This particular topic has excersised my mind for some time and I would like to hear other members opinions on the matter. I think it can be taken as read that U.M.S. was introduced primarily as a way to economise, by reducing the number of engineering staff required, and the whole concept was facillitated by the evolution of more sophisticated electronic monitoring and control systems than were available previously.
While I agree that we cannot stand still and ignore the advantages of modern electronic systems and computers I cannot help wonder how thoroughly the powers that be considered the full implications of the introduction of U.M.S.There is no doubt that many pages of varying opinion could be written on the subject so I have no intention of exploring all the pro's and cons at this juncture. Consider this one aspect of the whole debate if you will.An extra 3rd Eng that would facillitate the operation of a manned engine room would in today's terms (including his relief ), probably cost a shipowner in the region of£80K (open to correction on the figure).It is also a singular pre-occupation of the modern shipowner to keep dry docking costs, and the use of outside contractors while in service to a minimum.
Then consider how much work such as preventitive maintainance , and routine overhaul of equipment that can be achieved by a conscientous Eng
while on watch which drastically reduces the "dry dock list". How many of us have left a drydock only to find various pipes, pumps, etc leaking water, and various other machinery malfunctioning to various degrees - all because the dockyard personnel no matter how competent, are not, and cannot be expected to be, as intricately familiar with the ships equipment as its own engineers.
I would imagine the extra £80K in additional salaries would pale into significance when it is weighed against the aforementioned advantages,
would almost certainly save the shipowner money, and would most definitely make the E.R. a more safer place for all crew.
As they say in more exhalted circles - "I now throw the subject open to the floor"
Regards,
Paulm.
While I agree that we cannot stand still and ignore the advantages of modern electronic systems and computers I cannot help wonder how thoroughly the powers that be considered the full implications of the introduction of U.M.S.There is no doubt that many pages of varying opinion could be written on the subject so I have no intention of exploring all the pro's and cons at this juncture. Consider this one aspect of the whole debate if you will.An extra 3rd Eng that would facillitate the operation of a manned engine room would in today's terms (including his relief ), probably cost a shipowner in the region of£80K (open to correction on the figure).It is also a singular pre-occupation of the modern shipowner to keep dry docking costs, and the use of outside contractors while in service to a minimum.
Then consider how much work such as preventitive maintainance , and routine overhaul of equipment that can be achieved by a conscientous Eng
while on watch which drastically reduces the "dry dock list". How many of us have left a drydock only to find various pipes, pumps, etc leaking water, and various other machinery malfunctioning to various degrees - all because the dockyard personnel no matter how competent, are not, and cannot be expected to be, as intricately familiar with the ships equipment as its own engineers.
I would imagine the extra £80K in additional salaries would pale into significance when it is weighed against the aforementioned advantages,
would almost certainly save the shipowner money, and would most definitely make the E.R. a more safer place for all crew.
As they say in more exhalted circles - "I now throw the subject open to the floor"
Regards,
Paulm.