Majesty - "not under command"

[kb4683]

Just checked marine traffic.com and noticed that as of over 8 hours ago, Majesty OTS's status is "not under command" and was only traveling at 1.1kn.

 

Googled not under command and this was one explanation:

Vessels not under command and vessels restricted in their ability to maneuver are treated similarly under the Rules, as their combined status under Rule 27 reflects. The Rule 3 definition of a "vessel not under command" is that of a vessel "unable to maneuver as required" of ordinary vessels because of "exceptional circumstance." Rule 3 defines a "vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver" as one unable to keep out of the way because of "the nature of her work." In both cases, the vessel cannot physically comply with the Rules for ordinary vessels, and so they are granted special privileges. Rule 18 requires all other vessels to keep out of the way of these two classes of vessels.

 

Anyone here in contact with someone on board? Hope this is just a false report on marine traffic.

[reedl]

Maybe the Captain had to use the "little captain's room"?

 

:)

[irishgal432]

Are they docked at Cocoa Cay?

[IrishSails]

On the Majesty now. We are moving very slowly, but there isn't anything that seems abnormal.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[IrishSails]

No we are heading back to PC from Nassau.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[cruisinck]

Somebody went overboard on Independence this morning so maybe they are going slow to try to search.

[BillOh]

It hasn't updated in 11 hours no, though its not unusual for it not to update between Nassau and PC , It typically is due back to PC around 5am tomorrow, check before then and see if she is showing up again.

[davekathy]

Maybe the Captain had to use the "little captain's room"?

 

:)

 

Thanks for the laugh.

[easyboy]

Hope it gets back to PC without further problem.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[LMaxwell]

If you saw that from overnight chances are they were just drifting; on the Bahamas runs they do not need to be sailing all night to get to the next destination so sometimes they just cut propulsion to dead minimum to maintain steerage or cut altogether if weather conditions are favorable.

 

I doubt there was any problem and this is standard

[Capt_BJ]

Technical note .....

 

on an AIS system, "navigational status" is something that is manually input by the operator ... typically the watch officer

 

since "not under command" is a term that generally is accepted to mean something is wrong .....

 

I'm gonna guess that on MAJ' someone "fat fingered" the AIS and accidentally entered 'not under command'. Generally not under command means one of two things: no steering or no engines. In other words "I can NOT get out of your way even if the rules say I must". More importantly the court has interpreted the rules to say and that a vessel can not 'voluntarily' be not under command. The cause must not be under their control .... aka a "special circumstance". If I stop and turn off my engines and drift, I am not "not under command" because I can start my engines in time to avoid collision else I should not have turned them off in the first place.

 

I once took an excellent course on the maritime rules of the road (after the Academy). The course was 40 hours .... we spent a lot of time talking about how the courts have interpreted the rules as compare to what one might think they say .... high level legal stuff!

[jrmende63]

Majesty is showing 9.0 knots now. She is headed home to PC.

[chengkp75]

Technical note .....

 

on an AIS system, "navigational status" is something that is manually input by the operator ... typically the watch officer

 

since "not under command" is a term that generally is accepted to mean something is wrong .....

 

I'm gonna guess that on MAJ' someone "fat fingered" the AIS and accidentally entered 'not under command'. Generally not under command means one of two things: no steering or no engines. In other words "I can NOT get out of your way even if the rules say I must". More importantly the court has interpreted the rules to say and that a vessel can not 'voluntarily' be not under command. The cause must not be under their control .... aka a "special circumstance". If I stop and turn off my engines and drift, I am not "not under command" because I can start my engines in time to avoid collision else I should not have turned them off in the first place.

 

I once took an excellent course on the maritime rules of the road (after the Academy). The course was 40 hours .... we spent a lot of time talking about how the courts have interpreted the rules as compare to what one might think they say .... high level legal stuff!

 

While I 100% agree with your legal interpretation of "NUC", I will say that it is a fairly common practice to declare yourself and turn on the NUC lights when a ship wants to drift for any reason. As AIS is primarily a means of ship identification between ships in radar range, declaring NUC on AIS gives ships in the area an added "heads up" that you are drifting, and that it may take 5-20 minutes to start up propulsion. Is it right under law, no. Is it done as a standard practice in the industry, yes. If something happens while voluntarily NUC, will there be serious consequences, yes.

[Saab4444]

In most cases the distance to travel is just so short that the speed will be reduced significantly. Nowadays on many itineraries an average speed of under 10 knots is required between ports and ships are drifting or taking turns at night.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[Aquahound]

If something happens while voluntarily NUC, will there be serious consequences, yes.

 

Darn right, there will be.

[bobmacliberty]

Voluntarily not under command...thought this might be another drink package thread. :D

 

Love it when you guys add some real life marine talk. Gives my Engineering mind a peek into another world. I guess all of those ships around the globe don't just magically get from point A to point B.

[poncho1973]

I love techy threads where we get the insider views of both Cheng (from the ship's view) and the Hound's view (from the investigative view).

 

It's like a present all of its own!

[Clarea]

I love techy threads where we get the insider views of both Cheng (from the ship's view) and the Hound's view (from the investigative view).

 

It's like a present all of its own!

Totally agree. Like many things, we are shown that there is much more to the situation than imagined.

Edited December 23, 2016 by clarea

[jamesboat]

In most cases the distance to travel is just so short that the speed will be reduced significantly. Nowadays on many itineraries an average speed of under 10 knots is required between ports and ships are drifting or taking turns at night.

 

It really annoys me when lines schedule a 4pm departure when they dont need the time to make it to the next destination.

[poncho1973]

It really annoys me when lines schedule a 4pm departure when they dont need the time to make it to the next destination.

 

I believe a lot of that has to do with the port officials and not the boat officials. Traffic in and out of the port and the rate the ports charge for hours in port, etc.

 

I think there is more to the story than "Let's screw the passengers out of port time for giggles."

[jamesboat]

I believe a lot of that has to do with the port officials and not the boat officials. Traffic in and out of the port and the rate the ports charge for hours in port, etc.

 

I think there is more to the story than "Let's screw the passengers out of port time for giggles."

 

More time on ship = more money spent on ships.

 

You can see this when two ships do the exact same itinerary route but one of the ships (cough NCL epic) has an extra day at sea rather than stopping at a fun port.

 

You can also compare with the luxury lines which run a similar itinerary but frequently stay until 11pm and then arrive at 6am at the next island.

[troykahack]

Slower ship, less fuel burned. 11 Night Serenade made 22 kts to first pot of call, then very slow between ports, and fast again returning to home port.

Edited December 23, 2016 by troykahack

[Aquahound]

Slower ship, less fuel burned. 11 Night Serenade made 22 kts to first pot of call, then very slow between ports, and fast again returning to home port.

 

Not Under Command (NUC) does not mean cruising slow. NUC is a Nautical Rules of the Road term referring to a ship that is unable to maneuver and therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. So, if MOS designated themselves as such because they were slowly making way, it would be an erroneous claim.

[LMaxwell]

Not Under Command (NUC) does not mean cruising slow. NUC is a Nautical Rules of the Road term referring to a ship that is unable to maneuver and therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel. So, if MOS designated themselves as such because they were slowly making way, it would be an erroneous claim.

 

Enough to maintain steerage, but not make headway; would that fall under NUC?

[chengkp75]

Enough to maintain steerage, but not make headway; would that fall under NUC?

 

No. Because you are still "under command", in that you still have "command" of your propulsion and steering. NUC means you have broken down at the side of the road.

 

Now, to your scenario. If you are "underway" (meaning not moored or anchored) but not making any speed over the ground, you are "underway, but not making way". And "steerage" ( the ability to maintain a heading) at low speed, unless you are faced into a strong current or heavy seas (so your speed over ground is different than your speed through the water) is difficult to maintain at very low speeds even for azipod ships without using thrusters as well. Rudders lose effectiveness below 3-5 knots (speed through water), and at similar speeds if you try to maintain this for long periods, azipods will hunt directionally like crazy and you will have a snake wake not a constant heading.