Topics

1

Site related news, functions and modules / Grays Harbor (USA) Ports

« on: August 24, 2023, 03:12:26 PM »

I just recently noticed a port in the United States that seems to be separated from what should be a "parent" port.

Within the ports listing, "Grays Harbor, United States" exists as an umbrella port area, with two sub-ports:

Aberdeen, Grays Harbor, United States
Hoquiam, Grays Harbor, United States

As a result, I had often uploaded photos taken at the small fishing port of Westport, Washington under the parent "Grays Harbor" location, since the town is at the harbor entrance, about 20 km west of Hoquiam, the nearer of the two other ports. Just yesterday, however, I noticed that the location list now includes a port of "Westport, United States" with a lat/long (46.9086, -124.105) that corresponds to the town on Grays Harbor.

Given that Westport is associated with the greater Grays Harbor area, and is even the base of operations for the Grays Harbor pilots, shouldn't it be listed as a Grays Harbor sub-port as well?

2

Site related news, functions and modules / Fishing Vessel Naming Convention

« on: September 15, 2022, 03:47:13 PM »

Good Morning,

I have uploaded a significant number of fishing vessel photos over the years, and going back through them I have noticed occasional, inconsistent changes to the vessel names, so I wanted to clarify the site policy.

I tend to upload photos following typical site guidance of giving only the full vessel name (in all caps, but we don't need to rabblerouse that subject again...). Some of my photos have since had the vessel amended to include some form of vessel registration, in a rather inconsistent manner, so I'll offer a few examples:

1. CELTIC
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/3040789
The name has been amended to CELTIC 591971, to reflect the US Coast Guard Official Number clearly displayed on the hull as a visible identifier.

2. ALASKA VICTORY
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/2823242
Name amended in a similar manner to ALASKA VICTORY 569752. However, the official number is nowhere to be seen on the vessel exterior, and the only clear identifier is the Alaska Fish & Game registration 61083. As a result, the edit in theory consistent with the above format, but inconsistent with a policy of using a visible identifier, which would result in ALASKA VICTORY 61083 if formatted like cases 1 and 3 together suggest.

3. ALASKA QUEEN II
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/2230203
Named amended to ALASKA QUEEN II 21382. In this case, the number in use is clearly marked on the hull, but is a provincial fish and game registration (The vessel's official number is 174105). As a result consistent with the method used in case 1, but inconsistent with case 2.

4. CELTIC
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/2292828
Inconsistent with Cases 1 and 3, and questionably consistent with case 2. Name amended to CELTIC 687681. The new name uses the vessel's official number, but the only marking on the hull is Washington state license number WN314KWA. The "KWA" suffix ID's her as registered to the Quinault Tribe. In theory, state license and national documentation are mutually exclusive, but tribal vessels tend to be issued a state license to fish in waters governed by a US state, so both have standing to be the "official" registration.

With those in mind, I notice many more that haven't been changed, so I wanted to find out what the preferred method would be for a few other typical cases in United States fisheries, or if this is just so much of a headache that the names should be left alone:

A. STEALTH
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/2276804
Ex-Canadian fishing vessels have been entering US fisheries through a method of admeasuring for state license. Concurrently, the most "official" registration for the vessel is either California state license CF2484V or Alaska state license AK6277AU. Neither was visible on the hull at time of photo, and I've seen evidence that registration in one state doesn't necessarily mean another is abandoned. State licenses may also change under the same state when a vessel is sold to a new owner. Her only "permanent" identifier, Canadian documentation number 391849, ceased to be valid when she came under US flag.

B. BUCK AND ANN
https://www.shipspotting.com/photos/2297393
Inconsistent requirements for different fisheries mean that multipurpose fishing vessels can bear a whole smorgasbord of markings. In this case, the vessel displays her US official number (591368), and fish and game registrations for three different states (32862, 32426, 43295). If this were to be matched to the example set by cases 1 and 3, the name could be something like: BUCK AND ANN 591368 32862 32426 FG43295.

Thank you for your input.

3

Shipping News and information / Six Dead After COSTA CONCORDIA Runs Aground

« on: January 14, 2012, 04:34:04 AM »

Just saw this article posted in my local news, haven't seen much else on it yet. Sounds pretty bad, six dead, and the remainder of those on board being evacuated from the vessel. The "position" of the ship off the island of Giglio is described as "worsening," which sounds rather ominous.

The article I saw is here:

Reports: Cruise Ship Aground Off Italy, 6 Dead

UPDATE:

A much more detailed article, Cruise Ship Runs Aground Off Italy; Deaths Reported is found on MSNBC.

This article includes a couple images of the vessels condition, and describes her as having a 20 degree list, but not in danger of sinking. Said of just over 4,200 people on board, several were thrown off when the accident happened, and the condition warranted an abandoned ship, first by lifeboat, and with increasing list, now by helicopter.

4

Shipping News and information / Mystery Livestock Carrier Released (?)

« on: January 09, 2012, 05:51:46 PM »

A gCaptain article this morning details the release of an Indian-flagged livestock carrier by pirates, who evidently didn't initially realise what kind of vessel they were boarding.

It describes the vessel as the SAVINA AL-SALAAM, which I can find no reference to outside of the article, and that she is the former IRAN SALAM (IMO: 7385162) (Note, the picture in the article seems to be Bob Scott's with no recognition given...). The problem is, IRAN SALAM was reported to be scrapped at Mumbai in 2003.

So, does anyone know what the true identity of this vessel is? Or, if we're actually dealing with some absurd phantom claim here...

5

Shipping News and information / Elusive Ships

« on: November 16, 2011, 07:42:44 PM »

While out on a shipspotting expedition to the Port of Tacoma, I managed to capture Evergreen Line's rather large (6,332 TEU) EVER ENVOY (IMO: 9241308). When I posted her on the site, I was suprised to note that despite being built in 2002, mine was the first image of her to be posted.

So, this just made me wonder, are there any other rather elusive large vessels anyone knows of? Or, any stories of vessels you've been suprised to find you are the first to capture?

For me, it's almost kind of a game to see which vessels I find are new to the site, and the older they are, the more suprising

6

Shipping News and information / Oldest Seagoing Ships In Service

« on: September 28, 2011, 03:11:27 AM »

I've seen threads regarding the oldest active vessel on the face of the planet, with various candidates from the 19th century coming forward, but how about something a little more specific, yet requiring a little less effort to go and find in person.

What are some candidates for the oldest serving oceangoing vessels out there?

For me, this question was raised by today seeing CSL CABO at a pier on the Duwamish River in Seattle. Built in 1971, at 40 years old she must be one of the most elderly seagoing bulkers still out there. Any other rather old active candidates anyone wants to bring forward?

7

Site related news, functions and modules / "Preserved" Ships

« on: March 18, 2011, 02:32:11 AM »

This probably just seems like a trivial little thing, but I'd just like to bring up the awkwardness I sometimes feel with using the "Museum Ships" category, as there are numerous vessels I've encountered that are vintage, and a no longer in active service, yet would not be considered to be a museum vessel by any means. I really feel that instead a more appropriate category might be for "Preserved Vessels" that would encompass conversions of classic vessels to yachts, charters, or liveaboards, where they are still kept intact, but are generally not publicly accessible.

Does anyone else have any thoughts?