A1 It is generally recognized that the rapid growth in the size of vessels and the increase in the carriage of dangerous cargoes have presented Governments and harbour Authorities with problems of safeguarding environment.
A2 With reference to congestion of navigation in Coastal areas, the concern of Governments of nations flanking the North Sea, Channel and Baltic, has led to a setting up of a special committee, which has produced a code of conduct for Deep Sea Pilotage in these areas. Some difficulty has been encountered in ratifying the document. Recent VLCC disasters have reminded world public opinion of the urgency of action to minimise such incidents.
A3 Behind the coastal belt lies the Ports, aware of the enormous costs involved with a major accident because of the ship limited liability.
A4 EMPA’s national organisations believe that better co-ordination between the services and representatives of organisations rendering services within the ports, could lead to improve traffic flow and a reduction in the number of accidents.
B1 Papers issued from The Hague and Liverpool Symposium clearly indicate that all forms of sophisticated Vessel Traffic System are largely dependent on capacity for ships to maintain high standards of equipment, manning and communication.
B2 The experience of EMPA pilots annually serving about 2 million vessels, clearly indicates that such high standards are far from being reached and too often pilots find that faulty equipment or insufficient manning cause problems for safe transits to and from the ports.
B3 Experience has shown that the Authorities cannot be aware of the real state of foreign vessels visiting their ports until after an accident has occurred. Considering that the pilot is the first man to board the ship and without substituting himself for the competent Authority, it is recognized that the responsibility for drawing Authorities attention lies frequently in hands of the pilot.
B4 In more general terms, a better control of safety for all ships visiting European ports must be established that requires a better co-ordination between the services involved, and probably an exchange of information between European ports.
C. The considerations expounded in paragraph B explain the pilot’s reluctance as regard systems which do not take into account the real conditions of vessels and the consequent difficulties.
C1 Difficulties which arise when the Vessel Traffic System is compared to the air traffic control, for many technical and practical reasons explained in Liverpool Symposium.
C2 Difficulties resulting from language barrier.
C3 Legal difficulties as regards the respective liabilities of Masters/Pilots/Ship’s controllers.
D Such difficulties should hinder the installation, when necessary, of information centres provided with the most up-to-date technical devices.
D1 The experience already gained in certain harbours (Elbe/Weser/Gironde/ etc...) and recently extended to other ports, shows that the participation of pilots in the operation of shore based radars is greatly beneficial to the port community.
D2 Traffic co-ordination should take place at the early stage to indicate the sequence of movements that the ship has to carry out, taking account of harbour constraints (ships alongside/locks/tide/tug boats/etc...).
D3 Decision for performing such movements must remain with the ship. In case of emergency, a new plan will be provided and applied as aforesaid.
D4 When all the attempts to board a pilot have proved to be unsuccessful, selected vessels can be given Remote Navigational aid by a pilot. Such substitute must be submitted to any restriction (size of ships/channel section/density of traffic/etc...) covered by regulations and not used as a substitute for a normal pilotage service.
E The present recommendation, considered by EMPA as a positive and realistic contribution to improve safety, will be forwarded to Governments and Harbour Authorities, to the Maritime Institutes and transmitted to the IMPA for approval and subsequently submitted to IMCO.
Technical Committee, June 1978