200224 Passage Planning

Passage Planning
Report No. 200224

As a marine consultant and surveyor I visit merchant ships from time to time and as a former shipmaster I take an interest in the way in which shipping is conducted nowadays.

Within the last year or two I have had the opportunity to study the passage plans prepared aboard ocean going ships with Japanese, Singapore, Greek and Danish managers. Whilst the layouts of the passage plans have been different, they have all provided much the same information. Courses, waypoints, charts and navigational publications are listed, from pilot to pilot. Details of tides and currents may be given.

What has concerned me is that the remarks columns in the passage plans, when provided, have always been left blank despite the fact that, on at least two of those ships, important information was known to the ship. One shipmaster told me that, on approaching a Scandinavian port, the pilot boat had urged him to "Come closer" and he had replied "No, I don't have the chart, you come out to me", but, as I saw, the passage plan made no reference to that potential problem. The passage plan for another ship, bound for St Petersburg in the depths of winter, made no reference to the certainty of meeting ice and no reference to the obtaining of ice reports despite the fact that, as the master told me, the superintendent had reminded him in the previous port that he would be meeting ice.

In both cases the ship's master was aware of the potential problem but had failed to recognise the importance of recording it in the passage plan. If either of their ships had been damaged, they would have had difficulty in persuading the Authorities that they and their officers had been fully prepared for possible emergencies.

An additional matter for consideration is that none of the four vessels had passage plans for pilotage waters, despite the fact that the ICS Bridge Procedures Guide specifies that "The passage plan should cover ocean, coastal and pilotage waters".