So far as I can establish, e-navigation was introduced to the world by Dr Sally Basker in 2005 when she was Director of Research & Radionavigation at Trinity House. The concept received a boost when the then Shipping Minister, Dr Steven Ladyman gave it formal UK Government support in 2006. Since then, as documented within these pages, e-navigation has snowballed but where is it heading?

In 2009 e-navigation was formally adopted by the IMO and the Nautical Institute created a specialist department in order to try to ensure that the e-navigation agenda was user led. Fat chance! With the wide remit of  harmonising and integrating on board and shore technologies it was inevitable that e-navigation would become a corporate love-fest and, sure enough, conferences and seminars are taking place at far flung locations with eye watering registration fees that effectively exclude any end-user.

Three e-navigation events have recently taken place with the following cheapest fees:

-November in Seattle, $665.

-January : e-Navigation Underway : on board the Crown of Scandinavia : 670€

-November: ECDIS Revolution : £714

Whilst it’s good to note that the American Pilots are supporters of the Seattle conference it is almost guaranteed that they will be the only serving seafarers at any of these events but the big question is what’s it this achieving anyway?

Ship owners remain unfazed as they launch new ships  with traditional bridges totally unsuitable for e-navigation whilst at IMO, progress has been slowed by more and more groups jumping on the bandwagon and by debates over what the “e” might actually stand for.

As the French would say, “plus ça change, plus c’est la même”!

John Clandillon-Baker:  Editor

john@pilotmag.co.uk

“OK Captain, she’ll pivot round the fender now: hard to port and slow ahead”.        Photo: JCB

Many of you will recall Hugues Cauvier’s excellent article on the pivot point in the October 2008 issue of The Pilot. Paul Butusina’s article covers much the same ground but due to the importance to pilots of understanding this elusive point I felt that it was well worth revisiting the topic. JCB

The aim of this paper is to add few corrections to the pivot point theory as it is presented in seafarers books, because  understanding the pivot point is such an important element of safe manoeuvring of the vessel.

Introduction

The pivot point of the ship turning is defined in seafarers publications more or less accurately as follows: The pivot point is the point which traces the turning curve of a ship. It is located in the fore section of the ship, abaft of the stem at 1/6-1/3 of ship’s length. However other factors such as acceleration, shape of hull and speed may all affect its position.

It should be noted that when at anchor the pivot point moves right forward and any forces acting on the hull, such as wind or current, cause the vessel to move about the anchor position or the point where the chain lies on the sea bed although a sudden change will initially cause the vessel to pivot around the hawse pipe.

The available literature on ship manoeuvring and handling does not cover all aspects of the pivot point in a systematic way since it is the point in the diametrical plan of the vessel or in the prolongation of this plan, around which the vessel swings on the trajectory which she describes. This trajectory can be a circle arch with its own centre of rotation on the traject (momentary centre of rotation) which can result in the pivot point being located outside of the ship’s shape.

At speed, a more accurate description of the pivot point is a Tactical Point of Turning (TPT) which is located at the point of intersection between the ship’s diametrical plan and the perpendicular from momentary centre of rotation.  This is important for ships’ operators because it gives some indications regarding the equilibrium of the forces acting on the vessel and consequently provides an indication regarding space swept during turning and the possibility to predict the ship’s orientation.

Movements of a vessel: Water Resistance and Pivot Point

It is important to remember the three degrees of freedom of a vessel (Fig 1):

1. Longitudinal, along axis X-X’

2. Transverse ,along axis Y-Y’

3. Swinging to starboard or to port.

To find PP position we will simplify the factors which affect ship’s handling to the mechanical physics although the hydrodynamic effects have a considerable importance.

During straightforward movement, water-resistance force is applied right on the stem, which creates high pressure in front and around the bow (fig.2).

The same effect occurs for astern movement but in both cases the shape of underwater hull is very important in determining the high pressure effect.

As soon as a controlled or uncontrolled horizontal force acts on the vessel the ship will start to turn and she will expose a larger section of the hull to the water flow. The peak of water-resistance and pressure will therefore shift from axe X-X’ to the geometrical centre of underwater hull section area perpendicular on the new direction of the movement and the direction of the water-resistance (R), could be anywhere between longitudinal axis, X-X’ and transversal axis,Y-Y’.

Depending of the direction of the movement, the vessel’s speed, hull shape, trim and heel, etc the application point of the water-resistance force will be in different points along the vessel, changing continuously during complex manoeuvres.

To analyse the influence of horizontal forces applied on the vessel (ie rudder & wind) we have to relate these forces to the water-resistance force where it acts. This force will be present as long as vessel is floating and moving. The arm lever of these forces is the distance between their supports and Water-Resistance Force.

The resultant effect of several forces acting on a stopped vessel can generate all three movements. For our purpose, the rotation and the sideway movement are considered. The rotation movement has a centre of rotation which is the pivot point where the fore and aft extremities of the vessel are turning with the same angular speed inside of ship’s shape in all situations.

Besides the pivot point, the vessel’s trajectory has its own centre of curvature called the Momentary Centre of Rotation. In fact all forces acting upon a vessel have, more or less, momentary effects in ship’s dynamic movement.

Water Resistance and Pivot Point of a vessel stopped

Considering a ship stopped in the water we can find a point situated near its mid length, from where if a tug pushed with a force F the fore and aft extremities of the ship will move with same speeds V1= V2 (Fig.3).

fig 3

The force F is applied on the same support as water-resistance force R. Its centre of application is the Centre of Water (Lateral) Resistance (CLR). The lever F -R is therefore zero and the ship will move from position 1 -2 without any rotation.

If equal but opposite forces are now applied equidistant from the CLR then the ship will pivot around that point (Fig 4).

fig 4

Returning to the situation in Fig.3, if the force (F) is moved slightly aft of the CLR then the resultant will be a sideways movement coupled with a slight ahead movement which will cause the ship to start rotating but in this condition the pivot point will be ahead and well outside the ship shape (fig 5).

fig 5

From position 2, if our force (F) is now applied further aft and on the starboard 1/4, the speed of rotation is increased but the forward movement is reduced and the pivot point moves closer to the bow of the ship (fig 6).

fig 6

Moving this force right aft onto the rudder area ( i.e. with a pod proplsion unit) the pivot point may move back within the ship shape (Fig 7).

fig 7

The bow thruster will have opposite effect of moving the effective pivot point to the stern of the vessel (Fig 8). Obviously these are very approximate locations but at least serve to help anticipate where the pivot point might be.

fig 8

Getting Underway

If the engine is now put ahead with the rudder amidships with two tugs pushing up with equal power equidistant from the CLR the vessel will start to move ahead and sideways (Fig 9).

fig 9

Due to lateral resistance RL and the longitudinal resistance RI a resultant water resistance force RT acts on the starboard bow. The pivot point moves forward in the direction of the movement and consequently the levers of F1 and F2 related to RT change and d2 > d1. In consequence V2 >> V1  resulting in an accelerating swing to port. Even with a short “kick ahead”, this increasing of rotation speed can be seen. The same effect of course occurs when a vessel in a tideway is stopped over the ground parallel to the berth and the stronger the tide the greater is the effect. It is important to note that in this scenario the pivot point may again move ahead of the ship shape.

Likewise, if a vessel is moored with a current from astern, the pivot point will be aft at the moment the lines are cast off and ship will start to want to pivot around the stern with the bow moving away from the jetty faster than the stern if 2 tugs are alongside pulling off with equal power.

Fig 10 helps to explain why bow thrusters become useless for turning a vessel as the speed ahead increases.

fig 10

As the thruster (T) tries to swing the vessel towards the jetty, the water resistance on the CLR increases and with such a small lever (d) there is virtually no turning moment.

If we take the same ship and berth it stern to tide ( or approach the jetty stern first) ( Fig 11) then the lever (d) is long and the vessel will swing readily.

fig 11

The “Donkey Effect”

One of the most spectacular examples of applying an external force upon a vessel and getting the opposite result to that expected (donkey-like) is the movement of the vessel when a tug is acting on the support of water resistance force against it (Fig12).

If the tug starts to push on a vessel moving  at speed in position M1 it cannot turn the vessel due to the short turning lever. She will drift to starboard but will maintain the heading as in position M2. As soon as the tug stops pushing in position M3, the vessel will start to turn towards the tug. She will continue to turn in that direction as is shown in position M4 until the forces stabilise and the heading stability is restored.

In real time trials with escort tugs this effect has also been observed when the tug stays pushing on the hull. This effect along with those explained  in Fig 9 are most important for pilots using tugs on a vessel making way through the water. The higher the speed the more pronounced the effect.

JCB

The following link is to Paul Butusina’s full research paper from which the above article was edited:

There continue to be changes within the trustee board and at the Association’s last AGM earlier this year  Andy Jones, Finance Manager at Milford Haven and Linda Henry, Group Personnel Manager at Associated British Ports, were appointed as alternate port trustees.

Richard Williamson, a Boston pilot, also retired as a trustee on 30 September (See facing page).  Richard became an alternate trustee in June 1998 and a full trustee in May 2002.  In February 2003 Richard took on the role of Deputy Chairman and became the Fund’s Chairman in February 2006.  Richard had the unenviable task of taking the P.N.P.F. through one of its most difficult periods leading up to the first court hearing.  In February 2009 Richard reverted to the role of Deputy Chairman and continued to contribute a great deal of his time and energy to resolving the issues facing the P.N.P.F.  I know his hard work is very much appreciated by myself and the other trustees. At his last trustee meeting the Chairperson of the trustees, Heather McQuire, presented Richard with a painting of the Liverpool pilot boat no.1  (for those of you who do not know Richard was apprenticed in Liverpool).  Richard is leaving the U.K. for warmer climes and we all wish him well for the next phase of his life in Italy.

Additional Voluntary Contributions

Those members who continue to contribute to the existing A.V.C. scheme should have received their 2010/11 benefit statements from Loretta, if you have not done so please contact Loretta, in writing, requesting a duplicate.

Summary Funding Statement 2011

The 2011 Summary Funding Statement was sent out to all members on 21 September 2011.  It has not changed significantly from the 2010 statement as until the judgement is received from the pending appeal hearing the trustees are unable to finalise the 2007 and 2010 triennial valuations.

Benefit Statements as at 31.12.2011

When you receive your annual benefit statement in 2012 you will see a number of changes in the information it contains.  To reflect the changes in the Annual Allowance (see my letter of 9 December 2010 to all active members) the benefit statement will show the amount of annual allowance used and will include any A.V.C.s you may of paid during the Payment Input Period.  Going forward the “carried forward” of unused allowance for the previous three tax years will also be included.

Tyne’s Appeal Hearing

We have been advised by Hogan Lovells that Tyne’s appeal is due to be heard week commencing 14 November and should last 3 days.  We then have to wait for the judgement to be handed down and given how close Christmas will be then this may not be received until 2012.

Suspended Pensions

This is a plea for information.  We have had to suspend three pensions in payment as we are unable to ascertain the whereabouts of a Mr. J. S. Emberton (ex Manchester pilot), Mr. M. J. Parkin (ex Wisbech pilot) and a Mrs. M. Campbell (an Ipswich widow).  If anyone can give us any information on our three missing members I would very much appreciate it.

Auto-Enrolment

It is less then a year before the biggest pension reforms since the Old Age Act 1908 (another reason for me to retire!) come into force, yet apathetic employers are dragging their feet with only 7% of the larger firms making any plans for auto-enrolment.  Only a quarter of employers have budgeted for the cost of auto-enrolment with larger employers expecting between 12-17% of their employees to opt-out.  Smaller employers expect the opt-out rate to be higher with between 33-39% opting-out.

Early Access to Pensions

It now appears the government will look again at introducing early access to pensions if large numbers of workers opt-out of auto-enrolment due to be introduced in a phased process in October 2012, especially if lack of access is the main reason for the opt-outs.

This plan was shelved in April following yet another government consultation as it was felt it would add to the complexity already facing providers with the introduction of the auto-enrolment regime.

Working Beyond Age 65

A recent study carried out on 1000 employees over the age of 60 revealed 26% intended to work beyond 65 with a third of these wanting to continue working after age 65 to enhance their retirement savings.  The last decade has seen a doubling in the number of people over the age of 60 who are carrying on working and the number is expected to increase as the abolition of the default retirement age of 65 is phased in.

Inflation

A recent survey shows that pensioners fear that inflation and government tinkering with the pensions system will impact their retirement incomes.  To combat inflation respondents to the survey said they would draw on savings, investments and even consider selling their property and downsizing.  I have all this to look forward to!

Well this will be my last article for the Pilot Magazine and I will miss this tenuous contact with my members.  As it is the last quarter in 2011 I don’t think it is too early to wish you all a very good Christmas and a happy and healthy 2012. To celebrate my retirement Tom and I are sailing off into the sunset and taking a cruise up the west coast of South America and finishing in Florida.  At midnight on the 31st of December I will raise my glass to all of you who have been so patient and kind during my time with the P.N.P.F.  As we say where I come from : y’all take care.                Debbie Marten

Retirements

May 2011 to July 2011

P. N. Bush          Falmouth

R. Casson         Lancaster

J. D. Gray         Humber

J. S. MacGregor         Poole

*********

Pensioners Deceased

May 2011 to July 2011

P. W. Brown     London-North

A. F. Esson     Aberdeen

J. M Estill     PLA

D. R. Godfrey     London-South

J. F. Males     London–South

J. G. Mitchell     Clyde

J. Sanderson     PLA

N. Sigley     Manchester

O. Walton     Harwich

Richard was presented with a painting of Liverpool pilot cutter No1

Mike Kitchen (London)

August saw the retirement of Mike Kitchen after 50 years of service at sea. For the London pilotage district, Mike’s retirement also marked the end of an era since he had been the last remaining pilot to have originally been authorised by Trinity House.

Following pre-sea training at Reardon Smith Nautical College Mike joined his first ship on 9th August 1961 and having obtained his Master’s certificate in 1973 he commenced his pilotage career in 1976 in Dar es Salaam followed by Montrose until 1979 when he transferred to Harwich becoming authorised by Trinity House as a Class 4 pilot for London Sea Pilot (North) in 1980.

Piloting all the various ship types serving London and the Northern Thames Estuary ports, Mike progressed to become an “Inner List” pilot in 1987 serving the largest tankers. 1987 also saw him as duty pilot in Harwich on the 15th    October when the hurricane struck causing carnage within the harbour!

The 1987 Pilotage Act also created a storm by transferring responsibility for pilotage authorisations from Trinity House to the Port of London Authority (PLA). Mike decided to remain as a London pilot where he continued to pilot all classes of vessel up to his retirement.

In 1990 Mikes passion for steam engines saw the delivery of two old steam locomotives into Tilbury, one of which he has been restoring himself ever since.

As well as piloting and restoring steam engines, Mike was also involved in many of the pilotage committees, in particular as Secretary and Chairman of the Pilots national Committee for Pensions (PNCP) from 1981 to its closure in 2004.

Recognition of Mike’s long career as a pilot was  provided by a concerto of tug horns blowing as he passed on his final pilotage passage and he was presented with a painting by his colleagues at a subsequent retirement party where all wished Mike and his wife a long and happy retirement.                      JCB

-MCA VTS policy Steering Group (Martin Chatterton)

-CHIRP (Peter Lightfoot),

-EU Projects Funding Seminar (Nick Lee [T&TC])

In September I attended the MCA UKSON 90. At the latter meeting it was a pleasure to be thanked by the MCA for our contribution to the Port State Control defect reporting regulations consultation (see article at the end of this report. ed) which will effectively extend existing legislation to include our Deep Sea pilot colleagues. The implications of this are obvious and we have argued for some time that a robust and strictly confidential MCA reporting system is essential to protect the interests of the DSPs.  This we have achieved.

I also attended the launch of Trinity House’s “2025 and beyond” strategy (http://bit.ly/o6w7FL) which will have a direct impact on UK port and coastal pilotage in the years ahead.

We have a busy Autumn schedule ahead covering a number of seminars which have implications for UK pilotage – details of these are available on the UKMPA web site.  We need to have a good presence at these events, as often much is said about pilotage by those who in truth actually know very little about it. Additionally of course there will be the usual round of meetings at the various MCA forums we participate in as well as the EMPA e-navigation group and our own T&TC meetings.

As well as dealing with UKMPA matters, work has been progressing well (lead by John Pearn) on arrangements for the IMPA 2012 conference we are hosting next September (http://www.impa2012.org). As has been explained before, this is very much the UKMPA nationally as hosts and you are all asked to consider putting the dates in your diaries either to come and help with the daily arrangements (contact John) or simply attend what will certainly be a memorable international event. Registration should be live by the time that you read this.  Specific details for UKMPA members to register will be promulgated in due course.

Those of you in the PNPF will be aware that Richard Williamson (Boston) has retired and he was presented with a fine decanter on behalf of all UKMPA members for the huge amount of work he has done during his many years of involvement with the PNPF. (See pages 6&7)

Effective communications is the core of any successful modern organisation and our Association is no exception. Almost all of our contact with members is via email and the UKMPA web site (and of course this journal). We aim to keep the web site as up to date as possible with news items, publication of events, vacancies etc.  As an additional facility a Linkedin group (http://linkd.in/p1q8Zh) has been formed which you are invited to join.

In 1986, Harry Hignett (Manchester) wrote a history of the UK Pilots’ Association, copies of which (although long out of print) are available sometimes via Amazon etc.  I have recently been in contact with Harry (now retired)  and he has agreed (with the sanction of Section committee) to update the book. Covering the period post 1986 to date, it will hopefully be ready for publication by summer 2012.

I recently had the pleasure of accepting an invitation to attend the Nautilus International Conference in Rotterdam. Joe Wilson did a lot of valuable work in forging a relationship with Nautilus and attendance at this conference has confirmed to me that there is mutually much to be gained from the development of the relationship between our two organisations, notwithstanding our position within UNITE. A copy of my report on this conference can be found on the UKMPA web site under “conferences”. Of particular note is the imminent publication on the Dft web site of all UK shipping related legislation under review as part of the UK Government Red Tape Challenge programme and the awarding by Nautilus of the Victoria Drummond award to Rachel, wife of UKMPA member Neil Dunn (Southampton), herself an Admiralty Pilot at Portsmouth (See page 15).

You will all recently have received details of the IMPA bridge manning survey. This is part of a factual statistical data gathering exercise essential to illustrate to regulators and others the true status  of the nature of modern bridge operations.  Please do take the time to complete a form for every pilotage act you undertake until the end of November. Ultimately it is for all our benefits, individually and collectively. Details are available in Circular 14/2011, on the UKMPA and IMPA web sites.

Finally, as the nights draw in and the weather begins to deteriorate, stay safe!

*******

The UKMPA Submission To The MCA Defect Reporting Consultation

- A truly confidential and anonymous reporting process – by SMS and email – needs to be established. This in order to protect the identity of the reporting pilot from the client. In the event that the pilot’s client was to discover that it was the Deep Sea Pilot who had reported a defect which resulted in a Port State Control inspection and subsequent action against the ship, then it is probable that the Deep Sea Pilot’s  services would never be re-contracted.

MCA response: The MCA recognises that an unintended consequence of extending the reporting obligations to Deep Sea Pilots, whose use is voluntary, is the risk that it could prejudice use of their services and as a result safety of navigation. In practice, MCA will treat pilot reports with a similar regard for confidentiality as given to crew complaints, although this is not a legal requirement under Article 23 or under the regulations (since they follow the Directive). The MSN section 15 sets out means of reporting, including direct MCA email addresses. It also advises that prompt notification is more important than format. For the future, the European Commission may issue a Regulation setting out how reports should be made, but at present this is still under negotiation.

The unit has been developed to use advanced satellite communications to ease vessel traffic management. Safeport is looking at being able to deliver more accurate, secure and reliable navigation and positioning information to the pilot to ensure safer and more efficient navigation and berthing.

Vessels participating in the system share their planned routes and schedules with vessel traffic management, or request a route for them. These are then validated to ensure safe compliance with any rules, and that the piloted ship does not interfere with other vessels.

1. Strong integration of seaports

2. Reduction or elimination of formalities for the Short Sea Shipping;

3. Market access for:

Technical-Nautical Services

Labour

Terminal operations.

Of these both 2 & 3 directly affect pilots.

Item 2 is seeking to make PEC’s easier to obtain because the ship owners lobby has convinced the Commission that trade damaging blockages are occurring as a result of short sea trade ships having to queue up for their pilot! Already since last March a study into PEC’s has been underway ( supported by EU funding of course).

Item 3 includes pilotage under “Technical Nautical Services” and the EU philosophy is that TNS should be opened up to competition. Further to this a consultation process has now begun.

Fortunately, our association with EMPA means that pilots will once again submit their arguments against competition and EMPA President, Jacques Sauban, has already asked questions  of M. Theologitis who stated the following:

Conclusions of the stakeholders consultation of 2006/2007 will be taken into account;

Technical nautical services have old traditions but also some restrictive practices…

The study about PEC’s will explain for what reason PEC’s exist or not, how PEC’s are granted or not and why a pilotage fee is asked even with a PEC.

He agreed  that factors to take into account for granting PEC’s are linked to local knowledge, language knowledge, frequencies of call etc. Together with this study, the EU will analyse the following:

Who is entitled to be a pilot?

Has any private company the right to establish in any seaport ?

What are the public service requirements?

Is the right of establishment given to an association or to an individual?

What about “cream skimming” (cherry picking) of the market?

Although there isn’t yet a formal consultation on the issue, Jacques Saubin has already submitted documents detailing the arguments against competition and the liberalisation of PEC’s and the UKMPA will also be participating in the consultation. However, no member can afford to ignore this issue. The defeat of the last Ports Directive was aided considerably by individual pilots writing to their MEP.

MEP’s get very little mail so a sudden flurry of correspondence raising concerns over an issue tends to stir them into action so all pilots should make the effort to respond. Should you need any advice on the points to make, contact the UKMPA: UKMPAoffice@yahoo.com

Contact your MEP here

Recognising the important role Deep Sea Pilots have in enhancing “the effectiveness of the Bridge Team for the safety of navigation and the protection of the marine environment”, the Resolution includes  the following factors to be taken into account when considering the use of a Deep-Sea Pilot:

1. The familiarity of the Bridge Team with the congested waters of the English Channel, North Sea and Skagerrak.

2. The proliferation of navigational hazards, such as oil/gas installations and offshore renewable energy installations.

3. The available depth of water in relation to draft, under keel clearance and the essel’s intended route.

4. The possibility of adverse weather conditions and/or poor visibility.

5. The port rotation schedule requirements.

6. The availability of Vessel Traffic Services coverage in the areas to be transited.

7. Any other exceptional circumstances.

An interesting analysis of the use of Deep Sea Pilots with respect to Charter Party agreements is examined in  Ian Timmins’ letter here.