ShipSpotting.com Forum
Shipspotters all over the world => Shipping News and information => Topic started by: Barry Dewling on December 29, 2013, 08:28:42 PM
-
Cargo ship in distress near Portugal Cove South
Vessel was having problems with its hull, several people safely hoisted onto helicopter
CBC News Posted: Dec 29, 2013 4:14 PM NT Last Updated: Dec 29, 2013 4:49 PM NT
Two Cormorant helicopters are helping rescue crew members from a cargo ship off the coast of Newfoundland.
The joint rescue co-ordination centre in Halifax says a 24-member crew is being rescued from a container ship off the coast of Newfoundland.
Officials said four crew members have already been hoisted from the MSC Monterey, which is located about 60 kilometres south of Portugal Cove, by two Cormorant helicopters out of 103 Squadron Gander.
Several aircraft and a Coast Guard vessel were deployed to help with the rescue after the ship sent out a distress call at about 11 a.m. local time. Officials said the crew reported a problem with the ship's hull and said the vessel was in danger of breaking apart.
The crew will be transported to an RCMP casualty reception point in Portugal Cove South following the rescue.
Officials said it doesn't appear anyone was injured.
The ship's point of origin has not been determined.
-
I believe that, having completed calls in Bremerhaven, Felixstowe and Antwerp, MSC Monterey was en route from Le Havre to Newark.
-
Dec 29, 2013 6:02 PM NT
CBC Newfoundland & Labrador
Cargo ship in distress near Portugal Cove South
Vessel was having problems with its hull, several people safely hoisted onto helicopter
The joint rescue co-ordination centre in Halifax says a 24-member crew is being rescued from a container ship off the coast of Newfoundland.
Officials said four non-essential crew members have already been hoisted from the MSC Monterey, which is located about 60 kilometres south of Portugal Cove, by two Cormorant helicopters out of 103 Squadron Gander. They are being transported to an RCMP casualty reception point in Portugal Cove South.
The 20 other crew members remain on the ship and are working to resolve the issue.
Several aircraft and a Coast Guard vessel were deployed to help with the rescue after the ship sent out a distress call at about 11 a.m. local time. Officials said the crew reported a problem with the ship's hull and said the vessel was in danger of breaking apart.
Officials said it doesn't appear anyone was injured.
The ship's point of origin has not been determined.
With files from The Canadian Press
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/cargo-ship-in-distress-near-portugal-cove-south-1.2478492
-
new pictures here
http://gcaptain.com/msc-monterey-containership-sinking-canada/
-
Best of lock to everyone on board!
-
You can find news here http://www.cbc.ca/nl/ including news about ship Navi Wind on home page.
Article about Navi Wind:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/navi-wind-crew-return-home-vessel-remains-in-argentia-1.2478323
-
There we go again
As I say already a long time,Those bigger ships and now approaching 10 years are unproven ships and unproven construction It,s not the first and surely not the last.
Most Container that size and bigger are now coming to an age where cracks are the norm
and not the unexspected or unusual. I believe we will unfortunately see more of that. Looking fwd (not for the crews) to see the first mega boxers going apart.
One of the major points I think might play a big role is that these big ships really don,t feel bad weather up to force 7-8,,, they just go through without really moving with the waves.
This continuesly not moving but still taking 3-4 m waves and long swells makes the ships steel "brittle" next thing one knows they crack and in real bad weather like force 10 and more or long high swell they break apart complete.
-
AIS showing Monterey making way near St-marys NFD with coast guard George R. Pearkes by its side.
-
Hi
Its good to hear that knowone has been injured!
Regards
Gordon
-
Ted, I think we might see more photos from primedude, scraping now big 300m 10 year old boxers... There's a high rate of building new ones anyway!
Oh, and as usual, every time a new ship gets (in)famous, people start reuploading old photos of it for the sake of hits. :D
-
@Denis
yes,,but also due to the opening of the bigger panama canal a lot panamaxer will go to the
beaches because of that.
Lets hope these breaking apart becomes not the norm, but I am afraid that we did not see the end of it.
-
Captain Ted, don,t know if youv,e been on many trips in north atlantic this time of year but boy she,s sure acting up this year & i expect will be a lot rougher in jan & feb 2014.They can build all the large ones as they want but be on guard as "SHE" seems to welcome the big ones to show who,s boss. She,s a rough old sea that man has tried to tame but when she howls & roars batten down as "sleep" & "grub" are not a benefit when she does. Crew on MONTEREY are very lucky. God Bless.
-
There was a short report on German TV some minutes ago that said that the ship is in danger of breaking apart...
By the way, did anyone notice that the shipowner is NSB Niederelbe, Buxtehude, Germany? Remember MSC Flaminia...
-
I am about 150 km away from Portugal Cove. How far from land is it? I could try to go take pictures of it if it isn't too far.
-
Allo Steve,
I estimate the distance of the MSC MONTEREY from the west shore of the baie to be 5NM.
Go Steve Go!
Marcel Giroux,
PS: Bonne ann
-
Steve where are you located? Last i heard you were in BLANC SABLON. Long way from ST. MARY,S BAY.
-
Snocky
I crossed the NA at least 25-30 times in my carrier, also in the storm times. One time for a 6.5 day crossing we needed 9.5 days with a 2500 TEU ship. Look up my storm pics :-) (Cap Flinders for example)
This time of the year I really have no big interest to be there !!!!
-
Jens
Flaminia was a fire, this is a crack in the hull, by the nature of both total difference However seemingly serious enough that the Capt decided to get passengers off by choppers
-
Oh no, not again !!!
There was the MSC Napoli cracking... before, MSC had also a ship, that was diverting itself into two parts. (I think, the site where you can find Report and photos of this, and also other accident is www.cargolaw.com)
Bigger ships, with not flexible enough construction you think. New, not yet proofed designs of ships. Series of These ships are built in Korea and such.
But I wonder one Thing:
Maersk is the biggest Container shipping Company. NOT YET any of their ships did crack !!
Why MSC is more prone than other companies for that ??
It can't be just the ships design, or the Age of ships, because These series of ships are used by various companies, Maersk also has many older ships chartered.
So, I wonder - and it is really just a guess - whether such is also a case of continous non-careful cargo planning within certain companies ???
I am courious, Folks what you think !
Greetings,
Cornelia
-
Cargo planning/stowage by the container lines is sometimes hit by shippers not declaring the correct weight of the containers, - and the weight declared is probably not below the actual weight.
As for MOL Comfort a Japanese government institution has determined that the stress on the hull was only at 67% of the "design stress level". They will now take a closer look at the declared weight of the containers.
... and, Cornelia, Maersk ships also crack, even if they do not break. Emma Maersk at Suez
is a sad story of multiple errors and desigh flaws by all players, ... except by the sailors/crew.
Niels
-
You are thinking of MSC Carla, Cornelia, in the mid-90's.
-
The MSC MONTEREY has moved well inside St Marys bay near Admirals Beach. The Globe and Mail reported that Transport Canada said the ship has been ordered to stay at an anchorage just east of Little Colinet Island, which is in eastern Newfoundland
-
@Cornelia
Maersk has the same problems with cracks than others have too. They have however a better after construction support system. The first E-class had a lot after-fixes, because of cracks. I remember in 2007 when I was in R-dam inbound and one of the big ones at anchor, I think it was the Emma, and the pilot told me he was there the day before and he heard that
techs were a/b and worked on cracks. Has a lot to do with public relations and Maersk is good on that. Others are not as good or don,t care that much. When I was on the container ships, cracks were the norm, mostly not dangerous usually or not serious in that matter that the ship was threatened to come apart but fixable and specially then when it was right away attended too which we did. Some don,t.
But one thing I firmly believe that we did not see the end of it.
There is also another view to the whole cracking and the causes. How the companies let for example Captain,s handle bad weather situations.
Some companies are known when ships falling out of schedules then the Capt,s head is on the chopping block, ergo, they go high speeds as long as possible. You won,t believe what kind of inquiries from charterer offices coming to a ship when the vessel is delayed by bad weather. Asking for more speed is the least. Another thing is the distribution of cargoe,s during loading and discharging. (also when now the ships go slower in general)
Or the experience of crews. When I was young I hardly can remember that I had a Capt under 40, today it is not unusual to be under 30 !!!! No time to gain experience.
Construction another reason, I was as AB on a ship, the engineer in charge during construction sailed with us the first 2 month. He inspected everyday something and then again and wrote down. Today that is not done anymore because construction is planned by computers and not experienced engineers !!!
Also, the confinement to construction plans. Every change from the plans cost extra money and usually big. That,s the reason why you can be on a ship and see something bad and you sail another ship, which is 3 years younger, but the same class and the SAME problem. i.e. problems are not really fixed but more ignored.
And, last but not least, the majority of ships builded in the last 10 years had one thing in common: to be builded as quick as possible. I saw ships where welding crews were still aboard during the maiden voyage !!!!
In ports
The bending and shear moments are usually ignored, can not even be controlled by ships side because you have only the arrival condition and departure condition , there is no in-between condition. Impossible to do when a ship is discharged by 6 gantry cranes at the same time. However, I can say, sailed in charter for CSAV/HAPAG/H-SUED/MSC and also Maersk, the H-Sued and Maersk doing a better job than others with the planning of loading and discharging. I attribute just that a lot to the crack problems, not understanding when and how to reduce at sea and loading/discharging in ports.
For both are no examples to go by. These big ships at sea, force 7 is not even felt beside
that the waves still hitting the ship, and force 7 with good swell produces easy 3-5m waves,,thats enough to make material i.e. steel brittle over time in combination with the cargo operations
There are a lot of factors coming together, which it is, nobody ever can tell,,most probably it is a combination of all
-
@ theo thank you for such extensive and detailed explanation to bring some light into this :-)
-
I wonder how many of these containership cracks were caused by the vessels being loaded incorrectly. I remember one shipping bod admitting that he once sent one out with a negative gm
-
Captain Ted, you are the voice of reason in all of this.
You have the experience to comment accurately on why things go wrong.
From one Theo to another..have a brilliant New Year and thanks for your insight into all this stuff.
All the best
tvtech (Theo)
-
@ Cornelia/tvtech,,, you guys are welcome
@ Sandy,, if the Capt let that happen to him, what one can say. I had situations
not with negative stability but with over stowing by weights (means when a slot can hav 6 container and the tanktop {{hatch-cover}} can have 50 tons and the weight of all 6 together
is higher. Then nowadays a alarm is shown in the stabi-pc, visual and also,if not disabled by sound. I had that a few times and send an email to the planner to change it, what planners tend to do shift one container somewhere else , but then you might have too much there. Which means,,, If you don,t stay on top of it, you screwed !!!! Because once you sign the finished stow plan, even if you honestly overlooked it, the restow goes to the ships account. I one case , I saw it early enough and they had to restow 54 container,,all on chart account, you can imagine the planner did not like me anymore. In another I did not see that a reefer container was stowed in the 2nd tier on deck on the outside slot, I left it there,,because chart said,, restow on ships account, 4 restows would have been,,
nothing happened to the container, so I was lucky and it was only a short trip from R-dam to Le Harve and we had to move it there again anyhow.
But if you let it happen once, you can not back out anymore, so staying on top is the half rent !!!!
-
I'm afraid mis-declared weights are a big problem and MSC seem to be near the top of the table, boxes on the manifest are declared as 25t but come out of the hold as 32-33t. We twin pick on some cranes up to 50t yet the cranes are always cutting out, it's always the crane at fault <sigh> but when we insist the boxes are taken to the weight bridge they are all over weight. We now calibrate the cranes almost monthly due to the increase in mis-declared weights as the paperwork often does not match the real weight of the box and that puts a big strain on land side and vessel planning, there's too much trust in the paperwork.
The worst I had to extract was a 15t and a 32t twin pick, it got half way out of the hold and ripped through the cell guides and jammed because it was so unbalanced, ended up cutting the cell guides to get the load out.
To be fair it's not totally the carriers or planners fault, it's more down to the agents or those loading the boxes, with box costs dependent on weight then it's no wonder some shippers are overloading their boxes and trying to get away with a cheaper tariff and without dynamic weighting during loading, it's anyone's guess what's in the box. Once a box is loaded and arrives at the port in gate there's little or no weight check through out the whole loading process.
Capt Ted is correct, I think we will see more of these incidents in the coming years as vessels get older and the growing trend of overweight boxes increases.
-
Hi Captain Ted
That is exactly why you are still on top of the game. You have the experience. You have the knowledge. You can see things possibly going wrong...so you try to prevent bad situations.
Not try to ignore them and sail on...
tvtech
-
Thanks Michael
Good post and a brilliant 2014 for you.
Lovely to see answers from the Guys in the know. Not people guessing.
tvtech
-
@Michael
That is correct it is not always the fault of the carrier/planner,,but they are the ones who are in charge of accepting the containers (and of course their contracting agents/terminals)
It is therefore also already in some ports that every container is weighted. The funny part,,if we discharge with a bulker via hoppers into trucks,,each truck goes over a weight station if it is a truck with a container on it often not !!!
i.e. why is it possible in one segment of shipping and in the other where through misdeclarations stability problems can arise very quick not at all.
I remember in R-dam with a container vessel, we were on draft mark, but according terminal we had 800 tons to go in about 50 container. But according to the terminal ships fault because we had not all ballast out. We had !!!! but nevertheless they insisted.
Not unusual at all. Problem is than, if you don,t show them virtually the middelfinger,,everybody jumps on you as Capt, once you budge,,you dead meat !!!!
-
Probably the best discussion I have ever seen on the Internet.
Informed people talking sense. Thank you.
tvtech
-
Ted, I think you repeating like your older posts over & over while the containerships continue to crack! xD
Meanwhile, Happy New Year to all! ;D What kind of beautiful/interesting/ugly ships to spot now this year will bring?
Regards,
Denis
-
Ted, every crane we have has a load weight system, sadly it is not there to assist or protect the vessel stability, but is there to protect the crane from overweight and structural damage.
A typical large quayside rotation could be up to 4000 container moves in 30 hrs, with seven cranes working you can very quickly destabilize a vessel and out run the ballast pumps. Shippers demand faster and faster turn around times and it is getting close to the point where technology cannot keep up. If you get a delay on one or two cranes then the stability stowage plan goes to pot very quickly, it is a constant juggling act.
I don't think any port has the ability to dynamically record the weight of boxes being loaded, by the time the system has recorded the weight, sent it to the planners, added it to the stowage plan, forwarded it to the vessel (by hand delivered paperwork usually) you've probably already loaded another 20 boxes. The technology is there but the interface between planning/stowage and vessel systems is not. New systems are coming on line all the time and they all add in extra safety margins and speed up the planning process, but until we get dynamic box weights at the point of loading then vessels will always be at risk of undeclared weights and the resultant damage/losses.
The last line of defense is the guy loading the box and to be fair they do an excellent job, very often drivers have noted what are supposed to be empty boxes going eight or nine high on deck and are loaded at 25t, the plan shows it should be up there but common sense says not, in those instances a re-stow is called for and provided.
I've also seen a MSC vessel sail with no boot topping showing and the lower 12" of the MSC logo underwater, possibly overloaded or someone painted the logo too low? I'm sure I took a photo but cannot find it at the moment, I've also got a photo of MSC Carla a few days before she broke up, I believe Le Harve was the next Port (and last) after us to load.
Be safe and have a happy new year.
-
Yes, that "MSC" Logo is painted very low on the hull, as you can see on some photos I have taken, here.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=596109
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1085808
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=892824
It does aesthetically not look very good, I agree on that ;D It makes indeed looking their ships very well loaded.
-
@Michael
I know Michael, I sailed on 5 different 3 crane ships. it protects the crane but not the"stability"
As I wrote, stability check during load/disch is impossible so far, same as you state
Systems will come to correct that, same way as 30 years ago we worked with sextant and now
we have GPS. If one looks at the technisation of the last 30-40 years (never mind where actually) and think 30-40 years ahead,,it,s mindboggling. Amazon experimenting for example with home deliveries for orders via drones. They tested it already and it works, but of course the governing laws are not there for such matter now,, but in 10-20 years.
You order a toy and 1 hr later a drone lands in your back yard and drops the package !!!!
-
@Michael
I agree that the ability to dynamically record the weight of boxes being loaded is still far from real situation at container terminal. But let's take a look what we have now at terminals, the container position entered manually by stevedores with special device into system where planners can use all information about containers which are already loaded onboard. Normally after completion of cargo operations planner should provide vessel with updated cargo plan. The question is why nobody want include updated weights to this information? May be the answer is close to extra costs, "business" and so on.
My opinion that technically it is absolutely real to provide vessel with exact information about cargo weights, but of course terminals should do additional job. What about speed, it is not a question when the safety comes first, and if you win 5 minutes now later you can loose 5 hours and so on.
As example of normal weights record the US Crowley can be presented where as I know all containers are weighted at gates before delivering to the terminal (US ports, not the Caribbean ports where is another situation) and always final plan same as updated plan during operations was provided to the crew. And vessel's drafts calculated by stability programm were very close to real drafts.
Regards, Yevgeniy
-
The issue of weight goes all the way down the line. These days I drive a truck between Canada and the USA and every week I'm going to pick up loads that the shipper states on the Bill of Lading weigh lets say 37,000lbs and then when I go and scale the load, my gross weight is 83,000lbs (legal max weight in the US is 80,000lbs) but with an empty weight of 36,500lbs that means legally I can load 43,500lbs so the actual load on my trailer is 46,000lbs to be that much over weight. The whole shipping industry, right down from trucks, all the way yo ships is a very deceptive, back stabbing and risk taking industry where people will take all sorts of risks and try and get away with whatever they can. The shipper doesn't care, because if I dont bother to check my weight, which isn't always possible because the nearest scale is often too far away, then its all my legal responsibility when I get caught and I end up being fined hundreds or thousands of dollars and if I do go back to have some taken off, they make me wait for several hours and that hurts me because like all truck drivers in North America, I'm paid by the mile, not by the hour.
-
@yegenii
May be I understand it wrong,,but so far nobody said that one does not get a updated
stowplan after loading/disch ops finished.
What is fact that during loading and discharging and often both at same time,,i.e. one bay is loaded and another discharged etc etc,,the updating would be more or less impossible.
Of course one can thing of a system where the ships pc would be Wi-Fi connected to the terminal and in that moment where a container is loaded or discharged automatic also entered or deleted,,that would give a very close actual situation.
-
@Ted
The word "updated" is more connected with cargo designed for loading, that is what I think.
The main idea was that planner of course with stevedores help can provide vessel with updated info about containers weights. I don't have access to all parts of container terminal to see how everything is working but if to analyze what I see from vessel (that is more or less connected with specialized terminal equiped with gantry cranes) I think that at present time it is real to provide vessel with updated weights. I agree that it could require some updating in software connected with some changes in aspects of terminal work.
The real weight is possible thing at terminal. The speed of cargo operation 'll change but not so much, another question how much it 'll cost for container shipment.
-
Port operations of the vessels could be kept at the pace they are done now,if pre-stacking activities in terminals are reviewed and modified. Under modifications i mean weighing of the trucks at the gates. Only then the accurate manifest can be used for further planning and loading, stability and strength criterias met.
rgds
-
Dynamic weighting in the stack would be the best option, the rate of boxes moved is lower, time pressures are less and you would have time to adjust the load program before the vessel arrives, it would also allow you to extract seriously overloaded boxes and perhaps back track and take legal action before it even gets to the vessel. This does not solve the issue of over weight boxes on the road or rail, that as Jordan correct says, is down to the loader and his honesty in filling out the bill of lading.
We do currently run a small system that checks weights going out of the stack to the vessel but it is more to do with making sure we do not overload for twin picking operations and to be fair is probably too late in the cycle to have much impact on the vessel load plan.
Kindest
-
While some sound theories and ideas of loading plans have been presented,it seems the thread has drifted off topic.Any updated news on what's going on with the vessel? Are there still crew on board? Will she be towed to NFLD or NS? Is it in danger of sinking?
-
This link should take you to reederi nsb site the ship is to be repaired off Newfoundland.http://www.reederei-nsb.de/fileadmin/content/NSB/PDF-Documents/News/2014.01.03_Update_MSC_MONTEREY_ENG.pdf John D
-
Proposed changes to the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) convention concerning verification of container weights are due to be implemented approx. July 2016.
The new regulations continue to place responsibility for gross weight declarations on the shipper which must be obtained by:
A. Weighing the packed container on calibrated and certified equipment, or
B. Weighing all of the packages, including packaging, pallets, etc on calibrated and certified equipment and adding this to the tare weight of the container
If the gross weight is not declared, the regulations will not allow the container to be loaded on the vessel.
The shipper can however, arrange for the gross weight to be obtained prior to loading on the vessel and in sufficient time for it to be used on the vessel stowage plan.
It is likely that the terminal/port operator will have to assume responsibility for the availability and accuracy of container weights.
As mentioned in previous posts, Ports are concerned at how traffic flows could be affected by such requirements.
Weighbridges are not a particularly good option as the weight of the truck and trailer need to be known in order to deduct from the overall weight and a further complication would be caused by the vehicle hauling 2 x 20' containers.
Weighing systems incorporated into gantry cranes and straddle carriers have not been particularly effective and cannot provide an individual container weight when using twin lift spreaders.
Twistlock manufacturers have continued to develop technology that allows for the container weight to be obtained via sensors under and/or in the twistlock assembly.
Bromma, RAM and STINIS are now incorporating this technology during spreader production using the system produced by LASSTEC (www.lasstec.com)which is accurate to within +/- 200 kilos per container.
Acknowledgement: TT Club Mutual Insurance Ltd.
-
The MSC MONTEREY is now en route to Boston after temporary repairs were completed in NFL.