Kukri
Well-known member
We certainly don’t want any momentum! We want to be stopped, when anchoring.
Anchored cruise ships are having anchor problems
- Thread starter Concerto
- Start date
We certainly don’t want any momentum! We want to be stopped, when anchoring.
Neeves
Well-known member
Large commercial ships anchors look very much like the anchors used on commercial ships 100 years ago. There have been improvements but if you look at an AC 14 (current state of the art?) it looks like an anchor you see on a floating museum ship (the Aurora). If you look at modern oil rig anchors they look nothing like an AC14 and more like the anchors we use. Modern oil rigs use high tensile chain and/or dyneema for the exact same reason we (or some of us
) do - save weight. Anchoring an oil rig is ever so slightly different to anchoring a 40' yacht - but they too don't worry about catenary (or its absence). Most oil rig anchors need to be deployed and set with considerable care as they do not self right, except one of the models supplied by Bruce which itself is a development from the original cast Bruce - a miniature version of which is still used (by leisure boaters). The other interesting facet of commercial ships anchors are they they are still 'heavy', none (or none I can think of) are fabricated but all oil rig anchors are now fabricated, rejecting weight in favour of design. I have seen fabricated anchors on dredgers and see small fabricated Danforth types.One reason for design of ships anchors is they need to be able to deploy them from a hawse pipe and an oil rig anchor would look very ungainly. As oil rig anchors, excepting the Bruce design mentioned, don't self right - they would not be much use, as is, as an anchor.
There is some convergence between 'our' anchors and oil rig anchors, which look more similar to each other and bear little or no relationship to the Admiraly pattern, in that both are fabricated and depend on surface area for hold, weight has been rejected. Interestingly it was the CQR (and 50 years later, Bruce), that led the original development away from the Admiralty pattern (though there were unarticulated single fluke anchors used long prior to the CQR). 'Our' anchors, Spade Delta, Epsilon etc - all derive from CQR and Bruce - not from Admiralty pattern. Oil rig anchors, and Bruce I think developed the 'original ' and moved away from design based on Admiralty pattern, all now have a split shank, the cross pieces of which add to area and both have large flukes that dominate the design. Oil rig anchors tend to be very wide and have twin toes (but they do not self right). We cannot incorporate the split shank - our bow rollers are too narrow. There are some split toed leisure anchors, Britany?, but maybe its a development waiting its turn.
Designers of anchors, ground tackle and its associated gear for commercial ships and the Classification Societies never in their darkest moments EVER envisaged the ships being laid up for such a prolonged period - so the kit was never designed for the rigours currently imposed on it. What is surprising is that the kit has stood up so well. Most ground tackle lost would normally be recovered (if you can find it - its not ac tally difficult to recover if you are in a '1st world' location', I'm not sure what happens currently. Most large commercial ships carry spare anchors, indentical to the one in the hawse pipe, on the foredeck. There is probably a whole new industry that has developed offering a recover and replacement ground tackle service (there is a silver lining somewhere) for these large ships sitting and 'waiting'.
It occurs every year or so - the question of why big ships ground tackle is so puny. Simplistically it is not there for the same purpose we carry our anchors - so though they have the same name, ANCHOR, you cannot compare the two.
The ground tackle was never designed for such a long period of ships being laid up. The US Navy, and I assume other navies, have addressed this issue and have developed anchoring systems to which the fleet may anchor. Possibly if authorities had had a different crystal ball that might have been the sensible move. Lay large commercial moorings, charge for same, and this would have made sure these large ships were safely contained. A business opportunity missed. Hindsight is really marvellous. However Covid has no end in sight - despite vaccines the 'news' does not seem to be getting any better, mention of a re-start to the cruise industry remains a moveable feast - maybe some fixed moorings would pay for themselves.
Mooring were commonplace in HK but I don't think I ever knew what windspeed they would accept. I vaguely recall they were emptied when a Typhoon was forecast but typhoon winds are much higher than the winds accepted by a ships anchor so there is a 'gap' between the maximum a ship can tolerate with it own gear and the limits of commercial moorings in HK.
Stay safe, take care
Jonathan
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 36384
Guest
Indeed but to be fair, they have 2 anchor sets per quarter, 8 in total, more in some cases, on a very wide spread and long rode. Also the anchors are proportionally much larger, in area, that what would be found on ship. They are also placed in the optimal spread by an anchor handler and then pull tested when the semi submersible is anchored to a calculated pre load; if that fails, the anchor is reset. The anchor grip is required as the semi submersible will position itself by tensioning and slacking of on the anchors to place well centre at a coordinate. In 2019 I was last on board an anchored semi sub, west of Shetland, in about 500m of water. A F11 was forecast and the rig disconnected from the well and moved about 100m away from the wellhead and then just sat there as the storm blew through. All the anchors winches have tension meters with alarms and the barge master maintains the correct tension. Indeed they are stationary but the set up is a bit different from a normal ship, to be fair.
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
There are numerous "Typhoon shelters" for ships in Hong Kong; I presume that ships are packed in there when one is forecast. However, they certainly wouldn't take larger container ships; they're really for fishing vessels and lighters.
Worth noting that much of Hong Kong's waters are well sheltered - that's why we chose it back in 1843 (or whatever!). And there are many deep bays that can be used as refuges - for example, Port Shelter, right next to the village my late wife was from. The English name is a clue!
Finally, although there is a well-developed typhoon warning system, actual hurricane force winds are not common; perhaps once in every 2-3 years, or even less. They raise typhoon warnings for any strong wind, and the majority of warnings are for force 8-9 winds. The real vulnerability is the network of suspension bridges joining the major islands - ferries often continue to operate when bridges are closed.
Neeves
Well-known member
There are large, enormous, mooring buoys in the Harbour, between Kowloon and Hong Kong (Island). Cruise ships would enter and tie up at the wharf at Ocean Terminal and the RN would bring ships into the harbour. I don't recall the American aircraft carriers coming into the harbour - they used to sit outside north of Lamma, though whether on a buoy or anchor I simply don't know. Container ships entered freely to the terminals up the Lamma channel, between Lamma and Aberdeen. Access is not a problem - how big a ship used the big mooring buoys in the Harbour - I don't know. The buoys were well big enough for a man (or men?) to stand on them and take the mooring line from a large commercial vessel. In out time there containers would be offloaded from ships on the buoys into lighters/barges, and vice versa.
The Typhoon Shelters take local boats, the Aberdeen Boat Club and RHKYC are both based in Typhoon Shelters and a number of other marinas have been built - but come a typhoon warning they fill up with all the, other, local boats, none I would call a ship. All the fairways simply fill until you can walk anywhere you like within the shelter simply hopping from deck to deck. We kept our yacht on a swing mooring at Lantau until a marina was built there and come a typhoon warning we would move to the Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter (where RHKYC was located) and all the local boats would simply treat us as one of them - it was all very egalitarian.
I don't recall, there being any lighters, or barges, in the Typhoon Shelters and had always assumed they sought shelter at the container terminals.
The problem from typhoons was not so much the wind but the seas - it was not the wind that destroyed the typhoon shelters (Aberdeen) - but the seas.
Jonathan
Kukri
Well-known member
What a history of silly mistakes! Most of them made by “the office”!
Capt Popeye
Well-known member
yep; might mention that off Brixham /Teignmouth we have had many Cruise Ships anchoring for nearl a year now; quite often they 'up anchor' and move off somewhere else for a while; these movements have oft coincided with a severe storm warning, usually Easterly Direction and extended for many days at a time ; (Easterly on most South Devon Coasts means that the gales are blowing 'on shore' ) , hence the Railways are disrupted as well
Daydream believer
Well-known member
Yes, but even if you tell them all you know, unless they pay travelling time it will only add up to 4 minutes, so you won't get much
.
..
.
.
Oh come on-- It was a joke- we love you really
Kukri
Well-known member
Typhoon A and B buoys in Hong Kong Harbour
Harbour Moorings - Marine Department
https://www.mardep.gov.hk/en/notices/pdf/mdn19097.pdf
(this wasn’t taken recently... but it’s the only picture I seen to have of a ship on a Hong Kong Typhoon “A” Buoy):
Harbour Moorings - Marine Department
https://www.mardep.gov.hk/en/notices/pdf/mdn19097.pdf
(this wasn’t taken recently... but it’s the only picture I seen to have of a ship on a Hong Kong Typhoon “A” Buoy):
Last edited:
Mudisox
Well-known member
When stationed out in HK in the early 70s we had to go out to the typhoon buoys on three occasions. Attaching the anchor chain to the buoy and additionally veering 2 shackles of cable. At their height we also had the main engines running and "steaming into the wind" to ease the load on the cable. One typhoon had either me. the NO or the captain on watch all the time.
The seas were not however large. Unlike on a trip up to Okinawa when we were down to slow ahead for 10 hrs into the waves, and boy was it lumpy.
The seas were not however large. Unlike on a trip up to Okinawa when we were down to slow ahead for 10 hrs into the waves, and boy was it lumpy.
chrishscorp
Well-known member
Yes, but even if you tell them all you know, unless they pay travelling time it will only add up to 4 minutes, so you won't get much
.
..
.
.
Oh come on-- It was a joke- we love you really
Yes but the intial tool box talk and safety briefing should keep him going for the first two hours
tudorsailor
Well-known member
Will all these anchors on the sea bed will stop trawlers over fishing the area?
Neeves
Well-known member
Kukri - may have the answer. Anchors cost money so if you do lose one you want to get it back. But the cost of retrieval might cost more than the anchor and maybe some lost anchors are not reported (as if you do report a loss the local harbour authority will demand you retrieve it). Some may thus not be reported, ship steams of and gets another.
Jonathan
Jonathan
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Perhaps, but the captain seems to have been unable to tell the truth to anyone: he lied repeatedly to the port authority, the masters of all the tugs involved, and his own officers and crew.
capnsensible
Well-known member
I wonder if as he realised the enormity of what was happening, he had some kind of breakdown?
Stemar
Well-known member
That's why I charge so muchYes, but even if you tell them all you know, unless they pay travelling time it will only add up to 4 minutes, so you won't get much
.
..
.
.
Oh come on-- It was a joke- we love you really
AntarcticPilot
Well-known member
After reading it, I got the impression that he was in a cleft stick - be truthful and lose his job, tell lies and be at risk (serious risk as it turned out) of losing the ship. And we don't know what the owners had told him behind the scenes - maybe they'd said something like "She's worth more in insurance than she is as a working ship, so don't try too hard...." Of course, there would never be any evidence of that! Given their proximity to Gibraltar, I guess he might have reckoned the risk to the crew was within acceptable limits. But the whole pattern of repairs being done at anchor, lack of spares, minimal response to engineering breakdowns and so on all point to a ship that was on its last legs anyway. All through the report, you got a feeling of real cheeseparing going on, and a subtext of cost-cutting even at the expense of seaworthiness.
Kukri
Well-known member
Also my impression.
One of “mine” pulled a unit alongside at Felixstowe - with permission - as you do - and the liner stuck halfway out. The Port (Felixstowe Dock, not Harwich Haven) - wanted to put us out to anchor in that condition. I was NOT going to do that; we stayed alongside while the air turned blue and we scoured England for extra jacks. This experience convinced me that we are no longer a maritime nation.
One of “mine” pulled a unit alongside at Felixstowe - with permission - as you do - and the liner stuck halfway out. The Port (Felixstowe Dock, not Harwich Haven) - wanted to put us out to anchor in that condition. I was NOT going to do that; we stayed alongside while the air turned blue and we scoured England for extra jacks. This experience convinced me that we are no longer a maritime nation.
Last edited:
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
Possible. Was there a prosecution, do you know?
penfold
Well-known member
What a shambles.