Tanker Approach with a Failed Gyro and a Traffic Gap

The immediate priority is to keep the vessel safe while establishing a reliable heading reference and informing the master. I would call the master at once - this is a bridge equipment failure affecting navigation, which is a notifiable event under standing orders even though no alteration has yet been made.

For heading: switch to the magnetic compass, but treat it as suspect. The deviation card is three years old and steel pipe on deck can shift deviation by several degrees, so the card cannot be trusted for precise course keeping. I would compare magnetic heading against radar-derived course made good over a short interval (using successive positions or the radar's own track) to estimate actual deviation, and note the difference. Steering by magnetic compass with an unverified deviation is acceptable as a temporary measure in good visibility with radar, provided I keep a generous margin from other vessels and use radar bearings for collision avoidance rather than compass bearings.

I would not attempt the pilot boarding manoeuvre relying on an unverified compass; the master must decide whether to slow down, hold off, or take the vessel in using radar and visual references. I would also log the failure time, the actions taken, and the fact that the master was called.

Closing at 23 kn from 6 nm gives roughly 15 minutes to CPA - ample time, but not a situation to leave unmanaged while dealing with the gyro. The bulk carrier is on a reciprocal course, so this is a head-on encounter under Rule 14: both vessels should alter to starboard and pass port-to-port. I would make a clear alteration to starboard of at least 10° - which requires calling the master first under standing orders - and confirm the other vessel's aspect and bearing drift on radar.

The fishing cluster complicates this. Six vessels, some with intermittent lights, 4 nm to starboard, means a starboard alteration could take me toward them. Before altering I would plot the fishing vessels on radar/ARPA and check whether a modest starboard alteration keeps me clear of the cluster's southern edge. If it does not, I would consider a larger starboard alteration to pass well clear of the fleet, or a reduction in speed to open the geometry, and inform the master of the reasoning. Small fishing vessels may not be keeping a proper lookout and may not hold course, so I would treat their displayed headings as unreliable and keep a wide berth rather than assume they will give way. I would also sound the appropriate signals and, if risk of confusion exists, use VHF cautiously to agree intentions - while remembering VHF agreement does not override the Rules.

I would give a clear, honest assessment rather than a simple yes or no. My answer would be that it is possible but carries elevated risk, and set out the factors:

• The magnetic compass deviation is unverified, so headings could be off by an unknown amount; in a narrow approach with traffic this matters.
• Radar and visual bearings remain reliable for collision avoidance, so the main risk is track-keeping and position monitoring, not traffic per se.
• The fishing fleet and the reciprocal bulk carrier mean the next 30 minutes demand accurate heading control and predictable alterations.

I would recommend a practical compromise: proceed at reduced speed, keep the master on the bridge, use radar parallel indexing or visual transits for track-keeping rather than relying on compass course, and have a second person monitor the magnetic compass against radar-derived heading. I would also recommend logging the situation and, if the approach is constrained, considering holding off until the gyro is restored or a standby steering reference is confirmed. The decision rests with the master, but my advice should be explicit about the residual risk so the decision is informed.