Two Captains, One Boat--is this really possible?

[Kings Gambit]

So, the latest (October) issue of Sail magazine has a story about an (evidently) unmarried couple cruising from Vancouver to Baja in a 35-ft boat which has "two captains", meaning "sharing the responsibilities of making decisions." Is this a recognized "thing", say, in deciding culpability for outcomes where there is damage to property or loss of life? I was reminded of an incident a few years ago where the fellow, not the "captain", at the helm of a sailboat was charged and prosecuted for manslaughter when the boat was struck by another and a guest aboard the sailboat was killed. Is the crew member at the helm the de facto captain? It's always been my understanding that captain & crew may collaborate on a destination, etc., but it's the Captain who gets them there, etc. Do people (i.e., "two captains") really debate how much rode to put out, or what to do when a boat is dragging toward a rocky lee shore in the middle of the night? "I don't know, hon', what do you think we should do?"

 

[Gunni]

There are owners, and there are captains. The captain is the person in control of the ship, typically at the con. Although I know of one incident where no one was "in control" of the boat but the owner was charged with negligent manslaughter because he made an ignorant, uniformed, negligent decision to anchor in a ship channel for the night and was run down by a tug resulting in the death of his ignorant, uninformed, unfortunate crew member.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Ok, let's say, hypothetically, that you have two folks taking a cruise together and both are equally competent as captains. They have the same amount of experience, sailing the same kind of boats, in the same waters. Sure, no two individuals can have exactly the same competencies, but let's say that they are close enough and have independently captained vessels without depending upon each other.
Wouldn't it be feasible to share captain's decision making responsibilities, depending upon the watch? For instance, if there is a tense situation developing that requires both crew on deck, wouldn't it be logical to defer to the captain who is on watch because he/she would have seen the situation develop and should be more up-to-speed than the captain that has been sleeping for the past few hours. Anchoring decisions ... six-to-one, half dozen to the other ... why would there need to be conflicts? I don't know why it wouldn't work as long as the on-off periods are well defined.

 

[Jackdaw]

For racing, no matter who is owner, charterer, skipper, driver, or navigator, there is ONE PERSON designated in writing as the 'Person In Charge'. THAT person is legally responsible for what happens on the boat.

 

[Roland5048]

IMHO, I think the only time this would become an issue is when the lawyers get involved.

 

[justsomeguy]

Sounds like anarchy to me.

I'm all for it.

 

[CloudDiver]

The boat that was sailing to Baja, with a couple as two Captains; by any chance was the boat named 'Pandora's Box'?

 

[rgranger]

I read that article as well and frankly thought the entire piece seemed contrived. It just didn't pass the sniff test.

 

[Benny17441]

Yes there can be two Captains in a boat but only one in Command at any given time. I sail with a buddy of mine and the unwritten rule between us is that the person at the helm is the Captain in command irrespective of in whose boat we might be; I follow his commands and he follows mine and it works well. If there is decision that the boat owner's would like to make then he would request the helm and the other would surrender. As far as liability at sea it is the person in command who would be responsible.

 

[BudGates]

Since we're talking about a cruising boat, I don't see any reason the two can't share responsibilities as long as it's decided ahead of time who will be in charge when split decisions are needed. It's usually best if the person at the helm is in charge but it doesn't have to be.

 

[Benny17441]

You want another what if question? A USCG licensed 100 ton Master Captain comes along in a coastal passage on a sailboat captained by the owner which is not licensed. The boat encounters foul weather but the owner remains in command and has to make a critical decision on weather to run for shelter or stay and ride it out. The licensed captain indicates he has to put on a life jacket as he could place his license in jeopardy if it was found out latter that he did not. If something bad happened who would bear the most responsibility?




I believe the owner who was in command. Nothing happened, we stayed and rode it out and our friend, a river boat Captain, deferred to us as we had more experience in sailboats and open water sailing. You could tell our friend was alert enough to consider the implications to his license.

 

[Kings Gambit]

The only time I've done the alternative captain option was on one charter where we were equally sharing the "work" with another couple. On one day, our friends would run the boat; on the next day we would, and so forth. Essentially, each couple took turns as passengers. Worked well b/c the other couple were good sailors, and great cooks! But on my own boat, I'm always the captain regardless of who happens to be helming it, and whether or not I'm actually on watch. If the LAW does not see it that way and there's a problem, then I suppose it's up to the lawyers to sort it out in the end.

 

[Kings Gambit]

You want another what if question? A USCG licensed 100 ton Master Captain comes along in a coastal passage on a sailboat captained by the owner which is not licensed. The boat encounters foul weather but the owner remains in command and has to make a critical decision on weather to run for shelter or stay and ride it out. The licensed captain indicates he has to put on a life jacket as he could place his license in jeopardy if it was found out latter that he did not. If something bad happened who would bear the most responsibility?

I believe the owner who was in command. Nothing happened, we stayed and rode it out and our friend, a river boat Captain, deferred to us as we had more experience in sailboats and open water sailing. You could tell our friend was alert enough to consider the implications to his license.

I don't think it would matter to me if the Secretary of the Navy was with me on my boat, as long as I'm a civilian. If the situation called for us to stay out, then that's what we'd have to do.

 

[jeepbluetj]

I'm sure with some couples it would work fine.

With some it would be a total disaster.

CRM really isn't just for pilots.

 

[jleblanc31]

I tell you that two captain thing has been going on in since the beginning of time . She is the captain till things go haywire than all of a sudden Im labeled Captain.

 

[Warren Milberg]

I can see how co-captains might work when things are going well, or mostly well. But when conditions turn nasty, the wind and surf are up, there can only be one person in charge. He, or she, might consult with the others on board, but only THE captain is responsible for the ship and crew.

 

[capta]

Absolutely not, IMO.
One person, if capable, must keep all the factors in mind and make the ultimate decision based on those factors. And take the responsibility for them.
I allow input on any vessel I operate from any knowledgeable person, but after taking them into consideration, the final decision is mine. I would be very uncomfortable finding out that my instructions were discarded by someone else on another watch, no matter how capable, no matter the reason, without my knowledge. Wake me up, let's talk!
As a professional I have often been in the situation where an owner wishes to do something with his vessel that I do not consider prudent seamanship. My attitude is the I was hired because I was the best person for the job the owner could find and therefore I am the person to make the final decision.
There is no legal excuse in a maritime court that relieves the captain of responsibility, just because the owner demands something that ends up before that court.
All that said, this crazy new "bridge management team" idea still leaves the master of the vessel responsible even after the team overrules him/her, I believe. If I am the responsible party, then the final decision is mine, period.

 

[Roland5048]

If I am the responsible party, then the final decision is mine, period.

Absolutely! If I, as the captain, and there can only be one, is the one to take the fall, it's going to be because of my decision and not someone else's. On my boat, I have total responsibility and on a boat where I have been hired to captain, I, also, have total responsibility. I accept that. On someone else's boat, I will follow their commands as long as I feel it is safe. If not, then we have a mutiny.

 

[capta]

On someone else's boat, I will follow their commands as long as I feel it is safe. If not, then we have a mutiny.

It's always best to establish this before accepting a captain's position, not when the sh*t hits the fan. Isn't mutiny still a hanging offense? lol

 

[Spindrift NH]

Is it possible that the duel captainship(in the instance of the article) is for reasons other than decision making? Ie, hospitalization of one in a foreign port, the other could continue to make legal decisions regarding the boat?
Just a thought.