Containers lost overboard

[Kukri]

This sort of “weather bomb” is a known hazard of the North Pacific trade lane.

Many years ago, an OCL ship, the “Falmouth Bay”, on charter to Mitsui OSK, ran into the same trouble in the same area, and lost, if I recall correctly, around a hundred containers. and also put back to Japan.

For some reason I remember that she was commanded by John Fee and her Chief Officer was Charles Woodward, who probably should have got a medal for a remarkable act of bravery in entering the flooded under deck alleyway from the deck, in F12, taking a manhole cover off and draining the several hundred tons of water acting as free surface and impacting on the engine room to alleyway weather tight doors, into the bilge. In the water, in the dark and freezing cold

She was all of 1,200 TEU. It was a simpler age, but she was being weather routed by Oceanroutes. The late, great, Euan Corlett was asked to advise. He looked at some photos of the deck, taken in Japan, and said:

“The ladder on the fore side of the foremast has been flattened against it to a height of twelve rungs, so solid water crossed the foredeck at that height. We know the scantlings of the foremast, from the Class Rules. It has been bent back at deck level, so simple column theory tells us that the impact load on each container was (whips out scientific calculator) - eight hundred tons. Which is why they are no longer there.”

It was a tour de force of “expert witnessing”. Might amuse Pyrojames.

 

[Birdseye]

As mentioned a better means of securing containers,just accepting the seas can be littered with insured steel boxes is not very responsible,just because they are out of sight they are still there contaminating,it’s quite a while now since society realized the sea is not a waste bin

Society might realise that but sloppy half trained seamen might not. I did a trip on a SAF lines container ship some years ago and I was apalled to see that many of the deck containers were only half latched into position ie only half of the latchable corners actually fastened. Had a long chat with the german master on that boat and he was quite open about tank washing at sea on the tankers he was hired to drive. Given no option by the ship owners in oirder to save time.

 

[Kukri]

Society might realise that but sloppy half trained seamen might not. I did a trip on a SAF lines container ship some years ago and I was apalled to see that many of the deck containers were only half latched into position ie only half of the latchable corners actually fastened. Had a long chat with the german master on that boat and he was quite open about tank washing at sea on the tankers he was hired to drive. Given no option by the ship owners in oirder to save time.

Must have been quite a few years ago, if you are suggesting that the tank washings went over the side routinely. COW and IGS were mandated under Marpol Annex 1 which came into force in 1983. I grant you that tankers gas freeing for dry dock often dumped washings over the side after that but a ship usually docks every thirty months.

 

[Wansworth]

Society might realise that but sloppy half trained seamen might not. I did a trip on a SAF lines container ship some years ago and I was apalled to see that many of the deck containers were only half latched into position ie only half of the latchable corners actually fastened. Had a long chat with the german master on that boat and he was quite open about tank washing at sea on the tankers he was hired to drive. Given no option by the ship owners in oirder to save time.

That’s pretty damming of standards of seamanship,I assume it’s the mates responsibility to ensure the containers are properly clipped,but again as in all things speed and therefore dollars are the main drivers.With such hugeships they probably feel invincible but as we see the sea has the last word

 

[Wansworth]

As an aside my brief life aboard a dirty British coaster I put the fear of god up the skipper owner as he pumped the oily bilges into the harbour,the threat of a fine had him scurrying around with the Fairy liquid from the galley,getting rid of the evidence of his crime,he didn’t even think it was bad to empty his engine bilge in Teighnmouth harbour?

 

[Kukri]

That’s pretty damming of standards of seamanship,I assume it’s the mates responsibility to ensure the containers are properly clipped,but again as in all things speed and therefore dollars are the main drivers.With such hugeships they probably feel invincible but as we see the sea has the last word

Read this. It’s a simplified explanation for laymen. On a boxboat of any size other than the very smallest feeders the stowage planning is done by the terminal and the lashing plan is prepared by the ship’s lashing
computer. The Cargo Securing Manual is a Class item.

https://www.standard-club.com/media...u0PG_3Ndh8Om7cCc2dkJ4z4V2J0ub0_GLunG1pY8G5fKE

 

[Kukri]

From his description, I am not at all sure that Birdseye understood what he was looking at.

Container securing systems are not simple.

 

[Wansworth]

From his description, I am not at all sure that Birdseye understood what he was looking at.

Container securing systems are not simple.

Well you can have reports and standards but if not adhered to by the men on the job but if Birdseyes observation is correct surely you don’t condone it,being in the business.As a mate on a humble coaster I made sure the ship was ready for sea and the cargo properly stowed and protected,to see a wedge sloshing about on the deck in a gale was terrible upsetting

 

[mjcoon]

...
But, man, what sort of weather bomb is capable of throwing around a 14,000 teu boxship enough to do that much damage? I wouldn't want to have been on the bridge while it was rolling that much.
...
Most things in shipping are more complicated than they look on the surface.

Could be said to add up to a sort of cargo laundry. (C.f. money laundering.)

 

[penberth3]

Well you can have reports and standards but if not adhered to by the men on the job but if Birdseyes observation is correct surely you don’t condone it,being in the business.As a mate on a humble coaster I made sure the ship was ready for sea and the cargo properly stowed and protected,to see a wedge sloshing about on the deck in a gale was terrible upsetting

Not sure if its the incident referred to in post #1, but there's a recent MAIB report about a lost containers incident. Among other things the lashings used were in poor condition, so even if the containers were secured as intended they still weren't safe.

 

[Kukri]

Not sure if its the incident referred to in post #1, but there's a recent MAIB report about a lost containers incident. Among other things the lashings used were in poor condition, so even if the containers were secured as intended they still weren't safe.

This one? Same trade, same patch of water. As usual with the MAIB, a really excellent report and very well worth reading. It includes a very good account of modern lashing systems and procedures.

Loss of cargo containers overboard from container ship CMA CGM G. Washington

 

[LadyInBed]

It seems illogical to me that containers are stacked pointing fore to aft.
If they were stacked pointing beam to beam then wouldn't they handle the ships roll and waves hitting from the beam better?

 

[Kukri]

It seems illogical to me that containers are stacked pointing fore to aft.
If they were stacked pointing beam to beam then wouldn't they handle the ships roll and waves hitting from the beam better?

In a word, no.

Ships typically roll three times further than they pitch, and they do so in a shorter period, so the forces acting on both the container securing system and on the cargo securing system inside the container are much larger.

It’s a great way to get the cargo inside the container to first slacken and then break its lashings, batter down the doors and shoot into the sea.

Very early in the history of containerisation, some elderly general cargo ships, often owned at the eastern end of the Mediterranean, tried carrying containers that way.

The practice is now specifically banned as as result.

 

[Greenheart]

Plenty of interesting stuff here.

Thinking from a small boat perspective, can we determine (approximately) what percentage of the (average) seven hundred or so containers that are lost overboard annually (as opposed to just being damaged), sink immediately or shortly afterwards...

...and what percentage have contents that do not or cannot absorb water over time, and remain a hazard to shipping, indefinitely?

Apologies if this has been covered, I didn't see it.

 

[Kukri]

Plenty of interesting stuff here.

Thinking from a small boat perspective, can we determine (approximately) what percentage of the (average) seven hundred or so containers that are lost overboard annually (as opposed to just being damaged), sink immediately or shortly afterwards...

...and what percentage have contents that do not or cannot absorb water over time, and remain a hazard to shipping, indefinitely?

Apologies if this has been covered, I didn't see it.

There are three sorts that will float for ages:

1. Empty reefer boxes thanks to the insulation
2. Dry boxes with consumer electronics in polystyrene foam packaging.
3. Empty tank containers (rare).

Might be ten per cent

 

[michael_w]

In a past life having been in a few shipping containers, stowing household furniture and people's belongings for overseas removals, one big problem was the lack of tie-off points to secure to. It took a lot of care to wedge stuff into place.

 

[pyrojames]

In a word, no.

Ships typically roll three times further than they pitch, and they do so in a shorter period, so the forces acting on both the container securing system and on the cargo securing system inside the container are much larger.

It’s a great way to get the cargo inside the container to first slacken and then break its lashings, batter down the doors and shoot into the sea.

Very early in the history of containerisation, some elderly general cargo ships, often owned at the eastern end of the Mediterranean, tried carrying containers that way.

The practice is now specifically banned as as result.

That's very interesting. On some of the less well run ships I have visited after a fire, did indeed have athwartships stowed containers. Not dedicated contships though.

 

[Stemar]

There are three sorts that will float for ages:

1. Empty reefer boxes thanks to the insulation
2. Dry boxes with consumer electronics in polystyrene foam packaging.
3. Empty tank containers (rare).

Might be ten per cent

From a yottie PoV, the floating containers are a big deal but, overall, ISTM that the ones that really matter are those that contain polluting chemicals. A few tons of Chinese tat on the bottom don't matter much, a few tonnes of some of the nastier organic chemicals matter a lot more.

It seems unlikely that ONE Apus would have been in poor condition. Japan isn't exactly a flag of convenience. I'm quite happy to accept that flags of convenience are a bad idea, but it wouldn't be too hard to get rid of them. An agreement by Europe and the US that all ships coming into port must reach certain standards and those with flags with unacceptable standards or unacceptable enforcement of those standards will be inspected before they're allowed to unload. Oh, and the bloke who does the inspection's on leave this week. No, you can't leave port; until you've been inspected, we don't know if you're safe. Meanwhile that's £X, 000 a day in harbour dues...

one difficulty I do foresee with this plan is a fair number of abandoned ships alongside in Harwich and Southampton, but auctioned cargoes would go some way to covering the costs, and it would get rid of a lot of the dodgier ships.

 

[Kukri]

From a yottie PoV, the floating containers are a big deal but, overall, ISTM that the ones that really matter are those that contain polluting chemicals. A few tons of Chinese tat on the bottom don't matter much, a few tonnes of some of the nastier organic chemicals matter a lot more.

It seems unlikely that ONE Apus would have been in poor condition. Japan isn't exactly a flag of convenience. I'm quite happy to accept that flags of convenience are a bad idea, but it wouldn't be too hard to get rid of them. An agreement by Europe and the US that all ships coming into port must reach certain standards and those with flags with unacceptable standards or unacceptable enforcement of those standards will be inspected before they're allowed to unload. Oh, and the bloke who does the inspection's on leave this week. No, you can't leave port; until you've been inspected, we don't know if you're safe. Meanwhile that's £X, 000 a day in harbour dues...

one difficulty I do foresee with this plan is a fair number of abandoned ships alongside in Harwich and Southampton, but auctioned cargoes would go some way to covering the costs, and it would get rid of a lot of the dodgier ships.

Er... we have this. Have had for some years. It’s called the Paris Memorandum on Port State Control. Enforcement in the UK is by the MCA.

It works.

Paris MoU

 

[dom]

There are three sorts that will float for ages:

1. Empty reefer boxes thanks to the insulation
2. Dry boxes with consumer electronics in polystyrene foam packaging.
3. Empty tank containers (rare).

Might be ten per cent

As a matter of interest, are you aware of any data which helps to quantify "ages"?