I wrote an article about the ships in Wikipedia some years ago:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SA-15_(ship)

We have a very detailed scale model of Nizhneyansk next to my desk at the office, complete with the hovercraft on deck.

Ivan Papanin (IMO 8837928) has been sold for scrap to Chittagong following grounding or ice impact in Antarctica earlier this year. The 1990-built MSCO-operated vessel was a Project 10621 ("SA-10") Arctic cargo ship which has been used for Antarctic research base resupply missions.

www.shipspotting.com/gallery/search.php?search_imo=8837928

Looks like Ivan Papanin has bit the dust after the incident in Antarctica earlier this year; she's at Chittagong anchorage and listed for "scrapping":

http://cpa.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/cpa.portal.gov.bd/common_document/a1196d2c_2ad4_410b_97a4_732c62a76600/VESSEL%20-%2029-08-18.pdf

https://www.fleetmon.com/maritime-news/2018/21417/russian-scientific-ship-breached-antarctic-confusi/

The list in my previous post has been updated.

Finland/Firefox 60.0.1 64 bit, getting the same message and a notification from F-Secure that it's a virus.

Given the situation in the USSR as described by the poster...

...is not correct, we should follow our standard policy on posting content by other photographers.

You can find discussion about the Soviet copyright laws and whether or not material is considered public domain in e.g. Wikimedia Commons.

I guess one of the issues here is also whether the photographer wants to make money with their photos or not. Cheapskate shipowner or not, I bet there are still amateur or hobbyist photographers who would just be happy if someone liked their photos and wanted to use them for something, perhaps even give credit to the photographer. My photographs from Shipspotting.com have appeared in a few news articles in the past few days and I'm just happy to see my name next to them. They could have picked any of the other freely-available pictures, but at least now they chose, in my opinion, the best...

Of course, I fully understand why someone would not want to hand over their photographs for free.

Following received from "AntonioGtz" by email to Shipspotting:

That's interesting information - thank you for sharing.

I'm also getting the impression that there is some hidden agenda behind this bashing.  Maersk is not the only big shipping company that has not started a wide-scale transition to LNG. I'm pretty sure their next set of newbuildings will be at least LNG ready. There are still issues such as lack of infrastructure when it comes to gas fuels.

None of their (many) containership newbuildings is equiped with enviroment friendly LNG propulsion like other companies do (i.e. TOTE, Finnish company 'Containerships', CMA CGM ...)

How many LNG-powered container ships are in service or under construction?

Interesting to read that they have lost the towed ships to use not adequate materials in order to save a few thousands euros, and if the foundering was to be "performed" to reduce the recycle costs?

The ships had already been sold to the scrapyard which was expecting to make profit out of the scrapping. Nothing would have been gained from sinking them intentionally.

Please, please, no more categories!

Agreed. What next? Vessels underway? Vessels moored at pier? Vessels going backwards? Vessels turning?

Anchored ships can be categorized by ship type.

Tempera is probably a good candidate for an FPSO conversion. Diesel-electric power plant and large corrosion margin due to ice strengthening. She's also in good condition, having been owned by a Finnish oil company.

Tempera and Mastera are not Arctic shuttle tankers, though. Their ice class is only 1A Super.

I'm a bit sceptical that cargo liqufaction would sink a vessel originally designed to carry liquid cargo...

I would rather stick to the international standard than come up with something new that's only used in Shipspotting.com.

Two potential issues about the copyright banner:

- If one is added to the photograph, is the JPEG file re-compressed? Even at maximum quality settings, this may result in unwanted loss of quality.
- Would it be possible to opt out from the copyright banner (e.g. checkbox while uploading) if the photographs are covered by e.g. a CC license?