Nasty collision

[bbg]

Overtaking vessel keeps clear does not apply in this case as it was unable to.

Regardless of which one was overtaking, surely colregs will apply. Assuming the lead vessel was "unable" to keep clear because of hydrodynamic forces, I would have thought it still would have been the responsibility of the overtaking vessel to keep clear enough that the hydrodynamic forces don't come into play.

 

[sailorman]

Quite so

Regardless of which one was overtaking, surely colregs will apply. Assuming the lead vessel was "unable" to keep clear because of hydrodynamic forces, I would have thought it still would have been the responsibility of the overtaking vessel to keep clear enough that the hydrodynamic forces don't come into play.

 

[onesea]

Ok I cannot see the video here but as I understand, there was a collision 2 ships one over taking other.

Something happened before the video that resulted in 2 ships getting far to close to each other? The over taking ship (I think over taking ship bigger?) is coming up on the slower vessels Port quarter, interaction takes place (pressure wave at bow of larger ship?) turns the smaller vessel onto the bows of the bigger vessel?

So by the time the video starts its to late to analyse what happened RE ColRegs?

Just some other thoughts:
Do we know whats rumbling along behind them unable to stop before being involved?
Do you know what hours the crews have been working for the days before the incident?
If the overtaking vessel did (or could) go hard astern would it of just turned across the shipping lane causing more havoc?
Navigational hazards? deep water routes?
Had either vessel had machinery failure?
Do you know the education and experience these guys have? (shipping company's only see wages).
What time/ job pressures where put on who?

Sounds to me the video has, little to do with col reg's by this stage.

Just found a video I can watch, I love the press supertanker my A*%e it has hatches and cranes! Think it might be a bulk carrier
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/supertanker-runs-down-cargo-ship/story-fnddckzi-1226589650815

Having seen video part of the problem might be the ship that videoed it blocking the option of altering to starboard for either ship? I am also guessing a DW route might be involved?

 

[sailorman]

Ok I cannot see the video here but as I understand, there was a collision 2 ships one over taking other.

Something happened before the video that resulted in 2 ships getting far to close to each other? The over taking ship (I think over taking ship bigger?) is coming up on the slower vessels Port quarter, interaction takes place (pressure wave at bow of larger ship?) turns the smaller vessel onto the bows of the bigger vessel?

So by the time the video starts its to late to analyse what happened RE ColRegs?

Just some other thoughts:
Do we know whats rumbling along behind them unable to stop before being involved?
Do you know what hours the crews have been working for the days before the incident?
If the overtaking vessel did (or could) go hard astern would it of just turned across the shipping lane causing more havoc?
Navigational hazards? deep water routes?
Had either vessel had machinery failure?
Do you know the education and experience these guys have? (shipping company's only see wages).
What time/ job pressures where put on who?

Sounds to me the video has, little to do with col reg's by this stage.

Just found a video I can watch, I love the press supertanker my A*%e it has hatches and cranes! Think it might be a bulk carrier
supertanker[/COLOR]-runs-down-cargo-ship/story-fnddckzi-1226589650815"]http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/supertanker-runs-down-cargo-ship/story-fnddckzi-1226589650815

Having seen video part of the problem might be the ship that videoed it blocking the option of altering to starboard for either ship? I am also guessing a DW route might be involved?

Where is the tanker then

 

[onesea]

Where is the tanker then

It was on that link honest seems to of vanished...

Trying again: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/supertanker-runs-down-cargo-ship/story-fnddckzi-1226589650815

Text from website

Supertanker runs down cargo ship
News Limited Network
March 04, 20138:07AM



IT's every captain's worst nightmare.

A 57,000-tonne supertanker steaming out of Singapore suddenly has a smaller vessel veering across its path.

The incident - caught on video by crew members from another ship nearby - happened in the crowded Singapore Strait, which leads in and out of the world's busiest port.

The footage shows the smaller vessel veering to port (its left) and across the course of the much larger ship.


The bulk carrier nudges the cargo vessel

The collision is inevitable, as the massive BEKS line tanker is unable to stop or alter course.
The Singapore Coast Guard was called to the incident but there were no reports of any injuries.

 

[Stemar]

... And given the proximity, why she didn't go full astern to open some separation.

There was an article in one of the yottie comics a few years ago about a large container ship. IIRC, From the time the order was given to go astern, it took a minimum of five minutes before the propeller started to turn the other way.

 

[sailorman]

are they not variable pitch these daze

There was an article in one of the yottie comics a few years ago about a large container ship. IIRC, From the time the order was given to go astern, it took a minimum of five minutes before the propeller started to turn the other way.

 

[wadget]

are they not variable pitch these daze

not on any decent sized ship. And even with variable pitch you can't just go from full sea speed to full astern instantly.

 

[wadget]

There was an article in one of the yottie comics a few years ago about a large container ship. IIRC, From the time the order was given to go astern, it took a minimum of five minutes before the propeller started to turn the other way.

Thats probably 5 minutes when the engine room is manned, if the engine room is unmanned add another 5 at least for the duty engineer to wake up and head down to the engine room.

 

[Mariner69]

It is two general bulk cargo vessels.

The smaller one is over taking, you can see that from the relative movement of his stern past the bow of the BEKS vessel.

Ahead is a tanker at anchor, you can see the anchor ball on the focsle.

The smaller vessel appears to have decided this is problematic and is trying to move to the port side and force the BEKS to move as well.

The smaller vessel finds itself in the interaction area and things then become difficult if not impossible to control.

Classic incidents from interaction in the past have been the HMS FITTLETON & HMS MERMAID and the "ROYSTON GRANGE" in the River Plate.

Going astern on the BES vessel would risk throwing the bow to starboard.

 

[A1Sailor]

My limited memories of RASes (Rendezvous at Sea) is that big ships in close quarters have all sorts of pressure waves around/under them. That might be a factor here.
Do we have any "Big Ship" Bridge Watchkeepers who can give their expert views?

EDIT:
I guess the "interaction area" in mariner69's post #30 might be what I mean...

 

[davidpbo]

It is two general bulk cargo vessels.

The smaller one is over taking, you can see that from the relative movement of his stern past the bow of the BEKS vessel.

Couldn't that equally as well be that the larger ship having been overtaking has reacted to the situation has taken off power and is starting to slow down?

 

[RichardS]

Ahead is a tanker at anchor, you can see the anchor ball on the focsle.

You've got better eyesight than me - that anchor ball looks to me like it is above the aft part of the third vessel and I've got no idea what that indicates?

Richard

 

[Uricanejack]

My limited memories of RASes (Rendezvous at Sea) is that big ships in close quarters have all sorts of pressure waves around/under them. That might be a factor here.
Do we have any "Big Ship" Bridge Watchkeepers who can give their expert views?

EDIT:
I guess the "interaction area" in mariner69's post #30 might be what I mean...

Ineraction between ships is genuine phenomena.
There is a high presure wave at bow and stern and a low presure wave midships.
the larger the vessel the creater the effect.
the faster the vessel the greater effect.
How to avoid? reduce speed.
With the exception of incidents where ships are intended to come very close to each other.
Generaly it comes into play when ships have all ready got far to close to each other and is part of the final links in the chain of events leading to the colision.Interaction becomes instead of the cause of the colision a contributing factor.
Imediate cause. would be the direct error leading to the event. (ie the wing fell off, the plane crashed)
Determining the route cause is much more complicated.(ie why did the wing fall off)
Most commonly interaction events occur between big vessels and small vessels. (ie ships hiting tugs) excess speed a big factor.
Or in narrow channels two ships passing at very close quarters.
singapore straights are very busy, possibly the buisiest bit of confined water on the plannet but not a narrow channel.

 

[HoratioHB]

My limited memories of RASes (Rendezvous at Sea) is that big ships in close quarters have all sorts of pressure waves around/under them. That might be a factor here.
Do we have any "Big Ship" Bridge Watchkeepers who can give their expert views?

EDIT:
I guess the "interaction area" in mariner69's post #30 might be what I mean...

I hate to be pedantic but RAS stands for Replenishment At Sea. And I can vouch for the dangers of ships affecting each other. A friend of mine was the CO of HMS Jupiter doing a RAS with the Dutch RFA Poulster. The helmsman got them too close and in trying to get clear both boiler safety valves blew. The noise was so loud his commands couldn't be heard. The frigate got sucked in and pulled around the Poulster's bows very much in the same was as this video shows. Only this time it was amidships and the frigate was almost capsized. As it was she ended up with a 20 ft gash in her side, luckily above the water line.

 

[A1Sailor]

I hate to be pedantic but RAS stands for Replenishment At Sea. And I can vouch for the dangers of ships affecting each other. A friend of mine was the CO of HMS Jupiter doing a RAS with the Dutch RFA Poulster. The helmsman got them too close and in trying to get clear both boiler safety valves blew. The noise was so loud his commands couldn't be heard. The frigate got sucked in and pulled around the Poulster's bows very much in the same was as this video shows. Only this time it was amidships and the frigate was almost capsized. As it was she ended up with a 20 ft gash in her side, luckily above the water line.

Trust a WAFU to be correct! Replenishment at Sea...

 

[HoratioHB]

Trust a WAFU to be correct! Replenishment at Sea...

As long as you don't go and explain what WAFU stands for!!

 

[onesea]

not on any decent sized ship. And even with variable pitch you can't just go from full sea speed to full astern instantly.

Its hard to generalize, some of the smaller ones can although you just end up with cavitation and loss of steering, very little braking force. Especially with bigger slower ships you are using relatively small amounts of power to move very large amounts of weight. It takes time to accelerate and slow down, many can barely make headway in a real storm.

Couldn't that equally as well be that the larger ship having been overtaking has reacted to the situation has taken off power and is starting to slow down?

Large ships are much more likely to change course than change pitch/ revs, for the same reasons above it takes time to make significant differences in speed. Even if they did risk major damage to there engines with a full stop hard astern. It is quite possible that the captains on those ships where already on the bridge before the incident, yet had little opportunity to stop it (a most horrible feeling, I believe).

 

[[2574]]

I thought it was WAFI? Wind Assisted Fxxxxxx Idiot?

 

[Mariner69]

WAFI = That's the big ship reference to sailing yachts.

WAFU = wet and f***ing useless => aviator