1. Answer the questions

1.Where did the incident happen?

2.What vessel was on a voyage from U.S. Gulf to the Mediterranean?

3.What object was noticed on the vessel's port bow?

4.What actions had been taken to avoid a collision?

5.Did the tugboat display lights indicating her ability to manoeuvre?

2. Decide if these statements are true or false. Correct the wrong ones.

1.At first the weather was fine but then it became worse and visibility reduced.________

2. The Chief Officer of the general cargo vessel started calling on VHF Ch.16 because no action taken to avoid a collision._________

3. The tug's OOW asked the Chief Officer of the cargo vessel what his intentions were.______

4. At less than 2 miles of each other, the tug had to alter course sharply to starboard._______

5. The tug and the general cargo vessel have collided.________

28

Displaying nuc "Not Under Command"Lights

I recently had an interesting discussion on the bridge of a cruise ship with North European Deck Officers. As with many other such vessels, it is common practice to proceed sufficiently far from shore to discharge food waste and grey water (Outside a special area! Ed.). Passage times are often so short that much of the time the main engines are stopped and, once the discharge of waste is completed, the ship drifts until it is necessary to resume the passage.

The Master stated that he required the "Not Under Command" (NUC) lights to be exhibited while the ship was drifting. Many of these vessels exhibit NUC lights while drifting. I queried the legality of this and suggested that stopping by choice did not make the ship "not under command" as defined by Rule 3 (f), which requires the inability to manoeuvre due to some exceptional circumstance. The Master insisted that the ship was not under command if the main engines were not available immediately, whatever the cause. His concern was that, with the engines stopped, the ship would not be able to manoeuvre to avoid a collision. The obvious answer is to have the main engines available at sufficiently short notice to enable any necessary action to be taken. If stopping the main engines places the ship into any danger, they should not be stopped, or at least be kept at instant readiness. A discussion followed and a copy of the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at sea was produced.

Rule 3(i) defining a vessel underway seemed clear enough as did Rule 23(a) defining the lights to be exhibited by a vessel underway. Whether the vessel is making way or not is immaterial. The question of whether or not to extinguish the side lights once the vessel was no longer making way then arose.

The officers remained divided in their interpretation of the requirement to show side lights if not actually making way and, to settle matters, sought the opinion of their National Maritime Authority.

The reply is interesting and the last sentence conflicts with my interpretation of the Rules.

Dear Sirs,

Reference is made to your e-mail of……… with questions of how to read Rule 27. Please note that the definition of a vessel not under command" is given in Rule 3 (f).

In order to conclude:

If you have stopped your engines just to kill time, with the engines ready, the NUC lights should not be exhibited. The normal running lights should be shown. If the ship does not make way through the water the sidelights should not be exhibited.

I hate to disagree with a Senior Principal Surveyor, buy I do not agree with the statement that side lights should be extinguished if the vessel is not making way through the water. As I read Rule 23(a), side lights should be exhibited by a normal power driven vessel under way. As a lecturer, preparing candidates for their MCA Oral Examinations, this is what I taught. As a final thought, the prospect of half a dozen cruise ships, each carrying around two or three thousand passengers, all drifting in relatively close proximity off a port, arouses some concern, especially if they all consider themselves to be Not under Command.