Not, Not Under Command

[flightlead404]

Originally Posted by Off Trail

"Still showing NUC.... and giving us a lot of time. So if he's "really" NUC he's now the equivalent of a kamikaze headed at me."

Sorry, should have said NOT giving us a lot of time. Conditions were sporty: double reefed and strong SE swell in the Gulf Stream. Getting the preventer off and tacking would have been a scramble. Another minute or two and that would have been the drill.

The kamikaze term was what was in my head, didnt mean to imply he was intentional, maybe runaway train would fit better. If he was really not under Command then he wouldn't be able to turn potentially.

IMO underway showing NUC like that adds a bunch of ambiguity to the crossing, and that is a bad thing. I saw at the time that he was just starting to move, so maybe hadn't changed signals yet. But 30 minutes later he was still NUC underway.

Assuming the switch away from NUC status is not automatic, couldn't you simply have made a call "Captain your status is still showing Not Under Command do you need to reset?" or similar?

Idk, wasn't there, wasn't in your shoes, but I've forgotten to reset an xpdr a few times.

[flightlead404]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

Hello, Off Trail,

I can't begin to tell you what a frequent occurrence this sort of thing is. It happens a lot off the coast from Newcastle, NSW, Australia. The big ships have been drifting south on the southbound current, and the whole time, maybe 50 n. mi. or so, they're displaying NUC on their AIS. Under way, but not underway. Just avoid them. In your shoes, I'd have altered course to avoid them. I understand it's annoying, but for me, anyway, it is still that they are a moving hazard, and ultimately, it is up to me to avoid them. I shrug this things off to "it's an imperfect world" or "s--t happens".

One time, I heard a big ship going into Wollongong, also NSW, talking about getting his AIS fixed. The big guys can have things break that they need assistance to fix.

It makes it easier if everyone would follow the rules, but not everyone does, and it may or may not be "their fault". Had you collided with a NUC ship that was under way by drifting only, assuming your and your vessel survived, you would have been apportioned a percentage of the blame for the incident, because it is really up to each of us to avoid collision.

And a footnote for you if you go farther afield than the US: when you have a choice, if you know in advance the ship is coming from somewhere they have malaria or chikungunya, take their stern. We've had a horde of mozzies come out and chase us. A real, "Quick, Henry, the Flit!" moment.

Accept what you cannot change.

Ann

‘My mother had a flit gun
‘twas not devoid of charm
A bit of flit shot out of it
The rest shot up her arm.’
--Pam Ayres

[Montanan]

Reference to similar incident and discussion at Chirp Maritime

https://www.chirpmaritime.org/not-not-under-command/

CHIRP = Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting Programme
The aim of CHIRP is to contribute to the enhancement of aviation safety in the UK and to maritime safety worldwide, by providing a totally independent confidential (not anonymous) reporting system for all individuals employed in or associated with these industries.

CHIRP has been in operation for aviation since 1982. In 1996 the Programme was restructured in the form of a charitable company limited by guarantee to enable it to make a more effective contribution to the resolution of important safety-related issues. This corporate structure was selected in order to provide a totally independent organisation, with management and fiscal responsibilities held by an Independent Board of Trustees. The Maritime programme has been operating since July 2003.

CHIRP welcomes safety-related reports from flight crew, air traffic control officers, licensed aircraft maintenance engineers, cabin crew and the General Aviation community and people in the international maritime sector, including the shipping industry, fishing industry and leisure users.

Reporters' identities are kept confidential. Personal details are not retained and are returned to the reporter or destroyed on closure of their report. The information provided is made available, with the approval of the reporter and in a disidentified form to those who can take action to remedy the problem. Important information gained through reports; after being disidentified, is also made as widely available as possible principally through the publication of FEEDBACK with the aim of improving safety standards.

The CHIRP Aviation programme compliments the Civil Aviation Authority Mandatory Occurrence Reporting scheme. Both Aviation and Maritime programmes also compliment other formal reporting systems operated by many UK organisations, by providing a means by which individuals are able to raise issues of concern without being identified to their peer group, management, or the Regulatory Authority. Anonymous reports are not normally acted upon as they cannot be validated.

[Montanan]

Interesting read:

Journal of Navigation article

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...5D2BBCD06F5470

Not Under Command

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 June 2012

Abstract

Vessels are found frequently operating under the Automatic Identification System (AIS) ‘Not Under Command’ (NUC) option near ports and close to shores in order to report their manoeuvre status to nearby traffic. When asked if they are under any kind of restriction regarding their engines or steering, they often answer that they are just drifting or waiting for the pilot or shipowner's orders. The question that arises is this: “Are these vessels really under an NUC situation or can the AIS Navigational Status menu adapt to the different circumstances of navigation?”.

The NUC AIS status has to be set manually and is value is numbered 2.

Snipets:

Among the different circumstances a Court of Law accepts for a vessel to be in a NUC situation are the following:

A breakdown of engines or steering gear.

The loss of the propeller or the rudder.

A sailing vessel becalmed (as long as she does not have an engine).

A vessel with her anchor down but not holding.

Exceptional weather conditions (we emphasize here the importance of the adjective “exceptional”).


5. NOT UNDER COMMAND VERSUS UNDERWAY
Rule 3(i) of the COLREGs) states that:

The word “underway” means that a vessel is not at anchor, or made fast to the shore, or aground.

Although it may seem an obvious definition, different interpretations have originated to the point that the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has issued further guidance to make some aspects clear in order to find a homogeneous interpretation of the concept. It has been made clear that a stopped vessel with no engine or steering problems is considered to be an underway vessel (IMO, 1982). This means that a vessel drifting with no other apparent problem shall have her engines ready to manoeuvre, and in case a risk of collision may happen, she is forced to respect the full Rules. Logically, and under such circumstances, a vessel shall not exhibit NUC lights and shapes, but instead those stated in Rule 23, because the term ‘underway’ includes when the vessel is ‘making way through water’ but also when it is ‘making no way through water’ (as stated in Rule 35(a) and 35(b). That is, ‘underway’ is not a synonym for ‘making way’ (a typical misunderstanding of a non-English speaking mariner) but a hierarchically higher concept which includes the possibility or not of the use of the engine.

. . .

AIS NAVIGATIONAL MENU

. . . the AIS ‘Navigational Status’ menu offers seafarers a number of fixed options to report their navigation state to the traffic and maritime authorities (see Figure 4) and, among others, it gives vessels the opportunity to choose the ‘underway using engine’ option. Nevertheless, when a vessel is drifting, for a lot of seamen this option does not exactly make reference to their current manoeuvre state, because at those moments the engine is not being used. This is the reason why most of them prefer choosing the AIS ‘NUC’ option. However, as has already been explained, a drifting vessel with her engines and steering in perfect working condition can never be considered to be in a NUC situation. Moreover, if we add that the different options of the AIS ‘Navigational Status’ menu are related to the COLREGs, and both IMO and IALA recommend that the option chosen in AIS has to be in accordance with the lights and shapes that the vessel is exhibiting, paradoxically, it is found that the AIS option to be chosen is ‘underway using engine’, and we state this for two reasons: Firstly, because as it has already been highlighted that the Rules consider a drifting vessel to be an underway vessel. Secondly, because although the vessel may not be using her engine, it is her duty to have it ready in case it should be needed to avoid a collision. To sum up, except if the officer on watch could not start the engine (for instance, when some repairs are being carried out), the vessel will be considered ‘underway’. It must be understood that the expression ‘using engine’ means not only the effective use of the engine but also the possibility to start it at any given time.


. . .

PROPOSAL AS A CONCLUSION
On many occasions, mariners consider that rules and laws do not fit the real needs they have on-board. The fact that they are the first users of vessels gives them moral authority to disagree and demand some specific changes. However, no responsible seaman can avoid the fact that until those changes are made, the established rules must be respected. As the AIS ‘Navigational Status’ menu has a number of blank options (specifically from 11 to 14) which are reserved for future use, we recommend introducing a modification that could allow the user to choose a new option stating ‘underway but engine stopped’. In this sense, the seafarer would have an alternative option without contradicting the COLREGs, because this expression is already included in the COLREGs.

[Montanan]

Perhaps the title should read:

Knot, Not Under Command.

[C420sailor]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Perhaps the title should read:

Knot, Not Under Command.

Get out.

[Larry Florida]

Originally Posted by Off Trail

Some of us have seen commercial ships use NUC while drifting waiting for their pilot time. Here is an interaction that takes that to a new level and I think highlights why this is poor practice in general. This was a few months ago so I may have distances off a bit in my memory.

We were sailing north reaching at 6 kts, 5 miles off Miami. There was a cargo ship ahead and inland of us, stationary and showing NUC on AIS. We had plenty of clearance so just carried on.

3 miles out, he started moving SE at 8 knots, CPA went to 0.1 nmi. Still showing NUC.... and giving us a lot of time. So if he's "really" NUC he's now the equivalent of a kamikaze headed at me.

So I called him. The conversation went something like

Me. Captain it looks like we're close and you're showing Not Under Command. Do you need me to turn to avoid you?

Him. Oh no, we were just drifting. Do you want to turn inland?

(WTF?) Me. Negative I would like to hold course.

Him. Understood we will turn and pass port to port.

Ok so no harm no foul? He turned to starboard and carried on southbound at 8 knots, still showing NUC. We passed at maybe a mile.

I watched him continue on AIS for the next half hour.

Dan

So if you didn't have AIS what would you have done? 1 mile seems like plenty of clearance

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Larry Florida

So if you didn't have AIS what would you have done? 1 mile seems like plenty of clearance

Did you miss the bit about "CPA went to 0.1 nmi" IOW, they were essentially on a collision course, closing at somewhere close to 14 knots (So less than 15 minutes to collision when the ship started moving)

The only reason it ended up with 1 mile of clearance was because he got on the radio and negotiated a passing maneuver.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Off Trail

If he'd continued drifting, no problem, just stay out of the way. It was the maneuvering under power that I was reacting to.

Y'know I don't see the use of NUC as being so egregious - personally I can see the argument in favour of using NUC signals when hove to or lying ahull. To me the real issue is that this commercial vessel got underway and created a risk of collision without being aware there was a sailing vessel in front of them - clearly a very poor lookout, as well as the rule 2 infraction.

[Montanan]

As navigation technologies evolve, AIS can aid in the deployment of autonomous vessels, but if they are sending out incorrect data then AIS can be disruptive to proper successful and safe navigation protocols.

This is an example, wherein a human navigator realized that something was amiss as to the displayed status and noticed that the course was going to become unsafe and resolved the situation promptly and appropriately.

Question for the OP, where you transmitting your vessel's status and course on AIS such that the commercial ship should have detected your closings?

It is evident that there needs to be more detailed data being transmitted to avail enhancements in navigation. By way of example, an AIS could transmit not only the current status of a vessel but their intended course, so that multiple intended courses could be discerned and best resolved to be compatible.

[walt41]

They may have placed their engines and their underway watch section in standby; large ships need several evolutions to be fully operational. At least you know that he will not maneuver as you take steps to avoid him. A vessel does not have to be disabled to display NUC.

ALWAYS MANEUVER EARLY TO AVOID LARGE SHIPS. A 15-degree course change early enough will avoid a close encounter.

[Brian Renwick]

Originally Posted by Off Trail

Some of us have seen commercial ships use NUC while drifting waiting for their pilot time. Here is an interaction that takes that to a new level and I think highlights why this is poor practice in general. This was a few months ago so I may have distances off a bit in my memory.

We were sailing north reaching at 6 kts, 5 miles off Miami. There was a cargo ship ahead and inland of us, stationary and showing NUC on AIS. We had plenty of clearance so just carried on.

3 miles out, he started moving SE at 8 knots, CPA went to 0.1 nmi. Still showing NUC.... and giving us a lot of time. So if he's "really" NUC he's now the equivalent of a kamikaze headed at me.

So I called him. The conversation went something like

Me. Captain it looks like we're close and you're showing Not Under Command. Do you need me to turn to avoid you?

Him. Oh no, we were just drifting. Do you want to turn inland?

(WTF?) Me. Negative I would like to hold course.

Him. Understood we will turn and pass port to port.

Ok so no harm no foul? He turned to starboard and carried on southbound at 8 knots, still showing NUC. We passed at maybe a mile.

I watched him continue on AIS for the next half hour.

Dan

Completely illegal to display NUC when you are voluntarily drifting and you have the ability to restart your propulsion. This has been well established in the courts. I used to work off the NW Shelf (West Australia), and on several occasions I was a fly on the wall listening to the sometimes heated conversations between seismic survey ships conducting surveys (displaying RAM) and tankers awaiting their turn to pick up a pipeline and voluntarily drifting (into the survey zone!) and displaying NUC. When the mate (or master) on the tanker stubbornly declined to restart their propulsion and piss off, the conversation could get quite heated! Of course, in the end, the tankers always conceded and left the survey zone. And ceased displaying NUC... They knew they didn't have a leg to stand on.

[KJThomas]

Drifting while awaiting pilots is common. And had been as long as I've been at sea. Rather a long time now.
As a watchkeeper and Master I have never been entirely comfortable with it due to the lack of a treatment in the colregs.
If a yacht or tug, or even another power driven vessel starts asserting their "priority" under the colregs and heads for you on a collision course the rules state you must manouvre to avoid collision.
In reality that is not possible. Ships I've been on took, on a steamship four hours, down to an hour in a motorship. It is possible to "crash start" but even that takes 15 to 20 minutes and leaves a bunch of very unhappy engineers.
Also in reality it has not been an issue, in my experience, as the said yachts, tug boats etc are intelligent enough to realise you are stopped and just go around. Sometime s rather close. By the time you realised they were asleep and going to hit you, it would be too late to start the engine and get moving. I can imagine the meal a lawyer would make of the ship's watchkeepers in court, however if a yacht sailed into us.
There is no appropriate treatment in the colregs of the situation. Probably because there have been little or no actual collisions resulting from this.
There s a need to be able to indicate the status of "underway" but not able to make way immediately. NUC is not appropriate by definition. RAM is actually more appropriate. "By the nature of its work". Still doesn't entirely fit from a legal sense, as a stopped power driven vessel isn't one of the vessels allowed to use RAM in the colregs

[Manateeman]

In the oil field, survey ships have a “chase” boat which really never chases the survey ship. It runs out in front and chases away shrimpers.
Driving a chase boat means you are being pursued by a ship dragging wire and assorted floats that are as wide as a football field and they are not going to stop.
If they forget to call you and tell you they are doing a turn, you end up sailing off into the night. So you have to watch ahead and behind at the same time.
Rule book. RAM. If you see a “boom” boat, please remember to ask just how much wire they are pulling because it’s scary at night. Sometimes just call and ask “how can I make it easier for you guys”. ..I’m here at x and y. They can figure out something safe for everybody. Being patient and nice goes a long way.
Happy trails to you.
Captain Mark

[Paul L]

Most of the NUC situations we see are tankers and bulk carriers. They often also have destination set to something like Awaiting Orders,
We just stay clear of them. They are out making a living, we are cruising our retirement away.