CHANGE MY LOCATION
Rules floated for electronics used in navigation
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Heavy fog restrictions, universal electronic shipping aids and requiring pilots to carry laptops have become the focus procedures and policies for Bay Area ship pilots in the wake of the Cosco Busan incident.
The preliminary investigation by the San Francisco Bar Pilots Association highlighted the potential need for pilots to carry laptops or enhanced PDAs with electronic charts on board as well as possible restrictions in ship movement in specific areas of the Bay during heavy fog.
On Nov. 7, there was dense fog, and questions have been raised about the symbology used on the Cosco Busan’s electronic charting system — used after the ship’s two radars allegedly malfunctioned.
Ship operators may have steered toward the tower when they thought they were steering toward safe passage underneath the Bay Bridge, according to federal investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board.
In addition, the government, the International Maritime Organization and the shipping industry are also exploring how to bring some order to the jumble of electronic navigation aids proliferating on the seas.
While the cause of the accident is still under investigation, the pilot in that episode told authorities there was confusion between him and the ship’s captain over symbols on an electronic charting system while the vessel made its way through a fog bank.
The NTSB and the Coast Guard are looking into the possibility of miscommunication, perhaps even a language barrier, in the incident.
Investigators with the NTSB hope to have information from the ship’s voyage data recorder — akin to a airplane’s black box — transcribed by week’s end, but that information is not likely to be released right away, officials said.
AP contributed to this report
Comments from Examiner Readers
6:17 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007 re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"
Report as inappropriate
6:12 AM MST on Sat., Dec. 29, 2007
re: "Tests show Bay water is clean"
Report as inappropriate
11:56 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007
re: "Cosco Busan owners pay $80M to leave"
Report as inappropriate
1:23 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007
re: "Group turns oil into food for ’shrooms"
Report as inappropriate
10:30 AM MST on Tue., Dec. 11, 2007
re: "Bay spill lawsuits pour in"
Report as inappropriate
1:50 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007
re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"
Report as inappropriate
12:40 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007
re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"
Report as inappropriate
12:00 PM MST on Tue., Dec. 4, 2007
re: "Supervisor slams response to oil spill"
Report as inappropriate
9:34 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007
re: "Waters now safe, fishing to resume"
Report as inappropriate
9:32 AM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007
re: "Bay Bridge bumper bits lost"
Report as inappropriate
11:34 AM MST on Mon., Nov. 26, 2007
re: "Birds death toll continues climb following oil spill"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
Examiner Reader said: The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above. 7 agree | 6 disagree Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree How does one disagree with a statement of provable fact?
150 agree | 140 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"Additionally, state officials said that tests conducted by a California Department of Fish and Game biologist last week that found what seemed to be oil found in local herring fisheries were “inclusive,” according to Lt. Rob Roberts of the Department of Fish and Game’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response." Perhaps "inconclusive" was intended
123 agree | 101 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The ship's destination was QINQDAO (Tsingtao), China, not Korea as reported above.
158 agree | 163 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The Coast Guard did not turn away the Fire Department boat that came to investigate. That is false. The Coast Guard did, inform them of the 100 yard safey zoen around the Cosco Busan after the incident occurred. The statement implies that the Coast Guard is covering up this incident, which is ridiculous.
193 agree | 147 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Hey, SFoff, I live in SF and yes my county did fail miserably in their response. I just wonder if Dennis Herrera is really going to believe that he will get 25K for each day of the spill from Captain Cota.
137 agree | 141 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
SFoff said:
Dear Examiner reader (first grade level, apparently)12:40pm. There was no mention of S.F. being the only county affected by the spill. The article was from a San Francisco Newspaper, regarding San Francisco's response to the oil spill. Not very obscure. It's all clear in context. Nobody was wondering why SF. "was not kept in the loop". He is questioning why S.F. did not enter the loop of it's own accord, considering how much "training and partnership" had been established. Are we supposed to be happy with our particular cities response because your county also failed miserably to do anything in time to prevent this problem? And BTW, S.F. is not the center of the Universe, just the Solar System, but thanks for the exaggeration!
157 agree | 167 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
... and San Francisco was the only city, the only county affected by this spill. It seems that SF is to self-centered in this incident, wondering why it was not kept in teh loop. It seems that many other cities and counties were affected by this incident. way to go SF. Show you true colors. If ross Mirkirami wants to be mayor in 2012 then he should just come out and proclaim that San Francisco is in fact, the center of the universe. Then he will get my vote
160 agree | 146 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Seems strange that we would be knocking ourselves up for something we had little control over and had misleading info about. One would think you can rely on the Coast Guard to provide accurate info, since this IS their jurisdiction, but to get the info wrong hours later and even when others are pointing out that it's a LARGE spill (and to ignore this emergency) seems unconscionable. This, to me, should be about the ship crashing into the bridge tower and the bungled response of the Coast Guard, their effect on the greater Bay Area and effective preventive measures.
159 agree | 143 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Its my understanding two-thirds of the 58,000 gallons of oil is unaccounted for and will remain so. The water quality of San Francisco Bay was questionable before this event. Some sort of blanket statement regarding the "safeness" of the bay water seems a bit dubious to me.
318 agree | 168 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Having said that black made it harder to find the missing pieces of plastic lumber, they're going to use black again for the replacement?!! Foolish.
391 agree | 137 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Very self indulgent of you to equate an oil spill dead birds and your situation. Get over it already.
245 agree | 185 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree