After reading “Bad Regulations Can Kill: El Faro’s Sinking Is a Tragic Example,” I was astonished at the level of ignorance the author had towards the operation of the merchant marine, and the excessive level of freedom the author took to present such bias and deceptive information to justify their outlandish argument. As a merchant mariner, it was easy to tell when the article came out of left field struggling to prove an unjustifiable opinion. There are nonetheless several focal arguments within the article that, if invalidated, would discredit the entire argument the author tries so desperately to make of repealing the Jones Act of 1920. The first and most persuasive argument presented is the claim that the Jones Act “has made the U.S.-flagged
…show more content…
The captain charted a course around the hurricane knowing what would happen if they tried to sail through it. At the last minute, the hurricane without warning shifted course into the path of the vessel leaving the crew no time to react. Any ship regardless of age put into a hurricane that powerful has about the same odds the El Faro had despite any safety measures, technology, or redundant controls the newer vessel might have onboard. With new technology such as dynamic GPS-guided positioning, and bow and stern thrusters, the author declares that almost any ship could have survived the storm. This allegation is made with what appears to be no knowledge of what those systems are and how they operate. Ships do have a GPS system called the electronic chart display and information system (ECDIS), but in rough weather like the El Faro was experiencing the watch stander would turn it off and hand steer the vessel. Turning ECDIS off is a safety procedure since it cannot detect waves and correct the course to go head on into the waves as the article suggests. As for the bow and stern thrusters, they are only used in the aid for docking and undocking and are nowhere near powerful enough to maneuver the vessel in 40 to 50 foot swells. After analyzing the situation and other maritime accidents, it becomes …show more content…
However, the Jones Act is not the one at fault for this decline, but rather the thing saving the American shipping industry. Ship owners know that oversees, in places such as Chinese shipyards, the ships can be built for a quarter of the cost of American made vessels, due to the lack of labor laws, and cheaper labor. Those are just some of the factors that have driven companies to consider building outside the U.S., but the Jones Act is the only thing influencing ship owners to build in America. If we outsources the maritime industry, we would lose over a half a million jobs along with an annual revenue source of close to 20 billion dollars. With an amount that large, the entire market would crash with it. The article places all the blame on the Jones Act but fails to show other bigger factors at play that are hindering the shipping industry from being the powerhouse it was 20 years
The captain charted a course around the hurricane knowing what would happen if they tried to sail through it. At the last minute, the hurricane without warning shifted course into the path of the vessel leaving the crew no time to react. Any ship regardless of age put into a hurricane that powerful has about the same odds the El Faro had despite any safety measures, technology, or redundant controls the newer vessel might have onboard. With new technology such as dynamic GPS-guided positioning, and bow and stern thrusters, the author declares that almost any ship could have survived the storm. This allegation is made with what appears to be no knowledge of what those systems are and how they operate. Ships do have a GPS system called the electronic chart display and information system (ECDIS), but in rough weather like the El Faro was experiencing the watch stander would turn it off and hand steer the vessel. Turning ECDIS off is a safety procedure since it cannot detect waves and correct the course to go head on into the waves as the article suggests. As for the bow and stern thrusters, they are only used in the aid for docking and undocking and are nowhere near powerful enough to maneuver the vessel in 40 to 50 foot swells. After analyzing the situation and other maritime accidents, it becomes …show more content…
However, the Jones Act is not the one at fault for this decline, but rather the thing saving the American shipping industry. Ship owners know that oversees, in places such as Chinese shipyards, the ships can be built for a quarter of the cost of American made vessels, due to the lack of labor laws, and cheaper labor. Those are just some of the factors that have driven companies to consider building outside the U.S., but the Jones Act is the only thing influencing ship owners to build in America. If we outsources the maritime industry, we would lose over a half a million jobs along with an annual revenue source of close to 20 billion dollars. With an amount that large, the entire market would crash with it. The article places all the blame on the Jones Act but fails to show other bigger factors at play that are hindering the shipping industry from being the powerhouse it was 20 years