ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: frisian spring has 2 imo numbers  (Read 5731 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Michel Gosselin
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,832


View Profile
« on: August 01, 2006, 08:16:25 pm »

does anyone know why she has 2 imo numbers? on the stern the number is 9371842 while Lloyd`s-Fairplay number is 9367762. which one is the right imo number?
Report to moderator   Logged
frederik
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 736



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2006, 08:40:02 pm »

Hi logan007,

According to equasis.org the name frisian spring does not exist, the both IMO numbers also does not exist!! Is there someone here that knows more?

greetz,

frederik
Report to moderator   Logged

Proud to be a Belgian docker!
Gerda & Frederik Plets
Sea Canal Brussels-Scheldt ship photos
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13,891


Freger65


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2006, 10:28:23 pm »

Hi logan007 & frederik,

I think that you can't find her on Equasis.org because she's not 'In Service' and still under construction.
She's now underway to shipyard Peters B.V. in Kampen , the Netherlands for completion.

Regards,
Frederik & Gerda
Report to moderator   Logged

Gerda & Frederik (Freger65)
All pictures photograped > Gerda │ Information and uploading photos > Frederik
Michel Gosselin
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,832


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2006, 10:37:14 pm »

then how come one of beluga newbuildings that not going to be built till 2008 is on equasis already. with an imo number 9360556, the name is VOLHARDING 624
Report to moderator   Logged
Kelvin Davies
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,649


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2006, 11:40:38 pm »

He's right though, Fred.
There is a picture of her at:
http://www.boatnerd.com/news/newsthumbs/images06/3-Frisian-Spring-07-11-06-d.jpg
And this clearly shows the IMO number as 9371842.
However, world register shows her with IMO number 9367762
and an in-service date of September 2006.
Report to moderator   Logged
Tony des Landes
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,647



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2006, 12:46:21 am »

According to the Internet Ships Register

9371842 is allocated to a vessel named Peters Kampen () with a status of "Never Existed". The name is actually a reference to the yard. The dimensions are very similar to the Frisian Spring and is listed as a sister along with several other vessels.

Frisian Spring has an IMO number of 9367762 which is obviously incorrect. Both are shown as having the same builder so there must have been some mix up at some point.

It raises the question of the value of IMO numbers.

Tony d
Report to moderator   Logged

...
Phil English
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,492


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2006, 08:35:35 am »

This is a fairly typical problem when trying to track and correctly identify new ships - as I do for a living!

LR Fairplay are the body responsible for issuing IMO numbers. However, they do make mistakes and occasionally a new vessel - one that is yet to be delivered - will be given two IMO numbers. Now, I don't work for LRF (I actually work for a rival company) but I can only assume that they have very similar problems to those I have when trying to gather information from shipowners or shipbuilders. First of all, it is a bit like trying to get blood out of a stone in some cases (though LRF do have the unfair advantage of having sole rights to the IMO number, so owners are OBLIGED to send them data under IMO regulations). However, whether it is sent to them correctly and unambiguously is another matter. It is quite likely that in this instance, as with many others I have come accross, that the hull of this vessel was being built at one yard (probably Eastern Europe) but the actual building contract was placed elsewhere - Shipyard Peters in this case. Consequently, if the initial information is limited, it might appear that two ships are being built when, in fact, it is only one. Two IMO numbers were initially issued, but when it became apparent that there was only one ship, one number was cancelled and thus appears as 'never existed' on the LRF database. The correct number will be the one appearing on the ship's hull.

A bit of a long winded explanation, but I hope it helps.

Phil
Report to moderator   Logged
Michel Gosselin
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,832


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2006, 09:15:19 am »

thanks for info, phil, it help me a lot. you're right about it being built in two different shipyards. but the hull was constructed in canada & the machinery will be placed in the netherlands.
Report to moderator   Logged
Marc Piché
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,217



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2006, 11:03:15 am »

I updated my photos of the ship to include the correct IMO number.

Thanks for bringing up the issue.

Marc Piché
Report to moderator   Logged

......
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.027 seconds with 19 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved