Point of note, the pilot was in charge of a ship that had lost propulsion and, therefore, control of the helm. Put simply, the pilot had little recourse but to watch and wait while the wind, tide and river currents had their way with the direction the ship was heading. The pilot was entirely dependent upon the ships engineer rectifying the issue and restarting the engine(s).
As likely as any bullshit you’re coming up with.
____ Xeno
So are you agreeing that "whoever made the decisions to not properly maintain the essential equipment needed to control the ships motion" is responsible?
If so, from what can you conclude that for this ship in this instance?
IMHO the best wisdom is from micky: "it's not clear from afar, and it's not even clear to those on the scene, if someone was at fault and if so, who it was."
================================= micky previously posted
There were 4 or 5 minutes from losing power to crash - not enough time to do much of anything. Surprised they could close the bridge in both directions that fast.
Blame it on Trump. Maybe Cassidy Hutchinson will testify Trump lunged at the wheel in an attempt to drive the ship to the Capitol?
There were police at both ends supervising lane closures because work was being done on the bridge.
The pilot never touches any buttons, other than perhaps the switch on a microphone.
You keep blaming the pilot, without an ounce of evidence or any reasonable way a pilot could have caused the power failure(s).
When the reports are made, equipment failure will most likely be the cause, and the pilot is highly unlikely to be held responsible, since there is nothing a pilot could do to cause equipment failures. Some form of poor maintenance will likely be cited as the cause, with crew operational mistakes being the most likely alternative.
You're funny. And you also forgot that the power failed on the boat. You try steering a ship wihtout any power.
You were talk>> That 2016 incident occurred as the Dali was leaving port in Antwerp and
And you said:
But the link you snipped contradicted you.
"There were two ship pilots aboard the ship as it left its berth in the Port of Baltimore. Can you tell us what ship pilots do?
Post: Ship pilots are brought on board in what are considered restricted maneuverability or navigation areas. They are local experts who are usually certified by the state or federal government to provide advice to the master of the vessel as to how to control the vessel, safely and adequately, through the pilotage waters, which in this case would be down the river from the Port of Baltimore.
Pilots are well practiced in close-quarters maneuvering, especially with tugboats and docking the vessel alongside the assigned berth.
But a pilot doesn’t come aboard the ship and take control of it, do they?
Post: They are just advisers to the captain, who is known as the “master.” The master still has full responsibility for the safe navigation of the vessel. So the pilot will meet the ship out at sea or at the dock if it’s in port and leaving to go to sea. They proceed up to the bridge. Usually they exchange greetings, and usually a little bit of ship’s swag is given, either a hat or something else, or at least a cup of coffee.
They then set up their gear. With the electronics that we now have, they plug into the ship’s electronic chart data information system. And then they conduct the pilot exchange with the master of the vessel, where the master of the vessel describes where they are going, what the characteristics of the ship are, who’s on the bridge, what their first language is and the air draft of the vessel, which refers to how high out of the water the vessel is, so that you know whether you can take the ship under a bridge safely.
Once that’s completed, the pilot then starts instructing the officer of the watch or the captain – those are usually the same person – in how to get to where they need to be to dock the ship, or undock the ship and bring it to sea. This instructing is done during complex maneuvers, not all the time. The pilot can also say he’s not going to do it, and can shut down their operations if conditions are unsafe or if they feel that the vessel is not in condition to be able to transit safely. That happens a lot, especially in fog.
The ship pilot also interacts with the Coast Guard Vessel Traffic Service and other ships in the area, and coordinates with the tugboats and line handlers to be able to safely maneuver the vessel close to the pier or when a ship is leaving the berth."
micky wrote on 4/5/2024 7:55 AM:
It did not contradict me. Here I quote from rbowman's link:
"Under maritime law, all foreign flagged vessels must be piloted into state ports by a state licensed pilot so the Dali's pilot is licensed byAssociation of Maryland Pilots."
There is one thing very sinister about the aftermath of this incident. The Baltimore port authority was digging into all the details about the history of the ship, trying to pin blame on the ship, the ship owner, or the ship owner's parent company, but the Baltimore port authorities has never made any mention of the identities of the two pilots who were in charge of steering the ship through the water channel, their training, and the years of services. Don't you think it is odd? You'd think big boo-boo of this magnitude, the press would delve into the detail of the two pilots, and the public should know.
Please mark my word. I suspect the Baltimore port authority is deliberately hiding something. The truth they want to hide is that the two pilots who ultimately should be responsible for steering the ship into the bridge are very likely new hires who hardly had, if any, previous experience in piloting before this accident. The two pilots might even be "extreme DEI hires": both might be young, black, female and gay. ThinkKarine Jean-Pierre with pink and purple hair.
The weird one here - is you!
micky wrote on 4/5/2024 7:50 AM:
I have posted about this to another poster. The two pilot might have hit the wrong button and turned off the power.
The press mentioned the ship "throwing an anchor". My explanation is that when the anchor hit the sea floor, the anchor chain would pull on the ship. Since the anchor is attached to the bow of the ship, the pulling force from the anchor chain would pull the ship to one side, depending on which side the anchor came from. In this case, you can see from the accident video that the ship suddenly jerked to the right hand side (starboard side) and hit the bridge. But in one news article, reportedly the pilot dropped the anchor on the "port" side. If this was the case, the ship's bow should have jerked to the left side and avoided hitting the bridge. Apparently the pilots couldn't tell which side of the ship is called "port", and which side of the ship is called "starboard", and dropped the anchor on the wrong side.
It might be true. LOL
Loads of things might have happened. The problems is that you have no idea what happened and yet you write as if you do. No amount of detailed speculation on your part changes that.
Of course she didn't testify to that. She testified that someone in the car at the time told her that, and aiui he's never said otherwise.
micky wrote on 4/5/2024 9:45 AM:
You still have the "my boys can do no wrong" attitude. The harbour pilots were in control of the ship. Steering the ship out of dangerous waters is what they were there for. Their mistakes are the the most likely culprit.
Here I repeat my previous reply to you:
There is one thing very sinister about the aftermath of this incident. The Baltimore port authority was digging into all the details about the history of the ship, trying to pin blame on the ship, the ship owner, or the ship owner's parent company, but the Baltimore port authorities has never made any mention of the identities of the two pilots who were in charge of steering the ship through the water channel, their training, and the years of services. Don't you think it is odd? You'd think big boo-boo of this magnitude, the press would delve into the detail of the two pilots, and the public should know.
Please mark my word. I suspect the Baltimore port authority is deliberately hiding something. The truth they want to hide is that the two pilots who ultimately should be responsible for steering the ship into the bridge are very likely new hires who hardly had, if any, previous experience in piloting before this accident. The two pilots might even be "extreme DEI hires": both might be young, black, female and gay. ThinkKarine Jean-Pierre with pink and purple hair.
One video I saw they mentioned the pilots did everything right but the investigation will take a long time.
If you were the pilot, would you want your name spread across the media? You can be sure they would be getting death threats by some of the nut-jobs out there.
So much for you DEI theory too.
Diamond said he has spoken with the pilot, who he declined to name, and he is doing as well as can be expected given the traumatic event.
The following paragraphs are excerpts from your link:
#1 “The pilot ordered a hard left rudder, and dropped the port anchor to try to keep the ship from moving right,” said Clayton L. Diamond, executive director and general counsel for The American Pilots’ Association. “The pilot did everything he could to slow the ship.”
#2 The Maryland pilot who guided the ship received years of training to become a pilot, has a state license which requires knowledge of the local waters and has more than a decade of experience. An apprentice pilot was on board observing the pilot, but Diamond said he was new to the pilot training program, having started on Feb. 1, and was not involved in any of the decisions during the three minutes before the crash.
From the above two paragraphs (apparently carefully crafted), I can understand that there was a pilot and a trainee. The second paragraph above pointed out that the trainee "was not involved in any of the decisions during the three minutes before the crash". That implies that the trainee was making the decisions and operating the controls on his/her own all the time, but was following orders from the pilot during the three minutes before the crash. Everybody should understand that when a pilot and a trainee pilot are present on the bridge of the ship, the trainee pilot would be operating the controls (theoretically under the supervision of the pilot, but generally that's not the case in real life. The pilot would be drinking coffee, walking around, and yapping with other people on the bridge). The trainee operating the controls is how the trainee gets the experience in operating the controls.
From the first paragraph: "the pilot ordered a hard left rudder, dropped the port anchor...". Apparently the pilot ordered the trainee to drop the "port" anchor. From the crash video, the ship jerked to the right and hit the bridge. If really the "port" anchor was dropped, the ship would have jerked to the left. Apparently the trainee did not understand "port" means left, and "starboard" means right, and dropped the wrong anchor.
The ship's black box should reveal what the hell the trainee had done and what buttons were pushed. I hope they have surveillance video of the inside of the ship's bridge to see what the hell the pilot and the trainee were doing the whole time.
Same video:
That's what I said in an earlier post. Someone contradicted me, but the reporter here says that I'm right.
This was meant to be my last word on this subject and you're just repeating yourself now, so it will continue to be my last word.
Except that iirc you had predicted who will be held legally responsible. We got away from that topic, but I want to point out that you were wrong there for the same reason. That is, speculation from a distance does not decide the facts.
Your reply is unchanged below:
Quoting more of Bomwan's text does not help you when the problem is you were contradicted by Ed's link. I don't remember if Bowman contradicted you but I never said he did. It's Ed's link that contradicted you, just like I said. Get it?
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required