Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Terry, you'll probably have to wait two years before any liability is established, as that's the usual length of an inquiry, as all parties concerned will immediately deny liability, there are many parties involved, pilots, owners, harbour authorities, tug owners, crane operators, even if the harbour authority owns the tugs, they will probably be under a management company, whom the harbour authority may sue under a separate action, the combinations are numerous.
She would appear to be too far off the quay for a spring to be out, and doubt it would have made one iota of difference with the law of physics of a 250,000 tonne mass moving at some speed. If we're around in 2 years we may get the answer :deadhorse:
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Ivan, You never got to see how far i could throw a heaving line mate,
Are we all in agreement she was tying up and not letting go. Terry :LolLolLolLol:
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
#12... with smaller vessels , twin screw and a bowthruster is usual to Berth them sideways , by splitting sticks and using your rudders. And using the bow thruster to get in confined spaces , and you get used to a. Ship and the feel of having the right revs. at each end. People on these ships those who haven’t been on large vessels seem to think heaving lines are a thing of the past. Is quite common for them to stand there waiting for the ship to be positioned before passing the eye to someone ashore. Used to drive me mad . Heaving lines are still a thing of the present and. can be needed at a seconds notice. A line ashore is the first essential In any berthing and on smaller ships with a knowledgeable Crew, it is team affair as everyone knows what the aim is. Not the usual shouting through electric loudhailers and putting on a show for any spectators. People should know without being shouted at, what to do. you don’t have the crew numbers in any case today to put on a free show. I’ll bet there wasn’t much shouting on the ship in question only on the bridge amongst themselves it does wonders to see people in their true colours when seeking to come out of the situation , if not smelling of roses , then to cover their own backs. JS.
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Saw that on U Tube a couple of weeks ago.
In the early part it does appear there is a line to the tug, but then it is not!
Going a bit fast by the looks of the wash from the stern, but maybe the crane is too close, is the ship too big for the quay?
Or is it a simple case of the helmsman needing to go, very quickly one might add, to Specsavers!!!!!!!!
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Well, Well, Lads. A container ship from the Japanese shipping company ONE m
06 April 2020 - 18:13 - Update: 10 April 2020 - 18:49
A container ship from the Japanese shipping company ONE has collided with a crane in the port of Busan, South Korea. The terminal crane immediately collapsed and partly ended up on the ship. The incident happened Monday afternoon local time.
The container ship "Milano Bridge", which has a capacity of 13,900, sails under Panamanian flag and was built in 2018. As shown in the video , the ship was not loaded.
One injured
According to the maritime incident website Maritime Bulletin, it first sailed against another ship, the 'Seaspan Ganges'. Immediately afterwards, the 'Milano Bridge' came into heavy contact with three cranes of container terminal Busan New Port. One of the three cranes collapsed. As far as is known, one incident was injured in the incident.
ONE's vessel suffered considerable damage, as part of the crane ended up on the deck. Reportedly, the Seaspan ship was hardly damaged, if at all, and was able to continue its journey.
14:37: Commenced STBD turn, STBD 20 Helm, Dead Slow Ahead, Speed: 9.3Kts
14:39: Stopped engine, Speed: 7.6 Kts
14:40: Pilot appeared panicked, Speed 7.6 Kts, Dead slow ahead STBD 20 helm.
14:42: Pilot realizes heavy drift to port, panicked, full ahead engine, hard Stbd helm, concerned to avoid three (3) moored vessels. AFT Tug continuously pulling.
14:44: Cleared 1st moored vessel, drifting towards 2nd moored vessel, Navigation full ahead, STBD 20 helm, drifting further towards berth. FWD tug’s action not known as pilot speaking in local language. Master used BT.
14:47: Cleared 2nd moored vessel, random orders on ME and rudder, stern drifting towards port side, Speed 6 kts. 14:47: Cleared lesser beamed 3rd moored vessel.
14:49: Made hard contact with Gantry no.85 , fully collapsed on stern of ONE vessel. ME Nav full ahead, speed. 5.2 kts. FWD tug not pulling.
14:50: Emergency full stern to prevent contact with moored vessel ahead.
14:52: Hard contact with Gantry crane no. 81 by bridge wing, which was working on the moored container vessel ahead followed by slight contact with the moored vessel around Bay 02 & 06. Terry.
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Tony, Tried to P.M. You, you got to clear your inbox out mate Terry. :thumbsup:
Tony Taylor has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space.
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red lead ted
tony, tried to p.m. You, you got to clear your inbox out mate terry. :thumbsup:
Tony taylor has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space.
done it
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Gusting 4-14 knots might have some bearing?
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Malcolm Lawrence
Gusting 4-14 knots might have some bearing?
It sounds like a comedy of errors Malcolm, If the pilot starts panicking then everyone else does, The buck my well stop with him he was in command at the time Terry. :th_thth5952deef:
Re: Bang Crash (A wee while back)
Liability on a ship used to start and end with the master Ted. The only place years ago was when In the Panama Canal was run by the Americans where the master signed over responsibility of command of the vessel to the pilot for the transit of the canal, when all liability then was handed over. Those who remember in the old Bell Book PAMO stood for pilots advice masters orders. The reason why the master has this onus placed on him used to be , or one of the reasons was , that legally in the absence of the owner he is the owner, and his name and cert. number was on the cert. of Registry to prove this point. Today I don’t know if there has been changes to these old laws or not. In the absence of the master on the bridge the mate of the watch assumes his job. A pilot normally is there for advice. Cheers JS