Author Topic: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?  (Read 214117 times)

Offline davidships

  • Webmaster
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,346
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #105 on: April 23, 2014, 08:55:05 PM »
The master won't keep his job long if he doesn't know who his boss is!  "Not under command" is a standard expression to warn other vessels that the ship is not able to manoeuvre properly (or at all), follow the Collision Regulations (Colregs) etc - please put me right if I've got that wrong, Capt Ted.  The two tugs are about 200 miles apart at the moment.

« Last Edit: April 23, 2014, 08:58:06 PM by davidships »

Offline Tony_Birdman

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #106 on: April 23, 2014, 09:56:37 PM »
looks as if they have no plans to scrap them at the moment, if they were to become uneconomical then they would decide to scrap, the company dont have any ocean going tugs do they? maybe thats the reason they still have them cause it maybe cheaper to have your own tugs?

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #107 on: April 24, 2014, 06:22:48 PM »
Hi Davidships, I didnt know that term. I only know "unmanoeuverable" or "dead in the water" and "limited manoeuverability", and "crippled".
Offcoarse I understand that a master must know his boss, but I know from my own experience that masters are sometimes told to wait somewhere while negotiations are held and paperwork is being pushed. That's a very stressfull and uncertain time. We once had a stranger come up the gangway telling us to show him the ship, we were flabbergasted and asked who he was. He then introduced himself as the new owner.
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline davidships

  • Webmaster
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,346
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #108 on: April 24, 2014, 09:46:42 PM »
Thanks DH.  You reminded me about "limited manoeuverability", although I know it as "restricted manoeuverability". That's in the Colregs too and they have different meanings, defined in Rule 3(f) and (g) - http://navruleshandbook.com/Rule3.html.  But you are right, there are lots of "ordinary" ways of describing the situation.

I see that GLOBAL SUCCESS I has anchored this afternoon (she had a 7-8kn burst just before).


Offline Captain Ted

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,996
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #109 on: April 25, 2014, 04:42:46 PM »
There are only the terms "restricted manoeuverability" and Not under Command

It is a kind of confusing the terms:  "unmanoeuverable" or "dead in the water" and "limited manoeuverability", and "crippled" do not exist neither in the colregs nor otherwise. They exist however in plain English where peoples do not know or also the English is not good enough an so on (nothing to do now with not knowing better, it is maritime specific)

Restricted maneuverability means for example a dredger or a tug which tows or drills ships
at work,,but always when they are at work,, a dredger is not restricted when it not dredges
for example.
Not under command is a situation where a ship has a problem, usually of technical nature
this could include that for example it steers on manual rudder or the rudder can only
be operated to 15 degrees each side and not fully to the sides. Or the engine operates only
on ahead,,not astern anymore or only at 30% capacity.  and so and so on.

Not under Command has therefore nothing to do with that the capt or officers are all drunk or if they don,t know who the owner is (actually not uncommon that at all, often crews know the operator, the crew agent but not the real owner)or if they don,t know otherwise what they are doing, which actually is also not seldom when one sees some situations
NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #110 on: April 25, 2014, 07:52:56 PM »
Thanks CT, I cant remember ever learning the term, but maybe it differs between the Netherlands and other places, though 5hat shouldnt be the case. I can just aswell have forgotten, its been long since I had tolearn colregs. And offcoarse I learned them in Dutch, and we had to learn the respective terms in IMOEnglish in the English class. When I sailed the tugs we are following, all officers were Dutch, so among each other we spoke Dutch.
whichever reason it may be, doesnt matter. They are both still anchored I presume, and it really bothers me that they use them like they do. We were proud to sail them and kept them in perfect shape. They were excellent ships, old offcoarse, but stll perfectly fit for the job. We went through hurricanes and everything van else and they held together like heroes (as did the top skilled crew).
i would have loved it if a foundation would rescue one.
Has anyone seen the Hua An move at all? Since we have been talking about the bigger ones, I havent ever seen that one do anything.
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline Captain Ted

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,996
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #111 on: April 25, 2014, 08:15:53 PM »
@DH

You must getting old then :-)))
I lerned those terms in 1975 and they never changed and for the fact
that those are international COLREGS  (can,t be that countries hve different COLREGS, unless inland COLREGS,,Those are different from country to country)
they MUST be the same otherwise there would be total chaos at sea,,not that we don,t have that today not !!!!
But I share your sentiment for old ships/tugs, but then not all old ships can be preserved
also when one might whish. The Netherlands however have already quite a big number of old ships/tugs etc preserved, at least what I saw over the years when I came there on and off

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #112 on: April 25, 2014, 08:58:11 PM »
I know, they cant and yes we do.
Offcoarse youre right aboutcth de colregs, I just cant remember the term, although I did remember the "restricted" one.
about van prserving, these are so incredibly different van than others......it just saddens me.
What do you sail CT?
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline Tony_Birdman

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #113 on: April 25, 2014, 10:08:40 PM »
Thanks CT, I cant remember ever learning the term, but maybe it differs between the Netherlands and other places, though 5hat shouldnt be the case. I can just aswell have forgotten, its been long since I had tolearn colregs. And offcoarse I learned them in Dutch, and we had to learn the respective terms in IMOEnglish in the English class. When I sailed the tugs we are following, all officers were Dutch, so among each other we spoke Dutch.
whichever reason it may be, doesnt matter. They are both still anchored I presume, and it really bothers me that they use them like they do. We were proud to sail them and kept them in perfect shape. They were excellent ships, old offcoarse, but stll perfectly fit for the job. We went through hurricanes and everything van else and they held together like heroes (as did the top skilled crew).
i would have loved it if a foundation would rescue one.
Has anyone seen the Hua An move at all? Since we have been talking about the bigger ones, I havent ever seen that one do anything.

i see the Hua An was anchored offshore from singapore, someone has uploaded a picture of it on 22nd march 2014 and its anchored in the picture, also i see the owner of it is shanghai salvage, so maybe they are waiting for another job.

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #114 on: April 30, 2014, 07:09:15 PM »
Could be, I hope they find some nice tough jobs for her.
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline davidships

  • Webmaster
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,346
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #115 on: May 04, 2014, 01:38:54 AM »
GLOBAL SUCCESS I on the move again at steady 10kn for Jafarabad.
GLOBAL DESTINY still anchored NW of Mormugao

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #116 on: May 05, 2014, 07:28:03 AM »
I'm not sure, according to Marine Traffic she's still stationary with destination Jafarabad.
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline davidships

  • Webmaster
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,346
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #117 on: May 05, 2014, 09:23:00 AM »
GLOBAL SUCCESS I was anchored near Mumbai before, now she's anchored 15 miles off Jafarabad. May not be a good sign though.

GLOBAL DESTINY unchanged

HUA AN sailed Singapore area on Saturday 7/5 for Cilacap, Java (she was there before in March 2014)

Offline DutchHannibal

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #118 on: May 07, 2014, 08:57:07 PM »
Destiny seems to be towing to Goa.
If it can't be done like it should,
it should be done like it can.

Offline davidships

  • Webmaster
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,346
    • View Profile
Re: End of an era of former "Dutch Glory"?
« Reply #119 on: May 07, 2014, 09:53:41 PM »
Yes DH, definitely on the move at c5kn, but heading NNW, away from Goa.  Most likely towing a scrap ship for Alang or Gadani - time will tell (of if the crew update their destinaton on AIS)

HUA AN now at Cilacap

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk