical ignorance and INCOMPETENCE of some, may be best covered and hidden by uncle google assistance on Company Nickel of course.

    1. Wow. You sure must be fun to sail with. Now that you have finished ranting on this page, perhaps you could let someone with something coherent to say take precedence. Infact, the next time you feel the urge to rant and scream, do use aforementioned fax machine and send your best wishes to the same people who send you “irritating wishes”, since 1996!

      FYI most articles paraphrase statements given. Hence when you read “DOCK” in the below statement, do consider that it was paraphrased by the journo or editor, before jumping and shooting your mouth off!

      QUOTE :
      There was no internet on the ship and I agreed to dock in Mauritius so that the crew members could communicate with their relatives as it helps keep the morale of the crew high,
      END QUOTE.

      1. Alias Zz like “Zealous zulu” .
        Stay assured , i love sarcastic comments and I surely did not expect a round of applause after posting above. FYG i used the quote as a pretekst, which Your scrutiny seem to miss completely . Paraphrasing is what Journalist do for a living to stir or excite the public or shape opinion -do they not?.

        My opinion is not shaped by Them but my own experiences both practical and theoretical and as I mentioned above is subjective. But looks like i have achieved my objective by hitting and irritating a sore spot.

        I really can not wait for Your ” kind” , to deliver as promised something ” coherent to take precedence” . However Your lecture and kind advise what I shall do or not i feel extremely tempted to completely ignore. With or without the QUOTE i will stand by my observations/opinions which surely deserve You eloquent rebuttal , Cheers. .

        1. You very rightly mentioned “opinion”. Thats the wonderful thing about the Internet isn’t it? Everybody with an opinion and a keyboard suddenly becomes a know-it-all, spewing out ego fuelling crap to inflate their own egos.

          But then again, there is the old adage, which seems to fit you to a “T”: “Opinions are like @rseholes, everyone’s got one – and they usually stink!”

          Better to appear an idiot rather than open your mouth and confirm it!

          1. Alias Zz like “Zealous zulu”
            Well, in an attempt to further enhance spewing out ego fuelling crap, to inflate my own ego, , what by the way , seems to be such a great source of your irritation , allow me to serve You another opinion that:

            a) Editors of this news joint have not exercised their rights to sensor and/or block my input/content , what they did effectively in the past and I was 100 % sure they would do now. May be They want to have fun by unleashing their two best pitbulls to see the carnage. But I do not care much, as they surely confirmed their standards by allowing Your “crap ” to show up here.

            b) I can smell an arrogant red neck from a thousand miles, a skill acquired due to long and active participation in various maritime forums , where a mere attempt to say anything by an alias with a foreign looking name, results in a tsunami of racial , nationalistic slurs ,derision, utter contempt , disgust and hatred. Needless to say, even lepers do not enjoy such manifestation of brotherly “love” and empathy.

            c) Stay assured I am really getting warmed up and not at all intimidated by Your RED NECK’s craftily veiled metaphors and innuendos, intended to ridicule, debase, dehumanise, abuse and belittle another human being , that has the courage to voice his opinion , trying to enjoy an equal rights to such, like others here.

            d) I am not surprised , that promised ” something coherent to take precedence” and a civilised rebuttal has not materialised from an individual, who appears to be an unquestionable expert in human anatomy while suffering from acute case of OSMOPHOBIA .
            So tell me Alias Zz : which part of your anatomy is your most preferable, while talking to East Europeans or Others from less developed economies???? . I am not surprised either , that your apprehensive faculties required 4 days, to formulate such far reaching & enlightening conclusions . You surely area champion of intellect.

            e) It is not surprising You have not delivered as promised as our theoretical and practical experiences are simply incompatible to say the least.
            It seems obvious , You simply have nothing to say on the relevant topic discussed here, apart from Your veiled insults allowed and approved by Editors. There is another stark difference between us in the use of internet and key-board , as I use my own name, when You hide behind Your Alias Zz like a cowardly rat , which by the way has also an excellent sense of smell.

            f) Likewise, You seem also to have some Sherlock Holmes talents, as to establish beyond doubt, other commentators nationality. Surely You must have eyeballed their berth certificates or one of their Passports.
            Be careful Son , with such nationalistic slurs, as some prominent Scribblers here , have Polish wives and may be offended by your derogatory innuendos and surely some, may be insulted by Your use of such demeaning ” adjective” as Polish. Likewise the editors of Safety4sea may also feel not happy by Your ” an obscure article somewhere ” qualification and judgement of their journalistic output.

            g) Last but not least , for the sake of maintaining a more or less civilised discussion in the comments section, on an important topic of Wakashio, may I suggest to Editors to apply sensor-ship in a non-discriminatory manner and They have my permission, to give to gung-ho , jingoistic participants of this thread, my email address, so they can vent their frustrations and racist views in a more intimate environment. I am sure i am very willing to embrace and confront them there in a truly ” , a la Don Qixote, full tilt at the windmills” manner , without disturbing and frightening other viewers by the intensity of our mutual animosities.
            Cheers

          2. @Slawomir Palenda

            Wow! Do you really consider being called “Polish” as innuendo and derogatory “adjective”? I am honestly surprised. I would have thought, a person with your years of experience etc, shouldn’t really jump with the “Race” card at the first sign of trouble!! But then again, most people who are actually rascist, play the race card first!

            As for me being a Redneck, nope, try again! 🙂

    2. I don’t understand any of this. Are you suggesting he was trying to dock in Port Louis???? So why all the mambo jumbo from the pilot book?? Her was trying to miss Mauritius, not dock there.

      1. Capt. Colin, our learned and much opinonated Polish friend has fixated himself on one word in an obscure article somewhere and has gone, a la Don Qixote, full tilt at the windmills!

        1. Alias Zz like “Zealous zulu”
          You were not diligent and careful enough in slamming all the doors while hightailing.
          ++++++++++++
          Zzsays:
          February 25, 2021 at 10:41 am
          @Slawomir Palenda
          Wow! Do you really consider being called “Polish” as innuendo and derogatory “adjective”? I am honestly surprised. I would have thought, a person with your years of experience etc, shouldn’t really jump with the “Race” card at the first sign of trouble!! But then again, most people who are actually rascist, play the race card first!.
          As for me being a Redneck, nope, try again! 🙂
          +++++++++++++++++++++++
          As one can see You still left one open.

          Regret to inform You Zz, that i see no further practical purpose, in continuing our “friendly” chit-chat. If You missed it ,then allow me for a brief reminder, that the lead topic here is “Wakashio” and I do strongly suggest to hone, another of Your many talents/skills and play shrink doctor with somebody else.

          It is hard to believe , that You have noticed here only one pompous character and idiot , while close scrutiny of the series of comments on Wakashio and One Apus, would surely reveal quite an impressive collection of pompous clowns , vying for attention and applause of the stunned casual readers , by promulgating their bizarre and original theories.

          It seems evident, You will not add anything relevant regarding Wakashio , then may I suggest it is time to split, as analysing or “anal- lysing” me or exploring my lower intimate part and/or chemical composition of it;s discharges, will surely not make any substantial contribution to discussed topic and it unnecessarily distracts other participants, who surely are more interested in exploring nautical errors but not effects of my indigestion let alone my alleged huge ego.

          If You have anything further , then surely Editors or K.S. will give You directions. My sincere apologies to all other participants , that I have not backed off with tail between my legs, as surely I should have ignored the jibes of a ” master” provocateur , hiding in the shadows of anonymity and convinced he is thus occupying higher moral ground.
          Cheers

  10. Where r the Owners, Technical mangers, Charterers, Officers unions/MUI, crew union/AMOSUP, P n I, in all this.
    Who is attending this investigation on behalf of the above.
    Who is paying fr the lawyers ?
    Who is paying fr all the hotel bills ?
    Where can one find official updated report on the investigation taking place.
    These armchair experts make one really sick !!!!
    Are the crew getting paid whilst languishing in the monkey house & hotels ?
    COMMENT
    The master shud from now on keep his trap shut because he is really digging his own grave very fast. No idea who is advising him. His lawyer seems to b a real BUM. If he really had some sense now he wud get hold of a solid lawyer from New York. Did he hve his own professional insurance ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button