Royal New Zealand Navy Discussions and Updates

[John Fedup]

I'm afraid that this is a question that a Court Martial will undoubtedly ask and require answered

Absolutely and it is likely (albeit based on very limited information), the answer may be a career termination.

 

[Volkodav]

What is the mention of "Pilot"? Was there a non RNZN pilot on board, or is someone conflating helmsman with pilot?

 

[John Fedup]

Limited information and the pilot/helmsman/OOW issue will need to be sorted for sure.

 

[spoz]

“Pilot” is also Navy shorthand for the ship’s Navigating Officer. Suspect that is the reference.

 

[Xthenaki]

Another query is if MANAWANUI was working off a "Lee shore" with Gusts to 25K and a moderate swell - not conditions to put any vessel to operate in at close quarters. Her forward superstructure and foc'sle was high and could be affected by gusts.

 

[RegR]

So someone plotted a course, and set the autopilot and just... hung around?

What was the OOW and bridge team doing?

I thought it sounded more like it turned in the wrong direction while under auto-pilot so then when they tried to regain control but did not actually dis-engage auto pilot so then assumed the problem was something completely different, which only made matters worse as they were then applying wrong corrections to an unknown issue. Panic under pressure and procedure goes out the window. By the time they have gotten control back the damage is done and the recovery only makes matters worse.

 

[RegR]

Another query is if MANAWANUI was working off a "Lee shore" with Gusts to 25K and a moderate swell - not conditions to put any vessel to operate in at close quarters. Her forward superstructure and foc'sle was high and could be affected by gusts.

Doesn't this ship have (had) dynamic positioning so can literally hold on a dime? Made to take on north seas tendering oil rigs so not sure alittle weather would really affect it's handling or seakeeping in terms of operation in even adverse conditions.

 

[koxinga]

I thought it sounded more like it turned in the wrong direction while under auto-pilot so then when they tried to regain control but did not actually dis-engage auto pilot so then assumed the problem was something completely different, which only made matters worse as they were then applying wrong corrections to an unknown issue. Panic under pressure and procedure goes out the window. By the time they have gotten control back the damage is done and the recovery only makes matters worse.

I am unsure about RNZ's standard operating procedures and regulations but autopilots are typically limited to open water / transit.

Use of autopilot within restricted waters with high traffic density or known navigtion hazards are carefully regulated with the key requirement that the bridge team can immediately transition to hand steering.

It reeks of competency and training issue (inability to identify that autopilot was engaged, procedures to rapidly disengage and handsteer), as well as non comformance to regulations. The hammer's going to drop on a lot of folks.

 

[Volkodav]

A colleague once told me the only time in his career he bollocked a subordinate what when said subordinate gave him an incorrect navigation fix in confined waters.

Everyone has their job, if one person doesn't do theirs the whole thing can go to custard. If you are on the bridge you are expected to be competent.

 

[Xthenaki]

Doesn't this ship have (had) dynamic positioning so can literally hold on a dime? Made to take on north seas tendering oil rigs so not sure alittle weather would really affect it's handling or seakeeping in terms of operation in even adverse conditions.

yes I believe she had dynamic positioning - BUT- holding on to a dime in a swell could be fun especially if the ship gets "lifted". I would think that in adverse conditions you would keep clear of any structures.(Nth Sea rigs) Back to the MANAWANUI incident it will be interesting to see what happened when the findings of the C o I are made known.

 

[RegR]

I am unsure about RNZ's standard operating procedures and regulations but autopilots are typically limited to open water / transit.

Use of autopilot within restricted waters with high traffic density or known navigtion hazards are carefully regulated with the key requirement that the bridge team can immediately transition to hand steering.

It reeks of competency and training issue (inability to identify that autopilot was engaged, procedures to rapidly disengage and handsteer), as well as non comformance to regulations. The hammer's going to drop on a lot of folks.

Not sure it was initially in confined waters (it ended up there which is what they were trying to avoid/correct), sounds like it was in a box grid doing a survey pattern which would explain a semi plotted set of course waypoints to cover. Unsure as well but I highly doubt they just decided to suddenly use auto-pilot to undertake this seemingly regular (for this ship) task in this type of weather "near" this type of coast, point being I dont think they chose this particular survey mission to trial something new and out of order.

Edit: And if they did then someone definately is going to lose their pips as not following procedure on an operational mission vs informal training trials is not the done thing with this kind of asset in this type of organisation.

 

[SeaplanePaul]

Is it true that the Mawanui accelerated into the reef?