Colin, I think you have a valid point there. Lots of windage, a relatively small draught and a low quay. In most ports of the world the tidal range ensures that the ships crew maintains rope tension....either more or less, depending on whether the tide is going in or out. This is not really a problem in the Med so complacency can creep in.
Bunker-B, I am sorry to have to vehemently disagree with you re keeping a Bridge watch in port. This aspect of a ships officers duties would be totally counter-productive. Manning the Engineering spaces in port is a totally different ball-game to the tasks a deck officer has to do when the ship is in port. For one thing, overseeing the loading of cargo. Then the OOD (or OO the Deck) has to check the ropes and so on, he cannot do this from the bridge. But there will normally be at least one deck officer on the bridge or in the chartroom during the "normal" working day. The 2/O will of necessity be keeping the chart corrections up to date (electronic or otherwise). The 3/O could well be occupied with similar duties such as "llight lists" and so on and a plethora of "stuff" that just cannot be done at sea. The "nitty-gritty" of ensuring that all is well on deck can easily be delegated to the gangway staff, who can summon the OOD if required. It's a pity that you have chosen this subject to disagree on. I will leave you with the thought that a 500,000 ton tanker when loading or discharging her cargo could well need to have her mooring lines permanently attended! Cheers. Bryan.
Hi Bryan, I think it's far to say that I didn't share my views with the intention of choosing to disagree with anyone. I was simply putting my own thoughts forward and as long as every one else does the same in the atmosphere of mutual respect that we want to encourage here then we can all benefit from others experiences.
I agree that there are huge differences in the operation of cargo ships, where ever reducing numbers of officers continues to compromise what would be seen as the ideal situation, and the operation of cruise liners, where the safety of possibly 3-4 thousand people are to be considered. As we are talking about a modern cruise liner I think considering the manning of such vessels is of more relevence than considering any other type of vessel. These ships have a man on the bridge at all times and part of that officers responsibilities includes monitoring of current weather conditions. This is not debatable, this is a fact. The monitoring and tensioning of the mooring ropes comes under the responsibilities of the deck crew. Don't forget here we are talking of a deck department of possibly a total of 60- 70 officers and crew. My point is that if the deck officer was listening to the local weather radio channel while he was on watch on the bridge then this weather situation would have been expected and the ship suitably prepared for it.
I also agree that modern cruise ships with shallow draft, very high sail areas, tied up to quay sides that were never designed to take the loads that these vessels put on them only emphasises the requirements for the guy on the bridge to maintain the best possible watch under all situations, whether he is engaged in other activities or not and quite obviously in this case this was not done. I will say this again because a lot of people seem to be missing this point, if thrusters were running it is very unlikely that this would have happened.
As for tankers, I am well aware of the requirements there as regards bridge officers and crew as reference was made during my recent investigations to the operation of other vessel types. I was surprised to hear that most tanker terminals do not allow the use of auto-tensioning winches, which didn't make sense to me until I followed through the thought process behind this decision.