Japan tsunami 'ghost ship' drifting to Canada...

[Robert Tarling]

This from the BBC:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17500008

Does anyone know the ship's identity?

Very Best Wishes,
Bob.

[Dave Forbes]

This is truelly amazing , drifting for over a year without going aground and no-one has noticed it before now.

[Tuomas Romu]

Makes you wonder what else you could find outside the major shipping lanes...

I would expect that a derelict like that would capsize and eventually sink if left drifting without power in the open seas.

[Trucker001]

  i am suprised she didnt sink yet.. no power n no way pumping out the bilges  i wonder if she has any radioactivity in her? where that power plant was leaking

[Tuomas Romu]

I'd say it's quite unlikely that she has any additional radioactivity from the Fukushima incident. After all, that happened more or less after the tsunami, while the ship probably "departed" on the same day the waves hit Japan...

[Luis del Fresno Miyar]

I belive the vessel is larger than 15 mts. I don't know who gave the notice.

[Robert Tarling]

There's another link here:-
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-25/japanese-fishing-ship-spotted-off-canada/3911012

Gives the size as 65 metres...

[victor radio74]

I wonder if anybody was onboard at the tsunami,terrible supposition(the Flying Dutchman)!

[ManilaBoy45]

   WOW! A 65 metres ship that drifted for more than 1 year and yet nobody spotted or noticed it ...   

[davidships]

Best image I can find is http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Japanese+tsunami+ghost+ship+drifts+coast/6351683/story.html
Fishery number looks like HKI-113 or HK1113.
Reported that owner believes that nobody was on board when she was swept away.

[Jens Boldt]

According to German news the vessel called Ryou-un Maru has now been sunk by an American coast guard vessel.
 (Edited 08.04.12, removed a hyperlink which no longer worked)

[Timsen]

Video of ship under fire:
http://cgvi.uscg.mil/media/main.php?g2_itemId=1587691

[Trucker001]

 they sunk it without looking to see if it had fuel or other nasty stuff aboard it so my question is who will pay the cleanup bill if it has fuel in it?

[Jens Boldt]

The authorities have considered this, it says in the news. But they decided that a drifting vessel without any lighting and communication systems would be the bigger risk...

[Tuomas Romu]

they sunk it without looking to see if it had fuel or other nasty stuff aboard it so my question is who will pay the cleanup bill if it has fuel in it?

There was about 7,500 litres of diesel fuel onboard which could have resulted in a disaster had the derelict drifted closer to shipping lanes. Thus, sinking the fishing boat and allowing the fuel to evaporate from the surface was deemed to be a better solution than risking e.g. collision with another ship. It's unlikely that there will be any long-lasting environmental effects since we're not talking about heavy fuel oil or crude oil, but I too would have wanted to see at least the fuel tanks emptied before scuttling the vessel. It should have not been even difficult considering that the ship was floating and not in immediate danger of sinking, but I guess the USCG is not equipped for that kind of tasks. Towing the ship ashore and scrapping it there would also have been an option, but then again it would've cost more than couple of rounds from the deck gun...