Full Ahead No 1

Wow! Most likely a serious malfunction, but other causes possible.

Must have been terrifying for all, but hopefully nobody was hurt
 
I got the impression that that's what he was trying to do but the tug prevented it. Without the tug, would he have been able to turn far enough to miss the ship then straighten up before hitting the cranes?

Tiller steering that allows him to move the rudder instantly might have helped...
 
I have been chatting this one through with a group of friends who are former colleagues, I mention this because they are Masters and Chief Engineers - British, Australian, New Zealand, Filipino, Chinese - with several hundred years experience in command between them. So I pass on the group’s conclusions.

1. The ship is flying light, and to judge by the state of the paint she may be fresh out of dry dock.
2. The berth where this was shot is immediately after a roughly 90 degree turn to starboard in the channel.
3. The stern tug is a water tractor type and is pulling with full power in the correct direction but she is simply not powerful enough to make a difference.
4. The ship went into the turn at 9.2 knots (dead slow ahead, probably) according to the AIS, and came out of it at 5.6 knots.
 
Last edited:
Boater Sam said:
This plastic Meccano is not a patch on the old red and green stuff.
Click to expand...
9269243

(It's in Bolton, rather elegantly.)
 
I originally posted that the ship was not intended to berth on that berth. My group of friends have now established that she was indeed intended to berth there (berth 7, Busan; the crane that folds up is crane no. 311 and the operator survived with relatively minor injuries).

I’ll post two comments:

“Big ship, flying light, bucket loads of horsepower - I get the impression, looking at the AIS track, that the pilot didn't factor that in when he made his turn and approach. Completely overcooked it.”

“From a naval architecture point of view, the prop walk effect, that might have been relied upon to shove the stern to starboard (assuming a RH prop) would be reduced as the prop is out of the water, however when the engines went astern the effect would increase shoving the stern to port. Rudder not fully submerged would reduce it’s effect also. There but for the grace of God....”
 
Kukri said:
I originally posted that the ship was not intended to berth on that berth. My group of friends have now established that she was indeed intended to berth there (berth 7, Busan; the crane that folds up is crane no. 311 and the operator survived with relatively minor injuries).

I’ll post two comments:

“Big ship, flying light, bucket loads of horsepower - I get the impression, looking at the AIS track, that the pilot didn't factor that in when he made his turn and approach. Completely overcooked it.”

“From a naval architecture point of view, the prop walk effect, that might have been relied upon to shove the stern to starboard (assuming a RH prop) would be reduced as the prop is out of the water, however when the engines went astern the effect would increase shoving the stern to port. Rudder not fully submerged would reduce it’s effect also. There but for the grace of God....”
Click to expand...
I am guilty of making a bold assumption over on the other thread... however.. now armed with a few more of the facts I am still wondering if - when the pilot decided to enter with just the two tugs - the wind wasn't blowing quite as hard?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

davethedog
Raymarine AP No drive detected and invlaid command errors
Replies
4
Views
221
davethedog
davethedog
R
My boat trip hopefully in May Around Scotland
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
1K
RobBradley
R
geem
Atlantic crossing 2025
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
geem
geem

Share this page

Top