Containers in the sea. I was wrong. many apologies

Lots of them about. Apparently...

"There are 22,000 floating shipping containers in the oceans on any given day"

I know there is a lot of ocean but 22,000 is still worrying
Info from HERE

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>
 
Re: Any idea what proportion....

One broke up near one of the outer Scilly islands when I visited a couple of years ago. No sign of the container itself, but the beach was totally covered in its cargo - hundreds of six-packs of disposable Pampers nappies.

As the damp seeped through the packing, so they swelled up and burst forth in clumps like mutant cotton bushes, along the high tide line. They were quite fire proof and in contradiction to their name, there seemed no way of disposing of them.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Ok we'll let you off this time just do'nt give us disinformation in future lad! Actually I think the semi submerged container is a prepation for the forthcoming ice age to prepare us for the berg feist that is our future if the gulf stream switches off.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Asking a lot are you not??

Recent container(s) came ashore in Pembrokeshire, full of fridges.

So they do float, my guess is they probably float at sea level.

Stats must show that they are a hazard, but not a large one. Until you hit it!!!

MJ

<hr width=100% size=1>www.markjohnsonafloat.org.uk
 
Not Sorrento, this time

Green hull...

Actually I have a German friend, Master of a big MSC boxboat, who really likes working for them and says they are OK; he says they did not lengthen the one that broke in two, the previous owners (blue...) did. <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by Mirelle on 01/11/2004 20:32 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
Re: Not Sorrento, this time

I was told that the insurance industry expects (average) 1400 containers per year to fall off ships worldwide.
Take the bright view, only a small percentage are floaters or should I say "growlers".
After that it's your belief in Murphy's or Sods law that should worry you?
Peter.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
>>> The two shipping companies that I have spent my career with do not lose boxes over the side in large numbers.

This suggests that your employer adopts some policy or fits some safety device that makes losing containers less likely than the industry norm and that your Most Hated Competitor does not. Or have I misread you? If I understand you correctly could not this good practice be made compulsory for any ship docking in the EU.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Safety Devices

We fit our ships with a safety device known as a Pension Scheme.

Most of our competitors have eliminated this item, since it does not appear anywhere in the IMO Conventions, it is neither a Class Society nor a Flag State requirement and Port State Control inspectors do not check for one when they inspect ships.

For example, the ship I was aboard is commanded by a man who has been at sea for 37 years and is retiring at the end of his present tour; his wife was aboard with him. He has three deck officers; the Chief Officer has a Master's ticket in his pocket, of course. His Chief Engineer is a whippersnapper of 48 and he has three more engineers, an electrician, an electronics officer and a donkeyman. There is a chap called a bosun, a carpenter, a Chief Steward who doubles as a paramedic, a cook, another steward, and ten ratings. Not forgetting the North Sea Pilot, who joins in the Channel and stays on till the last European port.

Other ships of the same size get around perfectly happily with a crew of sixteen, hired without benefit of interview, and don't waste money on North Sea Pilots.

We are obviously doing things all wrong; if we did things the other way we could afford to drop fifty containers overboard now and again and still save money.

The exact causes of containers going overboard may vary, but include "parametric rolling", a subject in itself but which boils down to pointing the ship in the wrong direction at the wrong speed, incorrect data entry into the lashing system computer, anothers ubject in itself since the weight of containers can be misdeclared, poor quality lashing gear, incorrectly applied lashings, and of course sea water hitting containers at speed...

<hr width=100% size=1>Que scais-je?
 
Re: Safety Devices

interesting that misdeclared weight has an effect on ships too. A 747 Cargo plane went down on take off in Halifax, nova-scotia a couple of weeks ago, and it appears the pilot was 25 knots shy of takeoff speed and ran off the end of the runway, killing all onboard. The preliminary findings appear to indicate that the plane was massively overweight as some customers underdeclared the weight of the cargo - in order to save money. Everyone assumed that somewhere along the line the actual weight would be weighed - but it appears not to be the case, with tragic circumstances.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Safety Devices

That is horrifying! But, from experience in shipping, it sounds very familiar.

The problem of shippers understating the weight of their cargo is endemic in shipping, since weight often forms a part of the freight calculation. There have been rare cases of cranes collapsing, killing the driver, due to overweight undeclared containers - one such case happened in the UK.

Trucks entering a terminal go over a weighbridge, of course. Weighbridges are not perfect and they do break down. A very common problem with ships is that heavy containers should not be stowed over light ones, and there are also maximum stack limits of course. Occasionally a box will simple collapse due to excessive weight above it in the stack, but this is quite rare. More often the problem is "heavies over lights" due to the need to stow cargo for port A above cargo for port B, etc.

Another little problem that we get, and which I hope does not occur in air cargo, is shippers who ship dangerous good without informing anyone. Fireworks and cigarette lighters declared as toys, for example. There have been horrific fires due to a bleaching agent, calcium hypochlorite, which people persist in thinking "harmless".

Its only going to get worse.

<hr width=100% size=1>Que scais-je?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top