Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and 'Trusted' Mariner
 

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:05:30 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:56:37 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:40:11 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 14:58:21 -0400,
wrote:

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 14:29:03 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 09:44:27 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

I know what you're saying Greg. But my thought is that it's possible that it was bad enough but turned REALLY bad before they knew what was happening. Just my uneducated thought.

I suppose bravado goes a long way but I am not sure it would have me
steering into a storm when there was an easy way to avoid it.

===

There's more information he

http://gcaptain.com/collision-course-with-a-hurricane-how-doomed-el-faro-met-its-end/#.VhgL0SssycM

This will be discussed by the professionals for a while. At this time
I don't think it's known exactly when they lost power. It may be
possible that they caught a really bad break by losing power before
they could reroute.

In addition to a possible desire to save fuel, there may have been
port considerations. Some harbors have limited dockage space and
tightly scheduled slip assignments. It could be very expensive if you
miss your slot and have to wait for a new one. Don't know if that's
an issue in San Juan or not.

Not to go all "Harry" on you but it is still just money.
How much did losing the ship cost:?

Did the company actually make more on the insurance than that old rust
bucket was worth?

===

Conspiracy theories are always fun to kick around even when they are a
bit improbable. When you factor in the reputational risk to the
company, the asset loss, and all of the crew and cargo liabilities,
it's unlikely they could profit in any way. The captain always has
ultimate responsibility for the safety of crew, cargo and ship. In
the end it will go down as a bad decision on his part no matter what
might have motivated the risk taking.

I wasn't talking about them intentionally hazarding their vessel, I
was just curious whether it was insured for more than it was worth.
TV20 had a guy on who was on that ship for a while and he said it was
a rust bucket and they were just painting over the rust.. The cooks
area regularly flooded and other things. The loss of power might have
been a simple mechanical failure, having nothing to do with the storm,
just at the worst possible time.

===

Don't know about the condition of the boat but as a US flagged vessel
it has to undergo periodic inspections by USCG. A lot of commercial
boats look like rust buckets but they just keep chugging along. I've
heard rumblings that the owners are not the most well respected name
in the industry but don't know that for sure either. Next time I see
my captain friend in Connecticut I'll try to get the low down.

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and 'Trusted' Mariner
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew

You're nuts.

Make a point or shut your pie hole

What part of that was wrong?

Jesus. I have to explain? The "crew" doesn't make
navigation decisions.
It's the Captain with blood on his dead hands.
The non-officers in the crew were members of the Seafarers
Union, and don't engage in ship navigation.
What's this trickle-down bull****? These guys are paid a
monthly salary. They don't have ****ing profit-sharing.

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and'Trusted' Mariner
 

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew
You're nuts.


Really, Kevin?

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and'Trusted' Mariner
 

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew
You're nuts.
Make a point or shut your pie hole

What part of that was wrong?
Jesus. I have to explain? The "crew" doesn't make
navigation decisions.
It's the Captain with blood on his dead hands.
The non-officers in the crew were members of the Seafarers
Union, and don't engage in ship navigation.
What's this trickle-down bull****? These guys are paid a
monthly salary. They don't have ****ing profit-sharing.



Relax, Kevin!

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and 'Trusted' Mariner
 

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:17:55 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew

You're nuts.

Make a point or shut your pie hole

What part of that was wrong?

Jesus. I have to explain? The "crew" doesn't make
navigation decisions.
It's the Captain with blood on his dead hands.
The non-officers in the crew were members of the Seafarers
Union, and don't engage in ship navigation.
What's this trickle-down bull****? These guys are paid a
monthly salary. They don't have ****ing profit-sharing.


The senior members of the crew will have some input into the decision
making process and I bet there is a bonus program for on time
performance.
I don't have any experience with cargo ships but I know shrimp boat
captains and they will listen to advice from their crews.
I have also been on coast guard ships and I know the captain will seek
the advice of the other officers. They all get input from the crew.
He does make the final decision himself but it is not in a vacuum.

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and'Trusted' Mariner
 

On 10/10/2015 10:17 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew

You're nuts.

Make a point or shut your pie hole

What part of that was wrong?

Jesus. I have to explain? The "crew" doesn't make
navigation decisions.
It's the Captain with blood on his dead hands.
The non-officers in the crew were members of the Seafarers
Union, and don't engage in ship navigation.
What's this trickle-down bull****? These guys are paid a
monthly salary. They don't have ****ing profit-sharing.



There were at least two other college degreed "officers" aboard as
members of the crew. Don't know if they are members of the Seafarer's
Union or not.

That said, in Maritime law and in seafaring tradition the ultimate
responsibility for the safety of the ship still resides with the
Captain. In fact the responsibility for *everything*
related to a ship's operations, including navigation, resides with the
Captain. There is no passing of the buck.

US Navy ships have officers who serve as the ship's navigator however
it's the Captain who loses his command if the ship runs aground, is
involved in a collision or is otherwise imperiled unnecessarily .

Captain of Ill-Fated El Faro Described as 'Experienced' and 'Trusted' Mariner
 

On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 00:51:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/10/2015 10:17 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:59:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:49:39 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

The fact still remains that the final decision was up to the captain
and the crew.
They had a simple bail out option of sailing west around the storm
but, as Wayne pointed out, they may have had a problem of when dockage
was going to be available in San Juan. Ships are not making any money
when they are sitting at anchor outside a port and I assume that loss
trickles down to the lowliest oiler in the engine room.
I am sure the decision to press on was made by the majority of the
crew

You're nuts.

Make a point or shut your pie hole

What part of that was wrong?

Jesus. I have to explain? The "crew" doesn't make
navigation decisions.
It's the Captain with blood on his dead hands.
The non-officers in the crew were members of the Seafarers
Union, and don't engage in ship navigation.
What's this trickle-down bull****? These guys are paid a
monthly salary. They don't have ****ing profit-sharing.



There were at least two other college degreed "officers" aboard as
members of the crew. Don't know if they are members of the Seafarer's
Union or not.

That said, in Maritime law and in seafaring tradition the ultimate
responsibility for the safety of the ship still resides with the
Captain. In fact the responsibility for *everything*
related to a ship's operations, including navigation, resides with the
Captain. There is no passing of the buck.

US Navy ships have officers who serve as the ship's navigator however
it's the Captain who loses his command if the ship runs aground, is
involved in a collision or is otherwise imperiled unnecessarily .




You also have to remember, this is not a pirate ship. If the crew says
"we ain't going" the penalty is being fired and dropped off at the
next port. They can't be made to walk the plank.
You union guys would call it a strike.