Trucker001: I just looked at highlanders imo number and it was taken from her and given to stena transit .. what gives there
It would be remarkable if HIGHLANDERS had ever been allocated 9469388 since such numbers were not being allocated until 2007 - HIGHLANDERS ex-STENA TRAVELLER would have been given her 9331189 in about 2004, when first ordered, along with her sister's 931177. Occasionally an error is made in allocation, usually two ships turning out to be one-and-the-same or confusion with shipyard order-books.
Bob Scott: That pilot boat would never have had an IMO number. It is too small. The number quoted, if it is at all relevant, is probably some other official number
The Scheme, run by IHS-Fairplay, assigns IMO Ship Numbers to propelled, sea-going merchant ships of 100gt and over, covered by SOLAS. The IMO's coverage does not directly apply to a range of other vessels (eg fishing, non-powered ships, pleasure yachts, lightships, SAR vessels, hopper barges, hydrofoils, air cushion vehicles, floating docks, warships and wooden ships). But IHSF has extended the Scheme on a voluntary basis to include many of these shiptypes and vessels below 100gt. Shipbuilders and/or owners often request IMO numbers for such vessels and they are issued accordingly. They remain issued "for life" as with any other IMO number.
JAN VAN GENT of 1969 was indeed issued 8434051. It is possible that she was originally classed by LR and therefore given a LR number, which consequently morphed into an IMO number in 1987, or that it was requested by her owners. I think the reason the number has disappeared from some databases is that IHS-Fairplay wrongly deleted her from active vessels as "Continued Existence In Doubt".
David
