Author Topic: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam  (Read 43728 times)

Offline ugamskjaer

  • Just popping in
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #30 on: December 06, 2012, 01:47:31 PM »
I think it is a great call Tore  :) I think we should focus on the pure peoble were have loset ther fameliy members and freinds !!!!

Offline W.Pr. 242

  • Quite a regular
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #31 on: December 06, 2012, 02:16:47 PM »
any information on the nationalities of those onboard the baltic ace?

Polish (11 persons: Master, Officers and Cook. 2 Dead, 3 missed, 6 rescued), Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Filipino.


« Last Edit: December 06, 2012, 02:36:33 PM by Yaniv »

Offline sabastiaan

  • Just popping in
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #32 on: December 06, 2012, 02:20:49 PM »

Offline Tuomas Romu

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #33 on: December 06, 2012, 02:40:40 PM »
Although I agree that we shouldn't start pointing fingers and blaming people while they are still searching for possible survivors, there's no reason to curtail discussion about the potential causes of the incident, be it technical or human error, or ways to prevent such accidents from happening again.

Does anyone have Significant Ships of 2005 at hand? The sister ship of Baltic Ace, Elbe Highway, has been presented in that volume. Any chance of checking out if the ship had side tanks below the main deck?

Offline Hannes van Rijn

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,573
    • View Profile
    • http://www.shipspotting.com/userinfo.php?uid=20488
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #34 on: December 06, 2012, 02:41:37 PM »
FIVE crewmen were killed and six are missing after two vessels collided in the North Sea off Rotterdam.

Car carrier Baltic Ace was travelling from Zeebrugge, Belgium to Kotka in Finland when it was involved in the 5 December collision with German container ship Corvus J, which was en route to Antwerp from Grangemouth, Scotland.

Dutch coastguards launched a rescue mission and saved 13 seafarers from Baltic Ace, which sank about 70nm west of Rotterdam. Five bodies were also recovered but six other crew members are missing, feared drowned.

Sea conditions were severe at the time, with waters were near freezing. The rough weather also hampered the rescue mission, Netherlands coastguards spokesman Peter Verburg told the BBC.

The search involved three coastguard boats, two navy vessels, four rescue helicopters and a coastguard aircraft, Royal Dutch Sea Rescue Organisation spokesman Peter Westenberg told the BBC.

Chances of surviving in such conditions were
« Last Edit: December 06, 2012, 08:30:23 PM by Hannes van Rijn »

Offline Brian Cawkwell

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 801
    • View Profile
    • http://www.shipais.com/currentmap.php?map=SeahamDocks
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #35 on: December 06, 2012, 03:17:48 PM »
Sister ship is Nordic Ace , I was looking at her last night when I got a call from Dianne who runs the Mission to Seafarers at South Shields , this vessel was here 3 times last month and used to call on average every 8 days . I am a ship visitor volunteer and we rreat these guys as good friends , such a tragic accident .
Visit our facebook page search " South Shields Seafarers Centre " There are some photos of the guys on there , dont know who is missing though !!!

Offline Pier Master

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
    • The Pier Master
Blistering barnacles...

Offline michael-taal

  • Just popping in
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #37 on: December 06, 2012, 04:06:43 PM »
the Coast Guard has stopped searching for survivors reason: they think nobody will be a life right now in the water and it is dark now


Offline Captain Ted

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,992
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #39 on: December 06, 2012, 06:10:35 PM »
re: someone mentioned COLREGS

when I catched a 2.Mate some years back in the english channel (wepassed the greenwich buoy already, East bound, with a port maneuvre ( it is clearly said in the COLREGS that one should not change course towards a vessel on the port bow ), {think it is reg 17 d, not sure on that}
and I questioned the Mate why he did that, the only answer I got,, It was better !!!!
When I corned him about the COLREG, he could not really answer, so I aksed randomly a few
questions which all of them he could not answer. then he said and I quote, which I will never forget !!!!
" I did not involve myself with that book too much yet " . I made a report to the managing company by e-mail, asking them if I should fire him now on the spot, or set him on the next buoy we pass , for that answer I still waiting today. 
I,ts almost always human errors and as long 10% of the seaman of the worlds fleet go back to school when new regs / technics are invented (ECDIS comes to mind,,the biggest accident creator ever)and get updated certs or new,,the rest 90% comes aboard with nice, colorfull certs and when you ask what school they went for that,, it is a high school,,very high on a mountain,, the rest you think......
NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!

Offline Robert Smith

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,695
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #40 on: December 06, 2012, 07:01:25 PM »
This is the third time in the past 3 years that a relatively large vessel was hit head on by a short seatrade container feeder. After being hit by "Nirint Pride" the  "MSC Nikita" almost sank in August 2009. The "CMA CGM Alaska was hit below the waterline by the "Pantonio" in Oct. 2011 and had to return to port. And now this catastrophic event. Maybe the IMO or ITF should look into the perils of the short sea trade, because neither the Dutch authorities, nor the respective flagstates seem interested or able to investigate this phenomenon in depth.

Offline Hannes van Rijn

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,573
    • View Profile
    • http://www.shipspotting.com/userinfo.php?uid=20488
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #41 on: December 06, 2012, 07:51:04 PM »
Hi Robert.

I think that she was single hull,that's why she sank so fast.
The CMA CGM Alaska was double hull.and she was lucky that the Pantonio not sail so fast.
Just look at this picture.

ShipSpotting.com


Offline polsteam

  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 815
    • View Profile
    • http://ships.greenet.pl/photo
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #42 on: December 06, 2012, 08:04:19 PM »
Also, a number of recent ships have no double sides of any kind, making the ships susceptible to dangerous flooding even in minor "fender benders". I wonder if Baltic Ace was one of those?

Baltic Ace has had double sides in way from double bottom up to the level of main deck (which is also a external ramps level deck)

Baltic Ace had three decks (cargo space levels, including the one immediately above the inner bottom) below the main deck
« Last Edit: December 06, 2012, 08:18:01 PM by polsteam »
despite using "polsteam" for my nick I have NO personal (professional) or business connections with the company of the same name

Offline Tuomas Romu

  • Home away from home
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #43 on: December 06, 2012, 08:40:11 PM »

Baltic Ace has had double sides in way from double bottom up to the level of main deck (which is also a external ramps level deck)

Baltic Ace had three decks (cargo space levels, including the one immediately above the inner bottom) below the main deck

Thank you for the information.

Offline Dave van Spronsen

  • Photo Administrator
  • Top Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,418
    • View Profile
Re: ship sinking 100KM of Rotterdam
« Reply #44 on: December 06, 2012, 08:48:33 PM »
Found this one on Facebook


Admin for Containerships

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk