Missing Ship El Faro.

Re: El Faro EPIRBS
Seems strange hat they never activated. Regardless of their positon they have to be fitted with hydrostatic release device and would have thought that the ship would not have passed US Coastguard and Classification society surveys if they had been fitted in such a place as to prevent them from being float free. SOLAS and SMS require inspection and testing of these n a monthly basis and if the crew were in doubt as to their float free capability it was there duty t re-site them in order for them to work correctly and amend the ships safety equipment plan accordingly. Not wanting to cause dissent but it is things like this that Safety Committee meetings, run correctly, bring to light. You cannot rely on shore wallahs getting it right and the re-siting of vital safety equipment that only requires a few minutes work is surely down to ships staff making their ship safer.
rgds
JA

Dont know how deep it is where she sank and whether or not anyone will try to find the wreck. If they do, it will be interesting to see if the EPIRBS are still in position or trapped somewhere.

This report says she sank in 15,000 feet of water. she was 41 years old and some ex Crew Members reckon she was too old and a Rust Bucket.......................
.
The investigation of the sinking is just beginning, but speculation about the causes includes the cargo ship's age and condition.



By Eric Russell Staff Writer

erussell@pressherald.com | @PPHEricRussell | 207-791-6344


Share

facebook

tweet

email

print

print 8 Comments




Although the investigation into the sinking of the El Faro has just begun, former crew members are adding to speculation that the ship’s age and condition put the vessel at risk as it steamed into Hurricane Joaquin near the Bahamas last week.

Three former crew members of the 41-year-old cargo ship said it had structural problems, including widespread rust and some leaks, and may not have been equipped to handle a major storm, according to a report by CNN.

The 790-foot cargo ship El Faro vanished off the Bahamas during Hurricane Joaquin. Some former crew members say it had structural problems, including widespread rust and some leaks. Photo by Capt. William Hoey/MarineTraffic.com
The 790-foot cargo ship El Faro vanished off the Bahamas during Hurricane Joaquin. Some former crew members say it had structural problems, including widespread rust and some leaks. Photo by Capt. William Hoey/MarineTraffic.com


Related Headlines
›Navy team has narrow window for finding El Faro’s data recorder on ocean floor
›Vigil in Windham honors 33 ‘brave souls,’ including El Faro’s captain
›Fifth El Faro crew member was Maine Maritime Academy graduate
›El Faro’s unconventional design added to risk of operating in rough seas
→

The ship is believed to have sunk last Thursday after it lost power and was left adrift in the teeth of the hurricane. All 33 crew members, including five with ties to Maine, are presumed dead. It’s the biggest shipping tragedy involving a U.S. registered vessel in more than three decades.

TOTE Maritime, the company that owns the El Faro, has disputed claims that the ship was not seaworthy, saying it was well-maintained and fully inspected. According to the U.S. Coast Guard, the ship was last inspected in March and no deficiencies were found.

INSPECTIONS CALLED STRINGENT

Several experts cast doubt on the former crew members’ contention, saying ship inspections are stringent and that it’s unlikely the El Faro would have passed if it had structural deficiencies.

Joseph Murphy, a professor at Massachusetts Maritime Academy and a captain with four decades of experience, understands the desire of people to seek answers or even assign blame, but he doesn’t think it’s helpful.

“We just don’t know what information was available to the captain and crew,” he said this week.

Laurence Wade, a merchant captain who retired in 2011 after 50 years at sea, including 15 as captain of the Maine Maritime Academy’s training ship, discounted reports that the 790-foot El Faro was in poor condition.

He said that ships are inspected yearly by the Coast Guard and the American Bureau of Shipping and also are subject to more rigorous ABS inspections every five years or when a ship goes to a shipyard for repairs. Ships also are subject to random inspections by the Coast Guard, he said, adding that it wouldn’t surprise him if the El Faro was given unscheduled checks given its age.

He said the inspectors crawl all over a ship, checking the thickness of the hull, looking for signs of rust and going over the ship’s structure. They also look at life-safety systems, he said, including the lifeboats and the electronic systems designed to send out signals if the ship sinks or capsizes.

Typically, two teams of two to three Coast Guard officials will spend a day or two on the ship for the annual inspections, Wade said.

“It’s a constant thing over the lifetime of a ship,” he said.

Still, the reports from ex-crew members of the ship, which was built in 1974 and was soon to be replaced on its Caribbean route by a new vessel, could well be part of the National Transportation Safety Board probe that is likely to take a year to complete.

Now that the NTSB investigation is underway, TOTE signed an agreement that it would not talk about any specifics related to the El Faro or its sinking.

The Coast Guard and ABS also have been instructed to no longer discuss the tragedy.

TOTE did announce Friday that it has set up a relief fund for the families of the 33 crew members, a move it says was in response to “hundreds of employees, mariners, customers and individuals from around the country” who have asked where they can donate money. The fund will be managed by the Seaman’s Church Institute, the largest mariners’ service agency in North America.

TOTE didn’t respond to calls or emails Friday.

The crew included five Maine Maritime Academy graduates: Michael Davidson, 53, of Windham, the ship’s captain; Danielle Randolph, 34, of Rockland; Michael Holland, 25, of Wilton, and Dylan Meklin, 23, of Rockland, who graduated in May, and Mitchell Kuflik, 26, of Brooklyn, New York.

As the NTSB investigation develops, a critical question will be whether or not Navy searchers find the El Faro’s data recorder before its battery runs out. That device stores information about the ship’s speed, position and communication. Once a recorder comes into contact with water, it automatically stores 12 hours of audio from the ship’s bridge and emits emergency pings for up to 30 days.

Searchers will drag listening devices in the area where the ship is believed to have sunk in 15,000 feet of water – northeast of Crooked Island in The Bahamas – to listen for those pings.

‘IT WAS A RUST BUCKET’

Former El Faro crew members, though, have raised questions about whether the ship should even have been in that position.

Attempts to reach them on Friday were unsuccessful, but Chris Cash, who last sailed on the El Faro in January, told CNN that the ship should have been scrapped.

“(It) needed a death certificate. It was a rust bucket,” he said. “You don’t take a ship like that … that ship wasn’t supposed to be on the water.”

Cash said he thought the company maintained the ship just enough to squeeze a few more trips out of it before replacement.

Kurt Bruer, who spent six months on the cargo ship as a quartermaster, told CNN that leaks were common and the vessel’s drainage system “did not work well.”

CNN reported that Bruer had been terminated by the El Faro’s captain for reasons he would not discuss.

Attempts to contact family members of Mainers aboard the El Faro when it sank were unsuccessful Friday night.

NTSB investigators have talked to crew members of the El Faro’s sister ship, the El Yunque, and inspected the vessel Friday in Jacksonville.

“El Yunque is nearly identical to El Faro. We will thoroughly document the vessel, its systems and its equipment, and that includes documenting the exact location of the VDR (voyage data recorder) on these vessels,” NTSB Vice Chair Bella Dinh-Zarr said at a news conference on Thursday.

Both the El Faro and the El Yunque, which was built in 1976, were not conventional container ships but “roll-on/roll-off” cargo vessels designed to carry trucks and other vehicles. Roll-on/roll-off ships have large external doors that can be close to the waterline and open vehicle decks with few internal compartments. During extreme weather, such as the 30- to 40-foot waves the El Faro encountered during Hurricane Joaquin, seawater could have poured through any improperly secured or damaged loading door.

Such ships require large open spaces below deck for carrying vehicles, and when water gets inside the hangar-like spaces it can slosh around the entire deck, making the ship unstable. This sloshing is known as the “free surface effect,” and a surprisingly small amount of water can cause a ship to capsize, Rick Spilman, who has worked as a naval architect for 30 years and writes a blog about ships, said this week.

CAPTAIN CALLED SAFETY OFFICER

TOTE officials have said that Davidson, the El Faro’s captain, had a sound plan before the ship left and they trusted him completely. Many others have said Davidson was an extremely capable sailor, and family members of crew also have defended him.

NTSB investigators said they have interviewed a shore-based safety officer who took a voicemail from Davidson at 7 a.m. on Oct. 1, not long before the El Faro’s final communication. Davidson called back and spoke to the officer, who described the captain as calm.

Maritime experts in Maine and elsewhere have said that cargo ships often sail in bad weather, even in hurricanes. Had the El Faro not lost power and propulsion, the outcome likely would have been different.

“Ships like this make those trips all the time where you have to route around a storm,” said Murphy, the Massachusetts Maritime professor. “I’m sure that’s what they were trying to do when the engine failed.”

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree of Maine spoke about the tragedy on the House floor on Capitol Hill this week before calling for a moment of silence.

“In Maine we have a strong connection to those who make their living on the water and we know the risks they take every time they go to sea,” Pingree said. “But in no way does that make a tragedy like this any less painful. It is difficult for me to know what the families of the crew are going through, and have been going through – but they are in my thoughts and the thoughts of everyone in our state.”

Deb Roberts, the mother of crew member Michael Holland of Wilton, wrote on Facebook on Friday that the U.S. Coast Guard did all it could despite protests from some that the search ended too soon.

“Mother Nature is a son of a bitch sometimes,” she said. “However, I will never give up hope for a miracle that Mike is on an island somewhere drinking coconut milk waiting for a ride home.”

I found a member of the Coast Guard by name and e.mail address I sent him an e.mail and received a reply,quite interesting I don't know how to transfer so I will get my grandson on the case later and see what we can do.
Regards.
Jim.B.

Just being guided by my grandson so here we go I hope.
Regards.
Jim.B.

Dear Scott,I am ex Merchant Navy and I belong to a website where all our members are ex Merchant Navy men.We have been following the search by yourselves of the ship Al Faro and we were all hoping and praying that the ship and her crew would be found safe and well.This was not to be but what has disturbed our members is the fact the coast guard spotted a person in a survival suit you put down a swimmer and the person was found tobe dead.Your swimmer was then taken back aboard and the body left in the ocean.Our members find this hard to come to terms with,why was the body not recovered and at least one family would've had closure.Is it Coast Guard policy not to recover the dead.???I wrote to another of your departments on the same subject last week but did not get a reply.so thanking you in anticipation.

Yours sincerely.
Good morning Mr. Brady,

Thank you for your email sir. I can understand your concern. I am in Portsmouth Va, so I don't have the specifics of the search, so I will have to defer to the 7th Coast Guard District Public Affairs Office at 305-415-6683 for a response.

In general terms, the Coast Guard's priority is to always search for survivors in any search. In this case, I think there were reports of sightings of another possible survivor in the water. Once it was determined that this individual was deceased, the crew had to move on and investigate the other report. I think they marked the location of the deceased crew member, but could not relocate it after they investigated the other contact, which ended up being debris. Their intention was to come back and recover the body, but the priority was to find survivors if that makes sense. I think the District Seven office will be able to get you a better answer, since they were specifically on the case.

Please accept our deepest condolences during this time of loss for the entire merchant marine community.

Very Respectfully,
LT Scott McBride

well done jim ....respects cappy

Good one Jim,
at least you got a reply,
But that part of the ocean is also home to the great white shark and they are always on the look out for a feed, sorry to put it so crudely. so I think they are a little ignorant of the facts of the sea.
Leave a body floating it will drift northwards with the Gulf Stream currents. and will not be in that position.
Again if they have time to pick up the diver it only takes seconds to pick up the body.
I am afraid I still think they were negligent.
Thanks again for your efforts
Cheers
Brian.

Regarding the posts re recovering of bodies. I was asked the same question at a private interview by the disasterous events at a production platform in the North Sea. Every incident regarding such is different. On answering questions on were there other bodies visible I answered yes, on receiving the statement to sign I crossed out and inserted showed no sign of life. The circumstances being that some of these bodies were floating face down that is the ones that had faces, some did not even have heads. If circumstances had been different and had the time would probably have attempted to recover the bodily parts, however live persons are more important to fish out of the sea. Another time when working for the MOD on the recovery of the crew of a Naval helicopter in the English channel we brought the helicopter to the surface with the ships crane, which I was driving so had a ringside seat so to speak, one of the heli crews arms was flapping around outside the torn off door of the crumpled helicopter. The body then slid out and sank, the divers who were in the water around trying to recover bodies just let it go on sinking, they probably had their reasons as well. The story about the body in the suit will probably turn out quite different if the truth is ever printed by the source who put this out, visual sight as well as documentary as am hopeful there may have been other reasons for doing so, that the public dont know. However I still wonder about the co-pilot from the naval heli. The Navy does not broadcast its casualties during naval exercises, and have attended more than one, just as well as the press would make a meal of it. If we were working in the Portsmouth area it was standard procedure that all wreckage and bodies were landed at night, when all little goody reporters should be tucked up in bed. The recent one in a survival suit should also have been recoverable at a later date if I assume his suit was fitted correctly. Cheers JS. PS Wrote this before sighting Jims post, and have just seen, so there is one reason given why the body was left behind, good on yer Jim. If you dont ask you wont find out. Go to the source and not the scandal sheets. Cheers John S

Interesting article from gcaptain regarding the El Faro. There is also a map showing the actual route taken by the El Faro showing it heading directly towards the hurricane and that by the time they encountered it, there route westward to safety had been cut off by the Bahamas islands. On a previous occasion when there was a hurricane in the vicinity the captain had taken an alternative route closer to the Florida coast giving him shelter from the hurricane. There are reports circulating (strongly denied) that the ship was a rust bucket suffering from leaks in the hull.
It seems strange that neither the EPIRB nor the VDR (voyage data recorder), both of which are supposed to be float free in any condition, did not activate.
We Won't Learn Anything: What Sank El Faro and What Didn't - gCaptain
rgds
JA

There were it seems about the same amount of shipping losses due to TRS"s ( Tropical Revolving Storms) before the advent of satellite positioning as after. The old method of deducting the dangerous quadrant and to keep clear of was nearly always adhered to. For anyone who has experienced such will know the violence and unpredictability of running seas as regards their direction as extremely dangerous. With the old weather reporting system it was up to the master to use his own knowledge and take his own advice to avoid. I find it hard to believe that a shipowner would carry such weight that the master would obey his every whim, especially when it comes to shiphandling. As usual the answer goes with the people there and as they are all dead so does the answers.JS