ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
  Print  
Author Topic: Container vessel MOL COMFORT broke in two and sank off India  (Read 121757 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: June 20, 2013, 08:41:35 am »

Good morning!

As per schedule MOL COMFORT eta at Rotterdam on June 30th, 2013 with ets 1st of July, 2013; eta Hamburg 2nd July, 2013 with ets July 4th, 2013, eta Southampton 5th July, 2013 with ets 7th July, 2013 and eta Le Havre on 7th July, 2013.

Ports of loading: Kobe, Nagoya, Shimizu, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Vung Tau, Singapore
(Source: Hapag-Lloyd)

Containers loaded: 4,382 units (7,041 TEU) as per Mitsui O.S.K.

Dutch consignees meanwhile confirmed, they expecting cargo with MOL COMFORT. Magisso Benelux awaiting household ware (wine coolers) and Dayseaday Fresh and Frozen in Urk (Netherlands) awaiting also household wares. (Source: Nieuwsblad Transport)

This means: Havarie Grosse to be expected for several Consignees with port of discharge Rotterdam, Hamburg, Southampton and Le Havre.

Regards Peter
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 08:53:27 am by Peter Hartung » Report to moderator   Logged
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: June 20, 2013, 09:47:57 am »

Insurance MOL COMFORT

MOL COMFORT insured (hull only) with 83 Millions USD. Value of cargo estimated 300 Millions USD.

Source: http://www.nieuwsbladtransport.nl/Modaliteiten/Scheepvaart/ArticleScheepvaart/tabid/141/ArticleID/36477/ArticleName/AchmeavreesthetergstevoorMOLComfortenlading/Default.aspx

mfg Peter Hartung
Report to moderator   Logged
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: June 20, 2013, 01:18:33 pm »

Press release of APL regarding MOL COMFORT

MOL Comfort

19 Jun 2013

We have been advised by our alliance partner MOL that the hull of the MV MOL Comfort has fractured into two parts amid bad weather in the Indian Ocean where the vessel was sailing from Singapore to Jeddah. Unfortunately, there are APL shipments onboard the affected ship.

As of local time 5am on June 19, the two sections of the ship remained stably afloat and were drifting near the central part of the Indian Ocean.  Majority of the containers remained onboard.  The crew were reportedly safely rescued when the incident occurred.

MOL is currently arranging for tugboats to tow the two sections of the MV MOL Comfort.  A patrol boat has also been despatched from the Port of Jebel Ali, U.A.E. to monitor the state of the ship and its contents.  Barring unforeseen circumstances, the patrol boat is expected to arrive on the affected site on June 23.

We are anxious to help our affected customers ascertain the extent of their losses and damages.  We will continue to follow up with MOL and are committed to providing timely updates as and when we get  them.

If you have cargoes onboard the MV MOL Comfort, you would have received an advisory from us.  We urge that you immediately notify your cargo insurers as your shipment contents might have been lost or damaged as a result of this incident.

Please feel free to contact your local APL representative if you require more information.

+++

Regards Peter
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,974



View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 20, 2013, 08:52:17 pm »

@ Peter

yes,,now it goes into the finer details, what most people don,t even think of. Just in time delivery for example.
I had that in 2002, ran in a sling here in the Caribbean, with 3 ships, same speeds, 3 weeks round turn. one broke down ahead of us, then we could not take all that cargo. We had every trip transhipment container for CUMANA,VEN. loaded off in Manzanillo , Panama and
onto us. 20 every week with pre assembled motors. They were going to a car plant (Toyota I think) in Ven and in the Puerto Jose area. After another round turn when we came back there,the factory stopped 2 days because the other ships was out and no more motors.
Imgine things like that with 1000,s of containers !!!!!
There is a rat-tail behind which dearly cost money and may be even jobs.



Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: June 20, 2013, 10:24:56 pm »

@ Captain Ted: Thank you very much for your comment. The break is a big impact into the international supply chains. Hamburg is involved, the full UK/Europe-Range with a total of  4,382 units (= 7,041 TEU).

With great concern i like to give the following to your attention:

“We can’t prejudge, and we’re not directly involved,”commented Tom Boardley, Marine Director at Lloyd’s Register and Chairman of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) today on the catastrophic break up of the containership MOL Comfort. “This incident of great concern and we want to know the cause of this structural failure." More: http://gcaptain.com/comfort-incident-great-concern/

Regards Peter
« Last Edit: June 20, 2013, 10:26:37 pm by Peter Hartung » Report to moderator   Logged
Dеnis
Photo Administrator
Home away from home
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 301


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: June 20, 2013, 10:26:55 pm »

Ted, I see for modern times containership is more dangerous than tanker.
Report to moderator   Logged
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: June 20, 2013, 10:35:37 pm »

As per dutch sources following MOL-Boxships apparently involved in this case due to identical construction: "MOL Creation ',' MOL Charisma ',' MOL Celebration ',' MOL Courage" and "MOL Competence'. All Mitsubishi built in 2007 and 2008. Link: http://www.nieuwsbladtransport.nl/Nieuws/Article/tabid/85/ArticleID/36485/ArticleName/Vijfschepenhebbenzelfdeontwerpalsongeluksschip/Default.aspx

Regards Peter
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,974



View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: June 20, 2013, 11:04:28 pm »

@ Peter

yes,,of ocurse they do like surprised,, but I think they know very well what high risk is involved in ever bigger (if not then they really don,t know what they are doing).

In their defence one should not forget the rapid pace set by big box owners in the last years in building ever bigger ships and also not the ship yards who builded them. There was simply no time to make big studies on such size ships. Unfortunately the big studies coming now "afterwards".  AS stated before , I know a few guys who sail(ed) big boxers and most of them said now and then,,cracks here and cracks there, I don,t believe therefore that those guys and others in that business were totally unaware of something like this may be can happen. Lets hope it will not, but taking into consideration that those big ships are now on the threshold of getting old makes one think.
Any older container ship I ever sailed, was in the holds total rusty, ballast pipes started rotting away, frames and stringers did buckle/bend (brittle steel because of the constant torsions and bendings,,special in ports) this process of holes in the pipes etc starts at about 8-10 years by my own experience. Nowadays with ever thinner materials most probably already when they are 5-7 years old. That,s the age segment where I think both the MSC Nicole and the MOL Comfort were.(correct me if I am wrong)
If the two parts can be salvaged it would be interesting to read one day what the investigation says. But THAT investigation should be done by indenpendent institutions and not the very companies who builded and or oversaw the construction of the very same.



 

Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: June 21, 2013, 04:21:34 am »

Update (No.5): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort
TOKYO- Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (MOL; President: Koichi Muto) updates the status of  the containership MOL Comfort as of 23:00 JST (18:00 Dubai time) on June 20, 2013. The vessel could not continue sailing under its own power from June 17 because the hull fractured in 2 parts while under way on the Indian Ocean,

1. Vessel
The fore and aft parts are drifting near 14’10”N 63’27”E and 13’13”N 62’05”E respectively in an east-northeast direction. The weather at the site is still adverse. The patrol boat which has departed Port of Jebel Ali, U.A.E. on June 19 is expected to arrive at the ocean site on around June 24.
2. Containers
Some of the containers might be lost or damaged during the incident, but majority of the cargo are confirmed to be aboard the fore and aft part.

[No change on below items 3 and 4 from the Update (No.4) released on June 20]

3. Rescue of the cargo and hulls
We have contracted with a salvage company and are proceeding to rescue the cargo and hulls.

4. Oil leakage
We confirmed no large volume of oil leakage.

###

Regards Peter
Report to moderator   Logged
SteKrueBe
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 223



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: June 21, 2013, 05:04:25 am »

Moin Theo, hi Peter etc.!
The series concerned is as follows:
'MOL Creation', built 2007, yard no. 2225
'MOL Charisma', built 2007, yard no. 2226
'MOL Celebration', built 2008, yard no. 2227
'MOL Courage', built 2008, yard no. 2228
'MOL Competence', built 2008, yard no. 2233
'APL Russia', built 2008, yard no. 2234
'APL Zeebrugge', built 2010, yard no. 2258
'APL Ningbo', built 2010, yard no. 2259
'Seroja Lima', built 2011, yard no. 2268
'Seroja Enam', built 2011, yard no. 2269
'MOL Commitment', built 2013, yard no. 2293
'tbn', built 2013, yard no. 2294

Koyo Dockyard built two vessels to a similar but not same design, 'MOL Continuity' an 'MOL Cosmos'. I am not sure, if they used YP47 steel as well.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 05:26:20 am by SteKrueBe » Report to moderator   Logged
lappino
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: June 21, 2013, 06:20:33 am »

Couple of thoughts on the subject, not necessarily of crucial significance... Wink

Cracks in the structure are nothing new: sometimes due to faulty design, they appear on specific elements, and then are routinely repaired, with structural modifications/reinforcements fitted.

If it affects one ship of the same class, then it usually affects all sisterships.

As for corrosion being a significant problem...it isn't. Corrosion protection has come a long way, even from 10 years ago.

And lack of maintenance as an excuse for excessive corrosion is just like the admission of guilt for premeditated murder of the crew: if one wishes the ship to be safe and operational, one needs to maintain it. Period.

There is one thing I've seen many times on the upper decks and hatch coamings of container vessels, irrespective of their sizes: stevedores damaging the coating, with resulting deep spots of rust. If not immediately taken care of, this corrosion will quickly eat into the steel and diminish the thickness.

And there are limits for thickness diminution.

And there are ultrasonic measurements to verify the remaining thickness of steel plates.

100$ question: what are the requirements for thickness measurements for container vessels after 5 years of service, that is during its 1st "special survey"?

(Answer: zero. UT is not required.)  Lips sealed

I will be really interested in the results of the investigation...
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 06:24:15 am by lappino » Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,974



View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2013, 08:14:59 am »

@ Lappino   / Stefan -  Peter
thanks all the infos

quote
There is one thing I've seen many times on the upper decks and hatch coamings of container vessels, irrespective of their sizes: stevedores damaging the coating, with resulting deep spots of rust. If not immediately taken care of, this corrosion will quickly eat into the steel and diminish the thickness.
unquote

The problem there lies more if one can do it. Usually at sea the hatch covers are covered by containers. In ports those covers go ashore, no permission from any major port and or container terminal of which I know that crew could go ashore and derust/paint etc.
During dry dock times, it is too expensive to do from shore side , and/or the crew does other works. Anyone who was anywhere in a DD with a ship can attest that working hours for crews in DD are easy 14-18 hrs a day. Jobs which are not done, usually are assigned for later at sea,,, then containers standing on top of it or in port they are ashore !!
A never ending circle.

quote
Cracks in the structure are nothing new: sometimes due to faulty design, they appear on specific elements, and then are routinely repaired, with structural modifications/reinforcements fitted.
unqoute

They are sure not new, but in my now close to 40 years at sea, I saw the first cracks on container vessels and then bigger than 175m. I can not remember that I saw in any other ship I ever sailed cracks of significance that it had to be really attended to right away.
In my young sailing years I can not remember ever seen a crack. That tells me that most
probably the notion to build ships with thinner and thinner steel and less and less stringers/frames in order to gain deadweight has a significant influence on the strength of the ships and on safety in the end.

 


Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
lappino
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2013, 09:17:56 am »

Thanks for your input, Capt. Ted!

Just to clarify, even if they are big, bad and many times rusty, hatch covers on modern container ships are not part of ship's hull structure.

Sure, they carry the load of all those stacked containers, but they do not influence the strength of the vessel's hull towards bending and torsion.

Hatch coamings, on the other side...on small notch at the corner may signify beginning of catastrophic failure...
Report to moderator   Logged
SteKrueBe
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 223



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: June 22, 2013, 08:25:21 am »

Hey there! I agree with Ted, Cracks in the area of the upper length-girder of larger container vessels are nothing unusual. Have seen this phenomenon in various degrees of severity on virtually all container vessels i sailed on in the recent years. I can even remember a cracked weld seam in the hatch coaming of a 88 meter long Sietas coaster after a severe bad weather in the Bay of Biscay. It's of course hard to make any guess about what happened at the 'MOL Comfort' before she finally ripped apart, but my first thoughts at watching the picture of the "crumpled" outer shell were more about the buckling strength then the typical outcome of a growing crack. Anyway, it's certainly a very exciting investigation ahead.
All the best,
Stefan
« Last Edit: June 22, 2013, 08:57:13 am by SteKrueBe » Report to moderator   Logged
PHa
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2013, 10:23:12 am »

Updates (No. 5, No. 6 and No.7): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort

http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13037.html

http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13038.html

http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13039.html

further

i am still checking the loss of containers in bay No. 11 after ship splits in two parts.
As per my own calculations maximal 468 TEU possibliy involved (maximum 2 x 18 TEU in a row, six rows on deck, 7 rows below deck = maximum 468 TEU per bay. This is a theoretical amount of TEU, but after checking the photos of this accident it seesm that the contents of Bay 11 a completly lost. Comments appriciated.
Thanks. Regards Peter
« Last Edit: June 23, 2013, 10:29:37 am by Peter Hartung » Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.048 seconds with 19 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved