200241 Pilotage – Necessity or Convenience?

Pilotage – Necessity or Convenience?
Report No. 200241

I have been working as Master on Cape-size bulk carriers for the past five years after being upgraded from Panamax size bulkers but have had no previous experience of berthing any of these vessels on my own.

My last ship, a 170,000-ton bulk carrier, was chartered and further sub-chartered to a well-known Japanese company. Before arriving at a discharge port in the Inland Sea of Japan, there was a telex from the agent asking me if I required a pilot for the Inland Sea passage for berthing and un-berthing. He stated that none of the three areas of pilotage was compulsory. A copy of his telex was addressed to sub-charterers who promptly informed me that they would not pay for any pilotage that was not compulsory and if pilot service were used, it would be on Owner's account as per charter-party.

Taking an Inland Sea pilot was not necessary but without hesitation I decided to take a pilot for berthing. My Owners managed to convince the head charterers to pay for pilotage used for berthing, as it would be difficult for me to communicate with tugs and linesmen. An accident due to a minor communication error could damage the pier and discharging equipment, causing enormous losses.

Finally, when my vessel arrived at the port, two pilots boarded and they used four tugs and two mooring boats for berthing. When I asked them if one was a trainee pilot, I was told that two senior pilots were required for such a large ship as per local regulations. However, the master could berth his vessel on his own without a pilot! Berthing a loaded cape size vessel is a precision job to be undertaken by pilots with local knowledge. I couldn't understand the logic behind this regulation. On sailing, I decided to un-berth without a pilot so as to avoid more haggling between Owners and Charterers as to who would pay for it.