ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: EXCLUSIVE: The collision between BALTIC ACE and CORVUS J  (Read 11163 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
antondavis
Just popping in

Offline Offline

Posts: 2


View Profile
« on: December 06, 2012, 09:56:43 am »

Hi guys I attach a link to the EXCLUSIVE VIDEO of the collision between the BALTIC ACE and CORVUS J of December 5, 2012. You can see it at: http://www.vesselfinder.com/news/742-EXCLUSIVE-VIDEO-The-collision-between-BALTIC-ACE-and-CORVUS-J-AIS-Historical-Data
Report to moderator   Logged
Tore Hettervik
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 190



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2012, 11:10:32 am »

Thanks for the video antondavis
Report to moderator   Logged
polsteam
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 815


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2012, 07:59:58 pm »

judging from:

1. this "video" (I would think it should be interpreted in another way comparing to how it is explained by "Maritime Bulletin" / Odin website)

and

2. the fact that Corvus J has had its bow bulb twisted TO THE RIGHT

... I would think that:

1. Corvus J MADE a proper turn (to right) to avoid collision

2. Baltic Ace MADE a turn as well (to the left), while she should continue to proceed on its previous coyurse

the above resulted with the fact that Baltic Ace gave its STARBOARD side to be hit
(instead of PORT - what we would expect, judging from the initial courses of both ships)


Corvus J bulb is twisted to the RIGHT because the hit Baltic Ace's side was moving (in relation to Corvus J bow) to the right while being hit
if we assume that Baltic Ace was moving forward (not backwards) then the above means (most probably) that BALTIC Ace was hit in its RIGHT (starboard) side, while turning hard to port during last minutes or seconds before collision

IF the vehicle carrier would have been hit in its PORT side, then the containership's bulb would (most probably) have to be twisted to the LEFT




 
Report to moderator   Logged

despite using "polsteam" for my nick I have NO personal (professional) or business connections with the company of the same name
Allan RO
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,605


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2012, 09:27:56 pm »

Hi Polsteam

Seems to me that rules of the road would mean Corvus J should give way to Baltic Ace.  Skipper of Baltic Ace believed that Corvus J was not doing so, so ordered hard port turn to pass behind boxboat.  Simultaneously, box boat realised she should turn to starboard to allow Baltic Ace to pass in front of her.  By the time each realised what was happening it was too late.  Could not the vessels have commumicated by radio to let each other know of their intentions ?  A terrible disaster that should never happen in this day and age.  But until all vessels are controlled by computers, human errors will always occur.  I express my sincere condolences to all those affected by this terrible collision

Allan
Report to moderator   Logged
polsteam
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 815


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2012, 10:29:07 am »

what I found elsewhere:

CAPT. D. Peter Boucher, MN(Ret.) says:
December 6, 2012 at 3:55 pm
The video shows both ship tracks until about 0.20 secs. then it jumps forward to apparently after the impact took place. The Corvus J is shown as a southerly bound vessel which alters her course to her starboard (right) in compliance with Rule 15 of the Nautical Rules of the Road. There is then the jump at 0.20 secs and the northerly bound Baltic Ace is shown pointing NW (approx.) indicating that she could have altered course to her port (left) in a clear violation of the Nautical Rules of the Road. It is also reported that the Corfus J had severe bow damage which could be a further indication of the two ships relative position at impact. We shall have to wait until a complete AIS video is made available and/or the European Union Marine Accident Investigators complete their inquiries.
Good Watch.
Report to moderator   Logged

despite using "polsteam" for my nick I have NO personal (professional) or business connections with the company of the same name
Robert Smith
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,695



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2012, 02:23:46 pm »

For the sake of clarity and simplicity can we please limit this discussion to one thread only Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
Ancient Mariner
Not too shy to talk
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2012, 05:04:23 pm »

Could not the vessels have commumicated by radio to let each other know of their intentions ?

http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mgn167.pdf
This M-Notic is why VHF comms should be avoided for collision avoidance.

Also - since that video doesn't show where the collision occured, surrounding traffic, any traffic lanes, or any host of other factors anything said based on it is circumstanctial nonsense.

Let the authorities conduct their investigations and then discuss the outcome of that.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,972



View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2012, 07:11:02 pm »

agreed
but one thing about the last missing 20 sec.
The Corvus J made the required as per regulation turn to her stb. and then the Baltic Ace made the turn towards the course line of the Corvus J. Even when the last 20 sec missing
it is clear the the Corvus J made the right move and the Baltic Ace the wrong one. Assuming the Corvus J made then a turn back to her port side, that was most probably then a maneuvre of the last moment back to avoid the collision. Whatever happened in the last missing 20 sec. the Baltic Ace never should have changed course into the course line of the Crovus J.
If for any reason, as mentioned other traffic around, triggered the course change the Baltic Ace did, I don,t see that . If that was the reason,that course change to her port should have come before the Corvus J acted as per COLREGS and only after contact the Crovus J via VHF.
But these VHF contacts are highly dangerous and should be avoided, in this case may be warranted in an early stage, taking into account the area and a lot traffic, but nevertheless dangerous.
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Niall Magner
Quite a regular
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2012, 07:54:31 pm »

Has Corvus j been allowed to dock at Antwerp yet? Her AIS is still off!
Report to moderator   Logged
Brian Cawkwell
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2013, 08:35:05 pm »

Dutch police have identified a body found on 19 December, 20 nautical miles west of IJmuiden, as that of the 31 year-old Polish first mate of the Baltic Ace, a RoRo that sank within minutes 5 December  2012 after colliding with container vessel Corvus J.

The body was found by a fisherman and then subsequently transferred to port by a rescue boat and handed over to the police who established positive fingerprint identification.

11 of 24 crewmembers were killed as a result and only 5 bodies were recovered immediately following the incident.  The positive identification by authorities of the first mate marks the sixth body recovered.

Salvage operations suspended

In phone call with Svitzer Salvage spokesperson Cor Radings, he noted the recovery and removal of oil from the Baltic Ace has been temporarily suspended.

“Due to the low temperature of the surrounding water the oils inside the ship have solidified, our team of salvage experts discovered earlier this week. Samples that have been taken from the vessel’s bunker tanks show that the oil should best be removed and stored at higher tempatures, meaning the method to remove the oil has to be revised.”

According to Mr. Radings there are several options to increase the temperature of the oil. “One way is to inject hot water into the oil tanks, another way is to insert a heating spiral.”

These kind of operations however are difficult.

“The weather conditions at the scene are harsh. Because of the high waves, the windows in which can be worked are very short.” Cor Radings said it is not unlikely that new operations will be pushed forward until weather conditions improve.

Whether Svitzer will be carrying out following operations is yet unknown. “In consultation with the owner and insurers of the Baltic Ace the contract with Svitzer has been ended”, Radings said. “They will first make a new assessment before taking any further actions.”

“Before returning to IJmuiden our salvage team has blinded off the ventilation pipes of the Baltic Ace to minimize any potential leakage.” The diving support/supply vessel VOS Statisfaction, that functioned as a base ship during the operations, has been released from her duties.

- By Tobias Pieffers, Edited by Rob Almeida


http://gcaptain.com/missing-crew-member-baltic-found/
« Last Edit: January 15, 2013, 08:37:08 pm by Brian Cawkwell » Report to moderator   Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.057 seconds with 20 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved