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

On 10/10/15 9:40 AM, 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?


Surely you are not alluding to a corporate climate in which saving lives
and not losing a ship are less important than an in$urance claim? Why,
that sort of thinking is *so* un'Merican.

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

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.

On 10/10/15 12:59 PM, 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.



Greg, sadly, believes that *money* is the only real motivator.

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?

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.

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!

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.

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 .

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.

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?