Click for next page ( 68


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 67
Piloting Practices SUMMARY Piloting, as commonly understood, is a straightforward matter; a qualified local expert boards a ship at sea and brings it safely into its anchorage or berth. Actual piloting practices are far more complicated than this, and are poorly un- derstood, even within the marine community. By international tradition, a ma- rine pilot is a master mariner who, not being a member of a vessel's crew, provides expert local knowledge required to bring the vessel safely into port. The term "pilot" sometimes is used to refer to a vessel's officer who is control- ling its maneuvers. Pilots and piloting in the United States vary according to areas served, the functions performed, and differing requirements for local Icnowledge and specific shiphandling skills. Pilots may or may not be members of a vessel's crew depending on governance and, in the case of domestic shipping and the towing industry, depending on company operating policies as well. The term marine pilot is used in this report to mean a locally based master mariner who is independent of the vessel (that is, not a ship's officer or other member of the crew). Virtually all marine pilots in the United States hold a license issued by a recognized federal or state-level pilotage authority. Individuals that specialize in docking and mooring may or may not be marine pilots in the strictest sense, depending on their professional affiliation and the range of services provided. Professional development and licensing requirements vary by governing authority, but individual preparations to meet these requirements remain a per- sonal responsibility regardless of licensure. Some shipping and towing companies encourage or assist their masters and mates in obtaining federal pilotage creden- tials, primarily to improve operational safety aboard their vessels and to reduce 67

OCR for page 67
68 MINDING THE HELM risl<. Organized federal and state marine pilot associations and some docking master associations have organized professional development programs, or they otherwise assist their pilot candidates in obtaining service or other prerequisites for pilot's licenses or endorsements from federal or state-level governing au- thorities, or in some cases, both. Although qualifications for pilots still emphasize the use of expert local Icnowledge and visual cues, pilots make extensive use of navigation technology. Gyrocompasses, voice radio, rudder angle indicators, and basic radar have become standard equipment that is integral to piloting. Elec- tronic charts with a highly accurate real-time positioning capability, once proven reliable, likely will become assimilated into standard operating practice as well. Most pilotage systems have common elements that are universally con- sidered essential for developing and maintaining pilot expertise and system per- formance. Principal features include measures for professional development, ac- countability, standards, and organization. Three basic pilotage models public, corporate, and independent are in use. None stands out as most effective or efficient; highly professional pilot services are being provided in each form. Changes from one form to another usually are related to economic factors rath- er than to actual piloting practices and safety performance. Pilot response to the expectations of their profession seems to be the dominant factor in the effective- ness of pilotage, regardless of the pilotage model used. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes piloting practices in the United States, the context for the analysis in the chapters that follow. The controversial issue of professional regulation of pilots is introduced; a detailed examination is presented in Chapter 3. Beginning in this chapter and continuing in the next, comparisons are made and lessons drawn from pilotage systems on the Great Lakes, in British Colum- bia, in European countries, and for the Panama Canal. Finally, the central fea- tures of a complete system of pilotage, as envisioned by the committee, are presented. These elements are drawn from discussions and correspondence with pilots in the United States, Europe, Canada, and the Panama Canal, and from published accounts, and they provide a baseline to which existing pilotage systems can be compared. Several foreign pilot systems are described in Chapter 3 and Appendix F. The piloting operating environment, still another complicat- ing factor in pilotage and the use of navigation technology, is developed in Chapter 4. PILOTAGE OVERVIEW The common perception of a pilot is of an individual who boards a ship from a pilot boat at sea to bring it safely into port. While there are many pilots

OCR for page 67
BE pilot stepping Tom a pilot boat to a pilot ladder labile bonding a ship on San Francisco in good Scathe (Joscpb A. Zygote, 3~ F~~cf~o B~r FJo~) that At this image, pHotage is far more complicated. Even In Me msMne community, To levels of ~Dchona1 and adminis~bvo complexity are not Dog understood. This section introduces and describes typos and 1ocadons of pilots, govomanco, masto~pilot relationships, pilot rosponsibiLtios, compensation, pro- ~ssiona1 dovolopmont, and rolabonships to modern tecbDology.

OCR for page 67
thority; 70 MINDING THE HELM Pilots A pilot is traditionally a mariner with expert knowledge of local waters and special shiphandling skills. The pilot directs and controls the movement of a vessel through near-shore and inshore waters (referred to as pilotage waters or pilot grounds) unfamiliar to the master or provides navigation advice to or through the master for this purpose. The pilot is expected to integrate local knowledge with operational information to effect a safe passage. However, by tradition, admiralty law, and legal precedent, the master always remains in com- mand and is ultimately responsible for the safe navigation of the vessel, includ- ing the actions of the pilot (except that in the Panama Canal, the Panama Canal Company accepts a higher degree of responsibility and liability in exchange for a higher level of control over each vessel EMacElrevey, 1988; Parks, 19821~. Thus, in pilotage waters, the responsibility for piloting typically is shared (Crenshaw, 1975; MacElrevey, 1988; Meurn, 1990; see Parks, 1982, 1988, for legal defini- tions and case law). The pilot may be an independent professional expert whose services are hired by a vessel. Or, a pilot may be a member of a vessel's crew with expert local knowledge of the pilotage route. While describing a crewmember as a pilot is not common practice internationally, this attribution is well established in the U.S. coastwise trade and the inland towing industry. This report distinguishes "marine pilots" as locally based master mariners who provide pilotage service. Marine pilots are characterized as holding a pilot's license issued by a recognized pilotage governance au members of a pilots' association (or a company or governmental entity that solely provides pilotage services); independent contractors (except in three cases where they are company or municipal employees); not members of a vessel's crew (and thus independent of the crew and the vessel); and not otherwise affiliated with or employed by a shipping or towing com pany. Thus, where a master or mate is qualified and serving as a vessel's pilot, the individual would not be considered a marine pilot as the term is used in this report. Types of Pilots Five trade designations are used in this report for types of pilots according to areas served, functions performed, and requirements for local knowledge and specific shiphandling skills.

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES 71 1. A coastwise pilot guides domestic vessels into and out of domestic ports, and between ports when transits are made through inland waters, such as Boston to New York. A coastwise pilot typically stays aboard for the duration of the voyage whether the vessel is operating along inland passages or coastwise, al- though in some cases port-specific pilotage services are provided. 2. A bar pilot (sometimes referred to as a "sea pilot") directs the movement of the vessel across the "bar," to and from the pilot boarding area (the pilot grounds) and the inner harbor or river. 3. A river pilot directs the movement of vessels in river systems. 4. A harbor pilot directs the movements of (transports) a vessel in harbors, including shifts to and from anchorages and berths. The term "Navy pilot" refers to an individual employed by or a member of the U.S. Navy who provides harbor pilot services for Navy ships. 5. A docking master (sometimes referred to as a docking pilot) docks/un- docks vessels at a berth or moonng, usually with the assistance of tugboats (mooring masters perform similar duties for offshore mooring buoys, usually without assist tugs).) The term "branch pilot" is also a common piloting term. It is derived from a certificate of competency formerly issued to a pilot by the Trinity House in England. The certificate authorized the individual to pilot ships on certain speci 1There is considerable debate as to whether a docking master is a pilot in the strictest sense. Technical aspects of the debate are based on the functions performed. However, the principal issue is that official acknowledgement of docking masters as "pilots" would strengthen the case for issuance of state or federal licenses specific to the services they provide (see Chapter 3). Traditionally, a "dockmaster" was an assistant to a harbormaster, who supervised passage of a vessel through a locking system or into a berthing, either from a position ashore or from the vessel. "Dockmaster" also was used to refer to the individual responsible for dry-docking a vessel (Geen and Douglas, 1983; McEwen and Lewis, 1953). Today, docking and undocking services, usually with tugboat assistance, are typically provided by pilots except in most East Coast ports. In these and some foreign ports, docking masters who specialize in docking and undocking vessels are available. These individuals are not necessarily marine pilots unless affiliated only with an independent pilot association. Some docking masters, notably in the Port of New York and New Jersey, conduct the majority of intraport ship movements (vessel transport) as well (see Chapter 3). When transporting a vessel (up to 19 miles on one route), a docking master is, in effect, performing harbor pilot duties. When providing service to a U.S.-flag ship in domestic trade, docking masters do so under licens- ing requirements for federal pilotage. When providing service to a vessel in foreign trade, docking masters are not at present covered by state-level licensing requirements. The Coast Guard proposed rules in July 1993 that would require federal pilotage for foreign trade vessels making intraport transits in certain designated waters in New York and New Jersey, transiting designated waters in Massachusetts, and navigating at certain offshore marine oil terminals in California and Hawaii (FR 58[130]:36914-36918). The principal issues are whether an individual is qualified to direct and control the movement of a vessel and whether pilotage requirements adequately ensure the quality of professional service that is provided. These issues are central to pilotage performance and adminis- tration throughout the marine navigation and piloting system.

OCR for page 67
72 . ~ ~ ~ ~ . . hi. ~ ~ ~ MINDING THE HELM .. . ~.,. .,, , ,.~ ~. ~, .~.~ ~. ~ ~.~ ~ . ~. ~ i. ~ i. ~ ~ ~ ~.~.~ . .: ~ ~ . ~- . .~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ Ail. If. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ . ~ ,~".'~ 'I.'. ' ''':''.'.'"'"""''"''''''"" "'.'. ''.'""":T' ' ' '.' .' '.' '.' ' ' '. ."V.'' ':'.' .. '.' ''' ' '' '.''''.''~''' .':'.'..'','.'. ~.~.~. ~ i i . ~ . ... i, .. ~. ~ .~ .... . ~ . ~ fled waters. A full branch pilot is an individual without limiting restrictions on the certificate of competency (Mchwen and Lewis, 1953~. This traditional termi- nology frequently is incorporated into the titles and licenses of marine pilots issued under the authority of coastal states. As used in this report, the terms "federal pilot" or "federally-licensed pilot" refer to mariners, including masters and mates, holding either a Federal First Class Pilot's License or Federal First Class Pilot's endorsement on their Coast Guard-issued marine license. The phrase "independent federal pilot," as used in this report, refers to independent marine pilots holding only a Federal First Class Pilot's License or endorsement and who routinely serve under the terms of that license. Although virtually all marine pilots in the United States (including state- licensed pilots) hold a Federal First Class Pilot's License (or Federal First Class Pilot's endorsement permitting them to serve as pilot), some do not provide service under the authority of these licenses and are thus not officially account- able, as described in this chapter. Numbers of Pilots About 4,500 individuals hold Federal First Class Pilot's Licenses or en- dorsements. Of these, about 1,000 are independent marine pilots who hold pilot licenses issued by coastal states or local boards or commissions under enabling

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES state authorities. Of the total number, about 100 are marine pilots holding only a federal pilot's license or pilot's endorsement on their deck officer's license as master or mate, fewer than 100 are docking masters or mooring masters, and about 40 are registered (Great Lakes) pilots. The remainder are individuals hold- ing federal pilot endorsements on their U.S. Coast Guard-issued licenses as mas- ters or mates. Ninety-three active pilot and docking master organizations were identified in the United States, as follows: 62 state pilot organizations, the operations are regulated by board or commissions (includes 1 group of state-licensed pilots who are port authority employees iMobile, Alabama], 1 pilot association with a commission to provide pilot services but whose members only hold federal licenses tSan Diego]~; 11 organizations consisting solely of marine pilots holding only a federal pilot's license or endorsement (including 3 federal pilot associations in the Mid- Atlantic states and Louisiana; 3 registered pilot pools on the Great Lakes; 1 independent pilot group in Alaska (Kuskokwim Bay and River); and in Califor- nia, 1 employee-owned pilot corporation under contract to a harbor commission (Long Beach), 1 group consisting of port-district civil-service employees (Los

OCR for page 67
~lINDING THE HELM Angeles), and 2 self-governing pilot associations (Port Hueneme-Oxnard and Humboldt Bay-Eureka)~; 1 pilot corporation, consisting of pilots holding state and federal licenses, that provides service to Navy ships (in New York Harbor); and 19 docking master associations (on the East Coast). An undetermined number of individuals "act as pilots" on towing industry ves- sels under 10,000 gross tons as provided for by federal law. The distribution of pilot organizations providing services to commercial shipping is shown in Fig- ures 2-1 through 2-4.

OCR for page 67
75 i-\ ~ -.: :~ :~ Sm ~ Atop i~ : v) c) 3 Con O- C~ _ C) , it: elm ~ ~ O con 4O 5 et O ~ Cal ~ ; O U] to V,~ , ~= 2 O ~ 3 Z I o .~ <1) . O ~ O VO Ct CC O ~ O Ct =._ _ L bib ~ ~ O a a S a I em :> ~ ~ Cal ~ Ct cL i= ~ ;tm ~ O C! Cal 3 Cal o ._ Ct ._ C) o U: Cal Ct 50 Ct ._ Cal o c~ o . . 50 - o LL c~ ct o v c~ o o . - c~ o p~ v ~

OCR for page 67
76 I ~ ._ ~ ~ Cal ._ Ct ~ o :' ~ ski 3 V) Cal Ct Ct 1 US ~( o ~ g ~ o . ~ . ~ VCd UP C) Ct Cal o o Cq ~ ~_ A- o V ~ i, a_;, ~o 3 ~ ~ s ~ o I U:) =~.,. ~ . . I .................... ,,................................ r ~ ~ ) ~ _ ~ ] o . . . ~O Ct Ct - o an o .~ Cat ~ Cd 50 o C) ~ Ct lo ~ ~Q o .~ v - v) ~ o a ~ v 3;' o ~ cn - ~ ~ o ~Q s~ u, 'e - s~ o cd $= - v c~ cq ct s 50 o o ct v) o . - ct ~ - c) o c~ r:,q ct o - . ct o ~ v - v o o . - c~ c) o

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES Columbia River Bar h:.~.~---''------'-'-'- -I---'----- :-2-:":-:2:2:~:2:~:---.2.m2 A. LPuget Sound . ~I. hi.: Ways Harbor \ . ~ l ~ Humboldt Bay/Eureka _ ~ Pilotage Service Organizations State Pilot Association O Pilot Corporation Independent Pilot Group O Harbor Commission Municipal Pilots Company Mooring Masters ...... San Francisco Bay Area / . ~...................... Sacramento / Stockton ~ 2- / _~.- f,------------------------------------------------------------------d . ~. ~ ... ... . ..... Port Hueneme / Oxnard : ..... I , ,, ~ 1~ - Los Anoeles ~ a I. ~ ................................. _~ ~ ~ I . . . . ........ .......... ~ ~ Lone Beach ............................................. If. a i;,~ a,< _ .................................... V_: ~ ~ ~ ~ \~ ~ nor ~ t ~.2.~ FIGURE 2-3 Location of West Coast associations and mooring masters. _ I , , .,,,,,,,,, , , , i, ............................. ........ . ...... :,~ . 2 2 .. 2 2 ... .. - i2.'..'''...~..'.'.'...'.. ha, - ,,, ;~............................. ~ v Cur ~. Or Western Alaska / Dutch Harbor / Aleutians Alto D lo; ,. $:d' O ~ a,; ~ ~ ~> Honolulu - ::::: :.:.:...{ a,....,,,, .,,,,,,,,,,,,, .,, ,~,; ,,k,, , 1 ,::::::::::::::::::::~:: :::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::1:::::;.::::::.... 2::~:::::::: 1 <:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: :~:.::::,~.:::: 1 \:,: ::,:,::,:,:,:::,:.:,::.::::.::::.,.:,: ~:, 1 few 2.'...'....2..''.,2~2.2. ,4.,:,, ,,.~.:.,,,,::.,:.,,,, ,,,,,.,,.., :.,.,..:,l.:,.,, :< ,. 1 Et ~ Kuskokwim Bay & River . ~-:.::::::::::::::::::::::: I::$:::::::~::~. :::: :::: ::: :::: ~.~ ~ ~ \ ~- -.-.~ ~ ~, . ~ I ~Southwest Juneau / Glacier Bay ~ Alaska/ I- H ,' :~ ~omer Down Southeast Alaska / Ketchikan Pilotage Service Organizations O State Pilot Associations 0 Independent Pilot Group Company Mooring Masters 77 FIGURE 2-4 Location of pilot associations and mooring masters in Alaska and Hawaii.

OCR for page 67
oo -!lllI II~I Il=Ill ~ BI# I~I II4I1~III ~1~1~11 I 11111111 1 111 1 ~ Mob #Ilk HI S(6 I(~ {~i 3~} fins ~ PI MINI 1 I _~,I. I ~ I MALI I11111111c~)elll~lllc~>l~llll~lll>>i~i~lllluplldsllllll~lllCio~sllllll~lll ~4 lllf111 I1 1 11111 llllli~lll33~llI~{lll@lllhoIdll~dlll##ll:~llll~.##l~ 113111~ 1111111111 11 1 -~.~ 1 I 5::~::'I #:I:::~BI:~:'dAi::iRs::::! ::;~iltikI';I:::It::~:II;>l'lIlI:I' IN&~:~:t,Zd~t:'I':~:lE:::~`I: 11111 1=Slllll~lllllll~lll=~illlllillll#(lll~lllll_lllll~llll^~llll~llll_~lllllllll 11llllll~lll~lllll~#llllllm~ llllllc@lllllm~llllillllll~lllll~#llll#~>llllll3iIlll~lllll#~< l lll ll No je~llll~lll~l~clll~lll~lll~ llll#~lll 111~111~111~111111111 O&:~#:II###'I:I##I##I;##BlIIllINIIl#I I,I#ItUIID : :.::.:'~: :~:~:~;INI: ~S~S~!~!~!~!~!!!~ss~!!~!~!~!!!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~!~!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~!!~!!~!!~!~!~!!!!!~!!!!~!!!!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!~!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~!!!!!!!~!!!~s~s~!!!~S~!!!~!!!!~!!!!!!!~!!~!~!!!!~!~!!!!~!~ == ^ ~: -~1~ I:III/NIIIII:::::II:I1I:II~::~:~:I:# 111 lllll~lll~ll~llll~/lillll~:llllkll~lll##l~l##ll=_lll~Illllll1 :~S~S~:~S~Sss~s~s~:~s~Ss~s~ IS S~S~SSS~S~S~S~S~SSS~SS Ss~s~s~ss~Sss~!~ ~s~ssss~s~:~s~s~s~s~ss~:~:~:~s~ssS~ss~s~ss~s~s~S~s~s ~ ~ sag s~s~ss~s~sss~s~s~s~

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES 89 in order to acquire local knowledge of a pilotage route (gauged in terms of "round trips" over that route as an observer under conditions specified by the Coast Guard), an individual seeking a federal pilot endorsement for that route will "observe" the route aboard a vessel of which the individual is not a member of the crew. The provision of such opportunities is not required by federal regu- lations, and when they occur, they are generally a professional courtesy extended by an operating company. Some shipping and towing industry companies maintain pilot development programs or policies; These may assist regularly assigned employees in develop- ing the knowledge, service prerequisites, or skills that may be required to: obtain a Federal First Class Pilot's License; upgrade pilotage endorsements on other Coast Guard-issued marine li censes; or serve as a pilot or mooring master aboard company vessels or vessels mooring at a company's offshore facility (in the case of mooring masters) where there are no government-imposed pilotage requirements. Some shipping companies invest in computer-based ship bridge or manned mod- el shiphandling simulations. A small but growing number of towing industry companies are investing in computer-based simulations. Such programs are in- tended to support directly a company's operating, safety, and economic interests. For example, some shipping and coastwise towing companies advised the com- mittee that they encourage masters and mates to obtain a federal pilot's endorse- ment on their merchant marine licenses for certain routes to permit own-vessel pilotage where federal pilotage is required. In such cases, the services of an independent, federally-licensed marine pilot would not be to satisfy federal regu- lations. However, some companies advised that their policies authorize masters to take marine pilots in the interests of safety, even if not required to do so by pilotage authorities. The services of marine pilots are routinely being used by some companies to reduce risk even though a master or mate has a federal pilotage endorsement and could legally pilot the vessel. In this regard an increas- ingly important reason for obtaining a federal pilotage endorsement is to better prepare the master to effectively exercise command responsibility in overseeing the performance of marine pilots, docking masters, and mooring masters (Ra- maswamy and Grabowski, 19921. Development of Marine Pilots and Docking Masters Development of marine pilots (regardless of licensure) and docking masters, whether in the United States or elsewhere, occurs in three stages: . acquisition of basic maritime knowledge and skills; pilot training (normally an apprenticeship); and

OCR for page 67
9o MINDING THE HELM progressive advancement, once licensed, in the size of vessels to which . . . . . assigned to provide piloting services. Many pilot candidates have prior maritime service, including in some cases ex- perience as a federal pilot; other candidates are recruited from maritime acade- mies. In the absence of such background, the marine pilot's skills are built from the ground up by a marine pilot association (Ramaswamy and Grabowski, 1992~. This traditional approach is less popular today than it was in the past. Some station boats, on which pilot candidates developed basic maritime expertise as deckhands, mates, and masters, have been replaced by shore stations and all- weather pilot launches. Also, judicious recruitment of individuals with prior ex- perience provides the same basic maritime knowledge and skills. A few associa- tions that do not maintain station boats nevertheless follow the traditional method; they build on the candidate's experience gained in operating pilot launches or while aboard ship during pilot apprenticeships. Most, if not all, marine pilot associations (including most docking master associations) require an apprenticeship (or indoctrination period). Apprentice- ships generally take between a year or less and three years or more. Pilot candi- dates observe and receive practical instruction on the nature of local routes, ship behavior, and shiphandling skills for a wide variety of vessel types and sizes under widely varying operating conditions. Formal training programs with cur- ricula accredited by the Coast Guard (under 46 CFR 10, Subpart C) have been established by some state pilot associations. One state pilot association main- tains a full-time licensed master as a pilot instructor and has a well-developed training curriculum and professional development program (Vincent Black, Unit- ed Sandy Hook Pilots, personal communication, May 29, 1991~. Four other state pilot associations have training programs based on a comprehensive curriculum (Bennett, 1989~. However, the majority of associations take a less formal ap- proach, albeit with the same general contents. The emphasis varies considerably by association and operating environment (Ramaswamy and Grabowski, 1992~. Theoretical knowledge of 'strip behavior and shiphandling is taught formally by only a few pilot associations. An increasing number of marine pilots in recent years have taken refresher courses or been exposed to nautical theory through computer-based ship bridge or manned-model shiphandling simulation training. Docking masters report that they learn their trade on the job; some have partici- pated in shiphandling simulations supporting waterway design (see NRC, 1992a), . . . . . . . . . but parhc~pat~on In training s~mulahons Is rare. Virtually every development program for marine pilots and docking masters relies extensively on route repetition (the so-called "round trips") to ensure that apprentice pilots acquire essential local knowledge and are exposed to a wide range of operating conditions and ship behaviors. The more trips, the more op- portunities to observe and experience the broad range of situations in which the marine pilot is expected to perform perfectly and without hesitation. No one is

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES t .................... (.............................................................................. ......................................................................... ~ .......... . ..................... ?, .'.'.'.'.'.2.'.2.'.'.'.'.'.'.. ........................................ t:.'""2 ' ' "' ' ' "' ',.', '., ' ' ' 91 ............... ............................................................. . md." ~. ~...... a ~ ................ ~ ~ . ~. ....................................... ...................................................................................................................................................... A . ~'." ~'r ' ~''"' I' ' ~ I' ' ' ' I' I' ' id' ' ' 101 .................................................... ........................................... . "2"""22"""" ~] ~ Kim 80~5 =: ~0 ~[0 Kit ~ K ~= ~5~= t{~g .. 2'' ' ' ' : :' '': '' '' ': ' ''' ' ''''' ''' ' ' ' ' :'''' '' ' ~ ""'""' ~ ~0 : : : : ::: ........................... ''' ~ ' ''' a''' K '"''a'' '' .'.'~'' ~ ' ' .'.' ' . it' .'.'.'.'.'' .'.'.l'. ' ' ' '.'.' ' . a . ~ .. """"""."' "" ' - ~ """',, ,,'~''"~ X "'in ~: Ace, 'aid""! A, ,:~ ""', ' X""'" ,": "I'll """,,,.' ~''r! "" . , ~.,.,., - .,., , ~. ~,.,.~.,.,.,. .., ,~. .,.,., ....... ........ . . ~ ............................................................................................ ... ....... . ~. ~., ~,.,~, ~. . ,.,., a ,. , ,.,., I ~ . ,, . ~ ~. I ................................................ ........... . . . . .. .... '..' '.' ' ', ' '.' ' '' ' '.'.'' ' '.'.' ' '.'.'' Ad' '.'.'' '' ~.' ~''.'.' ~.'.~ , . . ....... """""""""".""2~.:''2 ~ ~ - ~5 3 ~.. Keg 3 0 , ,:,: :....2..2.2. 2.2 . .. . ' ' '.,',,~,, ,~,.'.~ '.'.m'.'.~' ......................................................................... . . . . ~,.,.,~.,., , - . B,. ,., ~, ., W t ~. ~ .,.,., '.,, ' ' ' ' ' 2.2.'.' ', ,2," ...... '.' ' 2 '.'.'.' '.'.' ' .'.'' '.'': ''' - At"' - '"'' t: ~ '"'I'' ''I: "': ""' I' """'""" .............................................................................................. . ~.'.'.,X0,~"""~""''s,~h X"'li"'0~"'~8'"'~"'t~"''~"""~""7'"""""""' .............................................................. ... .. .... ...... ...... . "' 22 ' ' ' '"""'I' i""" ~ "" ""me 2~ ~ ~ .' '~'YX''''''''''~'.''l''''''''~''~'' "' '' I'' I" "'em ,. .. .. .. .. ......... ................. ........... . ~.. ~ ~( me . t . ~ ........... .... . ............................................ . ~ . ~ ~. ~^ ~ :.''"~:.:'.'"o222'"2"::'q' '':':' ":'"'' :' ' 'I-:' ': ' ":'0::' :':':: , ................. ....... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~. ~., ....... I . ~,. ~^ , ~,~ . . ..................... ........................... ............. ..... ..................... ,.. ...,... .. I... .. I.. a.. ...~.. I.. ~..s sure how many trips are needed to ensure such performance, but virtually all marine pilots and docking masters agree that it is a large number and that it should include exposure to the range of operating variables. Trip requirements need to be flexible to accommodate differences in candidates' learning abilities and past experience in the marine environment. State-licensed marine pilots and some federally-licensed marine pilots believe that the number of trips required for a Federal First Class Pilot's License or endorsement 12 to 20 is at best a minimum requirement. One pilot association, by agreement with the Coast Guard as an element of their Coast Guard-approved pilot development program, does not permit a pilot candidate to take an examination for an initial Federal First Class Pilot's License until 360 round trips are accumulated (120 for a third mate oceans license) (Bennett, 1989; Basil R. Watts, Wilmington-Cape Fear Pilots Association, personal communication, December 18, l991J. The Coast Guard accepts the service during the trips as satisfying sea service requirements for an initial license. These trip requirements do not apply to other individuals that might seek an initial federal pilot's license or endorsement for the route. Ulti- mately, the issue becomes one of the quality of the trips, including training of

OCR for page 67
92 MINDING THE HELM sufficient duration aboard vessels for which pilotage is sought, not just the quan- tity (Richard P. Wieners, McCormick Pilot Association, personal communica- tion, July 29, 1991~. Pilots and Modern Technology Piloting by local experts is heavily dependent on visual cues, particularly for docking and undocking evolutions. However, gyro compasses, rudder angle in- dicators, radios, radars, and depth sounders are standard equipment, without which few marine pilots will sail. Electronic charts, integrated electronic naviga- tion systems, and automated piloting expert systems (that is, computer-based decision aids) are available but in very limited use. These advances should pro- vide real-time precision navigation and collision-avoidance capabilities. System developers state that the objective is to supplement but not supplant human

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES 93 operators (Grabowski, 1989, 1990). Once the value of specific technology is established, marine pilots frequently become the most ardent supporters and users. If tradition holds, real-time positions derived from electronic charting systems, once the technology is proven, will become as indispensable as radar to the marine pilot. Over the past decade, technology has been applied effectively by some ship- ping companies as a means of reducing crew size, so far without apparent reduc

OCR for page 67
94 MINDING THE HELM lion in safety (NRC, 1990a). The committee heard anecdotal indications that some shipping companies and operators of foreign-flag passengers vessels would prefer expanded opportunities for own-ship pilotage; such a development could potentially reduce operating expenses. Some believe that modern navigation sys- tems and vessel traffic services that permit precision navigation by ships' offic- ers under all conditions could be the means to achieve these ends (see Intertanko, 1990~. Shipowners with high-technology ships are interested in obtaining agree

OCR for page 67
HI== ~ ~SS ~S~SSS~:~SS~SS~ Il~#I~1 ~=~ #~1~1 1 1~11! 1S^-llPllP~ '?lC'Slll~1sm~lll2 1 ~13~1 ~I~1~I 161~:1B~~lll lolled- ~[llilll-~nll~c 1 ~ ll~lll~cllllll~lll ~llisllll~ll~hlll) 11 1 ~lllc~llll~lll3~lll~lllll#~ylll~l)~i/.1111~311116 #nJ11111s~lll~llll6#s~illlliav 111 1 l l ~ l l I l l ~ l l l l l s ~ ~ l l l l ~ l l l l ~ ~ ~ l l l l l l ~ l l l ~ l l l l l l ~ e l l l l ~ ~ ~ l l l l ~ ~ l l l l l l ~ l l l ~ l l c ~ u ~ l l l : Imp "I~I; ~#I~ 1 ll_~.INIIlIIl~ll'IIIlI' ~ I II2UI I llI' lI 1 IIII1 I1 I1 ~j meets ~om marine pilols ~r operadonal practices tbat would reduce or impose no delays in ~ansh, such as might result Lom ~g, to impro~c economic c~cicn- cy and operational sa~ty (by hmRing c~posurc to advcrsc operational condi- hons~ ~ "~ fo ~f~ 074~r /~ ~ ~~rf~ ~ot ~(f~ m~or or ~- cf~/2 g~/~ ~~r or ~' -~r ~~f~ ~ ~f7~t A~ 6~ ~/o ro ~rfJ~ /~ ~ (~/~ ~/~/ ~ff~g c~f~ ~ /~' f~ o~ff~/ r ~~ ~d ~cf~' f~~0 ~ ~f~.

OCR for page 67
96 MINDING THE HELM PILOTAGE SYSTEMS AND MODELS The committee's examination of pilotage systems and programs in the Unit- ed States and overseas uncovered remarkable consistency in key system features. These features seem to the committee to be essential to effective pilotage sys- tems. Comparisons also disclosed several significant areas in which important features vary among systems. The following section summarizes the central fea- tures of complete pilotage systems. Each feature is described in Appendix E. Assessment of how existing pilotage systems (regardless of governing authority) reflect these central features is a useful way to pinpoint where improvements could be made to improve individual and system performance. Of particular interest are opportunities for effective introduction and use of new navigation technologies. The Role of Pilotage Models Navigation safety depends on effective performance by whoever is piloting each vessel. The professional discipline needed to achieve elective performance is rooted in the preparations for becoming a pilot, the ability to apply practical skills, the ability to engage in interdependent decision making on the vessel and in the waterway, and professional integrity. A pilot must be prepared to work effectively with the expanding range of navigation technologies, amid variability in maintenance conditions, crew performance, and vessel behavior. Various or- ganizational models are used to prepare and motivate pilots to handle these challenges. An effective pilotage model thus becomes an important contributing factor in the effectiveness of piloting. Whether these models (and the associa- tions and governing authorities that employ them) are organized and capable of meeting the challenges of rapidly changing operating trends and technologies are important issues. Three generic pilotage systems are in use. Pilotage in maritime countries is generally organized around the concept of marine pilots as independent contrac- tors, although there are a few pilot companies and civil service pilotage opera- tions. Administration and governance varies widely within these paradigms. The independent-contractor pilotage model is a convenient way to limit liability to the pilot that provided the service in question, thereby shielding the pilot organi- zation with which the pilot is affiliated. But no model or variation thereof stands out as the most effective or efficient. Indeed, effective pilotage service is provid- ed nationally and internationally in all three basic forms. Even where pilotage models are flawed or have deteriorated in their application, actual piloting ser- vices seem in most cases to have remained within expectations of the profession, shipowners or operators, and the public. How well pilots respond to these expec- tations appears to be the dominant factor in the effectiveness of pilotage, regard- less of the pilotage model used.

OCR for page 67
PILOTING PRACTICES 97 Central Features of a Complete Pilotage System Despite the variability among pilotage systems, most have common ele- ments that are universally considered essential for developing and maintaining pilot expertise and system performance (Box 2-12~. Central features found in these models in varying degrees are shown. Some of the features are common, some are less common, and others are uncommon. Safety performance monitor- ing, periodic evaluation of senior or full branch pilots (or their equivalent), and continuing professional development are rare features in both state and federal pilotage systems. It is primarily these gaps that seem to make pilotage most vulnerable for near-term problems in effectiveness and efficiency. In particular, there appears to be significant potential for problems with human performance,

OCR for page 67
98 MINDING THE HELM such as development of bad habits or deterioration of skills, which either go undetected or are masked by familiarity with local conditions. Existing pilotage models have not been designed for responsiveness to rapid change in shipping trends and navigation technologies. Consequently, these changes could surpass the capabilities of pilot models. The pilot model features in Box 2-12 could be used by any pilotage author- ity, pilot association, or operating company as a functional guide to assess and improve their pilotage programs and practices. The generic model is not meant to suggest that all functions need to be consolidated in a single organization. Some model components might be best accomplished by a pilot association or operating company. Other components may be better suited to administration by a governing authority. Shared responsibility might be best for other components. The model also is not intended to suggest that radical restructuring is necessary or desirable. Dramatic change, in fact, could be counterproductive considering the inherent stability of pilotage services as now structured. This stability is particularly notable amid the dynamic changes that are occurring within marine transportation at large. Changing Pilotage Systems Somewhat surprisingly, past changes in the form of pilotage systems (such as from independent contractors to civil service employees), have been motivat- ed by administrative and economic reasons rather than safety performance. For example, in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, pilotage services were perceived as less than fully responsive to shipping needs, and in the former case, to public expectations as well. Both pilotage systems were modified to improve efficiency, but the countries took opposite approaches. Civil service pilots were reorganized as independent pilots in the Netherlands, while in the United King- dom, independent marine pilots were reorganized as civil servants (Herberger et al., 1991~. In the United States, the Great Lakes pilotage system was reorganized ad- ministratively to improve official oversight and to ensure an effective organiza- tional structure for pilot groups serving the region. Safety performance was not an issue. Responsibility for official oversight was centralized at Coast Guard Headquarters, in Washington, D.C. This action was taken to correct a less-than- independent relationship that had developed between regional administrators and one of the pilot organizations providing service under the system. One pilot organization was dissolved because of financial accountability problems; anoth- er was formed in its place to ensure that pilot service would be available (Boyd, 1992a,b,c,d; DOT, 1988, 1990).