As UK MAIB reports in its most recent Safety Digest, a few hours before the break of a midwinter dawn, an experienced pilot climbed the slab side of a large car carrier and made their way to the bridge to meet the master and prepare for the ship’s first call into the port.
The car carrier was relatively new, 300m in length, and was approaching harbour 2 hours before high water at 15kts on the flood tide. The wind was gusting up to 35kts from the stern and three tugs had been assigned to the move: one at centre lead forward, one at starboard quarter and one centre lead aft. The crew of the tug at the ship’s stern had recently started working at the harbour on a temporary contract to cover while the normal tug was in maintenance. The tugs turned up slightly later than the pilot had anticipated and it took over 15 minutes to secure the ship due to a delay with the lines being passed by the replacement tug.
Once connected the aft tug did not appear to have the power to deliver the desired slowing effect, and this combined with the effects of the tidal stream meant the ship took longer to slow down than planned. The pilot had to apply a hefty amount of astern power, which was unusual and caused the ship to veer off track towards a mud bank close to the harbour. The ship took a long time to stop, but the pilot managed to line the car carrier up with the dock entrance and the berthing operation was subsequently uneventful. Neither the pilot nor the master noted anything too worrying with this excursion from the plan but subsequent analysis identified that the ship had grounded, leaving a decent imprint in the mud. There was no damage to the car carrier or to the tugs.
Lessons learned
- Risk → While no single element of the car carrier’s arrival plan was inappropriate, a combination of factors proved unhelpful in its execution: the pilot did not fully appreciate the reduced pull of the replacement tug compared to the normal tugs and the replacement tug’s skipper was unsure what was required; arriving with 2 hours of the flood tide remaining and with a strong wind from the stern meant that slowing down was always going to be difficult. When connecting up the aft tug took longer than normal, the plan started to fall apart. Take time to identify each risk factor, examine the hazards involved, consider their combined effect on the plan, and implement appropriate mitigations to reduce the likelihood of an incident.
- Check → When the video of the car carrier’s arrival into port was reviewed it was clear that the bow of the ship had probably made contact with the mud bank. The subsequent investigation identified several points of learning that resulted in revised procedures, improved integration for new tugs, refreshed
communication procedures and a reminder to VTS operators to provide useful, and objective, information during a move. The regular review of day-to-day activities is an essential, continuous process that reaps many safety benefits. - Communicate → Pilots are required to coordinate the activities of bridge teams, tug crew and harbour authorities while being mindful to tides and other shipping. This case highlights how quickly things can change in a dynamic situation. Good communication during pilotage helps everyone understand their roles and deal with emerging situations effectively.
